Why do people think Aikido does not work?

Joep Schuurkes wrote: That's a limited view on effectiveness. Going to a bar, approaching a sailor without him noticing your ill intent, inflicting a deadly wound with a concealable edged weapon and being able to leave the bar without anyone knowing you killed the guy, seems to be more effective.

But, but, that's not aikido, that would be Ninjutsu

The aikido way is to insult that man's mother and sister so hard so that he would be blinded with rage and attacks you without reserve. Then you use one of the aikido techniques to throw him, and break one of his arms, or two, but never kill him. Aikido is not violent

Why people think that Aikido does not work? Because they haven't tried it.

Edward Karaa wrote: Alternatively you can pick up a fight in a bar or something similar. That's the only way to know, at your own risk.

If you do decide to go this route, apply at a bar or night club as a bouncer. At least this way you can get paid to test your aikido.

Traditional attacks also don't really prepare someone. Yes i know the argument that they are representations of attacks and that if you practice enough, you can deal with any attack but I think there comes a point in your development in Aikido after becoming familiar with the basic movements, is to actually try this 'any attack' scenario and see how Aikido comes into play. You'll be taken aback at first and probably suck at it a lot....but be pleasantly surprised later when you do find ways to apply Aikido principles in defending against almost any attack.
I've found that being exposed to different martial arts and mma styles have further developed my understanding of Aikido as a self defense system and increased its effectiveness.

The problem is the traditional dojo environment does not put you in the stress levels necessary to get you mentally prepared for a real conflict. Sure, maybe after years and years and years of dojo training but I've done Aikido for say 16 years and gained no such stress innoculation. When faced with a real fight, my heart still went racing, adrenaline rushed into my body and my fine motor skills went out of the window along with my Aikido.

After cross-training with styles that do spar, yes sparring is different than self defense but it does help you accustom yourself to 'fight' situations and give you the necessary mental calmness to apply your Aikido.

Aikido is not for sparring, it's for self defense and there's a huge difference there.

In most cases, self defense situations happen where the other guy doesn't really expect you to fight back or believes in his overwhelming strength. For those situations that do expect a fight for example bar room squabbles, most of the time you can avoid them or you can use Aikido before he actually kicks into gear (for e.g. the pre-fight stage where they shove you a bit and stuff).

This is way different where two trained fighters are expecting to duke it out. Hence why we don't see Aikido in MMA.

My question is why obsess over this question of "effectiveness". The problem is that something like Muay Thai is gear towards "fighting," while aikido is geared towards "resolving".

I remember in a tv interview Imaizumi Sensei was asked about this question. He smiled and said "the goal of all martial arts is an end to fighting, so how can you compare them?"

Reuben Yap wrote: The problem is the traditional dojo environment does not put you in the stress levels necessary to get you mentally prepared for a real conflict.

Train with Shibata Ichiro shihan and when asked to attack really try to crack him in the head. Get ready for the adrenaline. I'd say after a year of such practice you'll be ready for anything.

I'm certain there are plenty of others out there besides Shibata shihan but he's the one I have experience with. Fell free to discuss with him if he fits your definition of 'traditional dojo environment'.

It would be much simpler to just give a few beginners some knives and have them attack you in randori. The only rule is you are responsible for the beginners not getting hurt in the slightest (makes it a bit harder).

Thanks

Lyle Bogin wrote: My question is why obsess over this question of "effectiveness". The problem is that something like Muay Thai is gear towards "fighting," while aikido is geared towards "resolving". I remember in a tv interview Imaizumi Sensei was asked about this question. He smiled and said "the goal of all martial arts is an end to fighting, so how can you compare them?"

I guess it depends on your vision of resolving. Mine is to have the ability and the potential to control the situation...that is holding the cards in my hands that matter....then having the compassion, wisdom and insightfulness to do the right thing.

I think their is a certain level of "fighting skill" that goes with this and a good teacher should be able to demonstrate how these pieces of the puzzle fit together. Unfortunately, we have alot of folks out there that fail at being able to do this.

Having problems figuring out how a muay thai clinch works.....well then maybe you go and find a decent muay thai guy and figure it out and then look at the various risk factors, applications, and points that surround it.

Good instructors are like that, they are well rounded and can answer alot of questions for their students and are not afraid to say "I honestly don't know"..if they don't know.

I trained police cadets for the MT Dept of Justice for years in Aikido based arrest and control techniques...the field reports I received from officers over the years were very positive in regards to Aikido joint locks and take downs...It work´s you just have to do it right...

Marie Noelle Fequiere wrote: Why people think that Aikido does not work? Because they haven't tried it.

Nope
It is because there is a world of difference between training in a method and the actual application of the afore mentioned method.

If you are riding a horse as you would in dressage that is not going to help you a lot in a roping competition.
Now there plenty of thing you do in dressage that will give a massive edge in other equestrian discipline, from jousting to jumping passing by barrel racing but it does not give the basic set of skill for each of those discipline.

I really believe that aikido is a very very good system and really has answer to lots of situations. In fact I think aikido has a very systematic approach of the basic components. For exemple Irimi, tenchin tankan are used in any martial arts weapons included but not than may martial arts do explain them as clearly as in aikido.

You do not deal with druken uncle harris at a family due like deal with Marcellus Wallace when he says he is going to get medieval on your arse.
You can use the same method but the way to apply it will be different.

All that aikido do not work really comes from disconnection between the method and the relevant way to apply it in a given situation.

phil

I honestly find myself able to use aikido techniques in situations more and more as time goes on. However, I still strongly believe that if I was training the same way I was when I was training aikido that I would never be able to accomplish these things.

This is reflected in my boxing training as well. My coach commented the other day that I look amazing doing pad work. Simply amazing. He then made the joke "Now just do that when you spar". I told him "I would, but the other guy keeps punching me in the face!" That to me sums it all up.

Carolyn Parkinson wrote: We've had a lot of new members join our dojo recently, so this question in a similar form has come up a lot recently ("How do I use aikido in a fight? What if I get into a fight at school? How do I defend myself?") Our dojo flat-out says that if you want to learn self-defense, aikido's not the way to go. Aikido is more a holistic art, where you are learning a lot of basic body movement, and more subtle things, especially at the beginner levels. And yes, some aikido dojos are better than others at teaching the martial part of martial arts (distance, striking effectively, etc). I see it as a different way of learning. MMA is a faster style of learning. But aikido is much more gradual. Both are valid depending on what you are trying to do. It takes a lot longer to learn the principles of aikido, but I think that laying that deep foundation is really important.

Really? History doesn't uphold that idea. Ueshiba learned from Takeda in a short amount of time. Shioda and Tomiki learned from Ueshiba in a short amount of time. Research suggests that learning aikido principles can be done in a short time frame.

The real question is why is it taking *everyone* else so long and in the process, rationalizing it all away?

Joep Schuurkes wrote: Here are a few reasons. (I don't completely agree with all of them, btw, and some of them overlap a bit.) - No sparring or 'alive' training.

Ueshiba was tested throughout his life by all manner of men. He had "alive" training.

Joep Schuurkes wrote: - Limited technical curriculum (no body-to-body grappling, no punching/kicking).

Actually, there was no curriculum with Ueshiba. Or Takeda, if I remember right. So, really, when studying the way of aiki, why didn't Ueshiba use a curriculum?

Joep Schuurkes wrote: - No aiki.

As can be seen, Ueshiba learned aiki in a short time frame (5-10 years as opposed to everyone's belief in "20 year techniques", etc.)

Joep Schuurkes wrote: - Aikido has not proven itself in MMA fights.

I know of one karate student who met Shioda and tested himself against Shioda. He didn't fare very well and became a student of Shioda. While not "MMA", it was a free attack encounter. True aiki in the hands of an adept works in any situation.

Joep Schuurkes wrote: - Knowingly practicing many unrealistic (too elaborate) techniques to explore principles and ideas. - Training techniques on poorly executed attacks during training.

If you are training aiki, there are a lot of "unrealistic", but not too elaborate, training methods. Even techniques can be utilized for training methods. And a push to the chest, shoulder, etc are definitely poor "attacks" but yield very good aiki training.

Edward Karaa wrote: In my opinion, Aikido has limited effectiveness in fighting as proven in MMA events, but is a very effective way of self-defence, if you see what I mean.

What happens when you meet someone who uses aiki in an MMA training hall and wins? How then, can aikido be of limited effectiveness in fighting? Did Shioda back down from challengers because his aikido was of limited effectiveness in fighting? Did Ueshiba? The major concern, IMO, of aikido in MMA is Ueshiba's spiritual beliefs that his aikido was not meant for competition in the sense of the UFC. But, that didn't mean that Ueshiba's aikido couldn't be effective in the UFC.

William Hazen wrote: For the same reasons they believe The Moon landing was staged...Elvis is still alive...and our current President was born in Kenya... Some folks got allot of mileage out of continuously bashing Aikido's "effectiveness" They hold up this analogy and that fact and shout out how dreadful it all is that we Aikidoka are fooling ourselves... Well in answer to your question Folks have a right to think anything they want and I have no right to change their opinion other than to express mine.... All I know is that my Aikido works just fine thank you very much. That being said even after almost 20 years I have my hands full just trying to improve my practice... If your Aikido sucks what are YOU going to do about it.... Me...Continue to Cross Train to improve our Aikido's "effectiveness" as a Martial Art Practice Hard (though I am getting old LOL) Find someone who actually knows Aiki locally and see how far I can go because I love it!!! I hope to practice for another 20 years and can't wait to see what's around the next corner in my Aikido journey. Good Luck with yours youngster and remember... A little doubt is a good thing if you use it as motivation to get better. William Hazen

Hey! Elvis is alive! The King can't die.

Seriously, nice to see you posting again. I second what you wrote. My only additional point of view is that it shouldn't take 20 years to be really good at aikido and you shouldn't have to cross train to do it.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: I guess it depends on your vision of resolving. Mine is to have the ability and the potential to control the situation...that is holding the cards in my hands that matter....then having the compassion, wisdom and insightfulness to do the right thing. I think their is a certain level of "fighting skill" that goes with this and a good teacher should be able to demonstrate how these pieces of the puzzle fit together. Unfortunately, we have alot of folks out there that fail at being able to do this. Having problems figuring out how a muay thai clinch works.....well then maybe you go and find a decent muay thai guy and figure it out and then look at the various risk factors, applications, and points that surround it. Good instructors are like that, they are well rounded and can answer alot of questions for their students and are not afraid to say "I honestly don't know"..if they don't know.

Nice post, Kevin.

I look at Ueshiba and his training. He had to handle farmers, military men, karate, judo, jujutsu, all manner of koryu men, etc.

And who did Ueshiba turn to, early on in his training, to handle some of the tougher men? Takeda. The man who'd been through some sh... stuff. With Takeda's experience and aiki, Ueshiba then started dealing with all manner of martial artists. In a relatively short amount of time. Simply amazing, but very, very unlike modern day aikido training.

The question is how do you resolve that?

Mark Murray wrote: My only additional point of view is that it shouldn't take 20 years to be really good at aikido and you shouldn't have to cross train to do it.

Hi Mark,

It seems that there are a lot of things in life that shouldn't be, but are nonetheless. Many pretend or rationalize the in-congruency away. Others do something about it even though they believe they shouldn't have to. Based on what little I know of your training history, it seems you fall into the latter category. I can't see faulting you or anyone else for that . . . far from it.

Allen

Allen Beebe wrote: Hi Mark, It seems that there are a lot of things in life that shouldn't be, but are nonetheless. Many pretend or rationalize the in-congruency away. Others do something about it even though they believe they shouldn't have to. Based on what little I know of your training history, it seems you fall into the latter category. I can't see faulting you or anyone else for that . . . far from it. Allen

Hi Allen,

I agree.

Mark Murray wrote: Hey! Elvis is alive! The King can't die. Seriously, nice to see you posting again. I second what you wrote. My only additional point of view is that it shouldn't take 20 years to be really good at aikido and you shouldn't have to cross train to do it.

Thanks Mark.

As Joko Roshi said to me a very long time ago. "Lifetime lessons take a lifetime to learn so don't be in such a hurry!" The journey I am is not just technical proficiency so perhaps I needed to clarify that a little bit. It is to fully realize "IT" from all it's human aspects... Technical to Spiritual. That is the nature of a 'Way" for me.
So I don't need to cross train? Then why are you training with Dan? He doesn't practice Aikido HA HA HA HA HA HA (ribbing you a little bit)
Shoji Nishio encouraged Cross Training and I understood why many years ago and it should be obvious...Indeed How many times do we see questions like this thread or... "Is Aikido effective" or "Is Aikido a Martial Art" or "Why does Aikido suck?"

Aikido will not survive unless A. It works as a Martial Art and B. It (thanks in a large part to you Aiki boys) reconnects to it's Aiki roots.

What's even more INSANE is the rumor that Hombu is BANNING weapons practice in Aikido. But that is the topic of another thread.

William Hazen

See it is like this: Aikido observes a fair amount of spiritual kind of stuff. In it there is a pacifism, and a whole bunch of other contemplative introspective stuff. That catches people's attention, and they often don't give it allot of credibility because it doesn't fit their beliefs. People are really sensitive and critical of this stuff. Therefore automatically the disregard the technical application side of Aikido.

Aikido because of it's philosophy has been practiced to reflect it's philosophy. Aikido has many different styles and takes on what Aikido is and isn't. Skill is look at within subjective and abstract framework. There is no venue to evaluate skills, like MMA has.

There is a lot of myth woven in Aikido. Allot of creative language and stuff and that concerns lots of people. Which doesn't attract the average fighter wanntabees. Such language which is hard to understand and is in poetic form has lots of people thinking the art is for the artsy-fartsy, intellectual types.

All of this for many people who don't think Aikido works, does indicate that if an art is heavy with such philosophy and stuff then logically the techniques can't work.

And it also has to do with those who promote or represent the art via seminars or dojos to their communities who poor represent their art.

Then there is those who are jaded and share it with the world. And those who want to make their art or their self a name and discredit Aikido openly.

But they are in the minority.

Mark Murray wrote: What happens when you meet someone who uses aiki in an MMA training hall and wins? How then, can aikido be of limited effectiveness in fighting? Did Shioda back down from challengers because his aikido was of limited effectiveness in fighting? Did Ueshiba? The major concern, IMO, of aikido in MMA is Ueshiba's spiritual beliefs that his aikido was not meant for competition in the sense of the UFC. But, that didn't mean that Ueshiba's aikido couldn't be effective in the UFC.

I have no doubt that anyone with the right physical condition and mental attitude can potentially win in the UFC, even an ikebana practitionner. Aikido as a martial art has been designed to for self-defence against a set of armed and unarmed attacks. As such I have no reason to doubt its efficiency. There are other sport oriented martial arts that are more suited for competition and sparring. But then again, it depends on the individual.

Edward Karaa wrote: I have no doubt that anyone with the right physical condition and mental attitude can potentially win in the UFC, even an ikebana practitionner. Aikido as a martial art has been designed to for self-defence against a set of armed and unarmed attacks. As such I have no reason to doubt its efficiency. There are other sport oriented martial arts that are more suited for competition and sparring. But then again, it depends on the individual.

Hello
Well, you see one can not expect to miraculously be able to deal with several potentially armed opponents in an asymmetric situation when one can not deal with a single empty handed one in an even starting situation.

If you aikido training consist mainly of tenchin back against back against any incoming attack and you do have any atemi, you will need to be 2rd DAN to deal with year old grand-mother armed with a stick after you threaded on her beloved geraniums. Yes I know she is fierce, but she is 88.

Don't get me wrong I am the first one to say that your average SD customer is very unlikely to be skilled either in open hand or with the weapon he is using.
That being said he is very likely to manipulate the situation and the environment to get the drop on you.
If you do no train for that I do not think you can not expect to perform adequately in SD.
As well you state of mind in SD should not be different of than in competition. You are going to do and you have trained to get what it takes to win.

The differences are only the win conditions, in sport you will score points, submit to knockout or knock down your opponent.
In SD it can be anything from avoid the situation before it happens to doing you opponent uglier.

There are times when getting out of the way and letting the guy crash or throw him nicely until he sees the error of his ways if the right thing to do.
There are times when you throw them your intent is to make any nearby seismograph register the impact.

For me the beauty of aikido is that you can do both using the same method.

Phil

Tell you what to do... instead of asking, try it out for yourself.

Take Tai Boxing with your Aikido.
[I started after 2+ years of Aikido into Thai Boxing],

I will say that people tend to box all situations into the same scenario.

i.e. - The "Dont taze me bro" guy on youtube.
Had one of the multiple security guards just jumped in and done a sankyo they could have controlled and walked him out without the need to gang up on him and taze him.

If your in a mma fight, you probably will be nailed. Why? There is a lack of 'live' training and true attacks to defend against.

At a certain point your aikido is going to plateau in certain aspects, primarily as a viable means of fighting. [didnt say its not a good self-defense, as it has the potential to teach one to not even get into situations they previously would have, so in this regards its preemptive self-defense... which arguably is the best.]

But as far as showing off to your buddies or winning some medal, you have to make it real to get that timing down and feel how the techniques can be made flexible... as I promise you that executing some of the more viable techniques still might not look as 'pretty' as it does during an Aikido demonstration.

Ill say this, I have been doing this for 2+ years, and for me Ive peaked in the current conditions with Aikido. From here on out, as far as how things are structured, I might as well pick up ballet. [which I actually wouldnt mind doing, the shape those people are in is quite amazing... that and some yoga.]

This peak was with my 3rd kyu test. [6kyus in this system.]

Belts to an extent are irrelevant, but do support one as far as milestones and personal achievements.

Again, each system and dojo is different, and each person has to try it out for themselves... but eventually you will probably run up what I, and many others have when it comes to the particular topic of using Aikido in the likes of MMA. [I believe it has its place, but many are not either wanting to go that route, which is totally fine, or deceive themselves into thinking they can magically whip out a technique without having some real movement to whats happening.]

This is kind of like beating a dead horse with a stick, and again, the point is that Aikido is quite flexible and it ultimately is what you make of it...

If your into this kind of thing, take BJJ and Tai Boxing with your Aikido. At the same time, Aikido has a more valuable lesson, it can teach you how not to even get in that fight.

From personal experience I have written before how I have mellowed out and realized the futility of trying to argue points.
Once this led to an attack on me by a bigger guy who did jui-jitsu and I smashed his face to get him to stop. [not that this was choice, but at the time I did not know Aikido. With the way it went down, had I known AIkido, I would have been able to pin him...just what I know of how this fight played out. - And its one reason I took Aikido was to learn alternative ways to stopping the fight, and the primary was that of just letting things go... if someone wants to be right, let them go for it, otherwise they will explode in your face. [bet a lot of fights start like that]

Keep us updated with how your Aikido goes.
From what I understand you have picked a good branch of Aikido to train in... I like that they get the foundations and pound it into you and have a system, so to speak. - but to each their own.

Peace

dAlen

Ill add one more thing.

In regards to does Aikido work in a MMA type situation, you have to realize that you have guys who have trained daily...

... they have had their thighs kicked repeatedly by someones shins, and have had their stomachs punched continually, etc. - all to 'toughen up their bodies.'

Then you have black belts of Aikido who cant even run a quarter of a mile without being winded, etc.

Point is that it is unrealistic to believe that someone who has not undergone a tough training cycle, nor subjected their body to such rigorous abuse with the goal of toughening it up... [regardless of if you agree with this concept of training or not]... how are they to fair against someone who has?

I think this is the one point that people tend to stick to when they think of Aikido as ineffective. Sure its limited to the aspect of sport fighting, but within that aspect one must concede that in such a scenario they are correct. [unless their are some 'magic' powers at work, then the guy in shape has more than the upper hand.]

Aikido could do with a bit more conditioning. Im not saying break the body, leave that to those who wish to do such training, but I have seen many examples of out of shape people who move up the ranks... This shouldnt be the case, and thats regardless of if you want to sport fight or just use Aikido as a meditative practice.

In a way Im sure this goes a long way in the rep that Aikido has gotten, even in yoga people are left in a better condition than when they came. [not the best way to phrase it, but the pointer is there.]

Peace

dAlen

Sorry, folks. This discussion went too far. Actually it fits the subject: "Why people think Chess does not work?" Is it true that mixing Chess with MMA and Thai Boxing will make it more effective? Just my opinion.

Maciej Jesmanowicz wrote: Sorry, folks. This discussion went too far. Actually it fits the subject: "Why people think Chess does not work?" Is it true that mixing Chess with MMA and Thai Boxing will make it more effective? Just my opinion.

you may be onto something... it can help open your mind to various strategies, so yes it just might help.

peace

dAlen