Defence against hooks

Now, it's funny to me that people even try to solve boxing problems with Aikido technique. But I remember having these questions myself, and being really frustrated.

Aikido isn't a boxing style. If you want to box a boxer, you must learn to box. Aikido has 3 good answers to facing a boxer: shomen, yokomen and tsuki. Done with a weapon you'll be way ahead of most boxers by using just these three simple strikes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4mIHzZCv-g

If you don't have a weapon, and are going to face a boxer, what's wrong with learning to box? Even for those who believe boxing can be defeated by empty hand aikido, they will tell you it's going to take years.

3 months in a decent boxing gym and you'll learn to outbox 80% of the people you'll encounter in the "streets".

Boxing is a good system for: well, boxing, and Aikido isn't. As A student of Aikido you should pander to the systems strengths. Dealing with boxing strikes, unarmed, isn't one of them.

Chris Hein wrote: Now, it's funny to me that people even try to solve boxing problems with Aikido technique. But I remember having these questions myself, and being really frustrated. Aikido isn't a boxing style. If you want to box a boxer, you must learn to box. Aikido has 3 good answers to facing a boxer: shomen, yokomen and tsuki. Done with a weapon you'll be way ahead of most boxers by using just these three simple strikes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4mIHzZCv-g If you don't have a weapon, and are going to face a boxer, what's wrong with learning to box? Even for those who believe boxing can be defeated by empty hand aikido, they will tell you it's going to take years. 3 months in a decent boxing gym and you'll learn to outbox 80% of the people you'll encounter in the "streets". Boxing is a good system for: well, boxing, and Aikido isn't. As A student of Aikido you should pander to the systems strengths. Dealing with boxing strikes, unarmed, isn't one of them.

I'm not sure I need aikido to teach me how to beat a boxer with a baseball bat. It's kinda obvious.

I agree with Don.

I'd like to say I'd use either my bokken or arnis stick, but I don't know if I'd have the heart to actually whack someone on the head with them. I think I'd just feel sorry and say, "how about you and I just have beer together? It would hurt a lot less (unless you drink too much)."

Everyone thinks the weapon does all the work. That is until they need to use the weapon and it pops out of their hand, they find themselves at an ineffective range or they get it taken away from them...

It goes without saying that your last option should be fighting. This is whether you plan to do that fighting with or without a weapon.

Hello
I think part of Chris point is about knowing how to use the bat so that can expert it to work reliably and consistently.
Legal usage of weapon varies from place to place so according to where you are in the world you can get away with using weapons and I feared for my life.
I would not be surprised if in Texas, your SD case would not be harmed if your aggressor died of lead poisoning.

Where I think I may not be in agreement with chris, is that I think we have all we need in aikido. The thing we miss is practise and may be an idea or where to go.

If you do have atemi in your aikido, they should really be worth your while so the need to be delivered in range and in balance, basically as if you meant to strike. when we cut with the bokken or with the Jo we do not do it over extended and half-heartedly, why should we not do the same with our head, punch, kick, elbows and knees?

And that a "jab" or "cross"a swing a hook, if they are done with a full gather are exactly the same a shomen yokumen or study with a pass, provided that your shomen and yokomen are not too pants. (though we could that if the gather is a normal step, it is more a direct front hand or rear hand that a jab or a cross)
The problem is really when the puncher is conservative and gathers only by small steps, it does not work so well any more.

The think is that we do not have to find a technique straight away and if we stay at a moderm boxing range we are going to get our arse kicked in biblical proportions.
However we can use our atemi to cover our movements and to get in and out of distance and get stuck in fro a throw or a pin when we have an opening, really the same ideas of the EBKB of old.

What I am really trying to get at is that 3rd form (kata dori) ikkio from solid/static; if our initial step is irimi,we are going at exactly the same place as if we had been slipping a punch on the outside.
And the atemi is the same as a direct rear end.
The only difference is the patting down of the punch in the back end in the slip.

phil

I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by "we have all we need in Aikido".

This is something I say all the time. Aikido is a great system of martial arts, and doesn't lack anything in it's range. In the way that I understand Aikido, I think it is a remarkably complete system.

However it doesn't teach all ranges and types of fighting. But no system does. In fact (and I ponder this one often) if you put all ranges and aspects of fighting into one system, it would be impractically large.

Boxing is a very specific skill set. It is different then simply striking. Shotokan Karate is a striking system, however it is not a boxing system either. Boxing involves two people trading blows in a specific way. Learning to box is a unique skill, and Aikido doesn't teach this anymore then Aikido teaches ground fighting as done in submission wrestling.

If we are talking about fighting, specifically with the intent to do harm, Aikido is complete, and has answers to problems faced in boxing.

However what few are allowing for, is their desire to prove that Aikido is better at boxing then boxing. There is this desire to "Aikido" the boxer. A desire to beat the boxer at his own game. This is not possible. Boxers are good at their game, and it's a game that Aikido teaches nothing about.

Chris Hein wrote: Everyone thinks the weapon does all the work. That is until they need to use the weapon and it pops out of their hand, they find themselves at an ineffective range or they get it taken away from them... It goes without saying that your last option should be fighting. This is whether you plan to do that fighting with or without a weapon.

My point was two fold.

1) It is obvious to anyone that having a weapon is a huge advantage. And even allows untrained children to beat up adults. For example, in grade school I beat up a high school student with a hockey stick. He was bullying me and I got so upset I hit him with it. He never bullied me again.

2) Claiming a weapon allows you to defeat any attacker will require you to actually take that weapon with you everywhere. I'm not prepared (nor legally able) to carry a sword everywhere. I'm not inclined to carry a large stick everywhere. It's like I tell guys who want to carry guns. Make sure you pick one you can carry. A 22 in your pocket is more useful then a 45 in your closet.

I'm going to simply state that if you are unarmed and you give me a baseball bat and say lets fight, I'm going to win. I don't need any kind of weapons training to win. I'm just going to hit you repeatedly with it. The advantage being that I have no problems hurting someone who wants to hurt me. I see demo's all the time with guys disarming armed opponents, but those people are rarely actually trying to hurt someone.

Yes, having training is only going to make you better at using a weapon. So yes, it would be a good idea to train with the weapon you carry ever single day. However, consider why you train everything else.

Far to often it seems the answer to defeating any kind of sport fighter is simply "grab my katana", or "well I'd use my jo". If the unarmed portion is so useless, what is the premise of training it at all? You don't see judo guys looking at the striking in their art seriously or attempting to practice it. Nor do they do that with their weapon work (Hey it's all in the kata's right?)

This is the basic premise of MMA training. My bjj system has a horrible system of striking, so I'll go find a striking coach who can teach me Mauy Thai. Obviously that won't me he's the best striker and grappler in the world, that comes down to the person, but he did pick styles that were top notice in teaching those skills. Is aikido top notch in teaching unarmed defenses against strikes, and if not, then why practice those defenses at all?

Jean Jacques Machado went to a Dog Brothers fight (full contact stick fighting) threw his weapon away at the beginning of the fight, double legged his opponent, who was armed with a stick. Then submitted him.

It's no guarantee that having a weapon means you'll beat someone. There are lots of tough guys who just might take that weapon away from you as soon as to look at you.

The premise of MMA is a good one. And like I said, if you want to beat a boxer at boxing, learn to box.

Aikido is not useless unarmed. However it's not as sophisticated as other arts specializing in unarmed fighting. This is where I start to get tangential, I don't believe the techniques of Aikido were ever designed to deal with sophisticated unarmed situations. However I do believe they were designed too, and work very well in armed situations. The "unarmed" techniques in Aikido are much more akin to traditional Koryu style techniques which work around weapons problems.

As far as carrying a weapon goes, if one wants they can always be armed. Look around you there are hundreds of weapons right this second. Pick something up, a broom, a fire extinguisher, a kitchen knife, a bottle, there are almost always weapons, or things that can be used as weapons around you.

I wouldn't recommend Aikido for someone interested in unarmed strikes or unarmed defenses against them. Like I said take boxing for 3 months!

Chris Hein wrote: Jean Jacques Machado went to a Dog Brothers fight (full contact stick fighting) threw his weapon away at the beginning of the fight, double legged his opponent, who was armed with a stick. Then submitted him.

That’s great and probably no surprise too many I know. But a stick is not a knife. Taking a hit is different from being stabbed and cut.

It's no guarantee that having a weapon means you'll beat someone. There are lots of tough guys who just might take that weapon away from you as soon as to look at you.

True, but toughness is a quality gained from experience in training in mixed venues against full resistance and from having experienced life threatening situations. Neither of which is something really learned well in the vast majority of dojo.

The premise of MMA is a good one. And like I said, if you want to beat a boxer at boxing, learn to box.

This is untrue and witnessed in MMA bouts. I will say from personal experiences with several boxers who ended up knocked out or on their asses that I never learned how to box a day in my life.

Aikido is not useless unarmed. However it's not as sophisticated as other arts specializing in unarmed fighting. This is where I start to get tangential, I don't believe the techniques of Aikido were ever designed to deal with sophisticated unarmed situations.

Starting around the mid 90's the ability that prevailed for me was in fact -aiki- and not the use of jujutsu based MMA on my part that won the day. Of course people need to have learned how to fight, but aiki in the hands of a fighter is an extremely potent weapon that can do a lot of damage.

However I do believe they (aikido techniques) were designed too, and work very well in armed situations. The "unarmed" techniques in Aikido are much more akin to traditional Koryu style techniques which work around weapons problems.

No actually they are a poor representative of both sides of the equation. I have yet to ever meet anyone conversant in Koryu who would agree with any measure or degree of aikido being representative of the good use of weapons nor their unarmed techniques being akin to koryu methods for dealing with weapons. In fact they are typically seen as antithetical to a Koryu approaches. IME I have not found aikido waza to be effective in unarmed response to an attack with weapons for the simple reason that I have yet to see anyone in aikido use a weapon in a manner I consider to be effective in the first place. Why is it people try to make aikido a fits all art? It was never meant to be that in the first place. So where is the surprise?
If they do exist somewhere, I would love to see them. You would need know and understand how to really use weapons in order to train and understand how to defend against them-don't you think? If you disagree can you point me to any source in aikido for effective use of weapons compared to Koryu in an attack form? I would love to see it and possibly meet them.
And going beyond that there are men who have taken koryu into freestyle use of various weapons trained in freestyle- I think you would have a lot of fun meeting someone with a deeper understanding of weapons and what they can do before you state aikido can handle that sort of pressured environment, Chris.

As far as carrying a weapon goes, if one wants they can always be armed. Look around you there are hundreds of weapons right this second. Pick something up, a broom, a fire extinguisher, a kitchen knife, a bottle, there are almost always weapons, or things that can be used as weapons around you.

Were you to agree that some classical arts have very valuable lessons in the use of weapons than you might agree that the use of improvised weapons use can be approached rather well from some classical approaches to the use of weapons. Many of the principles transfer over quite well. There is no substitute for testing and the use of armor to more freely express in a more pressured environment.

I wouldn't recommend Aikido for someone interested in unarmed strikes or unarmed defenses against them. Like I said take boxing for 3 months!

I find boxing (while I am a fan) to be fine for use in most cases. But I find it limiting as an approach for unarmed combat in general and would never advocate it over the broader range of what's available today in MMA. Not the least of which will be the eventual use of internal power and aiki...in Aikido
Cheers
Dan

Dan Harden,
How about a video of you dealing with a boxer using your aiki skill?