Journey to a new style...

[_Simon_]

Simon, have you ever considered a grappling style like Judo, Bjj, or even Aikido? The systems you're practicing are actually quite similar to each other. Maybe you'd like something different?

Have never been drawn to the grappling arts to be honest... but I did definitely consider looking at Aikido and Daito Ryu just to try something different. I know I'm definitely attracted to the striking arts etc, but I do appreciate the suggestion. Trying different things is what this phase is all about

 

[Gerry Seymour]

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

Probably just a difference in terminology. Escapes from mount - the bridge-and-roll (what I call it) and its ilk.

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

That seems unnecessary at this point for BJJ. Folks know the root of the art. I don't think NGA is any older (probably younger by a bit), but we don't give credit to Daito-ryu on individual techniques. When we give any history, we cite it as a primary source, but individual techniques aren't credited (some are more likely from Judo, another source art).

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

Why is that a problem? When people learn a system, to them, what they learned is of that system. I don't expect people to remember where their instructor got techniques. I don't actually care. It's interesting, but not actually useful in any meaningful way.

 

[_Simon_]

While I also think grappling styles have a place in MA, one needs to examine closely what styles someone may recommend, as to reason the person recommends a particular style, and what are the characteristics of a style that you would like.

For example, there is a person on MT (I'm trying to remember the name ) who always recommends BJJ as if there is nothing else worth discussing. Me on the other hand, I very often recommend Hapkido. I have the best of reasons so I don't need to discuss good reasons.

Seriously, we all have our preferences, and may sometimes have trouble articulating why we feel one art, especially grappling arts, may be better than others. You also need to know what you are looking for in an art. The Hapkido I studied was defense oriented in that we would normally wait until we were attacked and respond with the intent to cause pain or injury, intending to prevent further attacks. Whereas my observations have been that Aikido normally doesn't intend to injure (but understands that may be a consequence of a defensive technique) but rather defend in a way that prevents injury to the practitioner, and waits until the attacker gets tired of being thrown around and quits attacking. Very different concepts. You need to know which one you can most easily find comfort with. And within Hapkido or other grappling arts you may still find schools that don't agree with what I say and teach a different method of defense.

Hope that helps.

Well said and hehe

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Have never been drawn to the grappling arts to be honest... but I did definitely consider looking at Aikido and Daito Ryu just to try something different. I know I'm definitely attracted to the striking arts etc, but I do appreciate the suggestion. Trying different things is what this phase is all about

If you like striking arts, the focus on flow in Aikido might actually be frustrating. They'll move past so many opportunities to strike (or throw) on their way to a finish.

 

[DaveB]

2.5 pages about Simon trialing karate dojo but as soon as Hanzou shows up it's a grappling thread.

 

[_Simon_]

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.

Thanks DaveB, all replies are much appreciated . Ah so you think that'd be right up my alley?

Yeah there aren't any traditional Shotokan or Goju etc really close by, all styles that are nearby and that I've trained in have been hybrids, BUT there is a Shotokan dojo on my list about 40 minutes drive away which I am definitely going to check out. Am trying to leave out distance as a factor (within reason)

 

[_Simon_]

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?

Haha our advantage or possible detriment ;D

Yep very well said, and every time I check out a style and go through all the things which look good on paper why I 'should' like this one, it doesn't really connect to my feeling of it. An very educational process

 

[DaveB]

40 mins isnt ideal, but its not bad.

I live in London and everything ends up being on the opposite side of the city to wherever I am. Currently it's an hour from home to the dojo.

 

[_Simon_]

If you like striking arts, the focus on flow in Aikido might actually be frustrating. They'll move past so many opportunities to strike (or throw) on their way to a finish.

Ah right, see I also really love that flowing non-rigid aspect of things (and a direction I'm definitely moving into), which is why I'm really drawn to Sensei Rick Hotton's style of teaching. He's from Shotokan, but more a blend with his Aikido practice/principles, so aiki karate. Which strangely the very first style I trialled was aiki karate, I have a feeling I may be going back there . I didn't get enough of a trial with it to be honest (only 3 classes, due to not wanting to pay the annual fee).

 

[_Simon_]

2.5 pages about Simon trialing karate dojo but as soon as Hanzou shows up it's a grappling thread.

Hahaha! Well... to be honest I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner haha... I've actually been hangin out for @drop bear to chime in with his classic "Do MMA". XD

All feedback is welcome, but I understand how things can go quite off topic round these parts

 

[_Simon_]

40 mins isnt ideal, but its not bad.

I live in London and everything ends up being on the opposite side of the city to wherever I am. Currently it's an hour from home to the dojo.

Ah that's comforting actually, it's really not that bad if I trained twice a week. So many hybrid styles around here... would be really nice to check out one of the traditional origin styles (so to speak!).

 

[_Simon_]

(Dubz post)

 

[Hanzou]

Have never been drawn to the grappling arts to be honest... but I did definitely consider looking at Aikido and Daito Ryu just to try something different. I know I'm definitely attracted to the striking arts etc, but I do appreciate the suggestion. Trying different things is what this phase is all about

Understood. Definitely give a grappling art a try when you get a chance. Be careful though, you might become one of us.

 

[Hanzou]

Probably just a difference in terminology. Escapes from mount - the bridge-and-roll (what I call it) and its ilk.

You mean the Upa Escape?

That seems unnecessary at this point for BJJ. Folks know the root of the art. I don't think NGA is any older (probably younger by a bit), but we don't give credit to Daito-ryu on individual techniques. When we give any history, we cite it as a primary source, but individual techniques aren't credited (some are more likely from Judo, another source art).

Meh, it's just something we do. For example, we call the gyaku ude-garami the "Kimura" in honor of Masahiko Kimura who beat Helio Gracie. The Americana got its name because it was transmitted by an American Catch Wrestler traveling through Brazil.

Why is that a problem? When people learn a system, to them, what they learned is of that system. I don't expect people to remember where their instructor got techniques. I don't actually care. It's interesting, but not actually useful in any meaningful way.

What if the technique (or series of techniques) are done poorly, and its effectiveness is completely removed because of it? Do you still feel that it isn't a problem?

 

[_Simon_]

Understood. Definitely give a grappling art a try when you get a chance. Be careful though, you might become one of us.

Haha cheers

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ah right, see I also really love that flowing non-rigid aspect of things (and a direction I'm definitely moving into), which is why I'm really drawn to Sensei Rick Hotton's style of teaching. He's from Shotokan, but more a blend with his Aikido practice/principles, so aiki karate. Which strangely the very first style I trialled was aiki karate, I have a feeling I may be going back there . I didn't get enough of a trial with it to be honest (only 3 classes, due to not wanting to pay the annual fee).

I'd be interested in seeing someone's take on aiki-based striking. I have my own thoughts on it, but suspect my usage of "aiki" is not standard for Aikido.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You mean the Upa Escape?

Yes, that's what I call a bridge-and-roll. I picked up the name from someone somewhere in BJJ.

Meh, it's just something we do. For example, we call the gyaku ude-garami the "Kimura" in honor of Masahiko Kimura who beat Helio Gracie. The Americana got its name because it was transmitted by an American Catch Wrestler traveling through Brazil.

That's a bit of homage, but not really the same (in the latter case, at least) as attribution.

What if the technique (or series of techniques) are done poorly, and its effectiveness is completely removed because of it? Do you still feel that it isn't a problem?

That's a separate and unrelated issue. If the history is accurate, but the application is rubbish, that's not better.

 

[dvcochran]

The first 2 Pinan forms’ order is usually what’s changed. 1 is sometimes called 2, 2 sometimes 1, and a few places will teach 2 before 1. 3-5 aren’t changed nor debated. Not in any karate that I’ve seen anyway.

When I used to work out with old Shotokan friends we were always surprised at the similarities in Pinan 1 and 2 compared to our TKD which is very TSD influenced. Our #1 form starts with a down block and our #2 form starts with a high block/outside block combo. Is that similar to yours?

 

[dvcochran]

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.

Thank you. I was about to respond with the same reply. I am glad you beat me to it.

 

[dvcochran]

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.

The first comment has nothing to do with quality in the current era. Who's who and competition to be the "founder" for an art has nothing to do with the quality being taught today. Sure, if some of 90's and 2000's instructors are bad, well they are bad. But who or what standard do you use to measure them by? Same can be said about some instructors of ALL other styles who became such in the 90's and 2000's.
I do not have a Hapkido background so I have little knowledge or concern about its founding's. But as a style and system it is hard to dispute it holds quality. I think it is one of the more complete styles out there.