Hmm it's been a while since I checked this thread and look at all the fun I've been missing. Please don't even attempt to patronise me OBCT. Firstly I took your post about using football skills as SD to mean in the heat of the moment. Secondly OBCT last time I found my self in a position where I had to defend my self on the street it was commonly called a fight. Now it's true that there is more to martial arts than just fighting. However the whole reason the art exists in the first place was because somebody somewhere needed to know how to fight more effectivley. Now if you are talking about self defence, which you were, and you're talking about using football skills such as a header or how to kick a ball, which you were, then you could only be talking about the fighting aspect. It's the common factor. On the point about using golf clubs and such as weapons, this doesn't require imagination. That is to say it doesn't require any conciouse thought to pick up a golf club in the heat of the moment and club an attacker to death. It's instinctive. No imagination required. As for accurate powerful strikes and good balance in football. Only a few players seem to have this down to a fine art. One other thing. Don't ever pitty me OBCT I don't need it. Have a nice day. Do I appear like I'm just being deliberalty dumb here? LOL
OBCT, you are very clearly reaching. And now I'm going to show you why . . . The first link has no more validity than your Black Belt mag's "history". Here's a hint: you might want to check the validity of your sources, Sensei Soke Dokey's quick snapshots of martial arts ain't going to cut it in terms of attempting a scholarly debate. As per the second link, I don't place a great deal of credibility in discussion board forum conversations where the users I don't know get by with mostly usernames (this includes Bullshido as well as MAP). However, assuming Otake Sensei uses a tachi blade for Iajutsu, how in heaven does that support the assertion regarding WuTe/kempo being the basis for all martial arts? Here's where I once again get seriously amused. Do you realize that Sato Ryu (and "Yo" Sato) are among the laughingstocks of traditional Japanese martial artists? His brand of "ninjutsu" is almost as universally derided as Ashida Kim's koga clan. As such, any mention of the ninjutsu curriculum in TSKSR is best left to discussion by members of the ryu. If they're training outside of Japan, there's only one person licensed to teach it in the West, and it ain't Yo Sato. Which is a mistake, given what I previously mentioned. It also depends on what we're going to accept as Ninjitsu/jutsu. I think the closest thing to a credible group of practitioners today is Hatsumi's group and the off shoots from him and his teacher, Takamatsu (X-Kans et al), although whether they're practicing ninjutsu, or a curriculum based off of bujutsu and Chinese traditions, is also in debate. I have no doubt that Hatsumi's Bujinkan is influenced by Chinese sources, given what his teacher went through. But that has no bearing at all on TSKSR. Er, what exactly, seems fairly likely? The only thing I know for sure is that you pick sources that either are "wrong" or take a general article and make a specific inference that is not supported by it. See my response to the judo statement. The cruxt of the article that you quote is that the benefit of training judo as a sport is that by following the rules of the sports environment, you are able to train all-out against full resistance. I heartily agree and think that this is one of the things that makes judo much more effective than other unarmed martial arts that claim to be "too deadly" for competitive use. On the other hand, judo also includes kata, atemi-waza and moves that are not allowed in sports competition that can supplement your abilities outside of the ring. Sorry, judo is a martial sport AND martial art. Read Jigoro Kano's 'Kodokan Judo' if you don't believe me. Your arbitrary assignment of such things is not only confusing, but from every argument and attempt at supporting it that I've read that you've posted -- it's also quite incorrect. I believe that you believe it to be the case. It just ain't necessarily so. You attempt to codify in a rigid manner that which is by nature flexible and shrouded in shades of grey (try and get a native JMA practitioner to say anything is definitive and be consistent about it). No one is arguing that they are all the same thing. There are obviously going to be differences between styles, teaching and practice methodologies. What I'm arguing about is your insistence on your labelling scheme as being the correct one. It ain't necessarily so. Well, let's see, if koryubooks (widely acknowledged as one of the most valid sources for info about Classical Japanese Martial Arts in the West) won't do it for you, then let's look at that link you posted from Furyu (published by Wayne Muromoto and another highly esteemed source for information on Classical Japanese Martial Arts): That said, I again state that I think it is you who are confused. I make no claims about arts/styles/methodologies inherently fitting into slot A-card B. It is incumbent on you to be able to back up the claims you are making. There are some great discussions of these things in the archives of E-Budo. Stuff written by Wayne Muromoto, Dave Lowry, Karl Friday, Ellis Amdur, The Skoss' (and others I'm sure I'm failing to mention) are especially worth checking out. But you are drawing conlusions that are simply not not supported in the context of the article. As you are trying to give concrete definitions, so too, is the article pointing out how quick the Japanese are to avoid them, especially in the context of describing their martial arts. I feel that this is the heart of the matter in debate. For all practical purposes, the martial arts are martial arts, combatives, fighting arts, fighting methods, physical countermeasures, hand-to-hand, etc. The only thing that ultimately matters is that your training be suitable for you and that it's presented honestly.
1. you cannot train muscle memory by thinking about it. a baby doesn't learn to walk by watching it parents. it get the IDEA of walking from watching it parents. to actually learn to walk the baby starts crawling and taking a step or two while parents support him/her and slowly the baby's legs develop the strength and coordination required to walk. it's debatable whether or not a baby even has the mental capacity to visualize themselves walking in the first place. i'll agree that meditation / visualization has a role in training the body to follow the mind, but you have to have a strong dose of the physical or else your visualization is pointless. an example, i don't know if you are familiar with the game of basketball? well, i played for years and one area where i used visualiztion was shooting freethrows. so, lets say you had a guy that meditated on shooting freethrows for years but never picked up a ball. how good would he be?---answer---terrible. in order to make myself good, i would literally shoot hundreds of freethrows a day. that my friend is muscle memory and there is only one way to get it. 2. "some of the best fighter are not overly concerned with fitness" that's absolute crap, name one. 3. i'll agree to some extent that MA are about preventing a fight before it happens. but not in the sense that you seem to have. MA are about preventing a fight because you know you would have to hurt somebody and you don't want to. i feel a sense of compassion when i decide not to throw a drunk idiot through a window. you come across as being "morally superior" and you sound like a frickin' chop sockey film. 4. the rest of your post is condescending in tone and i don't appreciate what you are implying. your post as a whole is very contradictory. "ma are not about fighting" -- "FA plus spirituality = MA" so which is it? the answer is neither. MA are about training to fight. intense physical exertion pushes you to the limits mentally and physically, tests your resolve, and show you where your body ends and your spirit/ mind must take over to push you through the pain to reach your goal. you cannot divide the body and the mind because you train them simultaneously through physical exertion, that is what MA are all about to me.
I thought learning to protect your self was learning to fight. I know that the goal is to not have to fight I took that to be a moral stand point turn the other cheek. But when I go to class I am not shown how to walk away I am taught how to deal with the fight. I mean anything that teaches you to punch, kick, twist, break, throw, or slam a person to me is fighting. But the fact that most of the ppl that teach martial arts teach you to be more level headed only means they don't want ppl going off on a rampage. I mean if martial arts was not teaching you to fight there would be no punch, kick, twist, break, throw, or slam would there. I like and agree with aikinoobs post so I have nothing against the thought of ki but the word is abused sometimes and I feel a joint lock is a joint lock with or withought it. Are you looking at the meaning of fighting in a diff way like only the person that starts it is fighting or the person mad. Becouse I don't get it if ma doesn't teach to fight then i realy want the ppl in class to stop hitting me
No. That totally depends on what you want out of it, and how you define spirituality, and on which "martial art" you study. Is it Shorinji kempo (strong Buddhist influence) or krav maga (kill-kill-kill fighting)? I don't have a problem with either one, but I sure recognize a substantial difference between them. It's too bad the English language doesn't have different words for these different types of "martial arts." I agree. No, what you get out of it in terms of "oneness with the universe" is directly, and strongly, related to the "martial art" that you are studying. There are several distinct subsets of "martial arts." Our English language unfortunately doesn't have standard words with which we can distinguish them. Apparently Japanese does. See this post for the Japanese distinctions. Having spent some time learning "kill-kill-kill" martial arts and some time in sport martial arts and some time in aikido, I see the difference. It's a plain as day to me that something like krav maga and something like aikido are not the same thing even though we call them by the same term, "martial arts."
people fear what they dont understand, blah de blah, one meaningless quote after another, cut to the chase and get real matey, when you step into the arena you want basic bloody and brutal, not defensive posturing dancing, too many flaws in the system of aikido , ive seen it pressure tested and wouldnt waste my time trying to make work what very clearly does not work
If you are talking about things like the ufc I would train to fight in the ufc down them fast and hurt them faster. But what does that have to do with anything. So are you saying there are no schools that train full contact or pressure test that is untrue my school does and for very good reasons it's hard to doe full speed so we learn how to do just that. my sense was part of the special expeditionary unit of Joint Task Force 6, so he has a pretty good idea on how to train for combat effective.
Fascinating that this would be your 3rd post on MAP, and that it would appear in the thread titled, "Why do people feel the need to insult aikido." Perhaps you want basic bloody and brutal in "the arena," but that's really quite irrelevant because aikidoka don't fight in an "arena." Ah, but you didn't know that, did you? I could tell that you're talking about something that you don't know much about. It's also apparent that you're a little short on courtesy. (hint, hint) I would like to talk more with you after you read up on aikido. Please come back then. Coincidentally we're developing a FAQ for aikido. You might find the unfinished version in the list there under the "aikido" heading.
blind do you feel that their is a correlation between street defence and fighting as part of an armed unit ?
Hmm you've seen Aikido "pressure tested"? Does this mean you just watched from the side lines and didn't get involved? Where did you witness the pressure testing? To the best of my knowledge Aikido students don't get involved in any mixed martial arts competitions. Only the Tomiki style of Aikido actually holds national and international competitions where individuals are pitted against each other. This is aikidoka against aikidoka. What did the "pressure testing" involve?
This is purely anectodal, but I've found aikido principles and techniques to be very useful in grappling, striking and mma sparring environments. I'm not competing at this point, but should that change, I'm fairly certain I will still feel the same way. Thanks for your concerns.
Dude, get a clue. It's not how many posts you have, it's the words you use. Some of us here have successfully used aikido on the street. Some of us here have friends who have successfully used aikido on the street. Yet you waltzed in here and in rude terms declared that aikido never works. Hello? Common courtesy? Some of the Scotish people here recently competed in (and in some events, won) the World Aikido Championship. Click here for the results. But you came in here and dissed their martial art. That's rude, period. The best teachers and best competitors don't insult other arts the way you did because (1) they know there's something good in all of them, and (2) it's just plain rude. The same goes for polite people. If you want to speak ill of aikido, try doing it the way Sonshu does it. He's respectful while critical, and we respect him in turn. Politeness takes a person far.
My good buddy says the same way. To demonstrate, he wrestled with me and with other people several times after aikido class. He did his ground-fighting aikido, and we did whatever. No one could submit him, no one could get in position to "pound and ground" him. Honestly, I don't know what he did, and I'm not good enough at aikido to duplicate his success, but hey, it worked for him. I can't deny his success.
no not at all um do you think they don't train to be effective in case they lose there weapon. So yes I believe if they can teach you to stay alive in a environment such as war if you had lost your weapon you should fair well in the street.
more aikimac you claim some of us here have succesfully used aikido on the street, again like your art ,defensive, also i didnt waltz in anywhere its a public forum maybe you feel your cosy world has been invaded but only by an opinion which is in contrast to yours and one which you seek to belittle because it doesn agree with yours? As for rudeness, i havent been rude i have in my opinion been accurate, maybe that is what your again uncomfortable with, im getting near the truth aikimac and again your squirming, i would put my money on a street fighter against one of your top men any day Blind, by your wide eyed naivety your obviously just a boy you believe all the soldier stories from your sensi whom you probably idolise, nice, naive!
would you like to pressure test your art, let me know where you are, i am in the west of Glasgow i can travel if you wish
1) I pressure test my art. 2) If you're ever in the Harrisburg Metropolitan Area in Southcentral Pennsylvania, we can go a few rounds (MMA rules, grappling, etc). I'm also hoping to be in the UK in Summer of 2005, so maybe I can come to you. Take care now.
Chib, relax. I don't practise Aikido, but anyone who makes such bold statements about any art shows their narrow-mindedness. To be fair, you did come in here and start blasting Aikido. Declaring that something "very clearly does not work" is quite rude, considering your position. You haven't stated with any conclusive backing exactly how you've seen Aikido pressure tested in such a convincing way to dismiss the whole art. For all we know, you could have watched a confrontation involving a beginner, and assumed afterwards that the art is useless. Just remember that the results of a martial art depend on the pratitioner, not the art. Aikido is a well-known and widely practised art, and with proper effort, can be as effective as any other. Keep an open mind, and maybe post with a little more forethought and courtesy next time.
k coffin the thread is "why do people feel the need to insult aikido", i have given my opinion, now i am wrong? Does an opinion have to match yours before it is valid? Is freedom of speech not important, please let me know where you think i havent been courteous,which forum rules on posting have i flouted, please get back to me soon as i err in ignorance, obviously!
