Requirements to start Hapkido

[Daniel Sullivan]

TKD didn't have a founder. It was synthesized from the training an experiences of a lot of people.

I'm well aware of that.

Some of whom wanted to tie their new art to ancient times (for many reasons) and some who did not.

This is the part that I was talking about; there was a fairly prominent effort at the outset to tie taekwondo to pre-occupation KMA and to obfuscate any non Korean elements in its origin. This was not the case when Choi founded hapkido.

Having said that, I have seen more than a few dojang websites that talk about "hapkido in ancient Korea," usually retrofitting the term, "hapkido" to describe grappling of pretty much any kind that is taught in their school.

 

[Instructor]

Whenever I am asked about the Hapkido origin story this is what I've been telling my folks: Hapkido History - Hapkido Online

I would like to explore the first generation students and teachers more. If anybody sees any glaring inconsistencies or has photo's, video, or stories, that would improve this page and is willing to share I'd love to improve it.

 

[Chris Parker]

Whenever I am asked about the Hapkido origin story this is what I've been telling my folks: Hapkido History - Hapkido Online

I would like to explore the first generation students and teachers more. If anybody sees any glaring inconsistencies or has photo's, video, or stories, that would improve this page and is willing to share I'd love to improve it.

Hmm… as I'm sure you'd figure, there are a range of things on that page I'd question… but, as most is presented as "legend", and unverified, it's not a big thing. The section that I'd most have an issue with, though, is the portion that addresses similarities to Aikido:

[FONT=Georgia, arial, sans-serif]It is also incorrect to say that Hapkido borrows many techniques from Aikido, that art evolved independently in another country.[/FONT]

Well, as the best evidence is that Choi was training alongside the early Aikido guys under Ueshiba, and that Aikido was in development in the same nation that Choi was in, at the same time he was there, in the same area, then I'd really question the validity of that statement. Aikido definitely continued to develop along it's own path later (which is what you seem to be addressing in the rest of that paragraph), but at the time Choi was there, it was still quite "positive" in it's methodology, very "hard" in it's application, and had quite a lot of atemi involved (Ueshiba was quoted as saying that "atemi is 90% of Aikido"… and his school at the time was referred to as the "Jigoku Dojo", or "Hell Dojo", for the amount of pain suffered within those walls). The differences in approach are more about Ueshiba's involvement with the Otomo sect of Buddhism later on, rather than it being drawn from a different set of ideals within Daito Ryu… honestly, that entire paragraph seems rather baseless, and lacking in understanding of Aikido's development.

I'd also strongly dispute the idea that the techniques only "superficially resemble" each other… as well as disputing the idea that the techniques are the defining aspect to show a link between the arts.

The next paragraph has it's issues as well (as do most of the references to anything Japanese… such as a "warrior class" still present in Japan in the 1940's&#8230, but that's not as important.

 

[Instructor]

Thanks Chris, I think I'll revise it. I tend to agree with you.

 

[jezr74]

Would be good if there was a MT wiki similar to wikipedia. Would be great to see collaboration of information from all you guys and gals.

 

[oftheherd1]

It's a controversy to ask sometimes. I don't give it much weight these days. But I love learning the history of different arts and how a style can be influenced by a single practitioner with a certain background, war, immigration, sickness etc.. I'm just a fan of getting the different theories and tid bits of info.

One of the things I was interested in trying to draw out in line with the TKD\HKD weave is when it started, or did something happen that sparked the trend of having them go hand in hand in some cases. I'm noticing, and correct me if I'm heading in the wrong direction, is that HKD has some soft teachers and some hard, and it reflects in the execution of some of the techniques I see performed from different streams. But I don't know enough yet about the different lines lineage.

Are HKD schools closely aligned with TKD schools a more hard martial art, than what may have originally came out? And so has a fork at that point to subtler differences?

What I have heard is that there was a movement to combine all the Korean MA under one unbrella; TKD. I think it was a big political thing, but nationally and within all Korean MA. As I was told, Hapkido and Tang Soo Do resisted, all the others complied, and became more Tae Kwon Do like. That was as late as the mid 80s. Hapkido has remained separate. I don't know about Tang Soo Do. I think Hapkido also went under a cloud of someone seeking to control it. I guess that actually succeeded for a short time, then the previous Hapkido broke away and went back to their own methods. Somebody who may know more should feel free to correct me, as I was not in Korea after 1987.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

What I have heard is that there was a movement to combine all the Korean MA under one unbrella; TKD. I think it was a big political thing, but nationally and within all Korean MA. As I was told, Hapkido and Tang Soo Do resisted, all the others complied, and became more Tae Kwon Do like. That was as late as the mid 80s. Hapkido has remained separate. I don't know about Tang Soo Do. I think Hapkido also went under a cloud of someone seeking to control it. I guess that actually succeeded for a short time, then the previous Hapkido broke away and went back to their own methods. Somebody who may know more should feel free to correct me, as I was not in Korea after 1987.

That is correct. MDK split, with half of the kwan going with Hwang Kee (MDK TSD) and half going with the Kukkiwon. Hapkido never went in, and I don't know if it's due to resistance on anyone's part or due to them not being taekwondo, or if the movement simply lost traction.

I'm not sure where Kuk Sool Won fits in, which is another organization with a name that implies a national organization, and which was founded in the sixties. Hwarang Do was registered as hapkido in Korea until the founder moved to the United States. I believe that Hwarang Do does require you to go through TKD to black belt prior to beginning the rest of their curriculum (you, or someone else may have mentioned this earlier), so if the HKD instructor mentioned by the OP came out of HWD, that would actually make logical sense.

 

[oftheherd1]

Anybody have a video of that one?

Sorry, just saw this. I don't have a video of it, but it may be online somewhere. Like so many things in Hapkido, the feet are very important. I have seen two methods. In one, you push off with your rear foot, either stepping into the kick, or from a stationary stance. The other, you rotate by spinning with both feet. You then drop as you spin around, and hook kick to the opponents ankle, as you support yourself by falling forward on both hands. That may sound odd, but it gives great stability, so more power, and allows one to more easily spring back to an upright position. I think the spin gives a little more speed and power, while stepping forward allows moving with an opponent that is retreating, especially from a kick.

EDIT: Took a quick look and found this.

 

[Dirty Dog]

What I have heard is that there was a movement to combine all the Korean MA under one unbrella; TKD. I think it was a big political thing, but nationally and within all Korean MA. As I was told, Hapkido and Tang Soo Do resisted, all the others complied, and became more Tae Kwon Do like. That was as late as the mid 80s. Hapkido has remained separate. I don't know about Tang Soo Do. I think Hapkido also went under a cloud of someone seeking to control it. I guess that actually succeeded for a short time, then the previous Hapkido broke away and went back to their own methods. Somebody who may know more should feel free to correct me, as I was not in Korea after 1987.

I don't think there was ever any effort to include Hapkido (which I think was going by a different name then) in the unification movement. Tang Soo Do didn't "resist"; the Moo Duk Kwan initially joined the unification movement, didn't like how things were progressing (it's thought this was largely because General Choi was the first president, rather than GM Hwang Kee), left, and (eventually) changed their name to Soo Bahk Do.

That is correct. MDK split, with half of the kwan going with Hwang Kee (MDK TSD) and half going with the Kukkiwon. Hapkido never went in, and I don't know if it's due to resistance on anyone's part or due to them not being taekwondo, or if the movement simply lost traction.

According to my Kwanjangnim (who was there at the time) it was more like a third of the Moo Duk Kwan left. And there was no Kukkiwon until much later. But that probably falls into the realm of hair-splitting.

 

[oftheherd1]

I don't think there was ever any effort to include Hapkido (which I think was going by a different name then) in the unification movement. Tang Soo Do didn't "resist"; the Moo Duk Kwan initially joined the unification movement, didn't like how things were progressing (it's thought this was largely because General Choi was the first president, rather than GM Hwang Kee), left, and (eventually) changed their name to Soo Bahk Do.

You may well be correct. But I distinctly remember being told Tang Soo Do and Hapkido resisted coming under one controlling body. Unfortunately, since that was some 30 years ago, I don't remember the source. As to not being called Hapkido, I got the distinct impression it wasn't too long before I was told about it, that it had happened. Could there have been two attempts to bring all Korean MA under TKD?

According to my Kwanjangnim (who was there at the time) it was more like a third of the Moo Duk Kwan left. And there was no Kukkiwon until much later. But that probably falls into the realm of hair-splitting.

He would know I would guess since he was there at the time. As far as I know, I wasn't, since the first time I was there was about 74-76, then again in 79-81, and last from 84-87. The last time was when I studied Hapkido there. Do you remember the time frame your KJN talked about?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

According to my Kwanjangnim (who was there at the time) it was more like a third of the Moo Duk Kwan left. And there was no Kukkiwon until much later. But that probably falls into the realm of hair-splitting.

Thanks! I was unsure of the ratio. I had also heard that there was some amount of animosity between Hwang Kee and General Choi.

 

[Instructor]

One thing is certain then and now. The martial arts community is very fractious. Heck we can't even get all the Hapkido Orgs under one umbrella much less get them to call Hapkido something it's not like TKD. I kind of like the atmosphere though full of strong independent type people.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

One thing is certain then and now. The martial arts community is very fractious. Heck we can't even get all the Hapkido Orgs under one umbrella

Probably for the best.

much less get them to call Hapkido something it's not like TKD.

Not like TKD, but there is definitely a lot of cross pollination from HKD to TKD. Probably not so much the other way around.

I kind of like the atmosphere though full of strong independent type people.

And that's a good thing!

 

[Instructor]

The interesting thing is on the handful of times I've worked with folks from other Hapkido Orgs we found a whole lot more in common than differences. At my level (relatively low on the food chain) I find parity with other orgs. They might teach things in a different order but the movements seem to be largely the same.

 

[Dirty Dog]

You may well be correct. But I distinctly remember being told Tang Soo Do and Hapkido resisted coming under one controlling body. Unfortunately, since that was some 30 years ago, I don't remember the source. As to not being called Hapkido, I got the distinct impression it wasn't too long before I was told about it, that it had happened. Could there have been two attempts to bring all Korean MA under TKD?

It's not like people were going around kneecapping people if they didn't join...
The first unification movements was in (if memory serves) 1955. There were five Kwans involved: Moo Duk Kwan, Chang Mu Kwan, Chung Do Kwan, Jido Kwan and Song Mu Kwan. The Korean War kind of stalled this effort. After the war, these five were joined by the Oh Do Kwan (from which the ITF evolved), Jung Do Kwan Han Moo Kwan and Kang Duk Kwan.

Tang Soo Do was the style taught by the Moo Duk Kwan, so as one of the original five, it's pretty clear that they didn't resist anything.

GM Hwang Kee left the unification movement with (reportedly) about 1/3 of his Moo Duk Kwan students in about 1964 and resumed teaching Tang Soo Do for a few years before changing the name to Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan.

So you could say there were two movements, if you consider the Korean War to have halted efforts. Or one protracted movement, if it was only on the back burner for a while.

I don't known when the name "Hapkido" was first used for the art, but I have always understood that (like most systems...) it's had several evolutionary names. I did a quick check and the Korean Hapkido Association was registered in 1969, but that doesn't tell us when it was first used.

He would know I would guess since he was there at the time. As far as I know, I wasn't, since the first time I was there was about 74-76, then again in 79-81, and last from 84-87. The last time was when I studied Hapkido there. Do you remember the time frame your KJN talked about?

Well, GM Hwang left in (about) 1964, so that would be when the Moo Duk Kwan splintered into two groups: Moo Duk Kwan Taekwondo and Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do. Other splinterings have occurred since then, obviously.

So Hapkido was never a part of the unification movement. Was this because there was no invitation to join, or because they declined the invitation? I don't think there's any way to know for sure, but I'm inclined to think there was never an invitation. Had there been one, it's likely that one or the other group would have recorded it.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I don't known when the name "Hapkido" was first used for the art, but I have always understood that (like most systems...) it's had several evolutionary names. I did a quick check and the Korean Hapkido Association was registered in 1969, but that doesn't tell us when it was first used.

Hapkido was first used by Dojunim Choi, though it was supposedly suggested by his partner, Seo Bok Seob. The last evolutionary name prior to Hapkido was Hap-Ki Yu Kwon Sul. This is supposed to have happened in 1959.

I believe Ji Han Jae founded the Korean Hapkido Association, though as I recall, Choi was made president of it at one point.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

The interesting thing is on the handful of times I've worked with folks from other Hapkido Orgs we found a whole lot more in common than differences. At my level (relatively low on the food chain) I find parity with other orgs. They might teach things in a different order but the movements seem to be largely the same.

That sounds like my experience as well. But without the element of international/Olympic level competition, the need for a large, centralized organization simply isn't there. Taekwondo, on the other hand, needs those mechanisms in place to support the sport on a global level.

Also, I tend to dislike large entities. Having said that, I am a part of the WHA, which has been a good experience for the past three years.

 

[Instructor]

I've seen some rather glaring quality control and performance issues with Tae Kwon Do comparatively speaking. It's definitely buyer beware out there. I've met TKD and TSD people that were phenomenal and I've walked into places and turned right around and walked out again. Massive orgs don't guarantee quality. You would think some level of oversight would take place but in my experience it's just not.

 

[Dirty Dog]

That sounds like my experience as well. But without the element of international/Olympic level competition, the need for a large, centralized organization simply isn't there. Taekwondo, on the other hand, needs those mechanisms in place to support the sport on a global level.

Also, I tend to dislike large entities. Having said that, I am a part of the WHA, which has been a good experience for the past three years.

I'm with you there. I have KKW rank, since we do offer KKW certification to students, but I don't really feel a part of the KKW. I'm a part of the Moo Duk Kwan.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I've seen some rather glaring quality control and performance issues with Tae Kwon Do comparatively speaking. It's definitely buyer beware out there. I've met TKD and TSD people that were phenomenal and I've walked into places and turned right around and walked out again. Massive orgs don't guarantee quality. You would think some level of oversight would take place but in my experience it's just not.

The same thing is true of small (or no) org schools.