Is Aikido A Martial Art?

None. I was responding to the post comparing the two.

 

So, you're saying, because acupuncture has slant evidence in its favour, Aikido must also?

I think I don't get your point

 

You are offering your usual inexperienced, unqualified and I'll-educated opinion so whilst you may have ventured something it has not answered the question because its pretty much wrong

 

Acupuncture makes specific claims of health and its veracity is 100% based on the success of those resukts. Whilst Aikido is a martial art it also has self betterment as an aim and persobal fulfillment....that is why yiu cannot simply swap a term

Aikido making a claim of being badass has to show how....Aikido making a claim of being for personal enjoyment doesnt

Acupuncture makes one claim - martial arts dont

 

Well there's a surprise. As I stated. Both can be tested. The latest evidence on acupuncture suggests that, if done properly, there actually is something to it. Which has been stated all the way through this thread with respect to Aikido.

I don't know how to make that any clearer.

 

I have no idea what Aikido as a whole claims (I presume, like many martial arts, it is too fractured to make any one claim), but a couple of MAP members have said it is useful training for self-defence.

I'm totally in favour of the principles I've read it teaches, but, other than the notable exception of Giovanni, I've not read much that supports that point.

I'm not thinking of it as a "yaargh, I needs to see it working on YouTube!" kind of deal, as obviously that would be the height of hypocrisy. But I would expect some kind of reasoned argument in text as to why it is useful.

 

You keep on making assertions. Assertions don't impress me. Saying I am wrong in a question, with no backing up is so meaningless it's not even worth adressing.

 

Well, this thread doesn't seem to agree with you:

http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119864

It's one of the two threads that gave me a reason to sign up here on this site, the other one being dry needling.

Well, the original article which is the topic of this thread claims that aikido WAS a MARTIAL art (note the emphasis on martial, not just the 'do' but the 'BU') and more importantly, in some cases still IS, as implicitly stated by the author and explicitly by some of the posters here:

(Emphasis added cuz it smacks of that "personal enjoyment" thingie)

So schuck that "personal enjoyment" to the dustbin. It's not what they claim. SO aikidoka, prove that it's still MARTIAL. Don't just live in a bubble of your own dojo.

Tell me, can aikido be a stand-alone tachiwaza art(as opposed to newaza arts like bjj,sambo,etc.) or is it just an add-on/expansion pack like what judoka contemporaries of Ueshiba's first uchi-deshi did? Does its training EFFECTIVELY and EFFICIENTLY impart martial efficacy? Against who? In what context? Or are there other arts that share the same PREFERENCES and do it better (in the case of wing chun's close in and trapping, muay thai.) ? Why train MARTIAL aikido (aside from enjoyment of course) ?

 

Yeah, same with wing chun (note: I had a classmate of chinese descent who trained in WC then trained with me in WTF TKD. He was one of the best I've met at his belt level at the time, better than me by miles, but not impressed by his WC, or any other's WC for that matter). Good principles, but (for me) nearly non-existent verification of those principles manifested as good technique IRL. Give both aikido and WC the "ran" in randori and they crumble. IMO, both arts assume and rely on things going THEIR way too much, WITHOUT PROPERLY SETTING UP THINGS NEEDED IN THE FIRST PLACE. And if you want to refute this statement, please give sufficient evidence.

 

You have consitently posted drivel, obfusticate your points and move the goalposts when you are proven wrong

I don't need to back anything up when your track record speaks for itself

You have no grade, no experience and no qualification and your opinions are polemic with no right to be

So yeah, pretty self explanatory

 

Any art needs context of violence and application of samr in its training if it is to function as self defense...otherwise all it has is potential

Again at the risk of overly pimping the video of me dealing with a 1-2 combo is clearly Aikiesque...no blend as such just something that i saw an opening for and took. I doubt i am alone and i dont even DO Aikido

 

Oh cmon hannibal (you ARE hanniballistic of bullshido and not that hannibal with the pink tag, right?), you said it so yourself: YOU DON'T DO AIKIDO.

Yet, probably by the video you're referencing, you're probably more "aikiesque" than most aikidoka out there. Now where does that leave them?

I myself have seen more than a dozen examples of "aikiesque" moves in bjj comps, one ending in a north-south position that ktfo his opponent.

Surprise: they are NOT DOING AIKIDO, they haven't TRAINED in it. They might use the same principles, just like a muay thai wai kru and a taekwondo-jin, but you can see differences in their PREFERENCES which leads to variations in setup and execution. Just like the preference of Eddie Bravo compared to the Gracies, they might use the other's preference as needed but they will come back to what they REALLY OWN.

That is the question here: aikido itself, NOT the aikiesque.

And there is the problem of "potential": dreams have potential, but those that are useful are those that turned into reality. Same with martial arts.

Acupuncture has potential... :evil:

 

Sorry, "Aikiesque"?

 

Im simply asking for an example of where it works as a martial art, and since no one can most a clip of it working the same way it does in its demos and compliant training when its actually being used in sparring or fighting then my next logical question is is its training methods outdated?

You say it works the way you want it to, im saying no one seems to be able to post a clip of it working at all outside demos, not on this thread or the 50 page epic des aikido work against other arts thread , fair enough if its a small art which doesn’t like to post clips, buth their are thousands of clips on line of aikido drills etc, you would think there would also be a handful of videos of it working the way you say it does for you

 

I'm almost on the fence as to which is worse.

 

Finally got the clip to work for me (had to change laptop). Usually I'm inclined to agree, but for once I don't believe it was a screw up though. I get the feeling that the hit was fairly intentional but that the consequences to that hit (him dropping as fast as he did primarily) was not expected.

That's just the way it looks to me though.

So what is the purpose of a martial art and how is it meant to work?

 

Intentionally doing it during embu is worse, IMO, for a few reasons.

If you clock tori during an honest and committed attack well that's down to tori mucking up but to do so in embu because you don't like what he's said is very bad form.

 

I was referring to subsequently claiming that you'd deliberately hit an instructor (who had knowingly left himself open judging by his comment) while acting as uke in a compliant demonstration for children and parents rather than having done it by accident.