Aikido

[Guest]

"Aikido takes many years to become even marginally effective"

Well, we are agreed on one thing. Funny how logic turns upside down. Many people go on about how long it takes to be effective at Martial Arts, as if the longer it takes the better it must be. What about an art that only takes a short time to become effective. What happens when you train that art for an awful long time? You become FAR MORE effective than Mr Wrist Twist, that's what.

"That's why you hit or distract them first"

But if you get the hit right, that is all you need. He isn't ging to grab you and stand there waiting around. You have to beat him to the strike that is already on it's way.

"another of my instructors is a S.W.A.T. team member who has made many of his techniques work, wristlocks and all, while under threat of death."

I'm pretty sure those SWAT guys have their guns out when they are under threat of death. But we all like a good story.....

"You can't judge an art by a few minutes of video"

Actually it was watching my brother in law for a considerable length of time. He is a Dan graded Aikidoka.

"P.S. NHB competition isn't the end-all-be-all of realistic combat. There are so many restrictions in any sane competition that believing you'll win in the street as a result of winning in an octagon is laughable. If you don't train to kill, you're going to get killed. Submissions don't work when the person your mounting crushes your balls or slits your wrist, or tears out your throat. No offense, but I doubt that supposition can be easily argued."

Sorry to quote you at such length, but I agree with every word. I don't agree with Martial Artists duelling to the death to find out who is most effective, but the MMA tournaments can go some way to indicating what kind of techniques can work. Burt you're whole quote does not readily sit well with your defence of Aikido.

"If you don't train to kill, you're going to get killed"

Thats why I went to the CQC Seminar, and that is why I do NOT go to Aikido.

I don't mean to be offensive. And I'm sure any martial art, including Aikido, can have at least something to offer in a fight. But consider this :-

3 clones all attend martial arts classes. One goes to Mixed Martial Arts, learning kick boxing, wrestling BJJ etc. Another goes to CQC, learning Axe Hands to the throat, fingers in the eyes etc., and the third goes to Aikido. I'm sure you would agree that the Aikidoka couldn't win either of his clone brothers after just a years training. Nor 5 years. But do you think he will ever win? Do you think his wrist twists and "chi" will defeat the monsters that his clone brothers have become?

I don't, but I'm sure he could give demonstrations of making dozens of other Aikido students roll around on a mat, impressing the gullible.

It all sounds so wonderful. Utilise your inner energy, harmonise your chi, flow with your opponents energy and use it against him. Whereas dishing out a strike to the throat sounds gruesome and horrible.

I know which approach I would prefer to be trained to adopt if my life depended on it.

[Brokenmace]

Hi, Bri Thai. Thanks for the response. We probably agree on more than you think.

Here's the thing that concerns me, though. A lot of people, especially on this board, seem to think a person trains for the martial arts for the sole purpose of survival and/or ring bouts. Either reason is an excellent reason, but not the only reason. Remember, the founder of Aikido was a traditionalist in many ways. In the Fifties he was already an old man. He was raised on the Budo (traditional warrior ethics), was trained in traditional Aikijutsu, and was a fair swordsman. He never intended his art to be what it may seem you want it to be. His primary weapon was a sword. His art was designed with the realization that any life-and-death situation would be resolved with a weapon (which he apparently carried around everywhere). Aikido has its place. If you are train in Bugei, your aim is not to kill with your hands, but to kill with your sword. My original post in this thread was simply to point out that the basic motions of Aikido were essentially human motions, and with proper thought could be an adjunct to any other art.

All arts were designed in a time and culture for which they were suited. A real, traditional Aikidoka would use a sword if death were warranted. That is why most Aikido moves are based on sword strokes. Aikido, like Japanese Jujutsu, was an add-on to Kenjutsu (Bugei), and thus was treated like a modern soldier treats a knife. It is the tool of the policeman.

As to your point about it taking years to learn, I've already state that the originals were Bugei practitioners, and thus were taught from childhood to be warriors, not simply competitors or even survivalists. They were learning to live and die for a Shogunate.

Could an Aikidoist beat Muay Thai practitioner of the same physical ability? That doesn't depend on the art, as I've stated elsewhere on this board. It is entirely up to the cercumstances of one's training. An advanced student from my brother's old school might have done quite well. They trained against kickboxing and grappling, and used resistance. Another student from another school might have done worse. This reflects more on student and instructor than the art practiced.

And, finally, about my instructors. Well, they aren't just stories, because as you may know S.W.A.T. team members aren't just that, they are also regular cops with regular cop duties. He's been in more than one bar room altercation and has had to restrain many unwilling suspects over his fifteen years of experience. Tell me that's not a likely story, and I'd like to sell you some swampland. Besides, even on a S.W.A.T. call, not every situation can be solved with an MP-5 or a Glock.

Sorry for being so long-winded

Respect

[Guest]

Being a Police Officer myself I know a thing or two about bar room brawls. You can use restraints to subdue an unruly person, maybe a noisy drunk. But I have never seen one used against a guy who is already fighting.

Watch how those morons figt on the Jerry Springer show. They're untutored idiots who have never trained. But that is one of their best weapons. They grab your clothes, hair, face - and they scratch and bite. They come at you like ferocious animals, and the idea of trying to catch a wrist of a person who is striking you with every other part of their body also is unreal.

But I have nothing against Martial Arts being "deeper" and philosophical. But their practitioners should not claim fighting skills beyond reality.

Anyway, I don't like my brother in law.........but thats another story!

[Roland]

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."

[Brokenmace]

Oh, yeah, baby!

Nice, Roland. That was my point all along. People are trying to fit Aikido into box it was never designed for. You have to look at things from the perspective of the progenator and only then apply the lessons to your current situation. You have to ask why you are learning it. Just because art hasn't saved my life doesn't mean I don't get fulfillment from it, right? As an artist (of more than one medium), I can assert the truth of this.

Also, you have to understand what situations respond best to your skills. I would never grapple with a gun-wielder. I doubt I would try submissions on someone who has shown a willingness to bite and claw, either. That doesn't mean BJJ is useless, far from it! But, like everything else, it has its place in the world. So does Aikido.

As for your comments, Bri Thai, I've seen the police reports. Apparently there are folks amongst us who grab you and respond to wristlocks. Do you really think seven-hundred years of martial study of wristlocks was wasted on techniques that have no real-world merit? I think not.

But like anything, wristlocks are not the end-all-be-all. They fail, like every technique, depending on the situation and skill of the martial artist. A time and place for everything . . .

As for why you would want to hit someone as a distraction instead of to kill/maim them? Obviously, you don't wish to kill or maim them. That's what wristlocks are for. I've made them work myself. They are great when you sense things are about to get physical, but you don't want to be seen as the assailant.

In fact, they are probably the only reason I've avoided the typical barroom brawl. I don't particularly enjoy fighting folks, and wristlocks, used wisely, can save you the hassle. If you want a specific anecdote just say the word.

I’ve never been in a “real” fight, the kind where you face off against another man with fists flying, since I’ve been trained. Wristlocks are the reason.

Respect.

[Guest]

I'm just not having it. Aikido is about taking swords off people is it.? Maybe that's what it is designed for, but I have never seen any proof of it being capable of doing so. You try to take a sword off someone if you want to, but take any expensive rings off first, that way you will still have them when you no longer have your arms. But then you revert to how it works in a real fight......and then you revert to how it is meant to be a life philosophy more than a fighting art....

Which is it? And don't say "it is all these things" as you jump about from one to the other when the need arises.

Aikido uses unrealistic techniques and, for the most part, trains them in an unrealistic fashion. And convincing yourself that's realistic training to take a sword off someone is a little ludicrous.

[Brokenmace]

Which is it? And don't say "it is all these things" as you jump about from one to the other when the need arises.

Of course I do. If something is both things, why can I not use both attributes to support my point? This thread was started simply as a way of telling if Aikido could mix with other arts. I say any art can mix with any other, with the proper study.

How many purported stunts have you seen performed in real situations by any martial arts that go beyond punching and kicking wrestling? No one walks around with a sword anymore, so the point is moot.

Simply because something seems beyond you, doesn’t mean it can't be done. Or that it is ludicrous. If it were ludicrous, most of the disarms I've seen Burton Richardson perform would fall into that category, as some of the initial movements looked quite similar. But we all know it is better to run or equalize than to disarm with your hands.

As for the training, I've already addressed that. Not every sensei is the same. In any art you will find a large number of folks teaching techniques and using methods that either don't work or are taught in a way that doesn't work. It is common in many arts.

And I never said Aikido was either the most efficient or realistic martial art. Recall that I made comments about the amount of time to become any good at it. Many of its techniques would collapse under survival stress (unless your mental training was up to it). However, the Tokyo police use a modified version of Aikido in their training, and I've heard it works for them. Just because you must dig through the dirt doesn't mean you shouldn't look for the gold.

There are some techniques in both BJJ and Thai Boxing that I would never try in the street. That doesn't mean either art has no value. Keep it simple, keep it swift, is what I say. But Aikido is a study in biomechanics, and as such can benefit any martialist who deconstructs it analytically.

Respect.

[Lightning&Earth]

what we also have to understand about aikido

is that it is NOT a confrontational martial art. the sole emphasis on aikido is to AVOID the confrontation at all costs. so in effect the techniques are soley evasive and passive. being one who has studied aikido in thier early years i have learned two things from aikido. How to fall and how to recieve. Aikido and Pakua are very similar in principle. the circular motion of the movements attempts to get behind the attacker either to run away or in a more aggresive way crack the back of his neck(base of the neck where it joins the skull) the only thing that I See is a flaw in aikido is that sometimes you NEED to strike and you NEED to kick.
but that is where the hsing i comes in. focus on a point to strike and make it a vital one ,,and you CAN end a situation. with principles and techniques found in Aikido and pakua you can evade and move with your attacker.

see in the relm of fighting and competetion fights ,,it is strength against strength, attack against attack. and the one that is the stronger of the two will be successful.
but look at what happens when the attack is met with the non attack,,the defensive,,,this is where the timeing comes in and this is what takes many years to master and make effective.
its easy for a BJJ or a MMA stylist to trash arts such as aikido or taichi,,,,these are arts that serve not to be a brute and a brutalizer, but rather a peaceful warrior,,,when the confrontataion comes to the peaceful warrior,,when all else fails,,then the peacefull ceases to be and the warrior surfaces and the outcome will not be that of a UFC fight or a cage match,,it will be where one will be dead and the other not(note that this contradicts aikido principles)

Lightning and Earth

[Brokenmace]

I see what you mean. I think it is vital that we look at any martial art (or, for that matter, any method of any kind) from the point of view of its origins, goals, and founding culture.

Aikijutsu is the basis of Aikido, and most old-timer Aikijutsu practitioners knew how to use a sword. The sword was their primary weapon. Aikijustsu was used in the same way the police use their nightsticks today. The sword was their gun.

When you have the mental attitude and authority that goes with being a lifelong samurai, dealing with the peasantry that they dealt with, survival stress was often lessened and one could indeed pull-off more sophisticated moves. And if that didn't work, you still had a large meat-cleaver . . .

The goal of Aikido isn't to fight in an octagon. Everything has its place.

Aikido may not be practical for most folks in our culture and times. I have no data to dispute this. I simply wish folks wouldn't take such a myopic view of everything outside prize-fighting and military CQC. It may work for some folks some of the time. Everything is like that, and that is good enough. I can think of a few folks who simply couldn’t get good enough at Thai Boxing to make it work for them. I meet them every day.

Whatever works for you is good enough.

[terry]

Mano Cacoy uses aikido in eskrido. It is difficult to see though because your head and body are constantly getting whacked with his stick. But if you watch his footwork during one of his barrages it is there. It's easier to see in his knife work.

I must admit that it was difficult for me to see past the fact that I didn't like the entries or feeding or the lack of physical conditioning I see in aikido practitioners. It took somebody like Cacoy to make me see it in a better perspective. I'm not sure an aikido purist would like it though because it is much more blood-thirsty than the original, but it suits me.

Terry

[Guest]

I think it is too easy to get into dreamland in the Martial Arts world. And again we get into "look at what it is trying to acheive" etc.

To summarise, it does work as an effective fighting art, it works so well you can take swords off people, it doesn't work, and it doesn't want to work as it want to be something else........

Confusing isn't it?

[Brokenmace]

Yes. Very. LOL

Just be careful about that dreamland talk. It applies equally to all martial arts. I've heard certain suspicious claims about BJJ as well.

[doubleouch]

Bottom line here guys is choose a martial art based on why you train. If you want to learn to fignt probably not aidido. If you like mixing it up maybie thai boxing. If you want self defence maybie JKD. If you like comeptition BJJ. Not every art was meant to be everything to all people. If you like a spiritual martial art that is not too hard on your body, has lots of tradition and can be easily trained in old age aikido makes perfect sense.

[MrPoopy]

I don't think aikido is totally useless. And I'm starting to think that other martial arts are not useless. BJJ kind of brainwashes people into thinking that all other MA's are worthless and it's not true. If people were taught the right time and place to use certian techniques then they would know better than to try a wristlock while being pounded in the face. I did a little bit of Isshinryu Karate around 7 years ago, and the instructor showed me a lot of wristlocks and fingerlocks. And he also showed me some grappling techniques. Karate guys suck at grappling tho, because they don't know the right time to use those techniques. Just like how grapplers really don't know how to take advantage of easy standing techniques like wristlocks, fingerlocks or groin strikes.

It would be interesting to see a UFC match with an aikidoka vs. a sword weilding opponent. And no octogon to keep the aikidoka from running away.

[Ice Phoenix]

The fact is that it's irrelevant how effective Aikido is for disarming sword-wielding opponents cause the fact is THERE ARE NO SWORD-WIELDING OPPONENTS!

Therefore, other than for preserving this unique martial art , why learn it?

And MrPoopy I agree that certain styles of Karate, Wing Chun, and likely many other martial arts have so-called anti-grappling techniques that may work in theory, but in reality they couldn't be executed effectively whatsoever due to the lack of, and inability to, practise those techniques against resisting, unco-operative opponents. If anti-grappling techniques could be practised in a similiar manner to BJJ they could be effective, but simply knowing them is not enough!

If people were taught the right time and place to use certian techniques then they would know better than to try a wristlock while being pounded in the face.

This is sort of true, but the only way you're ever gonna manage to accomplish this is to actually POUND THAT AIKIDOKA IN THE FACE!

In summary, I have no doubts about the potential for hard & long-trained Aikido, Karate, or even TKD techniques to be effective in reality if they were trained properly and realistically, but the vast majority of all such places that teach these arts, if not all, do not teach them this way, and so, why bother?

I'd rather learn Muay Thai & BJJ and some hard-drilled JKD disarm techniques over the period of 1 or 2 years and then be highly effective as an all-round fighter and self-defender, as opposed to learning some traditional martial art over a LONG period of time for just a freak chance of having learned the system in the PROPER way and only possibly being able to use it to any descent effect!