Hi,

 

I posted in the introduction about this, but anyway I took taekwondo just a week or so ago for quite a while, but it just wasn't for me. My sister is still doing it, but I quit. I don't know if the dojang just wasn't right for me, but now I'm looking for another art to start up.

 

There's a hapkido place nearby, the instructor is legit and he's been practicing for over 30 years.

 

I think hapkido's striking comes from taekwondo, so does that mean hapkido wouldn't have very good hand striking skills or is hapkido's hand strikes a lot different from taekwondo? Can a skilled hapkidoist beat a skilled muay thai?

 

Okay has anyone used hapkido for tournaments or real self defense? But I know hapkido isn't really a tournament art.

 

Bye.

Oops, I meant to put this in another section of the message board.

 

Getting started in the Martial Arts, I think it's called.

 

Can anyone move it? Thanks.

One of your question can be answered in the Art vs Art section. A skilled fighter in any style has a good shot at winning at any time. Style don't mean much. You can't coach heart, and tuffness.

Style means more than the fighter

Style means more than the fighter

 

In the left corner.......weighing in at over 1 ton.......MOST OF THE MEMBERS OF KARATEFORUMS.COM

 

In the right corner.........weighing in at something considerably less.......Jade_Lotus.....

 

Hee hee

Hehe uh oh Jade Lotus. I think the fighter is more important than the style, but the style has a lot to do with the fighter.

Why do think that the fighter is more important than the style??? I have talked about this in another thread, so I won't get into too much detail here. Here is the link to the other thread:

 

http://www.karateforums.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4389

 

It is not solely the art, and it is not solely the fighter, it is both. Howerver, the art is more imporant. You must take into account the means by which the fighter fights, for his art makes him the fighter he is. If the fighter did not have an art, then it doesn't matter how innate he is at fighting, it won't do him any good..the same is applied if he has an inferior art. His innate ability to fight will help him, and make the things in which he is learning, easier for him to comprehend, perform and become proficient at. But, without the art, he would not have the means to fight. His art is the means by which he utilizes his innate ability. First, it must be realized that not all arts are equal, and not all arts are good. As Martial Artist put it.."There is no good without bad, and there is no sweet without sour" You can't say that all MA's are good, without, there being bad ones. Once this is realized then you can begin to understand that the art plays more of an important role that the actuall fighter. You can read the link I provided for further support of my belief.

I'm going to have to say that the style/art is more important than the fighter.

 

You'll have to read my post under Comparative Style titled, ""Art vs Art?!?!?" for further explanation.

 

In short, what is the fighter without his art? A fighter is nothing without his art. Think about it....

There is no such things as an inferior art. Just an inferior fighter, and an inferior philosophy

 

Hapakido is an great system. The believe in being fluid and formless, which I think is very cool.

On the contrary Hapkido hand strikes are perhaps better than those taught or emphasized in TKD. The kicks will be just as good as TKD. Hapkido utilizes hand/foot strikes along with joint manipulations and takedowns. From my understanding Hapkido does not have any katas in it's system.