Here's an alternate style. The old man is little bit more, oh, what's the word -- assertive? Controlling? Yet he's still plainly "gentle" in the "aiki" sense, no? http://dojo.ikazuchi.com/
Aikido might work in a fight, on the other hand Aikido trained without pressure is little more than performance art.
Not Aikido as such - actually it is Small Circle Ju Jitsu and JKD - but there are a lot of similarities in principle and technique being shown here by Professor James Hundon [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCOKnhbHQ9M"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCOKnhbHQ9M[/ame]
I still rate Shioda above basically everyone else I've seen in aikido. Maybe it's because he had the judo 3rd dan that he wasn't afraid to get knocked around, execute techniques with power, and basically strike his way into almost any incoming attack. [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84dJxNGIYCI"]The Very Best of Gozo Shioda - YouTube[/ame]
Just prior to quitting my JJJ club - which also taught Aikido - I wrote a massive essay for my instructors mainly arguing the case for some sort of systemised pressure testing, but also for the separation of the Aikido syllabus from the JJJ syllabus, as there was a massive amount of "mixing" going on in class. And students didn't have a solid grasp on what was what. My argument was, and is, that Aikido is a fantastic finishing art, that it complements someone who already knows how to throw down. It's been mentioned here, and there's a fair bit of anecdotal evidence to support the idea that this is what it was created for. I wrote the essay because we'd tried implementing a pressure testing system to the class structure, but the trouble was that some techniques in the syllabus just didn't work no matter what - 9 times out of 10 they were techniques that had come from the Aikido syllabus. Is that to say they're rubbish? Of course not - I think they were designed as TRAINING TOOLS to re-enforce, emphasise, or build upon fighting principal that students had already learnt through Jujutsu, Judo, Kendo, whatever. The biggest problem Aikido has after lack of robust training is that people try to make it something it's not, by "forcing" it to be a system of actual fighting techniques. My .02 cents anyway. If anyone feels like reading the whole argument let me know (I showed it to a friend who does BJJ and he said that if he found a school that trained JJJ that way he'd do it).
I have trained years in Poekoelan Tjminde , Muay thai and currently study krav maga and they do train for multiple attackers
Many claim to - few actually do and fewer still to any standard If you cannot beat one person consistently the odds do not magically increase in your favor when you have more opponents
This whole thread is a perfect example of why the idea of "doing aikido" to someone in a fight is stupid. The martial art is a means to give you better attributes, understanding of strategy/mechanics and attitude; actually fighting is up to you. If you think you need to make it look distinct from other martial arts, you're missing the point. Martial arts that dedicate a lot of resources to looking special (aikido, wing chun, karate, Systema, etc.) are very attractive to people who are more worried about identifying as part of that group (and therefore being special) than actually improving technically. And the majority of non-competitive groups cater to this, especially the ones that dress up for no functional reason. That's why we have this mindset that the techniques will win your fights for you if you just perform them on a compliant partner until they're "automatic". It's BS but it's very tempting for someone who wants to be special. Very easy to memorize and perform and say you're a killer, especially when your method is visually distinct from everyone else's. Actually becoming a competent fighter, much less the murder-machines some people pretend to be, is not a glorifying experience. You have to keep finding ways to make yourself fail and stay there until it can't make you fail anymore. You have to spend most of your time looking at and exposing your failures in order to improve. It's no place for fantasists. In short, if you trained with a legitimate aikido teacher who taught aikido techniques or used training methods drawn from aikido, and then used the attributes gained from that training to win a fight, then that's it. It doesn't matter what other influences you had or how it looked. If it gave you an eye for distance or a feel for balance and that influenced what you did, that was aikido. I don't care if you used nikkyo or you shot the guy. Whether the bystanders were impressed with or even recognized your AIKIDO MAN skills isnt the point. When people get past the fantasy of how they'd look in a fight, inter-school resistant training is a no-brainer.
Most of the time when people have attitude like that are those who trains one MA style only. It bothers me when I put up the following pictures, people just say, "This is not WC (or Aikido, ...)". IMO, in some discussion, people may think "style" is more important than "fighting".
I've taken aikido and judo and i 'learned or got ''the way''' or the guiding principle behind the art. it's more important to know that than specific individual techniques, especially in a - real fight sitch - where you might be forced to improvise to win. it makes you really confident when you get the concept and then realize you can make stuff up and still win and in doing so, you've applied the guiding principle almost transparently without too much thinking as if it had become a reflex.
here's something to think about : a guy 470 lbs, 6'8" full of muscles against a guy 5'9" at 200 lbs with lanky skinny ol' arms. they both know acid, judo, and bjj. who will most likely win ? NOW PUT TWO KNIVES IN EACH OF THEIR HANDS. LET THEM TRAIN A MONTH WITH THEM AND LEARN TO FIGURE OUT HOW THEIR INSTINCTS AUTOMATICALLY PICK UP HOW TO USE IT WITH THE EMPTY HANDED ART YOU LEARNED. IF YOU TOOK AIKIDO, YOU'LL AUTOMATICALLY BEGIN USING IT CONSISTENTLY WITH YOU KNOWLEDGE AND TRAINING. SAME WITH JUDO, WING CHUN, OR ANY OTHER ART LIKE KARATE, EVEN. now strength isn't so important. who will most likely win ?
Horrible grammar and sentence construction aside the bigger guy wins - bigger, stronger, equally skilled with a superior reach and set of attributes Didn't really think that one through did you?
Which schools and to what level? Judo in particular is a highly competitive art with an emphasis on competitive testing so is pretty well respected as an art and combat system
as a former recreational weight-lifter, i think i did think through most of the time when i get big, and pump iron, and i do any kind of randori, i can beat guys with strength alone and not have to rely on technique. it's usual for stronger, bigger guys to rely on their strength to win and slack on technique. a smaller guy, a weaker guy, would have nothing but technique to carry him through if he's to beat the bigger, stronger opponent. i don't lift weights all the time. i did from time to time. nothing made me happier than winning through technique though, in anything, like bjj, or judo, judo ne-waza, judo nage-waza, aikido, etc..
Hannibal certainly doesn't need anyone speaking for him, but since I want to give two quick examples, I do it anyway (sorry for that. He will come and say something himself as well, I'm sure). I'm pretty sure, that was exactly Hannibals point: The stronger/ bigger one wins, if everything else is the same. During randori in Judo, my partner and me were on the ground. At some point, when I was clutching to anything I could get, he grinned at me - and gripped my gi: One hand by my neck the other in my trousers. He just lifted me and put my down half a meter away. (Yes, we were having have fun ) Another example: JJJ-training. Part of it at the moment, we were doing a new technique, was to simple to shove away the partner in the end. I ran at least 7meters (nope, not exaggerating) until I fell down and hit the mat. Everyone was laughing his behind off, I jumped again telling everyone I was fine. A few seconds later my Sensei remembered my partner that I'm only half his height and weight and that he doesn't need all his strength.
Yep considering the number of schools there are worldwide, the number of videos there are out there of aikido, and the near total lack of any of those videos being impressive or actually showing anything close to normal sparring intensity found in a judo or any other sports club, the number of practitioners who could make the ark work compared to the number practising would be minuscule.. It always gets me that people always come on to these threads to say we practise the art the correct way, we are in the minority who do and can and have made it work in real life, but none of them can actually show a video of themselves practising it the right way, or making it work, and those who do and have posted videos which they believe are special and unique sadly to those of us who have done sports training and spared hard it looks like the same usual rubbish But hey at least those people have posted clips (like on the aikido good video threads) to the rest who say they cant post clips but have made it work,I simply ask whats more likely that a) unlike the vast majority of the people practising the art they can make it work and do train correctly, but simply cant video anything, or b) b) that like the vast majority of the arts practitioners they are simply deluding themselves, I mean does anyone really think that the overwhelming majority of people practising aikido ( or wing chun, systema et al) really don’t think they too are in the minority who can make it work, that they too don’t feel that they have the real stuff and are on the right path??
old kendo video; one guy is trying to get an inverted armbar on his opponent https://youtu.be/WN9SDF05nX0 check out how they're practicing, randori, rolling, sparing, or free-fighting as some call it. it basically depends on your discipline. my observation is Judo goes with the Katana, and aikido goes with the two shorter swords, one held inverted so the arm can block a sword swing and the other to thrust into the opponent after a side-step, which is totally characteristic of the guiding principle of aikido--elegant, simple solutions. I COULD BE COMPLETELY WRONG. BUT SO COULD YOU.
Which is normal amongst the unskilled, but you quite clearly said that they were both the same in the scenario and the only thing that changed was the size - in which case the bigger, stronger guy with the superior reach wins - and easily based on the stats you provided So if you DID think it through you are once again showing how little you actually know about martial arts and combat Everything - EVERYTHING - you post screams "zero experience" so I will ask again in case you missed it A) What art(s) have you formally trained in? B) What branch/school/teacher? C) To what level? You are, we aren't
