PDA

View Full Version : Aikido Vs. Jujitsu (brazilian)


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


aries admin
06-27-2002, 12:10 AM
Its one of the favorite topic in our DOJO. What can an AIKIDOKA do with a BRAZILIAN JUJITSU practioner?

My opinion (READ: OPINION) Technique wise Aikido is really rich compared to the B Jujitsu. It will be hard for a B Jujitsu to tackle down a well versed AIKIDOKA.

I have tried to spar with a B. Jujitsu practioner and has indeed proven this. He tried many times to knock me down and he just could not get a hold on me. I simply blended with him and he always end up in the mat. He asked me numerous times did you trip me? I said no. On the ground with the B Jujitsu on top of me ( We started with me lying down) I was able to do both IKKYO and NIKKYO on one of the hands holding me down. Once I have done this I just rolled over still holding his hand. We ended up with me in the kneeling position while the guy is on the floor still PINNED.

With my back on the mat, I learned that an Aikidoka should be aware of the following things:

1. The punches - with your back on the mat it will be hard to parry it, one should be fast to apply the locks. faster than the punches. Try not to keep his head close to yours if you want to avoid the punches. See number 3
2. The leg locks - don't let them do this.
3. The hold that makes your head closer to his - I had a hard time applying the locks under this position. I pushed his head first then applied the lock.
4. If all things fail in real life don't forget to gouge the eyes and bite into their ears or any part of the body for the matter.

I was suprised of the result. I said a while ago about a WELL VERSED AIKIDOKA, I am far from that. Don't get me wrong about that statement,I only meant " If I can do it, a not so well versed Aikidoka what more can a well versed one do?"

On the other hand I think It will be B Jujitsu all the way if ever an Aikidoka is in on the mat on all fours with the B Jujitsu on his back. One has to avoid that from happening.

Then again the end result will still be on the practioner.

Iam interested in your comments and opinions or even experience.

Bronson
06-27-2002, 12:16 AM
What can an AIKIDOKA do with a BRAZILIAN JUJITSU practioner?

See a movie, get something to eat, paint a house, chase monkeys. Really just about anything you can do with any other person :p

Bronson

Edward
06-27-2002, 12:23 AM
Having practiced Judo for many years, my personal experience is that Judo and Ju-Jitsu are unbeatable once a grappling hold has been established. I don't think the average aikidoka has enough experience in grappling to be able to do anything useful.

The advantage of aikido, the way I see it, is minimizing the contact with the opponent, and keeping distance, even with armlocks or throws which in opposition to Judo are done from a safe distance and do not require body to body contact.

This I believe leaves you free to worry about some other attackers while grappling in the mud with the other guy will leave you vulnerable to multiple attacks. Also this gives you the option of running away which would be more difficult while grappling.

Cheers,
Edward

shihonage
06-27-2002, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by Bronson


See a movie, get something to eat, paint a house, chase monkeys. Really just about anything you can do with any other person :p

Bronson

Exactly :)

PhiGammaDawg
06-27-2002, 01:42 AM
aikidokas should try to be well rounded and should know some basic grappling skills...it could be complimentary...
we must also remember that aikido is not an attack first martial art like taekwondo...by attacking first we put ourselves in a dangerous situations anyways...
that is why 2 masters of jujitsu and aikido will not fight each other anyways *well not in the streets that is

they usually go for beer

Bruce Baker
06-27-2002, 01:33 PM
I don't know who you were playing with in your little wrestling match, but any good BJJ guy will force you to the ground ... of course, if you are scratching the eyes, poking the throat, hitting groan target #1, or other illegal moves for BJJ practice, that would be closer to my old Kempo practice.

Oh, and don't forget throwing your opponent across the room, against the wall or slamming them to the mat are no-no's also.

On the other hand, if your opponent used any of these distractions upon you, then I would be seeing a different story, maybe a more humble aikido practitioner?

I kind of liked the rough and tumble see what works on the ground practice of BJJ, it was eye opening enough to provide many balance, and unbalance points that translated into other Aikido techniques. It generally took jujitsu to another place that we don't always get time to explore, into a bloody streetfight/wrestling arena.

Just about anyone who says they only do Aikido usually freezes when grappled, my hat is off to you for not freezing, good job.

You shouldn't be cocky about though, because some little guy, who really looks like nothing, will probably beat your ass, and it will be because you were not respectful of BJJ?

On the other hand, if you are both just beginners, trying each others previous style, and looking for ways to adapt or overcome, it was a good lesson for winner and loser.

I probably shouldn't have said anything, but we are humble, respectful of other arts when we show Aikido, aren't we?

I was just kidding, there won't be a little guy from Brazil to beat you up ...

Maybe three big guys who want to have words with you and set you straight, but no little guy.

(Just kidding.)

aries admin
06-28-2002, 01:46 AM
Don't get me wrong I did not post to brag was just trying to relate my experience to everyone and hope to see what others think of it. Thank you for the replies. I got some things to clarify:

My BJJ sparring partner has been practicing for more than two years now. He has not achieve ROYCE's caliber yet but one thing I can be sure of is this, if I used my knowledge in Tae Kwon Do rather than my Aikido I would be on the mat and struggling. I have more than five years of TKD background yet I don't think I am fast enough to kick or get away the way he SHOOTS at me. On the Aikido side I have more than sixteen months of practice.


The rules of the sparring is this, take down, throwing, pinning, grappling and choking allowed. Punching and kicking allowed too. No biting, eye gouging,poking, targetting of the groin.


Bruce, thanks for the advice just to clarify however I RESPECT BJJ. I respect all aspect and types of martial art. Its not the ART as I always been told its the practioner.

Doshu
06-28-2002, 05:28 AM
All these posts really prove is preference, I mean on an Aikido web site it is unlikely that anyone is really going to say that BJJ is better than aikido. Its like comparing a sports car and a 4*4. They are not the same and so uncomparable. However they do have there advantages in certain terrain. BJJ has a considerable amount of ground work. Were as the Aikidoka, does but not at the same level.

What is it though with BJJ as everyone seems to be pitting there martial art against it. I have seen this on both karate and judo site. So perhaps these martial arts have something to prove. However Aikdio is not about fighting its about thinking.

the likely hood of to martial artists squaring off is unlikely. Especially an Aikidoka. As if you go looking for a fight then you are a failure as a student in Morihei's eyes.

Thats not to say that you cant train with different disaplines. But in a really fight, all martial arts take a more sinister turn. You will always hold something back if it is not a real fight.

Cheers
Chris

paw
06-28-2002, 09:49 AM
Aries,

All these posts really prove is preference, I mean on an Aikido web site it is unlikely that anyone is really going to say that BJJ is better than aikido.

Ah what the heck, I'll say it. BJJ is better than aikido.;)

Debriefing for your partner:

On the ground with the B Jujitsu on top of me ( We started with me lying down) I was able to do both IKKYO and NIKKYO on one of the hands holding me down.

Then your partner does not have good posture or control. Considering you later say you reverse the situation I assume either: your partner had very poor base, you have a significant size and weight advantage, or both.

My BJJ sparring partner has been practicing for more than two years now. He has not achieve ROYCE's caliber yet but one thing I can be sure of is this, if I used my knowledge in Tae Kwon Do rather than my Aikido I would be on the mat and struggling. I have more than five years of TKD background yet I don't think I am fast enough to kick or get away the way he SHOOTS at me. On the Aikido side I have more than sixteen months of practice.

So your partner is a wet-behind-the-ears blue belt, with a poor sense of strategy. Your partner should stop trying to shoot and let you come to him and then clinch. If your partner cannot touch you, they are too far away to shoot with any certainty.


1. The punches - with your back on the mat it will be hard to parry it, one should be fast to apply the locks. faster than the punches. Try not to keep his head close to yours if you want to avoid the punches.

Your partner should study the Brazilian Top Team's approach to striking (see Sperry's Value Tudo series). It sounds like your partner is losing control in order to strike. Try controlling first, then striking.
Second, there are a number of times when you would want your head close to your partner's to avoid strikes. The classic example is when you are mounted.

4. If all things fail in real life don't forget to gouge the eyes and bite into their ears or any part of the body for the matter.

Speculating on real life from a sparring match is a mistake. Wear goggles, roll lightly and add eye gouges, bites, knives and other assorted nastiness into your sessions and then draw conclusions. I'd recommend against this at this stage, as it sounds to me like your partner needs to focus on positional control first.

Respectfully,

Paul

PS. The preferred spelling is Brazilian Jiu Jitsu or bjj for short. If your partner is ranked by Royce/Rorion, et al, you may add "Gracie" to the art's name or abreviate it GJJ.

Doshu
06-28-2002, 11:19 AM
Many Thanks for your brave comment. However like I was saying no martial art is better than another. Some are Long Medium Range some are Medium short. Some use weapons. Some dont. Its down to the practioner. I am sure there have been cases that unfit man, with no martial arts training has won out against a well versed martial artist. Its all about heart. Weither you REALLY want it.

I would not imagin that Morihei would compare martial arts. Neither should we.

Cheers
Chris

Paula Lydon
06-30-2002, 09:46 AM
From what I've seen Brazillian Jujitsu is, all be it powerful, narrow and specialized. I come out of 12 years of a full-carriculum Jujitsu style, of which grappling is a part of the whole. Sometimes to be on the ground is stronger for you, sometimes it's stupid, but then we didn't train for the ring but the street. I'd suggest that if you're that interested (your reasons are your own) in testing yourself in this manner then you should play with a fuller-range Jujitsuka, or anyone from any other art. You will learn much...just remember to play nice.
Young bulls ram their heads into each other half the day, gaining strength and expierence, then graze together the remainder.
Compitition (yet another word perverted)is not 'evil' in and of itself, it's a tool like any other. How are you using it? Enjoy your research :ai: :D :ki:

erikhill76
09-13-2007, 03:52 PM
From what I've seen Brazillian Jujitsu is, all be it powerful, narrow and specialized. I come out of 12 years of a full-carriculum Jujitsu style, of which grappling is a part of the whole. Sometimes to be on the ground is stronger for you, sometimes it's stupid, but then we didn't train for the ring but the street. I'd suggest that if you're that interested (your reasons are your own) in testing yourself in this manner then you should play with a fuller-range Jujitsuka, or anyone from any other art. You will learn much...just remember to play nice.
Young bulls ram their heads into each other half the day, gaining strength and expierence, then graze together the remainder.
Compitition (yet another word perverted)is not 'evil' in and of itself, it's a tool like any other. How are you using it? Enjoy your research :ai: :D :ki:

I think BJJ is overrated. It works great in MMA with highly trained athletes, but even then you cannot overlook the punishment they take in order to “win” with an arm bar or choke. Personally, I would much rather learn to defend against committed attacks, grabs, and strikes; then to learn how to submit someone after they have beaten my face to a pulp. The bottom line is Aikido to me is a martial art BJJ is a sport. Both have applications for self-defense, but both are flawed. If you really wanna learn to defend yourself take a 6 week Krav Maga course.

Erik.

lbb
09-13-2007, 04:27 PM
I long for the day when this whole question and all like it can be relegated to the "can superman beat up batman?" circular file where they belong.

Dewey
09-13-2007, 05:27 PM
I long for the day when this whole question and all like it can be relegated to the "can superman beat up batman?" circular file where they belong.

AMEN!

This sort of pointless discourse has been clogging Aikiweb as of late. Such "observations" and "discussions" (if can really call them that) need to move over to Bullshido, where such things are obsessed over ad nauseam...with much vulgarity, I might add.

mathewjgano
09-13-2007, 06:00 PM
...any good BJJ guy will force you to the ground ...

...except for those good BJJ guys that couldn't force other folks to the ground in UFC fights I've seen. Not that it isn't even likely, but saying they will automatically (no matter how good) seems rather premature.

mathewjgano
09-13-2007, 06:08 PM
AMEN!

This sort of pointless discourse has been clogging Aikiweb as of late. Such "observations" and "discussions" (if can really call them that) need to move over to Bullshido, where such things are obsessed over ad nauseam...with much vulgarity, I might add.

But it's SOOO important! ;) I know I tend to get caught up in these kinds of "discussions" so i can relate to those who perpetuate them so much. People take their passions passionately after all, and people seem to love beating dead horses (not enough glue in the world apparently). On one hand I can see the importance of letting people know the truth of a situation they're deluded about. On the other hand it's often larger on ego and shorter on perspective. If folks want to waste energy, so be it. Personally, I'm just trying to be a more articulate person and I find the difficulties of the "my art rules; your art sucks" (and variations of that) a great opportunity to practice calm and rational discourse. After a point it does become useless though, even to someone like me.
Cheers!

Roman Kremianski
09-13-2007, 10:50 PM
I have tried to spar with a B. Jujitsu practioner and has indeed proven this. He tried many times to knock me down and he just could not get a hold on me. I simply blended with him and he always end up in the mat. He asked me numerous times did you trip me? I said no. On the ground with the B Jujitsu on top of me ( We started with me lying down) I was able to do both IKKYO and NIKKYO on one of the hands holding me down. Once I have done this I just rolled over still holding his hand. We ended up with me in the kneeling position while the guy is on the floor still PINNED.

Not even gonna bother sugar coating it, but I don't believe you. Sorry.

Dan Austin
09-14-2007, 12:58 AM
Not even gonna bother sugar coating it, but I don't believe you. Sorry.

Took the words out of my mouth. ;) Apart from that, a dozen years ago such style vs style nonsense was common, frankly I'm amazed to see it still going so far into the MMA era. People mixed styles long before MMA, but you have to be living under a rock to still think one style is the uber style. BJJ is very good at what it does, but it's only a piece of the puzzle, albeit a pretty reliable one.

Upyu
09-14-2007, 01:57 AM
Wow, for once I agree with Dan and Roman :)

salim
09-14-2007, 05:31 AM
Spiritual mysticism is one cause for that kind of mentality. Delusional grandeur's of Aikido. I agree with Dan and Roman.

grondahl
09-14-2007, 05:51 AM
1: The OP is 5 years old.
2: I think that Paw answered the original poster in a constructive and reasonable way. Far above Dan, Roman, Salims and Roberts posts in this thread. Can´t we just let the thread die?

philippe willaume
09-14-2007, 08:01 AM
Its one of the favorite topic in our DOJO. What can an AIKIDOKA do with a BRAZILIAN JUJITSU practioner?

My opinion (READ: OPINION) Technique wise Aikido is really rich compared to the B Jujitsu. It will be hard for a B Jujitsu to tackle down a well versed AIKIDOKA.

I have tried to spar with a B. Jujitsu practioner and has indeed proven this. He tried many times to knock me down and he just could not get a hold on me. I simply blended with him and he always end up in the mat. He asked me numerous times did you trip me? I said no. On the ground with the B Jujitsu on top of me ( We started with me lying down) I was able to do both IKKYO and NIKKYO on one of the hands holding me down. Once I have done this I just rolled over still holding his hand. We ended up with me in the kneeling position while the guy is on the floor still PINNED.

With my back on the mat, I learned that an Aikidoka should be aware of the following things:

1. The punches - with your back on the mat it will be hard to parry it, one should be fast to apply the locks. faster than the punches. Try not to keep his head close to yours if you want to avoid the punches. See number 3
2. The leg locks - don't let them do this.
3. The hold that makes your head closer to his - I had a hard time applying the locks under this position. I pushed his head first then applied the lock.
4. If all things fail in real life don't forget to gouge the eyes and bite into their ears or any part of the body for the matter.

I was suprised of the result. I said a while ago about a WELL VERSED AIKIDOKA, I am far from that. Don't get me wrong about that statement,I only meant " If I can do it, a not so well versed Aikidoka what more can a well versed one do?"

On the other hand I think It will be B Jujitsu all the way if ever an Aikidoka is in on the mat on all fours with the B Jujitsu on his back. One has to avoid that from happening.

Then again the end result will still be on the practioner.

Iam interested in your comments and opinions or even experience.
Hum
I have tried that with my BJJ nephew (lest than a year in bJJ) and some grappler in the medieval martial arts world.

In the standing phase, If you can (as in are allowed to use punches (well kick knee elbow and so on) you have a chance to keep him away and enter or to jam his grab (And that put it the stuff out side the BJJ world and really making a better striker than they).
It did not work all the times but It gives you a fighting chance. I.e. you need to be better at that that he is at taking you down.

When we worked from the ground, other than me mounting and being allowed to strike (or trap one or the arms and strike) or just leaning over trapping one arm, sitting on hips/tops of pelvis and pushing under his throat with one for arm.
I invariably got my arse chewed (and I am 20 kg heavier than my nephew)
We did it with me in the guard or they in my guard, mounting or mounted.

Since we exchanging opinions and experiences
Be it a BJJ guy or any type of grappler, I found that they keep their elbow close to their body and have good connection with the ground , that make ikkio nikkio and so on almost impossible to apply before the can prevent it to happen.

Ikkio nikio and so on become only possible when a knife is already out or accessed sneakily. What we have noticed is that they then tend to extend their arms more and they are not that flat on the ground with the hips anymore

We have noticed that if the grappler is aware of the weapon, they can usually prevent you to access it; starting from standing up, we use a shove of the other hand and moving one hip back. To facilitate weapon access and make jamming the drawing hand more difficult
That being said we just tried to access the weapon first (IE the knife man was not trying the wrestle a bit and then use the weapon)

I do not know if I am well versed (just 7 years of aikido) plus a few in muy thai and Chinese boxing. (and 25 year of horse riding, that does help when it comes to oompha)
Could describe the setup and what yo did to see if I can re-create it

Phil
Ps what did you do against shoot and attempt of taking you down with his guard/ half guard?

Dan Austin
09-14-2007, 01:24 PM
1: The OP is 5 years old.
2: I think that Paw answered the original poster in a constructive and reasonable way. Far above Dan, Roman, Salims and Roberts posts in this thread. Can´t we just let the thread die?

No, because posters whom you give more credit than Rob, Salim, Roman, and myself will give serious responses to a question you admit is worthy of a 5 yr old, thus guaranteeing the thread will go on for several hundred more posts. :)

What's truly sad is that the ratio of views/posts in this thread outstrip the average substantially, showing that a morbid fascination with this sort of topic persists.

Kevin Leavitt
09-14-2007, 02:28 PM
Dan, if nothing else, it is entertainment for me. I don't have cable TV. :)

Cyrijl
09-14-2007, 03:03 PM
1: The OP is 5 years old.
2: I think that Paw answered the original poster in a constructive and reasonable way. Far above Dan, Roman, Salims and Roberts posts in this thread. Can´t we just let the thread die?

Yes it is old, but people to this day believe this tripe.

And while Paw did respond well to the OP, your passive aggressiveness is exactly why people won't let this thread die. If you have something to say then say it and back it up. Too often the sport vs street debate is brought up, and almost invariably the 'street' people run from a real challenge. This is even in cases of friendly sparring or randoori.

Roman just came and said what he thought and it is about time. And Dan's post is something that people need to better understand. BJJ is just part of an overal fighting strategy.

MMA IS NOT BJJ.

People who train to fight, train not only BJJ but also in striking and clinching ranges. In addition fewer and fewer fighters are training formal BJJ. There is also wrestling, judo, sombo, etc.

No one here forces you to read these threads. Nobody was being insulting or rude.

Aristeia
09-14-2007, 04:20 PM
I think it's fair enough to point out that the thread is five years old and there's no real reason to resurrect it. I think continued interest in the modern state of the arts on this board is positive, but we don't need 15 different threads on it. When there's already an active BJJ thread up, why resurrect one 5 years old?

grondahl
09-14-2007, 05:01 PM
1: But for ***** sake, its a 5 year old thread. And it´s not contributing to anything new. We already have at least 2 or 3 thread dealing with training methods and I have a hard time seeing that this one will bring up anything new.
2: So I´m the passive aggressive one according to someone who posts just to point that out and also brings statements like "MMA is not BJJ" to the discussion. I usually enjoy your posts but this time I get a little "Don Quijote"-feeling from it.

Yes it is old, but people to this day believe this tripe.

And while Paw did respond well to the OP, your passive aggressiveness is exactly why people won't let this thread die. If you have something to say then say it and back it up. Too often the sport vs street debate is brought up, and almost invariably the 'street' people run from a real challenge. This is even in cases of friendly sparring or randoori.

Roman just came and said what he thought and it is about time. And Dan's post is something that people need to better understand. BJJ is just part of an overal fighting strategy.

MMA IS NOT BJJ.

People who train to fight, train not only BJJ but also in striking and clinching ranges. In addition fewer and fewer fighters are training formal BJJ. There is also wrestling, judo, sombo, etc.

No one here forces you to read these threads. Nobody was being insulting or rude.

Dewey
09-14-2007, 05:30 PM
...
What's truly sad is that the ratio of views/posts in this thread outstrip the average substantially, showing that a morbid fascination with this sort of topic persists.

Yeah, it's a lot like looking at a car accident...can't help it.

Yes it is old, but people to this day believe this tripe...

Why, yes they do.

I think it's fair enough to point out that the thread is five years old and there's no real reason to resurrect it. I think continued interest in the modern state of the arts on this board is positive, but we don't need 15 different threads on it. When there's already an active BJJ thread up, why resurrect one 5 years old?

1: But for ***** sake, its a 5 year old thread. And it´s not contributing to anything new. We already have at least 2 or 3 thread dealing with training methods and I have a hard time seeing that this one will bring up anything new...


Indeed. There are a few currently-running threads that have sprawled from this genus & species of discussion. I sure wish intrepid posters would first use the "search" function before posting.

Why can't they just leave it alone....?

http://brianpdewey.com/crocker-in-britney-clip.jpg

salim
09-14-2007, 08:19 PM
Yeah, it's a lot like looking at a car accident...can't help it.

Why, yes they do.

Indeed. There are a few currently-running threads that have sprawled from this genus & species of discussion. I sure wish intrepid posters would first use the "search" function before posting.

Why can't they just leave it alone....?

http://brianpdewey.com/crocker-in-britney-clip.jpg
Are you Michael Jackson's cousin? I see the resemblance.

Roman Kremianski
09-14-2007, 09:02 PM
1: The OP is 5 years old.

Holy sweet crap...I just noticed this. Feel like a total tool for even posting in this thread now. Ugh...

Dewey
09-14-2007, 09:15 PM
Are you Michael Jackson's cousin? I see the resemblance.

Sorry...it was my failed attempt at humor. It's a pop-culture reference. Google: "leave britney alone". It's a YouTube video of some crazed fan. It's worth a watch.

No, I don't look anything like that...imagine a bald Irishman.

Dan Austin
09-14-2007, 09:55 PM
Dan, if nothing else, it is entertainment for me. I don't have cable TV. :)

Dang, you sure you're not in West Virginia? ;)

mathewjgano
09-15-2007, 07:08 PM
Holy sweet crap...I just noticed this. Feel like a total tool for even posting in this thread now. Ugh...

LOL! Yeah I feel yer pain on that one.:uch: It's a good thing I'm numb from the neck up or it might've bothered me enough to not post when it comes around again.:o

Jorge Garcia
09-16-2007, 08:11 AM
Its one of the favorite topic in our DOJO. What can an AIKIDOKA do with a BRAZILIAN JUJITSU practioner?

My opinion (READ: OPINION) Technique wise Aikido is really rich compared to the B Jujitsu. It will be hard for a B Jujitsu to tackle down a well versed AIKIDOKA.

I have tried to spar with a B. Jujitsu practioner and has indeed proven this. He tried many times to knock me down and he just could not get a hold on me. I simply blended with him and he always end up in the mat. He asked me numerous times did you trip me? I said no. On the ground with the B Jujitsu on top of me ( We started with me lying down) I was able to do both IKKYO and NIKKYO on one of the hands holding me down. Once I have done this I just rolled over still holding his hand. We ended up with me in the kneeling position while the guy is on the floor still PINNED.

With my back on the mat, I learned that an Aikidoka should be aware of the following things:

1. The punches - with your back on the mat it will be hard to parry it, one should be fast to apply the locks. faster than the punches. Try not to keep his head close to yours if you want to avoid the punches. See number 3
2. The leg locks - don't let them do this.
3. The hold that makes your head closer to his - I had a hard time applying the locks under this position. I pushed his head first then applied the lock.
4. If all things fail in real life don't forget to gouge the eyes and bite into their ears or any part of the body for the matter.

I was suprised of the result. I said a while ago about a WELL VERSED AIKIDOKA, I am far from that. Don't get me wrong about that statement,I only meant " If I can do it, a not so well versed Aikidoka what more can a well versed one do?"

On the other hand I think It will be B Jujitsu all the way if ever an Aikidoka is in on the mat on all fours with the B Jujitsu on his back. One has to avoid that from happening.

Then again the end result will still be on the practioner.

Iam interested in your comments and opinions or even experience.

This kind of a post reduces Aikiweb to the level of the most ignorant poster. The question is old, too very old. The premise is wrong, so very wrong, and the ignorance is great, so very great.

BJJ is good. Aikido is good. Fighting is no good. Excessive concern over self defense is obsessive. and style vs style is stupid, unrealistic and wrong in it's premise. These kinds of discussions are a waste of time.

Sorry to be so blunt. The unvarnished truth can be rough sometimes but it saves time.

Jorge

antonis paps
09-16-2007, 10:16 AM
Aikido Vs. Jujitsu (brazilian)

jeezzz....:eek: :hypno: :yuck: :freaky:

Does it matter?

If you want to do grappling, do grappling.

End of story.

DH
09-16-2007, 10:52 AM
Maybe it's worth pointing out they are both limited in scope. Nether offers a complete system for fighting. Train in both, love them both for what they are. Then, train to blow them both up.

At a certain point in time everyone needs to -not- fall in love with their art- forsaking all others.;) At a point your single goal should be to stand back, look at what you do and know, and all those around you, and make it your purpose in training to learn every, single, weakness, in every single teacher you know. Look at them as so much meat. Don't buy anything they tell you. Be predatory in mind and action. It may help to see things more even handedly.

BJJ, Aikido, Daito ryu, Wrestling, are all limited venue grappling. While all may be wonderful and a blast to do-many could be in for an awakening. When you meet someone who can use elbows, knees, head butts and strikes and can deliver them with skill and power, and who UNDERSTANDS and is versed in what you are going to be trying to do can be rather interesting. When they can prevent you from using your R'epertoire while they deliver theirs can quite the eye opener. There's nothing like having your ribs or nose broken while you are "trying" for a set up tp some lock, throw or choke, to make you wake up and smell the coffee.
Everyone should make note of the fact that an American wrestler beat Royce.....with? The ground and pound. And Greco Roman wrestling with knees and strikes has been the reigning king in several weight classes., and dirty boxing beat -them- both at times.
When style limitations go out the window -styles no longer win-people do.
So, its pointless to keep thinking of what ART can beat what ART. Its stupid. No art beats an art. People who are well versed in different venues and use their brains, and train in full resistance win. Not some art.
See the arts, and more importantly these so-called artists and teachers for who and what they are. Keep trying a bunch of things, even if you fell in love with one art or another and doggedly work at making a better...you.

Aikibu
09-16-2007, 02:00 PM
Maybe it's worth pointing out they are both limited in scope. Nether offers a complete system for fighting. Train in both, love them both for what they are. Then, train to blow them both up.

At a certain point in time everyone needs to -not- fall in love with their art- forsaking all others.;) At a point your single goal should be to stand back, look at what you do and know, and all those around you, and make it your purpose in training to learn every, single, weakness, in every single teacher you know. Look at them as so much meat. Don't buy anything they tell you. Be predatory in mind and action. It may help to see things more even handedly.

BJJ, Aikido, Daito ryu, Wrestling, are all limited venue grappling. While all may be wonderful and a blast to do-many could be in for an awakening. When you meet someone who can use elbows, knees, head butts and strikes and can deliver them with skill and power, and who UNDERSTANDS and is versed in what you are going to be trying to do can be rather interesting. When they can prevent you from using your R'epertoire while they deliver theirs can quite the eye opener. There's nothing like having your ribs or nose broken while you are "trying" for a set up tp some lock, throw or choke, to make you wake up and smell the coffee.
Everyone should make note of the fact that an American wrestler beat Royce.....with? The ground and pound. And Greco Roman wrestling with knees and strikes has been the reigning king in several weight classes., and dirty boxing beat -them- both at times.
When style limitations go out the window -styles no longer win-people do.
So, its pointless to keep thinking of what ART can beat what ART. Its stupid. No art beats an art. People who are well versed in different venues and use their brains, and train in full resistance win. Not some art.
See the arts, and more importantly these so-called artists and teachers for who and what they are. Keep trying a bunch of things, even if you fell in love with one art or another and doggedly work at making a better...you.



The Best Post I have seen in years with regard to the " This VS That" Fallacy.

Bruce Lee ( One of my Heros') felt exactly the same way.

Another Generation Another Learning Curve.

Thank You Dan.:)

William Hazen

paw
09-16-2007, 04:44 PM
Everyone should make note of the fact that an American wrestler beat Royce.....with? The ground and pound

With all due respect, Hughes isn't "an American wrestler". He's a fighter who has trained extensively in boxing, wrestling and BJJ.

Off the top of my head, I cannot think of any competitor in mixed martial arts who trains in only one discipline. Which, as best I understand it, actually supports your assertion.

Regards,

Paul

Aristeia
09-16-2007, 06:01 PM
They train in the discipline of MMA. Hughes/Royce was a clear example of the evolution of MMA. It was like MMA 1.0 vs MMA 3.0

Roman Kremianski
09-16-2007, 06:06 PM
It wasn't MMA 1.0 vs MMA 3.0

It was a stronger, younger man beating down an older, weaker dude.

DH
09-16-2007, 06:47 PM
It wasn't MMA 1.0 vs MMA 3.0

It was a stronger, younger man beating down an older, weaker dude.
It was 1.0 VS 3.0.
Royce was unprepared for what and who he ws faciing.

Age can be a factor, but not always. Then of course we have Randi and Chuck; 45 and 38 respectively -which doesn't help explain away Royce not being better prepared when he fought at 40.
In any event pure jujutsu was always a dicey gambit-and it was originally made to work in connction with weapons. Stand alone grappling is as risky as Aikido or BJJ are- as stand alone arts- without striking and kicking.

Roman Kremianski
09-16-2007, 08:06 PM
Royce IS 3.0

He trains striking, wrestling, grappling. By the time he fought Matt he was an evolved, modern fighter. It's like people take a snapshot in their mind of UFC 1 Royce Gracie and freeze it in their head permanently. Royce simply lost to an exceptionally powerful guy who does BJJ just like any other fighter.

paw
09-16-2007, 10:17 PM
Royce IS 3.0

Most of the fans/fighters I know wouldn't agree, and I would certainly count myself among them.

With Royce, the question has always been who he's training with and how. My understanding is that he is not training with people who are at his level (or better) and as a result he's not improving or evolving as a fighter.

In contrast, Hughes was training with folks who were as good as he was, if not better, at Miletich's.

Regards,

Paul

Roman Kremianski
09-16-2007, 10:28 PM
The quality of Royce's training is a different matter. What I meant by 3.0 is that he no longer only trains only one thing like early BJJ guys did. He has expanded his game.

Aristeia
09-16-2007, 11:54 PM
Not quite what I meant. Royce may train in all ranges, but he is not effective in all ranges.

Leon Aman
09-17-2007, 02:01 AM
Hi to all,

Everytime I hear or read about a discussion with regards to the effectivness of Aikido against other MA, I am so irritated to hear a defensive reasoning such as..... Aikido is not about fighting and so on and so forth or even injecting spiritual mysticism in Aikido just to cover up its unreliability in fighting situation. Why don't you be honest with yourself and accept the fact that when it comes to actual fighting or in the ring, Aikido is not that reliable, instead of trying to defend it by Philosophical reasoning.

Of course there is a brilliant side in Aikido but that is a different topic of discussion.

Talking from experience.

Leon

salim
09-17-2007, 08:43 AM
Hi to all,

Everytime I hear or read about a discussion with regards to the effectivness of Aikido against other MA, I am so irritated to hear a defensive reasoning such as..... Aikido is not about fighting and so on and so forth or even injecting spiritual mysticism in Aikido just to cover up its unreliability in fighting situation. Why don't you be honest with yourself and accept the fact that when it comes to actual fighting or in the ring, Aikido is not that reliable, instead of trying to defend it by Philosophical reasoning.

Of course there is a brilliant side in Aikido but that is a different topic of discussion.

Talking from experience.

Leon
I couldn't agree with you more. Martial integrity is a huge huge issue in the Aikido world.

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 09:35 AM
I couldn't agree with you more. Martial integrity is a huge huge issue in the Aikido world.

No..... it's not. It's only a huge issue for some on this board and some other boards.

Most Aikido folks I know are accomplished Martial Artists and focus on bettering themselves and sharing thier knowledge

Aikido Martial Arts Psuedo-Controversy is nothing more than a straw man argument at best.

William Hazen

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 09:41 AM
Hi to all,

Everytime I hear or read about a discussion with regards to the effectivness of Aikido against other MA, I am so irritated to hear a defensive reasoning such as..... Aikido is not about fighting and so on and so forth or even injecting spiritual mysticism in Aikido just to cover up its unreliability in fighting situation. Why don't you be honest with yourself and accept the fact that when it comes to actual fighting or in the ring, Aikido is not that reliable, instead of trying to defend it by Philosophical reasoning.

Of course there is a brilliant side in Aikido but that is a different topic of discussion.

Talking from experience.

Leon

What experiance??? What style of Aikido??? What does fighting in the ring have to do with it's effectiveness against other Martial Arts???

No Tickey...No Laundry...

William Hazen

DonMagee
09-17-2007, 12:11 PM
What does fighting in the ring have to do with it's effectiveness against other Martial Arts???

William Hazen

It's a good place to start looking at the very least. Especially the early mma fights. They showed very well the strengths and weaknesses of many styles of fighting. And after all, fighting is a large part of the word martial.

bob_stra
09-17-2007, 12:30 PM
Royce IS 3.0


http://youtube.com/watch?v=EU0ARSJLEaU

Vs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91Lbc8OXDXg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lO43g2UVYk

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 12:39 PM
It's a good place to start looking at the very least. Especially the early mma fights. They showed very well the strengths and weaknesses of many styles of fighting. And after all, fighting is a large part of the word martial.

I respectfully disagree Don. How can you draw those kinds of broad based conclusions?

What is you methodology?

Why does everyone think losing or winning a fight has to do soley with technique as opposed to it's use by individual fighters ?

How many of the early contestants were masters aka experianced experts???

I do agree it may be a good place to start and that some of the observations over the years can be put into a hypothesis... which may lead to a premise.... which in turn may promote a theory...

The Martial Arts have been around for over a Thousand years. MMA stye combat existed during the Roman Empire for gosh sakes....

One would have to present more factual and solid based evidence backed with tons of data to support any emperical observation about the Martial Arts and keep in mind the hundreds of generations of practical application, tradition, and experiance.

Sincerely,

William Hazen

philippe willaume
09-17-2007, 12:51 PM
Hello Salim, Leon
Even if I would not go as far a William, because I believe that some ways of practicing aikido is not really martially orientate, I would still lean his way on this arguments.

I am really puzzled at you post Leon because you are taking the Mickey out of an explanation that is exact embodiment of the argument you present.
You are irritated by statement like “We do not particle aikido with martial efficiency as our main objective, we are interested in the more spiritual side of thing”
Well spotted Miss Marple, yes strangely enough that is not going to be necessarily reliable in the ring, is it. Which is just as well because they are very unlikely to end up there in the first place and second that irritating statement clearly states that going in the ring is not the main objective.

I am 100% in agreement with Dan on the ideas that a “grappling art” alone leaves you upon, regardless if we are talking ring or self defence. (And striking arts alone as well for that matter)

And this where I may disagree with William but I have definitely seen aikido practices (it varies within styles, so it is not really a style question) where atemi were frowned upon as a method. There was a debate about that on this forum a few months ago.

I remember a conversation with Dan and roman on another thread about the quality of atemi (I.e. how often you do train to deliver them with power), and that aspect is to be taken in consideration as well. As well as it is probably worth considering that some of us are trained or are still training in striking arts.
And for us rightly or wrongly, that striking comes under the umbrella of aikido whereas an argument can be made of that striking being a different art but that is really a dog chasing its tail type of debate.

phil

philippe willaume
09-17-2007, 01:31 PM
Hello William, Don

I am not sure that you are presenting a different argument.

As William said MMA was present since the classical Greek (and it is probably more a matter of available archaeology that an actual time limits
You will find BJJ strategy all over the weapon and wrestling manual through the ages.

Get position and from that position so something tat will either finish the match or give you a better position.

Well that is exactly what the medieval German call fighting in the VOR (I.E the before)
And you can transpose that to Fiore dei libery, or Italian, Spanish, English rapier guards vs guards. Basically each guard opposed to the other is just gaining the position.
Or to the true times and true places of Georges Silver
The medieval wrestling motto throw him and pin him on the ground (whilst keeping hand free) is what you want to achieve, use Strike and bone breaking when you need to.

So we have it written in Europe since the 15th century. You do need grappling and striking.

The big difference between ancient manual and traditional martial arts, and this is what MMA is really demonstrating. It is not about technique or physical abilities of the individual. Those are just there to support a strategy and tactics.

We can not really say that striking arts are not good, nowadays in MMA good strikers can keep wrestlers at bay until they are in a good position to finish of the fight.
It is that you are missing something in your striking art if you do not have methods/tactics to prevent to be grappled (and enables you to get up and/or to be able to strike from there if that happens)

Phil

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 01:49 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/14/death_match_poll/

:D

William Hazen

DonMagee
09-17-2007, 02:50 PM
I respectfully disagree Don. How can you draw those kinds of broad based conclusions?

What is you methodology?


It's simple really, Look at the overall broad use of a technique in many mma matches (I've seen every pride, ufc, and kotc match ever recorded). Look at how the technique is used at different levels of skill, finally decide on its effectiveness in the context. It's easy to see the patterns. Scientists don't try to cure cancer by just running simulations, they run their sims (kata) then they test promising cures on varying levels of animals (increasing resistance sparing), then when something is promising, they test it on real people (the deadly street!)


Why does everyone think losing or winning a fight has to do soley with technique as opposed to it's use by individual fighters ?

Who said that? However, good point. I would expect there is a single person doing the worst combat art in the world who can win fights, that does not justify his art, but if the majority of his students can't fight their way out of a paper bag, then we can see the flaws in his style. AKA, if almost every Don Ryu student losses his mma fight, obiously my Don Ryu is lacking, even if I win my fights.


How many of the early contestants were masters aka experianced experts???

Well many would claim to be, such as Ron van Cleef, ichikawa, Ettish (take special note he was a expert high dan rank in his own stile), and others all claimed to be masters, some with a lot of fight experience (jason delucia comes to mind). That's just off the top of my head, but my point being, they claim to be high ranking black belts, masters etc.

Yet the tournament showed their skills to be lacking. Those skills might of been age, technique, strength, etc, but they were still lacking and in most cases (especially Ettish) it was technique that was lacking. They would of known this had they been sparing more often under a MMA ruleset (that they probably didn't even know existed at the time.) Also a number of people who challenged the gracies were also self proclaimed masters, almost all of them were shown the weaknesses in their styles (except the great Kimura, who oddly came from a art with a lot of alive sparing and fought basically mma matches as a job).

So how do you know a master. For me, it's watching how he spars. It doesn't take long, I can see a good judo man by the way he walks and grabs, I can see a good boxer by the way he moves and keeps his hands, I can see a good mma fighter by looking at the way they engage. What is true for a good mma fighter, is true for any one on one engagement. One on One is a large component of many martial arts, so this is a good metric for seeing effectiveness, if it's not effective one on one, that is a problem. Of course not all one on one techniques are good when it is multiples, but eventually we will come up with a different metric for that as well.


I do agree it may be a good place to start and that some of the observations over the years can be put into a hypothesis... which may lead to a premise.... which in turn may promote a theory...

I think this has already happened.


The Martial Arts have been around for over a Thousand years. MMA stye combat existed during the Roman Empire for gosh sakes....

One would have to present more factual and solid based evidence backed with tons of data to support any emperical observation about the Martial Arts and keep in mind the hundreds of generations of practical application, tradition, and experiance.

Two words, Chinese Telephone. This is the state of martial arts without sparing. If you played the game in school, then you understand. A quick exploration of the idea follows:

Art with sparing
1) Instructor demo's technique
2) Student repeats demo
3) Student learns holes and mistakes though drills with resistance
4) Student incorporates technique into his whole though sparing and learns how it works, how it doesn't, and how to improve his understanding of it.
5) Repeated a million times, eventually student becomes a teacher and shows a technique he has used countless times to submit a person hell bent on stopping him. He uses this experience to help his students understand the holes, faults, traps, etc of the technique. He shows the things he learned to help it work better, and shows how he actually uses this technique against a person trying to stop him.

Arts without sparing.
1) Instructor demo's technique
2) Students repeats demo
3) Instructor visually looks for signs of what he thinks is poor technique. His only cues are things his instructor told him to lookout for, and comparing it to how he perceives he is doing the technique.
4) Student repeats demo with instructors advice a billion times.
5) Student goes on to teach technique to his students, using his perception of what the teacher was trying to make him do as a guide to give advice to his students.

There are flaws in both systems. The first assumes you can put aside your ego and learn from your mistakes. And that you have the fortitude to not give up and keep trying new ideas. There is a danger of a student being locked into static thinking and just doing what he is taught, this will lead to a lack of skill and stop the cycle of evolution required to keep this model running.

The second has a flaw I find much greater. It assumes the instructor is perfect. If the instructor is not perfect, then you will learn imperfect technique. Then if you are not perfect, the technique you pass down is also flawed further. There is also a grave danger of creativity in this setting. Creativity is bad because there is no testing. Only theoretical testing. There is a chance for complacency as well. I may modify my technique as a teacher to make it easier for my old body to do. Unfortunately, this was not the technique my teacher taught me, and has lost some effectiveness. Of course I will never know this. I have no way of testing if it is better or worse. Of course my students will never know and think this is the proper technique, and maybe they will be even lazier when they teach it, further degrading its ability. Nobody knows.

With most arts, this has happened for countless generations. Sure Don Ryu might of worked on the battlefield of ancient japan, but maybe my students, or their students were horrible teachers, now the art is degrading down a path to ineffectiveness, and without some more ancient battlefield wars, there is no way to shore it up to effective. We now are in a matter of pure faith, a religion, not a martial art.

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 03:36 PM
A Great Hypothesis Don. Thank You...

The second has a flaw I find much greater. It assumes the instructor is perfect. If the instructor is not perfect, then you will learn imperfect technique. Then if you are not perfect, the technique you pass down is also flawed further. There is also a grave danger of creativity in this setting.

However, this statement needs further reflection... You may want to reason this out because this is based on a False Assumption....

This assumes the Instructor "Thinks" he's perfect and does not continue to evolve his own practice and pass this on to his students...

In my case up until the day he passed Shoji Nishio Shihan was looking for ways to improve his Aikido Practice and always pushed his students to improve thiers.... Nishio Shihan always insisted that In order for our Aikido to be considered a Martial Art it must be effective against other Martial Arts.

We have both been around the block... How many Gendai or Koryu Shihan have you run into that have thought they were perfect and needed no further improvement? I have met a few and if you're like me Don you're out the Dojo Door in about five seconds :) Too much Ego on the mat. LOL

Why even the mindset "My practice is perfect and there is no reason to improve my transmission of it" goes against the very essence of what Asian Martial Arts are all about.

If folks have a problem with some forms of non-sparring practice it is because the pace of improvement is slow compared to a sparring practice but that is relative as well. It can also be hard to measure the results of non sparring practice because the only real measurement is how the individual feels about it. Kata is a whole other ball of wax but let me tell you I have experianced turning hundreds of hours of supervised Kata into effective technique when I needed it to defend myself.

We are all given the same set of tools as O'Sensei (to paraphrase) once said. What kind of practice you develop is entirely up to you, and he warned against relying on your teacher to transmit your practice. How you receive and embody it is up to you too. :)

Sincerely,

William Hazen

DonMagee
09-17-2007, 04:13 PM
A Great Hypothesis Don. Thank You...

However, this statement needs further reflection... You may want to reason this out because this is based on a False Assumption....

This assumes the Instructor "Thinks" he's perfect and does not continue to evolve his own practice and pass this on to his students...

In my case up until the day he passed Shoji Nishio Shihan was looking for ways to improve his Aikido Practice and always pushed his students to improve thiers.... Nishio Shihan always insisted that In order for our Aikido to be considered a Martial Art it must be effective against other Martial Arts.

We have both been around the block... How many Gendai or Koryu Shihan have you run into that have thought they were perfect and needed no further improvement? I have met a few and if you're like me Don you're out the Dojo Door in about five seconds :) Too much Ego on the mat. LOL

Why even the mindset "My practice is perfect and there is no reason to improve my transmission of it" goes against the very essence of what Asian Martial Arts are all about.

If folks have a problem with some forms of non-sparring practice it is because the pace of improvement is slow compared to a sparring practice but that is relative as well. It can also be hard to measure the results of non sparring practice because the only real measurement is how the individual feels about it. Kata is a whole other ball of wax but let me tell you I have experianced turning hundreds of hours of supervised Kata into effective technique when I needed it to defend myself.

We are all given the same set of tools as O'Sensei (to paraphrase) once said. What kind of practice you develop is entirely up to you, and he warned against relying on your teacher to transmit your practice. How you receive and embody it is up to you too. :)

Sincerely,

William Hazen

I guess perfect was too strong a word. I guess what I ment is the assumption is that what they are teaching is what worked on the battlefields of ancient japan. For this to be true, they would indeed have to have perfect transmission from teacher to student. You and I know this can not be the case, so how do we prevent the degradation without sparing?

mathewjgano
09-17-2007, 05:07 PM
I guess perfect was too strong a word. I guess what I ment is the assumption is that what they are teaching is what worked on the battlefields of ancient japan. For this to be true, they would indeed have to have perfect transmission from teacher to student. You and I know this can not be the case, so how do we prevent the degradation without sparing?

I liked what you spoke of with regard to graduated resistance. This occures in Aikidojo to varying degrees, so i guess the question becomes a matter of to what degree it progresses and up to what point. The only way we can prevent degradation is through diligence and sincerity of training. Sparring has existed in plenty of MA which have degraded over time, so i don't think sparring alone makes the difference, though I do agree it is one way of testing the hypotheses.

Basia Halliop
09-17-2007, 05:11 PM
William, it sounds like what Don's talking about is sort of like taking photocopies of photocopies, or transmitting a signal across a long distance (in both cases you get gradually fuzzier with time).

I.e., if each generation's understanding of what they are aiming for depends primarily on the accuracy of their copy of the previous generation or two before them (and they are unable to test their copy or generate new first-hand knowledge as Don suggests, as an error correction measure), then it's like a lossy system, or a system with distortion. (Each generation gets just slightly different from the previous one, but without some kind of error-detection the difference will on average be random and on average won't just happen to be an improvement). In such a system the degree of accuracy depends highly on the distance from the source. In such a system you can improve the transmission and make the decay (or distortion) slower, but without some kind of sanity checking along the way it's just slower decay.

Makes sense, actually.

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 05:35 PM
William, it sounds like what Don's talking about is sort of like taking photocopies of photocopies, or transmitting a signal across a long distance (in both cases you get gradually fuzzier with time).

I.e., if each generation's understanding of what they are aiming for depends primarily on the accuracy of their copy of the previous generation or two before them (and they are unable to test their copy or generate new first-hand knowledge as Don suggests, as an error correction measure), then it's like a lossy system, or a system with distortion. (Each generation gets just slightly different from the previous one, but without some kind of error-detection the difference will on average be random and on average won't just happen to be an improvement). In such a system the degree of accuracy depends highly on the distance from the source. In such a system you can improve the transmission and make the decay (or distortion) slower, but without some kind of sanity checking along the way it's just slower decay.

Makes sense, actually.

Sort Of.... Then I thought about it for about 15 seconds and came up with a whole host of contradictions like for example Shaolin Gung Fu and then the copy analogy does not work either as all the Martial Arts I know of are a reflection of thier teacher and every teacher is different.

You can't escape the 80/20 rule however for every ten "Rex Kwan Do's" (Bonus Points if you know where this name comes from) there are a few who strive to be the best they can and transmit what they have learned....

Your choice... You can be Kip Dynamite or the next Bruce Lee or like most mortals.... train hard to avoid the former always striving to be the latter. :)



William Hazen

Napoleon Dynamite: Stay home and eat all the freakin' chips, Kip.
Kip: Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.
Napoleon Dynamite: Since when, Kip? You have the worst reflexes of all time.
Kip: Try and hit me, Napoleon.
Napoleon Dynamite: What?
Kip: I said come down here and see what happens if you try and hit me.

Rex: At Rex Kwan Do, we use the buddy system. No more flying solo. You need somebody watching your back at all times. Second off, you're gonna learn to discipline your image. You think I got where I am today because I dressed like Peter Pan over here?
[points to Kip]
Rex: Take a look at what I'm wearing, people. You think anybody wants a roundhouse kick to the face while I'm wearing these bad boys? Forget about it. Last off, my students will learn about self respect. You think anybody thinks I'm a failure because I go home to Starla at night? Forget about it!

stan baker
09-17-2007, 05:40 PM
The reason why Ueshiba could defeat other maritial arts was due to his aiki power. Who has that kind of aiki power that can deal with the great fighters of today.

stan

Aristeia
09-17-2007, 06:14 PM
....

This assumes the Instructor "Thinks" he's perfect and does not continue to evolve his own practice and pass this on to his students...In some ways this is even worse. In a non sparring art I've seen several instructers look to "evolve" the practice. Trouble is without resistant sparring, the evolution is based on theory. So it both takes you further away from the source (which let's assume was once effective) while at the same time not having the redeeming feature of being an improvement based on combat experience. So it becomes a lottery whether such "improvements" are actually martial improvements.

Bow to your sensei!

Aikibu
09-17-2007, 08:28 PM
In some ways this is even worse. In a non sparring art I've seen several instructers look to "evolve" the practice. Trouble is without resistant sparring, the evolution is based on theory. So it both takes you further away from the source (which let's assume was once effective) while at the same time not having the redeeming feature of being an improvement based on combat experience. So it becomes a lottery whether such "improvements" are actually martial improvements.

Bow to your sensei!

This is the flip side of both coins sparring/non-sparring and I agree up to a point...The evolution of any art does not happen without without tradition and testing...

You can't discount either...

William Hazen

I've prevailed using Aikido in a few fights...Though I would not call it "Combat"

salim
09-17-2007, 09:16 PM
I respectfully disagree Don. How can you draw those kinds of broad based conclusions?

What is you methodology?

Why does everyone think losing or winning a fight has to do soley with technique as opposed to it's use by individual fighters ?

How many of the early contestants were masters aka experianced experts???

I do agree it may be a good place to start and that some of the observations over the years can be put into a hypothesis... which may lead to a premise.... which in turn may promote a theory...

The Martial Arts have been around for over a Thousand years. MMA stye combat existed during the Roman Empire for gosh sakes....

One would have to present more factual and solid based evidence backed with tons of data to support any emperical observation about the Martial Arts and keep in mind the hundreds of generations of practical application, tradition, and experiance.

Sincerely,

William Hazen
You totally missed what Don was indicating. It's about effectiveness, not winning or losing. The MMA methodology has already proven the inherit fallacies of many martial arts. It's about using what works, learning it well and testing it in a fight. It's has been tried and tested over and over and over again. Get in the ring man, let's see what you've got.

philippe willaume
09-18-2007, 06:38 AM
You totally missed what Don was indicating. It's about effectiveness, not winning or losing. The MMA methodology has already proven the inherit fallacies of many martial arts. It's about using what works, learning it well and testing it in a fight. It's has been tried and tested over and over and over again. Get in the ring man, let's see what you've got.

Come on Salim,
Despite that I agree with you about MMA methodology, you can not say it not about winning or loosing, of course it is about winning or losing.
Effectiveness provides the difference between loosing and winning. That exactly what sports are all about and so is self defence for that matter. Though, you could even say that self defence is about strictly wining.

William's point is that it is usually not the technique that makes the difference it is the man.
I agree with the techniques part, but I would say that it is the strategy and tactic of the man more than his physical abilities.

Now we can turn it every way we want;
Sparing is like competition, it develops tactic and strategy that are suited to the environment (i.e. where and how it is done).
And sparing is based on resistance training so it does give a very good understanding of technique application and creating the conditions in which they can be used.

I am recreating a 15th century fighting system, weapons and an open hand, so I bloody well know that sparing is an invaluable tool.
But what gals me the most is that people that advocate of sparing keep going on and on how sparing prepares you for self defence when they seemingly (according to what I understand from the post) do not understand the influence of the environment.

Just try it, spar with someone (with our without weapon), let every one group around you as if they were watching a fight outside and just add the possibility for another player to turn up on to help you opponent at the time he chooses , should he choose to.
That will radically change what "works" and do "not works".

That being said and to be fair, it galls me as much when people says that whatever they do is effective is there is no form of resistance training and methods to gain advantageous positions.

To train and to be trained
You do need
Form work
controlled sparing (call it drill or resistance from work, it deos not matter).
Sparing (in some from or another but that represent what you are training for)
I know some aikido club that do just that and some that absolutly do not.

Phil

DonMagee
09-18-2007, 07:00 AM
Aikido is in a lucky position currently, it is still relatively close to it's source. But lets look 5 generations from now after all the people who knew people who knew Ueshiba, or even Ueshiba's students are long dead. If nobody is sparing, how do they even know what they are doing is even close to what he did?

Sure they can do some resistance drills, and it helps keep people a little honest. Its in my experience though that what I refer to as resistance drills is usually looked as sparing by most aikidoka. What I see most aikidoka refer to as resistance drills are just the same kata only grabbing stronger or trying to use muscle to prevent them from moving your arm,etc. When I say resistance drill, I'm talking from the prospective of the mount escape drill. I put you in mount, you work your best to escape, I resist you and counter you at varing levels of resistance. We go until you escape, or I submit you, then we reset and do it again. While some aikido schools do this, it seems to me they are a minority.

In fact I've posted the kind of drills I'm talking about once before.
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=168747&postcount=60
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=168756&postcount=62

These can go a long way in keeping sure that the techniques you do are in the spirit of the techniques you were taught.

And yes it is true that sparing only can not keep your art pure. It requires instructors with good character. Anyone can water down sparing with useless rules, a few deadly myths, and light to no contact, then turn their art into a money grubing empire. But arts with real sparing, judo, bjj, boxing, MT, Kokoshin karate(spelling?) and it's like have all been able to keep their effectiveness without doubt. Further more, because of MMA, arts like bjj have been able to flaws in their art and many work to fix them. This means there will be evolution in the art, it will grow beyond and has already grown beyond the gracies. For example, my club has noticed that in our matches in mma and bjj competition that our lack of good throws has cost us many a match, and relying on single and double legs is losing some effectiveness now that people are learning how to work with those takedowns. A lot of us are seeking out judo to fill this hole, learning how to use judo in the context of bjj and mma. This is nothing new to fighting, but future generations of bjj students will be taught by people who are doing this and other things. So their bjj will not be lacking and they won't need to go cross train in judo. This fact is even further reflected in MMA. MMA in the past was going to a club to learn bjj, then MT or boxing, or some other mix of arts. And this is still done, but it is slowly becoming history. It is now possible to go to a gym that trains MMA. It's not put on a gi learn some bjj for an hour, then go put on some gloves and learn some boxing and then maybe if you are lucky do some mma sparing. It's all MMA, all focused only on MMA, and no longer is it a mix of arts, but a single unit designed to be effective in MMA. This is good evolution, though testing.

Phil, Yes, MMA is about winning and losing, it is a sport. But sparing and testing is not about winning or losing. When I go to a competition, I'm trying to win. I play different, I'm using everything I've got with no regard for my partner beyond the rules. I trust that my ref will keep him safe as long as I obey the rules. If I armbar him and he chooses not to tap, I will choose to continue my armbar to it's logical end.

But sparing is different in MMA, bjj, judo, etc. It is most defiantly not about winning. It is about exploration of technique and learning about yourself and how you respond to pressure. The focus of the session depends on the quality of partners, our own goals, and how we structure the session. I'm not caring about winning in this situation. If I get an armbar and my partner will not tap, I do not hurt him, rather I use this as a change to work on a transition and move on to something else. If it was about winning, I'd break his arm.

I am not saying people need to compete. That is silly. While I think competition is a good thing, and can be very healthy when done in the right context, I know it is not for everyone. I do think however sparing is a requirement for effective martial arts. You need the whole gambit of training.

Static drills
Drills with motion
Drills with motion and timing
Drills with motion timing and resistance
Positional sparing
Sparing

And you need to do some of this now and then with people who are not from the art you train. There is group think in martial arts, even the awesomeness that is bjj has group think. So you need sparing with guys who don't think like you. To make sure you are doing good technique, and not just good technique against guys trained to act like you do.

Mattias Bengtsson
09-18-2007, 07:44 AM
The ring isn't a "real fight"...
To fight for the ring isn't "real training"

The supreme martial art to win over all other martial arts is this:
http://www.olive-drab.com/gallery/photos/pistol_m9_500.jpg

If you fight for the ring, then sure, train for fighting in the ring, but dont ever confuse it with the ability to properly defend yourself out in the street.

Its true that by fighting in the ring, you gain some pretty useful abilities that could come in handy in real life situations. Like learning on how to predict a opponents body movement and take a punch amongst several.

But for every advantage you gain, there comes drawbacks. In real life situations you wont have the luxury of being able to study tapes of previous fights by your opponent to learn how to predict his tactics.

In the ring, your opponent wont have friends to come to his aid. In the ring, your opponent wont suddenly slip on some knuckle dusters, pull a blade or swing a bottle to your head.

Tons of things can happen, and all of a sudden all fighting in the ring has done is given you a false sense of security.

Morihei Ueshiba himself didn't approve of competing in Aikido.

He didn't create Aikido to teach us how to "beat people up"
He didn't even create Aikido to teach us self defence-
He created Aikido to promote peace by teaching methods on how to enforce it.
But not force peace by "breaking someone's arm so they calm down"
or even "I WILL break your arm if you don't calm down" but "I CAN break your arm if you don't calm down"

In closing, if anyone wants to learn to fight in the ring.. go train Boxing, Judo, MMA, Shodokan or BJJ or whatever. DON'T go train (regular) Aikido and expect it to adapt into a Sports variant just because you want to "try its effectiveness".

That's my view of Aikido anyway, it may be in conflict with yours, but its how I perceive it and the reasons why I train it.

And I train Iwama style Aikido and it's not known as "Lumberjack Aikido" for nothing.. we can get pretty rough at it sometimes. :D But we start carefully in the beginners level and then gradually increase resisting and countering techniques.
"if it don't hurt, it's not working" as we say.

DonMagee
09-18-2007, 08:23 AM
The ring isn't a "real fight"...
To fight for the ring isn't "real training"

The supreme martial art to win over all other martial arts is this:
http://www.olive-drab.com/gallery/photos/pistol_m9_500.jpg

If you fight for the ring, then sure, train for fighting in the ring, but dont ever confuse it with the ability to properly defend yourself out in the street.

Its true that by fighting in the ring, you gain some pretty useful abilities that could come in handy in real life situations. Like learning on how to predict a opponents body movement and take a punch amongst several.

But for every advantage you gain, there comes drawbacks. In real life situations you wont have the luxury of being able to study tapes of previous fights by your opponent to learn how to predict his tactics.

In the ring, your opponent wont have friends to come to his aid. In the ring, your opponent wont suddenly slip on some knuckle dusters, pull a blade or swing a bottle to your head.

Tons of things can happen, and all of a sudden all fighting in the ring has done is given you a false sense of security.

Morihei Ueshiba himself didn't approve of competing in Aikido.

He didn't create Aikido to teach us how to "beat people up"
He didn't even create Aikido to teach us self defence-
He created Aikido to promote peace by teaching methods on how to enforce it.
But not force peace by "breaking someone's arm so they calm down"
or even "I WILL break your arm if you don't calm down" but "I CAN break your arm if you don't calm down"

In closing, if anyone wants to learn to fight in the ring.. go train Boxing, Judo, MMA, Shodokan or BJJ or whatever. DON'T go train (regular) Aikido and expect it to adapt into a Sports variant just because you want to "try its effectiveness".

That's my view of Aikido anyway, it may be in conflict with yours, but its how I perceive it and the reasons why I train it.

And I train Iwama style Aikido and it's not known as "Lumberjack Aikido" for nothing.. we can get pretty rough at it sometimes. :D But we start carefully in the beginners level and then gradually increase resisting and countering techniques.
"if it don't hurt, it's not working" as we say.

I'll say it one more time, then never again. Sparing is not competing. It never was, it never will be. Sparing is not ring fighting. It never was, it never will be. Sparing can incorporate all the things you have talked about. You can bring in weapons in sparing, you can bring in multiples in sparing, you can do 95% of everything you can do in the street in sparing. The parts you can't do are of little consequence to good technique.

Most excuses listed for not sparing a really not valid.
1) Too dangerous - I do it almost every day without injury
2) Age - I know 50 year old guys who spar, sure it's not at the same crazy levels young guys spar, but sparing can be at different levels just like everything else.
3) Uesihba doesn't want competition - Sparing is not competition. There are no winners or losers in sparing. Only good and bad techniques.
4) Rules prevent realism - If you can punch someone in the face, it is safe to assume you might be able to eye gouge them. You never actually eye gouge someone when you are not sparing, so why does it matter you can't eye gouge while you are sparing. Weapons, multiple attackers, objects and uneven fields of play can all be added to sparing. I had a guy once try to choke me with his handwraps, it was funny and startling at the same time. A very hidden weapon. I of course choked him out with his handwraps.
5) But we are a weapon art - So spar with weapons, plenty of other arts do. Kendo guys even have a good set of armor to allow you to hit each other with sticks.
6) My art is not a sport - No one has said it has to be, sparing is not competition, there are no winners or losers. You simple use it as a tool to learn about what works and what needs work on your technique. It will give you insight into yourself and your character. All very budo to me.
7) My art is about killing people, not about fighting - Well, that is all fine and dandy, but usually sparing reveals those deadly techniques are not as easy to land as you think, and usually not as deadly. See nerve strikes as an example.

The list goes on and on. The only legitimate reason for not sparing is this

"I just don't want to."

That is fine, but you need to understand what probably is missing from your training. The pitfalls of not sparing and the issues it can create. I won't go back into that, it is covered well in the posts above. Suffice to say I feel the dangers of not sparing outweigh the dangers of sparing.

It's great if you want to do some kind of exercise that makes you feel spiritual and good inside. I would never want to take that away from anyone. But there are people out there who will one day be instructors (or are instructors now) preaching that they know how to teach someone to defend against an attack. Yet they have never, their instructor has never, their instructor has never, and their instructor has never been in a fight. Not even a fake fight like a sparing match. How can anyone even think that they can teach you to cope with the stress and adapt to the situation of a real fight when they haven't even been in the stress of a fake one.

Nicholas Eschenbruch
09-18-2007, 08:40 AM
Don,
thanks a lot for your usual structured and reasonable input on this subject. Its thought provoking in a very productive way.

Nick
(long time lurker)

Ron Tisdale
09-18-2007, 08:45 AM
Though, you could even say that self defence is about strictly wining.

Hmm, more likely self defense is about surviving.

Best,
Ron

Mattias Bengtsson
09-18-2007, 08:53 AM
Don, I actually agree with most if not all your points..

In our dojo we sometimes before or after class we do a bit of "practical applications", basically, just fooling around while waiting for everyone to arrive. in a way, it's a bit of like sparing.. Its just not part of the curriculum.

Its just that whenever I "win" its just that i get the feeling its because im stronger or bigger than my partner, and when I lose, its because my partner is stronger or bigger than me..

It makes it hard for me to evaluate the benefits of sparing when my own experience of it has yet to show me any..
Or they are there, I haven't yet discovered them..

Ron Tisdale
09-18-2007, 09:03 AM
Well, one benefit is that you realize your aikido is still limited to prevailing because of size or strength. So you know you have to train more to go beyond that (what is the point if there are no possibilities of going beyond size or strength??).

I'd bet that if you continue testing in that setting over some extended time, you may find ways to implement what you do in class in that setting. Maybe not every time...but perhaps enough to just a little more chance in a bad situation than you might have had without the training. That little edge might just enable you to survive.

Best,
Ron

DonMagee
09-18-2007, 09:38 AM
Don, I actually agree with most if not all your points..

In our dojo we sometimes before or after class we do a bit of "practical applications", basically, just fooling around while waiting for everyone to arrive. in a way, it's a bit of like sparing.. Its just not part of the curriculum.

Its just that whenever I "win" its just that i get the feeling its because im stronger or bigger than my partner, and when I lose, its because my partner is stronger or bigger than me..

It makes it hard for me to evaluate the benefits of sparing when my own experience of it has yet to show me any..
Or they are there, I haven't yet discovered them..

The trick in that situation is to look at it constructively. How did the bigger guy beat you? How did you win against a smaller guy? Was it just strength? Was it good technique? What could be done to cope with how you were beaten? How can you practice the methods required to cope with the reason you were beaten?

To beat someone smaller then you with strength is easy. To beat someone smaller then you with strength when the small guy has good technique is harder. To beat someone smaller then you without using strength is very hard. If you are constantly beating someone because you are bigger, try not using strength and focus in on your technique. If you are being beaten by guys bigger then you, learn from it. Focus on techniques that take advantage of their size.

I have an old saying I tell new guys in my club. "Don't pull guard on a fat guy." It's another way of saying the situation dictates the tactics, not the other way around.

And sure, it all sounds very easy to say on a forum. In practice it takes a LONG time to get good at. I sparred 4 days a week for a year before I ever tapped anyone bigger/stronger then me. I know a 15 year old kid in our club who can put the hurting on most adults of any size in bjj, myself included. He knows how to play to his advantages (crazy flexibility and speed). I think he is about 115 pounds.

In the end it comes down to looking at it from a 3rd party viewpoint. You have to be honest. If you are told a technique works on bigger stronger attackers, and you can't seem to get it to work in sparing, you have to ask why?

Is the problem you? Is the problem the technique? Is the problem somewhere in between?

I keep a notebook log of all my sparing and training. I use it to keep tabs on what I need to work on and how I feel about what I've done. I highly recommend that, and asking your instructor for some insight into why what you are trying to do just isn't working like you think it should.

philippe willaume
09-18-2007, 09:56 AM
Aikido is in a lucky position currently, it is still relatively close to it's source. But lets look 5 generations from now after all the people who knew people who knew Ueshiba, or even Ueshiba's students are long dead. If nobody is sparing, how do they even know what they are doing is even close to what he did?

Sure they can do some resistance drills, and it helps keep people a little honest. Its in my experience though that what I refer to as resistance drills is usually looked as sparing by most aikidoka. What I see most aikidoka refer to as resistance drills are just the same kata only grabbing stronger or trying to use muscle to prevent them from moving your arm,etc. When I say resistance drill, I'm talking from the prospective of the mount escape drill. I put you in mount, you work your best to escape, I resist you and counter you at varing levels of resistance. We go until you escape, or I submit you, then we reset and do it again. While some aikido schools do this, it seems to me they are a minority.

In fact I've posted the kind of drills I'm talking about once before.
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=168747&postcount=60
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=168756&postcount=62

These can go a long way in keeping sure that the techniques you do are in the spirit of the techniques you were taught.

And yes it is true that sparing only can not keep your art pure. It requires instructors with good character. Anyone can water down sparing with useless rules, a few deadly myths, and light to no contact, then turn their art into a money grubing empire. But arts with real sparing, judo, bjj, boxing, MT, Kokoshin karate(spelling?) and it's like have all been able to keep their effectiveness without doubt. Further more, because of MMA, arts like bjj have been able to flaws in their art and many work to fix them. This means there will be evolution in the art, it will grow beyond and has already grown beyond the gracies. For example, my club has noticed that in our matches in mma and bjj competition that our lack of good throws has cost us many a match, and relying on single and double legs is losing some effectiveness now that people are learning how to work with those takedowns. A lot of us are seeking out judo to fill this hole, learning how to use judo in the context of bjj and mma. This is nothing new to fighting, but future generations of bjj students will be taught by people who are doing this and other things. So their bjj will not be lacking and they won't need to go cross train in judo. This fact is even further reflected in MMA. MMA in the past was going to a club to learn bjj, then MT or boxing, or some other mix of arts. And this is still done, but it is slowly becoming history. It is now possible to go to a gym that trains MMA. It's not put on a gi learn some bjj for an hour, then go put on some gloves and learn some boxing and then maybe if you are lucky do some mma sparing. It's all MMA, all focused only on MMA, and no longer is it a mix of arts, but a single unit designed to be effective in MMA. This is good evolution, though testing.

Phil, Yes, MMA is about winning and losing, it is a sport. But sparing and testing is not about winning or losing. When I go to a competition, I'm trying to win. I play different, I'm using everything I've got with no regard for my partner beyond the rules. I trust that my ref will keep him safe as long as I obey the rules. If I armbar him and he chooses not to tap, I will choose to continue my armbar to it's logical end.

But sparing is different in MMA, bjj, judo, etc. It is most defiantly not about winning. It is about exploration of technique and learning about yourself and how you respond to pressure. The focus of the session depends on the quality of partners, our own goals, and how we structure the session. I'm not caring about winning in this situation. If I get an armbar and my partner will not tap, I do not hurt him, rather I use this as a change to work on a transition and move on to something else. If it was about winning, I'd break his arm.

I am not saying people need to compete. That is silly. While I think competition is a good thing, and can be very healthy when done in the right context, I know it is not for everyone. I do think however sparing is a requirement for effective martial arts. You need the whole gambit of training.

Static drills
Drills with motion
Drills with motion and timing
Drills with motion timing and resistance
Positional sparing
Sparing

And you need to do some of this now and then with people who are not from the art you train. There is group think in martial arts, even the awesomeness that is bjj has group think. So you need sparing with guys who don't think like you. To make sure you are doing good technique, and not just good technique against guys trained to act like you do.

Hello don

Didn’t we have that loosing winning debate before?
Basically I would say that it is just a matter of changing the victory conditions but nonetheless I agree with what you are saying on training, ( as well as competition and about MMA)

About resistance drill in aikido and in MMA/BJJ.
I see what you mean. As well as grabbing properly and resisting, We get some punch/grab/kick going when we uke (obviously according with whom we train).
But it is not similar to the mount/being mounted or guard/in guard drill that you mention..

phil

salim
09-18-2007, 09:59 AM
Strange that Don Magee had to go through great lengths to explain the basic premise of sparring. Why would one have to use analytical deduction to explain the basic fundamentals of sparring. The science of sparring is not new. The reasons for sparring are not new. I think the whole issue is more about a mentality that has crept into the psyche of some. Honesty is always the best policy. If you don't want to spar, if you don't like sparring, simply say I don't want to spar or I don't like it. Others love sparring and the hope is to learn and grow from the experience.

Aikibu
09-18-2007, 10:56 AM
You totally missed what Don was indicating. It's about effectiveness, not winning or losing. The MMA methodology has already proven the inherit fallacies of many martial arts. It's about using what works, learning it well and testing it in a fight. It's has been tried and tested over and over and over again. Get in the ring man, let's see what you've got.

Been There Done that Salim...You???

Sorry Bro No You Tubes....LOL

There is only one measure of effectiveness...

Are you alive??? If you survive an ecounter without serious injury or harm your technique is effective...And in Aikido if you manage not to cause undue harm to your adversary then you have achieved perfect effectivness...

Any Martial Art Taken Seriously... With Hard Practice... is effective 95% of the time...

Shifting the argument back and forth between Techniques... Instruction... Sparring.... Non Sparring... does not avoid that simple fact...

Aikido is about Resolving Conflict... Not Fighting...

In that sense I use it successfully every day...On the rare occasion the altercation becomes physical... My practice has not let me down...Ever...

By the way Salim The ring has little to do with real life...Unless Life is an MMA Contest...

Your Martial Practice is up to you...

Like I heard my first day of Ranger School back in the day.

Ranger!!! You want to run with the Big Dogs!!! You better start peeing on the Big Trees!!! Else You better get back up on the Porch with the Puppies!!! :)

Anyone who Knew SSG Swackhammer and Survived the Pit with him knows what I am talking about... The Hammer's Forearms were bigger than most men's thighs...LOL

Now days I spend most of my days under the porch in the shade... old dog that I am...:)

Respectfully,

William Hazen

philippe willaume
09-18-2007, 11:15 AM
Don, I actually agree with most if not all your points..

In our dojo we sometimes before or after class we do a bit of "practical applications", basically, just fooling around while waiting for everyone to arrive. in a way, it's a bit of like sparing.. Its just not part of the curriculum.

Its just that whenever I "win" its just that i get the feeling its because im stronger or bigger than my partner, and when I lose, its because my partner is stronger or bigger than me..

It makes it hard for me to evaluate the benefits of sparing when my own experience of it has yet to show me any..
Or they are there, I haven't yet discovered them..

What is the problem with concept of winning in sparring?
Does it not convey that you have been better than the opposition, and that precisely how you know you have been successful in the application of you technique.
Sure you can use euphemism like at that time it worked well or yeah that technique was successful, but albeit being periphrases and not euphemism, they do carry the same meaning, just more PC.

A sparing session is made of plenty of victories, plenty of defeats and hopefully not that many double kill or status quo.
I think you need to recognise them as defeat or victories in order to get the lessons as to why and what lead you there because that is what we try get out of sparring.

After I spar, I usually have a chat with the guy to see how he saw it from is side. What mistake he exploited what opening I left.
It is good as well to have a 3rd party (that is knowledgeable) looking and have his/her impression.

As Don mentioned, this is kilometres away from competition. Sparing is a really good tool to make you understand what is need to a given technique to be successful, especially when you fail.
Next time you do it, try to see where your uke stops you and take advantage of the situation and take from there.
If I am so bold as to add to Ron advices, May be you do have the technique in front of you anymore, or the bit you are working on is not longer isolated or you have weakened you position by over stretching, may be is moving in such way that you should change technique and so on.
those are thing you can then take to your from pratice.

Phil

DonMagee
09-18-2007, 12:11 PM
Interesting thought about winning and losing.

Does this not also exist in the kata?

I mean kata falls into one of two categories.

1) My partner lets me do the technique. This assumes I will be successful and helps in the intro stage, but teaches me nothing about how to apply the technique.
2) My partner resists the technique in a number of ways. Attacking on balance, grabbing stronger, using muscle, whatever the case my be. At this point he is resisting me and I am either going to fail, or overcome him. No different then a sparing match. So attempting to stop a technique from happening at all is just as much 'competing' as competition. Yet, how many of you would argue that if someone was doing the worst technique you have ever seen that you should take the fall anyways and make him think he is being successful?

You would point out his flaws in some way and help him grow? This is what sparing is doing, only at a higher level then that. It also allows both sides to be uke and nage at the same time. This allows that pressure of 'realism' and helps us learn to deal with the other, non technique parts of conflict.

philippe willaume
09-18-2007, 12:45 PM
Interesting thought about winning and losing.

Does this not also exist in the kata?

I mean kata falls into one of two categories.

1) My partner lets me do the technique. This assumes I will be successful and helps in the intro stage, but teaches me nothing about how to apply the technique.
2) My partner resists the technique in a number of ways. Attacking on balance, grabbing stronger, using muscle, whatever the case my be. At this point he is resisting me and I am either going to fail, or overcome him. No different then a sparing match. So attempting to stop a technique from happening at all is just as much 'competing' as competition. Yet, how many of you would argue that if someone was doing the worst technique you have ever seen that you should take the fall anyways and make him think he is being successful?

You would point out his flaws in some way and help him grow? This is what sparing is doing, only at a higher level then that. It also allows both sides to be uke and nage at the same time. This allows that pressure of 'realism' and helps us learn to deal with the other, non technique parts of conflict.

Yes I agree with you on all accounts.
I would call it resisting more than competing but may be this is the same semantic as me with victory and defeats

That is the way we train. (well I think we do anyway)
Of course you need agreement from both side otherwise there is a little bit of being an arse or a bully.
I mean if you know what is coming and you ignore the initial atemi, you can resist almost any technique. Especially if tori is less experienced.
Though I would say this can be quite useful for changing technique because usually resisting a technique in advance will present another one.
Like trying to escape ikkio by removing/ strengthening the arm is going to give you either nikkiom sankio, rokio (provided that you have attacked the elbow as well).
Or someone that tries to escape tenchi nage by break falling before the technique is there will give you his leg to ikkio, nikkio sankio if you see what I mean.

In any case, resisting kata, semi sparing or drill, they are useful to establish a entering (as in getting the position) and isolation strategy/tactics.
For me regardless of the weapon or what you want to do open handed, this is what makes technique “efficient” or not.

Phil.

DonMagee
09-18-2007, 12:56 PM
...
Of course you need agreement from both side otherwise there is a little bit of being an arse or a bully.
I mean if you know what is coming and you ignore the initial atemi, you can resist almost any technique. Especially if tori is less experienced.
Though I would say this can be quite useful for changing technique because usually resisting a technique in advance will present another one.
Like trying to escape ikkio by removing/ strengthening the arm is going to give you either nikkiom sankio, rokio (provided that you have attacked the elbow as well).
Or someone that tries to escape tenchi nage by break falling before the technique is there will give you his leg to ikkio, nikkio sankio if you see what I mean.



This is my favorite part about sparing. This kind of resistance is not possible. If he ignores the strike to the head, he gets punched in the head.

Of course I agree with you that in static drills it is possible to lock out a partner. Anytime you know what is coming you should be able to defend it. This is where the honesty of giving a good solid attack comes into play. If your attack is committed and the right attack for the drill, the kuzushi and technique should fall into place. I

n my example however, I was referring to someone doing an awful technique. Lets say like you throw a punch, they spin around, take the strike in the kidneys and then tell you that you should be on the ground with a broken hand. (Making up the most insane bad technique I can think of.). Or maybe something more real, they grab your punching hand with both of their hands, then step towards your free hand without taking your balance. Then they pull the arm expecting you to topple over their body into a nice break fall. Assuming this is a black belt, would you stand there with a funny look on your face, throw a fake punch with your free hand, punch them in the face, or take a nice dive over their back into the best breakfall you can muster?

Of course you and I both know that taking the dive is not teaching anyone anything (unless your breakfalls need serious work). Yet by standing there, you defeated his technique. just like escaping that triangle and passing the guard, or using a jab cross to setup a nice hook, or throwing a leg kick to prevent takedowns while trying to get into the clinch.

Roman Kremianski
09-18-2007, 01:42 PM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EU0ARSJLEaU

Vs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91Lbc8OXDXg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lO43g2UVYk

Isn't the first video a clip of Royce warming up moments before the actual fight, while the Matt clips are him training weeks prior to the fight...?

It looks light and he hardly breaks a sweat.

mathewjgano
09-18-2007, 02:52 PM
These can go a long way in keeping sure that the techniques you do are in the spirit of the techniques you were taught.
And yes it is true that sparing only can not keep your art pure. It requires instructors with good character.
But sparing is different in MMA, bjj, judo, etc. It is most defiantly not about winning.

Hi Don,
Nice post. I'm pretty sure I understand where you're coming from. I think perhaps the biggest problem with this discussion may be semantics. One person sees "spar" and thinks something different than another person...though I'd still argue that it (competing vs sparing) comes down to individual personality more than some formal situation. I think overall there's a fine line between what you would call sparing and competition, even if there's a very distinct difference in your mind. I think competition is a mindset, not just a formal event and that sparing tends to be viewed as just a less formal competition. Perhaps the idea in much of Aikido is that such forms of competition are a slippery slope best avoided altogether? I've always found simply doing my best to make the concept of competing irrelevant...and that is I think what Aikido has tried to propogate and articulate.
I know I used to look at Shodokan's competition as a bad thing...in the context of "pure" Aikido. Now I re-realize it's only as good or bad as the attitudes which engage in it. I've always played sports and always done my best to win, but I've always been a good sport about loosing or winning and playing fair, etc. If I can do that in a soccer match, why not others in Aikido, etc? Now, I might even describe that kind of competing as competing without competing...or to borrow from the famous saying, true victory is victory over the self. Long story slightly less long, I'm not convinced competing is bad, so long as the competitors maintain a good attitude. I saw a glimmer of it on Matt Hughes' face when he had Royce's arm hyper-extended (as I recall anyway). He looked up at the ref as if to say, "What do I do? I don't want to hurt him."
I personally disagree with the idea of breaking a foolish person's arm in a competition. I'd rather lose and know I had him beat. You're probbaly right that many Aikidoka take the ideal too far where self defense is concerned, but I don't think fighting is what most Aikidoka train for. It's usually something more abstract than that, though it is usually part of it. It's much like people who take tai chi for healthful reasons as opposed to self defense reasons...I think, anyway.
Thanks again for the food for thought!
Delicious as always.
Matt

mathewjgano
09-18-2007, 03:10 PM
Strange that Don Magee had to go through great lengths to explain the basic premise of sparring. Why would one have to use analytical deduction to explain the basic fundamentals of sparring. The science of sparring is not new. The reasons for sparring are not new. I think the whole issue is more about a mentality that has crept into the psyche of some. Honesty is always the best policy. Others love sparring and the hope is to learn and grow from the experience.

I don't think it's so strange...but I'm often a little bit strange so maybe it's all relative. I know he's repeated himself quite a bit in an effort to reiterate his meaning, but that's the nature of these forums. There are slight variations in meaning. Words, as symbols for our meanings, are highly subjective and thus subject to individual interpretation. Sometimes you have to cover a lot of ground to reach common understanding...and even then people tend to read based more on their own perceptions than trying to understand others...and sometimes people just miss each other's meaning outright.
If you don't want to spar, if you don't like sparring, simply say I don't want to spar or I don't like it.
Because it's not often being put forth in this way. The problem arises when people say one way is better than another and that others should do as they do. Sincerely meant or antagonistic (I don't think Don is antagonistic) this is where simple ideas expand into huge threads than never die (despite people complaining on said threads about how they never die:confused: ).
As an aside: I got a funny response a while back when I tried to apply Aikido to communication, but I still think the sharing of ideals and ideas tends to be one of the most important places we can evaluate our training. Physical interaction is relatively easy in my view; it's thoughts and feelings which get sticky and demand the highest focus, patience, and discipline.
Take care,
Matt

philippe willaume
09-19-2007, 06:30 AM
This is my favorite part about sparing. This kind of resistance is not possible. If he ignores the strike to the head, he gets punched in the head.

Of course I agree with you that in static drills it is possible to lock out a partner. Anytime you know what is coming you should be able to defend it. This is where the honesty of giving a good solid attack comes into play. If your attack is committed and the right attack for the drill, the kuzushi and technique should fall into place. I

n my example however, I was referring to someone doing an awful technique. Lets say like you throw a punch, they spin around, take the strike in the kidneys and then tell you that you should be on the ground with a broken hand. (Making up the most insane bad technique I can think of.). Or maybe something more real, they grab your punching hand with both of their hands, then step towards your free hand without taking your balance. Then they pull the arm expecting you to topple over their body into a nice break fall. Assuming this is a black belt, would you stand there with a funny look on your face, throw a fake punch with your free hand, punch them in the face, or take a nice dive over their back into the best breakfall you can muster?

Of course you and I both know that taking the dive is not teaching anyone anything (unless your breakfalls need serious work). Yet by standing there, you defeated his technique. just like escaping that triangle and passing the guard, or using a jab cross to setup a nice hook, or throwing a leg kick to prevent takedowns while trying to get into the clinch.

hello don
I agree with you about the punch in the face, if you blatantly ignore it, you will have a fat lip (from form work or sparing).

About your example I assume we are talking from form work and about a technique we have practiced before and that is functional. (ie that has entrance isolation/control/technique).

I would take the fall at least the fist time, and tell my partner that the technique was not really on. And if he agrees we can try to work that out at the next iteration of the technique. (May be he is working on a specific part of the said technique. or he may be an arse and not being worth the energy)

And yes resisting at that stage is exactly the same intent as the counter you mentions, just in a more controlled environment than free sparing. I think you still missing all the entrance startgy and tactics that you can explore in free sparing but you can integrate those elements in kokyu nague /randory.

phil

stan baker
09-29-2007, 05:39 PM
the problem is that even the top people in aiki do not have powerful aiki power.

stan

Roman Kremianski
09-29-2007, 07:53 PM
Not only did you pointlessly bump a dead thread, but you bumped it with a stupid post. I congratulate you.

:D

stan baker
09-30-2007, 06:59 AM
thank you, just look at some of the best jujitsu fighters ,who in aikido can handle them so it is not that hard to understand.

stan

mathewjgano
09-30-2007, 10:26 AM
thank you, just look at some of the best jujitsu fighters ,who in aikido can handle them so it is not that hard to understand.

stan

"IT'S ALIIIIIIIIVE! Muahahahahahhaaaaah!":crazy:
Not that I know one way or the other, but I'm curious how you know? Have you trained with many of the "top" guys in aikido and jujutsu? Are you including koryu, or BJJ only?
I know this kind of thread causes a great number of people to go :yuck: and I hope they'll forgive my dogged fascination with topics like this, but I am still curious about what causes folks to make assertions like this...or more to the point, I'm curious if I'll encounter something new which I can agree with. Very sorry for raising anyone's ire.

Roman Kremianski
09-30-2007, 05:58 PM
thank you, just look at some of the best jujitsu fighters ,who in aikido can handle them so it is not that hard to understand.

What does that have to do with my post?? :S