Aiki-Boxing

That was a joke to lighten things up. Sorry William.

I found this interesting clip of Aikido being used, kind of MMA style fight. Perhaps this will give some insight to handling a boxer with Aikido techniques.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XVbS0xHCerw

Phil Farmer wrote:
Hope this helps and again, sorry for coming on the thread late in the game. It is an interesting discussion. On a personal level, I have to comment that my experience in multiple aikido dojo over the years has been wonderful and made my Yoseikan skills much better but that the two arts are practiced by folks for very different reasons. Any reason is a good one to do martial arts and budo, the way of stopping conflict, is to be respected in all of its legitimate forms but everyone needs to keep in mind, to compare aiki, even different styles, and then to say which is effective and which isn't, that is not the humility any of us have been taught by our own sensei. Good discussion but, budo above all, we are all of the same tree - - - budo.

Humbly,

Phil Farmer


hum I am not sure I agree with that at all.i mean I though the discussion was not really about legitimacy or effectivity but usefulness in SD or a fight.

I am the fist one to say that heavily ki oriented styles are very good at what they are doing and that I always enjoy taking a course when ever I can or in seminar.
After all "ki" is the engine of what we do in aikido. Like me you can be more than dubitative about the mystical aspect of "KI" but in any case it transfers in the real word as good body mechanics and integrated movements.

However, and on the same vein of what I said to Dan but from the opposite side of the argument, In order to demonstrate the influence of ki, you need to strip a given technique from the forced compliance elements.
IE Once you have removed the physical controls on uke (ie what forces him to accept the technique), and the technique still happens, there we have it. It has to be something else.
That de facto render the technique utterly rubbish from a martial stand point; Uke will have to accept and follow the technique to keep the connection.
And your opponent will not do that either in self defence or in match fighting.

That does not prevent ki or softer style to be totally legitimate and effective in what they want to convey.

Is there anything disrespectful or lacking humility by saying that?

One of Dan's points was that to be autonomous in self defence it will take longer in aikido than in MMA (striking + grappling).
I would say that the softer the aikido the truer that is. For harder style is would say it is probably about the same style or slightly longer, according to what we call effective and what is the enemy.
Again it is not saying that soft aikido do not work, just that it take some time to be efficient with it.

Phil

Dan Austin wrote: Huh? It was joke - people here often bandy about a phrase along the lines of "your Aikido may be ineffective, mine isn't". I was musing whether Ueshiba said that when told that aiki "didn't work". Never mind, go look for the worst you can imagine in another thread, you ray of sunshine you.

More insults...

Yawn.

William Hazen

If you wish to denigrate my opinion further please do so via P.M.

Darin Hyde wrote: That was a joke to lighten things up. Sorry William.

No Worries Mate It was funny.

William Hazen

Done....

William Hazen

For Reals LOL

Dan Austin wrote: Hmm, while there may be about second from initial contact to the headbutt, he's shoved back off balance instantly. The real problem is he needed to have his hands between them when the guy invaded his space. It's too close to reasonably react, he would have eaten an untelegraphed punch just as well (like the poor sap on the way out the door). The guy's a dick, but you sure can't fault his execution and getaway. My point was that the grab is a secondary issue to avoiding the coming hits, so training grabs without simultaneous strikes isn't setting the difficulty dial very high. Glad you liked it though.

Dan,

Are you familiar with this guy in this clip? I would be interested in hearing your opinions about the Aikido approach in this video.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XVbS0xHCerw

Philippe Willaume wrote: I mean I though the discussion was not really about legitimacy or effectivity but usefulness in SD or a fight.

So if I understand you correctly, you're saying that ki-training essentially translates into good body mechanics, but that generally speaking, ki-oriented approaches don't teach one how to protect themselves very quickly.
If that indeed reflects the reality of most ki-based approaches, I imagine it would be as such only because they're almost exclusively dealing with very relaxed and supple "attacks." The energy can be intense, but in a totally different, very relaxed sort of way. The "circles" of energy are easier to draw out and expand, compared to a very tight, compressed sort of energy exchange more common to things like wrestling. So I think I can see where I might agree with you up to a point.
That said, I would say the ki-based approach requires greater timing...and perhaps that's more difficult to develop a sense for. I don't think that's necessarily cause to denounce aikido, or ki-based approaches as they relate to self defense. I know you're not really doing that, but I get the sense that's the biggest gripe people have against aikido in general, and that's what I'm addressing now. People seem to think of self defense in very specific terms, but from where I stand, with my set of experiences, you could say newaza-oriented BJJ (a very strong approach from what I can tell) doesn't protect you very well because, frankly, my friends growing up would have LOVED someone wrapped around one of their friends on the ground...nothing quite like a kick to the head or ribs at soccer ball level, or a shot to the head while they're raining elbows and punches down. We can qualify things about any given art which makes it seem relatively useless compared to another art. And, hey, I've heard from people I train with who i respect very much that much of aikido isn't very alive, so I understand where some people are coming from, but it seems very useless to go online and speak about "Aikido" as relatively ineffective for self defense when it's such a large group of approaches...including ki-oriented approaches.
Perhaps what I'm really doing is just complaining about people who don't speak specifically enough when making their criticisms. Aikikai is a big group, folks. Self defense involves more than physical ability...in fact I'd say physical ability is only the tip of the iceberg. Mental awareness and how you present yourself and where you direct your energies are a bigger part if the picture. Good self-defense begins long before you're jumped or confronted by a would-be attacker and in that light, all physical-based approaches seem to fall short in my opinion. Self defense is contextual. If I'm training in how to not-fight, that's self defense every bit as much as if I'm training to fight well. To me, an admitted neophyte, they just seem like different approaches and the love-dovey approach almost seems to look at the bigger picture...though not necessarily so. In my opinion, good self-defense, in order from most important to least important starts at the individual, then goes on to the instructor(s), then on toward style.
Anyhoo...I know I'm rambling and I hope you'll all forgive me for that. I also know I'm still very much a neophyte so I appologize if I sound like I'm trying to be an authority here...these are just the impressions of a guy who grew up with scrappers, but never got in a real fight himself so...for what's it's been worth.
Take care,
Matt

Salim Shaw wrote: Dan, Are you familiar with this guy in this clip? I would be interested in hearing your opinions about the Aikido approach in this video. http://youtube.com/watch?v=XVbS0xHCerw

Salim,

Yes, I know of Jason Delucia. He was a Kung Fu guy who lost to Royce Gracie twice and took up grappling after that, he's fought lots of MMA fights. Seems like he's sincere in training a number of different styles including Aikido, but since I haven't seen his tapes and heard him explain the rationale for what he's doing it's difficult to comment. Some things look OK, some don't look as good as what a solid judo player could do. It doesn't seem like the Holy Grail of crisp, clean overtaking of the opponent's space with a decisive result, but it would probably be worth watching to see if his ideas click with yours.

Matthew Gano wrote: So if I understand you correctly, you're saying that ki-training essentially translates into good body mechanics, but that generally speaking, ki-oriented approaches don't teach one how to protect themselves very quickly. If that indeed reflects the reality of most ki-based approaches, I imagine it would be as such only because they're almost exclusively dealing with very relaxed and supple "attacks." The energy can be intense, but in a totally different, very relaxed sort of way. The "circles" of energy are easier to draw out and expand, compared to a very tight, compressed sort of energy exchange more common to things like wrestling. So I think I can see where I might agree with you up to a point. Matt

No arguments from me there..

Matthew Gano wrote: That said, I would say the ki-based approach requires greater timing...and perhaps that's more difficult to develop a sense for. I don't think that's necessarily cause to denounce aikido, or ki-based approaches as they relate to self defense. I know you're not really doing that, but I get the sense that's the biggest gripe people have against aikido in general, and that's what I'm addressing now. People seem to think of self defense in very specific terms, but from where I stand, with my set of experiences, you could say newaza-oriented BJJ (a very strong approach from what I can tell) doesn't protect you very well because, frankly, my friends growing up would have LOVED someone wrapped around one of their friends on the ground...nothing quite like a kick to the head or ribs at soccer ball level, or a shot to the head while they're raining elbows and punches down. We can qualify things about any given art which makes it seem relatively useless compared to another art. And, hey, I've heard from people I train with who I respect very much that much of aikido isn't very alive, so I understand where some people are coming from, but it seems very useless to go online and speak about "Aikido" as relatively ineffective for self defense when it's such a large group of approaches...including ki-oriented approaches. Matt

.

Yes you are right, and I am not denouncing aikido (I practice it….) or BJJ for that matter.
What really buggers me to no end is the unwillingness of either side to recognize the value of the other.

It does not make akido crap to recognize that pressure testing in combat sport or RBSD is a good idea.

It does not make akido crap or make aikido, MMakido to say that you need the same fighting strategy and tactics to pass a standing rear choke and iriminague or that if you can do a DLT and SLT, you can do aiki o toshi.

But really is it that hard to admit that both aikido and BJJ (and any combat sport for that matter) paradigm are different and some sort of limiting factor.
Yes aikido is good against several opponents, weapons and ambushes but it usually relies on over committed attack.

Yes combat sports are very good for the one to one in a controlled environment but you can only be sure that there was only a single opponent when the fight stops and no-one else chipped in.

Matthew Gano wrote: Perhaps what I'm really doing is just complaining about people who don't speak specifically enough when making their criticisms. Aikikai is a big group, folks. Self defense involves more than physical ability...in fact I'd say physical ability is only the tip of the iceberg. Mental awareness and how you present yourself and where you direct your energies are a bigger part if the picture. Good self-defense begins long before you're jumped or confronted by a would-be attacker and in that light; all physical-based approaches seem to fall short in my opinion. Self defense is contextual. If I'm training in how to not-fight, that's self defense every bit as much as if I'm training to fight well. To me, an admitted neophyte, they just seem like different approaches and the love-dovey approach almost seems to look at the bigger picture...though not necessarily so. In my opinion, good self-defense, in order from most important to least important starts at the individual, then goes on to the instructor(s), then on toward style. Matt

Yes, in fact the style does not really matter. I have trained under at seminar several aikikai senseis whose stuff I though very functional as well as very powerful ki guys.

However the not-fight approach is completely flawed and based on wishful thinking. It physically takes two to tango. But fighting is like sex you just need one to want it for it to potentially happen.
Violence is ultimately a unilateral act; doing you best for it not to happen is not enough to prevent it.

Matthew Gano wrote: Anyhoo...I know I'm rambling and I hope you'll all forgive me for that. I also know I'm still very much a neophyte so I apologize if I sound like I'm trying to be an authority here...these are just the impressions of a guy who grew up with scrappers, but never got in a real fight himself so...for what's it's been worth. Take care, Matt

That did sound reasonable to me, and I had my arse kicked a few times…. Which incidentally does not really makes one that much more qualified than your good self.
As Confucius said experience is lantern than only light the path already covered.

phil

Dan Austin wrote: Salim, Yes, I know of Jason Delucia. He was a Kung Fu guy who lost to Royce Gracie twice and took up grappling after that, he's fought lots of MMA fights. Seems like he's sincere in training a number of different styles including Aikido, but since I haven't seen his tapes and heard him explain the rationale for what he's doing it's difficult to comment. Some things look OK, some don't look as good as what a solid judo player could do. It doesn't seem like the Holy Grail of crisp, clean overtaking of the opponent's space with a decisive result, but it would probably be worth watching to see if his ideas click with yours.

Hello Dan I agree with you there.
On the top of that seems to be a demo Video, and if you ever made one, you surely know what a bugger it is

phil

Hmmmmmm. Increase my killing power, eh?

If you guys are interested in Jason's philosophy, search up a few of his threads here on aikiweb.

Mountains of respect for the guy.

Roman Kremianski wrote: If you guys are interested in Jason's philosophy, search up a few of his threads here on aikiweb. Mountains of respect for the guy.

I think Jason's video shows some promising Aikido techniques that really could work against a real street altercation against a person who wanted to box. Really, it seems his approach may answer some of the questions about Aikido techniques against a boxer. Take a closer look at the below link.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XVbS0xHCerw

My post was a response to that link, as I've been a fan of Jason for a long time and have seen that video countless times.

the Competition with Boxer require training in boxing, this the best way to know how move when you Facing Boxer, we in aikido Dardari ryu Practice boxing 2 days in the week To increase speed,Improve breathing and Development reaction.

Enjoy, http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...0&fr=yfp-t-471

Mazhar Dardari wrote: the Competition with Boxer require training in boxing, this the best way to know how move when you Facing Boxer, we in aikido Dardari ryu Practice boxing 2 days in the week To increase speed,Improve breathing and Development reaction. Enjoy, http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...0&fr=yfp-t-471

This is more like it. I of course agree with the need to train boxing to develop the reflexes. The move at 1:10 is the sort of thing I was getting at with using the Greco underhook as a transition point into such a finish. The moves at 1:37 and 1:56 I also like because I think throws involving direct manipulation of the head are much more reliable than most arm manipulations, they are aggressive in taking space and balance, and make it hard for uke to keep throwing punches. For me those points are the best I've seen so far in this thread. Nice work, thank you for the clip.

This clips for free style in dardari ryu, and this kind of exercise for more experience, and good reactions.

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...2&fr=yfp-t-302

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ch&plinde x=1

Very nice stuff Sensei Dardari. Thanks for sharing those vids!

Salim Shaw wrote: I think Jason's video shows some promising Aikido techniques that really could work against a real street altercation against a person who wanted to box. Really, it seems his approach may answer some of the questions about Aikido techniques against a boxer. Take a closer look at the below link. http://youtube.com/watch?v=XVbS0xHCerw

Looks like judo with punches or as I like to call it junches

Jeff Davidson wrote: Very nice stuff Sensei Dardari. Thanks for sharing those vids!

you are welcome and Thanks for your comment Jeff.

Don Magee wrote: Looks like judo with punches or as I like to call it junches

He's definitely using Aikido techniques. Perhaps modified and mixed with other Jujitsu techniques. Aikido for the ring would probably look like that. The purist Aikido methods hamper effectiveness in some instances. Isoyama Sensei always stated, "Necessity is the mother of invention"!

If you want the techniques to work, then it's necessary to modify or invent.

Mazhar Dardari wrote: http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vi...0&fr=yfp-t-471

Nice demo. But I don't see how this offers much regarding dealing with a Boxer. It looks like the typical Aikido demo to me with lots of atemi thrown in.

It would be nice to see a full or medium resistance training session (similar to what Jeff and Bob put up) using the "Boxing" training Sensei Dardari and others are promoting. Even the freeplay clips were with zero resistance on the part of the receiver so one cannot use this to judge any sort of applied effectiveness.

I'm wondering if anyone here has used those parrying drills to assist their Aikido in getting in on a good puncher. The drills are good but only helps ones Aikido if they improve ones chances to move in, break balance and apply waza. They work well for me in Jujutsu, but the approach and tactical set is much different imho

Just some thoughts.
LC

Salim Shaw wrote: He's definitely using Aikido techniques. Perhaps modified and mixed with other Jujitsu techniques. Aikido for the ring would probably look like that. The purist Aikido methods hamper effectiveness in some instances. Isoyama Sensei always stated, "Necessity is the mother of invention"! If you want the techniques to work, then it's necessary to modify or invent.

Something I've always found odd. Especially after training in combat sports. Why not just train the way it works, rather then a way that doesn't?

Salim Shaw wrote: If you want the techniques to work, then it's necessary to modify or invent.

Or at least adapt them to the environment. Dojo is not the ring nor the street.

Like a judo throw: The same technique a doesn't look exactly the same as in judo kata, randori, a mma match or self defense. There are common points but there are modifications due the context where the technique is performed.