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 04-07-2002, 05:54 PM   #26
REK
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 102
Offline
Hey Kat!

I have been watching this thread with interest, eager to read a philosophical discourse on the practice vs the practitioner. Unfortunately, only you and Colleen seem to approach it at that level. In answering the original question, it is definitely the fighter. There is no "ultimate" martial art that can beat all takers (with the possible exception of some nasty things NORAD controls )

So that leaves us with this: any one at our level can pretend to identify the "shortcomings" of this or that martial art. Instead we should be trying to master one, in order that we may learn its deepest meanings and greatest value. We should stop pointing fingers at what we naively think any one art "lacks" and study it first to see if our opinions have merit or are born of misguided enthusiasm for the popular media's portrayal of martial arts.

Barring that, you can just fight a lot. If you survive, you will be very good.

Rob

________________________
Mors certa, hora incerta
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2002, 05:59 PM   #27
Kat.C
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 212
Offline
Re: Starting Aikido ...

Quote:
Originally posted by Bruce Baker
.



I see many, many good things in Aikido. They are too good to pass up. They will make you a better fighter, but then Aikido also has goals that encourage you to be a better person who strives for a better world.

Try a couple of Aikido classes, and tell me it doesn't look like more fun than getting all huffy at being a certain belt color in Karate who can beat the tar out of a lower belt color? Once you learn to fall down, get up easily (Ukemi) then riding a technique, looking for openings, it is really fascinating.

This is not the first time I have seen poor things written concerning karateka and I'm wondering if perhaps there is a huge difference between dojos in the U.S. and here in Canada? I never noticed any karateka that I trained with putting alot of emphasis on belt level.Yes it was an hierarchical system
and lower ranks called higher ranks sempai and bowed lower to them and all that stuff, but I never noticed anyone getting all puffed up over it. Respect was mutual. I encountered only two higher ranks who were jerks but that was their personality in life not just the dojo. Belt colour just was not a big thing. So are dojos in the States different? I am genuinely curious here, as I've never been to a dojo there and I have read quite a few comments on dojos being belt factories, and higher ranks lording it over lower ranked karateka,etc. Yes I know there are probably dojos like that here, perhaps that is the norm and I was just very lucky.
Just a point, our karate style's philosophy was self-improvement too. It isn't exclusive to aikido. It was also stressed to avoid fighting & to treat everyone with respect in and out of the dojo. Our sensei told us that our behaviour reflected on the dojo and we were expected to behave well always, and in our small village he would have heard quite quickly if one did not.
Kat
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2002, 06:35 PM   #28
Kat.C
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 212
Offline
Quote:
Originally posted by REK
Hey Kat!

I have been watching this thread with interest, eager to read a philosophical discourse on the practice vs the practitioner. Unfortunately, only you and Colleen seem to approach it at that level. In answering the original question, it is definitely the fighter. There is no "ultimate" martial art that can beat all takers (with the possible exception of some nasty things NORAD controls )

So that leaves us with this: any one at our level can pretend to identify the "shortcomings" of this or that martial art. Instead we should be trying to master one, in order that we may learn its deepest meanings and greatest value. We should stop pointing fingers at what we naively think any one art "lacks" and study it first to see if our opinions have merit or are born of misguided enthusiasm for the popular media's portrayal of martial arts.

Barring that, you can just fight a lot. If you survive, you will be very good.

Rob
Hi Rob! I was hoping for a philosophical discussion too or at least alot of opinions on this subject. Especially from the people who regularily post here as they are very insightful. I suppose the digression to the Gracies was my fault I did have to ask who they are.
Anyways I'm glad you replied. You know the fight a lot method would probably be very good training; it worked for Musashi Too bad is doesn't fit in with my philosophy or I might have become really great too
Kat
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2002, 09:27 PM   #29
guest1234
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 915
Offline
Paul,

Thanks. Just had to ask about Torrance, since I haven't thought much about it since I graduated HS there and left at age 17 (wow, could it be 28 years already???)... a name from a distant past...

I take it you do (did?) BJJ and enjoyed it... do you also do Aikido, and why the change?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2002, 05:43 AM   #30
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
Colleen,

I trained aikido for 5 1/2 years. I stopped about 2 years ago. I began bjj in 1997 and continue to train bjj as often as I can.

Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 07:34 AM   #31
Bruce Baker
Dojo: LBI Aikikai/LBI ,NJ
Location: Barnegaat, NJ
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 893
Offline
Fighter or ...

You are right about the torrence thing... being a lesson by lesson drop money in the hat thing, I didn't ask questions, just came to train, not make friends or get into spitting contests. Besides, I referenced training to the video tape series I had for refererence and still have. Although Wally Jay is more effiecient, there aren't any schools who spend the entire class grappling, so going to Red Bank became cost inefficient even if it was gratifying.

You can almost always add to your arsenal the outlawed techniques of a dojo, but assess the injury and destructive factors in relation to your local laws also?

To end proof of what works ... UFC ... Ultimate Fighting Championship. Hexagon.

The progression of UFC grappling, adapting to grappling with striking, and actual combat effectiveness of blowhards being deflated in actual matches? Yeah, that is the place to look.

Of course, you see more and more cross-training from UFC infancy to date, so what does that tell you?

Yeah, there are actually pictures and personal accounts of Gracies visiting Wally Jay in California. Check with his guys at his website for details.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 09:20 AM   #32
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
I guess I missed something...

Bruce,

I'm sorry, but I haven't the slightest idea what you are trying to say or what point you are trying to make.

Quote:
You are right about the torrence thing... being a lesson by lesson drop money in the hat thing, I didn't ask questions, just came to train, not make friends or get into spitting contests. Besides, I referenced training to the video tape series I had for refererence and still have. Although Wally Jay is more effiecient, there aren't any schools who spend the entire class grappling, so going to Red Bank became cost inefficient even if it was gratifying.
You didn't want to get "into spitting contests" then post how you picked up a bjj black belt (most likely David Lentz who was probably a blue belt -- 2 years of experience, as he is only now a purple belt) and slammed him, prompting "new" rules. Sure looks like a spitting contest to me.

Quote:
You can almost always add to your arsenal the outlawed techniques of a dojo, but assess the injury and destructive factors in relation to your local laws also?
You lost me. Could you try explaining your point again?

Quote:
To end proof of what works ... UFC ... Ultimate Fighting Championship. Hexagon.
Um, it's Octagon, Bruce. If the question is "does the style matter" then the UFC clearly indicates the answer is "yes".

Quote:
Yeah, there are actually pictures and personal accounts of Gracies visiting Wally Jay in California. Check with his guys at his website for details.
I think I will ask Royce about this.

Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 12:44 PM   #33
Erik
Location: Bay Area
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,200
Offline
Quote:
Originally posted by REK
In answering the original question, it is definitely the fighter. There is no "ultimate" martial art that can beat all takers (with the possible exception of some nasty things NORAD controls )
Rob, I would agree with your point here but want to add something to it. When we study Aikido, I think that at least for most of us on some small level, we hope to get closer in some way (spiritual or martial) to Ueshiba. We see an old man bouncing around guys in their 20's and we hope to extend that to ourselves on some level. The same thing applies to our teacher who probably throws us around like rag dolls most of the time.

I wonder what we would think if we had films of some guy knocking Ueshiba on his ass? Would Aikido still be as popular? Personally I don't think so.

When you talk and hear about Aikido there is a presumption in it that it always works (and I would say that for many that applies as an absolute). You get into a fight and you get choked out in 15 seconds. You question what you have learned (grappling in most aikido dojos?) and you hear, "Aikido works, your aikido doesn't work". Train harder. Train 5 more years however long you have been training. Train differently. You wouldn't have gotten into a fight if you'd really been doing Aikido. Whatever the problem or issue, it's never a failing of the art but a failing of the student. Truthfully, it may not be Aikido's (whatever it really is) fault but by virtue of that statement we are saying that Aikido is a perfect art and refusing to admit that there may be weaknesses within the training methods or the structure of the art itself.

Perhaps that statement should read, "Aikido is perfect, you ain't." Of course, that doesn't make any sense because Aikido was created by an imperfect person.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 12:57 PM   #34
Lyle Bogin
Dojo: Shin Budo Kai
Location: Manhattan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 588
United_States
Offline
The octagon has many rules and is mixed matial arts fighting is a sport. A tough, fascinating sport where the fighters use techniques that are applicable in abstract combat, but still a sport.

I see nothing wrong with the idea that if you are looking for straight combat you should begin somewhere besides aikido. At the same time, fighters should recognize that the elements from which they forge their specific techniques are address very directly in aikido.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 01:24 PM   #35
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
did I miss something?

Lyle,

I don't think anyone is saying style X is the best. Personally, I think only one person on this thread is disparaging an art, but I may have misunderstood their comments. My impression was we were asking if the style an individual trains in does make a difference or if success is determined solely by the fighter.

Therefore, I'm afraid I don't understand when you say:

Quote:
I see nothing wrong with the idea that if you are looking for straight combat you should begin somewhere besides aikido. At the same time, fighters should recognize that the elements from which they forge their specific techniques are address very directly in aikido.
Are you claiming all martial techniques are really aikido? Are you claiming that aikido addresses or has responses to all martial techniques? Do either of those points help answer the original question?

Confused,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 01:27 PM   #36
Kat.C
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 212
Offline
Well inspite of the glowing reports on the Gracies I'm still of the mind that the outcome of a fight would depend on the combantants rather thatn their respective styles. This is taking into account intent as well as skill. I think that how you fare in a fight could be effected by your mindset. Like, are you willing to maim & kill or are you trying not too hurt the oppponent too much. If he wants to kill you and you are trying not to do too much damage... well it might not end well for you. I think your attitude during training would affect the outcome as well. Training to learn to fight, training to learn self-defense, or training for enjoyment would give you different results in a fight, I think. Any thoughts on this? Anyone?

Kat

I find the aquisition of knowledge to be relatively easy, it is the application that is so difficult.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 02:22 PM   #37
Lyle Bogin
Dojo: Shin Budo Kai
Location: Manhattan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 588
United_States
Offline
The question of "is it the fighter or the style" that matters is unanswerable.

Therefore, I chose to focus on another more direct point, which is where aikido fits into the scheme of combat oriented arts.

"Are you claiming all martial techniques are really aikido?"

No.

"Are you claiming that aikido addresses or has responses to all martial techniques?"

I claim elements from which great fighters forge their specific techniques are addressed very directly in aikido.

"Do either of those points help answer the original question?"

Ther can be no help in answering a question to which there is no answer. Except, perhaps, to realise that there being no answer is actually the answer.

To replay to Kat's last question: you fight like you train.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 02:43 PM   #38
ronmar
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 66
Offline
Its certainly true that you fight how you train, and this can often be a big disadvantage, prompting unrealistic responses from people in certain situations.
Although I am new to aikido I feel that it compares quite well to other arts in this specific area, concentrating more on a feel or attitude when in a confrontation than relying on specific techniques (at least it seems this way when I watch a good aikidoka). I guess that most martial artists achieve this sort of state when they reach a high level, but I think it is good that this is actively encouraged in aikido.
I personally come from a judo background and freely admit that I haven't had the revelation yet. My mind is not "as smooth as a polished mirror" or whatever its supposed to be...I know it would be hard for me to resist turning any fight I was in into a grappling match, even though this is rarely a good response.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 02:50 PM   #39
Bruce Baker
Dojo: LBI Aikikai/LBI ,NJ
Location: Barnegaat, NJ
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 893
Offline
RE: What?

MY, my, my ... awefully testy aren't we, Paul?

Read the words, don't try to put meaning behind them.

Hexagon, octagon, dodecagon, put 'em in there and let 'em smack each other around.

The lines blur, means just that.

Dave / what ever who ran that circus of rent mat did have some kind of a black belt, I hear he is still teaching? I brought up my experience with one particular moment in "Brazilian" jujitsu as to note that sometimes the answer to breaking a technique can lie elsewhere than groin or eyes? It was my understanding that Dave was the senior student at that time, when Craig Kukuk came over and asked us both to be gentle, while he stopped the class to explain about slamming, thowing, and other bug smashing techniques that release someone locked on an arm or leg? I probably remember Dave changing from a black belt from teaching another class in that traveling circus?

Hey, I gave up all my good throat poking, eye gouging, groin kicking stuff to play nice ... and I didn't break any body either. Is that what it takes to get respect for BJJ, broken bones?

You wanna trade health with me for my swiss cheese memory, anytime. Let's see if you have any memory with constant whistling and pain in your head ... I think the rubber room be your friend, mon ami?

And the classes I went to were "pay by the class", even though I couldn't afford them.

Now, Aikido is the gentler way to move, throw, redirect without harm.

(If you don't drop the tough guy attitude, some P.O.'d person you thought you thumped righteously is gonna shoot you or catch the back of your head with a two by four. I have seen it happen too many times. Better they think you can't fight and leave you alone. Invisable.)

Best fighters I know are invisable. When you meet them on the street ... average nobodys. Some even practice Aikido.

You sure you don't remember me lifting him up and dropping him with a Kiai? Oh, well.

I thought it was quite gentle? Controled.

Hey, there are demo clips of Pressure points on the Dillman Karate site if you want to look. I see he is using police techniques that look like Ikkyo, but he uses Wally Jay's tricep tendon rub to straighten the arm?

(Just trying to expand Aikido ... make you aware of what we have available in Aikido but don't use. Like that old spagetti sauce commercial,"It's in There!")
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 02:52 PM   #40
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
Lyle,

If
Quote:
To replay to Kat's last question: you fight like you train.
Then why is the question unanswerable?

There is no groundwork in boxing, no striking in wrestling.... If a boxer is taken to the ground...? If a wrestler cannot force the fight to the ground...?

I submit that in both situations, each fighter lacks the skill set to succeed, therefore the fight is no longer theirs to win. I submit that there is evidence that supports this position, and my personal experience certainly supports this position.

If you disagree, that's fine. We can agree to disagree. I just don't understand how you are reaching your conclusion.

Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2002, 03:06 PM   #41
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
Bruce,

I don't train with Dave, I've never met him. If you think the aikido world is small, well, bjj is A LOT smaller, especially when we are talking about purple belts and above.

Let's be honest Bruce. If I said that I trained with some aikido folks and the head instructor was wearing a hakama and I poked him in the eye and then there was a lecture about how people need to settle down.... If I then said, well, those aikido shihan when over to train with Oscar De La Hoya so that Oscar could correct how they punch.... then ended with, but you know it's all good and I'm not trying to start a spitting war....

Would you believe me?

I said your comments were degrading to another individual and another martial art. If you honestly don't think they were, then we are done with the topic.

I don't know where you got the idea that I have a "tough guy" attitude, or the idea that my aikido instructors didn't show me the stuff that "in there".

You're entitled to your opinions. Your experiences are your experiences. If you honestly feel bjj isn't for you that's fine. But don't get on your high horse to throw mud at me...this ain't the first thread someone called you on something that wasn't exactly 100% true. Let's just stick to the topic, bro.

Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 07:42 AM   #42
Lyle Bogin
Dojo: Shin Budo Kai
Location: Manhattan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 588
United_States
Offline
Wrestlers are humans. Humans can fight standing up. Boxers are humans. Humans can fight on the ground. Skills do not guarantee success, or even clear advantage.

Fighting like you train does not only refer to physical skill.

In the ring these things matter more. In life, not as much.

Therefore, bearing in mind the infinite number of spontaneous factors involved in combat, I submit the question remains unanswerable.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 08:33 AM   #43
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
Lyle,

Quote:
Wrestlers are humans. Humans can fight standing up. Boxers are humans. Humans can fight on the ground. Skills do not guarantee success, or even clear advantage.
In theory, I'd agree. In practice, however, I cannot. To keep with boxers and wrestlers....

I've never seen a boxer instictively or intuitively perform anything that resembles a correct escape from the ground to return to their feet without being trained to so. Could it happen? Maybe. But I'd say the odds are pretty much the same as an untrained person performing a technically correct sankyo on an uncooperative nidan.

Certainly a wrestler can punch (or kick, or elbow or headbutt) without being trained to do so. But such strikes are hardly threatening to a skilled striker. The form, technique, timing, accuracy, placement and setups are terrible. This is why boxers train so very hard to get good at punching, it's not an easy thing to hit an uncooperative opponent effectively.

Simply put, we will never see an NCAA Div. 1 wrestler just walk into the ring and win the Golden Gloves without training in boxing. Nor will we see a boxer set onto the mat and equal Cael Sanderson's feat of an undefeated collegiate wrestling career without thousands of hours wrestling. Both groups lack the skill set of the other, and cannot compete in different environment.

A world class marathon runner isn't going to win a swimming event at even the collegiate level...running is not swimming and the skill set simply isn't there. I don't think anyone would expect the runner to fare well in a swim meet...why would martial skill sets be different?

Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 09:43 AM   #44
Lyle Bogin
Dojo: Shin Budo Kai
Location: Manhattan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 588
United_States
Offline
You give examples of specific sports mixing with other specific sports. I am talking about combat. Perhaps that is why we seem to disagree.

As I have already said, you are generally correct if we are talking about competition. But in combat, where the goal is to survive (or from the other perspective, to kill, maim, or capture), no rules apply.

I am fondly reminded of an old kung fu proverb (oh yes, fortune cookie time):

Old Master: "Here is a fox chasing a rabit. Will the fox our run the hare, or will the hare out run the fox?"

Young Student: "Experience tells me that the fox will win. He is fast, he is hungry, and he is strong."

Old Master: "Can you be so certain? I think not."

Young Student: "Why is that?"

Old Master: "Becuase the fox runs for his dinner, but the rabit runs for his life."

This nice little story works fine, unless the fox is dying from starvation and this is the only rabit in town .
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 11:08 AM   #45
paw
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 768
Offline
Lyle,

Thanks for your response. I greatly disagree. Ironically, I think your proverb proves my point. The rabbit runs because it does not have the physical attributes or the skill set to stand and drive the fox off. If caught, the rabbit will die. Is this not true for all foxes and all rabbits?

That's my point and why I believe the style matters. The rabbit must run, it is the only skill set it has (life on the line, bunnies at home, it doesn't matter).

If you still disagree, and I suspect that's the case, then I suppose it best we agree to disagree. I don't want this thread to become yet another "sport v combat" diatribe.

Warm Regards,

Paul
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 11:18 AM   #46
Kat.C
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 212
Offline
Quote:
Originally posted by paw
Lyle,

Thanks for your response. I greatly disagree. Ironically, I think your proverb proves my point. The rabbit runs because it does not have the physical attributes or the skill set to stand and drive the fox off. If caught, the rabbit will die. Is this not true for all foxes and all rabbits?

That's my point and why I believe the style matters. The rabbit must run, it is the only skill set it has (life on the line, bunnies at home, it doesn't matter).

If you still disagree, and I suspect that's the case, then I suppose it best we agree to disagree. I don't want this thread to become yet another "sport v combat" diatribe.

Warm Regards,

Paul
Bunnies aren't trained in martial arts. (Or any fighting style.) That is why it didn't have the necessary skills to fight the fox.

Last edited by Kat.C : 04-11-2002 at 11:32 AM.

Kat

I find the aquisition of knowledge to be relatively easy, it is the application that is so difficult.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2002, 03:14 PM   #47
Lyle Bogin
Dojo: Shin Budo Kai
Location: Manhattan
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 588
United_States
Offline
Paul -

I see the strength of your argument.

Thank you for this discussion.

-L
  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
Kung Fu vs. Street Fighter - video Robert Cowham General 10 08-04-2006 11:18 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:48 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2017 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