Defending Against Grappler Using Aikido

Phil wrote:

say what techniques from MMA or Aikido would be used to handle the situation. That would be a better use of our time and knowledge.

I couldn't answer that question as I don't have a technique oriented paradiqm...all I see is principles and the dynamics of the situation.

What techniques exist in aikido that do not exist in MMA and vice versa?

We can discuss the realitive merits of various training methodolgies all day long...strengths, weaknesses etc...

but to discuss HOW a particular methodolgy would fair in a fight...

well...I can't even begin to answer that one as I find it a sophmoric question of limited view. (Sorry).

as you'd expect, I agree in some areas and disagree in others. I'm not so sure there are MMAbunnies. Having said that, MMA is a bit of a looser term - so we get to look at the local kung fu school claiming MMA and say tthat's not really MMA. But most true MMA schools train with resistance which takes away alot of the bunnyness in my experience.

In general, TMA's (such as Aikido) provide a training environment where bunnies can multiply (really running with the metaphor now), where as live training environments tends to either weed them out or turn them into something else.
That's why I'm pretty comfortable to say in a one on one combat situation (no weapons) I'm happy to put one of my 1 year guys up against and aikidoka with 5 times that training and put my money on my guy. Because I know there's very little he has to adjust from his training to the combat where as the aikido chap will have to do more "filling in the gaps".

Having said that - if we could wave a magic wand and have all of my guys have 5 years aikido behind them before the walked in the door - that would suit me fine. It would make them better BJJers and MMAers (once we fix the damn stance). Aikido is a great training method for teaching some very useful principals. But I believe it needs something alongside it to truly functionalise those principals.

Where I agree with you is that the chances of a well trained grappler and an aikidoka going at it in a bar seeem pretty slim. It may be worth though looking for the question behind the question - which imo is someone looking to be reassured about Aikido's effectiveness. And it's in this light I think it behooves us to answer - with honesty and integrity - what aikido is and isn't good for , where it will and will not be useful.

Agree with Michael.

FWIW, i studied Aikido for about 8 years, then got in a conversation one day with one of my NCOs who is a MMA guy, and currently one of the top Army fighters. We got into this same debate. It ended with me getting into a fully resistant sparring situation with various sets of rules....I could not do much with him.

He then put me on the mat with a few MACP guys with less than one years experience and no MA or wrestling background...I to had a hard time with those guys...embarrassingly so.

How could I train 15 years in MA, 8 in Aikido and be bested by "grapplers" and MMA guys with less than a year?

That said, within 12 months I was a BJJ blue belt, and within 3 years a purple belt. My aikido background helped me immensely in BJJ once I figured out it was basically the same, albeit different in timing etc.

It seems that guys like me, Michael Fooks, Roy Dean, Don Magee all have almost the exact same story, and the exact same experience, and the exact same conclusion concerning MMA/BJJ and full resistance training and the influence/place that aikido fits very well in the overall picture.

Bring in the internal stuff that a few guys are doing with Mike Sigman, Dan Harden, and Aunkai and it gets even more interesting!

However, many can't get past the whole aikido in the bar thing..or aikido is a complete system thing, and MMA is bad thing...and continue to spin this over and over.

Anyway, I like to share my experiences and such, as I love this stuff and hope somewhere that maybe some others might take the chance to take a different look at things.

I know I wasted many years in denial about MMA/BJJ and now the IMA training stuff....only to now get on board and start expanding my training.

It has been an interesting 12 months!

Michael Fooks wrote: you're right that makes perfect sense. And completely misses the point. Which is that in the middle of a fight - logical considerations don't come into it. In an adrenalised state you won't be thinking "hey that boxing dad taught me 30 years ago maybe I should dust that off". You'll be on autopilot and defaulting to the things you have most recently been training consistantly. Unless of course you acheive a strong enough positional dominance that allows you to "collect your thoughts". But at that point the fight is pretty much won. Ask anyone who's competed in a sport art what the difference is between what they do when they're in learning mode vs what shows up in competitoin. It's the stuff that you've been drilling for the last x amount of time, day in and day out that shows up, even if you planned going in to try your fancy new sweep. And a "street" confrontation takes that phenomenum to the next level. It's not about what it's smart or not smart to do - it's about how human physiology and psychology operates under stress.

Maybe we should be training to keep our heads about us and keep the ability to think logically and rationally under pressure? Sounds good to me.

I agree that 30 years would be a long time to go without practicing a technique to think that you'll pull it out of the bag and actually do something useful with it. However, I'm really not feeling the whole "six months" argument either. If a guy who has been training boxing for 10 years decides to take six months off and practice ballet, i don't think he's going to perform Swan Lake if he gets in a fight.

Basically, I agree with you. The body and mind behaves unpredictably when under stress. Every time I hear this though, I can't help but think about the firing range. Are all those cops out at the firing range wasting their time because no one is shooting back at them, and they don't really know how they'll react when someone does? I know when I practice defensive shooting I attempt to induce varying physiological (psychological stress is harder for me to realistically induce) stresses; running as fast as possible for as long as possible and then trying to stay on target, doing curls with dumbbells until arms are completely exhausted and then trying to stay on target, etc. Preparing for, if not the worst, then at least an uncomfortable situation

It's really all academic as I have ice water flowing through my veins.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: you'd had better be controlling more than YOU if YOU expect to survive.

Agreed, but it seems somewhat circular. As far as i can tell, the ability to control someone else is directly proportional to one's ability to maintain control of themselves. It would be impossible to control them if you are not in control of yourself, so then which control is more important (should be practiced more). I'd say control of yourself.

W.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Phil wrote: I couldn't answer that question as I don't have a technique oriented paradiqm...all I see is principles and the dynamics of the situation. What techniques exist in aikido that do not exist in MMA and vice versa? We can discuss the realitive merits of various training methodolgies all day long...strengths, weaknesses etc... but to discuss HOW a particular methodolgy would fair in a fight... well...I can't even begin to answer that one as I find it a sophmoric question of limited view. (Sorry).

Chicken... Com' on Kevin you have jumped on topics less then this just to comment on something more sophmoric then this. Heck you respond to me!

Isn't that what it's about, right. Telling the world what you would do based on viewing a real situation! You should be partin' the red sea to comment on that instead commenting on hypothetical posts.

Michael Fooks wrote: That's why I'm pretty comfortable to say in a one on one combat situation (no weapons) I'm happy to put one of my 1 year guys up against and aikidoka with 5 times that training and put my money on my guy. Because I know there's very little he has to adjust from his training to the combat where as the aikido chap will have to do more "filling in the gaps".

Ahhh..come on, Michael! No weapons, thats reducing the reality of a street fight to a sporting match. I would put up an escrima guy with 1 year of training against one of your own BJJ guys with 10 years experience. Talk about filling gaps, Wow, with all those that the poor BJJ guy is going to have to fill is countless. I have my money on the stick guy.

Don't get me wrong a stick fight would be tough for an Aikidoka, but there are less gaps to fill. He isn't going to lay down and fight from the gound -don't be getting those neck hairs raised too high, it's good natured ribbing that's all. I am just playing.

Michael Fooks wrote: It may be worth though looking for the question behind the question - which imo is someone looking to be reassured about Aikido's effectiveness. And it's in this light I think it behooves us to answer - with honesty and integrity - what aikido is and isn't good for , where it will and will not be useful.

If people really wanted answers about aikido's effectiveness, they surely had found themselves. What they want is validation.

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: If people really wanted answers about aikido's effectiveness, they surely had found themselves. What they want is validation.

I'm not so sure. I think part of the issue we're discussing is that you never quite know how effective Aikido is just by training aikido...

Philip Burgess wrote: Ahhh..come on, Michael! No weapons, thats reducing the reality of a street fight to a sporting match. I would put up an escrima guy with 1 year of training against one of your own BJJ guys with 10 years experience. Talk about filling gaps, Wow, with all those that the poor BJJ guy is going to have to fill is countless. I have my money on the stick guy.

well yeah - I'd put my money on the guy with the weapon vs *any* martial artist.
I know this is somewhat tongue in cheek - still trying to "turn the tables" rhetorically. But it's a fairly common comeback - and I often wonder if those that use it realised they have just effectively said that aikido vs bjj is as much of a mismatch as empty hand vs weapon is....

Don't get me wrong a stick fight would be tough for an Aikidoka, but there are less gaps to fill. He isn't going to lay down and fight from the gound -don't be getting those neck hairs raised too high, it's good natured ribbing that's all. I am just playing.

heh - again I disagree - I think the bjjer will do better against a stick fighter than an aikidoka....

seriously.

Michael Fooks wrote: I'm not so sure. I think part of the issue we're discussing is that you never quite know how effective Aikido is just by training aikido...

Exactly, and people wants to know if aikido is effective without stepping themselves outside the training environment.

So, to the OP and every other who wants to "know" how to defend himself against a grappler/bjj'er/mma'er/whatever with his aikido in "the street": Go to the street and find it yourself. The answers you're looking for aren't in the dojo and much less in a internet forum.

or, if you prefer to stay out of prison - go visit a grappling school and have a play.

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: If people really wanted answers about aikido's effectiveness, they surely had found themselves. What they want is validation.

Validation for what? Again, are we assuming that just because you roll on a mat it instantly makes you the best fighter in the world?

With all this slanted MMA vs. Aikido post and the original question what I think is there are MMA/BJJ out that are looking for a we are better then everyone validation, because they aren't at the pro-level or appreciate the value of other martial arts. I understand, it happens.

Philip Burgess wrote: Validation for what?

Self-image.

Again, are we assuming that just because you roll on a mat it instantly makes you the best fighter in the world?

No. Rolling in a mat is rolling in a mat, no more, nor less. So don't include me in the "we", please. Thanks.

With all this slanted MMA vs. Aikido post and the original question what I think is there are MMA/BJJ out that are looking for a we are better then everyone validation, because they aren't at the pro-level or appreciate the value of other martial arts. I understand, it happens.

This happens in BJJ/MMA, in Aikido and in a lot of venues, no big deal. It's human nature. But if the question is "Do you think that one can defend (him/her)self from a grappler with Aikido techniques, on the ground?" what comes to my mind is the "Achilles vs. turtle" thing so, instead of going into philosophy, semantics and maths, I'll ask for someone to bring me a turtle, even if I'm not Achilles, and let's see what happens.

Of course, there are people who prefer philosophy, semantics and maths and conclude that Achilles can't catch up with the turtle, but I can accept diversity. No problem.

Michael Fooks wrote: or, if you prefer to stay out of prison - go visit a grappling school and have a play.

But going musha shugyo and dojo yaburi-ing is very un-traditional and lacks proper samurainess. Storming biker bars (if the bikers are trained in mma/bjj, of course) is what counts.

If you want to play the blues you got to pay your dues.

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Agree with Michael. FWIW, i studied Aikido for about 8 years, then got in a conversation one day with one of my NCOs who is a MMA guy, and currently one of the top Army fighters. We got into this same debate. It ended with me getting into a fully resistant sparring situation with various sets of rules....I could not do much with him. He then put me on the mat with a few MACP guys with less than one years experience and no MA or wrestling background...I to had a hard time with those guys...embarrassingly so. How could I train 15 years in MA, 8 in Aikido and be bested by "grapplers" and MMA guys with less than a year? That said, within 12 months I was a BJJ blue belt, and within 3 years a purple belt. My aikido background helped me immensely in BJJ once I figured out it was basically the same, albeit different in timing etc. It seems that guys like me, Michael Fooks, Roy Dean, Don Magee all have almost the exact same story, and the exact same experience, and the exact same conclusion concerning MMA/BJJ and full resistance training and the influence/place that aikido fits very well in the overall picture. Bring in the internal stuff that a few guys are doing with Mike Sigman, Dan Harden, and Aunkai and it gets even more interesting! However, many can't get past the whole aikido in the bar thing..or aikido is a complete system thing, and MMA is bad thing...and continue to spin this over and over. Anyway, I like to share my experiences and such, as I love this stuff and hope somewhere that maybe some others might take the chance to take a different look at things. I know I wasted many years in denial about MMA/BJJ and now the IMA training stuff....only to now get on board and start expanding my training. It has been an interesting 12 months!

I hate to say it, but I will. Most Modern Aikidoka are in denial due to the cult like status or religious fanaticism that has developed within most Modern Aikido circles. Modern Aikido has done something in the history of America's quest for marital arts that is significant, unlike most. It allowed, strongly advocated religious idioms as it's bases and made those who didn't accept those methodologies as somehow bastardized heathens. That's why those Aikibunnies mention, walk around in a fantasy world, speaking of super human capabilities. It's slowly developing into a superiority complex.

When an Aikibunnie is embarrassed or challenged beyond there martial abilities, then they begin to question Modern Aikido. They come to the realization about true self defense, much like so many of us have. Aikido is not the all, be all of self defense.

I myself have experienced similar situations much like you have.

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: I'll ask for someone to bring me a turtle, even if I'm not Achilles, and let's see what happens.

Well... if we count Otenjime as an Aikido technique, then turtle will lose...

No, seriously. Let's admit Demetrio is right: we aikidoka are always looking for validation. Best thing to do is go train with other MAists and share and learn. Dojo yaburi is not in the like of AIKIDO (TM) practicioners, so it's not really an option.

Best.

Salim Shaw wrote: I hate to say it, but I will. Most Modern Aikidoka are in denial due to the cult like status or religious fanaticism that has developed within most Modern Aikido circles. Modern Aikido has done something in the history of America's quest for marital arts that is significant, unlike most. It allowed, strongly advocated religious idioms as it's bases and made those who didn't accept those methodologies as somehow bastardized heathens. That's why those Aikibunnies mention, walk around in a fantasy world, speaking of super human capabilities. It's slowly developing into a superiority complex.

Is that really a fair comment anymore? I don't know I'm just asking.
It seems going way back to Aikido Today magazine and Sue refusing to publish any more "effectiveness" debate articles or letters-to-the-editor that something was a foot. Now you can hardly go to an aikido forum anywhere where effectiveness isn't a major issue.
Secondly as a follow up, more and more left, or got training outside but stayed involved.
Now you have the recent internal power (aiki) debate which is giving many in Aikido new hope for power being used more commensurate with their art-and hundreds are going to train it.

Overall it seems the issue really is only "debated" by a small fraction of those holding on, or those who frankly are not in aikido for "effectiveness" in the first place. Maybe its just me, but it seems the denial days are -for the most part-past us, and folks are involved in fixing it, in one form or another.
Am I wrong?

Dan Harden wrote: Is that really a fair comment anymore? I don't know I'm just asking. It seems going way back to Aikido Today magazine and Sue refusing to publish any more "effectiveness" debate articles or letters-to-the-editor that something was a foot. Now you can hardly go to an aikido forum anywhere where effectiveness isn't a major issue. Secondly as a follow up, more and more left, or got training outside but stayed involved. Now you have the recent internal power (aiki) debate which is giving many in Aikido new hope for power being used more commensurate with their art-and hundreds are going to train it. Overall it seems the issue really is only "debated" by a small fraction of those holding on, or those who frankly are not in aikido for "effectiveness" in the first place. Maybe its just me, but it seems the denial days are -for the most part-past us, and folks are involved in fixing it, in one form or another. Am I wrong?

I use the analogy, much like the Conservatives vs Liberals dilemma within American politics. The Conservative Aikidoka will ostracize you with intensity, if you don't agree with there principles and call you UNPATRIOTIC, Aiki style. The Liberals will advocate using what works for you. Try BJJ/MMA and learn it effectively. The Liberals will tell you to accept BJJ/MMA and utilize it's full potential.

The Conservatives will use media venues such as Aikiweb.com to covertly manipulate the psyche of those who are not well versed in the martial arts/self defense methods in general. They will continue this perpetration by using psychoanalysis within the dojos. This will help flourish and foster the mindset. That is the Modern Aikido movement of today.

Yes, it's true, many are starting to question Modern Aikido, venture into BJJ/MMA. Yes, I think it's fair now. Although Stanley Pranin and others, years ago, attempted to share and uncover some misconceptions about Modern Aikido's history, it was not widely accepted in the beginning. The MMA/BJJ craze and the advent of the Internet has changed the game of ignorance. People no longer have to accept at face value what there Sensei saids. People are more opt to question anything these days, and that's powerful.

Roy Dean and his academy, along with many others, hold bright features for Aikidoka to come. They are sharing, responding professionally, and advocating intelligent thinking, ask questions to much about a martial art. Bruce Lee try to do this over 30 years ago, but only a handful of people listened. Now information is everywhere, readily available for us to think intelligently without blinders.

Another note, the mindset is still very prevalent, that's why we are having this discussion.

Dan Harden wrote: Overall it seems the issue really is only "debated" by a small fraction of those holding on, or those who frankly are not in aikido for "effectiveness" in the first place. Maybe its just me, but it seems the denial days are -for the most part-past us, and folks are involved in fixing it, in one form or another. Am I wrong?

Only over-optimist, methinks.

Demetrio Cereijo wrote: Only over-optimist, methinks.

Agree. For everyone that posts on a thread like this on the internet there's probably 20 aikidoka who never discuss it online -just go to the dojo 3 times a week and believe whatever sensei says (who in turn is just repeating what their sensei said...and so on).

Phil - you persist in the claim that MMA/BJJ practioners have some sort of complex that means we need gain validtion from comparing MMA/BJJ to aikido. So once more:
look back through all the threads like this in aikiweb - and there are ample - and you'll notice something.

THE TOPIC IS NEVER, EVER RAISED BY SOMEONE VERSED IN BJJ/MMA!!

Why would we? It's purebred aikidoka or newbies asking the question.

Wow....

It's pretty simple really...Either you have an open mind or you don't.

We poor Aikidoka just seem to "roll" on doing the best we can with or without an open mind.

William Hazen

end of the day if you're off the couch and enjoying what you're doing it's all good - open or closed.

Michael Fooks wrote: end of the day if you're off the couch and enjoying what you're doing it's all good - open or closed.

Amen...

What I enjoy doing most is making connections with folks. I must remember not to lose sight of that here on Aikiweb. I have met a ton of folks because of the Web and some of them have taught me a good thing or two about life and the Martial Arts.

Hopefully we'll hang out one day too. I would love to visit New Zealand. I have an RNZSAS buddy who runs a sheep farm there, and surfs beautiful uncrowded waves... Another ex-pat who lives here in Malibu and goes back during your summer. And then there's David Lynch... Another cool Aki-Kiwi I would like to meet.

William Hazen

Was this thread seriously created in 2008?

I have to chime in here. While the art does matter, what matters even more is the training method.

In that regard I place my money on the guy who has been in more real fights, been actually hit more, actually had to respond to 'real' attacks more, and actually used their art against a resistant attacker more.

Essentially it comes down to this, actual experience trumps pretend experience. This is true in all senses. The closer to real your training is (towards the goals you are trying to develop), the better you will be at it.

Everyone here says if you want to train for the ring, you have to train for the ring. That means sparing with the rules of the ring. Does anyone here think you can make a pro maa fighter without sparing and aliveness?

What makes you think you can skip the same type of training and make a street fighter?

What we have here is a religious, faith based argument based on what I would loosely call a Chinese telephone system of training.

Don Magee wrote: Was this thread seriously created in 2008? I have to chime in here. While the art does matter, what matters even more is the training method. In that regard I place my money on the guy who has been in more real fights, been actually hit more, actually had to respond to 'real' attacks more, and actually used their art against a resistant attacker more. Essentially it comes down to this, actual experience trumps pretend experience. This is true in all senses. The closer to real your training is (towards the goals you are trying to develop), the better you will be at it. Everyone here says if you want to train for the ring, you have to train for the ring. That means sparing with the rules of the ring. Does anyone here think you can make a pro maa fighter without sparing and aliveness? What makes you think you can skip the same type of training and make a street fighter? What we have here is a religious, faith based argument based on what I would loosely call a Chinese telephone system of training.

Help me here Don...How did you reach this conclusion and what 'argument" are you specifically referring to?

William Hazen