To What Extent is Martial Effectiveness Necessary...

Michael Gelum wrote: Therefore, when an individual that has the training, experience and expertise is willing to " put up or shut up" , why are they deemed insignificant? Mickey

"Oh you didn't"...looking away and back again...."you didn't".... "oh....you did!"
Maybe you need to sit back and think on the words you have used toward others.
Some people do put their asses on the line, many times over... in rooms that were not always friendly. Some times the review of the results... are not always welcome to hear. I have heard of some people taking it VERY hard.

I agree with your admonition of "train hard and train honestly." Sadly some people cannot match their words to their own actions. Have you noticied that too? Honesty and straight forward stand-up behavior that carries through behind closed doors can be hard to find. Huh?
Dan

I appreciate your insinuating that I am dishonest. I have read it, and heard it,...face to face before. It doesn't end well for those who try it.

Gees Dan,

I never insinuated that you were dishonest or that you could not do what you say you can do. I offered you the opportunity to INCREASE your student base. I offered to PAY for your lodgings, accommodations and incidentals, for your instruction...you dismissed me.

I must defer to that old refrain from Dan Harden, "' SHOW ', ",
I guess that only is applicable to the rest of the martial world.

I know some of the people that are attempting to give you creditability, they suck..so their opinions suck too.

I hold no ill, but, you are not proving anything with your degrading posts or unnamed followers.

My offer still stands, come and train, my treat.

Mickey

I am not concerned with how all others train, I don't judge nor have prejudice, if they have the goods or not. If that art or this one, or that person or this person is effective. How they train is their right, and privilege, and to what level and perspective they want to exercise the goods is up to them. Am I into any Orwellian stuff when it comes to people's life or training choices. All so, a blanketed statement that stereotypes all Aikido or LEOs is really myopic and unrealistic. It usually is an indicator to many a lack of understanding and experience in the topic, btw.

I am not and can't be concerned who is better than who, or what is better than the other. All I know is we live in a society far less violent than many other countries and our ancestries. Many states are adopting concealed weapon laws that favor the average citizen for self-defense. Criminals have access to and their preferences is not MMA, Aikido, or any other martial art - self styled or not. They prefer weapons, namely a gun. Then a knife. Then their fists- quick hard, unsuspecting blows to the head. Well, many prefer that because it works so well, and doesn't need anyone to teach you it. But a weapon is the most used and preferred object of attack.

So really, it mutes most of these types of discussions. And I heard an instructor at a seminar say and I paraphrase, there is no need for martial arts in today's world as criminals have guns. Now with that said, being effective is defined by a well placed bullet. It really doesn't matter how good someone else is or isn't. What matters is when and how fast you pull a trigger. Or how well you surprise your target as you stab them or hit them, when they least expect it or see it. And how much experience a person has to handle the adrenaline dump, rapid heat rate, and your mental faculties and nerves when in a high pressure and stress situation. Yet there is all this recycled arcane and archaic martial arts talk , and no one about what I pointed out. No talk about how to handle a gun under a high stress situation and stuff instead it is "you suck and because I am better than you and know more than you, I'll show you why you suck." Or "you suck and go to this person only, as they are a god, and you suck. And since you suck they will show you why you suck, suckers. See I did it, and I am the world's greatest."

That is the reality. Guns are it, and no matter what your training is, your stuff isn't going to stop a bullet, much less a 100 rounds a second. Or buck shot. When your butt is kidnapped in your sleep or car jacked by 5 teenagers and twenty somethings at gun point. Who will more than likely shot you at some point. Rarely, now-a-days any serious criminal act involves 2 or more people with a high possibility you will not be breathing at their discretion. And being is bar fight in some soft half-assed bar with some drunk half witted Spike fan isn't much of a fight. Since it isn't for your life.

All this talk and exercising of the wills and egos is superfluous posturing and ego gymnastics, and has no value other then the entertainment value for those like me, who understand the reality of the world we live in, and not wrapped in a fantasy, or self delusion. I for one know exactly where I stand on how effective my skills are, and will live with the consequences if any. And I understand to what point of effectiveness all martial arts have.

Michael Varin wrote: This sounds like it may be a problem. Why is this so?

Because people are use to the look and feel of a technique being effective as oppose to actually working hard to really learn the technique and how to practically apply it in a real self defense situation. They want to gain rank without understanding and be able to demonstrate many variations of a technique without even being able to do the basic technique itself. This is why you will see a SanDan looking good and seemingly doing nice technique until someone they don't know gives them a really good attack with just slight resistance. If you are a sandan, I expect your entry to be serious and I expect you to at least be able to somewhat take my balance.

Because people are use to the look and feel of a technique being effective as oppose to actually working hard to really learn the technique and how to practically apply it in a real self defense situation. They want to gain rank without understanding and be able to demonstrate many variations of a technique without even being able to do the basic technique itself. This is why you will see a SanDan looking good and seemingly doing nice technique until someone they don't know gives them a really good attack with just slight resistance. If you are a sandan, I expect your entry to be serious and I expect you to at least be able to somewhat take my balance.

Absolutely true...and is the antithesis...

Train well,
Train hard,
Train honestly,

Mickey

Philip Burgess wrote: Why is it those who don't understand the effectiveness of Aikido, dismiss the testimonials like above? This is a good reason why I feel Aikido's technical history should be stressed more. Aikido wazas are slightly changed from the feudal combat jujitsu that parented Aikido. Just because Aikido isn't a toe-to-toe art that fits the needs of the sport fighting entertainment business, but instead fits the needs of LEOs and alike it is somehow not effective. If you have visited a prison or know anything of the career of a prison guard (corrections officer), the needs are specialized. A confrontation prison guards face isn't a street fight. It is a well thought out and planned engagement that requires the prison guard to employ specialize mental, psychological and physical tactics and stuff beyond that of sport's fight. Prisoners are highly dangerous and aggressive, assailants, which can be highly skilled in dangerous and aggressive behavior. You don't shake their hand after a fight, there is no such thing as any kind of sportsmanship what so ever. If LEOs and alike supportive of Aikido's effectiveness, as they are in life and death situations, as no one is playing in those situation, then it has to be recognized properly. I know of one LEO that is supportive of MMA, and he will tell you Aikido isn't effective; just the person. He feels the more proper tools an officer has at their disposable the better the can stay safe and handle a situation. He feels that most people train MMA to fight in the venues. He feels that in all his years of patrol he has never in a conflict went to the ground. And with in those years he has used Aikido many times to keep himself and others safe. And to quickly gain control over a situation. He feels those who don't recognize this are myopic and ignorant of street, and life and death situations to disregard Aikido's effectiveness. Here again, he is speaking to the individual's approach to Aikido. See most people who take Aikido don't do it to fight. It is a hobby, a way of life, a recreational pursuit, as the don't wish to pursue it in the manner dictated by a career as fighters, LEOs, etc. Who don't want to suffer the physical punishment and disabilities suffered for the glory of being an MMA fighter. Aikido is open to everyone. Because of that there are a variety of occupations in the Aikido corps.They are mostly jobs that don't require a person to train mentally and physical to be prepared and effective in policing situations. As a result you will not find the vast majority of the millions of people all around the world who practice Aikido training to be effective in a sports fight or in conflicts faced by LEOs daily. I say if a person discredits the effectiveness of Aikido as a result of testimonials by LEOs, than they really don't understand Aikido and are limited in discussing the effectiveness of Aikido.

Dismiss, no..take with several grains of salt, oh yeah. Speaking from a law enforcement perspective (18 years in municipal and federal law enforcement, various instructor certifications, SWAT operator, etc.), I will tell you that Aikido has its good points for LEO use and its bad points. Aikido, sometimes with some very basic BJJ ground techniques added, is the basis for many of the defensive tactics programs taught at some law enforcement academies, including a few I attended and/or at which I instructed. This is the case, for a couple of reasons. One of the main reasons is police administrators wanting something that looks, on its face, less likely to open their departments to civil rights complaints and law suits. Trying to push or grab someone looks so much better on the 6 pm news than does hitting them with a left hook. Very many police officers see what they are taught more as "something that the administration can say they taught me so they can get out of a law suit" rather than "the best possible system to actually help me save my life if attacked by a hardened criminal." Another reason, however, that Aikido is utilized is that Aikido is very good in many law enforcement situations. Against a person who passively resists arrest (goes limp) or who is trying to break your grasp and flee rather that fight, Aikido often works wonderfully. It is when things get ugly and the bad guy tries to beat you down and take your handgun, or when his own handgun or knife come into play that Aikido often falls short. I say often, because there are no absolutes in real combat and because there are some extraordinary individuals who could clear a biker bar with a toothpick using their preferred combat methodology, simply because they are extraordinarily gifted individuals when it comes to combat. Also, if you have trained in Aikido methodology for years, you often will have a very large advantage when it comes to footwork when compared to the "average street thug." Footwork can let you move and not get hit, and, having been hit before, I find this to be a very good thing.

Now, after being in the job awhile, officers often get a class in "Officer Survival," filled with methodologies and tactics that are specifically designed to keep them alive when the really bad things happen. These are the classes I most enjoyed teaching, and this is where, if they have a good instructor, the officer starts to feel like he or she is starting to get a glimmer of how to really survive and that they are learning something that is not just "to protect the administration."

Now, having said all that, the original Ki Aikido instructor was not posting about defensive tactics, but about his Aikido instruction. What I have to say about his training is maybe it is great, maybe it is not. I have never crossed hands with the man. As for effectiveness on the street or in the jail, I would have to look at the individual situations. You see, sometimes people just decide to give up. In law enforcement there are usually two kinds of situations: "How I wish I had a lot more officers here to help me out" (bad situations where you are getting shot at, are seriously outnumbered and the fight is on, etc.) and "How I wish most of these officers were not here" (when making an arrest and multiple officers are assisting, everyone wants to cuff the suspect or use a control hold, the suspect gets pulled every which way, and if it goes to the ground, the big law enforcement dogpile of flailing limbs commences). Sometimes, in either situation, the bad guy just gives up, though more often in the second situation. After all, as comedian Ron White mentioned when describing squaring off against a bunch of bouncers in a parking lot..."I didn't know how many it would take to kick my a$$, but I knew how many they were going to use." When confronted with lots of backup, sometimes people give up, even if they were "winning" the one-on-one confrontation. Also, please note that weird stuff happens, and sometimes you get lucky. Lastly, just because you won does not always mean that you were particularly good...you could have just found someone who is worse at fighting than you are, and this means that, yes, you still stink.

So does any of this apply to the way you guys and gals practice and teach Aikido? Maybe, maybe not. I will not condemn or endorse anyone here and their fighting ability without looking at what they do. If they are not practicing for "martial effectiveness" but for some other reason, then, quite frankly, that is their business. If we are talking about fighting, though, I think I just gave you the reasons why many in law enforcement and many others who have actually been attacked physically by people who want to kill them doubt the "ultimate effectiveness" and "no can defend" stuff about Aikido. Personally, I like quite a lot of the Aikido methodology and really dislike some of it. Aikido has some serious holes in its methodology for real world combat, as does pretty much everything else. Anyone who says they have the perfect methodology is either inexperienced or trying to sell you something. The rest of us are merely doing the best we can in attempting to plug our system's holes, refine our methodologies, and live long enough to enjoy retirement while maybe passing on some hard gained knowledge and experience from time-to-time. Of course, having switched over to the federal side after several years in municipal law enforcement, I still have several years to go before I can retire. I also don't claim to have but so much knowledge after 30 years of training, but, ahhhh...I do have experience (and not the kind most of you would like to have), and the nasty, ugly scars to prove that I was in there when the bad guys were swingin'

Dan Harden wrote: "Oh you didn't"...looking away and back again...."you didn't".... "oh....you did!" Maybe you need to sit back and think on the words you have used toward others. Some people do put their asses on the line, many times over... in rooms that were not always friendly. Some times the review of the results... are not always welcome to hear. I have heard of some people taking it VERY hard. ... Dan

Dan, while I applaud you doing sparring and somewhat "pressure testing" your art, I find it strange that this is considered "putting your ass on the line." You see, in the LEO world that Mickey and I have lived in, "putting your ass on the line" means something totally different. Teaching, training, or sparring with a bunch of guys in white or black pajamas, MMA gear and rash guards, or whatever, who were, heavens forbid, "not always friendly" just fails to rise to the stress level of having people try to kill you. Sure, you are going to get a few "good fighters" who are going to try to take you down a peg or two in the situation you describe. All that pales in comparison, of course, to: having to fight your way through the crowd of gang members who are trying to beat you to death; wondering if and when someone is going to try to collect the price that is on your head that was set there so you would not testify against those pesky criminal types; writing up that operations plan and then running your team through the location to get the guys responsible for multiple murders and worrying more about the guys with you than yourself because how are you going to face the wife and kids of the guy who died while following your plan; walking into that biker bar to stop the fight and make an arrest or two and knowing that your backup is miles and minutes away and that it takes less than a second to pull a trigger; getting shot at; getting attacked with knives; using your martial arts training in so many confrontations while working in housing projects and other places on the job that you do not even come close to remembering them all; getting injured on the job and wondering whether one day you are going to catch one that is not going to let you come back to work at all... Between the two of us, Mickey and I have been in these and in far more situations. I really don't think he is too worried about whether his stuff works. After all, he is still alive. Now, could he (and I for that matter) be better trained and more highly skilled? Of course he and I can. So can everyone else. I'm always up for some cross training in something or other that I think can help in my training or help in my job.

Philip Burgess wrote: I am not concerned with how all others train, I don't judge nor have prejudice, if they have the goods or not. If that art or this one, or that person or this person is effective. How they train is their right, and privilege, and to what level and perspective they want to exercise the goods is up to them. Am I into any Orwellian stuff when it comes to people's life or training choices. All so, a blanketed statement that stereotypes all Aikido or LEOs is really myopic and unrealistic. It usually is an indicator to many a lack of understanding and experience in the topic, btw. I am not and can't be concerned who is better than who, or what is better than the other. All I know is we live in a society far less violent than many other countries and our ancestries. Many states are adopting concealed weapon laws that favor the average citizen for self-defense. Criminals have access to and their preferences is not MMA, Aikido, or any other martial art - self styled or not. They prefer weapons, namely a gun. Then a knife. Then their fists- quick hard, unsuspecting blows to the head. Well, many prefer that because it works so well, and doesn't need anyone to teach you it. But a weapon is the most used and preferred object of attack. So really, it mutes most of these types of discussions. And I heard an instructor at a seminar say and I paraphrase, there is no need for martial arts in today's world as criminals have guns. Now with that said, being effective is defined by a well placed bullet. It really doesn't matter how good someone else is or isn't. What matters is when and how fast you pull a trigger. Or how well you surprise your target as you stab them or hit them, when they least expect it or see it. And how much experience a person has to handle the adrenaline dump, rapid heat rate, and your mental faculties and nerves when in a high pressure and stress situation. Yet there is all this recycled arcane and archaic martial arts talk , and no one about what I pointed out. No talk about how to handle a gun under a high stress situation and stuff instead it is "you suck and because I am better than you and know more than you, I'll show you why you suck." Or "you suck and go to this person only, as they are a god, and you suck. And since you suck they will show you why you suck, suckers. See I did it, and I am the world's greatest." That is the reality. Guns are it, and no matter what your training is, your stuff isn't going to stop a bullet, much less a 100 rounds a second. Or buck shot. When your butt is kidnapped in your sleep or car jacked by 5 teenagers and twenty somethings at gun point. Who will more than likely shot you at some point. Rarely, now-a-days any serious criminal act involves 2 or more people with a high possibility you will not be breathing at their discretion. And being is bar fight in some soft half-assed bar with some drunk half witted Spike fan isn't much of a fight. Since it isn't for your life. All this talk and exercising of the wills and egos is superfluous posturing and ego gymnastics, and has no value other then the entertainment value for those like me, who understand the reality of the world we live in, and not wrapped in a fantasy, or self delusion. I for one know exactly where I stand on how effective my skills are, and will live with the consequences if any. And I understand to what point of effectiveness all martial arts have.

Mr. Burgess, I applaud your motivation in writing this post, but I do want to say a few things. First of all, I have been in situations, in law enforcement, when people tried to kill me, so I know that, like you say, some things go straight out the window and you have to deal with what is, not what you would have liked it to be. However, please note that empty hand martial arts have a very real place in defending oneself and for both the private citizen and law enforcement officer. Quite frequently, if attacked, you will be 'behind the curve" and will have a devil of a time pulling any weapon that you may have on your person prior to the evil person who is attacking you being able to hit you at will with whatever weapon he has attacked. A lot of confrontations, even against armed felons, start with the good guy using empty hand methodologies and doing what is necessary to stay alive long enough to access whatever weapon he may be carrying and counterattack. Sometimes, the whole thing is handled at the empty hand level by the defender, as when you "win the lottery" and actually get that lock on the knife-wielder's wrist or some, normally, equally improbable outcome, you are just very, very good, or your opponent is just really, really unskilled and/or timid. Situations vary. Also, please note that there are a ton of instances where empty hand may be legally justified and a weapon may not. Just some thoughts.

Really, I find budo training helps sharpen the mind and spirit for physical confrontation. I love techniques, but it seems the mental sharpening, the kenshu and tanren, have helped me the most through difficult situations involving combat and life or death situations. And can be equally applied to everyday difficulties.
Osu!

Great to see another Ohioan!

Jon Holloway wrote: Mr. Burgess, I applaud your motivation in writing this post, but I do want to say a few things. First of all, I have been in situations, in law enforcement, when people tried to kill me, so I know that, like you say, some things go straight out the window and you have to deal with what is, not what you would have liked it to be. However, please note that empty hand martial arts have a very real place in defending oneself and for both the private citizen and law enforcement officer. Quite frequently, if attacked, you will be 'behind the curve" and will have a devil of a time pulling any weapon that you may have on your person prior to the evil person who is attacking you being able to hit you at will with whatever weapon he has attacked. A lot of confrontations, even against armed felons, start with the good guy using empty hand methodologies and doing what is necessary to stay alive long enough to access whatever weapon he may be carrying and counterattack. Sometimes, the whole thing is handled at the empty hand level by the defender, as when you "win the lottery" and actually get that lock on the knife-wielder's wrist or some, normally, equally improbable outcome, you are just very, very good, or your opponent is just really, really unskilled and/or timid. Situations vary. Also, please note that there are a ton of instances where empty hand may be legally justified and a weapon may not. Just some thoughts.

I do agree, and my response is to show why am in agreement. I do believe empty hand has its place. I have mentioned be before and I failed to do in my last post. Aikido has many tools that will fit the needs of LEOs. And when a LEO gives credit to Aikido's effectiveness it is discredited. In the post you responded to, it was to let such people know, you can't discredit Aikido's effectiveness. The street scenario that many construct is a fallacy, a fantasy, not in touch with reality. They don't calculate the variables in an engagement, only the perimeters of within their constructs that sever their interest, and support their views. For example, those individuals, usually from a MMA background, who don't feel Aikido is effective, don't consider how to handle a situation where a weapon is involved. For example, if you use MMA and take the fight to the ground you can be shot or stabbed by a person concealing the weapon and taking the advantage of being in engaged. An individual criminal who has no martial arts background or training -well very poor at best. But, they have allot of assault experience. Then there is the high likelihood more assailants involve themselves in the situation. This increases the dynamic and danger of the attack, many people who create the street scenario favoring MMA/BJJ ignore as well. Here as well, these assailants have no martial arts training, just experience assaulting people. On the street, there are many variables, you can't entangle yourself on the ground dealing with just one person in an MMA fashion.These things again are ignored my those who feel MMA/BJJ is superior to Aikido. Or those who think Aikido as an art is ineffective.

And the other thing they are don't factor in their scenarios that states favoring gun laws so citizen can have a concealed weapon. Basically saying the are out of touch. Aikido has many applications and is designed for these variables. And as a result those who say Aikido isn't effective fail to realize what a real street situation consists of. It isn't some drunken Hollywood frat party fight. It isn't Fight Club. It isn't kicking someone's ass because they kicked sand in your face. And the average citizen to protect themselves is going to buy a gun over taking a martial arts class. And violent gang members and other criminals don't rely on open hand techniques to commit their violent crimes. And LEOs carry guns for that reason.

But, in the case you laid out and your experience speaking, I can't argue against it. In that sense Aikido is very effective. Is it the only tool. No, I don't think so. Is a tool that is broad enough to apply to many situations LEOs face, and others face, yes. And I do believe that a gun alone in a self-defense situation should be completely relied upon. Though that has been the issue with many LEOs I have worked with. They believe all they need is their gun.

That is what I was getting at. So I agree completely with what you said. And have said it myself in many a post back.

I've been in the same situations as Jon and Mickey over thirty years and I largely echo their comments. There is no martial art, nor any defensive weapon that will satisfy all the needs of a cop on the street. Having a quality martial arts game and being an expert with his weapons are big advantages certainly. His greatest and most effective weapons are between his ears and his attitude. Most of the time his bearing, confidence (whether real or reaching the skills of an Olivier) and obvious willingness will prevent the attack in the first place. When all that fails and things start to get "real western", the officer's willingness to fight will give him an edge - maybe he will remember kotogaeshi or a closed guard, and maybe he will be reduced to a head butt or biting like a snapping turtle. Whatever "it" may be, it won't be pretty like the dojo, it won't be an artificial construct of some sort, it will be for real and it will be for keeps. Those who lose will be memorialized and those who win will be back again tomorrow or the next day and do it all over again. Thankfully it doesn't happen all that often, but when it does, it isn't anything like the MMA or Pride. Those very real events always reminded me of trying to give a hungry bobcat a bath - it wasn't much fun for either of us.

There have been some good posts on this thread -- Philip, Jon, Mickey, Nafis, Michael.

Philip Burgess wrote: Criminals have access to and their preferences is not MMA, Aikido, or any other martial art - self styled or not. They prefer weapons, namely a gun. Then a knife. Then their fists- quick hard, unsuspecting blows to the head. Well, many prefer that because it works so well, and doesn't need anyone to teach you it. But a weapon is the most used and preferred object of attack. So really, it mutes most of these types of discussions. And I heard an instructor at a seminar say and I paraphrase, there is no need for martial arts in today's world as criminals have guns. Now with that said, being effective is defined by a well placed bullet. It really doesn't matter how good someone else is or isn't. What matters is when and how fast you pull a trigger. Or how well you surprise your target as you stab them or hit them, when they least expect it or see it. And how much experience a person has to handle the adrenaline dump, rapid heat rate, and your mental faculties and nerves when in a high pressure and stress situation. Yet there is all this recycled arcane and archaic martial arts talk , and no one about what I pointed out. No talk about how to handle a gun under a high stress situation and stuff instead it is "you suck and because I am better than you and know more than you, I'll show you why you suck." Or "you suck and go to this person only, as they are a god, and you suck. And since you suck they will show you why you suck, suckers. See I did it, and I am the world's greatest." That is the reality. Guns are it, and no matter what your training is, your stuff isn't going to stop a bullet, much less a 100 rounds a second. Or buck shot. When your butt is kidnapped in your sleep or car jacked by 5 teenagers and twenty somethings at gun point. Who will more than likely shot you at some point. Rarely, now-a-days any serious criminal act involves 2 or more people with a high possibility you will not be breathing at their discretion.

So what's new?

The key to martial effectiveness has always been in the use of weapons, numbers, and surprise.

Any martial art that is useful will address these things. Aikido does.

Aikido is not an "empty-handed" martial art. The techniques were developed to support the use of weapons, which is the only realistic way to deal with multiple attackers. It must be remembered that the use of the weapon is primary, and the taijutsu gets you there or keeps you there, and can give you alternatives when using your weapon is possible, but not necessary.

Proper aikido training also addresses awareness and intent, which are crucial to these this type of encounter.

People who believe modern mma is the end all be all of martial arts are living in a fantasy world.

Of course, this doesn't address training methodology, which in mma is often far superior to aikido.

Michael Varin wrote: There have been some good posts on this thread -- Philip, Jon, Mickey, Nafis, Michael. Of course, this doesn't address training methodology, which in mma is often far superior to aikido.

Well MMA is about sport fighting. They take on a modern approach to conditioning, and other means of training the body for a contact sport. Such a sports philosophy is universal and isn't often found in martial arts,but rather in martial sports. I think that is often due to tradition and philosophy of those adherent to an exotic or established environment and experience offered by Aikido.

I guess training methodologies, in terms, of Aikido effectiveness should be compared fairly, in terms of superiority, to other like activities. For instance, martial arts training methodologies can't be compared to sports and visa versa as for each has different purposes, designs and goals. Yes,training philosophy and other training abstracts such as, how intensely or seriously a person trains no matter what the goal or purpose of the art, improves performance. That is up to the individual how hard they are going to train and what are their goals.

It is individual choice and individual goals that dictates to what extent martial effectiveness is necessary. It isn't the art or sport,it is the person. Like Randy Jackson said so obnoxiously, but a truth never the less, "Dog you're so good, you could sing the alphabet (or phone book)." Implying the singer was so good it didn't matter what was sung, it would sound excellent.

I think we would all be better at our Aikido, or any other physical activity if we followed the training regimen demonstrated by many of the MMA professionals. Most of them are incredibly fit people, with explosive strength and amazing endurance, perhaps more so than wrestlers, gymnasts and others. There was a recent bio-documentary on Rich Franklin, and if it were to be believed, the man trains eight hours a day, just like a regular 9 to 5 job. Genetics aside, I suspect that some of those guys would live forever if they weren't getting so badly beaten and banged up periodically. I also suspect that they could play almost any sport at a reasonable level due to their conditioning, flexibility, and coordination. Now which of us is willing to do that level of work?

Rich Franklin was probably in a more dangerous profession before the UFC when he was a high school teacher in the Rust Belt.

Graham Jenkins wrote: ...to Practice Aikido? I recently went to a 'ki aikido' class, and after being told by the guy trying to apply ikkyo to me 'Feel free to go down...' because I was still standing, and he couldn't lead me down, I said 'I'll go down when you make me.'. There was a dan grade practicing with us, and she just completely dismissed me with a patronising and cutting tone, saying 'We don't like to hurt each other here.'. I thought that the point of aikido was that you should be able to apply these techniques, and that you should do so with little/no pain - certainly in the case of ikkyo, anyway? My own view is that if you can be thrown quite hard/quickly, and effectively receive, so that you aren't harmed, then you are good at aikido - i.e., you are receiving/harmonizing with a lot of energy. So too with stuff like nikkyo, sankyo, yonkyo - doing them (viz., having them applied) quite 'strong' will open up and stretch your joints etc., and allow blood, antibodies, ki, what have you, to circulate. Hence, if you eschew practicing this way, then you will never be as pliable, filled with ki/energy, receptive to ki/energy, etc., as you can be. In terms of the practice of aikido as a martial art, and using it to hurt people, my own understanding is that o'sensei's conception of budo was that it is a means of preventing greater harm: it is not a means of killing others, but of protecting others; that is, you might have to restrain, or even kill somebody, for instance - but you do it for the good of society - to protect the innocent, etc. It's all well and good not wanting to hurt people, as these 'ki aikido' people seemed to really believe in, but perhaps sometimes it is necessary, and justified. What's your opinion on this?

Thought it best to re-quote the OP since the topic seems to have gone in a slightly different direction.

I understand EXACTLY where you are coming from. This was my big frustration when I started Aikido and struggled to find the middle ground on all this.

I agree to an extent that technique should be performed softly in such a manner that uke goes down, and I also agree with the statement "I'll go down when you make me!".

There is so much going on in the uke/nage relationship and in the context of aikido alot can get lost in translation for sure!

An unexperienced Uke, as I was once, might ignore alot of the input that simply is not communicated in the context of training and by doing so, sets up a false "wiring" with Nage. So, Nage can't be "soft" and also make Uke go down.

By ignoring what would be appropriate in a confrontation, uke and nage simply cannot work together.

This is a martial context, however, and both uke and nage need to realize this. Nage needs to be "On" and tactical and prepared to "Make uke comply", at the same time, Uke needs to understand that these things can happen to him.

When all this comes together, we have a proper environment to practice and train.

This brings up another important point. DISSONANCE. This occurs when we practice in the dojo and then say we go out on the street and our "UKE" does not cooperate with us, or fails to recognize that "NAGE" can and might hurt him. Maybe Nage has conditioned him or herself in the dojo so much that he/she forgets that the threat we pose must be real, credible, recognized, and believable to our Opponent and our opponent must react in such a way as to avoid that situation, which leads us to our next step in which we can respond and control the situation with the options we want to use.

Of course all this requires a great deal of practice and a functional understanding of the "branches and sequels" that can occur in such situations.

Lets face it...we are all constructed pretty much the same. two arms, two legs, about the same hieght, weight etc.

There are only so many ways to kick, punch, hit etc.

However, many, many permutations of how these things can be played out!

Our kata or training helps us work through these permutations and experience them and learn to get a grasp on the branches and sequels of fighting.

When I first started Aikido, I was told it was important to learn to be a good uke first. 15 years later, I am trying even more today than when I started to learn to be a good uke. I find I learn so much from being an Uke about how to respond or better yet how my opponent may or should respond that it seems to make the Nage/Offensive side much easier!

Anyway, while in practice it seems that we are dancing or learning alot of ineffective stuff..i'd say most of the time you are not, however, you do need to maybe look at the context of your training and try and understand how it would apply in reality etc and then allow the proper communication to take place between Uke and Nage.

It is not easy for sure, especially when you deal with beginners that simply do not have the context to understand all the bad things that may happen to them if they fail to move properly.

I know we don't like to think about hurting or using hard techniques in aikido, however, I think this is an important thing we do need to understand, that these things can and will happen to you on the street if you do not move and defend yourself properly.

It isn't about being an aikibunny or diving. It is about protecting yourself, placing yourself tactically in a better position, and trying to get back ahead of the OODA curve in the relationship. If Nage is doing things correctly, you simply are not able to do so.

Standing there and saying "Make me go down", is simply as bad as being an aikibunny or diving...maybe worse, since at least if you are diving or being a bunny you are doing SOMETHING!

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Thought it best to re-quote the OP since the topic seems to have gone in a slightly different direction. I understand EXACTLY where you are coming from. This was my big frustration when I started Aikido and struggled to find the middle ground on all this. I agree to an extent that technique should be performed softly in such a manner that uke goes down, and I also agree with the statement "I'll go down when you make me!". There is so much going on in the uke/nage relationship and in the context of aikido alot can get lost in translation for sure! An unexperienced Uke, as I was once, might ignore alot of the input that simply is not communicated in the context of training and by doing so, sets up a false "wiring" with Nage. So, Nage can't be "soft" and also make Uke go down. By ignoring what would be appropriate in a confrontation, uke and nage simply cannot work together. This is a martial context, however, and both uke and nage need to realize this. Nage needs to be "On" and tactical and prepared to "Make uke comply", at the same time, Uke needs to understand that these things can happen to him. When all this comes together, we have a proper environment to practice and train. This brings up another important point. DISSONANCE. This occurs when we practice in the dojo and then say we go out on the street and our "UKE" does not cooperate with us, or fails to recognize that "NAGE" can and might hurt him. Maybe Nage has conditioned him or herself in the dojo so much that he/she forgets that the threat we pose must be real, credible, recognized, and believable to our Opponent and our opponent must react in such a way as to avoid that situation, which leads us to our next step in which we can respond and control the situation with the options we want to use. Of course all this requires a great deal of practice and a functional understanding of the "branches and sequels" that can occur in such situations. Lets face it...we are all constructed pretty much the same. two arms, two legs, about the same hieght, weight etc. There are only so many ways to kick, punch, hit etc. However, many, many permutations of how these things can be played out! Our kata or training helps us work through these permutations and experience them and learn to get a grasp on the branches and sequels of fighting. When I first started Aikido, I was told it was important to learn to be a good uke first. 15 years later, I am trying even more today than when I started to learn to be a good uke. I find I learn so much from being an Uke about how to respond or better yet how my opponent may or should respond that it seems to make the Nage/Offensive side much easier! Anyway, while in practice it seems that we are dancing or learning alot of ineffective stuff..i'd say most of the time you are not, however, you do need to maybe look at the context of your training and try and understand how it would apply in reality etc and then allow the proper communication to take place between Uke and Nage. It is not easy for sure, especially when you deal with beginners that simply do not have the context to understand all the bad things that may happen to them if they fail to move properly. I know we don't like to think about hurting or using hard techniques in aikido, however, I think this is an important thing we do need to understand, that these things can and will happen to you on the street if you do not move and defend yourself properly. It isn't about being an aikibunny or diving. It is about protecting yourself, placing yourself tactically in a better position, and trying to get back ahead of the OODA curve in the relationship. If Nage is doing things correctly, you simply are not able to do so. Standing there and saying "Make me go down", is simply as bad as being an aikibunny or diving...maybe worse, since at least if you are diving or being a bunny you are doing SOMETHING!

I've recently started training under a teacher who teaches a style very much in the vein of Seigo Yamaguchi, and Seishiro Endo: he focuses on maintaining complete relaxation in the arms and shoulders, as this allows you to feel the other's energy/centre, and to receive it - and tension allows uke to get hold of something.

I also strongly believe in maintaining a connection in aikido - if, as uke, the connection/grip is broken, you are allowing nage the opportunity to strike you - I think kokyu-ho, where you keep hold of nage's hands, and nage's hands are coming towards your face when you are on the ground, illustrates this point well.
As such, in the situation I described, where I said to someone who asked me to go down: 'I'll go down when you make me.', was one in which I sought to maintain the connection - which, after all, is the essence of aikido (the roles of uke and nage being, essentially, one); when he moved me, I was receptive to his energy, and moved accordingly - he had no trouble moving me around in a circle, but he just didn't know how to lead me down.
I wasn't being a dick, and I wasn't being inactive/passive: I was trying my hardest to maintain a connection, and be 'live' - i.e., to practice the principle of non-resistance, and be in harmony with nage.

Until recently, I was used to using muscle power to force a technique: now I try and remember to stay relaxed, and use my centre to effect techniques - and I actually managed (I think) to do aikido at times last night!

Alex Lawrence wrote: I find that in judo, jujitsu etc and truth be told I find that more in those arts than I do in Aikido. Harmonising and connecting with a co-operative uke is childs play. Harmonising and connecting with someone bigger than you when they're trying to flatten you is something else. That's more spiritual IMO because it equates more to the real world. Aikido is like living in a hippy commune; everyone gets on because everyone wants to get on; it's false and plastic.

I didn't happen to walk into a judo or jujitsu dojo, but an aikido dojo.
I think we train in two different worlds & I'm sorry your experiences were negative but your words above do not describe the aikido I do or try to do. It is in working with and learning from a variety of training partners, testing my limits, finding my weaknesses, facing my frustrations that a spiritual practce is forged.
BTW modem died so have just been catching up today - at wifi cafe w: iPod so sorry for any weird typos!

Alex Lawrence wrote: I find that in judo, jujitsu etc and truth be told I find that more in those arts than I do in Aikido. Harmonising and connecting with a co-operative uke is childs play. Harmonising and connecting with someone bigger than you when they're trying to flatten you is something else. That's more spiritual IMO because it equates more to the real world. Aikido is like living in a hippy commune; everyone gets on because everyone wants to get on; it's false and plastic.

I'll give my opinion, then shove off the matter.

I don't think anyone who honestly studies and loves Aikido has the opinion you've expressed of the Aikido they practice in.
However,
If you get something out of Aikido, then train in Aikido. If you have an affirmed love and passion in Aikido, train every day that you can.
If you think something else serves you better, then go do something else. You have to be honest with yourself, and train honestly. Don't waste your time or any one else's time. Get off the mat and stop wasting mat space, there are students who would appreciate it's use. There's training to be done, for everyone who has an honest desire to understand this art, and no time to waste on people who don't love this art.

Alex Lawrence wrote: Harmonising and connecting with a co-operative uke is childs play. Harmonising and connecting with someone bigger than you when they're trying to flatten you is something else. That's more spiritual IMO because it equates more to the real world. Aikido is like living in a hippy commune; everyone gets on because everyone wants to get on; it's false and plastic.

Wow: it sounds like you've mastered aikido...how old are you?

In my experience, it doesn't matter how co-operative somebody is: it doesn't mean that you can connect/harmonise with them. And when I am uke to a 5th dan, I don't get the chance to co-operate: as soon as I make contact, he achieves kuzushi, and i'm trying my hardest to keep up with my arm - trying to harmonise/connect is the best way to do this, and is a massive struggle. For me anyway: sounds like you'd be the perfect uke for my sensei; he's based in Wolves - perhaps you'd like to attend one of his classes, show me what you can do/give me a few pointers?

In terms of training methodology, when teaching someone to drive, you don't toss them the keys and say 'Let's do a ton down the M6.', do you? - For one thing, it'd be very dangerous to do so. So you start off slow.
So with beginners/low grades in aikido, you co-operate - in order to get the movements into the muscle memory. I think that there's a point at which you should start to challenge someone's technique, yes, but not right away:

'He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and walk, and run, and climb, and dance; one cannot fly into flying.'

- Friedrich Nietzsche

Regards harmonising with another: well, that's so that you can avoid being hurt when a technique is applied - if you're stiff/resistant, then you won't feel nage's energy, and won't be able to keep up, leading to taking ukemi safely.
There's also the fact that you're training yourself in aikido - all the time: whether you're uke or nage, you are training the same principles; it would be entirely counter-productive and absurd as nage, to relax, move from the centre, harmonise, and be non-resistant...then as soon as you're uke, to be tense, use muscle strength, and resist. You'd only do aikido half the time...

Incidentally: I was playing football the other day, and I found that, when playing outfield (I usually play as goalkeeper), I didn't have it within me to take players on - to 'beat them'; I thought about it for a while, as it troubled me quite a lot
I finally realised that as a result of training in aikido, all such will/drive to defeat others had vanished - and I was glad.
How's that for 'equating to the real world'?

Aikido is like living in a hippy commune; everyone gets on because everyone wants to get on; it's false and plastic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8u84d...eature=related

Carsten Möllering wrote: Does this Ki Aikido Dojo follow Yoshigasaki Doshu (sic!) or do they follow Tohei? In my experience the "Ki Aikido" of Yoshigasaki is "different" from all other forms of aikido I know? In Europe Ki Aikido means mostly the style of Yoshigasaki. But in the US Ki Aikido mostly means the line of Tohei?

Apparently they're an 'independent' dojo, and they only mention Koichi Tohei on their website.

I don't suppose you can link me to some good clips of ki aikido? I've searched on YouTue, but everything i've turned up was very...soft/compliant.

I don't think anyone who honestly studies and loves Aikido has the opinion you've expressed of the Aikido they practice in

First, I would rethink this statement, as Shodokan illustrates Mr. Lawrences position completely, in regards to full non-compliance.

If you have an affirmed love and passion in Aikido, train every day that you can.

Secondly, in my opinion, if one is not training to realize the art in it's entirity, then one should not profess a "love and passion" for an art that ones lack of devotion is diminishing.

Get off the mat and stop wasting mat space, there are students who would appreciate it's use.

Tozando dogi and hakama....$450
Annual Dues/membership ...$1500 x5,
Seminars and Camps..........$500 x5,
Dan Grade, gets their ass handed to them
by a unco-operative untrained assailant.........FRACKIN' PRICELESS !


Train well,
Train hard,
Train honestly,

Mickey

Incidentally: I was playing football the other day, and I found that, when playing outfield (I usually play as goalkeeper), I didn't have it within me to take players on - to 'beat them'; I thought about it for a while, as it troubled me quite a lot I finally realised that as a result of training in aikido, all such will/drive to defeat others had vanished - and I was glad. How's that for 'equating to the real world'?

Could be why you are not a goalie anymore..

Honestly, Graham, that makes no sense...as a member of a team, you are letting your teammates down and could be viewed as intentionally aiding the opposition. You better be proficient with what ever you train in, because if that were my team you were on.....

Mickey

Michael Gelum wrote: Could be why you are not a goalie anymore.. Honestly, Graham, that makes no sense...as a member of a team, you are letting your teammates down and could be viewed as intentionally aiding the opposition. You better be proficient with what ever you train in, because if that were my team you were on..... Mickey

Hahaha.
I normally play in goal, as that's where i've played since I was a kid, and am best (besides having terrible cardio when I started playing again recently...). After a while of playing a again, when we had a large enough lead, I would come and play out for a bit - in defence, again: when playing out, that's where I have a history - i've never had the temperament for being a striker...

So anyway, i've still been good even when playing in midfield and up front - I just bring the ball, and distribute the play - drawing challenges and passing around players, as opposed to taking them on.
It actually works out better that way, as there's always someone on my team who's pretty greedy, and who doesn't pass much.

Michael Gelum wrote: Tozando dogi and hakama....$450 Annual Dues/membership ...$1500 x5, Seminars and Camps..........$500 x5, Dan Grade, gets their ass handed to them by a unco-operative untrained assailant.........FRACKIN' PRICELESS ! Train well, Train hard, Train honestly, Mickey

hmm... Some one has a chip on their shoulder about something I don't care to hear about. LMAO!

Michael Hackett wrote: I think we would all be better at our Aikido, or any other physical activity if we followed the training regimen demonstrated by many of the MMA professionals. Most of them are incredibly fit people, with explosive strength and amazing endurance, perhaps more so than wrestlers, gymnasts and others.

Emphasis mine. The MMA "professionals", like other elite athletes, have the resources to devote to a full-time training regimen. Would we be better at our aikido if we followed that regimen? Quite possibly, and good luck getting someone to carry your freight while you do so. The rest of us have other responsibilities in our lives that we can't simply abdicate in order to train full-time.