Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

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!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-20-2007, 08:37 AM   #26
DonMagee
Location: Indiana
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,311
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Quote:
George S. Ledyard wrote: View Post
This is not legally required and the mindset entailed could be a fatal under application of force in a dangerous situation. If things get to the point at which there is a fight, you should be thinking "knock the guy out" and have the intention to do it. When you go to the center and the first atemi hits, if you don't need to continue, if the life goes out of the attack, then fine, choose to do something less. But initially, you should have the mindset that your are going to the center and rendering this guy unconscious. If you have a less committed mindset, you are at grave risk.
I totally agree. I use subdue very loosely. When I leg kick, I do so with the intention the leg will buckle. When I throw my punch combos I do so with the intent they will knock you out. However I am trained to not stop at the punch, but to throw combos and keep pressing the offense. Once I see that opening it is not going to be a punch, attacker falls down, I back off. Its punch punch, close the distance, grab throw, follow down, punch punch, if he flips over choke. Of course this changes depending on what actually happens in the fight, you may be forced to abandon your position due to another attacker, etc. If you are in a fight I believe you do not stop fighting until the attackers are subdued or you are presented with a high percentage means of escape. Many things can accomplish this, gassing your attacker, knocking him out, breaking limbs needed to attack you, even death.

Where we might disagree is how to take a center. I will rarely give my balance to take another person center. I also believe in feints and draws to force an attacker to fight my fight. However I must agree that when you do decide to act, act completely. If you hesitate in your attack, you run a very real risk of getting hurt. Judo is an effective tool at teaching this. If there is any hesitation or lack of commitment in your throw, you will quickly find yourself countered and laying on the ground.

- Don
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 09:45 AM   #27
Talon
 
Talon's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Zenshin Dojo
Location: Edmonton
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 187
Canada
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

This discussion is getting interesting.

The reason I started this thread is because I got the feeling that our way of training where often there is some pain/discomfort to the uke during the practice of the techniques and pins is looked upon as bad or incorrect in the Aikido community.

To me this type of work is more true in a sense that we can feel that techniques, pins are working properly and by doing the techniques/pins this way everytime we can feel where the limit is before there is pain/discomfort and later on permanent damage. If uke taps we stop, but most of us don't mind to feel a bit of discomfort/pain temporarily before we tap.

I see that most agree that in the real world winning a fight without at least causing temporary discomfort to the attacker is very unrealistic. By the way I agree completely that avoiding the fight is the number 1 option that sould be taken everytime its possible.

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 09:50 AM   #28
CarlRylander
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 129
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

I have a TKWD black belt friend, who told me that if you give a little bit of pain, it enrages your opponent, but if you give a lot of pain, they tend to give up rather quickly!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 11:00 AM   #29
garry cantrell
Location: texas
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 35
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Quote:
George S. Ledyard wrote: View Post
This is not legally required ...
Just as an FYI - the Texas legislature just passed a law (yesterday) expanding self-defense rights (the governor is expected to sign same once it reaches his desk). Previously there was no duty to retreat in your own home (the so-called "castle doctrine") before using deadly force. The new law purportedly extends that doctrine to vehicles and offices and provides protection against lawsuits seeking civil damages in self defense situations (the tort reform passed several years ago already provides civil liability protection of that sort - so that part is redundant). Actually, under prior law, you only had to retreat if you could safely do so, and I think that's probably the case in all states. I haven't seen the language yet - the above is just from the newpapers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 11:14 AM   #30
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Quote:
Paul Nowicki wrote: View Post
This discussion is getting interesting.

The reason I started this thread is because I got the feeling that our way of training where often there is some pain/discomfort to the uke during the practice of the techniques and pins is looked upon as bad or incorrect in the Aikido community.

To me this type of work is more true in a sense that we can feel that techniques, pins are working properly and by doing the techniques/pins this way everytime we can feel where the limit is before there is pain/discomfort and later on permanent damage. If uke taps we stop, but most of us don't mind to feel a bit of discomfort/pain temporarily before we tap.

I see that most agree that in the real world winning a fight without at least causing temporary discomfort to the attacker is very unrealistic. By the way I agree completely that avoiding the fight is the number 1 option that sould be taken everytime its possible.

Paul
Now I am going to go contradictory on you a little.

The thing I think you have to do is separate aikido practice from reality and realize that the two really have very little in common other than the fact that you are interacting with another human being on a physical, interpersonal level.

I think in the aikido dojo it is appropriate to practice without pain or minimizing pain. It is appropriate for best learning the principles of aikido I think. My goal in the dojo is to be able to control properly without the need of pain.

I train for CHOICE. Or that is, expanding my options or choices in any giving situations. (Skill or skillfullness). If I have it or not in reality is quite another matter predicated on the situational factors present.

It is also appropriate to understand the thresholds of pain and damage, of what the body can and cannot handle. For instance twisting knee locks and achilles locks are very bad and have low threshold. Kote gaeshi, shionage, etc..all have mechanics that we must learn to understand pain, damage and control.

In a real situation, you do what you need to do for self defense or preservation. The actions you choose is based upon many factors, skill, size, availability of weapons, risk, danger, what not.

In a court of law, your actions in the United States will be judged upon the criteria of reasonableness and appropriateness. The level or the amount of pain is not really a factor if it was reasonable or appropriate for the situation.

I think it is important to not think WAZA or DO when we have to defend ourself.

While there is transferrence of skill from the dojo, it is not direct, nor 100%.

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 02:52 PM   #31
Luc X Saroufim
 
Luc X Saroufim's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 135
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Quote:
Paul Nowicki wrote: View Post
Had O'sensei really meant that Aikido's gentleness was literally to mean no pain/discomfort to the attacker at any time?
i'd like to meet the person who understood what O'Sensei said.

Quote:
Paul Nowicki wrote: View Post
Or has this idea been brought by future Aikido practitioners misunderstanding the meaning of the meaning of gentleness in the years back when O'sensei created Aikido?
future, and current, Aikido practitioners are changing Aikido all the time. everyone can understand the technique, but no one really understands the intent, so you have a good question. i think it's a valid martial art, while other Aikidoka, who are just as passionate, don't think that's its intended purpose at all

my $0.02; the techniques are worthless if you are trying to imagine using them at face value. the techniques (at face value) teach you how to be gentle, love one another, and be a better person. and in my opinion this is completely unrealistic if a crack dealer is trying to kill you with this dagger. even if your technique happens to work, i don't think you're going to hug when he's down on the ground, not feeling any pain.

if you want to use them in the real world, you have to modify them, and it can be done. Irimi Nage can easily break someone's neck if you modify your movement just a tiny bit.

this was O'Sensei's strategy: take modern techniques that are designed to maim/kill, and modify them to suit a different purpose. add some internal strength, and you have Aikido.

so if you're looking for some real action, you have to start with Aikido, and work backwards. if you're looking to defeat yourself and no one else, Aikido is fine just the way it is.

again this is my $0.02 and i expect many different opinions on this broad issue.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2007, 05:38 PM   #32
Just Jamey
Dojo: Milwaukee Shobukan
Location: Wisconsin
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 46
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Sleep deprived, and feeling a little silly. Note - the following should be read out loud in: a big silly cartoon annoucer voice, the voice of a hyper active computer programmer on a 3 day bender, or the Saturday Night Live "Deep Thoughts with Jack Handy" voice over because that's how I'm writing it in my head.

and now for...

Deep Thoughts with Just Jamey

Hypothetically speaking, an Aikidoka gets into a physical altercation, after they tried to peacefully resolve a confrontation. After attempting to blend with the attack(s) and desperately trying to extract themselves from the altercation, they successfully execute a throw (note- not saying it has to be pretty... just successful). That attacker hits the ground, presumably concrete in today's world, and they do not [know how/weren't in position] to fall.

Is it the Aikidoka who injured the attacker by throwing them, or is it the attacker who injured themselves by initiating a confrontation without knowing how to fall?

Another Deep Thoughts moment brought to you be the makers of Whammo...

Hypothetically speaking, an Aikidoka gets into a physical altercation, after they tried to peacefully resolve a confrontation. After attempting to blend with the attack(s) and desperately trying to extract themselves from the altercation, they successfully execute a joint-lock (note- again, not saying it has to be pretty... just successful). That attacker moves against the joint-lock because they were already in motion to continue their attack, and they break their [insert joint being locked].

Is it the Aikidoka who injured the attacker by applying the joint-lock, or is it the attacker who injured themselves by initiating an attack and moving into the joint-lock?

Yet another Deep Thoughts moment brought to you be the Acme Cartel... bringing a better tomorrow through the development or rocket powered ice skates.

Hypothetically speaking, an Aikidoka gets into a physical altercation, after they tried to peacefully resolve a confrontation. After attempting to blend with the attack(s) and desperately trying to extract themselves from the altercation, they throw a committed atemi to the face with only the intention of redirecting the attacker so that a full technique could be applied. That attacker was already in motion to continue their attack, running smack into the atemi, and they break their [insert facial feature].

Is it the Aikidoka who injured the attacker by throwing a committed atemi, or is it the attacker who injured themselves by initiating an attack and moving into the atemi?

It boggles the mind?!?!?

We now return you to your regularly schedule Aikido Thread.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2007, 02:18 PM   #33
Aikibu
Dojo: West Wind Dojo Santa Monica California
Location: Malibu, California
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,295
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Quote:
George S. Ledyard wrote: View Post
This is not legally required and the mindset entailed could be a fatal under application of force in a dangerous situation. If things get to the point at which there is a fight, you should be thinking "knock the guy out" and have the intention to do it. When you go to the center and the first atemi hits, if you don't need to continue, if the life goes out of the attack, then fine, choose to do something less. But initially, you should have the mindset that your are going to the center and rendering this guy unconscious. If you have a less committed mindset, you are at grave risk.
Amen Sensei Ledyard as Shoji Nishio Shihan used to say A basic tenet of Aikido is The fight should be over at the moment of first contact anything else is a form of dancing.

William Hazen
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2007, 07:45 PM   #34
DonMagee
Location: Indiana
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,311
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

I tell me kids in the unix class I teach this bit of wisdom.

"There is what should be done, and then there is what happens in a production environment.

In the lab, everything is done by the book, we have test machines, infinite time to debug, no pressure to perform, ability to have down time and research, and the ability to really write well written code. In production we have managers, middle mangers, upper management, an idiot college intern, under paid overtime, your lucky if you have a test box, restrictions on your choices of tools, and bosses who think that business degree makes them a master of IT. What gets done in the real world NEVER looks like what happens in this college lab."

I will give the same advice when I open my own marital art school someday.

- Don
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2007, 09:32 PM   #35
Edwin Neal
Dojo: Ronin
Location: Henderson, North Carolina
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 597
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

i think the "no pain at all" view is completely wrong headed... reports are that Osensei's nikkyos were excruciating... and pain should be just one additional facet of a technique that includes position and balance... in any "fight" when there is no way to avoid it, ones intent must me complete... no wavering or hesitancy... you should be ready and able to kill your attacker if necessary... aikido IS a martial art and should be practiced as such... in class be gentle with your uke based upon their level... practice SINCERELY...

Edwin Neal


  Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2007, 04:08 PM   #36
Carlos Rivera
 
Carlos Rivera's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido in Savannah
Location: Savannah, GA
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 35
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

Here are three rules I have used:

First, avoid the fight.

Second, if you must engage the opponent, then use only the amount of force necessary to stop the attack.

Third, walk away.

Of course, in a perfect world we would not have to use any physical techniques. But having worked around violent offenders and mentally unstable people for 15 yrs. of my adult life, I have used these rules consistently. I learned them when I practiced Okinawa Goju-ryu and when I started in Aikido kept them. I have found that Aikido is not about who's stronger, faster or tougher. It is more an understanding of who you are, and what you can do in a situation where there could be a physical outcome. Have I used Aikido in the real life? Yes, and to tell you the truth I never caused an injury which could not be defended in court, nor caused loss of utility to anyone's limbs. Did the interaction change me or those I intervened with? You bet. I, for one do not relish getting into a scrape, if the whole thing can be talked out. On the other hand, those who were considered opponents or attackers came to either a) respect me or b) appreciate the error of their ways and the fact that I did not cause further injury. One of such individuals, doing life for a very heinous crime, said to me that "a true man can make its mark on another either physically or mentally, if they maim you then there will be resentment and vindictiveness, but if they show you compassion they will gain your respect forever." Wise words from a convicted felon who had nothing to lose.

Thus, a non-injury would be equal to using only the force necessary to stop or neutralize a violent attack or situation. In other words, you walk away from the whole thing with your life and not your "pumped up" ego. So, we can theorize all we want but if you are able to discern what your priorities are when life comes at you at 100 mph or in the shape of a nasty shank, then perhaps you will be able to live another day.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2007, 11:49 AM   #37
Largo
Dojo: Aikikai Dobunkan/ Icho Ryu Aikijujutsu
Location: Indiana
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 247
United_States
Offline
Re: What do you consider NOT injuring your attacker?

I would say doing the minimum amount of damage necessary to accomplish my goal (being safe/ left alone).
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Systema Seminar with Vladimir Vasiliev, Part 1 aikibaka131 Seminars 2 07-22-2003 12:45 PM
Subliminal gestures willy_lee Techniques 59 05-25-2003 09:04 AM
Disabling the attacker through the art of peace Suru General 13 10-08-2002 04:36 AM
Randori DavidM Techniques 6 07-08-2002 07:56 AM
Run from an attacker? Kat.C General 65 05-23-2002 04:12 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:14 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate