How much time does a typical Hapkido class devote to kicking compared to TKD?

[oftheherd1]

In the Hapkido I studied we didn't spar other than as TKD practitioners spar. Sparring at speed would end up damaging practice opponents.

 

[oftheherd1]

I'm years divorced from my Hapkido and Tae kwon do training, but, again, it depends on which tae kwon do, and which hapkido. There was a Korean master in NY, (where I grew up) As someone who had trained in all of those arts, (and who has dan ranking in judo and tae kwon do-as well as Kyokushin karate) I have to say that he and his students were kinda awesome....but that there is something to what the TKD guy said.....most of the time.

Why don't you just come out and say you don't believe Hapkido is a viable art? Then give reasons. Of course it may be difficult when you have qualified your remarks about which TKD and which Hapkido. There is correctness in that. But take the best of TKD and the best of Hapkido, and compare them. That might give the OP or other readers more useful information. Of course that would have to presume you have studied the best of both. Regardless, it should make interesting reading from an experienced and respected MA.

Or explain what you mean by there is something to what the TKD guy said. I have said before on MT that if all an art does is block, strike and punch, they should be very good at that. I must not be over confident. But of course, the Hapkido I studied had many defenses against strikes and kicks. Against other grappling arts, Hapkido may have an advantage by being defense oriented. But I don't have experience grappling with other grappling arts. If you do, you could no doubt enlighten us. I know I would appreciate that.

 

[Axiom]

Why don't you just come out and say you don't believe Hapkido is a viable art? Then give reasons. Of course it may be difficult when you have qualified your remarks about which TKD and which Hapkido. There is correctness in that. But take the best of TKD and the best of Hapkido, and compare them. That might give the OP or other readers more useful information. Of course that would have to presume you have studied the best of both. Regardless, it should make interesting reading from an experienced and respected MA.

Or explain what you mean by there is something to what the TKD guy said. I have said before on MT that if all an art does is block, strike and punch, they should be very good at that. I must not be over confident. But of course, the Hapkido I studied had many defenses against strikes and kicks. Against other grappling arts, Hapkido may have an advantage by being defense oriented. But I don't have experience grappling with other grappling arts. If you do, you could no doubt enlighten us. I know I would appreciate that.

I would like to know why it depends on the TKD schools but not Judo? Is Elder suggesting that Judo has no crappy dojos?

 

[oftheherd1]

I would like to know why it depends on the TKD schools but not Judo? Is Elder suggesting that Judo has no crappy dojos?

I think that is something you should address to Elder.

 

[oftheherd1]

How was the sparring arranged given that it's a hybrid art? Was it like a precursor to MMA?

I don't think I understand what you are after here. First, what is a hybrid art? I think if you could go back far enough, it would be difficult to find any organized art that hasn't borrowed from previous arts or fighting skills. As far as MMA is concerned, I don't know much about it, but I'm pretty sure no MMA practitioner is going to say Hapkido was a precursor. From what I know, the MMA rule set would prevent Hapkido from competing and using Hapkido techniques. Perhaps you should ask MMA practitioners here on MT.

 

[Axiom]

I don't think I understand what you are after here. First, what is a hybrid art? .

Hybrid art is defined as the following: "martial arts or fighting systems that incorporate techniques and theories from several particular martial arts (eclecticism). While numerous martial arts borrow or adapt from other arts and to some extent could be considered hybrids, a hybrid martial art emphasizes its disparate origins."

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Well, I can only speak about the Hapkido I studied. We did practice kicks, and in different ways. Going through each of our kicks, eight reps each, in unison, was an opportunity learn and improve our kicks as well as good cardio. When possible, we had a drill where we lined up with higher ranks in the lead. Our GM, holding focus pads, would call out 8 or 10 kicks. Each of us in turn would execute the kicks and run back to the end of the line, going through two or three times. Then the sequence would change, as well the kicks required. Again a chance to improve kicks from our own observation and that of our GM.

But it was never a concern to me to try and decide what the percentage was of kicks we practiced. Nor what percentage of our techniques employed kicks.

How was the sparring arranged given that it's a hybrid art? Was it like a precursor to MMA?

Hybrid art is defined as the following: "martial arts or fighting systems that incorporate techniques and theories from several particular martial arts (eclecticism). While numerous martial arts borrow or adapt from other arts and to some extent could be considered hybrids, a hybrid martial art emphasizes its disparate origins."

So if your definition of a hybrid art is one that focuses on it's disparate origins, how does the first quote from oftheheard suggest that? It's not stating that it came from TKD, and some other system, it's just stating that in hapkido they utilized kicks and would practice them fairly often.

 

[Axiom]

So if your definition of a hybrid art is one that focuses on it's disparate origins, how does the first quote from oftheheard suggest that? It's not stating that it came from TKD, and some other system, it's just stating that in hapkido they utilized kicks and would practice them fairly often.

My definition of a hybrid art is an art that emphasises and blends two or more distinct fighting forms into one - in this case grappling and striking.

 

[oftheherd1]

My definition of a hybrid art is an art that emphasises and blends two or more distinct fighting forms into one - in this case grappling and striking.

I think it would be borderline at most, but I really don't know that I would consider Hapkido a hybrid art. It is generally accepted that the founder (DJN Choi) was taken from Korea to Japan as a boy, where he ended up at the household of the founder of Daito Rhu. After WWII, he returned to Korea, and related he had actually trained and been belted in Daito Ryu. That has been contested, but clearly DJN Choi was familiar with some MA. It is generally agreed that Hapkido (not the original name) was blended with Korean kicks, which probably made it a more effective art. But it did not really blend in a Korean art so much as incorporating in more kicks. So to me it is not really a hybrid. Not only is it a grappling art, it does not (normally) have forms, nor emphacise striking or kicking over grappling, rather using them within grappling.

EDIT: I probably should add that Hapkido and TKD apparently came into being around the same time in Korea. TKD is generally thought to have migrated in from Japanese Karate, but distinguished itself by adding more kicks. That makes it even harder to suggest that Hapkido borrowed kicks from TKD. It is more likely they were borrowed from some older Korean art, or from the same art that TKD originated from. However, things like that were often not recorded, and have become the source of much speculation. One reason is that at the time, and even still, the Japanese were very much disliked, so anything Japanese tends to be looked down on. The Japanese really didn't treat the Koreans well after they officially took over in 1910.

 

[Axiom]

I think it would be borderline at most, but I really don't know that I would consider Hapkido a hybrid art. It is generally accepted that the founder (DJN Choi) was taken from Korea to Japan as a boy, where he ended up at the household of the founder of Daito Rhu. After WWII, he returned to Korea, and related he had actually trained and been belted in Daito Ryu. That has been contested, but clearly DJN Choi was familiar with some MA. It is generally agreed that Hapkido (not the original name) was blended with Korean kicks, which probably made it a more effective art. But it did not really blend in a Korean art so much as incorporating in more kicks. So to me it is not really a hybrid. Not only is it a grappling art, it does not (normally) have forms, nor emphacise striking or kicking over grappling, rather using them within grappling.

EDIT: I probably should add that Hapkido and TKD apparently came into being around the same time in Korea. TKD is generally thought to have migrated in from Japanese Karate, but distinguished itself by adding more kicks. That makes it even harder to suggest that Hapkido borrowed kicks from TKD. It is more likely they were borrowed from some older Korean art, or from the same art that TKD originated from. However, things like that were often not recorded, and have become the source of much speculation. One reason is that at the time, and even still, the Japanese were very much disliked, so anything Japanese tends to be looked down on. The Japanese really didn't treat the Koreans well after they officially took over in 1910.

I say it's a hybrid art simply because two distinct forms of fighting are intermixed in one style. Regarding the kicks, both Karate and Taekwondo took their kicks from Shaolin Kung Fu, and Hapkido was probably no different. It all stems from the same source.

 

[oftheherd1]

I say it's a hybrid art simply because two distinct forms of fighting are intermixed in one style. Regarding the kicks, both Karate and Taekwondo took their kicks from Shaolin Kung Fu, and Hapkido was probably no different. It all stems from the same source.

Source?

 

[Axiom]

Source?

Given that Shaolin Kung Fu predates Karate, that Karate is based on Kung fu, and that the mechanics of several of Kung fu kicks are identical (ball of the foot), I'd say that's a safe bet.

I'm told Shaolin Kung fu is the style, but I will not state confidently whether that is reliable, since I'm no Kung Fu expert by any means.

 

[oftheherd1]

Given that Shaolin Kung Fu predates Karate, that Karate is based on Kung fu, and that the mechanics of several of Kung fu kicks are identical (ball of the foot), I'd say that's a safe bet.

I'm told Shaolin Kung fu is the style, but I will not state confidently whether that is reliable, since I'm no Kung Fu expert by any means.

Well, while Japanese Karate is generally believed to have come from Okinawa, and is generally translated "Chinese Hand," yes you can trace its history that way. There are sources which claim an Indian Buddhist monk changed the Shaolin monk's martial arts to something more rigorous and that is what has become Shaolin Kung Fu. Would you think you should be giving credit to that Indian monk for inventing Karate?

However, significant changes are not blending. Hapkido is generally accepted to be taken from Daito Ryu. It is a grappling art, not to be confused with striking arts.

 

[elder999]

Why don't you just come out and say you don't believe Hapkido is a viable art? Then give reasons. Of course it may be difficult when you have qualified your remarks about which TKD and which Hapkido. There is correctness in that. But take the best of TKD and the best of Hapkido, and compare them. That might give the OP or other readers more useful information. Of course that would have to presume you have studied the best of both. Regardless, it should make interesting reading from an experienced and respected MA.

Because I think Hapkido is a viable art. What have I said that make you think I don't?

And, for the record, some of the Korean "yudo" guys are some of the toughest judoka I've seen-and I certainly like their training more than what happens in a lot of "sports oriented/Olympic" judo dojos in the U.S.

It's the same with TKD-I don't lilke Olympic TKD, for a variety of reasons. I like good old fashioned "Korean Karate."

 

[Tony Dismukes]

From what I know, the MMA rule set would prevent Hapkido from competing and using Hapkido techniques.

Just for the record, the vast majority of Hapkido techniques would be perfectly legal in MMA.

 

[oftheherd1]

Because I think Hapkido is a viable art. What have I said that make you think I don't?

And, for the record, some of the Korean "yudo" guys are some of the toughest judoka I've seen-and I certainly like their training more than what happens in a lot of "sports oriented/Olympic" judo dojos in the U.S.

It's the same with TKD-I don't lilke Olympic TKD, for a variety of reasons. I like good old fashioned "Korean Karate."

My apologies. I obviously misunderstood.

A side thought. In Korea, a euphemism for hoodlum is 'a dropout from a judo school.' Some of them study and get very good at Judo. But after a lower belt or two, they officially drop out. In reality, they continue studying and get really very good at it.

 

[oftheherd1]

Just for the record, the vast majority of Hapkido techniques would be perfectly legal in MMA.

I would say yes and no. If I put a grappling move on someone at speed (how else to do it?) I am likely to dislocate a joint before they can jump into a breakfall suitable for that technique. If I am simply using kicks or punches, then yes. Unless it would be a strike to the (edit) heart plexus or down into the notch of the neck. Those are potentially death moves.

Is a dislocation of a joint considered legal? I am not in to MMA so I don't know.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I would say yes and no. If I put a grappling move on someone at speed (how else to do it?) I am likely to dislocate a joint before they can jump into a breakfall suitable for that technique. If I am simply using kicks or punches, then yes. Unless it would be a strike to the (edit) heart plexus or down into the notch of the neck. Those are potentially death moves.

Is a dislocation of a joint considered legal? I am not in to MMA so I don't know.

In MMA, if you dislocate the joint before your opponent can tap, then that's on them. No rules against it. The only Hapkido grappling moves which would be disallowed are finger locks.

Strikes to the "heart plexus"(?) are perfectly legal. The throat strike may not be legal, depending on the exact spot you are talking about.

There are certainly some moves from Hapkido (or most other arts) which would be banned in MMA, but if you go to YouTube and pull up some random Hapkido demonstrations, (as I just did), then over 95% of what you see will be legal under the current unified MMA rules. Much of the remaining 5% was legal in the past under different MMA rule sets.

 

[oftheherd1]

In MMA, if you dislocate the joint before your opponent can tap, then that's on them. No rules against it. The only Hapkido grappling moves which would be disallowed are finger locks.

Strikes to the "heart plexus"(?) are perfectly legal. The throat strike may not be legal, depending on the exact spot you are talking about.

There are certainly some moves from Hapkido (or most other arts) which would be banned in MMA, but if you go to YouTube and pull up some random Hapkido demonstrations, (as I just did), then over 95% of what you see will be legal under the current unified MMA rules. Much of the remaining 5% was legal in the past under different MMA rule sets.

Thanks for that information.

 

[oftheherd1]

In MMA, if you dislocate the joint before your opponent can tap, then that's on them. No rules against it. The only Hapkido grappling moves which would be disallowed are finger locks.

Strikes to the "heart plexus"(?) are perfectly legal. The throat strike may not be legal, depending on the exact spot you are talking about.

There are certainly some moves from Hapkido (or most other arts) which would be banned in MMA, but if you go to YouTube and pull up some random Hapkido demonstrations, (as I just did), then over 95% of what you see will be legal under the current unified MMA rules. Much of the remaining 5% was legal in the past under different MMA rule sets.

The heart plexus is a bundle of nerves associated with the heart. It can be struck with a fist, or as we would usually do, with the end of a short stick.

heart plexus - Bing

Brachial plexus injury as an unusual complication of coronary artery bypass graft surgery