Aikido does not work at all in a fight.

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Kevin Leavitt]

Rule #1: there is no such thing as a fair fight! :)

[Dirk Hanss]

Rule #2: there are either two winners or two loosers.

Here we have two winners, I guess
Kevin got post #1000, due to all his bjj tricks ;) I don't say ugly as there is rule #1
Jorge gave the respond no 1000 as post 1 was the original questions.

And we have even some more winners, as nobody else has now to care, if he could get the magic number. No restless sleep or unconcentrated work in fear of not getting it :D

Perfect aikido and it works. In my view this is the prove.

Any comments for starting the race to get the 10 000?


Dirk

[Kevin Leavitt]

Damn! never thought about 1000 RESPONSES! I was focused on 1000 post! Ah...aikido and the illusive paradigm at work! Thanks for pointing that out Dirk.

[Jorge Garcia]

Wow Dirk,
You're smart! You really double made my day! It turns out I was the official 1000th poster and I wasn't even trying. Sorry Kevin. I'll lend you my trophy anytime you want to look at it. :D

Best wishes,

[dps]

Reaching over 1000 posts. Does this mean the thread is over, or do you guys have enough stamina to go to 2000 posts? :)

[Budd]

What was the topic again? Oh, yeah . . . . Yes, it does.

[Mark Freeman]

oh look...we are at 1000! :) couldn't resist! timing and Ma'ai are everything.

You've had your eye on the target for quite a long time, but, good technique Kevin ;)

[Dajo251]

this is the thread that never ends yes it goes on and on my friends, when we started posting in it we didnt know what it ment then we realized that this is the thread that never ends.........

[dps]

Post #1

On 10-17-2000, 05:14 PM

"joeysola posted,

"I have competed in both boxing and wrestling and I am now training in brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. I have watched many No Holds Barred competitions, like the UFC, and it is clear to me that Aikido and it's techniques and it's way of training do not prepare anyone to actually fight. I know that Aikido practitioners talk a lot about concepts like spirituality, harmony...etc. but I also hear people talk about how it is a pratical means of self defense. Aikido does not have practical striking techniques or any REAL matwork at all. I would like to know how Aikido can be used as self defense if you cannot grapple or strike.
Interesting question, what do you guys think?

[Guilty Spark]

The more I practice Aikido the more I'm understanding how striking isn't the end all of self defense.

I'm of the opinion that you don't need to hit someone to hurt them. More than a few techniques I've seen would result in some serious injury if don't without regard for the other persons safty. Broken wrists, arms, dislocated shoulders, concussions. It sounds crude but if you break someones hand wrist or arm their going to have a hard time punching you regardless how skilled at striking they are. Same goes if you land them on their head and knock them out. NOT striking someone comes with two important pros in my book. Your not busting up your hand AND legal wise (correct me if i'm wrong) your on more stable ground. "I never hit him"

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yea if you can get those arms and wrist in a position to break it works. I have never been able to do a very good job at doing this full speed. arm bars yes. Sometimes kotegaehsi, but the amount of effort and commitment to get them to break in a real fight can be alot.

I think it is more important to learn how to position yourself and control uke than anything else. If you can do that, then you are able to do the other things. the catch is if you can control this much, do you really need to invest the effort it takes to break something?

Yea hitting with your fist can really ruin your day!

[Dirk Hanss]

NOT striking someone comes with two important pros in my book. Your not busting up your hand AND legal wise (correct me if i'm wrong) your on more stable ground. "I never hit him"
Not a correction, it is mostly easier, if you can say "I never hit him". It is just not always sufficient.
I was just told about an incident, where a tiny female jujutsuka was attack by a huge strong man. She was sued and fined for violently injuring him.
The (German) judge admitted a self defense situation, but as the guy had two broken arm and one broken leg, he could not understand the SD situation still applicable, when the third bon was broken. Well obviously one after the other and not an unlucky breakfall.

Dirk

[Guilty Spark]

I was just told about an incident, where a tiny female jujutsuka was attack by a huge strong man. She was sued and fined for violently injuring him.

Unfortunately as silly as this is, thats the society we live in now.
If someone tries to rob (and possibly kill) you and you defending yourself end up really hurting him, well guess what.... you're going to have to pay for his injuries. Thats probably subject to argument but I think there are ample cases where injured criminals while breaking the law get hurt and turn around and sue someone.

Right out to lunch.

[Aristeia]

t.
I was just told about an incident, where a tiny female jujutsuka was attack by a huge strong man. She was sued and fined for violently injuring him.

Paging Jorge....

[Jorge Garcia]

Paging Jorge....

Michael, you're funny!

Was that judo or BJJ she was using? Didn't it say a Jujutsuka? Better find out what art that was!
By the way, a tiny woman can take down a larger man, just not all tiny women.

Best wishes,

[Aristeia]

I'm here all week, try the veal.
You're right about the percentages thing. We just differ on which arts give the best percentages for the person concerned.

[Jorge Garcia]

I think that's right.
Best,

[MikeLogan]

Ok, ok, finish with your celebrating. This thread won't post itself to 2000, you know.

michael.

[Richard Langridge]

Heh, it doesn't need to.

[statisticool]

I suspect you're confusing Bas's well known humour with reality.


The DVD was marketed as instructional, not comedy.

[topan tantudo]

Hi cheer everyone

Well in my point of view, Aikido is more than just for a show off. Once you have mastered Aikido like O-sensei, you dont have to grab your opponent hands to put him/her on the mat. just follow the Ki rhytem. so i think it would be better you practice or study the aikido first then you can judge it.

Cheer up everyone.
Kimi wa kimi desu!!

[Richard Langridge]

Kimi wa kimi desu!!

"The feeling is the feeling" ?

[drew-jitsu]

Hi cheer everyone

Well in my point of view, Aikido is more than just for a show off. Once you have mastered Aikido like O-sensei, you dont have to grab your opponent hands to put him/her on the mat. just follow the Ki rhytem. so i think it would be better you practice or study the aikido first then you can judge it.

Cheer up everyone.
Kimi wa kimi desu!!


therein lies the paradox. O'sensei achieved his proficiency by ACTUALLY FIGHTING!!! Then later in life advocated not fighting. In order to achieve the proficiency O'sensei attained, you HAVE TO FIGHT against fully resisting opponents. And as far as your "Ki rhytem" (sic), try using that against a non complient uke, and you will get your arse handed to you. This is why aikido 99% of the time will not work in an actual physical altercation the way it is currently trained. I kinda find it funny that the aikido community actually had to develop a quote to defend against it's effectiveness, i.e. "My aikido works, yours does not." Aikido in my opinion does have useful applicable techniques. They just need to be trained in a manner that makes them effective. It's obvious by the examples set by O'sensei that aikido can be effective. Why the aikido community chooses to be passive aggressive in it's philosophy is its downfall.

[Hardware]

therein lies the paradox. O'sensei achieved his proficiency by ACTUALLY FIGHTING!!! Then later in life advocated not fighting. In order to achieve the proficiency O'sensei attained, you HAVE TO FIGHT against fully resisting opponents. And as far as your "Ki rhytem" (sic), try using that against a non complient uke, and you will get your arse handed to you. This is why aikido 99% of the time will not work in an actual physical altercation the way it is currently trained. I kinda find it funny that the aikido community actually had to develop a quote to defend against it's effectiveness, i.e. "My aikido works, yours does not." Aikido in my opinion does have useful applicable techniques. They just need to be trained in a manner that makes them effective. It's obvious by the examples set by O'sensei that aikido can be effective. Why the aikido community chooses to be passive aggressive in it's philosophy is its downfall.

At the risk of feeding the troll...

Sure, there are lots of Aikidoka who would be ineffective in real combat but that can apply to any martial art. Within any style or art, there will be some junior ranks who can consistently overcome senior ranks as well.

There is no competition or sparring in Aikido for a number of reasons, a predominant one being that the technques can be so devastating that to a certain extent, to practice them, the Uke must comply (ultimately in order to avoid serious injury).

Concessions, for lack of a better word, are made in all martial arts. In Karatedo I'm sure they avoid punching each other full force in the face and we don't judge that because of that, their art is ineffective...

[drew-jitsu]

At the risk of feeding the troll...

Sure, there are lots of Aikidoka who would be ineffective in real combat but that can apply to any martial art. Within any style or art, there will be some junior ranks who can consistently overcome senior ranks as well.

There is no competition or sparring in Aikido for a number of reasons, a predominant one being that the technques can be so devastating that to a certain extent, to practice them, the Uke must comply (ultimately in order to avoid serious injury).

Concessions, for lack of a better word, are made in all martial arts. In Karatedo I'm sure they avoid punching each other full force in the face and we don't judge that because of that, their art is ineffective...


No troll here. I just noticed that the thread was at the bottom of the page, and I didn't want it to die. However, regarding your concessions as to going all out, there are arts that do go 100% i.e. BJJ and Judo. Also, anytime someone mentions Ki throws, I find it to be the epitome of delusional.

[Talon]

Drew do you ever grab anyone's fingers at twist them in Judo/BJJ, or crank the wirsts in a quick movmement while the person is moving in the opposite direction? If the answer is NO then I don't see how BJJ/Judo compare to alot of Aikido techniques. Non complience to those and fingers/wrists are broken. No thanks, I'd rather roll out of it....

[drew-jitsu]

Drew do you ever grab anyone's fingers at twist them in Judo/BJJ, or crank the wirsts in a quick movmement while the person is moving in the opposite direction? If the answer is NO then I don't see how BJJ/Judo compare to alot of Aikido techniques. Non complience to those and fingers/wrists are broken. No thanks, I'd rather roll out of it....

Have you ever tried to grab someone's wrist or fingers in an actual altercation? It's kinda hard. And yes, there are people in BJJ that do try wrist locks. They are most of the time unsuccessful.

[Hardware]

No troll here. I just noticed that the thread was at the bottom of the page, and I didn't want it to die. However, regarding your concessions as to going all out, there are arts that do go 100% i.e. BJJ and Judo. Also, anytime someone mentions Ki throws, I find it to be the epitome of delusional.

BJJ and Judo do not go 100% on any technique designed to destroy a joint or limb or choke someone out to unconsciousness.

[drew-jitsu]

BJJ and Judo do not go 100% on any technique designed to destroy a joint or limb or choke someone out to unconsciousness.

correct. we tap out before the damage is done. However, if we don't, we suffer broken limbs or unconsciosness. The point being is that we do go 100% in attaining the submission, but stop before it's fully applied. It's a foregone conclusion that if the technique is brought to fruition it will result in physical disability.

[ksy]

therein lies the paradox. O'sensei achieved his proficiency by ACTUALLY FIGHTING!!! Then later in life advocated not fighting. In order to achieve the proficiency O'sensei attained, you HAVE TO FIGHT against fully resisting opponents. And as far as your "Ki rhytem" (sic), try using that against a non complient uke, and you will get your arse handed to you. This is why aikido 99% of the time will not work in an actual physical altercation the way it is currently trained. I kinda find it funny that the aikido community actually had to develop a quote to defend against it's effectiveness, i.e. "My aikido works, yours does not." Aikido in my opinion does have useful applicable techniques. They just need to be trained in a manner that makes them effective. It's obvious by the examples set by O'sensei that aikido can be effective. Why the aikido community chooses to be passive aggressive in it's philosophy is its downfall.

hi drew nichols,

For your info, I'm on my 3rd week of aikido training and i can tell you that aikido works just fine. I was playing with my dog the other day and when he jumped at me, i did a 180% tenkan and it fooled him good. Another 6 months and i'll ask my sensei to teach me the "2 pinky fingers of death" technique. Then and only then, will i quote "my aikido works, yours doesn't". I have to have my standards, y'know?

Thru aikido, i am now part of this 1000+ (and running) thread. the universe flows thru me.


rgds,
ksyuan

[mathewjgano]

try using that against a non complient uke, and you will get your arse handed to you. This is why aikido 99% of the time will not work in an actual physical altercation the way it is currently trained.
This seems a bit simplistic to me. I know scrappers; they've been my best friends all my life. I've done quite a bit better than succeeding only 1% of the time when we've tested each other out, and I've only trained in Aikido. You can argue about different approaches to Aikido perhaps, but I'm an example of how you seem to be making a bit of an assumption...or are at least not speaking clearly and precisely enough.
Aikido in my opinion does have useful applicable techniques. They just need to be trained in a manner that makes them effective. It's obvious by the examples set by O'sensei that aikido can be effective. Why the aikido community chooses to be passive aggressive in it's philosophy is its downfall.
That's still a pretty large brush you're painting with. The Aikido community is a pretty diverse group of people; different people seeking different things in their study of Aikido. Certainly it's true that what one focuses on will affect that which one becomes most proficient at.
You're saying that Aikido works but that Aikidoka in general don't know how to use it effectively. I haven't met most Aikidoka or even trained at a large number of schools: but the two I have chanced upon develop their level of resistance based on what they know you can do; by feeling you out. Perhaps it's coincidence, but it makes me wonder how much experience you have with Aikido. I've heard a lot of Aikido is "empty" or not lively, but I'm not convinced it's as extream as you make it sound...but, as I said, I have a limited frame of reference.
Take care,
Matt

[Raspado]

I was one of the large contributors to this thread and am most honored to see it still going strong.

[dps]

I was one of the large contributors to this thread and am most honored to see it still going strong.
How old were you when it started and how old are you now? :p

[Guilty Spark]

I hate to constantly use the army as examples but you gotta go with what you know right :)

In the military one of my biggest pet peeves is constantly hearing people compare their trade (job) against someone Else's job. We're tougher we walk everywhere. We're tougher we use tanks. We're more important we fly. With out me your nothing. Guys can have less than a year in and their already talking trash about everyone else. Concentrate on your own job and let other people do their thing.

Drew, Mike, this isn't to slight you or your style, I'm mostly speaking in more general terms. One of the biggest things about Internet jujitsu arguments/debates (especially including Brazilian jujitsu it seems) is that there is a constant argument about how effective their art is. How other arts fail to stack up against it. How their art is going to work in real life where others won't. How other arts won't last in a cage fight. I can't help but think who cares? If your tough do you need to go around telling people that your tough? No it should be obvious. If your martial arts is the best thing since sliced bread why tell people? It should be apparent.

Using this thread for example, Aikido does not work at all in a fight, thats a great discussion because it's a popular (important) argument among the martial arts community. Why then does it ultimately degrade into an aikido vs judo/jujitsu/TKD/karate etc.. thread? The title isn't aikido does not work against other martial arts, its working in a fight. The chances of two martial artists meeting up and going at it style vs style in the street is pretty slim. Ya someone on here is going to have a hockey bag full of examples, exception to the rule though.
Aikido- some jerk comes up and grabs you in a bar and you pin them or defend yourself without hurting them.

If you want to debate style vs style open up a new thread, as far as I can tell this thread is about aikido working in a street fight against someone who probably
A) Doesn't know said person knows aikido/martial arts
B) Doesn't know martial arts themselves.

Grabbing a wrist in a fight is very difficult, agreed, that said I've blocked a punch with my arm and slid my hand down to their wrist and grabbed it. Every situation on the ground is different, you could fill up this web site with examples of aikido working and aikido not working.

Sometimes I get the feeling that martial artists almost need validation on their art. They need the MA community to say YES your martial arts works, yes it's great. Some people seem to need even more seeming to be happy only when someone admits "yes your martial art is better than mine, you win".
Again mike and drew this isn't against you specifically, but truth be told I've found the JJ community, perhaps more so in their "greener members" seems hooked on pointing out other martial arts short comings against their own.

I hope I'm not reading too much into this thread. Apples and oranges as far as I'm concerned. One is good for vodka, the other for pie. I think the main reason behind the whole aikido not working in a fight stuff is because you don't really start learning aikido until your black belt. To me it's like white to black belt = this is how to do the technique. Black belt and above = this is how to make the technique work.

Defending yourself against someone without hurting the attacker is a hell of a lot harder than defending yourself aganst them without concern for their saftey.

[DonMagee]

Just to play devils advocate cause I'm really bored today.

Drew do you ever grab anyone's fingers at twist them in Judo/BJJ, or crank the wirsts in a quick movmement while the person is moving in the opposite direction? If the answer is NO then I don't see how BJJ/Judo compare to alot of Aikido techniques. Non complience to those and fingers/wrists are broken. No thanks, I'd rather roll out of it....

Yes, I have done wrist locks, toe holds, finger locks, etc. They are extreamly hard to get and usually I only use them against less skilled opponents (although fingers usually only when screwing around with friends as its really unsportsman like to bend peoples fingers without knowing they are ok with you trying). I have never had a wrist lock work from the standing position (Well I shouldn't say never, I think I got an ikkyo once). Every successful wristlock I have performed has been on the ground (tipically used as a setup for a sweep). The more I spar, the more my success rate goes up.

Personally to me aikido is not all about the deadly wrist lock. If you seek the wristlock in a fight, your not thinking properly. The real secret to making anything work is to seek to take your opponents balance. If you are going to talk about how badass anything is, or what will end a fight, its all right there. Of course once you do that, you have a lot of options depending on the situation. I personally perfer good throws over standing locks anyday. I've had a good harai or ogoshi end a fight even on the mats.

Remember, nothing hits harder than the earth.

The more I practice Aikido the more I'm understanding how striking isn't the end all of self defense.

I'm of the opinion that you don't need to hit someone to hurt them. More than a few techniques I've seen would result in some serious injury if don't without regard for the other persons safty. Broken wrists, arms, dislocated shoulders, concussions. It sounds crude but if you break someones hand wrist or arm their going to have a hard time punching you regardless how skilled at striking they are.

Unless they are Rich Franklin. He beat a man for 13 minutes with a broken hand. He said he knew 2 minutes into the first round his hand was broken. Here's a funny video with him talking about it
http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=MultiMedia.Detail&gid=2331

Here's a good article on that as well http://www.ufc.com/index.cfm?fa=news.detail&gid=2329 My favorte part :

"I remember clipping my hand and making a fist a couple of times and realizing that something was wrong," remembered Franklin two days after the bout. "And then I could feel the bones slipping over on top of one another. That's when I grabbed my hand to feel it."

He didn't like the answer his hand gave him, but he didn't stop fighting. As the round progressed, with seconds feeling like hours, he admitted that he was "trying to rationalize what's going on in my head."

That's the former math teacher in him -- look at a problem, analyze it, and solve it.

"Something's not right with my hand," he thought, but Loiseau wasn't going to step back in a corner and wait for Franklin to recover or take a breather. The punches kept coming, and so did the kicks, each passing his head with a whoosh. Franklin didn't give up his poker face either, continuing to pound Loiseau with all his limbs, not just the good ones. Once you show the first sign of weakness, a world-class fighter will pounce with extreme prejudice; Franklin couldn't let that happen.

The horn sounded. End of round two. Franklin went back to his corner after pitching a virtual shutout in the previous ten minutes.

He informed Gurgel, a fighter himself, someone who is no stranger to the pains that are as plentiful as the cheers in this sport, that he was fighting with only one good hand.

"He kind of looked at me like I was complaining, and I wasn't complaining," chuckled Franklin. "I was just giving him an informative statement so he could corner me properly."

Gurgel only seemed to hesitate for a millisecond before blurting out "then use the elbow." In a combat sport, when a cornerman has 60 seconds to be doctor, counselor, confessor, and strategist, there's no time for pleasantries. Watch a boxing match sometime, and see what a cutman tells his fighter when his eyebrow is split to the bone.

"It's okay, it's not that bad."

Gurgel took his fighter's mind away from the injury and back on the fight. He knew Franklin wouldn't quit. He also knew that despite what happened in the previous two rounds, Loiseau was still dangerous. So he had to get his fighter ready to fight again.

"Keep throwing punches," said Gurgel. "It'll go numb."

My point is, never stop fighting until the fight is done. Just because you throw the guy doesn't mean he's done. Don't expect the wrist lock to end it. It might end a argument between to posturing males. But when someone is really out to hurt you, I think you are going to have to seriously hurt them to end it (unconciousness or death).

I only have one other comment to make. I see a lot of people saying there is not sparing in aikido because it is too dangerous. I think that is bull. I submit that there are styles that have competition. I also submit that nothing done in aikido is more dangerous than techniques done in MMA. Your sparing would be restricted. No grabbing hair, eyes, fingers, etc. But I firmlly believe that if you are good in a restricted enviroment, you will be even better in an unrestricted enviorment. A lot of people counter saying that the sparing teaches you to not use the deadly techniques (eye gouges, fingers, groin, etc). But I counter that most people are not really doing these in non sparing enviorments and thus still not trained to properly use them.

The real problem with sparing for most people is they look at it as a concpet of winning and losing and they are afraid to 'lose'. Some are afraid to look bad, some are afraid to hurt others, some are afraid they might get hurt. Of course there are thoughs who use the reason that O'Sensei did not want competition in his art. But sparing is not competition. Obviously aikido is not about contest, but for you to learn to take the balance of a person in a real conflict, you need as close to real resistance as you can get. (In my opinion)

And that's my turn at devils advocate for the day.

[DonMagee]

Defending yourself against someone without hurting the attacker is a hell of a lot harder than defending yourself aganst them without concern for their saftey.

I just wanted to quote that last part again. It's very very true. It is only easy when you outclass your opponent.

[dps]

The real secret to making anything work is to seek to take your opponents balance.

What effect does physically unbalancing your opponent have on their mind? I am not sure if I am asking this in the right way but, is our physical balance a basic need to survival that we will try to maintain at the cost of not so important needs or wants.

[DonMagee]

Good question. I dont know the answer. What I do know is I have never met a person that can attack effectivly while off balance. Without balance you can't throw a hard punch or kick, you can't prevent yourself from being thrown, and you can't throw anyone yourself (unless of course they give up their balance in the act of throwing you). I'd say on the untrained person balance is a basic survival instinct. As you get trained you learn how to deal with fear and learn that there are things you can do while falling down. Judo guys are good at this, they can work reversals and twist and turn themselves to prevent landing in ippon. Its just a matter of getting comfortable with it like anything else.

So a person could ignore their loss of balance to continue their attack, but they are going to be very ineffective and if the loss of balance goes to far, they are going to fall down. I think it is safe to say that without balance there can be no good attacks. This is why I get frustrated at new people who play the martial arts chess game. You show them something slowly and that gives them time to keep their balance and they will say "Couldn't I just punch you here, or arn't you open for this here". They dont understand that when you actually do the technique full speed that even if they do throw the punch it is of very little concern to me. Usually some friendly sparing shows them.

[Guilty Spark]

I just wanted to quote that last part again. It's very very true. It is only easy when you outclass your opponent.
Exactly. Easier for a grown man or woman to defend themselves against a teenager, much more difficult than against someone their own "class" for lack of a better word.

It's easy to forget that the goal of aikido is to protect both the defender AND the attacker. Makes applying aikido on the street way more tricky.

What effect does physically unbalancing your opponent have on their mind?

Perhaps when you physically unbalance someone they loose their consintration/train of thought and focus?
They go from wanting to hurt you to a more self preservation mode and they focus on getting their balance back?

[dps]

Thank You Don,
That was an excellent answer. "Couldn't I just punch you here, or arn't you open for this here". That brings back memories of when I first started.

They go from wanting to hurt you to a more self preservation mode and they focus on getting their balance back?

Thank You.
The way you said it is closer to what I was thinking than what I wrote.

[Budd]

This is why I get frustrated at new people who play the martial arts chess game. You show them something slowly and that gives them time to keep their balance and they will say "Couldn't I just punch you here, or arn't you open for this here". They dont understand that when you actually do the technique full speed that even if they do throw the punch it is of very little concern to me. Usually some friendly sparing shows them.


I think this should be a primer for every martial artist when at a seminar or learning something new for the first time.

[dps]

As you get trained you learn how to deal with fear and learn that there are things you can do while falling down.
Could you say that balance and fear are two main principles Aikido.

[DonMagee]

Could you say that balance and fear are two main principles Aikido.

I would say only the balance really matters. The fear is inconsequential (I hope I spelled that right). It does not matter if they are afraid to fall down or not. The only thing that matters is the must recover their balance to launch an effective attack. I think taking someone's balance or letting them give up their balance is the most important core element you can learn in any martial art. I think this is even more important in aikido because of how percise the techniques must be in order to work. I really didnt' start understanding this until judo. This is because a lot of my partners in aikido would 'give it to me'. In judo I found out the hardware as I got counter-thrown every time I tried a throw until I learned how to properly take my partner's balance. Now I apply this to every aspect of my martial arts training. It doens't matter if it is bjj, judo, aikido, boxing, or a tickle fight with my wife.

[dps]

It doens't matter if it is bjj, judo, aikido, boxing, or a tickle fight with my wife.

The true Way of Harmony. :)

[Man of Aiki]

Good points about it's more important to take the attacker's balance than anything else.

And it's quite true that nothing hits harder than the ground, as a poster stated above.

The biggest problem many critics of Aikido have with it is that they never get to 'see' it pulled off an an untrained person.

If a really good Aikidoka pulled a full power, no-holding-back-whatsoever breath throw on an attacker who came at him full speed, full power (which is the only kind of 'demo' these critics would accept as authentic) and that attacker is untrained in ukemi, the chances of the attacker getting seriously injured are greatly multiplied.

We live in a culture where people sue others for minor bumps and bruises. What will happen if some guy gets thrown hard with a shiho-nage, lands wrong and separates his shoulder?

The fact is, by it's very devastating nature, Aikido has to be done slowly and gently with untrained people, this is why all the 'hey man show me your aikido - gee that's weak and slow' criticisms are missing the point.

Not that many people are competent enough to do many Aikido techniques on someone else full power with no holding back to begin with.

First they have to have the technical skill and the physical ability and then on top of that they need a highly trained uke to practice with.

Most Aikidoka don't reach that level, either technically, physically, or training-partner wise.

When you are involved in a martial art involving manipulation of joints, joint locks, and throws that send the other person's entire body flying through the air, there are going to be plenty of checks and balances before you reach a level where you can go full speed, all out, holding nothing back on a training partner who is skilled enough to take your high-level full power Aikido and get up unhurt.

So instances where a BJJ asks an Aikidoka to 'prove' to him that Aikido would work since the BJJ guy has no training in ukemi, if the Aikidoka accepts this challenge, mentally he realizes he's got an untrained person here, going full power and all out is automatically out of bounds.

Face it, a martial art that teaches it's students at the highest levels to take an attacker's entire body and slam it to the floor with incredible force or to lock up joints and take people down hard doesn't translate itself well to "Let me go half speed here and not really go full power so I don't hurt you, Ok?"

Unless it two Aikidoka who have reached a high level of proficiency at both the technique and receiving ukemi, there will always be holding back, not going as fast or as hard as they really could.

And when Aikidoka try to 'prove' to untrained people who have no ukemi skill that Aikido 'works' the first thing these people sense is that.........the Aikidoka is holding back.

manofaiki

[TigerJK]

I have competed in both boxing and wrestling and I am now training in brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. I have watched many No Holds Barred competitions, like the UFC, and it is clear to me that Aikido and it's techniques and it's way of training do not prepare anyone to actually fight. I know that Aikido practitioners talk a lot about concepts like spirituality, harmony...etc. but I also hear people talk about how it is a pratical means of self defense. Aikido does not have practical striking techniques or any REAL matwork at all. I would like to know how Aikido can be used as self defense if you cannot grapple or strike.

There is no good response to a thought like this. I don't even see this leading to a constructive conversation unless someone changes the subject.

Besides, I can say
Boxing, wrestling, and BJJ are useless in real life. I now train in "PullMyFinger" (M16A2 Carbine .223 with scope mount) and MMA is useless against it.

[DonMagee]

Good points about it's more important to take the attacker's balance than anything else.

And it's quite true that nothing hits harder than the ground, as a poster stated above.

The biggest problem many critics of Aikido have with it is that they never get to 'see' it pulled off an an untrained person.

If a really good Aikidoka pulled a full power, no-holding-back-whatsoever breath throw on an attacker who came at him full speed, full power (which is the only kind of 'demo' these critics would accept as authentic) and that attacker is untrained in ukemi, the chances of the attacker getting seriously injured are greatly multiplied.

We live in a culture where people sue others for minor bumps and bruises. What will happen if some guy gets thrown hard with a shiho-nage, lands wrong and separates his shoulder?

The fact is, by it's very devastating nature, Aikido has to be done slowly and gently with untrained people, this is why all the 'hey man show me your aikido - gee that's weak and slow' criticisms are missing the point.

Not that many people are competent enough to do many Aikido techniques on someone else full power with no holding back to begin with.

First they have to have the technical skill and the physical ability and then on top of that they need a highly trained uke to practice with.

Most Aikidoka don't reach that level, either technically, physically, or training-partner wise.

When you are involved in a martial art involving manipulation of joints, joint locks, and throws that send the other person's entire body flying through the air, there are going to be plenty of checks and balances before you reach a level where you can go full speed, all out, holding nothing back on a training partner who is skilled enough to take your high-level full power Aikido and get up unhurt.

So instances where a BJJ asks an Aikidoka to 'prove' to him that Aikido would work since the BJJ guy has no training in ukemi, if the Aikidoka accepts this challenge, mentally he realizes he's got an untrained person here, going full power and all out is automatically out of bounds.

Face it, a martial art that teaches it's students at the highest levels to take an attacker's entire body and slam it to the floor with incredible force or to lock up joints and take people down hard doesn't translate itself well to "Let me go half speed here and not really go full power so I don't hurt you, Ok?"

Unless it two Aikidoka who have reached a high level of proficiency at both the technique and receiving ukemi, there will always be holding back, not going as fast or as hard as they really could.

And when Aikidoka try to 'prove' to untrained people who have no ukemi skill that Aikido 'works' the first thing these people sense is that.........the Aikidoka is holding back.

manofaiki

I just wanted to point out that everyone I know who trains in bjj learns forward and backwards rolls, front, side, and back breakfalls. They can take any throw you want to put on them. In fact I've seen bjj guys that take falls better that judo guys (Because they dont concentrate so much on not landing in ippon but rather landing in a good defendable position). Yet, I constantly hear from my judo instructor and my aikido instructor about how they dont know how to fall. (Which I find funny because they compliment my falls, and the guys at my bjj club fall just as well as I do). Maybe this is exclusive to my club, but I doubt it. Especially with all the ex-judo guys I see at bjj competitions. They are not going to take a nice looking roll out of your attack, but if you throw them, you can expect a good breakfall and continued action until you get them to tap.

[statisticool]

Have you ever tried to grab someone's wrist or fingers in an actual altercation? It's kinda hard.


In gloved not-real-life-matches with rules that say to not grab fingers, I can see how grabbing fingers could be difficult.

[Guilty Spark]

Cats know how to fall, unless you drop them from a high enough a height :)

I remember watching some guy from the crowd step into a cage and KO the professional fighter.

There are too many variables at hand to decide what will work and what won't.
Skill of the attacker, skill of the defender, survival instinct, aggression of the attacker, the all important luck.

[mathewjgano]

Cats know how to fall, unless you drop them from a high enough a height :)
I remember learning that a cat is less likely to hurt itself from a slightly higher height than a lower one, even though both heights were somewhat significant. After a certain amount of time the cat relaxes and is able to absorb more impact with less damage to bones. I think it had to do with animals falling from roof-tops or something like that.

[Chris Birke]

Standing Armlock In MMA (http://tinyurl.com/f6rje) I think someone mentioned this sort of thing didn't happen because it was too violent, or banned, in MMA (fake fights).

[DonMagee]

That was cool to watch. thanks for the link to that vid.

[xuzen]

Standing Armlock In MMA (http://tinyurl.com/f6rje) I think someone mentioned this sort of thing didn't happen because it was too violent, or banned, in MMA (fake fights).
That was a nasty waki-gatamae or Hiji-shime. This technique scare the hell out of me. My elbow has been sprained many times when some over-zealous newbs put them on me.

Boon.

[Jorx]

Yep. Waki-gatame is not banned in MMA. It is very rare however as that technique is hard to master without a lot of resistance training and that can go very wrong :freaky:

[Pougee]

After reading nearly all 43 pages of this thread, it is apparent that some people are worried about the art they are learning. At the moment I am not learning Aikido, but I'm very keen to give it a try. You have to ask yourself why you want to do it. It would seem Aikido is more than just a self defensive art. Its a way of life, a different view on things helping you to become a better person. I myself am an open minded person. I believe that the Ki is real, and that these old forms, spiritually can achieve what they state. But I am questioning myself why do I want to learn Aikido and what do I want to get out of it. And to be perfectly honest I want the knoweledge that If I'm ever in a situation where I have to protect myself or others I want to be able to do it confidently. I have also have some damage done to me awhile back now which has never fully healed. Its has caused me to have no balance and little coordination in some aspects. Can I look towards Aikido to improve the way my body moves. I play a lot of squash also. I dont know if anyone has every seen it played or played it themselves. I just get the felling Aikido would improve my game with reaction times, short thinking into shot play and all round movement on the court. Also another big factor of squash, being more aware of your opponent.

After reading this thread It is obvious that Aikido is very effective in self defense. And that learning BJJ with Aikido do really go hand in hand. I know this is sort of off topic, but this thread has evolved into something more than the simple question "Does Aikido work in fights". I hope some people maybe be able to shed some light onto my view on things.

Also is a massive thread that needs to be revived :D

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

Yep. Waki-gatame is not banned in MMA. It is very rare however as that technique is hard to master without a lot of resistance training and that can go very wrong :freaky:

Isn't this an extremely common Shodokan randori technique?

[PeterR]

Isn't this an extremely common Shodokan randori technique?
Yes - for sure one of my favorites.

But I tell you without good control and good attitude it can be a real bastard of a techniuqe.

[Kevin Leavitt]

YES!, YES!

It took over a year! But it is baaaack! I knew it would be one day!

goes to show you...all you need is a little patience and time when studying aikido! :)

Waki gatame...why would it be illegal? many competitions disallow small joint manipulations but shoulders and elbows are open season for whatever position you capture them in. I cannot recall any MMA rules or grappling that disallow a shoulder on elbow lock.

Welcome Maynard!

if you took the time to read all these post and are STILL looking for the answer to those very relevant and legitmate concerns...you probably will not get them answered any better here!

Anyway, it is good to ask, and think about, and discuss for sure!

Welcome again, and look forward to the ensuing discussion!

YES...it is back! :)

[dalen7]

and it is clear to me that Aikido and it's techniques and it's way of training do not prepare anyone to actually fight.

I know that Aikido practitioners talk a lot about concepts like spirituality, harmony...etc. but I also hear people talk about how it is a pratical means of self defense.

Aikido does not have practical striking techniques or any REAL matwork at all. I would like to know how Aikido can be used as self defense if you cannot grapple or strike.

- As far as not preparing the to fight, it depends on perspective.
Most people want to be cool and show they are better by putting the other down. - we do this not only in physical fights but in words as well. Its an old mentality, but one that can change...is there a need to fight. - for me it is helping me (that is Aikido) to better understand to not need to fight. Having peace inside will attract peace outside. See this prepares for the fight in that it ended before it even started, pretty good self-defense if you ask me.

But as for satisfying the ego (ones identity in an object, role, story, etc) its a bummer. Because in the 'mind' the story is 'Ha, Im still better...if you would just fight I would beat you.'

See the story equates beating someone in a pulp as victory and does not understand that controll over ones actions and attitude is more of a victory and less of 'animal' extinct and yet another step in evolution. Dont feel bad if you or anyone has that desire to prove oneself...heck I still face that temptation at times to prove myself...but then I ask myself why I really want to.

So that answers the first 2 questions quoted above.

As far as its techniques not working...well, let me put it this way.
When I am put in 'ikkyo' I feel it...Nikkyo, sankyo, name it, I feel it - and sometimes I feel it a little to much.

Also, you learn to go with the flow or you will be 'broke' if you resist.
Thats why it looks fake, because someone who has wised up (or been taught as in Aikido) will know to 'follow' as not to resist and have your wrist or elbow snapped in half.

True that the uke appear to overdue it at times...but thats neither here nor there - or rather it does not detract from the fact that there is pain that can be inflicted.

Now is it practical in a fight? I think it depends on the circumstance completely. If you are going against a skilled fighter...you probably will need to be skilled as well, or your responses wont be quick enough or accurate enough.

Also about strikes, many of the movements allow you to strike...and we practice fake striking, as Im sure the uke doesnt want a bloody nose each time we practice. So yes that part is fake. But if you want to be bad boy, strike and kick and during your aikido moves...the opportunity will present itself. - Fact is there is not a martial art above another...and this is also not great for the ego who wants to have the 'best' and be the 'best' by kicking and putting down the most people. And again, the nature of Aikido is not really in that direction, but again, I suppose it can be.

I do like the fact that Im not using my body as a human shield to protect myself, and trying to follow what nature is doing by flowing with what is happening.

Anyway...

Peace

Dalen

[Cyrijl]

This thread is great. 7 years after is creation it continues to haunt and annoy the posters and lurkers of aikiweb.

When we all return to dust and robots have taken over the world, some ancient self-animated blackberry will come on an post "What people don't realize is X,Y,Z...."

Two add more thant just this comment, we just got an aikidoka in my bjj class. He is not flimsy or weak or delusional as is often purported to be the case of aikidoka outside of this sanctuary. Like everything in life, you have to be reasonable about your perceptions, goals and return on investment.

[DonMagee]

So that answers the first 2 questions quoted above.

As far as its techniques not working...well, let me put it this way.
When I am put in 'ikkyo' I feel it...Nikkyo, sankyo, name it, I feel it - and sometimes I feel it a little to much.

Also, you learn to go with the flow or you will be 'broke' if you resist.
Thats why it looks fake, because someone who has wised up (or been taught as in Aikido) will know to 'follow' as not to resist and have your wrist or elbow snapped in half.

The question is not does this lock break your wrist, or can an eye gouge really blind someone. The answers are obvious. We all know what can happen when you put a lock on and don't stop, you break something or tear something. The question is, can you actually get those moves to work on a person who is resisting. Not resisting after you have the lock, but resisting from the moment the conflict starts. Can you get it to work on a guy trying his best to knock your block off. Can you get it to work on fast guys, slow guys, big guys, little guys, trained guys, noobs, etc.

Once you answer that question, the next is, how reliable is your technique. Does it work 10% of the time? 20% of the time? Only against noobs, only against bigger people, only against slower people? Is there something else that is higher percentage that you can use in the same place?

In bjj I can do all sorts of cool stuff to noobs. However a lot of this cool stuff is very hit or miss and requires a lot of setup to work on a guy with even 6 months of bjj. I then have to ask, is it worth all this work and setup when they are vulnerable to a much higher percentage attack? Am I just trying to look cool?

I have to say it is not if the style works, it is if you train it to work. The more I read this article http://www.judoinfo.com/tomiki2.htm the more I realize that without aliveness, you are mostly spinning your wheels.

[Erik Calderon]

I've always believed that it's the man that makes the art, not the art that makes the man.

Erik Calderon
http://www.shinkikan.com

[dalen7]

Once you answer that question, the next is, how reliable is your technique. Does it work 10% of the time? 20% of the time? Only against noobs, only against bigger people, only against slower people? Is there something else that is higher percentage that you can use in the same place?

In bjj I can do all sorts of cool stuff to noobs. However a lot of this cool stuff is very hit or miss and requires a lot of setup to work on a guy with even 6 months of bjj. I then have to ask, is it worth all this work and setup when they are vulnerable to a much higher percentage attack? Am I just trying to look cool?

Well, for me, it is hopefully to never have to fight.
Personally, I dislike grappling...I like hard strikes, kicks.
Infact Aikido is really border line, and had I not incorporated it into my spiritual journey, I would have considered Aikido grappling and stayed away.

I pointed out that I dont have 'experience' in martial arts besides my new quest in aikido...but when attacked by a 'judo' guy (my brother in law) it ended with him getting his face kicked in (literally) and a follow up with a punch...his judo did him no good. His intent to harm someone based on bullying was not enough. (a knee almost landed him in the face had I not held back to not hurt him)

When younger I wrestled against a varsity wrestler who was good but thought that strength did not play as much at technique. I was 145lbs and benched 250lbs and he couldnt get me pinned, or rather keep me pinned...and also I did not punch or kick - which in a real situation would have ended it to.

So again, it depends on where you are at.
Yes if I want to kick butt, I would stay away from all grappling (actually maybe I would learn bbj just to know what my 'enemy' if I wanted to call them that, knows)

But alas, I have chosen the path of peace ;)
So Aikido is a true challenge stylistically, because I naturally react in a thai boxing manner despite never training in it.

- but to help answer the question you posed - I believe I mentioned earlier, however Aikido would seem to work against the average person who is hot tempered yet not a trained fighter. (bar brawls, etc)
If you have a fast boxer...not really sure.

Peace

DAlen

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I naturally react in a thai boxing manner despite never training in it.

Wow! Dalen has genetically-encoded Muay Thai!

I got stuck with DNA-Kyudo. :( All I can do is draw a bow really, really slowly and hit a target five feet away.

[Roman Kremianski]

Now is it practical in a fight? I think it depends on the circumstance completely. If you are going against a skilled fighter...you probably will need to be skilled as well, or your responses wont be quick enough or accurate enough.

Fact is: I have never seen an Aikido techniques performed against a jab. Or a solid cross. This leads me to believe Aikido is best used on untrained people who lunge at you with their attacks. Hence why we always step in with shomen/yokomen/tsuki...

Well, for me, it is hopefully to never have to fight.
Personally, I dislike grappling...I like hard strikes, kicks.

So did the many Karateka who challenged the Gracies. It's a shame their hard kicks and punches weren't possible on the ground.

Funny thing is, I have less of an urge to fight ever since I started MMA then when I was doing Aikido. My uke cooperated with my in Aikido...or gave me far too much generous energy to work with. I never felt satisfied after a throw because I knew he made it possible for me. In MMA, my "uke" did not give me any room to breath. Every successful throw/pin/submission I got rewarded my mind as I could feel myself improving, realistically. Why would I want to fight someone or prove my skills when I do it against resisting opponents on the mat almost everyday?

Just like how people think all guys who compete in UFC/Pride are thugs who like to smack people around on the street. I think after fighting a grueling match against a world class opponent in the ring/cage, the LAST thing they want or need is to get involved in something on the street. Read up some wise words by the legendary Bas Rutten regarding fighting on the street.

Most of all, have fun and learn. Grappling/striking for me is play time, not fight time. Find the art that's right for you. If it's Aikido, then that's excellent. Finding your peace doesn't necessarily mean you have to do the most peaceful martial art around.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

Nice post, Roman. Especially because, curious, I googled "Bas Rutten Quotes" and got this:

http://zine.infinitemma.com/index.php?page=Bas_Rutten_Quotes


Stephen Quadros: They tell me getting kicked by Mo Smith is like getting hit by a baseball bat at 85 mph.

Bas Rutten: No. I don't think so.

Heeheeheehee.

[jennifer paige smith]

After reading nearly all 43 pages of this thread, it is apparent that some people are worried about the art they are learning. At the moment I am not learning Aikido, but I'm very keen to give it a try. You have to ask yourself why you want to do it. It would seem Aikido is more than just a self defensive art. Its a way of life, a different view on things helping you to become a better person. I myself am an open minded person. I believe that the Ki is real, and that these old forms, spiritually can achieve what they state. But I am questioning myself why do I want to learn Aikido and what do I want to get out of it. And to be perfectly honest I want the knoweledge that If I'm ever in a situation where I have to protect myself or others I want to be able to do it confidently. I have also have some damage done to me awhile back now which has never fully healed. Its has caused me to have no balance and little coordination in some aspects. Can I look towards Aikido to improve the way my body moves. I play a lot of squash also. I dont know if anyone has every seen it played or played it themselves. I just get the felling Aikido would improve my game with reaction times, short thinking into shot play and all round movement on the court. Also another big factor of squash, being more aware of your opponent.

After reading this thread It is obvious that Aikido is very effective in self defense. And that learning BJJ with Aikido do really go hand in hand. I know this is sort of off topic, but this thread has evolved into something more than the simple question "Does Aikido work in fights". I hope some people maybe be able to shed some light onto my view on things.

Also is a massive thread that needs to be revived :D

Hi Maynard,
I only have a brief moment to write today but I would like you to know that I am spiritually like minded, as you.And I don't only believe aikido works in fights, I have proven it in my own radical little life. I would love to tell you more, talk about how and why, and also answer your other questions in depth. from the expereince of my training. Answers that are superficially, Yes, yes, yes, and ........yes!
Don't you fret! You can and will improve your bodies connective routes and re-achieve cooridination on a level that will encourage you to play to your fullest again!
I agree. This is an amazing thread that would be lovely to revive. I'll look for you again in the next day or two. Please check back!!!!
Jen Smith

[dalen7]

Wow! Dalen has genetically-encoded Muay Thai!

I got stuck with DNA-Kyudo. :( All I can do is draw a bow really, really slowly and hit a target five feet away.

Well, thats pretty cool...my whole thing is trying to achieve the ability to be 'still' (patient?) in my actions so that I can be more aware of the moment. - Kyudo seems like it would be quite a good practice for such aspirations... I have heard of this art (after reading its description, not by name.)

The best to you in your practice.

Peace

Dalen

[philippe willaume]

Fact is: I have never seen an Aikido techniques performed against a jab. Or a solid cross. This leads me to believe Aikido is best used on untrained people who lunge at you with their attacks. Hence why we always step in with shomen/yokomen/tsuki...


hello roman
i think your point is very valid but i would say your conclusion may be a tad of the mark.
I would say that what you describe can be applied to a kick or attempt to grab. it is not so much the technique, it is the delivery

if your opponet is centered (ie nor over extending his stike), which i understand you mean by solid. nothing is going to work until you take his centralisation away.
The only way I know is via atemi used as a one time counter
(and it is easier said than done, but at least you do not need to be
significantly better in aikido than he his in whatever he is doing).
someting irimi or irimi tenkan based.

You can try to tenchin away & grab all you life, unless you are someone of the caliber of Obata sensei (from toronto) fat chance of anything happeneing before a re jab, a cross, a kick, a spinned chassé or breing ran down for lacking space to back up.

phil

[dalen7]

The only way I know is via atemi used as a one time counter
(and it is easier said than done, but at least you do not need to be
significantly better in aikido than he his in whatever he is doing).
someting irimi or irimi tenkan based.

phil

irimi is the one thing along with all things surwari I dont like in aikido.
But Im trying to learn the benefit of it all.

Now ikkyo I totally dig - against a punch, maybe not...but against silly people that want to 'grab' at you because they are 'judo' king...I think it would work charmingly enough. :)

Peace

Dalen

[DonMagee]

irimi is the one thing along with all things surwari I dont like in aikido.
But Im trying to learn the benefit of it all.

Now ikkyo I totally dig - against a punch, maybe not...but against silly people that want to 'grab' at you because they are 'judo' king...I think it would work charmingly enough. :)

Peace

Dalen

Just be careful that the guy is not a skilled judo man, or you might quickly find yourself on the wrong end of a harai goshi. Judo, like boxing, bjj, mauy thai, etc is very dangerous inside its range of fighting (the clinch).

[dalen7]

Just be careful that the guy is not a skilled judo man, or you might quickly find yourself on the wrong end of a harai goshi. Judo, like boxing, bjj, mauy thai, etc is very dangerous inside its range of fighting (the clinch).

I would tend to agree with this - I was more generalizing about the type of people who take some lessons but never get the point...but true enough, I doubt I would knowingly go against anyone 'skilled' - and probably wouldnt need to, doubt they would be starting fights...but you never know. Im not against the art of 'run as quick as you can away' ;)

As much as I have read about BJJ and despite my lack of taste for grappling, I would be interested in trying it...but the closest place is a few hours away. (that I know of)...and I read quite a bit about 'gracies' - guess its time to wiki them. :)

Peace

Dalen

[Dewey]

This thread is great. 7 years after is creation it continues to haunt and annoy the posters and lurkers of aikiweb...

Two add more thant just this comment, we just got an aikidoka in my bjj class. He is not flimsy or weak or delusional as is often purported to be the case of aikidoka outside of this sanctuary. Like everything in life, you have to be reasonable about your perceptions, goals and return on investment.

Good Lord! I didn't realize this thread existed until it was resurrected a couple days ago! I'm not sure I'll read every post (well over 1,000...yikes!), but it has made for some interesting reading. This truly is an issue of concern for some folks, no matter their position on the matter.

Per your second comment: indeed, there is no "perfect" or "best" martial art/style. Each art/style has its strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies. Every art/style was originally conceived & designed to address certain situations and scenarios, and no one art/style can exhaustively address them all.

After browsing this thread, I respond to this 7-year itching thread by saying: if someone is overly-concerned about developing their "fightin' skilz"...they'd be a fool to rely upon only one art/style. Self-defense skills, though, are an entirely different matter of discussion...

[Cyrijl]

Roman,
You really seemed to have made quite the turnaround. If I remember correctly there was a time when you are rather anti-mma. I could be mistaken however....

[CNYMike]

..... The question is, can you actually get those moves to work on a person who is resisting. Not resisting after you have the lock, but resisting from the moment the conflict starts. Can you get it to work on a guy trying his best to knock your block off ......

There was a column in BLACK BELT a while ago about how such techniques are verified in MMA fights .... but that edges. Say, for instance, when a fight is stopped because someone takes a hit in the eye. I saw a fight reply in the Spike show in which a very big guy took a hit in the eye. That hurt him enough that he couldn't defend himself and his side though in the towel. If you follow boxing and MMA I'm sure you can think of other examples of fights stopped because one fighter took a hit in or near an eye, including situations where you get a bloody cut.

Likewise, he sighted the example of a fight stopped because someone took a knee shot in the groin; he was carried out of the ring.

Unfortunately, it's been months since I read the article, which I believe was on of Keith Vargo's columns. If you really want a precise citation, I can hunt for it. The point was to look at when fights are stopped for reasons other than a knockout or a submission. When it's because of hits in or near the eye, yes, it looks like you can reach that target if someone is trying to knock your block off, and you shouldn't put it down.

[Aristeia]

I've always believed that it's the man that makes the art, not the art that makes the man.

Erik Calderon
http://www.shinkikan.com

true in some respects. But when different arts continually deliver different results with a variety of people - that likely means something imo

[Aristeia]

There was a column in BLACK BELT a while ago about how such techniques are verified in MMA fights .... but that edges. Say, for instance, when a fight is stopped because someone takes a hit in the eye. I saw a fight reply in the Spike show in which a very big guy took a hit in the eye. That hurt him enough that he couldn't defend himself and his side though in the towel. If you follow boxing and MMA I'm sure you can think of other examples of fights stopped because one fighter took a hit in or near an eye, including situations where you get a bloody cut.

Likewise, he sighted the example of a fight stopped because someone took a knee shot in the groin; he was carried out of the ring.

Unfortunately, it's been months since I read the article, which I believe was on of Keith Vargo's columns. If you really want a precise citation, I can hunt for it. The point was to look at when fights are stopped for reasons other than a knockout or a submission. When it's because of hits in or near the eye, yes, it looks like you can reach that target if someone is trying to knock your block off, and you shouldn't put it down.

here's the counter argument. there have been at various stages a range of events where all that stuff is legal - groin shots, headbutts etc etc and it did not change a great deal the *style* of fighters who were susccesful. As to eye gouges - yuki nakai for example was blinded in one eye by Gerard Gordeau but still went on to win the fight....

[CNYMike]

Fact is: I have never seen an Aikido techniques performed against a jab. Or a solid cross. This leads me to believe Aikido is best used on untrained people who lunge at you with their attacks. Hence why we always step in with shomen/yokomen/tsuki...


The challenge with a jab is that it doesn't hang out there; it retracts almost immediately. This is an issue for many systems, not just Aikido. Personally, I haven't had anything Aikido-esque pop out during sparring, but then how does Aiki manifest in that situation? I don't know, but it challenges my imagination and it's a long term project of mine.

So did the many Karateka who challenged the Gracies. It's a shame their hard kicks and punches weren't possible on the ground.


True. But would you want one of them to hit you while you are standing up?

Let's remeber something aboutthe Gracies: Royce was not some punk off the streets of Rio who coould take on all comers after a handful of BJJ lessons. He is someone who has devoted his life to training in his family's art; he is very good at it. Taking down karate black belts doesn't mean those guys suck; it means he is very good. But I would not want to hop in the ring with any of the guys he beat because I know I would get killed!

Like I keep saying about high kicks: I agree with all the problems with them. Yes, there are a million and a half ways to counter them. But do you still want one to hit you? I am not keen on havin someone's foot hit my noggin at 75 miles an hour .... and my Jun Fan teacher has clipped me with enough crescent kicks for me to know they can be delivered.

So, raise your hands if you want to hop in the ring with anybody Royce beat ..... and post an address we can send the flowers to.

[CNYMike]

here's the counter argument. there have been at various stages a range of events where all that stuff is legal - groin shots, headbutts etc etc and it did not change a great deal the *style* of fighters who were susccesful. As to eye gouges - yuki nakai for example was blinded in one eye by Gerard Gordeau but still went on to win the fight....

So sometimes they work and sometimes they don't, but that doesn't mean they don't work at all.

[Roman Kremianski]

Yeah, Bas is known to be a comedian of MMA. Check out his gold self defense vids!

[quote]Roman,
You really seemed to have made quite the turnaround. If I remember correctly there was a time when you are rather anti-mma. I could be mistaken however....

All the more reason to hear me out. I used to be extremely anti-mma, complaining about basically everything that people have found to pick at in MMA. "Those stupid gorrilas pounding away at eachother. That's not martial arts" etc

If someone like me turned around, then maybe there's something in MMA many Aikidoka are not seeing. This is coming from a former hardcore Aikidoka, who trained in Aikido 6 days a week, 2.5 hours a day, for a couple of years.

Michael: How intricate are you in striking arts? Or grappling? Royce didn't beat them because they sucked at striking. They lost because they sucked at grappling. I think you're blowing these deadly karateka out of proportion.

[tarik]

All the more reason to hear me out. I used to be extremely anti-mma, complaining about basically everything that people have found to pick at in MMA. "Those stupid gorrilas pounding away at eachother. That's not martial arts" etc

Of course it's martial arts. That's just silly. Extreme positions usually are missing something important. :-)


If someone like me turned around, then maybe there's something in MMA many Aikidoka are not seeing.

Money? Lots of money.


This is coming from a former hardcore Aikidoka, who trained in Aikido 6 days a week, 2.5 hours a day, for a couple of years.

Less than 20 hours a week. Ah, so dedicated. ;)

Regards,

[Roman Kremianski]

Money? Lots of money.

Missed the hot ring girls, bro.

[tarik]

Missed the hot ring girls, bro.

Some of them in aikido, too, man! :D

[CNYMike]

..... If someone like me turned around, then maybe there's something in MMA many Aikidoka are not seeing .....

Yeah, but the Aikido world is very welcoming to people from other systems or have done other systems. MMA guys seem to be creeping into that, from some posts I've read. If people go both ways, or crosstrain in both, then maybe one way isn't right.


.... Michael: How intricate are you in striking arts? Or grappling?

Well, let's see: Over the past 22 years, I've trained in two styles of karate, taken a boxing class, and Kali which has, well everything, including boxing (Panantukan) and grappling (dumog). I'm also doing Jun Fan, and that includes a lot of stuff. I know what the basic postions on the ground are, although I'm not that good at synthesizing stuff yet. Still, I would like to think I have picked up a thing or two and, on occassion, I know what I'm talking about.


Royce didn't beat them because they sucked at striking. They lost because they sucked at grappling. I think you're blowing these deadly karateka out of proportion.

When Royce lost to Matt Hughs(?), my Kali instructor, who saw it on pay per view, gave a little speech that just because he lost doens't mean he sucked; he is still order of magnitudes better than most of us and anyone who hops in the ring with them will get clobbered.

All I am doing is expanding the principle: Those "deadly karateka" are still very good at what they do, and someone who beats them has to be equally good at he does. Yes, when he got them on the ground, they had problems, but that doesn't mean their skills shouldn't be respected. If I went up against any of the guys he beat, I would get clocked. That doesn't mean I'm not "intricate;" just recoginizing that I am not that good.

As for how "deadly" a karateka can or can't be, I still remember the time in my first karate class when we had a circle of war, and when Sensei was in the middle, he kicked me in the chest; I felt things in my body move out of position and return thanks to the impact, but there was no bruise.

So I'm thinking someone good at delivering something like that is going to be tough to beat, regardless of what he does or doesn't know.

[Keith R Lee]

YES! It will never die!

Not much to add really, we've been over it all before, just wanted to post again in this historic thread.

Also, I still think there is a lot of ignorance and confusion as what really goes on in most BJJ/MMA schools by many Aikido and other TMAers. Go try one out, they're fun places!

[dalen7]

YES! It will never die!

Also, I still think there is a lot of ignorance and confusion as what really goes on in most BJJ/MMA schools by many Aikido and other TMAers. Go try one out, they're fun places!

So MMA - from what I read it seems that MMA was first one art against another.

Now it appears MMA is a style of fight which people incorporated the best of the opponents fighting styles.

So in a sense its really Jeet Kun do (if I remembered the name correctly) which ol' Bruce said to mix arts.

Sifu Francis Fungs academy - back in the states, Atlanta - teaches J.K.D, Wing Chun, Thai boxing, Kali, BJJ and emphasizes training across all. I suppose you would call it MMA in todays standards as you no longer have just karate against judo, etc.

So at the end, the MMA differs based on what you like more (that is if you dont go to master 3 of the above, you pick and choose. so you could have a karate guy that learns a few grappling techniques, etc.)

As for Aikido in MMA, true, not sure how that would work...as these guys will be punching pretty fast - but then again, I wouldnt think that BJJ could beat a kick boxer as he would have to get past the reach of the legs and arms first...but what do i know, as I read it seems BJJ are magicians and avoid the crush of a Thai boxer and magically get him to the mat. ;) I realize there is more to it than that.

So will aikido work in a fight...as we evolve and cross styles, not against the trained...against untrained, probably pretty effective.

But then again there is Krag Mava (spelling) the Israeli matial art of 'using whatever is close at hand and hurting you in sensitive places (from what I read) so I guess thats rough.

I guess it boils down to how far you want to go.
What is the goal of the fight? To prove something? If so its useless...as in a real situation, there will be the krag mava (military style) that will kill you...they wont play with twist.

If its to learn self control to stay out of fights...Aikido seems a good path.

All perspective.

- and today marks my completion of 2 months of aikido...whoo hoo ;)

Peace

Dalen

[Roman Kremianski]

Well, let's see: Over the past 22 years, I've trained in two styles of karate

Then I assume you're also very experienced in full contact competition?

Also, some good bits from the Bullshido MMA faq:

- "MMA people only care about winning and being the best."

Quite the contrary. Due to the competitiveness of not only MMA competition, but MMA style training, it becomes quickly apparent that there is no such thing as being unarguably "the best" but rather the "best you can be"

- "MMA people rely on brute strength and muscle to win fights, rather than technique and skill"

Furthest from the truth. One of the basic components to winning MMA bouts is a solid ground game which includes heavy grappling skill, one of the most difficult skill sets to gain proficiency in. If you look back to early MMA where it was still "style vs style" the only ones who tried to use brute strength were those claiming a background in a striking art, where the grapplers were smaller and relied soley on superior technical proficiency, even if it was sloppy by todays MMA standards. Today, being well rounded with accurate and well timed striking abilities, and flawless and economical movements on the ground are necessary to succeed in MMA. Musclebound bar brawlers don't stand much of a chance against todays fighting athletes.

[dalen7]

Furthest from the truth. One of the basic components to winning MMA bouts is a solid ground game which includes heavy grappling skill,

See, that is what I still dont get...though 'statistics' prove otherwise...thus far.

And that is how grappling is seen as a key area to winning.
Again, It seems a M.T. boxer has his ground covered.

You have to get past the legs (and if hes fast and hard, should this not pose an issue to trying to grapple him?)
You have to get past the knee as you get closer that wants to smash the nose in...the elbow which can cut your head or pounce the top of your head...) - again from my one fight, it ended with the 'grappling type' dude having his nose smashed in...and I was going easy not trying to hurt. - and see thats the point of why I am taking Aikido, as I dont want to have to end a fight with someone broken, so to speak. :)

Again, Im not seeing to from a logic point of view.
I mean if we were all started on the ground lying on top of each other, I could see the grapplers having advantage...but if someone is using technique you have to reach the inside. Just like a boxer going against a taller boxer has to find his way in...

but it is as it is. suppose grappling is magic as mentioned before, they just somehow get that opponent on the floor without being kicked down themself... (suppose I watch to much welter weight boxing where the dudes are fast and can nail 'em out faster.) ;)

Peace

dalen

[Roman Kremianski]

Anything can happen in MMA matches. Theory doesn't really mean much.

Some matches go to the ground and stay there all match. Some are pure stand ups. If you really want to learn and understand, practice some yourself.

And example of the unpredictability I'm talking about:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3708304681865248026&hl=en

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

See, that is what I still dont get...though 'statistics' prove otherwise...thus far.
again from my one fight, it ended with the 'grappling type' dude having his nose smashed in...and I was going easy not trying to hurt. - and see thats the point of why I am taking Aikido, as I dont want to have to end a fight with someone broken, so to speak. :)

I respectfully suggest that your experience with "fighting a grappler" may in fact have been unusual compared to the general trend. Sure, sometimes people knock out a grappler before they get taken down...but usually, they do so because they've practiced grappling takedowns at the very least and have honed some basic defenses, like the sprawl. Or just getting an instinct for when someone's about to shoot in.

I'll also submit that some MMAers are quite a bit more psychologically stable and secure than TMAers, precisely because they test themselves in realms other than their daydreams or freak encounters ("One day, my cat tried to claw my arm, so I moved to the side and applied ikkyo! Worked great! It was so beautiful.") There is something very refreshing about a study where one's functional skill is pretty accurately assessed multiple times per practice.

[DonMagee]

There is something very refreshing about a study where one's functional skill is pretty accurately assessed multiple times per practice.

That's the thing, with MMA you know exactly where you stand. Krav Maga might teach you to kill, or as I experienced, it might be a cardio kickboxing class. The problem is you will never really know if anything works until you try it. I've seen many guys get shocked when there ideas of what was effective turned out to be false when put to the test.

After building these solid foundations of position, control, and technique. It's a short leap to start eye gouging and biting. There is a funny controversy going on at bullshido right now where a MMA guy took down a kung fu guy who had much more size and years of training. From the bottom he resorted to just holding on for dear life, so what did the MMA guy do? He bit him. Then used his experience in position and control to holding there and show he had dominance and could hurt him. Then after the guy verbally gave up (Complaining about this being a fight in a parking lot), he got off him.

Regardless of the idiocy of this fight. (It's very stupid that anyone would travel to fight someone they met on the internet with no rules in a parking lot) It showed a interesting truth we see all the time in the early days of MMA. 20+ years of training means nothing without randori (of the judo/mma variety). Tomiki realized this, Kano realized this. And this kung fu guy was beaten by someone with much less experience then he had. Afterwards he was completely unable to deal with the fact he was beaten and tried to restart the fight after he was standing. He was delusional. Thinking his art is superior, when he didn't realize the art doesn't matter, it is the method of practice.

[dalen7]

I'll also submit that some MMAers are quite a bit more psychologically stable and secure than TMAers, precisely because they test themselves in realms other than their daydreams or freak encounters ("One day, my cat tried to claw my arm, so I moved to the side and applied ikkyo! Worked great! It was so beautiful.") There is something very refreshing about a study where one's functional skill is pretty accurately assessed multiple times per practice.

But still my point is...how does the grappler get close enough to tackle? He rushes in, I will knee the crap out of him, and I havent trained in any hard arts (aside from some kickboxing lessons that were actually boxing lol )

See, there are real fights and then rule fights...neither here not there...but again, I see a grappler getting you if your on the ground...but how to get a trained, technique dude on the ground that has further reach.

What is the grappler, a puma gonna pounce the dude with a 12ft leap? lol

I know, I know, the videos show it all.
And I dont claim that I am right from one experience...it just is ironic for me.

So any grappler can tell me...how do you go in without getting your block knocked off...I truly am curious...seriously, what technique, are you crouching tiger...i know it sounds like sarcasim but I truly am curious. What has worked for you specifically.

By the way, I kicked him on the ground, in the face, got up and bopped him in the nose again. (I know, different situation...and I was holding back the whole time...I wrote about this in full somewhere else...I had the dude in a headlock and could have pounced his face in before he though me on the floor, but I didnt want to hurt the dude. But once on the floor, I wasnt going to wrestle with him.

Peace

Dalen

[dalen7]

He was delusional. Thinking his art is superior, when he didn't realize the art doesn't matter, it is the method of practice.
Well, he was bitten it sounds like. A Mike tyson was pulled. ;)
Hey if it works...but it goes to show you, its more than style...he could have bitten back or grabbed his crouch...so not sure about 'method' more about animal instinct. What genetics do you have in you is what it boils down to at the end of the day - viking. :)

[Roman Kremianski]

But still my point is...how does the grappler get close enough to tackle? He rushes in, I will knee the crap out of him, and I havent trained in any hard arts (aside from some kickboxing lessons that were actually boxing lol )

By the way, I kicked him on the ground, in the face, got up and bopped him in the nose again. (I know, different situation...and I was holding back the whole time...I wrote about this in full somewhere else...I had the dude in a headlock and could have pounced his face in before he though me on the floor, but I didnt want to hurt the dude. But once on the floor, I wasnt going to wrestle with him.

Ok bro, now this has gone from an intelligent debate to you running your mouth. Please get into a ring and show us this? Or Give us a video?

So any grappler can tell me...how do you go in without getting your block knocked off...I truly am curious...seriously, what technique, are you crouching tiger...i know it sounds like sarcasim but I truly am curious. What has worked for you specifically.

Easy answer. Go to an MMA gym and they will teach you. You'll be surprised when you find out it's alot more then just "tackling" the guy.

[dalen7]

Ok bro, now this has gone from an intelligent debate to you running your mouth. Please get into a ring and show us this? Or Give us a video?

Easy answer. Go to an MMA gym and they will teach you. You'll be surprised when you find out it's alot more then just "tackling" the guy.

Whoa, running my mouth (here goes 'ego' "He said I was running my mouth!") lol

Seriously, misunderstood I am (yoda) ;)

Again, those 'running their mouth' - Im asking you for your example Roman. ;) Peace to you dude...again, you misunderstand where Im coming from...and please...please...read.

I had a real fight, I dont go around having a plan to have a 'street' fight and have someone film it. So read before trying to say I did or did not do something...dude, relaxation is o.k...what is there to defend.
As for me, seems I said what I could, anything beyond this will be 'stories' and ego. (actually I have already involved myself on the realm of 'stories' of the ego by replying.

Peace

Dalen

[DonMagee]

But still my point is...how does the grappler get close enough to tackle? He rushes in, I will knee the crap out of him, and I havent trained in any hard arts (aside from some kickboxing lessons that were actually boxing lol )

See, there are real fights and then rule fights...neither here not there...but again, I see a grappler getting you if your on the ground...but how to get a trained, technique dude on the ground that has further reach.

What is the grappler, a puma gonna pounce the dude with a 12ft leap? lol

I know, I know, the videos show it all.
And I dont claim that I am right from one experience...it just is ironic for me.

So any grappler can tell me...how do you go in without getting your block knocked off...I truly am curious...seriously, what technique, are you crouching tiger...i know it sounds like sarcasim but I truly am curious. What has worked for you specifically.

By the way, I kicked him on the ground, in the face, got up and bopped him in the nose again. (I know, different situation...and I was holding back the whole time...I wrote about this in full somewhere else...I had the dude in a headlock and could have pounced his face in before he though me on the floor, but I didnt want to hurt the dude. But once on the floor, I wasnt going to wrestle with him.

Peace

Dalen

I'll tell you how I take down strikers. First tell me this, How do you punch someone without them kicking you. I mean if someone tried to come in to punch me, I'd just jump spin round kick them in the face.

Think about this. Your posts show you have no experience in fighting. It will be impossible to answer this question until you do. If you can answer how to punch someone without getting kicked, or how to punch someone without getting punched, or how to punch someone without getting clinched then you already have your answer.

I'll give you a hint, it's strategy and technique!

You also assume someone can't eat a strike to throw you. I do it all the time. Also my bjj class trains defenses against knee's and elbows from the clinch so we can throw. Wow, training to do what we plan to do, man that's nuts. Speaking of the clinch, how do you clinch with a guy who could just punch you? (Are you seeing how stupid this question is yet?)

Well, he was bitten it sounds like. A Mike tyson was pulled. ;)
Hey if it works...but it goes to show you, its more than style...he could have bitten back or grabbed his crouch...so not sure about 'method' more about animal instinct. What genetics do you have in you is what it boils down to at the end of the day - viking. :)

What was funny about it was it proved what bullshido was saying and disproved what he was saying. Basically that those in superior position can use dirty techniques with no effort, while those in inferior positions have almost no chance of doing the same. In my opinion he bit him without thinking, which just proves dirty tactics require no training to use effectively because they are natural. The good technique that allowed him to bite was skill and method of practice that let him take the guy down, secure the mount, and hold the mount for as long as he desired.

Here is that horrible video. The idiocy of all parties is very apparent http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-s5iDzgIRng

[philippe willaume]

Hello
Unless we are doing a job that has to do with LE or security, we could say that we are most likely to face two types of “threats”.
A impromptu encounter with an aggressive individual with or without cronies.
Or a well prepared (or very determined) individual or group of those.

Yes we can say that BJJ going to the ground is not that sound, that MMA doe not deal with weapon or that some aikido is so fluffy that it make ultras soft bog roll looks like sand paper. But if we place ourselves against the first category, any martial art or combat sport will do. Yes you will have the odd knife or improvised weapon and the odd cronies that will help the leader, but globally whatever you do will suffice in you are minimum proficient in it (provided that it has a certain martial soundness, I mean knitting or classical ballet will not help as much)

If you find yourself pitted against the second group, equally it does not really matter what you do. You opponent has engineered a situation where he has better weapon and /or more people in a place that suit him.
More that what style you are practicing, what matter is you ability to run a mile after a full blasts 400meters.

So to answer the original question there is only two alternative either the aikido particed is not martial or the person asking the question can not make it work.

Phil

[Budd]

This thread had a brief glimmer of hope upon its resurrection and has now gone back to being t43 $tup1d . . .

1) Dirty tricks are better able to be applied from the dominant position. As are weapons, tickles and hugs.

2) No martial art fully equals fighting. Some are better than others at approximating what happens in a fight.

3) If you've only just started training in MMA, you don't have the moral authority to say much more than "I've just started training MMA". Lots of people that only do aikido as a discipline can still kick your ass.

4) If you train aikido and you've never "worked out your stuff" against someone that tries to give skilled attacks of a strike/clinch/grapple nature, then you don't have the moral authority to say much more than "I don't know how it would work in that environment". Responding with, "But my sensei says . . ." only makes things worse.

I'm speeking from a position of having been guilty of a number of the above things. Others, I've only witnessed the pain (laughter) they can cause.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I might be wrong, but I think JFS (the guy who gets mounted) tries to eyegouge here and there...but it's just not doable given his suck position.

[DonMagee]

This thread had a brief glimmer of hope upon its resurrection and has now gone back to being t43 $tup1d . . .


Welcome to arguing on the internet :D

I might be wrong, but I think JFS (the guy who gets mounted) tries to eyegouge here and there...but it's just not doable given his suck position.

I noticed that as well. I couldn't tell if he was eye gouging, just flailing helplessly, or maybe smart enough to think he might go for an armbar that would give him a chance to escape.

I'm still going with flailing helplessly with no rational plan.

[Roman Kremianski]

Whoa, running my mouth (here goes 'ego' "He said I was running my mouth!") lol

Seriously, misunderstood I am (yoda)

Again, those 'running their mouth' - Im asking you for your example Roman. Peace to you dude...again, you misunderstand where Im coming from...and please...please...read.

I had a real fight, I dont go around having a plan to have a 'street' fight and have someone film it. So read before trying to say I did or did not do something...dude, relaxation is o.k...what is there to defend.
As for me, seems I said what I could, anything beyond this will be 'stories' and ego. (actually I have already involved myself on the realm of 'stories' of the ego by replying.

Peace

Dalen

Sorry if you feel it's a misunderstanding, but usually when someone on the internet with no credentials says they beat up X, with zero evidence to back it, someone will generally cry bullshido. If you had some kind of fight and you apparently whooped the guy's ass, then that's great for you. But the world will never know.

And for a good read...

But couldn't I just gouge the grappler's eyes, or bite him?

The non-grappler will claim to resort to such infallible techniques as eyegouging, biting and / or genital crushing techniques. The reasons why this is bullshido are as follows:

1. How often do these strikers actually train these movements? The answer is usually not very often. Thus, they are a somewhat risky method of countering a grappler, who has practiced the movements they will be using many times before on resisting opponents.

2. Eyegouging, biting and genital mandhandling are of course very uncomfortable for those on the recieving end, but they are not instant fight-enders. Resorting to these techniques suggests a 'last chance' situation, whereby the grappler has you under their control and you are trying a last ditch attempt to escape or injure the grappler. If you do not either gouge the eye right out of the socket and put your thumb in their brain, crush their nuts even through various layers of clothing, or bite a rather large chunk from their body, they will continue to choke you to unconsciousness or break / disable a joint or limb.

3. What you can do to them, they can do to you. In other words. if a grappler can beat you under a specific ruleset, chances are that when those rules are lifted, they can beat you even worse. There is no unwritten law in life that states only kung fu weenies can poke someone in the eye or squeeze some testicles.

Which brings us to the last point,

4. Whatever move you claim to be able to pull out of the bag during 'anti-grappling', chances are a grappler can not only do the same move to you, but can use their skill and experience of fighting in that range to put themselves in a much better position than you to apply the move, and also have the knowledge and experience to defend against it far better than a non-grappler.
For instance, from under mount, trying to gouge your opponent's eyes will give your opponent a great opportunity to armbar you. Whereas the person on top mount can gouge with impunity.

5: So far these tactics have never worked on a skilled grappler. For instance, in the john marsh vs. kung fu guy video on bullshido.net, the kung fu guy trys to gouge Marsh's eyes from underneath side control. Marsh uses the raised arm as an opportunity to apply a keylock and snaps the kung fu guy's shoulder.

[Budd]

Welcome to arguing on the internet :D


Yeah, I guess if the definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior while expecting a different result, I should expect the folks in the little white van and nice white coats to show up anytime now . . .

[philippe willaume]

This thread had a brief glimmer of hope upon its resurrection and has now gone back to being t43 $tup1d . . .

1) Dirty tricks are better able to be applied from the dominant position. As are weapons, tickles and hugs.

2) No martial art fully equals fighting. Some are better than others at approximating what happens in a fight.

3) If you've only just started training in MMA, you don't have the moral authority to say much more than "I've just started training MMA". Lots of people that only do aikido as a discipline can still kick your ass.

4) If you train aikido and you've never "worked out your stuff" against someone that tries to give skilled attacks of a strike/clinch/grapple nature, then you don't have the moral authority to say much more than "I don't know how it would work in that environment". Responding with, "But my sensei says . . ." only makes things worse.

I'm speeking from a position of having been guilty of a number of the above things. Others, I've only witnessed the pain (laughter) they can cause.

amen

[CNYMike]

Then I assume you're also very experienced in full contact competition?

No, but I've had some training in the things MMA guys use from Western Boxing, Thai Boxing, and grappling. Call me a mellow TMAer --- it's my base, but doing things from "the other side of the tracks" isn't going to kill me.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I noticed that as well. I couldn't tell if he was eye gouging, just flailing helplessly, or maybe smart enough to think he might go for an armbar that would give him a chance to escape.

I'm still going with flailing helplessly with no rational plan.

I was actually referring to earlier. He sort of reaches up in that area, causing Osiris to drop his head a bit to avoid. I dunno. Anyway, the summary is the same: flailing helplessly, cursing impotently.

[dalen7]

Sorry if you feel it's a misunderstanding, but usually when someone on the internet with no credentials says they beat up X, with zero evidence to back it, someone will generally cry bullshido. If you had some kind of fight and you apparently whooped the guy's ass, then that's great for you. But the world will never know.

And for a good read...

Roman, thanks, it appears from the above that we may be clearing the communication pipe way. (hard to in words face to face let alone on the internet...)

I appreciate your and other post - its true one what dude said that I dont have experience...tis true, and I havent claimed it to clarify, anyone can check my back post, etc.

Also, my story about beating Mr. Judo was published in more places then in fight forums - as it was a lesson in on a totally different level for me. The only fight I have been in is twice.
(well, maybe long time ago another...but whose counting)

And the point is they both were with my brother in law, who is rather opinionated, like myself. But as I have posted in other lengthy post - he underestimated me (story Im sure is even on this forum somewhere). Short in of story - first time he almost got kneed but someone else was there, so I did not smash his face in.
2nd time, 10 years later he did the same stupid move and I tried to counter in a peaceful way by grabbing him in a headlock and holding him there until he calmed down

he didn't calm down, and he managed to get me on the floor and I then proceeded to kick his face, popped up and smashed his nose.
It stopped there, blood on the floor, etc.

I never claimed he is a talented BJJ - infact its my understanding that he trained in Judo...he did single joint manipulation on me.

But, I do understand the fact that you have to see it and play around to see how it can work - but since its a forum, I was curious in this discussion if someone could paint a picture from their experience how it would work.

I say that, as my former boss was a teacher in O. Karate. The dude is tall as a giant...and arms long as can be.

And it is my understanding from what I know in boxing that reach has a lot to do with things.

And as I mentioned, a long time ago, a varsity wrestler tried his moves on me, and he could pin me, but could not keep me pinned.
I was 145lbs and benched 250lbs in highschool - he admitted I was a strong dude. (No this dude was not bigger than me, etc.)

I bring this up, because, again Im connecting what experience I have had and trying to make sense out how people tend to say BJJ rules over everything because they are good on the ground.
Yes I can see if you mess up that it is to their advantage, but back to boxing and my former boss that is giant size...to get 'in' close and avoid his long tentacles is another story.

And to put it in the wrestling terms, if hes strong...well.
You know, maybe even clearer...as I was reading on wiki, it said that now that bigger folks know how to counter move BJJ that weight classes were introduced in MMA because it was not as effective.

So I suppose I was just trying to cut past the hype.
But in truth, Im sure it is extremely effective.

As mentioned, Sifu Francis Fong Academy in Atlanta has the art, and they are a pretty 'serious'/cool place that you feel that you can kick butt just by walking in. ;)

Anyway, not sure if that clears things up, a bit - but peace to you and the rest.

- as for experience, I just got back from my 17th lesson in Aikido. ;)
At least Im not tripping over both feet like in my first class. :)

Peace

Dalen

[DonMagee]

I don't think anyone is stupid enough to say all you need is BJJ.

At least I should say I'd hope nobody is that stupid. This is why you don't see bjj guys in MMA, you see MMA fighters in MMA. It is stupid to neglect ANY range of fighting if you are going to get in a fight. This can even be said to MMA guys who do not train for weapons.

I personally do not train for the street, so I do not care about weapons (Until they allow them in the ring.). I would never say all you need is BJJ. I'd say all you need is solid delivery systems and training with aliveness. This means bjj/judo/mt/boxing/wrestling/etc

But if you don't train with aliveness, it doesn't matter what you study.

[dalen7]

One thing I have found interesting, from my reading on this thread and wiki is as follows:

With BJJ it appears from comments that a black belt, wait - even a purple belt is considered 'dangerous' (if I may use that term for this example, maybe better say that they can really put their art to the test)

Anyway, with Aikido, its opposite.
It appears that people tend to believe that its 'useless' in Kyu levels...and at shodan you just are 'starting'.

Again, its quite interesting that its implied that BJJ is effective at Black belt (and even at purple) whereas with Aikido many people say that until you are like 4 etc. maybe its useful.

Anyway, I found it a bit interesting - but again, Aikido is meant soley for defense, and on a spiritual side...stopping the fight internally before it manifest in the physical. - so that in itself, it seems, is what divides and makes the difference between Aikdio and BJJ (and perhaps all the other arts.)

The only other art that seems similar is Wing Chun - but at the same time it uses blocks, where Aikido is all about the flow.

Peace

Dalen

[Dewey]

All the more reason to hear me out. I used to be extremely anti-mma, complaining about basically everything that people have found to pick at in MMA. "Those stupid gorrilas pounding away at eachother. That's not martial arts" etc

If someone like me turned around, then maybe there's something in MMA many Aikidoka are not seeing. This is coming from a former hardcore Aikidoka, who trained in Aikido 6 days a week, 2.5 hours a day, for a couple of years.


Yikes! Well, at least you plainly admit that you're not being objective. Based upon this statement, someone could easily take issue with your pro-MMA arguments in this and other threads as being more of a "mission" than a matter of objective debate. You announce your disillusionment with Aikido, followed by a corrective course of action (i.e. to "educate" Aikidoka). Perhaps you should first openly admit your bias against Aikido in the interest of intellectual honesty, then go from there. If you just enjoy debating & arguing, then that's just fine, too...that's what internet forums are for.:D

It should be common knowledge that every martial art has its strengths & deficiencies, which is a simple fact. Each art was conceived & designed to address specific tactical scenarios. Someone who's concerned about technical deficiencies in their chosen art should cross-train to resolve those discrepencies to their own satisfaction. Sometimes that means leaving one art entirely...sometimes not. However, realizing and experiencing deficiencies in one's chosen martial art does not demand an abandonment (either partial or wholesale) of it. Rather, it provides an opportunity to expand your technical repitoire by cross-training and then incorporating those techniques into your existing "base" art. This holds true for whatever the focus of training is: fighting, competition, self-defense. That tired, worn-out "aiki-straw man" argument of Aikidoka being delusional about their own martial art is simply getting old. Indeed, they're out there...but not to the degree that Aikido detractors like to portray.

I can clearly see the strengths of MMA and its training methodology, but I can also clearly see it's deficiencies...just as I am well aware of Aikido's strengths and deficiencies. Some might argue that the strengths of MMA far outweigh its deficiencies, with the reverse being true for Aikido. That, of course, is a matter of opinion.;)

Welcome to arguing on the internet :D


Indeed! No truer words have been spoken.

Yeah, I guess if the definition of insanity is repeating the same behavior while expecting a different result, I should expect the folks in the little white van and nice white coats to show up anytime now . . .

Yup.

[DonMagee]

One thing I have found interesting, from my reading on this thread and wiki is as follows:

With BJJ it appears from comments that a black belt, wait - even a purple belt is considered 'dangerous' (if I may use that term for this example, maybe better say that they can really put their art to the test)

Anyway, with Aikido, its opposite.
It appears that people tend to believe that its 'useless' in Kyu levels...and at shodan you just are 'starting'.

Again, its quite interesting that its implied that BJJ is effective at Black belt (and even at purple) whereas with Aikido many people say that until you are like 4 etc. maybe its useful.

Anyway, I found it a bit interesting - but again, Aikido is meant soley for defense, and on a spiritual side...stopping the fight internally before it manifest in the physical. - so that in itself, it seems, is what divides and makes the difference between Aikdio and BJJ (and perhaps all the other arts.)

The only other art that seems similar is Wing Chun - but at the same time it uses blocks, where Aikido is all about the flow.

Peace

Dalen

A BJJ purple belt is of sufficient rank to teach under the watchful eye of a black belt. My bjj instructor just got his black belt this month, he has been teaching as a purple belt and brown belt for years.

I feel that within 6 months you are going to be able to use your bjj training in the club. You are going to see new guys and toy with most of them. By the time you are a blue belt, you are dangerous to people untrained in ground fighting. A purple belt would be the equivalent of technical mastery. Beyond that is just improving strategy and timing as you make bjj your own. Matt Thornton says the only difference between a purple belt and a black belt is timing and flow.

I'd put a judo shodan around the high blue belt, begining purple belt range in bjj.

[Keith R Lee]

One thing I have found interesting, from my reading on this thread and wiki is as follows:

With BJJ it appears from comments that a black belt, wait - even a purple belt is considered 'dangerous' (if I may use that term for this example, maybe better say that they can really put their art to the test)

Anyway, with Aikido, its opposite.
It appears that people tend to believe that its 'useless' in Kyu levels...and at shodan you just are 'starting'.

Again, its quite interesting that its implied that BJJ is effective at Black belt (and even at purple) whereas with Aikido many people say that until you are like 4 etc. maybe its useful.

I'd consider any decent blue belt BJJer dangerous, much more so than most Aikido students. Mostly because of what Don is talking about; aliveness. It makes all the difference in the world.

I would easily bet $100 that if you went into the average BJJ school, picked an average blue belt (trained for maybe 2 years) and then proceeded to the average Aikido school, picked your average 1st dan (practicing 4-5 years)-and then gave them 4 oz gloves and told them to square off in a ring-that the BJJer would win. Not because BJJ or its techniques are inherently someway better, but its training methodology (competition and "aliveness") is much better at producing effective martial technique quickly. The two arts just have very different goals and their training methodology reflects that.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

Of course, belt colors are somewhat arbitrary. My impression is that most people take at least 10 years to get a BJJ black belt -- that's, what, a nidan or sandan in most styles of aikido?

As for what X rank in aikido lets you do with the average person...well, I think until it's clear what sort of scenario aikido is meant to be improving your skill at, assessment of that nature is difficult.

[dbotari]

But if you don't train with aliveness, it doesn't matter what you study.

I believe the converse also holds true. If you train with aliveness then it doesn't matter what you train in.

Dan

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I believe the converse also holds true. If you train with aliveness then it doesn't matter what you train in.

Well, kind of sort of. If I create a martial art that consists of...I dunno...open-handed slaps to the torso...and I train it in a fully alive manner...I'm never going to be very dangerous.

I think the only reason the "aliveness makes everything good" argument can be argued to -always- hold is that part of aliveness is discarding the bad and picking up the good. So hypothetically, yes, aliveness would make Torso-Slappy-Art practitioners good...but they'd no longer be doing Torso-Slappy-Art by the end of it.

Put more casually, this theory might hold that if you took two people from some random TMA and had them train alive everyday, they'd probably start reinventing wrestling, boxing, BJJ, and so forth. It's like Fukiyama's "End of History" (everyone turns into a liberal capitalist democracy) theory.

I think Matt Thornton, the aliveness poster boy, had some remark about how training a TMA alive means you lose 95% of your curriculum.

Fortunately, aikido's 70% atemi, and people suck at atemi anyway, so .... ;)
(Yes, being purely facetious there.)

[dbotari]

The two arts just have very different goals and their training methodology reflects that.

Than why constantly and consistantly compare them????

Dan

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I'll also add that I don't think aikido is a "Torso-Slappy-Art". Maybe I'm blinded by affection, but I continue to believe aikido's probably got some methods in it that are functional, even optimal. I guess my two theories at present are:

1) Aikido actually does work in MMA-type situations, at least as a useful complement to judo
2) Aikido is meant for old-style jujutsu scenarios (weapons-containing environment).

[dalen7]

Of course, belt colors are somewhat arbitrary. My impression is that most people take at least 10 years to get a BJJ black belt -- that's, what, a nidan or sandan in most styles of aikido?

As for what X rank in aikido lets you do with the average person...well, I think until it's clear what sort of scenario aikido is meant to be improving your skill at, assessment of that nature is difficult.

Maybe that clears it up.
So black belt isnt just a couple of years...Yeah I suppose the belt ranking system can kind of be misleading.

Seems a lot of it has to do with time you put in...my place trains 2 times a week - so years from now I will be shodan hypothetically.
Whereas, I suppose if I was in the military training everyday, you could acquire efficiency even faster.

Point is well taken...got to learn to look past belts.
I have always taken it that at black belt in any style, that means you know the whole leg work of the system. (but as mentioned elsewhere, I have never really been involved in a martial art system...just watched to many jackie chan movies. ;)

- by the way, I am amazed at how many people seem to be involved in BJJ here at aikiweb.
But then again, my trip to Budapest to the Aikido shop had a surprise...when I saw that all the guys there were training BJJ at the time. (the shops are in the 'dojo')

Peace

Dalen

[dalen7]

I'll also add that I don't think aikido is a "Torso-Slappy-Art". Maybe I'm blinded by affection, but I continue to believe aikido's probably got some methods in it that are functional, even optimal. I guess my two theories at present are:

1) Aikido actually does work in MMA-type situations, at least as a useful complement to judo
2) Aikido is meant for old-style jujutsu scenarios (weapons-containing environment).

Im wondering how well it would replace wing-chun.

i.e.
Train in the following: BJJ - M.T.B - Aikido (vs. Wing Chun here) with maybe Kali on the side (well replace it with kendo or iado - spelling)

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

Yeah...I know a few aikido sandans who -- while I don't know for sure, and might be biased here -- could probably kick my sankyuu ass without much trouble.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

Im wondering how well it would replace wing-chun.

I don't know much about Wing Chun or other Chinese systems. They seem to also be pretty much out in the cold from MMA.

[Dewey]

I'll also add that I don't think aikido is a "Torso-Slappy-Art". Maybe I'm blinded by affection, but I continue to believe aikido's probably got some methods in it that are functional, even optimal. I guess my two theories at present are:

1) Aikido actually does work in MMA-type situations, at least as a useful complement to judo
2) Aikido is meant for old-style jujutsu scenarios (weapons-containing environment).

My thoughts as well. Aikido is not "completely" useless in MMA-type situations. The most basic principle of Aikido is blending/merging/joining with your attacker. Let's not forget that...no matter how it plays out. Once Aikidoka forget this "prime directive" of Aikido (for you Star Trek geeks out there), Aikido resorts to a nicely choreographed dance routine, ripe for sardonic comment. I'll let my attacker dictate my response.

There's still some life left in these here bones!

[Aristeia]

I'd consider any decent blue belt BJJer dangerous, .
Blue belt beat the world - purple belt beat blue belt....

[gregg block]

I have competed in both boxing and wrestling and I am now training in brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. I have watched many No Holds Barred competitions, like the UFC, and it is clear to me that Aikido and it's techniques and it's way of training do not prepare anyone to actually fight. I know that Aikido practitioners talk a lot about concepts like spirituality, harmony...etc. but I also hear people talk about how it is a pratical means of self defense. Aikido does not have practical striking techniques or any REAL matwork at all. I would like to know how Aikido can be used as self defense if you cannot grapple or strike.

I to have competed in boxing, kickboxing,and tae kwon do for many years before starting Aikido. Your statement screams ignorance. Clearly you know nothing about Aikido. Learning Aikido has complemented my striking background nicely and has helped me become a more complete martial artist. I also know some individuals who do only Aikido that I wouldn't want to mess with. And trust me I'm a good striker. All martial arts are effective and have value. It's the practitioners who fall short not the style.

[DonMagee]

I've been training in bjj for a little over a year and half. I'm a blue belt. I'm not near the best blue belt in my club, but I'd say I'm a competent blue belt.

I've been training judo for almost 3 years. I'm just now a Sankyu. I've been training aikido on and off for 4 years. I've yet to be ranked. Previous to that I received a club black belt in TKD and quit because my instructor (young guy hit by a truck) died and his assistant instructor who picked up his club was one of the early ATA mcdojo guys. I've also trained randomly in a few arts and did a 6 month stint in krav maga. I supplement my current training with MMA sparing and Mauy Thai instruction.

I really feel I did not gain any real skill before the last year. In the last year I got a good judo instructor and went from 7th to 3rd kyu and got my blue belt in bjj. Before that time I only believed I could fight. I'd dream of being able to take out guys in a fight with impressive wrist locks and head kicks. But I always had fears and really didn't know what I was able to do. Now I'll exactly 100% sure on what I can and can't do.

I no longer have any fears of what ifs. I no longer dream of being a bad ass. I simply have no drive or desire to be a hero, fight a guy on a street, or have power over anyone. I've become much less aggressive, been able to focus more on my job and my family, and I have a confidence I never knew I had. That fear in my throat I had growing up when I would be challenged by bullys is no longer there. I don't even think about self defense as a reason to train any longer. I'm having too much fun. I also went from 200 pounds to 155 pounds in the first 9 months of my bjj training. I'm gaining weight now, but it's mostly muscle (and chocolate shakes...mmmm). I have no need to talk about my training to others. I used to annoy the hell out of people talking about TKD, or Aikido, or Krav Maga about how bad ass my instructors were, about how I was going to be bad ass one day, and sometimes even about crazy feats of ki that were preformed by some guy I never seen, but someone I know, knew someone who seen it. (This reminds me, I should probably apologize to those people.) Now, when someone asks, or if someone mentions I train, I just say I do some sports. If they push I tell them I box, or wrestle, or do MMA. I try not to let them talk about it unless they are interested in trying it. I just have no desire to mention it. It's like the ego boost I got from knowing some super secret knowledge is gone. "You train at the local krotty place? Cool, I'm learning to channel the power of the universe to throw you on your butt." vs "You train in krotty. That's cool. If you ever want to play, let me know.".

I don't think bjj gave me all that. I think my coaches and training methods did. My current BJJ coach, judo coach, and MMA coach push me, care for me, and have no egos. They are willing to be challenged, push back, play, and get dirty. Their training methods validate what I'm doing every single day. I never thought I'd live to like getting punched in the face, like the feeling of a good leg kick, love that sweet sound that you make just before you pass out from a choke, etc. I crave it, I'm addicted to it, it should probably be illegal. But I've changed more then I ever thought I would.

[Roman Kremianski]

Good post Don.

[George Goldberg]

I've studied several martial arts, but at a very low level. I wanted to continue with Ju Jitsu, but I had contracted a very painful case of Rhumatoid Arthritis at a very young age and had a very hard time being thrown because it hurt so badly so I had to give it up eventually. Anyway, I have always heard these rumors about Aikido being useless in a fight and have to admit that it would not be my first choice for self defense.
My guess is that a very experienced practitioner could make it work in a fight, but someone who had only studied a few years would probably end up hurting himself more than an attacker.
Someone who is into the whole Aikido philosophy and is willing to study for several decades or someone who is bored of a harder art and wants to go softer, might end up satisfied with the struggle to get better, but most people wouldn't have the patience or motivation.
That's why I find people who choose it so interesting.

[Paul Sanderson-Cimino]

I guess my two theories at present are:

1) Aikido actually does work in MMA-type situations, at least as a useful complement to judo
2) Aikido is meant for old-style jujutsu scenarios (weapons-containing environment).

My thoughts as well. Aikido is not "completely" useless in MMA-type situations. The most basic principle of Aikido is blending/merging/joining with your attacker. Let's not forget that...no matter how it plays out.

To clarify, I don't mean that I think both are true -- I probably should have said "hypotheses" rather than "theories". Still lacking any solid evidence for either, which leaves me at my null hypothesis -- that aikido is crazy nonsense.

[CNYMike]

To clarify, I don't mean that I think both are true -- I probably should have said "hypotheses" rather than "theories". Still lacking any solid evidence for either, which leaves me at my null hypothesis -- that aikido is crazy nonsense.

I've never really been a big MMA fan, so I didn't catch any UFCs when they happened, but one of my training partners in Kali turned me on to the Spike shows that replay old fights. One obvious as all H-E-double toothpicks observations is that when it goes to the ground, the fighter on the bottom can be in extremely serious trouble very quickly. Not that the guy on the bottom doesn't have any choices such as from the guard position and can't win, but it seems like a very bad place to be!

So my hypothesis is that Aikido's place within the ranges of combat (kicking, punching, trapping and grappling) would beto give more options to find some kind of submission while you're still standing up. Yes, I agree, in case you end up on the ground, you should know what to do there. But I also agree it is a situation best avoided in the real world if at all possible; Aikido may provde options for resolving a situation before it gets to a ground-and-pound scenario.

Of course, in most MMA fights, fighters go straight from kickboxing to rolling on the floor, so they blast right by the opportunity for standing submissions. Then again, fights also end in knockouts before they end up on the ground. So having more tools for standing does't seem to be a bad idea.

[Daniel Blanco]

Yes it does work in a confrontation take it from me a active Police officer,you must establish your entry fast,and go right into a throw/lock and constantly moving and keeping control of the center.Reguarding other arts,all are different and respect is given to all,thats the aiki way,but if trouble comes my way the perp will see aikido at best.

[Daniel Blanco]

To all, your end result in a fight depends on how hard you train in any martial art.

[Kevin Leavitt]

my favorite thread is back...hello old friend! :)

[Chris Parkerson]

Does Aikido work in a fight?
I wouldn't leave home without it. But I don't expect it to look like I am striking a pose while tossing someone who has perfect ukemi.

[DonMagee]

I plan to start a new thread later...does aikido work for jello wrestling.

[lbb]

I plan to start a new thread later...does aikido work for jello wrestling.

Really. Can this wank get relegated to its own forum? Something like "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or, could Bruce Lee beat up Jean Claude Van Damme", and leave the rest of the site to people who want to talk about aikido (and other martial arts as they relate to aikido).

[Will Prusner]

"How many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or, could Bruce Lee beat up Jean Claude Van Damme"

7 and yes. :D

[DonMagee]

If Bruce Lee was alive today...what would he be doing?

My vote, trying to use his one inch punch to escape his coffin.

[Cyrijl]

i wonder when the last time joeysola even posted on this site.

[Ron Tisdale]

He was posting anonymously, so only Jun would know, probably. It is kind of funny that anon started such a long thread... :D

B,
R

[Tom Fish]

Over 1100 posts about this!!! I would say that at least Aikido can be used in an argument.

[Lloyd Heggestad]

Just wanted to point out that Aikido presents plenty of opportunities to hurt an opponent, but we don't do it because it's not taught. For instance, Louis in post # 13 describes how he used Kaitenage against a wrestler shooting for his legs. He could have kneed the wrestler in the face at the same time if he wanted. But that's not what we're taught. Virtually every Aikido move creates an opening or places an opponent in an unsafe position. Aikido simply chooses not to take advantage of the opportunity to strike, maim, or choke.

[Nelson Bricker]

Hello, I am new to the forum, and have only been training for about six years, but in my experience Aikido is irreplaceable in learning how to handle a fight. One of the problems is that no one will realize what they know without leaving their dojo once in a while. Recently I started working on a demonstration with a 3rd dan Tai Kwan Do practitioner that can strike as well as anyone you might run into on the street. Obviously he was not going all out while we practiced for a demo, but there wasn't anything he threw at me that I didn't think was easily manageable to deal with. One of my biggest problems in Aikido training can be waiting for the other person to move between the beats as it were, so the more intense an attack and a fight, the more easy it might be for a lot of even mid-level aikidoka to use that energy since it won't be broken with allowing the attack to end. The simplest and most effective principles aikido teaches should be the most useful in a real fight. I don't mean trying to put someone into Ikkyo, but more having faith in your movements and substance to your position. When you own the area, it doesn't matter if someone wants to enter it, no matter their intention, you have the upper hand.

[Cyrijl]

this is not a good sign.

[Ketsan]

If Bruce Lee was alive today...what would he be doing?

My vote, trying to use his one inch punch to escape his coffin.

:D

[Dewey]

my favorite thread is back...hello old friend! :)

This thread is like a zombie....the only way it'll die is if you destroy the brain and/or sever the head....if not, it just keeps coming back!

[Nelson Bricker]

To better explain my last post. I wrote it to simply answer the question of would Aikido work in a fight if you were attacked. The answer seems simple that it would. I am not trying to get into what constitutes a fight. What allows Aikido to work in my mind is that you are never in a fight, but the opponent is. If you take that idea with you from Aikido, it has worked.
P.S. There's no reason for a forum like this to end, if it ends it means there are no new people coming to Aikido!

[ayu cicada]

The question here is: What "kind" of fight are we talking about?
If we are referring to a fight inside the octagon/ring (UFC/MMA), Aikido might work or might not. Two points. First, Aikido is not designed to compete. Is developed to resolve conflict without harming the attacker as much as possible. O'Sensei said "The Art of Peace is the principle of nonresistance. Because it is nonresistant, it is victorious from the beginning. Those with evil intentions or contentious thoughts are instantly vanquished. The Art of Peace is invincible because it contends with nothing". I know it may sound so philosophical to non-practioners, but this maxim sets the reason why Aikido doesn't compete. Do we train just for gold and glory? I guess not. We train so when the inevitable comes (life and death situation), we know our chances to live is high.

Second, if you try to review the rules set by UFC, many aikido techniques wouldn't be allowed. Aikido works best on joint locks (big and small joints) and atemi (strikes) including to the groin which is not allowed by UFC. Even if we disregard the above dictum by the Founder, clearly, Aikido doesn't fit inside the octagon. But this is not to say that Aikido is superior to other forms of Martial Arts. Only that she is not designed to compete.

O'Sensei furhter said, "There are no contests in the Art of Peace. A true warrior is invincible because he or she contests with nothing. Defeat means to defeat the mind of contention that we harbor within....To injure an opponent is to injure yourself. To control aggression without inflicting injury is the Art of Peace. "

On the other hand, if we are referring to the fight in the street, Aikido will definitely work. Why? Most fights in this environment are non-competetive in nature, but are barbaric, physical, and survival. Fights would be in disproportionate number of people involve, usually one against many. It seldom happens a one is to one fight unless there is a consensus to both party specially if they want to put on a show of their ego. Aikido is designed to deal with multiple attackers, both armed and unarmed. Again, comparing a fight inside the ocatagon, which usually involves grappling, which I say works on a 1-1 situation, to a fight in the street which requires techniques to dodge and survive against more dangerous and more numerous opponents would show us that Aikido would indeed work in a fight.

:ai:

[Kevin Leavitt]

I really do love this thread and do agree with Nelson that it does mean that new people are coming on line here with the same age old questions!

A couple of thoughts.

Nelson wrote:

What allows Aikido to work in my mind is that you are never in a fight, but the opponent is.

I understand what you are saying philosophically, but if you are in a fight, you are in a fight...you can think what you want about it, reframe it a million ways, but someone hitting you, stabbing you, or what not is what it is, you must recognize the reality of the situation and deal with it appropriately.

How you define appropriately may vary. For instance, you may do a "Ghandi" and choose non-violence committing yourself to a greater purpose than return violence.

You may decide to use violence and determine that it is better to do that than to choose non-violence.

Oliver wrote:

Second, if you try to review the rules set by UFC, many aikido techniques wouldn't be allowed. Aikido works best on joint locks (big and small joints) and atemi (strikes) including to the groin which is not allowed by UFC. Even if we disregard the above dictum by the Founder, clearly, Aikido doesn't fit inside the octagon. But this is not to say that Aikido is superior to other forms of Martial Arts. Only that she is not designed to compete.

We've been down this road a million times before. I'd buy into the whole "not designed to compete/aikido is an allegory for philosophy" argument. However, you mixed that with "besides we do things that are not allowed in the UFC". That causes an issue for me.

Groin Strikes, Wrist locks, etc...go ahead, find a UFC fighter, and as an aikidoka, challenge him to play by your rules that allow those things....I am betting he would accept your offer to fight...i'd like to see that!

Anyway, fighting is complex. I agree with most of your statements. Just be careful about confusing the issue when bring the UFC argument up. It is apples to oranges and an illogical comparision when bring aikido into the mix. It's like trying to compare COBOL against C++ or something like that!

You have to be careful not to over generalize UFC types about the whole 1-1 thing offering up aikido as being superior in that area. I think not.

It is not about working or not working in a fight. It is the fighter that fights..not the art.

[Ketsan]

The question here is: What "kind" of fight are we talking about?
If we are referring to a fight inside the octagon/ring (UFC/MMA), Aikido might work or might not. Two points. First, Aikido is not designed to compete. Is developed to resolve conflict without harming the attacker as much as possible. O'Sensei said "The Art of Peace is the principle of nonresistance. Because it is nonresistant, it is victorious from the beginning. Those with evil intentions or contentious thoughts are instantly vanquished. The Art of Peace is invincible because it contends with nothing". I know it may sound so philosophical to non-practioners, but this maxim sets the reason why Aikido doesn't compete. Do we train just for gold and glory? I guess not. We train so when the inevitable comes (life and death situation), we know our chances to live is high.

Second, if you try to review the rules set by UFC, many aikido techniques wouldn't be allowed. Aikido works best on joint locks (big and small joints) and atemi (strikes) including to the groin which is not allowed by UFC. Even if we disregard the above dictum by the Founder, clearly, Aikido doesn't fit inside the octagon. But this is not to say that Aikido is superior to other forms of Martial Arts. Only that she is not designed to compete.

O'Sensei furhter said, "There are no contests in the Art of Peace. A true warrior is invincible because he or she contests with nothing. Defeat means to defeat the mind of contention that we harbor within....To injure an opponent is to injure yourself. To control aggression without inflicting injury is the Art of Peace. "

On the other hand, if we are referring to the fight in the street, Aikido will definitely work. Why? Most fights in this environment are non-competetive in nature, but are barbaric, physical, and survival. Fights would be in disproportionate number of people involve, usually one against many. It seldom happens a one is to one fight unless there is a consensus to both party specially if they want to put on a show of their ego. Aikido is designed to deal with multiple attackers, both armed and unarmed. Again, comparing a fight inside the ocatagon, which usually involves grappling, which I say works on a 1-1 situation, to a fight in the street which requires techniques to dodge and survive against more dangerous and more numerous opponents would show us that Aikido would indeed work in a fight.

:ai:

It's not the rules per se. It's the format. Sport fighting is unique in that trained fighters tend to employ a rather siege like strategy. They spend minutes, let me repeat that, minutes circling and putting attacks in that are not intended to end the fight outright. A jab isn't for knocking out your opponent, it's for grinding him down and sussing him out. At some point when one fighter believes that he has ground down his opponent enough to create an opening then he will move in to finish off the opponent.
If a boxer gets knocked down it's virtually certain that his opponent will charge in with a flurry of punches as soon as the ref will allow him to in an attempt to end the fight before his opponent can recover.
Things in the UFC are a little different, the knock out has largely been replaced by a shoot for the legs, but the principle is the same, you grind down your opponent, find his weaknesses then end it. It's a long slow relatively safe process which is more about not loosing the fight than winning it.

"Real" fights (TM) are more like an ambush. An ideal ambush is when your enemy, oblivious to your presence, wanders into a pre-prepared area and you annihilate them in seconds with overwhelming fire power. Ideally the experience for the enemy is walking along and then suddenly appearing at the pearly gates in much confusion. Most 13 year olds that play too many computer games know this.

Now physically ambushing someone in a bar or out in the street isn't easy so what tends to happen is a psychological ambush. The attacker keeps his intentions hidden, creates confusion and uses intimidation to suss out and create openings.
Once an opening is found the attacker launches into an all out assault, not allowing the defender to respond.
So the experience for the defender is of being in an argument or being asked the time one second and in intensive care the next.

The level of violence used in MMA is often much lower than in "reality" because the fighters are prepared to fight for a vastly greater time period than attackers can afford.

All this we know.

So IMHO if you want to see Aikido do well you need to change the competition a bit. First of all place the fighters about an arms length apart before the fight starts. Second, reduce the time limit to thirty seconds to a minute. Third make the victory condition a KO or submission only, no points, no judges. Fourth, fighters have to wear clothes, like normal people do.

What this would produce is a short and exceptionally violent fight, any technique that didn't have the power to KO or take down an opponent immediately would probably be dropped.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Alex,

You bring up some interesting points. I agree with your perspective for sure!

This is one thing I try to drive home to the soldiers I train. We will vary the goals (end state) of the situation when we train. I will do things like give them 5 minutes to fight and keep points or enforce rules (constraints). I will also then give them 30 seconds and say who ever is on top at the end of 30 seconds is the winner.

It is interesting to see how the level of intensity, the difference in strategy, technique etc play into it when you change these conditions.

I agree, it isn't the rules (implied or specified) but the other things such as time and desired endstate that makes the biggest difference.

good points.

[Ketsan]

Oh yeah rule 5, no gloves, no hand wrapping.

[Kevin Leavitt]

unless you dip them in tar and cut glass.

[Chris Parkerson]

As stated in other posts, Judo (Standing Jujitsu) and Aikido are complimentary. In fact, one blends into the other.

It confounds me that so many people envision Aikido as constrained by the intital curriculum that presents techniques from wrist grabs that force you to learn how to connect to the center through the 3 joints in the arm.

Elbow and shoulder throwing is what we often call Judo or Standing Jujitsu. It can be done with grinding force or it can be done lightly with Aiki principles.

When you get the bum's rush in a fight, skip the wrist and let the distance define your aikido. Ut will look like Mifune's Judo. Then comes BJJ or just good Judo ground work. That too can be done with Aiki principles.

[Ketsan]

Alex,

You bring up some interesting points. I agree with your perspective for sure!

This is one thing I try to drive home to the soldiers I train. We will vary the goals (end state) of the situation when we train. I will do things like give them 5 minutes to fight and keep points or enforce rules (constraints). I will also then give them 30 seconds and say who ever is on top at the end of 30 seconds is the winner.

It is interesting to see how the level of intensity, the difference in strategy, technique etc play into it when you change these conditions.

I agree, it isn't the rules (implied or specified) but the other things such as time and desired endstate that makes the biggest difference.

good points.

Thanks :)

[Ketsan]

unless you dip them in tar and cut glass.

:D Now we're getting some where and it's probably hospital. I feel this is progress in upping the intensity of combat sports. :D

[ECBudokaiSensei]

As has probably been mentioned before - Aikido is most certainly NOT a sport. As a rule, all martial arts "don't work" in a real fight. What "works" are your spirit, awareness and commitment to go to the "next level", if necessary. I most certainly don't claim to be the toughest guy on this forum...I probably am not even the toughest guy in my own house! However, I have taught police and military close-quarters combat for several years. And I have been in a scrape or two myself. Here is what I have found:

1) In a NHB fight, it is all about athletics. Much like a football game, one has the opportunity to prepare one's self and study one's opponent. Thus, the fitter and more prepared person should prevail. In a real fight, that is rarely the case.

2) In a real fight, the person is really trying to hurt, if not kill you. Consequently, the motivation (by one or both parties) is much higher. In a sport, one will "tap out" prior to being injured. In a real fight, one will spit, gouge, bite or whatever to escape the threat and/or dominate his opponent.

3) In a real fight, the movements are disjointed and the flow/tempo is uneven. People utilize improvised (or traditional weapons) and other implements/matter (such as dirt) readily found in the area. Of course this is not the case in a structured competition.

4) In a real fight, people exhibit a Startle-Flinch response. Tony Blauer has done an excellent study of this phenomenon. I would suggest you review this. He makes great study of the body's natural tendency to respond initially on a primal level (which negates fine motor movements), then moving through a protective mode into a tactical mode. Aikido, for the most part is a "tactical" mode. That is also the case with all martial "arts". The Tony Blauer's SPEAR system provides an excellent "bridge" between the primal (i.e., natural) response to surprise threats/attacks into a more tactical application of one's martial training - whatever that style may be. I have been to SPEAR training and it is VERY effective for dealing with real-life attacks. But can you fight NHB with SPEAR? Tony Blauer himself will be the first person to tell you "NO". However, he does give one a useful tool for dealing with surprise threats (because if it isn't a surprise, generally you CAN walk away) where all "technique" is thrown out the window and moving into your preferred martial mode. The reason we train (in whatever style) is to be able to move more smoothly, skillfully and effectively once we reach the tactical mode.

To bash other martial arts is not only ignorant, but downright disrespectful. ALL martial arts have something to contribute to their practitioners. I have been practicing for the better part of 30 years, and the more I learn the more I realize that I really don't know that much at all. There is a big world out there and there is something to be gleaned from all martial disciplines. Everyone has to find their own path that suits THEM. The reason martial arts even exist is to allow folks to practice something and perhaps one day master it. It is the same with learning how to play the piano. I will even go so far as to say that most "martial arts" aren't even intended for real fighting. I tell my students (civilian and police/military) that is confronted with a combat situation - arm yourself if possible. Samurai warriors were normally armed. They only went "hands on" as a last resort. If you are not in a warrior profession, the real chances of you actually using your art in a combative situation is actually quite remote. However, the lessons you learn from developing strength, resistance to pain, physical/mental/spiritual resiliency, camaraderie, are all things you can use EVERY day.

Martial arts are supposed to be fun! There is always someone out there who can kick your butt! So if you are looking for the magic death touch, I'm sorry to inform you that it does not exist. So let's get past the "my art can lick your art" stuff and get down to the real issue - cultivating the person. It will be much more instructive for everyone.

[Aikibu]

Excwllwnt Post Cameron and I concur 100%.

William Hazen

[Nelson Bricker]

I understand what you are saying philosophically, but if you are in a fight, you are in a fight...you can think what you want about it, reframe it a million ways, but someone hitting you, stabbing you, or what not is what it is, you must recognize the reality of the situation and deal with it appropriately..

Fair enough.
I certainly agree that even if you have the capacity to mentally remove yourself from the fight, you are still physically involved. I think that that is how most people get there to begin with besides. It, to me is important to recognize when a conflict begins before it becomes a fight (there is a fist flying at you). I've always been told if your technique doesn't work, you didn't start soon enough; it might work for other conflicts too. As for the type of fight, I more or less consider anything with rules a competition, and anything without rules a fight. Little basic I know, but it works for me. So that's what I think the thread is mostly about when I post.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Nelson,

I'd agree that it is important to recognize when a conflict begins, before the physical. that is ideal and appropriate. However that predicates that you have that choice.

I think one thing that we struggle with in aikido, which I think is an affect of the way we train is that we assume choice, better yet parity. That is both parties have equal knowledge, equal assumptions, and an agreement about what the rules are and what the "dance" will be.

In reality, we may not have the foresight of choice, it is quite possible (most likely) that most of us that will be in a fight (physically) that choice to be or not be in the fight as been removed from our options. That is, our opponent has closed distance, and attacked. AKA an Ambush.

Do we have choices in an ambush? absolutely, yet we probably don't have a choice to not "be" involved in the fight. We may choose not to return violence. We may choose to be passive. We may choose to fight back, or we may not be able to do anything at alll, because we have been rendered unconscious or dead. (very limited choice).

I think rules always apply. or at least ethics do, which also translate into laws. The perp may choose to ignore them. We may choose to ignore them, or to imply them to a point of incapacitation (minimal force). However, we will always be subject to the aftermath of the fight in some way. (karma if you will).

"work in a fight" is a loaded concept. In some capacity you will be judged by your response an actions, provided you are not incapacitated immediately, and will be held accountable in some capacity, either internally by yourself and your psyche, or by society as a whole.

Other than that...pragmatically....i'd have no issues...what works is what works as you state! Thanks!

[Kevin Leavitt]

Cameron. good post agreed as Mr Hazen states. I highly recommend Tony Blauer's stuff on flinch response, it is on the money!

[Chris Parkerson]

Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I think one thing that we struggle with in aikido, which I think is an affect of the way we train is that we assume choice, better yet parity. That is both parties have equal knowledge, equal assumptions, and an agreement about what the rules are and what the "dance" will be.

Colonel Mark Miles, my Jujitsu teacher never allowed us to bow and tussle Judo/Aikido-style. We would stand in a line, the front man would wait to be pushed from behind by the number 2 man. Number 1 would go into ukemi and the fight was on.

I still like to run randori sessions that way. For those who have not tried it, it can be a real eye opener. You may never recover to a full standing position. Often the only recovery from the push would be a front (face) fall. No real choice, just survive.

[fhatty]

Strangely I doubt many practitioners of any martial art or fighting style would want to meet Ueshiba Sensei to try their best. Foremost for Aikido, as I see from a Judo perspective, is that it can go from zero to 100MPH when needed. Anyone who has seen video of Ueshiba or Shiba Sensei will understand that if the opponent reaches out he will be falling down and often be placed in a maiming position.

I have had the experience to use Judo 3 times in true fighting situations. The last time I was teaching high school at the age of 47. I had just finished a year of training after many years away from the sport. I weighed 155 pounds and stand 5'6". A student, 240 pounds, football player and champion wrestler decided to bear hug me from behind so his friends could take something from my desk. I was seated on a table. He grabbed me very hard. While seated I ducked my shoulder, breaking his grip, grab his right wrist and using a wrist lock led him around the table. He landed face down and I placed my left knee on his elbow. I told him that if he moved I would break his arm.

The class thought they saw me throw him 6' through the air. I explained that Joe was just jumping to keep up with his wrist. It was the best throw I've ever executed and it was done on instinct and training in judo. That is the core of all Martial Arts: training that allows simple and well-executed action to defeat attack.

[fhatty]

Following up I suggest you either Google Ueshiba Sensei or go to You-Tube to watch some excellent footage of his seamless and quite powerful techniques. If Rickson Gracie is aware of these films he should realize that BJJ would have little effect on forceful Aikido. The videos unmistakably demonstrate the proactive side of Aikido. Sensei Ueshiba moves to and disables opponents. He doesn't just wait around for an attack. Watch and marvel.

[DonMagee]

Kevin Leavitt wrote:

Colonel Mark Miles, my Jujitsu teacher never allowed us to bow and tussle Judo/Aikido-style. We would stand in a line, the front man would wait to be pushed from behind by the number 2 man. Number 1 would go into ukemi and the fight was on.

I still like to run randori sessions that way. For those who have not tried it, it can be a real eye opener. You may never recover to a full standing position. Often the only recovery from the push would be a front (face) fall. No real choice, just survive.

We do that in judo a lot. We also start back to back the instructor says begin and you have to spin and attack.

I teach a judo class once a week for my bjj school. I'm constantly trying to find better training methods for our MMA guys and even just the bjj guys to improve their ability to keep their balance and win the takedown. Some of the things I do I feel are unique to my little judo class.

We do judo with open hand slaps allowed, judo no gi, judo with only foot sweeps, single, and double leg takedowns allowed. Judo with all illegal throws allowed (like bjj ruleset standup). Judo where one person starts with a underarm bear hug on the other. Judo where one person spins around as fast as he can for 15 seconds before the randori starts (to mimic being knocked hard and still trying to stand up and get the takedown). Judo were both partys spin around as fast as they can for 15 seconds and then randori. Judo where one person has to randori another with a rubber band around their waist being pulled on by two other people. We do judo where only one throw is allowed the entire randori match, so your opponent knows what you are going to do, and you have to really be creative to break his balance.

We also do a lot cardio work while throwing along the way. One thing I like to do recently is get 3 ukes out on the mat, each staggered one-third up and across the mat like so (the X are ukes)
-------------------------------------
| ................................ |
|.......................... X .....|
| ..............X..................|
|.....X............................|
|...................................|
------------------------------------

The rest of the class lines up on left side, they run to the uke and throw him as fast as they can (sometimes uke can resist, sometimes not). Then the uke gets up and runs to touch the edge of the mat in front of the next uke, then runs to the uke and throws him as fast as possible, that uke repeats this process, the last uke runs a lap around the mat (or does squats, pushups, etc) and joins the back of the line. This is a constant stream of throwing where you should be running or throwing non-stop for 3 minutes. Then we have a 30 second break and repeat at least 2 more times. After that we do kumi kata or some level of randori.

Why do I bring this up? Because I think these kind of exercises are what is needed to really build effective skill quickly. This kind of training is what I feel was missing in my aikido training, and why a lot of my aikido training never sank into my skull. I think you need that total package of a) getting in the best physical shape you can, b) working technique, and c) learning to deal with working while out of it, exusted, and with a attacker trying to impose his will on you.

Of course a lot of people think my training methods are too harsh. I have a hard rule to do everything I ask anyone else to do and I sometimes have trouble making it though my own class. I've scared off a few students and really narrowed it down to people who truly want to be effective in their area. We have a couple guys interested in it for MMA, some for bjj, some just for judo, and even a couple guys who do it for self defense. I think we meet all those needs without a problem. To me, this is truely the sign of effective training method, where you can apply what you are learning to multiple situations are not dependent on a single type of combat, or a single attack to make what you are doing work. I always say that just because you are not going to be a professional fighter, does not mean you shouldn't train as close to one as possible.

[DonMagee]

Strangely I doubt many practitioners of any martial art or fighting style would want to meet Ueshiba Sensei to try their best. Foremost for Aikido, as I see from a Judo perspective, is that it can go from zero to 100MPH when needed. Anyone who has seen video of Ueshiba or Shiba Sensei will understand that if the opponent reaches out he will be falling down and often be placed in a maiming position.

I have had the experience to use Judo 3 times in true fighting situations. The last time I was teaching high school at the age of 47. I had just finished a year of training after many years away from the sport. I weighed 155 pounds and stand 5'6". A student, 240 pounds, football player and champion wrestler decided to bear hug me from behind so his friends could take something from my desk. I was seated on a table. He grabbed me very hard. While seated I ducked my shoulder, breaking his grip, grab his right wrist and using a wrist lock led him around the table. He landed face down and I placed my left knee on his elbow. I told him that if he moved I would break his arm.

The class thought they saw me throw him 6' through the air. I explained that Joe was just jumping to keep up with his wrist. It was the best throw I've ever executed and it was done on instinct and training in judo. That is the core of all Martial Arts: training that allows simple and well-executed action to defeat attack.

My main question is, why are there not more practitioners with the skill level of the old greats? To me this is a sign of a problem in training methods. The goal of teaching should be to produce students as good as if not better then the teacher. If you can not consistently produce good results, then something is wrong. Sure, in the classes I teach at the college I get kids who just can't get computers and fail. But the majority of the kids get high marks, a lot get A's. Those who get A's grasp everything I thought they needed to know, and should be able to take what I though them to a higher level then what I can give them.

AKA, I've been there and done that, so you don't have too. Now that I caught you up, get on the horse and see what lies down the road.

[Chris Parkerson]

Don,

For what it is worth, I love your training methods. I think I will adopt some of them.

I am constantly looking for ways to get people out of the conscious mind and into their subconscious atavistic self. That is the place where the self simply trusts the body to perform because it has been trained to do so.

Who was it that said, "train like your are in competition match and when the day of the match comes, it is just another day of training.

[Aikibu]

My main question is, why are there not more practitioners with the skill level of the old greats? To me this is a sign of a problem in training methods. The goal of teaching should be to produce students as good as if not better then the teacher. If you can not consistently produce good results, then something is wrong. Sure, in the classes I teach at the college I get kids who just can't get computers and fail. But the majority of the kids get high marks, a lot get A's. Those who get A's grasp everything I thought they needed to know, and should be able to take what I though them to a higher level then what I can give them.

AKA, I've been there and done that, so you don't have too. Now that I caught you up, get on the horse and see what lies down the road.

I think your thinking is a bit flawed as to why supposedly there aren't a number of practitioners who match the old greats. First off... There are... I can think of a dozen right off the top of my head. The talent is there although talent plays a small part. O'Sensei, Kano, Helio Gracie, John Hackleman and the "greats' all had something in common. Thier lives were/are the Martial Arts. They lived... breathed... and ate... the Martial Arts every day. Almost every waking moment of the greats were spent improving thier practice. Very few of the folks I know (including me) who practice have this this devotion but those that do can and do achieve the same level of "greatness." I submit that anyone who can devote the time, energy, and complete total dedication to thier practice WILL achieve the same level of "greatness" over time.

When I was young I was an Airborne Ranger in a Ranger Battalion. Every waking moment was spent in the pursuit of killing people as quickly and as efficiently as possible with any and every weapon we could get our hands on. Those who did not have complete and total focus on this task were sent packing to other units. The standards were simple. You were either one of the best Infantry Soldiers in the world or you were out. I submit that very few instructors in the Martial Arts have the same kind of mindset and why should they....They have lives to lead...families and jobs too.

My point with my anology is I have "tasted" what it is like to have complete and total focus on being the best at something. After three years of this kind of practice I realized that all I needed to do was apply this kind of mind/heart set to anything and I could achieve the same result.Sadly very few people I know have had this kind of life experiance. Pick any sport or any Martial Art... Apply this kind of dedication.... And you will get to the top of the mountain or die trying. That is what it takes.

Funny thing is as far as Military Achievements go being a Ranger is not the top rung on the ladder. LOL

The task is simple to define...Do you have what it takes to be the best? Are you willing to go to any lengths and make any sacrifice required to achieve it? The result is always the same if you do and can be applied to any practice you set your heart on. You will be one of those "greats."

Training methods have nothing to do with it Don. look to the heart of the man taking the training... look to your own heart... How far you go and what you accomplish is completely up to you.

If you're being taught by someone who does not have the same fire in his eye Move On...You'll find fellow travelers on the journey...If you are the one teaching well... You have an obligation to lead by example... to hold yourself to a higher standard...And to practice hard...

Cynics bore me....They are usually folks looking for an excuse not to push themsleves to be the best they can.

The "Old Greats" all understood this...They did not look to anyone else to "teach it" to them...As O'Sensei once said,

"Instructors can impart only a fraction of the teaching. It is through your own devoted practice that the mysteries of the Art of Peace are brought to life."

William Hazen

[DonMagee]

I think your thinking is a bit flawed as to why supposedly there aren't a number of practitioners who match the old greats. First off... There are... I can think of a dozen right off the top of my head. The talent is there although talent plays a small part. O'Sensei, Kano, Helio Gracie, John Hackleman and the "greats' all had something in common. Thier lives were/are the Martial Arts. They lived... breathed... and ate... the Martial Arts every day. Almost every waking moment of the greats were spent improving thier practice. Very few of the folks I know (including me) who practice have this this devotion but those that do can and do achieve the same level of "greatness." I submit that anyone who can devote the time, energy, and complete total dedication to thier practice WILL achieve the same level of "greatness" over time.

When I was young I was an Airborne Ranger in a Ranger Battalion. Every waking moment was spent in the pursuit of killing people as quickly and as efficiently as possible with any and every weapon we could get our hands on. Those who did not have complete and total focus on this task were sent packing to other units. The standards were simple. You were either one of the best Infantry Soldiers in the world or you were out. I submit that very few instructors in the Martial Arts have the same kind of mindset and why should they....They have lives to lead...families and jobs too.

My point with my anology is I have "tasted" what it is like to have complete and total focus on being the best at something. After three years of this kind of practice I realized that all I needed to do was apply this kind of mind/heart set to anything and I could achieve the same result.Sadly very few people I know have had this kind of life experiance. Pick any sport or any Martial Art... Apply this kind of dedication.... And you will get to the top of the mountain or die trying. That is what it takes.

Funny thing is as far as Military Achievements go being a Ranger is not the top rung on the ladder. LOL

The task is simple to define...Do you have what it takes to be the best? Are you willing to go to any lengths and make any sacrifice required to achieve it? The result is always the same if you do and can be applied to any practice you set your heart on. You will be one of those "greats."

Training methods have nothing to do with it Don. look to the heart of the man taking the training... look to your own heart... How far you go and what you accomplish is completely up to you.

If you're being taught by someone who does not have the same fire in his eye Move On...You'll find fellow travelers on the journey...If you are the one teaching well... You have an obligation to lead by example... to hold yourself to a higher standard...And to practice hard...

Cynics bore me....They are usually folks looking for an excuse not to push themsleves to be the best they can.

The "Old Greats" all understood this...They did not look to anyone else to "teach it" to them...As O'Sensei once said,

"Instructors can impart only a fraction of the teaching. It is through your own devoted practice that the mysteries of the Art of Peace are brought to life."

William Hazen

I'm sorry, I simply can not agree. While it is a personal responsibility to improve yourself, you should not be alone in the pursuit. This is why you train with an instructor. It is the job of the instructor to push you beyond your own personal limits and beyond your breaking point. The training method is the way this is done. Great boxers will never be made by standing in a line throwing jab, cross, hook. Great bjj players will not be made doing nothing but hip movement drills and complaint armbars. Great judo players will not be made doing nothing but randori all day.The best of the best in anything in the world have a training method that developed that skill better then the people lessor than they are.

You mentioned the Gracies, perfect example of what I am talking about. They are no longer the best at bjj in the world. Their students took the art further then they did, developed better training methods, stole from other sports and arts, and made something bigger than what it was. I'm not nearly the best blue belt in my club, but I've been to a few clubs that still train the old way and found out that I was in better shape, had better technique, and better balance then most of the blue belts in those clubs. I've been to other clubs with a even better training method then what I do, and I found I was out classed by everyone there with the same amount of experience as I. I trained in a judo club that did nothing but standing uchi komi for 2 years. Almost no randori, no moving uchi komi, hardly ever a throw line. Of course the brown belts could beat me up, I sucked at every tournament I went to. Then I switched to a gym that trains properly, with a good balance of uchi komi, strength and cardio drills, moving uchi komi, throw lines, moving throw lines, and lots of randori. A few months later I went back to my old gym, I cleaned the mat with all those brown belts. Why? I think the answer is simple. At the old club, they were doing judo, but with a training method that developed the skills much much slower than what could be done. At the other club, they were training judo in such a way to really build skill quickly in every area needed. The same is true with the ground work. In most judo clubs I've been to (except the ones in chicago), mat work is practiced like this. You are shown a pin or submission, you drill it a few seconds, then you do like maybe 1 minute of sparing. When I went to bjj, I was destroyed on the mat by white belts I had a few years of aikido, and almost 2 years of judo. Why? Because their training method was designed to produce better mat work. When I took that mat work back to my judo club, even after just a couple months, I was the "king" of mat work. Today, most of my judo partners train in bjj and have brought that training method with them. We evolved our training method to improve our abilities.

This is in stark contrast to what I've seen in my experience in aikido. I have not heard of anyone taking the art greater than Ueshiba. It seems like his students were not able to reach his level (at least that is what I'm told) and I have not heard of people reaching the levels of his greatest students even. To make matters worse, I see a lot of people modifying their training methods and techniques without ever getting in a fight and finding out how the old ones worked. Simply put, they have no point of reference to be making those changes, so the results are unknown.

But don't get me wrong, I still train from time to time in aikido. But I don't go for the work out. I go to get ideas that I can practice using my training methods. Sense switching to this method of practice, my success rates have gone up. Although my aikido instructor would probably tell me what I am doing is not aikido, and maybe even that I have no right to do it.

And yes, I really think everyone can train as I do. I'm not a jock. If I can do it, I can't see why anyone can't do it. Maybe a little more or less intense, or more or less often, but it can't be done.

[Aikibu]

I'm sorry, I simply can not agree. While it is a personal responsibility to improve yourself, you should not be alone in the pursuit. This is why you train with an instructor. It is the job of the instructor to push you beyond your own personal limits and beyond your breaking point. The training method is the way this is done. Great boxers will never be made by standing in a line throwing jab, cross, hook. Great bjj players will not be made doing nothing but hip movement drills and complaint armbars. Great judo players will not be made doing nothing but randori all day.The best of the best in anything in the world have a training method that developed that skill better then the people lessor than they are.

Not my experiance at all so we'll just have to disagree. I hear this kind of excuse all the time. "It's not ME Sensei It's the training!" Training methods are very important but they only get you half way. The philosophy of instruction I was taught in the Martial Arts is slightly different and seems to produce good results...It is my "job" to take a person to his/her limit and then show them the point beyond it. Either they step into a new world or they don't. Success or failure means nothing at this stage... Only effort. Pick any cliche in this regard but I like this one... It does not matter how many times you fall down It's about wether or not you have the intestinal fortitude to stand back up and do it again.

You mentioned the Gracies, perfect example of what I am talking about. They are no longer the best at bjj in the world. Their students took the art further then they did, developed better training methods, stole from other sports and arts, and made something bigger than what it was. I'm not nearly the best blue belt in my club, but I've been to a few clubs that still train the old way and found out that I was in better shape, had better technique, and better balance then most of the blue belts in those clubs. I've been to other clubs with a even better training method then what I do, and I found I was out classed by everyone there with the same amount of experience as I. I trained in a judo club that did nothing but standing uchi komi for 2 years. Almost no randori, no moving uchi komi, hardly ever a throw line. Of course the brown belts could beat me up, I sucked at every tournament I went to. Then I switched to a gym that trains properly, with a good balance of uchi komi, strength and cardio drills, moving uchi komi, throw lines, moving throw lines, and lots of randori. A few months later I went back to my old gym, I cleaned the mat with all those brown belts. Why? I think the answer is simple. At the old club, they were doing judo, but with a training method that developed the skills much much slower than what could be done. At the other club, they were training judo in such a way to really build skill quickly in every area needed. The same is true with the ground work. In most judo clubs I've been to (except the ones in chicago), mat work is practiced like this. You are shown a pin or submission, you drill it a few seconds, then you do like maybe 1 minute of sparing. When I went to bjj, I was destroyed on the mat by white belts I had a few years of aikido, and almost 2 years of judo. Why? Because their training method was designed to produce better mat work. When I took that mat work back to my judo club, even after just a couple months, I was the "king" of mat work. Today, most of my judo partners train in bjj and have brought that training method with them. We evolved our training method to improve our abilities. Again training is important I agree However at the risk of repeating myself once again You make my point most convincingly so I don't see why you disagree. Folks took what they were taught and made it better. I find your thinking puzzling in this regard unless of course it's all leading to this....

This is in stark contrast to what I've seen in my experience in aikido. I have not heard of anyone taking the art greater than Ueshiba. It seems like his students were not able to reach his level (at least that is what I'm told) and I have not heard of people reaching the levels of his greatest students even. To make matters worse, I see a lot of people modifying their training methods and techniques without ever getting in a fight and finding out how the old ones worked. Simply put, they have no point of reference to be making those changes, so the results are unknown.

Sorry Don but with all due respect I understand this is your experiance. I submit to you that my exposure to Aikido is far more broad based than yours. Like you said "That is what you were told." Did you ever think the folks who told you that did not have any idea or experiance on the subject either? LOL I think I know where this comes from The old Hero Worship Syndrome regarding O'Sensei...This has mutated over the years to the point where some here in the West treat O'Sensei as a Demi-God. You can thank John Stevens for that. Let me say these plainly. The "Old Greats" were men. Thats right men...They did not descend from the heavens... At best one or two my have had great spiritual awakenings... But at the end of the day they were Mortal. That means in my world anyone else here can reach the top of the mountain like they did. 99% of most folks don't want to undertake this task. They're just satisfied with the Journey. All of these Greats I have mentioned recognized that thier Arts were not complete They EXPECTED thier direct students to take them further...Some did and you have many flavors of Aikido now and I will tell you what I may draw allot of heat for this but some of O'Sensei's students lived up to O'Sensei's legacy and the Sword has been passed on to this generation.

It puzzles why you think improving on something somehow lessens the original. All I know is that we have more than one portrait in our Shomen. :)

But don't get me wrong, I still train from time to time in aikido. But I don't go for the work out. I go to get ideas that I can practice using my training methods. Sense switching to this method of practice, my success rates have gone up. Although my aikido instructor would probably tell me what I am doing is not aikido, and maybe even that I have no right to do it.

And yes, I really think everyone can train as I do. I'm not a jock. If I can do it, I can't see why anyone can't do it. Maybe a little more or less intense, or more or less often, but it can't be done.

Good on ya Don. :) I for one appreciate your insights. Do yourself a favor and continue to explore Aikido. You may just find your own path up the mountain and someone to guide you there. :)

Take Care my Aiki-Web Friend. :)

William Hazen

[Pierre Kewcharoen]

Aikido practitioners don't participate in UFC. But elements of aikido are present, you are just too clueless to see it.

BJJ is good for one vs one. But it won't help you in the street where weapons are involved. Nor while you lock up with one guy while his buddies pound the living crap out of you.

Have a nice day!

[Kevin Leavitt]

Pierre, and when you speak of BJJ, you are speaking from a point of the fact that you have spent time studying it and are ranked in it in someway? Or is this just your opinion?

[Pierre Kewcharoen]

Pierre, and when you speak of BJJ, you are speaking from a point of the fact that you have spent time studying it and are ranked in it in someway? Or is this just your opinion?

A little of both. I am one to believe that no martial art is greater than another. In order to truly be the best martial artist, you will need to learn them ALL.

It seems the posts i have read so far is comparing street fighting with self defense with tournament fighting which are all completely different. One art is good for one thing but bad for another. I am not knocking bjj at all. I am merely giving my opinion from my experience. I mean no disrespect if I have offended you.

However I am a firm believer that aikido works in a fight whether it be defending or preventing.

[jennifer paige smith]

[QUOTE=Pierre Kewcharoen;199090

However I am a firm believer that aikido works in a fight whether it be defending or preventing.[/QUOTE]

worked for me.

[stuarttheobald]

did you know that Greg Jackson, one of the premier MMA trainers, has his foundation in Aikido...I watched an itnerview with him the other night where he really rated aikido...and lets be honest, he would know

[Guilty Spark]

I've used Aikido in fist fights at bars and while deployed overseas with the military.
Thats not the mighty UFC mind you but I'm glad aikido worked when I needed it too.

"But it still doesn't work in UFC!"

Sure I accept that.
That however won't seem as important when 4 or 5 guys try and jump you at 3 am when your with you're wife leaving a bar and you thump them.

It REALLY won't seem that important when your surrounded by a bunch of people and one of them tries to grab your gun and you have the presence of mind and physical ability to stop him.

PS Kevin, I took your advice and tried out BJJ. Love it. I'm going to supplement my Aikido with BJJ, I was pretty surprised at how I managed to apply some Aikido locks and stuff like kneeling technique to my first BJJ class.

Pierre I think perhaps you're buying into what you read a little too much.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Pierre, you certainly didn't offend me in anyway. I was just asking you to clarify the basis for your statement. That is all.

Experiences are different and it is hard to generalize across the Arts. Your experiences may be different than mine, and that is okay with me.

I only ask that when someone has an opinion about a particular topic that they qualify it with whatever experience base they are coming from, if it is from actual experience, or from watching youtube, or what not.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Grant, glad to hear that you have looked into BJJ. It simply is wonderful for giving you a different perspective on jiujistu based arts!

Yeah from time to time you catch guys in aikido like stuff from the knees, especially the new guys!

Curious once you do it and they experience it how quickly they learn to keep there hand/arms in close?

[Pierre Kewcharoen]

Pierre, you certainly didn't offend me in anyway. I was just asking you to clarify the basis for your statement. That is all.

Experiences are different and it is hard to generalize across the Arts. Your experiences may be different than mine, and that is okay with me.

I only ask that when someone has an opinion about a particular topic that they qualify it with whatever experience base they are coming from, if it is from actual experience, or from watching youtube, or what not.

I did a bit of jujitsu to complement my aikido (mostly testing scenarios out). To be more clear, my experience from bjj is that it is primarily consisting of close quarter grappling and groundwork. It is used to help a smaller guy defeat a much bigger person by getting in close. As far to my knowledge, I have not seen any form of bjj that can take on multiple attackers( BUT I COULD BE WRONG) I am by no means an expert. But I have experienced what it feels like to be in a armbar, arm triangle, kimura lock, and leg lock. Had only one gi choke done on me once.
Honestly, its alot of fun and increases your fitness. However, the only downside is that the energy expenditure can be too great sometimes.

I am also a 'brute force" type of person so me prefering aikido might be seem like a contradiction. I also like being on my feet than on my back on the ground.

[Ron Tisdale]

BJJ is good for one vs one. But it won't help you in the street where weapons are involved. Nor while you lock up with one guy while his buddies pound the living crap out of you.

There may be some (or even a lot) of truth to that...but this I DO know...

the high level of general fitness and conditioning that you see in the UFC would be a GREAT asset to anyone defending themselves. Add a little out of the cage thinking and poof! You may have adaquate self defence.

Or not...depends on the person, same as always.

Best,
Ron

[Kevin Leavitt]

Yes, the issue is looking at it through a literal or one dimensional filter. Sure literally, you spend a great deal of time dealing with one opponent very close in or on the ground.

The reality of it is that you get much more out of the training than just that.

I kind of equate it to this analogy:

We all form the perception that computers can multi-task, that is, deal with multiple inputs and outputs simutaneously, in reality it deals with them one at a time, it just does it quickly and efficiently by taking advantage of the gaps or space that exist between various actions.

Multiple opponent encounters work the same way. We never deal with them all at once, but one opponent at a time. The trick is to do it efficiently, one opponent at a time, and take advantage of the gaps.

The 2nd order effects of BJJ methodology is that you learn how to deal with opponents VERY efficiently at the critical range of the fight. Once you get proficient, it is much easier to "multi-task" that range and deal with multiple opponents. You will find that guys at the purple belt and above range (4 - 10 years of experience) to be quite proficient and competent at many fighting ranges.

Cursory, one would assume that aikido does a better job at training this, than say BJJ. the reality of it is, that it is not necessarily true.

You have to look past the practice of HOW you are training (methodology, and look at WHAT you are training (endstate). It is enlightening when you start looking at the ARTS as methodologies to achieve a desired endstate rather than the literal endstate.

On the energy expenditure issue I'd offer this perspective.

You are correct, beginning or novice BJJer DO expend a great deal of energy to make the gains that they make. However, experienced ones do not over commit and they are very, very efficient in movement.

I have grappled 30 novice soldiers in a row, gassed many of them, submitted all of them, and I was maintaining an moderate aerobic heart rate!

Also, in Real Fights (TM), you will find that you do expend quite a bit of energy, heck there is alot on the line usually, emotions run high, and someone usually has exploited a significant tactical advantage. So, there is much benefit to training at this levels of oxygen deficit. (Train as you Fight).

I hear you on the Brute Force issue. I tend to be that way as well by nature based on my size and mental conditioning as a soldier. Ironically, I found that BJJ actually help me deal with this better than aikido. Actually it serves as therapy for me to make my aikido much more lighter. I approach BJJ no different than aikido, I use the exact same amount of force or rather I try not to.

BJJ at first is intimidating, especiallly for aikidoka that has grown comfortable with aikido. You feel like you know nothing, things happen quickly, and you use force to prevent bad things from happening.

If you stick with it for say a year....you will start to find you aikido again in it...at least that has been my experiences. After 4 years, I can know sometime talk somewhat competently about how the two arts focus on the same concepts.

Check out Roy Dean's website for a good idea about how well it works!

http://www.roydeanacademy.com/

[Aristeia]

If you stick with it for say a year....you will start to find you aikido again in it...at least that has been my experiences. Absolutely! The more I train BJJ the more I rediscover my Aikido

[Pierre Kewcharoen]

Thanks for the info Kevin!

[Sam Turnage]

Thanks, Kevin

Good imput as always:)

[Robert Cowham]

Can I put in a plea to lay this thread to rest and close it to further comments?

It does span 8 years and 48 pages...

If someone is desperate to resurrect an old thread then let them make a convincing case in a new one?!

For reference on an idea:

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/BuildingCommunitieswithSo.html

<<<
Q. Your list of topics is sorted wrong. It should put the topic with the most recent reply first, rather than listing them based on the time of the original post.

A. It could do that; that's what many web-based forums do. But when you do that certain topics tend to float near the top forever, because people will be willing to argue about H1B visas, or what's wrong with Computer Science in college, until the end of the universe. Every day 100 new people arrive in the forum for the first time, and they start at the top of the list, and they dive into that topic with gusto.

The way I do it has two advantages. One, topics rapidly go away, so conversation remains relatively interesting. Eventually people have to just stop arguing about a given point.
>>>>

Just an forum-aikido related thought :)

Robert

[Aikibu]

I hope this thread never dies but grows to take over the entire internet with Aiki...:D

William Hazen

[Kevin Leavitt]

Thanks Robert for helping us get one step closer to our goal to hit 2000 post!

:)

[mathewjgano]

Thanks Robert for helping us get one step closer to our goal to hit 2000 post!

:)

LOL! When you put it that way...count me in on this action! Muahahahhahaaaah!evileyes :D

[lbb]

Can I put in a plea to lay this thread to rest and close it to further comments?
Seconded. This whole argument is the dumbest thing since dog sweaters. I vote for the creation of an "angels dancing on the head of a pin" arguments, so people who like that sort of thing can have their very own space, and the rest of us won't be plagued with the neverending "yes it is" "no it isn't" "argument a" "argument b" "yes but argument c" "oh yeah well argument q" "hey, argument a" "no, argument b"....on and on forever. All well and good for those who like it, but for those who don't, it's like watching people pick their noses.

[Chris Raihl]

Actually just bought my Pitt a "I hate Michael Vick" sweater for camping :)

On the flip side I am back doing Aikido after being away for a couple of years. I had moved and since then I had been doing Gracie Barra BJJ and SSF (Shamrock Submission Fighting). If anyone is familiar about Mr Shamrock's program you can hear him talk about "Taking one's energy" quite frequently when transitioning from one move to the next ... all very Aiki. Anyway - I found the same in BJJ and it helped me see Aikido in a way I had not before.

Going back to this thread ... I guess I will just say that I do not plan to find out. It is not why I am back doing Aikido. I am back in Aikido because I am of the opinion that apart from the Budo aspect it takes my other martial arts experience to the next level ... including my Aikido. Maybe I am wrong, but I am sure because of the many facets of Aikido we probably all take it for different reasons.

Respectfully,

Chris.
:ai: :ki: :do:

[Cyrijl]

Sorry for commenting. But these recurring themes drive me a little batty. Kevin has replied very well, but what is one more drop to the ocean?

. As far to my knowledge, I have not seen any form of bjj that can take on multiple attackers( BUT I COULD BE WRONG).
Nothing is going to help with multiple attackers short of a weapon or running. People who seem to think BJJ is about falling on the ground and flailing around forget that striking too also takes time, you need to aim and you only have two arms. If you need self-defense, then modern martial arts are not the place to start. Jogging, a nice smile and a good attitude is the best self-defense


I am by no means an expert. But I have experienced what it feels like to be in a armbar, arm triangle, kimura lock, and leg lock. Had only one gi choke done on me once.
Don't forget these techniques are designed to incapacitate people and some of the choke and strangles designed to kill. When in training you don't go full throttle on your partner. The same is true with aikido, you could literally thrown someone on their head causeing serious damage. so just because you had tried some BJJ techniques does not mean you necessarily understand their full potential.


Honestly, its alot of fun and increases your fitness. However, the only downside is that the energy expenditure can be too great sometimes.

Like Kevin said, someone who has trained in BJJ for even a short bit soon learns how to control their breathing and heart rate. On our open mats on saturday I typical roll for an hour non-stop (at least 45minutes)....no break, no water. I go against much stronger and much more skilled guys than me. But you learn, the worst technique in BJJ is not having breath control. Similarly, when I go judo, I gas out very quickly due to nervousness. The same would be true if I did true Aikido randoori. When you are not used to something you panic and breathe heavier. As you learn to relax and adapt you can go longer and longer.

Again, why are we so obsessed with fighting? :)

[Ron Tisdale]

All well and good for those who like it, but for those who don't, it's like watching people pick their noses.

Heh, well, personally, I always look away when people do things like that! :D

B,
R

[Ron Tisdale]

The same is true with aikido, you could literally thrown someone on their head causeing serious damage.

Whenever I hear something like that, I remember a Karo Paresian (sp) fight, where he threw someone on their head at least 5 times in the fight. He still lost the fight...

B,
R (some of the best darn judo I've ever seen in a MMA event)

PS Still not sure he REALLY lost the fight, I'd have hated to take those falls on concrete...

[mathewjgano]

Seconded. This whole argument is the dumbest thing since dog sweaters. I vote for the creation of an "angels dancing on the head of a pin" arguments, so people who like that sort of thing can have their very own space, and the rest of us won't be plagued with the neverending "yes it is" "no it isn't" "argument a" "argument b" "yes but argument c" "oh yeah well argument q" "hey, argument a" "no, argument b"....on and on forever. All well and good for those who like it, but for those who don't, it's like watching people pick their noses.

I dunno...
personally I've found this thread to be pretty usefull. If I get tired of what's going on in it at any given time, I disengage from it. I can understand why so many folks dislike this thread. It's fertile ground for contentious, half-assed remarks (many of which I've contributed). Still, while it may not have been initiated very intelligently, the underlying issues (like whether or not we as practicioners of Aikido want to be mechanically effective in "fighting") are still valid ones.
As for the nose-pickers and their audiences: while I'm not saying this applies to you, my slightly misanthropic opinion is that most people like to watch while complaining...kind of a "love to hate it" kind of thing maybe. They may not like to look at the booger itself, but they sure do seem to love looking at the nose-picker.:crazy: :yuck: :hypno:

[lbb]

I dunno...
personally I've found this thread to be pretty usefull. If I get tired of what's going on in it at any given time, I disengage from it.

But it's always. At. The Top.

I agree, sort old dopey threads to the bottom. To the bottom!

[mathewjgano]

But it's always. At. The Top.

I agree, sort old dopey threads to the bottom. To the bottom!

Good point...I guess it is a little like those pesky pop-ups most of us would rather not have to always actively ignore.
I wonder if it would be difficult to make the AikiWeb format more customizable...similar to sites like Yahoo.

[dbotari]

But it's always. At. The Top.

I agree, sort old dopey threads to the bottom. To the bottom!

Now come on Mary, no one forces you to click the link. You can exercise some self control and bypass the link or give into the dark side and click it to see what insight (or lack thereof) the thread holds.

Cheers,

Dan

[Cady Goldfield]

Mary,
Remember the "good old days" at Jae Kim's, when we didn't have time for this kind of stuff? No deep discussions. No endless analyses of hypothetical situations. We just... trained and found out the hard way what worked or didn't in a fight. And if one thing didn't work, we found something else that did work. ;)

[Ron Tisdale]

You two used to train together?? Wow...never knew that!
See??!?!?!? Something interesting DID come out of this thread!

Best,
Ron

[Cady Goldfield]

Small world, huh Ron?

What's that six-times-removed theory? That everyone is somehow connected to each other by no more than six in-between people/connectors. Hm. Or was that supposed to be that we're all somehow connected to Steven Seagal by six people... :D

[Dieter Haffner]

Can not ... resist ... temptation ... to big ... must not click ... Submit Reply

But Kevin asked for it.
No William, I'd rather see the "other" thread rise from the grave! :)
Shamefully bowing my deepest bow :blush:

I deserve to be banned for at least a week. :sorry:

[Kevin Leavitt]

Dieter,
the first rule of fight club is:

You cannot talk about this thread

the second rule of fight club is:

You cannot resurrect this thread.

Your actions are irreprehensible and very, very low...shameful!

[mickeygelum]

LEAVE BRITTANY ALONE !!!!! ...umm...I mean...:eek:

[DonMagee]

In the worlds of the strongest KI master ever (well until his son came of age)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

[Dewey]

ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!

The only way you can kill it is by destroying the brain or severing the head...it just keeps coming back if you don't!!!

http://www.geocities.com/bp_dewey/zombie.jpg

[CNYMike]

ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!

The only way you can kill it is by destroying the brain or severing the head...it just keeps coming back if you don't!!!

http://www.geocities.com/bp_dewey/zombie.jpg

Severing the head, huh? Time to get the bokens out and start practicing decapitations. Remember, In The End, There Can Be Only One (Zombie Thread (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?p=204078#post204078)). :)

[Elijah211Barr]

Your opinion of the art is so far from the truth. The founder himself taught that the importance of atemi over teqnique.

[Cyrijl]

Who are you responding to?


10-17-2000, 05:14 PM
"joeysola"
IP: --.217.144.230
Join Date: Aug 2000
Anonymous User

[Buck]

ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!

The only way you can kill it is by destroying the brain or severing the head...it just keeps coming back if you don't!!!

http://www.geocities.com/bp_dewey/zombie.jpg

Why is it that Zombies Threads can't run, but they can still catch up with you?

Why are people so obsessed with these types of questions? Surgical scalpels can be great weapons, right!

[DonMagee]

Looking back on this thread, besides being an ass, I still agree with everything I posted.

That's a first.

[Kevin Leavitt]

Same here Don. I do wish I could go back to around 1996 and look through the archives of the old Aiki list serv and see some of the crap I posted...I bet I would not have the same opinions, beliefs, or ideas!

[JamesC]

There's no way i'm reading the entire thread...lol

So i'll make it brief, even though i'm probably feeding the troll.

I used to practice in "MMA" under the Ajarn Chai, Inosanto, and Suwanda lineage of martial arts. One of the instructors at my school trained in aikido as well as the UFA. He was very, very good at both. His passion was in the arts.

Long story short, i've seen him use his aikido in crazy ways on the ground. Ikkyo, sankyo, etc using silat spins. Just stuff like that.

It's all in how you train. The more you train the more you'll start to realize that.

[Dewey]

There's no way i'm reading the entire thread...lol

Are you kidding? This thread has become a musha shugyo of sorts here on AikiWeb!

[Kevin Leavitt]

Can you name the first time you posted to this thread?

Mine was post 189 back in 2004. ahh memories.

A little trivia: the thread died back in 2000. It lay dormant for about 3 years and was revived in 2003.

Can you name the poster who revived the thread in 2003 that has been going strong ever since?

We should have an award like the "Joey Sola post award" :)

[CSFurious]

this really makes me laugh, i.e., the guy you are talking about had to train in JKD to make his Aikido more effective

i started in Aikido to shodan, trained in Daito-Ryu & now train at a JKD Concepts school

i am almost ready to come back to Aikido

anyway, you basically prove the point that an Aikidoka who has no other martial arts background is going to have some trouble in the translation from dojo to actual combat

the length & timeframe of this thread simply demonstrates why this debate will never end

There's no way i'm reading the entire thread...lol

So i'll make it brief, even though i'm probably feeding the troll.

I used to practice in "MMA" under the Ajarn Chai, Inosanto, and Suwanda lineage of martial arts. One of the instructors at my school trained in aikido as well as the UFA. He was very, very good at both. His passion was in the arts.

Long story short, i've seen him use his aikido in crazy ways on the ground. Ikkyo, sankyo, etc using silat spins. Just stuff like that.

It's all in how you train. The more you train the more you'll start to realize that.

[CNYMike]

this really makes me laugh, i.e., the guy you are talking about had to train in JKD to make his Aikido more effective

Funny you should say that, because my thinking about Aikido since coming back has been informed by my experince in the JKD universe, specifically Sifu Dan's mantra of "No one art has all the answers but everything has something to offer." Aikido has something to offer. Figuring out what that is is another matter! Simple idea, but a lot of work to realize it.

.... you basically prove the point that an Aikidoka who has no other martial arts background is going to have some trouble in the translation from dojo to actual combat ....

Maybe .... but neither of us is a Aikidoist with no other experience, so neither of us can really say one way or the other.

[lbb]

Can you name the first time you posted to this thread?

Mine was post 189 back in 2004. ahh memories.

A little trivia: the thread died back in 2000. It lay dormant for about 3 years and was revived in 2003.

Can you name the poster who revived the thread in 2003 that has been going strong ever since?

We should have an award like the "Joey Sola post award" :)

So how come threads that aren't an endless infantile babble of "yes it is" "no it isn't" get stuffed for "lack of aikido content", and this foolishness is apparently enshrined for posterity?

:circle: beats :triangle:
:square: beats :circle:
:triangle: beats :square:

[Kevin Leavitt]

Heck I don't know Mary. I guess it simply seems to have "strong KI" or something.

I personally think that this thread is rich with good, honest, grass roots content!

[DonMagee]

I think there is a lot of good content in this thread, just mixed with mindless crap. If we could cut the crap, it would be a interesting read. Good points are made on both sides, then a bunch of crap is posted in the middle.

[dps]

10-18-2000, 03:46 AM

No disrespect, but why do I feel like we've had this discussion before?

Wow, deja vu all over again.

David

[CSFurious]

very true

however, all martial arts systems including Aikido are ultimately false (this idea comes from a book called "Living the Martial Way")

as to no other experience, the first martial art that i trained in was Aikido so i can unequivocally state that i did not even begin to really understand Aikido until i started training in Daito-ryu (4 years after i started Aikido); as to JKD, that taught me how to be an offensive martial artist which i would submit the majority of Aikido dojos leave out of their curriculums

anyway, i think that i am qualified to say that Aikidoists who have either trained or train in other martial arts are going to have a greater understanding of the combat-applications of dojo Aikido

that experience can include basically any other martial art but Aikido, e.g., high school wrestling, judo, boxing, Muay Thai, Silat, Kali, Karate, etc.

Funny you should say that, because my thinking about Aikido since coming back has been informed by my experince in the JKD universe, specifically Sifu Dan's mantra of "No one art has all the answers but everything has something to offer." Aikido has something to offer. Figuring out what that is is another matter! Simple idea, but a lot of work to realize it.

Maybe .... but neither of us is a Aikidoist with no other experience, so neither of us can really say one way or the other.

[Aristeia]

Same here Don. I do wish I could go back to around 1996 and look through the archives of the old Aiki list serv and see some of the crap I posted...I bet I would not have the same opinions, beliefs, or ideas!I sometimes go back and read my oooold posts on RMA - scary. "but how would I get to the ground in the first place, with ma'ai and zanshin..."

[Kevin Leavitt]

a heck...I can't resist....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXaR4wlGu3s

This is a trailer for the "Foot, Fist Way". It is an "R" rated trailer, so keep that in mind.

I think most of us can relate to this in someway!

[Dewey]

a heck...I can't resist....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXaR4wlGu3s

This is a trailer for the "Foot, Fist Way". It is an "R" rated trailer, so keep that in mind.

I think most of us can relate to this in someway!

That's hilarious! Can't wait for it to come out!

[JamesC]

CSFurious...

I never said that he had to train in JKD in order to make his aikido effective.

In fact, he started training in aikido long after he was training in JKD.

Though I definitely see where you're coming from. He already had the experience from his JKD before he started in his aikido. Maybe that was your point?

[JamesC]

Just read your post again.

Sorry, it's sometimes hard to grasp the meaning and intention of words. Gotta love the internet.

[DonMagee]

a heck...I can't resist....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXaR4wlGu3s

This is a trailer for the "Foot, Fist Way". It is an "R" rated trailer, so keep that in mind.

I think most of us can relate to this in someway!

"I don't think you are going to like how this turns out!"

LOL I can't believe I haven't seen this before. And I thought Never back down was going to be a funny movie!

[Kevin Leavitt]

Instructor: "...It's the best of all martial arts [TKD]"
Prospective student: "I here jiujitsu is really good for balance."
Instructor: "pause, eye roll....no...jiujitsu, sucks."

Had me rolling.

[CSFurious]

yes that was my point

JKD taught him to use/apply Aikido more effectively

CSFurious...

I never said that he had to train in JKD in order to make his aikido effective.

In fact, he started training in aikido long after he was training in JKD.

Though I definitely see where you're coming from. He already had the experience from his JKD before he started in his aikido. Maybe that was your point?

[d2l]

WOW! :freaky: This thread seems to be beaten to death!

[George S. Ledyard]

WOW! :freaky: This thread seems to be beaten to death!

This thread will never die as long as people keep trying to treat Aikido as some sort of fighting system. As long as folks try to pound a square peg into a round hole, this thread will go on and on as people note that the square peg doesn't fit in the round hole.

Then there will be the never-ending comparison of how other shaped pegs fit more closely into that round hole... all with suggestions about how we can whittle our square peg to approximate these other shapes which more closely fit that round hole.

The end of the process is to have finally whittled the peg into a round peg which fits the hole beautifully only to realize that what has been created in the process isn't Aikido but rather something that has existed long before Aikido was created and the Founder's art is no-where to be found. O-Sensei was as clear as crystal that the peg is square but people simply can't accept that and their fears and insecurities cause them to project their desire to feel "safe" onto the art.

So don't expect this thread to go away any time soon. Folks come and participate until they arrive at their own answer and then they give up and leave and then another generation of folks shows up to debate whether the square peg fits the round hole, whether the peg really is round or whether the hole really is square, and on and on.

[dps]

This thread will never die as long as people keep trying to treat Aikido as some sort of fighting system. As long as folks try to pound a square peg into a round hole, this thread will go on and on as people note that the square peg doesn't fit in the round hole.


As opposed to reshaping the round hole (ourselves) into a square hole for Aikido to fit.

David

[George S. Ledyard]

As opposed to reshaping the round hole (ourselves) into a square hole for Aikido to fit.

David
Hi David,
I think that most folks believe that training is about reshaping ourselves. It's still question of the shape of Aikido is we might be trying to match.

Folks start training with all sorts of ideas about what the art is... after substantial time in, they should have a different idea (better informed) of what it really is. The ones who always thought it was about fighting almost inevitably start doing more and more cross training because they can't make Aikido work as a fighting system. Eventually, if they are really serious about fighting, they leave to do something that really is a fighting system.

The ones who never thought it was about fighting at all are usually far happier with the art and often have no interest in cross training nor do they spend any time at all on the net arguing about whether the art works "on the street". The big problem with these folks is that they use the fact that it isn't about fighting as an excuse not to look deeply into the principles which govern what we do. We are not talking here about people who can't use the art "on the street" or defeat a challenge from a practitioner of another style, we are talking about folks who cannot do their technique within the Aikido paradigm itself. This isn't about throwing the "un-throwable" man of Dan's description, this is about being able to throw an Aikido trained uke who has some intention and the ability to attack in a balanced fashion simply using the highly stylized attacks of the art. We are talking about people who cannot execute an irimi when given a standard shomen uchi with some intent to strike.

Stating that Aikido is not about fighting, which I do not believe it is, or was supposed to be, is a total cop out unless you have some idea what it really is. O-Sensei believed that Aikido was a budo that "completed" all budo. It is an art which should bring one to an understanding of ai-uchi (mutual destruction) and ai-nuke (mutual preservation) as described in the interview with Chiba Sensei which appears on Aikido Journal Chiba Sensei Interview (http://Chiba Sensei Interview)
Aikido is supposed to be transformative but most people simply adapt their practice to their own comfort levels and stay the same. So, while they may be perfectly correct (in my mind) that Aikido isn't about fighting, they may have only the foggiest notion of what it really is or could be with real effort and good instruction.

If we suppose that effective fighting is indeed represented by the square hole and transformative spiritual practice might be symbolized by the round peg, as described before, most Aikido isn't either.

So we can't just say that we shape ourselves to the art because there is very little agreement as to what the art is.

[dps]

So we can't just say that we shape ourselves to the art because there is very little agreement as to what the art is.

Thank You George,

O-Sensei knew what the art was all about. I think he also knew that he could not describe it in words, but he could show how to figure out the shape by the techniques of Aikido. We can't agree on the shape because we aren't at O-Sensei's level.

David

[Aristeia]

This thread will never die as long as people keep trying to treat Aikido as some sort of fighting system. As long as folks try to pound a square peg into a round hole, this thread will go on and on as people note that the square peg doesn't fit in the round hole.

Agreed. A first step might be for those that have the peg to be clear with people what sort of whole it's meant for...

[DH]

.......This thread will never die as long as people keep trying to treat Aikido as some sort of fighting system.
.......This isn't about throwing the "un-throwable" man of Dan's description, this is about being able to throw an Aikido trained uke who has some intention and the ability to attack in a balanced fashion simply using the highly stylized attacks of the art.
......O-Sensei believed that Aikido was a budo that "completed" all budo. It is an art which should bring one to an understanding of ai-uchi (mutual destruction) and ai-nuke (mutual preservation)

Hi George
I can't hep but ask. With your recent experiences, can you at least see my view with a bit more understanding?
I believe there is a much more *complete" view of the "aiki" based arts than has been commonly experienced. It is this dilemma that has continued to plage the aiki arts. Doesn't some of your recent research demonstrate the power potential I have been so unapologetically advocating these many years? This would include demonstrably showing what Ueshiba believed to be true; the completion of all budo- with what Takeda ascribed to as both a way of life and in his budo-that it "Leaves no openings."

Although your idea of completing a successful irimi against a balanced attacker is fine, it's just so limited and small compared to the fullness of what everyone could be doing. Comparatively, the power potential demonstrated in what you quoted me mentioning (the unthrowable man) is staggering. The greatness of the aiki arts-"aiki" (internal power in use) completes budo, and fulfils it's hope. Of being able to more meaningfully defend without causing harm.

Granted this isn't my goal, but within my parardigm, aiki can be profoundly effective within a resistive environment. Aiki strikes can be devastating, and the body method will work if you train it in MMA, BJJ or anything of your choicing. In much the same way Takeda and Ueshiba made it work in whatever they chose to use it in.

In the end, if or where we are seeing a failure of martial veracity, what we are seeing is not the failure of the way of aiki (aiki-do) but the failure of those practicing and those teaching aiki as a means of power.

I say that the majority of the people doing it are missing what aiki is. Thus they have, over time, incorrectly defined (or said more definitively re-defined) the art in a weakened state from what it once was, and could still be now.

Although I do not do Aikido or Daito ryu anymore, I remain as much of a fan of the potential of "aiki" as I always was. Well, actually no, I guess I am MORE of a fan of its potential in the hands of the few who truly understand it, Although the art has failed (most everybody) in conveying its real power potential- we have the means, and the potential... to fix it.

[George S. Ledyard]

Hi George
I can't hep but ask. With your recent experiences, can you at least see my view with a bit more understanding?
I believe there is a much more *complete" view of the "aiki" based arts than has been commonly experienced. It is this dilemma that has continued to plage the aiki arts. Doesn't some of your recent research demonstrate the power potential I have been so unapologetically advocating these many years? This would include demonstrably showing what Ueshiba believed to be true; the completion of all budo- with what Takeda ascribed to as both a way of life and in his budo-that it "Leaves no openings."

Although your idea of completing a successful irimi against a balanced attacker is fine, it's just so limited and small compared to the fullness of what everyone could be doing. Comparatively, the power potential demonstrated in what you quoted me mentioning (the unthrowable man) is staggering. The greatness of the aiki arts-"aiki" (internal power in use) completes budo, and fulfils it's hope. Of being able to more meaningfully defend without causing harm.

Granted this isn't my goal, but within my parardigm, aiki can be profoundly effective within a resistive environment. Aiki strikes can be devastating, and the body method will work if you train it in MMA, BJJ or anything of your choicing. In much the same way Takeda and Ueshiba made it work in whatever they chose to use it in.

In the end, if or where we are seeing a failure of martial veracity, what we are seeing is not the failure of the way of aiki (aiki-do) but the failure of those practicing and those teaching aiki as a means of power.

I say that the majority of the people doing it are missing what aiki is. Thus they have, over time, incorrectly defined (or said more definitively re-defined) the art in a weakened state from what it once was, and could still be now.

Although I do not do Aikido or Daito ryu anymore, I remain as much of a fan of the potential of "aiki" as I always was. Well, actually no, I guess I am MORE of a fan of its potential in the hands of the few who truly understand it, Although the art has failed (most everybody) in conveying its real power potential- we have the means, and the potential... to fix it.

Hi Dan,
I absolutely do not disagree with you about what you are doing. I'd be happy to train with you and experience things directly and take what seemed to fit and put it into what I am doing. I think what you are doing is great. It's just different than what I am doing.

What you know would fit into my idea of what I am trying to do without any conflict. It's simply the purpose of acquiring those skills that puts us into a different place on it. I would like to acquire more knowledge and skill in the area because that is how I go about perfecting my art. But I have no interest in applying these skills in fighting, in fact just the opposite. I've incorporated a bit of what I got from Akuzawa Sensei's visit and it's been helpful. I am looking forward to more opportunities to add to my knowledge. But I have recently come to exactly the opposite conclusion about the form the art of Aikido has from what you and a number of others have come to.

You've left Aikido and Daito Ryu because they are simply impractical for fighting. You are working out your own take on developing a fighting system which has the skills but is martially effective and practical, designed for application. I am interested in acquiring the very same skills but have little or no interest in changing the actual outer form of my art. The more I do it, the more I understand why the Founder made the form the way he did. The doing of this art can have a profound effect which will not at all be the same if the purpose and form is changed.

When I was younger, I was far more interested in application. I did a few years of koryu with Ellis. I understand what a combat art is from the Araki Ryu experience. I did quite a bit of law enforcement and security training and the stuff I taught proved to be just fine on the street with real bad guys. Not skilled martially trained opponents, just the run of the mill bad guys the cops meet on a daily basis.

I learned quite a lot from those days but that's not what I am into any more. I continue to train with new folks and get more exposure to other things, I am playing with Howard Popkin and getting tremendous benefit. I continue to incorporate the material I've gotten from Ushiro Sensei. I work with the Systema folks regularly, mostly on structure stuff and breathing. All of this fits into my Aikido and makes it better. I am looking forward to the time when I can see what you are doing. I'd like to get together again with Mike S, last time was too short. I have absolutely no doubt that my Aikido will improve with the help of people who are doing other things and have these skills.

But I have no interest in changing the form of what I do. My goal is to eventually have Aikido like Yamaguchi Sensei, Endo Sensei, and of course my own teacher, Saotome Sensei. I think that what they have done with what the Founder gave them would have met O-Sensei's approval. Many of the flaws which you and others point out with the art are only flaws if you start from the assumption that the art must be utilitarian from a fighting standpoint. Taking another paradigm for the art resolves that issue.

I applaud the fact that there are folks out there researching, developing, passing on the skills of aiki in different forms. I have no problem with anyone who is interested in effective martial application, modernizing the form which aiki training takes, etc.But if everyone took that approach Aikido would cease to exist. What you are doing is different, for different reasons, and with a totally different training paradigm. My path is to take my Aikido as far as I can. I'd be happy to take what I can from you and anyone else I come across with skills I want to develop. But my art will still be Aikido at the end of the process, which means it still won't be about fighting. I'm fine with that. And you will have your art, whatever you choose to call it, and you will be fine with that. I don't see any conflict with this process at all.

[Mark Uttech]

Onegaishimasu. Wonderful post George! And thanks for the reminder that "Aikido is not about fighting." Maturity understands the existence of more than one viewpoint. Maturity also seems to understand that the feeling to stay with one's own heart is 'Chisoku';
"Enough."

In gassho,

Mark

[rob_liberti]

What's so odd is my martial arts plan is to continue to learn from both Dan and Gleason sensei (and other aikido people especially like George) and resolve any conflicts myself. It seems to me that if we go after principle, the art should work as a fighting system and a transformative system to remove ego and manifest your true self. The conflict point seems only to be in ukemi. And I was planning on the "when in rome" model. When I train with Dan, uke becomes anti-aiki, when I train with aikido folks ukemi becomes an expression of nage when I attack with "normal" strength. As a matter of fact, in continuing my approach of "level-appropriate, progressive resistance" it just means I can continue to turn up my resistance to make things interesting for senior aikido folks too. They give an aweful lot, it would be nice to give back.

In terms of teaching aikido, I really don't plan to stop teaching the way I think will help people the most. If that means I incorporate anti-aiki as needed with my appraoch ("level-appropriate, progressive resistance") then so be it.

I don't see any other conflict points that cannot be resolved. And heck, resovling conflict is what this is all about anyway so I don't fear it.

Rob

[rob_liberti]

And by the way, isn't my approach going to be more in line with what Osensei was doing and capable of?! -Rob

[George S. Ledyard]

What's so odd is my martial arts plan is to continue to learn from both Dan and Gleason sensei (and other aikido people especially like George) and resolve any conflicts myself. It seems to me that if we go after principle, the art should work as a fighting system and a transformative system to remove ego and manifest your true self. The conflict point seems only to be in ukemi. And I was planning on the "when in rome" model. When I train with Dan, uke becomes anti-aiki, when I train with aikido folks ukemi becomes an expression of nage when I attack with "normal" strength. As a matter of fact, in continuing my approach of "level-appropriate, progressive resistance" it just means I can continue to turn up my resistance to make things interesting for senior aikido folks too. They give an awful lot, it would be nice to give back.

In terms of teaching aikido, I really don't plan to stop teaching the way I think will help people the most. If that means I incorporate anti-aiki as needed with my approach ("level-appropriate, progressive resistance") then so be it.

I don't see any other conflict points that cannot be resolved. And heck, resolving conflict is what this is all about anyway so I don't fear it.

Rob

Rob,
This is what Saotome Sensei has always maintained... that we all have to find our own Aikido. O-Sensei repeatedly said that Aikido has no set form. I think then, what makes it Aikido is that it a) be based on the principles of aiki and b) have a certain set of values at its heart. The Aikido people you are training with can give you a good take can give you a good take on the heart, I think.

So going forth and finding top level training with people who understand "aiki" principles better than the average Aikido teacher or who can teach these principles in a more comprehensible fashion will only benefit you and the art. And how that mix comes together in your person will be totally individual.

Look at what Ikeda Sensei has done with what he has taken from Ushiro Sensei... it's some of the most sophisticated Aikido in the world at this point. Ushiro Sensei is not an Aikido person any more than Dan, Mike, Aukuzawa, or Rob J. But what he has taught Ikeda Sensei has transformed Ikeda Sensei's Aikido completely. I see so many Aikido people who are presented with this material and are simply walking away from it because they don't understand what Ushiro is doing or they can't see past the outer form it takes as Karate. This, despite the fact that Saotome Sensei has flat out stated that he and Ushiro are doing the same thing. Despite the fact that one can watch the transformation of Ikeda Sensei's Aikido right before our eyes.

Aikido desperately needs people like yourself who will go forth and train with the Dan Hardin's, Mike Sigman's, Akuzawa's, Howard Popkins, Ushiros, Kurodas, Vasilievs etc. and then bring that knowledge back into their Aikido. The people who will do this are the ones who have a good sense of the heart of the art and what it should be, staying true to O-Sensei's message. People with little understanding of the heart of the art and its transformative power will simply go train with these other folks and quit Aikido. I am already seeing an exodus of talented young people who never stayed in long enough to get very deeply into the art who have now left to do what they see as "more effective" be it mixed martial arts, Systema, some sort of aikijutsu, whatever... If ones reason for doing Aikido is focused on defeating others, then one will eventually leave Aikido for precisely the reasons that all of these non-Aikido folks have been pointing out.

The only reason for folks to stay in Aikido, as far as I am concerned, is the Founder. He had the vision. Developing an understanding of that vision for oneself and being able to not only understand those principles on a conscious level but also be able to manifest those principles in ones body, on the mat, and be able to take those principles off the mat into ones life, well, that is far more difficult than mastering the principles of aiki for fighting.

Fighting is where we come from. It is where we are. We start with the mind of conflict. It will be the end of us if we can't find another way. The purpose of training can't simply be about fighting. What good is the ability to defeat any opponent in single combat when they fly an airplane in to your building or blow a dirty nuke in the port city in which you live? All the aiki skills in the world will not stop a road side bomb or a suicide bomber. Fundamentally, if we cannot get past this mind of conflict which plagues us as a species, it will be the end of us. Someone will nuke someone else and the whole place will go up. O-Sensei had a vision of budo that he felt would change that mind of conflict. That was the whole and entire point for creating his new art of Aikido, this new budo. I do not see any other reason for the art to exist if it isn't this. But people would rather take the easy way. The way that doesn't call for them to change themselves on the inside, in their hearts, rather than the outside of physical form.

So Aikido needs people like you with a commitment to its underlying mission. It needs people who want to do the work to do a an Aikido with greater depth, a stronger foundation in aiki principle, but who are motivated by the desire to develop an art that will transform them fundamentally as people not just make them better at, what in the end is a fairly useless skill, of defeating others.

[DH]

Hi George
We always reach a bit of an impasse on this narrower topic within a topic. I think the failure is mine in not being able to more fully express my ideas in this medium.
Once one is able to express aiki in motion, one is able to do aikido with little effort. Not fighting, not DR but...aikido. With everything it wishes to express in nonviolence and joining of forces.

I'm not approaching my ideal model as an outsider but from having trained within the aiki arts. I am able to 'down grade" my power into responses that are soft and flowing in randori to play with aikidoka and have the ukes responses very much fit-in-line, with everything aikido is meant to look like and be. This play, on my end, just does not involve nearly as much movement from me. In short I can choose to do this art or that art as well as anyone else can. Aikido would be a "choice" on my part.
To make it clearer, what do you suppose your chances of throwing Saotome to be if he does not wish to be thrown? Is he not doing aiki-do then? I seriously doubt most anyone can throw me doing aikido to me but I can throw most people rather easily using aiki. Am I not doing aiki-do to then.
I not only understand the model but on any other day embrace it. I think Ueshiba was a visionary in taking the capturing energy of DR aiki and making it a cast away energy, while retaining the power of aiki, it was not only different in use, but much easier to do or pull off. It was also safer for the uke.
In the end though Aiki-do's aiki is still aiki none-the-less. The non-violent choice of use can be done by anyone who understands aiki, in keeping with Ueshiba's goals. IMO the waza are not techniques, but an expression of that very same aiki. I am quite confident that were I able to impart in you all I can physicall express as aiki in my body, we would share a common view. The power, and ability to manipulate uke would change your views while allowing you to remain doing the exact same 'model" you currently embrace. But isn't that just what Saotome and Ikeda were telling you? That it's all the same? I just can't express that well in the written word.

[George S. Ledyard]

Hi George
We always reach a bit of an impasse on this narrower topic within a topic. I think the failure is mine in not being able to more fully express my ideas in this medium.
Once one is able to express aiki in motion, one is able to do aikido with little effort. Not fighting, not DR but...aikido. With everything it wishes to express in nonviolence and joining of forces.

I'm not approaching my ideal model as an outsider but from having trained within the aiki arts. I am able to 'down grade" my power into responses that are soft and flowing in randori to play with aikidoka and have the ukes responses very much fit-in-line, with everything aikido is meant to look like and be. This play, on my end, just does not involve nearly as much movement from me. In short I can choose to do this art or that art as well as anyone else can. Aikido would be a "choice" on my part.
To make it clearer, what do you suppose your chances of throwing Saotome to be if he does not wish to be thrown? Is he not doing aiki-do then? I seriously doubt most anyone can throw me doing aikido to me but I can throw most people rather easily using aiki. Am I not doing aiki-do to then.
I not only understand the model but on any other day embrace it. I think Ueshiba was a visionary in taking the capturing energy of DR aiki and making it a cast away energy, while retaining the power of aiki, it was not only different in use, but much easier to do or pull off. It was also safer for the uke.
In the end though Aiki-do's aiki is still aiki none-the-less. The non-violent choice of use can be done by anyone who understands aiki, in keeping with Ueshiba's goals. IMO the waza are not techniques, but an expression of that very same aiki. ;)

Hi Dan,
I'm fine with what you are saying... no disagreement. But as I teach around the country I constantly see people who I think have misunderstood the message.

I was training at one event with a partner who was enamored of the whole "you can't throw me" thing. He threw his punch, I entered and was resting, and I do mean simply resting, my hands on his arm. He was so busy anticipating what I was going to do and trying to stop it before I could do it that he was literally trembling with the tension of his contraction. I just sat there in wonderment... Sure he was pretty much immovable. But I was in and had the position of advantage. He was completely open. I wasn't the one that needed to move at that point. He had completely ceased anything that could be called an attack. The level of his tension was so great that he would of been completely unable to defend his openings had I moved to strike him.

What is really sad is that he will NEVER understand what it is that our teachers are doing by training this way. He is fundamentally caught in the mind of conflict and can't let go long enough to learn what Sensei is actually doing.

I think that this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are talking about. Being difficult to move is a byproduct of proper training but it isn't the point of the training. In the martial context stopping a technique simply means that the attacker does something else. It's all about kaeshiwaza when we talk about fighting. And kaeshiwaza requires the same joining, the same use of aiki, that all waza requires. The instant you simply stop a technique you have lost the opportunity of reversing it.

So my friend, in his eagerness to feel strong by stopping my technique had thereby made it impossible to counter it in an effective manner and take my center. He simply stopped my technique. When someone tenses up like that, they are like the board being held by a couple guys for breaking. With that level of tension, the strike I do will only have more effect.

I am not saying that this is what you are doing... I am sure it is not. But the way that a number of folks interpret these ideas often gives them a mistaken idea of what they should be trying for in their training. That's why I think it is good thing that you guys are making yourselves available so that folks can get a real hands on take on what you are doing. Because I am absolutely certain that many of the folks I run into think they are trying to do what you are talking about but are, in fact, missing it entirely.

Anyway, there are some good Aikido folks who are getting a chance to play with you that I am hopeful that there will be some movement in a positive direction in the larger Aikido community. But I continue to raise the cautionary flags when I think that people are in danger of misunderstanding what is going on.

[DH]

Hi George
Yes I have seen this very thing over the last three years when I opened up the door again. People were expecting allot of different things and came in with some misconceptions about what they were about to feel. Many were either expecting:
1. Static unmoving "braced" resistance
2. Muscle
3. Waza and counters as a way out

I think as most have stated after meeting Mike, Ark, or me is that they were completely taken aback by how different the feel was to the expectation. They were surprised that
1. It all works seamlessly in motion without much thought.
2. It has nothing to do with chambering and muscle-which in fact prevents and or reduces all we have been outlining
3. It has nothing to do with waza.. Personally I do an exercise where I let men try to come and throw me and I keep them at arms length and they cannot get in for kuzuzhi (no not stiff armed judo) Then...I let them do the same thing and I let them get in -within my arms- but when they try to position they are either lifted up at whatever contact point they may have, and loose their feet, or they are weighted and they can't move. So, they dump out and reposition to try again with the same results. Then... I let them get all inside my body range with hands and legs entering for a throw, even to the point they enter because they think they go kuzushi, say I let them fit-in-to an osoto-gari or O-goshi but they simple cannot complete the throw so they dump out.
Las,t I simply start throwing them when they try to throw me with their own power smoothly and without stopping. That one demonstration serves to fully express that I am not not using waza to defend and the point is in the way the body is being carried.
Aikido, I have found, is far, far easier to handle then this type of attack.
Anyway, It is very difficult to discuss on the net as everyone approaches it from their prior understanding.
It's all good though. I just hope some of these guys get out to meet some real masters of these skills. Guys up this way have gone to see a highly ranked DR representative and have been disappointed in what they felt. Others have gone on to meet Howard and were set straight about the difference between DR jujutsu (being taught as aiki) and real DR aiki. There are also guys training with some Taiji master level teachers and having their eyes really opened to what's available.

All in all I can't wait till I'm 60. With any luck I'll have more power and a better grasp at using it.

[G DiPierro]

I think that this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are talking about. Being difficult to move is a byproduct of proper training but it isn't the point of the training. In the martial context stopping a technique simply means that the attacker does something else. It's all about kaeshiwaza when we talk about fighting. And kaeshiwaza requires the same joining, the same use of aiki, that all waza requires. The instant you simply stop a technique you have lost the opportunity of reversing it.

So my friend, in his eagerness to feel strong by stopping my technique had thereby made it impossible to counter it in an effective manner and take my center. He simply stopped my technique. When someone tenses up like that, they are like the board being held by a couple guys for breaking. With that level of tension, the strike I do will only have more effect.Actually there are a couple of different ways of stopping someone's technique. What you describe is one of them, and the problem is that it is the only one that most people in aikido know about. The typical depth of understanding of the concept of resistance extends only as far two levels: complete non-resistance, where you give away your center and let the nage throw you (typically aikido ukemi) or complete resistance, where you do everything you can to stop the nage from throwing you, paying no attention at all to the openings this creates. These are just two poles on a very complex continuum of resistance, and I think most of the interesting training lies in between them.

It's very possible to stop someone without being open and yet without taking it to the level of full kaeshi-waza. But there is a lot more to being able to do this besides just trying to resist. To be quite honest, I have trained with senior-level people (5- or 6-dan) in a certain well-known major organization who have done the exact same thing you described here, so it would make sense that the lower-level people are copying them and doing the same thing. If your shihan only teach the nage side of the practice, and your senior people don't understand the uke side, then it's unlikely that you are going to have your junior people spontaneously learning these aspects of ukemi.

[George S. Ledyard]

To be quite honest, I have trained with senior-level people (5- or 6-dan) in a certain well-known major organization who have done the exact same thing you described here, so it would make sense that the lower-level people are copying them and doing the same thing. If your shihan only teach the nage side of the practice, and your senior people don't understand the uke side, then it's unlikely that you are going to have your junior people spontaneously learning these aspects of ukemi.

I completely agree with you. This is a failure on the part of the Shihan or other senior instructor(s). It's one thing to leave someone on his own to figure things out. Its quite another to keep promoting him and letting him open a dojo when all he is doing is passing on very bad habits to his students and ruining another generation of practitioners. I think it is wrong. I have publicly objected to this repeatedly. The transmission is largely broken.

It is our responsibility to fix this. No one else's. The folks who created the problem will not be the ones to create the solution. Much of the discussion on the forums here revolves around different folks take on what the issues are and what the solutions are. That is why there is hope. The folks who created the problems with the transmission are not discussing anything. They are not looking for new ideas or alternative methods. They decided these things long ago and are not interested in change. The best of them will at least give you some encouragement if you show signs of trying to do better yourself. The worst of them will actively stand in your way.

But no one except us will fix it. And it will take a community of people who decide to find a better way, not just isolated individuals. It will take people deciding that they need to look beyond the confines of the world as revealed by their teachers, to risk being criticized by the establishment. I am not saying break with the establishment because that is the surest way to end in obscurity and change nothing. But I am saying that it is possible to work within our various systems and organizations to slowly change people's ideas about what they are doing.

The entire old guard of American Aikido will be gone in the not too distant future. The Japanese and the American teachers who have pioneered the growth of the art here are all close in age. Who will take over when they are passed on? It is us. And we need to think about what we would like the art to be and how we expect to take it there when that time comes.

[aikishrine]

I think that this statement misses the point. I am reading a good book right now called the "Secret Teachings of Aikido" by O'SENSEI, translated by John Stevens, it is fairly new from Kodansha, but i believe that it hits AIKIDO right on the head, figuratively speaking of course :) anyway that is just my two cents worth.

[George S. Ledyard]

I think that this statement misses the point. I am reading a good book right now called the "Secret Teachings of Aikido" by O'SENSEI, translated by John Stevens, it is fairly new from Kodansha, but i believe that it hits AIKIDO right on the head, figuratively speaking of course :) anyway that is just my two cents worth.

I think this book is very important! It doesn't seem to get much fanfare, which is, I think because folks are so worried about technique and find O-Sensei's spirituality to be difficult. But so what else is new? The deshi largely didn't get it, by their own admissions. But for anyone who wants to understand what I mean when I talk about "O-Sensei's Aikido" this book is a must! It's got to more than double the amount of O-Sensei's words which have been translated into English.

[rob_liberti]

I humbly suggest you find a copy of the takeuchi scrolls, (learn Japanese or get a translator) and then re-evaluate your understanding of that book. -Rob

[George S. Ledyard]

I humbly suggest you find a copy of the takeuchi scrolls, (learn Japanese or get a translator) and then re-evaluate your understanding of that book. -Rob

Not likely to learn Japanese at this late date. Why don't you start another thread and give us your take on the book.
- George

[G DiPierro]

I completely agree with you. This is a failure on the part of the Shihan or other senior instructor(s). It's one thing to leave someone on his own to figure things out. Its quite another to keep promoting him and letting him open a dojo when all he is doing is passing on very bad habits to his students and ruining another generation of practitioners. I think it is wrong. I have publicly objected to this repeatedly. The transmission is largely broken.

It is our responsibility to fix this. No one else's. The folks who created the problem will not be the ones to create the solution. Much of the discussion on the forums here revolves around different folks take on what the issues are and what the solutions are. That is why there is hope. The folks who created the problems with the transmission are not discussing anything. They are not looking for new ideas or alternative methods. They decided these things long ago and are not interested in change. The best of them will at least give you some encouragement if you show signs of trying to do better yourself. The worst of them will actively stand in your way.Well if you ask me the transmission was broken right at Morihei Ueshiba. He learned what he needed to know from his teachers, but he never created a pedagogical method to pass it on. The default pedagogy of mainline aikido was basically adapted from Daito-ryu without much thought about whether and how it should be changed to transmit the essence of this new art. Some of Ueshiba's students (Shioda, Tohei, Mochizuki, Tomiki, etc.) thought they could improve on the default method and broke off and started their own organizations to teach their methods, but I don't think any of them really succeeded at capturing what Ueshiba was doing in a way that could be reliably transmitted.

I think aikido is a good idea for an art in theory but one that as of yet has no good practical implementation. I'm not even sure if it's possible to come up with one, but I do believe that the only way to redeem the art and attain its true potential would be a wholesale overhaul of the existing training method. I simply cannot see this happening within a major group since most groups are essentially defined by their training method. If you start making large changes to that, you are pretty much putting yourself outside of your group.

Either way, it doesn't make much sense to expect the current training system to produce different results than it has been demonstrated to produce. Aikikai aikido is basically geared towards producing large numbers of practitioners who can look good doing complex techniques with a cooperative partner. The people that manage to go beyond this are rare, and they almost have to go against the system to do so. Think about much farther they could go in a system that was trying to help them get to their goal rather than impeding them.

[DonMagee]

The solution is kinda simple to change the world. In this day of show me all one has to do is take say the aiki power Dan is talking about and go win something like the olympics in judo. An entire generation of martial artists will have to deal with what they have tossed off as old folk mumbo jumbo. Then with a little luck, as they learn the art they will find out it's not about fighting.

This is what Uesihba seemed to do. He seemed to go pick fights or show up in the right place to engage in one to show people a better way. That practice seemed to die with him (and his first students) however. And in that day, with only word of mouth and maybe some poor video to spread the word, it's not surprising this was forgotten. But I tell you that if you put a guy in a judo match who is unthrowable and doesn't even seem to defend, you will convert them by the thousands, maybe millions. Sure they wont be coming to be find the way of peace, but many will find what they wanted, and what they ended up with might be different things. Just like the guys who start showing up for my judo class who want to be better fighters, and find themselves learning about the art and culture of judo along the way.

I use the olympics as a example here because it is reasonably high profile that most people in judo would see it. Also, unlike say the UFC, it is also reasonable that anyone with the proper skills could get to that level (or at least the national level) without a good PR staff (Getting in the UFC is a lot of politics, getting into high end judo is simply skill).

I'm not trying to call anyone out. I'm just stating that the simplest answer (and one that would kill this thread cold) has been there from the first day aikido was named. In fact it was the method the founder seemed to like to take.