# What are my options?



## MAist25 (Jul 16, 2011)

Hey guys,

I posted a while ago in the Taekwondo section about a teacher of mine who I learned to be a semi-fraud, I guess you could call him. He claims to be a 5th Dan in Hapkido and 3rd in Taekwondo. He is completely legit in TKD because he has certification through the USAT (Richard Chun's group), and Kukkiwon. I know his exact lineage and everything adds up. However, he never had any Hapkido certificates, he never knew his lineage, or the kwan of Hapkido he learned. He always said he simply wasnt concerned with all that. What I found out though is that the guy he claims to have been taught by (Master X, lets say) doesnt exist. There is, however, a man in South Korea who is an 8th Dan in Hapkido with the same name of the Master X my teacher claims to have been taught by. In using this mans name, he was able to receive rank through a completely legitimate and very well respected Hapkido organization for 4th Dan. So basically, because he knows TKD, some joint locks and throws that he learned from his Taekwondo teacher and a few Ju-Jutsu seminars, he is now in possession of a 4th Dan certificate unbeknownst to the legitimate org he belongs to.

Anyways, I received rank through my teacher in Hapkido and Taekwondo. My TKD certification comes directly through the USTA and Kukkiwon, and I am continuing my training in Kukkiwon TKD at another school while I am up at college. My Hapkido rank comes from my teacher and through the legitimate organization he belongs to. So basically I am a TKD guy who knows some joint locks from my teacher and some throws from my previous training in Judo. I have also attended a few seminars with the legit org we belong to as well. The thing is that I have been lied to and was told I was learning Hapkido, even though I really wasnt and I feel like I have been ripped off.

I have since left my school because of what I found out about my teacher but I still have a passion for Hapkido and want to continue my training. What I learned from my teacher was not Hapkido but it also wasnt garbage. My teacher did know some great locks and throws, combined with the things I knew from Judo. Also, my teacher has been to many seminars with the legit org he received rank from. He is a solid martial artist and teaches good martial arts. I mean, he was able to get a 4th Dan from a legit organization while showing them absolutely no paperwork, only pure technique on the mat. I dont know what to think of myself though. Because we are under this organization that believes my instructor to have the skill of a 4th Dan make my training in Hapkido legit? And now what about the lineage thing? Am I the only Hapkido practitioner that does not have a direct link to Choi, or a rather discombobulated one? I just dont know anymore... What do you guys think? I want to continue training in Hapkido but I dont know where to begin..... I have a Hapkido 1st Dan certificate sitting in my room that took me 6 years of hard work to earn, and I need to pretend it doesnt exist? It just sucks...


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jul 16, 2011)

MAist25 said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> What I learned from my teacher was not Hapkido but it also wasnt garbage. My teacher did know some great locks and throws, combined with the things I knew from Judo. Also, my teacher has been to many seminars with the legit org he received rank from. He is a solid martial artist and teaches good martial arts. I mean, he was able to get a 4th Dan from a legit organization while showing them absolutely no paperwork, only pure technique on the mat. I dont know what to think of myself though. Because we are under this organization that believes my instructor to have the skill of a 4th Dan make my training in Hapkido legit?



Let's take a look at the above, piece by piece;



> What I learned from my teacher was not Hapkido but it also wasnt garbage.



If it wasn't Hapkido, what was it then?  Hapkido is just a label and I think you'll find that there are many 'flavors' of Hapkido that don't always resemble each other.



> My teacher did know some great locks and throws, combined with the things I knew from Judo.



These things are part of HKD.



> Also, my teacher has been to many seminars with the legit org he received rank from.



So he's willing to continue his education to perhaps make up for gaps he may have in his HKD training.



> He is a solid martial artist and teaches good martial arts. I mean, he  was able to get a 4th Dan from a legit organization while showing them  absolutely no paperwork, only pure technique on the mat.



Paperwork doesn't always mean anything.  If this legite org ranked him as a master based purely on the demonstration of skill presented...what's that tell you.  Either this org isn't legite or he was able to demonstrate something impressive enough to warrant the rank.



> Because we are under this organization that believes my instructor to  have the skill of a 4th Dan make my training in Hapkido legit?



I would say yes.  



> And now what about the lineage thing?



Have you seen my thread in the TKD section where I ask about the importance of lineage?  Most people either don't know or don't care.  I think it's important and if you do as well, start your lineage with your instructor.  It all has to begin somewhere.



> I have a Hapkido 1st Dan certificate sitting in my room that took me 6 years of hard work to earn,



Then as far as I'm concerned, you're a 1st Dan in Hapkido.  You earned it, enjoy it.


----------



## dortiz (Jul 16, 2011)

"I mean, he was able to get a 4th Dan from a legit organization while showing them absolutely no paperwork, only pure technique on the mat."

To most folks this holds a lot more water. In an ideal world the skills say it all. Its nice to get official certs if you want to teach later and it sounds like he went ahead and joined a good group for that.


----------



## MAist25 (Jul 17, 2011)

Thanks for the replies guys. Kong Soo Do, I did read your thread on lineage and I did see a lot of "I dont know's" and "I dont care's" when it comes to lineage. I dont think lineage is important at all for learning good martial arts. But I always thought lineage was important when it comes to calling your art something specific, like Hapkido. Sure someone could be great at joint locks and throws, etc. but does that make him good at Hapkido or just good at something that looks like Hapkido? Can someone go from no actual rank in any joint-locking or throwing martial art at all to a 4th dan in Hapkido just by attending some seminars? I mean I respect him for is actually getting on the mat and proving he can perform the techniques. What I dont respect him for is that he lied about having previous rank in Hapkido. I think the reason he wanted to get Hapkido certs was to keep the Korean theme in his school. He was already teaching Taekwondo so he wanted to teach a Korean system alongside that, instead of a collaboration of ju-jutsu locks, some HKD locks, TKD locks, etc.

dortiz, I think you are right that he wanted to get official certs and continue his training and I respect that. And I also understand why he wouldnt want to start over at white belt in a joint-locking/throwing art like Hapkido when he already knew a lot of things from his previous training in other joint-locking systems. I certainly think the way he approached his training by actually getting on the mat is much better than the people who claim to be Hapkido black belts through their home study dvd's though.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jul 17, 2011)

To further the discussion, back in 1954 Kanei Uechi Sensei held a mass promotion ceremony when first adopting the Dan/Kyu system of rank.  He had several students do directly to Godan (5th Dan), while many more filled in the ranks between 1st and 4th.  Now, they had been training of course for quite some time and could demonstrate skill appropriate with what a Uechi Ryu Godan should know.  This doesn't seem to be much different than what your instructor has done?  

I don't know first-hand of course, but this is how it sounds from your description.  If a legitimate Hapkido organization saw what he could do and recognized him as 4th, then it doesn't sound much different than what has been done in the past.  As far as honesty, don't know him so difficult to comment.


----------



## MAist25 (Jul 17, 2011)

Very cool, I did not know that. However, I do know that Choi, Yong-Sool himself claimed to have learned Daito-Ryu Aiki Ju-Jutsu directly from Takeda, Sensei and he said that his certificates were stolen from him, so even he had nothing to show except for pure skill. I guess I have always just been questioning things because my instructor didnt do things the "conventional" way, but that doesnt necessarily mean he did things the wrong way. I think people today are way too hung up on things like certificates and organizations, etc. I seems like back in the day things were done much better, where practitioners just did things their own way and focused more on actual training than getting involved in politics. There was a lot less caring about what other people thought about you and instead working to become better at what you do, ignoring the static buzzing around you.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 18, 2011)

Well, I going to take a different stance.  It appears there is too much selling of certificates for money only these days.  I am against that, no matter how skilled the practicioner.  If you had been diligent in studying TKD videos for 5 years, do you think it would be appropriate to be given a 2nd or 3rd or even 4th degree in TKD?  Is there nothing to be learned in the dojo that counts?  I think lineage counts to show where you came from, and there is a legitimate teaching method and curriculum.  Is my lineage directly from Choi or another is less important than the fact there is a line of established GM from some point.  Not everyone may agree, but that is how I feel.  It helps keep those without good training from contaminating an art imho.

Now as to your teacher, since I don't know all the details (and you may not either), it is more difficult to comment.  Did he get legitimate training?  I don't know.  I do have some concerns about just seminars to get Masters rank.  Why doesn't everyone just do it that way?  I have earned 2nd Dan in Hapkido while in Korea, and trained to 3rd Dan.  Since I have read Kimm's first book, "Hapkido, Korean Martial Arts" from cover to cover, should I now ask for certification to GM level?  I don't think so.  Sounds a little foolish doesn't it?  

But again, I don't know what training your teacher got, or how he got it.  As I said, I had training from  my GM to 3rd Dan.  But I never tested a single gup from 2nd to 3rd.  Nonetheless, I am sure my GM would have tested me for 3rd Dan had we ever had the chance to get together for it.  I was able to continure training as I taught other students lower belts.  My GM and I just never got together for testing.  So I can't say based on what you have told us that he never got suficient training to legitimately claim righteous knowledge.  But from what you have told us, I am suspicious and have grave doubts.

But what did you do for 6 years?  Did you study Hapkido exclusively for 6 years?  It is entirely possible you have the skills appropriate to 1st Dan.  And different schools have different requirements.  Dr. Kimm had some differences from my school.  Not significant really, but different skills in some cases.  Is his school less valid than my GM's?  I don't think so.  I am aware of a school in the US, that from its web presence, appears to teach an abreviated Hapkido.  Yet it gives Dan ratings from a legitimate school.  Is the web presence misleading? perhaps.  More may be taught that is talked about on their web site.  Unless you have a well established lienage from a school that is known to police its Masters and Grand Masters well, one has to worry.

Since you have left your school and old teacher, perhaps you should explore what you consider a legitimate school for the opportunity to study with them for a few months (so you can learn any few different skills needed) and test to 1st Dan.  I would be careful telling that school all the details of why you left.  You may not be correct, and could find yourself in court no matter.  Just see if they are willing to let you study a little and test in their style.


----------



## MAist25 (Jul 18, 2011)

The reason I left my school is because, like you said, I had doubts about my instructors Hapkido background. I was learning solid martial arts, but I could never get any concrete info on his teacher, what our lineage was, etc. He was never someone who cared much about history or lineage or any of that, just training. Anyway, I kind of got fed up with the whole thing and left, and I made it known to him my reasons for leaving. I might also add that I was his top student along with one other friend of mine who also left alongside me for the same reasons. I told him that I simply wanted some sort of proof that what I was learning was Hapkido and instead he ousted me off and said I betrayed him by questioning his legitimacy. But hey, I am a customer and I want to know that I am getting what I'm paying for. 

As for my training, I trained for 4 years to 1st Dan and continued my training for almost 2 years longer before deciding to call it quits. You mentioned finding another school and training there for a while. There are 2 other people who I know teach Hapkido where I am from but they are both about an hours drive away. One is a Taekwondo teacher who also lists himself as a Hapkido "expert" and teaches Hapkido on the side, but I dont think he issues rank in it. And the other is a Combat Hapkido school. I just recently emailed the International Combat Hapkido Federation about continuing my training at the school closest to me. However, I would probably only be able to train like once per week or once every other week for 4 months out of the year because of the distance and because of school. Because of this, I wrote to them that I am interesting in simply continuing my training, not starting over. It would be a huge waste of time and money for me to drive an hour each way once a week to learn how to do a forward roll.... I am still waiting to hear back from them and I am interested in what they have to say. I know the ICHF is pretty open and not as strict as many of the other more traditional Hapkido orgs. And the whole reason I am doing this is not for rank, I just simply want to train and get better. Like I said, I just do not have enough time at home to start all over at white belt and plan on getting anywhere. While at school I am continuing my training full time in Taekwondo and there are no HKD schools in the area near my college either. Right now it seems the ICHF is my best bet for continuing in Hapkido, and if they are willing to help me out I will certainly become a member. I just want to be able to progress in the art and I do not want to be one of these ridiculous long distance dvd guys. If the ICHF will provide me with a good instructor that is relatively close, the ability to go to seminars, and to continue on in my training then I will be happy. I just want to get my *** on the mat and train.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jul 18, 2011)

MAist25 said:


> The reason I left my school is because, like you said, I had doubts about my instructors Hapkido background. I was learning solid martial arts, but I could never get any concrete info on his teacher, what our lineage was, etc. He was never someone who cared much about history or lineage or any of that, just training.
> 
> *There is perhaps some place for emphasis on technique.  But I have to wonder if he isn't in to that because he has none.*
> 
> ...



Good luck in your quest.  Hapkido is a good art and worth learning.


----------



## zDom (Jul 19, 2011)

Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. There are plenty of people out there who have studied taekwondo extensively, are taught a few wrist locks and throws and end up certified as hapkido blacks belts equal to or very near their taekwondo rank &#8212; even though the hours they spent training hapkido are nowhere near the hours invested in their TKD training.

It sounds like you have probably received some training in legitimate HKD techniques.

I think if you found an instructor dedicated solely to HKD rather than treating it as a modular add-on to TKD, you might find a deeper understanding of what hapkido really is.


----------



## MAist25 (Jul 19, 2011)

zDom, thanks for your reply. As a matter of fact, I just contacted the International Combat Hapkido Federation since there is a school near where I live. Grandmanster Pellegrini emailed me back and stated that he will recognize my rank and that I will be able to continue my training in Hapkido towards my 2nd Dan. I am pretty happy about this because I will be able to focus 100% on Hapkido, like you said, instead of it being a TKD add-on.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jul 30, 2011)

I'd be interested to know if you like the CHKD training once you're into it, and how it differs (if at all) from what you've learned so far.


----------



## Native (Dec 7, 2011)

I know this is an old thread, but I am looking at a CHKD school in my area. I was curious about your experience with this and how you think it compares to the HKD you learned previously.

Thanks!


----------



## MAist25 (Dec 7, 2011)

Hey bud, I actually ended up not training at the CHKD school, so I can't really comment on the system from personal experience. However, I did communicate with GM Pellegrini via Email so I can comment on what little experience I have dealing with him and his organization. First off, he seems to have a genuine interest in spreading the art of hapkido and is very accommodating to people interested in the art. His organization also provides tons of opportunities to participate in different seminars that focus specifically on certain aspects that dont really get covered on a daily basis in your everyday hapkido class. The man is very open in welcoming in people who simply enjoy training. Based off of what I saw I would definitely say check out the CHKD school near you. Obviously, the instructor and training environment in that specific dojang is what is most important but he seems to have a pretty solid group so I see no reason why you should stay clear.


----------



## puunui (Dec 14, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> If it wasn't Hapkido, what was it then?  Hapkido is just a label and I think you'll find that there are many 'flavors' of Hapkido that don't always resemble each other.




Hapkido isn't "just a label", but rather a unique martial art with distinct characteristics. The fact that Hapkido allows its senior practitioners a certain amount of freedom to express themselves does not in any way take away from the fact that Hapkido is, a unique martial art.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 15, 2011)

puunui said:


> Hapkido isn't "just a label", but rather a unique martial art with distinct characteristics. The fact that Hapkido allows its senior practitioners a certain amount of freedom to express themselves does not in any way take away from the fact that Hapkido is, a unique martial art.



Negative Glenn.

Webster's defines the word 'unique' as follows;

:  Being the only one.
:  Being without a like or equal.

If there were no outward signs (such as signs, labels, uniforms etc), and a person walked into a room where practitioners were training, they would be hard pressed to distinguish between Hapkido, Aiki Jujutsu, Chin Na or a variety of other arts of a similar nature.  Indeed, even within one art such as Hapkido,  some have forms and some don't.  Some emphasis more kicking, others less.  Some more realistic principles, others not so much.  Hapkido certainly isn't the only one and it certainly isn't without like or equal.  It is a label.


----------



## puunui (Dec 15, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Negative Glenn.
> 
> Webster's defines the word 'unique' as follows;
> 
> ...




Hapkido fits that webster definition. Hapkidoin know what I am talking about. As for telling the difference between hapkido, aikijutsu, chin na or other practitioners, I can tell the difference. I can also tell the difference between someone who trained in Hapkido and another person who trained in something else and is trying to call it Hapkido. At least the difference between that and good Hapkido. I can also tell the difference between someone who learned a tiny bit of Hapkido and mix in their own crap and someone who has learned hapkido for a long time from a competent instructor. Hapkidoin recognize other hapkidoin instantly, just like taekwondoin can tell the difference between a karateka and a taekwondoin, instantly.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 15, 2011)

puunui said:


> Hapkido fits that webster definition.



No, as I already pointed out, it does not.  I know that you'd like to think so.



> As for telling the difference between hapkido, aikijutsu, chin na or other practitioners, I can tell the difference.



 I know that you'd like to believe you can tell the difference.


----------



## puunui (Dec 15, 2011)

MAist25 said:


> And I also understand why he wouldnt want to start over at white belt in a joint-locking/throwing art like Hapkido when he already knew a lot of things from his previous training in other joint-locking systems.




What's the big deal with starting over at white belt? I was a hapkido 3rd Dan who had taught for several years as an assistant under my original hapkido teacher when I moved to California for school. But when I went to learn from GM JI Han Jae in California, I put on a white belt and started all over. And when I retested for dan rank, I started back down at 1st Dan and went through all the ranks, without skipping any. I have every dan certificate from 1st to my current rank, for taekwondo and hapkido. 

When I opened my own dojang, I noticed that those who were voluntarily willing to do the same were the ones who learned the longest and the most, and eventually ended up with the highest dan ranks. The ones who chose to wear their older or present ranks tended to not last as long. As a policy I never bring up the issue of what rank a new student should wear, I leave it up to them to determine what belt they choose to wear. If the parents or the students asks if it is ok to wear a white belt or their present belt, I always tell them whatever they want to do is ok. To me, it is a test of character, that decision of what belt to wear in the new dojang.


----------



## puunui (Dec 15, 2011)

Kong Soo Do said:


> No, as I already pointed out, it does not.  I know that you'd like to think so.
> 
> I know that you'd like to believe you can tell the difference.




I think it is more telling that you think they are all the same. By the way, what is your hapkido background? Have you actually studied the art for any length of time?


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 15, 2011)

Gentlemen, drop the spitting contest or take it to PMs.  Everybody knows you don't like each other.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 15, 2011)

jks9199 said:


> Gentlemen, drop the spitting contest or take it to PMs.  Everybody knows you don't like each other.



I didn't consider this a spitting contest until Glenn tried (once again) to make the thread about me.  However, since Glenn knows that he has been offered a venue to discuss 'me', should he chose to actually take it, his attempts at derailing the thread can be ignored.  

Back to the OP


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 15, 2011)

MAist25 said:


> Hey bud, I actually ended up not training at the CHKD school, so I can't really comment on the system from personal experience. However, I did communicate with GM Pellegrini via Email so I can comment on what little experience I have dealing with him and his organization. First off, he seems to have a genuine interest in spreading the art of hapkido and is very accommodating to people interested in the art. His organization also provides tons of opportunities to participate in different seminars that focus specifically on certain aspects that dont really get covered on a daily basis in your everyday hapkido class. The man is very open in welcoming in people who simply enjoy training. Based off of what I saw I would definitely say check out the CHKD school near you. Obviously, the instructor and training environment in that specific dojang is what is most important but he seems to have a pretty solid group so I see no reason why you should stay clear.



Was there anything in particular that made you decline training at the CHKD school?  What did you decide to do for your training?


----------



## MAist25 (Dec 15, 2011)

Yes. I ended up leaving the school and that is why i was looking for somewhere else to train. Myself and another one of my instructors highest ranking students both left. About 2 months later, I got a call from my buddy who tested alongside me for our black belts, and he told me our teacher was closing the school down. Instead of letting it go he decided to take charge and became the head instructor to keep the school open. We were set to test for our 2nd Dan's the same summer, but never got the chance to because I left first and the school closed before he could. So, we called up the head of the organization we belong to and told him what was going on. He encouraged us to keep the school open and promoted us both to 2nd Dan a short while later. So now we are the head instructors at the school and continue our training mostly through seminars with the organization and just teach and practice what we know, which is up to 2nd Dan. I'm also a 2nd Dan in TKD and continue training on a daily basis in that. No idea what we're going to do about promoting people but right now the vast majority of our students are beginners and we are not a school that is really into ranks, just training hard, so we'll worry about promoting when the time comes.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 16, 2011)

MAist25 said:


> Yes. I ended up leaving the school and that is why i was looking for somewhere else to train. Myself and another one of my instructors highest ranking students both left. About 2 months later, I got a call from my buddy who tested alongside me for our black belts, and he told me our teacher was closing the school down. Instead of letting it go he decided to take charge and became the head instructor to keep the school open. We were set to test for our 2nd Dan's the same summer, but never got the chance to because I left first and the school closed before he could. So, we called up the head of the organization we belong to and told him what was going on. He encouraged us to keep the school open and promoted us both to 2nd Dan a short while later. So now we are the head instructors at the school and continue our training mostly through seminars with the organization and just teach and practice what we know, which is up to 2nd Dan. I'm also a 2nd Dan in TKD and continue training on a daily basis in that. No idea what we're going to do about promoting people but right now the vast majority of our students are beginners and we are not a school that is really into ranks, just training hard, so we'll worry about promoting when the time comes.



Excellent!  I'm happy that everything has worked out for you and the school.  I agree, don't worry about the ranks and promotions until it is much closer to an actual need.  By then, I'm sure the organization can assist you with it.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 21, 2011)

Glad to hear everything worked out for you! I will add, that a piece of paper doesn't necessarily signify quality!


----------



## MAist25 (Dec 21, 2011)

Thanks guys! Yea, I'm really happy with the way things worked out.


----------



## Indie12 (Dec 22, 2011)

What I meant to say was, a certificate doesn't necessarily mean the Instructors of qualitiy nor actually know's what he/she is doing or teaching. A certificate is just a piece of paper, like a belt is just a piece of clothing!


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Dec 23, 2011)

Indie12 said:


> What I meant to say was, a certificate doesn't necessarily mean the Instructors of qualitiy nor actually know's what he/she is doing or teaching. A certificate is just a piece of paper, like a belt is just a piece of clothing!



Very true.  A true martial artist is what he/she can do and/or teach.  Not what is on their wall or around their waist.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 6, 2012)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Negative Glenn.
> 
> Webster's defines the word 'unique' as follows;
> 
> ...


I have to agree with Glenn on this one.  

And yes, if there were no outward signs (such as signs, labels, uniforms etc), and a person (assuming that he or she knew what they were looking at) walked into a room where practitioners were training, it would be fairly easy to distinguish between the arts that you listed and hapkido.  And you can include aikdio on that list as well.  The differences go well beyond the uniform.  They may not be apparent to a non-hapkidoin, but they are there and though they may be subtle, they do make the art unique.  

Yes, there are different expressions.  But those expressions each share what makes hapkido hapkido.


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> They may not be apparent to a non-hapkidoin, but they are there and though they may be subtle, they do make the art unique.




I studied both Shotokan Karate and Aikido before studying Taekwondo and Hapkido, and in the beginning, I would look at Taekwondo and Hapkido in comparison to Karate and Aikido, saying this or that was the same. But as I progressed down the road, I came to a place where I saw taekwondo and hapkido for what they are, each its own unique martial art. To me, the day I stopped making those types of comparisons was the day that I became a true taekwondoin/hapkidoin. It was that day that I got rid of a mental block which prevented me from seeing these two arts in their own right.


----------



## dancingalone (Jan 9, 2012)

So out of curiosity what is the perceived distinguishing physical characteristic hapkido when contrasted to aikido or jujutsu or chin na?  The primary one I have observed as someone who practices aikido is the hapkido versions of the locks and pins are more direct or abrupt and thus likely cause more pain and physical damage.  (I am most familiar with the hapkido as taught by some people in GM JR West's group.)


----------



## puunui (Jan 9, 2012)

dancingalone said:


> So out of curiosity what is the perceived distinguishing physical characteristic hapkido when contrasted to aikido or jujutsu or chin na?  The primary one I have observed as someone who practices aikido is the hapkido versions of the locks and pins are more direct or abrupt and thus likely cause more pain and physical damage.  (I am most familiar with the hapkido as taught by some people in GM JR West's group.)



As you stated, Aikido is much more circular than Hapkido as far as the execution of techniques. The philosophical emphasis is also different, even though in my opinion both aikido and hapkido have a generally non-violent disposition. It isn't the joint locks and throws so much as it is the entire experience. A hapkido class feels different and is structured differently than an aikido one.


----------



## zDom (Jan 10, 2012)

puunui said:


> As you stated, Aikido is much more circular than Hapkido as far as the execution of techniques. The philosophical emphasis is also different, even though in my opinion both aikido and hapkido have a generally non-violent disposition. It isn't the joint locks and throws so much as it is the entire experience. A hapkido class feels different and is structured differently than an aikido one.



Hapkido as we train it at the MSK does have both circular and linear movements, both soft style and hard style techniques.

As for the "non-violent disposition" of hapkido I would disagree. We train followups which add trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended rather than hoping, as I understand Aikido does, that our attacker will see the error of his/her ways and decide to stop attacking. "Do as little harm to the attacker as possible" is NOT very high on our list of priorities.


----------



## puunui (Jan 10, 2012)

zDom said:


> As for the "non-violent disposition" of hapkido I would disagree. We train followups which add trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended rather than hoping, as I understand Aikido does, that our attacker will see the error of his/her ways and decide to stop attacking. "Do as little harm to the attacker as possible" is NOT very high on our list of priorities.



So under your hapkido, the guiding principle is to add "trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended"? Is that something that was taught by the founder of your style, or was that added later by someone else? If it was someone else, who was the person who made the above your guiding philosophy? You?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Jan 10, 2012)

zDom said:


> "Do as little harm to the attacker as possible" is NOT very high on our list of priorities.


I can relate to this and felt this way up until relatively recently.  I had to come to terms with the fact that this goes against my beliefs in every other area of my life.  I have concluded that putting more harm and negativity back into the world does not make the world a better place, regardless of how it makes me feel at the time.


----------



## zDom (Jan 10, 2012)

puunui said:


> So under your hapkido, the guiding principle is to add "*trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended*"? Is that something that was taught by the founder of your style, or was that added later by someone else? If it was someone else, who was the person who made the above your guiding philosophy? You?



That was a paraphrase. To be more specific, we train to always follow up after a throw. 

Now for some context:

My instructor was taught by Lee H. Park who learned from Won Kwang-Wha (fun fact: He Young Kimm asked Park to join him in the U.S. in part so that Kimm could continue training in hapkido).

Won Kwang-Wha was a body guard for a congressman. Practical combat applications are very much a part of the Korean MSK and Park's MSK (named in honor of the kwan in which he was trained, but a curriculum set by Park).

It is not our priority to hurt an attacker as much as possible. We do work techniques for control and restraint. But ending the threat, rendering an attacker unable to continue attacking, is a higher priority than the physical welfare of our attacker.

Example of how this is reflected in technique: after a throw, we immediately follow up. Our choice &#8212; could be stomp kick, punch, neck break, drop into a choke or armbar.. whatever.

But it reflects a mindset of: train to make SURE they stay down. Default setting is "followup technique" but we are people of good character. If an opponent is obviously seriously hurt by a throw and not continuing an attack, we don't stomp on their head.

But we certainly are not going to let them regain their feet and composure only to attack again because of some altrustic spiritual path.


----------



## zDom (Jan 10, 2012)

Compare this, if you will, to how LEO and CCWers are instructed to use their firearms: stop the threat.

Don't "shoot to wound" or "fire warning shots" or even "shoot to kill" &#8212; just continue shooting until the threat is ended. THEN worry about the attacker's wellbeing or not.

Same deal with MSK HKD, as I understand it.


----------



## dancingalone (Jan 10, 2012)

zDom said:


> But we certainly are not going to let them regain their feet and composure only to attack again because of some altrustic spiritual path.



Who would?  The philosophy implicit within aikido doesn't say we should favor peace to the point of victimizing ourselves.  It's merely that we should do the minimum amount of hurt to another in the goal of protecting ourselves.  If that means not hurting our attacker at all, that's great.  Otherwise, we do the best we can.


----------



## puunui (Jan 10, 2012)

zDom said:


> My instructor was taught by Lee H. Park who learned from Won Kwang-Wha (fun fact: He Young Kimm asked Park to join him in the U.S. in part so that Kimm could continue training in hapkido).




And Dr. Kimm left the Moo Sul Kwan in favor of Kuk Sool and eventually Sin Moo Hapkido because he felt the Moo Sul Kwan curriculum was limited technically and he wanted more. 




zDom said:


> Won Kwang-Wha was a body guard for a congressman. Practical combat  applications are very much a part of the Korean MSK and Park's MSK  (named in honor of the kwan in which he was trained, but a curriculum  set by Park).



Other hapkido practitioners served as bodyguards for politicians as well. GM Ji and many of his students for example, were bodyguards for the President of Korea.




zDom said:


> It is not our priority to hurt an attacker as much as possible. We do  work techniques for control and restraint. But ending the threat,  rendering an attacker unable to continue attacking, is a higher priority  than the physical welfare of our attacker.



And there are many ways to accomplish that. For example, your wife or daughter flips out and starts attacking you. Are you going to "*add **trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended*"? After you throw your wife or daughter, which follow up would you use -- a stomp  kick, punch, neck break, drop into a choke or armbar?



zDom said:


> we are people of good character.



I'm sure that you are of good character. I hope and assume all true hapkido practitioners and martial artists are the same way, until proven otherwise. 




zDom said:


> If  an opponent is obviously seriously hurt by a throw and not continuing  an attack, we don't stomp on their head. But we certainly are not going to let them regain their feet and  composure only to attack again because of some altrustic spiritual path.



I think you misunderstand what was written previously. dancing alone gives a good explanation of not only aikido's "altrusitic spiritual path" but hapkido's as well.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 10, 2012)

zDom said:


> Compare this, if you will, to how LEO and CCWers are instructed to use their firearms: stop the threat.
> 
> Don't "shoot to wound" or "fire warning shots" or even "shoot to kill" &#8212; just continue shooting until the threat is ended. THEN worry about the attacker's wellbeing or not.
> 
> Same deal with MSK HKD, as I understand it.



If I may offer some information in regards to L.E. and how we train with firearms since it was brought up.  We train to '*fire for maximum effect to stop the threat*'.  In most states it is illegal to 'shoot to wound' or to fire warning shots.  Here is the reason(s);



People do not react in real life to bullet wounds the way Hollywood portrays.  They do not fly back 6 feet.  In real life, they only rarely fall down and if so, it is a usually a psychological reaction not a physiological reaction.  In other words, they choose to fall down  rather than the bullet making them fall down.  To further clarify, a bullet 'can' make a person fall down due to a CNS shot or loss of BP (which takes quite a bit of time and the attacker is usually still able to continue the attack).  But a bullet cannot, in and of itself, physically make someone fall down due to kinetic energy.  There isn't enough 'energy' to accomplish this, even from rifle rounds.  One needs to fire for COM (center of mass) where the vital organs are located to maximize the potential for a CNS shot or rapid loss of BP.  One needs to be on target with as many follow up shots as are needed to stop the threat.  The ammunition needs to be able to penetrate deep enough to hit the CNS or a vital organ. 
A person is responsible for each and every shot fired.  A 'warning shot' means a round is going to be going somewhere other than the intended target. 
A 'shot to wound' may work on T.V. or the movies, but it usually requires an attempt to shoot the arms or legs which are smaller, moving targets.  To be able to successfully accomplish this, while under duress is dramatically less than shooting the largest portion of the human body.  Again, we are responsible for every round fired. 
I'm a senior member of several professional firearm forums.  The following thread may be of assistance to anyone wishing further, or more in-depth information http://excoboard.com/martialwarrior/148268/1784064 
 


			
				dancingalone said:
			
		

> The philosophy implicit within aikido doesn't say we should favor peace  to the point of victimizing ourselves.  It's merely that we should do  the minimum amount of hurt to another in the goal of protecting  ourselves.  If that means not hurting our attacker at all, that's great.   Otherwise, we do the best we can.



Agreed.  I've posted many times before that the application of force needs to be appropriate to the situation.  It needs to take into account subject/attacker factors.  Is the altercation a drunk uncle at the family BBQ?  Different response level than that of an attacker attempting to cause as much damage to you as possible in the shortest amount of time.  Keeping in mind (statistic from L.E. training circles based upon real world data) that the 'average' altercation lasts 7 seconds with injury occurring in the first 3 seconds (in regards to physical altercations such as muggings, rape, domestics etc).  An important consideration is that *MINIMAL* force may not be *MINIMUM* force.  

One of the things that I add every time I use force is the statement, 'The subject took away all of my non-force options and forced me to use force to regain control of the situation'.  This can similarly be applied to the use of force applied by a private citizen.  You try to avoid the conflict.  If you can't avoid, you try to de-esculate.  If you can't de-esculate you try to evade (if the act of disengaging does not put you at increased risk.  Also many states do NOT require the citizen to retreat.  These are sometimes called the _Castle Doctrine_ [in your home] or '_Stand your ground_' laws).  If you can't escape/evade/disengage or the situation dictates that you can't then you are forced to use (lawful) force.

As with anything, hope for the best, train for the worst.


----------



## dortiz (Jan 11, 2012)

Zdom,Compare this, if you will, to how LEO and CCWers are instructed to use their firearms: stop the threat.

Don't "shoot to wound" or "fire warning shots" or even "shoot to kill" &#8212; just continue shooting until the threat is ended. THEN worry about the attacker's wellbeing or not.

Same deal with MSK HKD, as I understand it.

The BIG difference is that we train for years to have choices in between. As my teachers call it the Friend, Drunk Uncle at Party and then Self Defense level. Sadly a LEO has less choices than we do. Yet we train to use whats right at the right point. I truly believe this is one of the greatest attributes to our art. Even compared to Hard Styles where most of the time a blow will have to be used yet in our chest of tricks a simple lock controls the moment and leaves less damage. Its our ability to control the levels and not do sever trauma that makes a hapkidoin a great Martial Artist and better person.​


----------



## puunui (Jan 11, 2012)

dortiz said:


> The BIG difference is that we train for years to have choices in between. As my teachers call it the Friend, Drunk Uncle at Party and then Self Defense level. Sadly a LEO has less choices than we do.



In addition, law enforcement also have certain advantages designed to intimidate and/or greatly stack the odds beforeany sort of personal threat gets escalated. For example, when being transported, felons are handcuffed at the ankles and wrists. LEO also carry an assortment of weapons and tools on their belts. Plus, any incarcerated person will tell you that any attack on a police officer or guard will result in severe consequences, which serves as a strong deterrent. 




dortiz said:


> Even compared to Hard Styles where most of the time a blow will have to be used yet in our chest of tricks a simple lock controls the moment and leaves less damage. Its our ability to control the levels and not do sever trauma that makes a hapkidoin a great Martial Artist and better person.



Exactly. A simple lock, a mild pressing of a pressure point, a simple escape, a light unexpected tap or brush somewhere go a long way to dissolving a potential self defense situation, over and above the most obvious, which is to leave the situation before it starts, or don't be there in the first place. I never worry about bar fights because I never go to bars anymore.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Jan 11, 2012)

puunui said:


> In addition, law enforcement also have certain advantages designed to intimidate and/or greatly stack the odds before any sort of personal threat gets escalated. For example, when being transported, felons are handcuffed at the ankles and wrists. LEO also carry an assortment of weapons and tools on their belts. Plus, any incarcerated person will tell you that any attack on a police officer or guard will result in severe consequences, which serves as a strong deterrent. ​



Very correct.  At a minimum a L.E.O. will have one pair of handcuffs and a handful of flex cuffs to secure an individual.  Those in Corrections that are responsible for transportation have a myriad of methods including handcuffs, shackles, waist belts, shock belts, prostraint vests and prostraint chairs and of course the 'boot'.  All of this is needed in safe transportation for the Officer/Deputy as well as the prisoner and the public.  

The individual officer arriving on the initial scene is often outnumbered and of course a firearm is present in every contact (his own).  So having a well stocked 'batman utility belt', as well as being proficient helps tremendously.  This may be showing my age a bit, but when I first started we had a .38 revolver with 6 rounds of ammunition and that was it.  No O.C. spray, no ECW (Taser), no MTM ventilator mask, no 911 tool and we didn't even carry handcuffs or a radio for my first two years!  Nowadays with all that stuff and a Glock 21 .45ACP and two magazines my belt weighs around 30lbs or more.

The average private citizen probably isn't going to carry these types of things.  Even off-duty Officers/Deputies don't carry nearly what they do on-duty.  Off-duty I carry a Swiss Army knife (it comes in handy with the different screwdrivers and such), an Endura Spyderco knife with full serrations (this makes an excellent rescue tool for cutting things like seat belts at the scene of an auto accident etc), a kubaton on my key chain (so I don't lose my keys  ) and off course my off-duty firearm, a Glock 23 .40 S&W.  For any private citizen I would suggest at the very least a pocket knife as it has so many uses.  O.C. spray on a key chain 'can' be useful.  And of course, whatever is legal in your area.



> Exactly. A simple lock, a mild pressing of a pressure point, a simple  escape, a light unexpected tap or brush somewhere go a long way to  dissolving a potential self defense situation...



Knowing these types of techniques can be of infinite value.  As mentioned above, hard core striking/kicking is great...if it's needed.  Not every situation needs the bad guy being trashed.  Yes, if it is necessary and no other choice is reasonably available.  Glenn mentions the 'light, unexpected tap or brush' in the above quote.  Professional security and bouncers regularly use exactly this, particularly when moving someone from point A to point B.  The light brush or tap, to the right area can in some situations be vastly preferable to hard hits to the same area.  And they are usually quite effective in not only gaining the undivided attention of the individual in question, but their compliance as well.



> ...over and above the most obvious, which is to leave the situation before  it starts, or don't be there in the first place. I never worry about bar  fights because I never go to bars anymore.



Bingo!  Words of wisdom that should be among the very first learned by a new student.  As the saying goes, 'the best way not to get hit is to not be there in the first place'.


----------



## zDom (Jan 13, 2012)

puunui said:


> For example, your wife or daughter flips out and starts attacking you. Are you going to "*add **trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended*"? After you throw your wife or daughter, which follow up would you use -- a stomp  kick, punch, neck break, drop into a choke or armbar?



All of them in sequence, twice, because we are mindless brutes. Our training overrides all common sense and reason. /end sarcasm


I mean ... Really? What kind of question is this to ask?


I thought this was a polite, friendly discussion not a contest to see who can pick through comments to twist them into something they are quite obviously not. What brought on this attitude, this sort of response? Have I offended? Am I missing something? Give me some time on break to go through and re-read this thread. I will examine my comments to find how I have erred.


I mean, it even feels as if you are taking a shot at me mentioning Won Kwang Wha was a bodyguard: I didn't say he was the ONLY master to be employed in such a way; the information was only offered it as an explanation as to why our curriculum might have its combat-ready focus. It as if you are trying to rebut every comment made.

So what gives?


----------



## zDom (Jan 13, 2012)

OK, as near as I can tell:

I must have offended because I disagreed with your opinion that _both aikido and hapkido have a generally non-violent disposition._


You then responsed by transforming my observation that We train followups which add trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended


into

a guiding principle (putting words in my mouth) and then grilled me on who established that guiding philosophy (another shift).


It is at this point I apparently made my mistake: I thought you were genuinely unclear on what I was attempting to communicate and seeking clarification. But it appears that might not have been your motive because you then went quote-by-quote to rebut everything I said (even going so far as to imply MSK is a flawed system because Kimm didn't think it was good enough for him  that was your point, right?)

Apparently you perceived my disagreeing with your opinion _both aikido and hapkido have a generally non-violent disposition as a challenge to debate and that your strategy in this debate is __to descredit me and my opinion by poking holes in each and every comment I make and/or trying to make it appear that I am a violent individual who has mistaken the true philosophy of hapkido and/or the MSK system as being a misguided bastard branch of hapkido.

Go ahead: release another salvo. I won't be baited into any more responses so do your best or worst with the above. Have fun. Good luck in your training.


_


----------



## puunui (Jan 13, 2012)

zDom said:


> I mean ... Really? What kind of question is this to ask?



So it is ok for you to take one of my comments from a post a long time ago and take that to an extreme and turn it into something that it is not, but when I go the other way of showing the extreme of your comment, you get offended? 




zDom said:


> I thought this was a polite, friendly discussion not a contest to see who can pick through comments to twist them into something they are quite obviously not. What brought on this attitude, this sort of response? Have I offended? Am I missing something? Give me some time on break to go through and re-read this thread. I will examine my comments to find how I have erred.



See answer above. 




zDom said:


> I mean, it even feels as if you are taking a shot at me mentioning Won Kwang Wha was a bodyguard: I didn't say he was the ONLY master to be employed in such a way; the information was only offered it as an explanation as to why our curriculum might have its combat-ready focus. It as if you are trying to rebut every comment made. So what gives?



Again, taking offense when none was intended. The point I was making was that others have served in a bodyguard capacity, and they are not into adding "trauma on top of the trauma to ensure the threat is ended", that people can and do evolve away from such priorities and concerns, especially when they are no longer functioning in such a bodyguard capacity. We do not know what GM Won would be doing today if he was still alive, because he passed away at such a relatively young age. I would comment though, that at the time GM Won served as a bodyguard for GM SUH Bok Sup's father (1954-58), Korea had just come out of a devastating civil war which left the country in ruins, which is quite different than the conditions you or your students face today, living in the United States. So perhaps the philosophies and policies that governed his thinking back then, may not be suitable or appropriate in today's gentrified lawsuit environment. 

Unless of course, your student base and focus is teaching primarily secret service agents, and others functioning or employed in a bodyguard capacity. 

As I understand it, GM Won was a relatively large, naturally powerful man, and so his hapkido was a reflection of that -- strong forceful hand techniques and powerful kicks. I think that because GM Won was a relatively large, naturally powerful man, that would also be a factor in both his hapkido style as well as why he was chosen to be a bodyguard for his teacher's father in the first place.


----------



## puunui (Jan 13, 2012)

zDom said:


> I thought you were genuinely unclear on what I was attempting to communicate and seeking clarification.



I was unclear on what you were attempting to communicate, which is why I gave you and example which hopefully would clear things up. If that isn't what you would do to your wife or daughter that was attacking you, then perhaps, your organization's philosophy isn't all that different from other branches of hapkido or even aikido, as you previously thought. 





zDom said:


> But it appears that might not have been your motive because you then went quote-by-quote to rebut everything I said (even going so far as to imply MSK is a flawed system because Kimm didn't think it was good enough for him &#8212; that was your point, right?)



My point was to explain Dr. Kimm's relationship with the Moo Sool Kwan. Here is an entry about it on Dr. Kimm's Hanmudo page: 

http://hanmudo.com/founder?start=7

"Dr. Kimm discussed this new venture of  Kuk Sool-Hapkido with Park Lee hyun, Chairman of the American Hapkido  Association (AHA). Park Lee-hyun and Grandmaster Suh had personality  differences and never associated with one another. Master Park insisted  that the AHA remain under the control of the World Mu Sool Kwan  Association. From Master Park's viewpoint, Dr. Kimm betrayed the AHA and  gone to the world Kuk Sool Association. Dr. Kimm told Master Park that  the AHA *needed more techniques* if they wanted to become a bigger  association in the future. In this light, Dr. Kimm asked that Master  Park take over the Association as President. He agreed and maintained  this office until his death in 1987."


----------



## MJS (Jan 13, 2012)

*ADMIN WARNING

Attention ALL Users:  We already have 3 reported posts in this thread.  The purpose of the RTM feature is to report posts that are in violation of the forum rules, NOT because you disagree with a member and their posts.  Hot pursuit of members, ie: following them from thread to thread, is against the rules as well.  Use the ignore feature, which is found on everyones profile.

Further disregard of the forum rules, will result in possible suspension of your account.

MJS
MT Asst. Admin*


----------

