PDA

View Full Version : "Aikido is for wusses": a response?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


pugtm
05-03-2007, 03:57 PM
I am not taking aikido yet but i plan to start in the next few months.So i was talking to a friend who takes Hapkido but a more aggressive version made up by a former bouncer who made it way more violent. So i was talking to someone who was interested also in taking aikido and this person taking aikido said aikido is for wusses. Your response? I think there is something to his statement that shows his lack of spirit and also ignorance. In my opinion it takes more courage to not just violently lash out, but i thought i would put it to aikidoka for your opinion or response or rebuttal.

gdandscompserv
05-03-2007, 04:06 PM
Hahahahaha.
Funny stuff.

Aristeia
05-03-2007, 05:04 PM
maybe it is. And maybe that's a good thing. Why to something that is only for bad asses. Bad asses are already bad, they don't need training. It's the "wussies" who most need martial arts - no? Or were you commenting on effectiveness?

SeiserL
05-03-2007, 05:07 PM
So i was talking to someone who was interested also in taking aikido and this person taking aikido said aikido is for wusses. Your response?
IMHO, it sounds like a statement made from an ignorant and arrogant spectator who never spent much time on the mat with someone who really knew Aikido.

OTOH, the way Aikido is often practiced, he is correct.

pugtm
05-03-2007, 05:42 PM
sorry correction to my post. Person taking hapkido said "aikido is for wusses".

aikidoc
05-03-2007, 05:47 PM
2nd Lynn.

Ecosamurai
05-03-2007, 05:54 PM
sorry correction to my post. Person taking hapkido said "aikido is for wusses".

Sounds like good old fashioned martial posturing to me. Ignore it.

I'll give you another example of the posturing I'm talking about. You do Kendo right? couple of weeks ago, after keiko we were putting away our bogu and stuff. Some people came in to the room we use after our time was up and set up the badminton net and some other guys came and put the table-tennis table up and started playing.

One of the table tennis guys went off somewhere (presumably to get some table tennis balls or something), the other guy stood watching us in our keikogi and hakama packing up our bogu.

When I next glanced in his direction I saw him practicing kicks, high fancy ones. Clearly doing it for our benefit trying to show that he too was a martial artist.

Quite what makes someone so insecure I'm not sure but IME they often tend to come out with statements that sound like the one your friend made. Often strangely critical of other arts that they haven't really tried and know little about. I've encountered so many people who say things like 'yeah but aikido doesn't do this or that' only to have me do that to them.

One of my favourite quotes is from a student of Chiba Sensei (does anyone know the name of the person in question by the way?): "He said there were no strikes in aikido, so I hit him again"

Regards

Mike

George S. Ledyard
05-03-2007, 06:17 PM
Aikido is an art for people who don't care what the guys in Hapkido think.

Qatana
05-03-2007, 06:25 PM
We have a shodan in our dojo who is a Grand Master in hapkido. He doesn't think aikido is wussie at all!

Lorien Lowe
05-03-2007, 06:42 PM
aikido isn't for people who fight for social status.

Aikibu
05-03-2007, 06:59 PM
Are you a wuss? Or...do you wonder if you're a wuss for taking Aikido???

Among the Aikido posters here are Combat Veterans...Law Enforcement Officers... Ex- Thugs...
Housewives...Ninjas...Vikings...Tranvestites...and ALL OF THEM can kick that guy's butt. So...if you are a wuss and you want to learn how not be be you've come to the right place. :D

William Hazen

pugtm
05-03-2007, 07:38 PM
here's were i stand on this issue. I have great respect for any true martial art and anyone who takes it seriously. I'm not training to kill someone i just want to be better than i am and also enjoy myself. otherwise id be practicing with firearms and bayonets. that story about the table tennis is really funny though. should have used the forbidden technique on him(scrotum tski). Sounds like a TKD mcdojo practitioner. I always get a good laugh when they show up...
But back on topic what i really want to do is take aikido and just flip him into a wall... Oh well maybe in a year or two...
but his main complaint is that Aikido is too soft on the opponent and the locks it employs aren't going to hurt the opponent or knock him out. But on the other hand i think boxing isn't a martial art. It has to have a spirit and honor otherwise it's just two animals beating each other bloody.

Aristeia
05-03-2007, 08:44 PM
you're right and you're wrong.
He thinks the techniques are too soft? Assume that the technique works - what happens to a lock if you keep applying it? If you *really* want to knock someone out it's a trivial matter once both their arms are broken I would have thought.

Where you're wrong is in thinking that boxing isn't a martial art.

maxwelljones
05-03-2007, 09:09 PM
It's especially telling that such a comment comes from a practitioner of a related art such as hapkido. I'm not exactly sure what it tells me, but it has to be more than coincidence. Most of the people I hear making such remarks are supporters of a specific body art, and/or believe that MMA is the ultimate determination of who's a badass and who's a wuss who's wasting time with some art that's too pitiful to show its pimply face in the ring.

It's a childish remark that any special discipline is "for wusses." It's simply invective. It's meaningless, especially if you use the discipline, regardless of what it is, to achieve excellence within its own context. You can achieve excellence in everything from rapid-fire pistol to ikebana.

pugtm
05-03-2007, 09:34 PM
ha ikebana. my parents made fun of me when i told them that one day i hope to learn it. Of course there are a lot of Japanese things id like to learn. I just don't know if ill live long enough.

ramenboy
05-03-2007, 10:07 PM
...He thinks the techniques are too soft? Assume that the technique works - what happens to a lock if you keep applying it? If you *really* want to knock someone out it's a trivial matter once both their arms are broken I would have thought...

yeah...this is a topic that really bugs me. it actually happened earlier this week at our iaido dojo. its a great dojo, we have great teachers, and the students are all serious about iai. its made up of a few of us who study aikido, someone from karate, a retired police officer, and the balance (the bulk of the group) are kendoists. so a pretty varied background. however, there's this one cat who's done kendo and (as he puts it) 'various martial arts for many years.' i was talking to sensei after class, and my girlfriend was talking to others on the other side of dojo. this guy here's her talking about how iai and aikido compliment each other, and he pipes up that he has 'an issue' with people who do aikido. he proceeded to say that he doesn't want to 'dance around with someone' and just lay down when the person wants him to. he said there's no finishing techniques. he boasted that 'if we get to this point (he puts his arm in a shihonage position) '...i'd break the elbow'. well, that's why we learn to take ukemi, so we don't get our elbows broken...

anyways, he'd never mention that to me, or the others who study aikido there. he jumped all over a girl and tried to turn into macho man. so my girfriend said, 'well that's cool. if you could break everyone's elbow that you practice with, how long will it take them to get better so you practice again?' that burned him up. (i'm so proud of her!)

some people don't get it.

:hypno:

Edward
05-03-2007, 11:04 PM
I do agree that the way it is practiced at some dojos gives this kind of impression, especially the manierism which I dislike the most.

xuzen
05-04-2007, 03:11 AM
Of course Aikido are for wusses... we even have a highlight video with EM1N3M's Uber cool track to groove with it...

Ask him whether HapkiDon't has any of this?

Enjoy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8wNjCScMUw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ebullshido%2Enet%2Fforums%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D52452)

Boon.

crbateman
05-04-2007, 07:38 AM
Aikido is for everybody... even wusses...:)

Dewey
05-04-2007, 07:47 AM
Jerks are jerks, and that will never change. As they say: "you can't fix stupid." The problem with "tough guys" is that the only language they understand is physical force. The other problem is that they never really ever grew up. Just like the bullies we remember as children, they're compensating for their personal insecurities & inadequacies. Just keep that in mind whenever a "tough guy" venomously attacks Aikido, or any other martial art for that matter, that doesn't fit their criteria. Learning how to fight is not the same thing as learning self-defense skills.

All that matters is what you bring to Aikido. As has been also said, low-intensity training also contributes to this "wussie" reputation...a problem not unique to Aikido but exists in all martial arts. However, if you bring the intensity to practice (not machismo), it's not uncommon for it to become "infectious" amongst your fellow students...at least I have experienced this in my own dojo. It's not the Sensei's responsibility to "pump up" his students...they should bring their own initiative & desire to train.

The frustrating beauty & genius of Aikido that I have discovered for myself is that it is both a "hard" and "soft" martial art simultaneously. That is, there is a continuum of force in existence within Aikido and its techniques. As such, they can range anywhere from a well-choreographed dance to brutal bone-crushing jujutsu...with an infinite spectrum in between. Aikido is most certainly not for "wussies!"

gdandscompserv
05-04-2007, 08:05 AM
What's a wuss?

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 08:27 AM
Jerks are jerks, and that will never change. As they say: "you can't fix stupid." The problem with "tough guys" is that the only language they understand is physical force. The other problem is that they never really ever grew up. Just like the bullies we remember as children, they're compensating for their personal insecurities & inadequacies. Just keep that in mind whenever a "tough guy" venomously attacks Aikido, or any other martial art for that matter, that doesn't fit their criteria.

Made me think of something even funnier than the table tennis guy actually. Last year at the freshers recruitment fair at the uni club here in Aberdeen, a guy came to the aikido stand and started chatting to me and said that his friend who'd done karate had told him that aikido was rubbish and 'didn't work'. I said that I could understand why a karate student might say that but that his friend was mistaken and that a common view of aikido by someone who does karate is that it doesn't work because you just can't grab a punch and apply a writstlock as it's too fast. I then described to him how you would apply a wristlock from a quick jab (kotegaeshi in this case) he offered his arm and as soon as I touched it I knew he was going to be a real pain about it all (he was obviously quite physically strong and wanted to prove aikido 'didn't work'), I knew I'd be able to put the kote gaeshi on him and I also knew it would be messy and risked injuring him not to mention that we weren't in any sort of a place where I'd be willing to do that to someone. So I just let him walk away thinking he was right and aikido was crap and ineffective, suited me and I certainly wasn't bothered.

A few months later he showed up at kendo and took part in a lesson. While we were waiting for our turn in a line to perform some exercise I looked over and saw that while he was waiting he had decided to punch the wall repeatedly. Presumably because he felt unhappy about the room having walls and they had clearly offended him by their grisly determination to keep the ceiling up above us.

Regards

Mike

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 08:37 AM
Is typical aikido wussy? Maybe. Is typical hapkido less so? I can think of no clear evidence to support that assertion. Having meaner-looking joint locks has little to do with effectiveness or intensity of training.

All that said, yeah, I could see the logic of the fellow's argument. It's just that I don't think it's particularly cogent logic.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 08:42 AM
I knew I'd be able to put the kote gaeshi on him and I also knew it would be messy and risked injuring him not to mention that we weren't in any sort of a place where I'd be willing to do that to someone. So I just let him walk away thinking he was right and aikido was crap and ineffective, suited me and I certainly wasn't bothered.

I hate doing this because it might appear rude, but my honest/scientific side compels me: evidence of (your personal) kotegaeshi being an effective and reliable counter to a jab, please. If you think you can provide that evidence yourself, maybe go to a Bullshido.com throwdown in your area sometime, participate in some friendly sparring, and get it on video. (I don't think you're lying, but I've picked up the habit of "video or it didn't happen". It's not a bad ethic for handling forum claims.)

A few months later he showed up at kendo and took part in a lesson. While we were waiting for our turn in a line to perform some exercise I looked over and saw that while he was waiting he had decided to punch the wall repeatedly. Presumably because he felt unhappy about the room having walls and they had clearly offended him by their grisly determination to keep the ceiling up above us.

Ha! Priceless.

pugtm
05-04-2007, 08:49 AM
A few months later he showed up at kendo and took part in a lesson. While we were waiting for our turn in a line to perform some exercise I looked over and saw that while he was waiting he had decided to punch the wall repeatedly. Presumably because he felt unhappy about the room having walls and they had clearly offended him by their grisly determination to keep the ceiling up above us.
Mike

with his kote on? HAHAHAHAHAHAH priceless

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 09:12 AM
with his kote on? HAHAHAHAHAHAH priceless

No, bare fisted. Even funnier.

Mike

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 09:20 AM
I hate doing this because it might appear rude, but my honest/scientific side compels me: evidence of (your personal) kotegaeshi being an effective and reliable counter to a jab, please. If you think you can provide that evidence yourself, maybe go to a Bullshido.com throwdown in your area sometime, participate in some friendly sparring, and get it on video. (I don't think you're lying, but I've picked up the habit of "video or it didn't happen". It's not a bad ethic for handling forum claims.)

It does appear rude. I have zero desire to provide evidence and publish it on the internet. My desire to feed the idiots and trolls over on bullshido.net is far far far below zero.

It is a bad ethic for handling forum claims because it assumes guilt in the first instance rather than innocence, I don't like the society I live in to function that way. But cos you at least tried to be nice about it I'll explain it to you as best I can (no video, not interested, sorry). At no point in countering a punch or strike of any kind do you ever try to grab the wrist which is the fastest moving part of the strike. Always go for the shoulder and you'll always find a wrist on the end of it unless something is seriously wrong with the guy. It's pretty hard from a jab but easier from a proper punch (they're easier to read). There's more to it than that but I can't really be bothered to explain, and in any case it'd do no good to do so in writing.

Regards

Mike

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 09:30 AM
I can understand that. Maybe I'm letting said "idiots and trolls" have too much sway over my approach to things. They can be very persuasive at times; their methodology can sound quite appealing to an aikidoka with anxieties about "being untested".

As for the kotegaeshi, thanks for the advice. I'd realized that snatching a wrist out of the air is ridiculous, and had some notion of catching the forearm and sliding down. But the shoulder: that actually makes more sense to me in terms of depth of entry. I appreciate you sharing that.

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 09:43 AM
I can understand that. Maybe I'm letting said "idiots and trolls" have too much sway over my approach to things. They can be very persuasive at times; their methodology can sound quite appealing to an aikidoka with anxieties about "being untested".

As for the kotegaeshi, thanks for the advice. I'd realized that snatching a wrist out of the air is ridiculous, and had some notion of catching the forearm and sliding down. But the shoulder: that actually makes more sense to me in terms of depth of entry. I appreciate you sharing that.

No problem :)

The shoulder is the slowest moving part of the punch (other than the hips) if you extend your arm towards it you can often catch a jab by preventing the upper arm moving forwards (or at least slow it down). Depending on your entry though you need to be careful not to leave yourself open to your partners other hand. The last thing you want is to stop a jab only to open yourself up for a left-hook.

Have fun playing with that. I do :D

Mike

jennifer paige smith
05-04-2007, 10:08 AM
2nd Lynn.

Could be said for any dicipline or art.

Aikido is for everyone. Wusses and all. Learning to deal with that and all people is a measure of Agatsu, the product of our training.

Further musings are:
But how does one define 'strong'? I had to be strong through the death and loss of many friends in the last year and Aikido has been my srength. I don't recall kicking anyones @$$ during that time. Although death didn't seem to have the same agenda.

Roman Kremianski
05-04-2007, 11:52 AM
I hate doing this because it might appear rude, but my honest/scientific side compels me: evidence of (your personal) kotegaeshi being an effective and reliable counter to a jab, please. If you think you can provide that evidence yourself, maybe go to a Bullshido.com throwdown in your area sometime, participate in some friendly sparring, and get it on video. (I don't think you're lying, but I've picked up the habit of "video or it didn't happen". It's not a bad ethic for handling forum claims.)

While that's a good idea, I seriously doubt it would mean anything to the Bullshido people. Already a cliche on their forums, they would simply say "Well it wouldn't work on a more skilled opponent".

Every single fight video I've seen always had some Bullshido folks point out that "The opponent sucked. Put Feodor in his place..." etc

In all honesty, even if you put up a video of an Aikidoka controlling an aggressive MMA guy, they would find a million things to rip it up about anyway. That's just the mindset over there.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 12:12 PM
In all honesty, even if you put up a video of an Aikidoka controlling an aggressive MMA guy, they would find a million things to rip it up about anyway. That's just the mindset over there.

I dunno. The whole thing's rather hypothetical. I think a good number might switch over to, "Well, maybe it works in casual matches, but if it were really a useful art, you'd see professionals cross-training in it." I think at that point those people could be easily accused of retreating to the pseudo-reality they claim TMAers inhabit.

Still, for all it's problems, I kind of like the (at least nominal) attitude of evidence-based judgment.

Alfonso
05-04-2007, 12:24 PM
Best you can do is try it yourself and work on your problem with the technique.

Try this; enter to touch the jabbing shoulder (for a right hand jab use the left arm to tap which puts your right arm as cover and slide your hand down the crook of the elbow (tegatana) ; from there you can continue entering or tenkan into uke's elbow when uke recovers balance by stepping forward and turning you should have the wrist for kotegaeshi all served up and ready to go. no wrist catching in that move, and a snapped punch won't be a problem either.

DonMagee
05-04-2007, 12:35 PM
It does appear rude. I have zero desire to provide evidence and publish it on the internet. My desire to feed the idiots and trolls over on bullshido.net is far far far below zero.

It is a bad ethic for handling forum claims because it assumes guilt in the first instance rather than innocence, I don't like the society I live in to function that way. But cos you at least tried to be nice about it I'll explain it to you as best I can (no video, not interested, sorry). At no point in countering a punch or strike of any kind do you ever try to grab the wrist which is the fastest moving part of the strike. Always go for the shoulder and you'll always find a wrist on the end of it unless something is seriously wrong with the guy. It's pretty hard from a jab but easier from a proper punch (they're easier to read). There's more to it than that but I can't really be bothered to explain, and in any case it'd do no good to do so in writing.

Regards

Mike

Actually I do not believe it assumes guilt. Simply stated it is impossible to prove a negative. I can not prove you can't do a wrist lock on a jab. I can not prove I did not rob that store. It is up to the person making a claim to prove what they say is true. This is how science works. Even in the court, the prosecution is saying this guy robbed a store. Now the burden is on them to prove it. If I say I can knock you out over the internet with my chi, it is up to me to prove it, not for you to disprove it. You said it is possible to apply a wrist lock on a arm used to jab. It is up to you to prove it.

However your description on how to do this (by going though the shoulder) is sufficient to me because I already do this. I do not feel this is applying a lock to a jab however, it is simply an easy way to get to the wrist, one that is used in MMA today, namely clinch and grab the wrist. Of course they usually don't wrist lock from there. But the logic is sound.

The problem I see is you feel someone is calling you a liar for challenging you to prove your statements. This is not so.

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 01:15 PM
The problem I see is you feel someone is calling you a liar for challenging you to prove your statements. This is not so.

Yeah. Can't be bothered to get into it, it's a waste of effort to nitpick.

Mike

maxwelljones
05-04-2007, 01:51 PM
I have a confession to make, if it's any more or less relevant to the notion of Aikido being for wusses.

I *AM* a wuss. In each of my keiko thus far (and I haven't had many ...) I've had little issues, like splinters from my jo, my knees when I first sit down, my toes doing shikko sabaki, and especially my keikogi which fits my very atypical body shape poorly, the trousers constantly falling down, etc. I press on, but I groan and whine, so I'm still a wuss.

Basia Halliop
05-04-2007, 02:02 PM
I am not taking aikido yet but i plan to start in the next few months

So, find a dojo that you think you'd like to practice at and try it for a few months, and see what you think yourself. If it doesn't suit you, either because you personally find it 'wussy', or for whatever reason, then stop. If you try it and don't find it wussy (or even if you find it kind of wussy but like it just fine anyway) then go ahead and keep doing it and don't worry about your friend.

It's not like you're asking him to take it up himself or anything.:rolleyes:

Demetrio Cereijo
05-04-2007, 02:24 PM
I dunno. The whole thing's rather hypothetical. I think a good number might switch over to, "Well, maybe it works in casual matches, but if it were really a useful art, you'd see professionals cross-training in it." I think at that point those people could be easily accused of retreating to the pseudo-reality they claim TMAers inhabit.

Still, for all it's problems, I kind of like the (at least nominal) attitude of evidence-based judgment.

You don't know what BS.net is about, isn't it?

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 02:31 PM
You don't know what BS.net is about, isn't it?

Maybe I'm a shade too credulous. So far, though, I mostly buy into their logic. It's pretty convincing. "A good martial art should be demonstrably effective against an active adversary."

Ecosamurai
05-04-2007, 02:36 PM
Maybe I'm a shade too credulous. So far, though, I mostly buy into their logic. It's pretty convincing. "A good martial art should be demonstrably effective against an active adversary."

What you mean like aikido is...?

What is it exactly that you mean by 'effective' (MMA types never define it as it is always the weakness in their logic and where there argument falls down) and 'active adversary' :confused:

Mike

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 03:06 PM
What is it exactly that you mean by 'effective' (MMA types never define it as it is always the weakness in their logic and where there argument falls down) and 'active adversary' :confused:

I seem to recall aikido masters telling challengers, "Please come at me any way you like." That seems like a fair model.

maxwelljones
05-04-2007, 03:31 PM
It's not possible to safely or ethically replicate "street" conditions in training. MMA nuts often believe the fight ring does, but it doesn't any better than anything else. And the notion that we shouldn't be using our art "on the street" without good reason should be obvious to children as well as adults. We *ARE* training for "the street," or rather we should, regardless of whether it's our primary concern, but it's impossible to verify the efficacy of our training methods in this matter.

Mike Haftel
05-04-2007, 03:32 PM
No problem :)

The shoulder is the slowest moving part of the punch (other than the hips) if you extend your arm towards it you can often catch a jab by preventing the upper arm moving forwards (or at least slow it down). Depending on your entry though you need to be careful not to leave yourself open to your partners other hand. The last thing you want is to stop a jab only to open yourself up for a left-hook.

Have fun playing with that. I do :D

Mike

In my experience, the hips move quite fast whilst punching. At least, they should since the speed of one's hip movement directly affects the speed and efficiency of the strike.

pugtm
05-04-2007, 05:26 PM
true on one hand that even mma isn't true street fighting but isn't it somewhat closer to it?

pugtm
05-04-2007, 06:00 PM
So, find a dojo that you think you'd like to practice at and try it for a few months, and see what you think yourself. If it doesn't suit you, either because you personally find it 'wussy', or for whatever reason, then stop. If you try it and don't find it wussy (or even if you find it kind of wussy but like it just fine anyway) then go ahead and keep doing it and don't worry about your friend.

It's not like you're asking him to take it up himself or anything.:rolleyes:
yeah i know but as a fellow martial artist i was insulted for you. So i though Aikidoka should get a chance to answer it.

Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???

graham
05-04-2007, 06:15 PM
I certainly hope Aikido is for wussies. Why should they be excluded from practicing such a fine and fun martial art?

However, it is weird that such a complaint would come from a Hapkido practitioner. He sounds as ignorant about his own art as he is Aikido!

gdandscompserv
05-04-2007, 06:20 PM
Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???
they're afraid of us?:D

maxwelljones
05-04-2007, 06:22 PM
Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???

Most of the people I hear making such remarks are supporters of a specific body art, and/or believe that MMA is the ultimate determination of who's a badass and who's a wuss who's wasting time with some art that's too pitiful to show its pimply face in the ring.

Bullshido.com is largely unmoderated, and its stated goal is to attack those schools that they view as inferior. As a result it's packed with individuals who insist on telling everyone how much more manly they are than everyone else. But if you're asking why they seem to target aikido specifically, the reasons seem to be that aikidoka are generally unwilling to "prove" themselves in mixed martial arts competitions, honor odd Japanese traditions, and deemphasize the the use of force in favor of the use of ki.

Incidentally, I've wondered why they don't have the same ire for, say, iaido. It's not because they're afraid of getting cut in half.

Mike Haftel
05-04-2007, 09:48 PM
Bullshido.com is largely unmoderated, and its stated goal is to attack those schools that they view as inferior. As a result it's packed with individuals who insist on telling everyone how much more manly they are than everyone else. But if you're asking why they seem to target aikido specifically, the reasons seem to be that aikidoka are generally unwilling to "prove" themselves in mixed martial arts competitions, honor odd Japanese traditions, and deemphasize the the use of force in favor of the use of ki.

Incidentally, I've wondered why they don't have the same ire for, say, iaido. It's not because they're afraid of getting cut in half.

It's because Aikidoka generally try and argue with them and try to justify how effective they think Aikido is. While, on the other hand, Iaido has no real claim to "street effectiveness" because the art's focus is not on combat, but on drawing the sword and use of kata.

That, and you can't exactly carry a sword around and use it in a fight in today's society.

People won't pick on you over at bullshido.net as long as you have no grand illusions about what your own abilities are and about what you think your art represents or embodies.

I love Aikido. I really do.

But, I've never met anybody who could really defend themselves by relying SOLELY on the principles and techniques learnt in the typical Aikido curriculum around today.

I think that is what a lot of people are implying when they argue about an art's effecitiveness.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 09:52 PM
yeah i know but as a fellow martial artist i was insulted for you. So i though Aikidoka should get a chance to answer it.

Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???

BS.net's big thing is aliveness and empirical demonstration. Aliveness means training with an actively resisting partner who has a way of "winning" the interaction. As for empirical demonstration, well, they generally favor arts that people have trained in and showed in cross-art sparring matches. E.g., they like judo, because people who know judo have demonstrated that it "works" in a freestyle competition. They like Muay Thai for the same reason. And so on.

Basically, going off of what Mike said above, they take issue with people saying, "Yeah, well I could throw that MMA guy by redirecting his energy." And they respond, "Okay. Why don't you and him have a sparring match so you can demonstrate this?" Aikido people typically just shut up at that point. Having seen nothing to change their minds, the BS.Net people retain their view that aikido is ineffective, and call the aikido person a twit for making ostentatious claims.

Regarding the topic of this thread, though, BS.net has much the same complaint about hapkido as it does about aikido.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-04-2007, 10:19 PM
Basically, going off of what Mike said above, they take issue with people saying, "Yeah, well I could throw that MMA guy by redirecting his energy." And they respond, "Okay. Why don't you and him have a sparring match so you can demonstrate this?" Aikido people typically just shut up at that point. Having seen nothing to change their minds, the BS.Net people retain their view that aikido is ineffective, and call the aikido person a twit for making ostentatious claims.

I'd like to clarify that I've never actually seen such an exchange happen in precisely those terms. Rather, I think it's more that BS.netters take issue with aikido people who talk about their art and training being "effective" without any repeatable evidence. On the other hand, the arts they consider legit have, in their view, proven their utility time and again.

Dewey
05-04-2007, 10:54 PM
Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???

Bullshido.com is largely unmoderated, and its stated goal is to attack those schools that they view as inferior. As a result it's packed with individuals who insist on telling everyone how much more manly they are than everyone else. But if you're asking why they seem to target aikido specifically, the reasons seem to be that aikidoka are generally unwilling to "prove" themselves in mixed martial arts competitions, honor odd Japanese traditions, and deemphasize the the use of force in favor of the use of ki.

Take the jackasses at Bullshido, and any martial arts forum for that matter, with a grain of salt. Anyone can be a "virtual tough guy." The reality is, they're all bluster and you never know if they're speaking from personal experience or talking out of their ass. Deal with real live people who challenge you in person, they're the people you should concern yourself with. How many of those BS.net dorks acually go to those "throwdown" events? A mere fraction of a percent of the active posters, I'm sure. Perhaps I'd be impressed with the trolls at BS.net if they begin posting "street fight" videos of themselves proving their own mettle. Or, better yet, candid footage of themselves going into their local aikido dojo and issuing challenges. We all know that none of these things would occur on even an occasional basis. However, everybody is entitled to their opinions...

It's because Aikidoka generally try and argue with them and try to justify how effective they think Aikido is....

People won't pick on you over at bullshido.net as long as you have no grand illusions about what your own abilities are and about what you think your art represents or embodies.

But, I've never met anybody who could really defend themselves by relying SOLELY on the principles and techniques learnt in the typical Aikido curriculum around today.

I think that is what a lot of people are implying when they argue about an art's effecitiveness.

Fair enough. I'd agree in large part with what you're saying. The issue isn't the curriculum...it's how it's practiced and what level of intensity is involved in training.

BS.net's big thing is aliveness and empirical demonstration. Aliveness means training with an actively resisting partner who has a way of "winning" the interaction. As for empirical demonstration, well, they generally favor arts that people have trained in and showed in cross-art sparring matches. E.g., they like judo, because people who know judo have demonstrated that it "works" in a freestyle competition. They like Muay Thai for the same reason. And so on.

Basically, going off of what Mike said above, they take issue with people saying, "Yeah, well I could throw that MMA guy by redirecting his energy." And they respond, "Okay. Why don't you and him have a sparring match so you can demonstrate this?" Aikido people typically just shut up at that point. Having seen nothing to change their minds, the BS.Net people retain their view that aikido is ineffective, and call the aikido person a twit for making ostentatious claims.

Regarding the topic of this thread, though, BS.net has much the same complaint about hapkido as it does about aikido.

Yours truly began a thread about this very issue a few weeks ago...
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12360

gdandscompserv
05-04-2007, 10:55 PM
BS.net's big thing is aliveness and empirical demonstration.
Don't forget anonymity.

Dewey
05-04-2007, 10:56 PM
I'd like to clarify that I've never actually seen such an exchange happen in precisely those terms. Rather, I think it's more that BS.netters take issue with aikido people who talk about their art and training being "effective" without any repeatable evidence. On the other hand, the arts they consider legit have, in their view, proven their utility time and again.

Yes, I'd concur with this. I read your clarification after I posted my previous response. For some folks, video evidence is sufficient. For others, a broken joint or limb...sometimes both!

Aikibu
05-04-2007, 11:08 PM
It's because Aikidoka generally try and argue with them and try to justify how effective they think Aikido is. While, on the other hand, Iaido has no real claim to "street effectiveness" because the art's focus is not on combat, but on drawing the sword and use of kata.

That, and you can't exactly carry a sword around and use it in a fight in today's society.

People won't pick on you over at bullshido.net as long as you have no grand illusions about what your own abilities are and about what you think your art represents or embodies.

I love Aikido. I really do.

But, I've never met anybody who could really defend themselves by relying SOLELY on the principles and techniques learnt in the typical Aikido curriculum around today.

I think that is what a lot of people are implying when they argue about an art's effecitiveness.

LOL...Look...Again having been there and done that I find Bulshido to be the exact opposite of how you portray it... There are very few redeeming qualities with regard to the behaviour of most of the folks there for anything not "Combat Ninja Viking MMA approved" One of the Moderators wanted to challenge me to a back ally "No holds barred fight to the finish" because he could not stand it when anyone presented a dissenting point of view in regard to Aikido. If you have never met anyone who has been able to defend themselves with Aikido well then you simply have not been around that much or perhaps you misunderstand what Aikido's purpose is.

I am cool with that...If some of the folks want to put in serious work dissing Aikido or other Gendai/Koryu Arts more power to them.

The whole theme of Aikido is that destructive violence is not the answer to anything and one trip to the Local VA Hospital or Prison will prove that to anyone.

If you think for a second otherwise well....Been there...Done that...You may come around to seeing Aikido's purpose as I have or you're just another ticket waiting to get punched. The choice is yours.

William Hazen

"Blessed are the meek...For they shall inherit the earth"

Kevin Leavitt
05-05-2007, 01:30 AM
Aikido is supposed to be an internal art. Internal to me is learning about yourself and what makes you tick and respond. It really is about overcoming the external aspects of life and realizing that we cannot effect what others do or say directly, but that we can choose our responses to what they do or say.

The choices we make may be skillful or unskillful.

As such, I think we walk a fine line between our concern for the external...that is we cannot totally ignore it or we become so focused on "us" that we do not respond appropriately.

Most of the time though we focus way to much on the external things that do not matter, such as what someone says on a website, or perversions such as defending our honor, reputation, etc. These things become distractions to our growth and development.

Anyway, we have to learn to pick through the static and garbage to find the elements of truth out there that we can learn from. Bullshido and Aikiweb are both like that for me.

Effectiveness is an emotional and slippery term. Not easy to define, nor to prove and it is subject to everyone's paradiqm and perspective. What we need to do with the term of effectiveness is really seek hard to see what are all the various angles, truths, and perspectives of what effectiveness can mean.

I have found that my definition of what is effectiveness (or aliveness), has expanded and changed over the last several years. In that respect it has not invalidated much of what I have learned in my past TMA or aikido dojos...but it has changed how I viewed the applications or appropriateness of it in many ways.

dbotari
05-05-2007, 09:13 AM
yeah i know but as a fellow martial artist i was insulted for you. So i though Aikidoka should get a chance to answer it.

Also 1 more question why is it that bullshido constantly is picking on you guys???

Honestly...this is beginning to sound trollish to me. Anyone else?

pugtm
05-05-2007, 09:23 AM
if i am being a troll i apologize i am not trying to be inflammatory intentionally.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-05-2007, 10:00 AM
Honestly...this is beginning to sound trollish to me. Anyone else?

Raising the issue of why group X with art-evaluation method A thinks aikido is "wussy" or "unproven"/"ineffective" is not, I don't think, trollish. It's a legitimate question.

jennifer paige smith
05-05-2007, 10:25 AM
Raising the issue of why group X with art-evaluation method A thinks aikido is "wussy" or "unproven"/"ineffective" is not, I don't think, trollish. It's a legitimate question.

Not to join in on the 'trollish' thoughts here.......(however thanks for that new language term for me as I think it applies in a lot instances, otherwise)

About the above quote.....This is the crux of Jitsu (sp?) and Do.

Is it really their 'art' that they are evaluating or their combat ability. In terms of artfulness and craft, if you find a well practicing aikidoka, you will find a tactician, a moving philosopher, and a supreme protector who inhabits the grace and power of nature. In terms of combat, you will find a battlefield allie who will carry you when you neeed to be carried, walk with you when you need to be accompanied, and fight for your body if the circumstance should arrive, and love your family if you should lose your life. Is it possible ,that in combat , we forget that there are nurses, priests, doctors, communicators, bridge builders and peace forces all of whom operate in the bloody realm of war. All of whom provide human support, and often love.

Everything else we call combat may very well just be sport.

It's a case by case issue.

thanks for the chance to voice my thoughts.

Mike Haftel
05-05-2007, 10:26 AM
LOL...Look...Again having been there and done that I find Bulshido to be the exact opposite of how you portray it... There are very few redeeming qualities with regard to the behaviour of most of the folks there for anything not "Combat Ninja Viking MMA approved" One of the Moderators wanted to challenge me to a back ally "No holds barred fight to the finish" because he could not stand it when anyone presented a dissenting point of view in regard to Aikido. If you have never met anyone who has been able to defend themselves with Aikido well then you simply have not been around that much or perhaps you misunderstand what Aikido's purpose is.

I am cool with that...If some of the folks want to put in serious work dissing Aikido or other Gendai/Koryu Arts more power to them.

The whole theme of Aikido is that destructive violence is not the answer to anything and one trip to the Local VA Hospital or Prison will prove that to anyone.

If you think for a second otherwise well....Been there...Done that...You may come around to seeing Aikido's purpose as I have or you're just another ticket waiting to get punched. The choice is yours.

William Hazen

"Blessed are the meek...For they shall inherit the earth"

I think you vastly misunderstood my point.

My point was, that most Aikidoka have "grand illusions" about what their own abilities are and about what their art embodies. And this is why a lot of people criticize Aikidoka.

I'm not criticising the art, itself. I like Aikido and I've been studying it for about six years.

I am criticising the average Aikidoka, not Aikido.

For example:

One day, at practice, a 2nd dan Aikidoka came to train with us. This particular person drops by from time to time.

For the life of him, he couldn't do a single joint lock on me. I wasn't even resisting him. He actually blamed me (the attacker) for his own inability. He said I wasn't being a good Uke. That I wasn't "blending properly." And that Aikido's goal was to promote harmony and such; and that because I wasn't taking the fall or giving in to the technique I was somehow at falt. One of his justifications he gave was that my tendons and ligaments were too strong and joint locks were hard to do on me. That's just ridiculous.

He basically scolded me becaue he lacked the ability to properly utilize the principles which had learnt...or had NOT learnt.

I know you're going to say that it's just him, or just me, or that I just haven't been exposed to "real Aikido" before. That's just a lame excuse, to me.

This same type of Aikidoka are the ones going around arguing with people about how effective Aikido is and about how skilled they are.

They have "grand illusions."

Mike Haftel
05-05-2007, 10:32 AM
Fair enough. I'd agree in large part with what you're saying. The issue isn't the curriculum...it's how it's practiced and what level of intensity is involved in training.

Yes, I agree. I should have been more specific. The IDEAL curriculum of Aikido is fine. It's how it is practiced that is the issue.

Maybe I'm just jaded.

Aikibu
05-05-2007, 11:57 AM
I think you vastly misunderstood my point.

My point was, that most Aikidoka have "grand illusions" about what their own abilities are and about what their art embodies. And this is why a lot of people criticize Aikidoka.

I'm not criticising the art, itself. I like Aikido and I've been studying it for about six years.

I am criticising the average Aikidoka, not Aikido.

For example:

One day, at practice, a 2nd dan Aikidoka came to train with us. This particular person drops by from time to time.

For the life of him, he couldn't do a single joint lock on me. I wasn't even resisting him. He actually blamed me (the attacker) for his own inability. He said I wasn't being a good Uke. That I wasn't "blending properly." And that Aikido's goal was to promote harmony and such; and that because I wasn't taking the fall or giving in to the technique I was somehow at falt. One of his justifications he gave was that my tendons and ligaments were too strong and joint locks were hard to do on me. That's just ridiculous.

He basically scolded me becaue he lacked the ability to properly utilize the principles which had learnt...or had NOT learnt.

I know you're going to say that it's just him, or just me, or that I just haven't been exposed to "real Aikido" before. That's just a lame excuse, to me.

This same type of Aikidoka are the ones going around arguing with people about how effective Aikido is and about how skilled they are.

They have "grand illusions."

I have had a account there for 3 years now though i have not posted in a long time (what is the point) Like I said and as has been pointed out by some other posters here. The gambit of the posts reflect the age of and experiance of the posters which IMHO is about 13 or perhaps 16 on a good day. VERY RARELY will you see an "Aikido Troll" go over there and pick fights with folks about the supposed superiority of Aikido versus "Throwdown proven." Combat Viking Ninja MMA (which has nothing to do with street effectivness.) Since all that most of these kids do "on the street" is throw the occasional punch at some obnoxius drunk at a kegger. I don't see what value Bullshido gains in promoting "realistic" anything considering MMA is no different than anything developed in the last 2000 years and would be better served to grow and promote itself as a legitimate discipline (which it is).

I have been cross training in MMA for about 5 years now and I highly value what it brings to my Aikido. I have" the Aikido is for wusses" verbal exchange at least once every couple of weeks or have some sparring partner grab my wrist and ask me "what am I going to do about it." I just laugh most of the time and say, "Nothing." The guy lets go and we hang out and have a good time training and he is completely unaware that I have just performed an Aikido "technique" on him. :D

I am of the opinion pitting Peanut Butter versus Honey is a complete waste of my time... or as a wise Sensei once said to me, Life is a smorsgasbord. Some folks like peanut butter, some like honey, The key to enjoying it is to let the other folks have all they want of what they like, and not to hold it against them if they don't have your taste in food. There is plenty enough to enjoy for everyone. That is Aikido.

William Hazen

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-05-2007, 12:08 PM
About the above quote.....This is the crux of Jitsu (sp?) and Do.

Is it really their 'art' that they are evaluating or their combat ability.

(Aside: Jitsu is a perfectly legit spelling, though the standard romanization is jutsu.) I think it's absolutely on-topic to mention this. Do I take more (for myself and to give to others) from the jutsu or the do of aikido? Well, while being a costumed superhero beating up muggers would be fun, I don't think it's going to be my contribution in life. Rather, it's all the things you mention above: being strong in hard times, supporting others, being a good person. People more eloquent than myself have expounded on this theme countless times.

However, I'm also reminded of something the late Kensho Furuya said in his book "Kodo": jutsu is a part of do. You don't do one or the other. A do contains a jutsu, a skillset at the core of the study. Someone who wants to study chado needs to know the jutsu of how to serve the tea, how to bring it to the right temperature, how to greet the guest and make them feel welcome. Learning to do those things is not why they study their art, but rather they pursue their do in part by polishing these jutsu to the fullest.

For this reason, I believe that aikidoka must develop clean, effective, and internalized aikijutsu. I'm not referring to the separate art (Daito-ryu), but rather to the literal term: "aiki techniques", which are a critical part of the "aiki way." I'll turn to Mike Haftel's anecdote for an example.

One day, at practice, a 2nd dan Aikidoka came to train with us. [...] For the life of him, he couldn't do a single joint lock on me.

Sometimes I see BS.Netters who have this crazy idea that they're studying "for the street". This is an absurd reason to study martial arts for most people nowadays. However, a budoka who cannot fight is like a chajin who makes bad tea or agitates the guest.

Yes, I agree. I should have been more specific. The IDEAL curriculum of Aikido is fine. It's how it is practiced that is the issue.

Which brings me back to the original topic. The reason why some people think that both Hapkido and Aikido are "for wusses lol" is I think given a more intelligent expression in the following video:

Matt Thornton on "Aliveness" in Martial Arts
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AWfK6aqWiNU

Some people (perhaps understandably) find his evangelizing tone silly. I sure found it goofy when he claimed that kata were "oppressive", like "the Catholic church". But I think he's got a good basic point.

Do I think we should throw out kata? No; I think he's being pretty myopic there. But it's a useful perspective to consider.

tarik
05-05-2007, 01:16 PM
I seem to recall that most of the founder's of the various TMA's all had this common sort of background story of being a "wuss" who needed to strengthen themselves.

true on one hand that even mma isn't true street fighting but isn't it somewhat closer to it?

When MMA fighters are allowed to strike people in the back of the head, gouge eyes, bite, strike vital areas, hit with a bat or a pipe, cut someone with a blade while they're trying to clinch or grapple, and so forth, it'll be more like the street fighting I've experienced.

To compare it (or aikido) to street fighting is really ludicrous.

MMA is a highly skilled sport with very specific parameters that are nothing like street fighting. If you tried half the things I see people do in MMA fights on the street against someone who really really wants to hurt you and is skilled, you will die.

If you're comparing a skilled fighter against the average schmo on the street, we're not speaking the same language.

The same observations hold about many people's aikido training (particularly against the knife). I believe that the common complaint on BS is the self-confident martial attitude of many who really are unprepared.

In any art or mixture of arts you choose, you will find adherents who are unconsciously incompetent, consciously incompetent, consciously competent, and unconsciously competent (is that the right progression?).

So...

Define your goals. Find a place to train where you can meet your goals. End of story.

Do I take more (for myself and to give to others) from the jutsu or the do of aikido?

I don't see it that way at all. They are inseparable in my training.

Jutsu is what I do on the mat. I study technique and all the physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual (sic) ramifications of that.

Do is the way I live my life. It is informed by the problem solving skills I learn and apply to my training on the mat while practicing jutsu.

I understand that many people teach and try to apply the principles of 'harmony' (which is just about the poorest choice of possible words for translating 'ai', IMO) on the mat, but I think that they are trying to apply an outside concept onto a real interaction without first understanding the interaction and so a lot of training I see as getting misdirected and not seeing the real underlying (deeper) issues and principles.

To rephrase, my understanding of 'harmony' is fed through my training and understanding of what makes a technique really operate in the most efficient, least harmful fashion instead of the other way around. The other way around is the way I perceive many people's practice.


Do I think we should throw out kata? No; I think he's being pretty myopic there. But it's a useful perspective to consider.

I fundamentally agree with your posted video except for one item. You HAVE to train the patterns; you just have to apply the aliveness concepts to those patterns or they become as useless he describes. If you train without the patterns with a resistant opponent, only the 'geniuses' will get any good at this.

I think that's one of the problems in much modern aikido practice; they throw out 'kata' on the basis of a single quote of the Founder's. Actually, very arguably, they mostly only practice kata, but refuse to acknowledge it or practice it as such. But any practice where the each partner knows the intended technique and who is going to attack and who is going to fall is practicing kata and they are doing it without the aliveness described since they know who will always fall down.

I have found the training when practiced without acknowledged kata becomes less informed because so few people really know why a particular form of a technique is different than a similar form or technique and even why it might be performed a certain way and usually can only say: "this is the way we do it" and speculate on the details.

For myself, I'm changing my training and focusing on kata training to inform and educate my basic fundamental coordination and to learn specifically WHY various techniques are designed the way they are designed. When I hit the technique correctly, yes, I'll know who will fall down, but if I leave any opening, my partner will inform me as happened last week, by launching me across the mat to land on my ass.

With that kind of base, I'll be able to deepen my randori training and make it more 'alive'.

Regards,

pugtm
05-05-2007, 01:37 PM
here's my thing about MMA guys. If you want a realistic defense system that is modern, learn to shoot a gun.

graham
05-05-2007, 01:45 PM
The guy lets go and we hang out and have a good time training and he is completely unaware that I have just performed an Aikido "technique" on him. :D

Love it! :)

I always think that when my friends ask how an Aikidoka would fair in a MMA fight. I say, "Have you ever seen one lose?"

Perhaps not getting into the 'cage' in the first place is the aiki victory.

jennifer paige smith
05-05-2007, 01:59 PM
I seem to recall that most of the founder's of the various TMA's all had this common sort of background story of being a "wuss" who needed to strengthen themselves.

When MMA fighters are allowed to strike people in the back of the head, gouge eyes, bite, strike vital areas, hit with a bat or a pipe, cut someone with a blade while they're trying to clinch or grapple, and so forth, it'll be more like the street fighting I've experienced.

To compare it (or aikido) to street fighting is really ludicrous.

MMA is a highly skilled sport with very specific parameters that are nothing like street fighting. If you tried half the things I see people do in MMA fights on the street against someone who really really wants to hurt you and is skilled, you will die.

If you're comparing a skilled fighter against the average schmo on the street, we're not speaking the same language.

The same observations hold about many people's aikido training (particularly against the knife). I believe that the common complaint on BS is the self-confident martial attitude of many who really are unprepared.

In any art or mixture of arts you choose, you will find adherents who are unconsciously incompetent, consciously incompetent, consciously competent, and unconsciously competent (is that the right progression?).

So...

Define your goals. Find a place to train where you can meet your goals. End of story.

I don't see it that way at all. They are inseparable in my training.

Jutsu is what I do on the mat. I study technique and all the physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual (sic) ramifications of that.

Do is the way I live my life. It is informed by the problem solving skills I learn and apply to my training on the mat while practicing jutsu.

I understand that many people teach and try to apply the principles of 'harmony' (which is just about the poorest choice of possible words for translating 'ai', IMO) on the mat, but I think that they are trying to apply an outside concept onto a real interaction without first understanding the interaction and so a lot of training I see as getting misdirected and not seeing the real underlying (deeper) issues and principles.

To rephrase, my understanding of 'harmony' is fed through my training and understanding of what makes a technique really operate in the most efficient, least harmful fashion instead of the other way around. The other way around is the way I perceive many people's practice.

I fundamentally agree with your posted video except for one item. You HAVE to train the patterns; you just have to apply the aliveness concepts to those patterns or they become as useless he describes. If you train without the patterns with a resistant opponent, only the 'geniuses' will get any good at this.

I think that's one of the problems in much modern aikido practice; they throw out 'kata' on the basis of a single quote of the Founder's. Actually, very arguably, they mostly only practice kata, but refuse to acknowledge it or practice it as such. But any practice where the each partner knows the intended technique and who is going to attack and who is going to fall is practicing kata and they are doing it without the aliveness described since they know who will always fall down.

I have found the training when practiced without acknowledged kata becomes less informed because so few people really know why a particular form of a technique is different than a similar form or technique and even why it might be performed a certain way and usually can only say: "this is the way we do it" and speculate on the details.

For myself, I'm changing my training and focusing on kata training to inform and educate my basic fundamental coordination and to learn specifically WHY various techniques are designed the way they are designed. When I hit the technique correctly, yes, I'll know who will fall down, but if I leave any opening, my partner will inform me as happened last week, by launching me across the mat to land on my ass.

With that kind of base, I'll be able to deepen my randori training and make it more 'alive'.

Regards,

Perhaps I'm off subject, but I'm inspired to continue the conversation.

I haven't yet heard your specific tales of streeet fighting in the all of the years I've known you. And, upon reflection, I realize that in all of that time you haven't heard mine either [ although at a potluck dinner we once were at together a couple of years back I was chastised by members of our previous community for relating a story where I stopped on the street to intervene in the bloody pummeling of a young man who had been 'jumped' by gangsters who thought he was black ( it was dark out, as it was 12:00 a.m.) I was told, "sounds like your hanging out in the wrong neighborhoods." The young man whose life I saved didn't feel that way, I'm sure.]

Personally, I have used the practice of Aikido to trancend the street. I don't need anyone talking to me about how 'it works on the street' never having asked where did I come from, first( a question Tarik has humbly asked me in the past) and never having been there themselves. For me, the street, my life and the dojo are the same. The quality has significantly improved.

We've had some engaging study together and it sure has been a fruitful practice. I'm thrilled you are continuing in your integrous inquiry of the art.

jen

Thanks for your post Tarik.

jennifer paige smith
05-05-2007, 02:11 PM
Just one quick thought about character.

O'Sensei instructed us never to criticize other teachers or traditions as it pulls us away from our own effective practice and inquiry of ourselves. He was firm about this for the cause of our characters and progress along 'the way'. When other people are critical I understand that they have not embodied this practice ( at least at the moment). Period. So don't be so distressed about others criticism.

'Aikido is for self-correction and not for the correction of others'.
- O'Sensei

Easily said; a lifetime practice.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-05-2007, 02:41 PM
When MMA fighters are allowed to strike people in the back of the head, gouge eyes, bite, strike vital areas, hit with a bat or a pipe, cut someone with a blade while they're trying to clinch or grapple, and so forth, it'll be more like the street fighting I've experienced.

Indeed, maybe the thing is to imagine that aikido waza (and the jujutsu waza from which it came) were meant for a situation where you don't want to clinch up with the opponent, or employ grappling maneuvers that leave you open for, say, a knife strike.

On the other hand, it seems to be the consensus that aikido waza are no good for taking a knife from a person who actually has it out.

jennifer paige smith
05-05-2007, 02:47 PM
Indeed, maybe the thing is to imagine that aikido waza (and the jujutsu waza from which it came) were meant for a situation where you don't want to clinch up with the opponent, or employ grappling maneuvers that leave you open for, say, a knife strike.

On the other hand, it seems to be the consensus that aikido waza are no good for taking a knife from a person who actually has it out.

Forgive me, but 'consensus' meaning whom?

Roman Kremianski
05-05-2007, 03:14 PM
It's not possible to safely or ethically replicate "street" conditions in training. MMA nuts often believe the fight ring does, but it doesn't any better than anything else.

Opinions like that baffle me the most. MMA is not street fighting. But it's the closest you're going to get to unarmed street fighting. Much closer then regular sparring or kata or cooperative opponents.

The Bullshido guys think we're dorks because Aikidoka are always bringing swords, knives, guns, and eye gouges into the equation every time the effectiveness of Aikido in an un-armed situation is brought up.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-05-2007, 03:53 PM
Forgive me, but 'consensus' meaning whom?

You needn't ask forgiveness. This isn't the Catholic Church or anything. (Oh, wacky Matt Thornton. ;) )

One example: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=577

The closest I've heard someone come is well-summarized by Christopher Wilson in that thread: "In a knife fight, the winner only gets cut." Alternately, I could believe that if you're assuming both people are in feudal Japanese armor, and only "strong" attacks count (ruling out quick slashes)...okay, maybe it's doable then.

But I've never heard an aikido person claim (let alone convincingly demonstrate) that aikido "tantodori" has anything to do with disarming a knife-wielding opponent actually out to cut you (in an unarmored context). Put another way, I've never heard anyone claim they could handle the classic "put on white coveralls and give uke a marker" test.

Of course, it'd be stunning if they did. Even practitioners of arts like Eskrima, whose training is focused on knife techniques, do not claim to be able to reliably handle a knife-wielding opponent. I'm sure they'd feel mighty stupid if they learned that aikido people, who spend far less time on knife techniques, could outdo them in their own specialty.

If you can reliably take a marker from me, I'll drop my current aikido plans and become your student right then and there.

Opinions like that baffle me the most. MMA is not street fighting. But it's the closest you're going to get to unarmed street fighting. Much closer then regular sparring or kata or cooperative opponents.

The Bullshido guys think we're dorks because Aikidoka are always bringing swords, knives, guns, and eye gouges into the equation every time the effectiveness of Aikido in an un-armed situation is brought up.

And I think they're right to complain, honestly. Nobody can really handle a determined ("primary objective: kill you ASAP") attacker with one of the first three. At least, not very reliably. As for eye gouges...well, wear some goggles and award a victory to anyone who can deliver a strong gouge. I don't think it would change results very much. It would make it more dangerous, but the same techniques would be useful. Put another way: who's in a better position to apply back-of-neck hits, throat strikes, eye gouges, and other dangerous strikes (which, by the way, most aikido schools do not exactly drill extensively)? Probably the same person who can win with "safer" strikes or submissions, because they've got the upper hand.

Put another way: sure, MMA is not exactly true fighting, and certainly isn't "combat". But what makes kata practice closer to "real fighting" than MMA?

Roman Kremianski
05-05-2007, 04:18 PM
Put another way: sure, MMA is not exactly true fighting, and certainly isn't "combat". But what makes kata practice closer to "real fighting" than MMA?

I'm a bit confused. Are you for or against what I said?

The whole point of my post was to argue that MMA is the closest thing on recorded video we have that comes close to a fight. My post was NOT intended to argue that MMA is in fact just a sport that has nothing to do with real fighting. (Like some people on here are claiming)

I think a lot of people try to ignore MMA because it's their personal fantasy breaker. No one practicing Aikido exclusively likes to admit that they would probably not stand a chance against a knowledgeable well rounded opponent.

Mark Uttech
05-05-2007, 04:28 PM
martial arts fantasies aside, aikido is an art, like ikebana or tea ceremony.You work on yourself, and you deal with the enemies within. O Sensei has said that the only way to cover your openings is to stand and acknowledge your fear of death. The late Terry Dobson sensei once taught a seminar with the theme that 'the uke brings your death'.

In gassho,

Mark

Mark Uttech
05-05-2007, 04:32 PM
I'm a bit confused. Are you for or against what I said?

I think a lot of people try to ignore MMA because it's their personal fantasy breaker. No one practicing Aikido exclusively likes to admit that they would probably not stand a chance against a knowledgeable well rounded opponent.

There are lots of folks who practice aikido exclusively and they do it with the knowledge that "yeah, maybe I am going to die, but I have to enter and see how things come out."

In gassho

Mark

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-05-2007, 04:44 PM
I'm a bit confused. Are you for or against what I said?

The whole point of my post was to argue that MMA is the closest thing on recorded video we have that comes close to a fight. My post was NOT intended to argue that MMA is in fact just a sport that has nothing to do with real fighting. (Like some people on here are claiming)

I think a lot of people try to ignore MMA because it's their personal fantasy breaker. No one practicing Aikido exclusively likes to admit that they would probably not stand a chance against a knowledgeable well rounded opponent.

I was agreeing. To people who say "MMA isn't fighting", I was saying, "True, it's very much not. But, the real question should be: is aikido kata practice closer?"

tarik
05-05-2007, 05:16 PM
I was agreeing. To people who say "MMA isn't fighting", I was saying, "True, it's very much not. But, the real question should be: is aikido kata practice closer?"

Proper kata practice doesn't serve the same purpose as getting in the ring to fight serves. It is supposed to provide an environment where a student can reliably learn proper targeting, distance, and timing, while also learning the consequences of missing any one of those parameters.

This level of purpose is missing in a lot of kata training, hence the very valid criticism's of aliveness brought forth in the youtube clip. It's not hard to see if kata is practiced that way or not once you've been shown how to see it.

MMA bouts are more akin to randori or perhaps shiai, not kata training. FWIW, I've watched plenty of 'kata' training in MMA training sessions; they just call it something different.

Good training should include a mixture of kata and randori. When you're beginning you emphasize one over the other and that balance changes as you learn.

I'll agree with what you seem to be suggesting and say that a lot of aikido practice doesn't do a good job of teaching and enforcing aliveness. It a valid and excellent criticism that I suspect the Founder shared (based on some of his reported comments). Every student should take it to heart and study what they're doing.

Regards,

Aikibu
05-05-2007, 05:21 PM
martial arts fantasies aside, aikido is an art, like ikebana or tea ceremony.You work on yourself, and you deal with the enemies within. O Sensei has said that the only way to cover your openings is to stand and acknowledge your fear of death. The late Terry Dobson sensei once taught a seminar with the theme that 'the uke brings your death'.

In gassho,

Mark

Agreed. All the Budo I have experianced has that exact theme. You must give yourself up in order to really live.

William Hazen

Luc X Saroufim
05-05-2007, 08:08 PM
"Aikido is for wusses"

anyone who speaks in absolutes is always missing a part of the picture. there is no such thing as universal truth.

Mike Haftel
05-05-2007, 08:18 PM
"Aikido is for wusses"

anyone who speaks in absolutes is always missing a part of the picture. there is no such thing as universal truth.

Does anybody else see the irony in this statement?

gdandscompserv
05-05-2007, 08:20 PM
Does anybody else see the irony in this statement?
lol...now that you mention it.:cool:

jennifer paige smith
05-05-2007, 08:51 PM
martial arts fantasies aside, aikido is an art, like ikebana or tea ceremony.You work on yourself, and you deal with the enemies within. O Sensei has said that the only way to cover your openings is to stand and acknowledge your fear of death. The late Terry Dobson sensei once taught a seminar with the theme that 'the uke brings your death'.

In gassho,

Mark

"Uke brings your death" is the most important piece of writing in Aikido that I have ever read. It was the most important when I read it in it's first printing in 1992 (date approx. but close. You can find it archived in Aikido Today Magazine August 1993) and it is the most important piece to me now.

In American Kenpo (Parker Style) they are emphatic in approach:
If you are training with a knife, for real, you are going to get cut. Both of you. People interested in live blade discussion may want to explore American Kenpo perspectives in addition to any other inquiry.

Tanto is only a fraction of our whole practice and can be reliably viewed as a tool for awakening.

CNYMike
05-05-2007, 11:21 PM
.... So i was talking to someone who was interested also in taking aikido and this person taking aikido said aikido is for wusses. Your response? .......

If he thinks that, it's probably just as well that (A) he's not taking it; and (B) he won't be paying your tuition when you start. It's be better if he were supportive, but OTOH, if you want to do it, it doesn't matter if he's going to be a jerk.

Guilty Spark
05-06-2007, 12:01 AM
"Aikido is for wusses"

Blarg blarg blarg aikido sucks you'll never see it in UFC.

Fine I'll accept that.

I've had to use aikido a few times while in Afghanistan and I was happy with the results.
I also just used it a few weeks ago in a fight against someone with his 4 buddies waiting outside of a bar for me and again I was happy with the results.

I know what I consider 'real life'. I'm happy with aikido working in combat and in a 5 on 1 ambush senario where I didn't have the option of tapping out or a ref, even if it doesn't get a little sponsorship deal on UFC 800 or whatever they are at.

Nicholas Eschenbruch
05-06-2007, 05:31 AM
"[QUOTE=Jennifer Smith;177540]"Uke brings your death" is the most important piece of writing in Aikido that I have ever read. It was the most important when I read it in it's first printing in 1992 (date approx. but close. You can find it archived in Aikido Today Magazine August 1993) and it is the most important piece to me now."

The links on that site dont work for me - does anybody have the text, or a link that functions? Jennifer? I'd be very interested.

Nicholas

Christopher Gee
05-06-2007, 05:59 AM
Yea, can someone put a link up for this article? Or PM us the article?

Sounds link and interesting read...

Dan Austin
05-06-2007, 09:59 AM
Blarg blarg blarg aikido sucks you'll never see it in UFC.

Fine I'll accept that.

I've had to use aikido a few times while in Afghanistan and I was happy with the results.
I also just used it a few weeks ago in a fight against someone with his 4 buddies waiting outside of a bar for me and again I was happy with the results.

I know what I consider 'real life'. I'm happy with aikido working in combat and in a 5 on 1 ambush senario where I didn't have the option of tapping out or a ref, even if it doesn't get a little sponsorship deal on UFC 800 or whatever they are at.

Hello Grant,

Would you might describing the scenario in more detail, and what Aikido techniques you used? I'm always compiling such experiences and think it would certainly be of interest to others as well. Thanks.

mwible
05-06-2007, 11:02 AM
i think that you should just blow off the ignorance of others. me and a fellow TKD practicionar(who is my best friend) sit in our 3rd period class, art,(im a junior in highschool) and we talk alot about martial arts in general, not just TKD but i talk about aikido too and we coment upon other martial arts such as karate or kungfu, and one day the kid sitting across from us tried to make it sound like we were being jerks and acting like we could take anyone. he sounded like he thought he could take either of us, and that martial arts was crap that didnt work. well, we werent trying to sound like jerks, and we both just kinda looked at him, like "did you really just say that?" and then he just kinda looked away. he was just ignorant, and i dont really feel the need to teach the ignorant. well atleast not just kicking his but to get my point across. so i guess what im trying to say is, use what you know, not what the ignorant tell you. so you did a good job seeking the truth instead of taking the advise of another.
and aikido is not for pansies. you should go check out a good dojo and watch the sensei there.
-morgan

Dan Austin
05-06-2007, 11:36 AM
here's were i stand on this issue. I have great respect for any true martial art and anyone who takes it seriously. I'm not training to kill someone i just want to be better than i am and also enjoy myself. otherwise id be practicing with firearms and bayonets. that story about the table tennis is really funny though. should have used the forbidden technique on him(scrotum tski). Sounds like a TKD mcdojo practitioner. I always get a good laugh when they show up...
But back on topic what i really want to do is take aikido and just flip him into a wall... Oh well maybe in a year or two...
but his main complaint is that Aikido is too soft on the opponent and the locks it employs aren't going to hurt the opponent or knock him out. But on the other hand i think boxing isn't a martial art. It has to have a spirit and honor otherwise it's just two animals beating each other bloody.

Boxing is one of the oldest and most practical martial arts. If all you want is something more formal because that seems like a "true martial art", have at it, but you may be disappointed in your ability to flip critics into a wall.

Aikido isn't soft on opponents, but it's a valid criticism whether it trains realistically. Many of the techniques aren't very modern or practical because the attacks don't reflect modern fighting. As a male you're pretty unlikely to have your wrist grabbed in a fight, so it's fair to criticize that as an inefficient use of time. I suspect much of the "wussy" comment is a reflection of people who take an art like Aikido, and hope to gain super fighting ability without mixing it up and taking their lumps in the process. That's not realistic, and Ueshiba had loads of experience sparring before codifying his art, so to just jump to the finished product makes it hard to develop the kind of timing and experience you need against someone good. Long story short, your reasons for training are your own, but you cuold do a lot worse than starting with boxing, regardless of what you do with Aikido.

jennifer paige smith
05-06-2007, 12:06 PM
lol...now that you mention it.:cool:

Boxing is one of the oldest and most practical martial arts. If all you want is something more formal because that seems like a "true martial art", have at it, but you may be disappointed in your ability to flip critics into a wall.

Aikido isn't soft on opponents, but it's a valid criticism whether it trains realistically. Many of the techniques aren't very modern or practical because the attacks don't reflect modern fighting. As a male you're pretty unlikely to have your wrist grabbed in a fight, so it's fair to criticize that as an inefficient use of time. I suspect much of the "wussy" comment is a reflection of people who take an art like Aikido, and hope to gain super fighting ability without mixing it up and taking their lumps in the process. That's not realistic, and Ueshiba had loads of experience sparring before codifying his art, so to just jump to the finished product makes it hard to develop the kind of timing and experience you need against someone good. Long story short, your reasons for training are your own, but you cuold do a lot worse than starting with boxing, regardless of what you do with Aikido.

You gotta learn to paddle in order to get into the wave.

And this whole wussy thing and the very well pointed out observation that if you are Male you are unlikely to get grabbed by the wrist is a good beginning point to the statement I'm about to make.
Aikido is practiced by a variety of women. We do get our wrists grabbed. We are by definition the anatomical carriers of the 'wusses' less p/c cousin the p-ss. So how about this. Wrist training is totally practical. And some Aikidoists will deal with the 'wuss' for life. Thank God ( or Kami or Ghandi or whatever).

Aikibu
05-06-2007, 02:01 PM
Boxing is one of the oldest and most practical martial arts. If all you want is something more formal because that seems like a "true martial art", have at it, but you may be disappointed in your ability to flip critics into a wall.

Aikido isn't soft on opponents, but it's a valid criticism whether it trains realistically. Many of the techniques aren't very modern or practical because the attacks don't reflect modern fighting. As a male you're pretty unlikely to have your wrist grabbed in a fight, so it's fair to criticize that as an inefficient use of time. I suspect much of the "wussy" comment is a reflection of people who take an art like Aikido, and hope to gain super fighting ability without mixing it up and taking their lumps in the process. That's not realistic, and Ueshiba had loads of experience sparring before codifying his art, so to just jump to the finished product makes it hard to develop the kind of timing and experience you need against someone good. Long story short, your reasons for training are your own, but you cuold do a lot worse than starting with boxing, regardless of what you do with Aikido.

Like I have not heard this a 1000 times spoken by someone with allot of incorrect 2nd hand assumptions.

You're on the wrong forum bro...

William Hazen

pugtm
05-06-2007, 02:15 PM
i think that you should just blow off the ignorance of others. me and a fellow TKD practicionar(who is my best friend) sit in our 3rd period class, art,(im a junior in highschool) and we talk alot about martial arts in general, not just TKD but i talk about aikido too and we coment upon other martial arts such as karate or kungfu, and one day the kid sitting across from us tried to make it sound like we were being jerks and acting like we could take anyone. he sounded like he thought he could take either of us, and that martial arts was crap that didnt work. well, we werent trying to sound like jerks, and we both just kinda looked at him, like "did you really just say that?" and then he just kinda looked away. he was just ignorant, and i dont really feel the need to teach the ignorant. well atleast not just kicking his but to get my point across. so i guess what im trying to say is, use what you know, not what the ignorant tell you. so you did a good job seeking the truth instead of taking the advise of another.
and aikido is not for pansies. you should go check out a good dojo and watch the sensei there.
-morgan

sound almost identical to me. Except im a sophomore in high school.

Mark Uttech
05-06-2007, 02:25 PM
Actually the wrist grab is a form of beginning practice. The wrist grab alone is an incomplete attack. It's been said that if an attacker can get ahold of you, you are basically already dead. We allow ourselves to be grabbed as part of the training process. Aikido is not fighting or about fighting. No matter how many tmes this is exlained, we all seem to forget, again and again. I suppose that just goes to show how hard transformational training really is.

In gassho,

Mark

senshincenter
05-06-2007, 04:43 PM
Yes, Aikido’s main goal is not fighting, but this does not mean that one can train in Aikido without training in fighting. In my opinion, this is because in Budo, in Aikido, one is supposed to use the processes and practices of fighting to first expose oneself to oneself, and then to transform oneself according to the principles and tenets held as Truth by the art as they are brought through fighting, to the spirit, and into one’s Life as a whole. This is not to say that there are not a whole lot of things worth learning and/or developing via an Aikido training that does not partake of fighting processes and practices. There are. This is especially true in contrast to the number of other things one might be doing with their spare time. However, as numerous as these things may be, and even as significant as these things may be in a given person’s life, they should not be considered as anything more than they are: a part of Budo; a part of Aikido.

That said, from the other direction, preoccupations with fighting, especially those that use current pop-cultural assumptions and marketing techniques as their logical foundations, are probably going to be further away from the whole of Aikido than anyone that might be doing just one of the parts I mentioned above. For example, from the thread, “testing” Aikido by having it “compete” against a jab, or “examining” Aikido by “judging” katate-dori according to contemporary self-defense marketing strategies are way more off the mark than saying, “Aikido is love man! And you cannot attack me because I love you.” This is even true when said person couldn’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag.

In the first case, you got what could amount to a lack of breadth in one’s training (in particular, not finding the really hard-core practitioners that are extremely well-conditioned, because they train multiple hours a day, have emotionless stares when they nearly kill you, because they consider it your job to protect your own rear, and have already used Aikido time and time again in a real field of operation). In the second case, you got what could amount to a lack of depth – not enough decades and/or hours per decade practicing within Aikido’s training paradigm as fast, as hard, and with as much attention to detail as one can muster.

dmv

Luc X Saroufim
05-06-2007, 05:20 PM
Does anybody else see the irony in this statement?

haha i was actually reserved about posting my statement for that very reason. i was still hoping my point would get through. oh well.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-06-2007, 07:41 PM
but his main complaint is that Aikido is too soft on the opponent and the locks it employs aren't going to hurt the opponent or knock him out.

I do not think "aikido is for wusses", although I think mainstream aikido does have some "wussy" training practices. Anyway, if I were trying to make a case that aikido was wussy, your friend's argument is not at all what I'd say. The weakness of aikido is not that the techniques don't do enough damage. (A better criticism would be, "they're hard to pull off.")

The locks (and/or throws) in aikido are all perfectly capable of putting someone out of a fight. (Or at least putting them at a serious disadvantage for the rest of the encounter.) Because it uses full body movements, the amount of force being sent into the joint is quite substantial; furthermore, just about every technique in aikido ultimately spikes the person's head down at the floor in the process -- or at least, has the potential to do so.

I think most aikido techniques present a continuum of force -- you can do them lightly enough to just (perhaps roughly) dump someone on the ground or hold them in place, or strongly enough to snap their arm and/or send them hurtling down head-first. For example, ikkyo looks tame, but do it high-speed sometime. And while you're at it, trim the forward motion; just roll the arm over and put their shoulder straight down. Yeah. Faceplant.

But the problem is that, no matter how much "power" is potentially in the techniques, if you can't execute them, it's all moot. Here's a "deadly" technique: charge forward in a straight line, then throw everything you have into hitting someone's trachea with the webbing between your thumb and forefinger. Pretty dangerous! Is it an effective technique? No, not really, unless you're fighting someone who's strapped against the wall. The humble jab is a much better strike in most situations.

It always irks me when people see some macho display of grotesquely violent techniques, and nod in amazement at how "martial" or "practical" it is. A really "martial" technique is one that you can pull off reliably in a wide range of situations -- it only needs to do "enough".

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-06-2007, 07:48 PM
I'll add that "yes", you should do aikido, because it's an amazing art that has serious potential for improving your life and helping you to help others. Very little of that potential comes in the form of making you uber-deadly.

Guilty Spark
05-06-2007, 08:32 PM
Hey Dan,

For sure. I'm heading out for the week but when I get back I'll send ya a PM or post on this thread, up to you.

Cheers!

Grant

Dan Austin
05-06-2007, 08:37 PM
Hey Dan,

For sure. I'm heading out for the week but when I get back I'll send ya a PM or post on this thread, up to you.

Cheers!

Grant

Grant,

If it's all the same to you, posting here would probably be better for discussion. Otherwise PM is fine if the thread is dead by the time you get back. Thanks!

Dan Austin
05-06-2007, 08:42 PM
Like I have not heard this a 1000 times spoken by someone with allot of incorrect 2nd hand assumptions.

You're on the wrong forum bro...

William Hazen

Everyone's entitled to an opinion, and I'm certainly not the only one to observe that it might be good to modernize the curriculum. While my concerns don't have to be shared by anyone else (though I see them all over the board), the original poster is entitled to hear different opinions. Your comment also makes little sense in light of the fact that in this very thread you mentioned having crosstrained in MMA for 5 years. If Aikido training lacks nothing, why do that?

CNYMike
05-07-2007, 12:09 AM
..... As a male you're pretty unlikely to have your wrist grabbed in a fight .....

Every self defense system in the world has counters to wrist grabs. Inosanto kali includes a counter to what in Aikido we would call kosa dori, leading to juji garame (I think). Yet the empty hand portion also includes Panantukan -- Filipino boxing -- which heavily influened Western boxing.

Furthermore, when sparring in Jun Fan, it's not unusaly for someone to try and grab your wrist! The reason is obvious: grab with one hand and hit with the other. This also applies to shoulder grabs (kata dori). I remember 20 years ago seeing a brawl at a hockey game on TV. Two players had grabbed each other's shoulders with their right hands and were bashing each other's heads with their left hands -- at the same time! More recently, there was a big scandal in Canada when one player came up behind another, grabbed his collar from behind (ushiro eri dori) and hit him with the other hand. The player who was hit fell forward; as he was moving down the rink at the time, he ended up with a serious neck injury that ended his career.

I think it's obvious why grabs are studied: because you want to short circuit the hit that is going to come after it. What if you're too late? That's when things like kata dori shomenuchi come in (IMHO).

Why don't western boxers grab the other guy's wrist? Well, it's physically impossible. Boxers have their hands and wrists wrapped so their wrists stay straight. Then you put a boxing glove -- basically a pillow that weighs somewhere around a pound -- over that. I've recently been exposed to 16 ounce gloves in Jun Fan; you can make a fist but forget a bout grabbing anything.

So there are perfectly valid reasons why Aikido trains against grabs. And their are perfectly valid reasons why Boxers don't. Which one is "better" depends on which one suits you.

..... Ueshiba had loads of experience sparring before codifying his art, so to just jump to the finished product makes it hard to develop the kind of timing and experience you need against someone good....

Even so, when you look at his book Budo Training in Aikido, a lot of the little drawings show counters to, you guessed it, grabs. Not surpruising since Hidden Roots of Aikido shows daito ryu people doing a lot of stuff off grabs.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-07-2007, 09:49 AM
I actually think grabs are reasonably common attacks. I think we have a basic instinct that tells us to immobilize someone before hitting them. And certainly, if you're going to try to throw someone down, grabbing them first is pretty common.

In my limited BJJ experience (very limited), I find that if I contract my arms, people go for the back of my head and my shoulders/legs. If I extend my hands (as though putting distance between us, or reaching out for my partner) and subtly 'offer' them, they generally seize my wrists or thereabouts. To my mild surprise, one technique that comes up a lot is tenchinage, because it's a fairly "direct" forward movement that has less requirement for a "if they let go" contingency. For reference, I usually start BJJ from kneeling, although the basic idea seems the same from standing.

(I'll add that I'm not claiming to be able to reliably throw grapplers.)

Dan Austin
05-07-2007, 11:23 AM
Every self defense system in the world has counters to wrist grabs. .

Granted, but they don't take years to learn, and atemi is a much easier counter in most cases anyway. I don't want my comment to take on some overblown meaning, there is more to Aikido than that. The larger issue is that many traditional arts suffer from not focusing on more modern attacks. The repertoire of Aikido was developed at a time prior to the information age where all this comparison and cross-pollination is possible and common. Ueshiba did travel Japan to seek out different instructors and styles, and what he created as a curriculum reflects his experience, which is very different than today. Apart from techniques, the other issue is that the training in many traditional arts amounts to variations of one-step sparring. When you are faced with a limited repertoire of attacks, you can get really good at reading them and choosing a counter, getting the timing, and so forth. Beyond the basics that's probably not the most efficient training method. Even if people do grab you they also let go (especially after a real atemi), and otherwise act unlike a typical uke. Your example of being punched with the other hand is an excellent example of another thing that's completely different than traditional training. I'm not covering any new ground here, these are the normal criticisms offered for many traditional arts, and you see them here regularly from people questioning their Aikido training. I'm on the fence about certain things, and I don't particularly want to play the role of Devil's Advocate against Aikido, but I tend to accept those as valid criticisms whether I personally like them or not. How much it matters probably depends on what you want to get out of your training. The original poster here seems to want to "prove" to critics that Aikido is effective, which is not a good attitude on many levels.

If you already have reasons other than combat effectiveness to study Aikido, that's fine. It's the combination of not having a combative background, and assuming that Aikido alone will fill that void, that I would caution against. If effectiveness is his main concern, perhaps he should come to Aikido with a different attitude after having worked through that concern in a more combative art if necessary. The "wussy" aspect isn't worth a serious response, but it's disingenuous to dismiss all criticism as though it always comes from thoughtless teenagers. Any martial art depends on a fine sense of timing and distance, and the most efficient way to learn that is to do a lot of sparring. In practical terms that means that if you are concerned about effectiveness, you should study the arts you would want to use your preferred art against. If you do study a lot of combative arts, you may end up not seeing the point of doing Aikido, but if you do, you'll be coming to Aikido for a better reason.

Dan Austin
05-07-2007, 11:36 AM
I actually think grabs are reasonably common attacks. I think we have a basic instinct that tells us to immobilize someone before hitting them. And certainly, if you're going to try to throw someone down, grabbing them first is pretty common.

In my limited BJJ experience (very limited), I find that if I contract my arms, people go for the back of my head and my shoulders/legs. If I extend my hands (as though putting distance between us, or reaching out for my partner) and subtly 'offer' them, they generally seize my wrists or thereabouts.

Roy Harris is one BJJ instructor who incorporates a fair amount of Aikido in his grappling. Not so much in a standing context as far as I know, but on the ground there is less freedom for the opponent to adjust and counter, and most people aren't expecting wristlocks and are used to constantly grabbing at you. Of course this is in a context where being punched isn't a risk, and it's no big deal if your lock fails. In a punching context I think it's pretty risky.

Jonshez
05-07-2007, 02:25 PM
(Oh dear me I can't believe I'm entering this fray!)

Please excuse any ignorance on my part, I'm very new to studying Aikido.

Isn't one of the reasons people unfamiliar with Aikido criticise it is because they are looking for something different from their art?

Aikido was (as far as I understand it) created to help realise the goal to be a perfect human being in both mind and body through training and practice.

To criticise it's effectiveness or manliness is the equivalent of claiming the Tea Ceremony is pointless, just use a teabag. The criticism misses the point of the exercise completely.

As far as I understand (and I really am very new) the purpose of training isn't to be the biggest bad@ss, but to find harmony with everything around you through the removal of self and ego.

I'm happy to learn if I have misunderstood.

Jon

CNYMike
05-07-2007, 03:11 PM
I actually think grabs are reasonably common attacks. I think we have a basic instinct that tells us to immobilize someone before hitting them. And certainly, if you're going to try to throw someone down, grabbing them first is pretty common.

In my limited BJJ experience (very limited), I find that if I contract my arms, people go for the back of my head and my shoulders/legs. If I extend my hands (as though putting distance between us, or reaching out for my partner) and subtly 'offer' them, they generally seize my wrists or thereabouts. To my mild surprise, one technique that comes up a lot is tenchinage, because it's a fairly "direct" forward movement that has less requirement for a "if they let go" contingency. For reference, I usually start BJJ from kneeling, although the basic idea seems the same from standing.

(I'll add that I'm not claiming to be able to reliably throw grapplers.)

I think one of the main things Aikido brings to the table is the repition of those referece points for the locks and throws; they get burned into your muscle memory, so you instantly recoginize them when they are in front of you. I've noticed this mainly in pushing hads and freestyle lock flow drills. That's why things "pop out."

How Aiki applies to kickboxing is harder to figure out because (A) many dojos don' train from those reference points, and (B) Aikido doesn't really have a premioum on anything it does. It may bea case of paying attention to what you do when you spar; if you do something dfferently that you didn't do prior to Aikido, that might be it. But otherwise it can be hard to figure out.

Dan Austin
05-07-2007, 05:00 PM
(Oh dear me I can't believe I'm entering this fray!)

Please excuse any ignorance on my part, I'm very new to studying Aikido.

Isn't one of the reasons people unfamiliar with Aikido criticise it is because they are looking for something different from their art?

Aikido was (as far as I understand it) created to help realise the goal to be a perfect human being in both mind and body through training and practice.

To criticise it's effectiveness or manliness is the equivalent of claiming the Tea Ceremony is pointless, just use a teabag. The criticism misses the point of the exercise completely.

As far as I understand (and I really am very new) the purpose of training isn't to be the biggest bad@ss, but to find harmony with everything around you through the removal of self and ego.

I'm happy to learn if I have misunderstood.

Jon

People criticize the art for different things, but the main criticism is usually some variation of "it doesn't work" or "it's inefficient" - something related to the presumed likelihood of successfully employing it for self-defense. I like your tea analogy, LOL. Well, if what you really want is a cup of tea, isn't that a valid argument? So usually you see this line of thinking from people primarily interested in a great cup of tea.

Your stated understanding of the purpose is perfectly valid and a good reason many people choose the art. Where things often become fuzzy is in two related areas. First, Aikido is a martial art, not a philosophy or religion. Those areas can overlap (in the general sense, not just in Aikido), so it's sometimes not an easy distinction. Self-perfection and self-knowledge can be approached through martial art, in a way of transcending the martial nature without denying it. It's still a martial art. People who found martial arts often follow a progression of their earlier focus being more martial, and later focus on being more spiritual. Ueshiba and his Aikido, Wang XiangZhai and Yiquan, and so forth. After you focus on how to beat people up for a long time, when you get older and weaker you tend to search for deeper meaning. You can see this in Ueshiba's writings, and things like the greater focus on atemi in the early period.

The other related issue is that frequently, people who come to the art who have no particular concern to be bad@ss, as you put it, invest many years in training, and then a sort of presumption sets in that after all that time invested, they can defend themselves with Aikido if they needed. It may not be their main focus or concern, and it's often unspoken, but I don't know if I've ever encountered anyone who said, "oh, I know I probably couldn't use it to defend myself, but I don't care at all about that." That's easy to say now, but after you've spent hours and years toiling, it's not as easy to swallow. Then you might wonder, well if that's true, am I really learning to harmonize, or am I just pretending? Isn't it better if you could harmonize and neutralize a more realistic attack? Isn't that what Ueshiba was able to do? If you can't use it, are you really following the Way, or is your practice empty? How can you come to know the true Way if not through the fire of combat? Didn't Ueshiba come to understand harmony and not contesting against the opponent after developing a high level of skill doing just that?

See what you're getting into? ;)

Dan Austin
05-07-2007, 05:10 PM
How Aiki applies to kickboxing is harder to figure out because (A) many dojos don' train from those reference points, and (B) Aikido doesn't really have a premioum on anything it does. It may bea case of paying attention to what you do when you spar; if you do something dfferently that you didn't do prior to Aikido, that might be it. But otherwise it can be hard to figure out.

Ah, reference points, spoken like a JKD concepts aficionado. ;) According to SBGi, reference points are not "aliveness". ;) Which is a valid point. But it can happen more easily in grappling where the options are more limited. Kickboxing is very much about timing, ma-ai. I think there are of course ways to address that with Aikido principles, but it can never be blessed from the Founder for obvious reasons. Like many martial artists of his day he began to use words like "scientific warfare", since the power of the fruits of science could not be denied. So the idea that the techniques should be written in stone and never adapt to modern conditions doesn't follow from embracing a scientific view of combat.

mwible
05-07-2007, 06:00 PM
(Oh dear me I can't believe I'm entering this fray!)

Please excuse any ignorance on my part, I'm very new to studying Aikido.

Isn't one of the reasons people unfamiliar with Aikido criticise it is because they are looking for something different from their art?

Aikido was (as far as I understand it) created to help realise the goal to be a perfect human being in both mind and body through training and practice.

To criticise it's effectiveness or manliness is the equivalent of claiming the Tea Ceremony is pointless, just use a teabag. The criticism misses the point of the exercise completely.

As far as I understand (and I really am very new) the purpose of training isn't to be the biggest bad@ss, but to find harmony with everything around you through the removal of self and ego.

I'm happy to learn if I have misunderstood.

Jon

you are quite correct on your opinion, in my book. ive been studying for about a year, and am no longer a "super super white belt", but still pretty new none the less.
i agree with you all except you are learning to harmonize with all things while being able to defend yourslef against any sized attacker in the most painless way posisble (for the attacker). so in my book you get the benefit of harmony with the universe, and also you get to become a bad@ss after much training. :D
-morgan

Dan Austin
05-07-2007, 07:18 PM
i agree with you all except you are learning to harmonize with all things while being able to defend yourslef against any sized attacker in the most painless way posisble (for the attacker). so in my book you get the benefit of harmony with the universe, and also you get to become a bad@ss after much training. :D
-morgan

Jon: see what I mean? ;)

DonMagee
05-07-2007, 08:08 PM
I had 3 sparing matches tonight, I did a test. Match one, I did not present the wrist. Number of times it was grabbed: 1. It was grabbed while working a clock choke from my back, I was in no position to attempt anything.

Match two, I presented my wrist, number of times grabbed during the match, 3 times. These were the first, second, and fourth attempt at taking me down, after this my partner realized what I was doing and ignored my wrist and went for traditional tie-ups. In the first two cases I was able to capitalize on the grab and use this to my advantage in an ikkyo like movement. On the thrid time he realized what I was doing and was able to counter me back to a neutral position.

Match three, I did not present my wrists, but I did not keep my hands inside, I just rolled naturally. Number of times my wrist was grabbed, 2 times. Once on an armdrag and once from my back while my partner was attempting to work up some kind of choke. In both cases I was unable to capitalize on the grab.

My partners were one advanced blue belt and two 6 month to 1 year white belts.

CNYMike
05-07-2007, 08:45 PM
..... the other issue is that the training in many traditional arts amounts to variations of one-step sparring.

So? I've seen plenty of that in Inosanto Kali for learning different disarms and empty hand entries and techniques. It's not the only form of traning, but it has its place.


When you are faced with a limited repertoire of attacks, you can get really good at reading them and choosing a counter, getting the timing, and so forth. Beyond the basics that's probably not the most efficient training method .....

You can make that point about almost anything. For instance, western boxing has four techniques: Jab, cross, hook, uppercut. That's it. There are many varieties of each, but if all you d is box, that's all you see. Would someone who learned to box be very goo at reading and countering boxing, but flop against everything else? Your argument says "yes." If not, then maybe something else is going on?

.... Even if people do grab you they also let go .....

I know. One night, my Aikido teacher tenkaned so fast I could not hang on to his wrist. Didn't faze him. "If he lets go, you do something else," he said, as his hand got ibn my face and I "blended" with the matat high speed.

..... Your example of being punched with the other hand is an excellent example of another thing that's completely different than traditional training .....

Ahem I did mentioned the attacks where kata dori is followed up by a rear hand attack. Usually shomenuchi or yokomenuchi, but one night we looked at a punch. It comes up.


.... The original poster here seems to want to "prove" to critics that Aikido is effective, which is not a good attitude on many levels.


There are enough testimonials about it that pop up to handle that.

senshincenter
05-07-2007, 08:47 PM
Well, we got both. We got folks that train in Aikido for self-defense reasons and we got folks that are not at all at the dojo for self-defense reasons - also realizing they couldn't defend themselves against those that are training for self-defense reasons. In a lot of classes, the two groups train together quite nicely. In some cases, for certain classes, the folks from the latter group just don't attend, don't want to attend, and don't feel a need to attend. They don't feel they are missing anything, at the very same time they realize that are not partaking of something.

What does this tell me? If you got some serious folks, training hard, no Aikido "lite" for them, etc., etc., the folks that don't train that way not only know they don't train that way, they are very happy for not training that way. If you got folks that don't know they are not training that way, or if you got folks that cannot be happy not training that way, one isn't really seeing something about the art. One is just seeing a lack of presence regarding the hardcore practitioner.

dmv

Roman Kremianski
05-07-2007, 08:54 PM
Aikido was (as far as I understand it) created to help realise the goal to be a perfect human being in both mind and body through training and practice.

Woaw, no. Perfect is definitely not the word you're looking for here dude.

CNYMike
05-07-2007, 08:58 PM
..... Ah, reference points, spoken like a JKD concepts aficionado .....

Not surprising since I've been studying under people tied to Guro Dan Inosanto for ten years now, and I've been to several seminars with Guro Dan; it shouldn't be a shock they shaped my thinking.


..... the idea that the techniques should be written in stone and never adapt to modern conditions doesn't follow from embracing a scientific view of combat.

Well, Aikido does have some wiggle room built in; there are as many styles as there are people teaching it (and probably practicing it). But I think there are limits. You want to teach grappling, do that any way you want. You want to teach Aikido, specifically, it's more than just the techniques. Something is being passed down to you, and you're passing it on to somone else. What will future generations get?

Personally, I'm approaching the traditional training from the presepctive of how it works and what do I get out of it. To coin a phrase, "No one martial art has all the answers but everything has somethin to offer." I won't get anywhere near what Aikido has if I don't look at the whole package.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-07-2007, 09:39 PM
I had 3 sparing matches tonight, I did a test. [...]

Great! Some more anecdotal evidence to add to the pool.

If I read that right, the number of potentially usable grabs was 0, 1, and 3, in ascending order of degree of offering. Ikkyo, though, kind of surprises me. I might just not be as good at it, but it generally feels like a wrist grab (with arms held below the shoulders, at least) is too low, given that in a BJJ context, they're generally willing to let go and reestablish a new grip if they feel you go for something.

The only times I've felt like ikkyo was feasible (and subsequently pulled it off) were when my shoulders were grabbed.

How high were you holding your wrists? Mine were a bit below "chest-high". At that height, the techniques I've tried are tenchinage and kotegaeshi. I'm currently wondering about shihonage -- if not the full technique, at least the opening arm-torque, perhaps taking it into that neck-hold people sometimes do. (I guess kind of like a ... what's that called...maybe a guillotine? But upside down?) I've also tried that inside-elbow-pushing kokyunage, but without that much success. (Works sometimes, but it's easy to run into their power.) Also, some desperate iriminages with some big guys. Generally felt like I was running right into their strength. I'd topple them sometimes, but they'd grab a leg or whatever and I wouldn't end up winning a very strong position.

In the above examples, I'm generally working with (other) relative beginners. (And again, this is generally starting from kneeling.) Less success doing things with people who have a better idea what they're doing. My standup vs. someone who knows judo = ow.

Anyway, I'll see if maybe I can take a more scientific tack, recording successes/failures, and let you know what I find.

Aikibu
05-07-2007, 10:04 PM
Everyone's entitled to an opinion, and I'm certainly not the only one to observe that it might be good to modernize the curriculum. While my concerns don't have to be shared by anyone else (though I see them all over the board), the original poster is entitled to hear different opinions. Your comment also makes little sense in light of the fact that in this very thread you mentioned having crosstrained in MMA for 5 years. If Aikido training lacks nothing, why do that?

Why not...You're mistaken in my reasons for crosstraining. It is not out of lack of "effective technique" in Aikido, but the exact opposite. Aikido like any Martial Art measures it's effectiveness in how well it "holds up" to other Martial Arts including MMA. There are several flavors of Aikido that hold up pretty well in my experiance. The bone of contention in all these cases concern the "goals" of Aikido which are vastly different than MMA. I also have experiance in other arts. The techniques of Aikido work period. The practice of Aikido also works. If there is fault to be found then it lies in the instruction which I do agree can be found lacking at times. That is why it is important to learn from the best and practice hard.

It can be frustrating to learn and one can lose sight of forest while complaining about the trees.... So what I tell folks is to leave and pursue your expertise in another discipline... Then give Aikido a try. Perhaps your perspective will change.

William Hazen

Aikibu
05-07-2007, 10:22 PM
Great! Some more anecdotal evidence to add to the pool.

If I read that right, the number of potentially usable grabs was 0, 1, and 3, in ascending order of degree of offering. Ikkyo, though, kind of surprises me. I might just not be as good at it, but it generally feels like a wrist grab (with arms held below the shoulders, at least) is too low, given that in a BJJ context, they're generally willing to let go and reestablish a new grip if they feel you go for something.

Perhaps you have discovered the cruxt of your problem with Aikido. Why are you "going" for anything your partner throws at you? If you're putting energy into "conflicting" with your partner then of course you're going to experiance difficulty.

If I have heard it once I have heard it a thousand times from Sensei at the beginning of my Aikido journey. "RELAX and STOP FIGHTING. Let them attack all they want...When the time is right you enter!"

Folks love to grab my wrist hard and stand there waiting for me to do something or throw a combination and hope I "fight back." Aikido is not designed to win conflicts in this manner by going mano au mano...matching blow for blow...

William Hazen

DonMagee
05-08-2007, 06:12 AM
Great! Some more anecdotal evidence to add to the pool.

If I read that right, the number of potentially usable grabs was 0, 1, and 3, in ascending order of degree of offering. Ikkyo, though, kind of surprises me. I might just not be as good at it, but it generally feels like a wrist grab (with arms held below the shoulders, at least) is too low, given that in a BJJ context, they're generally willing to let go and reestablish a new grip if they feel you go for something.

The only times I've felt like ikkyo was feasible (and subsequently pulled it off) were when my shoulders were grabbed.

How high were you holding your wrists? Mine were a bit below "chest-high". At that height, the techniques I've tried are tenchinage and kotegaeshi. I'm currently wondering about shihonage -- if not the full technique, at least the opening arm-torque, perhaps taking it into that neck-hold people sometimes do. (I guess kind of like a ... what's that called...maybe a guillotine? But upside down?) I've also tried that inside-elbow-pushing kokyunage, but without that much success. (Works sometimes, but it's easy to run into their power.) Also, some desperate iriminages with some big guys. Generally felt like I was running right into their strength. I'd topple them sometimes, but they'd grab a leg or whatever and I wouldn't end up winning a very strong position.

In the above examples, I'm generally working with (other) relative beginners. (And again, this is generally starting from kneeling.) Less success doing things with people who have a better idea what they're doing. My standup vs. someone who knows judo = ow.

Anyway, I'll see if maybe I can take a more scientific tack, recording successes/failures, and let you know what I find.

When I presented the hand, my arm was out slightly bent with fingers about neck high. When I kept my hands back, I kept the elbows in tight with my chest like I had T-Rex arms. When I was natural, I just did what I do naturally, sometimes I reach, sometimes I don't. These matches all started from the knees. I'm going to get some of my friends to start standing (we are all judo guys as well) this weekend and see what I can work.

I do not go for a technique, I use the ikkyo movement to create an angle of attack. You are right, they do let go to re-grip, but by the time they let go their balance is broken and I am able to out maneuver them. Usually this movement allows me to get side control or their back. So basically its a big arm circle with a tenkan step, if they don't let go they know they are going face down, so they do let go and attempt to turn in to pull guard, however by this time the angle is usually insufficient for them to do so. It is working with a fair amount of success though, the trick is getting them to grab your wrist. It seems the more advanced students realize it is out there for a reason and just work around it. I am hoping I get to play with this at NAGA at the end of the month.

Paul Sanderson-Cimino
05-08-2007, 07:42 AM
Thanks for the replies, William and Don; you've both given me stuff to think about.

Ron Tisdale
05-08-2007, 07:55 AM
Hi Don,

Looking forward to hearing how that goes. Thanks for the posts...

Best,
Ron

CNYMike
05-08-2007, 02:59 PM
I had 3 sparing matches tonight, I did a test. Match one, I did not present the wrist. Number of times it was grabbed: 1. It was grabbed while working a clock choke from my back, I was in no position to attempt anything.

Match two, I presented my wrist, number of times grabbed during the match, 3 times. These were the first, second, and fourth attempt at taking me down, after this my partner realized what I was doing and ignored my wrist and went for traditional tie-ups. In the first two cases I was able to capitalize on the grab and use this to my advantage in an ikkyo like movement. On the thrid time he realized what I was doing and was able to counter me back to a neutral position.

Match three, I did not present my wrists, but I did not keep my hands inside, I just rolled naturally. Number of times my wrist was grabbed, 2 times. Once on an armdrag and once from my back while my partner was attempting to work up some kind of choke. In both cases I was unable to capitalize on the grab.

My partners were one advanced blue belt and two 6 month to 1 year white belts.

You shouldn't be preoccupied with the wrist grab because there are other grabs studied: Grabs at the elbows, the shoulders, etc. So in theory, you should be able to present anything and when your partner goes for it you have him. Of course, that requires being one step ahead of your oppoent, but the relevant JKD term would be ABD, "attack by drawing" --- you bait him with a target and when he takes the bait, you apply whatever presents itself. Ideally, uke moves, nage moves, and nage does whatever he can with whatever he (or she) gets. But to get there, you do things bassackwards through the prearranged training.

So if you were to try the test again, same mindset but offer .... whatever. I think katate dori is used first because it is simple, straightforward, and the entries are least confusing.

Just my 2p.

Dan Austin
05-08-2007, 03:43 PM
Why not...You're mistaken in my reasons for crosstraining. It is not out of lack of "effective technique" in Aikido, but the exact opposite. Aikido like any Martial Art measures it's effectiveness in how well it "holds up" to other Martial Arts including MMA. There are several flavors of Aikido that hold up pretty well in my experiance. The bone of contention in all these cases concern the "goals" of Aikido which are vastly different than MMA. I also have experiance in other arts. The techniques of Aikido work period. The practice of Aikido also works. If there is fault to be found then it lies in the instruction which I do agree can be found lacking at times. That is why it is important to learn from the best and practice hard.

It can be frustrating to learn and one can lose sight of forest while complaining about the trees.... So what I tell folks is to leave and pursue your expertise in another discipline... Then give Aikido a try. Perhaps your perspective will change.

William Hazen

Sounds good, I said essentially the same thing a few posts back. If effectiveness is a concern, it's good to stay current with the arts of the day regardless of what your chosen art is. That experience also helps one be able to evaluate how the training is in any given school.

jennifer paige smith
05-08-2007, 03:48 PM
Actually the wrist grab is a form of beginning practice. The wrist grab alone is an incomplete attack. It's been said that if an attacker can get ahold of you, you are basically already dead. We allow ourselves to be grabbed as part of the training process. Aikido is not fighting or about fighting. No matter how many tmes this is explained, we all seem to forget, again and again. I suppose that just goes to show how hard transformational training really is.

In gassho,

Mark

This was so right on that I just wanted it to reappear in the post in case anyone missed it a little ways back on the road.

jen

pugtm
05-08-2007, 04:23 PM
wow this thread has really taken off. I cant even understand half of what is said anymore. But it's great it evolved this much.

James Stedman
05-08-2007, 07:57 PM
I am not aikidoka.I am karateka.No matter, the truth is the truth.All martial arts were designed and handed down to strengthen and improve the mind and body in many ways, one way being to recognize ignorance when it appears.Your friend's opinion speaks volumes about what he has not learned.His opinion is worthless.Chances are his skills are also.




One' s true path shall not be found while standing in another's shadow.

DonMagee
05-08-2007, 08:37 PM
You shouldn't be preoccupied with the wrist grab because there are other grabs studied: Grabs at the elbows, the shoulders, etc. So in theory, you should be able to present anything and when your partner goes for it you have him. Of course, that requires being one step ahead of your oppoent, but the relevant JKD term would be ABD, "attack by drawing" --- you bait him with a target and when he takes the bait, you apply whatever presents itself. Ideally, uke moves, nage moves, and nage does whatever he can with whatever he (or she) gets. But to get there, you do things bassackwards through the prearranged training.

So if you were to try the test again, same mindset but offer .... whatever. I think katate dori is used first because it is simple, straightforward, and the entries are least confusing.

Just my 2p.

I know all about baiting. Its just that I find it easier to do bjj or judo techniques off the bait then aikido techniques. I was explicitly trying to see if people would grab my wrists. When people grab anything else I simply keep moving and an opportunity presents itself or I get tapped out. Drawing people into my game is something I have learned without ever doing kata training for it. In the kata training I have done the techniques already have the setup. Rarely does my instructor talk about what to do to get the setup. Sometimes he will talk about how someone will attempt to counter or escape a technique thus setting up another technique. But usually he leaves that up to be worked out in sparing. Works great so far, most of us do great in competition.

I personally find it hard to learn though contrived movements, It is great for learning a single technique (like an armbar drill), but learning setups and combos that way really doesn't do it for me. I can't work my mind around all the little things that happen and I get very bored. I prefer to drill 3 or 4 related techniques, then drill with positional sparing.

xuzen
05-08-2007, 09:34 PM
wow this thread has really taken off. I cant even understand half of what is said anymore. But it's great it evolved this much.
Sadly...me too :( .

HULK no understand... HULK Smash! Die Puny Uke, DIE!

HULK err... Boon

CNYMike
05-09-2007, 10:30 AM
I know all about baiting. Its just that I find it easier to do bjj or judo techniques off the bait then aikido techniques .....

Ok, but how much of that is because you now do Aikido once or twice a month? As opposed to how much time spent on other things?


I was explicitly trying to see if people would grab my wrists ....

Yep, they will. Which may explain why every self defense system worries about them. ;)

philippe willaume
05-09-2007, 11:22 AM
Hello
May be I miss something but would not you say that all arts depend on distance and timing?
I mean it can easily be proven from medieval fencing to krav-maga or MMA passing by French small sword or English basket hilt.
So I would say if Don finds do MMA/judo easier to do, it is probably that at the distance he is, that is the case.
Intellectually speaking we can reduce any fighting to distance and time management. And to a certain degree I would agree with Michael, Don probably moves in such way so that timing and distance is right for MMA/judo.
From my own experience and medieval wrestling book that distance is slightly "closer" for MMA/judo/medieval social wrestling, than aikido/fighting wrestling/modern close combat/self defence.

On grabbing the hands.
Well of course fighting in earnest will have a tendency to have a look at grabbing the hand, the fist thing you want to do is prevent access to his weapon and secure access to yours. Hand grab can be used as well to create a situation where using a weapon /or a punching is safe (timing) and that exposed a sensitive area.
That is not really present in sporting or social wrestling.

I do not believe however that one will automatically try to grab our hands/wrist even in a non sportive circumstance. Unless we give them a good reason to make contact with our arm (ie atemi). As long as we strike within our own space it does not really matter if we strike him and he defends or if he strikes us and we defends.

Phil
ps and would someone be kind enough to tell that bloque that as far as he is concerned those who do aikido are mister wusses.

DonMagee
05-09-2007, 11:34 AM
I agree, distance plays a big part. Once we are closer then arms reach I find judo a much easier thing to perform. Of course the principles I use to do this are not so much the principles my aikido instructor would want me to use. I am also more comfortable on the inside, so I tend to go from striking to clinch range rather quickly. That probably doesn't lend itself to aikido.

pugtm
05-09-2007, 09:25 PM
I think that pretty much wraps this thread up. And i am glad to see that my friend was mostly wrong(those guys with the :ki:-ball attacks are a little :freaky::crazy: )