Help me choose a grappling art

[Flea]

I thought you'd appreciate it Brian. :ultracool

 

[Brian King]

"I thought you'd appreciate it Brian."

Right you are Flea.

Your journey might make a interesting and helpful thread in the women of martial arts section. Where you were when you started the journey, some of the issues faced, how you faced them, lessons learned along the way...that sort of thing. To not only help others that may be facing similar internal conflicts and experiences but to help others when giving 'advice' or working with ladies facing the battle.

Again, congratulations and good luck with your training.

Regards
Brian King

 

[Flea]

Good suggestion Brian. I'll chew on it, and see what happens.

 

[oftheherd1]

Because most of the Hapkido that I've seen is, in essence, TKD with some standing joint-locks mixed in and very little/no ground grappling. Further, the experience is that most sparring in HKD does not include grappling, particularly ground grappling.

YMMV of course, but that seems to be the typical setup for HKD.

Aikido's "grappling" is very narrow focus. Aikido looks at one particular element of fighting (Aiki/"Blending") and elevates that but at the expense of all other elements. The problem is, in order to fully functionalize the skills Aikido teaches, you really need to have a solid foundation in the fundamentals, otherwise it's an art with no way to express itself under stress (noted prodigies excepted, of course). Aikido is the calculus of the martial arts world. It's no good to try to learn calculus if you've never learned basic math (noted prodigies excepted, of course).

If I had my way no one would be allowed to learn Aikido unless they had a minimum of 2-5 years prior experience in something else. Karate, Boxing, Judo, whatever.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Wow! Indeed my mileage has varied. I never saw a Hapkido that was as you described. At least in my style, we defend against all forms of attacks. In the lower belts, we first learned grappling from grabs to all parts of the body. Then we went on to defense against punches, then against kicks. A little of striking and kicking, then more defense against both. Then on to some lapel grab defenses, and on to some throw defenses. After that knife defense (That has now been moved to 2nd Dan I understand), a little offense, which was primarily adaptations of defenses, and black belt test. There are no forms. You are right that we don't spare as a TKD artist would do. It would be too dangerous. However, practice of being attacted in some manner and reacting to it are often done.

After attaining BB, you learn more grabs, punch and kick defenses, sword defense, and defense using the short stick. Some very basic sword techniques are taught. There are defenses from sitting position, and while on the ground and being attacked. Other types of attacks/holds are defended against, such as head locks, choke holds, etc.

After attaining 2nd dan, you learn defenses against many of the defenses learned in the colored belts, and a lot of short stick defenses. More basic sword practice as well. I don't know about 4th Dan teaching, but I was told there are a lot of healing techniques. I never got to continue my training to find out.

Throughout all, there are blocks, strikes and kicks used, joint manipulation, pressure points, and throws, and of course combinations of all those.

I studied TKD many years ago. I assure you the Hapkido I learned was nothing like TKD.

I am not an Aikido practicioner, but I played one on TV.

Not! But I am acquainted with a practitioner, and we trade skills. His Aikido and the Aikido you describe aren't the same either. You do not need knowledge of other MA to be successful in Aikido, at least as he learned it. And if anyone is curious, you don't need it as a prerequisite for Hapkido either.

What Hapkido have you seen or studied?

 

[lklawson]

Wow! Indeed my mileage has varied. I never saw a Hapkido that was as you described. At least in my style, we defend against all forms of attacks. In the lower belts, we first learned grappling from grabs to all parts of the body. Then we went on to defense against punches, then against kicks. A little of striking and kicking, then more defense against both. Then on to some lapel grab defenses, and on to some throw defenses. After that knife defense (That has now been moved to 2nd Dan I understand), a little offense, which was primarily adaptations of defenses, and black belt test. There are no forms. You are right that we don't spare as a TKD artist would do. It would be too dangerous. However, practice of being attacted in some manner and reacting to it are often done.

After attaining BB, you learn more grabs, punch and kick defenses, sword defense, and defense using the short stick. Some very basic sword techniques are taught. There are defenses from sitting position, and while on the ground and being attacked. Other types of attacks/holds are defended against, such as head locks, choke holds, etc.

After attaining 2nd dan, you learn defenses against many of the defenses learned in the colored belts, and a lot of short stick defenses. More basic sword practice as well. I don't know about 4th Dan teaching, but I was told there are a lot of healing techniques. I never got to continue my training to find out.

Throughout all, there are blocks, strikes and kicks used, joint manipulation, pressure points, and throws, and of course combinations of all those.

So, no ground grappling and no grappling during sparring.

I am not an Aikido practicioner, but I played one on TV.

Not! But I am acquainted with a practitioner, and we trade skills. His Aikido and the Aikido you describe aren't the same either. You do not need knowledge of other MA to be successful in Aikido, at least as he learned it.

I am Yudansha in Aikido. I am not pulling this opinion out of my butt.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Brian King]

This section of the forum is called "Competitive Arts > Grappling / Brazilian Ju Jitsu / Wrestling" I do not think that competitive means this art vs that art ego stroking, but refers to sporting grappling competitions and training. I am assuming that this section of the forum was chosen for the original post for a reason.

Regards
Brian King

 

[K831]

It's important to be able to work in this context because, quite simply, it's very easy to force the fight there, particularly if the person forcing the fight is bigger and/or stronger. Surely you've seen someone losing a fist-fight barnacle on to his opponent and drag him inelegantly to the floor?

I would suggest you read my posts a little more carefully. I never suggested that one shouldn't be able to work in this context, or that one can avoid that context in all situations. In fact, I said the opposite, I merely clarified "how" a female should learn to work in that context.... there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

Umm... What? Throwing is very important to self defense oriented work. There are only about 5 or 7 basic throws but a myriad of variations among them.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Again, you are not reading the thread carefuly enough. I included Judo in my list of recomended arts, however I made the comment to which you are referring "Judo has a lot of throwing, which you don't want" not because I am suggesting one doesn't want throws in their skill set, but because the OP had said they didn't want to do a lot of throwing. I was merely clarifying how some of the arts fit the criteria the OP listed.

I appreciate your responses, however, you comments to my posts were miss-placed.

 

[lklawson]

I appreciate your responses, however, you comments to my posts were miss-placed.

Fair enough. Perhaps I did misunderstand the points you were hoping to make.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[oftheherd1]

So, no ground grappling and no grappling during sparring.

I am Yudansha in Aikido. I am not pulling this opinion out of my butt.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

I'm not sure how you mean ground grappling. We do train on defenses against being on the ground, sitting with attacks from front on rear, and being flat on our backs with someone on top, trying to strike or choke. In my style that was between 1st and 2nd Dan. As to sparing, that seems dangerous. I don't know what may be taught at 4th Dan or higher. We did spar on occassion, usually after a testing session. But we sparred more as a TKDist would spar. Using our techniques at full speed would often injure an opponent unless we pulled the response. Not necessarily a good approach.

Congratulations on you accomplishment in Aikido. As I said, I have never studied that art. I willl say, that with the minimal training I had in TKD, as I became more proficient in Hapkido, I did sometimes wonder if more training in punching would have been benificial. I never discussed it with my GM, and never came to any real solid conclusions. I certainly have seen students who had no previous training seem unhandicapped even with no previous training. I think as long as a punch is coming at full speed, the technical aspect of the punch is less important that the proper response. And we did do a lot of kicking; for practice, stamina, and concentration. We had some high kicks, but really, other than a heel-down kick to someone on the ground, considered middle and low kicks our real weapons. Other styles may do it differently, and that is fine.

If you wish to discuss that further, not to hijack the thread, I suggest we continue the discussion in the Hapkido forum. :asian:

 

[lklawson]

I'm not sure how you mean ground grappling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newaza#Ground_grappling

As to sparing, that seems dangerous.

Several arts incorporate standing grappling in their randori. Judo is a prime example.

I don't know what may be taught at 4th Dan or higher. We did spar on occassion, usually after a testing session. But we sparred more as a TKDist would spar.

OK.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Thesemindz]

there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

there is a difference between ground fighting, and submission wrestling.

I wish more people could hear and internalize this simple concept. Fighting on the ground is an important and valuable skill. But staying on the ground is a bad idea. Especially in a crowded, hostile, poorly lit, obstructed environment. That is the difference I was referring to up thread between "peace" arts and "war" arts. A competition art will encourage you to close, stay closed, and win the battle through technical skill. The whole concept, the limitation of techniques, the ring, the judges, the rules, is designed to determine who the best fighter is. A self defense art will encourage you to evade, escape, and cheat. The whole concept, the inclusion of an ever expanding technique base, the lack of a ring, or judges, or rules, is designed to determine who is left, and who is dead.

There is a ton to learn from competitive grappling arts. They have taken the techniques they use and elevated them to an extremely high skill level by using those techniques against other highly trained practitioners in a very controlled environment. Think of boxing. When you only have a few techniques, and you can only use them against a few targets, then the guy who is the more technically skilled fighter will win. But that is not the approach that a small woman wants to use for self defense. In self defense, she doesn't want to outskill her opponent. She wants to survive. Even if the techniques are taught with a mind towards self defense, the scenarios they are taught in in a competitive art may be completely contrary to a self defense approach.

And vice versa. My students wouldn't thrive in competition. Because in competition you can't hit someone from behind and kick them while they are on the ground. Or stick your fingers in their eyes. Or break their toes. Or box their ears. Self defense training isn't about being the best fighter, it's about being the one who goes home and see's his family one more time. There's nothing wrong with judo, or MMA, or BJJ, and I don't doubt for a second that there are some extremely formidable fighters in those arts. This is a different point. This is a point about how you train. Not what you train.


-Rob

 

[Thesemindz]

I think as long as a punch is coming at full speed, the technical aspect of the punch is less important that the proper response.

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can properly understand how to defend against an attack unless you understand how to properly execute the attack. If you aren't punching properly, then how do you know your punch defense would work against someone who does? I don't train to beat up civilians. I always assume my opponent will be bigger, faster, meaner, and more highly skilled.

The attack is just as important as the defense. You can't train a proper response without the proper stimulus. At least, that's my approach.


-Rob

 

[oftheherd1]

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oftheherd1
I'm not sure how you mean ground grappling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newaza#Ground_grappling


Quote:
As to sparing, that seems dangerous.
Several arts incorporate standing grappling in their randori. Judo is a prime example.


Quote:
I don't know what may be taught at 4th Dan or higher. We did spar on occassion, usually after a testing session. But we sparred more as a TKDist would spar.
OK.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Well, I had suggested we move this to another thread, but perhaps given the title of this thread, further discussion is warranted.

Indeed we don't do grappling as in your wikipedia example, nor as in Judo. Hapkido as I learned it is not a sport, nor really, does it have rules in defense other than make it work, and defend yourself without injury to yourself. We do have practice opponents grab us, or strike at us, or kick at us, and we apply a technique. Having an opponent attack us at speed without knowing what the attack will be, then reacting to that attact without the opponent knowing which technique will be used; no doubt it would work sometimes, but I still think it would lead to injury more often than not. Perhaps in your studies that was not so.

 

[oftheherd1]

I have to disagree with this. I don't think you can properly understand how to defend against an attack unless you understand how to properly execute the attack. If you aren't punching properly, then how do you know your punch defense would work against someone who does? I don't train to beat up civilians. I always assume my opponent will be bigger, faster, meaner, and more highly skilled.

The attack is just as important as the defense. You can't train a proper response without the proper stimulus. At least, that's my approach.


-Rob

Maybe I said it without sufficient explanation. If you throw a punch at me with tremendous speed and power, and a bent wrist, you may break your wrist. You will likely hurt me too. I don't care if your wrist is bent, I will defend against the punch. For punches and kicks, we tend to train against a martial artist's type of attack. That would likely be the most dangerous. But a technique will work against a non-martial artist's punch or kick as well.

I don't know if that explains it or not.