# From Brazilian Jiu Jitsu to Japanese Jiu Jitsu



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 18, 2019)

I recently gave up on Brazilian jujitsu. I love the sport, but my body is mangled - cauliflower ear, scar tissue on my eye, beginning of arthritis on my finger/hand. This is after only 3 months of consistent training.

I am interested in Japanese jujitsu, but there just isn't any information about it out there.

For those of you who have experience-

1. How is the cardio in Japanese jujitsu? 

2. Is there a lot of grip training that would lead to arthritis?

Any information would be greatly appreciated, thank you.


----------



## Flying Crane (Apr 18, 2019)

Holy cow, three months?  I wonder if the school you attended was simply engaging in reckless training practices.


----------



## jobo (Apr 18, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> I recently gave up on Brazilian jujitsu. I love the sport, but my body is mangled - cauliflower ear, scar tissue on my eye, beginning of arthritis on my finger/hand. This is after only 3 months of consistent training.
> 
> I am interested in Japanese jujitsu, but there just isn't any information about it out there.
> 
> ...


with anything approaching sensible level of progression,  grip training should not lead to arthritis, gripping is more or less the only think hands do, apart from picking your nose and work a remote control, though excessive texing or channel hopping could be a issue


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 18, 2019)

One thing that will help in your research is to realize that Japanese Jujutsu is not a style. It's an extensive family of arts, none of which is named just "Japanese Jujutsu."

Generally speaking, you can divide that family into two large divisions. 

Koryu (old school) arts are those created before 1868. They generally carry a lot of cultural trappings which would seem foreign to most modern students (even modern Japanese). Koryu jujutsu styles are pretty diverse in terms of their content: some were designed for civilian use, some for the battlefield. They will have an approach to training which is very different from BJ or most other modern arts. Koryu schools are hard to find and very selective regarding who they will allow to join. Here's a video for Takenouchi Ryu, one of the oldest surviving schools of jujutsu:





Gendai (modern) arts are those created from 1868 on. There aren't a lot of extant gendai Japanese arts which still use the "jujutsu" moniker. The most widespread Japanese gendai arts from the jujutsu family are Judo and Aikido, both of which have discarded the jujutsu name, but absolutely come from that family. There's also Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu (the parent art of Aikido), which presents itself as koryu, but was probably created in the modern era. There are also jujutsu arts taught within the Bujinkan and its derivatives (Genbukan, Jinenkan, etc). These arts go back to the koryu era but are usually not taught in such a traditional way. One of our members, @gpseymour, teaches a gendai system  (Nihon Goshin Aikido) which was created in Japan but has since gone extinct there and is only taught outside that country. Wado Ryu is a Japanese karate style which is really just as much a jujutsu style. (It was created as a blend of karate and jujutsu and originally was named Shinshu Wadoryu Karate-Jujutsu.)

Most schools in the West which bill themselves as "Japanese Jujutsu" are actually teaching systems of jujutsu which were developed outside of Japan, just as BJJ was. Most often these were derived from Judo (as BJJ was originally) and/or Aikido, with possible influences from other arts such as Karate. Danzan ryu is a popular system which could at least make a credible claim to being "Japanese" in that it was founded by a Japanese man. However, he did so while living in Hawaii and incorporated elements of non-Japanese arts such as Lua, Escrima, Boxing, and wrestling. A better description would be "Japanese-American jujutsu." Danzan Ryu has a number of spin-off arts such as Small Circle Jujutsu.
Danzan Ryu:




Small Circle Jujutsu:





The degree to which a jujutsu school will work your cardio and your grips will largely depend on how much time they dedicate to Judo/BJJ style live randori. That will range from "not at all" to "all the time."


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 18, 2019)

Flying Crane said:


> Holy cow, three months?  I wonder if the school you attended was simply engaging in reckless training practices.


It could be the school is throwing new students into the deep end with insufficient preparation. It could also be that the student is sparring too aggressively and paying the price. Or both. Or they could just be unlucky.

To the OP: I'm 54 years old and have been training BJJ for about 20 years and other arts for 17 years before that. I don't have cauliflower ear. I don't have scarred eyes. I have a bit of arthritis, but probably no more than I would have at this age without BJJ. If you and your training partners approach training in a careful, intelligent manner then it shouldn't damage you that much that quickly.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Apr 18, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> One thing that will help in your research is to realize that Japanese Jujutsu is not a style. It's an extensive family of arts, none of which is named just "Japanese Jujutsu."
> 
> Generally speaking, you can divide that family into two large divisions.
> 
> ...



All this makes me wonder what style I was training in the early 70s. Interesting, thanks Tony


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 18, 2019)

jobo said:


> with anything approaching sensible level of progression,  grip training should not lead to arthritis, gripping is more or less the only think hands do, apart from picking your nose and work a remote control, though excessive texing or channel hopping could be a issue


The thing that leads many Judo/BJJ competitors to have messed up fingers isn't the grip strength training. Rather it's grip _fighting_, where you're holding on to a sleeve or collar with all your might and your opponent rips it out of your grasp (possibly accompanied by impact to the gripping hand). That sort of action, done repetitively with high volume and intensity, can lead to damaged finger joints. I've avoided too much trouble along those lines by not building my personal style around gripping the gi, but I did get my thumb broken a couple of years back by my training partner while he was stripping my grip on his sleeve.


----------



## wab25 (Apr 18, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Danzan Ryu:


Hey!!! I know those guys... I have taken many classes from them over the years. Both are excellent instructors.

Note: I guess it didn't quote the video...


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 18, 2019)

wab25 said:


> Hey!!! I know those guys... I have taken many classes from them over the years. Both are excellent instructors.
> 
> Note: I guess it didn't quote the video...


Yeah, I was thinking that you could answer any specific questions from the OP regarding Danzan Ryu. I trained in one of the DR spin-off arts a while back, but I don't know how much they diverged from the original art.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 18, 2019)

Thank you Tony. That was my experience also, grip fighting. Right hand deep in their gi when they pivoted their shoulder, came close to dislocation of index finger, swelled up like a sausage. It may recover one day. I had a superb armbar defense also (for someone who's less than a white belt) which led to my hand feeling the same way.


----------



## Martial D (Apr 18, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> I recently gave up on Brazilian jujitsu. I love the sport, but my body is mangled - cauliflower ear, scar tissue on my eye, beginning of arthritis on my finger/hand. This is after only 3 months of consistent training.
> 
> I am interested in Japanese jujitsu, but there just isn't any information about it out there.
> 
> ...


I'm calling BS on this one. Been doing MMA and bjj for quite some time. If you really have these injuries after a couple months your teacher was garbage, and your school was garbage.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 18, 2019)

Martial D said:


> I'm calling BS on this one. Been doing MMA and bjj for quite some time. If you really have these injuries after a couple months your teacher was garbage, and your school was garbage.



LOL ignore the troll everybody.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 19, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> LOL ignore the troll everybody.


I don't agree with everything he says but he's not a troll and I agree with him. If you've got that many injuries that quick then something isn't right....oh and piece of advice coming on here calling people trolls isn't going to make you very popular on here....plus that's against the site rules


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

I didn't realize that the term I used was against site rules, my apologies.

You said it in a way that was not disrespectable to anybody. That was fine.



Headhunter said:


> I don't agree with everything he says but he's not a troll and I agree with him. If you've got that many injuries that quick then something isn't right....oh and piece of advice coming on here calling people trolls isn't going to make you very popular on here....plus that's against the site rules


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> I don't agree with everything he says but he's not a troll and I agree with him. If you've got that many injuries that quick then something isn't right....oh and piece of advice coming on here calling people trolls isn't going to make you very popular on here....plus that's against the site rules



The point of the thread was to find out information about traditional jujitsu, not information about the school I already left. He didn't say anything constructive about the topic at all, only insulted the school and my coach who is a good friend of mine, and mentor who he knows nothing about.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 19, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> The point of the thread was to find out information about traditional jujitsu, not information about the school I already left. He didn't say anything constructive about the topic at all, only insulted the school and my coach who is a good friend of mine, and mentor who he knows nothing about.


He's stating an opinion based on evidence. I mean I'm older than most at my bjj club and have trained 4 times a week for 2 years and never had a single injury as I said if you get that many injuries in 3 months and it's not a common occurrence for that sport then you need to start looking at the instructor and the school and anyway he was more saying what your saying isn't true rather than insulting the club his first words "I call bs on this"


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2019)

Anyway JJJ will either look like Aikido or judo depending on the school.

Sorta.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 19, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Anyway JJJ will either look like Aikido or judo depending on the school.
> 
> Sorta.


That's a reasonably accurate, concise description. I like it. I'd just add that some manage to look like both, depending what they're doing that day.


----------



## jobo (Apr 19, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Anyway JJJ will either look like Aikido or judo depending on the school.
> 
> Sorta.


when I briefly did  jjj, it looked exactly like judo, except when you got them on the floor you punched them repeatedly in the groin


----------



## wab25 (Apr 19, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yeah, I was thinking that you could answer any specific questions from the OP regarding Danzan Ryu. I trained in one of the DR spin-off arts a while back, but I don't know how much they diverged from the original art.


Unfortunately... there have not been any specific questions to answer. But, you have summed it up nicely... there is quite a range available. 

Its hard to say what the "original art" was. This is because Okazaki was always training, learning and adapting. His students would reach instructor level, then come to the main land to open a school at different times. What Okazaki was teaching changed between the different instructors coming over. As a result, we get lots of variation, and not just the "block in front stance or block in back stance" variety. One lineage will teach a forward hip throw, gain top position and apply submission. Another lineage will teach the same art by propping uke's knee, while sitting back at a diagonal causing uke to fall forward while you entangle his arm with your legs and apply the submission as he hits. Both techniques were taught by Okazaki as that same art, at different times. So, which is the "original" or "non-diverged" version? 

Whats more important is to see how they teach and practice. Both ways of doing the art can be effective, if you learn to do them against a resisting opponent. At one end of the spectrum you have people like Willy Cahill teaching Danzan Ryu: Willy Cahill You can also find people straying very close to the "no touch knock out / throw" end of the spectrum as well. (these are the guys that might offer some resistance in a fight with a wet paper bag, though not much) It really depends on the particular school you find and who is teaching it. (even with in the same organization)


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 19, 2019)

jobo said:


> when I briefly did  jjj, it looked exactly like judo, except when you got them on the floor you punched them repeatedly in the groin


So, it starts like Judo and ends like Ameri-do-te?


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 19, 2019)

One thing I'll add is this. If you do love bjj so much maybe look for another school. Because as we've said that amount of injury that quick is not common. Maybe another school there'll be less injuries. Or it could simply be your body can't take that sort of training. I don't mean that as an insult at all. Everyone is built differently. I know I could never do gymnastics or I'd end up in serious pain. Maybe that's the same with you in bjj. No shame in it just the way things go


----------



## jobo (Apr 19, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> So, it starts like Judo and ends like Ameri-do-te?


exactly starts like Judo and ends like a vicious beating in a back alley


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

Thank you Tony Dismukes, drop bear, jobo, gpseymour and wab25 for addressing the questions I actually asked and providing helpful information! This will give me some idea what to look for.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 19, 2019)

Headhunter said:


> One thing I'll add is this. If you do love bjj so much maybe look for another school. Because as we've said that amount of injury that quick is not common. Maybe another school there'll be less injuries. Or it could simply be your body can't take that sort of training. I don't mean that as an insult at all. Everyone is built differently. I know I could never do gymnastics or I'd end up in serious pain. Maybe that's the same with you in bjj. No shame in it just the way things go


Don't really know what was funny about this comment but okay


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Be it Brazilian or Japanese, this video will help.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

I wonder if OP has considered Hapkido? It is also another jujutsu-derived system (probably, the documented history of the art is a bit cloudy), that is quite versatile in terms of technical content.

I currently train in Hapkido myself, and while there are dozens of different styles of Hapkido, making generalizations difficult, the styles I have been exposed to can be summed up as containing the arm and wrist locks of traditional japanese jiu jitsu, the throws, chokes and some (but in general very little) of the newaza of Judo, and  many of the kicks of taekwondo with some unique kicks thrown in as well. In the style I train, we also use boxing style punches as well, but my impression is that that is not as common among Hapkido styles.

We also spar quite a bit with a not too restrictive ruleset, although not too hard (full contact to body, light contact to head, and with controlled arm/wristlocks, and without dangerous throws, i.e. mostly judo type throws), and with head and chest guard, elbow and shin pads, and shooto-type gloves, enabling gripping, but still having a bit of padding, adding a degree of aliveness to our training.

It will not make you into the worlds best fighter, or even give you the most effective training if fighting effectiveness is your goal (for that, I would advice you to go train MMA), but it is also far from the worst thing you can train among the huge selection of martial art styles out there. And most important for me at least, it will not put a huge strain on my body compared to several much more competitive arts I have trained before.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

Oh, and «full contact to the body» means that while it is allowed, we don’t really go that hard on each other in regular practice, to be honest.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Christian Bjørnsrud said:


> I currently train in Hapkido myself, and while there are dozens of different styles of Hapkido,


I do not mean this in a derogatory manner, but as far as I am concerned there is only 1 style of Hapkido, and many teachers that say they teach the art, may I ask, what was the very 1st technique you was taught in Hapkido?.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

I do not remember what the first thing *I* was taught in Hapkido is, as it was a long time ago, but in general, the first thing both my grand master and myself teaches beginners is deflection and diagonal movement.

As to there being only one style of Hapkido, I think I would like you to elaborate a bit on that before I give you my own take on the matter. What I can say before that, is that my own grand master was taught by one of the original students of
Choi Yong-sul, making myself three degrees of seperation from Choi Yong-sul.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Christian Bjørnsrud said:


> I do not remember what the first thing *I* was taught in Hapkido is, as it was a long time ago, but in general, the first thing both my grand master and myself teaches beginners is deflection and diagonal movement.
> 
> As to there being only one style of Hapkido, I think I would like you to elaborate a bit on that before I give you my own take on the matter. What I can say before that, is that my own grand master was taught by one of the original students of
> Choi Yong-sul, making myself four degrees of seperation from Choi Yong-sul.


Yes I can do that, I first started training in Hapkido, back in 1991, the 1st technique I was taught was live hand, the second technique was the 8 directions, followed by the importance of T stance one foot forward the other lateral to form a T, I stopped training in 2008 holding a 3rd Dan, and due to the club folding through lack of members making the club no longer viable, and a change of leadership due to the 8th Dan founder of the club retiring who trained under N G Joo


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

Christian Bjørnsrud said:


> I wonder if OP has considered Hapkido? It is also another jujutsu-derived system (probably, the documented history of the art is a bit cloudy), that is quite versatile in terms of technical content.
> 
> I currently train in Hapkido myself, and while there are dozens of different styles of Hapkido, making generalizations difficult, the styles I have been exposed to can be summed up as containing the arm and wrist locks of traditional japanese jiu jitsu, the throws, chokes and some (but in general very little) of the newaza of Judo, and  many of the kicks of taekwondo with some unique kicks thrown in as well. In the style I train, we also use boxing style punches as well, but my impression is that that is not as common among Hapkido styles.
> 
> ...



You read my mind. Already picking a Hapkido school.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

I can remember the 3rd Dan grading day, I had to perform all grading material from white belt up to 3rd Dan syllabus,  left and right side, it took about 6 hours.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Yes I can do that, I first started training in Hapkido, back in 1991, the 1st technique I was taught was live hand, the second technique was the 8 directions, followed by the importance of T stance one foot forward the other lateral to form a T, I stopped training in 2008 holding a 3rd Dan, and due to the club folding through lack of members making the club no longer viable, and a change of leadership due to the 8th Dan founder of the club retiring who trained under N G Joo



What I meant is that I would like you to elaborate on why you are of the opinion that there are only one style of Hapkido, especially since a significant number of Choi Yong-sul’s original students went out and started their own schools with unique curriculums, and there are quite a number of different Hapkido-styles recognized by the big Korean Hapkido organizations. Perhaps you are using the word «style» differently than I am, and that is the root of our confusion? 

In either case, I’m a bit over arguing about which martial art styles or arts are the «true» or «correct» one, spending a great amount of time doing that in the ninethies (training WTF taekwondo, and being constantly told by ITF practitioners that WTF wasn’t «true» Taekwondo). As I said above, my lineage goes directly back to Choi Yung-sul, and my dan certificates is signed by Kim Jung-Soo, himself being the eight person to recieve a dan certificate from Choi Yung-sul. His style is recognized by the Korean Hapkido Federation, and that is good enough for me. If someone thinks that my Hapkido is not real or true Hapkido, for whatever reason, I couldn’t really care less.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Apr 19, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Be it Brazilian or Japanese, this video will help.



No joke, someone said that actually worked in a fight before.   It becomes habit to release to taps if you do Grappling so it transitions to actual fighting to some people, or they release being good sports then you turn around and clob their  head in or something.     Its also addressed in a book i have on self defence things.   (granted its not told as the be all end all like in the clip, but its worth sharing)

Just thought i would share it as its pretty funny.

Edit:  its also made funnier that the author has done Jujitsu and that has been their main style, so im now triple  dying on the floor laughing.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Don't misunderstand me, Hapkido is not a common art in the UK, but many people claim to have trained in it, and we have people here claiming to have trained in Hapkido karate, or combat Hapkido, and their techniques are a mish mash of several arts, trained by some bloke who has a 1st Dan in 6 different arts, none of which are Hapkido, they seem to think if they use a cane it's Hapkido.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Just to add, I could have stated, I am 4th in linage to jii han jae, I am not, but nobody else can prove I was not.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

I’m not based in the UK, so I wouldn’t know. My master lives in Spain, and his master lives in Daegu, South Korea. 

In either case, what I refered to above was this: 


Gweilo said:


> as far as I am concerned there is only 1 style of Hapkido, and many teachers that say they teach the art


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

Ok we can argue the fact, Choi's art can be separated from Jae's Sin Moo, due to the argument over who named the art, because let's be honest, that is why the art has 2 names, Jae's Sin Moo is identical, in footwork and technique, it's just he prefers a slightly different approach, just that Jae argues he named the art not Choi, we could also argue, that Choi does not appear in any of the very detailed Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu records, but clearly learn't the techniques, I and yourself believe we trained in the line of Choi's art, rather than Sin Moo, what other styles are there?


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

Do you consider GM Geoff Booth’s Kwan Nyom a seperate style from Jae’s Sin Moo Hapkido? Because while he recieved a 10th dan from Jae (which he prefer not to use, thinking he hasn’t earned it yet), he does refer to Kwan Nyom as a Hapkido style seperate from Sin Moo.

How about Jin Jung Kwan? Or Bong Soo Han’s style? Both (as well as Kwan Nyom above) differs from both Choi’s original Hapkido and Sin Moo in both approach and curriculum, yet are founded by people who can claim direct linage back to Choi. Do you consider these seperate styles?

Just curious, but how do you define «martial arts style»? Because this seems to be turning into a discussion on semantics, and if so, I think it is highly relevant to define what a style is and isn’t before we go on.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

Rat said:


> No joke, someone said that actually worked in a fight before.   It becomes habit to release to taps if you do Grappling so it transitions to actual fighting to some people, or they release being good sports then you turn around and clob their  head in or something.     Its also addressed in a book i have on self defence things.   (granted its not told as the be all end all like in the clip, but its worth sharing)
> 
> Just thought i would share it as its pretty funny.
> 
> Edit:  its also made funnier that the author has done Jujitsu and that has been their main style, so im now triple  dying on the floor laughing.



That makes sense.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 19, 2019)

I refer to my original answer in my opinon of Hapkido styles, but you would have to wonder, your close ties to Choi's linage and for someone who has trained in the art for a length of time, who cannot remember the most fundamental basics of the art.


----------



## CKB (Apr 19, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> I refer to my original answer in my opinon of Hapkido styles, but you would have to wonder, your close ties to Choi's linage and for someone who has trained in the art for a length of time, who cannot remember the most fundamental basics of the art.



Okay, just to make sure I don’t misunderstand you here:

Are you refering to what I wrote a above about not remembering what the first technique I ever learnt in Hapkido (at a seminar in the ninethies, no less)? If so, there is quite a leap from that and to concluding that I «don’t remember the most fundamental basics of the art», unless there is some ill-will at play here.

If I understand you correctly, you comes across as both combative and disrespectfull. I’ll be happy to produce documentation of both my rank and linage if you ask me nicely, but continue with insinuating like you do above, and you will be promptly ignored from here on.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 19, 2019)

Rat said:


> No joke, someone said that actually worked in a fight before.   It becomes habit to release to taps if you do Grappling so it transitions to actual fighting to some people, or they release being good sports then you turn around and clob their  head in or something.     Its also addressed in a book i have on self defence things.   (granted its not told as the be all end all like in the clip, but its worth sharing)
> 
> Just thought i would share it as its pretty funny.
> 
> Edit:  its also made funnier that the author has done Jujitsu and that has been their main style, so im now triple  dying on the floor laughing.



Bjj guys always respect the tap in a real fight then let them up. They teach us that in the class. Really important for self defense. The purpose of the choke and armbar is actually psychological, not to choke or armbar someone.


----------



## WaterGal (Apr 19, 2019)

My teacher's teacher's teacher _did _train with Ji Han Jae (edit: or least, did according to my teacher's teacher), and I have an IHF 1st dan. The first thing I learned in Hapkido was breakfalls (nakbup). The idea that there's only one real whatever is a bunch of nonsense. Yes, there are lots of people that pretend to teach this or that in order to puff up their credentials, but that's a different matter.

OP, what are your goals? Is it just to do an activity, or are you looking to defend yourself, or get in shape?


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 19, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Bjj guys always respect the tap in a real fight then let them up. They teach us that in the class. Really important for self defense. The purpose of the choke and armbar is actually psychological, not to choke or armbar someone.


I’m not sure whether this is a joke or the misunderstanding of a beginner.

In practice, always respect the tap. 
In competition, always respect the tap.
When fighting in self defense, ignore the tap. If someone is willing to assault you in the first place, you can’t assume they won’t do it again the moment you let them go. If the situation is dire enough to justify the use of a choke or armbar in the first place, then put them to sleep or break the arm. Take away their ability to keep attacking you.
If the situation is not dangerous enough to justify putting them to sleep or breaking a limb, then don’t apply the choke or joint lock in the first place.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 20, 2019)

WaterGal said:


> My teacher's teacher's teacher _did _train with Ji Han Jae (edit: or least, did according to my teacher's teacher), and I have an IHF 1st dan. The first thing I learned in Hapkido was breakfalls (nakbup). The idea that there's only one real whatever is a bunch of nonsense. Yes, there are lots of people that pretend to teach this or that in order to puff up their credentials, but that's a different matter.
> 
> OP, what are your goals? Is it just to do an activity, or are you looking to defend yourself, or get in shape?



Hello.

At this point I am just looking to stay in shape, and have a hobby that is fun which is why I think Hapkido would be a good option.

I already got a hernia lifting weights, and did full contact Karate, and sport BJJ, both of which take their toll on the body. I'm over it.

Also, I never really focused on standing grappling/restraining techniques which would be good anyways since I work in security.


----------



## Martial D (Apr 20, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Bjj guys always respect the tap in a real fight then let them up. They teach us that in the class. Really important for self defense. The purpose of the choke and armbar is actually psychological, not to choke or armbar someone.


Ok now I'm certain your school/instructor were junk. That's about the worst advice I've ever heard.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 20, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Ok now I'm certain your school/instructor were junk. That's about the worst advice I've ever heard.



Hello Martial D.

I will spell this out.

This was obviously a joke at someone who was making veiled pot shots at me (similar to someone else I know).

Also, I don't care what you think about my previous school, or my instructor. Nobody asked for your opinion.

If you want to actually address the subject of the thread then please do so. 

If you are only interested in putting others down because that's the only way you can feel good about yourself, you will not get that satisfaction out of me, cause I don't care.

Crap on my thread one more time and I'm putting you on ignore.

Thanks.


----------



## Martial D (Apr 20, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Hello Martial D.
> 
> I will spell this out.
> 
> ...


My, aren't we the self important one. Why should I care if you ignore me? All you've displayed here so far is a whiney self entitled attitude, some bad advice, and a story about how two months in bjj about ruined your body.

If the last part is true, your training was bad. That's just a fact.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 20, 2019)

Martial D said:


> My, aren't we the self important one. Why should I care if you ignore me? All you've displayed here so far is a whiney self entitled attitude, some bad advice, and a story about how two months in bjj about ruined your body.
> 
> If the last part is true, your training was bad. That's just a fact.



Have it your way.

Man that kid was annoying.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 20, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> who cannot remember the most fundamental basics of the art


I don't think it's all that unusual for folks to not remember what the first thing was they were taught. Instructors choose different first lessons. Sometimes it even differs based on who's in the room. The first thing is also not necessarily the most fundamental basic. And not remembering what was taught first isn't the same thing as not remember the thing, itself.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 20, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Ok now I'm certain your school/instructor were junk. That's about the worst advice I've ever heard.


Or, perhaps, just the learner misunderstanding.


----------



## CKB (Apr 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I don't think it's all that unusual for folks to not remember what the first thing was they were taught. Instructors choose different first lessons. Sometimes it even differs based on who's in the room. The first thing is also not necessarily the most fundamental basic. And not remembering what was taught first isn't the same thing as not remember the thing, itself.



Exactly. And it is kind of sad that it is actually nescessary to point this out. As to anyone curious about my Hapkido linage, I have posted about that in the lineage thread in the Hapkido sub forum.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I don't think it's all that unusual for folks to not remember what the first thing was they were taught. Instructors choose different first lessons. Sometimes it even differs based on who's in the room. The first thing is also not necessarily the most fundamental basic. And not remembering what was taught first isn't the same thing as not remember the thing, itself.


Its not my intention to be disrespectful to anyone's training, but Hapkidos philosophies are fundamental to 3 things, live hand, movement (the 8 directions) and T stance, yes break falls are important as are the redirection of force, circular movement etc, just watch any video of a competent Hapkidoist,  or watch Ji Han Jae fight scene in game of death, or the final fight scene in Young master, watch the hands, movement and foot placement, every move leads to the next, also, when I trained the training syllabus of IHF is, you work your way up to 1st Dan grading requirements,  but in order to obtain 1st Dan, the grading contains all grading techniques from white belt up to 1st Dan to be performed in order to receive the 1st Dan, you then work on 2nd dan syllabus,  but to pass 2nd dan grading, all grading syllabus from white belt to 2nd Dan must be performed,  left and right side in order to achieve a pass, same in 3rd Dan,  that is why it took 6 hours of grading to obtain my 3rd Dan (+ time for breaks), this is done to maintain quality of the techniques,  and any teacher knows exactly what is required at any stage of teaching up to one belt below what they hold, so if this person did train IHF, he should remember the very 1st technique taught.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 20, 2019)

As stated before I trained in Hapkido from 1991 until 2008, I spent a lot of time, training with other MA as a training pair until 2015, I then started Systema,  but I still remember the very 1st techniques taught, and I have learnt from your self jpseymour,  answer a question over a few posts in order to climb the most post rankings


----------



## Martial D (Apr 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Or, perhaps, just the learner misunderstanding.


Naw. If someone is running a school/teaching (in bjj at least) it's up to them to make sure the students aren't going to hard for their skill level. If you are letting your beginner students get physically demolished, you are an objectively bad instructor.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 20, 2019)

I have also attended seminars under grand master Bong Soo Han, Kwang Sik myung, Tae Man Kwon, and Jong Bae Rim in the US, who have similar training syllabus.


----------



## Buka (Apr 20, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I’m not sure whether this is a joke or the misunderstanding of a beginner.
> 
> In practice, always respect the tap.
> In competition, always respect the tap.
> ...



There are gray areas at times. Sometimes in protective services the need to hold someone and calm them down comes into play.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 20, 2019)

Buka said:


> There are gray areas at times. Sometimes in protective services the need to hold someone and calm them down comes into play.


Yep, but in those cases you generally don’t apply techniques which are designed to break limbs or choke someone unconscious. Any good grappler should know ways to control someone without damaging them.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 20, 2019)

Buka said:


> There are gray areas at times. Sometimes in protective services the need to hold someone and calm them down comes into play.





Tony Dismukes said:


> Yep, but in those cases you generally don’t apply techniques which are designed to break limbs or choke someone unconscious. Any good grappler should know ways to control someone without damaging them.



That post was just a joke, I shouldn't have posted that.

Hold them in an omoplata without applying pressure so they can't move until the police arrive. 

Less likely to get sued that way.


----------



## CKB (Apr 20, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Its not my intention to be disrespectful to anyone's training, but Hapkidos philosophies are fundamental to 3 things, live hand, movement (the 8 directions) and T stance, yes break falls are important as are the redirection of force, circular movement etc, just watch any video of a competent Hapkidoist,  or watch Ji Han Jae fight scene in game of death, or the final fight scene in Young master, watch the hands, movement and foot placement, every move leads to the next, also, when I trained the training syllabus of IHF is, you work your way up to 1st Dan grading requirements,  but in order to obtain 1st Dan, the grading contains all grading techniques from white belt up to 1st Dan to be performed in order to receive the 1st Dan, you then work on 2nd dan syllabus,  but to pass 2nd dan grading, all grading syllabus from white belt to 2nd Dan must be performed,  left and right side in order to achieve a pass, same in 3rd Dan,  that is why it took 6 hours of grading to obtain my 3rd Dan (+ time for breaks), this is done to maintain quality of the techniques,  and any teacher knows exactly what is required at any stage of teaching up to one belt below what they hold, so if this person did train IHF, he should remember the very 1st technique taught.



I don’t know what your issue is, and frankly, I don’t care, I have never claimed to be part of IHF, and I have been honest about my lineage from the start. I have also never stated anything that could be reasonably interpreted as «not knowing what a live hand is», or that I «don’t remember it what a live hand is». Of course I know what a live hand is. I have never said anything else.

What I HAVE said, is that I don’t remember the first thing I was ever taught in Hapkido, for the simple reason that I don’t have photographic memory, and my first exposure to Hapkido was at a seminar back in the early ninethies, when Taekwondo was my main art and the Hapkido seminar was simply something I attended in the hope of learning a new thing or two. Hell, most of the time don’t even remember what I had for dinner yesterday.

As to the order of techniques I teach, it depends on whatever I feel I want to teach there and then. Yes, we have a curriculum, and yes, it does ofcourse include live hand, but no, we are not super rigid as to the exact order things are taught, as long as people know what they need at the time of gradings. I usually prefer to teach deflection and diagonal movement first, because that is how I like to do it. If that blows some of your fuses, it is not my problem. As to wether or not you think that disqualifies me from calling what I teach Hapkido, you can look up my linage in the linage thread and have a further discussion on that matter with yourself. 

Other than that, I really have no further wish to talk to you, as you come across as a very unpleasant, extremely rigid, and generally unreasonable person, with an approach to Hapkido that reminds me of religious fundamentalism, more than anything else. I am sorry for whatever happened to you that made you that way, but I don’t see why it should continue to affect my enjoyment of this board, so I’m going to ignore you now.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 20, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> Its not my intention to be disrespectful to anyone's training, but Hapkidos philosophies are fundamental to 3 things, live hand, movement (the 8 directions) and T stance, yes break falls are important as are the redirection of force, circular movement etc, just watch any video of a competent Hapkidoist,  or watch Ji Han Jae fight scene in game of death, or the final fight scene in Young master, watch the hands, movement and foot placement, every move leads to the next, also, when I trained the training syllabus of IHF is, you work your way up to 1st Dan grading requirements,  but in order to obtain 1st Dan, the grading contains all grading techniques from white belt up to 1st Dan to be performed in order to receive the 1st Dan, you then work on 2nd dan syllabus,  but to pass 2nd dan grading, all grading syllabus from white belt to 2nd Dan must be performed,  left and right side in order to achieve a pass, same in 3rd Dan,  that is why it took 6 hours of grading to obtain my 3rd Dan (+ time for breaks), this is done to maintain quality of the techniques,  and any teacher knows exactly what is required at any stage of teaching up to one belt below what they hold, so if this person did train IHF, he should remember the very 1st technique taught.


Even with a set order like that, any given instructor could start with something other than what you think is the first thing taught. The first technique tested for rank in any NGA school I'm aware of is 1st Wrist Technique. It's about the 50th thing I teach, and about the 10th thing taught in most NGA schools. I'm passingly familiar with Hapkido, and don't see why something outside the testing curriculum couldn't be the first thing taught. I'd imagine a block, a wrist escape, a starting stance, or a basic punch could be taught before anything else, with none of those being particularly dependent upon the others.

I remember the first thing I learned in NGA, only because it had a specific impact (in how different it was from what else I'd studied). I don't remember the first thing I was taught in Karate, Judo, or FMA, though I can take a reasonable guess at what each might be (based on the principles and progression). You asked a very specific question, which wasn't about what's most basic. You asked what a specific individual was taught first, assuming it must be the same answer you'd expect from your training. I'd challenge you to re-think that the art is so inflexible that it cannot have any shifting of the order of what is taught.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 20, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Naw. If someone is running a school/teaching (in bjj at least) it's up to them to make sure the students aren't going to hard for their skill level. If you are letting your beginner students get physically demolished, you are an objectively bad instructor.


I was referring to your post replying to the idea of always honoring the tap-out.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I was referring to your post replying to the idea of always honoring the tap-out.



Regardless if you couldn't out grapple the guy the first time. Are you going to do it the second?


----------



## Martial D (Apr 20, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Regardless if you couldn't out grapple the guy the first time. Are you going to do it the second?


Sometimes ya. Sometimes you get em, sometimes you get got.


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 21, 2019)

Interesting. You can still leave ratings for members on your ignore list.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 21, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Even with a set order like that, any given instructor could start with something other than what you think is the first thing taught. The first technique tested for rank in any NGA school I'm aware of is 1st Wrist Technique. It's about the 50th thing I teach, and about the 10th thing taught in most NGA schools. I'm passingly familiar with Hapkido, and don't see why something outside the testing curriculum couldn't be the first thing taught. I'd imagine a block, a wrist escape, a starting stance, or a basic punch could be taught before anything else, with none of those being particularly dependent upon the others.
> 
> I remember the first thing I learned in NGA, only because it had a specific impact (in how different it was from what else I'd studied). I don't remember the first thing I was taught in Karate, Judo, or FMA, though I can take a reasonable guess at what each might be (based on the principles and progression). You asked a very specific question, which wasn't about what's most basic. You asked what a specific individual was taught first, assuming it must be the same answer you'd expect from your training. I'd challenge you to re-think that the art is so inflexible that it cannot have any shifting of the order of what is taught.


I will conceded the fact, that a teacher can indeed, change the basis of how basics are taught, they may feel break falls are more important,  and it has been a while (11 years), since I trained in the art, however the top Hapkidoists when I trained, and in subsequent interviews all stated, the 1st thing that a student should be taught are the 3 principles non resistance to force, circular movement,  and the water principle, these 3 principles are taught along with live hand, the 8 directions, and the T stance which are a reminder and an example of the 3 founding principles, if this most basic thing is not taught and understood from the outset, the essence of the art is missed and will not conform to true Hapkido, it was what I was taught, when I trained, it was how it was taught by Korean Hapkidoists in the USA and in Korea. But I will conceded things change, arts diversify,  and we move on, I would like to apologise if in my posts if I have offended anyone.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 21, 2019)

drop bear said:


> Regardless if you couldn't out grapple the guy the first time. Are you going to do it the second?


Sorry, I can't make sense of that, DB. Can you reword for me?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 21, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Interesting. You can still leave ratings for members on your ignore list.


Yep. You can still read their posts, too, if you choose.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 21, 2019)

Gweilo said:


> I will conceded the fact, that a teacher can indeed, change the basis of how basics are taught, they may feel break falls are more important,  and it has been a while (11 years), since I trained in the art, however the top Hapkidoists when I trained, and in subsequent interviews all stated, the 1st thing that a student should be taught are the 3 principles non resistance to force, circular movement,  and the water principle, these 3 principles are taught along with live hand, the 8 directions, and the T stance which are a reminder and an example of the 3 founding principles, if this most basic thing is not taught and understood from the outset, the essence of the art is missed and will not conform to true Hapkido, it was what I was taught, when I trained, it was how it was taught by Korean Hapkidoists in the USA and in Korea. But I will conceded things change, arts diversify,  and we move on, I would like to apologise if in my posts if I have offended anyone.


Okay, I can see how that might be a common (if not ubiquitous) approach. But that seems conceptual. How do you teach those things first? It seems there could be several approaches, all with the aim of teaching those first.

I'll give you an analogy from my own experience. The first thing I learned in NGA was wrist escapes. Or was it? Those were used to start immediately teaching grip control, soft/strong reactions, and avoiding force-on-force. So, if you asked me the first thing I was taught, I could answer any of those things, and that might or might not match what any given instructor says should be taught first: they might say "soft/strong reactions", and I might say "grip releases." While I think one is part of the other, they seem like not the same answer.


----------



## CKB (Apr 21, 2019)

I simply cannot let Gweilo's claims about how Hapkido is generally taught around the world stand unchallenged, and while I am sure that this post will be met with another form of the no true scotsman fallacy, I will not accept Gweilo self-appointed role as sole holder of the power of definition for how Hapkido is taught worldwide.

I have no clue as to why Gweilo seemingly goes out of his way to discredit me, and even twist my words to confirm with this attempt, simply because I didn't answer his question about the first technique I ever learned to his satisfaction, but I suspect it has something to do with a wish to present his own Hapkido style as the sole, true Hapkido, in true religious fundamentalism-style, which would make everyone else, including me, imposters and heretics.

First, let's look at his claims, and see how it confirms to the real world.



Gweilo said:


> however the top Hapkidoists when I trained, and in subsequent interviews all stated, the 1st thing that a student should be taught are the 3 principles non resistance to force, circular movement,  and the water principle, *these 3 principles are taught along with live hand, the 8 directions, and the T stance which are a reminder and an example of the 3 founding principles, if this most basic thing is not taught and understood from the outset, the essence of the art is missed and will not conform to true Hapkido.*



While this may or may not be true for Gweilo's organization (I have no clue, as I haven't trained in his org), there are a multitude of Hapkido organizations out there, and even more schools, with very diverse approaches to teaching Hapkido. Anyone can do (and should do, to put Gweilo's claims in perspective) a simple google search for "Hapkido Curriculum", and find countless examples that all doesn't just differ from each other, but also differ from Gweilo's claims of how things are supposed to be.



Gweilo said:


> I have also attended seminars under grand master *Bong Soo Han*, *Kwang Sik myung*, *Tae Man Kwon*, and Jong Bae Rim in the US, who have similar training syllabus.



Anyhow, let's look at the curriculums of various Hapkido organisations,  led by high level grandmasters with well documented linages, and see how they confirm with Gweilo's claims above.:

*1. Kwan Nyom / International Hapkido Alliance, *led by Geoff Booth 8th dan. Geoff also recieved a 10th dan from Ji Han Jae, but is reluctant to use that dan, as he (according to himself), feels he has not earned that high a degree yet.

The term *Kwan Nyom *can be translated as "School of Concepts", and its self defined style of Hapkido with a curriculum that is conceptualy based with two new concepts introduced at each level. His entire curriculum is available on video, of which I own a set. In the videos, he begins with introducing proper stances, and then goes onto strikes and kicks, before moving onto the concepts. _The first concept_ introduced in the IHA/Kwan Nyom curriculum is, interestingly enough, *Evasive Movement*, and is more specifically focused on *deflection and angular movement. *The live hand is introduced in the second concept, called *Circular Releases*. In other words, Geoff Booth begins with the same concept as I do when teaching my own students.

Also, here is a link to a video of a seminar by Geoff Booth in Poland in 2016, that seems to be open to anyone (just as with my first seminar back in the day) judging by the variation of stylists present, where he begins the seminar with knife defenses, and not live hand.

*Conclusion: *Geoff Booth (and by Proxy Ji Han Jae, as he gave Geoff Booth his 10th dan AFTER Geoff Booth started his own style) doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.


*2. Bong Soo Han, and his IHF *(one of three organizations calling themselves IHF). It is well documented that Bong Soo Han trained with both Choi Yong-Sool and Ji Han Jae, before starting his own organization.

Luckily for us, Bong Soo Han also committed his entire curriculum up to 1st. dan to video (of which I own a set) before he died, and also wrote a book on the basics of his art (which I own two copies of), giving us an insight into what his emphasis is.

In both the book and the videos, he starts with Tan Jon breathing, before moving onto *proper fighting stance, and angular movement.* He then goes onto teaching kicks and strikes *before returning to angular movement, and showing how that can be combined with deflection to defend against basic punches. *Live hand doesn't show up in his yellow belt curriculum at all, and isn't present until his orange belt curriculum, when teaching wrist hold defenses. In other words, he emphasizes the same thing as I do, BEFORE moving onto live hand and wrist releases.

*Conclusion: *Bong Soo Han doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.


*3. Yun Bee Kwan / World Hapkido General Federation, and GM Shahram Lashgari 7th dan*, a student of Kim Jung Soo 9th dan, one of the original students of Choi Yong-soo. Yun Bee Kwan is one of the recognized kwans of the Korean Hapkido Federation (KHF).

This is my own instructor, who holds open seminars every other month, as well as closed seminars for his black belts. In his open seminars, he tend to focus on different things each seminar, which means that for people showing up at his seminars, their first technique depends on which seminar they first showed up at. 

In 2013, his entire year of open seminar was filmed, which is great since while I was present at most of those, I have no clue as to what was taught at each, and the videos gives me an oportunity to actually see what he emphasized at each seminar. And lo and behold, only one of those actually starts with a discussion of live hand, meaning that for everyone without Hapkido-experience who showed up at any of the other seminars that year, their first technique would be something else. And many of those later became students of his, and would then also answer «wrong» according to how Gweilo thinks anyone who has trained real Hapkido ought to answer the question of what their first technique learned was. 

GM Lashgari has also filmed his own curriculum up to first dan as a reference to his instructors (not available for sale), and the first thing he starts with at white belt level in this curriculum is breakfalls. Discussion on the live hand shows up in the first technique after that, but in general, his curriculum is structured differently from Gweilo's outline above, and GM Lashgari has also made it clear that it is up to the instructors under him to structure their teaching in they way they see fit, as long as their students know what they should know when it is time for grading.

Also, he was not my first Hapkido instructor, so the emphasis in his curriculum doesn't even apply to me in terms of what was the first technique I ever learned. As I said above, I have no recollection of what technique that even was, as I was one of those "outsiders" who had my first exposure to Hapkido showing up at an open seminar in the ninethies.

*Conclusion: *GM Shahram Lashgari, and by proxy, his instructor Kim Jung Soo, doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.


*4. Jin Jung Kwan, founded by Kim Myung Yong, 9th dan, one of the original students of Ji Han Jae, who he began to train under in 1958. *

This style of Hapkido was started in 1967 by an original student of Ji Han Jae, and has a general policy of open enrolment  meaning that the first technique a student is exposed to varies according to when that student began training.

The curriculum of this style is also well documented in several books and a video series, all of which I own copies of. The first thing emphasized in the first book is tan jun breathing, before moving onto basic kicks and strikes.

In his video series, the first emphasis is proper stances, and he then moves onto tan jun breathing and then basic strikes as a response to wrist grabs (where the live hand shows up for the first time). He then moves onto proper break falls.

*Conclusion: *GM Kim Myung Yong, and by proxy, his instructor Ji Han Jae, doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.


*5. World Hapkido Martial Arts Federation and GM Don Oh Choi, 9th dan.*

The Korea-based WHMAF has written detailed books documenting their whole curriculum, and the order of techniques taught. Their first emphasis, is Tan Jun breathing, and then they go on to proper stances, basic movement and basic strikes. Live hand shows up after that.

*Conclusion: *GM Don Oh Choi doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.

*6. International Daemoo Hapkido Martial Art Association, and GM Tae Man Kwon, 9th dan. *

GM Tae Man Kwon has listed his whole curriculum online, as well as described how a regular session is structured in his school. It goes as following:

_"Master Kwon teaches students in classes between 60 and 90 minutes. The first part of the class begins with a series of exercises to build strength and flexibility, followed by group practice covering the basic punching kicking, falling and rolling techniques. Students are then paired with other students of similar level to practice their individual techniques."
_
In other words, any new student to his school will first be taught basic punching and kicking, as well as rolling, before moving on to partner exercises. Instruction in live hand will, according to Tae Man Kwon himself, not be the first technique a new student learns.  

*Conclusion: *GM Tae Man Kwon both does and doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido in the two alternative realities that is Gweilo's claims and GM Kwon's own words, and we can therefore conclude that he both does and doesn't teach Hapkido in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.

*7. Combat Hapkido, and GM John Peligrini, 9th dan. 
*
While Combat Hapkido is usually refered to as a descendant art of Hapkido, it is still interesting to see their focus. As John Peligrini has made three different video series documenting his curriculum as his art evolved over the years, as well as written multiple books, it is easy to see what he emphasises. His current curriculum begins with breakfalls, and then goes onto proper stance, and basic strikes and kicks. The previous version of his curriculum began with an emphasis on proper stance and basic strikes, before moving onto wrist hold releases, where the concept of the live hand shows up for the first time.
*
Conclusion: *GM John Peligrini doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido, and doesn't teach it in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.
*
Kwang Sik Myung 10th dan, and The World Hapkido Federation. *

While I don't have access to the entirety of the WHF curriculum, I have several videos of GM Kwang Sik Myung and his students presenting the basics of the art, as they see fit to do so. None of these are structured exactly the way described by Gweilo above, and that discrepancy follows the trend of all the other examples above. In the two videos on WHF Hapkido published by Budovideos.com, for example, the focus is firstly on Tan Jun breathing in both, and then on offensive armbar (kal nu ki) in one, and on basic hand strikes in the second.

One could ofcourse argue that a video doesn't present a real overview of how the art is actually taught in the real world, but isn't it strange that in EVERY SINGLE EXAMPLE ABOVE, the emphasis and order of what is taught differens from Gweilo's outline? Isn't that a tad strange if, as he claims, everyone worth their salt in the Hapkido world, always introduces techniques and concepts in a certain way and order?

*Conclusion: *GM Kwang Sik Myung both does and doesn't have a true understanding of Hapkido in the two alternative realities that is Gweilo's claims and GM Kwang's own words, and we can therefore conclude that he both does and doesn't teach Hapkido in the correct way, according to Gweilo, the 3rd dan self-appointed sole defender of the true path of Hapkido.

I could go on and on and on, but I think I have made my point.
*
Overall conclusion: 

The claims of a common and universal approach to how Hapkido is taught, as presented by Gweilo above, is simply not in accordance with the vast diversity of how Hapkido is taught in the real world. While I would have no problem accepting the claim that Gweilo's outline is how things are done in his own organization, his attempt at presenting this as the gold standard and only correct way to teach Hapkido, and thereby discrediting anyone who doesn't do thing exactly as he presents them, has been shown to not hold water. 

While I have no hope that any of what is presented above will actually open up Gweilo's mind to the actual diversity in how Hapkido is taught out there, I presented this list in the hope that it makes it clear to anyone who has read his claims in this thread, thay they are not factual, and that his statements on how Hapkido should be taught, is probably more an expression of his own fundamentalism and rigidity of thought, than any reflection on how Hapkido is taught in the real world. 

I now consider myself finished with this ordeal, and will not do any more follow ups on Gweilo's wild claims, nor un-ignore him (or her, whatever applies) for the time being, as I'm quite fed up with him and his ********. Nuff said. *


----------



## Deleted member 40465 (Apr 21, 2019)

Scratch that.

Which style is best for wrist, and finger locks/holds?

Thumb locks?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 21, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Scratch that.
> 
> Which style is best for wrist, and finger locks/holds?


That’s tough to define. Several systems have them, and their applicability is arguable. Hapkido and NGA have similar approaches - both derived from Daito-ryu. Other JJJ styles have similar locks.


----------



## Deleted member 39746 (Apr 21, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> Scratch that.
> 
> Which style is best for wrist, and finger locks/holds?
> 
> Thumb locks?



Not saying all know or many can teach you or will, but if you know any police constables.   They tend to learn that as its semi useful to their progression.   (and they don't tend to care about style and just do what they do) Thats at least a real life source you can use if you have it.  

Probably not relevant however.


----------



## Gweilo (Apr 21, 2019)

@Christian Bjørnsrud , 1st I know longer train in Hapkido and have not trained in the art for 11 years, so I have no vested interest in mocking the art, on the contrary I enjoyed the art very much, and had federation and club politics been different I would still be training Hapkido.
You can claim, I claim to be a self proclaimed protector of Hapkido, I made no such claim, I spent a lot of time, effort and money, travelling throughout Europe,  the US, and Korea to attend Hapkido seminars and training courses and student exchange schemes, and can only relay what I was taught,  in your post you proclaimed to own a lot of material on grading syllabus,  from prominent Hapkidoists,  from different federations,  federations that have tried to merge over the years, which failed due to arguments over training syllabus, which they still do, IHF, WHF, KHF, all have a different view as to grading and training regimes what they do have in common are the 3 main principles,  which you did not mention in your who's who of Hapkido. To use teachers from different federations to back up your claim my argument is wrong, when the said federations cannot agree on training content is smoke and mirrors, as you make no mention of the training of the arts principles,  HAP KI Do, the way of co-ordinated power, I have already conceded I no longer train in the art, I am old and out of touch, and can only relay on what I was taught, I will say, when I trained in South Korea for six months, we did spend hours in T stance moving up and down the dojang, moving forward backwards moving the legs in a sweeping circular motion, forwards backwards, turning, we would spend 2-3 hours placing either arm out in front of us, relaxed, and then exploding the live hand, but it would seem you and I are never to agree, you know best, with your 2 hours 3 times a week training, as I stated earlier, I no longer train in the art, I was just relaying what I knew, I have no gain from knocking the art, there are no Hapkido schools near me at present, I really enjoyed the art, but I do truely believe, m if you are going to learn an art, you need to understand the core principles of the art, as many good mixed artist say, learn the essence of the art, take away what is useful,  and discard the rest, best of luck in your future training, seeing as you are ignoring me.


----------



## wab25 (Apr 22, 2019)

I don't think that any instructor, in any art, is any good... if he teaches the same first technique to every student. Or, if he teaches the same first core principle to every student. The reality is that every student is unique and different. They come with different expectations, with different abilities and different backgrounds. While you may teach the same curriculum to them all, they all start from very different places. Even as they progress through the same curriculum, they will have different challenges, different questions and different hang ups.

The good instructors are the ones that can take different people, from different starting points and bring them through the same curriculum. This means addressing different people differently... in order to teach them the same thing. A good teacher takes people from where they are to where they need to be. That means teaching each one a bit different.

If you have a bunch of people scattered around a soccer field, and you wanted them all on the midfield line... you could look at Bob, and then tell everyone to take 3 steps to the right. Then only Bob would be on the midfield line. There are some people both further and closer to the line, that would need a different number of steps. About half of the people are already to the right of the line and would need to be given the opposite instruction to the first group... move left instead of right.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 22, 2019)

wab25 said:


> I don't think that any instructor, in any art, is any good... if he teaches the same first technique to every student. Or, if he teaches the same first core principle to every student. The reality is that every student is unique and different. They come with different expectations, with different abilities and different backgrounds. While you may teach the same curriculum to them all, they all start from very different places. Even as they progress through the same curriculum, they will have different challenges, different questions and different hang ups.
> 
> The good instructors are the ones that can take different people, from different starting points and bring them through the same curriculum. This means addressing different people differently... in order to teach them the same thing. A good teacher takes people from where they are to where they need to be. That means teaching each one a bit different.
> 
> If you have a bunch of people scattered around a soccer field, and you wanted them all on the midfield line... you could look at Bob, and then tell everyone to take 3 steps to the right. Then only Bob would be on the midfield line. There are some people both further and closer to the line, that would need a different number of steps. About half of the people are already to the right of the line and would need to be given the opposite instruction to the first group... move left instead of right.


I agree with the overall principle, but does that always apply to the very first thing taught? Now, I probably teach the same exact first thing to only about 20% of my students - but that's just because I'm easily distracted. I've seen very good instructors who apparently always start at the same place, and use the reaction to that start (speed of adoption, difficulty in learning, etc.) to determine how to proceed. If the starting point is sufficiently basic that anyone can start there, it can also be used for more advanced starters (those with complementary experience) to start assessing what they already know. For instance, if I started every student with wrist releases (the first thing I learned in NGA), I'd quickly get some useful information about range of motion, fine and gross motor control, balance, ability to follow directions, understanding of the vocabulary I use, etc. I can't see any reason that couldn't be the first thing covered with every student who walks in, unless there's something truly exceptional involved.


----------



## wab25 (Apr 22, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> I agree with the overall principle, but does that always apply to the very first thing taught? Now, I probably teach the same exact first thing to only about 20% of my students - but that's just because I'm easily distracted. I've seen very good instructors who apparently always start at the same place, and use the reaction to that start (speed of adoption, difficulty in learning, etc.) to determine how to proceed. If the starting point is sufficiently basic that anyone can start there, it can also be used for more advanced starters (those with complementary experience) to start assessing what they already know. For instance, if I started every student with wrist releases (the first thing I learned in NGA), I'd quickly get some useful information about range of motion, fine and gross motor control, balance, ability to follow directions, understanding of the vocabulary I use, etc. I can't see any reason that couldn't be the first thing covered with every student who walks in, unless there's something truly exceptional involved.


So, are you really teaching that first technique or are you testing the student, with that first technique? Semantics aside, you certainly can start in the same place, to learn about your student, then very where you go from there. But, this is a case where what you are doing is not to follow the curriculum, but ascertain how to best adapt your approach to the curriculum for that student. 

I also think that as good as your first technique is at telling you what you need to know about a new student, there will be times when you already know things about the student. Either you know the student, you were informed or you notice things as you meet them. If what is best for the student, is to start somewhere else, the good teacher will start somewhere else... without any thought to "I must start here." I guess its intention. Are you teaching this first because its step 1 on the curriculum? Are you teaching this first because it is what you need in order to learn about your student? Are you teaching this first because it is where your student needs to start? I guess I sort of lump those last two together.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 22, 2019)

wab25 said:


> So, are you really teaching that first technique or are you testing the student, with that first technique? Semantics aside, you certainly can start in the same place, to learn about your student, then very where you go from there. But, this is a case where what you are doing is not to follow the curriculum, but ascertain how to best adapt your approach to the curriculum for that student.
> 
> I also think that as good as your first technique is at telling you what you need to know about a new student, there will be times when you already know things about the student. Either you know the student, you were informed or you notice things as you meet them. If what is best for the student, is to start somewhere else, the good teacher will start somewhere else... without any thought to "I must start here." I guess its intention. Are you teaching this first because its step 1 on the curriculum? Are you teaching this first because it is what you need in order to learn about your student? Are you teaching this first because it is where your student needs to start? I guess I sort of lump those last two together.


To give you an idea of how useful I find that as a first lesson (when I'm not distracted by something else I want to teach that day), I've even used it for a student transferring in from a nearby dojo, with 3 years of training within the same association. As one of the senior students, I was asked to run him through his paces and assess where he'd need some remediation (differences between schools, rather than actual weaknesses for the student). I still started with this, because it gives a quick baseline.

So, yeah, it might be semantics. If the student doesn't know it, I'd teach it. If they do know it (and I already know that), I'd normally start with it, anyway, to get a quick idea on some fundamental principles (how much strength do they depend on, how far have they gotten in their relaxation during technique, have they been taught unitized or linked movement, etc.). And that does get to my point - I could "teach" (again, semantics there - not always the actual correct word) the same thing to every starting student. The second thing I teach would vary dramatically between a brand-new, untrained, uncoordinated person, compared to that purple belt who changed schools.


----------



## Headhunter (Apr 22, 2019)

Christian Bjørnsrud said:


> I simply cannot let Gweilo's claims about how Hapkido is generally taught around the world stand unchallenged, and while I am sure that this post will be met with another form of the no true scotsman fallacy, I will not accept Gweilo self-appointed role as sole holder of the power of definition for how Hapkido is taught worldwide.
> 
> I have no clue as to why Gweilo seemingly goes out of his way to discredit me, and even twist my words to confirm with this attempt, simply because I didn't answer his question about the first technique I ever learned to his satisfaction, but I suspect it has something to do with a wish to present his own Hapkido style as the sole, true Hapkido, in true religious fundamentalism-style, which would make everyone else, including me, imposters and heretics.
> 
> ...


Did anyone actually make it all the way through this rant?


----------



## CKB (Apr 22, 2019)

Why knows. I just wanted to give multiple counter examples to a certain users dogmatic statements about how Hapkido is taught. I guess it is probably not of interest to the wast majority of users in here, but at least I got out some steam writing it.


----------



## VPT (Apr 22, 2019)

I opened this thread with gleeful excitement, getting ready to read five pages of koryu and jujutsu discussion. Damn.


----------



## Buka (Apr 22, 2019)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yep, but in those cases you generally don’t apply techniques which are designed to break limbs or choke someone unconscious. Any good grappler should know ways to control someone without damaging them.



Exactly. But I'm far from being a good grappler.

I've used the choke (position) to temporarily hold people without actually squeezing hard enough to choke them. Especially standing, moving them backwards, shaking them off balance as we move. I've always loved that position.


----------



## Hanzou (Jun 15, 2019)

I know this thread has probably run its course, but if you're looking for a softer Japanese style rooted in JJJ, I'd recommend Aikido.


----------



## Ivan (Jun 17, 2019)

boldeagle67 said:


> I recently gave up on Brazilian jujitsu. I love the sport, but my body is mangled - cauliflower ear, scar tissue on my eye, beginning of arthritis on my finger/hand. This is after only 3 months of consistent training.
> 
> I am interested in Japanese jujitsu, but there just isn't any information about it out there.
> 
> ...


I train in a club called Kuro Obi Ju Jitsu, which is for self defence. In my club, the cardio is light and we only train through sheer repetition. Months and months of just repeating the same 20 techniques. You need good grip for lapel chokes and collar holds, but apart from that (as far as I know) we mostly keep away from grabbing onto the gi or the belt so that we learn to appy the techniques without the need for a gi or a coat to grab onto the opponent.

Sadly, many clubs for TJJ (including mine) don't encourage sparring, and I haven't been able to pressure test the techniques which I have (supposedly) learnt.


----------



## Hanzou (Jun 18, 2019)

Ivan said:


> I train in a club called Kuro Obi Ju Jitsu, which is for self defence. In my club, the cardio is light and we only train through sheer repetition. Months and months of just repeating the same 20 techniques. You need good grip for lapel chokes and collar holds, but apart from that (as far as I know) we mostly keep away from grabbing onto the gi or the belt so that we learn to appy the techniques without the need for a gi or a coat to grab onto the opponent.
> 
> Sadly, many clubs for TJJ (including mine) don't encourage sparring, and I haven't been able to pressure test the techniques which I have (supposedly) learnt.



If your club doesn't allow sparring, you guys need to either form groups outside of class to spar, or go somewhere else. Lack of sparring is a killer, because you're not learning how to utilize your techniques under stress.


----------



## marques (Jun 18, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> If your club doesn't allow sparring, you guys need to either form groups outside of class to spar, or go somewhere else. Lack of sparring is a killer, because you're not learning how to utilize your techniques under stress.


Agree. Just be careful how do you train and with the people involved. Sparring easily drifts to silliness, even under formal supervision.


----------



## BrendanF (Jun 19, 2019)

Ivan said:


> Sadly, many clubs for TJJ (including mine) don't encourage sparring, and I haven't been able to pressure test the techniques which I have (supposedly) learnt.



Just join a judo dojo.

And 'kuro obi' JJ is not Traditional JJJ, it's gendai (modern) JJ.  Most folks take 'traditional' to mean actual koryu JJ.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jun 19, 2019)

Hanzou said:


> I know this thread has probably run its course, but if you're looking for a softer Japanese style rooted in JJJ, I'd recommend Aikido.


I had to do a triple take at the username and post to make sure I read it right.


----------



## Headhunter (Jun 21, 2019)

Ivan said:


> I train in a club called Kuro Obi Ju Jitsu, which is for self defence. In my club, the cardio is light and we only train through sheer repetition. Months and months of just repeating the same 20 techniques. You need good grip for lapel chokes and collar holds, but apart from that (as far as I know) we mostly keep away from grabbing onto the gi or the belt so that we learn to appy the techniques without the need for a gi or a coat to grab onto the opponent.
> 
> Sadly, many clubs for TJJ (including mine) don't encourage sparring, and I haven't been able to pressure test the techniques which I have (supposedly) learnt.


For grappling you need to roll. For stand up it isn't as important I mean you can get away with it but grappling you 100% need live training or in a real match all the techniques will be useless


----------

