This is a snippet that Bill Lewis wrote in one of his tape reviews - I believe he has a point:
"Some people may still wonder how knowing a martial art’s history will help them beat the snot out of someone. Understanding the creation and motivation behind the techniques of an art is critical to the execution of those moves. For example, I often hear people going on and on about how ineffective an art like Aikido would be in the UFC or on the street. Moreover, people criticize Aikido for its apparent unrealistic attacks that the practitioners defend against (wrist grabs or over hand strikes). When I hear things like this I get the same feeling that I do when a puppy craps on the rug. You want to spank the dog but you know the dog is so clueless that it would do no good.
A basic understanding of Aikido’s history would put the techniques in context. Aikido practitioner spend their time defending against wrist grabs and over hand strikes. Often these attacks are done by an opponent rushing rapidly in. One might ask, what kind of idiot would attack like this.
Step away from Aikido for a moment. Let’s assume that you are confronted with an attacker who has a gun and is standing 6 feet away. What do you do? You could run and hope he does not shoot you in the back. Or, you could fight. Do you play Bruce Lee and punch and kick. Not likely unless you like the taste of lead. Do you shoot-in and take the guy to ground. Maybe, if you recently had a steel plate installed in the top of your head to deflect the bullets. One of your few option is to get control of the hand that is holding the gun or that is about to draw the gun. Your attack really consists of you closing the distance as quickly as possible and grabbing that wrist. From there you can do a lot of things. All attention is on controlling the hand with the gun.
Now reverse the roles. You have a gun tucked into your pants (no, you are not just happy to see me) and you are confronted by an unarmed attacker. What will you do? The last thing you want to do is grapple with your attacker, lest he grab your gun and return your bullets to you. Really, our main concern is to keep this person away long enough so that you can get your gun out. You would also be looking to counter any attacks that might hinder you from drawing your gun, like a wrist grab. Now design an art around this situation and then redesign it so that the art is not self-defense oriented, but rather is now a way to improve yourself as a person. If you were able to do this, you would have an art very similar to Aikido.
Aikido assumes that either you are unarmed and your opponent has a sword in his scabbard or he has it fully drawn. Conversely, Aikido also assumes that you might have your sword drawn or in its scabbard and some poor fool decides to attack you. As with the gun analogy, most of the attacks by your opponent will be focused on neutralizing the sword. Very often in Aikido your opponent rushes in and grabs your wrist with both of his hands. The Aikdo practitioner will pivot out of the way and project the attacker forward thus freeing up his hand so that he can now freely draw his sword. When is the last time you saw, as much as we would like it, a person in the UFC with as sword. The Aikido is an art that is centered around a person being armed with a sword or being attacked with a sword. If this is your basic assumption underlying Aikido, it make sense that they do not worry about kicking and punching or BJJ like grappling. Try any of these things against someone armed with a sword. I would pay $19.95 to watch.
I could go on and on about how Aikido was developed from a battlefield efficient art and was changed into a way to improve yourself, etc. I think you get the point. It is vital that you know the background of your art. For no other reason than to avoid sounding like Homer Simpson."
|