Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.
If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!
It would be wrong to post this long response to the tread, the response is best posted as a blog.
There are times when laying upon the grass on a perfect spring day, alone peacefully starring up the sky watching clouds as they move by is a lost art of clearing the mind. We did it as children, we lost it as adults when we need it the most.
No one debates Aikido didn't come out of traditional Japanese samurai combat jujutsu. That is a fact. The Samurai were serious business, most were fierce warriors who lived and died by the sword. Samurai fought for their lives with the loser ending up dead more often than not. Aikido is an adaptation of the Samurai killing methods both empty hand and weapons. The Founder reworked jujutsu to the frame work of modern Japanese attacks which too were born from traditional Japanese martial attacks. Mounting isn't a componet Aikido or Samurai combat paradigm.
Aikido doesn't deal with mount or use the mount. It is outside the samurai paradigm Aikido drew from. If it wasn't effective to sit on top of a samurai suited in armor who had fallen on his back and punch them or work pins. There was no need to use a mount.
Mounting wasn't a practical move for the Samurai. Imagine yourself cladded in any period traditional armor, it will have a range of movement restriction and weight. Out of that element come jujutsu techniques we see represented in Aikido. No Samurai in armor would mount another Samurai. It is easier to grab a sword wheeling samurai's limb, apply jujutsu technique to isolate the weapon, then throw or hurdle the threatening samurai to the ground. All the while controlling the weapon's treat after ground impact, where you use your own bladed weapon to stab and kill the opposing treat. The stabbing targets are not random. The opposing Samurai is too wearing armor. A weak point in the armor is required to have one an effective killing stab.
Being on a battlefield, you don't have time or energy to turn the other guy into a pin cushion. As armor is designed it was optimal to stab the other Samurai on the side of the body and not from the top where the armor was designed to have the most protection. It is commonly seen in many classical modern techniques of jujutsu and Aikido the tori is in a position along the side of the side of the uke. The purpose of that position of being along side of the opposer instead of in a mount position gives greater access of a fatal stab target. Positioned on the side gives open areas of the body less protected by armor. A fatal stab from a bladed weapon in this position would enter the lungs between the joints of the armor or under the armor between the ribs. Aikido coming from jujutsu stays within that paradigm. Real briefly, it is easier too to manipulate the limbs and use pins from the side. Judo mainly from the mount executes chokes.
To avoid looking bad in the face of debate. There are jujutsu/judo/ techniques that deal with a mount. I am comfortable saying most of those techniques where developed later in jujutsu or done when attacked during the common Japanese sleeping position not in armor. It is more reasonable that the Samurai would only fight from the ground when in a sleeping position. Being on the ground made the Samurai far too vulnerable to being killed by bladed weapons.
The Founder modified Samurai jujutsu techniques further than those before him. He like Kano, and others of the time worked Samurai jujutsu techniques to fit the new developing Japanese self defense and sport paradigms. Even Kano didn't favor the mount. In Judo the mount had limited use, primarily as I said before as part of choking/shimewaza, and also in other techniques as part of the groundwork/newaza section of Judo. Kano didn't look highly upon the newaza because it was over-shadowing and altering his paradigm for Judo. The Founder probably for similar reason didn't incorporate the mount into Aikido. The mount didn't fit the samurai battlefield experience, thus, it didn't fit the Founder's paradigm for Aikido of modern times, as a result the mount or defenses against it didn't end up in Aikido. When making a criticism or comparison against Aikido for having a mount or defenses against against a mount, it is important to know why a mount or mount defenses don't exist.
BJJ and their judo based techniques are great within their context. It would be foolish to under estimate BJJ, or any martial art. But, you don't hear BJJ compared to other arts like Kenjutsu, or any other applied weapons arts, rarely. BJJ doesn't deal with weapons. BJJ is born out of the Gracie family paradigm that was not life or death situations. It was born from modern self defense based in Judo newaza turn competition. That is all good, BJJ is an effective art in it's paradigm. Outside its paradigm it faces the same problems as Aikido. Will a good BJJ take down someone in Aikido, yes. BJJ is tailored for competition, Aikido isn't. Will BJJ save your life against a well skilled person in Philippine knife arts, no. It is outside the BJJ paradigm. Therefore, when making comparisons of BJJ techniques to those of Aikido, it has to be done in proper context out of respect for both arts.