How to deal with aggressive, non-compliant attackers? And discussion on atemi.

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[AikiTao]

I have a few scenarios that I'm interested in running through. If I'm faced with ridiculously obvious one strike attacks with compliant attackers, I feel comfortable that I can handle them. But when it comes to someone blitzing straight down the line throwing straight punches, windmills, looping punches, etc., what are some appropriate responses?

Would you time the next attack and hopefully tenkan out of the way? Would you irimi with a good strike and then attempt a throw / lock? Please share your experiences or drills you've tried. I'm interested in transitioning from traditional attacks to more modern and realistic attacks.

Also, on a different note, how essential do you think atemi is in a street fight? Especially with this kind of aggressive attack. Would you use it merely as a distraction, a set-up, or a fight ender alone?

[Kevin Leavitt]

If you can time the attack to do something than that assumes you have a great deal of control of the situation. Of course you would do something like tenkan or irimi.

The problem with reality is that you may not have that amount of control. Chances are you don't. so you are managing a very difficult situation where you are trying to not lose ground, manage the fight and turn it around in your favor.

In a empty hand or even knife range it becomes all about the clinch...which fundamentally is exactly the same principles you employ in irimi tenkan, iriminage and a multitude of other attacks that we tradtionally practice in aikido.

The problem in a real fight is not that what you learn in aikido is wrong or will not work...it just that you will typically practice at a perfect range that is maintained cooperatively by both participants. In reality that range and distance is closed down very closely because you each of you wants to impose your will on the other and therefore you get close and very intimate very quickly!

My advice is to learn the clinch and to practice it. After you get the hang of the basics, you I believe you will begin to see things you have learned in aikido popping out of the clinch...albeit maybe it does not look or feel quite the same but principles and basics are there.

The clinch is the best place to start if you want to transition from traditional attacks to more realistic attacks.

How essential is atemi in a street fight? very essential. However it is secondary to control. You can't effectively do much if you are not dominating or controlling the fight. Atemi is useful to disrupt your opponents game plan if you are losing or behind in the OODA loop. It can create distance, space and opportunities for you to regain ground/control. Once you are in control it is useful to maintain control or to submit your opponent to a condition where he is no longer a threat. Watch any UFC for the stages of a fight and you can find many good examples of how atemi is used in conjunction with both the losing side of the fight and the dominate side of the fight.

[AikiTao]

If you can time the attack to do something than that assumes you have a great deal of control of the situation. Of course you would do something like tenkan or irimi.

The problem with reality is that you may not have that amount of control. Chances are you don't. so you are managing a very difficult situation where you are trying to not lose ground, manage the fight and turn it around in your favor.

In a empty hand or even knife range it becomes all about the clinch...which fundamentally is exactly the same principles you employ in irimi tenkan, iriminage and a multitude of other attacks that we tradtionally practice in aikido.

The problem in a real fight is not that what you learn in aikido is wrong or will not work...it just that you will typically practice at a perfect range that is maintained cooperatively by both participants. In reality that range and distance is closed down very closely because you each of you wants to impose your will on the other and therefore you get close and very intimate very quickly!

My advice is to learn the clinch and to practice it. After you get the hang of the basics, you I believe you will begin to see things you have learned in aikido popping out of the clinch...albeit maybe it does not look or feel quite the same but principles and basics are there.

The clinch is the best place to start if you want to transition from traditional attacks to more realistic attacks.

How essential is atemi in a street fight? very essential. However it is secondary to control. You can't effectively do much if you are not dominating or controlling the fight. Atemi is useful to disrupt your opponents game plan if you are losing or behind in the OODA loop. It can create distance, space and opportunities for you to regain ground/control. Once you are in control it is useful to maintain control or to submit your opponent to a condition where he is no longer a threat. Watch any UFC for the stages of a fight and you can find many good examples of how atemi is used in conjunction with both the losing side of the fight and the dominate side of the fight.

I like that you brought up the clinch. In doing Muay Thai, some BJJ, and other grappling styles, I've found the clinch to be quite useful but once in it, how do you use Aikido? Personally, I'll throw knees all day but that's not exactly Aikido. Maybe a knee to the groin, then a throw followed afterwards but more than likely, unless you strike FIRST in the clinch, it's going to be a wrestling match. Especially with someone who has no martial training. So what are some specific techniques you could employ in the clinch, in your opinion?

I do believe, though, that Aikido is somewhat of a clinching art. Most just don't realize that when you do close that distance into the clinch, it will become a grappling match. Not a one-sided, kokyunage throw.

[Bill Danosky]

If you get an attack like that, they mean it. So don't limit yourself to just Aikido techniques. Give them everything you've got.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Personally, I'll throw knees all day but that's not exactly Aikido.
Is not exactly the Aikido you imagine it should be.

Most just don't realize that when you do close that distance into the clinch, it will become a grappling match. Not a one-sided, kokyunage throw.
Welcome to the real world.

[AikiTao]

If you get an attack like that, they mean it. So don't limit yourself to just Aikido techniques. Give them everything you've got.

I agree 100%. I don't doubt that upon Aikido's creation that the senseis may've contradicted certain principles in order to prove the 'toughness' of their art. Nothin' wrong with that.

[Kevin Leavitt]

I like that you brought up the clinch. In doing Muay Thai, some BJJ, and other grappling styles, I've found the clinch to be quite useful but once in it, how do you use Aikido? Personally, I'll throw knees all day but that's not exactly Aikido. Maybe a knee to the groin, then a throw followed afterwards but more than likely, unless you strike FIRST in the clinch, it's going to be a wrestling match. Especially with someone who has no martial training. So what are some specific techniques you could employ in the clinch, in your opinion?

I do believe, though, that Aikido is somewhat of a clinching art. Most just don't realize that when you do close that distance into the clinch, it will become a grappling match. Not a one-sided, kokyunage throw.

I don't view aikido as a technique based practice, but a principle based one...so maybe that is a difference in our perspectives.

AIkido is based on Jiu Jitsu. Jiu Jitsu by nature is a grappling art. The concept of irimi is prevalent in the clinch. You can also see the concept and principles found in Ikkyo in the clinch. If you do the clinch correctly you will get high under the arms of your opponent. Using your body correctly you can use the same principles found in Ikkyo to off balance your opponent and do a takedown or throw.

If you look at the internal principles of aiki, feeling your opponent, reducing proprioceptions, getting under your opponents weight are all there.

As far as the wrestling match goes...with someone of a lesser skill set than I...there is not too much of a wrestling match for me once I gain control of him, I can usually move him around quite freely without much of a struggle, at least on my part. He can spaz and wrestle all he wants to!

[sakumeikan]

I have a few scenarios that I'm interested in running through. If I'm faced with ridiculously obvious one strike attacks with compliant attackers, I feel comfortable that I can handle them. But when it comes to someone blitzing straight down the line throwing straight punches, windmills, looping punches, etc., what are some appropriate responses?

Would you time the next attack and hopefully tenkan out of the way? Would you irimi with a good strike and then attempt a throw / lock? Please share your experiences or drills you've tried. I'm interested in transitioning from traditional attacks to more modern and realistic attacks.

Also, on a different note, how essential do you think atemi is in a street fight? Especially with this kind of aggressive attack. Would you use it merely as a distraction, a set-up, or a fight ender alone?

Hi Logan,
Responses you ask?Heres some for starters, Run like hell,kick the guy in the crown jewels, hit him with a 4by 2, bottle, brick or baseball bat.Break his knee joints.Forget the fancy dan stuff, just do your best to take out the person asap.As far as atemi is concerned, the no nonsence approach is the best.Any encounter is usually over in the first few minutes.No John Watne.Steven Seagal crap.Joe.

[AikiTao]

I don't view aikido as a technique based practice, but a principle based one...so maybe that is a difference in our perspectives.

AIkido is based on Jiu Jitsu. Jiu Jitsu by nature is a grappling art. The concept of irimi is prevalent in the clinch. You can also see the concept and principles found in Ikkyo in the clinch. If you do the clinch correctly you will get high under the arms of your opponent. Using your body correctly you can use the same principles found in Ikkyo to off balance your opponent and do a takedown or throw.

If you look at the internal principles of aiki, feeling your opponent, reducing proprioceptions, getting under your opponents weight are all there.

As far as the wrestling match goes...with someone of a lesser skill set than I...there is not too much of a wrestling match for me once I gain control of him, I can usually move him around quite freely without much of a struggle, at least on my part. He can spaz and wrestle all he wants to!

I like that you said that you view Aikido as a principle based art. I agree. If the principles are applied correctly and decisively, it can be an extremely effective art. Too many people take literal techniques and think they'll work them out in a random fight. Not to say that it's impossible because I know it's not but c'mon. Trying an ikkyo, nikyo, sankyo, etc., in the middle of someone swinging on you? I have my doubts.

And if you were to go up against someone who did, say, wrestling. How would you approach it. Sometimes you can't control someone merely by moving around them, especially if they know how to grapple. It's gonna turn into a wrestling match at some point.

Hi Logan,
Responses you ask?Heres some for starters, Run like hell,kick the guy in the crown jewels, hit him with a 4by 2, bottle, brick or baseball bat.Break his knee joints.Forget the fancy dan stuff, just do your best to take out the person asap.As far as atemi is concerned, the no nonsence approach is the best.Any encounter is usually over in the first few minutes.No John Watne.Steven Seagal crap.Joe.

Very true. Good post.

[Bill Danosky]

.As far as atemi is concerned, the no nonsence approach is the best.Any encounter is usually over in the first few minutes.No John Watne.Steven Seagal crap.Joe.

I like this. Some great street fighting advice I once got was, "Always get the first punch. It's usually the only clean shot in the fight." It does tend to digress into a grabastic wrestling match after that. But there are wristlocks that work well at those ranges, if you can keep from getting hit while you're sinking them.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Logan Light wrote:

And if you were to go up against someone who did, say, wrestling. How would you approach it. Sometimes you can't control someone merely by moving around them, especially if they know how to grapple. It's gonna turn into a wrestling match at some point.


Well being that I am a Brazilian Jiu Jitsu black belt.... :)

[Kevin Leavitt]

I like this. Some great street fighting advice I once got was, "Always get the first punch. It's usually the only clean shot in the fight." It does tend to digress into a grabastic wrestling match after that. But there are wristlocks that work well at those ranges, if you can keep from getting hit while you're sinking them.

Getting the first punch in is a fine strategy sometimes for sure.

However, pre-emption can be a dicey road. I think there is a very fine line in the decision cycle. I am all about getting the first punch in if I can or have to. But...damn...there is that whole escalation of force, use of force, and liability thing we have to deal with.

You can always go with the "I hit him cause I felt physically threatened and his violence was impending so I defended myself"

many times though if we are the "beta" to his "alpha"...meaning we are not the guy going around starting the fight...then by the time we process what is going on...it is too late to get that first strike in.

Then what?

I think the answer we are skirting around here is that you need to practice all ranges of combat. Striking, weapons, grappling etc.

[Keith Larman]

Well, just fwiw I think you should read most of Kevin's stuff here very carefully. I agree completely with what he's talking about. Then again I had a background in Judo and JJ prior to starting aikido. Even spent some time learning a bit of boxing and karate. Frankly I came to Aikido finding that what I learned there was complimentary and "expanded" my toolbox. Or maybe better gave me some insights in to how to use those tools better. Then again my first teacher (in judo) used to wax on philosophically about how one needs to learn to be a well rounded fighter (whatever that means) if you're going to be in a fight. And I was encouraged to go out and "play" with the other kids... :) But that was a long time ago now that I mention it... Body can't take it any longer.

So when I'm teaching a general class I'll often intersperse all sorts of stuff, just presented from an Aikido perspective. When I"m working on a specific Aikido technique, well, it's pure Aikido (in the sense of waza, etc.). Otherwise... Shrug. I also take as many classes from others as I can simply to keep expanding.

There are tons of "what ifs" possible. So you train and see what works with those "what ifs".

Finally... I'm really not sure of the answer to the question of when one should do these things. Do you create a solid foundation in Aiki first then play with the other stuff? Do you learn some of the other stuff and then train in Aiki to help find refinement? Shrug. My case was a mixed mess of a bit of everything ending up with me focusing on Aikido primarily as a refinement of whatever the heck it is I would do. I find the aikido is now my very core. But what I may end up doing may not look very aikido-esque although inside me I feel it is.

Enough philosophical waxing... Back to the stones...

[Demetrio Cereijo]

And if you were to go up against someone who did, say, wrestling. How would you approach it.

With caution (http://i.imgur.com/q8cJ6dv.gif)

:D

[jonreading]

Good comments Kevin, especially about the "control" mentality. I think we see a lot of tactical programs that emphasize control over striking. I am not sure if that is a PC thing, or if the program designers have correlated more success from suppression and control tactics (over striking tactics). I've even seen some bully programs where kids are taught to cover their attackers and wait for help.

Kata training in aikido gets you so far. But there has been some good advice to expose yourself to some other systems that look differently at striking and interaction. Clinching after a strike set is often a solid way to gain bodily control - I am a big fan of the programs that work this type of process. Aikido training is often focused on the irrimi of striking; that is, the mechanical process of acquiring and defending tactical space through occupation. Some schools just work with the principle, others with the strike, some have difficulty with that concept and some don't believe it. George Ledyard has an article on striking that I believe to be the hallmark article on this topic.

[Bill Danosky]

George Ledyard has an article on striking that I believe to be the hallmark article on this topic.

You gotta love GL. Link, please...

[Howard Prior]

You gotta love GL. Link, please...

http://www.aikiweb.com/columns/gledyard/2004_08.html

?

[Bill Danosky]

Great article! (but of course, we knew it would be). Can you imagine somebody who wasn't him dropping this bomb in a general thread?

"Anyone who has had occasion to apply Aikido techniques on a really resistant subject as in police application knows how hard it actually is to get a technique on someone intent on countering it. We train to maintain connection but a real attacker will attempt to break with you the instant that he doesn't feel things are going his way."

[AikiTao]

I like that so many are open to cross-training other arts and experimenting. I also like the lack of BS responses. Sometimes you just have to get down and dirty and like I said before, I have no doubts that the older senseis did this to prove their art as an effective one. In Ki Aikido, we don't have much, if any atemi. Our only applications seem to be as a distraction, which I don't believe is effective one bit, personally.

On the topic of clinching in Aikido, you guys may find this video of interest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spPNWKtcYo0

I love that there's full resistance. Most people who I show the video to say that it's not Aikido because there is resistance and it's not 'smooth' enough... obviously, they haven't been in or seen any real scraps. I think that in such close distance, even though you can't see it, he's definitely using very small, subtle movements to manipulate his opponent without having to wrestle him too much. I also like the inclusion of simple striking.

[sakumeikan]

I like that so many are open to cross-training other arts and experimenting. I also like the lack of BS responses. Sometimes you just have to get down and dirty and like I said before, I have no doubts that the older senseis did this to prove their art as an effective one. In Ki Aikido, we don't have much, if any atemi. Our only applications seem to be as a distraction, which I don't believe is effective one bit, personally.

On the topic of clinching in Aikido, you guys may find this video of interest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spPNWKtcYo0

I love that there's full resistance. Most people who I show the video to say that it's not Aikido because there is resistance and it's not 'smooth' enough... obviously, they haven't been in or seen any real scraps. I think that in such close distance, even though you can't see it, he's definitely using very small, subtle movements to manipulate his opponent without having to wrestle him too much. I also like the inclusion of simple striking.
Dear Logan,
This video is imo garbage.The guy with the hakama against low ranked opponents does not use any skills in aikido/judo or karate.He struggles against the opposition.His posture is all over the place.Words fail me for once.Cheers, Joe.

[jonreading]

Great article! (but of course, we knew it would be). Can you imagine somebody who wasn't him dropping this bomb in a general thread?

"Anyone who has had occasion to apply Aikido techniques on a really resistant subject as in police application knows how hard it actually is to get a technique on someone intent on countering it. We train to maintain connection but a real attacker will attempt to break with you the instant that he doesn't feel things are going his way."

Nope. That's why I direct questions to the man himself. I think you can argue whether you are capable of actual striking. And I think you can argue whether personally you want to include striking. This article is the best I have read in advocating that atemi is present in aikido and the role it plays in aikido.

I feel some of the sport application is difficult to demonstrate. If I grab a judo guy by the wrist, judo rules do not allow small joint manipulation so I am, in some sense, simply doing something the judoka has neither seen nor practices defenses against. I should hope I would have some success, presumably before being dumped on my head. Of course, now with the new rules about defending a grab... Same for for karate people. I think it is difficult to differentiate doing something with success because it is unexpected and doing something with success because it is effective. Fool me once...

Secondly, I think the focus of consetsu waza is misplaced in most randori situations, let alone free-style sparring. Not to draw on the other thread about self-defense, but the "real" techniques becoming mainstream for LEO and security have less to do with precision technique and more to do with basic suppression. Lock shields, advance and pin. Now if you don't have 4 or 5 riot officers, well...

Thirdly, I think one of the issues facing the "4-legged animal" connection model is working with the, "what if my partner disengages me?" question. Some instructors are very good at re-establishing connection; some not as good. Of the ones who are good with whom I have experience, most have another art under their belt. Your can see the little demon that was 20 years of karate or judo or jujutsu be unleashed and you die (just a little bit) in their eyes. Then you realize the connection was for you safety, not their convenience...

[JW]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spPNWKtcYo0

I love that there's full resistance.

Well, there's (at least) 2 categories of "resistance."

1. Basic/passive resistance, where uke uses a strong, resilient body to make it hard for you to put him down. He'll go, but he'll make you work.
2. Active resistance, where not only does uke not want to go down, he is looking to make YOU the uke. He should succeed in pinning/throwing you around half the time if your skill levels etc are matched. So if you aren't wasting your time beating up on someone who can't challenge you, you should be losing a lot of the time. By losing I don't mean failing to get a good throw-- I mean being thrown.

Anyway the video had some fun points like those edited bits at the beginning. But it is basically showing number 1 above, not number 2. So I do appreciate it, but I think it could go further.
Uke really should have felt free to strike toward the face at 2:26 for instance. (They were standing around within punching ma-ai, clearly thinking about the hakama guy's next throw/pin attempt)

BTW, if one guy is dressed like he is senior to the other people, I guess they wouldn't show #2, would they?

[Michael Varin]

Dear Logan,
This video is imo garbage.The guy with the hakama against low ranked opponents does not use any skills in aikido/judo or karate.He struggles against the opposition.His posture is all over the place.Words fail me for once.Cheers, Joe.

I would have to agree. My training partners and I have trained aikido under much heavier levels of resistance and also with the objective of countering the other's technique.

This teaches you how difficult it is to "do" aikido, and can help you understand what aikido actually is.

And no. I'm not referring to applying technique. That's relatively easy.

[Michael Varin]

I feel some of the sport application is difficult to demonstrate. If I grab a judo guy by the wrist, judo rules do not allow small joint manipulation so I am, in some sense, simply doing something the judoka has neither seen nor practices defenses against. I should hope I would have some success, presumably before being dumped on my head. Of course, now with the new rules about defending a grab... Same for for karate people. I think it is difficult to differentiate doing something with success because it is unexpected and doing something with success because it is effective. Fool me once...

Secondly, I think the focus of consetsu waza is misplaced in most randori situations, let alone free-style sparring. Not to draw on the other thread about self-defense, but the "real" techniques becoming mainstream for LEO and security have less to do with precision technique and more to do with basic suppression. Lock shields, advance and pin. Now if you don't have 4 or 5 riot officers, well...

Thirdly, I think one of the issues facing the "4-legged animal" connection model is working with the, "what if my partner disengages me?" question. Some instructors are very good at re-establishing connection; some not as good. Of the ones who are good with whom I have experience, most have another art under their belt. Your can see the little demon that was 20 years of karate or judo or jujutsu be unleashed and you die (just a little bit) in their eyes. Then you realize the connection was for you safety, not their convenience...

I don't get it. Please, explain more clearly.

On a possibly related note. . . Just this evening my wife's cousin came over to visit. He is a relatively green correctional officer. But he's huge and ungodly strong. I asked him if he knew a certain deputy who used to train under me. This gentleman is the head of the jail's SRT (they deal with cell extractions and such) and is also huge. There was quite a bit of surprise on the cousin's face as he told me that that was his trainer and he tried to establish what relationship I had to this gentleman. He told me that my former student put him in a certain hold that caused pain to his wrist and he felt like he needed to escape and he did so. This apparently took place in front of a large group and the cousin was severely scolded for his actions. He asked me if the deputy learned this move from me. I informed him that I did teach this gentleman aikido and that he was quite capable and had done things in practice that I had not, but that I did not know what he was teaching the other COs. I showed the cousin sankyo and he confirmed this is the technique the deputy used. I asked him if it hurt when I did it and he said no. Then I asked him to escape it, and I pinned him.

Your attitude and intention are significant. In my experience aikido doesn't work very well when you try to inflict it on another.

Unfortunately LEOs are often put in the place of the aggressor. That's the nature of their work. . . It's not the nature of aikido.

[AikiTao]

Dear Logan,
This video is imo garbage.The guy with the hakama against low ranked opponents does not use any skills in aikido/judo or karate.He struggles against the opposition.His posture is all over the place.Words fail me for once.Cheers, Joe.

How, then, do you apply specific Aikido techniques, especially wristlocks, without struggle? I have no doubt he could've been a little smoother in technique but honestly, when you're applying a wristlock and the only way to avoid them, especially if you know Aikido, is through subtle movements, how can you not struggle with that? If you have someone who is super flinchy and resistant and won't let you get anything, you may have to wrestle a technique or two in. I'm sure there's room for improvement but at least there out there putting it on the mat and testing their stuff out

Well, there's (at least) 2 categories of "resistance."

1. Basic/passive resistance, where uke uses a strong, resilient body to make it hard for you to put him down. He'll go, but he'll make you work.
2. Active resistance, where not only does uke not want to go down, he is looking to make YOU the uke. He should succeed in pinning/throwing you around half the time if your skill levels etc are matched. So if you aren't wasting your time beating up on someone who can't challenge you, you should be losing a lot of the time. By losing I don't mean failing to get a good throw-- I mean being thrown.

Anyway the video had some fun points like those edited bits at the beginning. But it is basically showing number 1 above, not number 2. So I do appreciate it, but I think it could go further.
Uke really should have felt free to strike toward the face at 2:26 for instance. (They were standing around within punching ma-ai, clearly thinking about the hakama guy's next throw/pin attempt)

BTW, if one guy is dressed like he is senior to the other people, I guess they wouldn't show #2, would they?

I don't think his students were actively looking for techniques as much out of concern for themselves. If you watch the full vids, you can see that they do try techniques but I haven't really seen anyone put him in anything. Maybe they aren't being fully committed. Either way, the video was to serve a point. And I appreciate the points you made. Maybe it wasn't full resistance but it's better than being compliant just for the sake of making sensei look good. I love how you brought up that they were in punching distance, though. Anyone on the streets is more than likely going to throw a strike if both their wrists aren't tied up or if they aren't in the clinch. That's why I think you have to be decisive in any sort of lock and not try to fight it out too much but still, it's a good start.

Anyways, back on topic. Me and my buddy were boxing the other day. We decided to do a drill where he was just striking (his style is primarily boxing) and I was defending. The whole time I was looking to tenkan and get to his side but if you don't have someone overly committed or someone who has good footwork, it's next to impossible for me. I was also gonna try to irimi and tie up but even then, thats difficult when they're throwing straights.

It's easy to tenkan off-line and avoid a simple, narrow sword cut or shomenuchi. But when you have someone going down a WIDE line because they're throwing multiple strikes, what's an alternative to getting control? All I could see was opening for strikes that'd maybe stun him, then I could rush in.

[AsimHanif]

Speed up to 5:40. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=j-SwEX1jAKA#t=336
To me this is classic aikido, get off the line and counter. Irimi, tenkan, ikyo, nikyo, etc IN MY OPINION are drills to train the body. It is very hard to pull off aikido applications the way it is usually practiced if someone is actually coming at you.
Also notice how relaxed VP was when he punched...aikido.

[jonreading]

I don't get it. Please, explain more clearly.

On a possibly related note. . . Just this evening my wife's cousin came over to visit. He is a relatively green correctional officer. But he's huge and ungodly strong. I asked him if he knew a certain deputy who used to train under me. This gentleman is the head of the jail's SRT (they deal with cell extractions and such) and is also huge. There was quite a bit of surprise on the cousin's face as he told me that that was his trainer and he tried to establish what relationship I had to this gentleman. He told me that my former student put him in a certain hold that caused pain to his wrist and he felt like he needed to escape and he did so. This apparently took place in front of a large group and the cousin was severely scolded for his actions. He asked me if the deputy learned this move from me. I informed him that I did teach this gentleman aikido and that he was quite capable and had done things in practice that I had not, but that I did not know what he was teaching the other COs. I showed the cousin sankyo and he confirmed this is the technique the deputy used. I asked him if it hurt when I did it and he said no. Then I asked him to escape it, and I pinned him.

Your attitude and intention are significant. In my experience aikido doesn't work very well when you try to inflict it on another.

Unfortunately LEOs are often put in the place of the aggressor. That's the nature of their work. . . It's not the nature of aikido.

No problem.

My first comment was directed towards the cleanliness of demonstrating the "effective" use of aikido against another person (with martial arts experience). I think aikido videos are difficult to develop; to good and they look fake, too bad and they look sloppy, anything in-between is somewhat contrived to not look fake or sloppy. Moreover, it is difficult to balance the "ah ha" lucky technique from the "I can do this all day" technique in a video.

My second comment was an observation that for randori, I think many aikido people prioritize kansetsu waza to a level not functional in randori (certainly multiple-person randori). For me, I think this both places an inappropriate focus on engagement and also reduces the focus on atemi and irrimi in the beginning. I think as we excel in randori, we are given some freedom to engage our partner with more options.

More as an observation of evolving methods of engagement elsewhere (self-defense and security practices), I am noticing a shift in tactical instruction that focuses less on precision and more on suppression. Partly, I think the shift is due to a specific need to prepare these individuals for their role in a short period of time. Partly, I think "teaching" specific methods of injury does not look good on the stand when an officer has to explain why a suspect's shoulder was dislocated. I do think that these individuals are placed in a role of authority and on occasion are the aggressor in establishing compliance.

One of the hypocrisies an aikido, I think, is that we idealize a role independent of our partner, but practice in such a manner as to require a partner. I think your comment about inflicting aikido on another is a good one. My third comment was directed at the role of our partner and the complex relationship of "connection" - whose job it is to maintain, whose job is it to exploit and whose job is it to break? I think the topic of atemi as a solution to engage our partner is complicated and often not well explained. I think many of us do not appreciate the actual danger we inherit when working with experienced people who know atemi.

[JW]

Anyone on the streets is more than likely going to throw a strike if both their wrists aren't tied up or if they aren't in the clinch.
And Ledyard sensei has written about that a lot too, not just in that atemi article above. (an examle here) (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpost.php?p=326824&postcount=15) Until the range is closed up by one of the practitioners, striking is a basic "martial language" and anything else that happens must be in the context of the possibility of strikes. I don't know any way to work with this than to train striking.
When the range gets closed up (as discussed in previous posts) then of course the "martial language" changes.. but we can't pretend striking isn't primary before the range is closed.


That's why I think you have to be decisive in any sort of lock and not try to fight it out too much but still, it's a good start.
True but I think it is important to think about the huge issues that one is facing before the lock is even on the table (relative position of you and the attacker, who has advantage, etc). Lots of stuff should come first I think, like kuzushi of the attacker-- lock comes later. "Going for the lock" just doesn't seem right (more likely to get you beat on by the guy who is not thinking so specifically). The other posters have all talked about this here too.


Anyways, back on topic. Me and my buddy were boxing the other day. We decided to do a drill where he was just striking (his style is primarily boxing) and I was defending. The whole time I was looking to tenkan and get to his side but if you don't have someone overly committed or someone who has good footwork, it's next to impossible for me. I was also gonna try to irimi and tie up but even then, thats difficult when they're throwing straights.


I was playing with that too, I really think there has to be a back-and-forth. You don't tenkan or irimi as a response to something uke does. Instead, if you are both in striking range (just for example), each person has to be feeling like the other will strike. Through that interaction, entering may happen but it is in the context of (in the case you described) both people striking or being able to strike. I mean, through your expression of striking, you create irimi. Well, this is hard to verbalize, but I just mean you are expressing yourself through striking when the two of you are striking. Rather than, "when he strikes I will do this big movement, devoid of strikes or the threat of strikes, in response to that." Of course, body movement is critically involved in striking, so that is where you can find the irimi movement.

[phitruong]

I was playing with that too, I really think there has to be a back-and-forth. You don't tenkan or irimi as a response to something uke does. Instead, if you are both in striking range (just for example), each person has to be feeling like the other will strike. Through that interaction, entering may happen but it is in the context of (in the case you described) both people striking or being able to strike. I mean, through your expression of striking, you create irimi. Well, this is hard to verbalize, but I just mean you are expressing yourself through striking when the two of you are striking. Rather than, "when he strikes I will do this big movement, devoid of strikes or the threat of strikes, in response to that." Of course, body movement is critically involved in striking, so that is where you can find the irimi movement.

methink, this video of Ledyard sensei described quite a bit of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKiukcxADXA most folks think of tenkan, but not irimi. there is no tenkan! took me awhile to figure that out.

[Michael Varin]

No problem.

My first comment was directed towards the cleanliness of demonstrating the "effective" use of aikido against another person (with martial arts experience). I think aikido videos are difficult to develop; to good and they look fake, too bad and they look sloppy, anything in-between is somewhat contrived to not look fake or sloppy. Moreover, it is difficult to balance the "ah ha" lucky technique from the "I can do this all day" technique in a video.

My second comment was an observation that for randori, I think many aikido people prioritize kansetsu waza to a level not functional in randori (certainly multiple-person randori). For me, I think this both places an inappropriate focus on engagement and also reduces the focus on atemi and irrimi in the beginning. I think as we excel in randori, we are given some freedom to engage our partner with more options.

More as an observation of evolving methods of engagement elsewhere (self-defense and security practices), I am noticing a shift in tactical instruction that focuses less on precision and more on suppression. Partly, I think the shift is due to a specific need to prepare these individuals for their role in a short period of time. Partly, I think "teaching" specific methods of injury does not look good on the stand when an officer has to explain why a suspect's shoulder was dislocated. I do think that these individuals are placed in a role of authority and on occasion are the aggressor in establishing compliance.

One of the hypocrisies an aikido, I think, is that we idealize a role independent of our partner, but practice in such a manner as to require a partner. I think your comment about inflicting aikido on another is a good one. My third comment was directed at the role of our partner and the complex relationship of "connection" - whose job it is to maintain, whose job is it to exploit and whose job is it to break? I think the topic of atemi as a solution to engage our partner is complicated and often not well explained. I think many of us do not appreciate the actual danger we inherit when working with experienced people who know atemi.

OK. That actually does clear up what you meant. And I must say, all very good topics for deeper discussion. You should start threads on all of them ;)

[Michael Varin]

Anyways, back on topic. Me and my buddy were boxing the other day. We decided to do a drill where he was just striking (his style is primarily boxing) and I was defending. The whole time I was looking to tenkan and get to his side but if you don't have someone overly committed or someone who has good footwork, it's next to impossible for me. I was also gonna try to irimi and tie up but even then, thats difficult when they're throwing straights.
I was playing with that too, I really think there has to be a back-and-forth. You don't tenkan or irimi as a response to something uke does. Instead, if you are both in striking range (just for example), each person has to be feeling like the other will strike. Through that interaction, entering may happen but it is in the context of (in the case you described) both people striking or being able to strike. I mean, through your expression of striking, you create irimi. Well, this is hard to verbalize, but I just mean you are expressing yourself through striking when the two of you are striking. Rather than, "when he strikes I will do this big movement, devoid of strikes or the threat of strikes, in response to that." Of course, body movement is critically involved in striking, so that is where you can find the irimi movement.

This is good to do. But frustrating, isn't it? I trained very heavily with this type of thing about 11 years ago. I think you're both missing the point. If you commit to irimi or tenkan when your opponent is making a small movement or maybe even feigning a strike, you will find yourself grossly out of position. You can't be said to have any ability with aiki. You are far from it. In fact, you are the one who is over committing. You may even be the "attacker."

You must join your opponent's movements (better to join the movement of their "spirit" than that of their body), but have the mentality that you will stay in an advantageous position. Otherwise you are extrapolating, and no longer responding to anything that is actually present. There is no way other than luck to be appropriate when you respond this way.

I suggest you stop thinking about what you are going to do and start observing and listening to your opponent very carefully. . . and continue to get more subtle with it.

The essence of aiki is not learned in contact, but pre-contact.

[Bill Danosky]

I suggest you stop thinking about what you are going to do and start observing and listening to your opponent very carefully.

Me too.

[Conrad Gus]

The essence of aiki is not learned in contact, but pre-contact.

Nicely put.

[JW]

I think you're both missing the point. If you commit to irimi or tenkan when your opponent is making a small movement or maybe even feigning a strike, you will find yourself grossly out of position.
Exactly. You say I'm missing the point, but regarding this first part of your post Michael, it sounds like you agree with my intention to dissuade Logan from "doing irimi" in response to striking, and to instead participate in the striking itself. In other words entering movements would occur in the course of doing striking oneself, rather than in response to uke's striking.

Regarding the second part--

The essence of aiki is not learned in contact, but pre-contact.
Well, this is one thing we disagree about. There can be many reasons, but one may be that we are in different places in our training progress. When I become more skilled and capable with the type of effect that requires good physical contact, I will certainly turn my training emphasis to what I can do with that skill BEFRE contact. But, if I can't do great stuff with good contact yet, I am not ready to use it pre-contact.
Maybe you have already maximized what you can do using physical contact, so you are looking beyond that level.

I'm still rapidly improving my skill within the context of contact.

One result is improved ability to deal with uke in the absence of contact.. but it all comes from contact work.

Of course that's just my opinion about my own training. I do have some reason to say this "primacy of contact work" idea about aiki may be right though:
When O-sensei wanted to firmly demonstrate the value of his art with people like Tenryu and Kenshiro Ab(b)e, he demonstrated what he can do with them through physical contact. (Like extreme versions of the kokyu demos he can be seen doing on stage and on the mat in his later years.) Whereas, when he tested Shioda for 9th dan, he did a non-contact test [Shioda's ability to perceive and utilize openings (or possibly even create them) was the deciding skill].

The picture I am painting here is that the non-contact things are an advanced manifestation of the skills that one has regarding physical contact with the attacker.

[AikiTao]

This is good to do. But frustrating, isn't it? I trained very heavily with this type of thing about 11 years ago. I think you're both missing the point. If you commit to irimi or tenkan when your opponent is making a small movement or maybe even feigning a strike, you will find yourself grossly out of position. You can't be said to have any ability with aiki. You are far from it. In fact, you are the one who is over committing. You may even be the "attacker."

You must join your opponent's movements (better to join the movement of their "spirit" than that of their body), but have the mentality that you will stay in an advantageous position. Otherwise you are extrapolating, and no longer responding to anything that is actually present. There is no way other than luck to be appropriate when you respond this way.

I suggest you stop thinking about what you are going to do and start observing and listening to your opponent very carefully. . . and continue to get more subtle with it.

The essence of aiki is not learned in contact, but pre-contact.

And how did that training go? I cannot join my opponents movements when they're throwing at least 3 strikes per second.. Let's be realistic here. Pre-contact? How do I tactically move my entire body into a position where I can dominate them without getting knocked out in a second? I don't know anyone mentally or physically capable of doing that. I understand what you're saying but still, "listening to his movements" when he is trying to knock me out is not a good response. How do I join a movement when it is absolutely random and quick? I don't know what he's gonna throw, how to respond, or how to move my entire body in response to a simple attack? And this is sparring. Assume it's self-defense. Let's remove some motor skills and see how I respond then. I just doubt these kind of responses in these situations unless you're ready to get in that range and strike a little. That's just realism.

I don't know who you guys train against but please, tell me what you used. When you have a skilled fighter blitzing down the line throwing good, solid strikes at your face, what do you do? Let's not be too theoretical here. What have you done or what do you feel is a realistic response. I don't see any other logical response other than throwing hands until Aikido presents itself.

Aikido is and always will be a principle based art to me. There's Aikido in boxing. Use that. Also, how can you have 'pre-contact' and not be an attacker? What? How many violent situations have you been in? Aikido is absolutely an effective art if used pre-emptively but you can't expect to always unify your movements with Uke's.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

I don't know who you guys train against but please, tell me what you used. When you have a skilled fighter blitzing down the line throwing good, solid strikes at your face, what do you do? Let's not be too theoretical here. What have you done or what do you feel is a realistic response. I don't see any other logical response other than throwing hands until Aikido presents itself.

Duck/cover change level and shot a double/single leg takedown.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Logan wrote:

I don't know who you guys train against but please, tell me what you used. When you have a skilled fighter blitzing down the line throwing good, solid strikes at your face, what do you do? Let's not be too theoretical here. What have you done or what do you feel is a realistic response. I don't see any other logical response other than throwing hands until Aikido presents itself.


I can't speak for anyone else, but realistically, for me, I use clinching skills. I am at the same skill level as Jonathan Wong it seems. I have not reached the point in my training where I can use pre-contact work to any degree of reality when someone is coming at me in a very real, intentful, and seemngly...I say seemingly, unpredictable way. I say seemingly because it really isn't unpredictable, heck the human body only moves in so many ways so you can pretty much form your responses around a framework. However, that framework for me, at least, fairly narrow. I am not at the point where I can stand off at a distance and control uke that is bearing down on me hard, fast, and agressively with an intent to hurt. That is why I make damn sure my clinching skills are decent.

Maybe one day I can influence a mad man's actions pre-contact...but I am of the mindset that the only one I can influence is myself and how I react to things, so I have tended to build my whole defense and fight strategy around what I can physically do to control someone....if they choose to respond differently to my intent or threat, that is their choice, but I cannot count on that.

[SeiserL]

IAlso, on a different note, how essential do you think atemi is in a street fight? Especially with this kind of aggressive attack. Would you use it merely as a distraction, a set-up, or a fight ender alone?
I have often said that I look forward to the day that my first startle response is Aikido.

As it is, "hit first, hit hard, hit often" seems to be my first response.

Guess I have more work to do.

[phitruong]

I have often said that I look forward to the day that my first startle response is Aikido.

As it is, "hit first, hit hard, hit often" seems to be my first response.


don't know about you guys, but my first startle response would be like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vCaMmP1fP8#t=3m39s
:D

[AikiTao]

I can appreciate these responses!

[JW]

Hi Kevin-
I'm printing this out and pinning it to my wall:
I am at the same skill level as Jonathan Wong it seems.
:cool:
Knowing full well that I am not at your level in any sense, I'm going to have to take that in the less-than-literal sense of "what JW wrote is not totally unreasonable." Which I will gladly take any day, thanks!

Hi Phi-
Your time-index in the video's URL didn't work. For some reason, it took me a ridiculous amount of time to realize that, and as I sat there watching cartoons when I was supposed to be going to work this morning, a sinking feeling of "What the hell am I doing with my life??" set in. Wow, these threads can get really dark really fast! :D

[Michael Varin]

Exactly. You say I'm missing the point, but regarding this first part of your post Michael, it sounds like you agree with my intention to dissuade Logan from "doing irimi" in response to striking, and to instead participate in the striking itself. In other words entering movements would occur in the course of doing striking oneself, rather than in response to uke's striking.

Regarding the second part--

Well, this is one thing we disagree about. There can be many reasons, but one may be that we are in different places in our training progress. When I become more skilled and capable with the type of effect that requires good physical contact, I will certainly turn my training emphasis to what I can do with that skill BEFRE contact. But, if I can't do great stuff with good contact yet, I am not ready to use it pre-contact.
Maybe you have already maximized what you can do using physical contact, so you are looking beyond that level.

I'm still rapidly improving my skill within the context of contact.

One result is improved ability to deal with uke in the absence of contact.. but it all comes from contact work.

Of course that's just my opinion about my own training. I do have some reason to say this "primacy of contact work" idea about aiki may be right though:
When O-sensei wanted to firmly demonstrate the value of his art with people like Tenryu and Kenshiro Ab(b)e, he demonstrated what he can do with them through physical contact. (Like extreme versions of the kokyu demos he can be seen doing on stage and on the mat in his later years.) Whereas, when he tested Shioda for 9th dan, he did a non-contact test [Shioda's ability to perceive and utilize openings (or possibly even create them) was the deciding skill].

The picture I am painting here is that the non-contact things are an advanced manifestation of the skills that one has regarding physical contact with the attacker.

Jonathan,

What you wrote is totally reasonable, and I don't doubt that you are on the right track with your training.

I'm quite sure I have nowhere near maximized my abilities with physical contact. I don't believe one should be mastered before moving on to the next.

Maybe I should have said, the essence of aiki is not expressed in contact, but in pre-contact.

[Michael Varin]

And how did that training go? I cannot join my opponents movements when they're throwing at least 3 strikes per second.. Let's be realistic here. Pre-contact? How do I tactically move my entire body into a position where I can dominate them without getting knocked out in a second? I don't know anyone mentally or physically capable of doing that. I understand what you're saying but still, "listening to his movements" when he is trying to knock me out is not a good response. How do I join a movement when it is absolutely random and quick? I don't know what he's gonna throw, how to respond, or how to move my entire body in response to a simple attack? And this is sparring. Assume it's self-defense. Let's remove some motor skills and see how I respond then. I just doubt these kind of responses in these situations unless you're ready to get in that range and strike a little. That's just realism.

I don't know who you guys train against but please, tell me what you used. When you have a skilled fighter blitzing down the line throwing good, solid strikes at your face, what do you do? Let's not be too theoretical here. What have you done or what do you feel is a realistic response. I don't see any other logical response other than throwing hands until Aikido presents itself.

Aikido is and always will be a principle based art to me. There's Aikido in boxing. Use that. Also, how can you have 'pre-contact' and not be an attacker? What? How many violent situations have you been in? Aikido is absolutely an effective art if used pre-emptively but you can't expect to always unify your movements with Uke's.

I can't answer these questions for you. Go train.

Out of curiosity, how long have you been training?

What you describe sounds mostly like laziness and doubt to me. And trust me, those qualities still exist strongly within myself, so I'm not pointing the finger.

There is no easy way to address these things intellectually. Even if you understand it intellectually it won't help you in physical conflict.

You cannot premeditate and plot your actions or responses. That is the anti-aiki. It's not about strategy. It's not about timing.

All I can say is that you have to demand it of yourself.

P.S. Listen to what Kevin said. Build a strong martial foundation that you can fall back on (even dominate with), but if you are so inclined, train to develop the skills that you think are so elusive. They might be more mundane than you currently believe.

Let's be honest, contact, the clinch, can get you killed in many real world situations. There was and is a good reason to cultivate pre-contact skills. When people mean business they typically bring weapons, and well, you just can't wait till contact occurs or you might be finished.

Human flesh, no matter how structured, cannot withstand the contact of a sword while it is cutting. So what are you going to do? Stand there and die, or move and live?

[Demetrio Cereijo]

P.S. Listen to what Kevin said. Build a strong martial foundation that you can fall back on (even dominate with), but if you are so inclined, train to develop the skills that you think are so elusive. They might be more mundane than you currently believe.
This.

Let's be honest, contact, the clinch, can get you killed in many real world situations. There was and is a good reason to cultivate pre-contact skills. When people mean business they typically bring weapons, and well, you just can't wait till contact occurs or you might be finished.
You can clinch and go for the kill. Why it seems people always think of unarmed defender vs armed attacker?

[David Orange]

I have a few scenarios that I'm interested in running through. If I'm faced with ridiculously obvious one strike attacks with compliant attackers, I feel comfortable that I can handle them. But when it comes to someone blitzing straight down the line throwing straight punches, windmills, looping punches, etc., what are some appropriate responses?

Would you time the next attack and hopefully tenkan out of the way? Would you irimi with a good strike and then attempt a throw / lock? Please share your experiences or drills you've tried. I'm interested in transitioning from traditional attacks to more modern and realistic attacks.

Also, on a different note, how essential do you think atemi is in a street fight? Especially with this kind of aggressive attack. Would you use it merely as a distraction, a set-up, or a fight ender alone?

Logan, I'm always amazed at these kinds of questions because they were all addressed in the training system I came up in. When I visit other aikido schools, I see none of it, so I'm not surprised that people wonder how to deal with complex, aggressive attacks and others say you have to go outside aikido technique to handle it. Aikido is swordsmanship. Would anyone tell a swordsman, "You have to go outside swordsmanship to handle this situation?"

If aikido is learned as a martial art, there is a definite progression to the training that takes care of all your concerns.

Begin with the various grabs and learn the basic techniques.

Add punches and develop dexterity applying the techniques against various strikes.

Add kicks. (Note that this means that both partners, by now, are proficient at punching, striking and kicking, as well as all aikido waza.)

Add randori. First, shite randori, in which every technique is specified. Then go to jiyu randori, in which attacks and defenses are not specified. At this point, attackers should come from every direction and with every kind of attack and weapon. Attacks should be powerful and serious, but controlled. People trained in striking and kicking can stop their attacks without hitting the defender, though demonstrating that their attack can penetrate. At this level, aikido technique must be very clean and to-the-point: aikido is swordsmanship. When the attack comes, you cut it down. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, you should also have the control in aikido to bring any attack to a safe conclusion, meaning that the attacker's own movement is drawn irresistibly into a position where the attacker cannot move at all, cannot generate strength against the defender, is in some reasonable amount of pain, but is not injured. The aikido defender has total control.

Next, up the randori: jiyu chikara randori--free attacks and aikido applications with both partners using strength and resistance where applicable. If the attacker is not thrown in the instant of his attack, he doesn't throw himself but attempts a follow-through attack. In the yoseikan, this follow-up attack could be a second punch or strike, a footsweep, any kind of throw or grab, and it will likely lead to a grappling situation on the ground. There's plenty of aikido in grappling, too. It doesn't end when your feet are off the floor or when your back is on the floor. And in grappling, the original defender either prevails or "gets killed." Every encounter is a serious study of life and death. Exhaustion is a great teacher. Eventually, one learns to take every attacker off his feet and into a locked-down position in the first instant.

Now, if your school doesn't teach this way, it's because the teacher wasn't taught that way and the school can never teach you to reach that kind of level. But if you learn from someone who learned that way and teaches that way, you can apply aikido technique to any attack without going outside aikido technique--which is formless, anyway, so how can it be limited?

The only way to answer your question is through research in training with people who can do it. And that means, you have to ask yourself, how important is this to me? It might mean you have to give up your life and comforts and go somewhere where you can really learn it. And anyone who does go to a high level will naturally take any opportunity to learn anything else that can bring him or her greater understanding.

Aikido is a sword, but it must be sharpened against a stone. And that stone can be any of the other martial arts, such as karate, judo, jujutsu, kendo and kenjutsu. The best aikido has been sharpened with every stone.

Budo is great in that it allows us to experience losing and death, time after time, which gives us respect. And it allows us to work diligently on preserving life.

Best wishes in your search.

David

[AikiTao]

I can't answer these questions for you. Go train.

Out of curiosity, how long have you been training?

What you describe sounds mostly like laziness and doubt to me. And trust me, those qualities still exist strongly within myself, so I'm not pointing the finger.

There is no easy way to address these things intellectually. Even if you understand it intellectually it won't help you in physical conflict.

You cannot premeditate and plot your actions or responses. That is the anti-aiki. It's not about strategy. It's not about timing.

All I can say is that you have to demand it of yourself.

P.S. Listen to what Kevin said. Build a strong martial foundation that you can fall back on (even dominate with), but if you are so inclined, train to develop the skills that you think are so elusive. They might be more mundane than you currently believe.

Let's be honest, contact, the clinch, can get you killed in many real world situations. There was and is a good reason to cultivate pre-contact skills. When people mean business they typically bring weapons, and well, you just can't wait till contact occurs or you might be finished.

Human flesh, no matter how structured, cannot withstand the contact of a sword while it is cutting. So what are you going to do? Stand there and die, or move and live?

I've been doing Aikido for about a year and a half but I've trained in other styles for much longer. And I don't think my response makes me lazy. My concern lies in 'staying with their movement'. Sure, if they overcommit, that's quite possible but if you do have someone who has a decent knowledge of striking and doesn't give you that (a boxer, for example), how can you unify your movement with his?

Logan, I'm always amazed at these kinds of questions because they were all addressed in the training system I came up in. When I visit other aikido schools, I see none of it, so I'm not surprised that people wonder how to deal with complex, aggressive attacks and others say you have to go outside aikido technique to handle it. Aikido is swordsmanship. Would anyone tell a swordsman, "You have to go outside swordsmanship to handle this situation?"

If aikido is learned as a martial art, there is a definite progression to the training that takes care of all your concerns.

Begin with the various grabs and learn the basic techniques.

Add punches and develop dexterity applying the techniques against various strikes.

Add kicks. (Note that this means that both partners, by now, are proficient at punching, striking and kicking, as well as all aikido waza.)

Add randori. First, shite randori, in which every technique is specified. Then go to jiyu randori, in which attacks and defenses are not specified. At this point, attackers should come from every direction and with every kind of attack and weapon. Attacks should be powerful and serious, but controlled. People trained in striking and kicking can stop their attacks without hitting the defender, though demonstrating that their attack can penetrate. At this level, aikido technique must be very clean and to-the-point: aikido is swordsmanship. When the attack comes, you cut it down. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, you should also have the control in aikido to bring any attack to a safe conclusion, meaning that the attacker's own movement is drawn irresistibly into a position where the attacker cannot move at all, cannot generate strength against the defender, is in some reasonable amount of pain, but is not injured. The aikido defender has total control.

Next, up the randori: jiyu chikara randori--free attacks and aikido applications with both partners using strength and resistance where applicable. If the attacker is not thrown in the instant of his attack, he doesn't throw himself but attempts a follow-through attack. In the yoseikan, this follow-up attack could be a second punch or strike, a footsweep, any kind of throw or grab, and it will likely lead to a grappling situation on the ground. There's plenty of aikido in grappling, too. It doesn't end when your feet are off the floor or when your back is on the floor. And in grappling, the original defender either prevails or "gets killed." Every encounter is a serious study of life and death. Exhaustion is a great teacher. Eventually, one learns to take every attacker off his feet and into a locked-down position in the first instant.

Now, if your school doesn't teach this way, it's because the teacher wasn't taught that way and the school can never teach you to reach that kind of level. But if you learn from someone who learned that way and teaches that way, you can apply aikido technique to any attack without going outside aikido technique--which is formless, anyway, so how can it be limited?

The only way to answer your question is through research in training with people who can do it. And that means, you have to ask yourself, how important is this to me? It might mean you have to give up your life and comforts and go somewhere where you can really learn it. And anyone who does go to a high level will naturally take any opportunity to learn anything else that can bring him or her greater understanding.

Aikido is a sword, but it must be sharpened against a stone. And that stone can be any of the other martial arts, such as karate, judo, jujutsu, kendo and kenjutsu. The best aikido has been sharpened with every stone.

Budo is great in that it allows us to experience losing and death, time after time, which gives us respect. And it allows us to work diligently on preserving life.

Best wishes in your search.

David

Thank you for that response. Wise, indeed!

[David Orange]

Thank you for that response. Wise, indeed!

The thing is, these questions can be dealt with intellectually, but it has to be done far in advance of the situation--years in advance. If you think rationally about the reality of life and death, then preparation is the natural response. But "preparation" doesn't mean just going down to the strip mall and signing up for whatever is available. What's the saying? "Better one year with a great teacher than twenty years with a bad one?" It's amazing to me how many people, with a choice between a really powerful teacher or one who teaches pleasant BS, will choose the BS, time after time, art after art. If you want real quality, you have to seek it out.

Second, if you seriously pursue this, you will definitely run into people you cannot affect in any way. Think Minoru Akuzawa and Dan Harden. And I will throw in one you may not have heard of: google Edgar Kruyning.

These people have something that even years of the process I described above will not develop--or, it won't develop it consciously. The process I described will definitely take you far past the level of most mortal humans, but to perfect it requires conscious awareness and rational development, seeking the deeper reason why these people are immoveable when they want to be and unstoppable when they want to move. And this is not something they can really even tell you how to develop. Ordinary waza training will develop a lot of stability, strength and rootedness, but only deep training with an IS expert will develop what Ueshiba called Takemusu Aiki, in which techniques are generated spontaneously on contact. At that point, there's no need for intellectualizing because as Akuzawa Sensei says, "the body is the martial art."

However, look at William Gleason to see someone who took very good mainstream aikido and filled it out with deep knowledge of IS.

And look at O Sensei's students. Even O Sensei could not directly give this knowledge to anyone. They had to feel it in him and learn to produce it within themselves through thinking about it and practicing the methods he showed them in order to feel it within themselves. Without that knowledge, all "generic aikido" feels more or less the same. But with that element, it's a tiger made of fire.

The point is, no existing "art" or curriculum of study will give you much of anything but a return on your own effort. And if you're making effort like that, almost no teacher will be able to show you anything--not because of your "full cup" or ego or being "set in your ways." They won't be able to teach you because their bodies cannot affect your body. And then, poor soul, you'll be forced to search for only the very best to train with.

It's all a question of how badly you want the truth.

Regards.

David

[mathewjgano]

I have a few scenarios that I'm interested in running through. If I'm faced with ridiculously obvious one strike attacks with compliant attackers, I feel comfortable that I can handle them. But when it comes to someone blitzing straight down the line throwing straight punches, windmills, looping punches, etc., what are some appropriate responses?
...
Also, on a different note, how essential do you think atemi is in a street fight? Especially with this kind of aggressive attack. Would you use it merely as a distraction, a set-up, or a fight ender alone?

Sorry where this might be redundant, and I essentially have only a little more time in than you do, but since I couldn't make it to training today, I'd like to wrap my mind around this a little bit. Although, as scenarios go, the following isn't very specific.
The short answer is always, "it depends." A direct, sustained, and well-balanced attack will lay anyone out unless they can perceive it well enough to stop it in some way. My thinking is "simply" to track/match the movements of the other person with my own body with an aim for readiness in any direction (this means also paying attention to how I'm engaging my own body; I try to have a sense of engaging my whole body; literally feeling as much of my body as possible as I track the other person's); slipping their strength/force and adding to their momentum in an effort to overextend some part of their body and then to continue hyperextending that part until the attacker is immobilized or projecting his body far enough to give me room to run (if he drops straight down and for whatever reason I don't maintain irimi well enough, the attacker could just "bounce" into a takedown...and if they're aggressive, they will). "Wind milling" or straight blast becomes moot until the strike manifests, so I try not to think about that too much. I'm guessing this is somewhat in line with the single strike paradigm; if we can gain control at the initial moment of contact, the 2, 3 of a 1, 2, 3 disappears. The question becomes how to move as a cohesive unit, but that takes some time. In my school we are taught to think of the follow-up attack and more senior students will ask each other to try harder at making that "2" strike happen.
Atemi is crucial. I would use it to whatever extent I could. It could be a fight ender if the right opening presented itself to me (hopefully through my being able to create the opening in the first place...possibly through a "distracting atemi"). There's either an opening or not; beyond that it's a matter of how much of my body I can get behind it (and how much I need).
From the pedagogical standpoint, I really like David's description. My brief exposure to Tomiki Ryu showed a similar kind of pressure progression. Most schools probably use that basic principle, but it stands to reason the differences in emphasis will shape how it gets trained into the body's automatic responses. Basically, when it comes to training for better handling a relatively good fighter, you have to train with relatively good fighters. I remember reading about Bruce Lee describing how a group of martial artists thought he was amateur because he "only" knew 3 kicks. His response was that those 3 kicks could handle whatever they had. So, as always, there's what you know and then there's how well you can apply it to the spontaneous demands of the organic moment.
My freshly minted wooden nickel; hopefully not too disjointed. As usual, I'm being crawled on by my 2-year old (he's pretty aggressive and I am regularly overwhelmed :D).
Take care!

[David Orange]

A direct, sustained, and well-balanced attack will lay anyone out unless they can perceive it well enough to stop it in some way...

It's just like playing a musical instrument. If you can't play a fast, complex tune, unless you have some physical malformation or something, it's due to experience and practice.

On the other hand, playing Mary Had a Little Lamb ten million times will never get you up to playing Rachmaninov.

Extensive experience in fast, high-pressure randori (based on highly-polished kihon waza) will develop the ability to see whatever is coming even as it emerges.

As for things like "windmill" attacks, it's actually a good sign that the attacker doesn't know how to use his body and has no particular skill, or he would use much better techniques. So practice of the basics and development of those basics with speed, complexity and resistance will gradually develop the ability to read and outperform most attackers.

However, you only get out of it what you put in. No one is unbeatable and the best will always stay the best because they intellectually know that and rationally pursue every possible advantage in training.

Regards.

David

[Bill Danosky]

Anybody done much judo randori? Some really good judoka have better "aiki" than a lot of senior aikidoka. My son and I did a couple of years (back when I was still willing to work out that hard) and I can tell you some of them are very silky. They are able to match and unmatch your rhythm very easily, and time which foot you're leaning on. Kuzushi is always a focus, and there are very few direct throws above novice levels. Kano named it "the Gentle Art" for a reason. High level players are interesting to watch- some of them barely move.

One of the more interesting notions was the importance of the "Shita Hara", a brick-sized area of your lower abdomen that features strongly in some training regimens. Engaging it when you do throws is analogous to Tohei's "One Point", I always thought. Most throws are said to fail, if you don't manage to get your Shita Hara under the other player's. (And a million other reasons our coach was gleeful about pointing out.)

[Kevin Leavitt]

I agree with that Bill.

[David Orange]

I agree with that Bill.

The small bit of BJJ I've experienced is an excellent system, based on meaningful principles and progressive development of skills. And it came from judo, but evolved. However, your breadth of experience transcends "martial arts," entirely.

And thank you and yours on this day and every day.

David

[Bill Danosky]

The small bit of BJJ I've experienced is an excellent system, based on meaningful principles and progressive development of skills. And it came from judo, but evolved. However, your breadth of experience transcends "martial arts," entirely.

BJJ guys are BIG on technique, in my experience. Anybody that thinks waza doesn't hold up under live resistance should roll with some BJJ practitioners. They always have a short, medium and long game in mind.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yes David it does. I just spent a wonderful evening in Dakar Senegal introducing them to BJJ. What is interesting is it is a different experience than normal for me. I typically do not get asked to go to Judo schools in the west to teach ne waza. However, in Dakar, the are very open to learning and exposing themselves to new and different methods/techniques apparently.

I spent some time explaining that Jiu Jitsu is not different than Judo that it is the same...only the rules and assumptions are sometimes different, which causes us to approach our training differently.

I did not teach them jiu jitsu from a sport BJJ perspective, but ne waza that would be very useful to them in a Judo competition, but also is based on solid foundations of self defense.

So we spent time on some basics and, of course, did not cover things like the 50/50 guard, berimbolo, inverted guard on dela riva guard, which are all great things, but things I don't consider foundational.

thanks for you thoughts!

[Kevin Leavitt]

BJJ guys are BIG on technique, in my experience. Anybody that thinks waza doesn't hold up under live resistance should roll with some BJJ practitioners. They always have a short, medium and long game in mind.

The good ones do. I am still developing my "game" and it changes over time. Some guys have very superficial or linear games that do not have many branches, sequels, or options.

YOu have to train, train. train wtih kata and with very precise and detailed training to commit the smallest details to muscle memory. you become very efficient and economical in montion and spent energy. You then develop Optoins...and then think two or three moves ahead with all those options stored up and ready to be the answer if you need it.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Hi Kevin,

Have you experienced Senegalese Wrestling

[Kevin Leavitt]

yes, a little. with my friend that is the Senegalese National Laamb Champion.

[David Orange]

I did not teach them jiu jitsu from a sport BJJ perspective, but ne waza that would be very useful to them in a Judo competition, but also is based on solid foundations of self defense.


I'm very impressed by the constant attention to making the other fellow bear all the weight, and if he does it with muscle, he's finishing himself with every move. Must be why I always got beaten so badly in judo...

[Bill Danosky]

We took a Haganah FIGHT class last week, and it was pretty interesting. Being a Krav Maga offshoot, they have a good "martial intent". There's not much finesse at the level they were instructing us (we white-belted it that night), but I did absorb enough to apply some of the concepts. Someone mentioned their general plan was to contain the attack, dissolve the violence, achieve your objectives, then spit them out.

Guy attacks you, you pull him in, elbow his face, throw a bunch of knees, step on his ankle and push him down. I'm thinking, "Now this is something I can improve upon." We (aikidoka) have that finesse. Nothing I learned there had any elements that compared to the precision we have, but they are refreshingly frank about what we're all doing there.

I'm not going Steven Seagal or anything, but if those Haganah guys had some of my waza, they would be.;)

[Kevin Leavitt]

what i personally have found that i like about the israeli systems is their violence of decisive and forward action. what i dont like is the assumption over the degree of control you have in a situation. did they start u off in failed or bad postions...balance broken...u are mounted...a gus is on your back...you atr kn his Guard?

once we understand the violence of action and how to disrupt your opponent...we then must increase the level of failure on our part by puttin ourselves in bad positions and learn how to protect ourselves and recover to a better position

[PeterR]

I still say that my Aikido took a quantum leap forward after I did a little Judo training. Lessons learnt there were not that difficult to put into an Aikido context.

[jonreading]

what i personally have found that i like about the israeli systems is their violence of decisive and forward action. what i dont like is the assumption over the degree of control you have in a situation. did they start u off in failed or bad postions...balance broken...u are mounted...a gus is on your back...you atr kn his Guard?

once we understand the violence of action and how to disrupt your opponent...we then must increase the level of failure on our part by puttin ourselves in bad positions and learn how to protect ourselves and recover to a better position

In working out and speaking with our Haganah group, they [also] emphasize decisive, aggressive, pressing movement. Even their small arms and edged weapons work is pressing (i.e. a foward-stepping draw and press of the weapon). The instructor is accomplished in BJJ, judo and he teaches basic combat at McPherson (I think). He also happens to be about 6'3" and 225lb. so that helps too. I like his program and his approach - he is working to make the program more real for smaller persons without significant physical advantages.

[AikiTao]

Great responses. I definitely need to put more of this to the test and be more patient and allow everything to manifest in it's own time but upon reading the 'hormonal induced stress chart', I still have my concerns. I don't think anyone realistically think they can pull off a wrist lock when someone's coming at you with bad intentions... or so i hope not unless you are maybe in clinching range. Even then, there's better choices in the clinch as far as self-defense goes. That's why I find atemi to be absolutley necessary, or an experience of some sort of striking art. I know quite a few practitioners who would absolutely freeze the first time they were hit because of a lack of realistic training. I love the idea of takemusu. I know my training has only begun and with more training and experience, I'll understand the principles more and be able to effectively apply them to combat. I love all the thoughts so far.

These videos are also relevant. Check 'em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdlTG2lIwA0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZyUub1Jn3Y

I feel like there's too much compliance in the second one but I love watching their style and the way they incorporate more realistic attacks.

[Bill Danosky]

..I don't think anyone realistically think they can pull off a wrist lock when someone's coming at you with bad intentions...

That must've been a tough admission. Go do 25 Kote Gaeshis and 25 Ude Garamis and get back with me. If you haven't changed your mind by then, switch schools.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

These videos are also relevant. Check 'em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdlTG2lIwA0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZyUub1Jn3Y

I feel like there's too much compliance in the second one but I love watching their style and the way they incorporate more realistic attacks.

I don't know if the uke are incompetent or act as if they are. What make these clips interesting to you?

[Anjisan]

Great responses. I definitely need to put more of this to the test and be more patient and allow everything to manifest in it's own time but upon reading the 'hormonal induced stress chart', I still have my concerns. I don't think anyone realistically think they can pull off a wrist lock when someone's coming at you with bad intentions... or so i hope not unless you are maybe in clinching range. Even then, there's better choices in the clinch as far as self-defense goes. That's why I find atemi to be absolutley necessary, or an experience of some sort of striking art. I know quite a few practitioners who would absolutely freeze the first time they were hit because of a lack of realistic training. I love the idea of takemusu. I know my training has only begun and with more training and experience, I'll understand the principles more and be able to effectively apply them to combat. I love all the thoughts so far.

These videos are also relevant. Check 'em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdlTG2lIwA0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZyUub1Jn3Y

I feel like there's too much compliance in the second one but I love watching their style and the way they incorporate more realistic attacks.

In a real street situation I am going to use utemi! I personally believe that it is not emphasized more is because many sensei don't want you to become reliant on it at the expense of being able to execute the techniques and connect with the attacker. Once you recognize which openings grease the wheel to give the appropriate response for the moment you can apply many techniques that may not have seemed like options initially. Oh and when you apply concepts such as leading so you have them grab you when and where you want them to and not where they do, yes you can definitely apply a wrist-lock to someone with bad intentions-so satisfying!

[Kevin Leavitt]

I think this 11 seconds says it all about knife fights and intent and why kote gaeshi doesn't work well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ah_0gia4A0

[Demetrio Cereijo]

I think this 11 seconds says it all about knife fights and intent and why kote gaeshi doesn't work well.
Exactly.

However many people around are doing things like the ones shown in the clip Logan recently linked thinking they are training in knife defense.

[dps]

The first seconds of a a fight is a bridge to using your martial art.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6CdH6xHcgo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0hJveJ8Hp0

[Kevin Leavitt]

The problem is that very few people take the time to really understand the dynamics of knives. We have learned most of our "customs" courtesy of Kali/Escrima which I think is very good stuff, but primarily based on a dueling culture. This paradigm seems to perpetuate our martial cultures.

The issue we have, which I believe is aptly illustrated in the 11 second video is that when the knife is revealed, we are already way behind the power curve. we must first process that the knife is there, orient on it then decide what action we need to take. That is only our side of the fight. Our opponent has already decided, in most cases, his action and is employing it.

The only exception may be if we take pre-emptive action or maybe he has shown his cards and is waving it around foolishly with no real initial intent to use it other than to wield power or something. In those cases, yes, maybe we can enter first (act) before he does and then we can establish some sort of control, which could appropriately lead to a kote gaeshi which is an excellent control technique for a knife. provided that we have already off balanced and have some sort of physical control of our opponents balance or center prior to that technique.

I am not a fan of kote gaeshi as a primary control mechanism. That is, as a technique that relies on timing our grab, much of what I saw in the videos that Logan posted. IMO, that only works in a compliant of semi-compliant environment where two people are essentially dueling.

In aikido terms, I think irimi to be important. That is, you enter, disrupt and control his center, then control the weapon, and disarm. Iriminage I think is a very good thing for this, if it is done correctly. (or aspect/principles of it.

Our emotions tell us to control the weapon first. I personally believe the reality...from my training experience....demonstrates that we have already lost that battle and the damage we will receive has already happened before it happens. We must emotionally let go of that, and disrupt the whole of his attack by gaining control of the person, then the weapon. It is difficult to time the weapon and will most likely put you in a negative vortex trying to reach for it.

The video shows the victim heading to the fetal position...we do not want that...it is certain death. However, when your senses are overwhelmed by the stimulus of the attack (Observation/Orientation phase)...this is exactly what we will do if we are not trained and conditioned properly to handle a violent and overwhelming attack.

It is not easy to accept this, which is why I believe most people practice the way they do. Everybody wants a solution to a horrible problem and psychologically we like to revise bad stories to have happy endings. This is my theory why we train so incorrectly when it comes to edged weapons.

Hope this helps!

[dps]

And one more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCRS97r7tlY

[Kevin Leavitt]

Thanks David. gotta love Tony as much as I hate to admit it!

[aikijean]

I have a question. Why atemi is never used when you see a demo of knife attack ? I know if I get in a fight with someone using a knife I will be cut, I have to accept that. I am ok with the fact that I must do something to disrupt the attacker not the attack before thinking of disarming. A good punch to the nose should be enough to take the balance of the attacker then run or if I cannot run do a technique or something to disarm. That is why I would like to see a video where the expert shows a hit in the face or somewhere else. I saw a systema video where the instructor hit the knee of the attacker with his foot before doing anything that is what I am talking about.
Never been attacked by a knife I do not what would I do but am I in lalaland when I say the first thing I should do is to hit the assaillant by any means at my disposal.
Is there any video of knife attack where it is shown to hit before doing anything ? I never saw one but I surely never saw every video made on that kind of attack

[Kevin Leavitt]

No your not in lala land...but I think the problem is that the first few seconds you are processing/orienting on what is going on. The links to the Tony Blauer vids posted above talk a lot about the issues from Startle/Flinch (which is simply a theory BTW), and Hicks law.

The startle flinch thing is also an emotional/fear driven event as you are getting stabbed, so I think it primarily depends on many things.

For me, a punch to the nose is a very specific thing, much like Kote Gaeshi. It may or may not be appropriate...you may or may not be in a position to do it effectively.

Just like Kote Gaeshi...sure a punch or kick will work and is appropriate if that is the thing to do.

You can "what if it" all day long. What you really need to do to understand the dynamics is simply "suit up" and have some one give you some very non-compliant and realistic attacks and work through it over and over. Key word is realistic and not the crap you see in many SD videos.

[aikijean]

Kevin I understand what your are saying, the best way to find out what you can do or not is to suit up and try to approch the real thing even if possible with the emotions unleached during a real attack . I just would want to see some video where the instructor prones the role of atemi during the first seconds of the encounter, a punch to the nose, a kick to the knee... anything and see what would happen not just do a technique supposed to work.
Even in a suit up exercise you cannot do the real thing because the suit up guy will not really feel the hits or almost not so he will not stop attacking, pain or shock not being present to stop him.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Even in a suit up exercise you cannot do the real thing because the suit up guy will not really feel the hits or almost not so he will not stop attacking, pain or shock not being present to stop him.
Use the minimum amount of protective equipment.

[Bill Danosky]

I have two old knife holes in me already and have met my quota of stitches. But I have learned some things along the way. My first priority in a knife assault would be getting my two hands on their one knife hand/arm and grounding that point somewhere. Everything else can be dealt with after that.

Break the knife if you can, or at least kick/throw it away. You want it out of the picture, asap. Because if the tables turn it can come back to haunt you. Until it's out of action, you can't use chokes or anything that's not immobilizing the knife and going for debilitating damage. IMO.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Kevin I understand what your are saying, the best way to find out what you can do or not is to suit up and try to approch the real thing even if possible with the emotions unleached during a real attack . I just would want to see some video where the instructor prones the role of atemi during the first seconds of the encounter, a punch to the nose, a kick to the knee... anything and see what would happen not just do a technique supposed to work.
Even in a suit up exercise you cannot do the real thing because the suit up guy will not really feel the hits or almost not so he will not stop attacking, pain or shock not being present to stop him.

Spear suits are not too bad for doing this kinda training. Redman suits are too padded as you mention, and you will not get an appropriate response. The Spear Suits (we also called them Blauer suits), transmit force and pain fairly well and you get decent responses without much risk to serious injury.

Here is a video of a training segment I did with some of my guys in Afghanistan a few years back. It is not weapons, but we were training the ground fighting aspect of a fight. You can pretty much go all out, but we limit full on kicks to the head from standing because they are simply too dangerous. The idea is to keep your feet between your opponent and your head, which the guy on the ground does a good job of doing. Keep in mind that he is not simply laying there trying to pull guard, but stand back up if he can. The guy standing doesn't want him back up so engages to keep him on the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-rZAR6DH20

I don't have any video of knife work, but we would do the same type of training with a knife and they are a game changer when introduced into the fight.

[Kevin Leavitt]

The thing with reality training is you have to employ constraints in training. You simply cannot train all out NHB. You have to have constraints and limitations.

If you do them correctly though, you can train safely, while encouraging the development of the skills/reactions that are desired.

[Kevin Leavitt]

I have two old knife holes in me already and have met my quota of stitches. But I have learned some things along the way. My first priority in a knife assault would be getting my two hands on their one knife hand/arm and grounding that point somewhere. Everything else can be dealt with after that.

Break the knife if you can, or at least kick/throw it away. You want it out of the picture, asap. Because if the tables turn it can come back to haunt you. Until it's out of action, you can't use chokes or anything that's not immobilizing the knife and going for debilitating damage. IMO.

I agree your priority is to gain control of the knife. However, I think the dynamics of training require you to break this down into a smaller subset of problems that need to be solved. Gaining control of the knife requires that you have control of yourself and your opponent in some way. In my experiences, you need to disrupt the attack and then work to gain control of the knife.

There are a number of things in this dynamic from you pre-emptively entering to off balance and disrupt, to you in a very bad postion and then disrupting, orienting on the knife, and gaining control of it.

I think this portion of training is left out way too often and we just "let it go" and say "priority is to gain control of the knife"...and only practice that phase.

Not sure I'd spend much time on breaking a knife...not sure how you'd do that, your not gonna break my Cold Steel. Also even if you did, it is still a weapon and can inflict damage. I'd rather focus on the control.

I would simply ask you to consider about the small details you need to do that lead to control of the knife...that is all I am really saying. Again, I agree, getting it out of the picture as fast as possible is paramount.

Agree also, I am not too worried about chokes or other restraints until the knife is under control an in my possession.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

I don't have any video of knife work, but we would do the same type of training with a knife and they are a game changer when introduced into the fight.
Here are some:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udwE_C7x3DA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llP1_PB2_JE

[sakumeikan]

Here are some:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udwE_C7x3DA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llP1_PB2_JE
Dear Demetrio,
Watched the first vid clip.In the scenario its one guy with knife the other withAk 47?
Why did Mr Ak 47 not simply do a Harrison Ford job on the knifeman ala Raiders of the Lost Ark?In a word shoot the guy !!! Cheers, Joe.

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Dear Demetrio,
Watched the first vid clip.In the scenario its one guy with knife the other withAk 47?
Looks a M4 to me

Why did Mr Ak 47 not simply do a Harrison Ford job on the knifeman ala Raiders of the Lost Ark?In a word shoot the guy !!! Cheers, Joe.
Maybe he has run out of ammo, weapon malfunction, jammed round....

[Kevin Leavitt]

In the first video with the M4, I am not really sure what the training objective was....however, I think it does illustrate the concept of aliveness on behalf of the guy with the knife. He attacks in a more realistic way than is seen in many training methodologies. Again, I am just not sure why the guy with the rifle did what he did. Could be that these guys are students and are new at doing this and simple have not figured this out yet. For me, the point is that it is possible to train fairly realistically.

In the second video. It demonstrates a drill we do in MACP. You never know when the knife will become a part of the fight. Again, the level of training of these students is very low...so their responses are not the best example of what to do. However, in our methodology, we provide a framework of failure and then they build success around that. So, while the responses they are choosing are certainly no optimal...the training conditions encourage a paradigm shift and begin to train correct responses through "negative" reinforcement.

I think the videos illustrate that you must gain control of the opponent before you can disarm. Both individuals, fail to gain control of their opponent and therefore, continue to loose until they will do so.

[Bill Danosky]

In video #1, the guy with the impact weapon (the AR) is wrestling a knife wielder. He needs to create some space and start simulating some bone breaking.

[jurasketu]

The ambush sucks. I played paintball for many years. We KNEW ambushes or hidden attacks were out there. We were ALERT, looking for them. And yet - still you would get whacked out of nowhere. The usual result was you were out, no chance to do anything. Most ambushes are like that. If you get surprised, you lose. Period. End of story.

That being said... If you were lucky and survived the initial attack, you had to MOVE and counterattack immediately - essentially enter and attack hard and fast with everything you had.

Now, over time we developed tactics to counter ambushes. Getting the ambusher to reveal himself (or herself) early and increase the odds of surviving the initial attack was always good. I was influenced by Audie Murphy, the most decorated US soldier in WWII, who stated in his autobiography that he would approach potential sniper positions from afar out in the open and invariably induce the sniper to get impatient and take the shot early and miss.

Another tactic we liked was to guess the most logical ambush positions (by thinking like an ambusher) and essentially flank those positions to dislodge any potential ambusher. Feigning indifference by appearing to be moving straight into the potential ambush but then veering off at the last moment can also cause the ambusher to spring a much lower percentage attack thinking their moment was slipping away.

As far as knives go... My practice with "realistic" knife attacks - ambush or no - leaves me feeling naked and vulnerable. Avoid the knife and strike hard probably would work given the experiments we tried (obviously we didn't actually strike each other hard...). That's what the Systema guys show. It seems like the ONLY thing to try against someone wielding TWO knives... But those only work if you read/see/feel the attack coming...

Good Aiki probably wouldn't hurt of course...

[sakumeikan]

The ambush sucks. I played paintball for many years. We KNEW ambushes or hidden attacks were out there. We were ALERT, looking for them. And yet - still you would get whacked out of nowhere. The usual result was you were out, no chance to do anything. Most ambushes are like that. If you get surprised, you lose. Period. End of story.

That being said... If you were lucky and survived the initial attack, you had to MOVE and counterattack immediately - essentially enter and attack hard and fast with everything you had.

Now, over time we developed tactics to counter ambushes. Getting the ambusher to reveal himself (or herself) early and increase the odds of surviving the initial attack was always good. I was influenced by Audie Murphy, the most decorated US soldier in WWII, who stated in his autobiography that he would approach potential sniper positions from afar out in the open and invariably induce the sniper to get impatient and take the shot early and miss.

Another tactic we liked was to guess the most logical ambush positions (by thinking like an ambusher) and essentially flank those positions to dislodge any potential ambusher. Feigning indifference by appearing to be moving straight into the potential ambush but then veering off at the last moment can also cause the ambusher to spring a much lower percentage attack thinking their moment was slipping away.

As far as knives go... My practice with "realistic" knife attacks - ambush or no - leaves me feeling naked and vulnerable. Avoid the knife and strike hard probably would work given the experiments we tried (obviously we didn't actually strike each other hard...). That's what the Systema guys show. It seems like the ONLY thing to try against someone wielding TWO knives... But those only work if you read/see/feel the attack coming...

Good Aiki probably wouldn't hurt of course...

Dear Robin,
I digress here from the subject matter.You mention Audie Murphy, one of my childhood heroes.He was a great cowboy actor especially when he co starred with Dan Duryea .Audie's biography should be mandatory reading by everyone.He was dirt poor , joined the army,and became the highest decorated soldier ever.He made Rambo look like a big girl's blouse.Audie died in a plane crash and he is buried in Arlington Cemetery. Cheers, Joe.

Ps In Glasgow he was nick named the 24hr cowboy [a play on his Christian name Audie ie Audie/all day.Glasgow venacular say AW DAY instead of All day while jawing.

[jurasketu]

Audie was definitely an amazing guy. :)

[AikiTao]

I said the attacks in the video I posted were more realistic. They still telegraph and Uke is way too compliant in my opinion BUT I do believe they are headed in the right directions throwing hooks, haymakers, more straights to the face, etc. All technique aside, I think they are a good example of how many, if considering self-defense, should be changing some of their training methods.

As far as knife defense, I consider it to be completely theoretical. I don't believe in 'catching the arm'. wielding the knife. In my own training, even with no adrenaline altering my motor skills, I get cut almost every time and many times, in a deadly spot. Imagine someone wields a shiny knife with and you can see the intention in their eyes. I don't think you're gonna get a kotegaeshi as easy as you think. It's more than likely going to turn into a scrappy blood fest. Here, like someone else mentioned, atemi is more than likely necessary.

Great video on this subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E61jnJe_1SI

[aikijean]

Good video, the guy talks reality but yet another video where the expert does not show or teach atemi. Why is that ?

[mathewjgano]

Great video on this subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E61jnJe_1SI

I really like his point about how some folks will close that space; often trying to touch nerves to overwhelm the judgment processes (even though they're not always explicitly aware of this). For me (and my personally low-level of training), the biggest issue I keep trying to wrap my mind around is the fact that many people will try and get in your face as if that weren't an invitation to get popped. I don't want to escalate first unless I'm convinced I'm going to be attacked because it's hard to dial the situation back at that point. On the other hand, I don't want to let anyone inside my "fight interval" (maai); I have kids and I'm not going to let someone potentially take me away from them. This is a big reason why I place so much weight on the mental/perception side of things and try to read as much about a person through how they behave, as well as finding ways to create distraction. After that it's all about the physical training we put into our body; how we go about resolving that connection we've been forced into. This is why it's important to train from all possible points and circumstances in the timeline; from slight advantage, to equal footing, to various states of disadvantage. Focusing on any one of those at the expense of the others would seem to create the potential for imbalance. On some level we can address these in standard keiko, but it requires a degree of spontaneity allowed. In the Shodokan method, this starts with the use of feints in randori/jiyuwaza. In other sytems it's addressed differently, if at all...which is why it's important to explore different schools/approaches at some point.

Good video, the guy talks reality but yet another video where the expert does not show or teach atemi. Why is that ?
Who knows, probably have to ask him. Emphasizing something else, perhaps?

[Demetrio Cereijo]

Good video, the guy talks reality but yet another video where the expert does not show or teach atemi. Why is that ?

I'd suggest Dog Brothers "Die Less Often" series or Karl Tanswell's "STAB" for a more atemi based approach to sensible knife defense.

[BAP]

attackers are usually aggressive and very seldom compliant... but atemi does help deal with both those conditions. :)