Hapki Yu Kwon Sool- The Martial Art of Choi Young Sul

[oftheherd1]

So, I don't know if you've been part of threads where I talk about the size of my TKD school, but the HKD class is a much smaller population. Our active members include (in order from highest to lowest rank in HKD)

1. 1st dan in TKD
2. 3rd dan in TKD (me)
3. 2nd dan in TKD
4. 3rd/4th dan in TKD (KKW/ATA)
5. 1st dan in TKD
6. Green belt in TKD
7. 3rd dan in TKD
8. Orange belt in TKD

So...we know how to strike.

Were you intending to answer another poster? I never said anything about HKD not having strikes, and not about TKD not having strikes either. I cannot imagine TKD without strikes and kicks. The Hapkido I learned certainly had strikes and kicks as well.

 

[Jinmukwan]

It makes more sense if they both come from the same place, at least to me.

Although with all that said, we kind of blend TKD and HKD at my school, even though they each have their separate classes. Every once in a while, I'll get to mix them when I spar, and it works really well.

What Choi Young Sul originally taught was Dae Dong Mu Hapki YuKwonSul. It is my understanding that Choi did not have much to do with giving a name to what he taught! This was done by Master Suh Bok Sub his first Korean student. To say Suh combined Dae Dong Mu with Judo makes no sense as Choi defeated every Judo technique easily! I wanted to bring up a point on GM Lim Hyun Soo and his sword method, it was not taught to him by Choi. He learned Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Iaido from several Japanese masters ! Choi did however teach swordsmanship but only after 4th Dan and from my research only a few learned this from Choi. Many masters claim Choi never taught any sword techniques! I believe this to be false.

 

[Gweilo]

Deleted

 

[skribs166 186]

What Choi Young Sul originally taught was Dae Dong Mu Hapki YuKwonSul. It is my understanding that Choi did not have much to do with giving a name to what he taught! This was done by Master Suh Bok Sub his first Korean student. To say Suh combined Dae Dong Mu with Judo makes no sense as Choi defeated every Judo technique easily! I wanted to bring up a point on GM Lim Hyun Soo and his sword method, it was not taught to him by Choi. He learned Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Iaido from several Japanese masters ! Choi did however teach swordsmanship but only after 4th Dan and from my research only a few learned this from Choi. Many masters claim Choi never taught any sword techniques! I believe this to be false.

I think you are having very specific conversations in very niche circles.

 

[Gweilo]

I will reply, here is my problem with the claims made by the linage of Hapki yu kwon sool, on the claims this arts co founder and 1st student of Choi's make (not doubting the mans credentials, abilities or training methods, or even the art).
There are contradictions in the story as told by Suh bok sub and his linage, 1st it is claimed he talked Choi into renaming his art Yawara to HYKS, because it sounded too Japanese, and feelings towards the Japanese after the occupation could effect students from coming to study, so a Korean name would be better, so the name was changed, So why then did he talk Choi into using the Japanes Dan grading system, why not rename that, to me it does not make sense.
But I do agree with you, Choi probably did teach sword techniques, as hed would have learnt them in Daito Ryu.

 

[oftheherd1]

I will reply, here is my problem with the claims made by the linage of Hapki yu kwon sool, on the claims this arts co founder and 1st student of Choi's make (not doubting the mans credentials, abilities or training methods, or even the art).
There are contradictions in the story as told by Suh bok sub and his linage, 1st it is claimed he talked Choi into renaming his art Yawara to HYKS, because it sounded too Japanese, and feelings towards the Japanese after the occupation could effect students from coming to study, so a Korean name would be better, so the name was changed, So why then did he talk Choi into using the Japanes Dan grading system, why not rename that, to me it does not make sense.
But I do agree with you, Choi probably did teach sword techniques, as hed would have learnt them in Daito Ryu.

Using a Japanese grading system was probably acceptable as I guess other non-Japanese systems were using. It must have been considered OK for whatever reason as TKD also used it.

I have no certain knowledge if Choi taught swordsmanship, but I also believe he must have. In the Hapkido I learned, we were taught some skills in order to be able to better defend against the sword. Many of the defenses were using the short stick, but there were a few that were unarmed defenses as well.

 

[Dirty Dog4 2]

no high kicks which are a waste of time in a real fight
TKD in my opinion is OK as a sport but not for any real fighting

What you're actually saying is "I can't use high kicks effectively; therefore, no one else can either". It's probably best not to assume others share your limitations.

 

[isshinryuronin57 56]

What you're actually saying is "I can't use high kicks effectively; therefore, no one else can either". It's probably best not to assume others share your limitations.

There are other factors in play besides ability, energy expended, greater travel distance and corresponding time to target when kicking to the head:

First off, we must acknowledge that clips (like above) of professionals landing spectacular head kicks are not the norm. These few guys are masters at it and such amazing kicks cannot be done even by many other professional fighters.

The rule set and tactics are different between a sport match and actual combat. In a sport match, especially MMA, fighters are trained in a wide variety of attacks such as kicking, punching and grappling. This means one trains to defend all of them - their defensive circle and awareness is necessarily spread out.

In actual combat, most fighters are not so trained. Punching head shots are the general rule. This means their defensive awareness is usually centered around protecting only the head making it harder to land a clean shot.

There are usually other targets easier to hit with a kick such as knee joints, groin. In sport, these are illegal. In actual combat they are not. They can be hit with less travel time and energy, and they offer high payoff without having to expose one's own groin (something a sport fighter needn't worry about) or risk of a counter takedown. Taking in all these factors and risk potentials, there is no compelling reason to go with a head kick in an actual fight. There are easier and safer targets.

Of course, in both sport and actual combat an opportunity may arise when a head kick (by one skilled at it) is just too good to pass up. In that case I'd say go for it. But as a general strategy, head kicks should not be at the top of the list.

 

[Dirty Dog4 2]

Being honest when did you, yourself actually use a high spinning kick in a real situation?

I have, but it doesn't really matter. The point is that saying high kicks cannot be used effectively is simply wrong.

Breaking boards in Tae Kwon do isn't realistic & if I'm honest you look out of shape in your picture for a black belt

I'm not sure what you think is unrealistic about breaking. Perhaps you do not understand why it's done? Breaking is a way to practice developing and delivering powerful strikes. And it's just fun.
Being 65 and 16 years of cancer treatment will affect your conditioning. But age and conditioning have little impact (if any) on knowledge and the ability to pass on that knowledge. John Maddon, Mike Ditka and a host of other Hall of Fame coaches were not in the best shape.

 

[Dirty Dog4 2]

There are other factors in play besides ability, energy expended, greater travel distance and corresponding time to target when kicking to the head:

First off, we must acknowledge that clips (like above) of professionals landing spectacular head kicks are not the norm. These few guys are masters at it and such amazing kicks cannot be done even by many other professional fighters.

The rule set and tactics are different between a sport match and actual combat. In a sport match, especially MMA, fighters are trained in a wide variety of attacks such as kicking, punching and grappling. This means one trains to defend all of them - their defensive circle and awareness is necessarily spread out.

In actual combat, most fighters are not so trained. Punching head shots are the general rule. This means their defensive awareness is usually centered around protecting only the head making it harder to land a clean shot.

There are usually other targets easier to hit with a kick such as knee joints, groin. In sport, these are illegal. In actual combat they are not. They can be hit with less travel time and energy, and they offer high payoff without having to expose one's own groin (something a sport fighter needn't worry about) or risk of a counter takedown. Taking in all these factors and risk potentials, there is no compelling reason to go with a head kick in an actual fight. There are easier and safer targets.

Of course, in both sport and actual combat an opportunity may arise when a head kick (by one skilled at it) is just too good to pass up. In that case I'd say go for it. But as a general strategy, head kicks should not be at the top of the list.

Strawman argument. I never argued that there were not easier strikes to land. I never argued that high kicks should be your first thought.
I said one thing, and one thing only. The statement that high kicks cannot be used effectively in a fight is patently incorrect. That's it. Nothing more.

 

[isshinryuronin57 56]

The statement that high kicks cannot be used effectively in a fight is patently incorrect. That's it. Nothing more.

This is factually true, they can, but I thought it was important to add some qualification: Not by many and depending on the nature of the fight, sometimes coming with risk. I did say there are times to throw them, even by me (at least till I was 40).

Just wanted to put things in perspective and list some factors not often thought about.