AikiWeb Aikido Forums

AikiWeb Aikido Forums (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/index.php)
-   General (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Injuring an enemy (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=274)

Nacho 09-17-2000 12:24 PM

Do you think an agressor on the street would follow the technique?(??) I think 99% would not. So, how an aikidoca could deal with it without harming or injuring the agressor?
Nacho
PD: Excuse my english, I need a bit of practice there too.

Shawn 09-17-2000 12:46 PM

Similar question
 
[quote]
After training in Aikido, if you were to get in a fight would you be able to win without placing permenant injury on your opponent?

Mike Collins 09-17-2000 03:31 PM

Yup,

I've done it. No real problem.
It didn't hurt that I was sober and he wasn't or that I outweighed him by about 100 lbs., but I had an easy time.

Better to avoid physical stuff in this day and age. If blood is let, nobody wins (hiv. hep, etc...)

Nick 09-17-2000 03:44 PM

... not to mention the legal mess that could ensue.

As for protecting an attacker, I can't say... never had to use physical aikido- I find verbal Aikido much more 'practical' and 'effective'.

-Nick

Brian 09-17-2000 07:48 PM

I'm compelled to agree with Nick. Of course, being the suave, smooth talker that I am, my verbal aikido didn't need much work before it got to be top notch *breaths onto his finger nails and proceeds to polish them on his gi with an overly smug look on his face*

But to be perfectly honest, I haven't really had any experience with this. About the only time I've used my aikido outside the YMCA mezanene was to block the arm of an annoying senior who was going to slap be on the back of my head because of a sarcastic comment I made. But, I would guestimate, from the techniques that I have seen and performed, they might get a few bruises, scratches, and maybe a pulled muscle. Whiplash might be an extreme, or a minor concussion if they don't tuck their head in when they go down, but I couldn't see anyone not being able to walk/use a hand/function properly after getting "aikidoed." If they take advantage of an ice pack and a few hours of uneventul television viewing, they should be fine. Then again, I haven't seen much of the entire aikido spectrum, and this guess of mine only comes from the beginning techniques that I have performed. I'll now end on that awkward note of "here's my opinion, but it's probably not very legitamite."

-Brian

Nacho 09-17-2000 10:09 PM

Yes, Nick. I agree with all that 'verbal' part. But as we train and practice fisical Aikido, we may want to have some answers on this. And, if you can deal with someone who can listen to you, it's ok. But i heard Seagal Sensei say "Hope fot he best, and be prepared for the worst".

jxa127 09-18-2000 06:57 AM

Rug burns...
 
My instructor has used Aikido on a number of occasions to control violent patients when he worked in a psychiatric ward at a local hospital. He said that the only injuries his assailants suffered was rug burns.

However, I can speak from experience, having taken some bad falls, that nasty things can happen to the person receiving the technique if he doesn't know how to fall properly. As recently as two weeks ago, I had a blank moment during a throw and simply fell wrong, right on my shoulder. Thank God we have soft mats or I might have dislocated or torn my shoulder.

My sensei has pointed out on a number of occasions that even a "simple" technique like ikkyo can be destructive, and I'm sure we all agree that nikkyo can be destructive too. *wince*

My point is that there is nothing inherent in Aikido techniques that keep them from destroying an attacker. Rather, it is the sensitivity and skill of the person doing the technique that determines in what shape the attacker comes out in.

-Drew

chillzATL 09-18-2000 07:21 AM

If someone attacks me on the street, I don't care if they plan to follow my technique, a technique will be applied to them. Whether it's a nice smooth technique or a sharp atemi followed by a hard throw. On the street you have to react. You don't know how this attacker is going to come at you and many times you only have a split second to see the attack coming and react. Some techniques are going to result in injury, regardless of how hard you do them, some will allow you to control the damage. If someone attacks you they should expect some pain in return and you shouldn't be hesitant to give it to them, if you are, more than likely they are going to give you some pain first.

Mike Collins 09-18-2000 08:47 AM

Pain doesn't work. Pain is a poor substitute for good off balancing and proper leading. I've done it, probably broke a wrist, and it had no effect. A much less harmful off balancing technique had far more effect on the same person.

Pain is seriously limited. This is terribly important to you "real world" guys, pain will keep you back. It is fools gold.

chillzATL 09-18-2000 09:20 AM

Quote:

Mikey wrote:
Pain doesn't work. Pain is a poor substitute for good off balancing and proper leading. I've done it, probably broke a wrist, and it had no effect. A much less harmful off balancing technique had far more effect on the same person.

Pain is seriously limited. This is terribly important to you "real world" guys, pain will keep you back. It is fools gold.

pain, as in the pain that comes from being tossed headfirst (after being off balance and properly lead) into the concrete is not limiting at all. You see the word "pain" in my post and jump to conclusions about what i'm saying without really reading post itself. There was an original topic I was responding too. I wasn't just tossing out an opinion that aikido is just about delivering pain and that pain is the only thing that will stop an attacker. You should try sticking to the topic at hand instead of looking for opportunities to take jabs at those "real world" guys who you feel have differing ideas about aikido than your own. Thanks.


Mike Collins 09-18-2000 09:42 AM

Well, I wasn't taking any jabs.

I thought someone had asked about whether it was possible to pin an attacker without injuring them, and in the process of having a dialogue about that topic, someone (apparently you, based on your sharp tone) said something to the effect that if they were attacked their attacker could expect some pain in return. My response was to that post by way of a reality check, not to take jabs at anyone. If you choose to believe that pain is to be expected in conflict, well this is America- believe what you like. My main point was, don't train to cause pain if you want to be really effective, train to unbalance and lead, cause that is what works. This is not from the ethers, I have had experience proving this to my satisfaction, and I thought I was passing along useful information.
To assume that you're going to be able to throw an attacker and break them on the ground is to have a preconceived notion of what you'll do in a reality situation, that is dangerous. Take what you get and work with it.

Be nicer to people, you take a sharp tone with someone you don't know, and that is, in my humble opinion, very rude. Not to mention poor martial strategy.

Cas Long 09-18-2000 10:13 AM

Let's Calm Down, Guys....
 
I have to say (trying to stick to the original point & trying not to offend anyone), that I believe that it would take a minimum of 20 years of Aikido training to do what Nacho originally suggests.

I say this, not to insult peoples ability (I myself have trained for under 20 years), but I refer to the sort of training required to mentally & physically prepare oneself to act instinctively on the street.

In my opinion, if you are not able to execute techniques effectively on everyone in your Dojo, then do not attempt anything on the street- a little knowledge can lead to danger for yourself.

However we train in the Dojo, & the myriad of assaults we face on the street are more wide-ranging & intuition & instinctive response come into play, this comes from training, training & more training.

After many years, I believe that a "by-product" like this will emerge & with this sense of timing, training heightens one's senses: 'O'-Sensei said "Seeing me before him, the enemy attacks, but by that time I am already standing behind him" - I would say that one could interpret this as being the notion of Irimi.

However, "without hurting or injuring the aggressor" is a very interesting factor, Nacho; tempering reaction is the key, this may lead to injury, but has the aggressor hurt himself if Aikido is about re-directing energy, perhaps?

& both of you be nice to each other on the Thread, okay? It is easy to "take jabs" at each other on-line!


jxa127 09-18-2000 10:46 AM

20 years to proficiency?
 
Cas,

I understand your point about it taking at least 20 years to be able to respond to a violent attack and deal with it without being injured and without injuring the attacker, but I don't agree, at least not completely.

I'll explain: my sensei has said that he considers one year to be the minimum amount of study for a person to be able to defend himself successfully. That figure is based on his own experience, so it's open to debate. However, HE was able to defend himself against violent assailants and not injure them in the process (except for the rug burns mentioned above) after about a year of study. And, in fact, after about a year of study, I'm beginning to feel as though I could probably at least avoid an attack pretty well and maybe even pull off a technique.

Having said that, I by no means feel complete confidence in my skills or have the attitude that I can stop training now. I can only hope that in 20 years I'll feel a lot more confident. Part of the issue is the degrees of danger that an attack may present. I'd feel pretty confident dealing with an uncoordinated belligerent drunk buddy (although my confidence may be a mistake). I'm not so sure about dealing with a dead calm attacker intent on killing me.

Even my sensei says that he doesn't feel confident enough in his technique to be able to end a potentially deadly encounter without hurting his assailants.

When your ideal is to be able to respond to a violent encounter without being injured and without injuring one's attacker, then 20 years seems like a rather short time.

I don't know how long it will take me to be that proficient, and it almost doesn't matter. I plan on simply training diligently and the rest will take care of itself.

-Drew

Cas Long 09-18-2000 11:25 AM

Self-Defence.....
 
Hi Drew,

It seems strange to me that this thread keeps surfacing in one form or another: the use of Aikido in "street" conflict.

I do not think that street-effectiveness is the aim of Aikido, but a by-product of it.

No offence to you at all, but I would be very surprised if after only 1 year of training, that one could consider oneself as competent in all the many aspects of self-defence using Aikido- but again this is my view & everybody is entitled to their own. If you do feel confident, all the better.

Self-defence, I agree, could be possible after 1 year, but not using Aikido techniques & principles, which require considerable time to learn, absorb, & more importantly execute with confidence & precision.

As an aside, why is it then not generally possible to achieve Dan ranking (as a symbol of developing proficiency)in an equal amount of time (one year)?

"In your training, do not be in a hurry, for it takes a minimum of ten years to master the basics and advance to the first rung."
'O'-Sensei Morihei Ueshiba



[Edited by Cas Long on September 18, 2000 at 11:37am]

akiy 09-18-2000 11:51 AM

Re: Self-Defence.....
 
Quote:

Cas Long wrote:
As an aside, why is it then not generally possible to achieve Dan ranking (as a symbol of developing proficiency)in an equal amount of time (one year)?
It's very much possible, especially in Japan...

-- Jun

Cas Long 09-18-2000 11:56 AM

Clarification?
 
Jun,

So what exactly are you saying?

chillzATL 09-18-2000 02:38 PM

Re: Let's Calm Down, Guys....
 
[quote]Cas Long wrote:
[b]I have to say (trying to stick to the original point & trying not to offend anyone), that I believe that it would take a minimum of 20 years of Aikido training to do what Nacho originally suggests.

I have to disagree as well. Though the beginners learning curve might be a little steeper than most punch/kick based arts, it's not hard to pick up the basics of a few techniques and have them be usable in a short time. years ago when I first came to aikido, a guy a few years older than me had been training maybe 2-3 months and some guy in a local game room took a swing at him and he dropped the guy with a kote-gaeshi. Even he was suprised by it, as it wasn't a situation where he had planned on trying a kotegaeshi, he said the guy just came at him and it happened, bang-bang. I'm sure it wasn't the prettiest kote-gaeshi that we've ever seen, but it was functional and saved him from getting his clock cleaned.

chillzATL 09-18-2000 02:51 PM

Re: Self-Defence.....
 
[quote]Cas Long wrote:
[b]Hi Drew,

It seems strange to me that this thread keeps surfacing in one form or another: the use of Aikido in "street" conflict.

I do not think that street-effectiveness is the aim of Aikido, but a by-product of it.

No offence to you at all, but I would be very surprised if after only 1 year of training, that one could consider oneself as competent in all the many aspects of self-defence using Aikido- but again this is my view & everybody is entitled to their own. If you do feel confident, all the better.

Self-defence, I agree, could be possible after 1 year, but not using Aikido techniques & principles, which require considerable time to learn, absorb, & more importantly execute with confidence & precision.


To be competant in all the aspects of any art, in less than a lifetime, is foolish to think of. Aikido is not the only art that focuses and uses somewhat obscure principles. but if we were talking about a karateka, nobody would doubt that they could readily defend themselves after a year of good study. You don't need to understand all the obscure, "mystical" aspects of aikido to be able to defend yourself with it. All those aspects were not taught by O'sensei. They are by-products of the way he lived his life. He did not teach ki, or instruct about ki. He talked about it because it was a living part of his life, but he did not instruct his students in Ki. aikido is martial art, first and foremost. O'sensei wanted it to be a recognized form of defense just like karate, judo or jujitsu. The key word is defense, not attack, not brawling. The belief system that he put into "HIS" aikido is what seperated it from all the rest. One doesn't need to embrace all those somewhat mystical aspects to be greatly effective with it or enrich ones life through it.

akiy 09-18-2000 02:53 PM

Re: Clarification?
 
Quote:

Cas Long wrote:
So what exactly are you saying?
Probably not much, as usual. Just pointing out that it is, indeed, quite possible to achieve dan ranking in one year, especially in Japan.

I'm not commenting on people's technical skills at the point; it's just that the idea of dan ranking being some indication of someone's technical ability is not necessarily an accurate nor practical indication...

-- Jun

PS: chillzATL, can you be sure to not clip off the "[ /B ]" and "[ /QUOTE ]" code at the end of the message you're quoting? It makes your postings a bit hard to read (as in, who is saying what)...

[Edited by akiy on September 18, 2000 at 02:57pm]

Brian 09-18-2000 02:57 PM

Involuntary Reaction
 
Quote:

chillzATL wrote:


years ago when I first came to aikido, a guy a few years older than me had been training maybe 2-3 months and some guy in a local game room took a swing at him and he dropped the guy with a kote-gaeshi. Even he was suprised by it, as it wasn't a situation where he had planned on trying a kotegaeshi, he said the guy just came at him and it happened, bang-bang. [/b]
Something similar to this has happened to me as well. Not with the part about actually getting attacked, but reacting without realizing it. I was walking down a hallway in school, two other students were play fighting as I walked by, one pushed the other, and he came stumbling in my direction. I blinked momentarily, and I when I opened my eyes I noticed my left arm was extended in a hand blade and the guy had sort of rolled/bumped off it. My right arm didn't do anything, but my legs were "dropped" how I suppose they would be in kamae. I drew myself back up and walked on, and to be honest, the fact that my body had reacted the way it had as quickly as it did without me thinking about it frightened me. Of course, this is probably a good thing, but since I "did something without doing it" completely freaked me out. Just thought I'd comment on that.

-Brian

Cas Long 09-18-2000 03:15 PM

Jun, You Should Know Me By Now!
 
Jun,

My "aside" was just that, an aside re: Dan grades within one year. You & I both know that this is extremely rare in the West.

My point is that I find it very difficult to accept that one can truly be "ready" to fully defend oneself after one year's training in Aikido.

Please let me know if I am wrong, but what is the average time that it takes an Aikidoka to achieve Shodan in the US?
& let me add, that this is not a guarantee that one could fully "look after oneself" anyway, let alone control an aggressor without pain or injury; which was the original point of my post.




akiy 09-18-2000 03:28 PM

Re: Jun, You Should Know Me By Now!
 
Quote:

Cas Long wrote:
My "aside" was just that, an aside re: Dan grades within one year. You & I both know that this is extremely rare in the West.
Yup -- indeed! And I guess you can take my response to your aside as an aside in and of itself (if that makes sense).

(Although one of the folks here at my dojo got his in two years -- quite appropriately, too, in my mind. It helps to have previous martial arts experience...)
Quote:

My point is that I find it very difficult to accept that one can truly be "ready" to fully defend oneself after one year's training in Aikido.
I'm not too sure how "fully" the person who commented that people should be able to defend themselves in aikido after a year.

I do think it's possible to pick up some skills to help yourself in a physical situation after a year of practice, but to expect that out of everyone, I think, is a bit uncommon. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I would wonder how much time is being spent on principles rather than on techniques...
Quote:

Please let me know if I am wrong, but what is the average time that it takes an Aikidoka to achieve Shodan in the US?
From what I've seen, it's between four to six years.

-- Jun

Cas Long 09-18-2000 03:31 PM

For ChillizATL
 
Hi,

Who mentioned anything about "Mystical" or "Ki"-? I didn't.

I quoted 'O'-Sensei in how long he thought it possible to "master" the basic techniques of Aikido that is all, in order to illustrate the main point of my Post (and I quoted 'O'-Sensei as he created the Art, & therefore I feel that he has some sort of bearing in how long it takes to "understand" the basics- not spiritually as you would make me out as saying, but the physical apsects.) Any Teacher offering "short-cuts" is selling the Art short.

In my opinion it is a "Do", a way, not something that can be understood in one year or less).

Cas Long 09-18-2000 03:35 PM

Re Four To Six Years.....
 
Jun,

I rest my case!

Thanks......

chillzATL 09-18-2000 09:22 PM

Re: For ChillizATL
 
Quote:

Cas Long wrote:
Hi,

Who mentioned anything about "Mystical" or "Ki"-? I didn't.

I quoted 'O'-Sensei in how long he thought it possible to "master" the basic techniques of Aikido that is all, in order to illustrate the main point of my Post (and I quoted 'O'-Sensei as he created the Art, & therefore I feel that he has some sort of bearing in how long it takes to "understand" the basics- not spiritually as you would make me out as saying, but the physical apsects.) Any Teacher offering "short-cuts" is selling the Art short.

In my opinion it is a "Do", a way, not something that can be understood in one year or less).

And here lies the nonsense in trying to "discuss" aikido with people. everyone wants to take something and stretch it to the literal extremes and it's such BS. You can't discuss aikido online because everyone wants to one-up the next person with some witty comment, instead of just coming out and saying they totally disagree with what someone says, that way they still feel aikid-PC. O'sensei would turn over in his grave at the thought that it took someone 20 years to be profecient in aikido, plain and simple. Of course this is my opinion, it's not written in stone. As I said, but you failed to connect the two parts of my post, even it karate, I would safely say it takes 20 years to master the basics. You might disagree, find someone who has trained in a traditional form of karate and ask them, they might agree but more than likely they will say much longer. But to be able to competantly defend yourself in most situations doesn't mean you ahve to "master" anything, or be an expert. You sell yourself short by trying to be so aiki-PC in your belief that noone can reasonably grasp aikido techniques and priniciples in a reasonably short time period, not master, but grasp. we obviously have very differing ideals on what aikido is and what it is to us. good day to you.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:59 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.