Combat
 

This is the discussion thread for the AikiWiki article "Combat".

Please add comments below regarding the article.

Re: Combat
 

Very interesting article. I prefer techniques that would have value in a street fight situation. This usually means those with fluid, efficient movement. A counter attack must be fast, so multiple steps and choppy broken movements simply won't do. I believe that effective use of atemi during your technique can turn an otherwise ineffective move into a very potent one. Stunning, or softening an opponent up with a strike can leave him vulnerable to almost any wrist lock or throw.

Aikido also lends itself to non-lethal means of self-defense and control over others. In other self-defense systems, like Krav Maga, the motto is beat them into submission. WIth Aikido, you can submit people through the application of temporary pain, rather than permanent injury.

Re: Combat
 

Training is not sparring.
Sparring is not fighting.
Fighting is not combat.

Very different intensity and intent.

Re: Combat
 

Aikido principles learned thoroughly make no differentiation. It's all a matter of when you reach that level of understanding and ability that's all.

There are no different levels of intensity to centre. There are no different levels of intensity to one point. Neither are there to centre line or koshi.

These are just some of the basics involved in Aikido and when you are truly aware of them and can use them as what they are then and only then will you know it makes no difference. In fact the higher the intensity the more interesting and fun to you yet dangerous to the person who thinks they are being more real.

Fighting? Combat? Sparring? All have certain things in common which when recognised are merely the same. The only true enemyto Aikido is self.

Regards.G.

Re: Combat
 

One thing I have taken from training outside of the Aikido dynamic is the observation that we tend to train in best case scenarios, clean and clear signaled attacks answered within the traditional paradigm of "single technique victory". This has some merit in developing a "winning" mind that sees no contention and therefore no conflict. However it also breeds arrogance and inflated ideas of actual proficiency. One concept I personally prefer is worst case scenario, assume that your techniques will fail, how do you free your mind and body to move on to the next, rather than falling victims to trying to muscle a result out of a wrong dynamic. I am not and have never been a soldier but I recognize many differences between law enforcement, open warfare, ambush and strategy, conflict awareness and deescalation, and pre-emptive engagement, mentally or physically. I am a bit tired of the simplistic declarations people make on the basis of theory.

Re: Combat
 

Interesting read.

In an relatively high abstract sense one might say Aikido is effective, because you learn to refine aspects that are helpful in a fight. But more concrete, or technical level, the techniques in Aikido make no sense in a fight. Why throw someone? You just let someone escape to attack you again. One could then say Aikido is not effective at all, almost useless....

All this fuels a lot of discussions. Know what you are looking for. ;)

Re: Combat
 

In order to refine aspects of a fight. You would first have to have the ability to fight and understand it competently at some
level. I'd agree with u if this is what was the norm. I think this is really the crux of the whole problem!

Re: Combat
 

To refine aspects of a fight refers to the common things that happen during a fight. What is the same?
I am a strong believer that working on posture, distance/timing and fluent motion helps everywhere, all the time. No sense in perfecting a shihonage or whatever (for combat purpose). The stylized, idealized scenario will not happen in a fight and you are not likely to be able to enforce it either. ;)
But yes. You start out with a crude ability to fight (bad as it maybe) and you start working on common aspects (refine) and become better and better.

Re: Combat
 

If someone can get up from a serious throw that involves them landing on concrete quicker than you can follow up, you deserve to lose.

Pointing out that dojo training is artificial is a good point, but it is taken too far. You do everything politely on the mat for a reason. Out in the world, it is a different context, and you will be in a totally different mindset.

Re: Combat
 

Its interesting that 50% of the replies here use the word "technique"... I believe, and teach my students, that you are not practicing to learn a technique, rather a construct.

The linked article makes a good point that the vast majority of us will never have to face a combat situation (unless you are unlucky or you work in law enforcement, the military or in the health system), it is more likely to be someone you know. Being brutally honest, how many people do you know personally and that you come into regular contact with are proficient or professional fighters?

There can never be a comparison of down and dirty fighting, the kind where you've lost your weapon and you are biting, gouging and clawing at your enemy, and what we practice in the dojo, but is that really the point?

Lesson plan 1: someone tries to attack you with a knife or some other bladed instrument. a) Not be there in the first place b) Try and talk your way out of the situation c) Run and a distant d) Try and deal with the attack.

I would hope that by practicing our "techniques" we stand a (slightly) better chance of dealing with an attack that not having trained in recognising the patterns and shapes that these techniques encompass.

Lynn's post was right on the money:
We don't generally practice or prepare for combat because we won't usually encounter it.

As with all things in life though, YMMV...

Re: Combat
 

First step is understanding the OODA concept and that all successful outcomes depend on gaining the upper hand and dominating the fight regardless of shape, form, technique etc.

In addition to that is realizing that physcial conditioning plays a very important roll...more than most people think. Also, mental conditioning/toughness etc.

Outside of that...I believe that as you are discussing, shape, form, posture, timing and distancing etc....are all very important and we must develop good habits etc. Certainly bad form, shape, posture timing do nothing to help us!

Techniques and Kata...IMO simply give us a common language or framework to discuss all this around and a efficient way to practice and communicate...that is all the use I really have for this stuff personally.

I think once you have a basic understanding of the framework and how to move...technique falls away and you simply just do what you know is necessary.

Most folks don't get far enough along in the process...nor do they really understand the importance of OODA.

Re: Combat
 

It is very important to realise that you have several 'filters' that need to change/removed in order to progress in Aikido. That takes effort. Once you are aware your whole training changes.

@Belt_Up why throw someone and then follow up? I already had aite under control!!!

Re: Combat
 

In my opinion effectiveness depends on one's level of ability and of course technique developed by constant practice is the only way to be effective on life and death situations.Techniques that neutralize the attacker imobilizing him are very effective and also projections or throws are very effective,depending on the situation.Throwing someone in a real fight could mean deliberately throwing him through a window,against a wall or "crash landing" him on concrete!Of course you can't practice that on a concrete...tatami or try to throw your uke through the dojo's window for obvious reasons.That doesn't make it less effective in a real fight.You can train realistically and still be inside the safety limits,that's why we learn breakfalls anyway.And once in a while you can try some surprise attacks to test your level.The attacks are real even if the knife is wooden...Let's not forget that aikido is a martial art so it should be practiced as one!

Re: Combat
 

Really? You would rather throw someone into a glass window rather than break his neck and be done with? Too much Hollywood, too little combat. When you do not want to kill someone you are in a brawl, a fight, not combat. Agreed, it would be fun to mimic western style fighting. :D

BTW we practise breakfalls to use the little exit tori gives to escape the technique...

Re: Combat
 

I would rather...nothing.In a real fight you don't choose,you have to act according to the situation so it might be strategically important to throw somebody and of course i agree with you it might also be important to break his neck and be done with.In a real fight you might want to kill him or imobilize him,interrogate him while you have him under control,anything.And with aikido you can have the choice that's what i meant,so i believe it's effective in any kind of situation.No point verbaly attacking me i meant no disrespect.My experience in real situation is not a topic of this forum,as for my hollywood taste...i prefer comedies and sci-fi.Nothing to do with action films.:)

Re: Combat
 

no attack intended :confused: and none taken! ;)
In Aikido you learn what you can do, how to do it and adjust it to your requirements (impress, intimidate, imobilise, interrogate, kill) in any situation.

Re: Combat
 

you'd have to define ability. In the sense that I believe you are speaking you are relating that to proficiency in a collection of techniques or mastery of a system. You can master a system, become very effective at it (projections, throws etc as you mention)...and yet STILL lose the fight to a guy that has no formal training or "ability" whatsoever!

This is important to understand. The individual might simply have the upper hand in the situation and NEVER give you the opportunity to do anything at all. He may simply understand the environment and control the conditions. So all that practice was for nought! You can train for years and years and STILL (most likely) lose if you fail to really understand this fact.

IMO, the chances are if you are in a fight such as defined by this thread...there will be little or no chance to throw someone or break there neck. It will simply be a fight to regain control and dominance of the situation.

In most cases by the time you get to that point you are physically and emotionally spent and have very little control over most of your own faculties much less his.

Aikido training can be a good practice to augment your training for such situations, however, in my experiences and opinion....there is a reason why most professionals and people in the business of "combat" train in a much different manner than we do in aikido in most dojos.

Re: Combat
 

Well said.
Compliments, appreciation, and agreement.

Re: Combat
 

The way i see it the word "ability" includes the profeciency in a collection of techniques as well as the warrior's way through training to be able to keep emotionally ballanced and in control of himself even if he would find himself inside the worst of circumstances because that's where it counts.The "combat" part of martial arts in my opinion is a training that helps you fight your way through a hard situation using the techniques and the calm,empty mind that we are taught in order to be able to do your best.It's not a matter of winning or losing,nothing can guarantee the outcome,is just that you win or you go down fighting!Anyway all of the above reflect the way we train at our dojo,diferent schools teach differently.It's also obvious in my opinion that people in the combat business train in a different manner because they have no interest in following aikido or any martial art as a way of life so they choose only one aspect of it...

Re: Combat
 

Graham, have you experienced actual combat?

I believe Lynn Seiser has, along with his long experience of aikido.

You might want to reconsider his comments.

David

Re: Combat
 

I think that's supposed to be a starting point, from which techniques are learned. After that, attacks should become progressively more realistic. Unfortunately, from a lot of what I've seen, that progression is rare, which does tend to breed arrogance and inflated ideas of proficiency.

On the other hand, anytime one is having trouble with a technique, I think it's good to go back and make everything clearer and simpler, and start the progression again.

Doesn't take much, does it?:p

Regards.

David

Re: Combat
 

David.
Maybe you should reconsider yours. I understand Lynnes comments. I understand my comments. Two different comments.

I suggest you don't understand mine.

Regards.G.

Re: Combat
 

Training can improve the tools for sparring
Sparring can improve the tools for fighting
Fighthing can improve the tools for combat

Do you know the tools? Do you know the spirit of sparring, fighting or combat? Can you control the effect of adrenaline in your body? .....?

Training is not sparring
Sparring is not fighting
Fighting is not combat

Body mechanics is "maybe" the same, but the result of the body mechanics is different.

Jusst my idea....
Eddy

Re: Combat
 

I must not. Not even everyone who has been to war has been in combat, after all, and street scuffles don't count.

Do you have actual combat experience?

Thanks.

David

Re: Combat
 

I would have to hear your personal definition of combat to answer that.

Then I would have to know if you have and if not on what you are basing your personal opinions.

Then we'll be off and running.

Regards.G.