MMA/Muay Thai
- Thread starter big matt
- Start date
I have never seen Aikido fighters spar or engage in tournaments so I do not know how effective present Aikido techniques are in a real combat situation. I have noticed a dramatic difference in the the performance of Daitoryu Aki Jujutsu based on pre - 1945 film footage. It appears to utilize powerful strikes/ attacks and take downs that I have not seen in present day Aikido classes. The current issue of Blackbelt magazine has an interesting article on the art featuring Katsuyuki Kondo, inheritor of daito-ryu aikijujutsu from Tokimune Takeda, son of Sogaku Takeda. Also check out books written by Donn F Draeger on the subject of martial arts.
That is not very "open minded" and "spiritual " of them, is it? Perhaps they take a quick look at you and figure: "this guy is too big and wants to fight for real!" ( just teasing). One possibility is that they may get the impression you may want to spar with them and not learn the "art" if you will, as their instructor would prefer. I have seen the reaction you recieved at a few Aikido schools, however.
Before taking up a particular style or enetering martial arts training at all, I believe it is important to first figure out what specifically one wants to get out of that discipline : combative/self defense purposes or the more deeper meditative aspects of the art. Now one can proceed. I have witnessed a few ranked Akidoka from a New York school whose techniques were rendered basically useless when engaed in a friendly demonstration against a boxer and a wrestler. Too me, if you can't use it in a practical self defense situation, then it is useless at being promoted as a self defense art. I'm not knocking any branch of Aikido, and there are plenty, that can utilize their techniques in a combative enviornment but there are indeed many Akidoka as well as other styles of martial artists who unfortunately would not be able to survive an attack.
Before taking up a particular style or enetering martial arts training at all, I believe it is important to first figure out what specifically one wants to get out of that discipline : combative/self defense purposes or the more deeper meditative aspects of the art. Now one can proceed. I have witnessed a few ranked Akidoka from a New York school whose techniques were rendered basically useless when engaed in a friendly demonstration against a boxer and a wrestler. Too me, if you can't use it in a practical self defense situation, then it is useless at being promoted as a self defense art. I'm not knocking any branch of Aikido, and there are plenty, that can utilize their techniques in a combative enviornment but there are indeed many Akidoka as well as other styles of martial artists who unfortunately would not be able to survive an attack.
I agree. In fact, that's why I stopped studying Aikido. I had been taking it for some time, and to my dismay, found, in a friendly sparring match, that all my training was utterly useless against someone who had just started boxing. As I said above, Aikido really only works if your opponent flat out runs at you, as though drunk, or if your opponent has the reflexes of a crash test dummy!
It has been my experience (more through observation), that Aikido as Segal showed in Above the Law and Hard to Kill, as well as the more traditional schools that follow Usheba's training style is indeed very effective in a fight.
Since I am a Hapkido practitioner not Aikido, I made the above statement. However, many of the wrist and clothes techniques are the same technique. They are just a bit different in application. I know of a 5th dan Aikido instructor in St. Louis who has talked with me in great lengths who has told me that this is true. I have even worked with the gentleman once and found that yes indeed the differences in application of the wrist and clothes techniques were so miniscule in difference that it was not even worth truly noting.
Since I am a Hapkido practitioner not Aikido, I made the above statement. However, many of the wrist and clothes techniques are the same technique. They are just a bit different in application. I know of a 5th dan Aikido instructor in St. Louis who has talked with me in great lengths who has told me that this is true. I have even worked with the gentleman once and found that yes indeed the differences in application of the wrist and clothes techniques were so miniscule in difference that it was not even worth truly noting.
shihonage
New Member
reno77 said:
That is because Aikido is not an athletic competitive art. It CAN be applied in such manner, but it requires some extracirricular research (for example, see Jason Delucia's "Combat Aikido" DVDs).
Practical self-defense situation ? Do you get attacked by many wrestlers and boxers on the street ? What about SWAT operatives armed with shotguns ? If you want to talk practical, let's talk about the average Joe, not a trained athlete. THAT is actual reality. THAT is who is most likely to attack you. Martial artists comprise less than 1% of overall population.
Aikido is a martial art which does not crank out athletes. It is aimed at people who do not feel that the sacrifice of going home beat up every day is worth it.
Judo and boxing are martial arts which train people to be athletic and to survive in competitive environment. Such an environment has several drastic differences to real life.
The thing is, in real life, you don't need to survive a 30-minute wrestling round with Royce Gracie. Things are a lot faster and more sincere. Athletic ability/endurance does matter but not anywhere near as much as in the ring. It is more about awareness, strong spirit, and strong technique.
In competitive arts you fight in a sterile, limited environment, where you are not damaged by going to the ground (because the ground is always matted, it is not asphalt/broken bottles and whatnot), and, most importantly, where both people choose to engage in the fight. This is very important.
Now I will demonstrate the meaning of this with a clear example from my personal experience. There was this one bully in my 11th grade (I was 17). I saw him spar with a guy with boxing gloves and the protective helmet, it was intense. It was an athletically exhausting experience for both of them, it lasted for a while, and there were flurries of quick punches and distractions and evasive footwork, etc.
The same bully once got a grudge with me, followed me on my way home from school, and then threw a couple of hooks which I easily blocked. We were promptly arrested by the plainclothes police that was trailing us (but that's a different story), but the point is, I wasn't actively engaging him in a fight. I didn't stop there like an idiot and square off with him. I had no intention of playing his game, and he had no way of using his fancy footwork or throwing fake jabs, because while he was doing that, I would simply walk away. It was do or bust - that is how it always is in the real world. If one side is not actively engaging another, they create an emotional and physical contrast, which makes the other side overextend when they actually go for the kill.
Another example - a hobo decided to box with me for whatever reason and raised his fists into boxing stance. The problem was I closed the distance and applied a technique on him WHILE he was raising his hands, because I was aware of his intent. In the boxing ring, anything like this is against the rules.
Yes, traditional martial arts like Aikido and say TaeKwonDo aren't as effective against trained athletes in a competitive environment. Cue surprise.
However this does not mean that their effectiveness in the real world is equivalent to ZERO. Quite the opposite. Some of these arts actually have a better suitability to real world circumstances than the competitive arts. For instance, Judo footwork can drive you directly into a knife, while Aikido footwork always assumes that the attacker is carrying a sharp weapon.
shihonage
New Member
charles said:
If you want to spar using Aikido, you need to do some research on your own. It is possible, however - for instance you can attempt an ikkyo ura (tenkan) on a boxer's strong arm if you drive/tackle it into him with your whole body to maintain contact(and keep his arm from shooting out a punch) while keeping yourself out of the reach of his weaker jabbing arm by doing the ura (tenkan) rotation.
It is about seeing beyond the version of the techniques that you practice in the dojo, and understanding the PRINCIPLES behind them, because it is the principles that will save your ass when you're under influence of andrenaline and experiencing tunnel vision and loss of fine motor skills.
Also, proper Aikido is not practiced with people "running at you". That is a sign of a bad school. Aikido ukemi is about delivering an attack with a step, but it is an attack which is powerful, solid, grounded, and the attacker does NOT give his balance to you voluntarily.
Eventually when you get a hang of the basics you learn to react instinctively and compensate for poor distancing and faster strikes based on what is best for your body type. For instance, when an untrained Joe throws punches at me, I can trap both their arms (not by catching their wrists, but by slapping/tracing the blur of their arms shooting out and locking it at their wrists) , crosslock them while turn my torso and do a juji-nage. If juji nage fails I can transition to kote gaeshi or irimi nage or whatever else comes along, depending on what they do to counterattack me.
Aikido is a complex art. There are shortcuts for everything, but first, you have to understand the basics.
Littledragon
Above The Law
Aikido doesn't work on the ground plain and simple. MMA is the best style for a street fight.
Boxing
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu
Muay Thai
Wrestling
are the most effective arts for a one on one fight. Keyboard warriors who are high black belts in other styles may tend to disagree but you just can't compare an Aikido black belt against an UFC fighter, we all know the outcome of that.
Boxing
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu
Muay Thai
Wrestling
are the most effective arts for a one on one fight. Keyboard warriors who are high black belts in other styles may tend to disagree but you just can't compare an Aikido black belt against an UFC fighter, we all know the outcome of that.
shihonage
New Member
Littledragon, FYI, all of your points have been addressed in my above posts. One side trains athletes, another are just regular people learning technique. One side trains for competitions, another trains to simply survive an attack. Reality and the ring seldom have anything in common. Bless the UFC fighters for their skill, but let's not try and nullify the value of traditional martial arts like Aikido.
Also in my observation a lot of MMA people have this stuff in their blood. They train seriously and work out far more often than an average guy who attends traditional MA classes. Thats because those are different kind of people (athletes) with different focus - dominating other athletes in competition with rules. People who do TMA usually have another major focus in their lives, to which they dedicate the majority of their time. Hardcore competition is not their interest.
Also in my observation a lot of MMA people have this stuff in their blood. They train seriously and work out far more often than an average guy who attends traditional MA classes. Thats because those are different kind of people (athletes) with different focus - dominating other athletes in competition with rules. People who do TMA usually have another major focus in their lives, to which they dedicate the majority of their time. Hardcore competition is not their interest.
Hello: regarding the person who replied to my post, I highly doubt that if an Akidoka cannot successfully defend himself against a skilled boxer in a controlled environment, he will then suddenly be able to use his skill with better results in a "real" fight scenario. I understand what you are saying iin so far as the type of engagement one encounters in a classroom setting wil never be the same as the real thing but one should make it as close as possible. If one never spars, I doubt he skills will kick in on the streets in a "live" situation. Bocers who don't sparr, don't win matches. Likewise, as a tennis player, if I don't practice by actually playing, I won't be able to have any great success in a real match. The modern day aikida practitioners I've seen don't engae in ANY sparing that I know of. It is not merely enough to "have an understanding of the basic principle of an attack" but a person has to develope it through practice. Otherwise, I may as well have "just an understanding" of a forehand shot without having to hit a ball against an opponent. I can simulate it at home, by myself.
As you mentioned, I do not envision myself being attacked by a 10th degree "master" in some dark art or by a 300 lb 6'5' summo wrestler on the street, however, the type of people, especially in NYC, who prey on their victims are indeed in shape and are accustomed to real fighting on the streets. Many of them are in shape because their "profession" mandates them to be if they are to be successful. Of course one encounters the bully, drunk and hobo whose fighting skills are questionable, but then again, you won't require much in the way of skill to survive their attack.
If a student can translate what he learns in his aikido class on the street in a real combat situation, that is great! I hope a student never has to test what he learned in class in a life threatening ordeal.
I just feel that the aikido, and indeed all martial arts, that were taught in Takeda's time, have lost their combat effectiveness. Undestandably this is because we do not live in "martial" days of yore.
I remember an incident in a demonstration where full contact (not point fighting) karate champ Joe Lewis lifted an established aikidoka of his feet after the blackbelt stated that his KI will prevent anyone from lifting him or moving him - like Ueshiba would demonstrate. Lewis stated that the first time he raised him was effortless ( he was not using his KI to illustrate his point), the second time, the aikido blackbelt was using his ki as he had apparently often done in class. Lewis found him a bit heavier, but never the less lifted him clear off. The akidoka didn't have too much to say.
As you mentioned, I do not envision myself being attacked by a 10th degree "master" in some dark art or by a 300 lb 6'5' summo wrestler on the street, however, the type of people, especially in NYC, who prey on their victims are indeed in shape and are accustomed to real fighting on the streets. Many of them are in shape because their "profession" mandates them to be if they are to be successful. Of course one encounters the bully, drunk and hobo whose fighting skills are questionable, but then again, you won't require much in the way of skill to survive their attack.
If a student can translate what he learns in his aikido class on the street in a real combat situation, that is great! I hope a student never has to test what he learned in class in a life threatening ordeal.
I just feel that the aikido, and indeed all martial arts, that were taught in Takeda's time, have lost their combat effectiveness. Undestandably this is because we do not live in "martial" days of yore.
I remember an incident in a demonstration where full contact (not point fighting) karate champ Joe Lewis lifted an established aikidoka of his feet after the blackbelt stated that his KI will prevent anyone from lifting him or moving him - like Ueshiba would demonstrate. Lewis stated that the first time he raised him was effortless ( he was not using his KI to illustrate his point), the second time, the aikido blackbelt was using his ki as he had apparently often done in class. Lewis found him a bit heavier, but never the less lifted him clear off. The akidoka didn't have too much to say.
shihonage
New Member
reno77 said:
This only means that you ignored what I said in my reply to you. Tsk tsk.
Aikido training has jiyu-waza, spontaneous reaction to random stylized attacks meant to imitate the energy of real attacks. Aikido also has a pretty unique drill which deals with evading/redirecting three opponents for several seconds (enough to get away).
That is an invalid comparison. Aikidoka work with real body weight of their partner and learn to leverage and control. The higher the level, the less cooperation there is in training, until you learn to do technique in a way where the attacker can not resist it.
If this conversation continues with me having to repeat things to you, we won't get far at all.
The NATURE of real attacks is different. The environment is different, there's a lot more space, and one side is not intent on keeping the close "hand faster than the eye" distance. With a mindset of keeping the distance, Aikidoka loses nothing while the attacker loses his window of opportunity following him. It is in attacker's interest to close the distance, and Aikidoka use that to make him predictable and limit his range of responses.
It doesn't matter how good of a shape you're in. Real fights are short and messy, and an Aikidoka's goal is to buy some time with a temporary immobilization and run off. Yes, run off. That is what reality self-defense schools teach as well, because you never know - there are "good samaritans" who may mistake you for the attacker, or attacker's friends, or police...
Depends on school you go to. Just FYI, Shodokan and Tomiki styles of Aikido retain full-resistance Judo-like sparring.
In addition, Aikido is very popular with policemen. Several of them released their own videos on how they used Aikido for decades with slightly modified technique. Once you get the hang of the principles, it really doesn't matter.
Also, Aikido is the official training regimen of Tokyo Riot Police.
Just keeping you informed so you don't keep throwing broad, uninformed statements around
Unfortunately there ARE a lot of Aikido schools which are more of a cult. Those schools do not practice real Aikido, they practice flowered up KI bull**** and talk about "opening flower sensations" in their stomach and "projecting their KI like a waterfall".
The "unliftable body" trick is silly, it never worked for me, and it never worked for anyone who tried to demonstrate it to me. It is not about being unliftable, it is about becoming as limp as a corpse, which just makes you difficult, but not impossible, to pick up. If it were impossible, we'd have a lot of rotten corpses lying around instead of the morgue, don't you think
usernametaken
CHUCK CHUCK CHUCK
hehehe