Defending against Aikido

Dustin Acuff wrote: .... i know for a fact that from the initiation of the punch shihonage can be completely preformed in less that 2 sec, probably closer to one..

Yeah, they can be a bit lower in Aikido dojos, something that has to be taken into account.

Alex Lawrence wrote: Round house as they're entering in or as they take. Keeps the range open. Snap kick to the thigh also works well.

So for this to work, you have to fire off the kick before the shiho-nage as even started, preempting it; wait to long, and you're in too close and your arm is being cranked. So the key to success is to hold tori off.

As I suspected. And even then, applying this defense assumes (a) you know in advance it's shiho-nage; and (b) tori is so committed to doing it he doesn't abort when he sees your foot leaving the ground.

This works best if your strategy is to hold tori off with kicks and punches and not let him or her close, and it sounds like it is. But if an Aikido person can get in as close as they want, you'll have some technical problems.

Michael Gallagher wrote: (b) tori is so committed to doing it he doesn't abort when he sees your foot leaving the ground.

If there is contact, its not even necessary to see the foot leave the ground, it can be felt.

kvaak
Pauliina

Michael Gallagher wrote: So for this to work, you have to fire off the kick before the shiho-nage as even started, preempting it; wait to long, and you're in too close and your arm is being cranked. So the key to success is to hold tori off.

Pretty much, if they're fast the foot lands as they begin to crank, if they're slow they just get booted.

Michael Gallagher wrote: As I suspected. And even then, applying this defense assumes (a) you know in advance it's shiho-nage; and (b) tori is so committed to doing it he doesn't abort when he sees your foot leaving the ground.

I'm not so sure that you need to know. If you do say TKD, and your hand gets grabbed you'll probably naturally kick.

Michael Gallagher wrote: This works best if your strategy is to hold tori off with kicks and punches and not let him or her close, and it sounds like it is. But if an Aikido person can get in as close as they want, you'll have some technical problems.

I prefer getting close in, really close in, so that I can use knees and elbows. The problem I find with that though is that Aikidoka try and stay at sword range and it ends up in a stalemate, assuming it's on a mat. Point blank range in a bar would probably be another matter, unless they're going to turn around mid fight and say "Excuse me mate, would you mind moving back a bit because I need to tenkan out of the way of this blokes elbow and I haven't got the room."


Aikido is very much a medium range martial art, you need a fair bit of room to do most of the techniques. Ok so yes more advanced Aikidoka can stand on the spot and use their hips to a certain extent but that doesn't entirely cut out the need to move.

Alex

if i have your arm, if you kick me you are going to get the hard version of the crank to your shoulder, not smart but could happen.

if your hand gets grabbed, then that means you committed energy from a punch or grab thus commiting your energy/intent on grabbing me. unless you had already initiated the kick you wont get one off, and you are assuming i enter outside so you can kick. if i went inside i'm already to your center in control, and should you try to kick, depending on what point i'm at in the technique, your size, the angle of the kick, the particular point of interception, ect. i may simply shift to ikkyo, step under and preform reverse sankyo, throw on a rokkyo in which case kicking me in the back with that roundhouse will be disasterous, or i might simply cut down through you center and dump you. i'm not just going to arbitrairly reach over, grab your wrist and overpower you into shihonage. if you are kicking, on the other hand, i'm just going to intercept your leg, create offest, and cut to your calf (a variation of this technique will snap most of the ligaments in the knee and i've heard it should create a nice little spiral fracture down the tibia and femur).

as to knees and elbows: i dont know about you, but an elbow strike looks alot like ikkyo to me, you have aready done most of my work for me. granted, you have to be very quick and relaxed to pull it off, but it can and has been done. knees pose a bit of a problem, but working close you will likely go for a clench and i could feel the shift in balance. the second your foot leaves the ground, you are no longer properly balanced and can be quite easily cut down.

at best this discussion is a stalemate. number one, you should never be attacked by an experienced aikidoka, maybe more experienced than you, but never someone with like 10+ years unless you ahve done something disasterous, in which case you need to go buy a gun. number two, while "what if"s are good, this one is just plain realistic. if you cant understand why then for some reason or another you are failing to grasp one of the most basic fundamentals of aikido. if you really think you can pop an aiki with a roundhouse, either try your sensei, or just in case you just have bad teaching, find the nearest daito ryu school, take a fieldtrip, explain your problem, and try it. your kick may land, but i promise you you will never try to do it again. number three, why are you learning aikido if you dont belive it works? are you just lookign for a better way to hurt people? are you the type of person who goes out and seeks confrentation? if not then why are you challenging everything that anyone says? this "what if" game just doesnt cut it. i cannot speak for anyone else out there, but when i enter a confrentation, i enter with the intent to do whatever is required to keep myself safe. i hold no illusions about walking out with no brusies, no broken bones, nor do i really think about if i am going to die. but i do go in with intent to preserve my life at any cost, including if that means killing you to live to fight another day, or simply running as fast and far as i can. dealing with someone on the street in a "what if" scenario will never definitively prove anything. everyone knows the game is a little diffrent against a trained fighter. but given the choice i'd rather have 4 trained fighters attack me over one mother who thinks i'm going to kill her child. that is reality.

Dustin Acuff wrote: Alex if i have your arm, if you kick me you are going to get the hard version of the crank to your shoulder, not smart but could happen.

Last person I seriously kicked collapsed pretty much instantly from a dead leg and I was being nice. Like I said earlier shi-ho nage is impossible with a broken knee or ankle. A lot of people seriously underestimate just how damaging and disabiling a kick can be especially if landed on the right spot. I mean a randomly landed kick hurts like hell and slows you down, a properly targeted kick drops you, plain and simple.

Dustin Acuff wrote: if your hand gets grabbed, then that means you committed energy from a punch or grab thus commiting your energy/intent on grabbing me.

If I throw a big Aiki punch yes, but who would willfully unbalance themselves in a fight? 1st thing I was taught was how to take up a proper fighting stance so that when I attacked or retreated I was always on balance. If you're getting energy it's the energy of my arm, the rest of my body is in a nice strong stance with all the weight of my body acting through my center and this is common sence to most people.

Dustin Acuff wrote: unless you had already initiated the kick you wont get one off

Well who throws just one attack? Second thing I was taught, don't give him a chance to come back. A single technique by itself is easy to deal with and even if it's successful it's not going to end the fight. So throwing combinations is par for the course.

Dustin Acuff wrote: i dont know about you, but an elbow strike looks alot like ikkyo to me, you have aready done most of my work for me.knees pose a bit of a problem, but working close you will likely go for a clench and i could feel the shift in balance. the second your foot leaves the ground, you are no longer properly balanced and can be quite easily cut down.

Yup it does, well some do. Chopping elbow, back elbow or an upper cut style elbow don't. Thing is at that kind of range you see it coming just after it's hit you plus the body angles and range are all wrong for ikkyo. You're thinking single technique to single technique. Punches or kicks or knees or elbows. The reality of the situation is punches and kicks and knees and elbows all mixed up together in different combinations and possibly, throws as well. To isolate out one single technique to throw someone with is going to be very difficult, which is probably why Aikido trys to keep a good distance away and force the attacker to cross that distance in one massive unbalancing attack.

Dustin Acuff wrote: number three, why are you learning aikido if you dont belive it works? are you just lookign for a better way to hurt people? are you the type of person who goes out and seeks confrentation? if not then why are you challenging everything that anyone says? this "what if" game just doesnt cut it. i cannot speak for anyone else out there, but when i enter a confrentation, i enter with the intent to do whatever is required to keep myself safe. i hold no illusions about walking out with no brusies, no broken bones, nor do i really think about if i am going to die. but i do go in with intent to preserve my life at any cost, including if that means killing you to live to fight another day, or simply running as fast and far as i can. dealing with someone on the street in a "what if" scenario will never definitively prove anything. everyone knows the game is a little diffrent against a trained fighter. but given the choice i'd rather have 4 trained fighters attack me over one mother who thinks i'm going to kill her child. that is reality.

I do Aikido because the beauty of ukemi Aiki style is that it teaches zanshin better than most arts and yes partly because I'm looking for a better way to hurt people. I figure if you end up in a situation where they're going to hurt you and you need to hurt them, using the best way of hurting them is a wise idea. I'm not big on running away because I don't like the idea of finding out that they're faster than me when I get kicked to the ground and stomped on. The whole "don't turn your back on your enemy...unless you're running away" doesn't cut it with me. As to confrontation. If someone seeks trouble with me I look on it as unfortunate. I usually get laughed at when people find out I do martial arts, I wont fight for myself unless I need to because to be honest, I'm too laid back.
I'm pointing out, not asking what if? The best way to understand an art, in my opinion, is to pull it apart and see what's going on and why, seeing what it can do and what it can't. In my opinion learning where the gaps are is half of the art. How can you claim to know Aikido without knowing where the gaps are?
"Know yourself and know your enemy...". If you know the gaps you (hopefully) will avoid putting yourself in a situation where your opponent can exploit them. "First make yourself invincible, then seek battle". I like to keep things full and frank, martial arts is life and death so openess and honesty is very important. I've seen students that have come back from Aikido courses with a new "uncounterable" technique taught by brilliant instructors and then dumped them on their ass with another art and they look at you as if you've done the impossible. Then it's all "Well we wont be fighting experienced martial artists" or "You can't do that because it's not Aikido" and that is a sloppy state of mind because if you end up in a confrontation you automatically underestimate your opponent. You find out if he's a martial artist during the fight, not before it. Not everyone out there is untrainned and not all untrainned people are crap at fighting and it goes without saying that assuming that all martial artists are nice people that don't get into fights is a massive sweeping generalisation and the product of a closed and confused mind not open to the possiblites of unrestricted combat.
Mushin, no mind, non-judgemental, not bound and clouded by preconceptions or misconceptions. In short a martial mind.
You need to approach everything in martial arts as if you were your opponent and you have loose your ego over how good you are and be utterly ruthless. Sometimes Aikidoka stink of Aikido and need to get back to the original mindset they had before they started training. You're just a person, in a fight who happens to know Aikido, it's one way of doing things, one way of looking at the world but it's not the only way and it's probably not your oppoents way. Study his ways get to know them so that you know how to beat him and so that you can learn his approach and all the useful things he has to teach.

People complain that this debate goes on ad infinitum, Good, we're all still thinking about it instead of shutting ourselves off in our dojo's and convincing ourselves that we know the answer.

God look at me rambling on like I'm 70 or something. I appologise, but do you see what I'm getting at?

I understand at what you are getting at, but I disagree with some points.

I am familiar with the Thai Kickboxing roundhouse and have experienced first hand the shutdown. I agree, the kick is absolutely devastating. I also agree that unless you have practiced pretty extensively on your knees, once you get hit with one you are screwed.

I realize that no one attacks only once, not even the brawler, but at some point they will either slow down or leave an opening where they can be taken, this is why we make entrance, get off the line, and deflect.

On punches, even a well-trained, well-balanced fighter can be offbalanced, in O Sensei's words "In Aikido you pull in the same direction your attcker is pulling." This means that if you throw a punch, even if you are well balanced, I SHOULD add my energy to yours in the same direction you were already going....kind of like pushing someone on a swing. This can be done on ANY extention given, except probably knees. Can I do it? Not too often. Can you? I dont know. Have I seen it done? Yep.

Knees/Elbows: Very difficult because of the short range of motion and high speed. But it can be done. Your only real course to knees is to try to get off the line through entrance. But as to being TOO close to work, that is just plain wrong. Kuzushi works BEST in very short/zero distance, just ask a Judoka. Think of Ikkyo or any number of our techniques. They work better close. It is very hard to do Irimi or Tenchi Nage without your center being right next to theirs. Each time you attack is a chance to hit me, but teach time is also a chance for me to intercept.

Why do you belive that someone will keep coming after 1 technique? These techniques were designed to maim and kill, and when properly executed still are easily capable of it, Ikkyo is an arm break, nikyo is a wrist break, gokkyo is a wrist/elbow break, shihonage can be a sholder break, rokkyo is like the swiss army knife of breaks, they are pretty much all there. Same concept as a leg kick, it only takes one to mess you up. Just think about your techniques from a little more jujitsu point of view and you will easily see what I mean.

These techniques are 800-1200 years old, developed by and for samurai. The bottom line is that they do work, but you are training Aikido, the world's hardest martial art to learn! These skills will take a long time to learn, to develope, and will quite literally take your entire life to maintain. To say that Aikido might not be the martail art of choice for someone who only has a few months to learn to handle a trained fighter is one thing, but to say that Aikido is incapable of handling that same fighter is just wrong.

But once again I submit to you, go get your sensei and try some of this stuff, or go to someone above him if you are not satisfied. If you get all the way through the ranks and are still unhappy with the results, then I will even quit training and go back to BJJ and Muai Thai.

Alex Lawrence wrote: Pretty much, if they're fast the foot lands as they begin to crank, if they're slow they just get booted.

Which means the 1-2 second shiho-nage Dustin mentioned would be a problem.

I'm not so sure that you need to know. If you do say TKD, and your hand gets grabbed you'll probably naturally kick.

I did Shotokan and TKD about 15 years ago, and I don't remember anything like that. In Kali and Wing Chun, when someone goes to trap or grab your hand, you're too close for a Karate/TKD style kick and (in the case of Wing Chun) you'd be getting nailed before you could fire it off anyway.

I prefer getting close in, really close in, so that I can use knees and elbows. The problem I find with that though is that Aikidoka try and stay at sword range and it ends up in a stalemate, assuming it's on a mat. Point blank range in a bar would probably be another matter, unless they're going to turn around mid fight and say "Excuse me mate, would you mind moving back a bit because I need to tenkan out of the way of this blokes elbow and I haven't got the room." Aikido is very much a medium range martial art, you need a fair bit of room to do most of the techniques. Ok so yes more advanced Aikidoka can stand on the spot and use their hips to a certain extent but that doesn't entirely cut out the need to move.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on Aikido's range. Aikido techniques may start at "sword range" or the inside edge of kicboxking range, but once things get rolling, you spend at least part of the technique very close to the other person, almost body-to-body, and even then, the difference is in inches. Even when your arms are fully extended, your body orientation should be such that you are very close to the other person. I haven't done an empty-hand technique that violates that rule; you admitted a while back that Shiho-nage puts you very close to your partners, so it is probably true in your dojo, too.

So I don't see how you can argue Aikido DOESN'T get close. It does a good deal of the time. So any assumptoins you've made that it doesn't would appear to be incorrect.

Alex Lawrence wrote: .... If I throw a big Aiki punch yes, but who would willfully unbalance themselves in a fight? .....

I saw some amateru boxing once, a tournament held by the Bangor, ME police department. One of the amateur fighters was a big guy who through these big haymakers. Looked more like a "big Aiki punch" than anything from boxing.

Willfully? No. Carelessly? Maybe.

.... Well who throws just one attack? ....

Aikido's goal appears to be to end a confrontation as early as possible. That is why there's so many responses to grabs -- you're assuming a grab and strike combo and the ideal is to nip it in the bud.

.... Aikido trys to keep a good distance away and force the attacker to cross that distance in one massive unbalancing attack.

See above about grab-and-strike. IOW, how far away is uke when you're praciticng off shoulder grabs?

..... I do Aikido because the beauty of ukemi Aiki style is that it teaches zanshin better than most arts and yes partly because I'm looking for a better way to hurt people .....

Well, that's something. But remember, one of the things you said where one of the things you said was you were totally disillusioned with Aikido. If you reach the point where even ukemi waza and zanshin hold no appeal for you -- quit. Don't stay there another second. I mean it.

.... How can you claim to know Aikido without knowing where the gaps are? ....

By pracitcing it. A lot.

Last person I seriously kicked collapsed pretty much instantly from a dead leg and I was being nice. Like I said earlier shi-ho nage is impossible with a broken knee or ankle. A lot of people seriously underestimate just how damaging and disabiling a kick can be especially if landed on the right spot. I mean a randomly landed kick hurts like hell and slows you down, a properly targeted kick drops you, plain and simple.

Totaly agree with you there.....

A few friends of mine in open sparing ( which one should really not do) in handsworth grabs me and trys the entry for shihonage only to find me gently placing my knee against on of his kidneys. At full blast- the kidney would need removing from the body by a surgeon.

Tori attempts shihonage and and as he turns and cuts out- the very beginning- when you draw out to take balance- gets his kidney/ spine/ knee/ ankle/ ribcage destroyed (pick your target and delete appropriately).

Tori attempts shihonage and is downed.
The end- its a mini adventure.

The only way out is to try and cause some pain before i can do this. it is rare but some of the faster mob can do it. Shihonage then i would say ( and this is only me- i confess to no great knowledge, only an open mind so ignore me if you wish) is a brave attempt and good for the right situation, but not exactly a practical solution. Besides there are far better things aikido can do with the fist.....

Richard Player wrote: ..... Tori attempts shihonage and and as he turns and cuts out- the very beginning .....

Those are the key words -- "the very beginning." This is the point I have been trying to make all along -- this counter works well just as the techique is starting. If you are slow or your timing is off, it won't.

One of the practical versions of shihonage I know of/practise, removes the majority of the technique and cuts down drastically on the time it takes to control/hurt the opponent. As a combination of sankyo/shihonage/atemi, the attackers own elbow strikes the attacker in his side/stomach just before his fingers are broken and his wrist is ripped out. Its very very fiendish and although im not vouching for my ability to put this technique on an extremely well trained intelligent fighter who is trying to clean my clock, I would really enjoy seeing someone try to counter this or strike the tori who is applying it...

Michael Gallagher wrote: Those are the key words -- "the very beginning." This is the point I have been trying to make all along -- this counter works well just as the techique is starting. If you are slow or your timing is off, it won't.

Any kind of counter that involves striking starts as soon, if not before, the technique starts because you're already throwing punches or kicks as he starts his technique.

Alex Lawrence wrote: Any kind of counter that involves striking starts as soon, if not before, the technique starts because you're already throwing punches or kicks as he starts his technique.

If we postulate a tori who's good enough to successfully initiate a technique faced with a flurry of kicks and punches, then guess what? You've just proved yourself wrong (again). Because to prove an Aikidoka can't handle that situation, you have to assume someone can handle it well enough to start a technique against a situation, a combination attack, he hasn't trained for.

How very Aiki of you.

The 'defences against aikido' are only going to work (or be rationally discussed) when someone with a lack of experience/understanding grabs someone's wrist or whatever and proceeds to 'do' a technique on them.

With this, you essentally have a technique that is bound to fail, and the 'uke' can then resist/reverse/merely thump the 'attacker', as discussed here, and no doubt experimented with in the dojo.

In this case, we can discuss and explore potential (or actual!) holes in our technique, interesting reversals, and ways to improve what we are practising.

However, when hypothetically applying a technique in The Real World (TM) two things to consider:

1: - A technique is applied where it presents itself. Uke (or tori!) have provided an opening in some way, by uke closing distance, tori moving off line, atemi, irimi, etc.

2: - A technique is applied as part of ingrained movement - tori/nage themselves do not consciously think "I will do X technique" - they just do it. As a result, the person on the receiving end (yes, hypothetically even aikido people) cannot possibly recognise, evaluate and employ some sort of resistance in the time it takes for the technique to happen.

Just these two factors make the chances of 'defending against aikido' per se rather slim. When a technique is done correctly by someone who knows what they are doing there is no way out IMO.

Discussing the shortfalls of shihonage for example, just means work is needed on it. Stating it does not work merely because you can shut down something you know is coming - from someone who would rather comprimise their technique than cause injury - is rather short-sighted in my book.

Ian Upstone wrote: ..... when hypothetically applying a technique in The Real World (TM) two things to consider: 1: - A technique is applied where it presents itself. Uke (or tori!) have provided an opening in some way, by uke closing distance, tori moving off line, atemi, irimi, etc.

This jives with the experience I had in Tai Chi, when I applied nikkyo to my partner during pushing hands. He actually put out hands into a position I could use as part of an attempt to trap me, and I used it. I admit, not the real world, but not an Aikido dojo with a "good uke" either, and an example of how you take a position that presents itself.

..... Discussing the shortfalls of shihonage for example, just means work is needed on it ....

Or, having come up with a counter, you can turn the problem around and ask yourself, Ok, how do I sector off that counter from happening?

Stating it does not work merely because you can shut down something you know is coming - from someone who would rather comprimise their technique than cause injury - is rather short-sighted in my book.

And if the counter depends on getting a kick in before the technique has even started, you have to be pretty certain it's going to be it. Otherwise, tori could change his mind right then.

I didn't read all of the replies to this thread, so maybe someone has already mentioned this, but there is a very simple way to stop someone trying to use aikido on you... just clap twice. Stops 'em in their tracks every time.

Dave Cole wrote: I didn't read all of the replies to this thread, so maybe someone has already mentioned this, but there is a very simple way to stop someone trying to use aikido on you... just clap twice. Stops 'em in their tracks every time.

Or just make sure, whatever else you do, that you don't grab their wrist.



Cheers,

Matt.

Lets back up this thread a little and try to view the initial question with a little more clarity. What if the attacker was trained in aikido
( to whatever level ) and for what ever reason he was attacking you.

Keashi waza is not about just regaining balance after experiancing shoddy technique or finding an opening, its also about just not letting there technique occur.

By becoming so sensitive as to what is occuring during an attack, you parry, move offline, or apply counter technique. KW occurs in situaitions when you are the uke and techniuqe is being applied, by changing postion and following your own redirected energy, you can change angles and apply counter. The counter applied depends on nothing but the opening given to you and your own choice of technique, after changing your body position and finding a positive angle on the situation.

Darren Paul wrote: Keashi waza is not about just regaining balance after experiancing shoddy technique or finding an opening, its also about just not letting there technique occur

I don't think either of these define Kaeshiwaza.

Thanks for putting me straight Peter, but could you please put me right on my viewpoint on Kaeshi-Waza.

As a relatively new player in Aikido, I sometimes make assumptions that are wrong, and probably always will, but am always willing to accept constructive critisicm, though just saying your wrong, never corrects a situation.

thanks

darren

Darren Paul wrote: Thanks for putting me straight Peter, but could you please put me right on my viewpoint on Kaeshi-Waza.

I usually tell my students that a correctly done aikido technique cannot be countered, so kaeshiwaza is a way to discover and repair weaknesses in one's aikido techniques.
On the other hand, it's not easy to accomplish a correctly done aikido technique...

I seem to recall reading and hearing that initially, Osensei only taught kaeshiwaza to the instructors - to give them a trump of sorts over their students. Since then, though, kaeshiwaza has become basics for all practitioners, so obviously the intention has changed.

True I should have given my definition but that has already been done. I was also just pointing out that your definitions were outside normally accepted parameters - you were reaching.

Kaeshiwaza are just reversals. For a kaeshiwaza to occur your opponent must be attempting a technique of their own. Recovering balance, leaving no openings - these are other concepts.

Heres something i've often thought about:

Can there ever be a correct aikido technique if uke can take ukemi from it? As such is the technique not then flawed in some way?

What do you think guys?

Nick Simpson wrote: Heres something i've often thought about: Can there ever be a correct aikido technique if uke can take ukemi from it? As such is the technique not then flawed in some way? What do you think guys?

I think we practice not for the techniques...but for what we can learn from them.