Aikido does not work at all in a fight.

Sure. My comment was that the Japanese Godan in that story was probably not hanging out with Chuck Lidell or anyone of his caliber. (And I suppose that the odds are really good that that level won't be randomly attacking you all that often!)

How was his posture? I like to turn when pushed, and enter when pulled myself. I got to try this in more of a randori with Jason Delucia and it was quite an experience (incredible posture). He is very good. I have to go visit him again!

Rob

wrote: I have competed in both boxing and wrestling and I am now training in brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. I have watched many No Holds Barred competitions, like the UFC, and it is clear to me that Aikido and it's techniques and it's way of training do not prepare anyone to actually fight. I know that Aikido practitioners talk a lot about concepts like spirituality, harmony...etc. but I also hear people talk about how it is a pratical means of self defense. Aikido does not have practical striking techniques or any REAL matwork at all. I would like to know how Aikido can be used as self defense if you cannot grapple or strike.

Hi Joey,

I understand the feeling you must have when seeing Aikido for the first time, or trying it and hoping for the feeling of effectiveness to be gained from practicing the technique.

I'm not going to criticize you or your attitude like some other posters, just explain how I saw things. Maybe it will help, and if not, I hope you find what you are looking for.

I used to do TaeKwonDo and Aikido regularly. I dropped aikido to do TKD and practiced that for a few years. I've since dropped TKD mostly because of time constraints. TKD was great. The kicks and punches were quick, effective, and rather easily learned. With practice, even my crescrent kicks, axe kicks, and spinning back kicks were fast and accurate. The sense of empowerment was exhilerating and I really felt I was learning something. I was confident (and a little cocky, being younger) and in the best shape of my life.

TKD, and I suspect a few other martial arts have what I call a fast "ramp up". You learn the basic punches and kicks, and spend years perfecting them until they are muscle memory and as easily executed as breathing or tying your shoe. Your immediate gain from these arts are huge, and in time your technique is very effective.

Aikido is not one of these arts, at least not for me. The devil is in the details. How you hold your opponents arm, where you grab their limbs, the small angles to really bring the techniques into their most effective forms, take a very long time and a lot of patience to develop. It also must happen in a cooperative environment where you and your partner are dedicated to learning the technique effectively together, whereas in TKD exercise such as sparring are more adversarial in nature. I call this a slow "ramp up" because it really does take years and lots of cooperation to develop them to their maximum potential. Maximizing the art is what makes it effective, and that comes in a long time, not a shorter time like other arts. This does not mean that Aikido only works if your oppenent cooperates, but that you need a cooperating partner to learn the moves well.

Ultimately, my point is that in the time it takes to master Aikido to its most effective state, the Aikido practitioner has aged, possibly by a decade or two, and no longer considers the "tough-guy" and "effective fighting" approach to be important. There is so much physical to learn in Aikido, and really the whole time it's your mental prowess that is growing.

A lot of people see combat tournaments unwise or childish displays of ego. But like you, I agree that Aikido as a martial art should be able to hold its own in the ring against other arts, and I'm sure there are practitioners out there that can make that happen, but the time to make it to effective levels of Aikido tempers the ego and the need to prove one's self in contest.

The early developers of Aikido had other martial arts backgrounds. Most were coming from karate backgrounds, and Aikido was developed as an extension to this. For a true understanding of the martial arts, I believe Aikido DOES need to be supplemented with karate or another art. Otherwise, to me its somewhat akin to painting or photography. You can buy the equipment, go to the same place Ansel Adams went, and take the same picture he did. What have you accomplished? You copied someone. The early practicioners of Aikido EARNED their aikido through the understanding and extrapolation of their previous arts and their years of knowledge and practice. We copy what they developed. And we spend years learning what they developed so that we may better ourselves and our understanding. But in my eyes, to truly develop as a martial artist I think needs to go back and explore these roots of their previous martial arts, too. One must see where they have come from so that they can see where they are going.

Are you training for UFC, or just trying to be the best MA you can be and want to expand your horizons? I know a few guys that are "belt-baggers", who learn an art like TKD and quickly go get other black belts in karate, JKD, etc with the kick/punch knowledge. They're seeking title over effectiveness in my opinion, because they're not really gaining that much more from the similar arts, but that's them.

From your boxing and wrestling background you mentioned, I think aikido would be a great addition to your "arsenal", but please trust me on this, it's not something you can go in for a year and master, expect at least 5 years before you feel some "martial effectiveness" feelings, especially at your level of awareness of these things, but it will come, and I think you'll see the wisdom in the art, and when you see the means of utterly controlling someone and yet not hurting them at all, you'll realize the supremacy of the art in its final forms. I'm not there yet by any means, and may never make it, but I strive for it.

Good luck to you. Osu!

DJA

Donald Alley wrote: Hi Joey,

THIS IS A FIVE YEAR THREAD STARTED BY A TROLL!!! FOR GOD'S SAKE, LET IT DIE!!!!! JOEY HAS LEFT THE BUILDING!!!!

This thing's like one of the undead... no matter how much punishment you deal, it just keeps shambling forward. Stupid zombies.

Rob Haruo Hori wrote: Donald Alley wrote: Hi Joey, THIS IS A FIVE YEAR THREAD STARTED BY A TROLL!!! FOR GOD'S SAKE, LET IT DIE!!!!! JOEY HAS LEFT THE BUILDING!!!!

OK, so Donald Alley should have read the date more carefully before posting. But it's a topic that never dies, so at least if it's here you know this is the Zombie Thread and you don't have to read it.

As for me, even though Joey's left the party I'm still enjoying the discussion. Every once in a while, someone (e.g. Lynn Seiser just now) pops up with a new insight based on recent occurrences.

Lynn Seiser wrote: I was watching a Chuck Lidell UFC fight the other night. The commentators were taking about his great defense against take downs. As I watch him, IMHO, he seemed to pull when pushed and pushed when pulled over extending the attack and taking balance, then stepping off the line in a circular step and letting the attacker fall. Look pretty Aiki and effective to me.

i agree completely .chuck liddell is one of my favorite fighters ,very aiki .

Zombie thread but nevertheless alive and kickin. After reading through posts, i really applaud the maturity of some of the posters here. I do not have extensive technical knowledge on aikido like many of you do (having been an on/off aikidoka), but basing on wot i know thru my previous experiences with various other arts and a keen interest in anything martial, i kinda do agree on DJA's insight - aikido as an extention of previous arts.

Like many things, i wouldn't wanna go into combat with only a basic set of skills, and with that im a true believer of MMA, or at least supplementing aikido with basic knowledge of striking and grappling. I used to be given these advices time n time again:

1. Any modern m.artist shld at least have 6 mths of boxing training.
2. Never enter the ground with a grappler unless you can swim, for the ground is the sea and they r the sharks.

Im sure its the same familiar lines to many of you, but i still swear by it. Well, tis is an old discussion that will probably never ever end, its the same old stuffs round and round again. Train hard.

Just my 2 cents' worth.
In gassho.

Ps. Btw will anyone be kind enough to let me know if i can get a video of Chuck Lidell in action? Help is much appreciated if u do.

Nixon Na wrote: Ps. Btw will anyone be kind enough to let me know if i can get a video of Chuck Lidell in action? Help is much appreciated if u do.

If you're willing to pay, sherdog.com sells UFC videos at their store. The latest UFC was 54 (Liddell vs. Horn), but the most recent I saw on the site so far was 52 (Liddell vs. Couture) -- so 54 will probably be there after a while. Chuck Liddell was in some older ones, too; I don't know whether Lynn was referring to 54 or an earlier one (Lynn?). The shows are available on PayPerView TV so you could plan ahead and watch an upcoming one, but Liddell's not listed on the card for UFC55.

I didn't see any video clips on Sherdog or by Googling; looks like they're saving Liddell footage for the DVD's.

Wendy Rowe wrote: I don't know whether Lynn was referring to 54 or an earlier one (Lynn?).

I have to admit, I don't know which match I noticed this in.

I watch all the MMA/NHB stuff I can, have a lot on disk, and catch the cable sport channels when they show it. Like I've said, I am glad it wasn't around when I was young enough to get involved.

Must admit, because I am personally rather concept application oriented, rather than just techniques and labels, I see Aiki used a lot. DeLucia is the only one I have heard admit it though. (Compliments, appreciations, and respect given)

Remember, a block can be a lock, can be a blow, can be a throw.

Lynn Seiser wrote: Like I've said, I am glad it wasn't around when I was young enough to get involved.

Glad of it, Lynn-san. You have instead put your "gray matter" to much better use...

I find Aikido perfect for escaping situations beyond my control ....
I cant go "kicking peoples arses in the hospital .... i wouldnt have a job very long ..." ... and alot of my patients are elderly ... and loopy! (yes thats a technical term! )
so just learning how to remove MY hand from their grip is invaluable ....
so ... i dunno .... never having BEEN in a fight .... (or not one where im not plastered and end up just takin a royal beating) ... i couldnt comment ...
but for dealing wiv bad situations .... it rocks .... and isnt that the whole point? ... to stop a fight before it starts?

Umm...does this person actually think that UFC represents a "streetfight"? What foolishness. It's a sporting event, and like all sporting events it has RULES. Get these UFC people in a TKD sporting event and guess who wins?

BJJ does not = you becoming a good "streetfighter".it means that in the real world while you fight your oponnent you will do as trained and head to the ground and possibly get BITTEN, GOUGED, and other things that are not allowed in the UFC which I guranteed you find in the real world. How will this help you get to safety? How will this help you if he has friends who wouldnt mind kicking you while you're down?

Basing the validity of a martial art on a sporting event is stupid, your post is stupid. You honestly don't know the difference between "fighting" "selfdefense" and "martial arts"

Read this: http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/grappling.html

That is written by a man who has spent much time on the "streets" and wishes to share his knowledge. He is NOT about teaching sports or how to fight in one, but rather how to get out of a situation and LIVE. That's what Aikido is about. Life (among other things). You find your self in a situation that obviously you dont want to be in, use what you've learned and what you do wont be "Aikido" but the accumalation of what you have learned about your limitations and the way the body works, so in essence i'm saying that even though you learn Ikkyo in the dojo this technique is just a tool to teach you how the body works in that given situation. You will apply it when needed outside the dojo much differently but none the less effectively according to how much this "tool" has taught you.

All in all, this is another stupid trolling thread made a person who believes one system can superior to the other and obviously he belongs to it. Good job, you not only made your self look like an ass, but you made alot of good people respond to your trolling.

Frank Alaniz wrote: Umm...does this person actually think that UFC represents a "streetfight"? What foolishness. It's a sporting event, and like all sporting events it has RULES...All in all, this is another stupid trolling thread made a person who believes one system can superior to the other and obviously he belongs to it. Good job, you not only made your self look like an ass, but you made alot of good people respond to your trolling.

Speaking of trolling: it doesn't really matter what the first poster intended. The discussion has evolved and has brought up some good points.

I think the main point, as some of us have discussed elsewhere, is that even though people had better not forget that there's a big difference between sporting events and "The Street," people who train seriously with a wide variety of committed attacks are better prepared to face real aggression than those who train with just kata, without really committed attacks, and with no groundwork.

The idea re BJJ or another groundwork systems is that although you don't WANT to be on the ground, you might end up there and had better have some idea how to do something.

Also, you are wrong if you think that seriously trained MMA fighters would be helpless in The Street. Those of us who have worked with them know that their training extends well beyond just what they need under sporting rules. Casual cross-training won't give the average person a huge edge in a street fight, and being a wrestling or judo tournament champ might not be enough to make you the automatic winner on The Street; but it is not reasonable to extrapolate from that to say that top MMA fighters would not fare well outside the ring and therefore we have nothing to learn from their mindset and technique.

Aikido MUST be some good, as they teach it's holds and nerve points to policemen and bouncers.
It's a way off immobilising someone without hitting them. It must be some use!

aikido is more about replacing burned out lightbulbs...

Wendy Rowe wrote: .....The idea re BJJ or another groundwork systems is that although you don't WANT to be on the ground, you might end up there and had better have some idea how to do something.

Yes, that is the argument I've had from my instructors in favor of grappling. I think it's worth noting that it's not a question of WANTING to go to the ground, but to have tools in the even that happens.

Also, you are wrong if you think that seriously trained MMA fighters would be helpless in The Street .....

I don't know; the Street can be pretty mean, esepcially when volume is heavy and the Dow .... oh, I thought you meant Wall Street. My bad.

Seriously, although I don't think MMA guys would be helpless in real life, I've never gone along with the "ground fighting = street fighting" point of view mainly because the guys I knew when I started MA 20 years ago who had street experience did no such thing. Yes, they confounded me with things I hadn't been formally trained for when we sparred, but they were mainly fakes and low kicks. Taking me down, mounting and choking out or going for juji gatame never happened. Yes, this was before BJJ came on the scene in the US in a big way. But have things really changed so much?

It's also worth noting that martial artists are rare in our society -- up to 90% of people who start quit within a year. And when you talk about things like BJJ, Shoot, Thai Boxing, Kali systems and Silat sytems, those are rarities within rarities. So the odds of bumping into -- let alone fighting -- another martial artist on the street are pretty bad; bumping into a trained grappler are even worse. It may not seem that way if you hang with those guys, but that's a fact.

From reading MA magazines over the years, I've observed that every martial art is backed by people who say it works. That includes Aikido, and there have been posts to that effect in this thread. If someone who's never done anything other than "aiki dance" aikido uses it to surive a real life situation, I, for one, will not tell them that they got lucky or that it shouldn't have worked or that their oponent/attacker was a loser but if it had been trained fighter it would have been different. If it worked, it worked, and that's the end of the discussion.

Having said all that, there's no harm in learning grappling regardless of whether you ever use it; I've had some exposure to it over the years and you get used to it. The only down side to cross training in grappling or anything else related to the JKD concepts world is you double the number of seminars you can go to. Trust me -- I've been trying to figure out who's crazier about seminars, Aikido people or JKD/Kali/SE Asian systems/grappling people. Right now it looks neck-and-neck.

Does that answer your question?

What was the question?

lots of assumptions and concepts floating around about "street fighting". ... What is street fighting? I am really curious to see what parameters, paradigms, and assumptions that everyone has about what street fighitng is all about, and what/when do you see yourself involved in them?

I find it interesting that aikido people spend a great deal of time trying to "let go" of assumptions/presumptions that are formed in their mind when trying to "do" or react to an attacker (establishing mushin)...but you mention the words "STREET FIGHT" and everything goes out the window!

We seem to establish an emotion around the concept of street fighting and develop scenarios in our mind that we fear or think that we might end up in. Then we judge our martial art, or other arts against the situations/emotions we make in our minds.

I have found most of them to be irrational and wrong. Therefore establishing our judgements about our training and effectiveness as wrong.

Think about it....could your whole emotional context and framework about what you think your martial skills are based on could be WRONG???

To me, it really meditating hard on conflict and engagement really turned my perspective around on martial arts and why we need to study them.

So, what do you really see as STREET FIGHTING?

Michael Gallagher wrote: Seriously, although I don't think MMA guys would be helpless in real life, I've never gone along with the "ground fighting = street fighting" point of view

I haven't heard anyone make an informed argument that "ground fighting = street fighting." But from the structure of your sentence, it looks like you're equating MMA with ground fighting. True, there are currently lots more Jujitsu guys than other TMA guys -- but JJ has standup, too. And there are still fights won on strikes and kicks, not everyone goes to the ground. Take a look at some of Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipovic's fights to see some really powerful standup, and there are lots of others who are perfectly comfortable staying on their feet.

But since they're allowed to go to the ground and they know their opponent doesn't have friends waiting to join the fray, a strong grappler will try to take down someone with strong standup skills to take the advantage. That's definitely just because it's a sport, and sport fighters need to do what people like to see that will let them win.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: We seem to establish an emotion around the concept of street fighting and develop scenarios in our mind that we fear or think that we might end up in. Then we judge our martial art, or other arts against the situations/emotions we make in our minds...So, what do you really see as STREET FIGHTING?

Here's the thread I started on Martial Arts Planet in a similar discussion, after an item by blogger Brian Jones on Aikido Journal pointed me to the Bureau of Justice Statistics site:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/for...ad.php?t=36652

What it boiled down to was that in the US you've only got a 2.3% chance of being attacked and 76% of those attacks will be unarmed; and, there's roughly a half chance or better that you'll know your attacker. Only about half the violent crimes are reported, but it's probably reasonable to assume that violent crimes committed with weapons are more likely to be reported than simple assaults. It doesn't say how many attackers there were per victim, but judging from the detail in the reporting it seems likely that if a significant percentage of attacks were roving gangs preying on individuals, there would be a category for "Multiple Attackers."

Really, though, I suspect most of us here aren't training just so we'll be able to defend ourselves against whatever attacks we expect we might be subjected to in Real Life. I feel that my training helps me cope with a wide variety of situations (physical, mental and emotional), and a benefit of that might be that I would do better in a physically threatening situation than someone with no training (or a deer in the headlights).

Kevin Leavitt wrote: I am really curious to see what parameters, paradigms, and assumptions that everyone has about what street fighitng is all about, and what/when do you see yourself involved in them?

IMHO,
street = location
fighting = physical conflict with intent to do harm
parameters = none
paradigms = none
assumptions = none
when = a long time ago, growing up in Detroit, when I was really young and really stupid

We won't even go into the military (Army 72-74) combat scenarios.

Although I have yet to start Aikido (*sigh*... ) I have been doing some sparring with a group of martial arts guys recently from various different styles. What I have noticed is that they do boxing style sparring in preparation for 'a street fight' and they believe that is what they will be up against. I dont see this as being the case.

I haven't been in many fights myself, mostly school yard scuffles, but they always used to start out as someone grabbing a shirt and pushing or pulling then eventually breaking off and swinging a wild punch. I can also not particularly imagine too many muggers asking for money and jewellery armed with nothing but their fists and some boxing skills... "give me your money or ill box your ears in!", the average thug is not so brave and most martial artists would not be such criminals (hopefully). I can however imagine many fights starting, at least, from a situation such as being grabbed, pulled, bear hugged, held whilst another strikes, or being faced by a knife weilding opponent ready to make a lunge.

I would imagine that many of the martial arts (jujitsu, aikido etc.) more focused toward throws, locks, holds... would be well equiped for such a situation.

As to wether Aikido would work in a real fight... well isnt any martial art only really a set of theories on how to do something? A martial art is more than just a set of techniques, you should always be able to extend the art to suit the situation. As many have said all martial arts are different paths to the same mountain top.

If you're interested in seeing "real fights," check out "World's Wildest Streetfights" Volumes 1 and 2. The typical MO is grab and punch, often resulting in both parties being off balanced and ending up on the ground.

Roy Dean

Roy Dean wrote: If you're interested in seeing "real fights," check out "World's Wildest Streetfights" Volumes 1 and 2. The typical MO is grab and punch, often resulting in both parties being off balanced and ending up on the ground.

Who said that training off a grab was a waste of time because no one ever grabs in a "real" fight?

Lynn Seiser wrote: Who said that training off a grab was a waste of time because no one ever grabs in a "real" fight?

Exactly. In these fights, they usually blow through all kinds of attacks and ranges, quickly and unpredictably. They might start off in striking range, then go to clinch range, grab and wildly swing like madmen (or women), fall down to the ground, get up from the ground, kick, stomp, run, tackle, and everything else under the sun. Total chaos. I found it to be pretty eye opening.

Wendy Rowe wrote: I haven't heard anyone make an informed argument that "ground fighting = street fighting." ....

IIRC, I read a print article seven or eight years ago in which a gentleman said he would go into grappling mode in a street fight, so he equated grappling with street fighting. So that's where the "grappling = street fighting" comes from. Also there are the posts on the 'net where the author claims MMA matches are close to reality, a point that is in dispute, obviously. So that's where that'c coming from.

I wrote my reply out of anger, so un aiki I know =[

They're is just so many people out there equating UFC to the real world. While I understand grappling has its place and is a great art, placing full faith in it because its a style that is effective in a sporting event is foolhearty. I can see the benefits of studying this style, but coming to the conclusion that it is superior to another art is taking a step backwards......this is the last I'll post here....so long as I dont see another "AIKIDO DOESN'T WORK! UFC SHOWS IT LIKE IT IS!" bah. Chances are I'll see 1000000 of those. Oh wells, back to ukemi behbeh.

Doesnt UFC stand for Ultimately Fake Crap?
Untrained FistiCuffs?
Until Fools Collide?
Unrealistic Fighting Competition?

Dont stress Frank, many (most?) martial artists have great disdain for the UFC.