Got pwned by boxer =-(

Just a suggestion, when facing someone who wants to land a punch, make them try to land a punch desperately. Evade and enter...once, twice, three times maybe, then as they turn to face you and strike, throw. Best percentage is not with throws that depend on grasping...best percentage is with throws that enter and cut down.

Be aware that evasions only work so long...in most cases unless you are extremely good at managing distance, the distance will narrow with each evasion. As the distance narrows, the timing required by you speeds up.

Best,
Ron

You've only been studying for a month man, don't let an experienced boxer get you down. Of course you would loose; it sounds like he has YEARS of experience on you. I have been studying Aikido for 2 1/2 years, which still makes me a noob , and im still not sure how id stand up against a boxer. But it would probably look more like a sparring session with strikes, blocks, and blending until i found an oppening (which might take a while depending on his skill level).
Im just saying, 1 month is hardly enough to even remember what couple techniques you've been over in class, much less to try and execute them in a sparring match against a trained boxer.
Give it time.

in aiki,
-morgan

Hey, I can relate. I've been taking tennis lessons for a month now with a really experienced coach. I got out on the court with a tennis professional and he kicked my butt! Obviously my training is no good and I need to change coaches. Why? Because after a month I should be able to hold my own against that other guy who's been playing for decades.

Obviously.

Or maybe I need a better racket.

Keith Larman wrote: Or maybe I need a better racket.

It were the balls.
They were fixed by your opponent.

I just wanted to give a positive reply to the OP.

Keith Miklas wrote: ... so that I could demonstrate Ikkyo and Sankyo.

If you asked me to show an ikkyo or sankyo after a month of training, my respond might have been something like ...
Well, I did not look that yellow, but you get the idea.

Keith Miklas wrote: I wonder if my mistake was at a conceptual level; in the "approach" as you say. Boxing is the art/sport of landing effective punches on an opponent. Aikido is not designed for sport-fighting.

You seem to be making lots of assumptions early in your training. You should get rid of them and try to see the purpose of aikido through your training, not what you assume. Or as a zen story says, you should "empty your cup"

Also keep in mind that Aikido (and many other arts) takes a lifetime to learn and understand.

James Edwards wrote: ...try to see the purpose of aikido...

Perhaps I'm off base here, but Aikido is a martial art, correct? I must assume that the purpose is, well, martial? To fight? If not, then it's really more like yoga, or dancing, or a combination thereof.

Every shred of my common sense tells me not to reply to this post...

...so much for common sense...

What you did is just so wrong, on so many levels...

One (1) month of Aikido practice ? I am not even confident that you know how to wear your gi properly and/or tie your belt correctly after one (1) month of practice...how many hours of training have you had, exactly ?

so that I could demonstrate Ikkyo and Sankyo

Really ? Explain to me after one (1) month of practice, how you were going to demonstrate either Ikkyo or Sankyo with any resemblance of a well executed...dare I say...'proper'...technique.

I apologize if this comes of as a personal attack, it is not intended as such. But, rather than feed your ego, maybe you should postponed the "sparring" session with your obviously skilled boxer friend for let's say...five (5) to 10 plus years...

What I think you accomplished was to put into the mind of another person, with martial art skills, that Aikido does not work...even if you told him you were only practicing for one (1) month...he will remember the time he sparred with an "Aikido" guy...

Neal Earhart wrote: What I think you accomplished was to put into the mind of another person, with martial art skills, that Aikido does not work...even if you told him you were only practicing for one (1) month...he will remember the time he sparred with an "Aikido" guy...

That's OK. Now the boxer might under-estimate aikidoka so we may have a tactical advantage.

Keith Miklas wrote: Perhaps I'm off base here, but Aikido is a martial art, correct? I must assume that the purpose is, well, martial? To fight? If not, then it's really more like yoga, or dancing, or a combination thereof.

Oh god, here we go again...

Keith, let me turn the question around on you: why did you start training Aikido? What did you think it was? What were your expectations of what you would learn, and when you would learn it? And -- here's the really loaded question -- do you think that because one month of Aikido training didn't enable you to go nose-to-nose with a boxer who has many more years of training and more ring smarts than you'll probably ever have, that it's "really more like yoga, or dancing"?

GeneC wrote: Exactly what I've been saying since I joined(Aikiweb). I'd add, Muay-Thai is not grappling, it's strictly a stand up, kick-boxing MA. Also, grappling IS ground. Sorry, so noone gets the wrong idea, I'm not trying to correct as much as 'enlighten'.

Peter Gr¡¦dahl wrote: You are actually totally wrong, Muay Thai includes a lot of standing clinchwork including throws from the clinch.

Well Peter, not only am I not "totally wrong" , but not even a "little bit" wrong.Grappling is on the mat, as in both folks in the supine ( horizontal, laying down) position, something not done in Muay Tai, at all and the "clinch" (as you call it), is standing up...two totally different things. That's like saying when boxers get "tied up" (and the ref says, i.e., "OK, break it up, guys), they're grappling.

Thanks for your response Mary. Before I answer your questions, let me state that I signed up for a $150 one-month trial to see what aikido was all about, and have no other martial arts experience other than two years of wrestling.

Mary Malmros wrote: Keith, let me turn the question around on you: why did you start training Aikido?

Because I wanted to learn some self-defense.

Mary Malmros wrote: What did you think it was?

I thought it was a martial art. I liked it because it was a gentle/civil form of self-defense, and could be used to control a situation without causing real damage to people, and learning how to handing conflict in a controlled manner.

Mary Malmros wrote: What were your expectations of what you would learn, and when you would learn it?

My expectations were that I would learn some basic self-defense techniques. I did expect to learn a couple of basics in the first month. (which I did--ikkyo and sankyo

Mary Malmros wrote: And -- here's the really loaded question -- do you think that because one month of Aikido training didn't enable you to go nose-to-nose with a boxer who has many more years of training and more ring smarts than you'll probably ever have, that it's "really more like yoga, or dancing"?

I fully agree that it is unreasonable to expect to be able to apply aikido techniques against a trained boxer.

I think what upset me--and drove me to post this topic--is the helplessness and defenselessness that I felt against his punches. Not just when he was using his skills.. even when he toned it down. I just had no defense! And a punch is not an uncommon attack. I tried the same thing on an athletic non-boxer, and i still could not defend against a simple straight punch.

I did take a couple of boxing lessons at one point, and it seemed much more practical. Keep your guard up; your chin down. Keep moving. After two 1-hour sessions with a boxing instructor I felt more confident than after a month of aikido.

I'm certain that Aikido is effective, but it seemingly takes a decade of training before one has the required skills to make it so. This of course leads into the question of why one trains Aikido, boxing, any martial art, or any activity for that matter..

Keith Miklas wrote: I'm certain that Aikido is effective, but it seemingly takes a decade of training before one has the required skills to make it so. This of course leads into the question of why one trains Aikido, boxing, any martial art, or any activity for that matter..

People take up Aikido for many reasons Keith. Some for exercise and some for self defense. I understand your discouragement, but I wouldn't count Aikido out. There are people out there that can really use their Aikido, even with boxers. You only did it for a month so what did you expect? Even if you took some self defense classes, Krav Maga for example, you are still just beginning to learn. It takes awhile.

Every time I read posts like this, all I can think about is this damn "fast food" culture we live in where everybody wants it now, now, now and expect to be experts or be able to handle themselves in about the length of a TV sitcom. Sorry Keith, this isn't personally against you, just the mentality of people out there.

Either stick with it or find something else that suits you. Aikido isn't for everyone.

Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

But, let's be clear, Tyson didn't let Shioda S. do nikajo on him because IF Shioda S. was able to apply it, Tyson COULD be out a lot of money.

But yeah, it was pretty funny...you've got Mike Tyson (HUGE) and Gozo Shioda (tiny) and NO WAY was Tyson giving him nikajo...

Best,
Ron

Keith Miklas wrote: This paragraph sums up my mistake well. I tried to force Aikido techniques on a jabbing boxer; and they don't work well against jabs. Aikido seems to require a committed attack to throw an opponent off balance. I wonder if my mistake was at a conceptual level; in the "approach" as you say. Boxing is the art/sport of landing effective punches on an opponent. Aikido is not designed for sport-fighting.

(sigh no.

Ron Tisdale wrote: Just a suggestion, when facing someone who wants to land a punch, make them try to land a punch desperately. Evade and enter...once, twice, three times maybe, then as they turn to face you and strike, throw. Best percentage is not with throws that depend on grasping...best percentage is with throws that enter and cut down.Best, Ron

I have to respectfully disagree with this strategy, as you definitely don't want to give a boxer a second chance to punch you. Any one could the "the one" that takes you out.

Ricky Wood wrote: That's OK. Now the boxer might under-estimate aikidoka so we may have a tactical advantage.

i am with ricky. we definitely have tactical advantage. talked to a guy who did combat hapkido (isn't that redundant?), he said aikido doesn't work, after i told him i did aikido. he asked why would i want to do aikido. i said i liked to wear big skirt and get in touch with my masculine side.

i remembered reading somewhere about a story of either shioda or o sensei did a demo at the american base. an army guy with boxing experience challenged. he then proceeded to knock out an experienced aikido guy. then either shioda or o sensei took on the dude, go after the other arm instead of the jabbing arm, and messed the guy elbow up.

the best way to deal with boxer is to approach him/her with a mug of beer in each hand.

Chris Covington wrote: Hello all, It's been a while, but there is a video somewhere on youtube (or there was) of a Russian aikidoka and a Russian Thai boxer sparring. The aikidoka was able to pull off a kotegaeshi from the boxer's jab. They were very well matched, but the aikidoka certainly held his own. It wasn't prearranged and they were certainly going all out with each other. ...

Chris, is this the video you're talking about?
http://video.google.es/videoplay?doc...79688232976890

If so, then.... I don't see the match in the same light.

@Keith

I fully agree that it is unreasonable to expect to be able to apply aikido techniques against a trained boxer.

Unreasonable until you have something more than 1 month of aikido. It's not about the techniques: they are very common japanese jujutsu/ western medieval wrestling/filipino wrestling techniques. They mostly work in a specific context (mostly what Chris Hein posted) for different situations aikido techniques need some adjustement or, like Leavitt said, follow the principles and technique will arise naturally.

I think what upset me--and drove me to post this topic--is the helplessness and defenselessness that I felt against his punches. Not just when he was using his skills.. even when he toned it down. I just had no defense! And a punch is not an uncommon attack. I tried the same thing on an athletic non-boxer, and i still could not defend against a simple straight punch.

Dont' be upset. Be happy. You learned a valuable lesson in a safe environment. Others learned the same lesson in the street. Others will never learn this lesson and will remain in the darkness.

This of course leads into the question of why one trains Aikido, boxing, any martial art, or any activity for that matter..

You are the only who can answer the question. Everybody has different motivations. Look inside yourself; the answer is there.

Clarence Couch wrote: I have to respectfully disagree with this strategy, as you definitely don't want to give a boxer a second chance to punch you. Any one could the "the one" that takes you out.

Disagree all you want. It works for me.

Best,
Ron

Keith Miklas wrote: Thanks for your response Mary. Before I answer your questions, let me state that I signed up for a $150 one-month trial to see what aikido was all about, and have no other martial arts experience other than two years of wrestling.

Gotcha. Thanks for the background.

Keith Miklas wrote: Because I wanted to learn some self-defense.

That's a very common reason for people to start training martial arts. Unfortunately, a lot of people who come to the martial arts this way end up disappointed. Some of them start off with a very vague notion about "self-defense" and their needs for it. They haven't stopped to ask themselves just what it is they're defending against, and what would be the most effective way to deal with that. Most of us don't deal with physical threats on a daily or even yearly basis. "But just in case!" says the new student who's interested in "self-defense". Okay...just in case...but does it really make sense to address a threat that you may have to deal with once in a lifetime by spending hours every week working at a skill that will take a long time to become proficient in? If I had some specific threat, like a stalker after me, I'd be calling the cops, getting a restraining order, handing out the nutjob's description to my neighbors and co-workers, increasing my situational awareness, possibly acquiring and becoming proficient in the use of a firearm -- I wouldn't be putting my eggs in the empty-hand martial arts basket. And if I didn't have a specific threat but some general idea about dark alleys and seedy bars...well, then I'd be wising up about where I walked, rather than try to acquire a set of skills to hopefully bail me out of trouble that I couldn't be bothered not to walk into. I'm not saying you had any of these expectations, just that when you really think through the perceived need for self-defense, these are some of the conclusions you're likely to come to.

Keith Miklas wrote: I thought it was a martial art. I liked it because it was a gentle/civil form of self-defense, and could be used to control a situation without causing real damage to people, and learning how to handing conflict in a controlled manner.

Well, I'd say it's a martial art (although there's a huge debate about just what that term means, but I won't go there now). I think that while it's true that it can "be used to control a situation without causing real damage to people", I disagree that every situation can be controlled this way: some situations can, but some can't (imagine dealing with an attacker who's pretty much out of his/her head and not capable of acting in his/her best interests -- that person doesn't respond to standard deterrents). I also strongly disagree that every person who trains aikido can control a situation in such a way -- in fact, I would argue that the large majority of people who train aikido would be lucky to control any attack without injuring their attacker. Aikido techniques work against joints and connective tissue, the stuff that don't heal well, if at all -- and in a real fight, things happen fast; you don't get time to cautiously increase pressure. If everything works right, if you and the attacker aren't moving with such combined speed that the damage is done in the first instant, if you didn't make any mistakes, if the attacker is rational enough to understand that the fight is over and he/she has no choice but to submit...then, yes, you may get out of the encounter with no real damage done. But as I've said before on this forum, I've had a boot to the head and I've had a disolocated shoulder, and I know which one I'd rather recover from.

Keith Miklas wrote: My expectations were that I would learn some basic self-defense techniques. I did expect to learn a couple of basics in the first month. (which I did--ikkyo and sankyo

Those are a couple of basics from the body of techniques that make up aikido. While they do have self-defense applications, neither is a self-defense technique. See...you signed up to learn aikido, not to learn self-defense. If you'd signed up to learn self-defense, I'd have expected on day one that you'd be dealing with specific scenarios of fairly realistic attacks (slow at first but not for long). The techniques you would learn would be simple, simple, simple -- much simpler than ikkyo and sankyo, believe it or not -- and you'd drill them over and over and over again, until you could do them in your sleep. At the end of a month of that, you might be able to execute a fairly competent defense against an attack like the ones you'd trained against -- and you'd maintain that competence, as long as you kept training.

Aikido training is different, and a lot of that has to do with elements of Japanese culture that I won't get into too deeply lest I totally embarrass myself. In short, though, things are taught and learned differently in Japan than they were in the west. Our ways of teaching and learning have their merits, and so do theirs, but they're different. When learning a Japanese art (martial or otherwise), the student is expected to be a sponge of sorts: to absorb information, and to do so in a sense without questioning -- or rather, without wasting time asking questions and demanding explanations that, as a beginner, you just wouldn't understand. Instead you practice, practice, practice. You do ikkyo without trying to understand ikkyo, without needing to see how ikkyo is going to save you if you ever end up starring in the shower scene from Psycho...without your instructor having to prove to you that it's worth your while to do ikkyo over and over and over. You just do it...and after a while (and it's probably months at least) it starts to make sense. "Aha!" you say, "I wish I'd known that months ago!" But months ago you couldn't have known that...because months ago, you hadn't done all those ikkyos.

Keith Miklas wrote: I think what upset me--and drove me to post this topic--is the helplessness and defenselessness that I felt against his punches. Not just when he was using his skills.. even when he toned it down. I just had no defense! And a punch is not an uncommon attack. I tried the same thing on an athletic non-boxer, and i still could not defend against a simple straight punch.

Right, because they weren't playing your game. In the dojo, when your partners punch at you, they're not trying to hit you -- not at this stage of the game. They're not trying to mess you up. Does that mean that as long as you train aikido, you'll never attain proficiency against someone who is trying to mess you up? Heck, no -- but you can't master all skills at once. If you want to learn to deal with punches, and you want quick results, go learn a striking art -- you'll be introduced to a series of very simple blocks and evasions that you can probably learn to use effectively (at least against someone with a similar level of training) very quickly. Ikkyo's just more complicated and more difficult to execute than a simple block or slip.

So why would anyone ever bother to learn ikkyo if there are these other ways? Answer: because if you can pull off ikkyo, it puts you in a better position than if you'd just slipped or blocked a punch. If you slip or block a punch, you could end up open to a followup, but let's assume that everything went well -- that you are, at the least, still ready to deal with a followup attack, and that you are possibly well-positioned to execute a counter. That's your best outcome. If, on the other hand, you can successfully execute ikkyo, if you can pull it off, you've got your opponent where he/she can't continue to attack you. That's a lot more control over the situation than if you simply block and counter a punch.

(btw, I speak as someone whose background in striking styles is much more extensive than my background in aikido...so I'm not just reciting the party line here. Also, I didn't quit my former style because I drank the aikido koolade -- I moved, and all we had here for real martial arts was aikido, so I did the starting-over thing. I don't see superiority in one style over the other -- they're different, and I'm glad to have trained in both)

Keith Miklas wrote: I'm certain that Aikido is effective, but it seemingly takes a decade of training before one has the required skills to make it so. This of course leads into the question of why one trains Aikido, boxing, any martial art, or any activity for that matter..

Yeah, there is that. Well, I don't think it's really possible of how long you have to train in aikido to make it effective, unless you answer the question, "Effective against what?" or maybe "Effective for what?" If being able to whale on people, whether or not they want to whale on you, is the goal, I think being sneaky and underhanded and unscrupulous will get you farther than any amount of training in a martial art: just sneak up behind someone and bash them over the head with a chair, and voila, problem solved!

So, you've stumbled upon the deadly secret: outside of the sport forms, most people who continue training martial arts for any length of time are doing it for reasons other than self-defense. Me, for example, I train for all kinds of reasons that have nothing to do with muggers in dark alleys. I train because training shuts up the noise in my head, forces me to "be here now", and that brings clarity to my life in other areas. I train because I've learned to love the striving. First martial arts taught me to have patience with things that I couldn't just do the first time I tried them; it taught me that if I kept trying, I'd get it, and I loved that. Then I learned to love the trying even when I wasn't getting it. I love training because it puts things in perspective, itself not least. I love training because I love being around people who understand these things. I don't know how universal the appeal of those things is -- I just know that this thing called aikido -- which, yes, is a martial art; which, yes, can be used to defend oneself -- is worth doing all for its own sake, and not for any result it might get me.

Sorry for the ramble, Keith, ya got me going there...

Nice post, Mary. Thanks for posting it.

-- Jun

Mary,

I don't know about Keith, but I truly enjoyed reading your post! It echoed a lot of the things that ring true with me as well. Very, very, very well written!

Keith Miklas wrote: A friend of mine boxed for the army. I've been studying Aikido for about a month and so I asked him to friendly-spar for a couple of minutes to show him what I'd learned. Basically, I got owned. I never came close to blending with his jabs. I finally had to tell him to slow his attacks down, so that I could demonstrate Ikkyo and Sankyo. His comments: 1. It's not possible to catch/blend with his punches. 2. He's going to throw a combination, so even if I try I'm probably going to get hit (this, too, he demonstrated with a gentle right to my floating rib when I tried for a sankyo). 3. He would never over-extend himself with a "clean attack" like we use in class. 4. All this has been settled with the Gracies in Brazilian Ju Jitsu. Back in the '70's they invited people from all different schools to come down and fight it out. What "came out in the wash" was these three positions, and most effective related styles: a. STANDING SEPARATE: boxing; kick-boxing b. GRAPPLING: Muy-Thai; Wrestling c. GROUND: Wrestling; Ju Jitsu In sum, I felt helpless and defenseless against his skills.

Not surprising after a months training. You made all the classic Aikidoka mistakes when dealing with a boxer. You cannot do techniques on boxing punches. You can do techniques on boxers though.
Don't even try to take hold of boxers punches, just use your guard to deflect them as best as you can until you can get a hand onto his body during the irimi movement.
An explosive entry from the instant the fight starts is the only way of dealing with a boxer. You don't need to do anything fancy, you just need to knock them off balance, then you pretty much own them.
BJJ demonstrates this.

Keith Miklas wrote: I'm certain that Aikido is effective, but it seemingly takes a decade of training before one has the required skills to make it so.

Not always; I know some Shodans who have only been training for a few years or so who could hold their own against anyone (although I do admit they're very much the exception, not the rule). You just need to accept that fact. You've stated your reasons for starting Aikido, and they're good ones, so if you're prepared to wait it out, you can get everything from the art that you hoped. Just be realistic about it.

On a sidenote, I had a similar experience. My brother (big, muscly guy) asked me to "show [him] something" when he heard that I'd picked Aikido up again. I think I just tried basic nikyo, and it failed. Then I think I tried something else. Again, it failed.

I knew I'd struggle against someone of his strength, but it still gave me a nice little tap back into reality. And it helped. You don't often get the chance to train with someone who's really trying, so it shown me what to concentrate on to improve.

If you're going to spar with anyone who has skill or strength, etc., then first be careful and second don't expect to come out on top. And most importantly, be prepared to take notes. You'll likely 'lose', but you'll also learn.