Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > General

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-07-2007, 07:31 PM   #76
DonMagee
Location: Indiana
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,311
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Budd Yuhasz wrote:
Plus, I've also seen too many instances of somebody talking about how good/tough/competent they are because they train with or against "resistance" and then met them and thought, "Hmm, I think their resistance was futile".
Just remember if he resists and you still defeat him, then you know your idea worked and he knows his idea did not. You both learned something you did not previously know. You can take this and become better. If you never tried, never of you learned anything.

- Don
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2007, 10:38 PM   #77
xuzen
 
xuzen's Avatar
Dojo: None at the moment - on hiatus
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 965
Malaysia
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Sometimes, we need to take a little lesson from Kyudo. As I understand it, in Kyudo, the final outcome is not so important. The journey / ritual from drawing of the bow to the final release of the arrow is more important than whether the arrowhead hits the bulls-eye or not.

Letting go of the arrow without caring whether it hits the bullseyes or not releases one of desire. Without desire, ones mind is not cluttered. When one's mind is not cluttered, it is un-impeded. When it is un-impeded, ones' action is natural. When one's action is natural, it will move through the path of least resistant.

I think Yamada's negative meaning with regards to competition is that he sees competition as clash of two opposing entity. Whereas many "aliveness" trained MArtist see it as another form of training (shugyo). As long as an MArtist see competition as another form shogyo (austere training), he is still considered a BUDOKA, IMO.

Boon.

SHOMEN-ATE (TM), the solution to 90% of aikido and life's problems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 01:59 AM   #78
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Boon,

I think Mushasi had the right idea. Winning IS important if you are truly concerned with life and death. Death is something that you may want to conquer. However, you cannot concern yourself with life or death at the moment of action. I think you do need to care if the arrow hits the bulleye...you simply cannot be fearful of releasing, or fear of not realeasing it because it might not hit it.

Winning can be defined in many different ways. It is possible to win and die. Look at the movie Last Samurai for a good example. Look at the life and death of Jesus.

We DO need to be concerned with winning in a sense.

A good example is my BJJ students. I recently went to the European Championships. Only one of my students had the courage to attend and fight in front of about 1000 people as a white belt. He admitted to me that he was nervous and scared because of all the hype and unknown between facing a unknown, anonymous competitor and about not looking bad.

I asked him if he felt the same way in the dojo when we trained. he said no. I asked why? He said that he knew everyone, and that it was just practice and he was comfortable and not concerned with the outcome, but learning.

I asked him what should be different in the competition? He said that he did not care so much about winning, but he really did not want to lose, or to lose badly.

Winning and losing is a interesting concept isn't it.

I told him to relax, fight, do his best, and learn from the experience. He was a winner simply by having the courage to meet the unknown, go to this tournament, and to step on to the mat and fight.

THIS is the essense of BUDO, it is NOT about waxing philosophically about what budo is, or isn't...it is about getting up every day and having the courage to expand and challenge yourself. Has nothing to do with competition or no competition.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 08:20 AM   #79
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo & Kiko - NY, PA, MD
Location: Greater Philadelphia Area
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 997
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Don Magee wrote:
Just remember if he resists and you still defeat him, then you know your idea worked and he knows his idea did not. You both learned something you did not previously know. You can take this and become better. If you never tried, never of you learned anything.
Okay, perhaps I needed to be more clear. I'm not necessarily talking about sparring, randori or non-compliant drills, per se, because those things already have built-in conventions for "resisting" . . .

(I'm liking this word less and less -- here's why)

I've encountered a number of folks that are 1) fairly new to training 2) don't train very often 3) not very good -- that have difficulty practicing drills with good form and therefore don't yet have or aren't building the strength, agility and sensitivity to feel out someone else and impose their will (even if it's just letting someone else impose their own -- to their detriment) within any given training paradigm.

What happens is that in the drills that are meant to build form, they "resist" because they know what's coming and believe they can defeat it. Against someone else that is new or hasn't built the skills to adapt to their "resistance", they can then offer pointers and make themselves feel knowledgeable and competent. Against someone that can adapt to their BS and get something (which may or may not be a technique in the "drill", but "alive" -- to borrow an SBG term -- training should give you the ability to deal with what the other person brings) regardless, they're more likely to get hurt or "banged up" in the result (oh, how some can whine).

The thing is, these types of people tend to do worse, not better, in more of a sparring setting because they don't have the base skills that one should get from thousands of reps ( to use grappling terms -- e.g. lots of uchikomi, lots of leg shoots, armbar transitions, sweeps, then work them into non-compliant drills and randori) that develop your form, conditioning and sensitivity.

Even when these guys are able to "resist" something in a drill or randori, all it typically does is reinforce their idea of being "right" (the same type of passive-aggressive BS I hate when I encounter it in any form of combatives) rather than give them an opportunity to learn to work within parameters and/or take their base skills and apply them in less restrictive situations.

I've kind of gotten away from the sports side of things, because, while I understand the need for "rules" in a contest, I've seen too many instances of "rules" in boxing, judo or wrestling being exploited or trained for (e.g. judo turtles, wrestlers offering their back) to win a match which develops poor habits in a less controlled environment. The upside is that these athletes are ferocious within their paradigms. For a time, I thought a "best of all worlds" approach was the right way to go and I cross-trained a lot. After a while, I started to experience too much "collision" and I wasn't really getting better at anything after a point.

I eventually decided to narrow the focus on what I believe will be the most beneficial long-term training-wise, with the group I most enjoy training with. YMMV. However, rules-based competitions aren't as much fun for me any more. I still like to get together with buddies from different things and spar, but I'm not looking as much to compete (that could always change, though). Having said that, those that don't have a solid background in combat sports who denigrate the combative skills they can teach -- aren't speaking from a very strong position IMO. It becomes more of the same passive-aggressive straw-man BS (though funny how the reverse can be true as well).

In other words, sometimes "resistance can be futile".

Taikyoku Mind & Body
http://taikyokumindandbody.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 09:12 AM   #80
DaveS
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 91
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Budd Yuhasz wrote:
(on subject)

Is it worth looking at the differences between competition, sports and training against non-compliance? Even though I'm guilty of doing so, I don't like to use the term "resistance", because I've seen too many instances of somebody being "resistant" and stupid at the same time.
That's an interesting question, actually. I'm not sure what you'd get if you took (say) shiai tanto randori, and kept the "try to stay standing at all costs within these parameters, and try to hit the other person with the tanto as often as possible" idea but removed the points system so there's no clearly defined winner. Would this be acceptable to people who don't like competition in their aikido? Would it lose anything compared to doing it with referees and a scoreboard?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 09:19 AM   #81
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo & Kiko - NY, PA, MD
Location: Greater Philadelphia Area
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 997
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Or another example is grappling without points, where the engagement is ended by tapout, escape or stalling (both are separated and restarted -- if on the ground, stood back up). I've been to traditional and sports-based places that do this.

What does this have to do with aikido, well you can do the same thing with aiki waza (it helps if your ukemi is based receiving rather than falling) and even *gasp* incorporate elements of grappling. All without keeping score. If you get in a spot where you have to tap, acknowledge it and start again . . .

Taikyoku Mind & Body
http://taikyokumindandbody.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 12:25 PM   #82
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Budd wrote:

Quote:
I've encountered a number of folks that are 1) fairly new to training 2) don't train very often 3) not very good -- that have difficulty practicing drills with good form and therefore don't yet have or aren't building the strength, agility and sensitivity to feel out someone else and impose their will (even if it's just letting someone else impose their own -- to their detriment) within any given training paradigm.
I encounter them every day! I routinely train new soldiers in our Army Combatives program. In about 40 hours (one week) of training, I can get them working fairly well within a non-compliant training environment. They methodlogy we use to train them allows for good technique and applications of principles, and gives them immediate feedback when they do it wrong.

It does not require years of training or learning very subtle things or a explicit knowledge of things like kokyu to train someone to learn how to be proficient martially.

I think many sensei and instructors who have spent many years training would like to believe that, and would like you to believe it too....but it ain't so. (how else would they stay in business and ego)

I always tell my new students what separates me from them is about 8 to 12 months of solid training...and I have been practicing for about 15 years!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 02:13 PM   #83
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo & Kiko - NY, PA, MD
Location: Greater Philadelphia Area
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 997
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I encounter them every day! I routinely train new soldiers in our Army Combatives program. In about 40 hours (one week) of training, I can get them working fairly well within a non-compliant training environment. They methodlogy we use to train them allows for good technique and applications of principles, and gives them immediate feedback when they do it wrong.
Yep, I've worked on similar things and there are lots of good drills and sparring elements from competitive grappling arts that I look at through the framework of aikido and vice versa. Just out of curiosity, do you get these guys & girls for a straight week? For a couple of hours a day or a couple of times a week, some combo? I'd love to work on stuff for a week at a time.


Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
It does not require years of training or learning very subtle things or a explicit knowledge of things like kokyu to train someone to learn how to be proficient martially.
Agreed. I don't think I made a case for that at all, rather I argued against showing stupid "resistance" versus training appropriately with "non-compliance".

Where we may differ is that I believe (when you have more than a week to train) that a combination of training to build form (waza, kata) and function (sparring, randori) is ideal, along with appropriate drills to bridge the two.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I think many sensei and instructors who have spent many years training would like to believe that, and would like you to believe it too....but it ain't so. (how else would they stay in business and ego)
Maybe they don't know any better . . . (which isn't exactly forgiveable, especially when you're giving them money). Typically, people like this subscribe to that passive-aggressive, one-upmanship BS I mentioned two posts ago.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I always tell my new students what separates me from them is about 8 to 12 months of solid training...and I have been practicing for about 15 years!
Depending on the skills you're trying to build, I may agree. I also think it (like everything else) depends on what your goals are and the criteria you're using to measure.

Taikyoku Mind & Body
http://taikyokumindandbody.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 02:33 PM   #84
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Bud,

Sometimes we get them for a straight dedicated week, sometimes for an hour or two a few days a week. I like the week long immersion as it quickly indoctrinates and creates fast muscle memory.

However, a few hours a day over time, supplemented with their own application and practice works just as well given the same amount of time put in...so it doesn't really matter wheter it is 40 hours in one week, or 40 hours in 4 weeks....it is about the quality of time spent training i have found.

Not to sound pompous, or at least not trying too, I do think that many sensei/instructors may NOT know any difference. They learned from someone who practiced this way, who learned from someone, who learned....etc...so the perpetuate the story.

I think the paradigm of aliveness goes a long way to breaking this down. the UFC coming along 10 years ago, coupled with the internet is causing a huge explosion in transferrence of knowledge and breaking down of paradigms concerning training.

Yes I agree that it depends on the skills you are trying to build. I am focusing on basic martial effectiveness, or building a sound martial base, which I really think is key to do, and which many or most people lack.

I studied for 15 years and STILL lacked a strong martially effective base, I have only recently established what I consider to be a decent one.

I just posted this in another thread....

I think you can understand and demonstrate Kokyu proficiently and STILL be martiall ineffective. It is also possible to be martially effective and NOT understand or be able to demonstrate Kokyu. While the understanding of martial effectiveness and Kokyu can support each other with wonderful results, the two concepts are NOT necessarily connected unless you connect them yourself.

Martial effectiveness and understanding of Kokyu can be trained in isolation of each other.

I think in many cases this is true in martial arts...and now we get into the concept of Aliveness or lack there of.

good conversation..thanks!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 03:05 PM   #85
gdandscompserv
 
gdandscompserv's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,214
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

And might it be possible to "have" kokyu and not be able to explain it?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 03:08 PM   #86
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Absolutely RIcky!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 03:33 PM   #87
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo & Kiko - NY, PA, MD
Location: Greater Philadelphia Area
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 997
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Bud,

Sometimes we get them for a straight dedicated week, sometimes for an hour or two a few days a week. I like the week long immersion as it quickly indoctrinates and creates fast muscle memory.
Again, I'm jealous, I love getting in that kind of time -- work rarely allows these days.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:

However, a few hours a day over time, supplemented with their own application and practice works just as well given the same amount of time put in...so it doesn't really matter wheter it is 40 hours in one week, or 40 hours in 4 weeks....it is about the quality of time spent training i have found.
I think that breaks down when it gets to be 40 hours over 4 weeks or more, but again, depends what you're trying to train.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Not to sound pompous, or at least not trying too, I do think that many sensei/instructors may NOT know any difference. They learned from someone who practiced this way, who learned from someone, who learned....etc...so the perpetuate the story.
I used to think along those lines, but the more people I meet, the more it seems to be a case-by-case kind of thing, with some generalities, the above being one of them, applying to larger groups.


Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I think the paradigm of aliveness goes a long way to breaking this down. the UFC coming along 10 years ago, coupled with the internet is causing a huge explosion in transferrence of knowledge and breaking down of paradigms concerning training.
Well, my base was in judo and wrestling before I came to aikido, I don't think "aliveness" is all that new other than as a clever term to group some common sense ideas around. I've been a fan of the UFCs since they began and I generally think more knowledge is being shared, but it also requires a better filter to weed through lots of stuff for the gems.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
Yes I agree that it depends on the skills you are trying to build. I am focusing on basic martial effectiveness, or building a sound martial base, which I really think is key to do, and which many or most people lack.
I tend not to paint with such a broad brush. Martial effectiveness is important to me as well, but I felt like I'd started on that road already before I came to aikido and still isn't the primary reason why I train.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I studied for 15 years and STILL lacked a strong martially effective base, I have only recently established what I consider to be a decent one.
That's good, but I think there's potentially a danger in going from one extreme to another (in some cases trading one "true belief" for another). I've walked that path as well and I'm just sorta starting to see that it's all related anyway . . . just depends which flavor of kool-aid you prefer. People that honestly care about being martially effective (rather than assuming they are) tend to find ways to try things out . . .


Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
I just posted this in another thread....

I think you can understand and demonstrate Kokyu proficiently and STILL be martiall ineffective. It is also possible to be martially effective and NOT understand or be able to demonstrate Kokyu. While the understanding of martial effectiveness and Kokyu can support each other with wonderful results, the two concepts are NOT necessarily connected unless you connect them yourself.

Martial effectiveness and understanding of Kokyu can be trained in isolation of each other.

I think in many cases this is true in martial arts...and now we get into the concept of Aliveness or lack there of.
Based on my *very* limited understanding, I agree with you philosophically, but from a practical standpoint, why would you want to settle for half the pie, if there's a chance you have the whole thing (and eat it, too!) . . . I think part of the key from both ends of that debate is to keep trying to get better at what you're doing, ask lots of questions, try and learn as much as you can from those that will share information/train with you, *rinse*repeat*.

As much as I'd like to go train with Team Quest in WA or at the Aikikai Hombu in Japan, or in China for Taiji, neither is likely to happen in the near future, but I do have some exercises I can work on individually and I have a great group of folks to train with at my dojo. I can get together with friends that practice other things and we can play and learn from each other.

In short, I can try to be honest with myself, keep improving in my training and maybe help others do the same.

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote:
good conversation..thanks!
Ditto!

Taikyoku Mind & Body
http://taikyokumindandbody.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 06:46 PM   #88
statisticool
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 534
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Definitely stellar atheletes, but I question the logic of people who use sport/entertainment to make determinations of what can/can't occur in real life events that are rule-less and random by their nature.

Of course, the whole idea of UFC-ish events was to see what MA is best in a street fight, so the premise is flawed from the start.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2007, 07:44 PM   #89
Chris Birke
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 258
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

The actual idea of the UFC was to promote gracie jiujitsu and make money; the premise was clear and accurate from the start.

The street fighting paradigm was that of Brazil, and fairly accurate as the rules of that culture dictate two people be allowed to fight without interruption. It would not have flown so well where knives considered more of an acceptable weapon. (It does work well against non blade weapons, however, as the dog brothers learned.)

Also, (and this speaks to the origional post) your assumptions on what the "sports/entertainment" fighter trains are off base. Sport fighters train a wider variety of traditional techniques than "traditional" dojo students - its just of a more diverse lineage. They train these techniques longer and with more intensity than most hobbists in "dojos" would imagine, and partially for this reason it's labled "non traditional".

I think it is silly to conclude that someone who is stronger, better trained, and more technically trained will be more likely a victim on "the street." Many "Reality Based Self Defense" places recognise this, and are training their students more like "sport" fighters, albeit with the addition of weapons and tactics.

If you ask a "RBSD" trainer (like, oh, Kevin) whether a successful cage fighter would fair well in a street fight, what do you think they'd say?

It's unfortionate, but by putting the elements into a graph in the way you do, you mislead people into believing your conclusions about the dojo are correct. On closer examination, it becomes clear that the points and distances on the graph are nonsense; for example: one can be a fighter, yet also run away from a street fight (without ever setting foot in a traiditional dojo no less). No where in training fighting technique for sport are you told "NEVER RUN AWAY FROM SOMEONE WITH A KNIFE!" - although to believe your graph you'd think they must.

However, in dojos across America, people frequently train knife disarms on a casual basis.

These claims clearly dispute the arrangement of your elements, and thus dispute any conclusions based upon the graph.

It seems as though you started with a set of conclusions (people concerned about safety should train in a dojo, not for sport) built a graph to represent them, and then wrote an explination as though the graph was what origionally lead you to your conclusion.

Creating a graph but being incorrect about the data the graph means to represent is a dangerous fallacy many people will not be able to spot (even if they intuitivly sense something is wrong.) It implies you have more data supporting your conclusion than your origional opinions, when in fact you do not.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 07:59 AM   #90
Cyrijl
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 188
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

I like how justin just makes something up and then quotes it as truth. I 'll have to use that technique in the future. I wish I could have finished my philosophy degree like that.

Me: "See profession Kant really thought X...it is right here in my paper"
Professor: "Did you use a graph?:
Me: "Yes"
Professor: "Then it must be true"

--edited:
I forgot to add something meaningful

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay...53&q=aliveness

If you have never been hit in your life, then you do not know how you will react to a phyisical confrontation that you cannot escape. It is pretty simple to understand. I have fought a few black belts in generic karate styles who decided to come to the school I was training at. As soon as we go into randoori, they are all done. They have no idea how to deal with the stress of a real attack nor the pain of getting hit

Last edited by Cyrijl : 02-09-2007 at 08:05 AM.

melior est canis vivus leone mortuo
Bog svsami!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 08:36 AM   #91
Guilty Spark
 
Guilty Spark's Avatar
Location: Flordia
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 300
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
If you have never been hit in your life, then you do not know how you will react to a physical confrontation that you cannot escape. It is pretty simple to understand. I have fought a few black belts in generic karate styles who decided to come to the school I was training at. As soon as we go into randori, they are all done. They have no idea how to deal with the stress of a real attack nor the pain of getting hit
I couldn't agree with you more, it's not just contained to martial arts either.

I remember going down to train in the United States at a base and going to something called the poor mans range.
Basically you crawl on your stomach while a machine gun with live rounds is fired over your head. It's done at night so you can see tracers zipping past. There's also big pits where explosives are set off. Really messes you up.
I've seen people who I thought were tough as nails crack while going through it. One very good friend of mine (whom I still respect) started screaming and crying.
Moral of the example is, you never know how you're going to react when it's done for real.

In MA I'm a firm believer that, if you expect to defend yourself, at some point you will need to stop doing planned attacks and the person needs to try and hurt you.

If you're hungry, keep moving.
If you're tired, keep moving.
If you value you're life, keep moving.

You don't own what you can't defend
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 08:36 AM   #92
DaveS
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 91
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Regarding Justin's discussion, if 'the dojo' denotes 'any place of training', then I don't think any MMA competitor would deny the use of what they learn in a dojo. They don't just keep stepping into the ring until they get the hang of it by trial and error, y'know...

I think the two axes of 'reality' (or perhaps 'freedom from rules') and 'contact level' are a fairly sensible way of thinking about it - although I'm not sure it's possible to produce a scale for them and so draw any particularly interesting conclusions from plotting things on graphs. But I'd assumed that most MMA competitors - and certainly the ones around here - are well aware of the gap in reality between the ring and the street, and cover that in other aspects of their training if 'street self defence' is a big issue for them. If anything there seem to be more people who ignore the gap in resistance between the dojo and the street.

For my part, from a technical point of view I mainly find shiai interesting as a laboratory for testing my understanding of aikido principles, not because it's particularly good training for self defence.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 09:24 AM   #93
gdandscompserv
 
gdandscompserv's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,214
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Joseph Connolly wrote:
They have no idea how to deal with the stress of a real attack nor the pain of getting hit
You think the pain of getting hit is bad. Just ask Ark about the pain of getting old.
I feel your pain Ark.
I really do.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 09:51 AM   #94
garry cantrell
Location: texas
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 35
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Hey Y'all! It's been a few years since I've posted. Got too busy, lost my password, etc.

This has been an excellent post to read. I have a couple of thoughts on same. One is that there are almost always rules of some sort. Whether it's a formal dinner, a jazz improv session or various levels of altercations, there are rules. In a fight, it seems the rules most often stem from an acknowledgement of how committed each participant is willing to be. Attempting to bite off the nose of an adversary acknowledges that you, in turn, accept that your nose could be bitten off and, now, the bitee understands the threshold of acceptable responses. A junior high scuffle has its own rules, a "trading punches and then roll around on the floor until your buddies separate you" type barroom brawl has a different feel, a different set off rules, than an altercation with a drunken frat boy, which is also very different from a "I'm going to kill you with this knife" flat out attack. O.K., the latter may be a bit different because the guy with a knife probably doesn't think you have a knife as well - but, wait, maybe not. The guy with the knife unilaterally sets the standard of acceptable violence - and, while he may not have expected a similar response, he has still mandated the level of acceptable response. We even try to mandate proper, acceptable, ways to wage war. I think we are societal beasts and require boundaries, we require rules. It's when we change them in the middle of the game (or we can't agree on what game we're playing) that we get testy.

I'm sure there's a point hidden somewhere in the above. Maybe not. Ah well, it's good to be back!

Cheers,

Garry
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 02:32 PM   #95
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Yes there are always rules of some sort, you simply may not know exactly what they are.

You can be a well trained fighter and simply lose because you brought a knife or stick to a gun fight.

You may get ambushed, which is the real threat of a fight. Assailants are not stupid, they know how to exploit the principles of suprise, steath, audacity, and speed.

About the best you can hope for is to train and hopefully you have trained in the right areas, and hopefully you have luck on your side.

Thoses that talk about sport martial arts versus budo really do not understand the dynamics of conflict. There are some sport arts that do not prepare students for reality, there are some budo schools that pride themselves on not worrying about sport that do not prepare their students for reality.

It ain't about all that...it is about aliveness in your training. BJJ is a competitve art that does well in this area, Judo is another one. Thai Kickboxing is another one. Even competitive shooting schools do well when it comes to firearms.

Most of your UFC/MMA competitor types are bright enough to know the difference in reality and sport and frankly I think they'd do as well or better than most of us given the same situation. They though are not invincible and could still be beat by an untrained thug given the right set of conditions.

Chris Birke:

I don't really consider myself a RBSD guy. Actually I don't care for the term as it implies someone that trains primarily in self defense and situational training. I do some of this i suppose in teaching soldiers how to deal with "to close to shoot" scenarios, however our approach to this is generic in nature...that is clinching, takedown, dominate kinda thing...that is....principle based training....not typically what I associate with RBSD which is particular techniques to use in a particular set of conditions. For example "Technique 5 against knife attack 3".

However, this is my definition of RBSD.

What we work on is much along the lines of aikido, build a good base in principles. I don't spend much time or energy on RBSD stuff, only to communicate the environment or conditions in which you might find yourself in from time to time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 02:54 PM   #96
Ron Tisdale
Dojo: Doshinkan dojo in Roxborough, Pa
Location: Phila. Pa
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,614
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

This is turning into a good thread...thanks for the reading!

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 03:55 PM   #97
Chris Birke
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 258
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

I'm with you Kevin - I actually think the entire "self defense" paradigm is pretty flawed. (And most examples I've seen on the internet on RBSD somewhat suspect.) Are we all walking potential victims who will ultimately be preyed upon unless we have some skill set to defend ourselves with? I think some schools calling themselves RBSD work with that idea...

But, I think Justin was using RBSD in terms of a place that takes real situations as a priority, and you fit the bill for that (sorry to put you on the spot.)

As far as "Self Defense" goes, I think the very concept itself is poor in it's meaning, and very political in its definition (not unlike the Department of Defense for a nation) - with defense being defined as "acts necessary for preservation" and therefore assumed therefore morally acceptable.

But self defense is another thread
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2007, 05:54 PM   #98
statisticool
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 534
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Quote:
Joseph Connolly wrote:
I like how justin just makes something up and then quotes it as truth.
I'm not sure where I quoted anything as "truth" as you claim.

Quote:
If you have never been hit in your life, then you do not know how you will react to a phyisical confrontation that you cannot escape.
True. I wonder how getting hit in a sport/entertainment event is "real life"?

Quote:
As soon as we go into randoori, they are all done. They have no idea how to deal with the stress of a real attack nor the pain of getting hit
Randori is not a "real attack" either.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 01:49 AM   #99
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Team Combat USA
Location: Olympia, Washington
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
United_States
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

I agree with your perspective on RBSD 100% Chris.

Justin:

If UFC/MMA offers a poor model for training for reality.

and Aikido does not offer a decent solution either....


what do you propose as a good training methodology?


I am interested to hear as you seem to have some opinions about what does not work, which must have an opinion about what does work.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2007, 07:33 AM   #100
Cyrijl
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 188
Offline
Re: This aint UFC!

Justin:
In the very least, in an MMA event you are getting hit from someone who has the intention of defeating you through physical means using punching, kicking, twisting bending, breaking, etc. And if you were not so obtuse you would just realize that no one here is equating MMA = 't3h str33ts'. What me and Kevin and others are saying is that this type of training is a closer approximation of a real confrontation than many aikido schools.

Also randoori != 'street fight', but if you cannot deal with randoori, how can you then claim to be able to deal with a real fight in which there maybe no one to help you, to end the fight.

I agree with Kevin in that you like to nay say alot but offer no other solution.

As far as RBSD--
I found many schools create 'paranoia' in order to make their students believe that they need the training in order to 'save their lives'. Most people never have a dangerous physical altercation in their adult life which was unprovoked and unescapeable. I did krav maga for a year at a very good school. Krav is very much centered on RBSD, but our instructors always told us that is running away is a viable option, then it is the best option. We also did full contact sparring to be ready for those cases in which running was not an option. I found the best self-defense is knowing then to keep your mouth closed and being in good shape.

melior est canis vivus leone mortuo
Bog svsami!!!
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:29 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate