Requirements to start Hapkido

[PhotonGuy]

I know not all schools that teach Hapkido will do this but I once knew of a school that taught both Tae Kwon Do and Hapkido. In order to train in Hapkido at that school first you had to get a black belt in Tae Kwon Do there. I do know that Hapkido does use some of the techniques from Tae Kwon Do but to even start as a white belt in Hapkido at that school you first had to get a black belt in their Tae Kwon Do. I wonder if other schools have that same requirement.

 

[oftheherd1]

I have no idea why a school would do that other than to keep a student longer and get more money. Tae Kwon Do is by no means a prerequisite for Hapkido, nor vice versa. If there is any other reason I hope someone can explain it.

I would beg to differ with you that Hapkido uses some techniques from Tae Kwon Do. I studied Tae Kwon Do briefly under Jhoon Goo Rhee in the sixties. I never learned techniques as such, nor did I see any taught to higher belts. To say either art took things from the other would require verifiable documentation, considering both are fairly recent arts. However, I was told by a student of mine that some of the Hapkido techniques I taught, he was able to recognize as movements in Tae Kwon Do kata. He stated that they appeared to have to no (other that the stated reason \of 'art') use until he learned the Hapkido technique.

Which art used those first, and why their meaning has been lost in at least some Tae Kwon Do, I cannot say.

 

[arnisador]

I've found it reasonably common that a TKD school teaches (some) HKD as part of its self-defense curriculum. There's a variety of TKD styles and those taht don't teach locking and do emphasize sports seem to be the ones most likely to add HKD to round things out. But I haven't seen it be a prereq. before.

Historically, TKD is karate and HKD is jujutsu, but I think there has been some convergence, esp. because so many who practice HKD seem to also do (or have done) TKD, and I think it is fair to say that a lot of HKD schools' kicking techniques largely overlap with those of TKD, for example.

 

[oftheherd1]

I've found it reasonably common that a TKD school teaches (some) HKD as part of its self-defense curriculum. There's a variety of TKD styles and those taht don't teach locking and do emphasize sports seem to be the ones most likely to add HKD to round things out. But I haven't seen it be a prereq. before.

Historically, TKD is karate and HKD is jujutsu, but I think there has been some convergence, esp. because so many who practice HKD seem to also do (or have done) TKD, and I think it is fair to say that a lot of HKD schools' kicking techniques largely overlap with those of TKD, for example.

I think you will find Hapkido is traced to Daitō-ryū not JuJutsu. Also, from my perspective, many who have/do practice TKD also wish to learn/move to Hapkido.

 

[Dirty Dog]

I think you will find Hapkido is traced to Daitō-ryū not JuJutsu. Also, from my perspective, many who have/do practice TKD also wish to learn/move to Hapkido.

True enough, but given that the full name of the art is Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, wouldn't you both be correct? Or just splitting itty bitty hairs?

 

[Chris Parker]

I think you will find Hapkido is traced to Daitō-ryū not JuJutsu. Also, from my perspective, many who have/do practice TKD also wish to learn/move to Hapkido.

Daito Ryu is jujutsu… just a specific system of it.

True enough, but given that the full name of the art is Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, wouldn't you both be correct? Or just splitting itty bitty hairs?

Yeah, you'd be correct. Of course, there's no such generic art as "jujutsu"… just many, many forms and expressions of it… Daito Ryu being one… so, in that sense, stating that Hapkido claims to be descendant from Daito Ryu, rather than simply "jujutsu" is also correct… which is where we get into the "splitting hairs" thing…

Of course, there is also the fact that there is really almost no evidence that Choi actually learnt Daito Ryu itself… instead, it's likely that he attended some scant training in early Aikido groups… likely with Ueshiba heading them… as Ueshiba was making his separation from Daito Ryu. Certainly, the stories given by Choi seem to have absolutely no corroborating evidence whatsoever… so… I think you'll find that Hapkido traces itself to basic methods which themselves trace back to Daito Ryu… at best, anyway.

 

[WaterGal]

I have no idea why a school would do that other than to keep a student longer and get more money. Tae Kwon Do is by no means a prerequisite for Hapkido, nor vice versa. If there is any other reason I hope someone can explain it.

I'm guessing the instructor didn't actually know a lot of Hapkido, and wanted to hide that by making you do 2-3 years of other stuff first! That way, most people would quit long before they got to the end of what Hapkido he or she knows.

 

[oftheherd1]

Daito Ryu is jujutsu… just a specific system of it.



Yeah, you'd be correct. Of course, there's no such generic art as "jujutsu"… just many, many forms and expressions of it… Daito Ryu being one… so, in that sense, stating that Hapkido claims to be descendant from Daito Ryu, rather than simply "jujutsu" is also correct… which is where we get into the "splitting hairs" thing…

Of course, there is also the fact that there is really almost no evidence that Choi actually learnt Daito Ryu itself… instead, it's likely that he attended some scant training in early Aikido groups… likely with Ueshiba heading them… as Ueshiba was making his separation from Daito Ryu. Certainly, the stories given by Choi seem to have absolutely no corroborating evidence whatsoever… so… I think you'll find that Hapkido traces itself to basic methods which themselves trace back to Daito Ryu… at best, anyway.

Given the oriental propensity for respecting age and longevity, I think believing all histories of ancient lineage of modern martial arts must be viewed with care. Modern TKD and HKD, usually acknowledge their recent beginnings, and lineage from Japan, Okinawa, or China. But even they have begun to try and show ancient Korean lineage.

As to Choi, it must be remembered that he was Korean, lived many years in Japan, where Koreans were often considered childishly ignorant and suitable for only menial jobs, if that. Any Japanese who agreed to have a Korean in his school would have had to have believed strongly in that decision, and had the standing in Japanese society to get away with it. That said, there does seem to be murkiness to Choi's claim. Yet he seems to have had much knowledge in grappling arts early on his return from Japan. You probably need to explain that away along with your dismissal of Choi, and Korean/Japanese interaction.

 

[oftheherd1]

I'm guessing the instructor didn't actually know a lot of Hapkido, and wanted to hide that by making you do 2-3 years of other stuff first! That way, most people would quit long before they got to the end of what Hapkido he or she knows.

That I can easily believe. There are many stories of seminars producing HKD rank, and other MA ranks as well, from teachers of questionable motives.

 

[Chris Parker]

Given the oriental propensity for respecting age and longevity, I think believing all histories of ancient lineage of modern martial arts must be viewed with care. Modern TKD and HKD, usually acknowledge their recent beginnings, and lineage from Japan, Okinawa, or China. But even they have begun to try and show ancient Korean lineage.

Yeah… not really anything to do with what I was talking about, for the record…

As to Choi, it must be remembered that he was Korean, lived many years in Japan, where Koreans were often considered childishly ignorant and suitable for only menial jobs, if that. Any Japanese who agreed to have a Korean in his school would have had to have believed strongly in that decision, and had the standing in Japanese society to get away with it. That said, there does seem to be murkiness to Choi's claim. Yet he seems to have had much knowledge in grappling arts early on his return from Japan. You probably need to explain that away along with your dismissal of Choi, and Korean/Japanese interaction.

That's the problem… the only reference we have to Choi being part of the school is Choi's comments… all of which contradict everyone else's accounts… and feature a whole range of claims that are backed up by exactly nothing. What is seen in Hapkido is really fairly entry level joint locking (indicating a rather cursory exposure, hardly the three decades as a "secret student" he claims), and so on. I'm not dismissing Choi, I'm saying that his claims fly in the face of reality and all other evidence. Now, does that mean that Hapkido is not a wonderful, versatile, powerful art? No. But it does mean that the claims of a Daito Ryu origin should be taken as suspect, in the least… most actual evidence have Choi (or someone he knew) attending occasional seminars and training dates with Ueshiba, who was in the process of formulating Aikido at the time (hence the usage of the same kanji… "Hapkido" is the Korean pronunciation of "Aikido", let's not forget&#8230, but these meetings were very few and far between.

 

[oftheherd1]

Yeah… not really anything to do with what I was talking about, for the record…






That's the problem… the only reference we have to Choi being part of the school is Choi's comments… all of which contradict everyone else's accounts… and feature a whole range of claims that are backed up by exactly nothing. What is seen in Hapkido is really fairly entry level joint locking (indicating a rather cursory exposure, hardly the three decades as a "secret student" he claims), and so on. I'm not dismissing Choi, I'm saying that his claims fly in the face of reality and all other evidence. Now, does that mean that Hapkido is not a wonderful, versatile, powerful art? No. But it does mean that the claims of a Daito Ryu origin should be taken as suspect, in the least… most actual evidence have Choi (or someone he knew) attending occasional seminars and training dates with Ueshiba, who was in the process of formulating Aikido at the time (hence the usage of the same kanji… "Hapkido" is the Korean pronunciation of "Aikido", let's not forget&#8230, but these meetings were very few and far between.

So Hapkido has 'fairly entry level joint locking?' Yet is a 'wonderful, versatile, powerful art?' I'll need to work on that a bit. But I will be diligent. Perhaps it would help if you could tell me how many different ways the different body joints can in fact be manipulated. Or better yet, if there are youtube or other examples of joint manipulations in other arts that Hapkido doesn't have, I would be thrilled to learn them. But I do agree that Hapkido is a wonderful, versatile, powerful art.


I have stated before that Choi's history is murky. There is no getting around that. The only thing that seems to remain are his own oral histories as told to his students (and the fact he was apparently good enough to have students). You may believe them, or not believe them. That is up to you. But I must admit I had never heard any claims that he '(or someone he knew)' attended 'occasional seminars and training dates with Ueshiba' but that seems to me a little far fetched. Granted, that is just my opinion. I just couldn't see why he would be more likely to claim lineage from Takeda rather than Ueshiba, if most of what he learned came from Ueshiba. And I never heard of Japanese schools teaching seminars or having training dates for outsiders, during that time frame. I wasn't aware of that teaching method from major schools in Japan.


But the real bottom line for the OP is that I know of no requirements for study of Hapkido other than finding a school and attending. If the OP, or you, or anyone else doesn't think Hapkido is for them, they should stay away. If anyone thinks there is another art better suited to them, they should seek out a school and teacher of that art and study it. On the other hand, if anyone thinks Hapkido is an art they would like to learn, I don't think they will be disappointed in learning it. I would just encourage them to find a good school and teacher.


And I would tell them not to worry about difficult to substantiate claims (for or against Choi or Hapkido) if they like what they see in Hapkido.

 

[Chris Parker]

So Hapkido has 'fairly entry level joint locking?' Yet is a 'wonderful, versatile, powerful art?' I'll need to work on that a bit. But I will be diligent. Perhaps it would help if you could tell me how many different ways the different body joints can in fact be manipulated. Or better yet, if there are youtube or other examples of joint manipulations in other arts that Hapkido doesn't have, I would be thrilled to learn them. But I do agree that Hapkido is a wonderful, versatile, powerful art.

Yeah, I wasn't particularly clear there… that's on me.

What I was meaning was that Choi's claims of being a secret disciple of Takeda Sokaku, living in essentially his "summer house" (away from anyone else who might have witnessed Choi's mere presence), having been trained in all aspects of Daito Ryu, including methods above and beyond those taught to Takeda's own son, Tokimune, fly in the face of mere observable methods, as what is seen in Hapkido is really far more reminiscent of the early, basic levels of Daito Ryu/early Aikido… so, when I say that Hapkido shows fairly "entry level joint locking", I'm only referencing the aspects that could potentially have come from Daito Ryu… from that perspective, yeah, it's fairly entry level.

But here's the thing… it's not about different ways to manipulate a joint… it's about how you do it…

I have stated before that Choi's history is murky. There is no getting around that. The only thing that seems to remain are his own oral histories as told to his students (and the fact he was apparently good enough to have students).

Ashida Kim gets students. Frank Dux still gets students. Antony Cummins has followers. Having students, honestly, is hardly an indication of anything other than an appeal to a certain segment of the market.

You may believe them, or not believe them. That is up to you.

With all evidence denying them, and there being nothing that corroborates the stories, I'll choose to not believe them. I appreciate that others do believe, though.

But I must admit I had never heard any claims that he '(or someone he knew)' attended 'occasional seminars and training dates with Ueshiba' but that seems to me a little far fetched.

The closest thing we have to corroborating evidence of Choi even being exposed to anything from Daito Ryu are recollections from Ueshiba's son, Kisshomaru, who has noted that his father mentioned "a Korean man" somewhat similar to Choi who attended "one or two seminars". Far fetched? Not at all… especially not when compared with the stories that Choi presented.

Granted, that is just my opinion. I just couldn't see why he would be more likely to claim lineage from Takeda rather than Ueshiba, if most of what he learned came from Ueshiba.

Because Takeda was Ueshiba's teacher. Even at that point, Ueshiba hadn't made his split yet.

And I never heard of Japanese schools teaching seminars or having training dates for outsiders, during that time frame. I wasn't aware of that teaching method from major schools in Japan.

Then take it from me, it was not an uncommon occurrence… especially for the more financially driven teachers (which included Ueshiba and Takeda, for the record). I mean, some of Choi's stories include the idea of him being taken along to some of these (including ones outside of Japan, such as Hawaii) to act as uke for the techniques… and, for the record, the seminars that he cited are on record, but there is no mention of Choi being involved…

But the real bottom line for the OP is that I know of no requirements for study of Hapkido other than finding a school and attending. If the OP, or you, or anyone else doesn't think Hapkido is for them, they should stay away. If anyone thinks there is another art better suited to them, they should seek out a school and teacher of that art and study it. On the other hand, if anyone thinks Hapkido is an art they would like to learn, I don't think they will be disappointed in learning it. I would just encourage them to find a good school and teacher.

Agreed.

And I would tell them not to worry about difficult to substantiate claims (for or against Choi or Hapkido) if they like what they see in Hapkido.

True… depending on the values of the person in question. Considering this particular OP, I don't think he's actually genuinely interested in studying Hapkido, or any of the other arts/teachers he's asked about.

 

[oftheherd1]

so, when I say that Hapkido shows fairly "entry level joint locking", I'm only referencing the aspects that could potentially have come from Daito Ryu… from that perspective, yeah, it's fairly entry level.

But here's the thing… it's not about different ways to manipulate a joint… it's about how you do it…

Well, I guess it is senseless for me to try and answer that since I personally am not sufficiently an expert nor have studied all the other grappling arts to know if there are better ways ‘to do it’ than how they are done in Hapkido.

Not sure how you mean ‘entry level’ either. In Hapkido, if we are going to manipulate a joint, whether for compliance or destruction, we tend to want to get in and do it the quickest and simplest way possible. I am curious as to what you think of the other aspects of Hapkido. Hapkido is generally thought of as a grappling art, but we do more than just grapple.

Ashida Kim gets students. Frank Dux still gets students. Antony Cummins has followers. Having students, honestly, is hardly an indication of anything other than an appeal to a certain segment of the market.

I don’t really know anything other than what a quick google showed about Ashida Kim, Frank Dux, or Anthony Cummins. But from that and your post, I take it their actual knowledge and abilities are very much in question by you.

I was interested in the fact that Antony Cummins appears to disagree with modern Ninjutsu as a traditional martial art. I note he made no claim to be a martial artist, but simply a historian and archaeologist. Why he has singled out Ninjutsu I don’t know. But he seems to feel the same about modern Ninjutsu as you do about Hapkido.

I am not sure that it is nice to compare the students of Choi to the likes of Ashida Kim and Frank Dux, or even Antony Cimmins, when you obviously think so little of all three of them. Clearly Choi had enough knowledge to train some very good students. Or do you deny that Choi’s students were good Hapkidoists and martial artists

With all evidence denying them, and there being nothing that corroborates the stories, I'll choose to not believe them. I appreciate that others do believe, though.[

I have no direct knowledge of evidence for or against Choi. But I have read both pro and con on the internet. I cannot state which pro or con to be totally or partially correct, but I read all I can find and try to judge them based on my own knowledge and experiences. I do have my own GM’s knowledge of Choi. He certainly didn’t think Choi was not knowledgeable, while acknowledging he studied in Japan

Anyway, I believe the Hapkido I studied to be a good and very effective martial art. I am sure you think the same about your chosen martial art. I have no interest in dissing your art, or anyone else’s martial art. I prefer not to have anyone try to dis my art (even round-about, through dissing its founder). But I am not worried that it will diminish my art in any way. It will stand or fall on its own merits. So far, it is standing.

 

[Chris Parker]

Well, I guess it is senseless for me to try and answer that since I personally am not sufficiently an expert nor have studied all the other grappling arts to know if there are better ways ‘to do it’ than how they are done in Hapkido.

Not sure how you mean ‘entry level’ either. In Hapkido, if we are going to manipulate a joint, whether for compliance or destruction, we tend to want to get in and do it the quickest and simplest way possible. I am curious as to what you think of the other aspects of Hapkido. Hapkido is generally thought of as a grappling art, but we do more than just grapple.

Yeah, you're missing the point… within Daito Ryu, the methodology is addressed in three (progressive) forms… Jujutsu; Aikijujutsu; Aikujutsu… the actual "locks" etc don't change… but the methods of application, the timing, the use of sen (initiative), methods of receiving, and a range of other principles do change. Someone who had learnt the entire curriculum of Daito Ryu, as Choi claimed, would have been able to demonstrate something beyond the initial methods found in the Jujutsu portion… which is not something that has been seen.

I don’t really know anything other than what a quick google showed about Ashida Kim, Frank Dux, or Anthony Cummins. But from that and your post, I take it their actual knowledge and abilities are very much in question by you.

Yeah… that and a fair bit more… I won't get into it too far here, but… well… yeah. The first two are some of the most overt and obvious frauds around, bluntly.

I was interested in the fact that Antony Cummins appears to disagree with modern Ninjutsu as a traditional martial art. I note he made no claim to be a martial artist, but simply a historian and archaeologist. Why he has singled out Ninjutsu I don’t know. But he seems to feel the same about modern Ninjutsu as you do about Hapkido.

Yeah… again, I'm not going to get too far into this (I can link you some stuff if you're genuinely interested, but if I was you, I'd spare myself the headache&#8230, but no, Antony's claims have gone back and forth a bit, from him having his own system ("The Dignity of Flying Birds", a name taken from a mistranslation from the Bansenshukai), to him trying to start an association where he was telling everyone how they should structure their classes, to now "reconstructing" a system (Natori Ryu) with no knowledge or experience at all. He's not a historian, his only credentials are a Masters in European Archaeology, he's presented books as an author which are really other people's translations of Japanese texts (done by people who don't have the requisite background to interpret them properly… Antony himself can't read, speak, or even pronounce a single word of Japanese&#8230, and far, far more.

In short, he's a publicity hound (or a slightly more sordid term) with no real credentials to speak of, and no actual knowledge or insight.

I am not sure that it is nice to compare the students of Choi to the likes of Ashida Kim and Frank Dux, or even Antony Cimmins, when you obviously think so little of all three of them. Clearly Choi had enough knowledge to train some very good students. Or do you deny that Choi’s students were good Hapkidoists and martial artists

I agree that it wasn't particular generous to Choi… and, to be completely frank, I wouldn't place any of them anywhere near him… I'm not even saying anything against Choi's skills or abilities as a martial artist or teacher… just that the claims of Daito Ryu, including how he claimed to have learnt it, are all so far outside the realm of plausibility that it shouldn't be taken as gospel. It's obvious he learnt something in Japan… but it's equally obvious he didn't get anywhere near the level of education in Daito Ryu than has been claimed. That's all. And let's not forget that Hapkido (as an art) has changed and developed significantly since Choi first introduced it.

I have no direct knowledge of evidence for or against Choi. But I have read both pro and con on the internet. I cannot state which pro or con to be totally or partially correct, but I read all I can find and try to judge them based on my own knowledge and experiences. I do have my own GM’s knowledge of Choi. He certainly didn’t think Choi was not knowledgeable, while acknowledging he studied in Japan

Okay.

Anyway, I believe the Hapkido I studied to be a good and very effective martial art. I am sure you think the same about your chosen martial art. I have no interest in dissing your art, or anyone else’s martial art. I prefer not to have anyone try to dis my art (even round-about, through dissing its founder). But I am not worried that it will diminish my art in any way. It will stand or fall on its own merits. So far, it is standing.

To be frank, I'm not dissing the art… or the founder… if anything, I'd say that it heightens the estimation of Choi, that he could create such a deeply faceted system from such a minimalist background. Not unheard of, either… but quite impressive.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I know not all schools that teach Hapkido will do this but I once knew of a school that taught both Tae Kwon Do and Hapkido. In order to train in Hapkido at that school first you had to get a black belt in Tae Kwon Do there. I do know that Hapkido does use some of the techniques from Tae Kwon Do but to even start as a white belt in Hapkido at that school you first had to get a black belt in their Tae Kwon Do. I wonder if other schools have that same requirement.

I teach hapkido and have no requirement that you learn taekwondo first. Honestly, that makes very little sense, unless his path to black belt in taekwondo is ridiculously short (one year at most), and even then it still makes very little sense.

There is a perception amongst some that hapkido is a more advanced art than taekwondo, thus learn the simpler to get the more complex. I don't subscribe to that notion, as taekwondo is every bit as advanced as hapkido.

The two arts are similar enough, and as others have mentioned, hapkido grappling techniques are frequently grafted onto taekwondo classes. I studied in such a class for several years, and loved it. But the class was structured so as to add the various grappling techniques in a logical progression that matched the taekwondo belt progression rather than being an entirely new class that you took after getting your black belt in the base class.

After your taekwondo black belt, you should be looking to deepen your knowledge in taekwondo, not just jump to another art that's similar but with added grapples.

The closest thing that I've seen to that in my area was a Jinenkan school that reserved the taijutsu classes for adults (ages 16 and up). The childrens class was (according to them) based in Isshin Ryu karate. The junior class was the same class, but with some taijutsu elements (mainly escapes, sweeps, rudimentary throws, rolls, and falls from what I could tell). Students who stayed in the school long enough to transition to adult classes transitioned to the taijutsu class, though so far as I know, there was no requirement to earn a black belt in the junior or children's class.

Aside from the suggestions put forth by others here, I can think of no logical reason for a school doing what you are describing, and being very familiar with both hapkido and taekwondo, I would consider it to be counterproductive; there is so much overlap in techniques between the two arts with regards to striking that there is really no reason to learn both.

Both arts are fairly 'complete' on their own (meaning that they are complete systems, not that they cover each and every range/combat possibility, not subsets of a larger art), and continued study and depth in either one after earning that black piece of cloth is probably more valuable than jumping ship and going to another art unless you've really determined that the first one wasn't for you and have had enough exposure to the second to know that that's where you want to go.

I had studied TKD for many years before taking up hapkido, and I mainly did so as a favor to my kwanjang, who was trying to get a new class off the ground. By the time I had my black belt in hapkido, I was fairly sure that it was a better fit for me than Kukki taekwondo was, though I did continue to stay involved in taekwondo for awhile afterward.

I won't tell you to avoid the school (given that you seem to want to go directly into HKD, you're probably inclined to look elsewhere anyway); I've never visited them and won't make an evaluation of them on the internet. I will say that I consider what you describe to be an incredibly inefficient way to get into a hapkido class.

 

[Carol]

This doesn't sound right.

When Joo Bang Lee created his Hwarangdo curriculum, he also created a program called "Tae Soo Do" -- borrowing a name previously used in TaeKwon Do, but since abandoned. I believe that to study Hwarangdo in Mr. Lee's organization, one must first earn a black belt in his Tae Soo Do, before studying what he calls Hwarangdo. That is the only Korean style that I am aware of where one must first earn a black belt in (X) in order to begin studying in (Y).

(Neither of these styles are Hapkido)

 

[Carol]

OK some clarification from the website of the organization:

Certified TSD Black Belts | World Hwa Rang Do® Association

TAE SOO DO®
Tae Soo Do® is an undergraduate training program to Hwa Rang Do® for people who have not had previous experience in the martial arts. Because of the complexity and vast requirements of Hwa Rang Do® techniques, experienced martial artists may begin directly in Hwa Rang Do®; however beginning martial artists need to build a strong foundation and good skills in Tae Soo Do® before beginning their Hwa Rang Do® training. When a Tae Soo Do® student receives their black belt, they also receive their yellow sash in Hwa Rang Do®. After completely learning white, orange and yellow sash techniques, students then move on by testing for green sash (HwaRang Do® intermediate levels) and continue their Hwa Rang Do® training. Tae Soo Do® is not a continuing degree Dan program.

 

[Dirty Dog]

So the tae soo do program is like training wheels?

 

[Carol]

So the tae soo do program is like training wheels?

That's how it looks to me.

Plus, Mr. Lee is reputed to be quite the businessman, if you catch my drift.

 

[jezr74]

I've never understood the whole TKD <> HKD thing in some schools that will give Hapkido ranks, when the instructor appears to have made a shortcut to instructor level of HKD based on both being a Korean martial art.

Obviously there are well credited instructors who have learnt both styles but I've also read and talked to people who have rank in both with 'iffy' timelines as to how it came about, or have been awarded rank based on their TKD rank, which equally confuses me. There may be legitimate reasons, I just don't know what they are, or I am reading too much into it at a glance.