Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
I cannot commend enough the remarkable efforts these guys do in order to produce something close to realistic when facing punches:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsWgY7PHbbc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7LYoQjn91o Excellent. However, uke is doing 4 things that normally do not happen: 1] you know which hand is coming 2] he clearly follows with his whole body the directions tori imparts him, rather than resisting or moving away (doesn't even attempt) 3] he leans forward after he has thrown the punch, and whenever tori wants him to stay in that leaned posture, he never regains the standing position. 4] he still seems to have one offending arm only. Let's try to imagine that aikido situation, but with uke moving in this other manner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLicPgA_CLw That's not a champion, and the video lasts 3 minutes so one has to view it in order to extract from it the interesting parts - full body mobility (trunk full mobility, foot full mobility) matched with full speed of execution. You cannot grab those tsuki - once their trajectory forward is over, they don't hesistate in place one instant, but are instantly drawn back (and with physical strength - you won't withhold effectively such a thing, even inthe unlikely case you manage to grab a tsuki as it flies). When these latter characteristics are at their best, they may look as follows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51090bGcoR8 What type of training could you think of, in order to get gradually prepared for a scenario with a highly skilled puncher? I think we need to think of a new type of training, facing a sparring punching partner with high mobility. We need to go lateral. But this is a type of opponent that will make it extremely difficult for us to do so. Tiresome, demotivating. Difficult. I know. But the problem is real. Training tips? |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Don't try to grab a punch. (I'm a little bit astonished: There is no grabbing of punches in the aikido I was taught.) Don't try to "wait and react" but learn to act forward yourself. Develop the skills to "go through" an attack. (Very very diffult to learn.) About the training-methods: Try to train with karateka. I think you will find karateka who also practice aikido. And they are able to offer you a lot of things which you are looking for but can adjust gradually to aikido practice. Try to crosstrain with martial arts or sports - like boxing. Maybe learn boxing, kickoboxing or karate yourself. Being able to produce a good combination as a boxer will also help to devellop a good answer as aikidoka. Practice kata / kihon waza / basics intense as possible. And at last - or as first step? Find a teacher who offers you, what you need. You will get very frustrated if you train "against" what is taught in your dojo. Or with a teacher who you do not "believe". My 2c. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Does the "only leverges and projections, and no force allowed except that which could move say 15 kilos" limitations still apply? |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Well, last Friday night a few of us were training with fast, repeated punching. I ended up having to sit out as I managed to deflect a second punch up into my face, splitting my face open. So yes, some of us train with an eye towards this stuff. It isn't easy, it is more intense and it is more dangerous. And it often ain't as pretty when it "works" too. Usually the upshot of training like this is that you are reminded as to why "irimi" is such a central part of Aikido. You will not do well to constantly try to step out of the way of a skilled puncher. The first may miss but the second or third won't. And a skilled puncher ain't leaving the hand out for you to grab either. So usually you have to invade the space, taking kuzushi somehow, and finish there. Working in tight or getting way the heck far away. The point here is that you can't be "reactive" to their attacks; you will lose because you are playing on their field rather than your own.
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Does Aikido need some other ways of training, than those normally used, in order to be a more effective means of teaching practical martial ability? Yes.
Are these ways of training new? No. Do they involve punching? No. There is a system that exclusively teaches punching techniques/defense; boxing. Why not study this system if you're interested in learning to defend against a punch? Aikido techniques specialize in another area all together. You're never going to get good answers for, "dealing with a punch" from the Aikido syllabus. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Aikido has principles for dealing with attackers. The type of attack shouldn't matter. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think the best tip for handling good strikers is simply to practice with good strikers, along with learning how to strike well. Some aikidojo have boxing connections, for example. Cross-training is cross-referencing the material, and in my opinion is the best way to be able to claim objective understanding. It's not a sure bet, just as a single aikidojo might have a very robust and well-rounded package, but to my mind it's the easiest way newer folks like me can comfortably develop any certainty for what we're doing. And for the record I've never formally studied boxing, and I admit my strikes aren't generally very good. I'm comfortable with that, but recognize going against a good striker, I'd probably be with some key disadvantages. However, at my dojo I have been hit a few times because I didn't move quick enough. It's a far cry from what would have happened in "real life" by a good striker, but it at the very least points toward certain realities. I would argue Aikido has techniques for dealing with attacks, but emphasis dictates the quality with which those methods will generally be implemented. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
The only training you need is going out to bars and pick up fights, 5 days a week. That's the only way to know if YOUR Aikido works.
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
If you want to fight, fight.
If you want to box, box. If you want to study Aikido, study Aikido. Nothing new. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
The issue may be with the way some teach Aikido not that Aikido does not know how to deal with punches or a boxer. With all due respect...The idea that O'Sensei was too stupid or ignorant to account for the way 95% of all physical conflicts start ( with a series of punches) in his syllabus requires a detailed explanation Chris. William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Um may I call a semantic time out? Maybe I'm out of line....but I think what William H means, to parse it out, is that 95% of physical conflicts start with a punch, therefore of course punching is addressed in his syllabus. Demetrio, are you reading it as 95% of his syllabus addresses it?
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
So I wonder: (a) where is founder's syllabus? As far as I know he didn't developed one. The most similar thing to a syllabus/curriculum is in Budo Renshuu and in Budo; both pre WW2 and where few techniques deal with punches. (b) where is the data/statistics regarding this 95% of physical conflicts start with a series of punches statement? Looks as fishy as the debunked "90% of fights go to the ground" Gracie family mantra. I hope William can clarify. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Do we need to invent a new training?
That sounds like a student who's failing at a subject and blames the teacher or the book or even the noise. Why don't you ask Do I need to get better at Aikido? Sincerely.G. |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Ah got it - thank you for clarifying. Good questions.
Quote:
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
No problem DJ
"Five scenario patterns accounted for 95% of the altercations" "Subject attempts to punch or kick the officer." http://ejmas.com/jnc/2007jnc/jncart_Leblanc_0701.html This study was for altercations involving uniformed armed officers of the law. Only 16% in the breakdown involved just punching. When the altercation involved just civilians The ratio of punches increased significantly. Sorry for my poor semantics DJ. In my personal experience 80% of the confrontations I've been in started with a push or punch. Continue to nitpick at your leisure and yes Budo and Budorenshuu can be considered part of the Aikido "syllabus" in my view. Where do you think Aikido got them from? Scores of books have been published on the Aikido "syllabus". Pick One. All of our techniques Start with Atemi... All of them... So let me ask you.... By questioning me are you defending Chris's view? Please explain if you like. :) William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Again the key word here is Start. :) I will try to explain things better in the future. :) William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...ries=17&page=1
With just a casual search I found 7 pages of Tsuki Techniques alone.... William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Who is DJ?
You can not equate physical conflict in general with suspects resisting arrest. Quote:
Because you say so. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
With all due respect...The idea that O'Sensei was too stupid or ignorant to account for the way 95% of all physical conflicts start ( with a series of punches) in his syllabus requires a detailed explanation Chris. This requires not only explanation but proof. Quote:
Quote:
OTOH, who is DJ? |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Well, since the two of you are determined to fight, I guess we'll find out if it begins with a flurry of punches or something altogether different.
|
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Looks like it's already started with a series of punches.
And we're seeing the wisdom behind AIkido's expectation that there may always be more than one attacker. :) |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
No need to fight... he wins!!! :D
I am so very wrong and he is so very right. So now that is settled perhaps the victor "DC" can address Chris's post. Or since his Aikido also contains Atemi Perhaps he would like to share How His Syllabus deals with folks who like to throw from the shoulder, and thus improved upon the founder's apparent said lack of expertise on the subject. :) So now that I am back on topic I would like to echo what someone else wrote. Yes if you feel there is a lack of technical acumen when it comes to dealing with Tsuki by all means you should seek "New Training". William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
William Hazen |
Re: Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?
Quote:
Having a technique or two that can loosely deal with a "punch" does not a punching system make. If you want to compare Judo punch defense to western boxing... You see where I'm going. Atemi doesn't mean "punch". Atemi means strike. Baseball bats strike things, arrows strike things, hands strike things, many things strike. A punch is an atemi, but atemi is most often not "punching". Aikido is 90% atemi, this discussion has been had many times, but we can cut to the quick here and see, quite decidedly that Aikido isn't 90% punching. 95% of all physical conflict starts with a punch. I couldn't think of a more misleading statement. When wars take place, do we punch at each other? Do you think the Samurai were running around punching people? Do modern "men of action" (LEO, Military) deal with punching a lot? Your 95% of physical conflict represents a very small portion of what physical conflict is. If you envision drunks fighting in the streets, or thugs fighting with police officers who have taken them into custody, perhaps you are correct. However this represents a VERY small portion of "all physical conflicts". If you would have gone to the James Williams seminar this weekend you could have heard him talking about coming out of the ego macho world where we believe unarmed fighting is somehow "important". Punching is a pretty good chunk of unarmed conflict. Unarmed conflict is a tiny piece of the whole of physical conflict. In the grand scheme punching isn't really very important. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:54 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.