Re: Aikido does not work at all in a fight.
Not sure exactly who is bashing aikido in this thread in last several months. Essentially I see it as an fairly intelligent coversation dissecting aikido...what it is...and what it isn't.
Mohammed, many of your comments and insights are correct. I agree aikido techniques work pretty darn well for law enforcement and civil arrest techiques. I have not been to too many schools that cater to LE community, but I bet you will find that they concentrate on those things that work well, another words they adapt aikido techniques and principles for their needs. Many schools also teach some very basic grappling and BJJ is every bit involved in LE as is aikido and many other MAs. Point is, there is room for many of the techniques. LE and the military adapt what works best for them....they don't teach TMA or waste precious time on learning TMA...it is the jitsu not the DO that is important to them.
Brian, many of your points are good and well documented by history and here on aikiweb as well. I believe however that you must be careful not to over romanticize the battlefield of yore. Certainly aikijitsu and dyaito ryu had at the heart of it's core the very essence of what you talk about, but I'd bet they spent sometime in the clinch as well. Again, they adapted their system for what was best for them in battle.
Now, for Kano and Ueshiba, they adopted the jitsu arts for philosophical reasons and made them into a DO art. The reasons for doing them completely changed what was important.
The reason we don't practice shooting, clinching, and grappling in aikido probably has more to do with the fact that those things did not communicate the message, concepts, and principles of the founder than they had to do with not being relevant or martially effective.
The USMC did not adapt BJJ as the base for their art. In fact in is more based on LINES training. Plus believe it or not, it was very heavily influenced by Dr. Richard Strozzi-Heckler, a very accomplished Aikido Sensei!
The U.S. Army bases their system on BJJ and we spend about 70% of our time working on the basics of this, but it is not the complete part of the system. There are many reasons for doing our methodology this way. 1. you gain useful skills quickly. 2. Less room for injury. 3. Builds the warrior spirity. 4. sustainable with little or no equipment...the list goes on.
Doesn't really matter why the army picked it....the point is they did it because they felt it worked best for them. THis fact does nothing to invalidate aikido as an art or way..just not what was best for the Army.
A big paradigm shift has been happening in the last 10 years or so in the MMA community. I believe it has alot to do with the fact that TMAs and fighitng has matured in the west alot. We have a huge book of knowledge now to draw on that simply did not exsit 50 years ago. Certainly the Gracies and UFC were the catalyst for that shift. However...that is a different topic all together!
The big thing is I think to really understand why you are studying martial arts and aikido and make sure that those reasons properly align with the goals that you have. It may be that aikido serves those goals...it may not.
It is the fighter, the opponent, and the situation that makes the fight...not the art that you studied or identify with!