PDA

View Full Version : What is aikido good for?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


Michael Varin
12-07-2006, 04:29 AM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice?

I became more exploratory and inquisitive about four years ago. The last two years, especially, have altered my view of aikido's techniques. I think they are considerably more relevant when one or both partners are armed, particularly with edged weapons. They essentially support the carry and use of a sword and knife. My personal experiences are definitely pointing me in this direction, and historically it makes sense. Look at the culture and the time when these movements were developed.

Despite this, almost everyone that I see discussing the usefulness of aikido techniques seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. All they see is one-on-one empty-hand combat, an arena where many more sensible and no less efficient techniques already have been proven.

What do you think? If the techniques of aikido are highly appropriate for empty-hand combat, why don't we see them used more often? Why do the attacks used in aikido not reflect the most likely ways that unarmed fighting occurs?

Again, I am not saying that it is impossible to use aikido techniques in one-on-one empty-hand situations. What I am saying is that situation is not their home, and when you find their home it opens up entirely new possibilities for your training.

Michael

SeiserL
12-07-2006, 06:25 AM
IMHO, the difference between other styles and Aikido is the idea of trying not to do harm to the other person. Since that is usually not the priority in a self-defense situation (or society for that matter), you don't see a lot of people with the proper level of efficiency and effectiveness. So the intent is different.

I also think that since O'Sensei appeared to be against sport competition, you don't see much from those who accept the art. I know Tomiki style has some competition, and from my little experience with them, they seem pretty good to show Aikido's efficiency and effectiveness in that arena.

Other arts are much easier and faster to learn, so they will always be chosen first.

stelios
12-07-2006, 06:41 AM
Just a personal point from own experience.
I was attacked from behind by a guy twice my size in bear-hug fashion attack (ushiro tori) with no weapon used. I sent him flying 10 feet in front of me.
Aikido (techical-spiritual) works. Always.

Gernot Hassenpflug
12-07-2006, 07:00 AM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice?

I became more exploratory and inquisitive about four years ago. The last two years, especially, have altered my view of aikido's techniques. I think they are considerably more relevant when one or both partners are armed, particularly with edged weapons. They essentially support the carry and use of a sword and knife. My personal experiences are definitely pointing me in this direction, and historically it makes sense. Look at the culture and the time when these movements were developed.

Despite this, almost everyone that I see discussing the usefulness of aikido techniques seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. All they see is one-on-one empty-hand combat, an arena where many more sensible and no less efficient techniques already have been proven.

What do you think? If the techniques of aikido are highly appropriate for empty-hand combat, why don't we see them used more often? Why do the attacks used in aikido not reflect the most likely ways that unarmed fighting occurs?

I think you make some very good points and are going to be a great help to the aikido community in the future. Let me state again as I did in a different thread what Kuroda Tetsuzan says about Jujutsu. "Jujutsu opens one's eyes to ken and iai, and ken and iai are the reason jujutsu techniques are as they are. The ju is the essence of use of the sword, and the opponent is always a sword in jujutsu. There is nothing wrong per se with imagining a flesh and blood opponent and using techniques suitable for such, but then what is used is no longer jujutsu."

In my comprehension, what he refers to here is the bodywork that jujutsu teachers (that which is invisible). As Robert John has pointed out a couple of times, the essential point is to move inside, first, before any external movement is made. To give a simple (!) example which I've only got to grips with so to speak in the last two or three days (thanks to Akuzawa Minoru's exercises), in aikido, from a wrist hold which represents a fairly distant ma-ai, the partner's intention is first drawn to one's center, and then the center leads the intention to one side to make space on the other side for irimi/tenkan, or in order to return the center to its original position (except that it slides over or under or to the side of the led intention of the partner). Making the center smaller and smaller allows this leading and side-slip to become ever smaller until one really only has the vanishing thinness of s swordblade in comparison: how little can you lead and still slide past the led intention, without the partner becoming aware of this?

Amir Krause
12-07-2006, 09:00 AM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice?

I became more exploratory and inquisitive about four years ago. The last two years, especially, have altered my view of aikido's techniques. I think they are considerably more relevant when one or both partners are armed, particularly with edged weapons. They essentially support the carry and use of a sword and knife. My personal experiences are definitely pointing me in this direction, and historically it makes sense. Look at the culture and the time when these movements were developed.

Despite this, almost everyone that I see discussing the usefulness of aikido techniques seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. All they see is one-on-one empty-hand combat, an arena where many more sensible and no less efficient techniques already have been proven.

What do you think? If the techniques of aikido are highly appropriate for empty-hand combat, why don't we see them used more often? Why do the attacks used in aikido not reflect the most likely ways that unarmed fighting occurs?

Again, I am not saying that it is impossible to use aikido techniques in one-on-one empty-hand situations. What I am saying is that situation is not their home, and when you find their home it opens up entirely new possibilities for your training.

Michael


At least Korindo Aikido techniques are suitable to S.D. most situations. At least as well as most other M.A. And since the technical differences are often minor, I would say Ueshiba Aikido is just as good.
I was in a BJJ Self-Defense lesson, the techniques the teacher chose to teach were almost exactly the same. If you look deeper into Judo, you will find most (if not all) of the techniques they practice have a more effective (yet dangerous to Uke) variation. Further, when I practiced TKD for a short while, the instructor had one lesson a week with a focus on S.D. in this lesson he often taught releases from grabs and many other techniques that were very similar to the Aikido techniques. I had a short Krav-Maga lesson, they taught some very gross basic locks, just like we have in Aikido, yet much less exact and thus less efficient.
If you look at it technically, the Aikido curriculum (at least in Korindo Aikido as I learn it, but I believe in all Aikido styles) is normally more efficient and much more refined.




But, one should not stay only with techniques in the curriculum. One should also look at the situations often taught and examine the reference scenarios those are taken from. In our dojo we practice punches often and kicks much less (did it last lesson and my legs still hurt from softening the fall in slow speed). But the most common situations show us scenarios that agree with your description above:
Releases from grab are much more important if you have an edged weapon you would like to draw and the grab delays you.
The Shomen Uchi attack is a basic classical attack for a sword.

The situations one practices for are important.

Amir

Dazzler
12-07-2006, 10:12 AM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice?


The situation they are most useful in is the study of Aikido.

If your personal study of Aikido is to find the techniques most appropriate to fight with then there are much better martial arts.

Aikido 'techniques' are tools to learn the bases of Aikido - distance, relationship, posture, breathing, timing, blending et al.

In the fullness of time perhaps the study of aikido techniques will allow one to find the way to blend yin and yang to achieve a form embued with ki (I'm not holding my breath for that to happen (joke intended) :crazy: )

These bases are what you need. You can't just pull a technique out in the same way you select a golf club (pass me the 5 ikkyo please caddy :) ), with Aikido you are working towards applying a form that is appropriate to whatever attack you receive, and its intensity. Within it these bases will be applied in an appropriate mix, perhaps like the ingredients of a good cake.

Get the mix wrong and you've nothing to put icing on.

Get it right and voila...you've blended with the attack and nullified it.

Depending on skill level and desire you can produce something that includes irimi and atemi to deal with an attack.

Or theoretically perhaps the aim of Aikido is to maintain the balance or harmony - if there is an attack then blend with it until order is restored.

Counter yin with yang if you like.

Probably never happen, maybe we'll never reach that level but if through practice we learn to respect others and have a bit of healthy fun too then maybe its not a major problem.

For those that debate existance and usefulness of ki - well put it to one side a second and think - An attack comes in? what am I going to do? The worlds best ikkyo / nikkyo /sankyo or any other technique or am I going to get offline and counter it.

Tai sabaki, kamae, Irimi, atemi. a handful of bases for starters that can be pretty much applied in some form to any attack.

So these are what we really study when we practice ikkyo nikkyo etc.

Well some of us do anyway. :D

All this ki talk sounds kind of fluffy I know - but I know what I mean :D and you did ask!!

Regards

D

Mark Freeman
12-07-2006, 10:27 AM
The situation they are most useful in is the study of Aikido.

I think Daren has hit the nail on the head there :) IMHO O'Sensei did not formulate aikido as a 'better means of self defence', but a continuous practice to polish ones own spirit. For me the word 'study' is what makes the above sentence ring so true. Study for it's own sake, looking deeper and deeper for the essence or truth in the movement. This for me is what aikido is good for.

As others have said, there are quicker more effective ways to gain a reasonable level of self defence. However, there is much more to self defence than physical techniques.

regards,

Mark

billybob
12-07-2006, 11:13 AM
Mark's comment could well end the thread being on point insightful and intelligent.....can't let that stand in the way!

I've discussed clashing with Sensei at my first aikido class. Besides that, I thought I was witnessing sheer madness! The multiple opponent training, with no apparent technique and running around seemed stupid!

Sensei entered an arm strike (raise your arm and hit me over the head......why?) with ikyo. The first time I felt him enter - against the grain - but with gentleness. I said "you're doing it the hard way". I was able to do that kind of thing, but it was a lot tougher than sidestepping and doing a trip style throw.

I liked the kokyu doza, and wondered why we didn't do it from standing position (just like judo??).

Having rambled, I'll add that IMHO there is no technique in aikido. Only ideas. The Judo Kodokan codified 40 throws, now it's 61, I think. It's just a syllabus - the number of possible throws is infinite.

From a practical standpoint - twice I tenkanned out of the way of punches and people hit the wall behind me ---- oops - I wasn't doing aikido - I didn't affect their centers. Can I ever win? no. just train.

david

Aristeia
12-07-2006, 12:22 PM
. I know Tomiki style has some competition, and from my little experience with them, they seem pretty good to show Aikido's efficiency and effectiveness in that arena.
yeah, I hear Aikido practitioners win almost 100% of those matches, obviously very effective....

;)

Michael Varin
12-07-2006, 02:38 PM
Gernot,

Thanks for the kind words. I found the Kuroda Tetsuzan quote very interesting, by the way.
The situation they are most useful in is the study of Aikido.
If your personal study of Aikido is to find the techniques most appropriate to fight with then there are much better martial arts.
IMHO O'Sensei did not formulate aikido as a 'better means of self defence', but a continuous practice to polish ones own spirit. For me the word 'study' is what makes the above sentence ring so true. Study for it's own sake, looking deeper and deeper for the essence or truth in the movement. This for me is what aikido is good for.
I agree with both of these statements, but the discussion doesn't end here. Because they both miss the point that I am getting at. I am not talking about the art of aikido, only its techniques. I am also not talking about practical self-defense.

To properly explore the essence or truth of movement, to go deeper you must know where those movements come from.
Aikido 'techniques' are tools to learn the bases of Aikido - distance, relationship, posture, breathing, timing, blending et al.
What sets those distances? Relationship? Timing? Why would you blend that way?
These bases are what you need. You can't just pull a technique out in the same way you select a golf club (pass me the 5 ikkyo please caddy ), with Aikido you are working towards applying a form that is appropriate to whatever attack you receive, and its intensity. Within it these bases will be applied in an appropriate mix, perhaps like the ingredients of a good cake.
Again, no argument. You can't look at it like, "if he does that I'm going to do this." In that sense you must move beyond technique, spontaneity, takemusi aiki, whatever you want to call it. But I think it is foolish to assume that these movements don't have a place where they are truly useful, more so than other things. After all, why else would they exist? For instance, boxers learn their timing, distance, and spontaneity all with the techniques that they intend to use in the ring.

If you discover the place where the techniques of aikido truly fit, it can only deepen your training regardless of your aim.

Michael

billybob
12-07-2006, 02:52 PM
If you discover the place where the techniques of aikido truly fit, it can only deepen your training regardless of your aim.

????????????????

name one?


dave

Erick Mead
12-07-2006, 03:02 PM
As others have said, there are quicker more effective ways to gain a reasonable level of self defence. Grenades. Really, you should swear by grenades.

Good aiki, too.

Everything ends up blended.

Shotgun, maybe, when feeling a wee bit more discriminating ...

mrfeldmeyer
12-07-2006, 03:35 PM
I became more exploratory and inquisitive about four years ago. The last two years, especially, have altered my view of aikido's techniques. I think they are considerably more relevant when one or both partners are armed, particularly with edged weapons. They essentially support the carry and use of a sword and knife. My personal experiences are definitely pointing me in this direction, and historically it makes sense. Look at the culture and the time when these movements were developed.
Michael

I think your statement is a bit unfounded. I'm curious exactly what happened in the last two years to make you feel that Aikido techniques are more relevant when both partners are armed. I'm also curious what your Aikido background is, to have these ideas.


Despite this, almost everyone that I see discussing the usefulness of aikido techniques seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. All they see is one-on-one empty-hand combat, an arena where many more sensible and no less efficient techniques already have been proven.
Michael

Aikido as an art is practiced one-on-one empty handed most regularly, so you would think there is some merit to that.
In doing the techniques I (as well as many people I have practiced with and talked to) can feel a great deal of usefulness in them for one-on-one empty hand self defense. Which techniques do you feel are more sensible and have already been proven (how do you prove one technique more sensible than another?) in this arena?


What do you think? If the techniques of aikido are highly appropriate for empty-hand combat, why don't we see them used more often? Why do the attacks used in aikido not reflect the most likely ways that unarmed fighting occurs?
Michael

Where would you expect to see the techniques used? I see them used several times a week in an Aikido dojo. Where do you see the "more sensible" moves outside of a dojo other than hollywood or UFC/K1? Most aikidoka don't seem to be into showing off in public what they can do, so you don't see a lot of it in hollywood or UFC/K1.

I practice in the Jiyushinkai system of Aikido and our attack is not the typical overhead handblade. We attack with a straight forward open hand application (similar to a palm heel strike in TKD, but not as forward thrusting), this attack feels slightly more realistic to me. However, the same techniques work for many types of attacks. We mix up the attacks in randori, anywhere from boxing punches to a variety of kicks. Utilizing what we have learned from waza we can easily create good self defense off of these attacks. Sorry to rant or seem negative, just felt like this statement is somewhat false. Many self defense techniques are out there and completely usable, but how is Aikido any more "square peg in a round hole" than any other art?

graham
12-07-2006, 03:49 PM
...they both miss the point that I am getting at. I am not talking about the art of aikido, only its techniques. I am also not talking about practical self-defense.
That for me is one of the most unique things about Aikido. I'm just not sure that it's possible to speak solely about the techniques.

Does it not, at that point, stop being Aikido?

Just a newbie thinking aloud...

Mark Freeman
12-07-2006, 07:47 PM
Grenades. Really, you should swear by grenades.

Good aiki, too.

Everything ends up blended.

Shotgun, maybe, when feeling a wee bit more discriminating ...

:D lol.
Grenades = explosive irimi, everything definitely ends up blended :uch:

Michael Varin
12-07-2006, 08:50 PM
Matthew,

First off, there is no need to apologize for your ranting or negativity. I'm not offended by things people say online.
I think your statement is a bit unfounded. I'm curious exactly what happened in the last two years to make you feel that Aikido techniques are more relevant when both partners are armed. I'm also curious what your Aikido background is, to have these ideas.
My statement is not unfounded at all. The techniques that formed the body of aikido had been used in other arts at times when carrying a katana and tanto or katana and wakizashi was the norm, for the warrior class at least.

My aikido background alone is not where these ideas come from. Believe it or not, they come from good old trial and error. I also feel no need to defend my ideas by telling you who my teacher is. They are mine, not his.
Which techniques do you feel are more sensible and have already been proven (how do you prove one technique more sensible than another?) in this arena?
Any that bypass the arms and go straight for the body.

I am not telling anyone how they should train. If you think my ideas are kooky and want to dismiss them that's up to you. I'm just offering them up for discussion, and thought others may find them of interest.
????????????????
That comment was not intended to be the slightest bit mysterious.

Michael

hapkidoike
12-07-2006, 09:59 PM
Aikido.
Huh!
Good God yall!
What is is good for?
Abolutely Nothin!
Say it agian!

Oh wait, that was war.

five04zog
12-08-2006, 12:20 AM
Aikido is a fine art for weapons defense and general H2H as it relates to self-defense on the street. As a law enforcement officer I have used it more then I can remember. I recall a common drunk trying to hit me in the head with a beer bottle. Shihonage was my response (bounced him off the ground). I also recall a druggie trying to stab me with his needle. I bounced him with Iriminage.

The most impressive Aikido tale of street defense I know about came from a fellow cop I met at a seminar. He used his Aikido to keep 3 attackers (like randori) off him for about 2-3 minutes. Long enough for backup to arrive. He said Aikido saved his life that night. I think Aikido is the best art against multi-attackers.

I still study/cross-train in other arts. I’ve studied Hapkido, ground fighting, and Kickboxing. A hard kick to a subject’s common peroneal nerve or shin bone is the best atemi I know and a small officer can do it (countless other nerves work great too). The only problem with Aikido is how advanced/sophisticated it is. It’s quicker to learn kickboxing or BBJ. Many Police Academies are switching to this. The Army uses BBJ and kickboxing because its quick to teach/learn and it works.

I still feel a true Aikido “master” can defend against most anything. Although it takes years and years to get to that level (meaning to defend all types of attacks) and most people are looking for instant gratification. I choose Aikido to defend against life’s many attacks. This goes way beyond street defense and defensive tactics.

I agree with some of the earlier posts that say it helps to have had training in other arts before coming to Aikido. I can see it on the mat. If you have had training in other arts your real world atemi will be better.

Many Aikido schools have lost this type of training or train little in it. A boxer can hit and has been hit and will not panic when his/her jaw gets dislocated or nose gets broken in a fight. Other arts have fallen into this training rut to, not just Aikido. Kata and kicking/pouching air will not teach you how to fight.

I guess what I’m saying is you MUST have the mindset of I WILL SURVIVE no matter what! If you get shot or stabbed or your nose is bit off. This is what we try to teach new officers when they come to the “job”. YOU WILL GO HOME AT THE END OF YOUR TOUR OF DUTY! Nothing else matters. Some officers/people see their own blood and just shut down. You can’t let this happen.

The button line is Aikido can work as well as any other art. Most of use choose aikido for more then just fighting. If all you need is self-defense you can get that from BBJ/MMA or a Glock and a can of pepper-spray. I think of Aikido as a way of life.

CNYMike
12-08-2006, 12:58 AM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice? ..... What do you think? If the techniques of aikido are highly appropriate for empty-hand combat, why don't we see them used more often? Why do the attacks used in aikido not reflect the most likely ways that unarmed fighting occurs?


I once saw a TV report about a brawl between hockey players; my mind fixed on the image of two guys grabbing each other's shirts with one hand and hitting each other with the other hands. Thsi grab-and-hit pops up under kata dori-<strike> combinations, although kata dori is also meant to forestall that -- you deal with the attempt to grab you can nullify the stike.

Same with wrist grabs; according to my Kali instructor, ever self defense system in the world works off wrist grabs. The same is true today; if you attend or help with a women's self defense seminar, some of the scenarios start with wrist grabs. So it does seem to play off the reference points self defense systems play off of.

Michael Varin
12-08-2006, 01:17 AM
Kurt,

Nice post. LE perspective is always interesting, because what you guys do can't really be called self-defense. You have to engage and then apprehend. It's your job.
As a law enforcement officer I have used it more then I can remember. I recall a common drunk trying to hit me in the head with a beer bottle. Shihonage was my response (bounced him off the ground). I also recall a druggie trying to stab me with his needle. I bounced him with Iriminage.
I'd like to point out that a bottle and a needle are weapons, and you as an officer are carrying at least a handgun, and probably pepper spray, an ASP(or other baton), a knife, and maybe a Taser.

This is much more like the context that I am saying these techniques are born from than one-on-one empty-hand situations are.

A question. How important is weapons retention to a person who carries weapons everyday?
I think Aikido is the best art against multi-attackers.
I agree.

Michael

five04zog
12-08-2006, 01:52 AM
Good question…
Most cops use a level 2 or 3 retention holster now. This helps a little. Most weapon retention DT moves are watered down Aikido. You need to always be thinking of your weapon. Just going to the bathroom in a public stall is a no-no (at least with me) when openly armed as a Police Officer. You always need to be thinking of your weapon in public.

I recall my first FTO asking me,” what is the percentage of incidents you will respond to as cops were a gun is involved? The answer is 100%. You the officer are always armed with a gun, Baton, OC and sometimes Taser. Too many cops are killed with their own weapon. Not many cops train as much as they need to in DT’s and weapons retention.

The continuums of force scale for most of today’s Leo’s:

1. Officer presence
2. verbal commands
3. hands-on control
4. pain compliance (joint locks, OC, Taser ) Maybe Taser depending on Dept. regs
5. Kicks, elbows, palm strikes, other strikes, Baton, etc.
6. Deadly force (at this point it is no longer DT’s its self-defense of your life or others)

Aikido has kept me at 1, 2 & 3 most of the time. It teaches you how to project yourself and enter the situation without all your testosterone blazing. Aikido is the best “COURT PROOF” art you can train in.

This is a new issue in today’s world. Some arts are great self-defense arts at levels 5 & 6 but this can get you sued in civil court or behind bars for excessive force. Joe citizen can get arrested for assault (battery in some states) for defending themselves using too much force. A lot of “experts” In self-defense seem to forget this. The only people that seem to have a practical grasp of the law are cops, criminals (and attorneys, same difference…  just kidding). I guess I’m pro Aikido. Can you tell?

Michael Varin
12-08-2006, 03:14 AM
I once saw a TV report about a brawl between hockey players; my mind fixed on the image of two guys grabbing each other's shirts with one hand and hitting each other with the other hands. Thsi grab-and-hit pops up under kata dori-<strike> combinations, although kata dori is also meant to forestall that -- you deal with the attempt to grab you can nullify the stike.

Same with wrist grabs; according to my Kali instructor, ever self defense system in the world works off wrist grabs. The same is true today; if you attend or help with a women's self defense seminar, some of the scenarios start with wrist grabs. So it does seem to play off the reference points self defense systems play off of.
There is obviously some truth to the hold and hit fighting strategy, and women (and small people in general) are more likely to receive grabbing attacks from larger attackers.

Consider this, if someone grabs your wrist and you begin to manipulate it, what is their motivation to continue the wrist grab? Why not disengage and jerk their hand away, then launch a new attack? If letting go means that you will be able to draw a weapon that will put severe punishment on your opponent, or you're already holding that weapon, they will have to hold on. To maintain their grip they'll have to make adjustments, and if you move into proper positions all the techniques of aikido will begin to flow naturally, and so will the counters.

Michael

Dazzler
12-08-2006, 04:25 AM
I agree with both of these statements, but the discussion doesn't end here. Because they both miss the point that I am getting at. I am not talking about the art of aikido, only its techniques. I am also not talking about practical self-defense.

almost everyone that I see discussing the usefulness of aikido techniques seems to be trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. All they see is one-on-one empty-hand combat, an arena where many more sensible and no less efficient techniques already have been proven.

What do you think?


Michael - You think youre point is missed? your choice if you believe that but I assure you its not so.

You comment that people seem to be trying to apply Aikido techniques where they don't apply.

You've been given an opinion - you did ask what we think- If you don't accept it fine but don't assume that because you don't like the answer your point has been missed.



I think it is foolish to assume that these movements don't have a place where they are truly useful, more so than other things. After all, why else would they exist?


First I'm missing the point, now I'm foolish...I am having a bad day.

Who's assuming they dont have a place? where has that been said? You've been given some opinions on their context from an Aikido perspective, and explanations why those square pegs need a bit of shaving to match round holes outside of aikido. In fact you've agreed with a lot of what others have said so why the accusations of foolish assumptions?


What sets those distances? Relationship? Timing? Why would you blend that way?


Study, practice, many ukes. Every situation is different - the more we train the more we learn.

Nothing is set. Thats the whole point of Aikido - to maintain harmony you redress the balance so what works against a. needs adjusting to work against b. Only thing set are the principles.

We train the way we do to learn Aikido. If this engenders a set of moves that can be deployed in a martial context then thats great too.

But only experience will give one the ability to cover all situations. And there is always more to learn.

Its just too simplistic to say heres a defence against a punch to the face and expect that to be set in stone.



I'd like to point out that a bottle and a needle are weapons


uh huh....err.... thanks - I'm sure we are all better equipped with that gem under our belts.


First off, there is no need to apologize for your ranting or negativity. I'm not offended by things people say online.


Me neither.


Regards

D

Peter Seth
12-08-2006, 07:10 AM
Hi all.
What is an 'aikido' technique - it appears to me that ai - harmony. Ki - energy. do - way. means to harmonise with another energy, to blend, extend and dissipate. Move in the correct time, rhythm direction with a complementary energy. Techniques have been described as being the full stop/period, at the end of a movement - basically the finalisation of tai sabaki. Its the first part which is aikido, the 'technique' can be any appropriate finishing movement. Which effectively means any technique from any art could be appropriate. It is the sen no sen, the avoidance of conflict, the blending, extension and appropriate control which defines physical aikido, not any specific 'technique'. I once had a chen style kung fu master comment that my kung fu was too big - he seemed pleased with it but decided if I made the movements smaller they would work better - I was doing an Aikido demo at the time - I took it as a complement and it made me consider my aikido in a different light. It turned out nearly all his movements/'techniques' and principles were near enough the same as what I was using in my aikido.

DonMagee
12-08-2006, 07:23 AM
I still study/cross-train in other arts. I've studied Hapkido, ground fighting, and Kickboxing. A hard kick to a subject's common peroneal nerve or shin bone is the best atemi I know and a small officer can do it (countless other nerves work great too). The only problem with Aikido is how advanced/sophisticated it is. It's quicker to learn kickboxing or BBJ. Many Police Academies are switching to this. The Army uses BBJ and kickboxing because its quick to teach/learn and it works.

I still feel a true Aikido "master" can defend against most anything. Although it takes years and years to get to that level (meaning to defend all types of attacks) and most people are looking for instant gratification. I choose Aikido to defend against life's many attacks. This goes way beyond street defense and defensive tactics.

I would not call bjj/boxing/kickboxing any less advanced then aikido in terms of techniques just because the basics are easy to learn. I recently was at a seminar of a high ranking Carlson Gracie black belt, he moved in ways I could only dream of being able to. I think BJJ/Judo/etc are just as complicated and advanced as aikido. The difference is the training methods applied to learning them. You build fundamentals quickly though sport training. This is why I advocate sparing as soon as possible. It helps reinforce basics and weed out poor technique. In fact I have gotten better at aikido though judo and bjj practice. I was able to develop body movements and flesh out techniques that just felt unnatural when I was only doing kata.

So I would say that sport arts are easier to learn good fundamentals because of their training methods. But they are at least as advanced and complicated as aikido in the technique realm. Watching a black belt judo guy work, or a purple+ bjj guy, or a boxer slip punches is a thing of beauty, and not something you can develop in a few months. A solid base, an idea of positioning, and a few strong attacks however can be built in a 3 months in sport arts.

billybob
12-08-2006, 02:18 PM
Michael Varin: Quote:
If you discover the place where the techniques of aikido truly fit, it can only deepen your training regardless of your aim.

"David Knowlton wrote:
????????????????

That comment was not intended to be the slightest bit mysterious.

Michael"

--------------------------------
Michael, I was not being snotty, I really don't understand what you meant. I asked that you name a technique as a reference point for discussion. You've been well answered by some posters above - aikido is not jujitsu because...........................well, that's a tough one, but people have spoken to it.

Interstingly I'm getting the feeling reading around the various threads that my aikido training is like a university lecture: I need to listen to the phd, then do most of my 'real training' outside of class.

Many instructors encourage homework. I still miss judo randori. If you don't know - you agree not to kill each other, take a grip on each other's jackets, and do your best to keep your balance and take the other fellow's.

Aikido is tough because you are supposed to know how to do deal with a strong partner in a relaxed way - then Somehow make that same strong/soft connection in mid air with a fast flying atemi from uke - while getting behind them and pushing - no pulling allowed.

See Michael, I'm frequently confused. :)

Sorry this got so long

dave

Kevin Wilbanks
12-08-2006, 03:06 PM
This is a new issue in today's world. Some arts are great self-defense arts at levels 5 & 6 but this can get you sued in civil court or behind bars for excessive force. Joe citizen can get arrested for assault (battery in some states) for defending themselves using too much force. A lot of "experts" In self-defense seem to forget this.

It is interesting to see this laid out numerically. I agree that many arts seem not to have much between zero and nuclear. I found it especially worrisome during a Krav Maga craze not long ago. I saw all kinds of shows and ads demonstrating students practicing head punches hard enough to break someone's neck, gun takeaways and the like. Why should a civilian be trained like a spy/commando-killer?

This would actually be my answer to the original question: the best practical situation(s) for Aikido techniques are ones where you are responsible for security and/or law enforcement. One big difference between being in law enforcement or security and being Joe Citizen is that Joe is a lot less likely to need levels 1 through 4 on your list. You have a duty to go towards dangerous situations and control them, whereas legally, Joe's duty is more often along the lines of getting away from that situation and making a phone call to summon you to the scene. If it is a situation where Joe is legally justified in going toward the danger and trying to take control, I think 5 and 6 would more likely be appropriate... er, except in Florida, I guess.

CNYMike
12-08-2006, 03:40 PM
..... if someone grabs your wrist and you begin to manipulate it, what is their motivation to continue the wrist grab? .....

That is certainly possible, but it seems to me somethin to address after you learn how the techniques should go. If you train on the assumption that your opponent will get away from your first technique, you won't know what to do if he doesn't. Although I can't remember anything we did way back when at that women's self defense seminar where anything like that happened.

Also, in addition to the reasons gven, a wrist grab is pretty simple and straightforward. I believe that is why Aikido looks at that first, as opposed to kata dori shomeuchi. While the latter may be more "realisitc," the entry is more confusing. I have seen this. Yet it used "atoms" introduced with kata dori.

As I see it, systematised martial arts (including Aikido) have to answer the following three questions:

1. Can you teach your techniques to somone with absolutely no ability or talent? The answer is yes, and you do this by making things relatively simple for beginners. In Aikido's case, this is why you start with wrist grabs.

2. Can you teach that person to teach someone else without any help from you? Again, "yes," which is why it is systematised.

And now for the killer:

3. Can you do 1 and 2 at the same time without your student knowing what's going on? That's the kicker. But it can be done. When you learn techniques, you're also learning the system and how to teach it to someone else.

Every martial art in the world has to address these questions. How they answer, in accordance with their founders' priorities, is why they are the way they are. And it goes without saying that is also true for Aikido.

Michael Varin
12-08-2006, 03:55 PM
Daren,

I did ask for opinions and I appreciate them all. There isn't a specific answer that I want to hear. I just thought people were approaching this discussion from totally different angles than I was, but maybe I missed your point. Communication, especially online, is imperfect.

I believe that it is possible to practice aiki with any set of techniques. Despite this there are movements that are recognized as the technical syllabus of aikido. I also believe that necessity is the mother of invention, so techniques are developed to achieve a specific goal in a specific situation (of course you need a calm and fluid mind to make this work in a spontaneous environment, but that has never been up for discussion). Naturally, there are other situations where the technique would work, but is less appropriate, and still others where it would be so difficult to achieve that another technique should be used.

Example: A classic double leg takedown from wrestling is a superb way to bring someone to the ground. Even when strikes are allowed, you can feign a blow to the face then double leg. But if your opponent was armed with a sword, surprise would be your only chance of success with a double leg. If you attempt it straight on you will be butchered. It is not appropriate for the situation. Your technique/strategy must be totally different.
I'd like to point out that a bottle and a needle are weapons
uh huh....err.... thanks - I'm sure we are all better equipped with that gem under our belts.
Quoting people out of context is a nasty little habit.

Kurt had mentioned aikido's usefulness in general H2H, which I took to mean one-on-one empty-hand. I was pointing out that: 1) he's a police officer who is always armed, so it's never empty-hand, and 2) in both examples the aggressor used a weapon.
I'd like to point out that a bottle and a needle are weapons, and you as an officer are carrying at least a handgun, and probably pepper spray, an ASP(or other baton), a knife, and maybe a Taser.

This is much more like the context that I am saying these techniques are born from than one-on-one empty-hand situations are.
I believe that these types of situations are very close to those that gave birth to the techniques used in aikido.

Michael

Michael Varin
12-08-2006, 04:02 PM
David,

I'm sorry. Now I'm confused. What sort of an example were you asking me for?

By the way, I have also studied judo.

Michael

five04zog
12-08-2006, 10:00 PM
First, let me say sorry. I did not mean to say that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is less sophisticated. I stand corrected. I have all the respect in the would for the art and think it is a powerhouse. I love cross training in it (any jujutsu, Hapkido or judo). The same goes for all arts.

I have trained in Southern Style Kung fu, Kickboxing and am belted in Hapkido (I believe a sister art to Aikido). I think the more tools you have the better you are in a real would situation. You will fall back on your training.

I know that this type of discussion on aikido in inevitable. We just need to remember that Aikido is different for everyone. I love how aikido makes me feel and think and it helps me socialize outside of my comfort zone. It can be hard to have friends outside of police work. When I am at the dojo, I am just an other student and I am comfortable. Great for of exercise to.

On the other side of the coin, aikido can be destructive. A fine art for self-defense. Some Aikido schools have even incorporated regular cross training in BJJ. I am not talking "combat Aikido" hard-core quaci-aikido/jujustu guys. I mean mainstream highly respected Sensei. Off the top of my head, Bookman Sensei in Seattle has cross-trained and many of his students do as well. I feel that this is great.

If Aikido is more of meditation in motion or a way for you to just better your self, this is great to. I like it for both.

Sorry if I got off track of the thread….

Stay safe

billybob
12-09-2006, 03:11 PM
Michael,

I think your discussion is going along nicely. I think my confusion stems from 'level of inquiry' problem. I was stargazing, and I think you were at conventional level. I tease Erick Mead for looking at each atom! (to finish my silly analogy).

I don't think the syllabus of aikido is worth much by itself. Would you choose ikyo, nikyo, sankyo to teach a beginner's course on jujitsu? I wouldn't.

dave

Dazzler
12-11-2006, 05:42 AM
I believe that it is possible to practice aiki with any set of techniques. Despite this there are movements that are recognized as the technical syllabus of aikido. I also believe that necessity is the mother of invention, so techniques are developed to achieve a specific goal in a specific situation (of course you need a calm and fluid mind to make this work in a spontaneous environment, but that has never been up for discussion). Naturally, there are other situations where the technique would work, but is less appropriate, and still others where it would be so difficult to achieve that another technique should be used.

Well thats a whole can of worms perhaps? syllabus for instance and measurement. This varies hugely from group to group - all i can comment on are those that I have experience of.

To this end the techniques that are practices within my own organisation which are passed on from Tamura Sensei are those that are best for developing skills of Aikido.

as you say yourself - there are other situations where a technique would be less appropriate. Our view is that focussing on a technique specifically for dealing with for example a downward blow from a right handed man weighing 250 pounds and wearing trainers is a. extreme (so forgive my humour) but more importantly of limited value. Our angle has been much more focussed on what can be learned from techniques rather than what the original design of technique was for.

Incidentally...when I did my jujitsu gradings we were never asked for specific techniques, we were given attacks and had to produce defences that were appropriate to ourselves in terms of physiques speed temperment etc. (obviously we had previously practiced a wide range to allow us to develop ideas) At the time I found this odd as it didn't match what I'd been doing in Aikido but now I see that if one has trained the martial essentials then the individual will deploy them instinctively as they feel fit rather than in a predefined match to a prescribed attack.

My feeling is the way to the spontaneous Aikido you mention. Others may not agree of course.

Perhaps really the title of the thread is misleading since it is not so much Aikido itself that you are interested in but more the history and deployment of its selected techniques?




Quoting people out of context is a nasty little habit.

Kurt had mentioned aikido's usefulness in general H2H, which I took to mean one-on-one empty-hand. I was pointing out that: 1) he's a police officer who is always armed, so it's never empty-hand, and 2) in both examples the aggressor used a weapon.

I believe that these types of situations are very close to those that gave birth to the techniques used in aikido.

Michael

Fair enough, If I have breached nettiquette I shall try a bit harder (to disguise it....), no - to restrain myself from such cheekyness, as you say, Communication on-line is not perfect and now you have isolated your reply to Kurt it is far clearer and does not appear as inane as previously.

Respectfully

D

gdandscompserv
02-26-2007, 08:36 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_QQ96maQzk

xuzen
02-26-2007, 10:22 PM
Remember class:

Aiki(DO) without the niceties is just JUJUTSU.

Boon.

JAMJTX
02-26-2007, 11:18 PM
As far as what Aikido is good for, the simple answer is "lots of things".

It is highly effective self defense, for one on one or against multiple attackers.

As for the attacks not being realistic I don't buy that argument. I think they are. In general, we practice technqiues from wrist, clothing/lapel grabs and strikes (tsuki, shomenuchi, yokomenuchi).

You can probably say that the shomenuchi and yokomenuchi are not common street attacks. But we are not training to respond to specific attacks with specific defenses. 1) We are learning to deal with generalized attacks coming from a specific direction. If you can deal with one, you can deal with them all. 2) At it's root, Aikido is an empty hand vs weapons art (the open hand generally represents a blade). Technqiues that work against a weapon will work against an empty handed attack. As where techqniues designed with an empty hand in mind may not necessarily work against a weapon.

I have always viewed Aikido primarily as a Police Martial Art. I started "aikido" by training in Kuniba Ryu Goshin Budo which incorporates some teachings of Gozo Shioda and Junsa Goshin Budo (essentially Yoshinkan and Judo) before training in Yoshinkan. I always trained with Police Officers and several Training Officers who swear by Aikido for controlling and handcuffing.

I am now working with Prison Guards teaching them Yoshinkan. They love it and can't get enough of it. They have all had some martial arts training of some sort and the consensus is that this is the ultimate martial art for them, and they tussle with some pretty rough guys.

Guilty Spark
02-26-2007, 11:31 PM
What a horrible video. Is there anything they WON'T put on youtube? I asked myself that question. I did a search for 'guy taking a crap' and got 2 pages of hits. I better quit while I'm ahead.

Kevin Leavitt
02-27-2007, 12:40 AM
Video is okay for what it is, frankly I find it entertaining and creative with the whole old timey look to it. Different.

The problem is not the attacks or response....it is back to the whole aliveness issue of it all.

It is not realistic in the dynamic of the attacks and does not replicate the speed, strength, stealth, and force that is used in attacks.

As far as the statement it is good self defense against multiple opponents...sure, there are some very good things we learn in principle that can be applied to Multiple opponents.

That is a long jump however, I think, it most cases to the statement it is good self defense in a multiple opponent situation.

Just as the video, while entertaining, and does an excellent job of showing technique....which might serve to lure in the ignorant masses. It does not approximate reality and we should be careful in creating the illusion in people that they are truely empowered with something they are not with dojo methodology as demonstrated in that video.

Is it good for the things you mentioned? Yes, it is very applicable...but I would be careful with the paradigm that says it translates directly to the street.

Most of us simply do not practice with enough aliveness and non-compliance in our daily aikido training to translate this as such.

CNYMike
02-28-2007, 01:30 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_QQ96maQzk

Cute video; wonder when it was made? I'm thinking 1950s.

As an asaide, the first "trick" she used, which pops up in Aikido under kokyu nage, is, IIRC, is known in Chin Na as "Twins Bow to Buddha." When something pops up in more than one culture, it's worth noticing.

Guilty Spark
02-28-2007, 09:07 AM
Hey Kevin,

I wasn't commentingon the technical part of the vid. I don't know nearly enough to even begin critiquing techniques. I just found the video very sketchy.

I think what I dislike most about the video and techniques is that the doesn't finish the job. She throws a guy and walks away.

I think in Aikido new guys develop this idea that if a bully or badguys attack them and they use aikido to defend themselves then said bad guy will stop and say hey I just cant get through this fellows defenses! I should find another victim.

I think thats one of the most dangerous ideas that aikido seems to impart on many people. If you DO gain the upper hand (and control) in a fight then you keep control and make sure the person can't have a go at you again.

CNYMike
02-28-2007, 11:53 AM
....I think what I dislike most about the video and techniques is that the doesn't finish the job. She throws a guy and walks away.....If you DO gain the upper hand (and control) in a fight then you keep control and make sure the person can't have a go at you again.

However, on more than one occassion when I was in his Kali class, Guro Kevin Seaman said your goal in a self defense situation was "survival and escape." Staying in it long enough to "keep control and make sure the person can't have a go at you" kind of runs counter to that. But bouncing the guy's head off the black top and then running for it might. There are also the legal ramifications; evne if you start defending yourself, if you go to far, you become the agressor and you could pay, not the other guy. Just food for thought.

DonMagee
02-28-2007, 12:35 PM
However, on more than one occassion when I was in his Kali class, Guro Kevin Seaman said your goal in a self defense situation was "survival and escape." Staying in it long enough to "keep control and make sure the person can't have a go at you" kind of runs counter to that. But bouncing the guy's head off the black top and then running for it might. There are also the legal ramifications; evne if you start defending yourself, if you go to far, you become the agressor and you could pay, not the other guy. Just food for thought.

In a best case situation, I'd perfer to make sure the guy was unable to persue before I attempt escape. Chokes are wonderful for this, as are joint locks. I'd have to agree that you should defend, control, then escape.

Tony Wagstaffe
02-28-2007, 01:17 PM
Lots of things really...... Happy journey:cool:

Luc X Saroufim
02-28-2007, 01:21 PM
First, let me clarify the title. I'm referring to the techniques of aikido. What situations are they useful in? Where are they the most appropriate choice?

every time i start answering questions like these, all seems well, and when i start elaborating it turns to complete garbage. Aikido is still very confusing to me. the only thing i can claim to know about Aikido is what time my classes are.

my only advice is that whatever level you are at, the only thing that matters is showing up for those classes.

Kevin Leavitt
02-28-2007, 03:48 PM
Grant, Don and all...

I think what we are getting at centers around intent and situation.

I certainly teach and do things much differently training for the technics of grappling than I do for reality.

For example in a real fight I might clinch, drop my strong side back with my gun and knife, cross face with my opposite hand and reach for my knife stab, release, then draw my gun and shoot.

In grappling or BJJ, I would clinch, pummel, off balance, go for the takedown....or I might jump guard to take advantage of the points.

The thing is this:

In order to do the frame, stab, shoot properly and confidently, I need to be a good grappler.

If all I ever practiced was the fram, stab, shoot...then that is all I'd ever be good at!

In training for reality, we isolate things and train things differently. Hence, there is nothing necessarily wrong with the video, in fact the technique in and of itself is pretty darn good I think.

However, what it illudes to in practice...is completely wrong. That is..that it approximates what might happen to a female walking down the street holding her purse and how she would react.

As long as we keep the practice and methods within the framework of theory and principle we are okay and practice is sound and good.

It is when we start believing what we practice everyday in the dojo equates to reality...it becomes dangerous. (Dissonance).

What SHOULD happen in a self defense situation is this. Guy runs up snatches purse fast, and runs away and she is left standing there as he runs.

OR

He runs up, over powers her with size strength, she goes down to the ground, and then fights to regain control of the fight and dominance.

I'd be impressed if this happened, then she got the niikkyo vice having him "place" his extended arm out there for her, giving her time and balance to do the technique. It just doesn't happen like this most of the time.

CNYMike
03-01-2007, 01:26 AM
.... As long as we keep the practice and methods within the framework of theory and principle we are okay and practice is sound and good.

It is when we start believing what we practice everyday in the dojo equates to reality...it becomes dangerous. (Dissonance).


Except that the theories and princples should be the drivers behind techniques that can be used in reality. That is my understanding of learning principles: When you understand the principles, you can come up with your own techniques as needed.



What SHOULD happen in a self defense situation is this. Guy runs up snatches purse fast, and runs away and she is left standing there as he runs.

OR

He runs up, over powers her with size strength, she goes down to the ground, and then fights to regain control of the fight and dominance.

I'd be impressed if this happened, then she got the niikkyo vice having him "place" his extended arm out there for her, giving her time and balance to do the technique. It just doesn't happen like this most of the time.

If a BJJ school today did a demo video, I'm sure that's whatit would look like. This is Japanese jujitsu done atleast fifty years ago. If anything, it reminds me of the section at the back of Gozo Shioda's Dynamic Aikido giving some practical applications. And remember, that is Yoshinkan which the Japanese police use(d).

Kevin Leavitt
03-01-2007, 02:48 PM
Michael,

Yes true, you do need to understand the principles of the underlying technique.

I am reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance right now. This is a big part of the underlying theme in this book I believe.

We do need to understand the principles carburation, air/fuel mixture, and combustion in order to ride a motorcycle across the country (at least in those years!). However, there is a ART to it as well that only experience through trial and error and making mistakes can produce.

Understanding principles CAN allow you to come up with techniques. I think I got pretty good at coming up with them in my Aikido dojo after several years of practice. However, when I left the dojo for a new paradigm of working with guys that did not understand aikido or care about my practice or hurting me, then I could not come up with the same techniques.

No matter how much I understood the principles, I lacked the experience in those situations to apply those principles. I had to gain those experiences through many, many hard hours of trial and error.

Yes, police can and do use technique. My post does not invalidate aikido as NOT being realistic or valid in ALL situations.

It all has to do with the point of control and at what point and parameters are present in the situation.

There is a big difference between being a lady in a dress being ambushed by an assailant (heck make it a guy, it doesn't matter), and a police officer arresting someone.

Again it is point of control.

My only point was that there are many, many variables and things that you encounter in a violent encounter.

Videos such as this can be misinterpreted as empowering someone to actually be able to do this things, when in fact they represent an ideal that is being performed in a very controlled, and constrained way to demonstrate principle.

That is all that I am saying. As Leaders and Instructors, Sempai...we have an obligation to properly manage the expectations and training of those that we are training and NOT delude them into a false sense of security.

Kevin Leavitt
03-01-2007, 02:56 PM
Oh yea..comment on the BJJ.

It is not that BJJ as commonly taught is superior by any means in teaching principles to aikido that are commonly taught, infact I think in many ways it is NOT.

However, I think the edge commonly taught BJJ has over commonly taught aikido is that it deals with point of control...that is point of failure in a more realistic way and better approximates how to manage this.

This is NOT a lick on aikido at all, only a different approach/methodology.

If you actually get involved in BJJ, it all starts making much more sense...and least this is what I have experienced.

A Weakness of BJJ as it is commonly taught is that they don't train for separation of the fight and the injection of weapons too often.

Combining the two methodolgies creates a very wonderful control of the spectrum of conflict...at least that is my experiences.

Anyway, my intent is not to turn this into another BJJ/Aikido thread. So I will stop here.

CNYMike
03-01-2007, 11:25 PM
.... Videos such as this can be misinterpreted as empowering someone to actually be able to do this things, when in fact they represent an ideal that is being performed in a very controlled, and constrained way to demonstrate principle.

That is all that I am saying. As Leaders and Instructors, Sempai...we have an obligation to properly manage the expectations and training of those that we are training and NOT delude them into a false sense of security.

I don't think the film was meant to "delude" anybody. I see it as a demo meant to promote a given jujitsu system which, I guess, was taught in the UK back in the '50s and generate interest. But I don't see any malicious intent there, ie they were saying, "Let's mislead those poor slobs who don't know any better." More like, "Let's get the word out and see if anyone shows up at our door." MA schools today do the same things.

I see whayt you're saying; I just don't think that accurately represents the thinking of the instructors who did the demo. And echoing what you said in another thread, it's not unlikely that people who studied in their dojo swore by it based on real world experiences. The more things change, and so on and so forth.

CNYMike
03-01-2007, 11:32 PM
..... my intent is not to turn this into another BJJ/Aikido thread .....

Yeah, those do get old after about five seconds, so no argument there.

Parenthetically, the one reference to that that's stuck in my mind is the poster a couple of years ago who said he loved Aikido so much that he was going to keep doing it while he continued to training in the other art he loved, BJJ.

Now that's the kind of resolution I want to see! :D

Kevin Leavitt
03-02-2007, 12:37 AM
no, I don't think the film was intended to delude anyone. I don't think anything like this starts out as deliberate intent.

However, when you dress someone up in street clothes, have her holding a purse, with the implication of walking down the street and being mugged....

what message are you trying to send to your viewers?

is it only principle? or are you trying to show practical application/scenario based application?

You and I might know the difference.

remember also, the topic is "what is aikido good for?"

showing and doing principles? or reality on the streets as protrayed/implicated in this video?

All I am saying is...we have a responsibility.

CNYMike
03-02-2007, 11:58 AM
no, I don't think the film was intended to delude anyone. I don't think anything like this starts out as deliberate intent.

However, when you dress someone up in street clothes, have her holding a purse, with the implication of walking down the street and being mugged....

what message are you trying to send to your viewers? .... are you trying to show practical application/scenario based application?


Sure.


You and I might know the difference.

remember also, the topic is "what is aikido good for?"

showing and doing principles? or reality on the streets as protrayed/implicated in this video?


Well, there have been enough testimonials in this forum by people who claimed to have used Aikido in real life situaitons, including LEO and security officers, that it is not too farfetched. It may not look as neat and clean as the dojo, but not inapplicable either.

And we don't know anything about the people doing that video. For instance, we don't know if that woman HAD used her techiques to subdue assailants. If she had, how far out is her video then?

And now to see if it'll post this time .... :hypno:

Kevin Leavitt
03-02-2007, 01:43 PM
Michael,

I don't think I have said anything that invalidates aikido and it's use in real situations. Absolutely many techniques work, especially in LEO situations. I teach them and the principles all the time to my army guys when we introduce knife and blunt object weapons into the mix.

No they are not as neat as the look in the dojo. There is a lot of speed, overwhelming force, and other things that cause your kamae to collaspe and your center to stop moving.

We also don't see this in this video.

That is what is missing.