What are some main differences? Are both equally effective for a real situation?

Are you familiar with either art?

It's not the art that makes it a piece of art, it's the artist that makes the art come alive.

Hapkido combines kicks ( all sorts of them ) with some of the moves of aikido . They are totally different ... i would suggest hapkido .

Hapkido is like TKD, Aikido and Jujitsu combined it is a more verstile art. Hapkido has more offense and torques harder then Aikido.

Aikido has some strikes/kicks but they perfer to use the enemy's energy against them, some Aiki people don't like using strikes. Its seems to be a totally counter defensive art.
Hard is a bad word in Aikido, even in taking falls. JMHO.

Strange because both arts stress breaking things on the body, no matter what the rhetoric. Its really an vicious ugly art, breaking someone wrist or elbow ain't pretty, the flying ukemi is pretty. But in real life a guys going to screaming, shouting, praying and fall on the ground rolling in pain. There won't be any pretty rolls at the end of a wristbreak!!! The guys I place in lock on the street making arrest didn't fly, they did like I mentioned above. And i didn't break their body just swelled some joints. It ain't pretty as it looks.

Maybe I'm just not good at it. Let me have it the Aiki/Hapki guys, but the truth hurt.

Both stem from the same roots, that being Daito Ryu. Generally they're pretty similar. To the best of my knowledge there isn't anything in Aikido that isn't in Hapkido so you're going to get much broader training with Hapkido. The advantage in Aikido is getting to focus exclusively on throws, pressure points, locks, and evasion while ignoring all of Hapkido's striking.

I can sum up the difference very easily:

Some tries to punch you in the face, you deflect it and grab their wrist.

Now in Aikido you'd put them off balance, throw them to the ground and hold them there via some form of joint lock.

In Hapkido you'd palm heel them in the solar plexus, pull them off balance, throw them to the ground, hit them again, then hold them with the joint lock.

The difference is whether you want to hit them or not.

There are strikes and striking in aikido, but it depends largely on the style of aikido, the instructor, and what they choose to emphasize. Many high level aikido teachers such as Shioda, Saito, and Tohei have quoted the Founder as saying that aikido is 70% striking 30% technique.

Many movements in aikido are based on the same body mechanics involved in most striking arts, noticeably karate. However, it is quite common to see such striking practiced "implicitly" rather than the explicit variety.

Last week I had the pleasure of training with a Yamate-ryu Aikijitsu practitioner. Yamate-ryu is an off-shoot of Daito-ryu - some suggest that it is the pre-cursor to Daito-ryu. Whichever way, the fundamental differences between Yamate-ryu and aikido is firstly, there is no ukemi, only "escapes". Secondly, there is no striking, throws, pins or locks - only "break and dislocate".

Interesting difference, despite the fact that the fundamental movements and premise for movement is very similar to mainstream aikido.

Just something else to think about....

Quote:

---

aikido is 70% striking 30% technique

---

Is that because in order to do the technique you first must take balance and striking is one way of doing so?