This is the rub. The personal development which goes beyond winning a point and reaches towards harmony with the universe. When we do not see our attacker as an enemy, or an opportunity to 'look good' or to practice a technique...when we see them as 'out of harmony'...it does not matter how the situation came about, whether randori, weapons, ninin-dori, suwari-waza, in a bar or on a street....if the techniques are used for those reasons they are merely jujuitsu. (no offence to the jujitsu brigade) Aiki is a state of mind
I meant sports competition Funny how a missing qualifier changes what you mean. In sports or sportive competition, there are rules for safety. And it is precisely because of these rules (don't do this... don't do that) that aikido's effectiveness can be watered down. My apologies... And by the way, randori is not competition in my own dictionary. Thanks Tintin.
Re: I meant sports competition But all Martial Arts are practiced this way. No-one is allowed to bite your nuts of or stamp on your head. All Martial Arts are taught in such a way as to allow the students to reach the next session safely (and stop the instructor being sued). Of course, some classes are 'harder' than others...but even extreme classes do not allow unreasonable damage students. Perhaps it would be better to ask 'is some training better than no training?' because you will most likely never see a class where anything goes.
I just meant your technique becomes compitition orientated and not 'true'. My truth is not your truth None taken
Damn, Dexter is really getting poetic on us today. Impressive. I must relate a time when I was in a situation slightly similar to this. I was practicing with a good friend of mine, Zack, whom I have known for many years now. He is a blackbelt in aikido, after about 10 years of practice. I was using judo, walked up, tossed him, pinned him. This type of thing happened for a couple months, and I was starting to wonder whether aikido was possibly more aligned towards striking. One day, we were hanging out around downtown and someone attempted to mug us, wielding a knife. Before I could hand the guy my wallet, Zack sprang into action, disarmed him, and had him flying through the air. I realized that he had been holding back based on my level of ability in Judo, and soon I was taking harder falls and encountering his more damaging techniques, as he noticed my competency level rising. I will not again make the mistake of assuming that someone is incapable simply because I can toss him a couple times.
Ok I couldn't be bothered reading everybodys posts but I've noticed some people saying they've beaten brown belts and black belts when they were only yellow belts. Personaly I think if a yellow belt is truly beating a black belt you're at a McDojo and it's time to find a new teacher. If you're not at a McDojo then the higher grade let you win (for lack of a better word) simply to let you try out what you've learned. As for sparing. Any black belt worth their grade in Aikido should at least hold their own against anybody of a comparible grade from other art. That said many Aikido federations are heading down the slipery path of becoming a sport and hand out grades purely becuse people pay for them.
ahhh the shames of the American Martial Arts community.... it's sad to see that they are more "black belts" in the US than any other country as well as many 10 dan and Super Duper Grand Masters... blah blah blah I agree that a black belt should no MUST be able to beat a yellow belt otherwise that school is way too commercial and cares only about gaining money than teaching students.... unfortunately this is the US and people want results fast or they leave well going back to the original comments aikido is more geared towards a way of life than an actual martial (please let me continue before i get the hate mail)... the actual word aiki do means something along the lines of "THE WAY" of harmony, harmonious bleed of the life force, ki and so on and so on... ueshiba was a very spiritual man and he believed that aikido was not only for uses of becoming a greater fighter but of becoming a greater being... HOWEVER anyone who has done aikido with someone who is ACTUALLY a "master" at it knows the efficiency of aikido and how potent of a self defense art that it truly is... but it also is not an offensive art.... as you can see in the stances it is very defense because in aikido we do not strike first... "if we strike first then it shows that we have not done enough training" - loose quote from ueshiba... therefore when i hear the word "sparring" it sounds like 2 people trying to strike each other.... which i feel is not PURE aiki.. kano once stated that aikido was the true judo (gentle way) where upon one of his students responded, "so are we doing fake judo?" (responding to someone's thread) aikido's real power lies in the fact that we blend (or try to) with everything... any attack doesn't need a complicated trapping to counter.... we simply move out of the way :Angel:
I agree the newer students seem to think that my fellow Senseis and I can't fight against a yellow belt , truth is we just don't want to hurt them, because they have not mastered Ukemi
im not an expert,but wasnt akido designed for sword/knife attacks? as for tkd or judo being useless for street defence,i strongly disagree! its all in the trainnig i would think ,but i could be wrong ,however to say one art is useless and another isnt,well i think we all might as well hang up our gis doboks and so forth,cause then all of them would be useless, never put your faith in any art! another can be designed to counter it ! thats why there is a counter to every tec there is ,its all in the timing !
The original post in this thread talked about problems an Aikidoka had sparring against a Wing Chunner. There may be valid points in the observations, on the other hand, nobody can honestly say then never have lost a fight. Even champions have lost in training or in life at times, what matters maybe more is to still be around after each time and winning when it counts. I have sparred many with Aikido training, and I myself have studied a few years of Aikido. I always find that Aikido techniques do not mix well with sparring, however, the footwork and the principles do work well in sparring. The techniques have problems, I believe, because they aren't trained to be used in sparring. Sparring emphasizes movement and people good at sparring can usually move around fairly well. What I am saying is that a Wing Chunner may have more experience moving in a sparring environment, but the Aikidoka probably doesn't because they don't really spar. Randori helps but the majority of randori happens at higher belt levels, not at beginner and intermediate levels. Opposed to say a boxer that might do some sparring within the first few months if not sooner. Hey, I've got a story that might help to put this in perspective... The story is from something my uncle experienced around the 1930's on the docks somewhere in California. One of the workers was a Judo champion from Japan. This story is about this Judo champion's fight on the docks. One day the Judo champion was approached by another man who attacked him with a knife. The Judo champion was cut several times and maybe stabbed during the fight, but eventually managed to break the other man's arm and then choked him out. The Judo champion told my uncle that if the other man had attacked him with a downward knife attack (ice pick technique) then he would have defeated the man much sooner without a problem. Instead, the other man was from the Filipines and had used some strange Filipino knife methods. Even a Judo champion from Japan in the 1930's had problems because he was not used to fighting the way the other attacked. Now the Aikidoka and the Wing Chunner were not used to the way the other attacked. The Wing Chunner came out on top, but did the Wing Chunner have more familarity with the sparring environment that gave an advantage? All I am saying is that not being used to fighting the way someone else fights can be major factor to consider. It isn't just, Aikido verse Wing Chun training... there is more to it than that.
....Unless you're Rickson Gracie..... Seriously though, this is kind of a cool match-up, because both are close range stand up arts and both have trapping, but one is more like grappling and the other more like striking, but neither are either pure striking or pure grappling. (to the original poster) Maybe you should'nt automatically just think "Oh, I can kick my friend's ass because Aikido sucks and Wing Chun owns it", maybe before all that you should be thinking "Is this Aikido student slow and out of shape? Is he a slow learner? Does he train at a McDojo?" This may be kind of off topic, but a lot of posts in this thread are anyway so I always have this funny picture in my head of someone who trains at a mcdojo in any ma (i.e. karate mcdojo, dumb looking student gets attacked and does a highblock with no follow up, just looks at the guy) The image I get of a student from an Aikido McDojo is some really arrogant kid who thinks he's got your number and when you start throwing punches at his face he grabs at the air in from of him trying to wristlock all the punches. Is the guy you spar with like that!? If so you have to tape these matches, that'd be the greatest thing ever. Really though (still to original poster) what does the Aikidoka do? what techniques does he use when you spar him? Is he entirely defensive or what?
One of these threads seems to crop up every few weeks. You can't compare arts from a sample of one, or a hundred, or a thousand fighting each other. Individual skill, fitness and bravery is involved in an infinite variety of combination in every single fight. Having said that, it's fun to test techniques on folks from other MA's - a long time ago UKMAF used to run day sessions where we all met up with half a dozen MA instructors and sampled every art. (I'm talking more than 10 years ago - God I'm older than I thought!) I have 'sparred' several times with different MA exponents, most recenty with a kick boxer and grappler. Guess what - sparring needs rules to avoid death or serious injury. Guess what - I 'lost' when playing by his rules, he 'lost' when I used Aikido. It proves........nothing. There is no way I could apply a 'full on' lock, throw or even atemi - the guy was not trained to receive them. He did notice, and learn, how important posture was in our art. ( I learned more about grappling, building on some very rusty Judo skills.) It has no implication for either art. It's just a useful and interesting exercise - and a bit of fun!
even though aikido is a peace martial arts where you dont beat ur opponent to a pulp. i think making him end up on the floor everytime will make him more angry. i know i would be.
WhereMyRiceGo: Maybe you don't hit the "floor" often enough. Being thrown down in a real life situation hurts. I'm not talking about being thrown on to one of the mats at the dojo. I'm talking about falling from 4 feet on to the sidewalk or the road. It might make you more angry, but I don't think it would inspire you to get up and go back for more.
just my two aikido cents on this subject. I first spent five years studying tae kwon do, went to college and studied Aikido for four years, great instructor also. I found that when my other MA friends in college wanted to see my Aikido in action, I had to slow it way down, when questioned why, because if I do it fast, i'm going to hurt you, they don't how to take Ukemi. Then one did get a little smart and actually threw a punch, in which I countered with Iriminage and threw him in to a wall. Now I study Shaolin Kung Fu (lohan Chuan for the purist), we do Friday Fight night, light protective gear and heavy hitting. I get my butt kicked a lot now. Four years of Aikido has kept my feet planted firmly on the floor. Well, one Friday night during my ritual butt kicking, one of the Black Sashes wanted to use open finger gloves and try some of his grappling out. (he started learning Gracie Jujitsu) I put on some open finger gloves, I have to say, I countered every move he had trying to take me to the mat. Anytime he grabbed me, I locked him, and threw him once. It was Randori all over again. He ended up asking if we could just start from the floor. I think all martial arts have thier strengths and weaknesses. I enjoy all the joint locks of both Aikido and Chin-na. Due to a back injury I find Shaolin more helpful for my health.
The answer to that is the either to not let him back up until help arrives the first time. Or resort to the "three strikes and your out" rule. In other words give him three warnings. Each more severe than the last. If three warnings isn't enough it's time to make sure he doesn't want to fight anymore. It's that simple. While there may be a philosophy of peace associated with Aikido, nobody is suggesting you should put up with idots who are hell bent on causing you harm. It's all about reading the situation and acting accordingly.
I've followed this thread with some interest and found the posts quite interesting; thought I'd chip in with my own opinions. I've often read people's comments about Aikido lacking in "ground skills". People who often make these comments in relation to the art's 'effectiveness' look upon (and probably expect something from) Aikido with an entirely different martial perspective to, where Aikido came from (its origins) in relation to its 'modern' application and, the philosophical aspects which are commonly associated (and often misunderstood) by students. It has been my long belief that Aikido, by its very nature, how it evolved and exists today, has an identity dilemma (for some within the martial arts community). Aikido has influences from deep within both classical Budo and the very fabric of Japanese society however; it is a Gendai art and not Koryu, and this is where the problems lie in relation to other arts which may be considered more 'modern' in the context of application, such as Brazilian Jujutsu to give a topical example. An aikidoist cannot apply his knowledge 'freely' against an individual without them first having skills in ukemi - to do so will simply result in an injury however, to try and explain this or even demonstrate the simplest of techniques without appearing either 'holier than thou' or that one is trying to cover up for ineffective application is very difficult, we are in essence caught in a catch 22 situation. 1, If I demonstrate on a fellow aikidoist - they are allowing the technique and not "fully resisting" 2, If I demonstrate on a non aikidoist - (who resists) a serious injury will probably result. 3, Anyone who spouts off about the philosophy of the art when faced with 'opposition' to the effectiveness of the system will more often than not further the "aikido is ineffective, a cult, a religion" debate without trying. I myself have had such debates where I was simply asked "is aikido a fighting art?" My answer was "of course", once into this pointless debate we quickly find the retort "...then why don't we see aikido used in UFC or BJJ or within the MMA arena?" The simple answer to that is... "aikido wasn't designed for that arena" None of us wish to fight (god forbid) on another person's terms, if I attempt to fight with a BJJ exponent, I pretty much expect to have my **** handed to me, its fairly obvious that one system pretty much relies on bringing their opponent to the ground then pounding or submitting them to a conclusion. The other art wants to stay upright on one's feet. However, if I place the BJJ exponent in an environment where Aiki technique originated, I doubt much ground work would take place; essentially what I'm suggesting is that ground work has it place as does staying on your feet. Each system having its merits and pitfalls - Neither are perfect. If you want both your train in both. In my limited martial arts lifetime I've come to realise that skills alone are only a small part (although important obviously) to a larger picture, honesty with one's self and having the right attitude also contribute to creating a well rounded student however, I firmly believe that to be good at what we do we must understand strategy. Without strategy, our techniques are meaningless, simply a series of moves from a set of attacks, no matter how you train unless you can create opportunities, understand the situation you exist in and, how to control all of those variables, we're on a downer. "Rules" exist even in a 'real' fight, unfortunately for us those rules are called laws and moral values. A scroat isn't abiding by those rules when he/she creates a situation where you have to respond to a threat thus, we are ALREADY playing on their terms, the problem for us is how far are we prepared to go to ensure we're always 'on par' with their terms ? Sounds an easy thing to do but I assure it isn't. Being honest about one's self, one's skills and what you expect from them is a primary aspect in studying Budo (of any kind) People train according to need. I myself enjoy my training, although I attempt to maintain a martial aspect to my study, I'm not training for war or any particular situation. If I thought I needed to learn how to "ground and pound" I'd either cross train or give up Aikido. I don't live my training by the "what if" scenario. I just get on and train as hard as I can. (which is often not as hard as it should be) The origonal posted asked some important questions My reply... Aikido is a Japanese Art based on principles used in feudal battlefields where kicks and, to some degree, punches were few and far between. This is why the influences of the sword spear and knife are so prominent in the system because; they were used to greater effect thus responses to those threats were required and developed. Yes aikido can be very effective against kicking and punching applications however THEY MUST BE TRAINED FOR. I hazard an educated guess that the longer the aikido student trains with the Kungfu student the greater his success rates will become in working off those attacks. I have within my dojo a Yudansha in Kyokushinkai Karate, this guy would easily knock my head off with either his hands or feet *if* I allowed him to fight his terms. As a result of having these particular skills within my dojo each week, I've learned that my aikido has improved from those specific sets of attacks which, were otherwise lacking before he joined, in other words, we've been given the opportunity to train for defense and counter against very strong (but equally stylised) punches and kicks. The critical aspect of strategy is understanding Ma-ai To live aikido under the "once he enters my sphere" philosophy is a dangerous game to play because equally when he is in YOUR sphere, YOU are in HIS !!! Regards
Good insights Dave; let me toss in one or two of my own. One of the things that irks me is when people talk about 'doing aikido' on someone; or words to that effect. Aikido - like any good martial art - isn't a list of techniques strung together; designed to be followed A->B->C. It's a system of movement, positioning and structure; designed to take maximum advantage of an opponent's structure and energy vector. In other words; aikido isn't the techniques. The techniques are (IMO) training tools to teach aikido. The techniques we learn in class teach us how bodies move in conflict; they teach us how to position ourselves, manipulate the opponent, redirect his force, maintain stability while taking his, etc. The upshot of this is that when an attacker attacks; if the aikidoist has learned properly he won't be trying to accomplish a mat-perfect kokyunage; he'll be allowing his body to do what comes naturally at the moment. (In the Clausewitzian sense; that is. The above example ignores a whole ton of other factors - I'm speaking strictly of movement at the moment.) In other other words; when faced with an attacker; an aikidoist doesn't 'do aikido'; he just does what is necessary at the moment. This is what happens if the aikidoist has learned properly. If he hasn't; if he's a low-ranked student or technique collector; then he's going to fail miserably. This is because just like battle plans; no technique survives first contact with the enemy. The really fun bit about all this is that when you talk about your art; other people have a tendancy to slot you into that particular role. For instance; I stepped into a sparring ring with a friend of mine the other day. He practices TKD; so was a bit on the overconfident side. This is how his thought process went: I do Aikido - I've been doing it for 5 years now. Which means I'm a rank beginner; and it means I'm totally defensive; and it means I don't spar, etc. etc. Heh heh heh - guess he didn't hear me talk about the other 17 years experience; 9 of them as a U/C instructor in the Canadian Armed Forces. A few minutes and several loud thuds later; he said "Wait! I thought you said aikido doesn't have any punches or kicks?!?" "It doesn't," I said, "I do." :yeleyes: So don't worry about what aikido can and can't do; especially in relation to other arts. Worry about what you can do; fin your weaknesses; and work to close those gaps. Easy, really; when you think about it. Cheers!
I'd pretty much agree with that statement however; ... I'd have to disagree. In a physical sense Aikido is a series of techniques but, any good instructor will encourage freedom of thought and a desire to cultivate correct attitude (That 'attitude' may also be opinions and subscription to Aikido philosophy). In the early stages of training a student hasn't any option but to learn a particular technique from a particular attack - essentially the epitome of choreography however, with several years of repeated practice with a large number of fellow students, that technique becomes 'internalised' and develops into subconscious action, when that happens our techniques no longer exist dependant upon A's B's or C's... They just exist. Techniques themselves don't actually teach us how to "manipulate" anything, the principles of those applications however, do. The principles of our art exist in some shape, format or degree in every waza we attempt but, fail to apply the key principles 'Awase & Kuzushi', technique simply becomes a struggle of physical strength. Agreed but from differing opinions. Well you've lost me there. The purest form of "aiki" is spontaneous action (very often kokyu in nature) that in its self is aikido at its best. Regards
Dave Humm, Your post #37 was very informative and very well put. Thank you for the insight. Well worth the time read it... and it's worth remembering it.
