She was still knocked back... you can see it. The line of force is directed perpendicular to space between her feet. To stop the force the defender's feet need to be lined up with the force. Body mechanics.
Not all self-defense situations can be solved with a firearm. While it is true that for a lethal force-level response, the best tool is a gun---but most SD situations aren't at that level. And in many people's cases, they don't have firearms available to them. So we make do with what we have.
I do note that 20-30 minutes of required self-defense action is---unrealistic. Similarly speaking, shooting someone doesn't take 3 minutes either.
I never said nor applied that a woman couldn't defend herself if she didn't have a fire arm, I'm just pointing out if you did have one you wouldn't have to put up with defending yourself for 20-30 min. To putting your attacker down with one bullet in less than 3 min.
I gotta agree with kbaptiste except with all the sexist gibberish, the only way to win a fight is to get your opponent on the ground and make sure he or she stays there, hence ladies carry a gun...don't try to be like chuck norris
@kingarthur2009 The problem with your statement is that it assumes 1) that all self-defense situations can be solved with a firearm, 2) that women can't defend themselves without a firearm, and 3) that all women actually have opportunities to carry firearms for self-defense. None of these three things are true.
kbaptiste made a comment about how "pure defence wont do anything against attacker" --- since this video has nothing to do with that topic, I'm not sure what the the point is?
@kingarthur2009 Not everyone does/can/will carry a firearm. Nothing wrong with learning how to defend yourself with your natural weapons. When it comes down to it, there are the only thing that you know for certain you'll have available if you need to defend yourself.
Have to agree with some that a GOOD tight hook of a good boxer would be difficult to stop in this manner. However, the outside hook that was demonstrated is not uncommon among those without good crisp boxing technique and a lot more likely to be encountered. The defense uses good triangular structure and zones out of the are of the greatest power. As long as the person is mindful of combinations and watches the other side, it's a sound response, better then a lot I've seen on youtube.
@hulk90000 Hm. Let's see---this is a response to a hook punch, it is in response to someone else's specific video for women's self-defense, and your comment is that it wouldn't work vs a straight punch from a professional boxer?
@nhahapkido sorry i wasnt being rude i just know how badass some boxers are and its easier said then done for a martial artist to block there punch without getting hit with another.
@hulk90000 Why would a pro boxer be punching a woman? Look, its easy to do the "what about this and what about that", but lets see you block a pro boxers punch.
OK, if, and it's a huge if, she reacts fast and moves fast to intercept it, before it develops power. Unlikely.
I thought Hapkido was basically Aikido with extra kicks. In Aikido there's the same interception, yet usually striking to the head or throat with the inside arm. Why? Because the attacker's force is not opposed. If the punch can't be blocked before it gets fully developed the force is TURNED WITH and redirected to unbalance etc. I don't see here the harmony best for lighter defenders.
I dont disagree with your point about the advantages of stepping in. The only problem with your theory is the fact that in a real attack your punch will already be there before she reacts. Stepping in will only work if the attacker telegraphs the punch. In that case the defender should move fist and strike the attacker. Many martial arts techniques conveniently leave out the real world element of reaction time.
seriously, womens self defence is completely idiotic. its women teaching women how to fight men like women. Take a real martial arts class and dont waist your time on a purly defensive style like hopkido. im a muy thai fighter, and from what ive learned, putting your opponent on the ground is the best way to avoid getting hurt. pure defence wont do anything against attacker. and dont be so sexist in your comments. so girls, take a real class and learn how to fight, not how to run.
@kbaptiste28 I confess that my belief in your understanding is lowered by the fact that not only can you not spell my art correctly (Hapkido), you cannot seem to even spell your own correctly. (Muay Thai)
It seems as if you don't understand women's self defense (which isn't necessarily taught _by_ women, but _to_ women), Hapkido (which is not a purely defensive art), and or sexist behavior (which far as I can tell wasn't mentioned in this particular video). What are you talking about?
@kbaptiste28 It's dangerous to teach people inneffective stuff like this, it'll just piss the attacker off. Attack is critical to defense to put the attacker off so you can escape.
[sigh] Did anyone actually watch the video, and pay attention to why we did this? And what it was a _response_ to? Or watch any of the followup videos?
Apparently not.
Amazing how much response there has been, most of which completely misinterpreted the reason for the video.
If someone blocked my hook like that, I would jab them in the face with my free hand. Both of your hands are now occupied by my one, so what is to stop me from doing this? I don't know why people complicate things, use a single forearm block with your left, or grab the back of your head like a boxer. Either way while I block and they step into the punch, I step in as well with a straight right to the face. I understand this is a hapkido thing, but I question its efficiency and effectiveness.
Well, as we said, this was a response to another video, and their defensive movement choice.
And as we said in the video, the point here is the discussion over the mechanical aspects of their response. I think I even made a point of saying that this particular technique was not optimal. If you take a look at the followup videos, this started discussion of a number of things regarding this topic.
For most women, a "single forearm block" will not be sufficient. In a similar fashion, grabbing "the back of your head like a boxer" generally won't work either (for most women). Powerful haymaker punches will collapse unsupported blocks, and merely cushioning your head won't work---unless, as you say, you also step in. However, as we said in this video and the followup ones, training someone to step _into_ an attack isn't easy. I prefer alternate responses for women's self-defense training.
While I suppose a single forearm type block might not be strong enough from a woman, I don't see how gender would affect the second boxing type block much at all... Although you might say teaching someone to step in in a fight is hard, it is still necessary. You can't win by backing up the whole time, and stepping in as they do will multiply the power of your strike several times. I'm interested in what "alternative responses" you're talking about. If a girl can do it, I might as well too.
Actually, from an anatomical perspective, there are quite a few different major muscles groups in the body. Pectoral group, abdominal group, two in the legs, several in the back, etc...
In this case, the strike is aimed at the center of the bicep of the arm--not a nerve strike, nor an origin or insertion point. If your aim is off and you hit one of the above, it still works--but a direct strike to the largest area of muscle is what we are trying to do.
Hmm. I wonder if you actually paid attention to the reason for this video? You did note it was a response to someone else's video, and our commentary on the structure and form of their response technique, right?
Commenting with a dismissive off-the-cuff comment (which, I'll note, doesn't even have to do with the reason for the video) merely will mean that people will tend to dismiss _your_ opinions as nonsense.
DUH, of course I noticed the purpose of the video. The tactics I mentioned are more efficient, easily acquired, non-perishable, and versatile alternatives that make this sort of double-block totally redundant, with or without the step in. Which is my point.
This video was a response to the _structural errors_ shown in a different video. You respond with mere terms, without demonstration---and I'll note that plenty of other people have video on YouTube showing the techniques you mentioned withOUT proper structure and form. (So merely listing technique names misses the point.)
Feel free to post a video showing how this should be done. Show us your structure and form, and how the technique works.
No, YOU don't understand the point. If you ask the wrong question, you'll get the wrong answer.
All modern RBSD entirely rejects the notion of blocking for SD as a fundamentally faulty methodology. My point is not that your "correction" of others' "incorrect technique" is invalid. My point is that it's wholly misguided, like explaining to modern soldiers that the guy teaching them load to fire their muskets is doing it wrong and "you should tamp the powder this way instead".
Sure, your musket-loading technique is "vastly superiour" to the other guy's but you're still teaching the wrong thing to get the job done. This is something that it's really dumb to be smart about. Throw the musket aside (carefully) and learn how a modern carbine works. You're wasting your time and your students'.
ALL blocking is obsolete. Look up Tony Blauer, Kelly McCann, ISR Matrix, Calen Paine, Demi Barbito, Matt Thornton, etc. No need for me to post a vid; there are tons here already.
Great. Show us the "right way" to do the "right thing"! As I said, there are many videos on YouTube that show (for example) Blauer's spear technique, with bad form. Show us how to do it right. Again, show us your proper form and structure.
By the way---all the techniques you originally mentioned have a version of a block in their initial movements. "All blocking is obsolete" --then you had better tell Blauer, McCann, et al.
Post a video. Show us the right way. Show us how it is done.
No, NONE of the techniques I mention involve blocking--all involve shielding, or a version of the JKD "crash-cover-defence" concept--occasionally FIlipino destructions. Shut off the sarcasm long enough to get acquainted with some methodologies other than what your sabom or sihing or whatever the hell taught you 20 years ago. Your ostrich mentality, bolstered, by your
cocky, ironic arrogance, is why you're still teaching stone-age tactics that will get your students killed in a real fight.
Dropping to personal attacks is fairly clear indicator that your mouth has overrun your ability.
If you think a shield isn't a block, then you are playing word/semantics games to support your "RBSD methodology" need for superiority. Similarly, a "crash-cover-defense" is again a block, as a limb/body part is used to deflect/stop an attack from connecting.
You obviously have not comprehended the video, nor paid attention to any of the followup videos.
People who have paid attention to this series of videos know that this isn't my preferred move---quite the contrary. I give reasons why and demonstrate a different response which is much easier. None of which is the point of _this_ video, which is still apparently lost upon you.
As you seem unable to post a video that shows your techniques as invited, your followup responses will be deleted unless they contain a video response. Why don't you make a _useful_ contribution to this discussion?
Comment by IronMongoose1 was deleted on 07/25, as did not include video response. (Contained only commentary reiterating his views vs the wrongness of our views.)
IronMongoose1: Include a video response showing how it should be done, and we'll let you back into the discussion.
[sigh] Please read my reply. Submit a video response, and I'll be happy to continue a dialogue with you. You say you know how it should be done---so show us. Don't post someone else doing a version--_you_ show us.
@nhahapkido Why insist that the vid have me demonstrating it? If someone else does exactly what I'm saying, it is redundant for me to shoot another identical vid.
Seems a simple request. You watch our video, and you say you have a better way (which, we note, completely misses the point of our video--but we say okay anyway). We ask you to show this better way, and you say, "See this other guy."
I repeat: There are plenty of videos on YouTube showing variations (some of them bad) on various techniques. You say you know how it should be done---then _you_ show us. We can then dialogue regarding what we see structurally in your technique.
So---what you are trying to get around saying is that you _can't_ do it?
Either submit a video, or wander off, smug with the knowledge that your superior understanding and RBSD techniques far outstrip ours, even though you don't seem to be able to demonstrate them...
One way we get a dialogue, the other, you go away. Either way, it is all good. :)
Back to deleting your posts until you reply with a video response of your own...
I agree to step in I use the non fist thing since I use breathing and energy block (or strike) so keep my hands open but do the same step in and block(or strike) if you notice when you block with just your arms she steps backwards and when she steps in she dont move very nice work teaching and please send some True self defence videos to Hapkidotv thanks
Its great to see a person that has a great understanding of body movement and basics. Keep up the great job, your one of the few that actually know their stuff.
Hopefully the attacker is also using hapkido.....and not just throwing wild lefts and rights in typical street fighting manner. Most of these defenses are feeder based, meaning they only work within the artificial rules of the system. Try it against a boxer if you don't believe me. Getting 'knocked backwards' by the power of the punch is the least of your problems....getting knocked OUT by the immediately following LEFT HOOK should be the worry.
Since you also responded to one of the later videos, I assume you understand the assumptions we are making about the situation? (Women's self-defense?) You are right that a typical street brawl/duel has many wild swings one right after another. However, most women's self-defense situations don't---different set of occurrences, different set of attacks. I'll also note that as I say in later videos, this isn't really what I would teach as WSD, this is merely what we are responding to.
on the other hand??? in a real situation the atacker will keep going. i dont think is good to be in front of the other hand to block the atack. and if you doit. it shouldnt be the end of the technique
I don't believe we have ever said that the defender should stop at this point. The idea for this part was simply to stop the attacker--obviously, followup techniques are necessary.
That being said, I completely agree that being on the inside is not the optimum place for the defender. Sometimes, however, there isn't a choice about that. In those cases, this is an effective beginning for a defensive series.
Of course the attacker will keep going--as will the defender.
You know, I've met 5th dans who had no idea, and I've met 1st dans who had skill and understanding.
On this topic especially (self-defense, particularly women's self-defense) people need to think critically, not just assume the instructor knows what they are talking about.
Will the technique actually work? Or will it only work for the instructor versus a non-committed student attacker in the practice hall?
This has been flagged as spam show
I let women punch me in the face all the time. hmm what a turn on.
TheRedCoke 4 months ago
She was still knocked back... you can see it. The line of force is directed perpendicular to space between her feet. To stop the force the defender's feet need to be lined up with the force. Body mechanics.
Vbudo 4 months ago
@vamphunterx
Well to each their own I suppose
kingarthur2009 11 months ago
@kingarthur2009
Not all self-defense situations can be solved with a firearm. While it is true that for a lethal force-level response, the best tool is a gun---but most SD situations aren't at that level. And in many people's cases, they don't have firearms available to them. So we make do with what we have.
I do note that 20-30 minutes of required self-defense action is---unrealistic. Similarly speaking, shooting someone doesn't take 3 minutes either.
nhahapkido 11 months ago
I never said nor applied that a woman couldn't defend herself if she didn't have a fire arm, I'm just pointing out if you did have one you wouldn't have to put up with defending yourself for 20-30 min. To putting your attacker down with one bullet in less than 3 min.
kingarthur2009 1 year ago
I gotta agree with kbaptiste except with all the sexist gibberish, the only way to win a fight is to get your opponent on the ground and make sure he or she stays there, hence ladies carry a gun...don't try to be like chuck norris
kingarthur2009 1 year ago
@kingarthur2009 The problem with your statement is that it assumes 1) that all self-defense situations can be solved with a firearm, 2) that women can't defend themselves without a firearm, and 3) that all women actually have opportunities to carry firearms for self-defense. None of these three things are true.
kbaptiste made a comment about how "pure defence wont do anything against attacker" --- since this video has nothing to do with that topic, I'm not sure what the the point is?
nhahapkido 1 year ago
@kingarthur2009 Not everyone does/can/will carry a firearm. Nothing wrong with learning how to defend yourself with your natural weapons. When it comes down to it, there are the only thing that you know for certain you'll have available if you need to defend yourself.
vamphunterx 11 months ago
Have to agree with some that a GOOD tight hook of a good boxer would be difficult to stop in this manner. However, the outside hook that was demonstrated is not uncommon among those without good crisp boxing technique and a lot more likely to be encountered. The defense uses good triangular structure and zones out of the are of the greatest power. As long as the person is mindful of combinations and watches the other side, it's a sound response, better then a lot I've seen on youtube.
ezraa123 1 year ago
yea sure try blocking a pro boxers straight punch with all his bodyweight.
hulk90000 1 year ago
@hulk90000 Hm. Let's see---this is a response to a hook punch, it is in response to someone else's specific video for women's self-defense, and your comment is that it wouldn't work vs a straight punch from a professional boxer?
Okay. You are right---this wouldn't help at all.
nhahapkido 1 year ago
@nhahapkido sorry i wasnt being rude i just know how badass some boxers are and its easier said then done for a martial artist to block there punch without getting hit with another.
hulk90000 1 year ago
@hulk90000 Why would a pro boxer be punching a woman? Look, its easy to do the "what about this and what about that", but lets see you block a pro boxers punch.
vamphunterx 11 months ago
OK, if, and it's a huge if, she reacts fast and moves fast to intercept it, before it develops power. Unlikely.
I thought Hapkido was basically Aikido with extra kicks. In Aikido there's the same interception, yet usually striking to the head or throat with the inside arm. Why? Because the attacker's force is not opposed. If the punch can't be blocked before it gets fully developed the force is TURNED WITH and redirected to unbalance etc. I don't see here the harmony best for lighter defenders.
danielskipp1 1 year ago
I dont disagree with your point about the advantages of stepping in. The only problem with your theory is the fact that in a real attack your punch will already be there before she reacts. Stepping in will only work if the attacker telegraphs the punch. In that case the defender should move fist and strike the attacker. Many martial arts techniques conveniently leave out the real world element of reaction time.
fcardvark 1 year ago
seriously, womens self defence is completely idiotic. its women teaching women how to fight men like women. Take a real martial arts class and dont waist your time on a purly defensive style like hopkido. im a muy thai fighter, and from what ive learned, putting your opponent on the ground is the best way to avoid getting hurt. pure defence wont do anything against attacker. and dont be so sexist in your comments. so girls, take a real class and learn how to fight, not how to run.
kbaptiste28 1 year ago
@kbaptiste28 I confess that my belief in your understanding is lowered by the fact that not only can you not spell my art correctly (Hapkido), you cannot seem to even spell your own correctly. (Muay Thai)
It seems as if you don't understand women's self defense (which isn't necessarily taught _by_ women, but _to_ women), Hapkido (which is not a purely defensive art), and or sexist behavior (which far as I can tell wasn't mentioned in this particular video). What are you talking about?
nhahapkido 1 year ago
@kbaptiste28 It's dangerous to teach people inneffective stuff like this, it'll just piss the attacker off. Attack is critical to defense to put the attacker off so you can escape.
PnutButter1986 1 year ago
@PnutButter1986
[sigh] Did anyone actually watch the video, and pay attention to why we did this? And what it was a _response_ to? Or watch any of the followup videos?
Apparently not.
Amazing how much response there has been, most of which completely misinterpreted the reason for the video.
nhahapkido 1 year ago
If someone blocked my hook like that, I would jab them in the face with my free hand. Both of your hands are now occupied by my one, so what is to stop me from doing this? I don't know why people complicate things, use a single forearm block with your left, or grab the back of your head like a boxer. Either way while I block and they step into the punch, I step in as well with a straight right to the face. I understand this is a hapkido thing, but I question its efficiency and effectiveness.
FalseShadowx 2 years ago 2
Well, as we said, this was a response to another video, and their defensive movement choice.
And as we said in the video, the point here is the discussion over the mechanical aspects of their response. I think I even made a point of saying that this particular technique was not optimal. If you take a look at the followup videos, this started discussion of a number of things regarding this topic.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
For most women, a "single forearm block" will not be sufficient. In a similar fashion, grabbing "the back of your head like a boxer" generally won't work either (for most women). Powerful haymaker punches will collapse unsupported blocks, and merely cushioning your head won't work---unless, as you say, you also step in. However, as we said in this video and the followup ones, training someone to step _into_ an attack isn't easy. I prefer alternate responses for women's self-defense training.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
While I suppose a single forearm type block might not be strong enough from a woman, I don't see how gender would affect the second boxing type block much at all... Although you might say teaching someone to step in in a fight is hard, it is still necessary. You can't win by backing up the whole time, and stepping in as they do will multiply the power of your strike several times. I'm interested in what "alternative responses" you're talking about. If a girl can do it, I might as well too.
FalseShadowx 2 years ago
Well I'm glad we agree on this, I guess I should have paid closer attention.
FalseShadowx 2 years ago
Comment removed
louiswashington1977 2 years ago
Actually, from an anatomical perspective, there are quite a few different major muscles groups in the body. Pectoral group, abdominal group, two in the legs, several in the back, etc...
In this case, the strike is aimed at the center of the bicep of the arm--not a nerve strike, nor an origin or insertion point. If your aim is off and you hit one of the above, it still works--but a direct strike to the largest area of muscle is what we are trying to do.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
*sigh* Just box, SPEAR, dive, or helmet.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Hmm. I wonder if you actually paid attention to the reason for this video? You did note it was a response to someone else's video, and our commentary on the structure and form of their response technique, right?
Commenting with a dismissive off-the-cuff comment (which, I'll note, doesn't even have to do with the reason for the video) merely will mean that people will tend to dismiss _your_ opinions as nonsense.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
DUH, of course I noticed the purpose of the video. The tactics I mentioned are more efficient, easily acquired, non-perishable, and versatile alternatives that make this sort of double-block totally redundant, with or without the step in. Which is my point.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
[sigh] And yet you still miss the point.
This video was a response to the _structural errors_ shown in a different video. You respond with mere terms, without demonstration---and I'll note that plenty of other people have video on YouTube showing the techniques you mentioned withOUT proper structure and form. (So merely listing technique names misses the point.)
Feel free to post a video showing how this should be done. Show us your structure and form, and how the technique works.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
No, YOU don't understand the point. If you ask the wrong question, you'll get the wrong answer.
All modern RBSD entirely rejects the notion of blocking for SD as a fundamentally faulty methodology. My point is not that your "correction" of others' "incorrect technique" is invalid. My point is that it's wholly misguided, like explaining to modern soldiers that the guy teaching them load to fire their muskets is doing it wrong and "you should tamp the powder this way instead".
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Sure, your musket-loading technique is "vastly superiour" to the other guy's but you're still teaching the wrong thing to get the job done. This is something that it's really dumb to be smart about. Throw the musket aside (carefully) and learn how a modern carbine works. You're wasting your time and your students'.
ALL blocking is obsolete. Look up Tony Blauer, Kelly McCann, ISR Matrix, Calen Paine, Demi Barbito, Matt Thornton, etc. No need for me to post a vid; there are tons here already.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Long story short: no point in teaching the right way to do the wrong thing.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Long story short, I'm saying that you're teaching the "right way" to do the wrong thing.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Great. Show us the "right way" to do the "right thing"! As I said, there are many videos on YouTube that show (for example) Blauer's spear technique, with bad form. Show us how to do it right. Again, show us your proper form and structure.
By the way---all the techniques you originally mentioned have a version of a block in their initial movements. "All blocking is obsolete" --then you had better tell Blauer, McCann, et al.
Post a video. Show us the right way. Show us how it is done.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
No, NONE of the techniques I mention involve blocking--all involve shielding, or a version of the JKD "crash-cover-defence" concept--occasionally FIlipino destructions. Shut off the sarcasm long enough to get acquainted with some methodologies other than what your sabom or sihing or whatever the hell taught you 20 years ago. Your ostrich mentality, bolstered, by your
cocky, ironic arrogance, is why you're still teaching stone-age tactics that will get your students killed in a real fight.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Dropping to personal attacks is fairly clear indicator that your mouth has overrun your ability.
If you think a shield isn't a block, then you are playing word/semantics games to support your "RBSD methodology" need for superiority. Similarly, a "crash-cover-defense" is again a block, as a limb/body part is used to deflect/stop an attack from connecting.
You obviously have not comprehended the video, nor paid attention to any of the followup videos.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
People who have paid attention to this series of videos know that this isn't my preferred move---quite the contrary. I give reasons why and demonstrate a different response which is much easier. None of which is the point of _this_ video, which is still apparently lost upon you.
As you seem unable to post a video that shows your techniques as invited, your followup responses will be deleted unless they contain a video response. Why don't you make a _useful_ contribution to this discussion?
nhahapkido 2 years ago
Comment by IronMongoose1 was deleted on 07/25, as did not include video response. (Contained only commentary reiterating his views vs the wrongness of our views.)
IronMongoose1: Include a video response showing how it should be done, and we'll let you back into the discussion.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
You lie. I had a vid link.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
[sigh] Please read my reply. Submit a video response, and I'll be happy to continue a dialogue with you. You say you know how it should be done---so show us. Don't post someone else doing a version--_you_ show us.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
@nhahapkido Why insist that the vid have me demonstrating it? If someone else does exactly what I'm saying, it is redundant for me to shoot another identical vid.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
Seems a simple request. You watch our video, and you say you have a better way (which, we note, completely misses the point of our video--but we say okay anyway). We ask you to show this better way, and you say, "See this other guy."
I repeat: There are plenty of videos on YouTube showing variations (some of them bad) on various techniques. You say you know how it should be done---then _you_ show us. We can then dialogue regarding what we see structurally in your technique.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
@nhahapkido Do you realize just how badly you fail at logic? Nothing you've said addresses the arguments in my last post.
IronMongoose1 2 years ago
So---what you are trying to get around saying is that you _can't_ do it?
Either submit a video, or wander off, smug with the knowledge that your superior understanding and RBSD techniques far outstrip ours, even though you don't seem to be able to demonstrate them...
One way we get a dialogue, the other, you go away. Either way, it is all good. :)
Back to deleting your posts until you reply with a video response of your own...
nhahapkido 2 years ago
Response from IronMongoose1 deleted, as again he did not submit a video response, and resorted to personal attacks.
nhahapkido 2 years ago
Very nice technique. We love to see our Hapkido brothers teaching truth!
Allen Hughes
Hapkido TV
hapkidotvcom 2 years ago
I agree to step in I use the non fist thing since I use breathing and energy block (or strike) so keep my hands open but do the same step in and block(or strike) if you notice when you block with just your arms she steps backwards and when she steps in she dont move very nice work teaching and please send some True self defence videos to Hapkidotv thanks
Ty
MasterHatfield 2 years ago
is there perhaps a website that you have up and we can go to?
puresskilll3 2 years ago
Its great to see a person that has a great understanding of body movement and basics. Keep up the great job, your one of the few that actually know their stuff.
ptrodrigu 2 years ago
Comment removed
m049980 3 years ago
Hopefully the attacker is also using hapkido.....and not just throwing wild lefts and rights in typical street fighting manner. Most of these defenses are feeder based, meaning they only work within the artificial rules of the system. Try it against a boxer if you don't believe me. Getting 'knocked backwards' by the power of the punch is the least of your problems....getting knocked OUT by the immediately following LEFT HOOK should be the worry.
sgtmac46 3 years ago 2
Since you also responded to one of the later videos, I assume you understand the assumptions we are making about the situation? (Women's self-defense?) You are right that a typical street brawl/duel has many wild swings one right after another. However, most women's self-defense situations don't---different set of occurrences, different set of attacks. I'll also note that as I say in later videos, this isn't really what I would teach as WSD, this is merely what we are responding to.
nhahapkido 3 years ago
Fair enough, good point.
sgtmac46 3 years ago
on the other hand??? in a real situation the atacker will keep going. i dont think is good to be in front of the other hand to block the atack. and if you doit. it shouldnt be the end of the technique
imthemaker 3 years ago
I don't believe we have ever said that the defender should stop at this point. The idea for this part was simply to stop the attacker--obviously, followup techniques are necessary.
That being said, I completely agree that being on the inside is not the optimum place for the defender. Sometimes, however, there isn't a choice about that. In those cases, this is an effective beginning for a defensive series.
Of course the attacker will keep going--as will the defender.
nhahapkido 3 years ago
now tath you say tath im agree. i just wasnt happy seing tath it just end there. good work.
imthemaker 3 years ago
Comment removed
tylerp8569 3 years ago
You know, I've met 5th dans who had no idea, and I've met 1st dans who had skill and understanding.
On this topic especially (self-defense, particularly women's self-defense) people need to think critically, not just assume the instructor knows what they are talking about.
Will the technique actually work? Or will it only work for the instructor versus a non-committed student attacker in the practice hall?
Rank doesn't always mean understanding.
Thanks for the comment, though!
nhahapkido 3 years ago