Aikido does not work at all in a fight.

Igor Vojnović wrote: "Let go" of what? The fact that people are claiming to teach a martial art with which none of them can actually fight? Seriously, what's the problem of discussing this issue?

The problem is that it's not an "issue". Unless, of course, you choose to make it one, and let it live in your head rent-free.

You don't control other people, Igor. You don't control their claims. Why elevate your blood pressure trying?

CNN reports that last evening, in Charlotte, NC, a man tried to kidnap a woman by forcing her into his car, but she broke free and ran into a nearby karate studio, pleading to the head instructor for help. The attacker followed her in "and was dealt with accordingly." Lucky for her she didn't run into an aikido dojo.

Mary Malmros wrote: The problem is that it's not an "issue". Unless, of course, you choose to make it one, and let it live in your head rent-free.

Yes it is. How you people manage to "let it go" is what baffles me.

You don't control other people, Igor. You don't control their claims. Why elevate your blood pressure trying?

Who said anything about controlling claims? If I can break one's limbs the control of claims is pointless.

Igor Vojnović wrote: "Let go" of what? The fact that people are claiming to teach a martial art with which none of them can actually fight? Seriously, what's the problem of discussing this issue?

None of them? Sounds like false advertising to me, Igor.

...By the way I make zero claims about my "can."


I see no problem with discussing the issue, but as long as people understand their limitations I don't see a huge problem.

Matthew Gano wrote: None of them? Sounds like false advertising to me, Igor.

What?

I see no problem with discussing the issue, but as long as people understand their limitations I don't see a huge problem.

Again what?

I don't know what all the fuss is about. I remember a woman's group that trained before my Jujutsu class back in the 80s. They were practicing shouting/screaming 'No' at each other. One day I tried to enter a bit early and got the 'No' treatment from a student. Scariest thing ever and impossible to enter! The instructor actually apologised afterwards :-) I was rather impressed.
I think it was Bruce Lee that said this: How you train is how you fight; how you fight is how you train.

Aikido is like any other art in my humble opinion so if your a brave fighter and super skilled in aikido it can work for you just like any other japanese based art not all the moves were meant for total destruction but yet some where made to keep the peace but it can be a very deadly art trust me there if you know what your doing it can save your life and then some and ive took may other arts aikido is great for stand up clinch movement and as it was once called before much like separated version of judo

Igor Vojnović wrote: Yes it is. How you people manage to "let it go" is what baffles me.

You can't decide what other people's concerns should be, Igor. Therefore, you can't decide what is and isn't an "issue". It seems simple to me.

And, by the way, a "you people" statement is a pretty clear signal that you haven't thought much about your audience.

Mary Malmros wrote: You can't decide what other people's concerns should be, Igor. Therefore, you can't decide what is and isn't an "issue". It seems simple to me.

This isn't about trivial issues, this is about the core issue of a supposed martial art. It's not about me either, there are far more people pointing this out. You are aware of that.

And, by the way, a "you people" statement is a pretty clear signal that you haven't thought much about your audience.

What "audience", I'm not a spokesperson?!

There is absolutely no point to this discussion. At all.

Mary Malmros wrote: There is absolutely no point to this discussion. At all.

There was never a discussion in the first place.

Igor Vojnović wrote: "Let go" of what? The fact that people are claiming to teach a martial art with which none of them can actually fight?

Wonder of wonders.
A martial art that was founded by a religious man, who said his art was not about fighting and who did not teach how to fight, but how to train ones body, or rather body mechanics based on a taoist cosmology.
An art that has no practice mode that trains fighting strategy and no competitions in which on could test fighting abilities.
An art that is practiced in dojos, that are places of harmony and often have an atmosphere like wellness-areas, not like combat schools .
You can take what you got from Aikido and go to some place where fighting is trained, there you learn how to fight.

Markus Rohde wrote: Wonder of wonders. A martial art that was founded by a religious man, who said his art was not about fighting and who did not teach how to fight, but how to train ones body, or rather body mechanics based on a taoist cosmology. An art that has no practice mode that trains fighting strategy and no competitions in which on could test fighting abilities. An art that is practiced in dojos, that are places of harmony and often have an atmosphere like wellness-areas, not like combat schools . You can take what you got from Aikido and go to some place where fighting is trained, there you learn how to fight.

Dude please, I know more than a couple of people who could fight and defeat trained fighters while training in Aikido alone. And it didn't take them 20 years to learn it.

Markus Rohde wrote: Wonder of wonders. A martial art that was founded by a religious man, who said his art was not about fighting and who did not teach how to fight, but how to train ones body, or rather body mechanics based on a taoist cosmology. An art that has no practice mode that trains fighting strategy and no competitions in which on could test fighting abilities. An art that is practiced in dojos, that are places of harmony and often have an atmosphere like wellness-areas, not like combat schools . You can take what you got from Aikido and go to some place where fighting is trained, there you learn how to fight.

Have you read biographies of Morihei Ueshiba? He was invited to do a demonstration for the Emperor of Japan - and he tried to refuse, apparently saying "I'd have to show true Aikido and kill my uke." - according to what I read, he was persuaded to back off a little and spare the life of his uke - so he "only" broke uke's leg.

If I still have the book, it may take me some time to dig up the reference, but I've moved about 8 times since reading that, so perhaps someone else can find a citation.

Walter Martindale wrote: Have you read biographies of Morihei Ueshiba? He was invited to do a demonstration for the Emperor of Japan - and he tried to refuse, apparently saying "I'd have to show true Aikido and kill my uke." - according to what I read, he was persuaded to back off a little and spare the life of his uke - so he "only" broke uke's leg. If I still have the book, it may take me some time to dig up the reference, but I've moved about 8 times since reading that, so perhaps someone else can find a citation.

All that would demonstrate is that "true Aikido" can kill a uke. Of course it can - so can clotheslining a passing-by bicyclist. This has no relation to its actual practicality.

Aikido has the potential to be a practical system for emptyhand self-defense, but that potential lies within Tenshin Aikido, mostly, IMO.

Aleksey Nikolaevich wrote: Aikido has the potential to be a practical system for emptyhand self-defense, but that potential lies within Tenshin Aikido, mostly, IMO.

I'd say the potential lies within the practitioner. The art is merely the tool that is wielded to realize the potential.

Ron

Ron Ragusa wrote: I'd say the potential lies within the practitioner. The art is merely the tool that is wielded to realize the potential. Ron

I find it interesting that this peculiar offloading of responsibility is so prevalent in Aikido. When you go train in a combat system like Muay Thai, Judo, wrestling or BJJ, nobody says "we give you the art and it's up to you if it works". Everyone knows that practitioners of these systems, even at low level, will destroy most untrained attackers.

But with Aikido... so much is missing from the core system that making it practical becomes "homework".

Walter Martindale wrote: Have you read biographies of Morihei Ueshiba? He was invited to do a demonstration for the Emperor of Japan - and he tried to refuse, apparently saying "I'd have to show true Aikido and kill my uke." - according to what I read, he was persuaded to back off a little and spare the life of his uke - so he "only" broke uke's leg. If I still have the book, it may take me some time to dig up the reference, but I've moved about 8 times since reading that, so perhaps someone else can find a citation.

I didn't say Ueshiba was not able to fight, or to kill people.
I said he didn't teach how to fight. He created no fighting system, but a body education system.
And thats what his students tought to the world.
It's true that Aikido has the potential to be a self defense system, but primarily it has nothing to do with real fighting. Everybody talks about this "potential", but how many known fighters Aikido has brought forth?
Fighting in Aikido is just treated theoretically, there are concepts of irimi, masakatsu agatsu, or the saying that an Aikidoka should be able to consistently cut down an opponent with the first blow, but for the most practioneres it is nothing they could do or use in a real fight, nobody in Aikido really trains to cut down people with one single blow or strike, for the majority it's just an idea.
What Ueshiba did or what he could do personally is a different story, he was trained in another way and in another time, and in his later years he was not at all interested in producing fighters, nor was his son. It was his intention that people get the idea of fighting out of their heads.

Aleksey Nikolaevich wrote: Aikido has the potential to be a practical system for emptyhand self-defense, but that potential lies within Tenshin Aikido, mostly, IMO.

No, I don't think so, they just make more noise.

Markus Rohde wrote: No, I don't think so, they just make more noise.

That's a superficial observation. I have some familiarity with Tenshin both thru indirect observation, and interaction with people who trained their method. The uke-nagashi deflection alone, which is not used in classic Aikido, is an amazing multi-tool which is highly valuable for Aikido. It can be used as a practical tenkan, as an entry into waki gatame, as a grip-fighting technique, and as a punch deflection.

And that's just one little thing that's an upgrade. There are many others, many of which are subtle modifications of how classic techniques are trained. Others are more obvious, like finger controls and full-speed punching drills.

Realni Aikido is the system that's mostly just more loud and faster. Tenshin has real, valuable technical enhancements.

Markus Rohde wrote: What Ueshiba did or what he could do personally is a different story, he was trained in another way and in another time, and in his later years he was not at all interested in producing fighters, nor was his son. It was his intention that people get the idea of fighting out of their heads.

And if there was evidence for anything that you had posted here, that would be great.

No, I don't think so, they just make more noise.

And in this case noise is good.

Walter Martindale wrote: Have you read biographies of Morihei Ueshiba? He was invited to do a demonstration for the Emperor of Japan - and he tried to refuse, apparently saying "I'd have to show true Aikido and kill my uke." - according to what I read, he was persuaded to back off a little and spare the life of his uke - so he "only" broke uke's leg. If I still have the book, it may take me some time to dig up the reference, but I've moved about 8 times since reading that, so perhaps someone else can find a citation.

Interview with Gozo Shioda by Stanley Pranin, Aiki News #93 (Fall 1992):

Q. Ueshiba Sensei gave a special demonstration at the Saineikan Dojo in the Imperial palace grounds about 1941. Did this occur as a result of his connection with Admiral Isamu Takeshita?

A. Yes. When Takeshita Sensei was a Grand Chamberlain he was told by the Emperor to arrange for aikido to be shown to him, so he went to the Ueshiba dojo. Ueshiba Sensei answered, "I can't show false techniques to the Emperor. Basically in aikido, the opponent is killed with a single blow. It's false if the attacker is thrown, leisurely stands up, and attacks again. [On the other hand], I can't go around killing my students." He refused the invitation in this way, but when Takeshita Sensei told this to the Emperor, he said, "I don't care if it's a lie. Show me the lie!" Tsutomu Yukawa and I took ukemi.

Q. I understand the Emperor was not actually present the day of the demonstration.

A. Yes, that's right.

Prince Mikasa [a younger brother of the emperor], Prince Takamatsu, and Prince Chichibu were in attendance. Takeshita Sensei was the announcer and explained the techniques. It was really something to give a demonstration before the Imperial family in those days and so we couldn't do anything disrespectful.

Q. I believe Ueshiba Sensei was sick on that occasion.

A. Yes. Since Sensei was ill Yukawa attacked him weakly and was thrown hard and broke his arm.

Igor Vojnović wrote: And if there was evidence for anything that you had posted here, that would be great.

I do not think this is neccessary, there is enough evidence to show Ueshibas thoughts about fighting.

Aleksey Nikolaevich wrote: The uke-nagashi deflection alone, which is not used in classic Aikido, is an amazing multi-tool which is highly valuable for Aikido.

Maybe there are some valuable movements, but they don't exist only in tenshin aikido, and what I see is sometimes inconsistend to the system of aikido, there are breaks between the handdeflections and the follow-up techniques, which are just normal aikido, and not performed on al very high Level, they are not more practicable for fighting situations then techniques from other "styles".
For example in kote-gaeshi, uke can punch in nages face because throwing is too late and nages position is in front of uke, instead of staying behind him, and things like this.
It is ok that they do what they do, but it doesn't amaze me, and there is no reason to make that noise.

You must have both hands free to perform any aikido technique. Thus, one should descend from the attack line, at least through the deviation of the torso. The fact that Morihei Ueshiba mastered this skill to perfection may be testified by witnesses to his duel with a naval officer who was an advanced kendo player. This duel took place in 1925 and ended with opponent's surrendering who attacked with a wooden sword. Not once was he able to hit the Master who appeared empty-handed. As far as I know, none of the students of O'Sensei as well as their students, have been able to do so until now. And that's exactly what ends all discussions in this topic.

Igor Vojnović wrote: Dude please, I know more than a couple of people who could fight and defeat trained fighters while training in Aikido alone. And it didn't take them 20 years to learn it.

What is a "trained fighter"?
And why do you say then that "people are claiming to teach a martial art with which none of them can actually fight"?
On one side there are lots of people who can defeat trained fighters (whatever that means), and on the other side there is no one who can fight?

Maciej Jesmanowicz wrote: This duel took place in 1925 and ended with opponent's surrendering who attacked with a wooden sword.

That was Haga Sensei, at that time he was a 24 years old All-Japan-champion in Kendo.

But it wasn't really a duel, O Sensei walked around the dojo and told him to try to hit him.