PDA

View Full Version : Aiki-Boxing


Pages : 1 [2]

Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


nagoyajoe
10-04-2007, 07:10 AM
Aikido must develop for modern times...and some ryu have. It IS as simple as that. Period. Why not jump on board and push our art forward? Enough with the BS discussions of Aikido vs whomever/whichever art. Meaningless dribble. We must have the courage to press forward and develop our art to the modern art. THIS is true aikido.

nagoyajoe
10-04-2007, 07:11 AM
We must have the courage to press forward and develop our art to the modern WORLD. Sorry.

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 09:53 AM
[QUOTE= always stated, "Necessity is the mother of invention"!

If you want the techniques to work, then it's necessary to modify or invent.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you in the opinion, there is in Arab nation, many of the trouble in the streets and public places, so the Persons who want to learn Aikido, Need to defend themselves Defense and their families, no body trained martial arts for health only.
I am not Teach attack the people, I Teach Response attack, and if you want to Response attack you mast have skills to do that, you must have experience and the experience gives self-confidence and Self-confidence give the Courage. And the experience can not be taken from traditional exercises, because you need to take the Techniques in your methods, So that you have enough experience.

Note: I am so sorry for my bad language.:)

Thanks

salim
10-04-2007, 09:54 AM
Something I've always found odd. Especially after training in combat sports. Why not just train the way it works, rather then a way that doesn't?

My sentiments exactly!

I think the overwhelming mentality behind unrealistic training for a lot of Aikidoist has more to do with the need, or the feeling of respect for the culture that the art developed from. It's unfortunate that there is not enough Aikidoist who see the need for more realistic application of technique, whether it be in the ring, MMA competition or in the street for self defense. Real application of technique is curcial to the development of self defense.

This is one of the many reasons for the different understandings of Aikido. Jason DeLucia clearly understands the importance of modification of a technique to the environment you are dealing with. Roy Dean is another Aikidoist who understands the importance of adaptation of a technique to the situation confronted with.

Check out the below clips. Of course some are just demonstrations. The first clip is real application of Aiki techniques.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=n5KLiDMzuTU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4vib4tjKnQY

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nujq9iiR78Q

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 10:00 AM
Aikido must develop for modern times...and some ryu have. It IS as simple as that. Period. Why not jump on board and push our art forward? Enough with the BS discussions of Aikido vs whomever/whichever art. Meaningless dribble. We must have the courage to press forward and develop our art to the modern art. THIS is true aikido.

great This is really aikido.

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 10:04 AM
My sentiments exactly!

I think the overwhelming mentality behind unrealistic training for a lot of Aikidoist has more to do with the need, or the feeling of respect for the culture that the art developed from. It's unfortunate that there is not enough Aikidoist who see the need for more realistic application of technique, whether it be in the ring, MMA competition or in the street for self defense. Real application of technique is curcial to the development of self defense.

This is one of the many reasons for the different understandings of Aikido. Jason DeLucia clearly understands the importance of modification of a technique to the environment you are dealing with. Roy Dean is another Aikidoist who understands the importance of adaptation of a technique to the situation confronted with.

Check out the below clips. Of course some are just demonstrations. The first clip is real application of Aiki techniques.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=n5KLiDMzuTU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4vib4tjKnQY

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nujq9iiR78Q

this site Locked :sorry:

salim
10-04-2007, 10:09 AM
this site Locked :sorry:

The site locked?

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 10:25 AM
The site locked?

Yes salim is locked, in arab countries

salim
10-04-2007, 10:27 AM
Yes salim is locked, in arab countries

Strange!!!

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 10:37 AM
Strange!!!

hahaha, this normal many site blocked.
if you can upload to yahoo video I grateful to you.

thanks

CNYMike
10-04-2007, 11:05 AM
.....I think the overwhelming mentality behind unrealistic training for a lot of Aikidoist has more to do with the need, or the feeling of respect for the culture that the art developed from .....

The culture and history are big part of what make a martial art, any art, what it is. It's not just a collection of techniques but a snapshot of what the founder was thinking at the time. You can't understand what's going on without understanding that or it's presuppositions and assumptions.

All you need to study joint locks and throws are a training partner and a crash mat; all you need to wear are sweats and any t-shirt. You can summarize the principles behind all the locks and throws in under five minutes. You don't need everything else for that .... but the everything else makes it a martial art and not just a mass of throws and locks.

And you have to think of the future -- what will your students be teaching their students after you're gone. Would they get any kind of sense of the art you fell in love with in the first place? Or will all that be long gone?

Maybe the traditional way isn't the best way to train those techniques, but then again, maybe it is. I don't know; I'd rather find out what it gets me than throw it out for the sake of doing the "in" thing.

Everything has something to offer. You just have to be willing to take the time to find out what it is.

Will Prusner
10-04-2007, 11:20 AM
Of course we have to modify, adapt and invent!!! Do we think that "Aikido" was "complete" the moment O-Sensei dropped dead? If he had lived another 10 years, would what we call "Aikido" be what it is today? The techniques we learn in the Dojo, as far as I can understand, are simply possible examples or common expressions of a concept. The concept being: blending energy in harmony. These examples are learned so that we can begin to understand through experiencing what it feels like when we are manifesting a physical reality of this concept properly. The true Aikido should be spontaneous and intuitive, it should "work" just as well as againt a boxer as it should against a flying monkey from Oz. The only limitation to my aikido, once i understand the concept, is the one I put up in my own mind. Kamiwaza - divine techniques. To be divine is to be creative and intelligent. Maybe this is a key to how we should express ourselves through Aikido.

salim
10-04-2007, 11:35 AM
hahaha, this normal many site blocked.
if you can upload to yahoo video I grateful to you.

thanks

I will try after I figure out, how it is done.

Basia Halliop
10-04-2007, 11:41 AM
All you need to study joint locks and throws are a training partner and a crash mat; all you need to wear are sweats and any t-shirt. You can summarize the principles behind all the locks and throws in under five minutes. You don't need everything else for that .... but the everything else makes it a martial art and not just a mass of throws and locks.

And you have to think of the future -- what will your students be teaching their students after you're gone. Would they get any kind of sense of the art you fell in love with in the first place? Or will all that be long gone?

Interesting thoughts, but you make it sound like the culture and clothes and stuff are what people fall in love with. But the physical principles themselves ARE for many people, the core that excites them, and ARE 'the art that you fell in love with in the first place.'

The clothes and japanese words and all that do add a nice note of continuity or history to the classes, which is nice, but for me, if all I had was the people and a crash mat and sweats and a T-shirt, I'm not sure I'd actually care much, nor would many people. Those things are pretty superficial in the end.

salim
10-04-2007, 12:04 PM
The culture and history are big part of what make a martial art, any art, what it is. It's not just a collection of techniques but a snapshot of what the founder was thinking at the time. You can't understand what's going on without understanding that or it's presuppositions and assumptions.

All you need to study joint locks and throws are a training partner and a crash mat; all you need to wear are sweats and any t-shirt. You can summarize the principles behind all the locks and throws in under five minutes. You don't need everything else for that .... but the everything else makes it a martial art and not just a mass of throws and locks.

And you have to think of the future -- what will your students be teaching their students after you're gone. Would they get any kind of sense of the art you fell in love with in the first place? Or will all that be long gone?

Maybe the traditional way isn't the best way to train those techniques, but then again, maybe it is. I don't know; I'd rather find out what it gets me than throw it out for the sake of doing the "in" thing.

Everything has something to offer. You just have to be willing to take the time to find out what it is.

Some will not gravitate towards the traditions and culture so much. Respect for the founder and culture will always be granted from a different perspective of acknowledgement of it's roots.

I like the approach of Roy Dean. His web site is very informative about real application of Aikido techniques. On his web site his has a fantastic free copy, article on Aikido with some references to Stanley Pranin. The inspiration from Stanley Pranin brought Roy Dean to the understanding and the need to modify and invent techniques for effectiveness.

Stanley Pranin has had several interviews with Aikido masters, Minoru Mochizuki and Kenji Tomiki. They both affirmed the importance of cross training.

Aikido was never meant to be tied down to one set of principles, frozen in time. The earlier students confirm the methodology of continuous evolution of effectiveness, modifying and inventing.

Hiroshi Isoyama stated, "Necessity is the mother of invention"! Several times he has invented or modified his Aikido techniques to make them effective.

Aikido for some will be nothing more than technique, leaving the tradition for the history books, and that's OK for some.

http://www.jujutsujournal.com/

http://www.roydeanacademy.com/

DonMagee
10-04-2007, 12:28 PM
Or at least adapt them to the environment. Dojo is not the ring nor the street.

Like a judo throw: The same technique a doesn't look exactly the same as in judo kata, randori, a mma match or self defense. There are common points but there are modifications due the context where the technique is performed.

But, when you see a judo throw, it still looks like a judo throw. Its kind of like watching kung fu spar. When they drill you get cool traps and neat movements and all this complex stuff. When they spar, it looks exactly like normal kickboxing.

I guess what I mean to say is, when I watch a bjj guy spar, it looks like bjj. When I watch a judo guy spar, it looks like judo. But that video looks like judo with some incidental aikido moves.

mazhar dardari
10-04-2007, 12:48 PM
The culture and history are big part of what make a martial art, any art, what it is. It's not just a collection of techniques but a snapshot of what the founder was thinking at the time. You can't understand what's going on without understanding that or it's presuppositions and assumptions.

All you need to study joint locks and throws are a training partner and a crash mat; all you need to wear are sweats and any t-shirt. You can summarize the principles behind all the locks and throws in under five minutes. You don't need everything else for that .... but the everything else makes it a martial art and not just a mass of throws and locks.

And you have to think of the future -- what will your students be teaching their students after you're gone. Would they get any kind of sense of the art you fell in love with in the first place? Or will all that be long gone?

Maybe the traditional way isn't the best way to train those techniques, but then again, maybe it is. I don't know; I'd rather find out what it gets me than throw it out for the sake of doing the "in" thing.

Everything has something to offer. You just have to be willing to take the time to find out what it is.

Great Michael, but remember the thinking in 1922 different now,
we not Talk abut history or wrong thinking, we talk abut Effective Exercises and How can we defend ourselves in a practical way, We along The Platform for Osensei, like that aikido Continue and in 2030 We will be history.

Domo

Demetrio Cereijo
10-04-2007, 03:35 PM
I guess what I mean to say is, when I watch a bjj guy spar, it looks like bjj. When I watch a judo guy spar, it looks like judo. But that video looks like judo with some incidental aikido moves.

Maybe what you see is aikido in an one vs. one, no weapons, no striking, friendly sparring wearing gi..., of course it looks like judo. In that clip you're seeing the most useful aikido techniques for that environment.

Maybe you expected to see aikido techniques designed for a different environment.

mathewjgano
10-04-2007, 05:18 PM
Maybe the traditional way isn't the best way to train those techniques, but then again, maybe it is. I don't know; I'd rather find out what it gets me than throw it out for the sake of doing the "in" thing.

Everything has something to offer. You just have to be willing to take the time to find out what it is.

I strongly agree with the latter part of this statement. To me this implies the impetus lies with the student; ultimately, it is up to the individual to make their art come alive for them and that means taking whatever it is they're learning and then applying it actively (finding how it can be effective/useful).
Learning the cultural/traditional/"whatever" approach includes more than simply waza. Look at uchideshi, which I've always thought epitomize the "student of the way." They often spend more time doing non-martial training than martial training. There's an intangible, social quality, much of which has to do with being sesitive to your surroundings so you can respond to them with precision and potency. In terms of self-defense, I almost think this kind of sensitivity makes physical technique moot. Being mentally aware will protect a person far more often than being physically aware will...as I see it anyway.

Roman Kremianski
10-04-2007, 05:41 PM
But, when you see a judo throw, it still looks like a judo throw.

There are wrestling throws that look like Judo throws. The Judo guys didn't invent hips.

Heck, I've seen a 12 year old with zero Judo knowledge grab another kid by the collar and sweep him. That looked like a Judo throw.

Aikibu
10-04-2007, 07:48 PM
Great Michael, but remember the thinking in 1922 different now,
we not Talk abut history or wrong thinking, we talk abut Effective Exercises and How can we defend ourselves in a practical way, We along The Platform for Osensei, like that aikido Continue and in 2030 We will be history.

Domo

Sensei,

Aikido has many styles. After reviewing your videos your style is not that different from the many flavors of Aikido I have experianced or the style I currently practice. The folks who complain about Aikido's effectiveness or Martial intent need only look at thier own training for the answers. It's a straw man argument in the very least. As a good mentor has always said "Remember when point a finger at someone or something three of your own fingers are pointing back at you."

I wish you all the best in your efforts to improve on your technique.

Aikido's future is secure. :)

Respectfully,

William Hazen

CNYMike
10-05-2007, 12:47 AM
Interesting thoughts, but you make it sound like the culture and clothes and stuff are what people fall in love with .....

No, but they are all part of the package. If you tear too much of that out, it's not what it was anymore. And notice I put this generically;you can apply this to any martial art.

CNYMike
10-05-2007, 12:52 AM
.... Aikido was never meant to be tied down to one set of principles, frozen in time .....

Yes, O Sensei said change and growth are part of Aikido. His early students were all different from them and different from each other. That's true today; two senseis in the same organization can be different from each other and their teacher(s).

But I still think there are read lines you don't cross. At some point, if you tear out too much, you've lost more than you game. Nor than do I think that O Sensei's desire that Aikido not be frozen in time be a license to do whatever.


.... Aikido for some will be nothing more than technique, leaving the tradition for the history books, and that's OK for some ....

Yeah, but that doesn't mean their view of Aikido is the only one that's right.

CNYMike
10-05-2007, 01:06 AM
Great Michael, but remember the thinking in 1922 different now,
we not Talk abut history or wrong thinking, we talk abut Effective Exercises and How can we defend ourselves in a practical way, We along The Platform for Osensei, like that aikido Continue and in 2030 We will be history.

Domo

Not sure what you're trying to say. If it's that Aikido will be gone by 2030 if it doesn't "adapt," I don't agree with that, because if it was true it would have happened already. Judo, Karate, Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do, Ninjitsu, all rode their waves of popular interest over the past 50 years; I believe TKD is, in fact, the most popular martial art in the world! So now MMA rules the roost, but if Aikido survived the other "competition" as is, why not this? It doesn't look as if each craze results with people abandning whatever arts that they've been doing and going to the latest "in" thing, leaving thei old schools to rot, because the old schools don'tgo out of business when something new pops up. True, people move between systems for various reasons, but some might start in Aikido and go somewhere else, and some might come to Aikido from elsewhere.

If it was something else, mea culpa.

mazhar dardari
10-05-2007, 03:06 AM
Sensei,

Aikido has many styles. After reviewing your videos your style is not that different from the many flavors of Aikido I have experianced or the style I currently practice. The folks who complain about Aikido's effectiveness or Martial intent need only look at thier own training for the answers. It's a straw man argument in the very least. As a good mentor has always said "Remember when point a finger at someone or something three of your own fingers are pointing back at you."

I wish you all the best in your efforts to improve on your technique.

Aikido's future is secure. :)

Respectfully,

William Hazen

You know William, I am working for develop techniques not for inventing techniques to be more realistic and effective , for this you see my style like the many flavors of Aikido, and simply if I make big difference Will not to be aikido.

Thank you William and I wish you success :)

salim
10-05-2007, 07:59 AM
Yes, O Sensei said change and growth are part of Aikido. His early students were all different from them and different from each other. That's true today; two senseis in the same organization can be different from each other and their teacher(s).

But I still think there are read lines you don't cross. At some point, if you tear out too much, you've lost more than you game. Nor than do I think that O Sensei's desire that Aikido not be frozen in time be a license to do whatever.

Those read lines you speak of are being crossed everyday by many Aikidoist and will continue to cross that line. You are several decades late on crossing the line. This was done by Minoru Mochizuki years ago mixing many elements of Karate, Judo, Aikido and Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu. He's not the only one and surely not the last.

Sensei Hiroshi Isoyama stated, "As you know, O-Sensei never wrote much about aikido in books, although some of this techniques are recorded in Budo. Sometimes I've wondered why he didn't write more about aikido, but on the other hand, I think I might understand: his thinking gradually evolved, and he may have felt that anything he wrote in his younger years would potentially end up being contradictory to his thinking later on."

Another quote from Hiroshi Isoyama is, "Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings."

"When O-Sensei taught he never gave any particularly detailed explanations."

Many young Aikidoist, such as Roy Dean and Jason DeLucia are just a small proven example of the exploriation of Aikido and mixing with different martial arts. This process is well established from the previous generation of Aikidoist. The founder never intended for Aikido to have one understanding. This was something developed from political organizations with there own motives.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean their view of Aikido is the only one that's right.

Hiroshi Isoyama stated, "Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings."

I can't agree with this, because there is no one view of Aikido. There are many views of Aikido. Aikido is not your way or my way, it's both.

salim
10-05-2007, 08:01 AM
Yes, O Sensei said change and growth are part of Aikido. His early students were all different from them and different from each other. That's true today; two senseis in the same organization can be different from each other and their teacher(s).

But I still think there are read lines you don't cross. At some point, if you tear out too much, you've lost more than you game. Nor than do I think that O Sensei's desire that Aikido not be frozen in time be a license to do whatever.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean their view of Aikido is the only one that's right.

Those read lines you speak of are being crossed everyday by many Aikidoist and will continue to cross that line. You are several decades late on crossing the line. This was done by Minoru Mochizuki years ago mixing many elements of Karate, Judo, Aikido and Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu. He's not the only one and surely not the last.

Sensei Hiroshi Isoyama stated, "As you know, O-Sensei never wrote much about aikido in books, although some of this techniques are recorded in Budo. Sometimes I've wondered why he didn't write more about aikido, but on the other hand, I think I might understand: his thinking gradually evolved, and he may have felt that anything he wrote in his younger years would potentially end up being contradictory to his thinking later on."

Another quote from Hiroshi Isoyama is, "Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings."

"When O-Sensei taught he never gave any particularly detailed explanations."

Many young Aikidoist, such as Roy Dean and Jason DeLucia are just a small proven example of the exploration of Aikido and mixing with different martial arts. This process is well established from the previous generation of Aikidoist. The founder never intended for Aikido to have one understanding. This was something developed from political organizations with there own motives.

I can't agree with this, because there is no one view of Aikido. There are many views of Aikido. Aikido is not your way or my way, it's both.

stan baker
10-05-2007, 08:08 AM
The future of aikido does not depend on improving technique but gaining and developimg the aiki power that some of the old guys had.
Internal power should be the main focus. Read Dan Harden's quote of Sagawa sensei at the bottom of his posts.

stan

Aikibu
10-05-2007, 11:36 AM
You know William, I am working for develop techniques not for inventing techniques to be more realistic and effective , for this you see my style like the many flavors of Aikido, and simply if I make big difference Will not to be aikido.

Thank you William and I wish you success :)

Cool Sensei I understand. :)

Look into Shoji Nishio Shihan...Nishio Sensei's had over 60 years of Martial practice before he passed away in 2005. In the late 1950's With O'Sensei's blessing... He threw out the Hombu Style techniques and incorporated His Judo, Karate, Iaido, and Jodo experiance to create an innovative style of Aikido based on the sword. His only criteria of his Aikido and other styles "For Aikido to be Budo (A real Martial Art) It must be effective against other Martial Arts Otherwise you're just dancing"...

Some folks here think innovation with Aikido started when the birth of the internet. For over 60 years now there are a number of dedicated Yudansha and Shihan in many different flavors of Aikido that continue to innovate and follow O'Sensei's path. Aikido's Innovative Shihan's didn't start changing and making Aikido more effective in the 1990's with the birth of MMA. They have been doing it for decades.

Nishio Shihan left behind a huge following in Europe and if you get the chance to travel I hope you can get to one of our seminars in Russia, Denmark, Czech Republic, Sweden, Germany, or Finland.

Hopefully on the near future The spirit of Aikido will allow you to travel here (Or folks to travel there) to share your love of our Art.

Peace and Blessings.

William Hazen

mazhar dardari
10-05-2007, 11:36 AM
Not sure what you're trying to say. If it's that Aikido will be gone by 2030 if it doesn't "adapt," I don't agree with that, because if it was true it would have happened already. Judo, Karate, Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do, Ninjitsu, all rode their waves of popular interest over the past 50 years; I believe TKD is, in fact, the most popular martial art in the world! So now MMA rules the roost, but if Aikido survived the other "competition" as is, why not this? It doesn't look as if each craze results with people abandning whatever arts that they've been doing and going to the latest "in" thing, leaving thei old schools to rot, because the old schools don'tgo out of business when something new pops up. True, people move between systems for various reasons, but some might start in Aikido and go somewhere else, and some might come to Aikido from elsewhere.

If it was something else, mea culpa.

(( I'm sorry again for my language ))

This is the secret of Aikido, your view and my view both true, but my view of the environment in which I live, and your view from your environment in which you live. and Like what he said (salim), there is no one view of Aikido. There are many views of Aikido. Aikido is not your way or my way, it's both.

You need aikido to public health
I need aikido to Self-defense.

You need aikido with Articles and books
I need aikido with the knife and gun

You need aikido Peaceful
I need aikido Defensive

You need traditional aikido Far from change
I need traditional aikido Close to reality

You are don't have the daily problems
I have daily problems

In your country all people respect each other
In my country no body respect if you haven't power

If you have enough strength, you don't need to defense you self,
Only the weak need to defend him self. And Believe me when the first the fighting in the street It was unable to defend himself and his children and his family Looking for him, he go to the different art.

But in the end aikido found for people thinkers and Combatants
You need to think, but I need fighting, the fighting aikido different from fighting in other arts, as well as thought.

mazhar dardari
10-05-2007, 11:50 AM
Cool Sensei I understand. :)

Look into Shoji Nishio Shihan...Nishio Sensei's had over 60 years of Martial practice before he passed away in 2005. In the late 1950's With O'Sensei's blessing... He threw out the Hombu Style techniques and incorporated His Judo, Karate, Iaido, and Jodo experiance to create an innovative style of Aikido based on the sword. His only criteria of his Aikido and other styles "For Aikido to be Budo (A real Martial Art) It must be effective against other Martial Arts Otherwise you're just dancing"...

Some folks here think innovation with Aikido started when the birth of the internet. For over 60 years now there are a number of dedicated Yudansha and Shihan in many different flavors of Aikido that continue to innovate and follow O'Sensei's path. Aikido's Innovative Shihan's didn't start changing and making Aikido more effective in the 1990's with the birth of MMA. They have been doing it for decades.

Nishio Shihan left behind a huge following in Europe and if you get the chance to travel I hope you can get to one of our seminars in Russia, Denmark, Czech Republic, Sweden, Germany, or Finland.

Hopefully on the near future The spirit of Aikido will allow you to travel here (Or folks to travel there) to share your love of our Art.

Peace and Blessings.

William Hazen

Perhaps I have time to go to Belgium and I will try to attend some seminars, with all respect william.

Peace and Blessings.
Mazhar Al-Dardari

DonMagee
10-05-2007, 01:42 PM
There are wrestling throws that look like Judo throws. The Judo guys didn't invent hips.

Heck, I've seen a 12 year old with zero Judo knowledge grab another kid by the collar and sweep him. That looked like a Judo throw.

Your not getting my point.

BJJ and judo both have armbars. I can easily tell when watching someone setup an armbar if they are a judo or bjj guy. Their training will develop methods of setting up and performing the technique. I can tell if a guy is a wrestler or a judo player by how he setups his throw. That video did not have a unique feel to it. He could of trained just judo or wrestling and preformed just as well. There was not anything I could discern as unique or adventagous about his method. So the question is, why bother with all that when wrestling or judo would of given him the same skills if not better training for those same skills. (As the sole purpose of those sports is to apply those skills against a resisting opponent with hundreds of years of perfection for that goal behind it.)

If I want to be a good striker. I could keep going to aikido and get some buddys together to do some sparing. After a bit of time I'm sure I would improve, find out what works and doesn't and slowly gain skill in striking. I would be better served by seeking out a Mauy Thai instructor, getting instruction from an art that has spent hundreds of years perfecting how to hit someone hard and effectively while not getting hit. And I can help starve off some of those bad habits I'm going to pick up trying to reinvent the wheel.

Demetrio Cereijo
10-05-2007, 03:54 PM
That video did not have a unique feel to it. He could of trained just judo or wrestling and preformed just as well. There was not anything I could discern as unique or adventagous about his method. So the question is, why bother with all that when wrestling or judo would of given him the same skills if not better training for those same skills.

Then, really it doesn't matter if one trains in aikido, judo or wrestling if the performance is more or less the same. The diference is in the amount of time needed to achieve the skill level to perform because the different training methodologies.

Am i getting your point?

Keith R Lee
10-05-2007, 06:16 PM
How about just stop trying to re-invent the wheel?

If you want to learn to strike, clinch, or grapple, why half-@$$ your way through it in Aikido? Instead of trying to figure it out on your own or making it up as you go along, why not just go to a Thai/wrestling/BJJ gym instead? They've already figured all this stuff out, there's no need to come up with it on your own.

Demetrio Cereijo
10-06-2007, 01:13 PM
How about just stop trying to re-invent the wheel?
Because wheels also have their limits, and there are places where they don't work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgBNjdwYdvE
:)
If you want to learn to strike, clinch, or grapple, why half-@$$ your way through it in Aikido? Instead of trying to figure it out on your own or making it up as you go along, why not just go to a Thai/wrestling/BJJ gym instead? They've already figured all this stuff out, there's no need to come up with it on your own.
There's no need, but it's fun to try new things (this how we are not still living on trees).
:)

salim
10-06-2007, 02:23 PM
How about just stop trying to re-invent the wheel?

If you want to learn to strike, clinch, or grapple, why half-@$$ your way through it in Aikido? Instead of trying to figure it out on your own or making it up as you go along, why not just go to a Thai/wrestling/BJJ gym instead? They've already figured all this stuff out, there's no need to come up with it on your own.
One of the points being made, but not the only point, is that Aikido when used in a MMA situation or for self defense will not necessarily look like a Aikido demonstration.

This is often times the confusion about how techniques are applied and the modifications that are needed for it to work in a real life altercations or an MMA situation. It depends on the situation as to when you can apply a technique, how you can apply a technique and to what extent the application of the technique will need to be adjusted to achieve the goal of self defense.

People need to stop thinking that demonstrations are real life. Demonstration don't have the full impact of realization. Aikido is not based on demonstrations. Demonstrations are rehearsed movements, punched then let me apply wrist lock. Kick then let me tasibaki and counter attack. Demonstrations are not real and youtube is filled with Aikido demonstrations.

CNYMike
10-06-2007, 05:16 PM
Those read lines you speak of are being crossed everyday by many Aikidoist and will continue to cross that line .....

I may be relatively new in mentioning it on Aikiweb, but these ideas aren't new. My thinking was influenced by Guro Kevin Seaman and Guro Andrew Astle, under whom I have been doing LaCoste Inosanto Kali for ten years. As you may have guessed, their thinking was influened by Guro Dan Inosanto, who has been noted for saying repeatedly that no one martial art has all the answers and everything has something to offer. Guro Andy has also been adamant in that he rjects the idea of stripping out the lingusitic and cultural aspects of the arts and just teaching the techniques.

So, yes, it seems to be new to Aikiweb. But it's not new at all.


You are several decades late on crossing the line. This was done by Minoru Mochizuki years ago mixing many elements of Karate, Judo, Aikido and Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu. He's not the only one and surely not the last.


And as far as "combining" arts goes, Bruce Lee did that, too. But he didn't call his creation Wing Chun Kung Fu, even though Wing Chun is the nucleus of Jun Fan Gung Fu. So when you pile several arts together with Aikido, can you still call it Aikido? Or call it something else to refelct the fact that this your philosophy? Just a thought.

Or look at MMA guys. They draw on Thai Boxing for their standup game, but how many of them go to Interet forums and argue that Thai Boxers should adda ground game, throw out the cultural and traditional elements, and so forth? If there is someone doing that, point him out; if not, there does seem to be a precedent for drawing on various martial arts to create something new without chaning the source material. MMA guys do it all the time. Seems a good model to follow.


..... Another quote from Hiroshi Isoyama is, "Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings."


Which seems to continue to this day. :)


Many young Aikidoist, such as Roy Dean and Jason DeLucia are just a small proven example of the exploration of Aikido and mixing with different martial arts ......

And over the summer I went to the New York Aikikai summer camp, and I was impressed by the number of 20-somethings on the mat. If they were all gnashing their teeth at having to bow and do things Yamada Sensei taught, I missed it.

CNYMike
10-06-2007, 05:18 PM
How about just stop trying to re-invent the wheel?

If you want to learn to strike, clinch, or grapple, why half-@$$ your way through it in Aikido? Instead of trying to figure it out on your own or making it up as you go along, why not just go to a Thai/wrestling/BJJ gym instead? They've already figured all this stuff out, there's no need to come up with it on your own.

The empty hand portions of Filipino martial arts also has all these things combined. You may find it under the same roof as Thai and BJJ, so you can get all the things you mentioned, Keith, and a "cheat sheet" for how to combine them, as well as weapons, too.

CNYMike
10-06-2007, 05:25 PM
..... But in the end aikido found for people thinkers and Combatants
You need to think, but I need fighting, the fighting aikido different from fighting in other arts, as well as thought.

There's one more issue in the mix: Future generations. What will your students teach their students long after you're dead? You're not just doing martial arts for yourself but a link in a chain that started with O Sensei and extends into the future.

Yes, it is absolutely true that O Sensei intended Aikido to change over time. But if one throws out too much of what he created for the expediency of the here and now, future generations could be short-changed. They may get something they enjoy and benefit from, but it still won't be Aikido anymore. It's an issue that one way or another, has to be dealt with, like an elephant in the living room: One can choose to igneore it, but that choice still has to be made.

Aikibu
10-06-2007, 06:39 PM
And over the summer I went to the New York Aikikai summer camp, and I was impressed by the number of 20-somethings on the mat. If they were all gnashing their teeth at having to bow and do things Yamada Sensei taught, I missed it.

Yamada Sensei in his prime is a great example of one of the most fearsome Martial Artists of the last 30 years....and all he practices is Aikido. :)

William Hazen

Roman Kremianski
10-07-2007, 01:06 AM
How about just stop trying to re-invent the wheel?

If you want to learn to strike, clinch, or grapple, why half-@$$ your way through it in Aikido? Instead of trying to figure it out on your own or making it up as you go along, why not just go to a Thai/wrestling/BJJ gym instead? They've already figured all this stuff out, there's no need to come up with it on your own.

Nominated for quote of the year.

Fellow Aikidoka would once in a while tell me "No, this technique will work in this circumstance. Watch."

And the guy would basically do a self-improvised version of what we do in MMA. Closer to the way a beginner would do it.

After repeating observations, I've arrived at the conclusion that there's just no point in "making Aikido work" under resistance and genuine aggression. You basically will be re-inventing the wheel, only that wheel will be shaped like a hexagon, and filled with cracked holes. People sprawl because it's the humanly most efficient way of not ending up your back. People block punches by keeping their hands high not because they're primitive morons that don't feel like doing irimi/tenchi, but because it's the only thing you'll have time to do.

If people wanna do the MMA stuff, cut out the middle man, and just go to MMA.

Yamada Sensei in his prime is a great example of one of the most fearsome Martial Artists of the last 30 years....and all he practices is Aikido

What did he do to become so fearsome? From what I read, he was a normal hard working student, and he seemed like a really nice guy when I attended his seminar.

It's funny the kind of titles Aikidoka give other Aikidoka, that only apply in the Aikido circle.

Aikibu
10-07-2007, 01:24 AM
Nominated for quote of the year.

Fellow Aikidoka would once in a while tell me "No, this technique will work in this circumstance. Watch."

And the guy would basically do a self-improvised version of what we do in MMA. Closer to the way a beginner would do it.

After repeating observations, I've arrived at the conclusion that there's just no point in "making Aikido work" under resistance and genuine aggression. You basically will be re-inventing the wheel, only that wheel will be shaped like a hexagon, and filled with cracked holes. People sprawl because it's the humanly most efficient way of not ending up your back. People block punches by keeping their hands high not because they're primitive morons that don't feel like doing irimi/tenchi, but because it's the only thing you'll have time to do.

If people wanna do the MMA stuff, cut out the middle man, and just go to MMA.

What did he do to become so fearsome? From what I read, he was a normal hard working student, and he seemed like a really nice guy when I attended his seminar.

It's funny the kind of titles Aikidoka give other Aikidoka, that only apply in the Aikido circle.

Your lack of experiance speaks for itself and any further comment from me regarding most of what you posted seems appropriate.

How did I get sucked back into this thread.

I know it was to speak to Sensei Dardi.

My mistake. :)

Respectfully,

William Hazen

DH
10-07-2007, 01:26 AM
Yamada Sensei in his prime is a great example of one of the most fearsome Martial Artists of the last 30 years....and all he practices is Aikido. :)
William Hazen
I can't read the words "fearsome" martial artists attached to any of the top three Aikikai guys names and keep a straight face. But "one of -thee- most fearsome artists of the last 30 years?"
Please...They did nice Aikido. Why not say the feircest Aikido teachers or some such. Even that will be argumentative I'd bet.
I'd rate collegiate wrestlers over most budo shihan in the "fearsome catagory. I guess it all depends on what you see and don't see.

Aikibu
10-07-2007, 01:33 AM
I can't read the words "fearsome" martial artists attached to any of the top three Aikikai guys names and keep a straight face. But "one of -thee- most fearsome artists of the last 30 years?"
Please...They did nice Aikido. Why not say the feircest Aikido teachers or some such. Even that will be argumentative I'd bet.
I'd rate collegiate wrestlers over most budo shihan in the "fearsome catagory. I guess it all depends on what you see and don't see.

Whatever Danger Dan. ;) I'll stick by my comment and leave you to ponder what I really meant.

William Hazen

darin
10-07-2007, 08:46 AM
Here's some fearsome moves for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=990kdheTIOY

DH
10-07-2007, 09:32 AM
Well, I don't mind body training looking funny. I do some really odd looking rolling around on the floor and flipping for ground work training. And some truly weird looking standing exercises. Including something we do for crossline bodywork meant to strengthen while loosening the central pivot. I call it gorilla aiki. And breathwork training looks worse. Hell, I have people standing in doorways stretching their tendon/ligaments in their crotch. I'll let folks laugh all the day long. If you ask the folks who have come here from AikiWeb they will tell you we laugh at ourselves and each other so the embarrassment over the "weirdness" of what they are being asked to do is diminished. If you watched any of it-you would find it equally hilarious, if not more so, as this video. Till you felt us hit or kick you, tried to throw us, or watched us hit a heavy bag.

And to make this Aikido video even funnier- the thing those exercises they were doing were meant to impart? It's not even being done. Their lines are a mess. Hips rising and falling, upper out of step with the lower, swaying, If you watch Shioda you will see a whole different movement going on in the same types of movement. It isn't the same. So in the saddest of all possibilities, these folks here can't even say they are actually "doing' anything much more than the joke that was made of it...line dancing.

William
I addressed it the way it sounded that's all. No offense intened. I don't usually disagree with much of what you write. But I found that one over the top bro.

darin
10-07-2007, 09:54 AM
I think thats Tomiki aikido in the video. No insult intended to those who do that style but the video was funny.

Glad you liked the video Dan, I hope nobody caught you dancing along to the music. :)

DH
10-07-2007, 10:17 AM
The one thing that is saddly, but glaringly obvious from a few years of doing, now twenty years of watching Aikido, even more so with all the video now available? There is no longer much Aiki-power in Aikido-if at all. Over time it looks like it has been reduced and evicerated as a martial art. Needing to take boxing or BJJ or MT to support what has been gutted out of Aikido is sadder still. Those arts are great but they cannot offer anything to help "fix" the central tenant of what has been gutted from Aikido; a trained body, that demonstrated aiki-power, and the teaching method to put it into good use in a viable way against resistance. And even saying you need to incorporate x or y art to make yours viable, clearly demonstrates your lack of understanding of your own.
Why do I say that?
Because Aiki-power is not fruity, is not blendy and flowery, it will knock you out cold, impart in you the "heavy hands' any boxer is looking for, make you fast in movement, powerful in striking and kicking, and a son of a bitch to try and throw and all done in very strict accord to what Ueshiba was tryng to tell you all along. The only difference is that many, if not most, teachers......don't really know what he was doing nor what to do to make a martial body.
And the real heart of the problem is?
That -they- think they do.
Make note that I am not slamming Aikido. I have more confidance in what it potentially can do, if it were fixed to be what it was meant to be-than many still in the art.

Demetrio Cereijo
10-07-2007, 10:28 AM
Here's some fearsome moves for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=990kdheTIOY
The original version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPhG6XA2fL8)

Not as funny to watch.

Roman Kremianski
10-07-2007, 10:50 AM
Your lack of experiance speaks for itself and any further comment from me regarding most of what you posted seems appropriate.

I'm naturally going to assume that by dropping this comment, you're well experienced in various arts, including grappling, wrestling, and striking?

So you've done all that and still consider Aikikai to be among the most fearsome in the last 3 decades? You must simply be on a higher plane then the rest of us.

Dan Austin
10-07-2007, 10:56 AM
Here's some fearsome moves for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=990kdheTIOY

Wow. It's appalling how many people are born without a shame gene.

Dan Austin
10-07-2007, 10:59 AM
If you watched any of it-you would find it equally hilarious, if not more so, as this video. Till you felt us hit or kick you, tried to throw us, or watched us hit a heavy bag.


Dan,

I'm not looking for comedy, but do you have any video of you or your students hitting a heavy bag? I'm curious to see how it looks different.

Aikibu
10-07-2007, 01:54 PM
I'm naturally going to assume that by dropping this comment, you're well experienced in various arts, including grappling, wrestling, and striking?

Yes.Been There Done That... Started Karate in 1967 at the age of seven originally with Chuck Norris then Ed Parker Been doing something ever since. Judo and Wrestling in High School. 2nd Ranger Batt Hand to Hand Demo Team for a short while in the Service...More Karate...Boxing...Ju-Jitsu and now Aikido, Iaido, some Submission Wrestling... Just ran into an old friend "Rock N Roll" Rick Metzler and he's moved back to Malibu and hoping to start a Dojo Here. Rick is one of the Chief Instructors at "The Pit" Hawaiian Kempo and a 5th Dan (The other 5th Dan being Chuck of course)...The Pit Workouts are legendary and keep you in excellent shape...by the way...Im' not going to "learn" how to hit but to enjoy the hard training/conditioning which will greatly benefit my Aikido... There you have it Roman old buddy. The baseline experiance for my opinions. Here in LA with so many outstanding Martial Artists I am just a small fish in a big pond an good thing in my opinion.

So you've done all that and still consider Aikikai to be among the most fearsome in the last 3 decades? You must simply be on a higher plane then the rest of us.

Well we're Aikikai and I would say our Aikido kicks ass but then I would sound like a broken record and contradict myself because I am in Aikido for other reasons and I know Aikido is effective against other Martial Arts. So yes... even though you're putting words in my mouth (since I just mentioned Yamada Sensei NOT Aikikai which by the way has many branches) doesn't bother me... Your nearsightedness will clear up over time. :)

William Hazen

Aikibu
10-07-2007, 02:11 PM
Well, I don't mind body training looking funny. I do some really odd looking rolling around on the floor and flipping for ground work training. And some truly weird looking standing exercises. Including something we do for crossline bodywork meant to strengthen while loosening the central pivot. I call it gorilla aiki. And breathwork training looks worse. Hell, I have people standing in doorways stretching their tendon/ligaments in their crotch. I'll let folks laugh all the day long. If you ask the folks who have come here from AikiWeb they will tell you we laugh at ourselves and each other so the embarrassment over the "weirdness" of what they are being asked to do is diminished. If you watched any of it-you would find it equally hilarious, if not more so, as this video. Till you felt us hit or kick you, tried to throw us, or watched us hit a heavy bag.

And to make this Aikido video even funnier- the thing those exercises they were doing were meant to impart? It's not even being done. Their lines are a mess. Hips rising and falling, upper out of step with the lower, swaying, If you watch Shioda you will see a whole different movement going on in the same types of movement. It isn't the same. So in the saddest of all possibilities, these folks here can't even say they are actually "doing' anything much more than the joke that was made of it...line dancing.

William
I addressed it the way it sounded that's all. No offense intened. I don't usually disagree with much of what you write. But I found that one over the top bro.

No worries Dan we're on the same basic path... here's some help...

American College Dictionary- "Fierce":3. Intensly eager; intense; ardent

He mellowed in his old age but Yamada Sensei would mix it up with the best of them back in the day...Unless Virgina Mayhew Sensei was BS'ing me. Virgina was one of the first Gaijin women to move to Japan and train with both O'Sensei and Shoji Nishio Shihan.She was a pioneer in the late 1950's. She knew Yamada very very well. He has been completely dedicated to his Aikido for a very long time.

As for the rest of your comments I completely agree. If your practice sucks then that means your teachers suck and how can you hope to be good someday???

Take Care

William Hazen

DonMagee
10-07-2007, 03:46 PM
Wow. It's appalling how many people are born without a shame gene.

I found it horribly funny. I suspect my aikido teacher will as well.

DH
10-07-2007, 05:16 PM
Dan,

I'm not looking for comedy, but do you have any video of you or your students hitting a heavy bag? I'm curious to see how it looks different.

Hi Dan.
Nope. I'm not much of a video guy. Don't expect I ever will be either.
Its not the look of hitting the bag.You won't be able to "see" anything other than me not doing much and the bag jumping in the chain or banging off the wall. There's nothing to learn from watching, and most have trouble learning from doing with me showing anyway-so there's really no point in a video.
A typical boxers knockout punch will knock you out just as well so who cares right?.I just don't generate power that way. Nor should anyone in Aikido...ever. The upside is this way of moving allows me to do some interesting things close-in that a boxer or jujutsuka cannot typically do. And on the ground, in a clinch, or on my back, it brings a whole new tool set to play as you can deliver knockout power in a very small space.

Dan Austin
10-07-2007, 06:13 PM
You won't be able to "see" anything other than me not doing much and the bag jumping in the chain or banging off the wall.

That would have been fine, but no worries, just thought I'd ask.

Roman Kremianski
10-07-2007, 09:54 PM
I know Aikido is effective against other Martial Arts

Totally agree with you. The only martial art Aikido is ineffective against is the Art of the Video Camera...for some strange reason, every time someone tries to film Aikido against other arts, the Aikido tends to muck up...

Weird. I will meditate on this during my next tea ceremony.

edit: Just out of curiosity, what is your experience in MMA? From what I read, you've done the individual arts, yes.

Jeremy Lambert
10-07-2007, 10:02 PM
I would reply but really doesn't require one. A little short sighted though.

mathewjgano
10-07-2007, 11:23 PM
Weird. I will meditate on this during my next tea ceremony.
Well, I think you're supposed to be focusing on tea ceremony when doing tea ceremony;)

edit: Just out of curiosity, what is your experience in MMA? From what I read, you've done the individual arts, yes

Might that not be called a Mix of Martial Arts?

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 08:37 AM
Training multiple arts and practicing MMA are not the same things any longer.

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 09:55 AM
Training multiple arts and practicing MMA are not the same things any longer.
From what little I can tell, I guess I'd have to agree. "MMA" has become a proper noun instead of a simple description and mostly seems to be a hybrid of wrestling, judo (by way of BJJ), and thai boxing. Still, the concept behind MMA, which is to cross-train in order to gain a more accurate perspective, seems to still apply to what's being discussed, don't you think?

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 10:15 AM
Might that not be called a Mix of Martial Arts?

I''m sure everyone here knows the difference between competitive fighting, and a "mix of martial arts", so I'm not gonna explain the obvious.

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 10:27 AM
I''m sure everyone here knows the difference between competitive fighting, and a "mix of martial arts", so I'm not gonna explain the obvious.

Yeah I get it now, I got confused by the reference to "individual" arts following the idea that Aikido always mucks it up when filmed with "other [martial] arts." My bad; I understand MMA is not literally "Mixed Martial Arts" any more...just wasn't thinking of it in those terms at the time.
Although, if judo and karate were involved, "competitive fighting," as you say, probably would have been inclusive to what was being referenced, don't you think?

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 11:33 AM
I''m sure everyone here knows the difference between competitive fighting, and a "mix of martial arts", so I'm not gonna explain the obvious.

I dunno...from what I can tell this is basically a discussion calling into question the effectiveness of Aikido again. Your premise seems to be that Aikido falls short because of its lack of competition. Without talking much about Tomiki Ryu (ie-"Aikido"), from what I can tell, competition alone doesn't make the difference, though it provides something very useful.
Granted, you might only be speaking in very general terms when you talk about the "ineffectiveness" of Aikido against other arts and assume as many do that on average a person with say 3 years of training in it will not fair well against a 3yr MMA/competitive fighting-dude. I can't really address that as I haven't even come close to experiencing the "average" Aikidoka like you might well have. So my point of view really only speaks from my own frame of reference: Tomiki Ryu and Barrish sensei's teaching of Aikido. One involves competition; the other doesn't; both seem to be effective.
Then again, if you're just talking about the average aikidoka (which for all I know could fit your description) in your conversation with "aikibu" as being ineffective against other martial arts, maybe you should just speak more specifically instead of simply saying, "aikido." If you said that in an earlier post, I appologize for misrepresenting your meaning. I have a hard time reading every post and I know that makes it difficult to always get what other folks here mean.
That said, in the matter of "combat effectiveness," MMA might very well be the best thing out there...or even just the newest thing which has revived the practicality of martial arts in general (a very useful thing, of course), but to describe aikido as "ineffective," as you seem to be doing, is incorrect per everything I've ever experienced. "Aikido," in my opinion, is itself distinct from any given person who practices it (despite the fact that they often shape its practice), so it doesn't matter how many aikidoka there are who hypothetically might be bad at "fighting." "Aikido" works against other martial arts, though not every practicioner will do well...particularly when you become as popular as Aikido has become. Karate and Tae Kwon Do experienced similar issues of effectiveness (ie- the McDojo), but that doesn't mean they're "ineffective." They were born from combat-oriented thinking, after all.
PS-in terms of self-defense/combat, from what I've seen of MMA on youtube, the ne-waza focus is very dangerous in a setting where there are many people around. This is what I see of MMA, does that mean that's all there is to it? No.

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 11:56 AM
Training multiple arts and practicing MMA are not the same things any longer.

I respectfully disagree...Mixed Martial Arts is just a description. The sport of MMA is new but training in MMA has gone on for Generations. Even Aikido is MMA in a sense since for example ours blends Karate, Judo, Iaido, Jodo, and Aikido together.

So in essence we practice MMA all the time. In my experiance every good teacher I know tries to incorporate other techniques to try to make thier practice better.

With the advent of the sport of MMA and You tube I personally think some folks have lost sight of the forest because they have been blinded by a few trees.

Nothing new there... I remember as a child when Kung Fu was all the rage (it even had it's own disco song LOL) back then Folks we're talking how Kung Fu would make all other Arts Obsolete. I was very young when Bruce Lee was alive but I remember how he said not to get caught up in rigid forms. Then the Billy Jack Movies came out and everyone was sure Bong Soo Han's Hapkido (God Bless Master Han RIP) would make everything else silly to practice as it was far superior blah blah blah.

Now my time line may be a bit messed up but this kind of thing has been going on since I started practice in the late 60's as a child every decade or so something "new" comes out. In the 80's I remember the PKA... I trained hard for it at one point, and got smacked around by guys like Bill "Superfoot" Wallace... So a full 15 to 20 years before the popularity of MMA folks were testing thier practice "in the ring" The only reason MMA is thriving now is because they made it a sport with rules and within those rules you can only make certain things work. Does some of this translate outside of the ring absolutely! Does this mean everything else is BS because of it? Nope. Is MMA training good for self defense? Absolutely. Is it good for Combat ( as some folks throw this concept around all the time) Absolutely not... Except... To give Soldiers a strong baseline. You're not going to square off with someone on the battlefield and duke it out..You're going to kill/destroy them as fast as you can by any means at your disposal

Will Aikido and other traditional Martial Arts 'survive" this latest "trend". Absolutely. Is MMA a legitimate Martial discipline? Absolutely. Can Aikido and MMA learn from each other and grow "better" Absolutely

Will some folks in the Media Universe eventually grow up with regard to thier arrogance about any Martial Art they practice? Yup.... That is an essential part of all Martial Disciplines. Maturity and Respect for the Other evolves with good practice.

Will folks eventually come to thier senses with regard to You Tube? Yup... Science has taught us that Visual Perception is the weakest link in any hypothesis and someday regular folks will seek to delve deeper beyond what they see and subject thier perception to Rational Art of the Scientific Method once again. Or... they will just get bored with it. LOL

Take Care Don,

William Hazen

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 12:37 PM
I respectfully disagree...Mixed Martial Arts is just a description. The sport of MMA is new but training in MMA has gone on for Generations. Even Aikido is MMA in a sense since for example ours blends Karate, Judo, Iaido, Jodo, and Aikido together.

So in essence we practice MMA all the time. In my experiance every good teacher I know tries to incorporate other techniques to try to make thier practice better.

With the advent of the sport of MMA and You tube I personally think some folks have lost sight of the forest because they have been blinded by a few trees.

Nothing new there... I remember as a child when Kung Fu was all the rage (it even had it's own disco song LOL) back then Folks we're talking how Kung Fu would make all other Arts Obsolete. I was very young when Bruce Lee was alive but I remember how he said not to get caught up in rigid forms. Then the Billy Jack Movies came out and everyone was sure Bong Soo Han's Hapkido (God Bless Master Han RIP) would make everything else silly to practice as it was far superior blah blah blah.

Now my time line may be a bit messed up but this kind of thing has been going on since I started practice in the late 60's as a child every decade or so something "new" comes out. In the 80's I remember the PKA... I trained hard for it at one point, and got smacked around by guys like Bill "Superfoot" Wallace... So a full 15 to 20 years before the popularity of MMA folks were testing thier practice "in the ring" The only reason MMA is thriving now is because they made it a sport with rules and within those rules you can only make certain things work. Does some of this translate outside of the ring absolutely! Does this mean everything else is BS because of it? Nope. Is MMA training good for self defense? Absolutely. Is it good for Combat ( as some folks throw this concept around all the time) Absolutely not... Except... To give Soldiers a strong baseline. You're not going to square off with someone on the battlefield and duke it out..You're going to kill/destroy them as fast as you can by any means at your disposal

Will Aikido and other traditional Martial Arts 'survive" this latest "trend". Absolutely. Is MMA a legitimate Martial discipline? Absolutely. Can Aikido and MMA learn from each other and grow "better" Absolutely

Will some folks in the Media Universe eventually grow up with regard to thier arrogance about any Martial Art they practice? Yup.... That is an essential part of all Martial Disciplines. Maturity and Respect for the Other evolves with good practice.

Will folks eventually come to thier senses with regard to You Tube? Yup... Science has taught us that Visual Perception is the weakest link in any hypothesis and someday regular folks will seek to delve deeper beyond what they see and subject thier perception to Rational Art of the Scientific Method once again. Or... they will just get bored with it. LOL

Take Care Don,

William Hazen

So before the advent of sport MMA, you called people who trained in multiple martial arts "Mixed martial artists" and they described themselves and MMA fighters?

I just don't buy it. Sure there have always been people who mixed arts. Even Bruce Lee named his mix of styles. The modern day use of MMA has direct sport meaning and has superseded its original use in the begining days of value tudo and the like.

This partly has to do with the expectation of training. If someone says I train in a mix of martial arts, this tells me nothing. I then have to clarify on the arts. Then I can get a good feel for the type of training they receive. If they said TKD, Aikido, and Kendo. I know what they training is probably. But that would not be anywhere close to what I think of as MMA training. In fact even if the guy said he did bjj, Mauy Thai, and wrestling, He is still not doing 'MMA'.

Modern MMA as used in the context of modern martial arts is a description of a training method for competitive 'low rules' fighting. This would be a series of delivery systems for standup, clinch, and ground fighting that is rolled together will drills and sparing designed to blend these into a 'complete' system for competition. There is little if any focus on self defense (not to say it can't be used for it) and a very big focus on wining in competition.

People who compete in MMA events are not automatically training MMA either. I practice BJJ, Judo, some boxing and muay thai when I get the fancy and the occasional aikido class. I am not training MMA. Sometimes I do train MMA, but this is not any of those other things I train. If I was to step in the UFC today, I would not be announced an MMA fighther. I would be described best as a bjj or judo fighter.

If I was to describe to you the normal training the kids who practice MMA do in my club, and the training I do, you would find them very similar, but my training is still different. My training is far more isolated with ground fighting being different then my takedowns and that being done on different days then my striking and very rarely do the sparing matches allow all of the skills I practice. A MMA fighter's training would be turned around. They would be focused on the full use of all the ranges of fighting in their sparing and drills, combining two or more ranges into a sparing session. Very rarely are you going to see only 'boxing' or only 'bjj'. More often are you going to see Boxing with takedowns, or bjj with strikes to allow them to full explore an isolated range in the exact method they are going to use in competition.

Finally, everyone in the martial arts world at this point should be aware of MMA competition. It happens in almost every major country in the world, it's huge or growing rapidly in the country's where the majority of martial art came from, and it's impact is felt everywhere you look in martial arts websites, magazines, etc. As with any word, modern use of a word can change it's meaning. A perfect example is hacker. I am a computer geek who spends his free time (which is very little anymore) playing with hardware and writing software to do cool things. Years ago I could call myself a hacker and everyone knew what I meant. Today if I told someone I am a hacker, they will not know what I mean. They will assume I mean to do illegal things with computers and cost companies millions of dollars. Calling myself a hacker is misrepresenting myself. I can whine all I want about the original meaning. It still does not change the fact that the language has moved on.

MMA is the same thing. It has moved on, and is solidifying into it's own unique and distinct style/styles. Maybe in the future we will have Randy Culture Ryu or something, but right now it's MMA. So at this moment, anyone who claims to train MMA and is not truly training for rule set of sport MMA competitions is misrepresenting himself (intentionally or unintentionally).

To say "I train in a mix of martial arts such as ..... with a primary focus in ..." is way way different then saying "I am a mixed martial artist".

Of course in the end MMA is really a throwback to what martial arts used to be (full contact fighting with a variety of rules) before the 70's - 90's where everyone got all metaphysical and became philosopher bar bouncers and poets who were too deadly for physical contact.

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 12:53 PM
So before the advent of sport MMA, you called people who trained in multiple martial arts "Mixed martial artists" and they described themselves and MMA fighters?

I just don't buy it. Sure there have always been people who mixed arts. Even Bruce Lee named his mix of styles. The modern day use of MMA has direct sport meaning and has superseded its original use in the begining days of value tudo and the like.

This partly has to do with the expectation of training. If someone says I train in a mix of martial arts, this tells me nothing. I then have to clarify on the arts. Then I can get a good feel for the type of training they receive. If they said TKD, Aikido, and Kendo. I know what they training is probably. But that would not be anywhere close to what I think of as MMA training. In fact even if the guy said he did bjj, Mauy Thai, and wrestling, He is still not doing 'MMA'.

Modern MMA as used in the context of modern martial arts is a description of a training method for competitive 'low rules' fighting. This would be a series of delivery systems for standup, clinch, and ground fighting that is rolled together will drills and sparing designed to blend these into a 'complete' system for competition. There is little if any focus on self defense (not to say it can't be used for it) and a very big focus on wining in competition.

People who compete in MMA events are not automatically training MMA either. I practice BJJ, Judo, some boxing and muay thai when I get the fancy and the occasional aikido class. I am not training MMA. Sometimes I do train MMA, but this is not any of those other things I train. If I was to step in the UFC today, I would not be announced an MMA fighther. I would be described best as a bjj or judo fighter.

If I was to describe to you the normal training the kids who practice MMA do in my club, and the training I do, you would find them very similar, but my training is still different. My training is far more isolated with ground fighting being different then my takedowns and that being done on different days then my striking and very rarely do the sparing matches allow all of the skills I practice. A MMA fighter's training would be turned around. They would be focused on the full use of all the ranges of fighting in their sparing and drills, combining two or more ranges into a sparing session. Very rarely are you going to see only 'boxing' or only 'bjj'. More often are you going to see Boxing with takedowns, or bjj with strikes to allow them to full explore an isolated range in the exact method they are going to use in competition.

Finally, everyone in the martial arts world at this point should be aware of MMA competition. It happens in almost every major country in the world, it's huge or growing rapidly in the country's where the majority of martial art came from, and it's impact is felt everywhere you look in martial arts websites, magazines, etc. As with any word, modern use of a word can change it's meaning. A perfect example is hacker. I am a computer geek who spends his free time (which is very little anymore) playing with hardware and writing software to do cool things. Years ago I could call myself a hacker and everyone knew what I meant. Today if I told someone I am a hacker, they will not know what I mean. They will assume I mean to do illegal things with computers and cost companies millions of dollars. Calling myself a hacker is misrepresenting myself. I can whine all I want about the original meaning. It still does not change the fact that the language has moved on.

MMA is the same thing. It has moved on, and is solidifying into it's own unique and distinct style/styles. Maybe in the future we will have Randy Culture Ryu or something, but right now it's MMA. So at this moment, anyone who claims to train MMA and is not truly training for rule set of sport MMA competitions is misrepresenting himself (intentionally or unintentionally).

To say "I train in a mix of martial arts such as ..... with a primary focus in ..." is way way different then saying "I am a mixed martial artist".

Of course in the end MMA is really a throwback to what martial arts used to be (full contact fighting with a variety of rules) before the 70's - 90's where everyone got all metaphysical and became philosopher bar bouncers and poets who were too deadly for physical contact.

With all due respect Don. It does not matter how you frame the Rhetoric The definition of Mixed Martial Artist is far broader then the one you're trying to define. It has a long tradition and goes back further that the dawn of Western Media. I think the semantic framework of your post has you chasing your own tail.

Respectfully,

William Hazen

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 01:06 PM
So before the advent of sport MMA, you called people who trained in multiple martial arts "Mixed martial artists" and they described themselves and MMA fighters?
Great post...gave me a clearer picture of things, thank you. It seems you might liken MMA with judo during the last turn of the century: it came from studying multiple approaches and formed its own codified system from them, thus becoming something new...or new-ish, anyway.
My only disagreement would seem to be with the idea that the phrase "mixed martial artist" always equals "MMA." Just because the common semantics of the phrase might mean one thing, that doesn't mean a person who trains in multiple arts can't accurately describe themselves as such. I've got very little MMA exposure (all visual), but I personally would describe a person who trains in multiple arts, a mixed martial artist. I can't say exactly when that phrase came into full usage, but it was probably around the time MMA was developing into something distinct. Talking to friends of mine who don't train in martial arts but are fans of the UFC would take the phrase to be a general description more than some single entity.
The idea of a Randy Culture Ryu seems to already be around though...the only difference I see is in the terminology. When people speak of the Lion's Den, or who various people are training with, they're alluding to the kind of thing "ryu/schools" address: particular systems approaching the same thing (how to use the body efficiently; with power).

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 01:46 PM
With all due respect Don. It does not matter how you frame the Rhetoric The definition of Mixed Martial Artist is far broader then the one you're trying to define. It has a long tradition and goes back further that the dawn of Western Media. I think the semantic framework of your post has you chasing your own tail.

Respectfully,

William Hazen

Does this give license for black belts in judo to claim to be black belts in bjj? After all, bjj came from judo and the name is just a modern twist. Perhaps all judo guys can describe themselves as training jujitsu? Yet their method of practice looks nothing like japanese jujutsu I've seen. If a jujutsu practioner told me they trained judo, I would be very shocked to go visit them and see them doing weapons work and katas all day long.

Like I've told English teachers here on campus, the most important part about language is being on the same page. If you mean one thing and everyone else you speak to does not use that meaning, it does not matter if your meaning is the 'correct' term. Meanings change.

Just like modern 'traditional' martial arts are anything but traditional, the modern usage of MMA is far from training in multiple martial arts. It doesn't matter if you agree or not. You, like my friends who still call themselves hackers, are just relics who need to understand that most people are going to have a false understanding of what you do when you tell them you are a 'Mixed martial artist'.

Jiujitsu is another word that is meeting this fate. If you tell me you practice Jiujitsu (in a context where I can see the spelling), I have no idea of what you do. I have to ask "Japanese, Brazilian, or American?". Depending on the area you use it, people are going to have assumptions. If you said it in japan, people are going to think about the historic old arts from a bygone era. If you say that in brazil they are assuming you mean you train with the Gracies. If you say it in the US, depending on your whom your speaking, you either mean a bunch of funny kata, or a sport from brazil. There is simply no way to know. But as MMA gets more popular, it is only obvious that the meaning will sway it's common usage to bjj. This is already seen by watching the UFC or talking on a MMA forum. They no longer say bjj, they just say jiujitsu. Joe Rogan will say "He's a brown belt in jiujitsu". With usage the definition changes. Where it was once needed to define you were doing bjj and not japanese, now you are beginning to need to define you are doing japanese and not bjj.

Beginning judo practitioners called what they did jiujitsu. Kano called it judo and eventual usage made it such that for a judo man to call what he does jiujitsu would be to miss represent himself. Even though technically, he is doing a form of jiujitsu.

Technically, one could go train at a local ATA mcdojo and another gimpy place and call themselves a Mixed martial artist. But when they tell other people that, they are misrepresenting themselves. They know, or at least they should know that people think they mean MMA sport fighter.

This fact is further solidified by the fact that people on this forum had to explicitly asked when MMA training was done, meaning by saying mixed martial artists they automatically assumed MMA sport fight training.

Rectangles have 4 sides. Squares have 4 sides. All Squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares. If you are a rectangle, and you claim to be a rectangle and not a square, people will assume things. You have let them assume things. Of course you can say "Well, I do have 4 sides..." and you are correct. But the common knowledge of a rectangle and a square have caused a misrepresentation.

So in a nut shell, times change. Agree or not, you will eventually have to face the fact that nobody will know what you are talking about and you will be eventually bold face misrepresenting yourself without explaining a lot more then saying "yea, I train MMA."

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 01:48 PM
The one thing I've noticed is how no one likes to be left out by admitting they've never actually done MMA. They will claim they've dabbled in various arts here and there, in high school/a few years back/etc They'll even give their own take on the actual acronym of MMA.

In the most well known sense: MMA is merely the North American name for no holds barred fighting or Vale Tudo. It's a competitive environment more than a collection of fighting methods. People shouldn't get caught up in the name. They have to call it something. Call it Hillbilly Rat Fighting. It'll still contain kicks and punches and takedowns.

I think the MMA crowd is more at peace with what they do. The traditional guys will whine more than the serious MMA guys. And yes I know a lot of MMA guys whine about traditional arts on internet forums. At the end of the day they go back to sparring, and the traditional guys go back to compliant kata. The world just works, and those who are happy with what they do, stay happy.

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 02:24 PM
Does this give license for black belts in judo to claim to be black belts in bjj? After all, bjj came from judo and the name is just a modern twist. Perhaps all judo guys can describe themselves as training jujitsu? Yet their method of practice looks nothing like japanese jujutsu I've seen. If a jujutsu practioner told me they trained judo, I would be very shocked to go visit them and see them doing weapons work and katas all day long. Language is only one part of the Trivium Don. The other two parts are Logic and Rhetoric. Since this is nothing more that a straw man argument or (in english) Argument by Association I suggest you explore this line of thinking in better detail and with an objective point of view. To use your same argument The Kimoura is a Modern Judo Submission and yet it's identified with MMA. What does it matter to the user if he learns it in "MMA" or "Judo" Can it not be "said" that he practices an MMA technique or a Judo technique or both? ( I prefer both)

Like I've told English teachers here on campus, the most important part about language is being on the same page. If you mean one thing and everyone else you speak to does not use that meaning, it does not matter if your meaning is the 'correct' term. Meanings change. True but again as part of the Trivium Both "meanings" can be true and both false it just depends on the context. My context is simple MMA is not new nor revolutionary just part of an evolution

Just like modern 'traditional' martial arts are anything but traditional, the modern usage of MMA is far from training in multiple martial arts. It doesn't matter if you agree or not. You, like my friends who still call themselves hackers, are just relics who need to understand that most people are going to have a false understanding of what you do when you tell them you are a 'Mixed martial artist'. Another fallacy commonly reffered to as ignoratio elenchi Since (as you admit) there is no definative syllubus for Mixed Martial Arts everyone and no one practices them and uses a combination of techniques that have already been developed in other Martial Disciplines How can you "argue" the Differance between Mixed Martial Arts and a Martial Artist who uses different techniques from a varieity of Martial Arts. Very Interesting.

Jiujitsu is another word that is meeting this fate. If you tell me you practice Jiujitsu (in a context where I can see the spelling), I have no idea of what you do. I have to ask "Japanese, Brazilian, or American?". Depending on the area you use it, people are going to have assumptions. If you said it in japan, people are going to think about the historic old arts from a bygone era. If you say that in brazil they are assuming you mean you train with the Gracies. If you say it in the US, depending on your whom your speaking, you either mean a bunch of funny kata, or a sport from brazil. There is simply no way to know. But as MMA gets more popular, it is only obvious that the meaning will sway it's common usage to bjj. This is already seen by watching the UFC or talking on a MMA forum. They no longer say bjj, they just say jiujitsu. Joe Rogan will say "He's a brown belt in jiujitsu". With usage the definition changes. Where it was once needed to define you were doing bjj and not japanese, now you are beginning to need to define you are doing japanese and not bjj.

Beginning judo practitioners called what they did jiujitsu. Kano called it judo and eventual usage made it such that for a judo man to call what he does jiujitsu would be to miss represent himself. Even though technically, he is doing a form of jiujitsu. I will agree that the media has a large influance on popular culture but however with all due respect having influance does not constitute being an Authority. Argumentum Ad Authoritum

Technically, one could go train at a local ATA mcdojo and another gimpy place and call themselves a Mixed martial artist. But when they tell other people that, they are misrepresenting themselves. They know, or at least they should know that people think they mean MMA sport fighter.

This fact is further solidified by the fact that people on this forum had to explicitly asked when MMA training was done, meaning by saying mixed martial artists they automatically assumed MMA sport fight training.

Rectangles have 4 sides. Squares have 4 sides. All Squares are rectangles, not all rectangles are squares. If you are a rectangle, and you claim to be a rectangle and not a square, people will assume things. You have let them assume things. Of course you can say "Well, I do have 4 sides..." and you are correct. But the common knowledge of a rectangle and a square have caused a misrepresentation.

So in a nut shell, times change. Agree or not, you will eventually have to face the fact that nobody will know what you are talking about and you will be eventually bold face misrepresenting yourself without explaining a lot more then saying "yea, I train MMA." Yawn...In your own mind perhaps...Ignoring my premise does not invalidate it.Again FYI thats called ignoratio elenchi If you wish to feel that somehow MMA is "special" and is not a part of the family of Martial Arts Well who am I to change your mind Don? LOL

Respectfully,

William Hazen

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 02:31 PM
The one thing I've noticed is how no one likes to be left out by admitting they've never actually done MMA. They will claim they've dabbled in various arts here and there, in high school/a few years back/etc They'll even give their own take on the actual acronym of MMA.

In the most well known sense: MMA is merely the North American name for no holds barred fighting or Vale Tudo. It's a competitive environment more than a collection of fighting methods. People shouldn't get caught up in the name. They have to call it something. Call it Hillbilly Rat Fighting. It'll still contain kicks and punches and takedowns.

I think the MMA crowd is more at peace with what they do. The traditional guys will whine more than the serious MMA guys. And yes I know a lot of MMA guys whine about traditional arts on internet forums. At the end of the day they go back to sparring, and the traditional guys go back to compliant kata. The world just works, and those who are happy with what they do, stay happy.


Edited by me. This posts speaks for itself.

William Hazen

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 02:41 PM
I wrote this giant post out. I then realized I can summarize this very quickly.

If I open a school called "Don's Mixed Martial Arts Academy", what would you expect to be taught there?

It makes my point better then the 7 paragraphs.

If that doesn't do it, google MMA. Look at the references. Modern use and definition of the word is on my side. Personally, I feel people only call themselves MMA because they feel the need to associate themselves with the sport somehow. If you came into any club I've trained at and said you were a MMA practitioner, we would ask where you fought or trained. If you didn't train in an MMA club, or fight in MMA events, we would push you off into a wannabe realm.

If you would like, I can post my huge post on the argument at hand dealing with logic, modern use of the word, perceptions in training, modern methods, history of MMA, etc. I saved it in a nice text document to work on as a possible post on bullshido.

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 02:48 PM
...Perhaps all judo guys can describe themselves as training jujitsu?

Like I've told English teachers here on campus, the most important part about language is being on the same page. If you mean one thing and everyone else you speak to does not use that meaning, it does not matter if your meaning is the 'correct' term. Meanings change.
Meanings change from person to person. I would say that, yes, in a very real sense, judo guys can call what they do jujutsu. Break down the rootwords and it makes perfect sense. Judo (the way/method of "ju") is a collection of jujutsuwaza compiled into a coherant system. Think of the terms as proper nouns however, and I agree it doesn't make sense. I agree with you that one of the most important parts of language is common understanding or else you have two people preaching to the pelicans and wondering why the other guy doesn't get it. However, you're wrong that popular usage dictates "correct" meaning...at least, that's what you seem to be saying. Semantics/meaning is far more subjective than that. So with regard to "mixed martial arts" it's not, "one meaning or the other"; it's both, de facto. Popularity of meaning has nothing to do with it...it's not like I looked at MMA and thought, "I'm going to find an obscure meaning to tangle up the conversation." I saw the phrase, it registered a particular meaning, and I expressed an idea based on that meaning. What matters next is that a communication of meaning take place. If meaning can change over time, it doesn't come about through rejecting different meanings that get proposed for a term just because they're not popular or common...or they wouldn't change in the first place.

Beginning judo practitioners called what they did jiujitsu. Kano called it judo and eventual usage made it such that for a judo man to call what he does jiujitsu would be to miss represent himself. Even though technically, he is doing a form of jiujitsu.
Then "technically" I'm no different in my original usage of the phrase "mixed martial art." In the same way you're using the term "technically" to describe a context which make the meaning valid, so too are we describing our own contextual meaning of the phrase in question. What you're doing is saying everyone should have the same meaning of mixed martial arts in orer to make communication easier...that's a linguistic argument many linguists would agree with, but not exactly what we're talking about here.
My original point, which seems to be not very important to anyone but myself, was that a person who trains in multiple martial arts (and which do include competition) might have a good perspective on whether or not aikido works with other arts. I appologize if this idea is not very interesting, and that it has sparked a debate on the nature of semantics, but would anyone care to address this idea instead of arguing over the differences of what "mixed martial arts" means?

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 02:48 PM
I wrote this giant post out. I then realized I can summarize this very quickly.

If I open a school called "Don's Mixed Martial Arts Academy", what would you expect to be taught there?

It makes my point better then the 7 paragraphs.

If that doesn't do it, google MMA. Look at the references. Modern use and definition of the word is on my side. Personally, I feel people only call themselves MMA because they feel the need to associate themselves with the sport somehow. If you came into any club I've trained at and said you were a MMA practitioner, we would ask where you fought or trained. If you didn't train in an MMA club, or fight in MMA events, we would push you off into a wannabe realm.

If you would like, I can post my huge post on the argument at hand dealing with logic, modern use of the word, perceptions in training, modern methods, history of MMA, etc. I saved it in a nice text document to work on as a possible post on bullshido.

And my retort consists of one simple question...

What style of Mixed Martial Arts do you teach?

William Hazen

Don't blame me Don... Blame Zen. :) LOL

Ron Tisdale
10-08-2007, 02:52 PM
Silly arguement. Don knows what William is saying and visa versa. Why waste the time?

The one thing I've noticed is how no one likes to be left out by admitting they've never actually done MMA. They will claim they've dabbled in various arts here and there, in high school/a few years back/etc They'll even give their own take on the actual acronym of MMA.

I have trained in wrestling, karate, aikido, a little boxing. I am not a mixed martial artist, or a Mixed Martial Artist, or a sport fighter. I am a 46 year old wannabe trying to stay young by doing aikido. Oh well, as you say, keeps me happy. :D

Best,
Ron

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 03:05 PM
Edited by me. This posts speaks for itself.

Glad it does. See, everyone's happy.

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 03:07 PM
Meanings change from person to person. I would say that, yes, in a very real sense, judo guys can call what they do jujutsu. Break down the rootwords and it makes perfect sense. Judo (the way/method of "ju") is a collection of jujutsuwaza compiled into a coherant system. Think of the terms as proper nouns however, and I agree it doesn't make sense. I agree with you that one of the most important parts of language is common understanding or else you have two people preaching to the pelicans and wondering why the other guy doesn't get it. However, you're wrong that popular usage dictates "correct" meaning...at least, that's what you seem to be saying. Semantics/meaning is far more subjective than that. So with regard to "mixed martial arts" it's not, "one meaning or the other"; it's both, de facto. Popularity of meaning has nothing to do with it...it's not like I looked at MMA and thought, "I'm going to find an obscure meaning to tangle up the conversation." I saw the phrase, it registered a particular meaning, and I expressed an idea based on that meaning. What matters next is that a communication of meaning take place. If meaning can change over time, it doesn't come about through rejecting different meanings that get proposed for a term just because they're not popular or common...or they wouldn't change in the first place.

Then "technically" I'm no different in my original usage of the phrase "mixed martial art." In the same way you're using the term "technically" to describe a context which make the meaning valid, so too are we describing our own contextual meaning of the phrase in question. What you're doing is saying everyone should have the same meaning of mixed martial arts in orer to make communication easier...that's a linguistic argument many linguists would agree with, but not exactly what we're talking about here.
My original point, which seems to be not very important to anyone but myself, was that a person who trains in multiple martial arts (and which do include competition) might have a good perspective on whether or not aikido works with other arts. I appologize if this idea is not very interesting, and that it has sparked a debate on the nature of semantics, but would anyone care to address this idea instead of quibbling over the differences of what "mixed martial arts" means?

No. Not all squares are rectangles. In fact no squares are rectangles, though the angles can be described as square (90 degrees) in some settings. Squares have 4 equal sides; rectangles do not.

Thanks for the post Matt. poor Don... Hopefully he'll refine his geometry argument a little bit.

I do agree with you whole heartedly that the thread starting as an earnest attempt by the Thread Starter to ask questions about how to train for punching/counter punching in Aikido but was quckly taken over by folks from Bullshido to impose their narrow view that All Aikido is bad and MMA is the best thing since sliced bread blah blah blah. I used to contribute to Bullshido until I got a couple of death threats and a challenge to a back ally no holds barred fight from one of the moderators.

Funny how no matter how heated the discussion gets here on Aikiweb no one has ever threatened me.

I am trying my best to look for the simularities and not the differances between Aikido and MMA and welcome MMA into the family.

When I go train at most MMA Dojos and hang out with MMA folks Our Art is treated with respect and both of us have learned from each other. it's only a few folks whose mess this spirit up with thier narrow dogmatic views... Most of them on Bulshido.

That gives me hope and makes me try harder out there in the real world. :)

Take Care Matt,

William Hazen

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 03:12 PM
Silly arguement. Don knows what William is saying and visa versa. Why waste the time?

I have trained in wrestling, karate, aikido, a little boxing. I am not a mixed martial artist, or a Mixed Martial Artist, or a sport fighter. I am a 46 year old wannabe trying to stay young by doing aikido. Oh well, as you say, keeps me happy. :D

Best,
Ron

What's wrong with being silly. I have the day off and the time to waste.... LOL

Your point is well made... One wannabe to another. :)

Signing off this thread moving on...Again. LOL

William Hazen

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 03:13 PM
And my retort consists of one simple question...

What style of Mixed Martial Arts do you teach?

William Hazen

Don't blame me Don... Blame Zen. :) LOL

Ahh, but you gave it away. You see, you just refered to mixed martial arts as a single entity consisting of a style, and not a mix of random arts.

Proof to the point. Prospective MMA students are not going to call Don's Mixed Martial arts and say "What arts do you teach, I'm really looking for Wing Chun mixed with kenpo and a little aikijitsu." No they are going to show up expecting to be taught techniques, training methods, and strategy explicitly targeted towards wining in a MMA competition. Like boxing, the styles may vary, but the intent is always the same. Where the techniques come from is no matter, it's the intent, training methods and strategies that has defined mma.

But I'll get off it now. I've made my point, at this point I have yet to see any one counter my argument with anything other then "In the past, it could mean this." If someone came on this forum and their first post was this

"Hi, my name is Don, I train in mixed martial arts." You obviously would think he trains for MMA competition in a school focused on that. I highly doubt you would wonder if he trains karate, kendo, and judo or bjj, mauy thai, and hopkido. And if his next sentence was
"I think aikido is worthless" you would respond with a argument that sport fighting does not equate usefulness or something similar. Thus automagically assuming he was a sport fighter under modern MMA rules.

Thanks for the post Matt. poor Don... Hopefully he'll refine his geometry argument a little bit.

I do agree with you whole heartedly that the thread starting as an earnest attempt by the Thread Starter to ask questions about how to train for punching/counter punching in Aikido but was quckly taken over by folks from Bulshido to impose their narrow view that All Aikido is bad and MMA is the best thing since sliced bread blah blah blah. I used to contribute to Bulshido until I got a couple of death threats and a challenge to a back ally no holds barred fight from one of the moderators.

Funny how no matter how heated the discussion gets here on Aikiweb no one has ever threatened me.

I am trying my best to look for the simularities and not the differances between Aikido and MMA and welcome MMA into the family.

When I go train at most MMA Dojos and hang out with MMA folks Our Art is treated with respect and both of us have learned from each other. it's only a few folks whose mess this spirit up with thier narrow dogmatic views... Most of them on Bulshido.

That gives me hope and makes me try harder out there in the real world. :)

Take Care Matt,

William Hazen

You keep using this MMA thing...are you refering to ata tkd mixed with hopkido? I think not :-)

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 04:06 PM
until I got a couple of death threats and a challenge to a back ally no holds barred fight from one of the moderators.

Sounds like a classic call-on-BS throwdown. They only do that in special cases where people aren't very responsible for what they post on a legitimate martial arts forum.

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 04:11 PM
Sounds like a classic call-on-BS throwdown. They only do that in special cases where people aren't very responsible for what they post on a legitimate martial arts forum.

Very off-topic, but I've had over 1,500 posts on bullshido. Some of which when I was still very much sucked into some very misguided beliefs. Not once was I ever challenged to a fight. I feel like I missed out.

Aikibu
10-08-2007, 04:27 PM
You two are so cute!

My handle on Bullshido was RangerHazen... Look it up and make up you own minds

I have gotten booted from a few forums Mostly Special Ops... For my vocal oppostion to the Iraq War among other things...Fascists don't like dissent... all of which have nothing to do with this forum or this thread...

It looks like you two may wish to make this personal somehow???

How sad if true...

I highly suggest if you do wish to make this personal by all means PM me and I will be glad to accommodate any further discussion you wish to have about me...

Lets allow the more mature folks a chance to continue a discussion on the thread topic.

Again I have said all I need to say here about Aiki-Boxing & MMA myself.

William Hazen

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 04:37 PM
Guns, at dawn.

Ketsan
10-08-2007, 05:03 PM
Something I've always found odd. Especially after training in combat sports. Why not just train the way it works, rather then a way that doesn't?

Same reason combat sports have rules.

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 05:16 PM
Same reason combat sports have rules.

Even with rules, combat sports still train things that work. They don't train something that you then turn into a jab when you spar, they train a jab. You don't train something that turns into an armbar, you train an armbar.

Everything in combat sports works in a one on one fight without major modification. Are there holes because of the rules? Sure, but that doesn't make anything trained less valid.

BTW, I'm not making a personal issue with anyone. I really don't care that much. I'm having a discussion. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers. My respect for most people is though my saying exactly how I feel and what I mean. I do not sugar coat my beliefs and don't want any catering or sugar coating back. That's what I call respect.

Demetrio Cereijo
10-08-2007, 05:18 PM
My handle on Bullshido was RangerHazen... Look it up and make up you own minds
I always tought you were Aikibu.

Sounds like a classic call-on-BS throwdown. They only do that in special cases where people aren't very responsible for what they post on a legitimate martial arts forum.
ROFLMAO!!!

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 05:31 PM
Even with rules, combat sports still train things that work...BTW, I'm not making a personal issue with anyone. I really don't care that much. I'm having a discussion. Sorry if I ruffled any feathers. My respect for most people is though my saying exactly how I feel and what I mean. I do not sugar coat my beliefs and don't want any catering or sugar coating back. That's what I call respect.

Right on. I still don't see how aikido doesn't fit into the category of training in things that work though...I'm assumming that's an implication being made by you here.

Roman Kremianski
10-08-2007, 05:33 PM
ROFLMAO!!!

legitimate martial arts forum...as legitimate as you're gonna get, while still being an internet forum

Corrected.

DonMagee
10-08-2007, 05:52 PM
Right on. I still don't see how aikido doesn't fit into the category of training in things that work though...I'm assumming that's an implication being made by you here.

This goes back to a post I made a while ago. Essentially, the Delucia video posted in this thread looks more like judo with punching then aikido. The response was that aikido as it is practiced does not work and must be 'changed' or 'modified' while sparing to make it work. This is not the case in boxing, judo, bjj, etc. What you train is exactly what you do.

mathewjgano
10-08-2007, 06:19 PM
This goes back to a post I made a while ago. Essentially, the Delucia video posted in this thread looks more like judo with punching then aikido. The response was that aikido as it is practiced does not work and must be 'changed' or 'modified' while sparing to make it work. This is not the case in boxing, judo, bjj, etc. What you train is exactly what you do.

I see what you mean...it does look more often like Judo than Aikido...although I do see a lot of irimi tenkan and saw a few other techniques like tenchinage and what looked a little like rokkyu. I'd have loved to see ikkyo or something like that which really gave the "Aikido look," but there was a lot of fighting for control which turned into a fight for leverage giving way to "sacrifice throws" and other hallmark Judo stuff...in other words the timing wasn't very well blended...not that I could have done better.
Anyhoo...thanks for the clarification.
take care,
matt
...oh and for the record I looked up "rectangle" and found I was wrong about that little thing:eek: ...that's why I edited it from its post:D Still...I could have sworn I was taught differently!:grr: Cheers

Bob King
10-13-2007, 09:32 AM
This goes back to a post I made a while ago. Essentially, the Delucia video posted in this thread looks more like judo with punching then aikido. The response was that aikido as it is practiced does not work and must be 'changed' or 'modified' while sparing to make it work. This is not the case in boxing, judo, bjj, etc. What you train is exactly what you do.
Couldn't agree more, Don.
My biggest realization through the process of aikiboxing is that to be able to apply aiki type techniques I need to learn how to effectively control my opponents hips and stop worrying about controlling his limbs. Doing traditional taisabaki is not efective so that is where learning to apply entries from other arts to close the gap, control their hips and apply atemi waza is what is most functional for me.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
10-13-2007, 11:15 AM
Couldn't agree more, Don.
My biggest realization through the process of aikiboxing is that to be able to apply aiki type techniques I need to learn how to effectively control my opponents hips and stop worrying about controlling his limbs. Doing traditional taisabaki is not efective so that is where learning to apply entries from other arts to close the gap, control their hips and apply atemi waza is what is most functional for me.

If you're saying this produces something other than judo/wrestling, and more to the point something distinctly, aikido, please do post the video. It sounds fascinating. I confess I'm somewhat skeptical, though.

L. Camejo
10-13-2007, 11:54 AM
Doing traditional taisabaki is not efective so that is where learning to apply entries from other arts to close the gap, control their hips and apply atemi waza is what is most functional for me.Hi Robert,

What works for you works for you, no doubt. This however has not much to do with developing ones Aikido, which contains certain specific tactical and strategic principles. I daresay attempting entries from other arts will only help one in developing tsukuri that will be best suited to execute waza from those arts, but will not assist one in developing the Aikido responses to that scenario.

I teach both Jujutsu and Aikido. Often there are times when I could easily shoot in during full resistance Aikido randori, do a dlt and end the encounter on the ground... but I won't be doing Aikido as I was taught. As I use Tomiki Sensei's approach to guide my training I make sure to separate the two arts (just as he would not resort to Judo waza during Aikido and vice versa) so development can take place in both approaches. The challenge is to improve my own Aiki waza to a place where it works just as well as a well trained approach from any other method. But to do this I need to fully understand and be able to execute those elements that make up sound, effective Aiki waza.

It's always interesting to see a student's first Aikido resistance randori session - all students who have prior training in other martial arts resort to that training to attempt to survive the bout. This is fine for self defence but not so for developing ones Aikido.

So far you've seen the effect that putting on MMA type gloves have had on your mental approach to Aiki waza during Aiki boxing - this is very important. The gloves enticed you to operate more like a modern Jujitsuka than an Aikidoka. Your entire strategy changed because you could now trade punches with the boxer. This is one approach, but it is not the approach to use if you want to execute Aiki waza in that situation.

If your Aiki boxing project is truly about developing your Aikido (and not just your ability to potentially defend yourself against a Boxer) then start searching for ways that already exist within your own Aikido training paradigm that will assist you. I have found that traditional Tai Sabaki (especially the way it's done in Shodokan) is quite effective at getting one into position to execute Aiki waza in the Boxing situation. The problem however does not lie in the physical response but the mental.

Btw, do you have a copy of "Aikido: Tradition and the Competitive Edge" by F. Shishida and T. Nariyama? There's some good stuff in there about what you are trying to achieve, but is is not stated directly.

Just some thoughts.
LC:ai::ki:

CNYMike
10-13-2007, 07:19 PM
.... aikido as it is practiced does not work and must be 'changed' or 'modified' while sparing to make it work. This is not the case in boxing, judo, bjj, etc. What you train is exactly what you do.

Maybe. Or maybe it's the other way -- that sparring/freestyle training is designed to explore an art's techniques in the sort of random format, so you have to start with what the art does. Consequently, since Aikido "as it is practiced" doesn't do kickboxing and doesn't (generally) roll around on the ground but appears to be sandwiched in between those two ranges, kickboxing and ground fighting just don't fit for Aikido. Yes, one can explore how to apply Aikido against attacks from kickboxing and grappling, but IMO that requires starting with a grounding in the princples of Aiki, timing, and so forth, which one can only get from having practiced it for years; and then knowing those rules, one can as oneself, "Ok, so how does that apply when a attack is driven less by charging and more by a short sharp body rotation?"

Start with the art, learn what it does, where that type of training gets you, and work from there. You want to do the reverse, fine, that reminds me of that old chestnut about square pegs and round holes.

Budd
10-14-2007, 12:16 PM
As most people here already know, ultimately, what people say on an internet forum has little relevance, beyond getting people to experience things firsthand in person . . .

I commit to getting the chance to feel what people are doing in person, whenever possible . . . and it's always been fun. I also like to think I represent myself well whenever I do so.

As for testing one's ability to apply aikido principles against varying levels of resistance, I encourage it -- a lot of people already do that, even if they don't talk about it. However, I do recommend learning how to apply resistance with skill, which may sometimes mean training in other stuff if you aren't covering it in your regular training sessions. Sloppy flailing or spastic grappling can be effective, but not really the way to go in the long run . . .

As for whether "aikido" is or has or can be xyz . . . or whether "aikido organizations" or "aikido teachers" have or can be abc . . . I get *yawn* bored fairly quickly with those discussions. Most of the important points have already been made. It's up to you to see what people are doing, get experience, train and ultimately work things out for yourself.

salim
10-14-2007, 12:35 PM
So before the advent of sport MMA, you called people who trained in multiple martial arts "Mixed martial artists" and they described themselves and MMA fighters?

I just don't buy it. Sure there have always been people who mixed arts. Even Bruce Lee named his mix of styles. The modern day use of MMA has direct sport meaning and has superseded its original use in the begining days of value tudo and the like.

This partly has to do with the expectation of training. If someone says I train in a mix of martial arts, this tells me nothing. I then have to clarify on the arts. Then I can get a good feel for the type of training they receive. If they said TKD, Aikido, and Kendo. I know what they training is probably. But that would not be anywhere close to what I think of as MMA training. In fact even if the guy said he did bjj, Mauy Thai, and wrestling, He is still not doing 'MMA'.

Modern MMA as used in the context of modern martial arts is a description of a training method for competitive 'low rules' fighting. This would be a series of delivery systems for standup, clinch, and ground fighting that is rolled together will drills and sparing designed to blend these into a 'complete' system for competition. There is little if any focus on self defense (not to say it can't be used for it) and a very big focus on wining in competition.

People who compete in MMA events are not automatically training MMA either. I practice BJJ, Judo, some boxing and muay thai when I get the fancy and the occasional aikido class. I am not training MMA. Sometimes I do train MMA, but this is not any of those other things I train. If I was to step in the UFC today, I would not be announced an MMA fighther. I would be described best as a bjj or judo fighter.

If I was to describe to you the normal training the kids who practice MMA do in my club, and the training I do, you would find them very similar, but my training is still different. My training is far more isolated with ground fighting being different then my takedowns and that being done on different days then my striking and very rarely do the sparing matches allow all of the skills I practice. A MMA fighter's training would be turned around. They would be focused on the full use of all the ranges of fighting in their sparing and drills, combining two or more ranges into a sparing session. Very rarely are you going to see only 'boxing' or only 'bjj'. More often are you going to see Boxing with takedowns, or bjj with strikes to allow them to full explore an isolated range in the exact method they are going to use in competition.

Finally, everyone in the martial arts world at this point should be aware of MMA competition. It happens in almost every major country in the world, it's huge or growing rapidly in the country's where the majority of martial art came from, and it's impact is felt everywhere you look in martial arts websites, magazines, etc. As with any word, modern use of a word can change it's meaning. A perfect example is hacker. I am a computer geek who spends his free time (which is very little anymore) playing with hardware and writing software to do cool things. Years ago I could call myself a hacker and everyone knew what I meant. Today if I told someone I am a hacker, they will not know what I mean. They will assume I mean to do illegal things with computers and cost companies millions of dollars. Calling myself a hacker is misrepresenting myself. I can whine all I want about the original meaning. It still does not change the fact that the language has moved on.

MMA is the same thing. It has moved on, and is solidifying into it's own unique and distinct style/styles. Maybe in the future we will have Randy Culture Ryu or something, but right now it's MMA. So at this moment, anyone who claims to train MMA and is not truly training for rule set of sport MMA competitions is misrepresenting himself (intentionally or unintentionally).

To say "I train in a mix of martial arts such as ..... with a primary focus in ..." is way way different then saying "I am a mixed martial artist".

Of course in the end MMA is really a throwback to what martial arts used to be (full contact fighting with a variety of rules) before the 70's - 90's where everyone got all metaphysical and became philosopher bar bouncers and poets who were too deadly for physical contact.

Don,

First, I agree with you. Secondly, there is no need to apologize to those who refuse to under basic concepts, methodologies of self defense or fighting. We living in an time when information is readily available and there is no need to live in a vacuum tube of traditionalist mindset. Really, the cover up mentality of not wanting the mixing of arts, cross training, fighting, sports competition is really the culprit. Some individuals despise the methodology of mixing another martial art or concept with Aikido, is that simple.

The ironic thing is, they want everyone to believe and understand Aikido there way. Why should those who enjoy Aikido, but also love to train and mix Aikdio with other arts have to labor in exhaustion with explanations of why we train that way. We share other methods of training without the traditionalist attacking.

Again no need to apologize.

salim
10-14-2007, 10:05 PM
The concepts of Aikido have been obscured beyond belief. The application of Budo have been made to appear less a part of the art in recent decades. Stanley Pranin wrote an interesting article,
"Is O-Sensei Really the Father of Modern Aikido?"

http://www.aikido-iwama.ru/text1_en.html

CNYMike
10-15-2007, 01:30 AM
..... there is no need to apologize to those who refuse to under basic concepts, methodologies of self defense or fighting. We living in an time when information is readily available and there is no need to live in a vacuum tube of traditionalist mindset. Really, the cover up mentality of not wanting the mixing of arts, cross training, fighting, sports competition is really the culprit. Some individuals despise the methodology of mixing another martial art or concept with Aikido, is that simple.

The ironic thing is, they want everyone to believe and understand Aikido there way. Why should those who enjoy Aikido, but also love to train and mix Aikdio with other arts have to labor in exhaustion with explanations of why we train that way. We share other methods of training without the traditionalist attacking ...

Althoough I consider myself a "mellow traditionalist," I'm not against cross training at all. In addition to "traditional" Aikido, I'm doing karate, Jun Fan/JKD, Inosanto Kali, and Pentjak Silat Serak, doing each art once a week, sometimes twice. Keeps me busy. Every morning when I work out on my own, I cycle through things from most of those systems (although Kali has fallen by the wayside a little, I'm sorry to say). When I spar, all those things influence me to one extent or another. So in that sense, I'm "mixing."

But I'm also a big believer in compartmentalization. I also believe that what's going on in martial arts is transmitting a body of knowledge from generation to generation. Doing that requires maintaining the integrity of what's been passed to you. So if I were to become an instructor in any of the arts I'm doing, I would teach that art as I learned/understood it and not pile in things from the others. Note I put that in general terms; that applies to everything I do, not just Aikido. Yes, in both Jun Fan/JKD and Aikido there is wiggle room; no on teaches those arts exactly the way they learned them, and students of any given insturcotr would be different from their intructor and each other. But I think there are limits; you wiggle to far, you're not transmitting the art anymore. If that's not important to you, don't do it, but it is important to me.

So my approach to Aikido is likely to stay "traditional" for the whole of my career in that art. That doesn't mean I won't do other things along side it. That doesn't mean I'll turn up my nose at the training methods in other systems. But I won't pile things from different systems together and call it "Aikido;" if I called it anything it would have its own name to reflect that it's my thinking and not someone else's. Again, if you don't agree with me, fine, don't. It's a free country. But I feel very strongly that that is how I should approach my training and that is what I will continue to do.

DonMagee
10-15-2007, 06:52 AM
Maybe. Or maybe it's the other way -- that sparring/freestyle training is designed to explore an art's techniques in the sort of random format, so you have to start with what the art does. Consequently, since Aikido "as it is practiced" doesn't do kickboxing and doesn't (generally) roll around on the ground but appears to be sandwiched in between those two ranges, kickboxing and ground fighting just don't fit for Aikido. Yes, one can explore how to apply Aikido against attacks from kickboxing and grappling, but IMO that requires starting with a grounding in the princples of Aiki, timing, and so forth, which one can only get from having practiced it for years; and then knowing those rules, one can as oneself, "Ok, so how does that apply when a attack is driven less by charging and more by a short sharp body rotation?"

Start with the art, learn what it does, where that type of training gets you, and work from there. You want to do the reverse, fine, that reminds me of that old chestnut about square pegs and round holes.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. If you are saying you need to learn the arts techniques before sparing, then I agree with you. Other then that, I'm not sure what you are saying.

Sorry.

CNYMike
10-15-2007, 11:24 AM
Honestly, I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. If you are saying you need to learn the arts techniques before sparing, then I agree with you. Other then that, I'm not sure what you are saying.

Sorry.

And I don't know how I could have been any clearer. What threw you?

mathewjgano
10-15-2007, 01:36 PM
...Why should those who enjoy Aikido, but also love to train and mix Aikdio with other arts have to labor in exhaustion with explanations of why we train that way. We share other methods of training without the traditionalist attacking.

Again no need to apologize.

I'm not so sure that's what Don was replying to in the post of his you responded to. I'm pretty sure the only thing he was addressing here was the distinction between the new phenominon of MMA and the idea of mixing martial arts.
I think there are purists in every style of martial art. Some are dojo purists who don't want to train in any other dojo than their own; more are style purists who feel theirs is superior to some degree. Personally, I can't think of a time I've seen an Aikidoka say one couldn't mix their training...though granted I'm not always paying much attention. I've heard people say they don't think they need to, and I agree that's a dangerous mentality. Any perspective is improved when it comes from more than one point of reference...that's how our 2-D eyes form a 3-D image allowing us to see depth much better and the same is true for martial training.

Ketsan
10-15-2007, 01:57 PM
I have a possibly daft idea here, let me just bounce it around and we'll see where it goes. I think we're too busy trying to use Aiki as a tactical principle "How do I defeat x using Aikido" or "How do I over come x using Aikido" might be a better way of putting it.
I think (emphasis on think) we should be using Aiki as a strategic principle "Do I need to defeat x or do I just need to be in one piece at the end of the encounter?"

The former, I feel, is a competition/sport based mindset. You have turned up for a fight and you must win it. The second, I feel, is a martial mindset. You are in trouble, you must get out of it.

If I during the course of my day come across a boxer that wants to beat me up it makes far more sence for me to keep my mai-ai and force him to come across it, onto my atemi and then technique than it does to stand in his mai-ai and risk getting punched. Obviously there are exceptions to this, I might literally be boxed into a corner etc, but overall I've been taught how to move, been taught to keep mai-ai, in short, I know how to make it difficult for someone to hit me. I am, reletively speaking, safe, let him throw punches and exhaust himself. Let him goof up, come storming at me and get thrown.

Just a thought.

mathewjgano
10-15-2007, 02:36 PM
The concepts of Aikido have been obscured beyond belief. The application of Budo have been made to appear less a part of the art in recent decades. Stanley Pranin wrote an interesting article,
"Is O-Sensei Really the Father of Modern Aikido?"

http://www.aikido-iwama.ru/text1_en.html

Conceptually? I disagree. i think the concepts are there just fine for the most part. Practicality? Can't say for sure, but fairly certain that varies from school to school; person to person.
I think the essence of what OSensei taught is still present in Aikido today. Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure because I never trained with OSensei, but if I had to make an educated guess, that would be it. I've done a highly Ki-society oriented style and Shodokan/Tomiki style; both felt different from each other, but both were very much the same. One uses competition; the other doesn't; both seem pretty potent to me. Both seem to have involved a high level of feeling the way through the technique and it's there that I think the real learning takes place. When you can experience having people find and exploit openings, you find out how to not create them. The better your training partner, the more you tend to learn. The thing i really like about aikido training, per my own experiences anyway, is exactly that ability to begin from a powerful-feeling posture, move with that same kind of feeling, and finish with it, ready to move again at a moment's notice. Mix that with continually practicing with different partners who are doing the same thing and it's awesome. Granted, I can see how there might be different levels of awareness/proficiency; different areas of focus, etc. I agree there must be some who simply don't get it, or aren't looking as much for the ability to physically overcome another person, but I think "Aikido" is perfectly oriented for teaching someone how to maneuver quickly, with power.

salim
10-15-2007, 07:07 PM
Conceptually? I disagree. i think the concepts are there just fine for the most part. Practicality? Can't say for sure, but fairly certain that varies from school to school; person to person.
I think the essence of what OSensei taught is still present in Aikido today. Of course, I have no way of knowing for sure because I never trained with OSensei, but if I had to make an educated guess, that would be it. I've done a highly Ki-society oriented style and Shodokan/Tomiki style; both felt different from each other, but both were very much the same. One uses competition; the other doesn't; both seem pretty potent to me. Both seem to have involved a high level of feeling the way through the technique and it's there that I think the real learning takes place. When you can experience having people find and exploit openings, you find out how to not create them. The better your training partner, the more you tend to learn. The thing i really like about aikido training, per my own experiences anyway, is exactly that ability to begin from a powerful-feeling posture, move with that same kind of feeling, and finish with it, ready to move again at a moment's notice. Mix that with continually practicing with different partners who are doing the same thing and it's awesome. Granted, I can see how there might be different levels of awareness/proficiency; different areas of focus, etc. I agree there must be some who simply don't get it, or aren't looking as much for the ability to physically overcome another person, but I think "Aikido" is perfectly oriented for teaching someone how to maneuver quickly, with power.

I strongly suggest you read the article thoroughly. Stanley Pranin stated, "spread of aikido following the war taking place under the direct tutelage of the founder is fundamentally in error. Tohei and the present Doshu deserve the lion's share of the credit, not the founder. It means further that O-Sensei Morihei Ueshiba was not seriously involved in the instruction or administration of aikido in the postwar years. He was already long retired and very focused on his personal training, spiritual development, travel and social activities. Also, it should be noted that, despite his stereotyped image as a gentle, kind old man, O-Sensei was also the possessor of piercing eyes and a heroic temper. His presence was not always sought at the Hombu Dojo due to his critical comments and frequent outbursts. This is the truth of the matter as attested to by numerous first-hand witnesses."

Aikido as it is taught today in most instances, is not directly from the founder.

One one if his direct students, Hiroshi Isoyama stated, "As you know, O-Sensei never wrote much about aikido in books, although some of this techniques are recorded in Budo. Sometimes I've wondered why he didn't write more about aikido, but on the other hand, I think I might understand: his thinking gradually evolved, and he may have felt that anything he wrote in his younger years would potentially end up being contradictory to his thinking later on. The same is true of his techniques: if he had said anything definitive about them at any point, he might have ended up contradicting himself later on as he evolved.

Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings.

When O-Sensei taught he never gave any particularly detailed explanations."

Stefan Stenudd
10-16-2007, 06:31 AM
I had a look at the videos on the skinnymonkey YouTube account. The third aiki-boxing shows significant improvement from the first one - both the aiki and the boxing side of it :)
Here it is, if you didn't already know:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6Q8ShKpM1Q

It is very difficult to compare martial arts, mainly because of their rules differing so much, and also because one tends to adapt to one of the two arts when trying them out together.
For example, in the first video, I got the impression that the aiki-guy moved more like in boxing than in aikido - stepping sideways instead of forward. In the third video, especially the first half of it, the aiki-guy moves more like in aikido. Irimi steps.

Not that I imagine to be that accomplished at it, but I guess that one needs to stick to aiki steps and principles, and go for the body more than those quick boxer arms. I would probably try iriminage nine out of ten times.
A wrist technique probably needs to be applied from a clinch distance, not at arms length. You go in close, apply a wrist grip, and then step out for the throw or pinning.

Anyway, it is clear that you guys experimenting with it have great fun, and that you improve. I am curious as to what it will look like in a year or so.

skinnymonkey
10-16-2007, 08:05 AM
Thanks Stefan! I'm glad you liked it. I'm curious what it will look like in a year or so as well! Your suggestions are very good. We'll try to keep them in mind next time we do this. The 3rd experiment felt a lot better from the Aiki side (for me). We haven't been catching as much flack for the boxing on the 3rd one, so I guess that has improved too! Either way, it keeps us on our toes and we are having a lot of fun with it, so we'll keep on moving forward.

Thanks again for your input.

Jeff D.

mathewjgano
10-16-2007, 03:05 PM
I strongly suggest you read the article thoroughly. Stanley Pranin stated, "...Tohei and the present Doshu deserve the lion's share of the credit, not the founder."
Another difficulty is that different people have tended to interpret O-Sensei's words in different ways, even though he may have actually said the same thing to all of them. People then end up expressing their own interpretation as if they had absorbed all of what he meant, leading in turn to small variances and eventually to misunderstandings.

When O-Sensei taught he never gave any particularly detailed explanations."
I didn't say this wasn't the case. OSensei taught a lot of people, but it was the Shihan who went out around the world and popularized it. I get that. Their students, and so on and so forth will continue to do it too. I believe the principles OSensei taught are alive and well is all I was trying to say. I can't speak for most of Aikido because I've not come even close to experiencing it.
I don't doubt there are mistakes of understanding which have occured. I imagine it a bit like the parable of the 3 blind men and the elephant: all three have very different ideas of what the elephant feels like. In a sense, all three are wrong about what the elephant "really" looks like. As it relates to Aikido, still, through experiencing other methods (whether from different schools, styles or people), one can begin to get a pretty good idea of what's strong about each.

DonMagee
10-16-2007, 03:18 PM
Thanks Stefan! I'm glad you liked it. I'm curious what it will look like in a year or so as well! Your suggestions are very good. We'll try to keep them in mind next time we do this. The 3rd experiment felt a lot better from the Aiki side (for me). We haven't been catching as much flack for the boxing on the 3rd one, so I guess that has improved too! Either way, it keeps us on our toes and we are having a lot of fun with it, so we'll keep on moving forward.

Thanks again for your input.

Jeff D.

I'd like to point out that in no way are any of my posts saying what you are doing is a bad thing. I just was re-reading the thread and was afraid I might be coming off that way. I think what you are doing is a good idea.

skinnymonkey
10-16-2007, 03:56 PM
Thanks Don... I didn't take it that way so no problems here.

I always appreciate a spirited debate as long as I can learn something from it.

Jeff D.

Bob King
10-17-2007, 07:32 AM
[QUOTE=Larry Camejo;191622]Hi Robert,

I daresay attempting entries from other arts will only help one in developing tsukuri that will be best suited to execute waza from those arts, but will not assist one in developing the Aikido responses to that scenario.

The challenge is to improve my own Aiki waza to a place where it works just as well as a well trained approach from any other method. But to do this I need to fully understand and be able to execute those elements that make up sound, effective Aiki waza.

I have found that traditional Tai Sabaki (especially the way it's done in Shodokan) is quite effective at getting one into position to execute Aiki waza in the Boxing situation. The problem however does not lie in the physical response but the mental.

Btw, do you have a copy of "Aikido: Tradition and the Competitive Edge" by F. Shishida and T. Nariyama?

Larry,

Yep, have the book and have read it once or twice, need to read it again.

I agree that Shodokan taisabaki is effective, as it is not much different in footwork than basic boxing is. I'm not sure that all styles taisabaki is the same, what little I have seen of other styles seems too big, too circular to respond well to sharp blows (jabs and crosses). And taisabaki as Shodokand and Nariyama teaches it is not always that effective, the famous story (in Ohio at least it's famous) of Nariyama getting shot in the chest six times with a burning cotton wad proved that without a doubt. He was quick to admit that getting out of the way of a boken is quite different than a cotton wad shot from a .38.

As to my goals from this excercise, they are multiple, but mostly to become a more effective combatant and improve the use of my Shodokan techniques: "to fully understand and be able to execute those elements that make up sound, effective Aiki waza". Well put summary.

When I referenced other entries I was not really thinking of doing DLTs, more like using hubud/lubud or bagua and tai chi redirections (pardon my misspelling for anyone who is a kali practioner) to close the gap and make faster initial contact and entry possible. Once, as you state, we go to the ground it isn't shodokan anymore, it's ground grappling.

Thanks for your insight and comments. Oh, and welcome to the JAA/USA, I see you are applying for membership. That is great, welcome aboard!

L. Camejo
10-17-2007, 08:56 AM
And taisabaki as Shodokand and Nariyama teaches it is not always that effective, the famous story (in Ohio at least it's famous) of Nariyama getting shot in the chest six times with a burning cotton wad proved that without a doubt. He was quick to admit that getting out of the way of a boken is quite different than a cotton wad shot from a .38.Now that is quite an interesting story. Would love to hear the details via PM. Being a gun nut myself I'd like to know the range, conditions etc. at which this was attempted. I've never heard that story but it makes perfect sense to me. The beauty of using a cotton wad is that mentally you WILL aim to hit. Even though Ueshiba M. dodged the six police gunmen firing live rounds during his challenge there is another story where he faced a friend of a young Gozo Shioda, a rifleman and he knew even before a shot was made that he could not escape that man's bullet. This guy would have shot to kill also.

This brings an important point to your testing - mindset. This is partially why it is difficult to balance safety with reality. The real attack comes with certain psychological elements that are impossible to replicate in a "test" environment. This of course can make the test a lot more difficult or easy depending on the test. Recently we had the Kendo club go at us with Shinai (we put on the Men to protect our noggins) what we quickly found out was that if the Kendoka used bokken or tried a more powerful stroke with the Shinai (i.e. in an attempt to really hurt the attacker) we would be able to avoid and execute waza on most occasions. However, after realising what was happening they modified their strikes by pulling it short at the last second or by doing quick snap strokes (not full powered cuts). The change in mindset resulted in it being more difficult to avoid and we got hit most times, so the experience was most enlightening. The reality was however that even if they did hit us it would probably not end the fight at that point and we'd be inside where they had no defence.

Bringing this back to Aiki-Boxing - the gloves on the Boxer would enable him to be a bit more free with his striking power (this is good from an Aiki perspective), but due to the size of the gloves the potential for certain Aiki waza (esp. kansetsu waza) is reduced. We see this in the videos as the more effective waza tend to be those going for the body and not the limbs. You can move to smaller gloves, but the safety factor diminishes and your partner may hold back more, making things more difficult. As I indicated in an earlier post, you also saw how putting on gloves as the Aikidoka also modified your movements, which was as a result in your changed mindset now that you had gloves and could strike in a different manner.

My own experience in this sort of training says that there may be some benefit in presenting a clear, easy target to your opponent (lead his mind) so that he dedicates an attack and then remove the target at the last instant as you enter. I use this in tanto randori and it never fails as long as I am relaxed enough to move efficiently and at the right time. Also, from using this in sparring against Kendo, Judo and Jujutsu it also worked, but one has to be willing to almost taste the strike so that when you do move at the last instant there is no possibility of recovery for the Boxer.

Thanks for your insight and comments. Oh, and welcome to the JAA/USA, I see you are applying for membership. That is great, welcome aboard!Lol. Wow it doesn't take long for ones business to get out does it? :D Thanks, I hope we can do the organization justice.:)

Regards.
LC:ai::ki:

DonMagee
10-17-2007, 09:12 AM
I would recommend a glove like
http://www.combatsports.com/detail.aspx?ID=22614 or http://www.combatsports.com/detail.aspx?ID=22292

Not much noticeable difference from the impact of a boxing glove, but a lot smaller footprint, and it's possible to control the hand better.

Bob King
10-17-2007, 02:40 PM
[QUOTE=Larry Camejo;191819]"Now that is quite an interesting story. Would love to hear the details via PM. "

I'll send that on a PM later! It is very good story.

"However, after realising what was happening they modified their strikes by pulling it short at the last second or by doing quick snap strokes (not full powered cuts). The change in mindset resulted in it being more difficult to avoid and we got hit most times, so the experience was most enlightening. The reality was however that even if they did hit us it would probably not end the fight at that point and we'd be inside where they had no defence."

I agree whoeheratedly mind set is all important. When there is no "real" danger (often seen in tanto randori matches) we react totally differntly thatn when we percieve the attack as "real" and react from the superconcious/instantaneous part of our mind instead of the thinking side if that makse sense. Wish I had better words for that concept.

"My own experience in this sort of training says that there may be some benefit in presenting a clear, easy target to your opponent (lead his mind) so that he dedicates an attack and then remove the target at the last instant as you enter."

Another good point and it atkes great deal of centering to be able to present that target, good goals to work on. Domo arigato!

"Lol. Wow it doesn't take long for ones business to get out does it? :D Thanks, I hope we can do the organization justice.:)"

I'm sure you will do us justice, Larry, it's great to have you joining. We have been contemplating for a while about how to make it a Pan-American organization (instead of just USA) since we have associated clubs in Brazil already as well. And as to knowing your business, it helps that I'm on the board. Got that inside track!

Bob King
10-17-2007, 02:42 PM
I would recommend a glove like
http://www.combatsports.com/detail.aspx?ID=22614 or http://www.combatsports.com/detail.aspx?ID=22292

Not much noticeable difference from the impact of a boxing glove, but a lot smaller footprint, and it's possible to control the hand better.

Thanks Don, those do look very applicable. Need to put them on this year's Christmas list.