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 > Non-Aikido Martial Traditions

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 02-11-2008, 06:06 AM   #26
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Oops, you are correct. I meant to post the Army News link and grabbed the wrong link! Thanks for correcting that one!

http://www.army.mil/-news/2003/10/22...n-afghanistan/

Oh don't call me sir! I guarantee you are much older than I Ranger!

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 10:25 AM   #27
Don
Dojo: aikido of charlotte
Location: Charlotte
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 112
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Kevin: I guess the thing that the Military Combatives would bring to a curriculum is the ability and knowledge of how to transfer effective skills in a reasonably short amount of time. What I see is that unless there is some other reason for staying with the art, people tend to drift away from aikido because they don't see the transferance to everyday life in a fast enough way. Few people stay around "to preserve the art" and most have other agendas driving them, imo. The unique thing that the military knows how to do is to transfer skills competently, quickly and effectively to many people. Most aikido (and other martial arts instructors) teach it the way they learned it. (and truth be told for those who are trying to actually make a living, have a motive for people staying around as long as possible). There is not a vetting mechanism for figuring out what is the best way to teach in the quickest and best way. Perhaps Krav Maga and systema approach that since they came from other military training systems.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 10:43 AM   #28
DonMagee
Location: Indiana
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,311
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

I fear I was taken out of context, or perhaps did not make my point clear. I read the articles linked. I did not see anything showing hand to hand happens anywhere near the scale of combat with firearms.

My point was simply, so many people think hand to hand is the end all be all of military training. The talk about how by not training X our troops are all going to die. The truth is hand to hand combat is easy. As was posted above, you can walk into any mma gym in the world and getting good hand to hand training. I've spared with all my friends. Their skill in unarmed combat is minimal at best. I'd put them on par with students who have trained 3-6 months at our club. I do not see this as a flaw in the military training, but rather just another example that unarmed combat is not nearly as important as martial artists like to think it is.

We need to get over ourselves. That was my point. It doesn't matter if you are training in aikido, boxing, TKD, bjj, MMA, krav maga, jump rope, etc. If the training method is good, then you will learn the level of skill my friends have. It seemed good enough to get them though their combat, and as they pointed out, I might of beat them in a sparing match, but if they had their rifle, things would be different.

- Don
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 11:39 AM   #29
Chuck.Gordon
Location: Frederick, MD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 509
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Kevin can speak far more intelligently about the MACP than I, but as an old soldier and 30+ year budoka, the best thing I see about MACP is that the troops are actually TRAINING it, and it's not just a little-used manual taking up space in the bookshelf.

Me, I liked the old H2H manual (based mostly on Danzan Ryu jujutsu, by the way). But it wasn't being trained, it wasn't being used and, frankly, in the mindset of the Cold War (and earlier wars) military, it wasn't particularly useful outside SpecOps circles and their ilk who might have to be sneaky and field expedient.

Larsen and others have done a very good job of interpreting physical combatives in a way that will be useful on today's battlefield, and more importantly, in a way that will actually get units and troops DOING it.

Today, a HUGE part of military ops in Iraq and Afghanistan involve breaking down doors and apprehending, rather than massed battles of firepower vs firepower (though there have been exceptions and some very intense running battles have occurred certainly).

In the environment these guys are facing, what they're training works very well.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 11:43 AM   #30
Chuck.Gordon
Location: Frederick, MD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 509
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

PS: Kevin, things are looking like I may end up at Fort Detrick. Waiting to hear something this week hopefully. If so, we'll be just up the road from ya. I'll keep you posted.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 12:58 PM   #31
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Wow. Fort Detrick! That is a huge shift! that would be great for all of us here in the DC area for sure! Let me know.

Chuck you bring up some points I did not discuss concerning MAC-P.

Matt points out exactly what you were saying...we have soldiers training. This is a big part of the design of the program that is based on the MMA competitive model. Soldiers do it because it is 1. rapidily learnable. 2. Does not require lots of equipment. 3. It can be done safely 4. Sucess and accountability is measureable.

As Don points out above. It is pretty easy when you think about it. Closing distance, grappling, kicking and striking. How much more complex do we need to make things???

I always go back to Musashi's philosophy at some point. Producing warriors is a multifaceted thing.

I get beat all the time in the dojo. That is not the point. the point is the same one I learned as a Boy Scout so many years ago. "Do your Best". and "Be Prepared".

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 01:14 PM   #32
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Don McConnell wrote:

Quote:
Kevin: I guess the thing that the Military Combatives would bring to a curriculum is the ability and knowledge of how to transfer effective skills in a reasonably short amount of time. What I see is that unless there is some other reason for staying with the art, people tend to drift away from aikido because they don't see the transferance to everyday life in a fast enough way.
Yes the military in general does a pretty good job of transferrence of skill.

You know I was just discussing this very topic with another aikidoka yesterday. That is...the topic of students coming to aikido, staying with aikido, leaving aikido, what we are trying to teach them, and how their own agendas line up with the goals and expectations of aikido.

It is not for me to say what aikido should and should not be. It is what it is in each dojo. Since I don't control or run an aikido dojo, it would be out of place for me to comment on.

I think we all come into the arts with expectations of what they will do for us. I think most of us would agree that our reasons today are probably not what they were 10 years ago!

I think if you stick with this stuff for longer than a year or two, you probably have figured this out! If not, you probably lost interest once you accomplished the basic goals of "self defense". Either that or you are really deluded and think that what we do in most dojo's is a great and efficient delivery mechanism after 10 years of study!

It is tricky ground. I can teach in about 40 hours most of what someone needs to get by in a hand to hand altercation.

On that same note. Mike Sigman taught me in a weekend everything that I probably need to do in order to develop Jin and Kokyo power in my aikido!

The catch is, how much training and time am I willing to put in to improve and to what level! That is....How do you define success and quality, and what is the realitive value of the time spent doing these things!

I think Don Magee is correct in his last post concern realitivity.

So when you talk about training "efficient Self Defense skills". Think about this: Why not spend a couple of hours learning how to fire a hand gun correctly. Or why not take a class in learning how to use a taser, pepper spray, or other non-lethal types of weapons.

I had an FBI security expert once talk to me about guns in a house and how illogical it was as a form of self defense.

Look at it this way. Take the money, build a "safe room" with a iron door with a secure method for locking. Put a cell phone in that room with a back up commo sources, call for help, and stay in that room.

Certainly beats calling the cops, then walking around the house with a loaded gun trying to "shoot" a perp then having the cops have to deal with both the perp and you and distingush the difference.

Which way makes you safer?

The issue is we get emotionally involved in our notions about what is best, what is efficient, then we confuse the parameters of the situation with the desired endstate, and muddy the waters with stuff like guns, and martial arts!

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 01:26 PM   #33
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

I kinda got off track a little on that last post. It would also make a interesting disussion I think to discuss why people lose interest in aikido.

Again, I think people come to the art with expectations. Aikido does not fill those expectations sometimes so they leave.

I see two types that come to the art and leave. Those that are chasing the dream of enlightment and look towards aikido as an endstate to that, and those that come to it with self defense as an endstate.

there may be other reasons to, like those that look at it with Physical fitness as a endstate.

When you look at these extremes, Aikido really is inefficient.

Think about it. Zen practices certainly deal with the concept of enlightment more directly right? There are plenty of ways to be better at self defense that are more efficient deliver mechanisms. Physical fitness, going to aerobics, the latest kick boxing craze, or the gym of the month all do better than aikido.

So, why do aikido at all?

Why not take the MMA approach and "Cross train your way".

Go to Zen study group to get better at enlightment.

Go to your local RBSD school to get the "down and dirty".

Go to a good "Cross Fit" gym, or whatever to gain physical fitness.

Wouldn't "Cross Training" this stuff produce a better holisitc better approach than aikido?

So Why would we want to study aikido at all. What makes it so special that we "Should" spend our time studying it? What is the compelling reason to continue?

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2008, 02:23 PM   #34
Chuck.Gordon
Location: Frederick, MD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 509
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
Wow. Fort Detrick! That is a huge shift! that would be great for all of us here in the DC area for sure! Let me know.
Will do. Although, we spent several years here only about an hour apart and got together, what, ONCE!?!?! Heh!

Quote:
How much more complex do we need to make things???
This is something you note in many of the koryu ryuha ... things are very simple. The more complex they get, the hard they are to learn and to pass on.

Quote:
I always go back to Musashi's philosophy at some point. Producing warriors is a multifaceted thing.
And old Musashi was fond of just wading in with a big stick and just whacking people. Simple, elegant, efficient.

cg

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2008, 02:07 PM   #35
erogers
Dojo: Springfield Jiu-Jitsu & MMA
Location: Missouri
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Mr. Leavitt, your insight has proved quite valuable. i ship for bct on march 25th in fort jackson, sc. then i'll have my ait in fort lee, va. i'm a little curious if you happen to know what my course of action would be if i decided to continue my combatives training after basic? will there be places to train during ait, or even once i get back home to southwest mo, or would i have to go to the combatives school in georgia? just thought i'd ask in case you knew. thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2008, 04:20 PM   #36
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Your not one of those National Guard Guys are you???

Anyway...it depends is the answer.

The program is proliferating all over the place, and you can get good training at most MMA schools around the country. It may not be exactly MACP, but close enough to work on the basics.

My advice would be to find a good BJJ school and work on ground skills for a while mastering the basics of ground fighting, and go from there. You will never go wrong with a base in BJJ for sure.

I am working with some guys here in the DC area to set up a Nationwide program that would enable soldiers (AC and RC) to get training where ever they may find themselves.

Good luck and stay in touch.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2008, 04:41 PM   #37
erogers
Dojo: Springfield Jiu-Jitsu & MMA
Location: Missouri
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

No i'm not national guard, lol. army reserve rather, 414th MP company. are you in the dc area? do you have a school? i might look you up then when i'm in va for ait if you do. thanks
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2008, 04:50 PM   #38
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

I am a Full Time National Guard Officer that is why I asked!

Anyway, yes, we do have a "school" in the area.

www.pentagoncombatives.com

There is some guys down at the Fort Lee area as well I believe, ask on the MMA.TV message board under the soldier ground forum. Fort Lee is a AIT location so combatives will be taught there for sure.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2008, 11:38 AM   #39
Stephen Kotev
Location: Metro D.C. Area
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 71
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Kit Leblanc wrote: View Post

A phrase I have settled on lately is that so many people, especially in the martial arts, simply don't know what they don't know.
Kit,

Care to elaborate?

Best,

Stephen
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2008, 08:06 PM   #40
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Damit, just wrote a reply and it got destroyed by the web gods.

Anyway, I am sure it was for the best!

So I will keep it short.

Read a little about Cognitive Dissonance Theory to get an idea of what Kit is talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

In Martial Arts we are training in things that hurt or kill people. In order to make the environment safe and to train, we have to have constraints, conditions, and assumptions to make this happen.

When we don't understand those things for what they are, and if we are new coming into an established practice or system, it is easy to not know these things.

When we train week after week with our training partners we begin to believe that what we are doing in the dojo is indeed appropriate and our partners are presenting the same conditions that we will encounter in reality. Many times these are not.

Cognitive dissonance sets in when we are presented with new things. You don't want to have this happen for the first time in a fight or you may not respond or recognize it for what it is.

Read also about the OODA loop. The military uses this to try and break such cycles and get ahead of the ball game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_Loop

If you watch my cheesy little video about the history of the martial arts...that is why we made that video, not to be a concise history, but to try and help our students understand the process of martial training and what it does for you (or doesn't).

We spend a great deal of time trying to get this across to our students in MACP.

So I agree with Kit..."we don't know what we don't know"!

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2008, 10:49 PM   #41
KIT
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 140
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Stephen Kotev wrote: View Post
Kit,

Care to elaborate?

Best,

Stephen
Certainly. Kevin addressed aspects of it, but it goes deeper.

Martial arts is one of the few subjects at which one can be an expert in something one has literally never done. Martial artists are considered experts at "self defense," "combat" and "real fighting" though they may have never done anything of the sort outside of practice. Being good at martial arts has little to do with real fighting, even less with self defense in most training halls.

No surgeon in the world would be considered an expert surgeon by anyone with any credibility if that surgeon stated that they had in fact never performed an actual surgery. If all they had done was perform in controlled conditions, on cadavers.

Now the latter surgeon may know and understand actual surgery techniques, might in fact due to natural dexterity or some other individual attribute have scalpel skills that rival the best in the world; might even be able to teach a veteran "real life" surgeon a new thing about a very specific aspect of handling a scalpel or making a certain incision, but his frame of reference will always be lacking in a total sense.

First, he's never been tested. Certainly he may have felt stressed under certain circumstances, but he can never even remotely feel what it is like to be in fear of losing an actual patient. Let alone what it is like to actually lose one and continue on with his career, still performing surgery.

He's also not developed the situational awareness that is dependant on a real situation. Of course, under mock conditions, and with cadavers that have died from one thing or another he might be able to identify certain characteristics of this or that malady, even that may inform his decisions on how he would perform surgery, based on the condition of the body.

But he cannot ever know the experience of the subtle things; the conscious and subconscious cues that long experience with actual patients give him and that he has learned to trust or dismiss based on that experience. He cannot know whether one of those subtle signs is important or is not, he will be severely limited under uncertain and rapidly evolving circumstances (say a patient crashing and having to identify why, and to fix in, while performing the operation).

Sure, he can read about the experience of other, real surgeons and glean something from what they have written. He can train with them and get an even greater understanding, perhaps even undergo training that is more relevant and more realistic based on the knowledge that the real surgeon can impart and graft that onto his understanding of cadaver surgery, but he will not have the most important insight, what he would do when operating on a real patient, or more importantly, what he would do and where his understanding would be after years of doing so, learning from mistakes and successes and dealing with the adrenalin of life and death.

I hope that makes sense.

Last edited by KIT : 02-14-2008 at 10:51 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2008, 01:52 AM   #42
Michael Varin
Dojo: Aikido of Fresno
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 567
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Great analogy, Kit.

Of course, on any given day a surgeon with 25 years of experience can lose a patient, and a med school student could be successful.

Any martial artist after their first off the mat altercation (even a minor one) will quickly learn that there are many more variables outside the dojo.

You can never plan for every eventuality.

This is why I believe a calm and composed mind is a most important aspect of martial training.

-Michael
"Through aiki we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately." - M. Mochizuki
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2008, 04:35 AM   #43
KIT
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 140
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Michael Varin wrote: View Post
Great analogy, Kit.

Of course, on any given day a surgeon with 25 years of experience can lose a patient, and a med school student could be successful.

Any martial artist after their first off the mat altercation (even a minor one) will quickly learn that there are many more variables outside the dojo.

You can never plan for every eventuality.

This is why I believe a calm and composed mind is a most important aspect of martial training.
Absolutely.

And how much more will the lessons of that "off the mat" experience be integrated when having many such encounters, across the spectrum from minor to very serious ones?

How much more will that martial artist know after the first? The tenth? The thirtieth?

How much will he realize he thought he knew after the first when he reaches the tenth? And so on....

The composed mind under duress is the most important aspect of martial performance. I would point out that whether that is really being developed depends on the training.

The best way to truly understand it is to train under similar duress and similar dynamics to a real encounter, then have that understanding tested, repeatedly, producing similar results under a variety of circumstances in real encounters. That is what the experienced surgeon has that the med student doesn't. I guess we could call it "depth."

Good point re: the compare and contrast of the med student and 25 year surgeon. Chance always plays a role, only the most arrogant believe that they can circumvent it totally based on training and experience.

Experience as well can be parsed: does the guy have 25 years experience, or one year of experience 25 times over? Did he have that one encounter and learn nothing from it, and has he repeated the same damn mistakes over and over in each successive one?

Its common sensical in many ways, but martial arts and common sense often don't go together.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2008, 11:35 AM   #44
Stephen Kotev
Location: Metro D.C. Area
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 71
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Kit Leblanc wrote: View Post
Certainly. Kevin addressed aspects of it, but it goes deeper.

Martial arts is one of the few subjects at which one can be an expert in something one has literally never done. Martial artists are considered experts at "self defense," "combat" and "real fighting" though they may have never done anything of the sort outside of practice. Being good at martial arts has little to do with real fighting, even less with self defense in most training halls.

No surgeon in the world would be considered an expert surgeon by anyone with any credibility if that surgeon stated that they had in fact never performed an actual surgery. If all they had done was perform in controlled conditions, on cadavers.

Now the latter surgeon may know and understand actual surgery techniques, might in fact due to natural dexterity or some other individual attribute have scalpel skills that rival the best in the world; might even be able to teach a veteran "real life" surgeon a new thing about a very specific aspect of handling a scalpel or making a certain incision, but his frame of reference will always be lacking in a total sense.

First, he's never been tested. Certainly he may have felt stressed under certain circumstances, but he can never even remotely feel what it is like to be in fear of losing an actual patient. Let alone what it is like to actually lose one and continue on with his career, still performing surgery.

He's also not developed the situational awareness that is dependant on a real situation. Of course, under mock conditions, and with cadavers that have died from one thing or another he might be able to identify certain characteristics of this or that malady, even that may inform his decisions on how he would perform surgery, based on the condition of the body.

But he cannot ever know the experience of the subtle things; the conscious and subconscious cues that long experience with actual patients give him and that he has learned to trust or dismiss based on that experience. He cannot know whether one of those subtle signs is important or is not, he will be severely limited under uncertain and rapidly evolving circumstances (say a patient crashing and having to identify why, and to fix in, while performing the operation).

Sure, he can read about the experience of other, real surgeons and glean something from what they have written. He can train with them and get an even greater understanding, perhaps even undergo training that is more relevant and more realistic based on the knowledge that the real surgeon can impart and graft that onto his understanding of cadaver surgery, but he will not have the most important insight, what he would do when operating on a real patient, or more importantly, what he would do and where his understanding would be after years of doing so, learning from mistakes and successes and dealing with the adrenalin of life and death.

I hope that makes sense.
Kit,

Thanks for your reply.

In your view is the only way for a martial artist to know is to be in a fight? It appears that the crux of your argument focuses on actual experience and not simulations. Is this correct?

Regards,
Stephen
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2008, 12:42 PM   #45
KIT
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 140
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Stephen

Correct.

Simulations are excellent training (depending on the quality of the simulation, which is another can of worms, just as what we mean by "a fight.").

I know for a fact that solid foundational training, coupled with realistic and intensive simulations that mirror real world dynamics, will allow one to perform as trained...

...if the individual are able to realize that training.

Just because you've had good training doesn't mean you will perform as trained. And, some people with no training perform better than those with training. There is an element, especially when facing the potential for injury or death, that is highly dependant on the individual.

Once you have performed as trained, and repeatedly, you come to "know," to have a confidence that you can never get absent actual experience. Again, not everyone really learns from experience either, but having good training, experience, and the ability to analyze, merge, and learn from both is really the best way to come to "know."
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2008, 12:59 PM   #46
Stephen Kotev
Location: Metro D.C. Area
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 71
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Kit Leblanc wrote: View Post
Stephen

Correct.

Simulations are excellent training (depending on the quality of the simulation, which is another can of worms, just as what we mean by "a fight.").

I know for a fact that solid foundational training, coupled with realistic and intensive simulations that mirror real world dynamics, will allow one to perform as trained...

...if the individual are able to realize that training.

Just because you've had good training doesn't mean you will perform as trained. And, some people with no training perform better than those with training. There is an element, especially when facing the potential for injury or death, that is highly dependant on the individual.

Once you have performed as trained, and repeatedly, you come to "know," to have a confidence that you can never get absent actual experience. Again, not everyone really learns from experience either, but having good training, experience, and the ability to analyze, merge, and learn from both is really the best way to come to "know."
Kit,

I follow you. I believe that this is a kin to "aliveness" and other similar arguments presented before expressing the value of resistive training in addition to many other relevant components.

My quandary is that most of us are not regularly in situations that put us in harms way nor are we in fights. LEO like yourself and soldiers are the exception. The majority of Aikidoka are not typically in 'real' fights; I think you could make this same statement for martial artists in general. For most of us this is a hobby and not a profession.

How are we supposed to gain this experience? Should we start a fight? I am not being facetious. To fully gain this 'knowledge' as you have referenced actual 'field' experience is required. How do we reconcile this? Would you point to competition? Or some other solution?

Regards,
Stephen
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2008, 09:14 PM   #47
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Steve,

check out my post under the split post yestereday concerning Dyiato Ryu. I talk about training models, the difference between, information, knowledge, wisdom...and how you can approximate a good training environment provided that you have decent institutional wisdom that is based on actual and live experiences.

It is possible to train in simulation. the key is to understand fully as possible that environment, and have leadership in the organization that has "been there done that". to make sure you are training correctly.

Aliveness is definitely key. I'd say a majority of the traditional schools out there are dead based on the aliveness model...but there are many reasons for studying budo than simply the physical skills that the art gives you. (I also touch upon this as well in that thread.)

Certainly nothing replaces actual experience gained first hand in combat, or on the street...but those events are too far and few in between to help you develop any real skill.

Again, the key I think is collective institutional widsom that evolves and changes based on the needs and dynamics of the group, and the situations that are presented that impact the reasons why you train.

  Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2008, 11:12 PM   #48
KIT
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 140
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Quote:
Stephen Kotev wrote: View Post
How are we supposed to gain this experience? Should we start a fight? I am not being facetious. To fully gain this 'knowledge' as you have referenced actual 'field' experience is required. How do we reconcile this? Would you point to competition? Or some other solution?
The first question would be do you really want or need that experience? If it is not a major part of your perception of budo, or your purpose and intent in studying budo as opposed to the greater lessons, then I don't think it really matters, so long as you understand what it is you are actually doing.

I don't think it can be reconciled fully. You can come to some of it in the way that Kevin as laid out, but never all the way. There really is no solution other than to get out there and do what you have to do, so to speak.

It is the same lesson included in statements like "You want koryu? Come to Japan!" No one seems to question the common sense in that. You want to learn aikido? Join an aikido dojo and immerse yourself in practice. You want internal martial arts power? Go and feel someone who has it, listen to what they say, and spend a lot of time doing the exercises they do to develop it.

Same thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 05:59 AM   #49
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

Kit wrote:

Quote:
The first question would be do you really want or need that experience?
I think this is most key. Beginning with an end in mind, or understanding why you want to do what it is that you want to do!

Most of us, me included, began my martial training for what I would consider to be very irrational reasons. Many days I find myself wondering why I am make the choices that I make or made!

I thought about this a little last night, and you know, when you start talking about this stuff in terms of soldiers and police officers, it starts to get a little more focused and narrow. You start looking at what we in the Army call "TTPs", or techniques, tatics, and proceedures. i.e. "how to do your job".

Again, we try and focus our guys on making sure they understand why they are training and what it is that they are getting out of the things they are doing. That way, they can make good decisions as they evalutate TTPs and implement them.

Budo is a little more broad and focused on development in other areas, that I would say are more strategic in nature, that is, a little more esoteric. Maybe not any less important, but it means different things to different people.

Martial training is good to do for many different reasons. We as individuals though must try and understand ourselves and our objectives as we train to realize the value of our training!

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2008, 10:46 AM   #50
d2l
 
d2l's Avatar
Dojo: Purple Dragon School Of Self Defense
Location: Florida
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 42
United_States
Offline
Re: Modern Army Combatives

I have to throw my 2 cents in this mix. As a former Soldier, and now Correctional Officer in a maximum security prison, I have fought more "hand to hand" in the prison than I ever did in the Army, and I was in Bosnia and Kosovo. Meaning I was in a real life combat arena. However, I can softly say, that working in a prison is by far more violent. I have walked in to a battle field everyday for the past 7 years. One of the things that really burns my ass about the questioned effectiveness of Aikido/Jutsu is the "what if ?" scenarios. Often times I read from experts that certain techniques do not, or won't work in a given situation. That they only work if your partner is willing to let you do them. Maybe this is ignorance on the so called experts part by not checking out more than one school? I have found Aikido to be immensely helpful when dealing with violent inmates. When I first started the prison, I was too stupid to be scared, and the name of the game was ground and pound. Now, things have changed. In Aikido, I have found better arresting techniques, take downs , and pain compliance. This is needed because unlike the military where it's kill or be killed, prisoners are starting to have more rights. Even when they have weapons, you are still under VERY close scrutiny as to how and why you did what you did to subdue said prisoner. To me, this is a very important facet to Aikido/Jutsu. One can go from a simple lock, to a pin, to a break, or even a choke if need be. I'm very well aware a lot of it depends on the individual. But if the individual is dedicated, the techniques will work. It also must be said, that in time, you will NOT stand there and rack your brain for the "proper" technique to use in a given situation. It will just happen. Many experts who proclaim that Aikido is worthless in the real world, tend to ignore the fact that the Aikidoka has more in his/her arsenal than just a fancy wrist lock that leads to a throw. Sorry all, just had to vent a little.

Last edited by d2l : 03-05-2008 at 10:50 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Handmade Aikido Gifts - Handmade functional ceramic art with aikido themes



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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Early Aikido vs Modern Aikido Dom_Shodan General 33 12-07-2006 02:47 AM
US Army combatives and aikido willy_lee General 49 01-03-2005 02:47 PM
Modern weapond xuzen Humor 30 12-03-2004 02:09 PM
What is the nature of modern fighting Don General 10 11-03-2004 04:27 AM
Koryu and Modern Budo Kensai General 7 07-06-2003 06:21 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:58 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 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