the difference between tae kwon do and hapkido

[hong kong fooey]

I pratice TAE KWON DO and have allways wonderd what he difference was between TAE KWON DO and HAPKIDO

 

[IcemanSK]

Hapkido adds joint locks & throws with the TKD kicks. (Please correct me Hapkido folks & forgive the oversimplification.)

 

[arnisador]

Also, TKD is derived from Shotokan Karate, and HKD from jujutsu. But, HKD does have a lot of kicks, like TKD.

 

[IcemanSK]

Also, TKD is derived from Shotokan Karate, and HKD from jujutsu. But, HKD does have a lot of kicks, like TKD.

Sorry, I forgot about that big difference, too.

 

[Brother John]

Mind you....this IS coming from an 'outsider', but isn't there more than one strain of Hapkido, having one or more that don't emphasize kicks all that much? Thanks...

Your Brother
John

 

[howard]

Mind you....this IS coming from an 'outsider', but isn't there more than one strain of Hapkido, having one or more that don't emphasize kicks all that much?

Yes, good point. There are still a few organizations that have stuck to what Choi Young Sool originally taught, and that material contained few kicking techniques. Ji Han Jae is the man who should be given most credit for adding the Taek Kyun kicking techniques (among other things) to the "Yawara" he learned from Choi to create "modern Hapkido", so to speak (my attempt to identify Ji's style... not a formal term)... imo it's fair to say that most Hapkido people train in a style that derives from Ji's base art.

 

[shesulsa]

Mind you....this IS coming from an 'outsider', but isn't there more than one strain of Hapkido, having one or more that don't emphasize kicks all that much? Thanks...

Your Brother
John

I'm not Hapkido, but what I study is PRETTY CLOSE! There are two main schools of Hapkido - check out the Hapkido threads for rampant discussion of the two main approaches of Jae and Choi. Other offshoots would be smaller, more private versions. There is American Hapkido, "Authentic" Hapkido, etc.

The main focus of Hapkido is the joint lock and its application in throwing, takedowns, etcetera, especially geared towards self-defense.

Right, Hapkidoin?

 

[Brother John]

I'm not Hapkido, but what I study is PRETTY CLOSE!

Though Not a Hapkido-ist (?) I find it VERY interesting. From what I understand Hapkido and Hwarang-Do have the same or similar roots... is that true? I've heard two different histories for Hwarang-Do, one very ancient and fanciful and one that seemed more reasonable and not nearly so ancient....which to believe??
Thanks

Your Brother
John
PS: There MIGHT be a better place for this question, if so...please let me know.

 

[shesulsa]

From what I understand Hapkido and Hwarang-Do have the same or similar roots... is that true? I've heard two different histories for Hwarang-Do, one very ancient and fanciful and one that seemed more reasonable and not nearly so ancient....which to believe??
Thanks

Your Brother
John
PS: There MIGHT be a better place for this question, if so...please let me know.

Aaaahhhh welll yessssss ummmmmm .......

There are explanations that seem more likely than the story that is often told about HRD's roots, but it's no secret that Lee Joo Bang and Lee Joo Sang were WELL known for their abilities and rank in Hapkido.

This is a topic for a different thread and there have already been a few - I would suggest running a search in the Korean-General section on hwarangdo and checking out some threads there.

I will say this in regards to DJN Lee - He and his family lived in Korea in a time where ancient ways were only beginning to die and I think that is an unfathomable reality for many westerners. His story as to the monk on the mountain COULD be true. On the other hand, I have never personally visited a Kuk Sul Won dojang, nor a Hapkido dojang, nor an Um Yang Kwan dojang. So DJN very well may have 'invented' a style named after a group of people whose history and origin is controversial and which material was comprised of some rare training with other Korean styles.

The Hapkido influence, however, as I've read and researched, is unmistakable.

 

[howard]

...There are two main schools of Hapkido - check out the Hapkido threads for rampant discussion of the two main approaches of Jae and Choi...

Hi,

Not to split hairs, but when I read this, I think some might get the idea from reading this that Choi's and Ji's arts are mutually exclusive, when they are not at all. I think it's probably most accurate to say that Ji retained the base that he learned from Choi, which Ji refers to as "Yawara", and added several other elements. Probably the best-known and most visible of those other elements is the kicking repertoire that Ji added.

Ji's Sin Moo Hapkido retains the locking and throwing basics that he learned from Choi.

 

[shesulsa]

Hi,

Not to split hairs, but when I read this, I think some might get the idea from reading this that Choi's and Ji's arts are mutually exclusive, when they are not at all. I think it's probably most accurate to say that Ji retained the base that he learned from Choi, which Ji refers to as "Yawara", and added several other elements. Probably the best-known and most visible of those other elements is the kicking repertoire that Ji added.

Ji's Sin Moo Hapkido retains the locking and throwing basics that he learned from Choi.

Howard you would, of course, know far better than I. :asian:

 

[arnisador]

I think the stories of Hwa Rang Do being an ancient art are not widely accepted. It's most likely heavily modified Hapkido. But check the KMA section--there have been extensive discussions of this in the past, as mentioned.

 

[howard]

Howard you would, of course, know far better than I. :asian:

Hi Shesulsa,

Thanks for the kind words... but I'm no more than a student. I don't hold myself out as an authority on Hapkido. :asian:

Last summer I attended a Ji Han Jae seminar. Ji himself referred to what Choi had taught him as "Yawara". From what I could tell at the seminar, Ji's locking and throwing techniques were very consistent with what Choi taught the head of the kwan of which I'm a member.

Hope this helps... Regards, Howard

 

[Brad Dunne]

Just a very objective overview of the subject question. Before Choi brought back his version of Daito-ryu, martial arts was alive and being practiced in Korea. Granted it was influenced by the Japanese, but it was still in place. Choi taught already practiced instructors and students of the arts. Ji further influenced Choi's rendenering by adding more of what they already knew. Now the birth of TKD as we have come to know it. Just about every instructor coming from Korea during the invasion of America back in the early 70's, had a practical background in Karate and Hapkido, to use simplistic terms. What we now consider "Old School" TKD/TangSooDo was very rooted in Hapkido. Hapkido was the self defense aspect of the new blend of the aforementioned styles. Now the spector of politics and of course greed rears it's ugly head and we have multiple divisions of all aspects of the different disciplines. From all that I have encountered and this is nothing more than "a personal" opinion, the very bottom line to what you study or wish to label it would be ---- is it practical and does it work for you! Everything else is just a waste of time and effort to give attention to. :asian:

 

[Gemini]

Training under a Korean who is a master in both arts, the answer I got was fairly simple. TKD and HKD appear to a beginner to be very different. The farther down the road you go, the more they tend to incorporate each other's movements to the point where they appear to be almost identical. In TKD, we have practiced many different holds and take downs that are in fact, similar to HKD. Having only practiced HKD for a few months, my experience from that angle is very limited, so I take his word for it.

As far as the history of who brought what where, when, I haven't gotten there yet because it's not a priority to me. I'm fascinated with history, and will at some point get involved with it, but first things first. I think learning an art's effectiveness outweighs the historical and politcal aspect. I've seen artists get caught up in such things too early on, only to have it interfere with their training. Everthing in due course.

 

[Paul B]

I have been holding off on this one,but I don't think I can continue to do so.

I would imagine that the end result would depend on the style of TKD or HKD being discussed and background of the Teacher.

However,at their roots the two Art's philosophies are so distinct as to be incompatable. IMVHO they just don't mix well w/o one influencing the other to the point of technical bleed. That being said...

The opposing philosophies and basic movements that "make" the individual art, I would think, as one progresses in either art the differences in technique would be even more clearly delineated.

Sorry to say..but the techniques from GM's of TKD do not resemble those of GM's in HKD..at least none that I have ever seen.

Since when are the principles of Yoo,Won and Wha part and parcel of TKD?

Could anyone tell me if they have ever seen "circular" TKD?

How about a technical approach of "yeilding" or "blending"?

"Soft" blocking in TKD?

Nauk Bup? Yu Sool? Dahn Bong Sool? Po Bak Sool? Bu Chae Sool? Dan Kum Sool? Kum Sool? Mok Jou Ri Ki? Joong Bong Sool? Do jin Bup? Dan Jun breathing?( Ki Cho Ja Ki) Maek Chi Ki? Sohn Sa Li ki?

Identifieable concepts such as center-line and third point?

I'll even take the use of a classical triangular stance taken which is integral to use a pivoting movement and to aid in redirection.Anyone?

I think the facts are that:
1. Both are Korean MA sharing some terminology and..
2. Both utilize kicks (albeit in a different manner of execution) and...
3. Some TKD intructors may choose to include basic HKD techniques as a part of their Hoshinsul curriculum..haven't really done a whole lot to dispel these common misconceptions.

 

[Ric Flair]

I have been holding off on this one,but I don't think I can continue to do so.

I would imagine that the end result would depend on the style of TKD or HKD being discussed and background of the Teacher.

However,at their roots the two Art's philosophies are so distinct as to be incompatable. IMVHO they just don't mix well w/o one influencing the other to the point of technical bleed. That being said...

The opposing philosophies and basic movements that "make" the individual art, I would think, as one progresses in either art the differences in technique would be even more clearly delineated.

Sorry to say..but the techniques from GM's of TKD do not resemble those of GM's in HKD..at least none that I have ever seen.

Since when are the principles of Yoo,Won and Wha part and parcel of TKD?

Could anyone tell me if they have ever seen "circular" TKD?

How about a technical approach of "yeilding" or "blending"?

"Soft" blocking in TKD?

Nauk Bup? Yu Sool? Dahn Bong Sool? Po Bak Sool? Bu Chae Sool? Dan Kum Sool? Kum Sool? Mok Jou Ri Ki? Joong Bong Sool? Do jin Bup? Dan Jun breathing?( Ki Cho Ja Ki) Maek Chi Ki? Sohn Sa Li ki?

Identifieable concepts such as center-line and third point?

I'll even take the use of a classical triangular stance taken which is integral to use a pivoting movement and to aid in redirection.Anyone?

I think the facts are that:
1. Both are Korean MA sharing some terminology and..
2. Both utilize kicks (albeit in a different manner of execution) and...
3. Some TKD intructors may choose to include basic HKD techniques as a part of their Hoshinsul curriculum..haven't really done a whole lot to dispel these common misconceptions.

Interesting you mentioned Hapkido's principle of Centerline and third line. A friend once told me Hapkido has a lot in common with certain Chinese martial arts...

 

[Brad Dunne]

Found this reviewing some Hapkido informational sites and thought it may be of some interest.

Q. What is the difference between Taekwondo and Hapkido?

A. Sometimes not all that much; there has been a LOT of cross-pollinization. Virtually everyone in Korea gets some Taekwondo training (it's their national sport - ever know an American boy who'd NEVER played baseball?). The specialty jumping spinning kicks of Hapkido proved very useful for demonstration and breaking purposes and got adopted into Taekwondo. Any Hosinsool (self-defense) techniques you see in Taekwondo got adopted from out of Hapkido. Any HKDists that want to spar tend to do so under TKD rules and adapt their techniques accordingly. There's a lot of mixed versions out there. Who originated what techniques? Who cares? But in general if its sport oriented, it's Taekwondo; and if it's self-defense oriented, it's Hapkido.
​

Q. What's wrong with TKD types doing Hapkido seminar training?

A. Nothing, if it's used properly. There are many many more TKD type places than HKD, and many schools do some sort of mix; doing some Hapkido as the self-defense part of their curriculum. I've attended, taught, and hosted many seminars and much can be learned from them. But for myself and for the vast majority of people, learning something well takes time. For anything physical, repetition to acquire muscle memory is absolutely essential. So if the material shown at a seminar is not practiced enough over time, it is lost. Ongoing regular Hapkido practice with a good instructor will correct mistakes in your practice and stop bad habits from being ingrained. But a seminar here and a seminar there is not going to do much more than give you an idea of the material. Thus I feel that doing rank tests at a seminar that simply test what's been worked on at that seminar is a bad practice. It tends to promote memorization of the particular techniques done just before, without understanding principles behind the techniques or being able to apply the techniques to different situations. And to me, that's like someone playing scales versus someone playing music. If it's rote technique, you're not a martial artist.
​

 

[shesulsa]

Brad, could you please cite your source?

 

[Brad Dunne]

Brad, could you please cite your source?

http://www.rimshapkido.com/faq.html

Just thought that the information was interesting, seeing as it is coming from a source that presents itself as a direct link to Choi.