How effective is Hapkido?

[kempezy]

Hi guys,
I have never studied a martial art before and i've been doing some research on the net to try and find a very effective style for most situations.By situation i mean on the street and against other martial arts.Hapkido kept coming up quite often, so my question is, in begining a martial is Hapkido one of the most effective styles to learn? Is there any that are better/effective
Thanks
kempezy

[eXcessiveForce]

welcome to the forum, i would like to suggest that you search the forum. This particular topic has been talked to death. There are easily 20 is hapkido effective threads.

Enjoy the forum,

Excessiveforce

(p.s. before you all say it, he's not even from the US so he is most likely not TKDperson)

[kuk sool won]

The way i see it, Hapkido is a very effective self defence IF you have had the time and training to become efficient with it, if you are thinking of learning a martial art that has an immidate impact allowing you to use it almost instantly then something like Kick boxing or Karate would be the better choice.

[muaythaiguy15]

TAKE MUAY THAI!!!!!!!! Jk. Hapkido is pretty good. A teacher at my school is really well versed in it and kickboxing and hes a great fighter. Most styles are good if you work at it enough. I know good TKD fighters and awful Muay Thai fighters.

[aseepish]

Hi guys,
I have never studied a martial art before and i've been doing some research on the net to try and find a very effective style for most situations.By situation i mean on the street and against other martial arts.Hapkido kept coming up quite often, so my question is, in begining a martial is Hapkido one of the most effective styles to learn? Is there any that are better/effective
Thanks
kempezy

If you intend to use ANY martial art against other martial artists, you have to spar with other martial artists. What happens to a lot of martial artists is that they only train within the context of their own gym. They can be sparring champion of the strip mall, but then get KO'd by someone who throws punches/kicks differently than they do.

Some arts, especially traditional arts, pracitce their techniques in a non-resisting way. It makes sense - some techniques are very dangerous to pracitce at full power and speed. This creates a problem for real-world application. People won't let you slap on a wrist-lock or do a fancy trapping sequence they way your training parters would.

We can divide the learning process into several steps. First you have basic learning - this is when you pracitce a movement for the first few times. You go slowly, against limited resistance. Next you have mastering - this is when you repeat the technique again and again and again and again, polish up your movement, and gradually increase the speed and power. The next step, which is the most IMPORTANT step for people who want to be able to use their techniques in a real world situation, is FUNCTIONALIZING - this means sparring, and sparring as realistically as possible. This means sparring against boxers, against Muay Thai people, against kung fu people, against BJJ people, against everyone. In sparring you find out what works and what doesn't. Finally there is maintaining - keeping your techniques sharp and rust-free.

There aren't a lot of traditional styles that go through the functionalizing stage. One reason is their so-called deadly techniques. They are too dangerous to practice full power and speed, the end result is that they are NEVER practiced at full pwer and speed, and are thus never fully functionalized. The practictioner cannot apply his/her techniques under duress and gets cold-clocked by some untrained street punk. Or the practictioner functionalizes his/her techniques on the steet, puts a lot of people in the hospital, and ends up in jail.

Sport oriented martial arts on the other hand have a certain amount of functionalizing training built in. The dangerous techniques are removed, so the art can be practiced at full power and speed, against fully resisting opponents. These people still should take the extra step of sparring against other styles, but they have the advantage when facing more traditionally-based fighters.

It's been repeated time and time again - STYLE is not the most important thing. Attributes win fights. The person who is stronger, faster, tougher, more pain-tolerant, who has the stronger killer instinct, familiarity with lines of attack, familiarity with ranges/phases of fighting, has better endurance, better foot-work, better base and balance, flexibility, sensitivity to the other person's movement, etc... will win.

Style does come into play with the idea of ranges/phases. Ideally, a person should be comfortable and FUNCTIONAL in the free-movement stage - kicking and punching ranges; in the clinch - trapping range and standing grappling; and on the ground. Weapons come into play too. A knife will nullify a lot of attributes.

The problem is that there isn't any one style that does this. BJJ, great on the ground, doesn't teach much in the free-movement stage. Muay Thai is hopeless on the ground. Wrestling has great clinch work, but no strikes. Boxers have the best punches, but are limited in the clinch.

Hapkido has a lot of good techniques - especially in standing-grappling. How effective it is (to use your words) will depend on the instructor, and on yourself - are you willing to go into another club and spar with them? Are you willing to take the steps necessary to functionalize your art?

There are a lot of good reasons to study a traditional art. For pure fitness, for culture, for niche sport, for fun. But if fighting is what's important to you, modern arts are the way to go.

What I would suggest is to take Hapkido for a year. Then take some JKD classes. Then find your own way.

[kempezy]

Thanks guy's for your input,thats why i'm using this forum to get feed back.
Sorry if i piss alot of people off by asking a question that has been asked many times before