Here's another method that works. Position uke's wrist above his face, elbow bent. Leave the wrist there, frozen in space. Don't move the wrist! With your other hand, use the crook of uke's elbow as a lever. Walk around uke's head while turning his elbow around his head. But don't move uke's wrist! This rotation puts more pressure on the shoulder joint than anyone can withstand. It's not a matter of pain. Uke will roll over before his shoulder hurts, "just because."
That principle is sound, but I think what aikinoob was saying is that it can be countered (all uke has to do is brace the arm nage has with their other hand and the fulcrum is no longer there). I like the keylock, because it requires about the same level of find motor control to apply and allows for a lot more control.
that's exactly what i'm talking about, except rather than holding uke's arm at the elbow with your hand you would reach under his elbow and grasp back on your own forearm controlling the wrist. and budd is correct
I would still have to disagree Budd. Aikido performed in a combative manner loses all the elegant and pretty big sweeping movements and swaps them for something sharp and to the point. In effect the techniques are cut so short there isn't much time for anybody to perfom a ukemi. Especially as a counter. Ukes ukemi becomes their instinctive saving grace that allows uke to get up after the technique has been completed. I would argue that in that situation if uke manages to counter with a ukemi then uke attacked with the intention of makeing the ukemi instead of commiting fully to the attack. To counter like this requires uke to know what's going to happen before it happens. To properly counter a technique uke must be capable of picking out a mistake on nages part, as nage is making the mistake and use that mistake to ukes advantage. It isn't likely that a ukemi would be the best course of action.
That's why you train progressive levels of resistance, so you can do the quick, dirty versions as nage/tori and uke has the skill to still bail out of it. It becomes a game and a way to train that's not dependent on the insert card A into slot B method of practice. You're statement above is still dependent on the assumption that nage/tori is somehow so skilled that uke's not going to be able to do anything once a technique has been initiated. Just ask Porgy & Bess . . . it ain't necessarily so. You train the shape of ukemi so that you can get up after a technique has been completed and can receive it safely. Ukemi used as strategy is about uke maintaining as many choices and options until they can choose the best one available, whether it's to outright counter the technique, roll out of a lock and away, fall straight down and away from a strike, break or dislocation. Other jujutsu derivations, like DR AJJ, judo, bjj, systema, et al. understand this and incorporate it into their practice, as do other aikido schools that I have trained at, besides my home dojo. It's usually considered to be common sense. And I would vehemently disagree, because your statement implies a level of passivity involved in uke's response, natch that they are magically thrown, rather than they strategically have decided that the best way to receive the technique is to take ukemi. Hence, uke commits strongly to the attack, nage/tori blends and gains kuzushi, while uke is still trying to attack, nage/tori effects a technique to end the conflict, uke makes the decision to bail out of 1) having a broken limb or appendage 2) a painful hold (don't like these as much, but I acknowledge that they exist) 3) A desire and opportunity to escape the situation. It's a strategy. Practicing otherwise I have found to be part of the aiki-passivity that I cannot stand, whereby students tank to make their seniors and sensei look good. No, to counter like this requires that uke has a fine understanding of kuzushi and anatomy. Kuzushi, in order to know when their balance is being broken and anatomy to know how much and how far their body parts can withstand being pounded and strained. That way they have the best tools to make a strategic choice to counter the technique, whether that means regaining the advantage, taking ukemi to escape, or taking ukemi to minimize the damage inflicted by nage/tori's movements.
No my answer is based on the fact that I class escaping from a technique safely by means of a ukemi and countering the technique in such away that uke takes control and effectivley now assumes the role of nage as being two different things. If uke decides at any point during the execution of a technique to ecsape by means of a ukemi then at that point the technique has ended and nage has acheived the primary objective of fending off the attack. If uke decides to attack again, then that is a new attack to be dealt with appropriatly. If nages technique is sufficiently weak at any point that uke can take control then uke should take control. A ukemi being the best course of action would implie that nage has retained suficiant control of the technique. Yes as I said a ukemi is ukes saving grace. We seem to agree on this. Falling away from a strike is simply the proper escape where there is no other better option. Who in their right mind deliberatly runs into a punch? Breaking or dislocating is something we don't train to do at my Dojo. However as techniques such as Kote Gaeshi could have both breaking and dislocating effects a ukemi at the point where uke can no longer resist safely is again best option. At this point nages primary objective has been acheived and the technique is complete. Pinning uke to the ground is a seperate matter. If uke re-asserts his/her resitance this is again a seperate attack to be dealt with approriatly. I also absolutly hate the magical flying uke. However I think you have misunderstood my point here. If uke is to pre-determine the exit point of a technique before initiating an attack then uke must know before attacking which technique is going to be executed. In a free practice scenario uke has no way of knowing before hand which technique nage will choose. So uke cannot pre-determine the escape route. In this scenario if uke is attacking, already preparing for the ukemi, then uke cannot be giving a full attack and we have one magic flying uke. This is of course different from a ukemi used to strategically withdraw from an unsuccesful attack. While a ukemi here might avoide uke being pinned it still doesn't allow uke to take control of the situation. At best uke gets a second chance. At worst uke escapes safely. Either way nage has seen off the orginal attack. A ukemi might very well be an important tool in strategy however that does not make it a counter.
Aikiwolfie, You seem stuck in thinking of aikido practice as Uke attacks and Tori/Nage defends -- the end. That's a basic method of practice. What about randori (not the multiple arm-waving kind, but true person-to-person) or shiai? In such an encounter, the attacks and defenses aren't predicated on "I strike, you defend" technique A, then technique B types of engagements. When it's organic, unless uke is totally defeated upon first contact (which is the ideal, but not usually the case in the real world -- ask Chiba Sensei), uke's actions are not based on one attack failing, they're going to keep attacking until nage is defeated (at which time, it's not a matter of them switching roles, the designations are useful to determine who initiates the encounter), or they can no longer continue the attack. If nage successfully defends, then a pin or restraint had better be forthcoming, or the ukemi counter (to a potential appendage break, which any uke worth his salt should be preparing to defend against, unless they only ever expect to have to defend against nice aikidoka). In this case, the uke/nage line blurs and the difference between your apparent definition of ukemi as escape versus ukemi as a counter becomes nearly null. If you don't engage in that kind of practice, then I can see how you wouldn't be accustomed to considering ukemi as a counter.
Not at all Budd. You can be as dynamic as you like and attack as many times as you like however at some point somebody has to initiate the attack and somebody has to attempt to take control. Both parties could do this simultaniously but one will lose out. If one party be it uke or nage ukemis away the attack has ended. Followup attacks may be lauched by either party instentaniously, however these are still seperate attacks.
Ever been hit by multiple attacks on one entry? These are all built into tai no henko. Is it one attack or more than one thown at the same time or is it just "the entering move"? Reread what you just wrote above here and apply that logic to any other martial arts practice outside of static aikido drills. It doesn't wash. Real engagements don't usually fragment so neatly and to pretend that the idealized drills are representative of anything other than a training principle (usually basic ones, like "get off the line" or "don't meet force with force") is just silly. Ukemi is a counter that uke chooses as a response to nage's technique. It doesn't get much simpler than that. Adding more labels to describe or codify what happens in static drills doesn't change the idea that, if you're training ukemi as an unavoidable response, then you're being a passive practitioner. If you're training it as your best option to respond to what's happening when a technique's being applied, that's called a counter.
Budd where did I say ukemi was "an unavoidable response"? I don't mind critism or even being proven wrong but please don't put words in my mouth. All along I've said uke should ukemi only when uke has no other better option. In other words uke continues to attack until the best course of action availible to uke is to ukemi out of danger. Uke may decide to ukemi to escape mortal danger or as a pre-emtive action to nages attempt to pin uke down or execute another technique. That is hardly a passive approach. I see no tactical logic in going to ground only to get back up when you could have stayed on your feet in the first place. Ukemi in my book is an escape not a counter. Lets agree to dissagree.
"This is of course different from a ukemi used to strategically withdraw from an unsuccesful attack. While a ukemi here might avoide uke being pinned it still doesn't allow uke to take control of the situation. At best uke gets a second chance." Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting, but you're above description of uke's chances in ukemi or part of what I've been railing against "all along". It simply aint that limited, which you're free to disagree with, but I'm going to provide some more examples for some of the others that might be reading this thread (aikinoob, it is on topic, as we're discussing how various perceptions of techniques may be more encompassing or have different expressions than previously thought, silly n00b): Ikkyo - from the initial downward ukemi uke takes when nage enters with omote, if you get enough ahead of the technique, ukemi can put you in position to attack with your feet or sweep into a takedown by redirecting with your arms. Kotagaeshi - when nage applies pressure against the wrist, you should be trying to move your body in the direction of the pressure, do this fast enough and you will brace your arm against your body, negating the lock. If you fail and must take a high fall, just use the opportunity to 1) Get closer to nage 2) Throw an elbow or strike through nage's head as you take the fall. This can also be modified to work for shiho nage and sumi otoshi -- using the same ukemi/counter principle. Nikkyo - as nage applies pressure and drops their center inward on your arm/wrist, get low enough (by taking ukemi) and off the line enough and the force will be negated, hopefully giving you an opening to take control. None of these strategical variations change that I'm performing ukemi to regain control of the engagement. It sounds like (not trying to add words to your mouth) that you're writing off ukemi as the, "I guess I lost" type of response, which is odd since aikido practice doesn't typically look at "winners" and "losers". While I respect your right to disagree, I'm looking at ukemi from the standpoint of, you have to go to the ground, what can you do on the way? I've listed some examples to illustrate this and think that it makes for a more comprehensive practice on the part of both uke and nage. I'm interested in hearing what others think as well.
A ukemi here is not the only option Budd so yes you have misinterpreted my post. Uke could bring his/her knees up under their body to help counter the immobilisation. So yes there are other options. Losing or winning is not the issue. Ukemi is used to prevent injury. Like I said uke gets a second chance. That second chance would be like in your examples. However I would have to disagree with your examples. Perhaps there is a difference in the way that we both perform these techniques that would allow a uke to react as you have described. Performing a ukemi when nage still has a hold of your arm isn't what I would call the best option here. First of all as nage still has a hold of one of your arms, there is the danger you will land on your head. I'm sure I don't need to describe the consequences of that. Secondly if you do manage to pull off a ukemi here nage still has a hold of your arm, which is now twisted and in the perfect position for the Kote Gaeshi turn and pin this thread started with. For this ukemi/counter to work nage would have to be so kind as to let go of your arm. And talking about the kote gaeshi. If a uke prevents you from turning them over by bracing their free arm against the arm nage already has, isn't uke effectively pinning him/her self. Why bother continuing to turn uke? Ok given that you said, "you will brace your arm against your body", I'm assuming you mean uke moves towards nage. Maybe I'm being stupid here but wouldn't that only help nage to apply the technique even faster. Kote Gaeshi doesn't stop at the wrist. It goes down through the fore arm to the elbow. So by following your initial instructions in this example you are actually performing empi (elbow to the gut/ribs) on your self. Which is only going to put you on the ground so much faster. Again with shiho nage moving closer helps nage perform the technique. I can't comment on sumi otoshi, we don't do that one unless it's something else under a different name. Taking any sort of ukemi that involves a roll while nikkyo is being applied is only going to cause damage to uke. Unless nage lets go. Accepting the technique and dropping low (by bending the knees or kneeling) is where nage would want uke to be to execute the pin. A ukemi might be possible at this point however nage still has a hold and uke is in a similar position to ikkyo described above with all the same consequences. Also by deliberately dropping low here uke is exposing him/her self to a kick to the face. It's also worth noting that a nikkyo can be applied with a step back away from uke. Countering many of the options uke has to counter the nikkyo. A ukemi as a counter here would not seem to be the best option. I think it's also worth noting that these examples depend on nage allowing uke to execute the ukemi safely. In other words you would have to be practising with a nice Aikidoka. I'm not saying these techniques can't be countered. But I wouldn't attempt to use a ukemi as part of the counter. It just seems to do more harm than good.
Explain more what you mean above, because as written it doesn't make any sense in the context of resistance-based training. Nice passive-aggressive statement. Try these moves on someone (who doesn't want you to do them) that's good at judo, sub grappling or bjj and you'll see exactly what I mean. Or when I visit the British Isles in Summer 2005 you can try them on me (in a friendly martial-arts sharing way, of course, I'm not out for blood ). Not at all. Get together with a good grappler and try and hold onto their arm simply doing ikkyo. Unless you've effectively taken their balance and kept it (which is very hard to do), have a hold of their arm without keeping kuzushi will only give them the connection they need to counter. When you use ukemi to regain your balance from nage's kuzushi, that's a counter. Watch UFC 2, where Royce fights the kenpoka and you'll see what I mean. Think strategically, wolfie, I've done what I'm talking about, right now you just seem to be spouting theory-based crap. No, uke is not pinning himself and not giving nage the ability to apply the technique faster. If you're doing kotagaeshi, the technique is dependent on keeping distance from uke so they can't strike/grab you. If you're closing the distance, you'd better have kuzushi, or uke, if he gets an idea of what you're going for, will defeat your technique every time. The arm brace is to allow uke to get his full body behind the are your controlling, which will give him more than enough to 1) Stop your technique and 2) Counter you. Ukemi that lowers the body with aid in this by stopping forward and side momentum and giving access to nage's areas for attack. Try to kotagaeshi a good grappler, better yet videotape it so we can all have a laugh. Much of the ukemi I'm talking about is already a natural instinct to a good catch wrestler, sub grappler, etc. I'll say it again, moving closer only works if you have kuzushi, which by the time you've gotten the entry on someone that knows what they're doing, you'll need to use atemi or have padded the moves well enough that they don't see what's coming. Otherwise, you will get nailed. Show me a videotape of someone doing shiho nage or kotagaeshi on a non-compliant opponent. I said nothing about rolling -- I said get low and off the line. Nikkyo is dependent on nage maintaining the line of contact and connection with uke. Once you change the line, the technique is defeated every time. If nage then tries a kick, good, that's the kind of friskiness I like to see in practice. Uke's best options to this type of kick are (aikido version) sankkyo spiral your hand out of the group and irimi kokyo nage the nage who's now only standing on one leg (non-aikido version) sweep the extended leg or just single leg the off-balanced nage. You can drill these full-resistance or practice them in pieces. Once you use them in randori, I want to hear about it. No, these examples depend on uke not being overly-compliant sheep that wants to make sensei/sempai look good in their technique. You seem to be talking from theory. I speak from training/drills/randori. Get one of your juniors and have them try what I was talking about above while you try to get your technique for real. Then get a good grappler and try the same thing. Please remember to get video of both events.
I can see this discussion deteriorating to a play ground scuffle. That's not what I'm here for. Neither am I here to prove my self to anybody. If you want to practice when you visit the UK feel free to let me know closer to the time. Given that you are so into proving things on video perhaps you could post some video of you demonstraighting your ukemi/counters. I'd like to see them being done.
Just a friendly warning guys that this is the Aikido forum, AIKIDO. If you want to talk about Aikido vs Sub-grappling or something like that start a specific thread for it please guys. Cheers, Col
No, we're not going to have a playground scuffle and I'm not trying to paint you into a corner and make you feel like you have to prove yourself, I just take umbrage at being told why things won't work when I've personally done, seen and experienced otherwise. Don't take me calling theory-based stuff as crap as a personal attack. I'm attacking your argument, not you As for putting some of my own stuff on video, I attend throwdowns where I get the chance to put some of these principles into effect on persons that are actively trying to prevent me from doing them. When there's some good video that illustrates one of the examples I listed, I'll be sure to point you in that direction.
Heya Col, You're point's taken, but the initial topic of this thread was how an aikido hold, modified slightly, bears a great deal of resemblance to a sub-grappling hold. I then illustrated further how other things are related as well and how they can be practiced with varying degrees of resistance within both milieux. I understand the reticence that I encounter from aikido practitioners when it comes to blurring the line between arts (I have been a proud aiki-purist at one time and that's not a reflection on anyone here, just my own admission). I would think that the Shodokan folks would understand more readily, given the history of their art. I also know that some of my teachers don't always understand (and granted, I am bullheaded, so I do appreciate everyone's patience when I repeatedly destroy the china shop). But I just have so much enthusiasm for the ideologies behind aikido and how, with just some minor modifications of practice, it can be trained with so much more intent and martial integrity than they dancing-skirt schools allow. I'm passionate about what I preach and make no apologies for it. Bear in mind that I have no ill will for anyone here and enjoy a spirited debate. If you disagree with things I say, I want you to tell me why, but then be prepared to be challenged if I disagree with that, in turn. Especially if you're using untested theories to espouse your argument (not there's inherently anything wrong with it, it just smacks of trying to win the argument, rather than debating based on experience, trial and error).
