PDA

View Full Version : MMA vs. Traditional Arts


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


Scott_in_Kansas
09-17-2001, 03:44 PM
I recently started a thread on NHB Fighting and aikido because I was hoping to get a little support for my (somewhat naive) notions:

"A strong traditional martial artist would fare well in the UFC."

AND

"Traditional martial arts are as combat effective as Mixed Martial Arts."

It seems the overwhelming opinion is:

"Mixed Martial Arts are more effective than traditional martial arts."

Does everyone agree with the former statements or the latter?

Respectfully,

Scott in Kansas

Kami
09-17-2001, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas
Does everyone agree with the former statements or the latter?
Respectfully,
Scott in Kansas

KAMI : Dear Scott,

Since you ask, I'll have to disagree with all your three points :
- "A strong traditional martial artist would fare well in the UFC."
NO. Being a strong traditional martial artist offers no advantage in the specific context and specific rules of the UFC.

- "Traditional martial arts are as combat effective as Mixed Martial Arts."
NO. Neither are combat effetive, neither are developed for "the battle field". They're either sports oriented,art oriented or self-defense oriented.

"Mixed Martial Arts are more effective than traditional martial arts."
NO. Effetive in what sense? Effetive for what? In my opinion, they're both effetive for their own purposes (sports or arts).
My 2 cents...
Best :)

Bill D
09-17-2001, 05:39 PM
I think I'm agreeing with Kami in thinking that MMA are more effective in MMA competitions but probably not more effective toward the goals of Aikido.

My understanding is that a true Aikidoka could not even join one of those competitions because it is against our teaching to challenge others or seek out violent encounters. Tohei Sensei tells of one such experience in his book "Ki in Daily Life." (although he ends up taking the people on)

I also find it telling that the Gracie family invented the UFC and they always seem to win it. Home field advantage?

:ki:

Irony
09-17-2001, 07:52 PM
I don't think we'll know until someone tries it. Okay, holding open tryouts for the NHB for Aikidoka! Everybody who wants to, line up! All three of you! :)

Kami
09-18-2001, 04:08 AM
Originally posted by Irony
I don't think we'll know until someone tries it. Okay, holding open tryouts for the NHB for Aikidoka! Everybody who wants to, line up! All three of you! :)

KAMI : THREE?!?!?! Which three???:confused:
Best :D

ian
09-18-2001, 06:48 AM
Unfortunately the apparently sharp definition between types of martial art makes is think that some techniques are better than others etc. One of the beauties of fighting is that it is so dynamic. Sometimes just grabbing someones balls really hard can incapacitate them. Although martial arts can help you to identify weak spots and also techniques which allow you to take advantage of the situation the best technique is the one that 'works' at the time. Although you can say some techniques are invariabily more likely to be effective, it depends who you are fighting, on what they expect etc. However, at higher levels martial artists generally see a bit of other martial arts either in their own martial art or through training to defend against them anyway.

For this reason, when fighting someone with a broader experience of fighting or martial arts it is harder to do something they don't expect, unless they train with restrictions (e.g. a kick to the knee/balls or an attack from behind is a good way to deal someone with no experience outside boxing).

Although we stand behind the 'aikido' front, each of our abilities in self defence is very different. Aikido provides a useful way to analyse combat and work through realistic self-defence situations. Whether it works or not very much depends on your physical ability (not particularly strength, but the ability of your body to react in an effective way).

Ian

Irony
09-18-2001, 10:09 AM
Kami, I was trying to imply that very few aikidoka want to participate in NHB.

Bill D
09-18-2001, 01:56 PM
One of the beauties of fighting is that it is so dynamic. Sometimes just grabbing someones balls really hard can incapacitate them.

Ian,

"Beauties of fighting" ??!!

And this is one of them??!!d

:ki:

Scott_in_Kansas
09-18-2001, 02:18 PM
Is aikido a martial art or is it a form of dancing?

So far it appears to be a dance with no combat application. I have heard no one defend the art as a MARTIAL ART.

If I want to be able to defend myself should I study Karate and Ju Jitsu and forget about aikido?

Respectfully,

Scott in Kansas

Irony
09-18-2001, 02:30 PM
Neither. Aikido is a Martial Way. :)

michaelkvance
09-18-2001, 02:35 PM
Aikido certainly can be called a martial art, but not, I think, a dance routine. It is graceful and beautiful to watch for some people, though.

Saying you want to learn self-defense is a bit vague, but if you want some quick "take-downs", aikido will not be for you. It generally takes a long time to be effective, and the technique can be subtle.

With the right teacher, aikido is much more than self defense. It is a budo whose aim is the purification of the self. I recommend you attend dojos which teach things that interest you, and get a feel for which will work best for your particular interests.

m.

Kami
09-18-2001, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by Irony
Kami, I was trying to imply that very few aikidoka want to participate in NHB.

KAMI : I know. That's why I put the "smiley" beside my text.
Best ;)

Irony
09-18-2001, 04:01 PM
Oh. The angry face threw me.

shihonage
09-18-2001, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas
Is aikido a martial art or is it a form of dancing?

So far it appears to be a dance with no combat application. I have heard no one defend the art as a MARTIAL ART.



You can go to www.aikidofaq.com and look at the "Stories and anecdotes" section.
It has a subsection titled "Real-life stories involving Aikido".
Have fun.

Bill D
09-18-2001, 10:44 PM
Aikido is a martial way, which is useful in self-defense and can help you vastly improve yourself in many ways. If you want to defend yourself, you should study Aikido. If you want to fight, you should consider Karate.

:ki:

darin
09-19-2001, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas
Is aikido a martial art or is it a form of dancing?

So far it appears to be a dance with no combat application. I have heard no one defend the art as a MARTIAL ART.

If I want to be able to defend myself should I study Karate and Ju Jitsu and forget about aikido?

Respectfully,

Scott in Kansas

Aikido does have some good self defence techniques. I know many relative beginners who have used techniques successfully to defend themselves or others. Self defence is about applying the right technique at the right time. If you are serious about learning self defence then don't limit yourself to one style or method of fighting.

I found that karate and jujitsu has many techniques that can be incorporated into aikido. Maybe you should look for a teacher that teaches more a more practical form of aikido.

Tony Peters
09-20-2001, 12:01 AM
In one of the early UFC'c there was an Aikidoka who fought. Suposedly he was a Shodan. He got his A$$ kicked along with the rest of his sorry carcass. As a watcher and Fan of MMA events I would say that Some knowage of the tactical concepts of Aikido might be usful but that's about it. Judo (which is all BJJ is in the end), wrestling, boxing and Thaiboxing are infinatly more appropriate dicipline for MMA competitors to study.
That said Mixxed Martial Artist are artist in the same sense that an Aikidoka or a Judoka is they just have a differant Focus. Traditional/Koryu pracianers on the other hand are a bit differant. There art require everybit as much dedication as MMA but the flexible nature that is in MMA doesn't come into being until much later. This is in my opinion due to the transmission nature of Koryu arts. Which is not to say that the techniques aren't useful either just that the Focus isn't the same. I have trained with MMA people and they take their art serious. Class starts with a warmup that would have many so called martial artist puking 500 squats countless crunches and pushups and other conditioning exercises (I say countless because I did lose count after 100 and I did puke). After all that they work technique just like anyother school slow first and then speeding up. It was rather like judo in shorts and a rashguard instead of a gi.
True modern man to man combat would be better reflected in the art of "Shotgundo"(TM) than in any weaponless art

L. Camejo
09-20-2001, 05:10 AM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas
"Mixed Martial Arts are more effective than traditional martial arts."

I guess it depends on the individual, and in the case of Aikido (as a traditional martial art:confused:) it may depend on the style of Aikido.

Many many moons ago :D when I had just begun training in Aikido, a friend of mine who taught a self defence form of Karate mixed with Jujitsu (Go Shin Do I think it was called)wanted me to come to his class instead, saying that an "art will never be as practical as something more tailored to self defence."

I decided to take my chances with Aikido. Now we're many years later, and guess who's requesting private Aikido classes to enhance the "practical self defence aspect" of his own mixed Karate-based style?

How the tables turn sometimes. :)

Not ALL Aikido however, may be "effective" in practicality.

My 2 cents.

L.C.:ai::ki:

Aikilove
09-20-2001, 07:50 AM
Well... I believe O-sensei himself said, looking at his pupils doing too much dance and too little Aiki technique, - "Aikido wa budo de aru!!" in the sense that Aikido is budo and has to work othewise you might as well take up dancing! Well this is my opinion of what it meant of curse, but at least two shihans (I know of) has said it too, so I take their word for it.

Another thing is something Tomita Sensei said once - "Other teachers (Aikido) give their students pieces of a cake (and they only eat the good part of it!), I teach people how to bake the cake.
What he meant is that he believe, that in order to be able to handle any situation (the aiki way!), the techniques that we learn shouldn't be trained as marely techniques against that scenario, instead learn all what the technique has to give. And the most inportent part of all in that sense - Open your mind.
It's all there! In all the techniques is everything you (and your body) need to know to be able to bake the cake, but in the event of attack you have to open your mind and expect nothing and everything.

phew! There I go again... Talking way too much!

Tony Peters
09-21-2001, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by L. Camejo


I guess it depends on the individual, and in the case of Aikido (as a traditional martial art:confused:) it may depend on the style of Aikido.


L.C.:ai::ki:

Sorry gotta raise a flag here. Aikido is not now nor has it ever been a "Traditional Martial Art". That isn't to say that I don't like it or that it isn't a martial art which some folks might say but I would reserve the title traditional to the same sort of MA that can be described as Koryu or in the case of Karate Pre WW2.

Kory
09-22-2001, 07:06 AM
After reading the discourse here, the following points came to mind.
1. On the subject of Aikido vs. MMA, actually Aikido is a mixed martial in which the founder incorporated elements from jujitsu, sword-fighting, spear-fighting and others. So there really is no debate. The only real question is, gIs it mixed to your liking?h If so, believe in it fully and do with all your worth. If not, throw in your own stuff, start your own school and call it something different.
2. Boxing rings are a lot more forgiving than real ground. Did you ever see Superfly-Snooka do a backflip off the top rope and land on his knees or stomach and win with a three count? It never looked like it hurt that much. My point? This is good if you are BJJ and donft want to hurt your knees taking someone down, but not so favorable if you want to use an Aikido throw to make someone gone with the concrete.h
3. I was watching a Japanese UFC called Pride the other day where a Japanese professional wrestler beat one of the Gracie boys. Broke his rib with a well-placed knee.
Does that mean we should all become Hulkamanaics?
It would mean very little if an Aikidoka won one of these events sunless he could keep winning everyday for the rest of his life. Otherwise people would not speak of the Aikidoka, but would talk about the one who beat him. But suppose he did go undefeated until the end, and then ended up with some side-effects like Parkinsonfs disease. Could that really be considered winning?

Cheers to all of you who didnft mind my gratuitous references to professional wrestlers

Tony Peters
09-22-2001, 12:03 PM
Here is a term that has mixed meaning depending on where you utter it. At the acting/entertainment end of things you have the Man-soaps of the WWF. In Japan where athleticism is respected more that big muscles the Pro's know a lot more about real wrestling and as it shows a lot less about acting but hey that's what pays. Then you have the socalled "amatures who wrestle for the varios Olympic teams. Some are true to the term most are professional athletes whose dicipline is wrestling. All are students of the Human Body and much more so that most "Martial Artist" That a professional wrestler beat a Gracie is like saying a Bicycle messenger has beaten a Tour de France cyclist (this has happened a lot in small races here in the US).
As for a boxing ring being forgiving have you ever set foot in one??? I have it ain't nothing but a thin layer of foam over plywood covered by canvas. The bounce comes from the amount of undersupport the ring platform has. less for wrestlers more for boxers. Still its a hard surface. What you see when the wrestlers land is great ukemi. I didn't really understand it until I started training as a small Judo club that uses a simple wrestling mat over concrete. Good Ukemi is all that keeps us from pain but we see very little in the way of injuries.
And lastly what the hell does Parkinson's disease which is a genetic disorder have to do with professional fighting. Even counting Ali which if it isn't genetic then it is Parkinsonia and not related in any way. MMA fighting has none of Boxing's punch drunk symptoms/problems. The, relatively unprotected, hand strikes don't happen near as often in MMA as the punches do in boxing. Why cause it hurt's like hell that's why and because fights are called faster in MMA than in Boxing. Repeated micro damage is common in boxing, most MMA losers tend to lose fast they progress from at a slight disadvantage to helpless much faster due to the added tools (other than just punching) that a MMA person has.

RobTrim
09-24-2001, 07:17 AM
This old chestnut again......:)

No, seriously there is nothing wrong with this question - "is Aikido street effective....how would it fare against xxxxx-do etc...."

I personally started Aikido for self defence reasons, so the question of it's effectiveness has of course entered my mind. However, as the years have gone on, I now view Aikido as much more than just a potentially lethal form of defence.

Firstly, a good Aikidoka has an equal chance as any other good martial artist has, in a UFC type bout - if one was ever to enter. As someone very correctly pointed out; Aikido is a mixed martial art - albeit one that has had the time to evolve and blend nicely, but still mixed never-the-less. Therefore a 'good' Aikidoka, will be proficient at striking, throwing, ground control etc....

Secondly, in regards to combat effectiveness, yes Aikido can be devastating on the street. I have seen it and unfortunately - and I do mean that - had to use it. Aikido, technically is a very 'complete' martial art/way and the priciples of centering, focus and multiple attack awareness, are concepts echoed in many MMA's and 'Reality' based self defence systems. But make no bones about it - these MMA systems take just as long to be 'good' at as Aikido does. Combat is a very difficult skill to learn, do not think that MMA of any type will give you a 'quick fix' to a given situation - and that is what the teachers of these arts will say too.

Rob T

Chuck.Gordon
09-24-2001, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas:
>Is aikido a martial art or is it a
>form of dancing?

Scott,

Speaking as a longtime student of budo in general and occasionally of aikido, I have to say that aikido is definitely a budo.

However, what that means may not be what you're asking. Remember, too, that there are lots of different kinds of aikido and lots of different teachers. To some, it's all about the philosophy of peace-love-harmony, to some it's about rock-and-roll with tori being the rock and uke doing the rolling. There's a huge spectrum of variation. For more, it's about a little of both.

>So far it appears to be a dance with no >combat application. I have heard no one >defend the art as a MARTIAL ART.

It's both, at different times. For a more martial application of aikido and it's principles, look at the aikido of some of the Yoshinkan folks, look at the Aikikai aikido of Chiba or Nishio.

But it's an art also capable of great beauty and grace.

>If I want to be able to defend myself should >I study Karate and Ju Jitsu and forget about >aikido?

Bottom line. You want self defense? Learn to box, learn to wrestle, buy an axe handle. You'll be well-set to handle 99% of anything you encounter.

You want to learn a martial art, then aikido might be for you. Self defense is a part, but not the whole -- by a long shot.

Aikido and the UFC -- IIRC, there WAS an aikidoka in the UFC some years back, a Tomiki stylist, I think. Don't remember how he did, but don't think it was a very stellar performance. What does that mean? Not a damn' thing. UFC, like any such competition is governed by rules and restrictions. It is tailored to folks who train to those rules and conventions. And don't forget, first and foremost, almost ALL of those NHB things are entertainment.

Aikido and jujutsu -- Foist of all, aikido IS a type of jujutsu. Jujutsu is a rather generic Japanese word used to describe any number of unarmed or lightly armed fighting systems. Aikido has roots in Daito Ryu jujutsu and Ueshiba also studied other old JJ systems in his youth. It is a unique and innovative system of jujutsu, but is still JJ.

Trad. vs Mixed MA -- Sigh. There are so very few pure budo out there. Judo is an amalgam of older jujutsu systems. Kendo is an amalgam of sword styles, iaido is same. Even the old guard (koryu like Shinto Muso Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, TSKSR, etc) tend to have some drift and inclusion in their histories.

I think the real question you're asking (correct me if I'm wrong) is 'What good is aikido?'

It's an art rich in philosophy and theory. It's an art capable of great power and potential. It's an art of subtle depths and broad reach.

You want fighting? Join a boxing club. You want budo? Get thee to a dojo.

The bottom line is that it ain't about effectiveness. Study budo for a long time and you'll learn a lot about personal combat, but you'll also learn a lot of other stuff that may not interest the individual looking solely for that ever-elusive and legendary 'street-effective' martial art.

Chuck

Lowell Richey
09-24-2001, 02:01 PM
Scott,
Let me try this one on you. If you think that Aikido is a dance then maybe you need to look at "your" ukemi and your uke. Here is what I mean: Boxing would be a dance if neither partiner tried to hit the other. Same in Aikido. If you do not give a good clean comitted attack you are not helping Nagi. Likewise if your Uke does not attack you to the point that if you don't move you will get hit. Then he/she is not doing you any favors either. This is how you can answer your question about the effectiveness of Aikido. It answered mine.
I have two people who I trust undoutedly and on a regular basis we will "test" our ability in regard to Aikido. I say our ability because we have seen that Aikido works when done correctly. The question we try to answer is "am I doing it correctly"?
Aikido is a cooperative effort between two partners. However, if one partener don't do his/her job you will not have anything to blend with or to follow.

Kami
09-24-2001, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by LOEP
It's an art rich in philosophy and theory. It's an art capable of great power and potential. It's an art of subtle depths and broad reach.
The bottom line is that it ain't about effectiveness. Study budo for a long time and you'll learn a lot about personal combat, but you'll also learn a lot of other stuff that may not interest the individual looking solely for that ever-elusive and legendary 'street-effective' martial art.
Chuck

KAMI : Ai Sensei!
It's always a pleasure to read your posts. I couldn't agree more with you.
Best

Tony Peters
09-25-2001, 01:34 AM
are better than mine. But I do agree Budo can include self defence but selfdefence rarely includes Budo. That said I think the reality guys learn at a more rapid rate than than folks in Karate or Aikido. Primarily because the sport oriented styles provide a more freeform enviroment (albeit with some rules) to practice. I intentionally left judo out because though it is a semi tradional art it's practice style in most sport dojos (the ones that I've rolled in) is the same. Going all out even with some limitations is vastly differant than practicing with a partner...no matter how good he/she is. The intensity is differant when the other person it really fighting you and Aikido though lethal if taken to the extream cannot be practiced at that level. A disctiption of Kukishin Ryu stickfighting I once read said that you can only practice a few techniques and only for a short time before the human body begins to perform worse and worse. This also applies to Aikido. By the time you progress to a level wherein you can compete with the boys of the Octogon you aren't a Boy and have likely outgrown such things.
One last thing and then I'll end this. The Aikidoist who competed in the UFC did so in the days before any major rules... just No eyes pokes and no fishhooking. And having seen the match it was bad...real bad he didn't do us proud. Yes UFC is entertainment and there will be one on TV this Friday Sept 28. Watch it (on pay per view) if you want to seen what it has become...it is more of a game now than it used to be...then again the guys who play that game are a lot more skilled now than they used to be.

Scott_in_Kansas
09-26-2001, 09:56 AM
Rob Trim ...Thank you. Finally someone spoke of the combat effectiveness of aikido. I would also like to thank you for validating my hidden question:

"Is it okay to question the combat effectiveness of an art?"

It seems that aikidoka sometimes get caught up in the peace-love-harmony aspect of the art and ignore the self preservation aspect of the martial arts. I DON'T think aikido is unique in this aspect. Most of the martial arts styles I study have a very strong code of conduct and adherance to non-violence.

Most in this forum have stopped well short of saying aikido is a complete system of self-defense, ready for anything any time anywhere. I am glad to see you believe in the combat effectiveness of the art as I do.

Respectfully,

Scott In Kansas

L. Camejo
09-26-2001, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by Scott_in_Kansas
Rob Trim ...Thank you. Finally someone spoke of the combat effectiveness of aikido.

I am glad to see you believe in the combat effectiveness of the art as I do.



I'm with you guys there Scott.
For a while I was worried as to whether the Aikido experienced by most on Aikiweb had become something other than a way of defending oneself and more of perpetual forms practice without any type of real resistance. :) Thanks guys, I don't feel so alone anymore. :D

If we lose the Martial that exists as part of the Art. Then all we're doing is Art. Which is not what I think Aikido was intended to be (in my very very humble opinion of course).

Oh and Tony you're right about the "Traditional" thing I said earlier in this thread. I was not sure about that (hence the question marks).:)

Domo Arigato.
L.C.:ai::ki:

Scott_in_Kansas
10-02-2001, 09:11 AM
Thanks L.C.! I applaud your opinion. As far as the discussion on what is a traditional art, here is my opinion:

I consider the traditional arts to be karate, jujitsu, kung fu, aikido, jujitsu (stand up variety), judo, etc. I even consider Ed Parker's Kenpo a traditional art. They are arts which are taught in a dojo, have a code of conduct, uniforms. Proficiency is attained through years of training, perfection of technique and some physical conditioning.

I consider MMA to be things like combining boxing and wrestling and a few submissions. Heavy emphasis is placed on physical conditioning. Very little emphasis seems to be placed on perfection of technique (especially striking technique).

I consider Frank Shamrock to be the poster child for MMA. While I think he is a phenomenal athlete and competitor, I was amazed to find the at the time he won in the UFC, he had only been doing MMA for 4-5 years!!!! I surely thought a seasoned traditional artist could do better.

Respectfully,

Scott in Kansas

Tony Peters
10-02-2001, 11:46 AM
While Frank Shamrock was only practicing MMA for 5 years when he won the UFC that's five years of training every day. This is the same amount of time that a 3 day a week person would put in in 12 years. Which I'm sure you would admit is a reasonable amount of time. It is conditioning that allows for this accelerated learning pace for otherwise you wouldn't be able to last through the technical training. Many of these fighters/athletes come into the sport with a background in another sport. Maurice Smith is/was a Pro Kickboxer, Randy Coture was an Olympic wrestler, Chuck Liddle was a Kempo guy (N.A. Champ) Tito Ortiz was a State wrestling champ in California. Under your way of thinking the the wrestling would easilly be considered traditional martial artist. And the guys who train in Japan like Ricco Rodriguez train in tradional Dojos with all the trappings that go with it. Do you really consider kickboxers to have poor striking technique? It alway surprises me when I hear people from a non combative art when the comment on a combative one. there is a big differance between 3 days a week and 7. And I can tell you from experience that that the technique that these guys have far and away exceeds a Blackbelt level. What everyone fails to take into account is the fact that the other guy isn't a willing partner. And that one fact if the two are evenly matched in skill will make for a sloppy/boring fight.

Irony
10-02-2001, 11:25 PM
Scott_in_Kansas:
Most in this forum have stopped well short of saying aikido is a complete system of self-defense, ready for anything any time anywhere.

Chris:
I'm not sure people here are afraid to say that aikido is a system of defense. It's just that most people here are very passionate in making sure that it's clear that's not all it is.

Plus, no good ever came of being too cocky! :)

Gotta learn to do the quote thing.

JJF
10-03-2001, 02:49 AM
Scott_in_Kansas:
Gotta learn to do the quote thing.
Easy.... insert the quote between two 'tags' placed in square brackets. Tags are interpreted on run-time and are not shown directly in the text, however they influence the text written between the start-tag and the end-tag. Below an example shown with round brackets instead of the square brackets used in tags:

(QUOTE) (B)Scott_in_Kansas:
Gotta learn to do the quote thing. (/B) (/QUOTE)

The (QUOTE) tag starts a quote - and it is ended by the (/QUOTE) tag. The (B) and (/B) tags respectively turns on and off bold-mode. Similar you can use (I) and (/I) around text that should be written in italic mode.

Just remember to use square brackets instead of the round brackets in the example. (I couldn't show it the right way here, cause then it would be interpreted by the system as another quote - you see ??? ;)

Have fun!

andrew
10-03-2001, 04:54 AM
Originally posted by Tony Peters
While Frank Shamrock was only practicing MMA for 5 years when he won the UFC that's five years of training every day. This is the same amount of time that a 3 day a week person would put in in 12 years.

That's one of the facts that diminishes the absoloute relevance of these kind of debates. I don't imagine there's many people on the forum who can train for long hours every day. There are aikidoka who have done and continue to do so.
I think people are on this forum are realistic about what they can achieve with the amount of time they can afford to train each day. It'd be a bit childish sounding to start talking about the achievements of whatever masters/teachers of the art one has encountered or even just read about to validate the martial potential of aikido, and then be forced to concede that you're not at that standard yourself, "but they can really kick ass..."
Aikido is powerful as a martial art, but that's not emphasised in training in many places. Like many I have faith in Aikido as a martial art, but I have to be realistic about Andrew as a martial artist.

Let me just add that I am sick to the bone of people throwing themselves instead of taking ukemi. Bit of a tangent I know, but it's a pet peeve that's at me right now.

andrew

Tony Peters
10-03-2001, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by andrew

Let me just add that I am sick to the bone of people throwing themselves instead of taking ukemi. Bit of a tangent I know, but it's a pet peeve that's at me right now.

andrew

This is part of the reason the Aikido isn't effective as a MA. It's not the techniques, its the manner in which they are practiced. Still some techniques cause instand compliance on me whereas other folks can resist so the Ukemi/falling arguement is relative to the person you are working with. That is differant than fighting though because as I said a partner no matter good in his/her resistance isn't trying to hurt/throw you.

Erik
10-03-2001, 07:38 PM
Originally posted by Tony Peters Snipped!

Tony, you just went and said something I'd been thinking about saying.

I think people who have never been exposed to elite athletes don't realize just how much better they really are. I bike semi-regularly. I go anywhere from 1-1/2 to 2 hours on my mountain bike. When I'm on pavement I average around 12 to 13 mph, faster if I push it. There are people who could run that route at those speeds. I'd bet that most people here couldn't run an 8:00 minute mile. People do it in less than 4:00 minutes which is likely a faster pace than most people could sprint 100 yards.

I've played a lot of basketball. I'm respectable but the couple of times I've played against major college or NBA level folks (scrubs), they were faster, taller, jumped higher, shot better and passed better. It's almost impossible to even describe how much better they were.

I have no doubt that it works exactly the same way in the NHB realm.

Tony Peters
10-03-2001, 10:29 PM
a few years back I was living in Guam and training Aikido full time and parttime in Judo. There was a guy there named John Calvo who at present is a student and training partner of Enson Inoue. At that time he was a hot Amature MMA fighter who used Judo as his ground practice. He would go on his back and working at roughly 50% take on all of us going at 100% granted he had 30 lbs (at that time I was about 210 right now I'm closer to 175) on me but he never left his back. I was "Handled" by him and a very nice manner but handled none the less. A while after that experience I watched him fight Dan "the Beast" Severn (this was at a time when Dan was still consideed to be at or near the top of his game). I noticed how very much like me poor John looked like enroute to his first loss. Dan was fighting at somewhere near 70% and John was going flat out at about 125% At that very moment I realized exactly where in the grand scheme of things my abilities were rated. Now John has gone on to find a true MMA teacher and has vastly improved his abilities but I will always think back on that night and know that no matter how much I train or how good I think I am I'm not a professional and I don't take my training with that purpose in mind. MMA praticianers are very, very good at what they do. Though it is out of the scheme of Aikido attending a seminar with one is by no means a waste of time money. Beware though you will be more tired than you could possibly imagine. Then again My first few Judo classes last August (after 2 years off) I felt as if I'd been beaten (mostly by a 16 year old girl). And I know I'm in good shape I surf 4-5 times a week.

RobTrim
10-10-2001, 08:38 AM
Scott_in_Kansas:
Most in this forum have stopped well short of saying aikido is a complete system of self-defense, ready for anything any time anywhere.

I don't think any MA/MMA/Budo...whatever! could claim that Scott :) I've been MA training for 7 years, had to defend myself twice on the street and can definitely see the holes in my technique. My point is that style - and even technique - is not really relevant in an effort to train yourself for self defence. More important is mindset, effort, intensity and most importantly TIME!

Tony Peters:
The intensity is differant when the other person it really fighting you and Aikido though lethal if taken to the extreme cannot be practiced at that level.

I disagree. Travel to ten different Aikido dojos - you will find everything from 'really soft' to 'OUCH! I think my spine just broke...' in terms of levels of intensity.

That said I think the reality guys learn at a more rapid rate than than folks in Karate or Aikido

No I don't thinks so, at least not according to 'Reality' guys I've met and trained with. To have a decent workable grasp of the knowledge and how to apply it takes just as long. It's more difficult to 'land a punch' or perform a good 'takedown' than most people appreciate. Reality guys train just as long and just as hard as 'we' do to get good :)

Rob.

Tony Peters
10-11-2001, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by RobTrim

Tony Peters:
The intensity is differant when the other person it really fighting you and Aikido though lethal if taken to the extreme cannot be practiced at that level.

I disagree. Travel to ten different Aikido dojos - you will find everything from 'really soft' to 'OUCH! I think my spine just broke...' in terms of levels of intensity.

That said I think the reality guys learn at a more rapid rate than than folks in Karate or Aikido

No I don't thinks so, at least not according to 'Reality' guys I've met and trained with. To have a decent workable grasp of the knowledge and how to apply it takes just as long. It's more difficult to 'land a punch' or perform a good 'takedown' than most people appreciate. Reality guys train just as long and just as hard as 'we' do to get good :)

Rob.

I have been to a lot more than ten Aikido Dojos in more than 5 countries (including Japan) It's not the same.
Yes it is more difficult to apply good technique than most people realize. especially against a partner who is fighting back. Aikido dosn't teach Henka waza at a lower level even Judo does. This is a big difference. As you said Reality guys do put in the same hours as we traditional folks do it's just that they do their hours in fewer calander days.