Hapkido / TKD Fusion DVD

[Barrie Restall]

I wonder what people think "making the hapkido arts better" actually entails; what criteria do we use to asses betterment?

Preserving, improving and promoting an art are different things, and may have different interpretations for different people. Any thoughts out there?


I realise this is getting away from the thread topic so feel free to take it elsewhwere Mr Moderator.


Barrie Restall

[Brian_Beach]

Good question Barrie - I think this is THE question lies at the heart of most of our most heated debates. ( it should be it's own thread )

Off the top of my head - I think a jumping off place although it probably equally open to interpretation, is the akin to the Hypocratic Oath, "abstain from doing harm".

So I think that betterment would include all three. You would preserve what is given to you. Improving entails obviously striving for personal growth, but also expanding the context of the curriculum. Each person will be drawn in a direction, so the context will reflect their interest. One of the gongs I beat is Ukemi, so my teaching has had that bent to it with in the context of the curriculum that was given to me. Keeping the "improvement" within the context of the curriculum hopefully avoids extraneous additions. Promotion is, to me, procreation, which means instruction based on the prior tenets.

[HapkidoPrincess]

Wow! I always find these when they have about 3 or 4 pages of posts to read! LOL

I'm sure that by posting my thoughts, I'm opening myself up to all the criticism, but here goes:

After reading all of the "debate", I went back and re-read the originial post. From my understanding the DVDs are intended for people with a TKD background that are using them as a means of being introduced to HKD or to supplement HKD training when TKD is your original art. I know that nothing can take the place of hand-on training, and anyone with a strong martial arts background would know the same. Of course there will be people out there who purchase the DVDs as their sole method of training and will THINK they "know" HKD, but let's face it...There are those who go out and try a class or two, and will go around thinking that they "know" HKD. Make sense?

As for Master Allison and his contribution to HKD--and as his student, I may be a little biased...We are in a very rural area, and growing up I had only heard of Karate, Kung Fu, and TKD. If not for Master Allison, this area would have remained uneducated as to what HKD is or the fact that it even exists. As for his list of students and ranks under him, how is this not a measure of what he has done for HKD? This allows the art to grow and expand to reach more people, and isn't that what it will take to keep something from becoming "extinct"?

[Klaas Barends]

or myself, the improvements I started with was the DOCHANG JOURNAL Project and the effort to convert my own teacher's material from the Confucian Model to the Western Academic Model. It required working within the context of my teacher's material rather than whipping together bits from disparate practices.

So what you did, is reshuffle the techniques and added to it.
Why not stick with the original method?

[Barrie Restall]

Interesting concept, Brian, promotion as procreation, instruction within the tenets. I'll have to think about that for a bit.

My Hapkido master was Matthew Sun Su Kim who came to Australia in the late 1970s with a vision to create "an Australian hapkido with Korean roots" (his words). His particular penchant was sparring and the early curriculum reflected this. The curriculum evolved under his stewardship in the early years, patterns were introduced as well as expansion of the self defence component. It took some years before he was happy that his vision had come about.

I would consider this contribution to be an ADDITION to the hapkido art spectrum rather than an improvement per se.

He took some seniors to Korea in 1992 to visit various Hapkido groups and he arranged for some sparring bouts. The Australians performed very well, winning many bouts against the locals. Master Kim was very happy but when I asked him how he rated the contests he replied " Australian tactics excellent, Australian technique S...T; Korean technique excellent, Korean tactics s...t". So recognised deficiencies in the style he had created. He set about correcting this by arranging visits to Korea for the students and sponsoring visits by Korean masters and instructors to Australia. He also gathered all the BB instructors together and told them to choose one particular aspect of the art, and then told them that they had 10 years to master that aspect, to become expert, so that the organisation would have a team of "experts" as a resource for the improvement of the overall quality of the art. The visits both ways were very productive, but unfortunately not many of the BB instructors failed to applied themselves diligently to the task of becoming expert in some aspect.

Even tho this strategy was only partly successful it had a big impact on the organisation and undoubtedly improved the quality of the material being practised. So I would consider that he had been successful in improving the art within his own organisation.


As a successful business man, he did not need to make money from teaching but he did recognise the value of a solid student base. So he encouraged the BBs to start clubs and expand the organisation. Today there is a solid association of clubs all teaching Master Kim's style.

Creating an organisation that has thrived up to this time, could be considered a contribution to the Hapkido arts in so far as it offers choice and opportunity, thus keeping the Hapkido flame burning.

While all this is very commendable it says nothing about the comparative quality of the style or whether or not any innovation has been introduced to enhance the art as a whole. In the great scheme of things this may not matter.


I have no doubt others have opinions about Master Kim's contributions, or similar organisations..

Just scribbling while I'm thinking.

Regards,

Barrie

[Daniel]

Barrie,

Just to bounce on from your comment regarding Matthew Kim Sung Su's contributions - I find it a real mystery that so many of us learnt from him, spent so much time with him - and yet none of us 'look' or 'move' like him - it is almost like he taught each of us something different - custom-Hapkido tailored to each of our individual needs - so as you say - maybe there is something that defines Hapkido that is deeper than the physical appearance of a technique.

Apologies to all for diverting the subject even more - you should all go back to discussing the merits/pitfalls of selling a Hapkido video to TKD practitioners.

[Brian_Beach]

I would consider this contribution to be an ADDITION to the hapkido art spectrum rather than an improvement per se.

An addition could be an improvement or not. Just like an architectural addition that fits in with the existing architecture and enhances the space vs one that clashes, competes and detracts from the original.

Sounds like Matthew Sun Su Kim had vision not just nailing up bits as he found them.

[Bruce W Sims]

or myself, the improvements I started with was the DOCHANG JOURNAL Project and the effort to convert my own teacher's material from the Confucian Model to the Western Academic Model. It required working within the context of my teacher's material rather than whipping together bits from disparate practices.

So what you did, is reshuffle the techniques and added to it.
Why not stick with the original method?

For myself, learning Hapkido under the Confucian Model seemed to encourage an atmosphere of non-accountability. Tests under this model were often affairs where a person was simply asked to do X number of techniques. The core of the curriculum were the ten KEBONSU and any other techniques were loosely related to those ten techniques with the kicking techniques tacked on a'la JI Han Jae. The material that my late teacher taught would vary from presentation to presentation, with his "Art of Masters" book as a sort of "touchstone". Not too long after I began the DOCHANG JOURNAL Project and published the first four levels, my teacher came out with a more structured approach of five levels. He had roughly grouped bunches of techniques together but the model was still distinctly Confucian as it did not follow the sort of developmental progression that one finds in the Academic approach.

The improvement of the Academic approach is that the techniques follow an intelligent progression from biomechanically simplistic to sophisticated execution. The progression is easy to understand and one knows where they are in their growth at any given time. The volumes for 1st Degree BB through 7th will likewise interface unarmed techniques with their armed counterparts.

There still remains quite a bit of work to do. The recent publication of the SOH BONG material only barely skims the top of what Myung taught regarding this weapon. In like manner the sword work on the YON MU KWAN is only the most simplistic warm-up exercises from KENDO cum KUMDO. The staff work is likewise only the most simplistic and superficial introduction to staff handling and is heavily corrupted by Okinawan and Japan staff work. Does any of this help?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[dortiz]

Its very odd to read that portions of your teachers curriculum were " corrupted" with Okinawan and Japanese influences and that you think the improvement is removing that. That is what he learned and taught.
Choosing to teach another style is one thing but saying you are fixing his is very hard to fathom. Maybe I am totally misunderstanding this and if so I do apologize.

[Stuart Rosenberg]

I appreciate people dedicated and working hard but for what result???

I don't see this a collaboration as building anything better or a more effective MA style.

HKD kicking is better than TKD IMO and HKD SD and weapons is way better than TKD.

In fact half the people doing HKD use TKD kicks anyway.

So what's the benefits of this project to KMA?

[Brian_Beach]

I appreciate people dedicated and working hard but for what result???

I don't see this a collaboration as building anything better or a more effective MA style.

HKD kicking is better than TKD IMO and HKD SD and weapons is way better than TKD.

In fact half the people doing HKD use TKD kicks anyway.

So what's the benefits of this project to KMA?

Hey!!! We agree!!! Wooohooooo -

I too see this as TKD pilfering HKD. I'll never support it.

[Bruce W Sims]

Its very odd to read that portions of your teachers curriculum were " corrupted" with Okinawan and Japanese influences and that you think the improvement is removing that. That is what he learned and taught.
Choosing to teach another style is one thing but saying you are fixing his is very hard to fathom. Maybe I am totally misunderstanding this and if so I do apologize.

Why is that? Have you grown so used to people making things up or stealing from other cultures? When you find things broken, don't you fix them? What don't you understand?

If you are REALLY looking for something odd you really oughta take a look at what my teacher's son has done to his legacy.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Thomas]

I too see this as TKD pilfering HKD. I'll never support it.

Heh heh heh... not something really new though. Taekwondo has at its roots Karate and a bit of Taekyeon styling/image... and a healthy dose of Hapkido added in for self defense (check out General Choi Hong-hi's encyclopedia). What I like about this DVD (at least the advertising that I can see) is that they are being completely up front and clear about what they are offering... namely (1) elements of Hapkido taken and modified to fit a TKD curriculum and (2) that it is intended to offer some help for the TKD self defense curriculum. It's actually refreshing to see this level of honesty and collaboration instead of trying to sneak in techniques from other arts and calling them secret TKD/Hwarang/Monk/hidden Poomsae techniques.

Stuart asked

So what's the benefits of this project to KMA?

and I would say that resources such as this are good for KMA. People don't "have" to use them, they are being clear and honest about the source material, and it could actually improve the self defense practices for various schools. Beyond that, seeing high level practitioners/instructors of different KMA working together to try to choose techniques that can be successfully blended and used across arts is a good thing. Having qualified people working to adapt techniques is much better than just mixing and matching without a coherant plan.

With much of WTF Taekwondo drifting towards sport and much of ITF TKD being taught strictly as it has been formulated... I think there is a real desire for some TKDists to look for new sources of improving their self defense. Personally, I find HKD to good place to look for practical self defense... who knows, maybe when TKD students get a taste of HKD, they may just go looking for the whole art later...

[rabbit]

I received my copy of Mixed Taekwon yesterday and it is very good. I'm sure it will be a very useful tool. Master Kim and Master Cha are both very skilled martial artists and I am very happy with their product.

[Daniel Sullivan]

Those practicing Hapkido with a background in TKD understand how learning HKD opens up new concepts and techniques for the practitioner. We designed this DVD to introduce TKD students the various skills of Hapkido through combining the "hard" and "soft" skills from both arts. The techniques are meant to be easily related by TKD students. This program will help students gain new concepts and appreciation for both arts. Tell all your TKD buddies about this unique DVD!

Check out the Mixed TaeKwon DVD at http://9thdan.com/site/Taekwondo.html We used some high quality 3D animations in this DVD, come check out our preview video.

Take advantage of a 5% discount by using the promo code 5forum, expires in 6 months.

Thanks!

Interesting discussion. This is my first post on this board, so I suppose jumping in to this thread right away might not be the best choice, but I will take a stab at it.

I view any video resource in the same light that I do books: some are good, some are not good, but both are best as reference material. The write up of the DVD is certainly intriguing enough, but I bolded one sentence that I specifically want to comment on.

We designed this DVD to introduce TKD students the various skills of Hapkido through combining the "hard" and "soft" skills from both arts.

Having both a TKD and an HKD background, I will say that without an instructor, a taekwondoin with no Hapkido training would have a very difficult time simply working in Hapkido techniques. Couple that with the fact that those most likely to try to use the video to do this without an instructor are keup grade students and the problem is amplified, as not only do they not have any Hapkido training, but they still are very much a novice in their base art.

Such a DVD might be a valuable reference to a person who is an experienced instructor in both arts, who has learned each art separately, and may be looking to work the concepts into a TKD class, but simply never tried to put the two together. Such an individual could instruct a well designed hybrid class.

The only question that I have is why would such an individual do so? Hapkido has a fully developed striking system already, plus all the grapples that TKD instructors seem to desperately add into their curriculum, so why not just run a Hapkido class? Seems like a lot of unnecessary work to combine the two when one already does it all.

Daniel

[vincent]

I have no problem at all with anyone making DVD on a particular art for commercial reasons but I find I have a similar view to the above post.
I personally find the concept of this production a bit cynical ie it begs the question WHY do you need to add to HKD to TKD at all?
As someone with over 15year expereience in TKD before ever starting HKD I can only come up with the following reasons why you might want this DVD, none of which are very positve:
1) Because you dont really understand TKD and what it actually entails (ie you havent learned your syllubus material properly)
2) less chartiably - its to be used by TKD-based schools as a way to retain senior students are dissatisfied with the specialised nature of TKD training
3) Worse still - it is going to be bought by a yet another TKD based practitioner who wants to misrepresent their actual skill base, as being much broader than it really is (you know the ones - "Hapkido is just TKD mixed with XXX" or " Hapkido is just the senior levels of TKD" etc, etc )

If you want to improve your TKD then explore your own art & develop your skills.
Altenatively if you want to study HKD then do so by starting a white belt and learn a diverse cirriculum (not some half-a**d, cut down version) & you may become a much better martial artist for it.