Is Aikido designed for defence against an untrainned attacker?

Or possibly "Most effective against an untrainned attacker"?

First Point

As I see it the techniques we are taught in Aikido work best against a strong commited attack where the attacker moves towards you and gives you enough force to use it against him.

A (well) trained fighter is likely to throw very controlled attacks, he wont want to overcommit because he knows he can KO you without much effort and he doesnt want to unbaalance himself by overcommiting because he will know the consequences from sparring.

Second Point

You need to be able to block an attack and grab the attacking arms wrist, if you watch videos of a bar brawl you see the sort of attacks you can easily evade, lead and neutralise whereas if you watch a couple of middleweight boxers, Karateka or whatever you see their punches are not telegraphed so are very difficult to even block let alone grab/lead and perform a technique on.

Third point

Aikido stresses the point of being a more gentle passive art and whereas other arts teachers may boast as to how much better they are than other notes an Aikido teacher will nearly always ascribe many good points to other styles techniques, even going so far as to say they are a lot more practical in the short to medium run, all this makes Aikdoka less likely to take on trained opponents anyway due to the fact that we have more good sense that that (in theory at least).

Fourth point

Whereas in other styles they will focus at higher levels more on sparring with opponents of a similar skill level in Aikido randoori(freestyle) the skill of your attacker in Aikido is only important for their own safety and making the practice realistic, by this I mean if I could do Randoori (Which I cant as I have not yet graded once in Akido) then being attacked by a 5th dan and being attacked by someone with just a years experience in Aikido, it woukld in fact be easier to defend against the 5th dan genrally(Barring exceptional circumstances like him deciding to really push you to your limit by giving you new attacks to deal with).

So instead of tak8ing on mkore skilled opponents in Randoori we focus on taking on more opponents full stop with 3 or 4 on 1 randdori at higher levels of Aikido practice.

Fifth point

If we examine the tecniques in Aikido we have to take 2 or 3 steps to neutralise an attacker before they take one, quite possible against someone that doesnt have a clue but very difficult to achieve against someone who has any idea how to escape grappling techniques(Twisting quickly and/or releasing your hold on the thrower will rendere a large percentage of Aikido techniques innefective I have found).


Anyway these are just my experiences in Aikido, I am interested to see what other people believe and have experienced.

 

I've done some AIKIDO for about 8 months. I saw a lot of good stuff and some crap (but that goes in every MA). I would like to know how would an AIKIDOKA defend low roundhouse kicks , or sucker punches (meaning for example show you will do a left jab , and do a right hook instead, we do that a lot). If the guy tries to catch the left hand but fails , he'll take the right into the jaw (they dont usually keep their hands up).

But one think i liked was that some AIKIDOKA stepped back when i got in and didn't let me advance and hit him (he threw some awfull punches i saw a mile away trying to catch me off guard) but I thought that the art's approach to fighting was exelent .

But it was too technical for me and with a really slow learning curve so I stopped.

 

Well yeah, its going to work best against commited and uncontrolled attacks, it makes the aikidoka's job that much easier. You can also do techniques staticly, meaning you have to make the power. This doesnt mean hurl the guy but rather manipulate the attackers kazushi and then build power from that.

How does an aikidoka versus a trained fighter very from any other art? Any art vs an untrained attacker is more likely to clean house than a trained attacker vs trained attacker. This makes the argument pretty moot so why preclude aikidoka?

Blocking isnt always necissary. The aikidoka has many options, they can simply evade or blend. The initiation of the aikidoka's attack isnt limited to attacking limb. The attacker has 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 shoulder, a neck and a few other targets to choose from.
A philosiphy I follow is, the moment you touch an attacker he should be one of two things, off balance, or in pain. Ideally you want both and your proficiency will determine this. An aikidoka's ability to do this greatly improves the effectiveness of his technique.

Well the best way to win a fight is not to get in one, but that is about as passive as I get. Alot of schools vary on their level of passivness, so it is hard to make a general statement like this. Basically it is common sense, if the situation doesnt require alot of force then dont use it. If some one is really trying to hurt you, clean their clock... Dont take chances, subdue the attacker quickly and ferociously and leave asap. But first and formost, avoid the confrontation by any means possible. I am sure many aikidoka may disagree with me, but this is my school's idealogy.

I am having a hard time understanding the rest of your point. From what I gather its about aikidoka training with other arts. I've gone to the mat with judoka, karateka, boxers, thai boxer, and tkdist. Sometimes I win, sometimes they win. I will say this though, The aikidoka has an extreme disadvantage when sparring non aikidoka because the opponent lacks the proper ukemi waza and this puts a siezable limit on the number, speed, and strength in which we can apply a technique.

Which I cant as I have not yet graded once in Akido This speaks volumes.... There is a HUGE learning curve in aikido! I dont see why being attacked by a 5th dan would be easier than a 5th/6th kyu and you dont have any support for your reasoning. but seeing how you are a 6th kyu your job is to learn the footwork and basic principals and not have to worry about a powerful attack, without the basics you wouldnt be able to handle the power properly. A 5th dan knows this and wont be taking your head off, because he knows it doesnt benifit you now.

As you advance you'll realize alot of those first steps are stepping stones. You'll find methods and ways to elimate most of them later or do them much more efficiently. There is a myriad of nuances in taking kazushi, the more you train the more you will find and add to your arsenal. After a while taking someones balance will not be so difficult because you have a broad understanding and can easily adapt to a dynamic situation. But it requires years of practice and dedication. Aiki is certainly not every one's cup of tea, but it does have some great long term rewards.

 

i admire that answer, just a small point to add. In its origins aikido came from eushiba's learning from several years of JJ, i'm pretty sure its designed to work agaist JJ, Judo probably even karate practitioners considering its a newish art. Just to use aikido against an untrained attacker can be learnt in months, whereas against the MA expert it will take years, even decades.
I miss aikido so much.

 

It has to be remembered that Aikido is not a fighting art therefore its effectiveness against either trained or untrained fighters is specious.

Aikido, being a 'do' or 'way', seeks to improve a practitioners spiritual aspects rather than fighting prowess. Whilst this is done in a martial context there is little emphasis on actual fighting forms.

Conversely the art that Aikido was developed from, Daito Ryu Aiki Ju Jutsu, is a fighting art and has forms that deal with both trained and untrained attackers.

However there are elements within the various styles of Aikido that recognize that ones opponent may be as adept at martial arts as yourself. If this was not the case why would there be tachi-tai-tachi forms (sword against sword)? Does this not pre-suppose a knowledge of sword use in ones attacker?

The style of Aikido I practice is Tomiki. In competition we perform Tanto Randori (freeplay) against each other. The aim being to score points either by striking correctly with a Tanto or by performing a technique against such a strike. If Aikido was designed purely for use against those untrained in martial arts such randori competitions would be quite short and, for the most part, very dull. Since both competitors are adept martial artists, both understanding the concepts of kuzushi, blending etc they can be considered trained and very much aware of how their opponents are going to behave. However they still manage to perform some blisteringly effective techniques on each other.

In short - no aikido is not designed for use against untrained attackers!!!


To ask is but a moments shame but to not ask and remain ignorant is a lifetimes shame.

 

Every art works best vs. an untrained attacker.

 

Yoshka,

Although i agree with you that Aikido is not in the spirit of fighting, i would have to say it is very good against an untrained attacker, if not then why are the techniques used to train Police and Military personnel worldwide, who often have to deal with untrained attackers ? If it was not useful, it wouldn't be taught.

You could also try to argue that tomki aikido isn't in the spirit of aikido, because aikido is non competitive.

It may not have been and still is not specifically engineered to defend against an untrained attacker, but, it works well for this purpose.

 

OBCT,

Perhaps you've misread my post. I did not say aikido was ineffective against an untrained attacker. I said it was effective against either but tends to pre-suppose training on the part of an attacker.

I agree that aikido is effective especially when used in a law enforcement context (did I say it wasn't?).

Perhaps you might want to look more closely at Sensei Tomiki's reasons for introducing competition into Aikido. In its early years (and to some extent still to this day) traditional Aikido never appealed to the younger generations. Judo on the other hand, because of its competitive nature, DOES appeal to youngsters. Tomiki sought to introduce the younger martial artists to Aikido by adapting Judo style competition to Aikido with the intention of guiding them towards Aikido's spiritual side later. I would say this is very much within the true spirit of Aikido not opposed to it.


There are many paths to the top of the mountain but there is still only one summit.

 

don't get me wrong, i'm not saying i personally believe tomki to be in opposition to aikido core ideology, just that it could be argued.

I really don't think it's seen, or pre supposed that the attacker would be trained.
In the dojo they are, it keeps injuries to a minimum, however in a real life self defence situation Aikido will hold up equally well aginst trained/untrained attacks. It's a person moving toward you with an extension, be it an arm or a leg, trained or untrained its movement powered by energy, it's going to hit the floor.

 

Ok I concede that maybe you didn't mean what I thought you meant about Tomiki style being in opposition to traditional Aikido values. Those of us who practice Tomiki style tend to find that the respect we have for traditional Aikido is frequently not reciprocated. I tend to go on the offensive when the "not true Aikido" argument rears its head.

However, just to re-direct this debate down a slightly different track, I don't believe that Aikido is effective in the majority of self defence situations. Don't get me wrong, I expect we aikidoka would be able to hold our own in a fight but not by using pure Aikido technique. You try doing a Tenkan or Irimi on a boozed up idiot throwing a Saturday Night Special (swinging punch) at you & you'll end up getting a right royal kicking. If, on the other hand, you use the Aikido principles of avoidance and blending, followed by strikes or short-order arm/neck locks (such as those used in Aiki Ju Jutsu etc) you're more likely to prevail.

I would suggest that, assuming you practice Aikido, one night during training you try an experiment. Get an uke to attack with 'ugly' strikes (swinging punches, headbutts, hair grabs, pushes etc) and see how effective your Aikido is as compared to Aiki Ju Jutsu or just plain streetfighting. Try using Aikido avoidance techniques followed by a good old fashioned elbow-to-the ribs or similar!! Its best if your Uke is as aggressive & non-compliant as possible. For example if the back of your head is exposed they should slap you on it to show your vulnerability (their slap would be an attackers punch or elbow), that sort of thing.

We've tried this experiment a few times at our club and its a real eye opener. But be warned ego's can get a bit bruised along with the body so try to remain friends with your uke.

Bear in mind that Aikido was designed for attacks that are intrinsically Eastern in nature and frequently don't translate well into Western fighting styles.




How can you tell the difference between Aikido and Aiki Jutsu. Well, if your opponent smiles its Aikido, if they scream its Aiki Jutsu. Anon.

 

some of the more complex moves would be very hard to impliment against an 'ugly attack' i agree. My self, against a 'saturday night special' (assuming it's right handed), simple right hand to collar bone, left arm follows direction of arm, absorbs, I step in turning to my left, right hand slides across chest arounbd neck, goes up to around back of head, left hand slides down arm to their wrist, as my knees drop a little. Down with a strike of my imaginary sword, and hey presto! I'm where they were, and they're in their rightful place, writhing in agony before my feet.(well, more disorientation than agony, but you know) I wouldn't go for i pin, i'd run away. Ha Ha.

 

Try Shudokan Aikido as the most 'street effective'. It is a style which originated with Yoshinkan. Its founder trained with O Sensei and mainly with Shioda in Japan. No one martial art or style is perfect but at least this one insists on the eventual ability (for 1st dan) to defend against multiple and random attacks with a live tanto - not a rubber sausage. This is freestyle - as done in martial arts, not randori - as done in sports like Judo and Tomiki.

 

Oh - and don't forget that O Sensei also learned much from the ancient battlefield techniques of Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, still taught today. It's awesome stuff. As for 'real fighting' on the street - expect to be frightened, get hit or cut unless you are very, very skilled and have previous street experience - it ain't a dojo.

 

so you guys fight NHB? anything goes? got any vids, would be cool to see aikido in action.

 

I disagree. Every CORRECTLY trained art works best against an untrained attacker. Arts which have stagnated in their training methodologies work best against someone who has trained in their system. The fact is most of us spend most of our time training against people who punch and kick like we do. The more stylized the atemi of a system, the more difficult it will be to execute it against an untrained attacker who doesn't follow the mental/physical model that has been trained for.

As pointed out, bring someone with no experience into the Dojo, pad up and let them go at you. Your ego may be in for a HUGE shock.

- Matt

 

No vids, sorry, but main dojo now based in Nottingham under Ken Robson.
www.shudokan.inf

 

How DARE you correct me, and prove me wrong! I am a TOPIC MODERATOR! My foolish statements are NOT to be questioned!

 

I quake. I quake! I forgot rule one:

Do not meddle in the affairs of mods for they are subtle (or sometimes not so) and quick to anger.