Journey to a new style...

[Hanzou]

I've never found issues with origin to be significant to an art. It wouldn't matter (from a functional standpoint) if he'd made up the entire origin story.

The claim is that the founder learned Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu from Sokaku, when the evidence points to him actually learning Aikido from Ueshiba.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The claim is that the founder learned Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu from Sokaku, when the evidence points to him actually learning Aikido from Ueshiba.

I'm aware of the issue. I just don't see it as much of an issue. It might make me question training with that individual (why would I train with someone who I think is lying to me), but wouldn't necessarily affect my opinion of the art or others in it.

 

[oftheherd1]

Well, not necessarily.

There's two issues with Hapkido: Historical issues, and Modern issues.

The historical issues are two fold: The founder's account of where he learned his art is highly questionable. A Hapkido practitioner assassinated a president of South Korea so the are got a bad rap and was intentionally watered down in Korea.

The modern issues are that there's multiple types of Hapkido, there's a lack of Hapkido in combat sports, some TKD instructors magically became Hapkido instructors in the 90s and 2000s, and some of the modern claims of some practitioners are dubious.

And all of that leads to quality control issues.

DJN Choi's account has been supported and denied.with equal vigor. But clearly he learned his art somewhere.and knew it before he returned to Korea. So I don't think you have any credibility in saying his account is "highly questionable." Japanese policy of putting down Koreans or claiming everything Korean as their own is not "highly questionable" for that matter.

I don't know if the KCIA director was a Hapkido practitioner or not, as that was not a topic in the news in the aftermath of the assassination of Pak Chung Hee (no other Korean president I know of has ever been assassinated). But considering the rivalry between other, more Korean MA at the time, and the fact that Hapkido has long been a preferred MA for Korean security forces, he may have been. I remember there was some problem, and the support of Chun Doo-Hwan's brother after Chun Doo_Hwan became president.was somehow part of the issue. But not knowing anything more, I again suspect MA rivalry. After all, Pak Chung Hee was shot, not Hapkidoed to death.

"...multiple types of Hapkido?" How many "types" of other Korean arts are there? How many types of Karate or BJJ? There is indeed a lack of Hapkido combat sports. If you are the expert on Hapkido you are setting yourself up to be, that should be no surprise. But I suppose it could be turned in to that if all the worthwhile techniques could be stripped out by rules to prevent injury. But would it really be Hapkido after that? The fact that many other Korean MA instructors magically become Hapkido instructors should tell you something about the respect Hapkido has among other Korean MA. So many want to be Hapkido BB/instructors, they just don't want to spend the years studying it to be knowlegeable to teach it. What would you have me say?

 

[oftheherd1]

The claim is that the founder learned Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu from Sokaku, when the evidence points to him actually learning Aikido from Ueshiba.

In my post above, I allude to the Japanese culture not allowing anything worthwhile to be of anything other than Japanese invention. Would you think family pride might have caused someone in the family to remove DJN Choi's name from the roles. Especially if there was any anger over him leaving Japan for Korea? Mind you, I don't know that anything like that happened, but Japanese pride and prejudice against Korea is no secret. But Aikido? Where did that come from?

Early in my training, I once mentioned to my GM that I wondered if Hapkido and Aikido had any similarities. He rebuffed that. And as I progressed in my learning of Hapkido, I can see they are very different, no matter that both have roots in Daito-Ryu. But that doesn't mean Hapkido can from study of Aikido. If you can show that, from credible sources, I would be interested in that information.

What has caused your hatred of Hapkido?

 

[Hanzou]

I'm aware of the issue. I just don't see it as much of an issue. It might make me question training with that individual (why would I train with someone who I think is lying to me), but wouldn't necessarily affect my opinion of the art or others in it.

Wouldn't a style derived from Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu be fundamentally different than a style derived from TKD and Aikido?

 

[JR 137]

Wouldn't a style derived from Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu be fundamentally different than a style derived from TKD and Aikido?

What does it matter if it came From Daito Ryu, Aikido, or Mars? So long as the techniques are effective and reliable, I couldn’t care less where they originated. The origin is trivial. What matters is what’s going on in the here and now on the floor. Crap from the most distinguished person is still crap; effective stuff from Wile E Coyote is still effective. The history is mostly useless back story. It can make you feel good about what you’re doing, but feeling good about it ain’t going to save your a$$ when you need it to.

 

[Hanzou]

What has caused your hatred of Hapkido?

Hatred? No.

Initially Hapkido schools were doing Aikido-style wrist locks and never discussed ground fighting. However with the growth of combat sports and Bjj, we now have stuff like this;

Both of these examples are terrible, but I'm sure both of these examples come from respectable Hapkido organizations correct? I certainly enjoyed the "Aikijutsu" method of submitting someone from Guard....

It would appear that Hapkido adopts whatever is popular at the time and adopts it into their art, which is why I tend to believe that the founder pulled his stuff from Aikido over Aikijutsu.

I have no problem cross-training and bringing new arts into your system, but give credit where credit is due.

 

[oftheherd1]

I'm aware of the issue. I just don't see it as much of an issue. It might make me question training with that individual (why would I train with someone who I think is lying to me), but wouldn't necessarily affect my opinion of the art or others in it.

I see your point, but I don't know of any time my GM lied to me, and in fact am quite sure he never did. I would worry about that from a teacher I knew lied to me, always wondering what else he might be telling me that were lies; such as "this strike is good to stop an opponent," but not telling me it is a likely death hit.

 

[oftheherd1]

Wouldn't a style derived from Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu be fundamentally different than a style derived from TKD and Aikido?

I think you can quit talking about Hapkido as being derived from any other Korean art; too much difference in method and philosophy. Actually, the same for Aikdo.

Hatred? No.

Initially Hapkido schools were doing Aikido-style wrist locks and never discussed ground fighting. However with the growth of combat sports and Bjj, we now have stuff like this;

Wow! how old are you? You have seen things I have never seen nor even heard of. Unless ou are talking about things Hapkido and Aikido share due to their lineage; both being from Daito-Ryu. Is that what you meant? Wouldn't seem to be pertain much to your argument though.
...

Both of these examples are terrible, but I'm sure both of these examples come from respectable Hapkido organizations correct? I certainly enjoyed the "Aikijutsu" method of submitting someone from Guard....

I have no idea if either of those schools are legitimate or not. As I said, I can only talk about the Hapkido I studied.

It would appear that Hapkido adopts whatever is popular at the time and adopts it into their art, which is why I tend to believe that the founder pulled his stuff from Aikido over Aikijutsu.

What an outlandish statement. Where in the world do you come up with those things? Do you really have so much time studying Hapkido that you can be such an expert on its history and methods? Why don't I think that is so?

As to the videos, I agree the first looks more like what I would expect from BJJ or some such. The second looks like Hapkido techniques I learned to defend myself from being on the ground and getting back on my feet. In the Hapkido I studied, we don't like to be on the ground unless our opponent is under us and we have an elbow in his back or are hyper extending his knee joint, or are about to strike him, or some other such favorable thing..

I have no problem cross-training and bringing new arts into your system, but give credit where credit is due.

What does cross training have to do with it? Or do you mean your art has adopted some Hapkido techniques?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Wouldn't a style derived from Daito-Ryu Aikijutsu be fundamentally different than a style derived from TKD and Aikido?

Not necessarily. Early Aikido was much more similar to Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. In fact, there is a vague period when the names seem to overlap in Ueshiba's art. So, TKD+Aikido blended and reformatted could look similar to TKD+Daito-ryu blended and reformatted. It would probably depend more on which period of Aikido (and which senior students), compared to which depth of Daito-ryu (I've been told by folks within Daito-ryu that Aikido appears a shallower approach to aiki, so to speak).

 

[Hanzou]

Wow! how old are you? You have seen things I have never seen nor even heard of. Unless ou are talking about things Hapkido and Aikido share due to their lineage; both being from Daito-Ryu. Is that what you meant? Wouldn't seem to be pertain much to your argument though.
...

I'm merely stating that I don't recall Hapkido doing ground fighting back in the day, now I'm seeing multiple examples of them doing it (poorly) and I'm wondering where that impetus is coming from.

What an outlandish statement. Where in the world do you come up with those things? Do you really have so much time studying Hapkido that you can be such an expert on its history and methods? Why don't I think that is so?

As to the videos, I agree the first looks more like what I would expect from BJJ or some such. The second looks like Hapkido techniques I learned to defend myself from being on the ground and getting back on my feet. In the Hapkido I studied, we don't like to be on the ground unless our opponent is under us and we have an elbow in his back or are hyper extending his knee joint, or are about to strike him, or some other such favorable thing..

If that's what you learned, I would strongly recommend attending a few Bjj classes and learn how to actually fight from the guard position. That vid was bad on multiple levels.

What does cross training have to do with it? Or do you mean your art has adopted some Hapkido techniques?

I'm saying that if you're pulling techniques from BJJ or other MAs, you should acknowledge that you're doing it instead of pretending that that stuff is native to the system in question.

 

[Hanzou]

Not necessarily. Early Aikido was much more similar to Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu. In fact, there is a vague period when the names seem to overlap in Ueshiba's art. So, TKD+Aikido blended and reformatted could look similar to TKD+Daito-ryu blended and reformatted. It would probably depend more on which period of Aikido (and which senior students), compared to which depth of Daito-ryu (I've been told by folks within Daito-ryu that Aikido appears a shallower approach to aiki, so to speak).

Is ground grappling and the guard part of traditional Daito-Ryu?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm merely stating that I don't recall Hapkido doing ground fighting back in the day, now I'm seeing multiple examples of them doing it (poorly) and I'm wondering where that impetus is coming from.

Perhaps they've had it a long time, and are now making it more prominent. That is happening inside NGA. It has always had some (pretty lame) ground work, and some of the instructors are working to both extend and improve that. I doubt anyone outside actual NGA practitioners had ever seen it prior to the last decade or so, because it wouldn't have been likely to show up in videos or demos.

I'm saying that if you're pulling techniques from BJJ or other MAs, you should acknowledge that you're doing it instead of pretending that that stuff is native to the system in question.

What kind of acknowledgement. I pull techniques from a lot of places (sometimes as entire techniques, sometimes as other ways of doing what I already know). I tend to mention the source, but not in any systematic way - just as a matter of explaining the technique. Probably doesn't happen anything like every time I teach them. Probably doesn't in any art.

Is ground grappling and the guard part of traditional Daito-Ryu?

I don't know. It might be, though it wouldn't be anything like you'd see in BJJ - much simpler, and mostly less effective, I'd expect, if it existed. I don't know if the ground work in NGA came directly from Daito-ryu, from our alleged Judo roots, or was introduced later by one of the senior instructors.

 

[Hanzou]

Perhaps they've had it a long time, and are now making it more prominent. That is happening inside NGA. It has always had some (pretty lame) ground work, and some of the instructors are working to both extend and improve that. I doubt anyone outside actual NGA practitioners had ever seen it prior to the last decade or so, because it wouldn't have been likely to show up in videos or demos.

I'd be open for that possibility if the ground fighting emerging didn't look like a poor version of Bjj. It's literally the same techniques, but its modified to be "deadly".

What kind of acknowledgement. I pull techniques from a lot of places (sometimes as entire techniques, sometimes as other ways of doing what I already know). I tend to mention the source, but not in any systematic way - just as a matter of explaining the technique. Probably doesn't happen anything like every time I teach them. Probably doesn't in any art.

Something like this would be suitable:

Just mention where you got the technique from. Simple.

I don't know. It might be, though it wouldn't be anything like you'd see in BJJ - much simpler, and mostly less effective, I'd expect, if it existed. I don't know if the ground work in NGA came directly from Daito-ryu, from our alleged Judo roots, or was introduced later by one of the senior instructors.

Well that's the problem here; That Hapkido ground fighting is VERY similar to Bjj ground fighting, just executed in a much worse way.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'd be open for that possibility if the ground fighting emerging didn't look like a poor version of Bjj. It's literally the same techniques, but its modified to be "deadly".

The ground work (sweeps from mount) in NGA would fit that exact description ("poor version of Bjj"). And it was there 30 years ago, long before I'd ever heard of BJJ. In the case of NGA, it's not even "more deadly" - just "not as good".

Something like this would be suitable:

Just mention where you got the technique from. Simple.

My point is, how often, and for how long? When does a technique become part of the system? I wouldn't expect one of my students to necessarily remember where I told them a technique came from. To them, it's all NGA. And I might forget to give credit from time to time, especially if I'm talking to a group that includes people I've told before.

Well that's the problem here; That Hapkido ground fighting is VERY similar to Bjj ground fighting, just executed in a much worse way.

And it is most likely picked up from BJJ. The picking up might have started 20 years ago, though, so what you see there might be 2nd generation - so those folks might just think of it as HKD.

 

[DaveB]

Just an update...

Have been training for 3 weeks at this new place, it's been okay.. I just don't think I've fallen in love with it if I'm being honest...

It almost looks great on paper reasons for me training here, but I dunno, I haven't really vibed with it. The people are friendly, everyone is respectful, technique is similar to what I'm used, it seems they do alot, aLOT of these partnered self defense sequences. Every class we've gone through them and spent a great deal of time on them, and while those looking purely for self defense would benefit, I'm just not haha, and find it's just not really something I want to dedicate alot of time to. It's like every class has been mostly the same with not a great deal of variety, and working on solely curriculum stuff (in which there are a lot of those sequences, takedowns etc), which of course does makes sense, that's what you're there to learn and train.

Am I the only one who isn't that interested in takedowns, locks etc? Have been reflecting, I know I'm more drawn to the deeper spiritual aspects of MA, the focus, discipline, meditative aspects, physical mastery, technique... perhaps it's moreso the forging of the body into that embodiment of speed, power, ease, technically-brilliant ideal that I'm more drawn to.

Before I started I honestly thought this would be the place I end up at... The teacher is a really great instructor and martial artist, and he's a machine in terms of power and flow and technique, and I greatly respect him.

I did sit in and watch their sparring class too tonight, and man they go pretty hard... reminded me of Kyokushin days, only these guys had more padding. Really not sure the body could withstand that intensity of sparring either... and whether I want to go down the road of killing myself in training yet again...


Like I said earlier, I truly do not know what I'm looking for in a style/dojo... I guess I'll know when I know?

Still 1 week left here then I shall move upward and onward... :s


Signing out, lost and confused.....

I realise this reply is to an old post, but honestly with the info you've put in the above, the style you need is traditional jka Shotokan.

 

[_Simon_]

Oh my goodness so many posts, I was puzzled by this thread update haha!

Let us know what you see and think. Checking out a new potential school can be a lot of fun.



Hmm...clearly either you didn't wait until Monday, or I'm confused about days of the week. Or you're in a vastly different time zone. Or all of that??

Anyway, glad you saw something that looked interesting. Hope the first classes keep that feeling going for ya.

Thanks heaps mate, yeah still on the search! I know I may not find the perfect style for me (whatever that means), but really tuning into that feeling of what 'clicks'.

Hehe ah so yesterday was Monday and I checked out the class last night. I'm in Australia so I can't remember the difference in time zones

 

[Hanzou]

The ground work (sweeps from mount) in NGA would fit that exact description ("poor version of Bjj"). And it was there 30 years ago, long before I'd ever heard of BJJ. In the case of NGA, it's not even "more deadly" - just "not as good".

Sweep from mount? I'd be very curious to see this.

My point is, how often, and for how long? When does a technique become part of the system? I wouldn't expect one of my students to necessarily remember where I told them a technique came from. To them, it's all NGA. And I might forget to give credit from time to time, especially if I'm talking to a group that includes people I've told before.

Considering that Bjj came from Judo and we still give credit to Judo throws? A very long time.

And it is most likely picked up from BJJ. The picking up might have started 20 years ago, though, so what you see there might be 2nd generation - so those folks might just think of it as HKD.

Hmmm, yet another illustration of my issues with that system. However, to each their own.

 

[_Simon_]

For starters, it's Tang Soo Do, not Tang Soo.
There are no kicking techniques from Taekkyon, because Taekkyon is a dead art.
Tang Soo Do is the branch of the Moo Duk Kwan that split from GM HWANG, Kee during the time after he left the unification movement but before he changed the name to Soo Bahk Do.
It's basically Shotokan karate as taught by GM HWANG. It uses the same kata as Shotokan, though I believe that they're taught in a different order (this may be incorrect, as I am going from memory, and we all know how that works...).
As for Chinese influences... GM HWANG reportedly had some training in Northern Chinese styles, but I've never really seen any evidence of this.

Ah right. I just called it Tang Soo similar to how people call karate-do 'karate'. But fair enough (this club is actually called Tang Soo Tao!).

Ah right, am just going by club info and good ol Wiki. That's fascinating, yeah it definitely lookes to be quite Shotokan-like, in that case I may vibe with it. Cheers for the info

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Oh my goodness so many posts, I was puzzled by this thread update haha!



Thanks heaps mate, yeah still on the search! I know I may not find the perfect style for me (whatever that means), but really tuning into that feeling of what 'clicks'.

Hehe ah so yesterday was Monday and I checked out the class last night. I'm in Australia so I can't remember the difference in time zones

Clearly, neither do I. Apparently, you're many hours ahead of us, so you already know what I'm going to type.

I think, for most folks' purposes, that feeling of "what clicks" is far more important than any truly practical consideration. If you're having fun and don't feel like you're missing something important, who gives a damn about anything else?