How can one person using Aikido beat another using Aikido?

This is a quasi philosophical question regarding all the 'internal' martial arts like Judo.

If the whole principle of these styles is to divert your opponent's force and ultimately use it against them, if your opponent is not just punching/kicking you and is also using an internal fighting arts system and thus trying to use YOUR force against you, how is anyone meant to win the fight?

In karate and boxing, the bigger/faster/more explosive/more pain resistant guy will win.

In styles such as Aikido, how do you win?

 

Be better.

 

The one that strikes more loses

 

osu,


LOL ---- that's a strange question that assumes the Aikidokas are unbeatable, but for the sake of conversation, I would suggest to extend warm greetings with a big smile, maybe a little present and small talk about the wife and family, followed by a massive sucker punch right on the button... Sorted!

............. now, tell me how wrong I am and that the assailant's arm will be detached from his body long before he lands on his head and break a vertebra...


osu!

 

By definition of no competition, no one wins or can win in Aikido.

Really.

 

By definition of "no competition", no one "wins" or "can win" in Aikido.

Really.

 

Win or survive?

If survive, the guy with most friends, with most baseballbats/knifes/guns/weapons. The guy most prepared, fastest, strongest physical/mental strength. The guy with the best pain resistance, most explosive, and the one not to be taken by surprise, most desperate one, the one who is able to in a blink of an eye know how much force is needed. And I am sure a bunch of other things.

If win, I don't know.

 

Well lets make the question about judo then, where it is a competition. If Judo always preaches that a small guy can take a bigger guy out by manipulating his momentum.

If both competitors are trying to maniupulate each other momentum, how does anyone win since apparantly the whole point of the internal arts is that it's not about how fast/big/strong you are??

 

Some people are better than others, simple as that.

I don't really understand the confusion in the question, as there is obviously always a broad range of skill levels; due to natural ability, training etc. Judo is no different. A Judoka trains to manipulate their opponent, sometimes this means baiting that opponent. Sometimes that baiting can be turned against them, the persons concentration might stray, they might be too narrowly focused, I dunno. There are a ton of factors.

The philosophy of size and strength not mattering becomes a bit moot when you get together people of the same skill; then size and strength do matter. The philosophy is meant for self defence purposes, not competition. With a wide enough skill gap, a Judoka should be able to throw/restrain an opponent on the street.

Just saying that 2 people that train in the same art should not be able to defeat each other because they're learning the same thing is a bit silly. Someone will always be better.

 

Boxing = Hitting without getting hit.... difficult
Judo = Throwing without getting thrown.... difficult
Karate = Same as boxing...... difficult
Kung fu = Same as boxing..... difficult
Aikido = Depends on the style you do..... Hee hee!!

Become like water my friend........

 

Even when using an opponents force against him, you are still using some of your own force - otherwise you'd get steam-rollered!

The key comes in who's force is softer, and which practitioner has greater 'ting jin', or the ability to feel an opponents developing force and intention, and thus neutralise it and counter, before it even happens.

 

It's all about using force economically.... Otherwise you will get steam rollered

 

This is quite a sensible question since so many MAs are promoted on the basis of being reactionary: someone throws a punch at you and you can defend yourself.

There are two very different situations where MA training is commonly used: self-defence and sports competition.

For self defence, I believe the reactive nature is over-hyped, but this is where it applies. You use your training to overcome someone who has less training, even if they are physically stronger.

For competition, the setup is different. Yes, a Judoka may be able to easily throw someone to the ground as they swing a punch and unbalance themself, but in competition they won't be facing a punch. Watch some Judo competition on Youtube (or Tomiki Aikido - the competition one). As with any other wrestling/grappling, you will see both players trying to get good grips - reaching out trying not to expose themselves too much. Then they might try and move the other player - in Judo, circular movements are favoured as they are less risky while opening up your opponent. You try to draw them into a position that the street puncher put himself in when punching. Then capitalise on that opening. So if someone swings in the street, you don't need to spend two minutes moving in circles trying to get the very best grip, because chances are your assailant is not trained in stopping your favourite throw. And that throw is the aim. The sport is reactionary in that it takes advantage of the other being in a weak position, but both players step up with the intention of slamming the other to the ground.

The idea of minimising risk is the same in what you may call external arts -the visibly aggressive striking arts. A Thai Boxer times her punches and covers her chin with her shoulder, because the opponent in the ring trains to capitalise on those openings. The street puncher most likely does not.

 

Sutemi waza?

 

Cheers Martial Novice - that's the sort of reply I was hoping for. I was confused because, as you say, in a Judo competition there is no-one to throw the first punch as the techniques are focused on being reactionary unlike, for example, a strike in karate: how would anyone actually get to use a throw if both are waiting for the other to make a move?

So I think I get it now - that they are jostling for position and the more skilled Judoka is able to get himself in a position so that the next move by the opponent will result in an easy throw whilst keeping himself safe from being thrown - is this correct?

 

i think it comes down to who's better. like your judo example. if you watch a top-level judo match, these two guys/gals are both looking to use the other guys' energy/momentum. i think it comes down to who's better. and by that i also mean, who gets to the right spot first.

 

When competing in Aikido many factors come into play, skill, spirit, fitness and a little bit of luck. The competitive arena is vastly different to club practice.

An Aikidoka will have to put in hours of Hikitategeiko pratice to become a good competitor.

 

Sucker punching also works.

Really.

 

ultimate_defens, I actually ignored your first post when you grouped Aikido and Judo as internal martial arts. They are not internal martial arts. However, it appears that you have good intentions and really do want a discussion so I am sorry I just ignored your first post.

Given that both competitors are prepared for the competition (e.g. in shape, been training, uninjured), then the factors that tend to matter the most are in this order:

1. Experience
2. Fighting Spirit
3. Skill (a distant third)
4. Physical ability (almost a tie with skill)

Because people make mistakes, those with more applicable experience tend to not make as many mistakes and are able to get the opponent to make more mistakes. Experienced people can also stay more relaxed and move more effectively and efficiently because they know what works and what doesn't and can be more in control of themselves in the familar situation.

Fighting spirit is important because if you lose the will to fight, you will lose the competition even if you are better than the opponent in all other areas.

Skill is important but if you look at a highly skilled person that has no real applicable experience, they tend to be more like a fish out of water and so experience and fighting spirit tend to be much more important to have.

Physical ability is always a factor... it is the point of martial arts to maximize your physical abilities while being able to negate the physical abilities of the opponent. You might have a really fast and strong person, but say if they are inexperienced, then they tighten up and get sloppy, losing a lot of the advantages of speed and power because they are so tense and unable to relax and root while keeping maximum mobility.

So the answer I would give to the Judo question is that the one with more experience is more likely to be able to trick the other into making a mistake that they can take advantage of.

 

It's important to remember that although Aikido and Judo utilise kuzushi as a primary tenant, their methods differ greatly in achieving it. As does the mentality behind the respective ukemi for each art.

The vast majority of Aikido does not engage in randori thus the vast majority of it's students have no experience of it, conversely, the vast majority of Judo does.

The vast majority of Aikido does not train with aliveness - working against resistance to the application of technique, again, conversely, the vast majority of Judo does.

When you weigh-up the balance, the Judoka is far more prepared.