Aikido challenges today [Archive] - AikiWeb Aikido Forums

takusan

05-01-2005, 05:56 AM

To all those that think Aikido is not an effective art, or a weak 'karate ryu', you are correct. Your attitude makes it such.

I happen also not to belong to that particular school of thought.

Aikido, as a 'karate' system is highly effective, just so long as the person doing the training has a budo spirit within them, rather than a sporting spirit. That goes for ANY martial art. The effectiveness is directly proportionate to the spirit with which one trains - even with-in a system that promotes itself as having a 'gentle form'.

In fact even a 'sport' done with the martial / competitive spirit, makes itself stand out as better than merely average.

Fighting spirit does not however mean brutal or base in nature.
I do not consider my technique as brutal when I lower my partner to the ground 'fast', if it was done with sufficient timing.
Indeed, I consider my best techniques to also to be the gentlest.
I just love it when I ask someone to really resist, (or speed up, or get a helper or two)and then proceed to do the technique as gently as I can, without them even beginning to resist.

I then like to qualify the situation by saying, that was probably still only a fraction of what a real street attack would be like, and to go and train your spirit, not your muscles.

PS I do understand competition and the ability to over-come another person that is resisting, (I was an amateur wrestler before Aikido) but equally, I have a far larger arsenal at my disposal that is NOT allowed in wrestling, judo, most karate competition etc, does that mean I am not to make use of this (unfair) advantage.
Rubbish.
If the **** really hits the fan, the training that I received (and teach) should stand well against a wide variety of other 'styles', BUT equally my teaching should also allow for me to 'talk the situation down' - what other systems even has that as a concept let alone a guiding philosophy?

ChrisHein

05-01-2005, 11:49 AM

Misogi-no-Gyo

05-01-2005, 02:17 PM

David,
I think there is no need to defend Aikido. Everyone here understands it's merits. It's an awesome system that teaches lots of things that can't be found else where. However to say that it is a sound empty handed system is foolish. Aikido has no real striking ability (shomen, Yokomen, and Tsuki are all Representative of what would happen with a weapon in hand). Aikido has almost no ground techniques (Suwariwaza is very limited in full on ground fighting). Has no real defenses against striking,throwing, or ground fighting. Has a syllabus that is full of wrist grabbing, which is a clear indicator that it's infasis is on controlling a man with a weapon. Worst of all Aikidoka don't spar, sparring is a key that you will find in any readily usable empty handed system (western boxing, wrestling, kick boxing, Bjj, MMA etc etc).
I think Aikido has amazing things to show the world, however it's not designed for, nor meant to be an empty handed combative system. Budo spirit is not limited to traditional Japanese martial artists. I think that if you spent some time with modern mixed "sporting" martial artists you would find that they are shinning exsamples of martial spirit. We should stop pretending like Aikido is something it clearly is not, and be happy for what it is, a wonderful unique system.

-Chris Hein

...Yeah, I had heard this about some of the dojos up in Northern California... Looks like you should be moving on and finding another dojo where they are teaching Aikido, as opposed to Aikidance.

In all seriousness though...
I fear that you may have wasted too much time at the one you are at if that is what you think of the training that you received there. Of course, it could just be you and not the dojo at all. Perhaps we should ask your Sensei what he/she thinks about the effectiveness of the art, or their own ability to use it effectively. Should they feel about the same as you (indicated by your prior sentiments) perhaps you should take my earlier recommendation. If that doesn't work for you, well I give up. In either case, you should really get out more and check out some of the dojos that are run by teachers with different training goals than the one you seem to have accepted.

.

CNYMike

05-01-2005, 04:01 PM

..... Secondly - nowadays why noone does it? I would love to see a less-than-10-year old videoclip of some Aikidoka taking on 5 (even one would be a start) professional judoka/boxer/whatever "sport" stylist.

But I've never heard of it. At least nothing that is supported by proper evidence.

Why?

Nowadays, cross-training is all the rage. Rather than try to beat up the "new kid on the block," many martial artists view other sytstems as things to learn from than challenges to take one. So it's more likely a Judo person would cross-train in Aikido than march into an Aikido dojo issuing a challenge. Even MMA guys cross-train in Aikido, according to this thread I found in usenet:

http://webnews.newsfeeds.com/webnews?cmd=body&item=706675&group=rec.martial-arts&sid=28731&th=12

When you look at arts as things to learn from instead of as potential challenges, the ego-motive to issue a challenge is gone.

Charles Hill

05-01-2005, 05:55 PM

But there are still full-time Aikidoka and other "stylists".
Is Aikido evolved since then that it is nor longer a real combat art?.

Yes, exactly. Aikido is no longer a real combat art. A real combat art would necessarily be firearm based, Aikido is not. In the days of challenges, to train in an art that was not martially effective meant that someone could be killed, thus the challenges. I imagine that those who nowadays teach police, for example, get challenged by the officers. Of course, what they are learning is not combat, however.

What Aikido is today is a way for self-development through hard physical, martial training. The fact that we can improve self-defense skills and combat skills is a bonus not a central point. To look to Aikido or any martial art solely for self-defense is to be lost in b-movie fantasyland, in my opinion.

If one is interested in modern day dojo busting, you could go into the dojo and tell the chief instructor that he/she is a jerk and their art is a joke. If they get angry and defensive, consider the dojo "busted" and get out. If they handle your outburst in a calm, polite manner, apologize profusely and start training right away.

Charles

ChrisHein

05-01-2005, 07:03 PM

Well said Charles! I belive once Uyeshiba saw what an attomic bomb could do he thought the same thing. Aikido works wonderfully for self development, much as it was intended to do!

Shaun,
Do you think that any of the original members of Daito Ryu were planing of fighting predominantly empty handed? The techniques of Aikido are clearly first and formost a weapons system. If you don't understand this you havent' been training Aikido, weather you live on the east coast, west coast or Antartica! Aikido has large number of weapons strikes, tons of parries, lots of grappleing methods for dealing with someone who attacks your weapon hand. I'm sure that you belive your sensei to be the toughest man in the whole wide world, but lets face facts, if any, and I mean ANY Aikidoka with training only in Aikido faced a person of equal size and will who was trained in a competitive empty handed fighting system, they would lose.

-Chris

deepsoup

05-01-2005, 07:17 PM

Worst of all Aikidoka don't spar
They dont?

Michael Neal

05-01-2005, 08:43 PM

Nowadays, cross-training is all the rage. Rather than try to beat up the "new kid on the block," many martial artists view other sytstems as things to learn from than challenges to take one. So it's more likely a Judo person would cross-train in Aikido than march into an Aikido dojo issuing a challenge. Even MMA guys cross-train in Aikido, according to this thread I found in usenet:

http://webnews.newsfeeds.com/webnews?cmd=body&item=706675&group=rec.martial-arts&sid=28731&th=12

When you look at arts as things to learn from instead of as potential challenges, the ego-motive to issue a challenge is gone.

As a Judoka I agree with you, Aikido has alot to offer any martial artist. I happen to believe that Aikido has weaknesses that require some crosstraining to fix, but the same can be said for other arts as well, including Judo.

Instead of making challenges maybe Judoka and Aikidoka should get together and train together during special seminars or something and show each other the benefits of each art. Aikidoka learning more about the value of randori training and Judoka learning a host of techniques that are not allowed in competition.

Right now Aikido has many "Friendship" seminars for different Aikido styles, maybe a special type should be organized to host different arts.

Chris Li

05-01-2005, 08:45 PM

Yes, exactly. Aikido is no longer a real combat art. A real combat art would necessarily be firearm based, Aikido is not. In the days of challenges, to train in an art that was not martially effective meant that someone could be killed, thus the challenges. I imagine that those who nowadays teach police, for example, get challenged by the officers. Of course, what they are learning is not combat, however.

"Get a gun"? Well, that presupposes that you live in a place where you can carry firearms - more than half my adult life was spent in a place where you couldn't. It also presupposes that you would be willing and able to carry a firearm on a regular basis, which is not an option for most people. It also assumes that firearms are appropriate for all situations, which they are not. For similar reasons, empty hand arts survived in Japan for hundreds of years even though almost all battlefield combat was performed with weapons. And there were plenty of challenges.

Best,

Chris

Ibaraki Bryan

05-01-2005, 09:06 PM

...Yeah, I had heard this about some of the dojos up in Northern California... Looks like you should be moving on and finding another dojo where they are teaching Aikido, as opposed to Aikidance.

I wholeheartedly agree -- but it would be good to point out that Northnern California is host to many traditional or otherwise serious dojo -- of the non-hippy variety.

Notable are Tatoian Sensei (http://www.traditional-aikido.com), Goto Sensei (http://www.baymarinaikido.com) and most any other listed on http://www.takemusu.org... and quite a few others. My father, who lived about 5 hours away from me when I was in California, was forced to train at what I would call a "hippy dojo" for a number of months when he lived in a very rural area. Now he lives in an even MORE rural area and trains only in weapon suburi... iwama style. :)

CNYMike

05-01-2005, 09:55 PM

.... Instead of making challenges maybe Judoka and Aikidoka should get together and train together during special seminars or something and show each other the benefits of each art. Aikidoka learning more about the value of randori training and Judoka learning a host of techniques that are not allowed in competition.

Right now Aikido has many "Friendship" seminars for different Aikido styles, maybe a special type should be organized to host different arts.

Sounds like a good idea; multi art events like that aren't uncommon, just a !@$%^%$# to put together. Has that ever been done for Aikido and other arts? I don't know; wouldn't be surprised if it has, though.

CNYMike

05-01-2005, 09:59 PM

.... A real combat art would necessarily be firearm based, Aikido is not .....

I imagine some of the guys at the Wing Chun seminar I was at today and yesterday might beg to differ on that part. Although Sifu Francis Fong is no stranger to firearms, and made several references to them during the seminar, no one with a functioning brain in their skull would suggest he couldn't handle himself empty handed just because Wing Chun isn't firearm based.

stuartjvnorton

05-01-2005, 10:16 PM

I think the concept of "dojo busting" doesn't take the western legal system into account.

takusan

05-01-2005, 10:22 PM

It would seem that in stating my position, I was defending the art of Aikido.
No problem with that being the impression. But I wasn't doing that intentionally.
The art of Aikido will / can stand on its own two feet, with or without my help.

I stand by my stance of Aikido being a sound syllabus (perhaps not complete, nor diverse) 'karate ryu'.
What is important is that the individual art that one trains in, if done with a strong personal budo spirit, can be considered worthy. This I say from MY perspective, but must qualify that by stating that I'm not a purist.
Indeed, some of my 'kung fu' is of a mixed heritage and therefore is not constrained by a single system. Thats the benefit (and weakness I suppose) of having many instructors over many decades.
No ground techniques - correct, and will support your view on that, (I teach some limited waza in class)
No real defense against strikes or throwing - to a degree I agree but I think my clubs students wouldn't agree, as we do alot of - 'what if it all goes wrong' type scenarios.
Syllabus full of wrist grabbing - yup - and loving it. But thats just the base - isn't it - not the entire art.
Worst of all, Aikidoka don't spar - oh yes they do. In our dojo. I would prefer they didn't sometimes, but they are energetic souls.
But I must concede, you are right, as it really is only amongst ourselves, and that really doesn't count.
We share the dojo with a judo group , and their idea of sparring is totally different from ours, however, the diverse nature of Aikido's techniques still allows me feel confident in its ability to 'match' it on the mat.

But thats possible because I'm considered a 'mean son of a really quite nice lady.' :D

Bodhi

05-01-2005, 10:37 PM

"Nowadays, cross-training is all the rage. Rather than try to beat up the "new kid on the block," many martial artists view other sytstems as things to learn from than challenges to take one. So it's more likely a Judo person would cross-train in Aikido than march into an Aikido dojo issuing a challenge. Even MMA guys cross-train in Aikido, according to this thread I found in usenet:

http://webnews.newsfeeds.com/webnew...sid=28731&th=12

When you look at arts as things to learn from instead of as potential challenges, the ego-motive to issue a challenge is gone"

Very true, JKD concepts people have been doing this forever!

In the 70s, Muay Thai fighters were going through people in other systems like a hot knife through butter, thus everyone began to barrow from the Thai's. They saw that the Thai fighters trained reality, lots of sparring, with resistance, and were just all around tough guys. Their art derived from Krabi Krabong, a military combat system wich was known for its effectiveness, so people began to supplement because of its no nonesense approach, and it worked very well!

In the 90s everyone saw a little 180 lb Brazilian deal with all that came his way, size, strength, speed, different systems etc all fell to BJJ. A 65 year challenge was brought to America, and helped to open the eyes of martial artists everywhere! Royce has said many times that he is the least skilled of all his brothers and that is why they chose him to show the effectiveness of their familys art (if they would have put in Rickson it just wouldnt have been fair ) :D So now strikers started to learn to grapple, thus increaseing their effectiveness in that range. What do the Brazilians do now, they start supplementing with Muay Thai and boxing, because they were beginning to have trouble with strikers that now knew how to grapple. Boxers learned to wrestle, and wrestlers learned to box. Kickers learned to punch, and punchers learned to kick, and EVERYONE learned to grapple, thus creating a more well rounded fighter in all the ranges! Granted i am speaking of a MMA tournament setting but there is no denying that becomming proficient within all the ranges will make you a more complete martial artist and all around better fighter, with or without weapons!

Learn from different arts, just as you would learn from different cultures and ways of thinking! You enjoy different foods, books, movies, hobbies, vacation spots etc, so learn to see the worth in other martial arts as well! Bruce Lee once said, "Absorb what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is uniquely your own" He took from 26 different systems in creating the "Original Jeet Kune Do", some of it was actual technique, some of it was just theory and principle, but all played a part in the overall developement! He later said that he wished that he would have never even named his art because of the way people fuss over labels. Its just a name, not a set way of doing anything, but an individual expression! Its not a Chinese way, its not a Japanese or Korean way, its not a Thai, Indonesian, or Philipino way, its having "no way" as way, so you are able to fit in with all ways, ideas, and systems!

I believe that if more people could possibly move towards this way of being, then we might be able to get a closer look at what the principles of Aikido seem to speak of in the first place.

BTW, it has been said many times that BJJ is Aikido on the ground ;)

ChrisHein

05-01-2005, 11:36 PM

Hey David, I didn't mean to make it sound like I was anti-wrist grab. I think lots of good things come from it, and I think it's really the only way to deal with someone who has a weapon in their hand. I was just using it to illustrate my point about Aikido being a predominantly weapon system.

Nice post Jason!

-Chris

Misogi-no-Gyo

05-02-2005, 01:38 AM

I wholeheartedly agree -- but it would be good to point out that Northnern California is host to many traditional or otherwise serious dojo -- of the non-hippy variety.

Notable are Tatoian Sensei (http://www.traditional-aikido.com), Goto Sensei (http://www.baymarinaikido.com) and most any other listed on http://www.takemusu.org... and quite a few others. My father, who lived about 5 hours away from me when I was in California, was forced to train at what I would call a "hippy dojo" for a number of months when he lived in a very rural area. Now he lives in an even MORE rural area and trains only in weapon suburi... iwama style. :)

Bryan,

Of course my comments were meant to be taken "tongue-in-cheek" and in no way indicative of any generalization that I feel should be attributed to Aikido dojos, or the like. However, having said that, that doesn't mean that it isn't true about any particular dojo, Chris Hein's dojo apparently excluded by him from the mere possibility. He seems to think that his opinions based upon his limited experiences amount to the truth, but don't we all... However, simply restating them, albeit with a little more verve" as he did in his last post doesn't seem to make them any more right - pity.

Taking a closer look
For whatever reason, he stepped up and stated, " you think that any of the original members of Daito Ryu were planing of fighting predominantly empty handed? The techniques of Aikido are clearly first and formost a weapons system." Spelling mistakes aside, dealing with his first, "original" idea, well, he seems to forget that Aikido is not Daito-Ryu. However, should we choose for a brief moment to stand on the weak shoulders of that argument as a misbegotten truth, and extrapolating further from the farce of it all, even those on the wrong side of that argument would then agree that Aikido is merely a subset of the Daito-Ryu syllabus. We hear that message all the time coming from Daito-Ryu land, and even further along the path of extrapolation that this limited set of techniques are, at some level a way one competently deals with attackers who are armed when one happens not to be.

He later states, " If you don't understand this you havent' been training Aikido, weather you live on the east coast, west coast or Antartica! I would venture that if we gathered up a 100 person committee to judge our two perspectives, his being that one trained in (his art of) aikido could as he states, "…never face even an unarmed skilled opponent…," and my view being that someone competent in (my art of) aikido should be able to face a skilled, armed opponent, it may be judged by same committee that he may be the one who, in fact, may be missing the proverbial point.

As for his second point, as it so happens, I do remember fifteen or so years ago the shihan of my dojo at the time uttering a few words selected amongst many others for the consumption of those attending one of his public seminars. They went something along the lines of "I am teaching you how to be practical, how to make it work. …it has to work… If you can't go outside into that street and let a couple of gang-bangers come at you with baseball bats, and know that you are going to do the right thing, then you don't know aikido." These were uttered just prior to this other memorable ditty, "…it has to be real, otherwise, you may as well go take up aerobics, or something…" Again, with regards to his second point that The techniques of Aikido are clearly first and formost a weapons system" interestingly, the answer to the next question we asked of, "how much of your aikido is based upon kenjutsu, he answered, "I would say all parts of it. When I do nikyo, I cut, when I do irimi, I cut, when I do shihonage, I cut…" So given all of that, perhaps there is some element of truth to what Mr. Heins in his infinite wisdom has said. The problem I have with his argument is that this coming from someone that says that Aikido doesn't work.

Funny thing is the seminar where this question and answer session was taking place was in Northern California. His comments were designed to encourage those whose aikido was not effective to question their training methods, and their allegiances to dojos, teachers or organizations that have gutted aikido into something it never was, that isn't practical and has sold the student short on promises of the spiritual and harmonious without any basis in reality. My post simply echoed the sentiments of an old proverb (but aren't they all old?) Don't spend ten years aimlessly practicing an art, but focused on finding a teacher that can lead you to the place you want to go. It doesn't sound like with regards to Aikido that Mr. Heins has found that for himself - yet.

Mr. Heins hailing from a "KI" dojo in Northern California tells us, "Aikido doesn't work." Now O-Sensei didn't teach ki, but his aikido worked, so who are we to believe?

.

takusan

05-02-2005, 05:37 AM

Thats ok Chris, I think making our respective points can lead us down paths that are rather hard to solidify in the typed medium.
You are welcome at my dojo anytime.

Mmm, seems you have lit a candle under a couple of people.
Real strong opinions being shared.
None have all the answers and none are totally wrong.
Its perspective.
I teach 'hard aikido' so therefore might be considered a brute.
I also teach very 'gentle aikido', so therefore might be considered a *******, by certain others.

Thing is, I like to teach.
Whether a student likes to learn, is not my problem, but I often teach just one thing and still have various students give me a critique of the technique that is diametrically opposed.

Go figure.

Point here is that while we may all be on the same path,(maybe), we are most definitely on very different positions on said path.
How then can one persons perspective be invalidated if viewed from another's? :rolleyes:

takusan

05-02-2005, 05:50 AM

Ooops, meant to ask - why is Aikido thought of as (only)a weapons based / focused system?????

I agree and support the idea that to do most karate waza, you must have a sound understanding of weapons, but for all that, I don't see aikido as a weapons based system.

Weapons derived - yes
even weapons directed - yes -but
'karate waza' dominated - I would believe more so.

The thought of doing shiho nage without a real good appreciation of weapon is almost laughable, but I don't see shiho nage as a weapons technique. It came from weapons, its practiced with / against weapons, but for day to day training and self protection, it is a karate waza.

Thats my penny's worth :p
Night all

Jim Sorrentino

05-02-2005, 09:55 AM

"Get a gun"? Well, that presupposes that you live in a place where you can carry firearms - more than half my adult life was spent in a place where you couldn't. It also presupposes that you would be willing and able to carry a firearm on a regular basis, which is not an option for most people. It also assumes that firearms are appropriate for all situations, which they are not. For similar reasons, empty hand arts survived in Japan for hundreds of years even though almost all battlefield combat was performed with weapons. And there were plenty of challenges.

Well-said, Chris. This brought to mind one of my favorite quotes:

"Having a gun and believing you're armed is like owning a piano and believing you're a musician." Jeff Cooper, Founder of Gunsite

... or, like wearing a hakama and believing that you're practicing aikido. If your aikido, or whatever martial art you practice, is not preparing you to deal effectively with conflict by developing and inculcating the "combat mindset", then find another art. Serious firearms training (such as the courses offered by Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, and John Farnam, to name but three) are at least as demanding, physically and mentally, as anything I have experienced in aikido or karatedo (Uechi-ryu, for those who are curious).

Jim Sorrentino

makuchg

05-02-2005, 10:10 AM

Thing is, I like to teach.
Whether a student likes to learn, is not my problem

I always thought one of the primary purposes of teaching is to motivate and encourage learning. Maybe your statement doesn't express you correctly but that is a very callous approach to teaching.

ChrisHein

05-02-2005, 11:56 AM

Hey guys,
First off let me state to the anal that my spelling is poor, this if obvious, but hopefully you can make out what I'm trying to say....

I practiced Aikido for 5 years in an Iwama based school. One year uchi-deshi. I was quite good at Aikido, I went to seminars, trained with all the best people I could find (sorry I was limited to northern California), and thought I had a good grasp of Aikido. My teacher said I was one of the best Students he had ever had (coarse he was trained in Iwama, but he did live in northern California at the time). I had been in lots of fights as a kid, and knew what real fighting in the street was like. Although I couldn't quite put it together I was sure that Aikido was going to be applicable in a street fight some day. So after I had been a shodan for a bit I decided to travel about and see what else I could see. I moved to southern California, and began training at a school where sparring, and competitive fighting, and street applicable techniques were the goal. I was there for quite some time, when I learned that Aikido was applicable to empty handed fighting. Not in technique, but in the methods for learning new things and applying them to a resistive person. I was pleased that Aikido had taught me so much about dealing with another person. However I had never used the techniques Aikido in sparring (save Kokyunage, and once kotegaeshi). So I just thought, oh well the techniques must suck, I'll get over it. Then I went and fought with the dog brothers (http://www.dogbrothers.com/). I did it just to fight another fight. The dog brothers are a full contact stick fighting group in southern California. They fight wearing only a fencing helmet and gloves, they hit as hard as they passably can. All striking, wrestling, submitting goes. So I took a Rattan jo with me, and fought one of the dog brothers (lonely dog), and I found that Aikido techniques started working, and the way I had trained to fighting in Aikido worked like a charm. It was almost magical, like I knew something that I didn't know that I knew. This had never happened to me in empty handed sparring, even though I had spent the vast majority of my time practicing aikido empty handed. This lead me to start thinking about Aikido and it's techniques, and what it was designed for. I haven't based my opinions on anything that a teacher told me, or what some Wise old man thought. I based them I what I saw, when I put MYSELF on the line.

Dave it's funny that you said shihonage. It's my pet technique, I love it and can do It in an Aikido dojo like a champ. However I never got it sparring empty handed. I gave up on it like I had allot of other Aikido techniques. Then one day I was sparring with a guy and a knife. We got in a struggle over the knife and out came shihonage, I threw him with shihonage. After that it happened a few other times when sparring with a knife. Which lead me to think about how shihonage worked, and that of coarse it's designed to be used when struggling over a thing.

Look I don't think we need to try and defend Aikido, saying that "it dose infact work, and O-Sensei is the best guy ever". It works, I know it because I've used it, but it works with weapons. It is meant to be used with weapons. It's not a good empty handed system. If any of you are in Cali, look me up.

-Chris

rob_liberti

05-02-2005, 12:44 PM

kironin

05-02-2005, 12:47 PM

Right now Aikido has many "Friendship" seminars for different Aikido styles, maybe a special type should be organized to host different arts.

Aiki Expo has had and does have classes with martial artists from arts other than Aikido already. That's actually my favorite part of it.

Roy Dean

05-02-2005, 01:28 PM

Chris, this is just my opinion, but 5 years isn't really enough experience in aikido to expect the techniques to work well in the dojo let alone outside of the dojo regardless of how great a student you are - especially in the Iwama system that breaks teaching aikido up into what they felt was level appropriate teaching. I'd say you never got to the part of the Iwama system that could possibly work in real life.

Rob

5 years of dedicated study isn't long enough? When does effectiveness come in then? At the 10 year mark? Why is the teaching methodology so poor then for creating effective martial artists? A year or two spent in BJJ, Judo, Muay Thai, or Krav Maga will yield results against an untrained attacker.

The "You must have not gotten the REAL techniques" excuse is one that the Aiki-jujutsu guys have been using against Aikidoka for years. Good to see it's still alive and kicking.

Incidentally, Chris has trained under some excellent teachers, so I'm certain that he's "gotten the goods", as good as they are. With his experience testing his techniques in the crucible of competition, he might even be able to effect aiki techniques better than than those that have never attempted that training method, yet may have been training considerably longer.

Sincerely,

Roy Dean

rob_liberti

05-02-2005, 02:59 PM

Hi Roy
5 years of dedicated study isn't long enough? When does effectiveness come in then? At the 10 year mark? I'd say the 15 to 20 year mark is more reasonable for aikido.

Why is the teaching methodology so poor then for creating effective martial artists? Because the goal is not to create effective martial artists _at any cost to the attacker_.

If you accept the basic premise of aikido in terms of self defense is to protect yourself and do no damage (which when pressed by someone without regard to their own safety in an unavoidable situation can at best result in minimum damage) then it seems a bit more reasonable to require much more time to be effective at protecting yourself _while avoiding the typical maximum damage response_ one might find in the Muay Thai or Krav Maga.

The "You must have not gotten the REAL techniques" excuse is one that the Aiki-jujutsu guys have been using against Aikidoka for years. Good to see it's still alive and kicking. Sorry but I have no idea how other aikido people tried to construct an argument on this topic in the past, so I cannot defend them. I did in fact say "this is just my opinion".

Incidentally, Chris has trained under some excellent teachers, so I'm certain that he's "gotten the goods", as good as they are. With his experience testing his techniques in the crucible of competition, he might even be able to effect aiki techniques better than than those that have never attempted that training method, yet may have been training considerably longer. I'm sure he had some wonderful teachers and excellent experiences. However, many aikido people call iriminage "the 20 year technique." Why do you think they call it that? It is certainly not because they are comparing their process to Muay Tai or BJJ. I'd say they couldn't care less.

Basically, it has been my experience that the techniques were designed not to work based on surface level understanding. "Aiki" was borrowed from a sword school that used that term for their okuden-level (level of depth). Depth in understanding takes time.

Five years to get to shodan is fine. The way I have been taught is that shodan, nidan, and sandan are the beginner levels ("shoden"), yondan, godan, and rokyudan are the intermediate levels ("chuden"); and nandan+ are the mastery levels ("okuden" - level of depth).

I think that people in the intermediate levels of aikido should be able to handle themselves well if that has been their intention in training, but who gets there in five years?! No one. Not even with cross-training.

Rob

takusan

05-02-2005, 04:27 PM

Hi all,
(esp Gregory)
Previously I mentioned that Teaching has many facets to it.
If I were to pander to every single person that has ever set foot within my dojo, just so that I could prevent being criticized for not motivating them, most of the other students, that didn't need that particular 'motivation' would be receiving material that was totally unnecessary - perhaps even unwanted.
If a student finds themselves unmotivated - for what ever reason - it IS their problem. That I may, through my actions, help them over come this, is a great out come, but not my motivation.

While teaching may involve motivation and encouragement to a large extent, I was always under the understanding that its primary role is the passing on of information.
Maybe I'm stuck in the 'old school' where the teacher didn't need to be all things to all students.
Give me time, I may change. :rolleyes:

Roy Dean

05-02-2005, 05:05 PM

Rob,

Thanks for the quick reply, and I can see you position far more clearly now. I say 15 years for solid effectiveness is a bit long for my taste, but tastes do vary.

Perhaps there should be a disclaimer printed clearly on sign-up sheets for new students, indicating the time frame when effectiveness should be expected.

Not that I believe in those time frames. Under the proper teacher, with the right training methods, a person can increase their skill level dramatically in a short period of time. Isn't that what being an uchideshi is all about? The quality of your instruction and training time is more important than the total time elapsed.

4 years of full time training can easily equate to 10 years of being a serious hobbyist. Who really knows the quality of another person's training experience? Who's to say that effectiveness can't be reached in under 5 years?

Roy

ChrisHein

05-02-2005, 06:41 PM

If you want to be capable of protecting yourself, and you can't get it in 5 years, then your system is no good. Like Roy said, a guy can become very effective in 2 years with Bjj, Muay Thai, boxing, etc etc. The goal of protecting yourself and not hurting the other person is a mixed bag. Could I stop a small woman who is untrained in the martial arts, with out hurting her? Most certainly I can. Can I stop a 400 lbs. professionally trained Sumo with out hurting him? Most defiantly not. Being able to control someone with out hurting them is dependent on many factors, and cannot be summed up to 20 years of training.
I think most people are too hung up on the idea of some mysterious magic that will happen down the road. O-sensei said that you could get Aikido in 3 months if you understood what it was. In-fact he said he got it in an instant. "True victory is self victory, and it happens in an instant.". I think it's wishful thinking that you will wake up 20 years down the road and magic will happen. I would put my technical knowledge of Aikido up against any that I've met.

takusan

05-02-2005, 08:40 PM

So what are you actually saying?

Give up training after five or so years? Because you are probably as good as you'll ever be (from within your current system)???

I'm sure that wasn't want you meant

Hell, that would have relegated a huge % of the aiki community to being masochists, as, for them to carry on training after that time means they are truly deluding themselves to their ability to gain anything further.

I relay a comment my friend told me, that came from Pat Hendricks sensei while he was training at her dojo, (not a direct quote, but you'll get the idea)

"What is it with all these people, they think when they get to yon dan or something, that they believe they actually know something - and want to teach." :crazy:

Just love that. This allows me to carry on training - and teaching and having an open mind, for many years to come.

CNYMike

05-02-2005, 09:44 PM

..... So I took a Rattan jo with me, and fought one of the dog brothers (lonely dog), and I found that Aikido techniques started working, and the way I had trained to fighting in Aikido worked like a charm. It was almost magical, like I knew something that I didn't know that I knew. This had never happened to me in empty handed sparring, even though I had spent the vast majority of my time practicing aikido empty handed. This lead me to start thinking about Aikido and it's techniques, and what it was designed for. I haven't based my opinions on anything that a teacher told me, or what some Wise old man thought. I based them I what I saw, when I put MYSELF on the line.

Dave it's funny that you said shihonage. It's my pet technique, I love it and can do It in an Aikido dojo like a champ. However I never got it sparring empty handed. I gave up on it like I had allot of other Aikido techniques. Then one day I was sparring with a guy and a knife. We got in a struggle over the knife and out came shihonage, I threw him with shihonage. After that it happened a few other times when sparring with a knife. Which lead me to think about how shihonage worked, and that of coarse it's designed to be used when struggling over a thing.

Look I don't think we need to try and defend Aikido, saying that "it dose infact work, and O-Sensei is the best guy ever". It works, I know it because I've used it, but it works with weapons. It is meant to be used with weapons. It's not a good empty handed system. If any of you are in Cali, look me up.

-Chris

That Aikido is weapons-based is widely known; I've read O Sensei explained techniques in terms of sword moves. Kali is also weapons based, and has many of the same joint locks as Aikido, although so far, I have only seen them empty hand.

As to how well Aikido pops out with the empty hand, I've had things "pop out" a couple of times during pushing hands in Tai Chi (although I am not quite sure what they were). I also finished the ikkyo pin on my Kali instructor when we were going over an arm bar very similar to ikkyo ura, although the Kali version stops short of the Aikido final position; it was very strange to watch my body finish it on its own without me consciously decide to do it! However, in what little empty hand sparring I've done in the last few years -- the most recent sparring session in the last few years being an impromptu round with my Kali instructor -- nothing "Aiki-ish" popped out. So it can "pop out" empty hand, but my gut tells me you have to snag a reference point when it's handed to you or you don't get it.

Then AGAIN, there's the persepctive of retaining a skill. I haven't trained in a Wing Chun class in a long time, but I retained enough of the basics for this past weekend.

Just a few thoughts.

CNYMike

05-02-2005, 09:54 PM

sunny liberti

05-02-2005, 10:33 PM

Fine, but there are just not going to be so many people who are going to understand aikido so well that they can get it in three months. I think Yamaguchi sensei was such a person, but that's just one man. We haven't had too many people come along after Tesla who could repeat some of the scientific feats he did 100 years ago either, but I'm sure someone will come along sooner or later. I think it is a lot more wishful thinking that you are going to be a genious like that compared to being someone who improves gradually over time from years of dedicated practice!

Bascially, I think the point was that we are talking about the average person - I'll even give you the better than average person. It still makes a lot of sense to me that is should take much longer to be effective and not injure someone than it does to become effective regardless of the damage you do to a person. I do, in fact, explain that to new people who walk through the door. If you want to be fair, then you have to also ask if the BJJ places talk to the new students about the % chance they'll end up rolling around on the ground with someone once they get our of grade school?

About uchideshis: Good point, but it really depends on who you are an uchideshi for and what their goals in aikido are. The ones I know well in Japan tend to get really good up to sandan and then they turn into masters of the "basics for the sake of basics" brand of aikido. (The teacher's goal is to spread aikido's basics and he does a wonderful job.) The five uchideshis in that system have good mind/body unification in their movement and I'd say they must think that is all there is. After sandan, they started getting promoted from that point out of loyalty and/or teaching basics for the sake of basics ability - as opposed to getting promoted for aikido martial ability. They never even consider giving up some of their power for better blending and learning how to separate their mind and body tasks for more efficiency. To my mind it is a terrible waste. It's like playing scale on the piano for ever and never actually writing your own song, or copying words out of a dictionary but never writing a story - ever. These people are becoming the next generation and many sensei's with more technical ability are dying off. In my experience some of these uchideshis want more and find they have to try to get it by cross training - so as not to insult the training method of their teacher or whatever.

Anyway, if you can do ikkyo without directly pushing, iriminage without directly pulling or pushing, and shihonage without directly lifting in 5 years you are doing better than many people who have trained much longer than that, but still say you have a long way to go from there as that isn't even intermediate yet.

Lastly, I don't know about being effective in 2 years of BJJ. As a matter of fact, I just a few hours ago took a 2 year BJJer apart for as long as he wanted to try to take me to the ground - he tried for about half an hour! (I like and respect BJJ.) The fact remains that this guy was shorter than me and heavier by about 20 pounds. He had apparently been kicked ouf of a gracie school for being unsafe with people in his training. (I understand that this was just one person but that's all I have to go on at the moment.)

I like wrestling and I knew he wasn't going to be able to get me anywhere near the ground. I can't tell you how many times I had my thumb in his eye and didn't push in. I was holding back from more horrible things than that. I would say that he was suffering from cooperative training much more than I was.

After a long while - I told him I would lie down, let him get on top of me and I wrestled him - and I still kept him to a stale mate for a long while. (Where I was relaxed and breathing normally and he was panting like mad and getting more tired.) Then, to be a sport and drop my ego I let him start out in positions totally favorable to him he took me apart effectively. That was impressive, I must say. It was fun and I learned some things from those positions. But I think I have a good idea about what an average 2 year BJJer can and cannot do. Let's not kid ourselves, effective is a relative term, and if that is the measure of what is effective, than my 15 to 20 years of aikido mark is a bit high. (But I still say that my mark is right, and your mark on BJJ is a bit off.)

Anyway, I do agree that there are faster ways to get effective than aikido. If you think that makes aikido bad than by all means don't train aikido. From my way of thinking, a longer time to get somewhere might be worth it depending on what you are trying to get to.

Rob

(bummer I posted as my wife - sorry!)

sunny liberti

05-02-2005, 11:56 PM

OK! Please direct any challenges to Rob - not to me!! I'm happy with my path - I don't care to fight about it...

Robert Townson

05-03-2005, 06:57 AM

CNYMike

05-03-2005, 07:22 AM

I always wonder why people compare MA systems.. it is assuming that everyone out there in the world is/has training is a MA and is using it.
I very much doubt that the majority of people out there that attack people have any MA expericence and if they do it would only be basic.

The question shouldn't be "How does Aikido compare to "X" MA system". It should be "If a Aikidoka was attacked in this way <insert attack>, would the Aididoka survive?"

In my experience, however limited, most people that train in any MA do so for personal defence, fitness, or just the love of the Art itself, and are very unlikely to user it unless provoked.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make in the "Defending Against Aikido" thread, and even then I'm taking a cue from my Kal instructor: When someone asks him "But what if he does <insert grappling attack here>?" he says "Don't worry about it," precisely because the odds are greater that you will be confronted by some doof off the street with little or no training, as opposed to a trained fighter with MMA experience; they're spending their time training (or typing on the 'net) than mugging people. Thank you.

rob_liberti

05-03-2005, 08:27 AM

I agree that it is unlikely that I'll be fighting anyone period. As I said, I like wrestling because it is fun, not because I was comparing anything. I only piped in because it was just suggested that
1) "If you want to be capable of protecting yourself, and you can't get it in 5 years, then your system is no good" and
2) "a guy can become very effective in 2 years with Bjj"

and I just don't agree with the weights and measures being used...

When people go for both legs I can generally move so that they can only get one and so that they don't get their forehead directly attached to the front of my thigh/hip. So while they go for their single leg take down I can work their face and control their body better than they can control mine. I didn't find this too difficult against a 2 year Bjj player. If someone can make a better set up so that they can get to a point where I can be taken to the ground, then that's awesome and I'd love the lesson.

What's funny is that this particular guy I was playing with was so set in his way of thinking about things that while I was just salt and peppering his face (gently - less than skin hard - but enough to stop or adjust the grabs he made at me without concern for his face) he was trying to convince me that we do the "same thing". So I told him that I'm using the skills I practice in aikido to create this positioning and to hit you everytime you create an opening by trying to grab me from that terrible position, but he couldn't hear it.

Rob

jester

05-03-2005, 09:03 AM

When people go for both legs I can generally move so that they can only get one and so that they don't get their forehead directly attached to the front of my thigh/hip. So while they go for their single leg take down I can work their face and control their body better than they can control mine. I didn't find this too difficult against a 2 year BJJ player. If someone can make a better set up so that they can get to a point where I can be taken to the ground, then that's awesome and I'd love the lesson.

That's odd that he would want to take you to the ground right away. BJJ has a standing self-defense aspect to it that doesn't get talked about much. Only after a throw, lock etc. takes the attacker to the ground, will the grappling aspect of the art come into play.

People that just want to take you down and pull guard are probably not that well rounded in BJJ.

All BJJ is not created equal. You have to take in account of his school, instructor etc.

rob_liberti

05-03-2005, 09:34 AM

I totally agree. Same goes for aikido! I agree that I'm seeing more aikido that is basics for the sake of basics than people who are getting good basics to then move beyond them - but that's not the art's fault, that's a problem (in my opinion) with how the art is being spread.

I am totally confident that if there is an excellent teacher in town - anywhere who actually has the goal of developing students beyond sandan martial ability and teaches that way - I could move into town, and set up a basics for the sake of basics dojo and put the better school out of business.

Rob

Ben Joiner

05-03-2005, 10:47 AM

Interesting thread, Rob could you explain to a relative newbie why the above statement holds true?

grondahl

05-03-2005, 10:54 AM

And even better; since basics for the sake of basics seems to be a problem spreading trough the world, why don't you name some of the teachers or dojos that operate in that fashion. A pm will also be fine.

ChrisHein

05-03-2005, 12:35 PM

Well I'd just like to say 5 years is a fair amount of time, specially if you're training 5-6 days a week, between 2-6 hours each of those days. I was uchi deshi for a year, a dedicated student, not just hobbying around. Also my experience with Brazilian jiu jutsu is not limited to some kid, who came into my school and said he had 2 years of Brazilian jiu jutsu training. I trained for 2 years under a top level competing black belt, and also frequented Clebber Jiu jutsu in Huntington beach. Those two years of Brazilian Jiu jutsu were also 3-6 hour days, 4-5 days a week (I had a job, and couldn't train as much). My experience with both systems is very sound, my time wasn't spent hobbying about. I'll tell you right now, Brazilian jiu jutsu is twice the system for unarmed combative that Aikido is. An Aikidoka would prolly beat the Jesus out of a Bjj man if he had a stick, but it's not an empty handed system. I have fought with both in the ring, I have fought full contact stick fighting, I actually have applied my knowledge against people who wanted to defete/hurt me. I'm sure you have convinced yourself that your Aikido is very sound (and maybe it is) but if you don't get that it's a weapons system, I really have little respect for you. If you would be interested in finding out what 2 years of mixed martial arts training and a mear 5 (7 now) years of Aikido can do, you should come see me, I'd be more then happy to show you.

-Chris Hein

rob_liberti

05-03-2005, 01:09 PM

Chris,

I train 5-6 days a week, between 2-6 hours each of those days now and I have been doing that non-stop with some great aikido teachers for almost 15 years straight. I'm not gifted - in fact I'm a bit slow at learning aikido compared to some. But I can tell you that I remember what I could do 10 years ago, and what I could do 5 years ago, and I'm fairly well aware of what I can do now. Sorry, but I don't agree with your "fair amount of time" opinion. I would say I will need another good 5 years of paying better attention before I think I'll really want to start having more fun and cross-training more frequently.

Please remember that I did post (and meant) the following:
1) "I like and respect BJJ."
2) "I'm sure he had some wonderful teachers and excellent experiences." < -- referring to you
3) "If someone can make a better set up so that they can get to a point where I can be taken to the ground, then that's awesome and I'd love the lesson." - so sure anytime I can meet you that would be fine. I hope your set ups to shoot me completely take me apart so I can continue to learn.

You have said:
1) "a guy can become very effective in 2 years with Bjj"
2) "I would put my technical knowledge of Aikido up against any that I've met."
3) "If you want to be capable of protecting yourself, and you can't get it in 5 years, then your system is no good"

To 1, after reading you last post, to be fair I'll give you the point. You said a guy can become very effective, and I read that as the average guy - but I can see now that you are talking about a highly committed and dedicated person with excellent instruction - and I'm sure such a person "can" become very effective in that art in that time frame.

To 2, I wrote:
"Anyway, if you can do ikkyo without directly pushing, iriminage without directly pulling or pushing, and shihonage without directly lifting in 5 years you are doing better than many people who have trained much longer than that, but still say you have a long way to go from there as that isn't even intermediate yet."

If you can do these things and more then I'm wrong and you are certainly qualified to make that statement #3 (about aikido not being a good system). I'd still say we disagree, but you are qualified - or should I say you have much more credibility than I initially guessed based on the amount of time you had in and what I've been told the focus of those dojos are with beginners.

If you cannot do those things and more in aikido, then:
a) you are do not yet have the credibility in my eyes - which is what I was saying initially
b) we should get together and trade and share.

Peace, and I really do hope I get to meet you someday!
Rob

Ron Tisdale

05-03-2005, 01:24 PM

I'm sure you have convinced yourself that your Aikido is very sound (and maybe it is) but if you don't get that it's a weapons system, I really have little respect for you. If you would be interested in finding out what 2 years of mixed martial arts training and a mear 5 (7 now) years of Aikido can do, you should come see me, I'd be more then happy to show you.

Well, hey...don't take it personally or anything....

Ron

rob_liberti

05-03-2005, 01:33 PM

About basics for the sake of basics:

Well, it's human nature to want to feel like you achieved something. Sandan is the most physically powerful rank - and people love that. (I love that too!) The idea - I guess - is get people there, and the serious folks will continue on their own. It happens rarely. To their credit, they say things like get 1000s of people interested and the exceptional will rise to the top (and the rest will pay all of the bills) - which is fine EXCEPT that the people in the "rest" category are still getting promoted for all sorts of reasons other than the ability to perform aikido with more advanced martial ability - and that undermines the credibility of the art. I've had a couple shihan - promoted for time in and making the art popular as opposed to technical ability - fail to do nikyo and sankyo on me. That is terrible. My friends say "Rob just fall down for them, they are old they can't be expected to over power you in their 60s" or whatever. Well, bullocks! Gleason sensei and Suganuma sensei are both in their 60s and they wipe the floor with me - all the while protecting me. They just actually got so much better at aikido as they got older that their physical strength decreases and they can throw me harder regardless of the fact that I'm getting better too. How old is Ikeda sensei or Sugano sensei?, I'd say they have no problems with powerful waza either at their age. (I haven't felt Chiba sensei in a long time, so I don't know.)

Now as to who teaches basics for the sake of basics and no more - I agree that a PM is in order.

Rob

Gareth Hinds

05-03-2005, 02:56 PM

Apparently, the answer to Jorx's question is that challenges have moved to internet forums.

Seriously though, this has devolved into another iteration of the "is aikido effective" debate which has been argued here ad nauseum. Jorx's twist on the question is *why* aikido masters don't try to publicly prove its effectiveness by taking on challengers from other martial arts. Well, indeed one possible answer is "because they're afraid their aikido won't really work." I don't believe this personally, and I have to ask, how realistic is a challenge if it's not a real fight, and who wants to encourage real fights?

No, I'd say masters of many arts (not just aikido) nowadays are content to look at each other's arts, give a nod to what they do well, maybe do some cooperative training together, and leave it at that. And I think it's generally better that way. If you are constantly hung up on the question of whose art is better in a challenge fight, or a real fight (two different things, the latter encompassing an unanswerable range of circumstances),... well, I'd say that's just a hangup, and at some point you may need to let go of it.

Hi, Rob ;-)

Bronson

05-03-2005, 03:54 PM

...the odds are greater that you will be confronted by some doof off the street with little or no training, as opposed to a trained fighter with MMA experience.

I believe the odds are greater that you'll be attacked by someone you know and probably don't want to injure (badly).

Bronson

ChrisHein

05-03-2005, 04:20 PM

I think Aikido is really really effective, at teaching armed combat. I think there are no challange matchs because most people don't want to fight with weapons, and because wars are fought with firearms.

-Chris Hein

Ron, I do hope we get to play someday, I think you might be more level headed then I was giveing you creadit for.

Bodhi

05-03-2005, 09:43 PM

Being an effective fighter depends upon the "individual" and how they have been training, period! Most systems do not address all the ranges effectively so there must be an adaption if you do indeed wish to become a complete martial artist!

If you were to take 2 top fighters, the one who trains realistically the most, and is the most well rounded, and conditioned, with a mindset to work through pain and explode all over you at the right moment, will more than likely come out on top. This isnt rocket science, fighters have to adapt to win, they have to crosstrain so they can be able to deal with particular situations that may be unfamilliar to them! A person can indeed become very good in 2 years BUT it depends on what and how they have been training for those 2 years!

One of my teachers trained with the great Antonio "Tatang" IIlustrisimo, a legend in the Filipino martial arts! Tatang was known for the death matches he had been involved in, he was feared throughout the Phillipines, with live blades as well as sticks. By all accounts, many well known and highly respected FMA masters all the way up into the 1990s, have said he was a real life warrior from the past! Never defeated in actual combat, even up into his later years, IIlustrisimo declined to compete at the first open Arnis tournament in the Philipines. When asked why, he said it was a joke, not real fighting, and that if anyone wanted to take his reputation then they would have to take it for real, with a sword!. Tatang said that his system was so simple that you could get good at it in a matter of weeks, good enough to deal with a skilled knife or stick fighter, much less anyone off the street!

This whole business of fighting is really simple, you strip away technique, not add more to confuse! You wont be able to recall a hundred different ways to do something when its for real, so you pick one way that has been shown to consistantly work against all types of opponents under resisting conditions! If you want to be a good fighter, everything must remain simple, straight to the point, and highly effective in all the ranges! It must work the majority of the time, not just sometimes! Good fighters have proven techniques,have consistantly worked over and over again against resisting opponents in real world conditions. They practice this way, they train what works, not what is said to work!

That 2 year BJJ man sounds like he hasnt been training as much as he thinks, especially if hes getting winded and tires easily. I know when i was in my 2nd year of BJJ, i could give anyone trouble, but then again i created openings using things from different systems. Like Aikido, most my training comes from weapon based systems in the Philipno and Indonesian arts I have supplemented with many things, Boxing, Muay Thai, BJJ, as well as Combat Rifle, Shotgun, and Pistol training, i tie them all togather with JKD Concepts. Of course i have my favorites, but what i have learned over the years is that no one system is the be all end all fighting art, there are just to many things that can happen. Weapons based systems help increase your empty hand skills to a level you just cannot get to without! Have someone take a stick or knife, and use quick slashing and thrusting movements. Have them move it as fast as they can while you try to follow the weapon itself with your eyes. Now have them do the same movements with empty hands, you will notice how easily it is to see their movements now, almost as if they are moving in slow motion. Weapons based systems if practiced using those weapons will indeed make you a better empty hand fighter!

As far as there not being a high percentage of fights going to the ground, thats just not true! I have been in to many fights and seen to many fights to say that there is not a high percentage that you may go to the ground. You can trip, you can stumble, u can be on a slippery surface and loose your footing, you can twist an ankle, or you can just be thrown. There are many ways you can end up on the ground, and if your not worried about that, then your not training as a complete martial artist with a mindset for reality!

Stop bickering and learn from ALL your brothers and sisters in the arts, without critisizing and disrespecting eachother! If someone says something contrary to our way of thinking, we should first examine that comment to see if they are right! Then we test it out and see what kind of consistent results we get over time. Most of all, we should have fun with the process!

With Respect
J

ChrisHein

05-03-2005, 10:01 PM

Thats two great posts Jason!

-Chris Hein

takusan

05-03-2005, 10:01 PM

At last, I'm starting to get to grips with why we have such different view points on this topic.
But first, Rob, you made the points I would have liked to have made - and you did it better, so thanks.

Time / training / ability.
I have one or two of these qualities at any one time, seldom - if every, all three at the same time.
I am a truly slow student.
Three decades now (coming up) and unlike you Rob, I'm finding it hard to remember what I was doing at the beginning of class let alone 5 -10 years ago.
But its really nice to 'find' that little bit the missing puzzle, be that I probably have discovered it many times - and forgot.

The real point is, time is not an issue.
Enjoyment is.
It still needs to be effective though, as I would truly hate to have any of you come to my dojo and challenge me.
I just hate seeing myself cry.
Besides, if I couldn't talk you out of the challenge with the appropriate levels of caffeine or alcohol, all those years WOULD have been wasted.

If I feel like I'm still achieving something when into my fourth decade, I will probably carry on training and teaching.
Thats it.
No more justification required. (for me) :cool:

CNYMike

05-03-2005, 10:42 PM

I believe the odds are greater that you'll be attacked by someone you know and probably don't want to injure (badly).

Bronson

Good point!

sunny liberti

05-03-2005, 10:45 PM

Hi Chris. Ron, I do hope we get to play someday, I think you might be more level headed then I was giveing you creadit for.I'm guessing you meant "Rob", so any time would be wonderful. We do a friendship seminars in CT with other styles in November - you should come to that!

Jason, As far as there not being a high percentage of fights going to the ground, thats just not true! Well that's progress from the 90% made up statistic - which we've guessed has come from a 70% statistic of LEO apprehending unarmed criminals or something. I still think that there must be literally millions of bar fights that happen in a month where nobody goes to the ground and I'm wondering what is counter balancing that to get those high statistics... To be fair, I suppose if you count prison fights and school yard scuffles you might be getting closer, but older kids who wanted to really fight in my area typically had weapons - and since I have no plans of going to jail - I'm still feeling like my chances of being taken to the ground would only approach high percentages if I happen to join a BJJ school.

Your ideas about the best way to train might be true, and they might be short sighted and limiting. I won't judge you, maybe you shouldn't judge my choices... Maybe we should schedule like 1 match every 10 years and see what works out long term...

Rob

(sorry, I posted as my wife again - I can see why Chris got confused about my name ... I can't manage to get it right!)

ChrisHein

05-04-2005, 12:17 AM

Rob, so have you worked with any Judoka? Because I'm finding it hard to believe that skilled Judoka can't throw you. Have you ever worked with a collegiate wrestler? Because I can stop a layman, or someone who thinks he's a wrestler from shooting on me. But a real competitive wrestler is no joke, I'm pretty sure you'd be taken down. Besides if you ever sleep laying down, if you spend say 1/3 of your day laying down, you might want to think about training from your back. Or if maybe you have ever sat down outside, ever been to a picnic, ever fallen over anything, been shoved hard and lost your balance? I mean there are lots of ways to be on the ground, and I'm sure lots of people who can take you there. Lot's of Brazilian Jiu jutsu guys I know, throw more like judoka, then by shooting. Infact I've never shot in a Brazilian Jiu jutsu match and I've taken many people down. I would never make the statement that I wouldn't ever go to the ground, I don't always have a choice in the matter!

I honestly believe Jason is the most realistic in his opinions of what fighting is all about.

-Chris

Yeah I did mean Rob, sorry for that.

Charles Hill

05-04-2005, 06:53 AM

"Get a gun"?

This thread has gone well past my post but I have to respond to this and the others that followed. Nowhere in my post did I say "get a gun" and nowhere did I imply it. The point (I`ll try again) is that "combat" is not an appropriate word in regards to Aikido and even personal self defense. Combat means a fight with the nuance of armed battle. This is occuring in Iraq and other places in the world, but nowhere where there is active Aikido practice as far as I know. Chris, please read the post more carefully.

As for the current direction of the thread, I will throw a little gas on the fire and remind all that Chiba Sensei became third dan after three years of practice and was teaching aikido to self defense forces.

Charles

Bodhi

05-04-2005, 06:57 AM

Rob, as someone who has worked law enforcement, security, and bounced in bars for many years, i can tell you that 90% stat is probly very close to being right. When i said that most the fights i had eaither seen or been in went to the ground or had a very good chance of going to the ground, i was addressing not only what i have seen street criminals do, but the average bar fight, as well what happens many times among trained martial artists Its natural to tie up, its hard not to sometimes, especially in a confined space, in a hallway, in a crowded area, sitting in your car, or between cars, or just being pushed down from behind. I mean i can name all kinds of situations i have seen it in. Do you think your always gonna have a wide open field with nothing or nobody around you, or that you may never trip/fall etc? Things happen in all kinds of areas, under all kinds of circumstances, from different types of obstacles, to different types of people and how they react. If you dont think that they do, then you just havent been in enough scraps yet, and i hope it stays that way for you.

BTW, i am not trying to single you out or pick on you in any way, so no need to say "maybe i shouldnt judge your choices" Im just typin out loud here, sharing what i know from years of real world experience. I can also assure you that the way i train as well as who i train with is in no way shortsighted or limiting, be it mental, physical, psychological, or spiritual. I make it a point to be as open, honest, and progressively realistic to what i do as well as whom i do it with, i always well.

Yea, the match every ten years would be a great idea, i know many guys that did the same thing longterm, including Guro Inosanto, some Dog Brothers, Helio Gracie, as well as the great Gene Lebell, not to mention many Philipino and Indonesian fighters that are still rollin hard in their 60s, 70s, and 80s. Anything to progress and keep it real is always welcome, especially as one ages!

J

Michael Neal

05-04-2005, 09:00 AM

Rob, I saw that you were a Sandan in Aikido so I am not sure I personally could throw you, I am only a Yonkyu in Judo, but I certainly would not be afraid to randori with you and try. I have thrown Judo nidans before, although it is not common.

rob_liberti

05-04-2005, 09:15 AM

Chris and Jason,

I think we have VERY different ideas about the reality of fighting.

1) I'm positive that people developed to some reasonable amount of skill can throw me if I attack them. I have no doubt of that what-so-ever. Personally, I don't attack people all that often, so I'm feeling pretty safe on that front. Nor have I been playing a life long game of kill the man with the ball where I'm "it" so I think that would explain my success rate over the past 25+ years with going to beaches and parks having somehow managed to avoid the wrath of all fledling and seasoned frustrated martial artists and competitive wrestlers. (Prior to that, I'm sure my brother had taken me to the ground in the park or on the beach!)

2) I'm also positive that some people who have developed much more skill can even attack me and get me to the ground. Not only have I said this before in this thread, but I went so far as to explain that I'm always happy to find someone willing to do such a thing so I can learn more. It hasn't been my experience that someone with only a couple of years of BJJ was at _this_ level of ability which seemed to have been suggested relative to my specific training choices. (I understand it wasn't directed at me personally.) Could some very talented and dedicated individual get to that level of ability in only a couple years - asked and answered, I gave that point already. Again, I had just thought we were talking about the average person or even the little better than average person when comparing the arts in terms of what they do for people. In terms of reality, if you do decide to jump out of the bushes at me while I'm in the park, you might take me down, and you might get slashed across the face with my pocket comb or find my pen lodged in your body or both. (That's pretty much reality to me.)

Further, about having a realistic opinions of what fighting is all about:

The thing about statistics is that they are only meaningful when appropriately applied to the situation. However, Jason, while I have seen and been in a number of bar fights that never went anywhere near the ground, I accept your word that you've had different experiences. I'm curious, when people went to the ground in bars in your area, did other people kick them, stomp them, or throw beer bottles at there heads. That would certainly happen in the bars I used to frequent when I was in College. At the time, I just might have been one of the people throwing a bottle at the bonehead rolling around on the floor.

Honestly, if either of you just come to visit the area right around where I work - which is not even considered the worst part of the area and try to start a fight with someone I suspect that you'll be stabbed or slashed as opposed to grappled with - sorry but that's the reality of New Haven, CT.

On a slightly more sophistocated level, as a matter of fact, there used to be a phone number written on the wall of the Milford train station with the name "Benny". If you wanted to hurt someone you called the number and told Benny who the person was, where he could find them or their car, and then decided if you wanted to pay $50 to have him break their knee cap with a small bat or $50 to have him wreck their car. If you chose the knee cap option, he had contacts in all of the local hospitals and would actually send you the X-ray upon request. While Benny might be retired, people like this still exist. If you are having trouble finding someone like this go to a pool hall, loose a lot of money and refuse to pay - then please by all means post all about your resulting _wrestling_ match with the collector(s)!
Besides if you ever sleep laying down, if you spend say 1/3 of your day laying downThat made my wife and I laugh! Chris, my friend, you must not be a parent! Seriously Chris, I do think that aikido movements come from sword and jo. I train that way and teach that way. I don't know if that makes it a solely weapons based system - but I think you should have respect whether I agree with you or not. I respect you without knowing if you can actually perform basic aikido waza without directly pushing, pulling, or lifting. I've been in aikido a long time and have never met anyone, uchideshi or otherwise who could do that in 5 years and I just don't consider anyone lacking that degree of depth a credible source for speaking about difficiencies of aikido - but I'd have respect for them.

Jason, about "Philipino and Indonesian fighters that are still rollin" - really? I thought they were mainly stick and/or blade fighting or is "rollin" a more loose term than I realized?

I don't mean to attack your world view. I do think that wrestling is fun and interesting, and I would love to improve my skills in that area too... If I ever bump into you, please teach me whatever you are willing to share, and I'll do the same if you are interested.

Rob

ChrisHein

05-04-2005, 11:19 AM

Well, here we go.
The reason I asked those questions is because you said, and are saying it again. That fights don't go to the ground. Fights do, they happen there all the time, you can choose to believe it or not, but people who get in fights often will tell you it's a fact.

I don't mean that practicing with a jo, or bokken makes it solely a weapons system. The Taijutsu techniques are based on having a weapon in your hand also. Start thinking about what I said. When you practice your taijutsu techniques (it's easier to see with the controls) think of how the technique would go down if you had a weapon in your hand. Why is uke grabbing your wrist? Could it be that you're suppose to have a weapon in you hand? Honestly practice this way for a few weeks, and then we'll talk about it again. I think you'll be surprised. Aikido doesn't have any real hold escapes, from bear hugs, headlocks ect (I mean realistic escapes that will possibly work on someone trying to hold you for real.) Escapes from these basic holds is necessary for an empty handed system. Why dose Aikido not have these? Because the system is designed to have a weapon in your hand, my headlock escape- I stab them, my bear hug escape- I stab them. These holds are necessary in an empty handed system, but not in a weapon system, because you just stab them if they do anything but grab your weapon hand.

Play with it for a few weeks and tell me what you think.

-Chris Hein

Michael Neal

05-04-2005, 12:21 PM

I am interested in how you would stab somone with your pen, as you said you would do, as you are all of the sudden yanked off your feet unexpectedly and then have someone on top of you pounding your face in. You are telling us that your first reaction would be to go "hmmm, I have a pen in my pocket, let me reach down there and get it out and stab this guy with it." Realistically you would be instinctively covering your face trying to stop it from being bashed in. If you were just being pinned it still would be very difficult to get in your pocket and get a pen out to stab him with.

Bodhi

05-04-2005, 12:27 PM

Your right rob, we do have VERY different ideas about whats REAL, but its all good, dont get your hakama in a bunch :crazy:

I do think your missing the point about possibly ending up on the ground, i really wasnt referring to you being thrown all the time, but merely ending up there through whatever reason, and having to adapt to that enviroment.

Yea your right about people kicking, stomping, throwing chairs, beer bottles, bum rushing and whatever else at the guys who went down, thats reality! You try not to go down, but ya trip, ya stumble, ya fall, or whatever, it happens, all the time!

I think i have probly lived in a few places quite worse than the mean streets of New Haven CT, LOL,, and have eaither been friendly or not so friendly with a dozen or more guys like your Benny! I grew up in the street, i ran with gangs when i was younger, i was best friends with kids of known players in the crime world, and have seen many ugly truths growing up in that kind of enviroment! There is nothin your tellin me about the street here that i dont know many times over, i have lived it! But yea your right, when it comes to the street, most people are usin weapons, however, that doesnt mean you wont end up on the ground grappling with a blade, screwdriver, broken bottle, or firearm for that matter, wether its yours or theirs! I dont know who trained you, but if you have ever worked with any law enforcement, tactical folks, or military personnel, you would know why its important to know grappling and groundfighting with weapons! Just because you havent experienced any of this, doesnt mean it doesnt happen! This is why im never found without an EDC blade, as well as pepperspray, and some other unmentionables.

As for the FMA/Indonesian arts etc, they are stick/ blade/ projectile based in their purest form, but like i said, that base increases your empty hand skills, and if your cross training it does nothing but make you better at what your already doing! Look at Dan Inosanto, he just Got his BB in BJJ awhile back and hes like in his late 60s early 70s! His Kali/silat skills are incredible, wich has helped his empty hand game, including grappling!

As far as attacking my world view LOL dont worry bout it, like i said, its all good ;)

In the end everyone must follow their own path, sometimes people just need to train more than they run their mouths and type on their keyboards! You can get most of your questions answered better that way, especially if your training with many different people that have a midset for reality!

Now i think im gonna go take my own advice!

Peace out...

rob_liberti

05-04-2005, 03:19 PM

Chris:Well, here we go.
The reason I asked those questions is because you said, and are saying it again. That fights don't go to the ground. Fights do, they happen there all the time, you can choose to believe it or not, but people who get in fights often will tell you it's a fact.Chris, I did *not* say that fights don't go the ground. I argued the high percentage. As a matter of fact, I wrote "I accept your word that you've had different experiences" to Jason when referring to bar fights going to the ground. If I believed no fights ever made it to the ground I would have asked Jason why he lied as opposed to accepting his word. Also, a few post back I mentioned the 70% actual static from the LEO going to the ground while fighting/capturing unarmed people. I have no idea how you came away with the idea that I don't think any fights go to the ground. I didn't write that anywhere.

There is a significant difference between arguing "all, "none", "some", or "most" fights go to the ground - especially in the context of an individual's life. I am not a kid in grade school. I'm not in prison, nor am I wanted for any crime, nor to I plan on committing any crimes. I go to beaches and parks all of the time and NO ONE has even come close to wanting to tackle me or throw me to the ground in YEARS (since I was in grade school.) The closest it ever gets to a real situation for me is when I'm in the middle of bar and a fight breaks out, when some one looses it in traffic, or when I'm walking in a city and I think someone is wants to hurt and rob me. All of those things have happened to me and I didn't end up on the ground with any of those people.
I don't mean that practicing with a jo, or bokken makes it solely a weapons system. The Taijutsu techniques are based on having a weapon in your hand also. Start thinking about what I said.Okay, but you have to promise to do the same for what I said. How different is your "The Taijutsu techniques are based on having a weapon in your hand also." from my "I do think that aikido movements come from sword and jo. I train that way and teach that way." ???
When you practice your taijutsu techniques (it's easier to see with the controls) think of how the technique would go down if you had a weapon in your hand.Again, that's why I said "I train that way and teach that way."
Why is uke grabbing your wrist? Could it be that you're suppose to have a weapon in you hand? Honestly practice this way for a few weeks, and then we'll talk about it again.I've been honestly practicing this way for years. But if you have different insights, I'm honestly interested.
I think you'll be surprised. I'll take that as my failure to communicate my opinions effectively. But, how about you consider that you might just be failing to give me the benefit of the doubt based on my choice of words.
Aikido doesn't have any real hold escapes, from bear hugs, headlocks ect (I mean realistic escapes that will possibly work on someone trying to hold you for real.) Escapes from these basic holds is necessary for an empty handed system. Why dose Aikido not have these? I agree that aikido specializes. I just don't agree that makes it bad, and that people are in constant tackle-danger at beaches and parks! How about the idea in aikido is to not let people get into those positions in the first place, and if you are worried that this is going to happen to you (which I'm not given my life circumstances) - or if you are just plain interested (as I am) then you can join a different system that specializes in that area?! I think the idea of specializing and focusing is a good thing. That's pretty much why people have majors in University. Would you say that physics is bad because there is not enough language requirements? - I mean 90% of all physics discussions use words...
Because the system is designed to have a weapon in your hand, my headlock escape- I stab them, my bear hug escape- I stab them. These holds are necessary in an empty handed system, but not in a weapon system, because you just stab them if they do anything but grab your weapon hand.
I certainly do agree with you on this to a point. That just doesn't translate to me as "solely a weapons system".

Honestly, Chris, I think aikido needs more people like you who do aikido and other arts and are willing to help bridge some gaps. I don't think that your 5 (or 7 - I'm confused about that, but regardless) years of dedicated aikido has you to wear you should be talking about what aikido techniques work period as opposed to what techniques work for you.

Michael Neal:
Hi, I don't know you yet, and I'm sorry I didn't mean to ignore you last post -- I think you posted while I was responding and didn't see yours until after I finished.

Anyway, I think I gave a fair if condition and I'll be happy to elaborate. If I'm in a park and the first instant I know you are tackling me is when it happens, I agree that I'll be tackled. If, however, I'm sitting there and I have some idea that something is not right in the direction of those bushes over there, the first thing I'll do is reach for something handy which might be my pen or comb, or hopefully the katana I was sharpening in the park! :)

Jason,

Some people do the very necessary but difficult job of evaluating the appropriateness of studies (and the resulting statistics). The majority of people I meet who like to use statistics to back up their points have no idea what I could possibly be talking about when I bring up the idea of "appropriateness" to the situation, causing my thinking cap to bunch up more than my hakama. (The hakama is flapping freely; thank you very much! :) )

Also, in no way, was I trying to imply that the mean streets of New Haven were the most dangerous! I meant that the average place only has to be that bad for people to be very unwilling to want to try to wrestle someone on the street in an altercation. My argument was about the high percentage -- which I think has to be appropriately applied to one's own life circumstances -- or in this case simply the average person's circumstances. As we both agree, I'm just one of many people pretty much only dealing with the mean streets of New Haven.

As just one example of an average person, I think back over my entire life span so far, and cannot come up with very many times that I thought "ya know, having more ground fighting would have sure helped me there." For me to suddenly think different based on questionably appropriate statistics seems a bit VERY unrealistic to me.

I totally agree with you that "You try not to go down, but ya trip, ya stumble, ya fall, or whatever, it happens, all the time!" And I think it is worth mentioning that we do practice getting up from the ground as fast as possible in aikido every class AND we (okay not everyone in aikido -- but certainly my circle) practice highly responsive, and full body resistance (level-appropriate for the cooperative model, yadda yadda yadda) and constantly restoring balance from all sorts of crazy circumstances. So I don't think we go down as easily as the untrained person who might stumble on a curb; and I don't think we take our time getting back up like the average person -- so I'd say aikido training does give us an edge with that regard. However, I do agree as I posted many times now, that I'm certain I can be brought to the ground by a highly skilled and motivated person. Back to the issue of personal safety and appropriateness of the fights going to the ground statistic, I don't think I motivate too many people skilled or otherwise to wantto throw me to the ground, so as I said to Chris I don't see it as a big survival need, as much as a healthy interest. Regardless, I also think aikido training gives us an advantage in getting at least one good shot in while a motivated person wants to throw me with their kamikaze attack. If I have to be in a fight, I really don't mind getting in the first good shot!

You know, I have actually had a chance to work out with some people who do things with "grappling and ground-fighting with weapons" and I think it is fascinating and valuable. That doesn't mean I see this as a high-percentage thing for my life - and I suspect many others (YMMV) - but I think it is wonderful that people are working this kind of stuff out and teach -- as I have said many times now in this thread.

I agree that sometimes people just need to train more than they run their mouths and type on their keyboards! I can assure you that I haven't missed one second of training time to be on the online discussion boards. Since I like to train all of the time, and I can't -- the whole time I'm not training -- it's great to think about this stuff and even better to get to discuss it with other interested parties…

Rob

p.s. if there is anyone I missed, please excuse me, I got tired!

Jeremy Young

05-04-2005, 04:49 PM

just a quick comment about that aikido does not have any real escapes from holds, etc. There are several (well, maybe not several but quite a few) that i have learned. oh well, just one of my random thoughts.
jeremy

ChrisHein

05-04-2005, 06:25 PM

I'm not saying that Aikido is bad. I've been trying to say from the begining that I think it teachs lots of things very well (this would be why I train in it, and practice it.) It just dose a poor job of teaching empty handed techniques. This all got started by me saying that Aikido was a poor empty handed system, which it is.

-Chris

ps, I had been training in Aikido for 5 years when I began training in mma, that was 2 years ago, 2+5=7 years of training in Aikido.

Michael Varin

05-04-2005, 06:47 PM

I know that I'm stepping on sacred territory, but what I gather from reading Morihei had a maximum of ten years training with instructors. That includes his time in the military. Also, he trained in at least six different styles.

Rob,

Where would a person be if you used aikido to end a physical conflict?! On the ground? Ironic isn't it? If it's not, please, give me a senario.

About getting the first shot in a fight. Isn't western boxing much better at teaching that?

One final question. Doesn't using a pen, or any field expedient weapon (which I'm not criticizing) back up the point that Chris was initially trying to make? Because using any weapon necessarily makes it no longer empty hand.

As an approach to all things "aiki" is it, but as a set of techniques aikido is not complete. Jason has made some most intelligent posts about learning different ranges, handling various weapons, and being wise enough to keep what works. Then keep training and have a great time.

Michael

rob_liberti

05-04-2005, 08:16 PM

I know that I'm stepping on sacred territory, but what I gather from reading Morihei had a maximum of ten years training with instructors. That includes his time in the military. Also, he trained in at least six different styles.

Hello. It seems this is your first post, and I have to say it is really good. Please post more. I don't think the territory is sacred I just want things accurate, logical and reasonable. I'm confident we'll come to a meeting of the minds on most of this stuff sooner or later. I think I tried addressing the martial genius thing already in the first part of post 39 in this thread. I can see how you might have missed it in that I accidentally posted as my wife - sorry about that! Anyway, that's my line of reasoning.

Where would a person be if you used aikido to end a physical conflict?! On the ground? Ironic isn't it? If it's not, please, give me a senario.Great point. I will actually give you an example where it didn't go to the ground, but to be fair I like where you are going so I'll address that first. When the 2 year BJJ guy just visited me, one of the first things I did to his punch was wrap him up in that inside shihonage and bring him to the ground on his side while I stood over him choosing not to continue to break his arm. I let him struggle a while and then I let him out. As far as I'm concerned, the aikido part was how I got that technique on his punching arm. Of course it wasn't a death match, he wasn't the best 2 year BJJ-er apaprently, and he went to the ground (and that was your excellent point). But I guess I'm trying to say that I didn't personally need ground skills to handle that! Before everyone gets all nervous, I would like to have them anyway, but that was a real example in the past couple days of my life in front of a bunch of people where when it went to the ground and no extra special skills outside of what I learned in aikido class we needed.

Now for two stories of no one going to the ground at Satotome sensei's Washington D.C. dojo. First story, Saotome sensei was late for class, he was running down the road on his way to class. A street person in the way decided to take a swing at him. Saotome sensei didn't bother to break stride, he dodged under the punch, and kept running while yelling back to the guy "I'm sorry I don't have time to fight, I'm late to class". The second story was that they were making a lot of noise doing weapons work and some guy from the street who may have been a bit hung over came in and was very upset with the noise they were making and had apparently come in to put a stop to it. The story goes that Charlie Page sensei calmly walked up to him into his blind spot and put one arm around the guy's shoulders in a loving and heavy way and lightly held the guy's other hand, and while the guy was still yelling and all set to fight. Charlie Page sensei apparently just agreed with him like "yes you are right, it is noisy" as he calmly moved them into that very safe position. They proceeded to stand there together watching class talking about how it was noisy and how it would be over soon.

About getting the first shot in a fight. Isn't western boxing much better at teaching that?I like boxing a lot. It does a great job with a lot of things. I think it works a lot better when the other guy is standing toe to toe with you trying to get enough points for the round - which I wouldn't be doing in a real fight, but yes it does a great job developing destructive skills. And as I posted earlier, destructive skills are going to take a much shorter time to to develop.

One final question. Doesn't using a pen, or any field expedient weapon (which I'm not criticizing) back up the point that Chris was initially trying to make? Because using any weapon necessarily makes it no longer empty hand.I don't think I'm limited to only doing aikido when I'm attacked, but let's not kid ourselves - the minimum damage needed to deal with an attacker might just happen to also be the maximum damage I can do. The point is that aikido offers more choices than maximum damage every time.

But yes, great point about my reaction backing up Chris's point. It's just that unlike Chris (and Chris I don't mean to pick on you but I really disagree with you on this point) I don't feel that I represent all that there is about aikido. If we want to agree that low level aikido is most effective as a weapons based art, I'm all in. But high level aikido exists.

Now Chris, my thinking is that 5 or 7 years of lots of dedication probably still won't get you to intermediate level, unless you happen to be one of the aforementioned rare genius types, but I never got the impression that you could do your basic techiques without directly pushing, pulling, or lifting (which is just starting to approach intermediate level).

As an aside, the reason I'm harping on this is not to discredit you. I think that it is very important for dedicated people to cross-train aikido and other arts. It's just that if you don't start from the place that aikido could possibly be more effective in open-handed situations than you seem to think, I don't think you're going to continue to look to improve your depth of understanding in aikido. And that doesn't actually result in cross-training anymore.

As an approach to all things "aiki" is it, but as a set of techniques aikido is not complete. Jason has made some most intelligent posts about learning different ranges, handling various weapons, and being wise enough to keep what works. Then keep training and have a great time.

Michael

Hey well, I think Chris and Jason's posts are a valuable part of this board and I appreciate them too. My take is that low level aikido is by definition not complete, and yes it takes too long for most people to get to intermediate, and almost no one gets to mastery (even though some are getting the rank as some kind of honorary thing). There are some really good aikido people out there - and I like it everytime I find out that they started learning something else to augment their training - but I disagree with the idea that having something in aikido not work for you means you should throw it out, instead of figure it out.

Rob

takusan

05-04-2005, 08:57 PM

Well done Rob,
you lay out your argument well.
Can I use some of that rationale in my class?

For me, you have summed up the knowledge v's experience debate very well.

I have had the impression that alot of the people contributing to this forum are long time aikidoka. I now start to think I have been mistaken, due simply to their ability to speak / write well.

The points made (by everyone) are great and have certainly challenged some of what I do / teach.
However, I will generally default to the person with experience every time.
Sounds like we have both had alot of 'what if' scenario's in our time, and people that have 'got it'. (please tell me you have been doing aikido for a long time)

In my time, there has been little in the way of 'new' stuff that was of any value, simply peoples genuine attempts at finding their 'way'. My instructors were older and wiser than I, and their experience was worth bottling

Chris,

You MAY be correct about aikido not being a good empty hand system. Your experience to date has allowed you to conclude this.

I MAY be wrong, as my 28 years does not allow me the luxury of assuming that time make me wise.
However, I do actually believe that aikido is a great empty hand system.

So who is correct??????

Firstly, if any of our aiki, is working, WE, would never enter a fight.
Others (outside aikido's influence) , however wont share our experiences.

If a hypothetical attacker engages in a fight, they had bloody well better be equipped to 'take me out' as I feel aikidoka, generally, are well meaning spirits that may have a dark side that they are trying to subjugate into non existence (control). Speaking personally here.

Just as one of the US President's once was quoted,

"walking softly, but carry a big stick"

I think that is what aikido can be seen as.
We don't want to fight, but when push comes to shove, they will use whatever training they have to protect themselves.

My aikido is therefore different to many that write in this forum, some - the same. This makes it difficult to find common ground.

IF you enjoy it - great
IF you find it lacking - keep practicing
IF you think you have found a better system - train in it

I have / do, all three

Its the middle one that was the most beneficial, as it gave me answers to question that I didn't realize I needed to ask.

Rob, again I like your point, that just because something doesn't work for you (now), simply train more until it does.
Brilliant.

Everyone else, - I would love to have some of your experiences, but I don't, but please allow me the privilege to discuss them in a constructive manner - without derision or vitriol - so that I may be the better person at the end of the discussion. ;)

Dave

ChrisHein

05-04-2005, 09:36 PM

rob_liberti

05-04-2005, 10:12 PM

Chris,

Understood. It makes perfect sense _to me_ because:
1) it is much faster to learn destructive skills
2) aikido was brilliantly designed not to work well with surface level understanding
And in my opinion, not because aikido is lacking...

(Your milage may vary)

Dave,

Thanks for your kind words. I've been training for the past 14+ years with my current teacher and I've been doing about a month of 8-10 hour a day training in Japan every year for the past 10 years (but I'm no uchi deshi or anything).

Rob

CNYMike

05-04-2005, 10:30 PM

2 Years of MMA have have made me twice as good (probably much much more), then 5 years of Aikido training, empty handed.

When engaged in weapons conflict I had no trouble useing Aikido, in empty handed combat I never used any of the techniques (or AIki) of Aikido.

-Chris Hein

Your mileage may vary, because I found a thread in Usenet where some MMA guys say they have used Aikido techniques in sparring, and like them. (May only work one time per customer, durn it.)

Here is the link to the thread (which is on Google so you can access it without a password :o ):

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.martial-arts/browse_thread/thread/85f13cd8231cc8e3/1a093ca4a5707294?q=Evolution&rnum=3#1a093ca4a5707294

Have a nice day.

Mike

ChrisHein

05-04-2005, 10:48 PM

Indeed, maybe I should spend years of my life doing the same thing over and over trying to hide from the real facts of life.

-Chris

rob_liberti

05-04-2005, 10:59 PM

Well, there you have it...Good luck in your training.

You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both and there you have ... (highly skilled ninjas tackling you at beaches and family picnics) - you know, the real facts of life.

When you think about it like that, I should start hiding! In fact, forget I was ever here.

- Certainly not Rob

maikerus

05-04-2005, 11:07 PM

Chris, I hate to say it but your last few posts are costing you serious credibility points.

Maybe you'll understand when you're older. ;) :)

--Michael

xuzen

05-05-2005, 12:41 AM

The original title is "Aikido challenges today" and somehow this thread has degenerated into a 'Is aikido effective'esque' type of thread which has been discussed as nauseum. Having said that it is still a relevant question as long conflict still exist amongst mankind.

Some proponent of MMA and equivalent are looking at aikido from their angle i.e., can she stand on her own against grappler, boxers etc. That I let you discuss amongst yourself 'till the cows come home.

Now let me put forth my perspective. Aikido was designed from combat purpose to allow soldiers to handle multiple opponents and to negate the effect of size/brute strength in her utilization. It was not designed to be a mano-o-mano type of slug fest as many people would think (Not that practical in those UFC type situation). That type of situation would favour IMO, strength and physical prowess.

Now, let's address a group of practitioner whom this thread has mostly ignored: Women. Yes, womenfolk has every right to self defense against crime. What some earlier post had discussed was in a very narrow context of grappling to the ground etc. Again a very mano-o-mano type of situation. If you are a woman or teaches woman class you will quickly realize that many of those grappling type MA is not suitable. A hit and run type of tactic (e.g. aikido type techs) are more useful. Again, my caveat not all aikido techs are suitable. One very quickly realize that as one progress in the art/teaches the art to woman.

I have a book Vital Karate written by Mas Oyama. His brand of karate is well known to be the very hard style (rock solid type). And when you turn the pages to the women self defense section what do you get? I clearly see Nikajo, Irimi zuki/Shomenate, Kokyunage etc. I did not see any striking technique that karate is so well known for in that section. Nor did I see it telling its female audience to get down and start newaza or shimewaza. Now, what do these tell you. These are potential real situation for real potential victim. Large burly man tries to rape a diminutive woman in a lift. Tell her to start doing newaza as some art are famous for to defend herself... I don't think so.

It may be me, I totally agree grappling has its place in UFC, K-1 or Pride; in real encounter where you are severely disadvantaged... try aikido or any of her tactics.

Boon.

maikerus

05-05-2005, 01:09 AM

Boon...interesting what was shown in the book wrt women's self defense. Thanks for sharing.

cheers,

--Michael

Roy Dean

05-05-2005, 01:37 AM

Chris,

Keep cool, bro. Believe me, I understand where you're coming from. And your voice, just like Rob's, is important to the discussion and advancement of our pooled understanding.

I did a similar tour of duty, with timed served as an uchideshi, in the Northern California Aikido scene. There is some great Aikido in that area, and I think enough to get a solid grasp on what Aikido is, even at an intermediate level.

All of these martial convictions we're relaying to one another are based on our experiences. Rob's experiences lay in a very deep study on a focused field. Your exposure is different. As much as you (or I) would like to be able to express the martial truth of our experiences, it's almost impossible to through this medium.

There have been several points in my training where I reached a place of confidence in my abilities, only to have my eyes opened at how easily I could be dispatched in another range. But I never would have known unless I got on the mat and tested it out.

I know what it's like to be taken down by a Division I wrestler. I know what it's like to be thrown by Mike Swain, and choked by Renzo Gracie. You and I both know the intensity level of a tournament match or MMA fight vs. sparring with teammates. You can talk and discuss and relay anecdote after anecdote, but you've got to feel that adrenaline dump for yourself to understand how enlightening it can be.

And that should be enough. "Those that understand, understand perfectly." Words of wisdom from Kenji Tomiki. Until those that are curious actually test out kaiten-nage vs. a double leg or escaping the hold downs of a Judoka, they'll never know, and you'll never be able to tell them. All we can do is offer encouragement for more experimentation and perhaps some video to show the results.

Forget about Aikido challenges, I'd be happy with some good footage of high level aikido against moderate to full resistance.
Royler Gracie recommends taping training sessions, and I've also found it invaluable for objectively showing how you're evolving, year after year.

Boon,

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is ideally suited for female self defense in that range. It is very likely for a female with around a year's training to pull off a simple submission (i.e. bent armlock, cross body armlock, even a triangle) against an attacker within her guard. This is more likely to finish the fight and allow her time to escape than a wrist lock, throw, or vital strike, IMHO. I've tapped to women before while sparring. The strength of their hips and legs is tremendous, and that's well utilized in the ground game.

Roy Dean

takusan

05-05-2005, 01:52 AM

Chris - NO
Don't give up.
Challenges come in all forms.
You sound like an honest, sincere, friendly person. Someone that I think would enrich my life (and many others) should we have been friends.
That there is healthy debate, shouldn't lessen any relationship, unless its too personal. It does seem that things are getting a bit bogged down. Maybe following one of the lessons we learn in self defense is appropriate.
Walk away.
Teach that all the time. Save your energy for a better battle.
Even if you think that you could - just maybe, - win.
Some people will never submit, no matter how persuasive your reasoning is. Therefore its ultimately - futile.

Even if this thread has developed away from the original, its still an interesting topic.
Otherwise why would there be so much traffic?

To all those that relegate this topic to the

'oh' its been done to death' file

Remember, for some, this is their FIRST time round, and new to aikido. Its educational for them.
If you don't like it, don't follow the thread.

And yes, it may well be necessary for you to spend many years doing, apparently, the same dumb arse things. Bit like life really - isn't it? :rolleyes:

Wecome to my world :hypno:

maikerus

05-05-2005, 01:57 AM

To all those that relegate this topic to the

'oh' its been done to death' file

Remember, for some, this is their FIRST time round, and new to aikido. Its educational for them.
If you don't like it, don't follow the thread.

David,

Good point on the "done to death idea" and for those of us who have gone around and around with it over and over again...

We should probably think of it as a technique...where we train again and again and again...each time learning something new and gettting that touch better.

cheers,

--Michael

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 03:21 AM

Roy, David good points.
I've exsplained things as well as I can from my veiw point, if you wish to see it, you can, if not that's up to you too....

takusan

05-05-2005, 05:49 AM

Its a funny old world isn't it!

Thing is, this challenge thing, whether it be from an out side source, or one from within our own ranks - it make you take stock of where you're at and makes you draw a line in the sand.

All good as far as I'm concerned.

Chris, what I say next I don't wont it to sound arrogant, just take it for what it is - a well intensioned comment.
This is the same as I tell / mention to people within my sphere.

Its not that we don't see where you are coming from. Nor do we necessarily want to ignore what you have to say. Its that sometimes we have BEEN where you are. Perhaps, its that we believe we have moved on. Or that we have just found an alternative that satisfies our current needs.
Point is, we are ALL on a path. Aikido is not the only nor even the best path. It is however the path that some of us wish to follow, come the good and the not so good.
We make it what it is.
My reality is that aikido can and does give me everything that I currently need.
Aikido too, is able to cater to my future needs, as I have seen so much that I have yet to accomplish.

Sadly, some of my 28+ years, seem to have been the same year, over and over again. Ground Hog Day-ish. :drool:
Can't change that.
But my current level (of understanding) is still a long way from the likes that I have seen, ala Hendricks sensei, Tissier sensei, etc etc.
Hell, there are even people that I teach, that I would like to emulate aspects of.
I am a flawed human.
My task is to become better.
Not the best.
Simply better than I am now.

rob_liberti

05-05-2005, 07:30 AM

Umm, guys, my main challenge was try to figure aikido out instead of dismissing it.

To that end, I put forth these ideas for consideration:
1) can your do your techniques without directly pushing, pulling, or lifting in the cooperative areana? (You know, the people who know how to do that, know that perfectly.... This "know perfectly" thing is a bit multifaceted, don't you think?)
2) can you consider that if you haven't even gotten there yet then you are probably not yet qualified to authoriatitively dismiss open-handed aikido technique?
3) can you consider using statistics about "high percentage" without any real statistical data is invalid?
4) if we accept that impossible-to-collect statistical data without a source just to be sport, can you consider how to appropriately apply (suspect) statistics to the average situation (if that is what you are making claims about)?

Hey don't let me confuse anyone with facts. (Now look at what I have been unfairly accused of, and how nice I have been about it.)

Excuse me, gotta run, umm... my grandmother is on fire...

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 01:43 PM

David,
No offense, but I don't think you have been where I have. I don't think many Aikidoka have actually put themselves in the positions that I have, to gain the knowledge that comes from those experiences.

Rob,
Keep on truck'en man, keep on truck'en.

-Chris

Jorx

05-05-2005, 03:42 PM

Now let me put forth my perspective. Aikido was designed from combat purpose to allow soldiers to handle multiple opponents and to negate the effect of size/brute strength in her utilization. It was not designed to be a mano-o-mano type of slug fest as many people would think (Not that practical in those UFC type situation). That type of situation would favour IMO, strength and physical prowess.

Now, let's address a group of practitioner whom this thread has mostly ignored: Women. Yes, womenfolk has every right to self defense against crime. What some earlier post had discussed was in a very narrow context of grappling to the ground etc. Again a very mano-o-mano type of situation. If you are a woman or teaches woman class you will quickly realize that many of those grappling type MA is not suitable. A hit and run type of tactic (e.g. aikido type techs) are more useful. Again, my caveat not all aikido techs are suitable. One very quickly realize that as one progress in the art/teaches the art to woman.

I have a book Vital Karate written by Mas Oyama. His brand of karate is well known to be the very hard style (rock solid type). And when you turn the pages to the women self defense section what do you get? I clearly see Nikajo, Irimi zuki/Shomenate, Kokyunage etc. I did not see any striking technique that karate is so well known for in that section. Nor did I see it telling its female audience to get down and start newaza or shimewaza. Now, what do these tell you. These are potential real situation for real potential victim. Large burly man tries to rape a diminutive woman in a lift. Tell her to start doing newaza as some art are famous for to defend herself... I don't think so.

Boon.

I have to disagree with you very strongly.

First - how could a martial art be more successful against multiple partners if it can't handle one in any situation? I'm not talking about aikido or anything but that statement when made about any art is weird and illogical at best.

Second... in women's self defence hit and run is what is done TO the women as well. Of course for women it's okay to use hit and run tactics when she feels threatened... but my guess is a lot of SD should address what to do when already on ground or standing up and grabbed.

The last thing we need is to teach women standing wristlocks on nonresistant men making them believe they can actually apply them. I have never ever seen ANY woman in TMA that could actually resist a bigger determined opponent. Because they never try what's it really like. And there's a pretty good chance a broken finger or a wrist does not stop a rapist.

And obvously you have not much grappling experience because then you would know that the easiest to overcome strength and size is on the ground (comparing to striking distance and clinch).

Jorx

05-05-2005, 03:46 PM

And another thing... as we are drifting off the subject - we all have heard of single challenges to old aikido masters as well. And these werent' mortal kombats but in quite ordinary brawl setting not too different from todays vale tudo.

Why none of these today? Why so many answers that "oh well aikido is not exacty for that, it's for weapons and "real" situations and multiple attackers and..." I'd call it running away from the question

rob_liberti

05-05-2005, 04:26 PM

I agree that BJJ is perfect for women who would like to avoid rape. Also, I have every intention of making that kind of training available to my son (as I'm sure he'll be in a school yard scuffle or two when he gets older). Although, I worry that it may have some other weird side effects. Do they do a lot head strikes? That might explain a lot about this thread.

Jorgen, I think that Jason Delucia spoke well about your question on a different thread on aikiweb.

Hmm, that got me thinking... Have any other people with experience in both MMA and aikido (like Jason Delucia or Roy Dean or some other folks on some google thread mentioned a few posts back) found that they were able to get any of their open-handed aikido techniques to work in the MMA arena?

If not, that would be a bit more interesting to hear what their struggles have been. If so, well, that would pretty interesting too.

Rob

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 04:38 PM

"First - how could a martial art be more successful against multiple partners if it can't handle one in any situation? I'm not talking about aikido or anything but that statement when made about any art is weird and illogical at best."

Well Said!

"And obviously you have not much grappling experience because then you would know that the easiest to overcome strength and size is on the ground (comparing to striking distance and clinch)."

Also well Said!

"And another thing... as we are drifting off the subject - we all have heard of single challenges to old aikido masters as well. And these werent' mortal kombats but in quite ordinary brawl setting not too different from todays vale tudo."

I have heard some story's about old masters being challenged, I don't know what to believe because I haven't' seen those match's. I have however seen "Randa vous with adventure" (sp?), where an untrained camera man seems to give Koichi Tohei a very hard time!

"Why none of these today? Why so many answers that "oh well aikido is not exactly for that, it's for weapons and "real" situations and multiple attackers and..." I'd call it running away from the question"

I think Aikido is a weapons system. I took the challenge of the dog brothers with my Aikido (although it wasn't a personal challenge) and it worked. I think Aikido was never meant to be an empty handed system, thats why you don't see Aikidoka winning UFC's, or Pride. It's not good for fighting unarmed. Much like a Carpenter doesn't build stuff out of metal. It's not that he cant learn, or that his wood working skills are inferior, just that he's not familiar with the methods of working metal.

-Chris Hein
P.s. great posts!

takusan

05-05-2005, 05:27 PM

To Chris,
Sorry if you took offense at my assumption.
However, I stand by the intent of the issue.
I may not have your experience, directly, but simply, the issues that you argue are the same as I and no doubt others, have done as well during our aikido career.
Only in that light then, do I reiterate, it is likely, that the limitations that are apparent to you, (and others), were similar to those that I once had.
Those limitations have since been exorcised from my training concerns.
BUT, I have other/different concerns regarding aikido's 'suitability'.
Or should I say, I have yet to extract from aikido, my answers.
Maybe I never will.
Maybe aikido doesn't have those answers (for me).

Really, why should aikido have all the answers?

It seems that we approach a point where it merely becomes a pissing contest.
In any other endeavor, we would see this for what it is, and stop.
With Aikido however, we seem to get overly protective.

Excuse my rudeness here, but in my dojo, this might well be the point where I would offer this challenge, -

"Cut the crap guys, if you like what you are doing - to hell with what others think. Just get on with it."

Dave H

Michael Varin

05-05-2005, 06:08 PM

I wasn't following this thread from the beginning, but I'm not sure that anyone questioned aikido's effectiveness. I think Chris said (correct me if I'm wrong) that it was a system that was designed to be used while the parties involved were wearing or using weapons. I don't think he said that you cannot use it empty handed, but rather that it is not suited for that type of situation. One shouldn't use a butter knife to screw down a screw, but it's done all the time. Sometimes it works, but screwdrivers were built for the job. I also believe Chris said that he has tried to use aikido techniques in MMA situations, and said they were not often successful. Maybe he could elaborate. Another sticking point seems to be the time someone has put into training. I don't think anyone in their right mind would disagree that regarding a particular individual with the proper mind set that he will be better at what he is doing the longer he has been doing it. I don't think that was the question either.

Xu said, "Aikido was designed from combat purpose to allow soldiers to handle multiple opponents...", and there was some replies that if it wasn't designed for one how could it handle many. Think about this, on the battlefield soldiers have weapons, be it rifles today or swords in days gone by. These weapons kill in an instant compared with bare hands where it is a battle of attrition. You can easily dispatch someone with a sword and move to the next. It's lightning fast and there aren't situations where you claw back into the fight like with bare hands. In this environment, having a fluid mind that is able to let go of things quickly is one of the biggest assets. Just like jiyuwaza or randori from aikido, not like randori from judo.

I personally think this is very interesting, and hope the thread can continue along these lines without people getting to frustrated or defensive, because it's just not that serious.

Oh Rob,

What do you mean when you say without directly pushing, pulling, or lifting? Can you clarify, maybe with an example.

Michael

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 07:40 PM

"Really, why should aikido have all the answers?"
I couldn't agree more!

Nice analogy with the butter knife Michael!

"I also believe Chris said that he has tried to use aikido techniques in MMA situations, and said they were not often successful. Maybe he could elaborate"

I think one of the main problems with Aikido as an unarmed system is the set ups. By set ups I mean the positions from which you practice the techniques. For example in unarmed combat, wrist grabbing is not very common. Many of Aikidos techniques are baised on its set ups. Shihonage is a difficult technique to get in real unarmed combat. It involves you having to grab one of your attackers hands and spin underneath it (forgive me for paraphrasing here, we all know what shihonage is.) it's uncommon in unarmed combat to have someones hand an be set up with this opportunity. However if you are struggling over a weapon it sets up easily. I've made Irimi Nage, Rokyo, and Kokyu Nage work several times, and done kotegaeshi once. Also with trained fighters people seldom hurl themselves at you with reckless abandon, I will admit that this is not like a street fight with an untrained person, it is common for novices to just run at you, which the Syllabus of aikido sets up nicely. I seldomly get in street fights anymore (prolly thanx to Aikido also).

-Chris Hein

takusan

05-05-2005, 08:26 PM

Get ready for this Chris, I'm going to confirm your every suspicion about aikido.

At a party, I was asked to help get a particular person off a bed. He's drunk and stoned.
His friend goes in first. Friend gets his nose broken.
Me, - thought oh shit here we go, so apply kote gaeshi.
Nothing.
He just stood there.
Mmm, I thought. That was interesting.
Next technique. Quick.
Grabbed his hair and dragged him down, falls onto bed. I lay on top of him.
Read the riot act to him. (Wagging my finger at him).
Calmed him down.
Drove him home. Basically looked after him.

Point - the kote gaeshi didn't work - for a whole raft of reasons.
No balance breaking - still in his center - wrong distance PLUS he could feel absolutely no pain.

Conclusion. Aikido sucks. No. :)
Conclusion. MY aikido sucks. Yup. :(

Eventual outcome. Can tell you what, my kote gaeshi works now - you can bet on it.
Took time. But it was tested, and was found wanting.
Trained some more until the "Got it" stage was achieved.

SO, if I had of stopped training just after my failure, I would conclude that aikido wasn't a very effective empty hand system.
As luck would have it, I stayed with it.

Perspective - aikido doesn't have the answers - within each of us, is the answer. (or not)

CNYMike

05-05-2005, 09:05 PM

..... I think one of the main problems with Aikido as an unarmed system is the set ups. By set ups I mean the positions from which you practice the techniques. For example in unarmed combat, wrist grabbing is not very common .....

Tell that to the people setting up women's self defense classes.

.... Shihonage is a difficult technique to get in real unarmed combat. It involves you having to grab one of your attackers hands and spin underneath it (forgive me for paraphrasing here, we all know what shihonage is.) it's uncommon in unarmed combat to have someones hand an be set up with this opportunity ....

Think so? In Kali and Serak, I have seen a variety of throws done off the jab or the jab/cross, including things that are basically shiho-nage under different names. So don't tell me it can't be done!

..... with trained fighters people seldom hurl themselves at you with reckless abandon, I will admit that this is not like a street fight with an untrained person, it is common for novices to just run at you, which the Syllabus of aikido sets up nicely ....

And which is what most people are probably thinking of when they take an art for self defense.

.... I seldomly get in street fights anymore (prolly thanx to Aikido also).

-Chris Hein

And your problem with Aikido is .... what?

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 09:41 PM

NagaBaba

05-05-2005, 10:02 PM

I DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH AIKIDO.
let me please say it again.
I CHRISTOPHER M HEIN, DO NOT, HAVE A PROBLEM WITH AIKIDO.

It however is not a good empty handed system. Will it work empty handed, sure, so will a butter knife turn a screw. Was it designed to turn a screw, no. Do I have a problem with butter knives, no. Do I have a problem with screws, no. Butter knives were not designed to turn screws.
Well put, Chris. Aikido is a tool to harmonise with Universe, to pass from "profane" to "sacred". That's why M.Ueshiba talked about Silver Bridge Between Earth and Heaven, and not about street fighting. :D
I can't believe there are still in the world aikidoka who, after so many years of historical researches done by S. Pranin, continue to promote aikido as more or less ideal fighting system. :rolleyes:

rob_liberti

05-05-2005, 11:06 PM

I don't think that even a very good shodan in aikido (because I used to be one) should be explaining much about what works and what does not work in aikido period, as opposed to what works for them so far. If that wasn't his intention, then we have no argument at all and I apologize for my confusion, and there is no need to read further...

In my experience, when I hear that a shodan can't get his empty handed techniques to work, I don't think 'what a shocker!' I think, 'yep that's shodan.'

While I have no doubt that adding 2 years of MMA would make any aikido shodan (any person period) a much better fighter - THAT DOES NOT QUALIFY SAID PERSON to make sweeping judgments about all of aikido. What I said in post 75 sumed up my thoughts about this.

When I read the following: "So I just thought, oh well the techniques must suck" - I thought 'wow there is a major case of externalization.' As in, the problem is the art, not me...

I even went so far as to say:"If we want to agree that low level aikido is most effective as a weapons based art, I'm all in." Somehow we couldn't reach a compromise there. Based on _apparent_ externalization issues and fairly condesending explanations without knowing the audience, I was lead to the possible conclusion that we couldn't reach this compromise there because there must be an ego attachment to not having low level aikido. Maybe I got it all wrong, but then I can't explain post 77.

Low level aikido directly pushes, pulls, lifts, yanks, cranks, hits them to soften ' em up, and let's not forget threatens (exactly how does one threaten with non-violence?). A good example (for Michael Varin) would be ikkyo from a cross wrist grab. If you swing your arm up in a herky jerk motion, and then plow into them hoping to push their elbow into their ear - you my friend are directly lifting and directly pushing, then you will probably follow that up with drectly cranking them over, and then directly yanking them down to the ground. On the other hand, if you twist your arm to use their grab so that their elbow starts bending, percieve their resistive energy in that side of their chest start to disipate, continue to fill that empty place with your body forward so that your two arms are lifted up more from the movement of your feet/hips in relationship to uke, and then cut the line from between uke's grabbing arm and their head such both of you continue to feel like you are expanding - then I'd say you are not doing totally low level aikido. When all of your techniques are smooth and more indirect - basically more sophistocated, you are starting to approach the line between beginner and intermediate. There is much more than just technique, but that's an okay example off the top of my head.

Rob - who keeps on trucken

ChrisHein

05-05-2005, 11:23 PM

"Low level aikido directly pushes, pulls, lifts, yanks, cranks, hits them to soften ' em up, and let's not forget threatens (exactly how does one threaten with non-violence?). A good example (for Michael Varin) would be ikkyo from a cross wrist grab. If you swing your arm up in a herky jerk motion, and then plow into them hoping to push their elbow into their ear - you my friend are directly lifting and directly pushing, then you will probably follow that up with drectly cranking them over, and then directly yanking them down to the ground."

Maybe our schools have different times of accomplishment. I would say that in my school (under Patrick Cassidy, Iwama style) people stop doing this long before shodan. Not just the gifted, but everyone, reaching this level of ability is considered rudimentary, and our teacher would not let us do any less then this.

I think our schools just achieve things at different times, I can see how if this represents shodan to you that you would be apprehensive about my skills, this is not the case.

-Chris Hein

xuzen

05-05-2005, 11:38 PM

I have to disagree with you very strongly.
First - how could a martial art be more successful against multiple partners if it can't handle one in any situation? I'm not talking about aikido or anything but that statement when made about any art is weird and illogical at best.
Jorgen, I suggest you read post #94 by M. Varin:
Xu said, "Aikido was designed from combat purpose to allow soldiers to handle multiple opponents...", and there was some replies that if it wasn't designed for one how could it handle many. Think about this, on the battlefield soldiers have weapons, be it rifles today or swords in days gone by. These weapons kill in an instant compared with bare hands where it is a battle of attrition. You can easily dispatch someone with a sword and move to the next. It's lightning fast and there aren't situations where you claw back into the fight like with bare hands. In this environment, having a fluid mind that is able to let go of things quickly is one of the biggest assets. Just like jiyuwaza or randori from aikido, not like randori from judo.
Now to add my few cents... think about it, it is not as illogical nor weird as you might think. Again I feel that your idea of combat is too narrowly minded and biased towards the typical one to one type of slug fest, which will naturally favour the one who is physically superior and stronger. My training is not designed for this type of slugging out. There is another thing Jorgen, not everyone you meet who wants to fight with you should challenge him head on. What about sizing him out, make a psychological evaluation if you can take him out? If you can't, there are other ways rather than slugging it out.

Maybe it is my way of training all these years, all those technique I learn, all those waza I learn are just alphabets to prepare me for the randori type situation. My training prepares me for the chaotic situation of group situation; which I am more comfortable than say a one to one combat situation. To put it further, for me, it would be easier to throw, trip, push/shove a moving person than say a committed dug in person for me.

Having said that, I am not a professional UFC type fighter, hence those type of one to one type slug out fight is pretty redundant to me. I felt compel to post here because I felt that too many of the posters here emphasize the one to one fight that is typical of sport/competition and sort of putting the scenario which aikido work best (chaotic, multiple attacker scenario) on the background

The last thing we need is to teach women standing wrist locks on nonresistant men making them believe they can actually apply them. I have never ever seen ANY woman in TMA that could actually resist a bigger determined opponent. Because they never try what's it really like. And there's a pretty good chance a broken finger or a wrist does not stop a rapist.
No, standing wrist lock alone is not going to make non-compliant opponent go down, that much is true. There are other elements you need to include (kuzushi, tsukuri, tai sabaki). Just water and flour alone down make bread. If you are a genuine student of aikido... you should realize this. If you are a beginner... ask your sensei for further clarification and if you are not a student of aikido... join a class to explore further. Broken finger and wrist don't stop a rapist? I beg to ask you, is this factual or formed from your own opinion? .

And obviously you have not much grappling experience because then you would know that the easiest to overcome strength and size is on the ground (comparing to striking distance and clinch).
No, I am not a grappler. I am an "Atemi Kind of Guy(TM)" (AKG) :D.

rob_liberti

05-05-2005, 11:38 PM

Chris,

That would certainly be fair enough! I didn't think you would take it that way. That was actually the lowest level I could imagine, and it would not be considered 3rd kyu in my school - and no didn't actually think you were there. I gave a simple example. I think the question is are all of your techniques sophistocated. For instance, I would be much more interested in the opinion of someone who can do iriminage without directly pulling or pushing - I've never met a shodan who could do it - I'm still working on it - but getting closer! Honestly, if you can do that, and you can't get your open-handed techniques working outside of aikido then please explain the difficulties. Otherwise, and you still want to speak about aikido period (not just your aikido), then please consider reflecting on my previous post.

Peace - really -
Rob

ChrisHein

05-06-2005, 12:00 AM

I'll say this, I've seen many very high ranking instructors around here (I will not name names, but 6th dan and above), I am impressed with very few of them, often when I go to seminars my technique is much cleaner, and I'm not the only one saying this. I feel my skills are fine. Maybe yours are too, I don't know, but I do not attach time, or rank to ability (not that time can't make you better, it's just that it's not a guarantee). I know if many of the higher ranking Aikidoka I am speaking found them selves in a confrontation they would fail, in-fact I've seen this happen, people who have spent more time and have more rank then you and I combined. My opinions are Representative of what I've seen, maybe I'm not right, but no one has presented an argument to change my mind. In all fairness you would probably have to show me, which to date no one has.

-Chris Hein

xuzen

05-06-2005, 12:27 AM

Hey Chris,

Is that Shihan (6th Dan), Whatisname shihan, the same guy you know that I know that belongs to a dojo named.... Aikiddojutsudomawa-ryu McDojo? Yeah that guy... he can't swat a fly.

CNYMike

05-06-2005, 12:55 AM

.... It however is not a good empty handed system. Will it work empty handed, sure ....

I won't argue that there are a lot of empty-hand areas Aikido doesn't cover. It doesn't, period. That doesn't mean it's doesn't work empty handed at all. Remember that the Aikido techniques aren't one-trick ponies. Their setups are off a variety of grabs, some strikes, and grab-and-strike combinations. They are also used to counter each other. I don't see why one can't dope out how to use them against other things with a little time and effort, especially given the sort-of endorsement from some MMA guys I found on usenet.

ChrisHein

05-06-2005, 01:29 AM

"It however is not a good empty handed system. Will it work empty handed, sure, so will a butter knife turn a screw. Was it designed to turn a screw, no. Do I have a problem with butter knives, no. Do I have a problem with screws, no. Butter knives were not designed to turn screws."

-That quote is from me.

If you look at my posts, I never said it dosent ever work. I think sometimes somethings work, but my point is that it's not a good empty handed system, it was designed to be used when armed. I'm sure someone somewhere has used all the techniques of Aikido empty handed, but that dosent mean it's good for that.

-Chris Hein
We keep comming back to people thinking that I'm saying Aikido is worthless or something, all I'm trying to get acrost is that it's a GREAT weapons system, and a very POOR empty handed system.

rob_liberti

05-06-2005, 07:10 AM

Before this ends, I meant to say Hi Garret a long while ago!

Chris,

I'm not confused about what you have been saying. How about this: If someone somewhere has used all the techniques of Aikido empty handed, then _that_ person is qualified to make sweeping generalizations about empty handed aikido (I'd say that person is not low-level). It won't make them necessarily 100% right, but no one that couldn't do all the techniques of Aikido empty handed would have _any_ credibility in arguing that point either way.

Concerning your anecdote about Tohei, I suggest you read the thread called: Tohei throwing Judoka in Hawaii?
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7978

I certainly agree that there are a lot of people who got promoted for other reasons than martial ability which undermines the credibility of aikido. I'm sorry that's been your experience with many higher dans - who I'm sure are very loyal.

Rob

CNYMike

05-06-2005, 10:28 AM

.... If you look at my posts, I never said it dosent ever work. I think sometimes somethings work, but my point is that it's not a good empty handed system, it was designed to be used when armed. I'm sure someone somewhere has used all the techniques of Aikido empty handed, but that dosent mean it's good for that.

And as I said, that Aikido is derived from weaponry isn't a news flash to anyone who knows anything about the art. The empty hand parts of Kali are also evolved from weapons techniques. Does that mean they're "poor" empty and or not desinged for it? No. Just the same ideas are applied to different scenarios.

ChrisHein

05-06-2005, 11:45 AM

This is honestly starting to get silly.

Rob,
We apparently have different ideas. Maybe someday I can show you what I mean, maybe someday you can show me how I can't throw you or what ever. This is degrading into a "yes it is. no it's not"argument, that I believe nether one of us need.

Michael,
All empty handed martial arts are probably derived from weapons systems. I read a nice essay once on how western boxing was derived from European fencing. The thing is, the effective systems, those that regularly fight empty handed have spent time developing that. They use the original ideas of the weapons system and rework things from the idea of fighting empty handed. These things different depending on what range they plan to work in, for boxing they developed beyond the jab, and made a usable syllabus of Punch's covers, footwork,combos. I'm sure a modern boxer doesn't know jack about fencing, and a modern fencer would be terrible at boxing. This doesn't mean that ether is bad at what he trains, just that he docent train for that type of thing. No one has really developed Aikido for empty handed use. There is not a strong and agreed apon syllabus of headlock escapes, and clinching methods, practical striking skills etc. Thins necessary for empty handed fighting. As for Kali, I've played with some very good dudes, they are awesome with sticks in their hands, but when we went closer range, we were both using an awful lot of Brazilian Jiu jutsu.

-Chris

rob_liberti

05-06-2005, 10:35 PM

Chris,

Well, okay. Maybe I'm the one not paying attention to the discussion. I thought _you_ were the one saying that aikido open-hand technique didn't work, not me. I'm sure I never said you couldn't throw me. But hey, I wish you well in your training.

Rob

CNYMike

05-06-2005, 11:11 PM

..... No one has really developed Aikido for empty handed use .....

The problem with this claim is that Aikido's techniques are derived from Japanese jujitsus systems, including Daito-ryu Akijutsu. You want to argue that jujitsu is not a good empty hand system, good luck. It doesn't pass muster. If it has empty hand techniques, it's an empty hand system.

..... There is not a strong and agreed apon syllabus of headlock escapes, and clinching methods, practical striking skills etc ....

Yeah. So?

Boxing may have the striking and clinching, but you ever see a boxer worry about getting out of a headlock? No, of course not. You want to tell a boxer it's incomplete because of that? I don't think anyone would dream of that. Oh, and why did you leave groin kicks off your list? Some guys I knew back when I started MA in 1985 liked low kicks, such as groin kicks and low side kicks to the knee; they'd use fakes to divert your attention when they went for those. Not mentioned? Does this mean the systems you like are lacking? Ooops.

I'll be the first to agree that there are a lot of things Aikido doesn't do. No argument. But it's a long way from that to saying "It was never designed as an empty hand system." Sorry, but for me, that's totally ridiculous. That's a leap too far IMHO.

..... As for Kali, I've played with some very good dudes, they are awesome with sticks in their hands, but when we went closer range, we were both using an awful lot of Brazilian Jiu jutsu.

-Chris

I suggest you someday take a formal class in it, preferably LaCoste/Inosanto Kali. You'll gain a better appreciation for what's going on, and in how the empty hand system works.

ChrisHein

05-07-2005, 12:11 AM

If I'm not mistaken the dog brothers are under inosanto.

I said the syllabus depends on what range you were working in, boxers don't grapple. more importantly I was pointing out the way it works and not the particulars.

I think Jujitsu was designed by samurai, who were worried about someone who was armed, I believe Japanese jujitsu falls in the same class as Aikido when it comes to empty handed techniques.

I'm sick of fighting about this, I feel like I've enriched my life and training. Thats fine by me, if you wish to look at this in your life and training, cool, send me a message we'll chat it up. Otherwise I'm done with this.

-Chris Hein

CNYMike

05-07-2005, 01:30 AM

If I'm not mistaken the dog brothers are under inosanto.

You're right, they are. However, I don't think it would hurt you to look into formal Kali classes. In particular, the empty hand joint locsk, which are very similar to Aikido's, but done off things like jabs.

I said the syllabus depends on what range you were working in, boxers don't grapple. more importantly I was pointing out the way it works and not the particulars.

I must have missed that. :o

I think Jujitsu was designed by samurai, who were worried about someone who was armed, I believe Japanese jujitsu falls in the same class as Aikido when it comes to empty handed techniques.

Yes, but they still had quite a library of empty-hand techniques. Threre is a book on daito-ryu that lays them out. And if jujitsu is a "poor" empty hand system, how do you go from that to things like Judo and BJJ, which like Aikido, are offshoots?

I'm sick of fighting about this, I feel like I've enriched my life and training. Thats fine by me, if you wish to look at this in your life and training, cool, send me a message we'll chat it up. Otherwise I'm done with this.

-Chris Hein

Ok.

Jorx

05-07-2005, 04:24 AM

Having said that, I am not a professional UFC type fighter, hence those type of one to one type slug out fight is pretty redundant to me. I felt compel to post here because I felt that too many of the posters here emphasize the one to one fight that is typical of sport/competition and sort of putting the scenario which aikido work best (chaotic, multiple attacker scenario) on the background

No, standing wrist lock alone is not going to make non-compliant opponent go down, that much is true. There are other elements you need to include (kuzushi, tsukuri, tai sabaki). Just water and flour alone down make bread. If you are a genuine student of aikido... you should realize this. If you are a beginner... ask your sensei for further clarification and if you are not a student of aikido... join a class to explore further. Broken finger and wrist don't stop a rapist? I beg to ask you, is this factual or formed from your own opinion? .

Xu, it seems to me that you have formed an opinion about "sport"-like MMA training and applications watching couple of UFC-bouts. None of the pro-fighters WANTS to slug it out. Maybe very few do. Most of them want a quick end to the fight. But when skills and sizes are equally matched, it is not that easy. Also your tone implies that it does not seem technical to you.

My opinion is that most of well rounded MMA-fighters would do very well in those situations you speak of as "chaotic" and "multiple-attakcker-based". Now if they would actually train for this for a month or to and another month of "competitive"-real-resistance-drills against blade as well...

Now many aikidoka speak so highly of principles and learning principles via practicing tecniques (as do you speaking of balance breaking and footwork). But most of the "sport systems" have found a way to dedicate MOST of the time practicing these and very little time (compared to other things) to technique.

Now the question about how may I suggest that broken finger does not stop a rapist I hope you didn't form it this way on purpose.

There are countless police records on about people who are severely damaged continue to fight. Being on drugs is one possibility. People (attackers and defenders) get cut, broken elbows, ears ripped off, get kicked into groin multiple times (yes) and still keep on fighting. There are two sure ways to end a physical fight. A choke and major head trauma. A woman is quite probably NOT able doing the second without a weapon.

Now if to bite the worm you threw out and which I (possible that wrongly) percieved a little irritating:

If I was to rape someone, a broken finger or wrist would sure not stop me. I'd beat the crap outta her and then still do it.

(and to clear it out, I have 6 years of quite intensive Aikido experience. I personally think it sure is not enough time to be proficient in Aikido but is enough to have seen and felt enough to form a creditable opinion)

Jorx

05-07-2005, 04:32 AM

Oh and by the way... Dan Inosanto is a BJJ blackbelt.
To me (from a very far distance and very limited knowledge) it seems that he very well understands what works in a fight, how people need to be trained to make them learn faster, how "sport" applications are much practical and safer most of the time. He is just a head of a major money-making-organisation and an old man and would never say that "well it seems that this old stuff is crap, let's all do mma and dogbrothers stuff, that's what really works"

Jorx

05-07-2005, 04:34 AM

rob_liberti

05-07-2005, 06:37 AM

Well,as I posted in this thread, a person I never met before claiming to have 2 years of BJJ came in and I let him try whatever he wanted for well over an hour. The response to this was basically that he must not be very good. I'm okay with that. If it had gone the other way, I'm sure some aikido people would say well Rob must not be very good (which is probably true as well.)

I'd love to see someone with better skills attack Saotome sensei.

Rob

takusan

05-07-2005, 07:07 AM

God this is fun.

Never seen so many varied opinions and views. I'm not being facetious, I truly enjoy the views being aired.

This may upset a few of the newer aikidoka.

This I tell my students, but the knowledgeable ones, get my point pretty well.

I'm about to be involved it a fight. There is two sounds. Me being hit, followed by me hitting the ground.

???? How could this be so.? :blush:

You are an instructor.
Have done decades of training.
Have also been spouting off what a fantastic martial art aikido is.
What are you saying?????

Point is, I'm one hell of a nice guy. Why on earth would anyone want to hit me?? ;)

Doesn't my aikido protect me?
Nope, never will.
I protect me.

If I have the wrong frame of mind, don't blame the aikido training, just blame me.
Thats why I would be the first person hitting the ground.
Its the nice guy that wouldn't hurt a fly, that seems to get it first. (In my little story)

Now ask me if I REALLY think this would be the case.
No, but its one of the possible outcomes that exist, should I engage in a fight.

But boy, the initiator of the fight had better well think this was going to be the case, for if it turned out that I was not 'hitting the ground' he's in deep doo doo's.

So these guys come to my dojo, and challenge me. :blush:
If it were the 'old days' all my students would be in like a shot to protect me.
Why do you think the sensei sits with his students between him (her) and the door?
And he also stands between the door (the attackers) and the kamiza.
Well, its not the old days.
My students would be polite and invite them in. (god bless them) :rolleyes:
So I have to fight these dudes.
IF that were to happen, my students may or may not see some 'fine demonstration of aikido'
More likely they would see some serious serious whoop arse violence.
Might be me getting the whoop arse though. Thats one possibility.

Anyone that thinks otherwise, hasn't trained long enough and is still in love with the 'aikido is the ultimate martial art' mind set.

(This is not, to me, some clinical, theoretical situation. Nor is it a academic scenario. Its is what it is. A fight. As I have seen posted before, aikido doesn't have rules, just a philosophy. I agree.
I would do what ever it took to first, stop the fight from even happening, and second, win - if the first choice was not possible.
I don't know these guys - they may well be nutters, out to prove themselves. Why else would they be there?
Have you not heard the name that was given Osensei's dojo - ie that it was at one time known as "Hell dojo". Ask your sensei why this was the case. )

Do I think aikido is the ultimate martial art?
Yup, pretty much. Especially so when someone else is doing it - in a fight. ;)
It touches areas that some martial arts don't even acknowledge.
We train in a wide variety of scenarios.
Our ultimate goal is not simply to come out on top, but to attempt to protect the attacker.
Further still, we should be aiming to neutralize the entire affair, so that no fight actually occurs.

While there may be other arts that have these features, I am currently unaware of any that have them all - as foundation principles.

That is why we must have this protracted (and repeated)discussion.
We are growing.
And developing.
This applies to the experienced - and those that are just starting aikido.
With that comes pain. Not necessarily physical pain, but our soul is being tested and with :ai: :ki: we will be the better for it.

OK. I'm off the soap box again

Dave H

CNYMike

05-07-2005, 10:59 AM

Oh and by the way... Dan Inosanto is a BJJ blackbelt....

Yes, he is. He taught some of it at semianrs a few years ago, and had one or two funny stories about his training. Yet he is also head of a Kali system, LaCoste/Inosanto Kali, and that is a vast system which contains (among other things) a ground-fighting system not unlike BJJ (in fact so close to it that when Guro Kevin Seaman first saw a GJJ tape in the '80s, his first thought was, "Wait a minute, that's Kali!") and joint locks almost identical to Aikido's, but I have pracitced them off things like jabs. He's also involved with other SE Asian systems, and they also have the same locks you find in AIkido -- you just get there differently. Know the figure four armbar? Every do it off a jab? Guess what -- in Aikido, that is considered a variaiton of shiho-ange (although I didn't know this until a couple of weeks ago). So when someone says, "You can't do shiho-nage off a jab or a jab/cross," I say, "Look at the Filipinos. Look at the Indonesians. They do that all the time. So it can be done."

CNYMike

05-07-2005, 11:04 AM

And as it all strives offtopic...

If let's say a judoka or two would walk into the class and challenge (very politely and nicely) you (or your teacher) to an... let's say mma-type sparring match in kimono, would you/he/she do it? How would it fare?

I'm not 100% sure of this, but I believe that some people from the local Judo club train in the Aikido dojos I've been involve with, and some of the Aikido people may crosstrain in Judo. So in this situation, I think such a challenge is a moot point: Friends don't go to try and give friends a hard time.

Michael Varin

05-07-2005, 09:22 PM

Yes, but they still had quite a library of empty-hand techniques. Threre is a book on daito-ryu that lays them out. And if jujitsu is a "poor" empty hand system, how do you go from that to things like Judo and BJJ, which like Aikido, are offshoots?

Yes, like aikido, judo and bjj are derived from Japanese jujutsu. One major difference is how judo and bjj approach training. Both arts have narrowed their teachings to techniques that can be safely practiced full force against an opponent that is not only resisting you, but is also trying to apply the same techniques. This allows people training in these arts to get a true sense of timing and all of the other minute but crucial aspects that can only be obtained through doing. And since they train the techniques exactly as they would be used in an actual conflict, they are very effective within their range. Judo focuses on throwing from a clench, and bjj on ground work, so if a judoka can't get his hands on his opponent he won't deal well with punches, likewise a bjj guy won't be as effective if he's not on the ground. So these arts have been honed and tested under fire for specific empty hand situations, as has been boxing.

For the record, I have never trained or personally seen kali and the videos I've seen have been weapons only, but I have never seen complex joint locks effectively demonstrated against good punches thrown with bad intentions. Picture James Toney in front of you and now go show me shiho nage or any of its variation.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying I've never seen it.

Michael

CNYMike

05-07-2005, 09:49 PM

..... For the record, I have never trained or personally seen kali and the videos I've seen have been weapons only, but I have never seen complex joint locks effectively demonstrated against good punches thrown with bad intentions. Picture James Toney in front of you and now go show me shiho nage or any of its variation.

I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm saying I've never seen it.

Michael

Bingo -- it is possible, and I have been practicing it. For a test I am getting ready for, I have to review some joint locks, and they are done not off grabs or lunge punches but off jabs.

Kali is more than just sticks. It is a vast system encompassing every type of weapon you can imagine and every empty hand area you can name, including kicking, punching, locking, throwing, and grappling. Their boxing system, Panantukan (which may have had a strong influence on western boxing) is used not to trade shots with someone as you might see in a boxing match but to get through your opponent's defenses so you can then apply traps, throws, and submissions as found in the grapppling system, Dumog. That's why Kali would go well with Aikdio -- if nage waza and osae waza are the bombs, Filipino boxing would be the missile that delivers them.

And I say all this not from the perspective of someone who has seen a few tapes or been to an few seminars but someone who has studied Kali once a week from 1998 to the present, and is not stopping. (I actually tried it for the first time in the summer of '97, but I took the winter off because I wanted to make both karate classes for once, and they conflicted with the beginner's Kali class on Monday and Wednesday nights. However, I did Wing Chun on Tuesdays so I could continue training under the same instructors, and that's how I got into that art.) So call me silly, but I think I know what I'm talking about.

deepsoup

05-08-2005, 05:01 AM

One major difference is how judo and bjj approach training. Both arts have narrowed their teachings to techniques that can be safely practiced full force against an opponent that is not only resisting you, but is also trying to apply the same techniques.

I know nothing about BJJ, but in the case of Judo I think I take issue with this. There are still plenty of techniques within the judo syllabus which can't be practiced safely in the "competitive randori" environment, and which are therefore practiced only in kata form. (Like most aikido practice.)

Its true that many, even most, dojos have narrowed their teachings, in the sense that they're only interested in shiai and what is effective in shiai, but the Kodokan (and therefore Judo itself) has not.

Sean
x

Jorx

05-08-2005, 07:25 AM

Kodokan is as wide if not wider than Aikikai (in technical terms that is). There are many dojos that have dropped tha kata altogether.

The groundwork in judo is watered down in many places due to it's relative ineffectiveness to throws in shiai according to the current rules.

BJJ has no kata whatsoever.

Bodhi

05-08-2005, 07:40 AM

"Kali is more than just sticks. It is a vast system encompassing every type of weapon you can imagine and every empty hand area you can name, including kicking, punching, locking, throwing, and grappling. Their boxing system, Panantukan (which may have had a strong influence on western boxing) is used not to trade shots with someone as you might see in a boxing match but to get through your opponent's defenses so you can then apply traps, throws, and submissions as found in the grapppling system, Dumog."

This is true, Kali has been tested over the centuries under the harshest of conditions, it was forged through the blood of the people who practiced it. Passed from father to son throughout tribal societies, it was developed for mass attack as well as single opponent confrontations and has proved effective time an again in real world combat.
The fighting arts of the Phillipinies use a survival methodology, there is no unnessecery practices, practical use is of the utmost importance. Anything that wont work against a resisting opponent is thrown out. A child as well as an old woman should be able to become effective in a short time frame, as was usually the case within tribal culture. Kali came from a poor working class people, not a pampered warrior society that had the time and resources to devote a substancial amount of training to becomming combat effective. This art had to work for the survival of the tribe, every man, woman, and child had to have effective fighting skills, and have them now.
Kali is very well rounded and can effectively deal with weapons as well as kicking, punching, trapping, and grappling ranges. It teaches you to use whatever works based on the circumstances, anything from a bandana, book, or umbrellas can be used, as well as empty hand, stick, blade, and projectile weapons. I remember a teacher talking about using zoning and sinwali (double stick/blade weaving) but with a toaster to stop an attack.
Most everything in the FMA derived from weapons practices wich is why Kali empty hand skills are so efficient. Hence "Panantukan" wich basically came from double blade sparring. If you train with weapons, you are going to get tremendous hand eye coordination, not to mention handspeed, footwork, balance, agility, timing, rythm, and an overall ability to recognize openings you just were not able to see as quickly training empty hand alone. Kali is one of the most highly evolved systems i have ever seen or trained in, it is just awesome on its own, as well as a great supplement to any other art or system. I highly recommend it!

Usagi

05-20-2005, 12:45 AM

Isashiburi desu ne :)

Well, from what i have seen here, the concept of "combat" favored here is dueling and the concept of "self-defense" is exchanging techniques to see who wins.

Within that particular settings i may agree that Aikido takes longer to master and has a higher margin of failure (greatly because the "yurusu" idea of sparing the opponent from unnecessary harm).

Although i don't think it would be that much of a challenge to use Aikido in duels by simple letting go the "Yurusu aspect" (what some say would "kill" the art's doctrine), is dueling the same as self defense responses?

Even from a legal point of view, Self defense has more to do with avoiding damage than with "teaching this guy a lesson".

First, the most important aspect of self defense is awareness so as to avoid being caught of guard.

If you are aware of your surroundings you won't get in harm's way.

If you are not, you may end up get mounted, yeah...or simple get a rock throw at your head (from behind)... i don't know many MA that teach how to use ESP to defend from a rock launched into your head or a sniper...

BJJ? Well, if you end up in the floor, what you will really need is luck.

Why is it that every opponent an aikidoka is "likely to meet" has to be a wrestler, bjj stylist, muay thay boxer or NFL Quarterback? And why every opponent a bjj stylist is "likely to meet" has to be completely ignorant of ground fighting, with slow reflexes and no friend around?

Sorry, but i don't buy this.

If anyone here REALLY take the time to do some statistics
will find out that most of the people have never really needed any MA training on their life spam.

Fitness, awareness and empathy on the other hand...

BUT lets say i am in Aikido for the eventual need to DEFEND MYSELF in a brawl...

Any MA that emphasizes standing techniques and dodging is far better than one the favorers engaging in ground grappling.

If i am boxing and i feel that you are better than me, maybe i can run away.

If i try an nikkyo and your hand slips, maybe i can run away.

If i go to the ground with you i CANNOT run away until i finish you; what if i can't?

To train a"little grappling" will only do if my opponent has no training at all.

On the other hand, to train a "little dodging" will help allot, not only for "self defense" but also in walking inside busy malls or crowded streets.

And about aiki techniques like ikkyo, shiho nage and so on...they are present in MA of the most varied cultures...this is a proof that they are, from human anatomy's perspective, valid to some end, even if it is not "Vale Tudo" environment.

Don't get me wrong...we should train MA in a way that we enjoy, but to advocate the "correct way", specially on the lines I've read here seemed, at least to me, like preaching the "combat gospel".

You are only as strong as your opponents are weaker...since you cannot control the odds, to believe one can become "skilled" for this "future Duel" sounds , IMHO, romantic at best.

For self-defense, mindset and awareness (feel and avoid); techniques are the tools to acquire those skills.

Just for the record, i am very happy to see Mrs Liebert and Sorrentino here...it is been a long time, but you both have provided me with great ideas and influences :)

Thank you both!