Kenpo and Hapkido

[Paul B]

Off the beat - Kenpo would be my first choice for survival because I don't have to go to control tactics to place the cuffs on an individual - I am simply trying to eliminate the threat that is being posed to me or my family at the time - I am not going to dance around with trying to subdue the attacker into compliance.

Actually...I would go with Hapkido on this one. Reason being,I wouldn't have to worry about "arresting" techniques and go straight to "break and escape" mode. Please don't confuse joint locking with joint breaking. Arresting techniques are used for their own purpose,and have their own limitations...justified use of force,etc....Hapkido (mine,anyway) has a very clear outlook on maximum use of power in a self defense scenario. I don't plan on dancing,I plan to do whatever it takes to walk away alive,be it through limb destruction or otherwise. :asian: Just a thought.

 

[arnisador]

Apparently you haven't met Doc!

Why, do his pressure point techniques always work?

The negative body posture sounds like what's done in Wing Chun/JKD, with the idea that a person moving backward can't defend himself, or that a person who is being clinched is disadvantaged. It's certainly a key idea in BJJ, though that's principally on the ground. But, having never seen Kenpo/SL4, I'm not sure I'm picturing what you're saying correctly.

 

[eyebeams]

I was specifically told by my kenpo teacher that hapkido was the most similar extant art in terms of how to generate power (striking in my kenpo and hapkido is different from EPAK, since there is no chambering or "focus") and in the continuum of techniques.

When I studied Moo Gong Kwan Hapkido I noted that the striking (which tends to comitted power blows) is quite different. Plus, not all arm/wrist controls rely on pain compliance. A joint can only be bemt so far before it reaches its limit, no matter the pain threshold of the subject. Instead, you must account for varying degrees of flexibility.

As for effective pressure point striking, there are really two levels to this skill. I didn't stay with hapkido long enough to learn their emphasis.

The atemi level involves being able to naturally find weak points and note some of the major vulnerable areas. In Ryukai, the maxim "flatten hills and widen valleys" is used to tell people to attack body seams and muscle heads with focused blows.

The kyusho level is, IMO, somewhat overdone in some schools and based on a more intense study of TCM principles where meridians are struck in sequence to either:

1) Induce the suppressive cycle.
2) Enhance the energetic cycle and then "seal" the next meridian in line.

Really,though, a lot of it is, IMO, after the fact justification for a compound striking or striking/grappling technique. For instance, a common technique makes it easy to hit GB20. It's quite handy that this point is at the back og the neck and would work fine anyway, but you can get to it more easily by securing the person in the correct fashion.

 

[Hollywood1340]

Actually...I would go with Hapkido on this one. Reason being,I wouldn't have to worry about "arresting" techniques and go straight to "break and escape" mode. Please don't confuse joint locking with joint breaking. Arresting techniques are used for their own purpose,and have their own limitations...justified use of force,etc....Hapkido (mine,anyway) has a very clear outlook on maximum use of power in a self defense scenario. I don't plan on dancing,I plan to do whatever it takes to walk away alive,be it through limb destruction or otherwise. :asian: Just a thought.

 

[Bode]

Why, do his pressure point techniques always work?--Arnisador

My apologies, I thought you knew who Doc was because I thought you practiced Kenpo. Do they always work? As we were saying in this thread. Pain thresholds differ. Doc's methods overwhelm the nervous system through destructive sequences of nerve strikes. Some people will collapse or have PMD (Physical/ Mental Disassociation) with nothing more than a tap on the corrrest nerve. (Dependent upon body posture). Others will require more. Over time, in our class, people will develop a resistence to the nerve strikes. Your brain get's accustomed to the overwhelming nervous response and requires more to "shut it off".

You obviously have a naturally high degree resistence to nerve strikes, which is very believable. However, everyone will respond at some level to nerve strikes assuming the practioner has skill. You might require a harder tap or further misalignment to expose the nerves and give you a "buzz" as we like to call it. If anyone could show you, Doc could. I have seen many a non believer quickly convert. Ask Dr. Dave on KenpoTalk.com

The negative body posture sounds like what's done in Wing Chun/JKD, with the idea that a person moving backward can't defend himself, or that a person who is being clinched is disadvantaged. It's certainly a key idea in BJJ, though that's principally on the ground. But, having never seen Kenpo/SL4, I'm not sure I'm picturing what you're saying correctly. -- arnisador

You are correct in a general sense. In Wing Chun when someone is moving backwards they are more vulnerable for various reasons. Moving backwards is a structurally week movement. The body must be re-alligned when the movement is completed. SL4 discusses the weekness of body when it is in a stabalization mode versus a defend mode. When the body is in stablization mode it cannot defend (we're talking muscles now, not arms blocking kicks). Striking someone when their muscles are in stablization mode is more harmful. The nerves are more open. There are various physical tests to prove this, but require someone capable. Perhaps we can take this to another thread and I, or Doc when he's back, can better explain. (With examples of course). So, in a sense this is what's happening when in Wing Chun they advise striking when the attacker is moving backwards.

There is more application of Negative Body Postures in SL4 than I have seen in any other art. Is it necassary? Do other arts utilize it? Yes, as you pointed out, BJJ shows that the person being clinched is at a disadvantage. In general most arts have some form of utilizing the attackers Negative Body Postures, but, and here's the key, they don't define it clearly. Why does it work? What is physicallly happening? Understanding NBP helps you create NBP in your attacker.
In addition, SL4 has NBP at the core of the art (science). As I said, it's not a byproduct of training or drills, it is the core. Every technique involves NBP in some way and it's not always the same. The human body is very complex and as such, requires detailed study.

Doc has an uncanny ability to find the nerve points in everyone. Any body size. As the body moves the nerve points shift so I respect his ability. It can't be easy.
I'm sure he would fin them in you!

A joint can only be bemt so far before it reaches its limit, no matter the pain threshold of the subject. Instead, you must account for varying degrees of flexibility. --EYEBEAMS

Right. But wouldn't you rather have an additional control mechanism that doesn't potentially get you involved in a lawsuite? Popping someones joints can be a bad move. Someone pushes you and he wont go down. "But Sir, I was only trying to control him when he pushed me, I didn't mean to tear his rotator cuff!"
I am not saying it's invalid. I love Hapkido. I am only saying it's one part of the equation. Life or death, hell, break every bone in his body, but I would say most fights that occur are not life or death. (Perhaps that depends on location... bar fights or gang fights are different)

TCM principles where meridians are struck in sequence to...

We call that Destructive Sequencing. Nice to know there are other teachers who are teaching this obscure knowledge.

 

[eyebeams]

Right. But wouldn't you rather have an additional control mechanism that doesn't potentially get you involved in a lawsuite? Popping someones joints can be a bad move. Someone pushes you and he wont go down. "But Sir, I was only trying to control him when he pushed me, I didn't mean to tear his rotator cuff!"

Not exactly the same thing. You can apply a technique that neither relies on pain nor dislocates joints. You have to take the person's balance so that their body will move with the technique. This relies on you applying motion with the entire body without the torque you use in percussion to extend and coil the force of the reciever's movement.

We call that Destructive Sequencing. Nice to know there are other teachers who are teaching this obscure knowledge.

IMO, it's one of those things that is often made unnecessarily complicated.

 

[arnisador]

Thanks for your responses Bode. I'm sure someone could buzz me on nerve points, somewhere on me, but after years of DKI folks trying, most of the major ones have been hit. I also don't use novocaine (lidocaine) at the dentist when getting a filling--I just have a high resistance to pain and, I'm told, to nerve strikes.

The idea of focusing on negative body posture is interesting to me as I compare it to the JKD and BJJ I study. (I've read some of Doc's stuff here but am not a Kenpoist.) Could it be compared to Judo's off-balancing (kuzushi) and similar ides in Jujutsu?

 

[Bode]

Could it be compared to Judo's off-balancing (kuzushi) and similar ides in Jujutsu?

If you can recommend any reading on the subject I would be interested. As I have only practiced Jujutsu occasionally I don't have any in depth knowledge of their methods. I am always interested though. It's quite enlightening to search for similarities in the arts. Where one calls it "this" the other calls it "that"... fascinating.
Either way I don't doubt that Judo or Jujutsu have terms for it, but doubtfully as scientific as the SL4 approach. But hey, if it work, it work. Can't argue that.

 

[bdparsons]

I've been watching this thread with interest, but I'm also a bit disconcerted that the question of the initial poster has quickly faded into obscurity (maybe that's why they've not posted again). I'm intrigued the thread has taken the direction it has, focusing in on what Hapido is or isn't, whether it does what it does by "accident" or by "design". Maybe this part of the discussion should have been broken off into a different thread. That being as it may, here's my thoughts on both issues, for what it's worth.

A strict comparison between Kenpo and Hapkido actually reveals more similarities than differences, perhaps this explains why they blend so well together. Properly taught, both are techniques-based systems, oriented to self defense. Both are principle based, and can have a high degree of flexibility and adaptability while executing technique. [Flexibility-You choosing to modify the techniques based on your preference at the time, possibly ladder of force considerations. Adaptability-You being forced to modify the techniques due to an unforseen circumstance.] Both are based on a balance between linear and circular movement. Both reflect an emphasis on committment to ending confrontations a) in as little time as possible and b) with as little force as possible. Both make extensive use of anatomical positioning (anatomical compliance or negative body posturing of you will) to phase between defensive (counter-offensive) maneuvers to accomplish the ultimate goal of disengagement. Though some would call these items generalizations, they actually reflect a desired mind-set when approaching the art(s). That mind-set being the establishment of the ability to flow from one phase of defense to the next. Properly executed, neither art will fall into the start-stop-adjust-start-stop method of execution.

The primary differences lies in the emphasis each art places on how we assure anatomical positioning of our attacker. In a general sense, it been my experience that Kenpo emphasizes striking to set up maneuvers while Hapkido emphasizes maneuvering to set up striking. With an understanding that there is a constant ebb and flow between these two. Some may consider this very simplistic, and it probably is, but it helps me not to lose the forest for the trees.

Finally a note concerning the assertion that many Hapkido techniques rely mainly on pain compliance. For the majority of joint manipulations this is correct, though it is by no means required. It is actually quite easy to modify joint manipulations so that the flow of the technique will affect the center of gravity (up, down, forward or back) and/or balance with no pain, though admittedly most beginning manipulations are taught as pain compliance maneuvers. There does need to be a clear distinction between joint manipulations and pressure point usage in Hapkido. While joint manipulations can entail using pressure points, the scope of pressure points lie in the whole of Hapkido, using these points in different manners including pressing, grasping or striking. That being said, there is such an integration between each facet of the art, my opinion has to be that it was by design, not by accident.

Just another voice crying in the wilderness.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute

 

[Doc]

Pressure points don't always work on everybody, either. And you have to remember that each build is different, so they're not always in the same spot. People with more body fat / mass will not feel them as much and vital (soft spot) striking becomes important.

It would appear you are the under the impression the pressure point activations do not work because there is not always a "pain response." This is untrue. They work on everyone but the effects of a single "pressure" activation may not be noticeable. While it is true that some respond more visibly than others to "pressure" on a single point, when a series of points are properly activated the effect is involuntary and significant.

 

[shesulsa]

They work on everyone but the effects of a single "pressure" activation may not be noticeable. While it is true that some respond more visibly than others to "pressure" on a single point, when a series of points are properly activated the effect is involuntary and significant.

We study pressure points. Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?

 

[eyebeams]

We study pressure points. Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?

I'm fairly skeptical. Claims like this are usually demonstrated on suggestible targets -- in other words, the majority of students and seminar participants -- in static scenarios. This is usually actually a public demonstration/moneymaking/reputation enhancement, along with things like breaking staves across the body and various strength/"fakir" style tricks. The point used to be to demonstrate that an art was being taught without giving away the real trick to it.

Points that don't create pain can have an effect. In TCM terms these is because the meridian struck affects subsequent meridians. The single most common sequence is to strike a brachial point that has already been brough to the surface by causing the limb to pull or bend, followed by hitting a point in the head, neck or torso. The final point is often effective on its own, but made moreso by the preliminaries.

For instance, the soft parry/limb strike/head or neck strike is very common. In one version, the soft parry (or grab) hyperextends the arm, exposing a point on the inside of the biceps tendon. Hitting that point exposes a point on the neck (2 thumb-widths from the corner of the mandible) that can be hit without causing serious injury to the receiver.

 

[Doc]

We study pressure points. Could you provide an example of a no-fail series such as you mentioned?

I wouldn't begin to give such information out over the internet. However anyone properly trained in acupuncture can tell you the effects are not always manisfested in the individual as "pain." That is the misconception. Pain CAN be a vicareous byproduct of activations but is not actually the intent of the knowledgeable, nor should it be.

 

[Brother John]

Finally a note concerning the assertion that many Hapkido techniques rely mainly on pain compliance. For the majority of joint manipulations this is correct, though it is by no means required. It is actually quite easy to modify joint manipulations so that the flow of the technique will affect the center of gravity (up, down, forward or back) and/or balance with no pain, though admittedly most beginning manipulations are taught as pain compliance maneuvers.

BILL...
Your whole post is the BEST analysis of eihter art that I've read on MT!!!!
Bar NONE.
:asian:

With regard to what you said about the successful use of joint manipulations being mainly based upon 'pain compliance'. Isn't it also true though that anytime you place a joint into "Control" that you are placing it in a position where that limb has no power and that if you continue the motion it took to get there that you will be SNAPPING tendons/ligaments and contorting the joint it'self. ...therefore affecting the alignment of the body overall???

I may just be restating something you said.

Your Brother
John

 

[pete]

not specifically hapkido, since i never studied it... but the skill of chin na (qinna) as practiced through the art of tai chi chuan (taijiquon), i was given the following analogy: controling the joint or the limb (through pain or otherwise) is like trying to push a chain up a hill. locking the spine through that initial joint is like putting the chain in a box and carrying it up the hill.

pete

 

[donald]

As I remember it. When asked about what arts he thought were worth their salt. Mr.Parker Sr., mentioned Hapkido, namely its "water" theory. Like its already been stated here. It realy depends on which system of Hapkido, or Kenpo you choose. Some kenpo systems are very rapid fire self-defense oriented(ie,Epak), and some are very much rooted in the more traditional aspects of training(ie,Kosho-Ryu). From what I've read over the years. It would seem that Hapkido is no different. If possible I would try to examine a studio, or two of each system. Someone here gave that same advise with an added twist. Look at the more advanced students, and see if they move how you would like to. I had never thought of that approach, but it makes perfect sense! I looked to an instructor that I wanted to move like. He became the yard stick by which I would measure other practioners. I have'nt hit his level yet, but with our Lord Jesus' help, maybe some day I will.I hope The Lord blesses your journey. Have you ever heard of Shinsei Hapkido? Check out Karate for Christ International. You can get some of there info online. There may be a class near you to examine.
By GOD'S Grace

 

[Brother John]

controling the joint or the limb (through pain or otherwise) is like trying to push a chain up a hill. locking the spine through that initial joint is like putting the chain in a box and carrying it up the hill.

pete

Hey Pete...
these analogies sound interesting, but I'm having a hard time really fleshing them out.
Could you extrapolate on what you mean by them??
thanks


Your Brother
John

 

[bdparsons]

With regard to what you said about the successful use of joint manipulations being mainly based upon 'pain compliance'. Isn't it also true though that anytime you place a joint into "Control" that you are placing it in a position where that limb has no power and that if you continue the motion it took to get there that you will be SNAPPING tendons/ligaments and contorting the joint it'self. ...therefore affecting the alignment of the body overall???

Close. But also remember the action of placing the limb in position of control is in and of itself affecting body alignment, and depending on the technique can with proper adjustments affect CG and balance with no or minimal discomfort. It's important to note that it's not an "all or nothing" proposition. For joint manipulations it comes down to a matter of choices. If you recall the "Lock to Throw or Lock to Strike" thread on the General Self Defense section where we both posted, that's what was touched upon.

A quick side note: Joint manipulation is often associated with limb extremities such as elbows and wrists, knees and ankles. Don't forget the torso! Shoulder, hips and the "longest" joint in the body, the spine (including the neck). Because of their proximity to the body core these take the least amount of effort to affect CG and balance. Not to mention they can hurt like nobody's business as well!

Thanks for the kind words.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute

 

[shesulsa]

I wouldn't begin to give such information out over the internet. However anyone properly trained in acupuncture can tell you the effects are not always manisfested in the individual as "pain." That is the misconception. Pain CAN be a vicareous byproduct of activations but is not actually the intent of the knowledgeable, nor should it be.

Agreed. However, we all know that pressure point striking and the "X-touch knock-out" is popularly taught. Woukl you say that a rapid-fire multiple-point technique is effective, in your opinion?

 

[pete]

ok, using kenpo-terms think of the hammerlock attack in flight to freedom, since its fresh in my mind from last night's class! if the attacker is controling your spine through the hammerlock, you will not be able to step back and elbow him effectively, if its just your arm that he's got, the tech works fine.

the analogy compares the human body to a 200 pound iron chain, each limb being a link and the joints are where the links meet. if you grab one link and lock it to only the one link next to it, it would be difficult to move the entire chain. the further away from the link you've grabbed would remain unaffected and difficult to move, even though you may have good control on the 2 links that are locked. so in the ineffective hammerlock, the kenpoist can move his leg to step back and use his other elbow to deliver the strike.

if the you use your whole body to control your opponent's whole body, its like putting the chain in a box. all the links are affected when you move the box, and cannot move independantly. in the hammerlock example, an effective lock would go through the elbow, shoulder and down the spine disturbing your balance and putting you up on your toes, making any attempt at steppinb back and elbowing ineffective, if at all possible...

pete