Aikijitsu

I expect sankyo to happen as soon as you touch me, but as an experienced Aiki Jujitsu player, I know when to reverse based on feel.

Easy answer, its called constructing...

1) DRAJJ

2) Prob some damage to the face or neck. Although I have serious doubts on the effectiveness of this technique. With atemi, this technique would be more effective.

3) If I'm thinking of sumi otoshi from a basic standpoint, you'll get some elbow damage. Thats actually a good example of how Aikido is watered down. AJJ, we'll destroy that elbow, could care less about throwing him.

4) Shiho nage, if done correctly, you'll literally rip his arm out of its socket. Another great example of how Aikido is watered down.

5) Irimi nage, is this with or without the dancing? Without the dancing, I think (with atemi), you'll knock his head off. With dancing, it will never work.

When I use the term neck slam, I'm using it in context of being picked up and slammed down. Not the simple fact that my arm comes across your chin.

Dave, I understand your need to argue how you feel about Aikido, but it seems as though you're being short sighted here. You don't want to concede on the watered down debate, that's fine, but the ukemi being a means of reversal and escape, that amazes me. With your 18+ years experience, you should easily see that...

 

I already conceeded the point of ukemi as a means to allow for the safer practice of dangerous techniques. I never denied that was the case.

What is in disagreement is that I am saying to look at techniques from a view point outside of Aikido and examine what we know of the original intentions used in the combat use of the techniques.

Many techniques, way before Aikido was created were modified so that they could be practiced more safely or if they could not be, they were removed from the basic martial arts systems.

Aikido adopted the versions of many techniques that could be practiced more safely with the use of ukemi skills.

Some, and I repeat SOME, of these techniques practiced are watered down versions of the original "fight-ending" techniques. Not all of them, only some of them. Shihonage is one of the techniques that is watered down from the original as far as I know, because I have been taught the same technique with a much nastier finish. Yes, ukemi could still be used, but let's say I could sucessfully use ukemi 9 out of 10 times in normal practice, well the nastier version might lower the odds to something like 1 out of 3 times I can.

The problem with the original more dangerous techniques was that people could not practice them except really slowly and with complete compliance. That is okay to learn technique, but really lacks realism and does not work to learn how to use it in a real situation.

So in many cases the safer versions of techniques are BETTER because they can be practiced more.

IT IS ALL IN THE DETAILS of the technique. Good technique works off of solid underlying principles no matter what the purpose of the technique is for. A simple change in the detail of how the technique is applied, such as how a grip is used, can alter how dangerous the technique is to practice safely. By the same token, a simple detail can be applied to make it much more difficult for uke to escape from the technique without something broken or a vital area damaged.

The way I look at it, if I know of two versions of the same technique that only vary in simple details, but one targets vital areas intending to end a fight and the other doesn't, and the first one is much more difficult to practice safely using ukemi, then I would say the second version (the safer version to practice) is a watered down version. I would still practice and want to get good at the second version, but I would want to practice slowly and experience the first version to understand how it works. I can then apply that knowledge to help me overall.

What I say only applies if one knows details of techniques well enough to know different versions of the same technique. Such as a version used in karate, a version used in Jiu-jitsu, a version used in Aikido, a version not taught anymore but still known by old-timers, etc. It is only then can one assess if one version is MORE watered down than a different version. It is not a black or white, it is not a case that a version is watered down or it is not, it is totally relative to the intentions and purpose of the technique.

The majority of Aikido techniques cannot be said to be watered down because the purpose of those techniques is to get a person down and then immobilize them.

However, shihonage and the techniques that actually pick uke off the ground and slam them to the ground, most of those are the watered down versions taught in the system, IME.

 

aiki-jo, I don't think there is much value in arguing this point. IMO, what Dave said about ukemi is right on the mark. However, you are not wrong, as good ukemi skills can help one be more supple and understand how to counter and escape from techniques better.

Ukemi by itself is not a counter to a technique but so that techniques can be practiced more safely. With ukemi you learn to go with a technique but still have enough control of the situation so that you can come out of it safely. With counters, you MIGHT go with a technique but then redirect the energy and keep your feet under you. With a counter you MIGHT entangle tori so that they lose leverage and if you go down they come down with you. With a counter you MIGHT, strike tori in such a place as to take away their technique. With a counter you MIGHT alter the technique into a reversal. etc. etc.

 

Rebel,

Ukemi is many things. First and formost though, its an escape from a technique. As you become more and more advanced, it easily turns into counters for too many techniques to mention. Now can people train without taking ukemi, not with what we train in. So ukemi is vital as a training tool as well. I suggest as you train, try to think as you're doing ukemi, how its an escape. Try to think of how you can counter his technique with your ukemi. You'll see what I'm talking about.

 

I agree with what you have to say, but I don't agree with the priorities. I consider ukemi to be first and foremost for uke learning how to protect himself while tori practices techniques.

From ukemi practice, one can gain suppleness and experience and use that to escape from techniques.

The reason I say this is that IMO, you are fighting a person and not a technique, so escape should not be the priority, neutralizing the opponent's delivery systems and countering should be a higher priority.

Maybe the first 50% moving into ukemi can be used to neutralize a technique, but the remaining 50% is almost purely a bail out, protect yourself action.

I one time used some Aikido ukemi against my karate Sensei of ten years. He put me in a rolling armbar (Ikkyo done karate style), and I rolled out of it. You would think that was good, but I came to realize that full ukemi is only really good at escaping out of poor technique. He did the same thing again, putting me in a rolling armbar and I again started to roll out of it, but this time he wrapped my leg and stacked me. There I was with leg and arm pinned, upside down with my butt in the air. My ukemi put me in a worse situation!!!

I prefer a version of Ikkyo, after fifteen years plus working on it, that takes the uke down to the side. There is almost no way anyone is going to roll out of that one without breaking something. I've used it against resisting opponents, some almost twice my size. No it does not always work, I find some harder to do it on than others, but the ukemi for it is not going to counter it, it is going to help protect the uke when taking the fall.

Well that's what I have to say about this.

 

Indeed, I have no further contribution to make.

<edit>

Actually yes I have, a few questions for Aiki-jo

Based on what you say here:

Your opinion on ukemi being an escape leads me to believe that you must be able to cope with hard technique and apply your ukemi to escape it, correct ?

So this form of training gives you the ability to survive rapid contact with an unforgiving surface as a result of techniques being applied to you dynamically outside the confines of a tatami ?

To answer my own question to you earlier in this thread regarding Sankyo... Sankyo is an immobilization method (the third in a series of osae waza) immobilization cannot and never will occur at the "moment of contact" (as you indicated) as the point when you'd expect me to apply sankyo on you but, once the person is prone or semi prone and his body is pretty much arrested of movement that is the time to finish with osae. Everything up to the point of immobilization is simply taisabaki in one form or another leading to the application of whatever technique fits. Not much chance of an ukemi escape there.

Additionally correct technical application of ANY waza requires three primary principles to have been put in place.

1) awase
2) kuzushi
3) kokyu

If each of those principles have been correctly applied there is little or no opening for ANY form of Kaeshi waza.

Now, I feel you and I will have to simply agree to disagree regarding our opinions on this subject; non of my Japanese influences in 18 years have ever described Ukemi as being a means of escape, survival yes but not as a means to counter the application, indeed as I stated earlier the literal translation of the word ukemi has absolutely no context or meaning of escape in terms of 'countering'.

A technique in pictorial depiction : Suwari waza kote gaeshi​

​

Is the uke taking ukemi to survive the potential for injury to his wrists or, perfoming some elaborate escape ?

If it is to escape the kote application, isn't the fall to the ground isn't going to result in some equally serious injury - replace tatami with the pavement. BTW there's no "rolling" going on here, this is tobu ukemi and he will hit the floor hard which is why he has primed his right arm ready to absorb impact.

You ask me why I cannot see your point after 18 years of study ? simply because I don't study a watered down art, the above picture states the obvious.

Dave

 

I think you need to train with some senior Aikidoka and stop with the patronising "dancing" comments which smacks of a 'my art is tougher than yours' attitude.

Regards

 

The full on version of the Shihonage I was taught causes massive damage to the spine and back in general. Just an example then of how Aikido is different and not watered down.

If you're picked up and slammed on your back the break fall or ukemi is actually very simple. You slap the mat with your hands before the rest of your body follows. This allows your arms to act as shock absorbers.

 

Of course!!

Yes! We learn ukemi so we can take a fall on concrete. In fact we've practiced taking ukemi on concrete.

There are many techniques that can be considered immobilizing at point of contact. Again, due to the watered down affect of Aikido, you may not be aware of them. Isn't my taisabaki a form of escape?

You forgot the most important aspect, atemi. With proper atemi, reversal becomes more difficult. But still not impossible. And you know as well as I do, that there is a reversal for EVERYTHING.

What does it matter what ukemi means? It's how it's interpretted and trained, that's what makes it important. Not it's meaning.

His ukemi is the escape from the potential wrist break from the kote gashi! You want to know how he escaped? I bet he got back up to attempt another form of strike!

Not doubt about hitting the ground. Although someone on the street is not going to take a fall like that. A person on the street will try to escape the technique by turning his body toward the twist of the wrist. Then once they hit the ground, there could be considerable damage.

 

Sorry for the remark. We can go on and on about how I feel some styles of Aikido appear to dance more than fight. I apologize if I'm making a generalization again. Just because one style is tougher than the other doesn't mean much. For example, when you see a demonstration of a guy being poked in the chest by a flimsy sword, the sword starts to bend. That sure looks 'tough', but my question would be, 'But can he fight?'

 

What would happen if I slammed you down on your head? No ukemi there... Shiho nage does cause damage to multiple parts of the body. If done correctly, it can cause damage to knees, hips, shoulder, spine, neck, wrist, elbow... I can go on and on...

 

Aiki-Jo, you study DRAJ yet you come to this forum and TELL long term aikidoists (some senior dan grades) what our art is, I find that arrogant.

To use your statement "What does it matter what ukemi means" I suggest you adopt your own sentiment and stop telling 'us' what our 'art' is all about. (or more to the point what it lacks compared to DRAJ)

Do you live in the UK ? If you do feel free to PM me, and we'll arrange a training session in the not too distant future where I'll be happy to demonstrate this "watered down" art.

Dave

 

I've noticed.

What if I dropped you on your head? Is your style then watered down? I wouldn't say so. More to the point, how many times are you reguarly dropped on your head during training?

 

I don't call it arrogant. I call it 'objective criticism'.

Every art has lacks something compared to another art. Again, it's objective criticism.

No, unfortunately I do not live in the UK. I live in the U.S. Although I'd love to see some of your schools demo's. Do you have any video clips on your site or someone else comparable?

 

Dropping someone on their head demonstrates a technique that is not watered down. Are you suggesting there are techniques in Aikido that drops you on your head? Thankfully, I have not been dropped on my head. Although it's been REAL close.

 

aiki-ju can be as passive or painful as you make it, but certainly never 'watered' down. There are safety aspects involved, and training with people weekly you get to know them and know how much they can take (or are prepared to take)! We have people of various ages and abilities and they train to the 'best' of their ability. I would never be so bold as to say any MA is 'watered' down. x glitta

 

Are you referring to Aiki-Jujitsu or Aikido being not watered down?

 

aiki-ju. It depends on the dojo and sensei, but both are equally important and taught in equal amounts. I personally like the 'gentleness' and swiftness of aikido and the grappling of jujitsu, so it suits very well. I would also point out that during aikido I got knocked out (after breakfalling very badly and landing on head), so anything is possible!

 

I would say landing on your head is not a breakfall. Also, its a GREAT thing that you're here talking about it. Ask yourself this, is 'gentleness' the same thing as 'watered down'?