# Kotegaeshi with a difference



## now disabled

Ok first I am well aware that it still dojo set up and it not a boxer (DB I know what ya gonna say lol)  however when I was looking around you tube I came across this, It is still Kotegaeshi just not the flowery one and there is an entry for the retracted punch ( DB it not a boxer lol) anyway may explain there is more than one way to apply the principle.


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Ok first I am well aware that it still dojo set up and it not a boxer (DB I know what ya gonna say lol)  however when I was looking around you tube I came across this, It is still Kotegaeshi just not the flowery one and there is an entry for the retracted punch ( DB it not a boxer lol) anyway may explain there is more than one way to apply the principle.


Not to be 'that guy' but as this post seems to imply combat application, could you give an example of this working against a resisting opponent?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Not to be 'that guy' but as this post seems to imply combat application, could you give an example of this working against a resisting opponent?
> 
> Thanks in advance.




What you are missing totally and completely is the principles and unless you get that you will never get Aikido  no matter what is posted you will not actually get it lol ....I am not being sarky but honestly you are missing it totally


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> What you are missing totally and completely is the principles and unless you get that you will never get Aikido  no matter what is posted you will not actually get it lol ....I am not being sarky but honestly you are missing it totally



Wow. Calm down.

I'll take that as a no then.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Wow. Calm down.
> 
> I'll take that as a no then.


I'm not upset lol 

you ask the same everytime bro and unless you got a good long while to sit and learn then you will miss the principles it not the application only but the principle 

I will post a trad kotegaeshi and you will maybe see what I mean


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> I'm not upset lol
> 
> you ask the same everytime bro and unless you got a good long while to sit and learn then you will miss the principles it not the application only but the principle
> 
> I will post a trad kotegaeshi and you will maybe see what I mean


Well, you keep framing it as combat applicable, so yes the next logical step would be to talk application. I'm not sure why you keep acting offended every time you take this direction and get the logical outcome.

If you would frame it as choreography, and show a video of choreography, that would be a different discussion. But if you frame it as combat and show choreography, that's a different discussion again.


----------



## now disabled

I am not offended at all 

it is combat orientated lol as I said you are missing the principles that are there and unless as I said you are willing to see that then your not going to get any Aikido at all lol 

it like when you had a go at Shioda lol well I would have liked to see you do to him what you claim you can do and yup I have seen folks try and they ended up on the floor as they have with Chida and most definitely did with the power house that was Chiba  and they used the same principles lol 

I am not offended at all you want to see blood and busted up humans lying around and that ain't gonna happen lol ...Aikido is not a sport so you are not going to see the same as you see in the cage


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

When you

- know that your opponent is going to punch you with his right hand at a certain height, to catch his wrist is possible.
- don't know whether your opponent is going to punch you or kick you, to catch his wrist is almost impossible.

Your technique should not depend on that wrist grabbing.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you
> 
> - know that your opponent is going to punch you with his right hand at a certain height, to catch his wrist is possible.
> - don't know whether your opponent is going to punch you or kick you, to catch his wrist is almost impossible.
> 
> Your technique should not depend on that wrist grabbing.




It doesn't lol he is not trapping  the wrist necessarily of the hand that is punching it is the principles you are missing whatever hand is used left extended or retracted or the one that isn't punching the principles are there move offline enter use what he gives you and disrupt his centre  the principles are the same in each one and really it was to show a different application of the same tech 

so are you saying when you train you never know what attack is coming you learn techs that way ?


----------



## now disabled

another style of Aikido with same principles 


and yet another classical kotegaeshi from another different style but same principles lol


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> it is the principles you are missing ... so are you saying when you train you never know what attack is coming you learn techs that way ?


What principle? An abstract principle has to map into concrete technique. That's not a good technique to represent that principle.

For example, when your opponent punches at you, you use your leading hand to redirect his punch arm so your back hand can catch his wrist, IMO that's more realistic technique that your principle can map into.

In all my training, I always attack my opponent first. I don't wait for my opponent to attack me. So I don't have "what attack is coming" issue.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What principle? An abstract principle has to map into concrete technique. That's not a good technique to represent that principle.
> 
> For example, when your opponent punches at you, you use your leading hand to redirect his punch arm so your back hand can catch his wrist, IMO that's much better concrete technique that your principle can map into.
> 
> In all my training, I always attack my opponent first. I don't wait for my opponent to attack me. So I don't have "what attack is coming" issue.




and what part of you second paragraph is not happening lol 

so you teach by attacking you never learn tech? first ?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> and what part of you second paragraph is not happening lol
> 
> so you teach by attacking you never learn tech? first ?


Don't know what you are trying to discuss here.

Since the leg is longer than the arm, if my opponent attacks me first, a kick at his belly should be able to interrupt his attack. In other words, I like to use one common technique to deal with all attacks.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> For example, when your opponent punches at you, you use your leading hand to redirect his punch arm so your back hand can catch his wrist, IMO that's more realistic technique that your principle can map into.


 

go and watch the vids again as you will see hand deflection and all the rest you have just said so it is not abstract at all 


What I asked is how you learn your techniques and skills ?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> What I asked is how you learn your techniques and skills ?


1. Develop from partner drill.
2. Test from sparring.
3. Polish from solo drill.
4. Enhance from equipment training.

In all my "partner drill" training, I always attack first. Here is an example.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> 1. Develop from partner drill.
> 2. Test from sparring.
> 3. Polish from solo drill.
> 4. Enhance from equipment training.
> 
> In all my "partner drill" training, I always attack first. Here is an example.




ok but how do you learn the technique to start with ? surely you have to practice and know what is coming o you can apply the tech and your teacher can then correct mistakes ? 

saying you always attack first and always kick to the belly is ok but what do you learn from that?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> ok but how do you learn the technique to start with ? surely you have to practice and know what is coming o you can apply the tech and your teacher can then correct mistakes ?
> 
> saying you always attack first and always kick to the belly is ok but what do you learn from that?


Most people like to start from the solo form. I like to start from partner drill.

1st - You learn from partner drill. Your opponent punch at you, you kick his belly.
2nd - You test it in sparring.
3rd - You kick in the thin air.
4th - You kick on heavy bag.


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> I am not offended at all
> 
> it is combat orientated lol as I said you are missing the principles that are there and unless as I said you are willing to see that then your not going to get any Aikido at all lol
> 
> it like when you had a go at Shioda lol well I would have liked to see you do to him what you claim you can do and yup I have seen folks try and they ended up on the floor as they have with Chida and most definitely did with the power house that was Chiba  and they used the same principles lol
> 
> I am not offended at all you want to see blood and busted up humans lying around and that ain't gonna happen lol ...Aikido is not a sport so you are not going to see the same as you see in the cage


You keep leading with some variation of 'im not upset' and then fly off the handle for three paragraphs. I don't really see the need for that.

Look, if you are discussing any style used for combat or fighting, you should be able to point to an example of that, or there isn't really anything to discuss. Choreography just doesn't count as you can do literally anything if your partner cooperates. (See- pro wrestling).


----------



## now disabled

I am not flying off at all lol

you slagged of shioda and all i said was you were wrong 

it is not worth arguing about as you will never see the point as you do not want to 

You have a very strong opinion that what you do is the only way 

you quote a sword saint etc yet do you study the sword ? 

You wish to see broken bodies etc before you will believe anything and that is ok you say you have done this and that with Aikidoka and basically you let them etc.

How can you slang off anything with the same again and again and again if you have never even studied or made the effort to ...that to me is narrow minded. 

and I am not going off on one at all


----------



## Tony Dismukes

I'm pretty skeptical of likelihood of getting a solid control of the wrist on either the punching or non-punching hand the way he's showing. I'd also like either a close up explanation or an in-person feel for what he's doing to break the opponent's structure to allow the kotegaeshi. Even if you can grab the wrist of the non-punching hand, it's in solid structure and good position.  Unless you can compromise that structure somehow, the odds of just being able to grab and twist for the kotegaeshi effectively against any sort of competent opponent are essentially nil.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> Ok first I am well aware that it still dojo set up and it not a boxer (DB I know what ya gonna say lol)  however when I was looking around you tube I came across this, It is still Kotegaeshi just not the flowery one and there is an entry for the retracted punch ( DB it not a boxer lol) anyway may explain there is more than one way to apply the principle.


He started talking about the retraction early on, then we track of that for a while. I'd like to see him demo this on a less stylized punch. Kote gaeshi doesn't require that full commitment of weight forward, but not having it changes the dynamics of the throw.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Not to be 'that guy' but as this post seems to imply combat application, could you give an example of this working against a resisting opponent?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


It's hard to find the opportunity with a resisting opponent (you have to wait for the opening - not one you can force, even with technique). I've pulled it off pretty nicely a few times, but it's not going to be a go-to move. Think more of getting into a struggle where you have ended up with his arm in your grasp. From there, this is a possibility - more so if he's trying to use that arm against you.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When you
> 
> - know that your opponent is going to punch you with his right hand at a certain height, to catch his wrist is possible.
> - don't know whether your opponent is going to punch you or kick you, to catch his wrist is almost impossible.
> 
> Your technique should not depend on that wrist grabbing.


The technique shouldn't really be about catching the wrist. Trapping the arm is easier, as the trap starts high on the arm and leads down. Depending on the situation, it might go to the wrist, where techniques like this become available.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> another style of Aikido with same principles
> 
> 
> and yet another classical kotegaeshi from another different style but same principles lol


I can't hear what he is saying, but he looks like he's covering counters in that. Wish i could hear him.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What principle? An abstract principle has to map into concrete technique. That's not a good technique to represent that principle.
> 
> For example, when your opponent punches at you, you use your leading hand to redirect his punch arm so your back hand can catch his wrist, IMO that's more realistic technique that your principle can map into.
> 
> In all my training, I always attack my opponent first. I don't wait for my opponent to attack me. So I don't have "what attack is coming" issue.


Aiki arts tend to always start from a defensive response. Some have offensive capability in their curriculum, others do not (some don't consider it "aiki" to initiate).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Don't know what you are trying to discuss here.
> 
> Since the leg is longer than the arm, if my opponent attacks me first, a kick at his belly should be able to interrupt his attack. In other words, I like to use one common technique to deal with all attacks.


There's no such thing, John. No technique counters every attack. A punch is as close to a universal answer as you can get, and it fails reliably against some attacks (as early UFC showed us).


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> I am not flying off at all lol
> 
> you slagged of shioda and all i said was you were wrong
> 
> it is not worth arguing about as you will never see the point as you do not want to
> 
> You have a very strong opinion that what you do is the only way
> 
> you quote a sword saint etc yet do you study the sword ?
> 
> You wish to see broken bodies etc before you will believe anything and that is ok you say you have done this and that with Aikidoka and basically you let them etc.
> 
> How can you slang off anything with the same again and again and again if you have never even studied or made the effort to ...that to me is narrow minded.
> 
> and I am not going off on one at all


You notice how all of your posts are about me, but all mine are about the subject?

Also, literally none of your wild assertions about me are even true. You keep bringing up that other thread(which isn't even relevant) about that shioda guy, when all I did in that thread is point out people in THAT particular demo video were literally falling over without even being touched. I maintain that in reality some level of contact is indeed needed to put someone on the ground.

As per the signature quote, the content of which is independent of swordsmanship.  I'm not sure why that is an issue for you.

As for "I wish to see broken bodies" "what I do is the only way", etc and the rest of your ad hominem BS, you couldn't be more wrong.

So with that out of the way, how about giving a moment to the actual subject at hand? How about this ; since you can't provide evidence of this technique working under resistance, how about you concoct a theoretical situation under which this technique could be applied to someone fighting back?


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> It's hard to find the opportunity with a resisting opponent (you have to wait for the opening - not one you can force, even with technique). I've pulled it off pretty nicely a few times, but it's not going to be a go-to move. Think more of getting into a struggle where you have ended up with his arm in your grasp. From there, this is a possibility - more so if he's trying to use that arm against you.


Thank you 

This is how adults do it


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Ok first I am well aware that it still dojo set up and it not a boxer (DB I know what ya gonna say lol)  however when I was looking around you tube I came across this, It is still Kotegaeshi just not the flowery one and there is an entry for the retracted punch ( DB it not a boxer lol) anyway may explain there is more than one way to apply the principle.



I can't see the video so I am not sure yet what I will say.

But at a guess if you don't start with a good clinch and decent pressure. You are going to get your head punched in trying to secure an arm


----------



## Oni_Kadaki

It's worth mentioning that you don't necessarily need to "catch" the wrist to get kotegaeshi to work. I've applied it against one guy who was getting in my face, and it ended the confrontation real fast. In theory, you can also ride the arm of an opponent until you can grab the wrist, giving you more surface area and more reaction time. That being said, I've never pulled it off against a skilled and determined opponent in real life.


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> I can't see the video so I am not sure yet what I will say.
> 
> But at a guess if you don't start with a good clinch and decent pressure. You are going to get your head punched in trying to secure an arm



Otherwise if you clinch up well. And have your head properly tucked. (which he didn't)

You can attack the arm. Stretch it out and start using things like arm bars and wristlocks.





Or grind them. Break their posture then attack the arm or wrist.


----------



## pdg

Martial D said:


> I maintain that in reality some level of contact is indeed needed to put someone on the ground



If that were universally true I wouldn't have ended up on the floor all those times (usually after half-assing an attempt at something, probably aerial, I've not tried before)


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I can't see the video so I am not sure yet what I will say.
> 
> But at a guess if you don't start with a good clinch and decent pressure. You are going to get your head punched in trying to secure an arm


Don't worry, you nailed the issue without seeing the video.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Oni_Kadaki said:


> It's worth mentioning that you don't necessarily need to "catch" the wrist to get kotegaeshi to work. I've applied it against one guy who was getting in my face, and it ended the confrontation real fast. In theory, you can also ride the arm of an opponent until you can grab the wrist, giving you more surface area and more reaction time. That being said, I've never pulled it off against a skilled and determined opponent in real life.


Yes, that's the idea I was trying to get to in an earlier post. Arms are easier to make contact with (the higher, the easier).


----------



## hoshin1600

my view is that O sensei never intended for Aikido to be an effective fighting art.  it wasnt about using it in a fight at all.  but putting that aside and if we are going to "go there" with the fighting application then aikido fails because of one basic flaw... pressure testing.  many will argue over this but this is how i see it.  in science the biggest question is what test to use to prove out a hypothesis.  same applies here.  if your not using the right test you will never know if your stuff works.  
my 7 yo son seems the think that if he had a few dinosaur size feathers and a trampoline he could fly.  in his mind it will work.  the problem is that he doesnt have a full concept of the strength of gravity.  in the same way  martial artists tend to view their technique with the same lack of conceptual understanding.  they are not adding the full complexity to their model.  thus their mind see's that it will work.  there is a big difference between "seeing" it work in your mind and it actually working.
if aikido wants to prove out their hypothesis then they need to step up to a multi level analysis.  start with what you have ... a static thrusting munetsuki.  then step up to a more boxer style punch.  this should also include variability,  the punch should be targeted anywhere on the torso ( meaning variation in vectors)  then retract back to the gaurd.  next the testing needs to be stepped up to randomization, where the uke can throw any punch to any target.  over hand right, hook , jab, shovel hook,  cross right.   
then full sparring full contact and get your technique to work.

until that happens then Aikido is going to have problems with the MMA crowd.


----------



## Martial D

hoshin1600 said:


> my view is that O sensei never intended for Aikido to be an effective fighting art.  it wasnt about using it in a fight at all.  but putting that aside and if we are going to "go there" with the fighting application then aikido fails because of one basic flaw... pressure testing.  many will argue over this but this is how i see it.  in science the biggest question is what test to use to prove out a hypothesis.  same applies here.  if your not using the right test you will never know if your stuff works.
> my 7 yo son seems the think that if he had a few dinosaur size feathers and a trampoline he could fly.  in his mind it will work.  the problem is that he doesnt have a full concept of the strength of gravity.  in the same way  martial artists tend to view their technique with the same lack of conceptual understanding.  they are not adding the full complexity to their model.  thus their mind see's that it will work.  there is a big difference between "seeing" it work in your mind and it actually working.
> if aikido wants to prove out their hypothesis then they need to step up to a multi level analysis.  start with what you have ... a static thrusting munetsuki.  then step up to a more boxer style punch.  this should also include variability,  the punch should be targeted anywhere on the torso ( meaning variation in vectors)  then retract back to the gaurd.  next the testing needs to be stepped up to randomization, where the uke can throw any punch to any target.  over hand right, hook , jab, shovel hook,  cross right.
> then full sparring full contact and get your technique to work.
> 
> until that happens then Aikido is going to have problems with the MMA crowd.



Personally, I wouldn't put my self in the 'mma crowd' box. I'm a CMA guy at heart, and everything I do filters through that. This is perhaps why I am so hard on 'bologna', as I ate my share of it early on, swallowing gratuitously, until a proverbial stiff shot to the gut made me throw it all up and re-evaluate.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

hoshin1600 said:


> my view is that O sensei never intended for Aikido to be an effective fighting art.  it wasnt about using it in a fight at all.  but putting that aside and if we are going to "go there" with the fighting application then aikido fails because of one basic flaw... pressure testing.  many will argue over this but this is how i see it.  in science the biggest question is what test to use to prove out a hypothesis.  same applies here.  if your not using the right test you will never know if your stuff works.
> my 7 yo son seems the think that if he had a few dinosaur size feathers and a trampoline he could fly.  in his mind it will work.  the problem is that he doesnt have a full concept of the strength of gravity.  in the same way  martial artists tend to view their technique with the same lack of conceptual understanding.  they are not adding the full complexity to their model.  thus their mind see's that it will work.  there is a big difference between "seeing" it work in your mind and it actually working.
> if aikido wants to prove out their hypothesis then they need to step up to a multi level analysis.  start with what you have ... a static thrusting munetsuki.  then step up to a more boxer style punch.  this should also include variability,  the punch should be targeted anywhere on the torso ( meaning variation in vectors)  then retract back to the gaurd.  next the testing needs to be stepped up to randomization, where the uke can throw any punch to any target.  over hand right, hook , jab, shovel hook,  cross right.
> then full sparring full contact and get your technique to work.
> 
> until that happens then Aikido is going to have problems with the MMA crowd.


I agree, and will add one adjustment. With many grappling techniques - especially when focusing on least resistance - you can't expect to perform a specific technique against a resisting partner. If your partner knows what is coming, and uses what he knows, most grappling fails reliably. Same is true for punches, of course: if you know I'm throwing a jab, my ability to connect that jab goes way down, because all you have to do is defend that one thing. So, variable input and variable response options. If an opening almost never presents, that's a low percentage technique against that person. If that pattern continues with other people (especially if it continues with new students and people from other styles), that's probably a low percentage technique all-around...and only worth training if it's just too damned much fun to not train.


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> I agree, and will add one adjustment. With many grappling techniques - especially when focusing on least resistance - you can't expect to perform a specific technique against a resisting partner. If your partner knows what is coming, and uses what he knows, most grappling fails reliably. Same is true for punches, of course: if you know I'm throwing a jab, my ability to connect that jab goes way down, because all you have to do is defend that one thing. So, variable input and variable response options. If an opening almost never presents, that's a low percentage technique against that person. If that pattern continues with other people (especially if it continues with new students and people from other styles), that's probably a low percentage technique all-around...and only worth training if it's just too damned much fun to not train.


 Exactly that. Here is a clip of what aikido vs aikido actually looks like. A whole lot less running and diving and a whole lot more stifling and struggling.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Exactly that. Here is a clip of what aikido vs aikido actually looks like. A whole lot less running and diving and a whole lot more stifling and struggling.


I've often said that, if trained well, Aikido against a collected and/or skilled opponent should look more like Judo. If not trained well, it keeps trying to look like Aikido in the dojo, and just doesn't work.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

gpseymour said:


> I've often said that, if trained well, Aikido against a collected and/or skilled opponent should look more like Judo. If not trained well, it keeps trying to look like Aikido in the dojo, and just doesn't work.


The reason is simple. You have 2 arms and your opponent also has 2 arms. If you use 2 arms against your opponent's 1 arm, you will give him 1 free arm. If you use both arms to deal with both of your opponent's arms, wrestling, Judo, or Aikido should all look similar.

It doesn't matter which style that you may train, you still need to know how to handle a clinch.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Exactly that. Here is a clip of what aikido vs aikido actually looks like. A whole lot less running and diving and a whole lot more stifling and struggling.



That is Tomiki Aikido and basing what you say on it is not altogether balanced


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> I've often said that, if trained well, Aikido against a collected and/or skilled opponent should look more like Judo. If not trained well, it keeps trying to look like Aikido in the dojo, and just doesn't work.



I see where your coming from and yes the dojo classical style doesn't work i have said that many times in conversations with yourself.

What I will stand by is that the principles do work it the application of said that needs tweaked


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> I agree, and will add one adjustment. With many grappling techniques - especially when focusing on least resistance - you can't expect to perform a specific technique against a resisting partner. If your partner knows what is coming, and uses what he knows, most grappling fails reliably. Same is true for punches, of course: if you know I'm throwing a jab, my ability to connect that jab goes way down, because all you have to do is defend that one thing. So, variable input and variable response options. If an opening almost never presents, that's a low percentage technique against that person. If that pattern continues with other people (especially if it continues with new students and people from other styles), that's probably a low percentage technique all-around...and only worth training if it's just too damned much fun to not train.




I do agree with the point that if you know what is coming then you should be able to reverse it.

I do think Aikido has many flaws and when talking to and putting it up against skilled martial artists the flaws will come out as they are skilled ... and in any cage or MMA fight Aikido will struggle if it applied classically

That said against the average dude in the street I would say it has a chance assuming it is applied (not the classical way the shortened tweaked way) if you remember the vid poated a while back when a guy used kotegaeshi ...well it was more the classical way as he was taught he put the guy down but he used the big circle which had the opponent been more skilled he'd have well you get the idea.


I posted those vids really just to show different approaches and from different schools as they all were from different styles


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> I do think Aikido has many flaws ...


Do Aikido guys train foot sweep or single leg?


----------



## Ryback

Aikido works, it can work in any situation according to the person's skills... 
Since the days of the Samurai the practice of martial arts was done in a controlled environment for obvious reasons... Imagine two people "sparring" with katana swords... There would have been more dead bodies at the dojos than the battlefield. 
In my opinion Aikido doesn't look like Judo or anything else in a real fight. Aikido is Aikido it has its principles. In a real fight it could be anything from a single devastating atemi to one of the most complicated techniques... 
I agree that it's not a good idea to try to grab on one's wrist while he is punching you, that's why Aikido has hand deflections but as I said, anything is within the person's skills and ability. Of course, when you don't know the attack it's more difficult to defend against it, that's why in Aikido we are forging certain combat skills rather than training different scenarios that may never happen... Kata is not a scenario, anyone who is practicing seriously Aikido knows what I mean.. 
So, yes, it's more difficult when you don't know what's coming but remember that in a real self defense situation, your attacker doesn't know of your Aikido skills either...


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Do Aikido guys train foot sweep or single leg?




Not in classical Aikido


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> Aikido works, it can work in any situation according to the person's skills...
> Since the days of the Samurai the practice of martial arts was done in a controlled environment for obvious reasons... Imagine two people "sparring" with katana swords... There would have been more dead bodies at the dojos than the battlefield.
> In my opinion Aikido doesn't look like Judo or anything else in a real fight. Aikido is Aikido it has its principles. In a real fight it could be anything from a single devastating atemi to one of the most complicated techniques...
> I agree that it's not a good idea to try to grab on one's wrist while he is punching you, that's why Aikido has hand deflections but as I said, anything is within the person's skills and ability. Of course, when you don't know the attack it's more difficult to defend against it, that's why in Aikido we are forging certain combat skills rather than training different scenarios that may never happen... Kata is not a scenario, anyone who is practicing seriously Aikido knows what I mean..
> So, yes, it's more difficult when you don't know what's coming but remember that in a real self defense situation, your attacker doesn't know of your Aikido skills either...


The same could be said for pro wrestling though. You can SAY anything works. All we truely have to work with is the vast repository of video evidence and/or first hand experience. I've examined many hours of aikido footage, and regularly spar with a guy that knows aikido. When I go limp for him and cooperate he can throw me around in cool ways, but in sparring he only gets people with sweeps and shoots. Throwing a guy by his wrist(unless you count a head and arm throw) just isn't something that happens, at least not very often.

Even in that aikido vs aikido tournament clip I posted there aren't any throws like that.

Now this isn't to say I think aikido is useless, because I don't. It helps movement, stability, and flow. It really seems to help with cadence and timing too in the clinch. It is, IMO, as osensei intended, a great thing for a trained fighter to supplement his skills with.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Even in that aikido vs aikido tournament clip I posted there aren't any throws like that.




That was Tomiki style Aikido


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> The same could be said for pro wrestling though. You can SAY anything works. All we truely have to work with is the vast repository of video evidence and/or first hand experience. I've examined many hours of aikido footage, and regularly spar with a guy that knows aikido. When I go limp for him and cooperate he can throw me around in cool ways, but in sparring he only gets people with sweeps and shoots. Throwing a guy by his wrist(unless you count a head and arm throw) just isn't something that happens, at least not very often.
> 
> Even in that aikido vs aikido tournament clip I posted there aren't any throws like that.
> 
> Now this isn't to say I think aikido is useless, because I don't. It helps movement, stability, and flow. It really seems to help with cadence and timing too in the clinch. It is, IMO, as osensei intended, a great thing for a trained fighter to supplement his skills with.




What rank or grade is the guy you say knows Aikido ? I am not being nasty but it does matter and what style Aikido does he study?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> Not in classical Aikido


This is my concern. Why?

The 1st time that I saw MT flying knee, I asked myself, why didn't I have that in my long fist system?

It's very difficult for me to believe that Aikido guys don't know there is a technique called "foot sweep". Even if you don't have it in your system, after you have added it in, it will be in your system. It's just a such simple logic.

My question is after so many years, why there is still no Aikido guys who tried to add foot sweep, or single leg into the Aikido system?


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is my concern. Why?
> 
> The 1st time that I saw MT flying knee, I asked myself, why didn't I have that in my long fist system?
> 
> It's very difficult for me to believe that Aikido guys don't know there is a technique called "foot sweep". Even if you don't have it in your system, after you have added it in, it will be in your system. It's just a such simple logic.
> 
> My question is after so many years, why there is still no Aikido guys who tried to add foot sweep, or single leg into the Aikido system?




AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

they do lol they do but it not classical Aikido lol 

just because you are not seeing vids of that does not mean that it is not used lol the vids that are posted are mostly either classical Aikido (dojo training vids) or demos and they ain't gonna do that as it not part of the Aikido system (as such) 

I have said before that why the strikes Kicking etc etc was never incoporated into any drills is because whe Ueshiba started teaching or formulating Aikido the students he taught (and they were mostly by introduction not walk in of the street) already knew how tokick punch strike sweep etc so he just didn't teach what they already knew


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> I do agree with the point that if you know what is coming then you should be able to reverse it.
> 
> I do think Aikido has many flaws and when talking to and putting it up against skilled martial artists the flaws will come out as they are skilled ... and in any cage or MMA fight Aikido will struggle if it applied classically
> 
> That said against the average dude in the street I would say it has a chance assuming it is applied (not the classical way the shortened tweaked way) if you remember the vid poated a while back when a guy used kotegaeshi ...well it was more the classical way as he was taught he put the guy down but he used the big circle which had the opponent been more skilled he'd have well you get the idea.
> 
> 
> I posted those vids really just to show different approaches and from different schools as they all were from different styles


Yep. There are plenty of videos (of actual altercations) of people punching with the kind of forward commitment that makes aiki responses pretty easy to access.


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> Yep. There are plenty of videos (of actual altercations) of people punching with the kind of forward commitment that makes aiki responses pretty easy to access.



you sir can see that but that is because you know the principles of Aikido thereby you can see the openings


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Do Aikido guys train foot sweep or single leg?


I’m not sure. I’ve never seen either referenced in an Aikido book or video, or in any class or seminar I’ve attended. But I’ve talked to Aikidoka who knew a sweep similar to what I teach (close to osotogari in the basic form), so they may have the principles for that foot sweep. And the single-leg principles are there, except maybe for the need to brace against them in he pivot.


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> I’m not sure. I’ve never seen either referenced in an Aikido book or video, or in any class or seminar I’ve attended. But I’ve talked to Aikidoka who knew a sweep similar to what I teach (close to osotogari in the basic form), so they may have the principles for that foot sweep. And the single-leg principles are there, except maybe for the need to brace against them in he pivot.



they are not in any classical Aikido style but as you say it does not mean they would not use one if required 

I still say that imo the reason that they are not in the Aikido curriculum is due to the original students already knowing that kinda of thing ...but that just my thoughts as Ueshiba did on numerous occasions say that atemi were a big part of Aikido (I forget the % he used lol)


----------



## now disabled

hoshin1600 said:


> my view is that O sensei never intended for Aikido to be an effective fighting art.  it wasnt about using it in a fight at all.  but putting that aside and if we are going to "go there" with the fighting application then aikido fails because of one basic flaw... pressure testing.  many will argue over this but this is how i see it.  in science the biggest question is what test to use to prove out a hypothesis.  same applies here.  if your not using the right test you will never know if your stuff works.
> my 7 yo son seems the think that if he had a few dinosaur size feathers and a trampoline he could fly.  in his mind it will work.  the problem is that he doesnt have a full concept of the strength of gravity.  in the same way  martial artists tend to view their technique with the same lack of conceptual understanding.  they are not adding the full complexity to their model.  thus their mind see's that it will work.  there is a big difference between "seeing" it work in your mind and it actually working.
> if aikido wants to prove out their hypothesis then they need to step up to a multi level analysis.  start with what you have ... a static thrusting munetsuki.  then step up to a more boxer style punch.  this should also include variability,  the punch should be targeted anywhere on the torso ( meaning variation in vectors)  then retract back to the gaurd.  next the testing needs to be stepped up to randomization, where the uke can throw any punch to any target.  over hand right, hook , jab, shovel hook,  cross right.
> then full sparring full contact and get your technique to work.
> 
> until that happens then Aikido is going to have problems with the MMA crowd.




I am not sure that I agree totally ....yes in the end he did not (when oomoto really started influencing his thinking and attitudes towards Aikido) but the early stuff and the during the war no I thimk he at that time did ...his book budo was given as a manual to the military (I think it was the navy) and Tomiki did teach to the military as did Shioda (pre Yoshinkan) and I am sure he himself taught at the naval academy


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> What rank or grade is the guy you say knows Aikido ? I am not being nasty but it does matter and what style Aikido does he study?


I'll ask him what style of aikido it is next time I see him. I know he recently got promoted to 1st Dan because he was talking about it.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> Yep. There are plenty of videos (of actual altercations) of people punching with the kind of forward commitment that makes aiki responses pretty easy to access.



It really isnt that easy. This is why people get hit by them. It just looks easy on a video.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> I'll ask him what style of aikido it is next time I see him. I know he recently got promoted to 1st Dan because he was talking about it.



Hmmm that may well explain a bit (not knocking the guy ) but if he has just reached shodan then it really is not the best guide ....that is not meant to offend but try and find a sandan or above that may give you a better test and one from either Yoshinkan old Iwama style or the tenshin style then you might have a different perspective 

Again not knocking your friend but really a newly promoted shodan isn't the best test


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> It really isnt that easy. This is why people get hit by them. It just looks easy on a video.


I agree to eg a trained boxer it will not be easy at all but to a normal saturday night idiot well that a different ball game .he throws and well there will be some form of opening where as a trained fighter there will not be necessarily 

I get what you mean and other folks who are skilled however in the real world how many trained fighters are you going to run into ? (ok you may say in your life plenty where as in my life very few ...oh there are those who think they are until it comes to crunch time and well that a different story)


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Hmmm that may well explain a bit (not knocking the guy ) but if he has just reached shodan then it really is not the best guide ....that is not meant to offend but try and find a sandan or above that may give you a better test and one from either Yoshinkan old Iwama style or the tenshin style then you might have a different perspective
> 
> Again not knocking your friend but really a newly promoted shodan isn't the best test



Well, he's been doing it for ten or so years I think. Maybe it'll work after 20.


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> That was Tomiki style Aikido


Oh ya, this. I don't know what flavour of aikido you did, so could you post a video of someone doing it in a fight(tournament or otherwise) so that I might compare the two?


----------



## Steve

now disabled said:


> I agree to eg a trained boxer it will not be easy at all but to a normal saturday night idiot well that a different ball game .he throws and well there will be some form of opening where as a trained fighter there will not be necessarily
> 
> I get what you mean and other folks who are skilled however in the real world how many trained fighters are you going to run into ? (ok you may say in your life plenty where as in my life very few ...oh there are those who think they are until it comes to crunch time and well that a different story)


Are you just hoping to never fight anyone who has some experience fighting?  That Saturday night idiot might also have been a high school wrestler, a former gold gloves boxer, or a guy who just likes to get into fights and has a natural aptitude for violence.  Training to beat untrained people is pretty easy and doesn’t take long.   If that’s the measure, 6 months of boxing, judo, mma, must Thai or BJJ and you’re good to go.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

gpseymour said:


> There's no such thing, John. No technique counters every attack. A punch is as close to a universal answer as you can get, and it fails reliably against some attacks (as early UFC showed us).


When your opponent punches you, he has to put weight on his leading leg. You can either kick that knee, or sweep that leg. The opportunity will always be there.

If you are good at foot sweep, you can handle almost 80% of your problem. Some techniques are more useful than the other.


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> The same could be said for pro wrestling though. You can SAY anything works. All we truely have to work with is the vast repository of video evidence and/or first hand experience. I've examined many hours of aikido footage, and regularly spar with a guy that knows aikido. When I go limp for him and cooperate he can throw me around in cool ways, but in sparring he only gets people with sweeps and shoots. Throwing a guy by his wrist(unless you count a head and arm throw) just isn't something that happens, at least not very often.
> 
> Even in that aikido vs aikido tournament clip I posted there aren't any throws like that.
> 
> Now this isn't to say I think aikido is useless, because I don't. It helps movement, stability, and flow. It really seems to help with cadence and timing too in the clinch. It is, IMO, as osensei intended, a great thing for a trained fighter to supplement his skills with.


Well I don't know if everything works but most traditional Martial arts have the potential to work if the person practicing them has the skills needed... Aikido, Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Aiki-jutsu, you name it. 
And of course sparring or combative sports is not the way of the warrior so we don't measure Aikido in such a context... And furthermore Kote gaeshi is not the only aikido technique. It works when the situation calls for it as it is with any other technique. 
As for sparring or testing or experimenting with an aikidoka... Well, in another thread I saw a YouTube link of someone supposedly using Aikido to fight an MMA guy and completely failing.... So everyone's thoughts are probably "well, Aikido is useless against the MMA guy", but....the fact of the matter is that the aikidoka is lousy in his Aikido. In the whole video his posture is bad, his movements very far away from the Aikido way of moving and, to make matters worse, he is not trying a single Aikido technique, anything!! He looks like he is going for his legs or doing other lousy, monkey mumbo jumbo and he is claiming to be doing aikido. 
The guy is a bloody joke! He is, not the art! And that's not bad, nobody is perfect but you don't post a video on YouTube demonstrating your incompetence and blame it on the art. 
And by the way, I think we should stop trying to decipher what o'sensei wanted, what o'sensei said because o'sensei was saying a lot of things, mostly in Japanese, a long time ago and maybe he was changing his mind every other day. So to claim that o'sensei wanted Aikido to be a supplement of other martial arts skills is at least naive... 
There were people in Aikido that had previous martial arts background and they were close to o'sensei, like Shioda... Neither he, nor Saito or Tohei or whoever ever claimed in any of their books that Aikido needs other martial arts experience in order for it to work... And also in my experience, it doesn't! It is a complete martial art as much as it can get(and so are others too of course). 
One just needs to study hard in order to get Aikido's principles inside Aikido's techniques to make it work. It's all on the individual person, the art is perfect, all martial arts are perfect. The openings and flows we see in them are people's lack of perfection. Believe me I see a lot of this in myself, but I am working on it....


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Oh ya, this. I don't know what flavour of aikido you did, so could you post a video of someone doing it in a fight(tournament or otherwise) so that I might compare the two?




Well as there is only one from of Aikido that has any competition that will be difficult and as I cannot train due to health reasons (yes I was on the mat recently to try something out but it was very clear I cannot train fully now) I studied both Aikikai, Yoshinkan and the old Iwama style (before it returned under the control of the Hombu ...yes it was always affiliated before anyone jumps but it was differnt) #

So basically I cannot 

Be aware that the vid you posted is the only style that has competition and as such there are rules as to what counts and what does not ...for scoring ...it is not a free full contact anything goes so looking at it well again gives a distorted view 

I am not going to go into why or the where fors of how it was created but if you do a little reading and research you will find that out 

But in no way try to even think it is in any way shape or form like other competition arts as it is not lol


----------



## now disabled

Steve said:


> Are you just hoping to never fight anyone who has some experience fighting?  That Saturday night idiot might also have been a high school wrestler, a former gold gloves boxer, or a guy who just likes to get into fights and has a natural aptitude for violence.  Training to beat untrained people is pretty easy and doesn’t take long.   If that’s the measure, 6 months of boxing, judo, mma, must Thai or BJJ and you’re good to go.



My friend I have had many confrontations in life and some that have left me in the condition I now am 

Would i use and did I use Aikido yup and did it work yup 

Saying the saturday night idiot could be this or that ...well yes he could be but there again he might not be lol ...so that really is a moot point , but I would add that well at least what I have seen most of the saturday night idiots are not trained fighters and as over here we tend not to have high school wrestling teams etc.

If you are implying that most attacs or confrontations are with trained fighters then I would disagree and I would add that in my experience trained people tend to avoid fights not look for them


----------



## now disabled

Ryback said:


> Well I don't know if everything works but most traditional Martial arts have the potential to work if the person practicing them has the skills needed... Aikido, Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Aiki-jutsu, you name it.
> And of course sparring or combative sports is not the way of the warrior so we don't measure Aikido in such a context... And furthermore Kote gaeshi is not the only aikido technique. It works when the situation calls for it as it is with any other technique.
> As for sparring or testing or experimenting with an aikidoka... Well, in another thread I saw a YouTube link of someone supposedly using Aikido to fight an MMA guy and completely failing.... So everyone's thoughts are probably "well, Aikido is useless against the MMA guy", but....the fact of the matter is that the aikidoka is lousy in his Aikido. In the whole video his posture is bad, his movements very far away from the Aikido way of moving and, to make matters worse, he is not trying a single Aikido technique, anything!! He looks like he is going for his legs or doing other lousy, monkey mumbo jumbo and he is claiming to be doing aikido.
> The guy is a bloody joke! He is, not the art! And that's not bad, nobody is perfect but you don't post a video on YouTube demonstrating your incompetence and blame it on the art.
> And by the way, I think we should stop trying to decipher what o'sensei wanted, what o'sensei said because o'sensei was saying a lot of things, mostly in Japanese, a long time ago and maybe he was changing his mind every other day. So to claim that o'sensei wanted Aikido to be a supplement of other martial arts skills is at least naive...
> There were people in Aikido that had previous martial arts background and they were close to o'sensei, like Shioda... Neither he, nor Saito or Tohei or whoever ever claimed in any of their books that Aikido needs other martial arts experience in order for it to work... And also in my experience, it doesn't! It is a complete martial art as much as it can get(and so are others too of course).
> One just needs to study hard in order to get Aikido's principles inside Aikido's techniques to make it work. It's all on the individual person, the art is perfect, all martial arts are perfect. The openings and flows we see in them are people's lack of perfection. Believe me I see a lot of this in myself, but I am working on it....




It may be my fault in saying that the striking kicking etc etc was left out ...that was just my own thoughts and observations my friend having spent a good number of years in Aikido and reading learning and in some ways researching and what I did learn was that most if not all of the original students knew how to punch ick etc before they started their Aikido journey and it is my opinion only that Ueshiba did not see the need to include the punching drills etc ...I am not a far from am I having a go at Ueshiba the man was truly a gifted human being and a master of what he did and that is easy to see ...what I am saying is that the post war Aikido was affected by his spiritual thinkings and ways


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When your opponent punches you, he has to put weight on his leading leg. You can either kick that knee, or sweep that leg. The opportunity will always be there.
> 
> If you are good at foot sweep, you can handle almost 80% of your problem. Some techniques are more useful than the other.



Ok 

but not as everything in life can be solved one way there usually more than one way to do things 

I get that in your training most things seem to be solved with a kick or a punch but other arts do have different approaches


----------



## Tez3

Martial D said:


> You keep leading with some variation of 'im not upset' and then fly off the handle for three paragraphs.



I really don't see where he's getting upset, you seem to be projecting your feelings onto him. I don't train Aikido, though I've done a little and have trained with people who have but his points are put forward in a very reasonable way so it must be the way you are reading them.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> I agree to eg a trained boxer it will not be easy at all but to a normal saturday night idiot well that a different ball game .he throws and well there will be some form of opening where as a trained fighter there will not be necessarily
> 
> I get what you mean and other folks who are skilled however in the real world how many trained fighters are you going to run into ? (ok you may say in your life plenty where as in my life very few ...oh there are those who think they are until it comes to crunch time and well that a different story)



Why do you think people get hit by unskilled fighters?


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Why do you think people get hit by unskilled fighters?




numerous reasons


----------



## drop bear

Steve said:


> Are you just hoping to never fight anyone who has some experience fighting?  That Saturday night idiot might also have been a high school wrestler, a former gold gloves boxer, or a guy who just likes to get into fights and has a natural aptitude for violence.  Training to beat untrained people is pretty easy and doesn’t take long.   If that’s the measure, 6 months of boxing, judo, mma, must Thai or BJJ and you’re good to go.



That Saturday night idiot will be trying to take your head off with that punch. Not thowing it slowly or predictably so it can be caught.

It changes the game.

It is basically changing the attack so the defence works. Which is self defence suicide.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> numerous reasons



But an average person doesn't have to do aikido. They just have to move their head. It should be easier to just never get hit.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> But an average person doesn't have to do aikido. They just have to move their head. It should be easier to just never get hit.




Oh I agree totally there 100% 

I am not saying that anyone needs Aikido at all sorry if I gave that impression


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> Well I don't know if everything works but most traditional Martial arts have the potential to work if the person practicing them has the skills needed... Aikido, Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Aiki-jutsu, you name it.
> And of course sparring or combative sports is not the way of the warrior so we don't measure Aikido in such a context... And furthermore Kote gaeshi is not the only aikido technique. It works when the situation calls for it as it is with any other technique.
> As for sparring or testing or experimenting with an aikidoka... Well, in another thread I saw a YouTube link of someone supposedly using Aikido to fight an MMA guy and completely failing.... So everyone's thoughts are probably "well, Aikido is useless against the MMA guy", but....the fact of the matter is that the aikidoka is lousy in his Aikido. In the whole video his posture is bad, his movements very far away from the Aikido way of moving and, to make matters worse, he is not trying a single Aikido technique, anything!! He looks like he is going for his legs or doing other lousy, monkey mumbo jumbo and he is claiming to be doing aikido.
> The guy is a bloody joke! He is, not the art! And that's not bad, nobody is perfect but you don't post a video on YouTube demonstrating your incompetence and blame it on the art.
> And by the way, I think we should stop trying to decipher what o'sensei wanted, what o'sensei said because o'sensei was saying a lot of things, mostly in Japanese, a long time ago and maybe he was changing his mind every other day. So to claim that o'sensei wanted Aikido to be a supplement of other martial arts skills is at least naive...
> There were people in Aikido that had previous martial arts background and they were close to o'sensei, like Shioda... Neither he, nor Saito or Tohei or whoever ever claimed in any of their books that Aikido needs other martial arts experience in order for it to work... And also in my experience, it doesn't! It is a complete martial art as much as it can get(and so are others too of course).
> One just needs to study hard in order to get Aikido's principles inside Aikido's techniques to make it work. It's all on the individual person, the art is perfect, all martial arts are perfect. The openings and flows we see in them are people's lack of perfection. Believe me I see a lot of this in myself, but I am working on it....



If you are going to suggest something works. You really should show it working.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Oh I agree totally there 100%
> 
> I am not saying that anyone needs Aikido at all sorry if I gave that impression



I don't think people have a real grasp on how fast a real punch comes at you. Whether it is sloppy and telegraphed or not.
.
I am going to have to explain this hard truth. If you get your friend, put a set of 16s on him and get him to hit you. He is easier to deal with than a guy trying to kill you.

So if your technique doesnt work against your friend throwing casual punches. Do not assume it will work when they start thowing 100%

Forwards momentum at speed is not working to your advantage. If you can't handle that dynamic at half speed.

So people get punched by sloppy punches because even though they are terrible and telegraphed. They are still coming too fast to deal with properly.

Aikido doesnt work at half speed because they are trying to squeeze too much crap in to to short a time frame.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> It really isnt that easy. This is why people get hit by them. It just looks easy on a video.


I didn't say they were necessarily easy to counter - just that they make for easy access to aiki responses. Aiki responses aren't magical, so they have the same kinds of technical difficulties you'd expect of any technique.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Well, he's been doing it for ten or so years I think. Maybe it'll work after 20.


This is a common issue I've heard from folks training in Aikido, actually. There's a long learning curve to real proficiency. This is understandable if it was originally intended as a "finishing school" for already competent martial artists, who don't need to get to competency (they already have that) and would probably not take as long to proficiency in Aikido as a true beginner would.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Oh ya, this. I don't know what flavour of aikido you did, so could you post a video of someone doing it in a fight(tournament or otherwise) so that I might compare the two?


As far as I know, Tomiki is the only style that does tournaments.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> When your opponent punches you, he has to put weight on his leading leg. You can either kick that knee, or sweep that leg. The opportunity will always be there.
> 
> If you are good at foot sweep, you can handle almost 80% of your problem. Some techniques are more useful than the other.


80% isn't everything. And I doubt a single technique (other than a straight punch) really fills that much. That sweep won't cover a tackle, shoot, kick from range, or someone whose footwork puts them in range before you can set the sweep. I like a foot sweep, but it's not that universal. If it were, we'd see competitions where the first move was a successful foot sweep over and over.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Ryback said:


> Well I don't know if everything works but most traditional Martial arts have the potential to work if the person practicing them has the skills needed... Aikido, Tai Chi, Wing Chun, Aiki-jutsu, you name it.


This is a dangerous argument, Ryback. How do you define "enough skill"? Someone with enough skill can successfully defend themselves with a saucepan of water. They'll need skill that's entirely unrelated to the saucepan of water, though.



> And of course sparring or combative sports is not the way of the warrior so we don't measure Aikido in such a context...


I've never liked this argument. It's philosophical at best, and specious. What is "the way of the warrior", and who gets to define it? Some martial sports have a background in competition among soldiers during peacetime, and others have a background in people learning to defend themselves and testing their techniques against each other. Sparring is a training tool, and excluding it on philosophical basis is like deciding to leave out an ingredient from a cake because of the color of the box.



> As for sparring or testing or experimenting with an aikidoka... Well, in another thread I saw a YouTube link of someone supposedly using Aikido to fight an MMA guy and completely failing.... So everyone's thoughts are probably "well, Aikido is useless against the MMA guy", but....the fact of the matter is that the aikidoka is lousy in his Aikido. In the whole video his posture is bad, his movements very far away from the Aikido way of moving and, to make matters worse, he is not trying a single Aikido technique, anything!! He looks like he is going for his legs or doing other lousy, monkey mumbo jumbo and he is claiming to be doing aikido.


If you're talking about the one I'm thinking of, you've missed everything important in it - including what the Aikidoka said. It's never going to be useful to try classical Aikido movement against a boxer, and rarely so against a Muay Thai fighter (those being the most common stand-up fighting bases in MMA). 


> And by the way, I think we should stop trying to decipher what o'sensei wanted, what o'sensei said because o'sensei was saying a lot of things, mostly in Japanese, a long time ago and maybe he was changing his mind every other day. So to claim that o'sensei wanted Aikido to be a supplement of other martial arts skills is at least naive...


This conclusion was drawn by some folks with a lot more insight and experience into the art than either of  us. Aikido's culture is to try to follow Ueshiba's teaching. That includes trying to figure out why he made some decisions. Without that, it's just a religion.

And remember as you read this, I actually kinda like Aikido. But you're breaking out the weakest arguments. Understand the limitations of the art, and it can serve you much better. Defend it blindly with rationalization, and you won't be aware of its or your limitations.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Why do you think people get hit by unskilled fighters?


Because punches are simple and have a wide margin for error. Bad punches are still dangerous.

(I know you didn't ask me, but I gotta keep up my post count somehow. )


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I don't think people have a real grasp on how fast a real punch comes at you. Whether it is sloppy and telegraphed or not.
> .
> I am going to have to explain this hard truth. If you get your friend, put a set of 16s on him and get him to hit you. He is easier to deal with than a guy trying to kill you.
> 
> So if your technique doesnt work against your friend throwing casual punches. Do not assume it will work when they start thowing 100%
> 
> Forwards momentum at speed is not working to your advantage. If you can't handle that dynamic at half speed.
> 
> So people get punched by sloppy punches because even though they are terrible and telegraphed. They are still coming too fast to deal with properly.
> 
> Aikido doesnt work at half speed because they are trying to squeeze too much crap in to to short a time frame.


I mostly agree. The only part I disagree with is, "They are still coming too fast to deal with properly." People deal with punches all the time, sometimes quite properly. As ND has often said, it won't be classical Aikido (what I call "dojo Aikido", which focuses on flow and feel), but Aikido can deal with these. The skill needed includes - which I think you're getting at - the ability to recognize and move with a punch. If someone can do a slip on a punch, they're halfway to accessing Aikido techniques (the other half is knowing the techniques).


----------



## now disabled

The way of the warrior is I agree a very very dangerous ground to even step on far less to try and define or put in a place, 

I would suggest that at best most of us are striving on our own paths but as warriors well that I would never say 

And yes Ueshiba's later teachings are not the easiest to get a grip on but maybe that is what he intended to make people strive and study and evaluate their entire time and life in search of what he meant. 

A bit like the search for the holy grail lol


----------



## now disabled

that might be better


----------



## now disabled

ok this is not kotegaeshi  but it is against an clinch ...it is not classical Aikido but it still uses the principles of Aikido


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> that might be better


This is still choreography.

The fact is, without pressure testing, the best you can do is HOPE this works.


----------



## lansao

Martial D said:


> This is still choreography.
> 
> The fact is, without pressure testing, the best you can do is HOPE this works.



I’m not expert in this but have a feeling this would plant the clinchers face into the floor if they didn’t roll with it. Is it dependent on grabbing sleeves? I think slipping off the arm is the biggest risk.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> This is still choreography.
> 
> The fact is, without pressure testing, the best you can do is HOPE this works.




I really do not know why you even bother to post lol as every vid or post gets the same response and then mostly you go on to and have done to slang of recognised shihan etc ...even the vid you did post you obviously had no idea at all that what you were posting was Tomiki Aikido or if you want it precise Shodokan Aikido so why bother why bother at all why not just put anything Aikido related on ignore lol


----------



## now disabled

lansao said:


> I’m not expert in this but have a feeling this would plant the clinchers face into the floor if they didn’t roll with it. Is it dependent on grabbing sleeves? I think slipping off the arm is the biggest risk.




yup the uke knows how to take the breakfall and knows ukemi ...hence it look a bit diff if same move was used on someone who doesn't know


----------



## lansao

now disabled said:


> yup the uke knows how to take the breakfall and knows ukemi ...hence it look a bit diff if same move was used on someone who doesn't know



I feel like it would look like someone clapping with the back of their head and spine as their face gets driven to the ground. I feel like I’ve seen this kind of movement in a UFC fight and it was awful.


----------



## hoshin1600

now disabled said:


> ok this is not kotegaeshi  but it is against an clinch ...it is not classical Aikido but it still uses the principles of Aikido



i am going to go back to my analogy of flying with dino feathers.   this technique looks like it will work. it actually looks really good and maybe it will work with an unskilled person.  but again there are missing factors when we imagine how this will work in our minds.  the missing factor i see is that the uke is doing a horrible clinch.  he is not controlling the head or body.  i went and looked at some Muay Thai videos for comparison and after analyzing the clinch a little more i think the uke is giving too much freedom for Nage to move around.  it makes me wonder if the clinch was tighter could Nage actually do the throw. pressure testing is so important but it has to have the correct parameters.
so perhaps the technique will work but the details need to be worked out other wise the nage will never fully understand if what he is doing works.


----------



## now disabled

lansao said:


> I feel like it would look like someone clapping with the back of their head and spine as their face gets driven to the ground. I feel like I’ve seen this kind of movement in a UFC fight and it was awful.




not exactly but close 

it looks way more flowery as the uke knows one what coming and two can take a break fall and knows ukemi


----------



## Gerry Seymour

lansao said:


> I’m not expert in this but have a feeling this would plant the clinchers face into the floor if they didn’t roll with it. Is it dependent on grabbing sleeves? I think slipping off the arm is the biggest risk.


I'll have to try this out, but I think you're spot on with both points. Techniques like that do have that risk of face-planting. Heck, look for videos of drop seoi nage in Judo competition - even those folks sometimes get an ugly landing out of it. It's a strength and weakness for sutemi waza - there's very little control once you get going, because you commit your whole weight into it. As for the grip, it probably can be done on skin, but sweaty skin would be a problem. I'm sure I can do it without the sleeve grab, so long as the fabric is there to provide grip. Offhand, I'm not sure about doing it without the fabric. It might be possible to get enough purchase in the crook of the elbow to at least get them into a full stumble (sufficient for the purpose, and should provide other opportunities, if only to get up), but I'd need to try it out.


----------



## lansao

gpseymour said:


> I'll have to try this out, but I think you're spot on with both points. Techniques like that do have that risk of face-planting. Heck, look for videos of drop seoi nage in Judo competition - even those folks sometimes get an ugly landing out of it. It's a strength and weakness for sutemi waza - there's very little control once you get going, because you commit your whole weight into it. As for the grip, it probably can be done on skin, but sweaty skin would be a problem. I'm sure I can do it without the sleeve grab, so long as the fabric is there to provide grip. Offhand, I'm not sure about doing it without the fabric. It might be possible to get enough purchase in the crook of the elbow to at least get them into a full stumble (sufficient for the purpose, and should provide other opportunities, if only to get up), but I'd need to try it out.


----------



## now disabled

hoshin1600 said:


> i am going to go back to my analogy of flying with dino feathers.   this technique looks like it will work. it actually looks really good and maybe it will work with an unskilled person.  but again there are missing factors when we imagine how this will work in our minds.  the missing factor i see is that the uke is doing a horrible clinch.  he is not controlling the head or body.  i went and looked at some Muay Thai videos for comparison and after analyzing the clinch a little more i think the uke is giving too much freedom for Nage to move around.  it makes me wonder if the clinch was tighter could Nage actually do the throw. pressure testing is so important but it has to have the correct parameters.
> so perhaps the technique will work but the details need to be worked out other wise the nage will never fully understand if what he is doing works.




I get your point however to actually get a Thai fighter to actually perform as nage well i am not sure on as if it was performed and the uke doesn't or can't take the breakfall or knows how to take ukemi then well it might kinda hurt a person


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> I'll have to try this out, but I think you're spot on with both points. Techniques like that do have that risk of face-planting. Heck, look for videos of drop seoi nage in Judo competition - even those folks sometimes get an ugly landing out of it. It's a strength and weakness for sutemi waza - there's very little control once you get going, because you commit your whole weight into it. As for the grip, it probably can be done on skin, but sweaty skin would be a problem. I'm sure I can do it without the sleeve grab, so long as the fabric is there to provide grip. Offhand, I'm not sure about doing it without the fabric. It might be possible to get enough purchase in the crook of the elbow to at least get them into a full stumble (sufficient for the purpose, and should provide other opportunities, if only to get up), but I'd need to try it out.




Make sure your uke knows how to breakfall and take ukemi and ummm his insurance up to date just in case lol


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> I really do not know why you even bother to post lol as every vid or post gets the same response and then mostly you go on to and have done to slang of recognised shihan etc ...even the vid you did post you obviously had no idea at all that what you were posting was Tomiki Aikido or if you want it precise Shodokan Aikido so why bother why bother at all why not just put anything Aikido related on ignore lol


ND, he's actually making a valid point. Without pressure testing, there's a lot that seems feasible that has big problems. I find that classical training sometimes (perhaps most often) ignores what I call the "failure mode" of a technique: what happens when it fails, and how likely is it to fail. That sutemi waza response from the clinch is a good answer, if the failure mode isn't too dangerous. So, what happens if you fail at that? There are two likely "failure" outcomes: they only stumble badly (not a bad failure mode, probably), or you slip off and end up at their feet (very bad failure mode). How likely are those? It takes some testing, including someone trying to do stuff from clinch and nage trying to pull this off (among other possible responses). Sometimes, uke knowing what's coming makes things harder to do (uke consciously or unconsciously counters the exact move they know is coming), and sometimes it makes them easier to do (uke sometimes unconsciously just starts too early into the fall). This is why, when demonstrating in class, I often only instruct the attack, and don't tell them what response I'm bringing the first time. Not a full solution, but part of one.


----------



## now disabled

I guess the point I am trying to make is that with tweaking and nudging and perseverance Aikido does work and can work (Classical Aikido doesn't for the most part ) 

If lateral thinking is applied then tweaked well the results may surprise.

You will never get a Aikidoka into a MMA ring of cage fight as one they are not trained for it and two for the most part they ain't nuts to think they are lol


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> ND, he's actually making a valid point. Without pressure testing, there's a lot that seems feasible that has big problems. I find that classical training sometimes (perhaps most often) ignores what I call the "failure mode" of a technique: what happens when it fails, and how likely is it to fail. That sutemi waza response from the clinch is a good answer, if the failure mode isn't too dangerous. So, what happens if you fail at that? There are two likely "failure" outcomes: they only stumble badly (not a bad failure mode, probably), or you slip off and end up at their feet (very bad failure mode). How likely are those? It takes some testing, including someone trying to do stuff from clinch and nage trying to pull this off (among other possible responses). Sometimes, uke knowing what's coming makes things harder to do (uke consciously or unconsciously counters the exact move they know is coming), and sometimes it makes them easier to do (uke sometimes unconsciously just starts too early into the fall). This is why, when demonstrating in class, I often only instruct the attack, and don't tell them what response I'm bringing the first time. Not a full solution, but part of one.




Yeah I get that point  and it would be interesting to take that further


----------



## Gerry Seymour

hoshin1600 said:


> i am going to go back to my analogy of flying with dino feathers.   this technique looks like it will work. it actually looks really good and maybe it will work with an unskilled person.  but again there are missing factors when we imagine how this will work in our minds.  the missing factor i see is that the uke is doing a horrible clinch.  he is not controlling the head or body.  i went and looked at some Muay Thai videos for comparison and after analyzing the clinch a little more i think the uke is giving too much freedom for Nage to move around.  it makes me wonder if the clinch was tighter could Nage actually do the throw. pressure testing is so important but it has to have the correct parameters.
> so perhaps the technique will work but the details need to be worked out other wise the nage will never fully understand if what he is doing works.


With a lot of responses like this (the video, not your post), my position is that they are responses right before the worst case scenario. I'd need to feel a good MT clinch (@Tony Dismukes: next time??) to see what I think it leaves available. But as they are moving into the clinch - before they get that last bit of restriction - this would be available. This, by the way, is true of a lot of aiki techniques, in my opinion - they are an answer for right before the worst case, but not right after.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

lansao said:


>


Yep, that's essentially a drop seoi nage (real Judo folks might disagree - I have a loose interpretation of what fits within a technique's name).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> I get your point however to actually get a Thai fighter to actually perform as nage well i am not sure on as if it was performed and the uke doesn't or can't take the breakfall or knows how to take ukemi then well it might kinda hurt a person


Yeah, I'd want someone who knows a MT clinch well, and also knows this kind of ukemi well.


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> With a lot of responses like this (the video, not your post), my position is that they are responses right before the worst case scenario. I'd need to feel a good MT clinch (@Tony Dismukes: next time??) to see what I think it leaves available. But as they are moving into the clinch - before they get that last bit of restriction - this would be available. This, by the way, is true of a lot of aiki techniques, in my opinion - they are an answer for right before the worst case, but not right after.




That is very true it is don't wait for the worst case get your behind in gear before that happens


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, I'd want someone who knows a MT clinch well, and also knows this kind of ukemi well.




It getting all the players in place and that is always the hard bit


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> Make sure your uke knows how to breakfall and take ukemi and ummm his insurance up to date just in case lol


Unfortunately, I don't have an uke for this kind of thing right now. When I visit my old school, I can probably get someone for some basic exploration, but not for full-speed work on this kind of thing with full pressure testing.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> That is very true it is don't wait for the worst case get your behind in gear before that happens


Agreed. Part of the issue I've seen with classical Aikido - as I've seen it taught - is that it doesn't teach enough of what to do to get to those points (striking to control distance and upset timing/balance), nor what to do if you miss them (how to deal with situations where you can't stay so aiki).


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> Unfortunately, I don't have an uke for this kind of thing right now. When I visit my old school, I can probably get someone for some basic exploration, but not for full-speed work on this kind of thing with full pressure testing.




I totally understand that ...and that leads to another thread that in it was mentioned ethics ...as you know the uke might not be able to take it so you as you said will not go full out and that in my view shows something good


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. Part of the issue I've seen with classical Aikido - as I've seen it taught - is that it doesn't teach enough of what to do to get to those points (striking to control distance and upset timing/balance), nor what to do if you miss them (how to deal with situations where you can't stay so aiki).




No it don't as it has got lost in the peace and love and no harm thing (which is ok if that there way ) and always waiting and definitely the atemi is rarely taught and as you say it more than just knowing how to punch kick strike call it as you will ...it why and the reason you have to


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> I really do not know why you even bother to post lol as every vid or post gets the same response and then mostly you go on to and have done to slang of recognised shihan etc ...even the vid you did post you obviously had no idea at all that what you were posting was Tomiki Aikido or if you want it precise Shodokan Aikido so why bother why bother at all why not just put anything Aikido related on ignore lol


LOL there you go again. Look, it's like this; the fact that you are talking about aikido isn't a problem for me. In fact, one of the people I respect most here, and have the most productive discussions with, is primarily an aikido practitioner. 

The problem is you keep making claims but are unable to provide any evidence to support them. At this point you are basically talking religion.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> LOL there you go again. Look, it's like this; the fact that you are talking about aikido isn't a problem for me. In fact, one of the people I respect most here, and have the most productive discussions with, is primarily an aikido practitioner.
> 
> The problem is you keep making claims but are unable to provide any evidence to support them. At this point you are basically talking religion.



Umm I am not you posted a vid and had no idea what you were posting ...I am not getting at you at all 

and religion oh please stop right there as ummm unless you know anything about the oomoto I really would not go there and as I constantly say that atemi and tweaking and yes actually hurt the opponent it is well kinda the opposite to the oomoto lol


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Umm I am not you posted a vid and had no idea what you were posting ...I am not getting at you at all
> 
> and religion oh please stop right there as ummm unless you know anything about the oomoto I really would not go there and as I constantly say that atemi and tweaking and yes actually hurt the opponent it is well kinda the opposite to the oomoto lol


What? The only video I posted was that aikido match, to show that it looks nothing in practice like any of the choreography you have demonstrated.

The thing is I tend to take the science of martial combat quite seriously,and as such I  think faith based martial arts beliefs are antithesis to that and can cause not only stagnation, but real potential danger to those that buy into them. I'd be saying the exact same thing if you practiced ANY style and made logistical claims of effectiveness while acting downright belligerent when probed for actual evidence to support them.


----------



## lansao

Martial D said:


> What? The only video I posted was that aikido match, to show that it looks nothing in practice like any of the choreography you have demonstrated.
> 
> The thing is I tend to take the science of martial combat quite seriously,and as such I  think faith based martial arts beliefs are antithesis to that and can cause not only stagnation, but real potential danger to those that buy into them. I'd be saying the exact same thing if you practiced ANY style and made logistical claims of effectiveness while acting downright belligerent when probed for actual evidence to support them.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> What? The only video I posted was that aikido match, to show that it looks nothing in practice like any of the choreography you have demonstrated.
> 
> The thing is I tend to take the science of martial combat quite seriously,and as such I  think faith based martial arts beliefs are antithesis to that and can cause not only stagnation, but real potential danger to those that buy into them. I'd be saying the exact same thing if you practiced ANY style and made logistical claims of effectiveness while acting downright belligerent when probed for actual evidence to support them.




Yes that vid would look diff as unless you actually know what it is .............and why it is..................then well 

You are entitled to your view of whatever you want to call what you do etc but well if you look deeper then you may find that as you put it religion is involved (I use that word not just in the western sense) and well it is your opinion and we have to agree to disagree


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Yes that vid would look diff as unless you actually know what it is .............and why it is..................then well
> 
> You are entitled to your view of whatever you want to call what you do etc but well if you look deeper then you may find that as you put it religion is involved (I use that word not just in the western sense) and well it is your opinion and we have to agree to disagree


Fair enough. One last thought.

Would you trust a car if all the crash testing was done at 1/10th speed, into padded objects?

I hope the answer is no. Be well


----------



## Tony Dismukes

now disabled said:


> I get your point however to actually get a Thai fighter to actually perform as nage well i am not sure on as if it was performed and the uke doesn't or can't take the breakfall or knows how to take ukemi then well it might kinda hurt a person


There are some of us who know Muay Thai and also can do decent ukemi.



gpseymour said:


> With a lot of responses like this (the video, not your post), my position is that they are responses right before the worst case scenario. I'd need to feel a good MT clinch (@Tony Dismukes: next time??) to see what I think it leaves available. But as they are moving into the clinch - before they get that last bit of restriction - this would be available. This, by the way, is true of a lot of aiki techniques, in my opinion - they are an answer for right before the worst case, but not right after.





gpseymour said:


> Yeah, I'd want someone who knows a MT clinch well, and also knows this kind of ukemi well.



You can try it on me next time you come up.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Tony Dismukes said:


> There are some of us who know Muay Thai and also can do decent ukemi.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can try it on me next time you come up.


I figured I could. You're easy like that.


----------



## now disabled

Tony Dismukes said:


> There are some of us who know Muay Thai and also can do decent ukemi.
> 
> 
> I do not doubt that at all sir and I respect that
> 
> 
> You can try it on me next time you come up.


----------



## hoshin1600

now disabled said:


> I get your point however to actually get a Thai fighter to actually perform as nage well i am not sure on as if it was performed and the uke doesn't or can't take the breakfall or knows how to take ukemi then well it might kinda hurt a person


 Thats kind of a non issue.  MMA guys who do Muay Thai know how to fall.

the bigger question is along the lines of; what is Aikido?  in another thread i posted a Krav Maga  guy doing nikkyo.  is that Aikido?  is that Krav Maga?
the answer is not so obvious.  what is a style?  how do you define it?  if krav, karate, kung -fu, judo and aikido all do the same technique  what style are you doing?
digging into this question it becomes apparent that the techniques do not define the style.
in my training i do kotegaeshi, as well as  ikkyo, nikkko and sankyo but i am not doing aikido.
making a claim that aikido works in the street is not the same as saying kotegaeshi works on the street.  because my kotegaeshi is not the same as aikido, well it is,... but it isn't.  there is something different and it is not the technique per say.  all styles can do the same technique.  is that a validation for aikido if it works for another style?   i think not.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

hoshin1600 said:


> Thats kind of a non issue.  MMA guys who do Muay Thai know how to fall.


Do they know falls from that sort of throw? I ask because I don't know. I'd expect someone from Judo to know that fall, probably most branches of Japanese Jujutsu, Aikido folks should be able to do that if they've experienced it before, but I'm not sure who else has training for those face-first falls to convert them into something safer.



> the bigger question is along the lines of; what is Aikido?  in another thread i posted a Krav Maga  guy doing nikkyo.  is that Aikido?  is that Krav Maga?
> the answer is not so obvious.  what is a style?  how do you define it?  if krav, karate, kung -fu, judo and aikido all do the same technique  what style are you doing?


I like that question. My answer is that the style is bounded by the principles, not the techniques. That doesn't help much, though, because two different Aikidoka can have a different view of how much the philosophy (from Ueshiba's later life) defines the bounds of the art. So, if I do a technique and consider it NGA, it's NGA. If someone does it and considers it KM, it's KM. Same for Aikido, Karate, etc.


> digging into this question it becomes apparent that the techniques do not define the style.
> in my training i do kotegaeshi, as well as  ikkyo, nikkko and sankyo but i am not doing aikido.
> making a claim that aikido works in the street is not the same as saying kotegaeshi works on the street.  because my kotegaeshi is not the same as aikido, well it is,... but it isn't.  there is something different and it is not the technique per say.  all styles can do the same technique.  is that a validation for aikido if it works for another style?   i think not.


Saying any art works is kind of the same issue. If we define the art as the principles, then all we need is to see those principles in action (regardless of their source). If we define the art by its most common training, then we'd need to see someone who developed their skill with that training approach. If the definition includes the techniques (and I think we often include at least key techniques when we define an art), then we'd also need to see some of those key techniques work. What I'm not convinced is that we need to see it look like what we expect training to look like. I can recognize "aiki" in practice in street altercations, even if it doesn't look like what NB calls "classical Aikido". Mind you, what I see as "aiki" in the wild isn't really exclusive to aiki arts - most arts have at least some of it. A fantastic boxing slip-and-counter can be quite "aiki" to my eyes, because of the principles it uses. Is that Aikido? Maybe. I'd call it NGA, and that's part of the original grouping of Aikido (though not the art of Aikido), so to me, it's Aikido.

Okay, I might have had too much coffee.


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> Do they know falls from that sort of throw? I ask because I don't know. I'd expect someone from Judo to know that fall, probably most branches of Japanese Jujutsu, Aikido folks should be able to do that if they've experienced it before, but I'm not sure who else has training for those face-first falls to convert them into something safer.
> 
> 
> I like that question. My answer is that the style is bounded by the principles, not the techniques. That doesn't help much, though, because two different Aikidoka can have a different view of how much the philosophy (from Ueshiba's later life) defines the bounds of the art. So, if I do a technique and consider it NGA, it's NGA. If someone does it and considers it KM, it's KM. Same for Aikido, Karate, etc.
> 
> Saying any art works is kind of the same issue. If we define the art as the principles, then all we need is to see those principles in action (regardless of their source). If we define the art by its most common training, then we'd need to see someone who developed their skill with that training approach. If the definition includes the techniques (and I think we often include at least key techniques when we define an art), then we'd also need to see some of those key techniques work. What I'm not convinced is that we need to see it look like what we expect training to look like. I can recognize "aiki" in practice in street altercations, even if it doesn't look like what NB calls "classical Aikido". Mind you, what I see as "aiki" in the wild isn't really exclusive to aiki arts - most arts have at least some of it. A fantastic boxing slip-and-counter can be quite "aiki" to my eyes, because of the principles it uses. Is that Aikido? Maybe. I'd call it NGA, and that's part of the original grouping of Aikido (though not the art of Aikido), so to me, it's Aikido.
> 
> Okay, I might have had too much coffee.


I'd imagine it's the same with many styles. Sure, some look in practice like they do on the mat, like say bjj mt or boxing, but many dont, which has more to do with the training.

Take a guy like alan orr for example. Many would say what he does 'is not Wing Chun', because he doesn't teach a lot of things that people look at and say 'thats Wing Chun' , like the mansau woosau guard or the rooted stepping footwork or the stationary trunk and head, but to me it's still plainly Wing Chun. It's just wing Chun that's functional for fighting.


----------



## now disabled

hoshin1600 said:


> Thats kind of a non issue.  MMA guys who do Muay Thai know how to fall.
> 
> the bigger question is along the lines of; what is Aikido?  in another thread i posted a Krav Maga  guy doing nikkyo.  is that Aikido?  is that Krav Maga?
> the answer is not so obvious.  what is a style?  how do you define it?  if krav, karate, kung -fu, judo and aikido all do the same technique  what style are you doing?
> digging into this question it becomes apparent that the techniques do not define the style.
> in my training i do kotegaeshi, as well as  ikkyo, nikkko and sankyo but i am not doing aikido.
> making a claim that aikido works in the street is not the same as saying kotegaeshi works on the street.  because my kotegaeshi is not the same as aikido, well it is,... but it isn't.  there is something different and it is not the technique per say.  all styles can do the same technique.  is that a validation for aikido if it works for another style?   i think not.



I only said in the other thread it looked like it was a form of nikkyo ,as that is what I would call it 

As far as ikkyo sankkyo etc I am sure that they exist in other styles I can only say what I would call them and I am not saying that if it is a validation of Aikido in any way. I have said many times that what I call classical Aikido does not work on the street as it parts it is to big circle and to stylized and can get very complicated therefore it will fail as in a street apllication it needs to be cut done and be more direct.

Kotegaeshi is in no way purely an Aikido tech again I can only say what I call it no more it is not trying to validate Aikido at all ...where it came from originally I do not know and I would suspect that it is contained within many systems and Arts


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I mostly agree. The only part I disagree with is, "They are still coming too fast to deal with properly." People deal with punches all the time, sometimes quite properly. As ND has often said, it won't be classical Aikido (what I call "dojo Aikido", which focuses on flow and feel), but Aikido can deal with these. The skill needed includes - which I think you're getting at - the ability to recognize and move with a punch. If someone can do a slip on a punch, they're halfway to accessing Aikido techniques (the other half is knowing the techniques).



I am sure there is a way to deal with fast punches. But not if you are not dealing with slow ones.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> that might be better



He is giving himself more time.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> He is giving himself more time.



in what way are you meaning that?


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> in what way are you meaning that?



As I said before. Generally you are trying to squeeze that throw in in the time it takes to to throw another punch. And that generally doesnt work.

Because he clinches up. The other guy can't throw those punches as easily. So he creates more time to do that throw.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> As I said before. Generally you are trying to squeeze that throw in in the time it takes to to throw another punch. And that generally doesnt work.
> 
> Because he clinches up. The other guy can't throw those punches as easily. So he creates more time to do that throw.




Yeah I agree and that leads to where I say the principles are the same the execution is what is different as in it has been tweaked


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Yeah I agree and that leads to where I say the principles are the same the execution is what is different as in it has been tweaked



The technique is the same. The principles are different.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> The technique is the same. The principles are different.




no I'd say the reverse but I do get what yo mean ...I am just looking at it from a different angle


----------



## Ryback

now disabled said:


> It may be my fault in saying that the striking kicking etc etc was left out ...that was just my own thoughts and observations my friend having spent a good number of years in Aikido and reading learning and in some ways researching and what I did learn was that most if not all of the original students knew how to punch ick etc before they started their Aikido journey and it is my opinion only that Ueshiba did not see the need to include the punching drills etc ...I am not a far from am I having a go at Ueshiba the man was truly a gifted human being and a master of what he did and that is easy to see ...what I am saying is that the post war Aikido was affected by his spiritual thinkings and ways


You are right mate it changed after some time and it was affected by Omoto kyo but as Toshisiro Obata says we don't have to keep o'sensei's image and style only as that of his old age.... 
I'll tell you something very interesting my friend. Before I was studied Aikido I had some background in Fu Jo Pai Kung Fu and in Shotokan Karate, but guess what... My Aikido teacher was the one who actually taught me how to do proper atemi and furthermore how to do correct Mae Geri... Of course, I know it's an exception, Karate people know how to do proper Mae Geri but what I'm trying to say is that we learn how to strike in Aikido, without necessarily having to train in another martial art... But not all schools do that...


----------



## now disabled

Ryback said:


> You are right mate it changed after some time and it was affected by Omoto kyo but as Toshisiro Obata says we don't have to keep o'sensei's image and style only as that of his old age....
> I'll tell you something very interesting my friend. Before I was studied Aikido I had some background in Fu Jo Pai Kung Fu and in Shotokan Karate, but guess what... My Aikido teacher was the one who actually taught me how to do proper atemi and furthermore how to do correct Mae Geri... Of course, I know it's an exception, Karate people know how to do proper Mae Geri but what I'm trying to say is that we learn how to strike in Aikido, without necessarily having to train in another martial art... But not all schools do that...



I fully do understand what yo are saying and I am willing to go further and say that you were taught why you were applying the atemi and mai is very important and especially so from an Aikido perspective


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> no I'd say the reverse but I do get what yo mean ...I am just looking at it from a different angle



There are principles there that are making that technique work. To start with there is the distancing and foot movement to make that jab bigger and easier to manage. Good striking principles.

Then he enters with pressure. Good grappling principles. 

Then when he gets the response he wants he is using aiki.

Three different principles at work. All of them necessary for the technique.


----------



## Ryback

gpseymour said:


> This is a dangerous argument, Ryback. How do you define "enough skill"? Someone with enough skill can successfully defend themselves with a saucepan of water. They'll need skill that's entirely unrelated to the saucepan of water, though.
> 
> 
> I've never liked this argument. It's philosophical at best, and specious. What is "the way of the warrior", and who gets to define it? Some martial sports have a background in competition among soldiers during peacetime, and others have a background in people learning to defend themselves and testing their techniques against each other. Sparring is a training tool, and excluding it on philosophical basis is like deciding to leave out an ingredient from a cake because of the color of the box.
> 
> 
> If you're talking about the one I'm thinking of, you've missed everything important in it - including what the Aikidoka said. It's never going to be useful to try classical Aikido movement against a boxer, and rarely so against a Muay Thai fighter (those being the most common stand-up fighting bases in MMA).
> 
> This conclusion was drawn by some folks with a lot more insight and experience into the art than either of  us. Aikido's culture is to try to follow Ueshiba's teaching. That includes trying to figure out why he made some decisions. Without that, it's just a religion.
> 
> And remember as you read this, I actually kinda like Aikido. But you're breaking out the weakest arguments. Understand the limitations of the art, and it can serve you much better. Defend it blindly with rationalization, and you won't be aware of its or your limitations.





gpseymour said:


> This is a dangerous argument, Ryback. How do you define "enough skill"? Someone with enough skill can successfully defend themselves with a saucepan of water. They'll need skill that's entirely unrelated to the saucepan of water, though.
> 
> 
> I've never liked this argument. It's philosophical at best, and specious. What is "the way of the warrior", and who gets to define it? Some martial sports have a background in competition among soldiers during peacetime, and others have a background in people learning to defend themselves and testing their techniques against each other. Sparring is a training tool, and excluding it on philosophical basis is like deciding to leave out an ingredient from a cake because of the color of the box.
> 
> 
> If you're talking about the one I'm thinking of, you've missed everything important in it - including what the Aikidoka said. It's never going to be useful to try classical Aikido movement against a boxer, and rarely so against a Muay Thai fighter (those being the most common stand-up fighting bases in MMA).
> 
> This conclusion was drawn by some folks with a lot more insight and experience into the art than either of  us. Aikido's culture is to try to follow Ueshiba's teaching. That includes trying to figure out why he made some decisions. Without that, it's just a religion.
> 
> And remember as you read this, I actually kinda like Aikido. But you're breaking out the weakest arguments. Understand the limitations of the art, and it can serve you much better. Defend it blindly with rationalization, and you won't be aware of its or your limitations.


I follow nothing blindly, on the contrary I'm studying pretty hard and my conclusions are based on my experience... There is no limitation in any martial art... The only limiting factor is each individual person's skill... But how can you define skill? Well, you've got Aikido skills, when you are good in Aikido. What's so difficult about it?
Having understood that it saves me the excuses of blaming the art and makes me work harder... Maybe more people should do that...


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> There are principles there that are making that technique work. To start with there is the distancing and foot movement to make that jab bigger and easier to manage. Good striking principles.
> 
> Then he enters with pressure. Good grappling principles.
> 
> Then when he gets the response he wants he is using aiki.
> 
> hmmm not my thinking on aiki but yes I guess that is how it looks
> 
> Three different principles at work. All of them necessary for the technique.


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> You are right mate it changed after some time and it was affected by Omoto kyo but as Toshisiro Obata says we don't have to keep o'sensei's image and style only as that of his old age....
> I'll tell you something very interesting my friend. Before I was studied Aikido I had some background in Fu Jo Pai Kung Fu and in Shotokan Karate, but guess what... My Aikido teacher was the one who actually taught me how to do proper atemi and furthermore how to do correct Mae Geri... Of course, I know it's an exception, Karate people know how to do proper Mae Geri but what I'm trying to say is that we learn how to strike in Aikido, without necessarily having to train in another martial art... But not all schools do that...



Correct Mae geri is defined by their effect.

So if you can jump in the ring and buckle a kickboxers leg without getting bashed. You are throwing correct Mae geri.

I get the impression you think there is some sort of superior technique that makes the difference. And it is less important than a lot of other factors.


----------



## drop bear

Yeah. You guys have some mystical super hard to explain Aiki.

I just call it good timing.

If it is any consolation there is also mystical super hard to explain pressure as well. If you have the trick of it.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Correct Mae geri is defined by their effect.
> 
> So if you can jump in the ring and buckle a kickboxers leg without getting bashed. You are throwing correct Mae geri.
> 
> I get the impression you think there is some sort of superior technique that makes the difference. And it is less important than a lot of other factors.





I don't think he is 

Mai is a very important principle in Aikido if not one of the first things taught it is up there ...as from that everything else comes ...I dunno if that makes sense


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> I follow nothing blindly, on the contrary I'm studying pretty hard and my conclusions are based on my experience... There is no limitation in any martial art... The only limiting factor is each individual person's skill... But how can you define skill? Well, you've got Aikido skills, when you are good in Aikido. What's so difficult about it?
> Having understood that it saves me the excuses of blaming the art and makes me work harder... Maybe more people should do that...



You should spend time on what works. If you want what you do to work.

This means abandoning preconceived ideas like your method will work if you just try hard enough.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> I don't think he is
> 
> Mai is a very important principle in Aikido if not one of the first things taught it is up there ...as from that everything else comes ...I dunno if that makes sense



We are talking about a round kick right?

Sorry front kicks.

Yeah sort of? there is a trick to dropping people with them.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> We are talking about a round kick right?
> 
> Sorry front kicks.
> 
> Yeah sort of? there is a trick to dropping people with them.




No sir, I wasn't


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> No sir, I wasn't



My japanese terminology isn't very good. 

Front kick right?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> Yeah. You guys have some mystical super hard to explain Aiki.
> 
> I just call it good timing.


Is Aiki as simple as "apply force in one direction, suddenly reverse the direction"? All wrestling art use that principle.


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> As for sparring or testing or experimenting with an aikidoka... Well, in another thread I saw a YouTube link of someone supposedly using Aikido to fight an MMA guy and completely failing.... So everyone's thoughts are probably "well, Aikido is useless against the MMA guy", but....the fact of the matter is that the aikidoka is lousy in his Aikido. In the whole video his posture is bad, his movements very far away from the Aikido way of moving and, to make matters worse, he is not trying a single Aikido technique, anything!! He looks like he is going for his legs or doing other lousy, monkey mumbo jumbo and he is claiming to be doing aikido.
> The guy is a bloody joke! He is, not the art! And that's not bad, nobody is perfect but you don't post a video on YouTube demonstrating your incompetence and blame it on the art.



And Lets just call this one while we are here.

This was the guys training history.





He put the work rate in. There was something wrong with his system.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Is Aiki as simple as "apply force in one direction, suddenly reverse the direction"? All wrestling art use that principle.



Aparently not.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Is Aiki as simple as "apply force in one direction, suddenly reverse the direction"? All wrestling art use that principle.




simple answer nope


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> simple answer nope


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> And Lets just call this one while we are here.
> 
> This was the guys training history.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He put the work rate in. There was something wrong with his system.





Yes he has moved on a bit has got a bit disillusioned and has said so but what he is saying essentially is correct  

He came from what I have seen of him and his techs etc the Iwama style  ...might be wrong though


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


>




yeah I guess so


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Yes he has moved on a bit has got a bit disillusioned and has said so but what he is saying essentially is correct
> 
> He came from what I have seen of him and his techs etc the Iwama style  ...might be wrong though



He started aplying scientific method to his martial art. And martial arts tend to fall apart when that happens. It happens to a lot of guys when they either fight or start a sport. Happened to me.

It happens when you go from pads and drills to sparring.

It happens when you go from sparring to a fight.

Which is why people get mashed in sparring for stupid reasons. For example the other guy just might be really tough. And If you don't factor that in your ten years of technique gets overcome.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> He started aplying scientific method to his martial art. And martial arts tend to fall apart when that happens. It happens to a lot of guys when they either fight or start a sport. Happened to me.
> 
> Which is why people get mashed in sparring for stupid reasons. For example the other guy just might be really tough. And If you don't factor that in your ten years of technique gets overcome.




I guess for me it a live in the moment not what might be or has been but what is


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> yeah I guess so



You are welcome to find a better one.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> I guess for me it a live in the moment not what might be or has been but what is



I dont understand.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> You are welcome to find a better one.


 No I wasn't meaning that at all


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> I dont understand.




Ok  

If it totally blind encounter  as it were then it don't assume don't expect and don't get drawn look at the here the now and what he is giving not what he might or might not go with what he does


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


>


In CMA, that's called "lead your opponent into the emptiness".

Your opponent shoots at your leading leg. You pull your leading leg back and your opponent kisses the dirt.


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In CMA, that's called "lead your opponent into the emptiness".




There ya go different terminology same thing


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Ok
> 
> If it totally blind encounter  as it were then it don't assume don't expect and don't get drawn look at the here the now and what he is giving not what he might or might not go with what he does



That is a different concept to just having a tool box of reliable methods based on real world factors.

People train what they would like to happen. (people like to be comfortable)

And not what actually does happen.

Like street punch argument. Where if your technique doesn't actually work anywhere in training. It will still probably work in the street.

That way you can continue to be justified in your badassery without ever having to be a bad ***.

And this happens a bit if someone say takes up kickboxing from a TMA background.

You have crisper better technique than gumby who has been training 6 months. But 30 seconds in you are done and getting your head kicked in because you never trained your will game.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> In CMA, that's called "lead your opponent into the emptiness".
> 
> Your opponent shoots at your leading leg. You pull your leading leg back and your opponent kisses the dirt.



I mentioned once sprawls were Aiki.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> That is a different concept to just having a tool box of reliable methods based on real world factors.
> 
> People train what they would like to happen. (people like to be comfortable)
> 
> And not what actually does happen.
> 
> Like street punch argument. Where if your technique doesn't actually work anywhere in training. It will still probably work in the street.
> 
> That way you can continue to be justified in your badassery without ever having to be a bad ***.



not my take on it but I fully accept your view 

and I am no badass lol never have been never will be I'm just me and opinions vary on that lol


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Ryback said:


> I follow nothing blindly, on the contrary I'm studying pretty hard and my conclusions are based on my experience... There is no limitation in any martial art... The only limiting factor is each individual person's skill... But how can you define skill? Well, you've got Aikido skills, when you are good in Aikido. What's so difficult about it?
> Having understood that it saves me the excuses of blaming the art and makes me work harder... Maybe more people should do that...


There are limitations in EVERY martial art.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Is Aiki as simple as "apply force in one direction, suddenly reverse the direction"? All wrestling art use that principle.


No, though it sometimes expresses that way. There's no single part of aiki that you can't find in other arts. You can probably find all parts of aiki in more than one art. The only difference for aiki-oriented arts is that they focus more on it.

For the principle you mention, the difference in a truly aiki approach would be there would never be resistance by the proponent. As soon as they feel any opposing force, they move with it. With rare exception, aiki approach doesn't initiate the movement, where wrestling (and Judo, etc.) will.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I mentioned once sprawls were Aiki.


Can be, certainly.


----------



## Ryback

drop bear said:


> You should spend time on what works. If you want what you do to work.
> 
> This means abandoning preconceived ideas like your method will work if you just try hard enough.


As I said already I have no preconceived ideas, my ideas come from my experience and my experience comes from studying hard day-in, day-out, no days off, no bloody Sundays. 
So, what's your experience with Aikido then?


----------



## O'Malley

now disabled said:


> He came from what I have seen of him and his techs etc the Iwama style  ...might be wrong though



Having practiced both Iwama and Aikikai, I can say that the Rokas guy from AikidoSiauliai/AikidoJourney is definitely not Iwama (nor any of the older styles of aikido). He looks like a shodan (1st degree BB) from a modern school of aikido.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> Is Aiki as simple as "apply force in one direction, suddenly reverse the direction"? All wrestling art use that principle.



This is not a definition of aiki. This is a definition of the "ju no ri" of judo (pull when pushed, push when pulled), at least in my understanding of ju no ri. Aikido can also make use of this concept (particularly in dynamic situations) but it is not aiki. I would like to add that given the number of high-level judoka (and other martial artists) that were thrashed by Osensei and described his strength as "a mysterious force that is impossible to resist against", I doubt that they would have had this impression from an application of the most basic judo principle (the same discourse can be applied to Yukiyoshi Sagawa and Sokaku Takeda).

While in a real situation it will be applied upon contact (creating "instant kuzushi"), aiki at its most basic levels is trained in static situations and does not rely on timing. Here is the kokyu ho exercise, which has been called "the secret to aiki" by aiki's best exponents and can be trained from both static and dynamic POVs:






Based on quotes from Morihei Ueshiba, Yukiyoshi Sagawa and some contemporary sources (that demonstrate, for example, that Osensei was using the same terminology and imagery as the ones used in the Tai Chi Classics), my current understanding of the concept of "aiki" would be as follows (I will expose here the different aspects/levels that I can think of, even though they ultimately overlap):

- the ability to manifest a tension between opposing forces within the body (extension-contraction, gravity-ground reaction force, etc.)
- the ability to absorb external force into the center, make it rebound into the ground and send it back through physical contact, nullifying the force of an opponent thanks to "non-resistance"
- the ability to redirect the nullified force by tackling it at a perpendicular angle (we use circular or spiral movements so that the force applied to the point of contact is in a direction that is tangent to the circle, thus perpendicular to the force of the opponent)
- the ability to focus whole-body power into one movement (this, in conjunction with the use of momentum, forms what is called "kokyu-ryoku")

I'm purposefully leaving out the spiritual/tactical aspects (being one with the universe, "filling" the voids that the opponent makes within his own guard when he moves, etc.) because, as you see, it is a really convoluted, complex, and holistic principle and the best one can hope for is to make artificial distinctions such as the ones above.

Some styles/teachers focus more on some aspects (Ki Society focuses a lot on push tests and what can be linked to the two first aspects, while the kokyu bit is emphasised in Iwama and Yoshinkan, etc.).

Based on videos, Osensei seemed to focus on a more dynamic application of aiki compared to the Daito ryu guys (what Iwama guys call "ki no nagare") and that might be the thing that led to the confusion that aiki is "good timing" or that aiki is "ju no ri" (or "blending"...). But he was on a different level also in terms of perception and reflexes. Leaving out the stories where he reportedly dodged bullets, he was able to catch the punch of a pro-boxer (Piston Horiguchi) and pull him to the ground with the first technique in this video:






There's so much more to aiki that frankly I can't wrap my mind around it.

For a more contemporary example of good technique, relaxation, non-resistance, connection and of how the power can be transmitted from the hips to the hands via a relaxed structure, I really like Ryuji Sawa's aikido (he's from the Iwama school where, although they don't do full-on sparring, uke is told to resist fully to the technique):


----------



## now disabled

O'Malley said:


> Having practiced both Iwama and Aikikai, I can say that the Rokas guy from AikidoSiauliai/AikidoJourney is definitely not Iwama (nor any of the older styles of aikido). He looks like a shodan (1st degree BB) from a modern school of aikido.




 Ok but I can see Iwama in him for sure and I trained there lol, mind you as he has kinda gone on a diff line and has been around quite a few different teachers then maybe he is an amalgam  ... as for his rank I do not know but he certainly does not teach all the 6 techs mind you there are many schools that don't teach all 6


----------



## Ryback

O'Malley said:


> Having practiced both Iwama and Aikikai, I can say that the Rokas guy from AikidoSiauliai/AikidoJourney is definitely not Iwama (nor any of the older styles of aikido). He looks like a shodan (1st degree BB) from a modern school of aikido.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a definition of aiki. This is a definition of the "ju no ri" of judo (pull when pushed, push when pulled), at least in my understanding of ju no ri. Aikido can also make use of this concept (particularly in dynamic situations) but it is not aiki. I would like to add that given the number of high-level judoka (and other martial artists) that were thrashed by Osensei and described his strength as "a mysterious force that is impossible to resist against", I doubt that they would have had this impression from an application of the most basic judo principle (the same discourse can be applied to Yukiyoshi Sagawa and Sokaku Takeda).
> 
> While in a real situation it will be applied upon contact (creating "instant kuzushi"), aiki at its most basic levels is trained in static situations and does not rely on timing. Here is the kokyu ho exercise, which has been called "the secret to aiki" by aiki's best exponents and can be trained from both static and dynamic POVs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on quotes from Morihei Ueshiba, Yukiyoshi Sagawa and some contemporary sources (that demonstrate, for example, that Osensei was using the same terminology and imagery as the ones used in the Tai Chi Classics), my current understanding of the concept of "aiki" would be as follows (I will expose here the different aspects/levels that I can think of, even though they ultimately overlap):
> 
> - the ability to manifest a tension between opposing forces within the body (extension-contraction, gravity-ground reaction force, etc.)
> - the ability to absorb external force into the center, make it rebound into the ground and send it back through physical contact, nullifying the force of an opponent thanks to "non-resistance"
> - the ability to redirect the nullified force by tackling it at a perpendicular angle (we use circular or spiral movements so that the force applied to the point of contact is in a direction that is tangent to the circle, thus perpendicular to the force of the opponent)
> - the ability to focus whole-body power into one movement (this, in conjunction with the use of momentum, forms what is called "kokyu-ryoku")
> 
> I'm purposefully leaving out the spiritual/tactical aspects (being one with the universe, "filling" the voids that the opponent makes within his own guard when he moves, etc.) because, as you see, it is a really convoluted, complex, and holistic principle and the best one can hope for is to make artificial distinctions such as the ones above.
> 
> Some styles/teachers focus more on some aspects (Ki Society focuses a lot on push tests and what can be linked to the two first aspects, while the kokyu bit is emphasised in Iwama and Yoshinkan, etc.).
> 
> Based on videos, Osensei seemed to focus on a more dynamic application of aiki compared to the Daito ryu guys (what Iwama guys call "ki no nagare") and that might be the thing that led to the confusion that aiki is "good timing" or that aiki is "ju no ri" (or "blending"...). But he was on a different level also in terms of perception and reflexes. Leaving out the stories where he reportedly dodged bullets, he was able to catch the punch of a pro-boxer (Piston Horiguchi) and pull him to the ground with the first technique in this video:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's so much more to aiki that frankly I can't wrap my mind around it.
> 
> For a more contemporary example of good technique, relaxation, non-resistance, connection and of how the power can be transmitted from the hips to the hands via a relaxed structure, I really like Ryuji Sawa's aikido (he's from the Iwama school where, although they don't do full-on sparring, uke is told to resist fully to the technique):


Very nice post about Aiki as a principle... Although it can be expressed through timing it is a whole different thing... 
There are numerous ways of practice and tests that we do in our dojo to explore how good is each one of us in manifesting Kokyu, Ki power that are essential to the application of Aiki and most of them are static, therefore it has nothing to do with timing... 
Aiki principle is absolutely necessary in order to make Aikido work and that's why most people can't understand that it is actually effective...


----------



## O'Malley

While I do agree that aikido has a fantastic potential, criticism regarding its effectiveness is justified in a sense: so far no modern exponent of the art has been able to show it working against a resisting opponent. While it's great in theory, if you cannot show it working, it's all talk...


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> Aiki principle is absolutely necessary in order to make Aikido work and that's why most people can't understand that it is actually effective...



What does aikido that is 'actually effective' look like? I assume you mean effective for fighting? I'm really not trying to be antagonistic here, but I've never seen anything that ''looks like' any of the many many cooperative demos I've seen in any sort of live sparring, fighting, or competition. Is it possible that it look so different in practice I just can't recognise it?

Surely that's more likely than an effective martial system practiced by millions NEVER being caught in action in a world where every single person carries a high res video camera in their pocket?


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> What does aikido that is 'actually effective' look like? I assume you mean effective for fighting? I'm really not trying to be antagonistic here, but I've never seen anything that ''looks like' any of the many many cooperative demos I've seen in any sort of live sparring, fighting, or competition. Is it possible that it look so different in practice I just can't recognise it?
> 
> Surely that's more likely than an effective martial system practiced by millions NEVER being caught in action in a world where every single person carries a high res video camera in their pocket?




Firstly before I say anything and you start yelling I am getting at you....................I am not 

You make me really laugh as it the same thing you say time after time after time 

Anyone the posts anything positive about Aikido or how they view it you jump on them 

as you stae you have an Aikidoka as a friend why don't you get on the mat with a vid camera and do vids then post them and we can all see how effective you are against things


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Firstly before I say anything and you start yelling I am getting at you....................I am not
> 
> You make me really laugh as it the same thing you say time after time after time
> 
> Anyone the posts anything positive about Aikido or how they view it you jump on them
> 
> as you stae you have an Aikidoka as a friend why don't you get on the mat with a vid camera and do vids then post them and we can all see how effective you are against things


Ok. That doesn't at all answer my question, but thanks for responding I guess.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Ok. That doesn't at all answer my question, but thanks for responding I guess.



You ask the same time after time after time 

If you are so sure as you seem to be then go out and find the eveidence yourself you keep saying the same things so if you are so sure of that then go do an expose and let the whole world see instead of saying the same again and again and again 

You obviously have massive insight into Aikido that you claim it doesn't work so why not go prove it ...it that simple


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> You ask the same time after time after time
> 
> If you are so sure as you seem to be then go out and find the eveidence yourself you keep saying the same things so if you are so sure of that then go do an expose and let the whole world see instead of saying the same again and again and again
> 
> You obviously have massive insight into Aikido that you claim it doesn't work so why not go prove it ...it that simple


Can you try to focus here? I just don't care what you think of me. Every single thing you've said here is about me, not the topic. Is it your attention span that is disabled?

All I've done is ask reasonable questions. Answer them or go away.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Can you try to focus here? I just don't care what you think of me. Every single thing you've said here is about me, not the topic. Is it your attention span that is disabled?
> 
> All I've done is ask reasonable questions. Answer them or go away.




Yes the last post was focused on you as you jump on every Aikidoka ...even have the audacity to slang of recognised masters and keep demanding video evidence . In the past you haul out that I am getting at you and even tried to be smart in a post and quoted a sword saint (incidentally do you know which book of the go rin no sho that comes from?) now your saying I my attention span is disabled

For your information I am disabled cause I got blown up and shot ok ...so yes sir I have faced combat and did for 15 years so don't you dare roll out the crap on disablement 

As I said you are so sure that Aikido doesn't work ...why don't you go out and prove same instead of jumping on everyone and anyone that says anything positive about Aikido 

If you had actually read I have never said that classical Aikido was effective I said the principles are and if you cannot get those principles then that is down to you no one else


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Can you try to focus here? I just don't care what you think of me. Every single thing you've said here is about me, not the topic. Is it your attention span that is disabled?
> 
> All I've done is ask reasonable questions. Answer them or go away.




What no come back on the disabled bit ??? 

Come on start on that ...and say I am getting at you 

No true martial Artist would ever say that to a person as part of any Martial ethos is respect regardless 

report me if you must and get me banned for all these personal insults I have directed at you


----------



## now disabled

And for others info I was in a landy that hit a IED I got out 3 of my mates didn't and the other guy that was with us took his own life because he couldn't take the stress of what had happened.

My whole body got put through the ringer so that is why I am disabled


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> Yes the last post was focused on you as you jump on every Aikidoka ...even have the audacity to slang of recognised masters and keep demanding video evidence . In the past you haul out that I am getting at you and even tried to be smart in a post and quoted a sword saint (incidentally do you know which book of the go rin no sho that comes from?) now your saying I my attention span is disabled
> 
> For your information I am disabled cause I got blown up and shot ok ...so yes sir I have faced combat and did for 15 years so don't you dare roll out the crap on disablement
> 
> As I said you are so sure that Aikido doesn't work ...why don't you go out and prove same instead of jumping on everyone and anyone that says anything positive about Aikido
> 
> If you had actually read I have never said that classical Aikido was effective I said the principles are and if you cannot get those principles then that is down to you no one else


You are on ignore until such a time as you show you are capable of reasonable conversation.


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> As I said already I have no preconceived ideas, my ideas come from my experience and my experience comes from studying hard day-in, day-out, no days off, no bloody Sundays.
> So, what's your experience with Aikido then?



I have spoken to Paul Cale about it. His issues kind of reflect MMA vs Aikido guys issues which seem to be consistent with any Aikido guy who can actually demonstratively make any martial art work.

Shibucho Paul Cale – Kudo Australia

I would have to see something work before I invest time and money in it.

Can you make aikido work? Can anybody do it on video and then explain it.

I mean there is no shortage of aikido video. These guys are not hiding out. It is just the lack of demonstrated with resistance that makes me not want to put the day in day out no Sundays. 

And potentially get no result.


----------



## Martial D

Does anyone else have the answer to these questions of mine? 

IF this is a combat effective system, what does it look like in practice?

If it looks the same as the cooperative demos, where is the footage of it working in either sparring, fighting, or competition?

Sometimes an absence of evidence is the same as evidence of absence.


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> What does aikido that is 'actually effective' look like? I assume you mean effective for fighting? I'm really not trying to be antagonistic here, but I've never seen anything that ''looks like' any of the many many cooperative demos I've seen in any sort of live sparring, fighting, or competition. Is it possible that it look so different in practice I just can't recognise it?
> 
> Surely that's more likely than an effective martial system practiced by millions NEVER being caught in action in a world where every single person carries a high res video camera in their pocket?


The effectiveness of a martial art has nothing to do with sports fighting or sparring, that's a game with rules and referees... 
Most Aikidoka I know (myself included) would try to stay out of harms way by avoiding any conflict and when it ever happens, believe me, I won't stop to make sure that my cellphone's camera is recording in order to satisfy people on YouTube or any forum... 
As a matter of fact, I wouldn't like any witnesses around...


----------



## Ryback

drop bear said:


> I have spoken to Paul Cale about it. His issues kind of reflect MMA vs Aikido guys issues which seem to be consistent with any Aikido guy who can actually demonstratively make any martial art work.
> 
> Shibucho Paul Cale – Kudo Australia
> 
> I would have to see something work before I invest time and money in it.
> 
> Can you make aikido work? Can anybody do it on video and then explain it.
> 
> I mean there is no shortage of aikido video. These guys are not hiding out. It is just the lack of demonstrated with resistance that makes me not want to put the day in day out no Sundays.
> 
> And potentially get no result.


What do you mean by resistance? Putting all of your strength in order to stop the aikidoka from applying a technique? That would be a huge mistake for two reasons. 
Firstly because if the attacker (Uke)  does that the technique is actually applied easier, I've tried it millions of times... 
And secondly, because it is very dangerous to do such a thing, something will be dislocated, broken or worse. 
If on the other hand, by resistance you mean relaxing in order to be able to re-attack or apply another technique as a counter technique, then that's fine and we practice that every day, although I wouldn't call it resistance (it's actually kaeshi waza).
The reason that we do not often see kaeshi waza in demos is probably because most Aikidoka want to demonstrate a set of clear techniques. Or at least that's my conclusion, I don't do public demos and I don't film myself because I don't think it accomplishes anything... It's not something bad, it's simply not my cup of tea...


----------



## Ryback

O'Malley said:


> While I do agree that aikido has a fantastic potential, criticism regarding its effectiveness is justified in a sense: so far no modern exponent of the art has been able to show it working against a resisting opponent. While it's great in theory, if you cannot show it working, it's all talk...


As I said in another post, define resistance. Usually there is a misunderstanding with this term. 
Resistance is putting effort and strength in order to stop the technique from happening... Well, that will never happen. If the Uke resists the Tori will apply the technique much easier and the Uke will get injured... 
Now if we are talking about counter attacking or doing a counter technique it is part of Aikido anyway. 
If you mean that the attack should be firm and strong in the beginning, again that's how we do it... 
In demos people are trying to show a nice, clean way of applying the techniques because it's simply a demonstration of the art, not a real self defense situation...


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> The effectiveness of a martial art has nothing to do with sports fighting or sparring, that's a game with rules and referees...
> Most Aikidoka I know (myself included) would try to stay out of harms way by avoiding any conflict and when it ever happens, believe me, I won't stop to make sure that my cellphone's camera is recording in order to satisfy people on YouTube or any forum...
> As a matter of fact, I wouldn't like any witnesses around...


So, all we have to go on is your very strong assertions that this stuff ought to work, but there is literally no evidence, anywhere, to support said assertions. Gotcha.


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> What do you mean by resistance? Putting all of your strength in order to stop the aikidoka from applying a technique? That would be a huge mistake for two reasons.
> Firstly because if the attacker (Uke)  does that the technique is actually applied easier, I've tried it millions of times...
> And secondly, because it is very dangerous to do such a thing, something will be dislocated, broken or worse.
> If on the other hand, by resistance you mean relaxing in order to be able to re-attack or apply another technique as a counter technique, then that's fine and we practice that every day, although I wouldn't call it resistance (it's actually kaeshi waza).
> The reason that we do not often see kaeshi waza in demos is probably because most Aikidoka want to demonstrate a set of clear techniques. Or at least that's my conclusion, I don't do public demos and I don't film myself because I don't think it accomplishes anything... It's not something bad, it's simply not my cup of tea...



I can punch a guy who is putting all his strength into trying to stop me and not be dangerous. I can throw a guy and not be dangerous. I can do chokes and neck cranks and arm bars and heel hooks and wrist locks.

But you can't do a wrist lock without them either collapsing on you ripping their arm off.

So basically you can't do anything that would provide any sort of empirical evidence.

And your own conclusions are not drawn from any sort of empirical evidence.

I can see what that guy from the Aikido vs video is on about.


----------



## drop bear

What is aikido supposed to do by the way?

Because I can do MMA more safely. Which still blows my mind.


----------



## O'Malley

Ryback said:


> As I said in another post, define resistance. Usually there is a misunderstanding with this term.
> Resistance is putting effort and strength in order to stop the technique from happening... Well, that will never happen. If the Uke resists the Tori will apply the technique much easier and the Uke will get injured...
> Now if we are talking about counter attacking or doing a counter technique it is part of Aikido anyway.
> If you mean that the attack should be firm and strong in the beginning, again that's how we do it...
> In demos people are trying to show a nice, clean way of applying the techniques because it's simply a demonstration of the art, not a real self defense situation...



Ok, let's rephrase it.

No modern exponent of the art has been filmed while successfully dealing with a competent attacker in a live situation (meaning that the attacker is allowed to throw whatever he wants, when he wants, including feints and combos). These days, you only see kata, even during so-called 'randori'.


----------



## pdg

drop bear said:


> What is aikido supposed to do by the way?



Kill instantly.

That's why there's no video - only survivors get to publish video.



drop bear said:


> Because I can do MMA more safely. Which still blows my mind.



You're not doing it right.


----------



## drop bear

O'Malley said:


> Ok, let's rephrase it.
> 
> No modern exponent of the art has been filmed while successfully dealing with a competent attacker in a live situation (meaning that the attacker is allowed to throw whatever he wants, when he wants, including feints and combos). These days, you only see kata, even during so-called 'randori'.



So I looked up kageshi waza. Is this accurate?


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> So I looked up kageshi waza. Is this accurate?




Kaeshi waza means counter techniques and it not just in Aikido it means that


----------



## drop bear

I have done kotegeshi in fights by the way. It cranks the arm but doesn't really get the throw. So i have probably hurt people with it. But not effectively advanced my position much. And not hurt them so they collapse. 

When I did it in training people flipped over fine because they knew what was coming. Which is why I thought it should work. 

I use it a lot for stripping weapons. Which was predominantly glasses. But have done the occasional knife. And once a cigarette packet by mistake.

I can do kotageshi in sparring if the other guy is terrible. But then I have more than one speed.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Kaeshi waza means counter techniques and it not just in Aikido it means that



Yeah aparently it is judo as well.
 But is it still coreographed?

rather than say flow wrestling.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> I have done kotegeshi in fights by the way. It cranks the arm but doesn't really get the throw. So i have probably hurt people with it. But not effectively advanced my position much. And not hurt them so they collapse.
> 
> When I did it in training people flipped over fine because they knew what was coming. Which is why I thought it should work.
> 
> I use it a lot for stripping weapons. Which was predominantly glasses. But have done the occasional knife. And once a cigarette packet by mistake.
> 
> I can do kotageshi in sparring if the other guy is terrible. But then I have more than one speed.



In a dojo yup there is a very good chance the person will flip esp in you use the classical tech and use the big circle version , however if you go smaller and quicker and more direct then the flip as you put it need not happen. Kotegaeshi is not necessarily a throw ,,,yes in the training videos it looks that way but that is really the uke taking the breakfall ...Kotegaeshi isn't by any means the finish in itself as if imo you do so you follow up ...with whatever you want to follow up with or you use the pin.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Yeah aparently it is judo as well.
> But is it still coreographed?
> 
> rather than say flow wrestling.




All training is that way


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> I have done kotegeshi in fights by the way. It cranks the arm but doesn't really get the throw. So i have probably hurt people with it. But not effectively advanced my position much. And not hurt them so they collapse.
> 
> When I did it in training people flipped over fine because they knew what was coming. Which is why I thought it should work.
> 
> I use it a lot for stripping weapons. Which was predominantly glasses. But have done the occasional knife. And once a cigarette packet by mistake.
> 
> I can do kotageshi in sparring if the other guy is terrible. But then I have more than one speed.




Also kotegaeshi is not just an Aikido tech it is in many many arts not just Aikido


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> In a dojo yup there is a very good chance the person will flip esp in you use the classical tech and use the big circle version , however if you go smaller and quicker and more direct then the flip as you put it need not happen. Kotegaeshi is not necessarily a throw ,,,yes in the training videos it looks that way but that is really the uke taking the breakfall ...Kotegaeshi isn't by any means the finish in itself as if imo you do so you follow up ...with whatever you want to follow up with or you use the pin.



Which is why I like to work through the clinch beacuse you are throwing your head at their back hand with both your hands tied up.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Also kotegaeshi is not just an Aikido tech it is in many many arts not just Aikido



Yeah I have done a few different versions.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> All training is that way



Could you try to find a good Aikido example.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Which is why I like to work through the clinch beacuse you are throwing your head at their back hand with both your hands tied up.




you mean when doing kotegaeshi ??? if so then you doing something you do not need to


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> you mean when doing kotegaeshi ??? if so then you doing something you do not need to



Position before submission.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Could you try to find a good Aikido example.



If you are meaning a street fight there is only one I know of and it was posted before 

there are vids of Aikidoka going up against tkd guys but that will not look like Aikido as you probably think of it as really what you see in the vids online is mostly the same small group of techs all the time and they are the ones that look good at demos and are performed in the classical genre 

The closest I have seen to a more shortened version of Aikido and more direct online is probably Leny sly's vids ...if you can get past him and his ummm ways lol ...


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Position before submission.




ok 

To me if I put a guy down using kotegaeshi I'd be following it up pretty rapidly with serious atemi and then go for a pin (well maybe depending on the situation)


----------



## O'Malley

In the Iwama school, kaeshi waza are used as 'keys' for proper technique. If you miss one detail that jeopardizes the effectiveness of your technique, uke does a kaeshi waza and you bite the dust. Then you know which detail you missed. For example, if you step forward too early when doing ikkyo, uke is able to do a single leg takedown. With proper technique, he's down before you step forward and the step sends him to the ground.

For this reason, kaeshi waza are taught at the level where one can become a teacher, to make sure proper technique is handed down to the students.

At high level, it can also be used in some kind of flow-sparring, I guess.

Btw the reason why we keep the connection when tori does a technique is that we are looking for an opening for kaeshi waza.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> ok
> 
> To me if I put a guy down using kotegaeshi I'd be following it up pretty rapidly with serious atemi and then go for a pin (well maybe depending on the situation)



If I was using serious atemi. I wouldn't bother with kotegeshi. I would put them down with atemi.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> If you are meaning a street fight there is only one I know of and it was posted before
> 
> there are vids of Aikidoka going up against tkd guys but that will not look like Aikido as you probably think of it as really what you see in the vids online is mostly the same small group of techs all the time and they are the ones that look good at demos and are performed in the classical genre
> 
> The closest I have seen to a more shortened version of Aikido and more direct online is probably Leny sly's vids ...if you can get past him and his ummm ways lol ...



Lenni sly doesn't do anything good that I have seen. Drills done hard are not really equal to drills done live.

Old mate who was at least dealing with retracted punches and a bit of footwork has been the most sensible aplication so far.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> If I was using serious atemi. I wouldn't bother with kotegeshi. I would put them down with atemi.




Yeah I get that but you are a punch /striker and have a different approach


----------



## now disabled

Can I as





O'Malley said:


> In the Iwama school, kaeshi waza are used as 'keys' for proper technique. If you miss one detail that jeopardizes the effectiveness of your technique, uke does a kaeshi waza and you bite the dust. Then you know which detail you missed. For example, if you step forward too early when doing ikkyo, uke is able to do a single leg takedown. With proper technique, he's down before you step forward and the step sends him to the ground.
> 
> For this reason, kaeshi waza are taught at the level where one can become a teacher, to make sure proper technique is handed down to the students.
> 
> At high level, it can also be used in some kind of flow-sparring, I guess.
> 
> Btw the reason why we keep the connection when tori does a technique is that we are looking for an opening for kaeshi waza.




Can I ask who you studied Iwama style under ...just curious


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Lenni sly doesn't do anything good that I have seen. Drills done hard are not really equal to drills done live.
> 
> Old mate who was at least dealing with retracted punches and a bit of footwork has been the most sensible aplication so far.




I get you totally 

in some ways it is a mind set really how you view how you can apply 

just a very simple thing like if if manage to slip a punch and have entered a simple pull to the collar (backwards) can put a person down or and break his structure enough to poss allow another opening


----------



## now disabled

O'Malley said:


> In the Iwama school, kaeshi waza are used as 'keys' for proper technique. If you miss one detail that jeopardizes the effectiveness of your technique, uke does a kaeshi waza and you bite the dust. Then you know which detail you missed. For example, if you step forward too early when doing ikkyo, uke is able to do a single leg takedown. With proper technique, he's down before you step forward and the step sends him to the ground.
> 
> For this reason, kaeshi waza are taught at the level where one can become a teacher, to make sure proper technique is handed down to the students.
> 
> At high level, it can also be used in some kind of flow-sparring, I guess.
> 
> Btw the reason why we keep the connection when tori does a technique is that we are looking for an opening for kaeshi waza.




Were you deshi in iwama and if so which Saito ?


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> Yeah I get that but you are a punch /striker and have a different approach



No. Just I would be going from low risk to high risk. I don't like to drop both of my hands in a striking exchange.  Seems a bit face punchy.

Even grappling my hands would be high untill i am inside his range.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> I get you totally
> 
> in some ways it is a mind set really how you view how you can apply
> 
> just a very simple thing like if if manage to slip a punch and have entered a simple pull to the collar (backwards) can put a person down or and break his structure enough to poss allow another opening







I am not a fan of punch stop collapse. And uke gave him that arm bar about half way in. 03:20.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> No. Just I would be going from low risk to high risk. I don't like to drop both of my hands in a striking exchange.  Seems a bit face punchy.
> 
> Even grappling my hands would be high untill i am inside his range.




totally get that 

ok if I ever faced a person like yourself , firstly I'd back off (I won't use Aikido terms here ) and make sure I was out of range of your jab for instance and try my best to keep that until I could get you to commit as in start to throw , and even then I might not close not until I can in myself see the opportunity to enter ...it may not come and it may not work but that is how I would try let you commit so you are then giving me something ...also if I did achieve the entry then any atemi I would use would be to a part of the body where you were not as a boxer used to being hit ...I know that may sound dumb but going for a person like yourselfs jaw etc is pointless as I do not have the resources to take you that way ,,,where as going for your neck area or throat would make more sense or the traps or even the spinal column ...I dunno if that makes sense


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> I am not a fan of punch stop collapse. And uke gave him that arm bar about half way in. 03:20.




yes he did 

it just the only readily available stuf online that shows not the classical style of Aikido ...I don't agree with all he says but some from my angle does actually make sense ...but I am looking at it from the Aikidoka standpoint lol


----------



## Martial D

This dude is doing a little more realistic form of choreography, but only a little

"Ok guys, do this parry to the side that leaves your face exposed to a rear hand shot, but before he can move you do two more moves"

Ok.

Against anyone that has a week of boxing he goes to sleep.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> This dude is doing a little more realistic form of choreography, but only a little
> 
> "Ok guys, do this parry to the side that leaves your face exposed to a rear hand shot, but before he can move you do two more moves"
> 
> Ok.
> 
> Thought I was on ignore ???
> 
> and ofcourse you are the now expert in boxing ....oops sorry is that getting at you again ? or am I still attention disabled
> 
> You sir show a great wide gap in understanding imo and are only to quick to jump on people I would suggest as I said before if you are so confident go to an Aikido dojo and just see for yourself take a vid camera and vid yourself destroying everyone it that simple then you will have all the vids you need to finally expose Aikido
> 
> Against anyone that has a week of boxing he goes to sleep.


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> So, all we have to go on is your very strong assertions that this stuff ought to work, but there is literally no evidence, anywhere, to support said assertions. Gotcha.


Evidence?  Go practice the art seriously for some years and you will "feel" all the evidence you need....


----------



## Ryback

drop bear said:


> I can punch a guy who is putting all his strength into trying to stop me and not be dangerous. I can throw a guy and not be dangerous. I can do chokes and neck cranks and arm bars and heel hooks and wrist locks.
> 
> But you can't do a wrist lock without them either collapsing on you ripping their arm off.
> 
> So basically you can't do anything that would provide any sort of empirical evidence.
> 
> And your own conclusions are not drawn from any sort of empirical evidence.
> 
> I can see what that guy from the Aikido vs video is on about.


What?? Of course I can do wrist locks, joint manipulation and every kind of technique without harming the Uke but in order to do so he should relax and follow my technique at the point of application. Anyone who says anything different they don't know what they're talking about, how can it be otherwise?
And do you think that someone who is using strength in order to resist a technique is a difficult opponent? How about if he has learned to be completely relaxed in order to escape the technique or counter it,or add a strike while you are doing the wrist lock. That's what's really difficult to defend from, not people tensing up in order to stop the technique. They are soooo going down and getting hurt!!


----------



## Ryback

O'Malley said:


> Ok, let's rephrase it.
> 
> No modern exponent of the art has been filmed while successfully dealing with a competent attacker in a live situation (meaning that the attacker is allowed to throw whatever he wants, when he wants, including feints and combos). These days, you only see kata, even during so-called 'randori'.


I have already answered that, most aikidoka like to demonstrate a clear version of the techniques because it looks...nicer. And of course, most of them belong to organizations that are giving them directions about what they should be doing in order to hunt down ranks and that's why generally there are few aikidoka who are really studying the art seriously...
But that has nothing to do with the potential and the nature of the art, it's simply a wrong choice of direction in practice...
So, there are very famous aikidoka who are getting out there simply being showmen for the sake of Aikikai or whatever (not all of them of course).  But I have seen unknown little basement dojos that have a great, holistic approach to the art, studying seriously in order to actually learn the art, not put a Dan rank on their wall... You don't have to display your Aikido on the social media in order for you to exist you know, I don't do that! I'm doing my Aikido practice in the Dojo and I don't think of youtube or Facebook as something so important...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Ryback said:


> to be completely relaxed in order to escape the technique or counter it, ...


For joint locking, the 

- best solution is the body unification force. You feel water flow from your spine, to your shoulder, and all the way to your finger tips (Aikido unbendable arm?).
- next best solution is to use vibration (or shaking) force to interrupt your opponent's motion during the early stage.


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> Evidence?  Go practice the art seriously for some years and you will "feel" all the evidence you need....


Believing isn't the same as emperical evidence.

Like say, if I were to say boxing is an 'effective martial art', I could produce hundreds of videos of people winning fights with boxing, and in fact if I were to make that claim I would expect someone to call me on it. The same goes for any other system I might name, or anything else in life really.

If I claim to be ten feet tall, I wouldn't expect people to just believe me. I certainly wouldn't make such a claim and follow up any challenges to it by telling people measuring sticks don't work on me and my skin reflects off all attempts at being photographed.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Believing isn't the same as emperical evidence.
> 
> Like say, if I were to say boxing is an 'effective martial art', I could produce hundreds of videos of people winning fights with boxing, and in fact if I were to make that claim I would expect someone to call me on it. The same goes for any other system I might name, or anything else in life really.
> 
> If I claim to be ten feet tall, I wouldn't expect people to just believe me. I certainly wouldn't make such a claim and follow up any challenges to it by telling people measuring sticks don't work on me and my skin reflects off all attempts at being photographed.



Why don't you if you are so emphatic about wanting evidence actually go to an Aikido dojo state your case and see if they will let you practice? 

I can see no other way that you will get the evidence you keep demanding!!! 

If you go and it is all as you say then you win if not then you get your evidence first hand ....so it a win win situation, what do you have to lose ? 

you stated that you have a friend who you think has just passed his shodan but unless you "let him " he can't perform any tech on you ,,,,well another way of getting your evidence is to resist as you want to and see what happens (I would say that a shodan might not be the best grade to do that with but hey go with what is there )


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Ryback said:


> What do you mean by resistance?





Ryback said:


> As I said in another post, define resistance. Usually there is a misunderstanding with this term.
> Resistance is putting effort and strength in order to stop the technique from happening



I'll repeat something I said in an earlier thread ...

"Resistance" doesn't mean that (for example) uke waits until nage has a full-fledged kotegaeshi locked on and then tried to muscle out. That's just asking for a broken wrist. It would be like applying "resistance" in a boxing match by waiting until someone punches you in the face and trying to tense up your nose to resist the incoming fist.

"Resistance" or "non-compliance" involves imposing your will and your techniques on the other person while not allowing them to do the same to you, using whatever methods are allowed within the confines of the current exercise.

Getting back to kotegaeshi as an example ...
Typical application of kotegaeshi involves several steps:

Gaining control of the opponent's wrist
Using that control to break the opponent's balance and structure by leading him to overextend and compromise his alignment.
At the same time, nage will be moving off line, gaining a favorable angle relative to uke
Compromise the structure of the opponent's wrist through flexing it.
Finish by applying outwards rotation to the compromised wrist. 
(There are additional details, such as leading the opponent to shift his body weight one direction then applying the kotegaeshi in the opposite direction to increase the destructive power of the lock, but I think I've covered the high points above.)

In true "non-compliant" randori, your opponent will
Try not to let you get control of his wrist
Try to break your control if you do get hold of his wrist
Work to avoid having his structure or balance compromised
Work to regain his structure and balance if it is compromised
_At the same time_, the opponent will be working to gain a favorable angle on you, compromise _your_ structure and balance, and apply whatever techniques he knows (strikes, throws, trips, etc) which are allowed within the current exercise.

If you have examples of Aikido folks training with this kind of resistance, please post them. The only things I've seen along those lines are Tomiki shiai.



now disabled said:


> Why don't you if you are so emphatic about wanting evidence actually go to an Aikido dojo state your case and see if they will let you practice?



If I knew of an Aikido dojo that was open to that sort of practice (especially with a visitor from a different art), then I would love to visit them.


----------



## O'Malley

now disabled said:


> Can I as
> 
> 
> Can I ask who you studied Iwama style under ...just curious



My teacher is a 4th dan under M. Aviotti, who is himself a 6th dan under Paolo Corallini, 7th dan under Morihiro Saito.


----------



## now disabled

Tony Dismukes said:


> If I knew of an Aikido dojo that was open to that sort of practice (especially with a visitor from a different art), then I would love to visit them.




Yes I know you would however that was not directed towards your good self in any way


----------



## Martial D

Tony Dismukes said:


> If I knew of an Aikido dojo that was open to that sort of practice (especially with a visitor from a different art), then I would love to visit them.



None of the three I visited had any interest at all in sparring or rolling. I would think that if any did that sort of thing there would be evidence of that somewhere. Contrary to what certain spaz cases might believe, I would LOVE to find aikido guys that can actually toss people around as advertised. I'm all about improving my practical game wherever and however I can .


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> None of the three I visited had any interest at all in sparring or rolling. I would think that if any did that sort of thing there would be evidence of that somewhere. Contrary to what certain spaz cases might believe, I would LOVE to find aikido guys that can actually toss people around as advertised. I'm all about improving my practical game wherever and however I can .




If the spaz was directed at me then you are something else 

find a tenshin dojo they will accommodate you i have no doubt and umm there are vids of Aikidoka going up against others you just need to go look, also maybe if you changed your attitude somewhat and not come over as you do and insult then you may get on a bit further ....but that just a wild thought


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> Believing isn't the same as emperical evidence.
> 
> Like say, if I were to say boxing is an 'effective martial art', I could produce hundreds of videos of people winning fights with boxing, and in fact if I were to make that claim I would expect someone to call me on it. The same goes for any other system I might name, or anything else in life really.
> 
> If I claim to be ten feet tall, I wouldn't expect people to just believe me. I certainly wouldn't make such a claim and follow up any challenges to it by telling people measuring sticks don't work on me and my skin reflects off all attempts at being photographed.


Telling you to go and study the art has nothing to do with believing, on the contrary it has to do with experiencing... 
Now if you think that posting videos of you or anyone winning boxing matches would prove any claim that boxing is an effective martial art, well, boxing is not a martial art, it's a combative sport and is any match, or game or sport proof of martial effectiveness?? I mean is this your idea of realistic, practical application? Rules, referees, regulations, one on one in a ring?? 
Like, seriously now??


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> What?? Of course I can do wrist locks, joint manipulation and every kind of technique without harming the Uke but in order to do so he should relax and follow my technique at the point of application. Anyone who says anything different they don't know what they're talking about, how can it be otherwise?
> And do you think that someone who is using strength in order to resist a technique is a difficult opponent? How about if he has learned to be completely relaxed in order to escape the technique or counter it,or add a strike while you are doing the wrist lock. That's what's really difficult to defend from, not people tensing up in order to stop the technique. They are soooo going down and getting hurt!!



Well not really. If someone defends with strength and structure. You basically are not wrist locking them.

Then you have to fight to break their structure using either pressure or Aikido.

That is pretty much how every submission works. 

There are are all these extra elements.


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> Telling you to go and study the art has nothing to do with believing, on the contrary it has to do with experiencing...
> Now if you think that posting videos of you or anyone winning boxing matches would prove any claim that boxing is an effective martial art, well, boxing is not a martial art, it's a combative sport and is any match, or game or sport proof of martial effectiveness?? I mean is this your idea of realistic, practical application? Rules, referees, regulations, one on one in a ring??
> Like, seriously now??


Of course boxing is a martial art. You should try it some time.

Anyway, telling me I need to experience it myself is a bit of a sketchy premise. Why would I spend a LOT of time doing something when there is no indication it would help my game? I would first need to see other people with the ability to 'aikido' people around that aren't compliantly participating before I would consider studying under them. Presumably, if you are correct, there should be thousands of such people across hundreds of schools. Surely at least one of them brushed off the peace and love thing and used it instead to win fights?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Tony Dismukes said:


> "Resistance" or "non-compliance" involves imposing your will and your techniques on the other person while not allowing them to do the same to you, using whatever methods are allowed within the confines of the current exercise.


IMO, "resistance" can be as simple as your opponent tries not to give you any opportunity. You have to try to create that opportunity yourself. In other words, if you just wait for that opportunity, that opportunity may never happen.

When I was young, I tried to stay home and waited for girls to ask me out. It never happened. That was how I found out "If I want to take, I should give first."


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Of course boxing is a martial art. You should try it some time.
> 
> Anyway, telling me I need to experience it myself is a bit of a sketchy premise. Why would I spend a LOT of time doing something when there is no indication it would help my game? I would first need to see other people with the ability to 'aikido' people around that aren't compliantly participating before I would consider studying under them. Presumably, if you are correct, there should be thousands of such people across hundreds of schools. Surely at least one of them brushed off the peace and love thing and used it instead to win
> fights?




You really show a total lac of understanding anything don't you, 

So turn the tables again as you keep having a go at Aikidoka then what are your credentials for so doing ? you keep telling us all that this don't wor at that is crap slanging people off so what is your background in the Arts ? and how long have you been studying same that gives you the right to keep shooting people down 

I noticed you state wing chung so what else ??? are you an expert grappler ? where did you study and under whom as you seem to know all so pray do tell


----------



## Ryback

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'll repeat something I said in an earlier thread ...
> 
> "Resistance" doesn't mean that (for example) uke waits until nage has a full-fledged kotegaeshi locked on and then tried to muscle out. That's just asking for a broken wrist. It would be like applying "resistance" in a boxing match by waiting until someone punches you in the face and trying to tense up your nose to resist the incoming fist.
> 
> "Resistance" or "non-compliance" involves imposing your will and your techniques on the other person while not allowing them to do the same to you, using whatever methods are allowed within the confines of the current exercise.
> 
> Getting back to kotegaeshi as an example ...
> Typical application of kotegaeshi involves several steps:
> 
> Gaining control of the opponent's wrist
> Using that control to break the opponent's balance and structure by leading him to overextend and compromise his alignment.
> At the same time, nage will be moving off line, gaining a favorable angle relative to uke
> Compromise the structure of the opponent's wrist through flexing it.
> Finish by applying outwards rotation to the compromised wrist.
> (There are additional details, such as leading the opponent to shift his body weight one direction then applying the kotegaeshi in the opposite direction to increase the destructive power of the lock, but I think I've covered the high points above.)
> 
> In true "non-compliant" randori, your opponent will
> Try not to let you get control of his wrist
> Try to break your control if you do get hold of his wrist
> Work to avoid having his structure or balance compromised
> Work to regain his structure and balance if it is compromised
> _At the same time_, the opponent will be working to gain a favorable angle on you, compromise _your_ structure and balance, and apply whatever techniques he knows (strikes, throws, trips, etc) which are allowed within the current exercise.
> 
> If you have examples of Aikido folks training with this kind of resistance, please post them. The only things I've seen along those lines are Tomiki shiai.
> 
> 
> 
> If I knew of an Aikido dojo that was open to that sort of practice (especially with a visitor from a different art), then I would love to visit them.


There is such practice in Aikido, at least in our dojo... 
According to the specific practice of the day, in an advanced level (but sometimes not only)  the Uke will use aiki principles in order to stop the technique. If he is successful, and many times he is, I will concentrate on fixing the weak point in my technique in order to affect his whole body and unbalance him... The Uke is helping me by telling me where exactly he felt the weak point that allowed him to take control, or hit me and we are working towards fixing that... 
The other way of such practice is kaeshi waza, counter technique. The Uke is using his Aikido skills not to stop my technique but counter it by imposing to me another technique... His job is to do that, and my job is to be able to apply my technique anyway... 
And that doesn't happen only in a pre arranged practicing mode but also randomly during practice... My Uke is supposed to attack me and I'm supposed to do, let's say Nikkyo or anything and without a warning if he gets the chance I find myself on the receiving end of his technique and I'm working towards correcting that... 
Furthermore, the attack must be real and strong, no matter what kind of attack... I almost got choked yesterday because my Uke attacked me in a te Kubi shime hand and neck lock and while I was supposed to be the Tori (Nage) my timing was a bit off so I ended up tapping in order for him to release his grip. 
Practicing with compliance is necessary in the early stages but later on such elements as the ones mentioned above must be introduced if one wants to study the art deeply....
Of course this is not the only aspect of Aikido, everything physical, mental, spiritual, nutrition, every aspect is important and all of them are connected to each other, none can be neglected. 
Until one day, after years of practice you realize that these are not many important aspects but all of them are one! And the difference between effective and ineffective technique is hidden inside minute details... Well, detail is a *****.


----------



## pdg

Martial D said:


> Anyway, telling me I need to experience it myself is a bit of a sketchy premise. Why would I spend a LOT of time doing something when there is no indication it would help my game? I would first need to see other people with the ability to 'aikido' people around that aren't compliantly participating before I would consider studying under them. Presumably, if you are correct, there should be thousands of such people across hundreds of schools. Surely at least one of them brushed off the peace and love thing and used it instead to win fights?



To play with this concept a bit.

My personal opinion is that aikido (and closely related arts) can be useful.

I've had a couple of discussions to this effect, about how I'd like to find a competent aikidoka to work with.

A lot of tkd defensive techniques look superficially very similar to aikido techniques that are stopped part way through.

So, taking the finishing school perspective in this - I reckon it would be perfectly possible to reinterpret certain tkd stuff with an aikido flavour to expand on them.

This is not to say replace, or improve, or fill gaps - but to use movements I've already practiced in a slightly different way.


Now, from the classical practice of the art, I don't think it'd work how anyone seems to expect it to - especially against someone with reasonable competence in striking. The demonstration videos where someone does a (pisspoor) punch and then gets led on a tour of the town before falling over because of a touch on the wrist, that's just fluff.

But using what is already a successful blocking technique as a lead in to a takedown, I can see that.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> Well not really. If someone defends with strength and structure. You basically are not wrist locking them.


Agree! If your opponent doesn't want to give you that opportunity, you have to create that opportunity yourself. So far, I have not seen any Aikido clip that uses "Give before taking" strategy yet.


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> You really show a total lac of understanding anything don't you,
> 
> So turn the tables again as you keep having a go at Aikidoka then what are your credentials for so doing ? you keep telling us all that this don't wor at that is crap slanging people off so what is your background in the Arts ? and how long have you been studying same that gives you the right to keep shooting people down
> 
> I noticed you state wing chung so what else ??? are you an expert grappler ? where did you study and under whom as you seem to know all so pray do tell


Careful, or you might add a busted capillary from all this rage to your list of disabilities. I get that it makes you angry when people want to see evidence before offering belief, but it is what it is. Now back to ignore you go until you can focus on subject matter.


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> Of course boxing is a martial art. You should try it some time.
> 
> Anyway, telling me I need to experience it myself is a bit of a sketchy premise. Why would I spend a LOT of time doing something when there is no indication it would help my game? I would first need to see other people with the ability to 'aikido' people around that aren't compliantly participating before I would consider studying under them. Presumably, if you are correct, there should be thousands of such people across hundreds of schools. Surely at least one of them brushed off the peace and love thing and used it instead to win fights?


Winning fights where??  In a sports environment, in a ring?  I see no relation of your standards to any real martial art. You are probably looking for a sport, a game to play, so that's fine there are plenty around... 
Boxing, a martial art?? Hmm, you are confused my friend...


----------



## now disabled

No my f





Martial D said:


> Careful, or you might add a busted capillary from all this rage to your list of disabilities. I get that it makes you angry when people want to see evidence before offering belief, but it is what it is. Now back to ignore you go until you can focus on subject matter.




Eh no I take offence at you making fun of disabilities etc 

and calling people a spaz .....that is what I take offence to 

and still no answers forthcoming 


you want my credentials I'll state them no problem and they can be backed up as can my military service 

All you do is state I WANT VIDS I WANT VIDS this don't work that will never work show me street fights 

You also state you take martial combat seriously .....have you ever actually been in combat ? or are you just dreaming ? you wanna get into slanging things then put up your creds and back your words up with your knowledge not just the same again and again and again


----------



## Martial D

pdg said:


> To play with this concept a bit.
> 
> My personal opinion is that aikido (and closely related arts) can be useful.
> 
> I've had a couple of discussions to this effect, about how I'd like to find a competent aikidoka to work with.
> 
> A lot of tkd defensive techniques look superficially very similar to aikido techniques that are stopped part way through.
> 
> So, taking the finishing school perspective in this - I reckon it would be perfectly possible to reinterpret certain tkd stuff with an aikido flavour to expand on them.
> 
> This is not to say replace, or improve, or fill gaps - but to use movements I've already practiced in a slightly different way.
> 
> 
> Now, from the classical practice of the art, I don't think it'd work how anyone seems to expect it to - especially against someone with reasonable competence in striking. The demonstration videos where someone does a (pisspoor) punch and then gets led on a tour of the town before falling over because of a touch on the wrist, that's just fluff.
> 
> But using what is already a successful blocking technique as a lead in to a takedown, I can see that.



I get that. I have already stated that aikido seems to help some attributes;balance, movement, an understanding of how to lock up joints, etc.

I've just never seen evidence of anyone using aikido itself, ie anything close to how it is demoed, to beat a resisting opponent.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think all martial arts are about that, and that's not my be all end all criteria for martial arts. Many martial artists practice for health and fitness, to socialize, whatever. And that's just fine.

But when strong claims are made, the ones making them should be able to provide some sort of evidence when asked for it.

I mean, would you buy a car from a guy if he refused to start it up for you so you could make sure it actually drives?


----------



## now disabled

Ryback said:


> Winning fights where??  In a sports environment, in a ring?  I see no relation of your standards to any real martial art. You are probably looking for a sport, a game to play, so that's fine there are plenty around...
> Boxing, a martial art?? Hmm, you are confused my friend...




Bro he wants to see fights and vids of fights and more fights and then slang and call people out on disabilities and say he being got at


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> Winning fights where??  In a sports environment, in a ring?  I see no relation of your standards to any real martial art. You are probably looking for a sport, a game to play, so that's fine there are plenty around...
> Boxing, a martial art?? Hmm, you are confused my friend...


Anywhere. 

I mean, it's supposed to be a way to nonviolently put people away right? It should be easy to show it working.


----------



## pdg

Martial D said:


> I mean, would you buy a car from a guy if he refused to start it up for you so you could make sure it actually drives?



Umm, actually, I have done 

(Special case though, the engine was never going to be used and everything else was to be overhauled or rebuilt so it driving was utterly immaterial.)


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> I get that. I have already stated that aikido seems to help some attributes;balance, movement, an understanding of how to lock up joints, etc.
> 
> I've just never seen evidence of anyone using aikido itself, ie anything close to how it is demoed, to beat a resisting opponent.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I don't think all martial arts are about that, and that's not my be all end all criteria for martial arts. Many martial artists practice for health and fitness, to socialize, whatever. And that's just fine.
> 
> But when strong claims are made, the ones making them should be able to provide some sort of evidence when asked for it.
> 
> I mean, would you buy a car from a guy if he refused to start it up for you so you could make sure it actually drives?




You really do not get anything behind Aikido at all do you lol yet you keep saying all you do do you understand the principles etc ???


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Anywhere.
> 
> I mean, it's supposed to be a way to nonviolently put people away right? It should be easy to show it working.




and who told you that ?you do not get the meanings do you or the philosophy lol your hung up on all this love bit and you really don't get that bit at all lol


----------



## Martial D

pdg said:


> Umm, actually, I have done
> 
> (Special case though, the engine was never going to be used and everything else was to be overhauled or rebuilt so it driving was utterly immaterial.)



This is more akin to finding a dead aikidoka and stripping off his Gi


----------



## pdg

Martial D said:


> This is more akin to finding a dead aikidoka and stripping off his Gi



Hey, if it works


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> Well not really. If someone defends with strength and structure. You basically are not wrist locking them.
> 
> Then you have to fight to break their structure using either pressure or Aikido.
> 
> That is pretty much how every submission works.
> 
> There are are all these extra elements.



This is why timing is so important. And if you don't spar. I have no idea how you develop timing.

This is also why people wo don't spar always look so akward in drills. They just don't have that constant assesment of what the other guy is doing.


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Anywhere.
> 
> I mean, it's supposed to be a way to nonviolently put people away right? It should be easy to show it working.



No you are confusing Aikido with wrestling.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> No you are confusing Aikido with wrestling.


I find it hard to believe you have never been slammed on your head by a wrestler. I sure have, and let me tell you...its usually pretty darn violent.

Now jitz on the other hand..if you just get to a good position like the back or mounted crucifix and just dont finish you can give the other guy time to calm down and then go for a beer later


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

drop bear said:


> No you are confusing Aikido with wrestling.


Should we category Aikido as one kind of wrestling art? It's not considered as a striking art and that's for sure.


----------



## Martial D

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Should we category Aikido as one kind of wrestling art? It's not considered as a striking art and that's for sure.


Can you really do that if they don't actually resist against eachother? Maybe PRO Wrestling...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Martial D said:


> slammed on your head by a wrestler.


The best finish move - head meets earth.


----------



## drop bear

Ryback said:


> Winning fights where??  In a sports environment, in a ring?  I see no relation of your standards to any real martial art. You are probably looking for a sport, a game to play, so that's fine there are plenty around...
> Boxing, a martial art?? Hmm, you are confused my friend...



Martial arts is supposed to be a game or a sport. That is what develops the correct skills, mental and physical to handle conflict. 

Without the competitive aspect you will not gain a correct understanding of what you are doing.

A fight is a physical puzzle. And to solve that puzzle you are best equiped by having to have solved puzzles before. So that even if you get a completely unfamiliar problem to solve. You still have these problem solving skills.

If you dont have these skills then knowledge isn't as much help as people like to think.

Which is where people come unstuck generally.


----------



## Martial D

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The best finish move - head meets earth.


I was thinking more like a double leg takedown slam or a body to body but ya...that looks painful too.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> Martial arts is supposed to be a game or a sport. That is what develops the correct skills, mental and physical to handle conflict.
> 
> Without the competitive aspect you will not gain a correct understanding of what you are doing.
> 
> A fight is a physical puzzle. And to solve that puzzle you are best equiped by having to have solved puzzles before. So that even if you get a completely unfamiliar problem to solve. You still have these problem solving skills.
> 
> If you dont have these skills then knowledge isn't as much help as people like to think.
> 
> Which is where people come unstuck generally.


Once you systematically disqualify any and all forms of evidence as valid, you can be comfortable in not needing to produce any. Young Earth Creationists love to do this too.


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> totally get that
> 
> ok if I ever faced a person like yourself , firstly I'd back off (I won't use Aikido terms here ) and make sure I was out of range of your jab for instance and try my best to keep that until I could get you to commit as in start to throw , and even then I might not close not until I can in myself see the opportunity to enter ...it may not come and it may not work but that is how I would try let you commit so you are then giving me something ...also if I did achieve the entry then any atemi I would use would be to a part of the body where you were not as a boxer used to being hit ...I know that may sound dumb but going for a person like yourselfs jaw etc is pointless as I do not have the resources to take you that way ,,,where as going for your neck area or throat would make more sense or the traps or even the spinal column ...I dunno if that makes sense



The neck thing is a pretty desparate plan to rely on. It is a method certanly. But the reason boxers hit people in tye jaw is that is works really well. So you are banking on a less effective strike being more effective because I haven't trained to defend it as much.

To pull it off you need to be really slick at judo chopping the neck.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> The neck thing is a pretty desparate plan to rely on. It is a method certanly. But the reason boxers hit people in tye jaw is that is works really well. So you are banking on a less effective strike being more effective because I haven't trained to defend it as much.
> 
> To pull it off you need to be really slick at judo chopping the neck.


Unless you have your chin in the air there is no neck target. If the point of hitting the neck is because the opponent is a BOXER you're definitely not getting any neck.


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Once you systematically disqualify any and all forms of evidence as valid, you can be comfortable in not needing to produce any. Young Earth Creationists love to do this too.



Yeah the celestial T Cup. 

Which is why the person who makes the statement needs to show evidence.

Now what that means is If I say Aikido doesn't work I am being technically incorrect.

If I say there is no evidence Aikido does work.  Then that would be more factual.

Which is why combat sports have the better reputation. Because they just have the more consistant evidence.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> Yeah the celestial T Cup.
> 
> Which is why the person who makes the statement needs to show evidence.
> 
> Now what that means is If I say Aikido doesn't work I am being technically incorrect.
> 
> If I say there is no evidence Aikido does work.  Then that would be more factual.
> 
> Which is why combat sports have the better reputation. Because they just have the more consistant evidence.



Yes, but there's rules. so none of it counts because rules.

So people who's martial arts rely on ball kicking and eye gouging have the real juice. Right?

The thing is afaik nothing in aikido is illegal in mma comp so im not sure why it doesn't count.


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Unless you have your chin in the air there is no neck target. If the point of hitting the neck is because the opponent is a BOXER you're definitely not getting any neck.



you might get over the top through the guard and you are working on the theory that the boxer may not recognise the movement quick enough to counter it.

But you want to be mindful that your own jaw is probably being attacked at the same time. So if you strike like a goober. With no timing or head movement you will probably get popped and loose the exchange anyway.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> you might get over the top through the guard and you are working on the theory that the boxer may not recognise the movement quick enough to counter it.
> 
> But you want to be mindful that your own jaw is probably being attacked at the same time. So if you strike like a goober. With no timing or head movement you will probably get popped and loose the exchange anyway.


LOL

I guess. Is Jackie Chan in this movie?


----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> Yes, but there's rules. so none of it counts because rules.
> 
> So people who's martial arts rely on ball kicking and eye gouging have the real juice. Right?
> 
> The thing is afaik nothing in aikido is illegal in mma comp so im not sure why it doesn't count.



Cant wristlock in MMA. You can in jits. Most do both.

And going street doesn't magically give you a free pass from having to know basic fighting fundimentals.


----------



## Martial D

drop bear said:


> Cant wristlock in MMA. You can in jits. Most do both.
> 
> And going street doesn't magically give you a free pass from having to know basic fighting fundimentals.


Pretty sure small joint manipulation only applies to fingers and toes. Gotta grab 3 or more!

Wrists are fair game.


----------



## Martial D




----------



## drop bear

Martial D said:


> I find it hard to believe you have never been slammed on your head by a wrestler. I sure have, and let me tell you...its usually pretty darn violent.
> 
> Now jitz on the other hand..if you just get to a good position like the back or mounted crucifix and just dont finish you can give the other guy time to calm down and then go for a beer later



Wrestlers have more than one speed. You have to understand it is an art that focuses on harmony and personal development. Not just running around snapping guys wrists in their 5s and 10s.






I mean what are these guys doing to have that many people upset with them at one time?

I mean if that guy did more wrestling he wouldn't have to worry about being barry badass on the street.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Unless you have your chin in the air there is no neck target. If the point of hitting the neck is because the opponent is a BOXER you're definitely not getting any neck.




why has the chin to be in the air and how are you so certain yet again?


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> Wrestlers have more than one speed. You have to understand it is an art that focuses on harmony and personal development. Not just running around snapping guys wrists in their 5s and 10s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean what are these guys doing to have that many people upset with them at one time?
> 
> I mean if that guy did more wrestling he wouldn't have to worry about being barry badass on the street.



it to do with Aiki lol and connections it not about fighting lol


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> why has the chin to be in the air and how are you so certain yet again?



Two reasons.

Because I actually do this stuff rather than make up fanfic

Because the first thing a boxer is taught is to keep his chin tucked. That means no neck for your choppy choppy.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> What does aikido that is 'actually effective' look like? I assume you mean effective for fighting? I'm really not trying to be antagonistic here, but I've never seen anything that ''looks like' any of the many many cooperative demos I've seen in any sort of live sparring, fighting, or competition. Is it possible that it look so different in practice I just can't recognise it?
> 
> Surely that's more likely than an effective martial system practiced by millions NEVER being caught in action in a world where every single person carries a high res video camera in their pocket?


Here's my take, and this is based only on what I've been able to see and experience personally, so others may be able to provide better perspective. I think most of what you see in traditional Aikido practice is NOT meant to be application (at least, originally). They were movement drills, intended to exercise principles and methods of movement. In TMA, when doing that, often things are exaggerated, so that students don't shortcut too much (students typically don't make as big a movement as you want when you want big, nor as small a movement as you want when you want small). If we also go back to the assertion that it was mostly taught (early on) to folks who already had a fighting base, it makes even more sense. Take a good Judoka, and just work him only on the movement principles he doesn't have, or which are barely present in his Judo. Thus, the training is all highly compliant and over-emphasized aiki, because that was the point of training. If that's true, then it wasn't ever intended that training would necessarily look like application. Even when I find myself applying aiki (and feeling it fit perfectly) in a more "live" situation than classical drills, it doesn't look like Aikido (though some of our classical drills to bear some resemblance to Aikido's training).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I have spoken to Paul Cale about it. His issues kind of reflect MMA vs Aikido guys issues which seem to be consistent with any Aikido guy who can actually demonstratively make any martial art work.
> 
> Shibucho Paul Cale – Kudo Australia
> 
> I would have to see something work before I invest time and money in it.
> 
> Can you make aikido work? Can anybody do it on video and then explain it.
> 
> I mean there is no shortage of aikido video. These guys are not hiding out. It is just the lack of demonstrated with resistance that makes me not want to put the day in day out no Sundays.
> 
> And potentially get no result.


I think the issue is expecting the aiki to stand alone. Everyone I know who has used anything from an aiki art in a real situation (meaning outside the training drills) has actually used more than just the aiki side. They were striking, maybe grappling from a clinch, etc., and an opening for aiki execution showed up, so they used it. To me, that's where the aiki stuff fits - it's not meant to stand alone, getting by entirely on flow, evasion, and waiting for something to happen. The few times I've seen something in a "street" video that I considered aiki, it was almost always (rare exceptions) in the middle of a mess. Nothing like it looks in classical dojo training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Sometimes an absence of evidence is the same as evidence of absence.


The rest of your points are good. This one isn't.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Ryback said:


> The effectiveness of a martial art has nothing to do with sports fighting or sparring, that's a game with rules and referees...
> Most Aikidoka I know (myself included) would try to stay out of harms way by avoiding any conflict and when it ever happens, believe me, I won't stop to make sure that my cellphone's camera is recording in order to satisfy people on YouTube or any forum...
> As a matter of fact, I wouldn't like any witnesses around...


While it's true that competitive folks aren't drawn to classical Aikido (so there's little internal drive to compete), that doesn't answer for the failures in friendly bouts. Aikido has an issue, the way it is often taught. I don't think it's an issue inherent in Aikido, but something it picked up over the generations of instructors, in failing to recognize that some important aspects weren't being taught to most students.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Ryback said:


> What do you mean by resistance? Putting all of your strength in order to stop the aikidoka from applying a technique? That would be a huge mistake for two reasons.
> Firstly because if the attacker (Uke)  does that the technique is actually applied easier, I've tried it millions of times...
> And secondly, because it is very dangerous to do such a thing, something will be dislocated, broken or worse.
> If on the other hand, by resistance you mean relaxing in order to be able to re-attack or apply another technique as a counter technique, then that's fine and we practice that every day, although I wouldn't call it resistance (it's actually kaeshi waza).
> The reason that we do not often see kaeshi waza in demos is probably because most Aikidoka want to demonstrate a set of clear techniques. Or at least that's my conclusion, I don't do public demos and I don't film myself because I don't think it accomplishes anything... It's not something bad, it's simply not my cup of tea...


Strength and resistance aren't the same thing. "With resistance" mostly means having your partner actually try to stop you, and perhaps counter with their own technique. Practicing for the purpose of countering (where the point is the uke becomes nage) is partway there, but not entirely. Moderate resistance would be me feeding the initial attack, then trying to stop you from throwing/locking me. If you can still throw/lock, you've succeeded. If not, I've succeeded.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I can punch a guy who is putting all his strength into trying to stop me and not be dangerous. I can throw a guy and not be dangerous. I can do chokes and neck cranks and arm bars and heel hooks and wrist locks.
> 
> But you can't do a wrist lock without them either collapsing on you ripping their arm off.
> 
> So basically you can't do anything that would provide any sort of empirical evidence.
> 
> And your own conclusions are not drawn from any sort of empirical evidence.
> 
> I can see what that guy from the Aikido vs video is on about.


Actually, with some locks, there's just not room for fighting through it. You have to give it up as soon as they resist, or risk injuring. I've seen it happen with our 3rd Set Wrist (I don't know the more common name for it) in a class, and know of another instance with the same technique during LEO training. In one case, the uke simply didn't feel any pain so he resisted and nage kept going. In the other, a young LEO decided to show the technique wouldn't work if he resisted, and the trained (who related the story as a _mea culpa_) let his ego get in the way and kept going.

Now, that's not to say those can't be practiced with resistance, but there's a safety issue that has to be taken into account. If I put one of those locks on and uke is resisting in a way that doesn't stop the technique from working, I just release. I know I had it, but won't hurt him to prove it. If he resists in a way that would stop it, I just change techniques (I know ways to get past some of this resistance, but it comes on too fast to have dependable control). So, if someone is resisting one of these techniques, what you'll see is some other technique. There's just not enough play in the joints from the critical point to safely push through resistance.

Give me a shoulder, and it's another matter. There's plenty of room to work against resistance there. Same for most people's elbows, knees. Even true for some (most?) finger cranks. And for a couple of the wrist locks I can think of, where it's compression, rather than torsion. But there are those few...


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> What is aikido supposed to do by the way?
> 
> Because I can do MMA more safely. Which still blows my mind.


Most of Aikido can be safely done with anyone. Especially on mats.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> So I looked up kageshi waza. Is this accurate?


If I read the term properly (always a doubtful prospect with me and Japanese terms), kaeshi waza just means countering techniques or recovery techniques. That drill appears to be a progression drill, to walk through the recovery options from one end of a spectrum to the other. I'm not sure how effective that drill is - it seems better suited to simply demonstrating to students the progression.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I have done kotegeshi in fights by the way. It cranks the arm but doesn't really get the throw. So i have probably hurt people with it. But not effectively advanced my position much. And not hurt them so they collapse.
> 
> When I did it in training people flipped over fine because they knew what was coming. Which is why I thought it should work.
> 
> I use it a lot for stripping weapons. Which was predominantly glasses. But have done the occasional knife. And once a cigarette packet by mistake.
> 
> I can do kotageshi in sparring if the other guy is terrible. But then I have more than one speed.


This.

It's possible, if you get the aiki component in there, for kotegaeshi to turn into an actual throw. But I doubt it would happen often in "the street" or in sparring. More likely, it drives them to their knees (where they are in kneeing/kicking range), or back past their heels into a sit-down/fall-down (not a pretty throw - more of an off-balance). Mostly, it's useful because of the weapon takeaway you mention. I teach it as both throw and standing strip, and what to do when the throw doesn't throw.


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> The rest of your points are good. This one isn't.


You don't think so? If you search the planet for unicorns, find no unicorns, no tracks, no evidence of them filling any role in the food chain, no unicorn bones or fossils, would that not be strong evidence that they don't exist?

Sure, some mad scientist might have one under lock and key somewhere, or maybe there is a grande multifaceted conspiracy involving 62 national governments to keep their existence covered up.

But which is more likely?


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> Here's my take, and this is based only on what I've been able to see and experience personally, so others may be able to provide better perspective. I think most of what you see in traditional Aikido practice is NOT meant to be application (at least, originally). They were movement drills, intended to exercise principles and methods of movement. In TMA, when doing that, often things are exaggerated, so that students don't shortcut too much (students typically don't make as big a movement as you want when you want big, nor as small a movement as you want when you want small). If we also go back to the assertion that it was mostly taught (early on) to folks who already had a fighting base, it makes even more sense. Take a good Judoka, and just work him only on the movement principles he doesn't have, or which are barely present in his Judo. Thus, the training is all highly compliant and over-emphasized aiki, because that was the point of training. If that's true, then it wasn't ever intended that training would necessarily look like application. Even when I find myself applying aiki (and feeling it fit perfectly) in a more "live" situation than classical drills, it doesn't look like Aikido (though some of our classical drills to bear some resemblance to Aikido's training).


That's what I'm after. What does it look like? I've visited all of the aikido schools in driving distance of me, and none of them do actual sparring or even live drills.

I want to see this real stuff. Where can I find it?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> No. Just I would be going from low risk to high risk. I don't like to drop both of my hands in a striking exchange.  Seems a bit face punchy.
> 
> Even grappling my hands would be high untill i am inside his range.


In my opinion, done properly, the second hand stays in defense until structure starts to break down, or you are in a position where the second hand isn't a threat. That buys the time to spend on a grappling move. That approach leaves room for combining striking and grappling.

In dojo practice, it's easy to lose sight of that second hand (on the defender) and go right to technique without accounting for the attacker's remaining weapons.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> I am not a fan of punch stop collapse. And uke gave him that arm bar about half way in. 03:20.


He seems to understand combinations, but not that the other guy can use them, too.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> This is more akin to finding a dead aikidoka and stripping off his Gi


Not worth it. I have enough trouble untying my own hakama. On a corpse? Forget about it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> The neck thing is a pretty desparate plan to rely on. It is a method certanly. But the reason boxers hit people in tye jaw is that is works really well. So you are banking on a less effective strike being more effective because I haven't trained to defend it as much.
> 
> To pull it off you need to be really slick at judo chopping the neck.


It worked for Captain Kirk.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> you might get over the top through the guard and you are working on the theory that the boxer may not recognise the movement quick enough to counter it.
> 
> But you want to be mindful that your own jaw is probably being attacked at the same time. So if you strike like a goober. With no timing or head movement you will probably get popped and loose the exchange anyway.


Yeah, or around the side, but that's just the same as trying to get in a hook to the jaw, so far as the boxer's concerned. And his shoulder is probably up in the way.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Wrestlers have more than one speed. You have to understand it is an art that focuses on harmony and personal development. Not just running around snapping guys wrists in their 5s and 10s.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean what are these guys doing to have that many people upset with them at one time?
> 
> I mean if that guy did more wrestling he wouldn't have to worry about being barry badass on the street.


Hey, when we walk down the street in those dresses, people just gang up on us. It's our plight.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> You don't think so? If you search the planet for unicorns, find no unicorns, no tracks, no evidence of them filling any role in the food chain, no unicorn bones or fossils, would that not be strong evidence that they don't exist?
> 
> Sure, some mad scientist might have one under lock and key somewhere, or maybe there is a grande multifaceted conspiracy involving 62 national governments to keep their existence covered up.
> 
> But which is more likely?


We find new species all the time. We didn't used to have any evidence of them - for centuries - but they existed. Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence, but it is very good reason for skepticism. The more data piles up without the sought evidence being found, the less likely it is that said evidence exists, but that lack of evidence never rises to the level of being evidence of absence.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> That's what I'm after. What does it look like? I've visited all of the aikido schools in driving distance of me, and none of them do actual sparring or even live drills.
> 
> I want to see this real stuff. Where can I find it?


The easiest place to find it is a Tomiki (Shotokan) Aikido dojo. As you see in their competitions, it doesn't look much like classical Aikido when the opponent knows the counters. it starts to look more like Judo. Every now and then, you'll see one of them pull off something that's distinctly different, because they caught their opponent in a big error, and got to use a full Aikido technique, aiki and all. But most of the techniques, if taught properly, have a non-aiki aspect, as well, and the most "useful" (outside the dojo) Aikido will make use of that aspect when the aiki aspect isn't available.


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> We find new species all the time. We didn't used to have any evidence of them - for centuries - but they existed. Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence, but it is very good reason for skepticism. The more data piles up without the sought evidence being found, the less likely it is that said evidence exists, but that lack of evidence never rises to the level of being evidence of absence.


Well, I don't necessarily agree but let's go a step further. What happens when a lack of positive evidence for a thing or idea(forget the pretty little unicorns for now) is supplemented by a healthy amount of negative evidence against?

Would that be enough for you to accept?


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> The easiest place to find it is a Tomiki (Shotokan) Aikido dojo. As you see in their competitions, it doesn't look much like classical Aikido when the opponent knows the counters. it starts to look more like Judo. Every now and then, you'll see one of them pull off something that's distinctly different, because they caught their opponent in a big error, and got to use a full Aikido technique, aiki and all. But most of the techniques, if taught properly, have a non-aiki aspect, as well, and the most "useful" (outside the dojo) Aikido will make use of that aspect when the aiki aspect isn't available.



Yes, I posted a video of the dildo attack(sorry man that what it looked like...flopping around too and fro...they need better props) earlier in the thread.

The two making the claims I am arguing against rejected that as the real deal.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Well, I don't necessarily agree but let's go a step further. What happens when a lack of positive evidence for a thing or idea(forget the pretty little unicorns for now) is supplemented by a healthy amount of negative evidence against?
> 
> Would that be enough for you to accept?


Of course. That's providing counter evidence, rather than just missing evidence. So, the issue isn't that we can't find Aikido folks in MMA fights (we can find some things I'd consider Aikido, but even that is rare, and not from Aikido training, as far as I know). The issue is that we see too many examples of Aikido failing when not in a classical dojo situation. Mind you, even those are rare, which leaves us with frustratingly little actual evidence to work with. Even I can only provide mostly my experience, which is somewhat thin when we're talking about actual Aikido (the art) rather than just aiki (or the Aikido group of arts).


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> Yes, I posted a video of the dildo attack(sorry man that what it looked like...flopping around too and fro...they need better props) earlier in the thread.
> 
> The two making the claims I am arguing against rejected that as the real deal.


Yeah, the dildo attacks (I'm using that as a formal term with all floppy-weapon attacks, now) are at least "real" to the point that they are with resistance. The guy stabbing is actually trying to get his point, and the guy defending is trying to get his. Same when they put the dildo down. it's "real" the same way any competition is.

To me, what you see in those competitions is what happens when well-trained aiki stylists (meaning they know how to work both with and without the aiki component) face each other or someone who has skill and control. You'd see more aiki against someone raging in a bar, if they have the skill to handle the incoming punches, but it still isn't going to look like a Seagal movie.


----------



## Martial D

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, the dildo attacks (I'm using that as a formal term with all floppy-weapon attacks, now) are at least "real" to the point that they are with resistance. The guy stabbing is actually trying to get his point, and the guy defending is trying to get his. Same when they put the dildo down. it's "real" the same way any competition is.
> 
> To me, what you see in those competitions is what happens when well-trained aiki stylists (meaning they know how to work both with and without the aiki component) face each other or someone who has skill and control. You'd see more aiki against someone raging in a bar, if they have the skill to handle the incoming punches, but it still isn't going to look like a Seagal movie.


To be fair, that sort of reminded me of what it looks like when two regular WC guys put on the gloves. 

If it boils down to judo without the throws, it would be good to also have the judo.

Just like the WC guy is going to benefit from some kickboxing.

I'm not sure if the proverbial blood transfusion is needed because of the system or the training in either instance. Maybe both.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Martial D said:


> To be fair, that sort of reminded me of what it looks like when two regular WC guys put on the gloves.
> 
> If it boils down to judo without the throws, it would be good to also have the judo.
> 
> Just like the WC guy is going to benefit from some kickboxing.
> 
> I'm not sure if the proverbial blood transfusion is needed because of the system or the training in either instance. Maybe both.


It should have the throws. That was my point. To get those (against someone who knows grappling, too), you have to have some muscle-on-muscle fighting, and aiki arts tend to avoid that. I think it's useful to explore it. In fact, I know of no quicker way to get some students to work on developing "ju" (from Judo) and "aiki" than to let them tire themselves out using a lot of muscle on someone who is less muscular but can still beat them.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

gpseymour said:


> "ju" (from Judo) and "aiki"...


This is why I have asked many threads ago, when someone drags your clothes and running in circle, what will be the Judo "Ju", or the Aikido "Aiki" solution?

I assume both Judo "Ju" and Aikido "Aiki" want to yield, sticky, and follow. Unfortunately, that's not the correct solution. The correct solution is to interrupt your opponent's action and take the control back which is more aggressive than both the Judo "Ju" and the Aikido "Aiki" approaches.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is why I have asked many threads ago, when someone drags your clothes and running in circle, what will be the Judo "Ju", or the Aikido "Aiki" solution?
> 
> I assume both Judo "Ju" and Aikido "Aiki" want to yield, sticky, and follow. Unfortunately, that's not the correct solution. The correct solution is to interrupt your opponent's action and take the control back which is more aggressive than both the Judo "Ju" and the Aikido "Aiki" approaches.


Neither requires only yielding. In most cases (not all) Aikido would yield to gain time, then apply force to redirect. So, if someone pulls me (doesn't matter how he's pulling me, I'm talking about the overall concept), I want to redirect his pull. If I don't see it coming early enough, I'll need time, so I'll probably yield with the pull initially to get the position and structure I need to introduce a different direction. Judo would probably take a similar approach, often using both push and pull to change the direction.


----------



## now disabled

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, the dildo attacks (I'm using that as a formal term with all floppy-weapon attacks, now) are at least "real" to the point that they are with resistance. The guy stabbing is actually trying to get his point, and the guy defending is trying to get his. Same when they put the dildo down. it's "real" the same way any competition is.
> 
> To me, what you see in those competitions is what happens when well-trained aiki stylists (meaning they know how to work both with and without the aiki component) face each other or someone who has skill and control. You'd see more aiki against someone raging in a bar, if they have the skill to handle the incoming punches, but it still isn't going to look like a Seagal movie.



that is true it is more difficult to apply Aiki when the other guy knows that to as both are going to be looking for that


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> Yes, I posted a video of the dildo attack(sorry man that what it looked like...flopping around too and fro...they need better props) earlier in the thread.
> 
> The two making the claims I am arguing against rejected that as the real deal.




The resaon they don't use as you put it real props is they both know what they are doing and as it a comp someone one get hurt. There are rules in that comp as in all other comps 

Maybe you should note that the Tomiki style of Aikido contains a heck of a lot more "judo" in it than other styles and there is a reason for that ...if you go look at who founded that style you will find out why. Even then there is a paradox there and I will leave you to work out why that is if you can find out why it contains more judo


----------



## Ryback

Martial D said:


> Anywhere.
> 
> I mean, it's supposed to be a way to nonviolently put people away right? It should be easy to show it working.


You misunderstand, you see? It's a way of controlling, neutralizing, immobilizing, throwing etc people who attack you without having violent feelings and without using violent methods. But the results on the attacker are usually very violent and destructive... 
So, don't get confused. The of blending, harmonizing with the attacker instead of violently colliding with him doesn't mean that he remains unharmed if he is at the receiving end of an Aikido technique. On the contrary, most of the times he will be injured while the aikidoka keeps his calm state of mind... 
Of course, according to the nature of the attack and your opponent's reaction to your technique, there is a possibility that you can neutralize someone without serious injury using Aikido, but that is not always the case...


----------



## Ryback

gpseymour said:


> While it's true that competitive folks aren't drawn to classical Aikido (so there's little internal drive to compete), that doesn't answer for the failures in friendly bouts. Aikido has an issue, the way it is often taught. I don't think it's an issue inherent in Aikido, but something it picked up over the generations of instructors, in failing to recognize that some important aspects weren't being taught to most students.


You are right about that, it is unfortunately true for the majority of the Aikido people. But not for all of them. That's why I keep on saying that Aikido has the potential to be effective but it depends on the individual practitioner...


----------



## Ryback

gpseymour said:


> Strength and resistance aren't the same thing. "With resistance" mostly means having your partner actually try to stop you, and perhaps counter with their own technique. Practicing for the purpose of countering (where the point is the uke becomes nage) is partway there, but not entirely. Moderate resistance would be me feeding the initial attack, then trying to stop you from throwing/locking me. If you can still throw/lock, you've succeeded. If not, I've succeeded.


Agree, I have already answered that, we practice that way but we don't call it resistance... I know that unfortunately many Aikido dojos don't do that...


----------



## now disabled

This is a serious question @Martial D (and don't get bent outta shape and all your being got at personally) would you recognize in a fight any Aiki ? ...or any of the techniques contained within Aikido (not being nasty) as you are basing everything on what you are seeing in the demo and dojo vids... if the opponent is a trained MA then you are very unlikely to see the flowing classical things you are basing all your comments on as that will not work at all. To complicated in part and require a heck of a lot of set up. 

Think on this if you go for say a tech that require you to have full control of the arm elbow wrist etc etc etc (doesn't matter what really) and the opponent resists you relax somewhat and don't meet that resistance with a trial of strength (as in if you are stronger than your opponent -and yes I have been in situations when in normal everyday life I would and knew I was stronger and would be able to overpower the person that way but when the person was all wound up and the blood was up and the adrenaline flowing he did have extra in the locker so to speak- ) you redirect that use his resistance against him and flow into another tech then that is Aiki, you have blended with him not met force with force and used what he was doing against him, 

Now again in fights would you be able to spot that as you think and have a very closed off mind towards Aikido, There is very little in Aikido that involves just pure strength as if it did then even in a dojo with a compliant partner a little guy would not be able to throw the big guys the way they can (and you will say oh the uke is flipping over on purpose helping nage and literally jumping and in public demos you are prob right up to a point) it is he is redirecting the force used against him (yes the turns and the pivots etc) to allow him to throw (if you really know what you are looking for then you can spot a mile of when that is happening and uke is not just flipping over - the ukes feet give that away - that said he as he knows what is coming will try to get into a position of least resistance for (a) to be a good uke and (b) cause he doesn't want to get hurt - again you can if you know what you are looking for tell if it the nage who is throwing or the uke that is flipping -that is all dojo classical stuff ) In a real situation it is unlikely you will see the big flow and the impressive throws and flip overs as those only happen in dojo set up and if both uk and nage know what they are doing. 

Also and yes this a bit Hollywood but hopefully it will illustrate a point ... a guy comes semi head down running at you in say a bar while you standing there he gonna try in effect rugby tackle you ...now you are stationary and he has momentum thereby he has built up some form of "power and strength" yes you could meet that head on if you are wanting engage him and roll with him (that could actually be described as kinda Aiki depending how skilled you are and that I would say no Aikidoka necessarily will be, a JJ, Bjj guy may well be an Aikidoka does not want to go to ground as that is not his/her strength) however if you pivot move of his line redirect him (and redirect doesn't always mean different direction) and assist him head on into the wall or the bar or even the folks behind you then that is Aiki you have blended by moving and not met force with force and used his force against him ( also on the way past you can apply atemi) that leads me on to the randori vid lol that exercise is not only to do with putting folks on their behinds or slamming them or hammering them down it is to build up the Aiki as in the blending the moving the redirecting of force and also the looking for the openings if they are there and when they are there to apply any tech and that could be just to move out the way (yes simple but effective) or to redirect into one of the other dudes coming at you from the other side ... and there by as well as building up the Aiki side it is building up your spacial awareness and the total scene.

Yes to most the many running about like idiots, trying to grab etc the nage looks like to  some as the palour tricks in vids  (like you see Ueshiba do and Shioda do) that has nothing to do with them trying to look like super beings at all absolutely not lol all it is showing is if you know how to apply Aiki and blend and redirect then you can throw off many and not by pure strength ...also the demos you see with Ueshiba with a jo and folks holding on to it then he throws them ...that is not fighting tech lol that is again Aiki principles and allowing him to throw ...nothing to do with a real life situation just showing what is possibly if you apply Aiki and not ever intended as the look of the super human. Also the vid when Shioda made RFK's bodyguard look a dork ...all Shioda did was drop his centre use the position of strength he was in use the weakness of the body guard (he was in socks and pants on mats there by his purchase was not ideal he was bigger than shioda so to get the leverage he was looking for from pure strength he had to try and go low and that was his downfall Shioda dropped his centre and merely used what he was given to his advantage lol...no big secret mystery at all he blended with what he was given and achieved the result.

Aikido is and never was an Art that meets things directly head on and the peace love and harmony bit is rooted in oomoto but with slightly different ideas of what all that means than the normal westerner would take it as ...jee even I 35 years ago thought hmmm how can slamming a person into a mat show any of that or how can trying to break an elbow be close to that , but from the founders outlook and his philosophy it is lol, also do note that latterly he really did go deep into oomoto hence why his early deshi have a different take on things and even they in later life changed as Ueshiba kinda intended you can practice Aikido from 10 to 100 and still get Aikido and to take the ideas into everyday life , ok many do not want to do that or miss that bit or gloss over it but it there Aiki is not just about combat lol it is about way more ... and that is up to the student if he or she chooses to go the whole path or  not.   

Every person everyday uses Aiki at some point it is just called different names and it is assumed that Aiki is purely martial arts ...it isn't and never was lol just it is associated with them almost exclusively and especially in the west


----------



## now disabled

Also do bear in mind that Aikido is a philosophy and the philosophy has always held as that came from Ueshiba Morihei ,,,the Aikido that was really spread around the globe well that came from the influence of the second doshu and if you watch him and compare him to his father or the other deshi of his father then they are different. I heard an interview once with a well respected shihan and he let it slip that although Ueshiba Morihei's biography has been translated the biography of Ueshiba Kisshomaru hasn't been ... I have a friend that reads Japanese (he should he is Japanese lol) and he said to me that unlike his Father, Kisshomaru really glossed over the oomoto side and to a certain extent the martial side. Now yes the second Doshu knew oomoto and had to whatever degree studied same but he didn't exactly follow same in as much. Also imo his straying (if that the right word) from the martial side was more to do with how Japan was when he was Dojo-cho and then Doshu than much else, Imo he took the course that he did more out of being practical due to the image Japan had from it's war time "endeavours" as he wanted to spread Aikido and yes it was his business and without students there is no business and he had to keep the Hombu going so imo he did as he had to, He was a very different character to his father (I am only going on what I have been told by shihan that did study with both and what I have read and seen, Yes I did take a few classes by the second doshu and he was very very circular and the like very light on his feet and his movement was superb not forceful but graceful, like Tohei (although they seriously fell out because Tohei wanted to take Aikido down the Ki path and the Doshu and the other Hombu shihan didn't basicaly) in his early years. 

Aikido is very very very political lol always has been always will be since Ueshiba Morihei passed as the shihan who split from the Aikikai would never have done so when he was alive with two major exceptions ...one that never caused a rift the other did (Shioda and Tomiki) the one that did cause the rift well Imo there was deep reasons for that and well I have my own views there. So getting a true picture on what Aikido was is not easy as I don't think any of the original deshi are still alive (I mean the pre war deshi ) maybe one but I do not know if he has now passed if he hasn't then he is very old. What we all see now is the Aikido of Kisshomaru exported and the teachings(writings ) of Ueshiba Morihei and they were latterly heavily influenced by oomoto. There is Iwama but even now that really does not exist as such really ...yes Saito Hitohiro still teaches but he is no longer affiliated with the Akikai so politics play a major role. Yes Saito Morihiro taught what was termed original Aikido but was it imo (and I studied there) it was and it wasn't as well just the times involved (I mean the actual period in time) To me Shioda was more like the original and it still is but just my opinion. 
There have even been Shihan saying (the older ones that are mostly now gone ) that Aikido was not a commercial business nor should be taught that way it was a vocation, has that had an effect on the Aikikai ...possibly as they are commercial ... Also (unless it has chaged recently and I stand corrected ) the Aikikai do not teah weapons at the Hombu but as a paradox the Aikikai shihan teaching outside of the Hombu mostly do lol and some have even gone on to set up there own stye of Aiki ken and Aiki jo so again it not all as it seems. 

It will remain to be seen where the current Doshu takes Aikido and after that where waka-sensei takes it and how the rise of the different Aikido organisations pursue Aikido , and if there will but really major splits and we will see the classical Aikido and the more direct Aikido really diverge, Time will tell there


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> Yeah, or around the side, but that's just the same as trying to get in a hook to the jaw, so far as the boxer's concerned. And his shoulder is probably up in the way.



Judo chop them straight down would probably slip through. It is pretty small


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> This is a serious question @Martial D (and don't get bent outta shape and all your being got at personally) would you recognize in a fight any Aiki ? ...or any of the techniques contained within Aikido (not being nasty) as you are basing everything on what you are seeing in the demo and dojo vids... if the opponent is a trained MA then you are very unlikely to see the flowing classical things you are basing all your comments on as that will not work at all. To complicated in part and require a heck of a lot of set up.
> 
> Think on this if you go for say a tech that require you to have full control of the arm elbow wrist etc etc etc (doesn't matter what really) and the opponent resists you relax somewhat and don't meet that resistance with a trial of strength (as in if you are stronger than your opponent -and yes I have been in situations when in normal everyday life I would and knew I was stronger and would be able to overpower the person that way but when the person was all wound up and the blood was up and the adrenaline flowing he did have extra in the locker so to speak- ) you redirect that use his resistance against him and flow into another tech then that is Aiki, you have blended with him not met force with force and used what he was doing against him,
> 
> Now again in fights would you be able to spot that as you think and have a very closed off mind towards Aikido, There is very little in Aikido that involves just pure strength as if it did then even in a dojo with a compliant partner a little guy would not be able to throw the big guys the way they can (and you will say oh the uke is flipping over on purpose helping nage and literally jumping and in public demos you are prob right up to a point) it is he is redirecting the force used against him (yes the turns and the pivots etc) to allow him to throw (if you really know what you are looking for then you can spot a mile of when that is happening and uke is not just flipping over - the ukes feet give that away - that said he as he knows what is coming will try to get into a position of least resistance for (a) to be a good uke and (b) cause he doesn't want to get hurt - again you can if you know what you are looking for tell if it the nage who is throwing or the uke that is flipping -that is all dojo classical stuff ) In a real situation it is unlikely you will see the big flow and the impressive throws and flip overs as those only happen in dojo set up and if both uk and nage know what they are doing.
> 
> Also and yes this a bit Hollywood but hopefully it will illustrate a point ... a guy comes semi head down running at you in say a bar while you standing there he gonna try in effect rugby tackle you ...now you are stationary and he has momentum thereby he has built up some form of "power and strength" yes you could meet that head on if you are wanting engage him and roll with him (that could actually be described as kinda Aiki depending how skilled you are and that I would say no Aikidoka necessarily will be, a JJ, Bjj guy may well be an Aikidoka does not want to go to ground as that is not his/her strength) however if you pivot move of his line redirect him (and redirect doesn't always mean different direction) and assist him head on into the wall or the bar or even the folks behind you then that is Aiki you have blended by moving and not met force with force and used his force against him ( also on the way past you can apply atemi) that leads me on to the randori vid lol that exercise is not only to do with putting folks on their behinds or slamming them or hammering them down it is to build up the Aiki as in the blending the moving the redirecting of force and also the looking for the openings if they are there and when they are there to apply any tech and that could be just to move out the way (yes simple but effective) or to redirect into one of the other dudes coming at you from the other side ... and there by as well as building up the Aiki side it is building up your spacial awareness and the total scene.
> 
> Yes to most the many running about like idiots, trying to grab etc the nage looks like to  some as the palour tricks in vids  (like you see Ueshiba do and Shioda do) that has nothing to do with them trying to look like super beings at all absolutely not lol all it is showing is if you know how to apply Aiki and blend and redirect then you can throw off many and not by pure strength ...also the demos you see with Ueshiba with a jo and folks holding on to it then he throws them ...that is not fighting tech lol that is again Aiki principles and allowing him to throw ...nothing to do with a real life situation just showing what is possibly if you apply Aiki and not ever intended as the look of the super human. Also the vid when Shioda made RFK's bodyguard look a dork ...all Shioda did was drop his centre use the position of strength he was in use the weakness of the body guard (he was in socks and pants on mats there by his purchase was not ideal he was bigger than shioda so to get the leverage he was looking for from pure strength he had to try and go low and that was his downfall Shioda dropped his centre and merely used what he was given to his advantage lol...no big secret mystery at all he blended with what he was given and achieved the result.
> 
> Aikido is and never was an Art that meets things directly head on and the peace love and harmony bit is rooted in oomoto but with slightly different ideas of what all that means than the normal westerner would take it as ...jee even I 35 years ago thought hmmm how can slamming a person into a mat show any of that or how can trying to break an elbow be close to that , but from the founders outlook and his philosophy it is lol, also do note that latterly he really did go deep into oomoto hence why his early deshi have a different take on things and even they in later life changed as Ueshiba kinda intended you can practice Aikido from 10 to 100 and still get Aikido and to take the ideas into everyday life , ok many do not want to do that or miss that bit or gloss over it but it there Aiki is not just about combat lol it is about way more ... and that is up to the student if he or she chooses to go the whole path or  not.
> 
> Every person everyday uses Aiki at some point it is just called different names and it is assumed that Aiki is purely martial arts ...it isn't and never was lol just it is associated with them almost exclusively and especially in the west



What I don't get is I can't see how you would understand aiki  without training live. Because that is where the understanding of timing and the nuances of body live.

So even from a purely academic stand point I don't think aikido are using the right tools to understand aikido.











MEDIA=youtube]l_KsW_tL9Ng[/MEDIA]


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> What I don't get is I can't see how you would understand aiki  without training live. Because that is where the understanding of timing and the nuances of body live.
> 
> So even from a purely academic stand point I don't think aikido are using the right tools to understand aikido.



sort off and I get that from your standpoint 

the randori is one way as well it can get way more serious than you'll ever see a vid made of lol 

Oh mant ...myself included coud spend a lifetime trying to get Aiki "right" and never master it lol... but it the path you take to get there and how you choose to move on that path has an effect on your abilities ...

also you could take ten guys train them the same ...same dojo same instructors et al and get 10 different results so there really is no standard way to approach Aiki you can try teach it and give the principles and get them to train but if they just don't get the feel or the rest then it will never work


----------



## drop bear

now disabled said:


> sort off and I get that from your standpoint
> 
> the randori is one way as well it can get way more serious than you'll ever see a vid made of lol
> 
> Oh mant ...myself included coud spend a lifetime trying to get Aiki "right" and never master it lol... but it the path you take to get there and how you choose to move on that path has an effect on your abilities ...
> 
> also you could take ten guys train them the same ...same dojo same instructors et al and get 10 different results so there really is no standard way to approach Aiki you can try teach it and give the principles and get them to train but if they just don't get the feel or the rest then it will never work



There are greater and lesser effects from training. But they are not random. A good process will have a consistant result.

If you are getting any old result. Especially if you are looking for something like aiki. You are training the wrong thing. And all you are noticing is that peoples natural abilities are different.

So If I taught 10 people to play chess by making them swim. Then yes the ten people would have different outcomes.


----------



## now disabled

drop bear said:


> There are greater and lesser effects from training. But they are not random. A good process will have a consistant result.
> 
> If you are getting any old result. Especially if you are looking for something like aiki. You are training the wrong thing. And all you are noticing is that peoples natural abilities are different.
> 
> I haven't explained what I meant clearly ...let me have a ponder and I'll get back to you
> 
> So If I taught 10 people to play chess by making them swim. Then yes the ten people would have different outcomes.


----------



## Martial D

Ryback said:


> You misunderstand, you see? It's a way of controlling, neutralizing, immobilizing, throwing etc people who attack you without having violent feelings and without using violent methods. But the results on the attacker are usually very violent and destructive...
> So, don't get confused. The of blending, harmonizing with the attacker instead of violently colliding with him doesn't mean that he remains unharmed if he is at the receiving end of an Aikido technique. On the contrary, most of the times he will be injured while the aikidoka keeps his calm state of mind...
> Of course, according to the nature of the attack and your opponent's reaction to your technique, there is a possibility that you can neutralize someone without serious injury using Aikido, but that is not always the case...


Look man, I think my opinion on the matter is pretty clear at this point, so I'm going to leave the dead horse be for now. 

I've put in the legwork here, visited all three aikido places within driving distance of me, scoured the net, and regularly spar with a shodan that trains in my MMA group. All I've found are guys that won't go live, found countless examples of aikidoka getting handled, and learned that the aikido stuff Mr shodan has don't work at full speed if I try to stop them. Granted he may suck, the studios I went to may be mcdojos, and maybe there is other evidence of what you say vis a vis effectiveness. I'll grant you these maybes because I'm not omnicient, just as I grant the religious folks a maybe. 

I do find it a little odd that nobody uses such a potentially devastating stand up grappling style in MMA even though all the techniques are legal, but I'll grant you there may be reasons for that too.


----------



## Martial D

now disabled said:


> This is a serious question @Martial D (and don't get bent outta shape and all your being got at personally) would you recognize in a fight any Aiki ? ...or any of the techniques contained within Aikido (not being nasty) as you are basing everything on what you are seeing in the demo and dojo vids... if the opponent is a trained MA then you are very unlikely to see the flowing classical things you are basing all your comments on as that will not work at all. To complicated in part and require a heck of a lot of set up.
> 
> Think on this if you go for say a tech that require you to have full control of the arm elbow wrist etc etc etc (doesn't matter what really) and the opponent resists you relax somewhat and don't meet that resistance with a trial of strength (as in if you are stronger than your opponent -and yes I have been in situations when in normal everyday life I would and knew I was stronger and would be able to overpower the person that way but when the person was all wound up and the blood was up and the adrenaline flowing he did have extra in the locker so to speak- ) you redirect that use his resistance against him and flow into another tech then that is Aiki, you have blended with him not met force with force and used what he was doing against him,
> 
> Now again in fights would you be able to spot that as you think and have a very closed off mind towards Aikido, There is very little in Aikido that involves just pure strength as if it did then even in a dojo with a compliant partner a little guy would not be able to throw the big guys the way they can (and you will say oh the uke is flipping over on purpose helping nage and literally jumping and in public demos you are prob right up to a point) it is he is redirecting the force used against him (yes the turns and the pivots etc) to allow him to throw (if you really know what you are looking for then you can spot a mile of when that is happening and uke is not just flipping over - the ukes feet give that away - that said he as he knows what is coming will try to get into a position of least resistance for (a) to be a good uke and (b) cause he doesn't want to get hurt - again you can if you know what you are looking for tell if it the nage who is throwing or the uke that is flipping -that is all dojo classical stuff ) In a real situation it is unlikely you will see the big flow and the impressive throws and flip overs as those only happen in dojo set up and if both uk and nage know what they are doing.
> 
> Also and yes this a bit Hollywood but hopefully it will illustrate a point ... a guy comes semi head down running at you in say a bar while you standing there he gonna try in effect rugby tackle you ...now you are stationary and he has momentum thereby he has built up some form of "power and strength" yes you could meet that head on if you are wanting engage him and roll with him (that could actually be described as kinda Aiki depending how skilled you are and that I would say no Aikidoka necessarily will be, a JJ, Bjj guy may well be an Aikidoka does not want to go to ground as that is not his/her strength) however if you pivot move of his line redirect him (and redirect doesn't always mean different direction) and assist him head on into the wall or the bar or even the folks behind you then that is Aiki you have blended by moving and not met force with force and used his force against him ( also on the way past you can apply atemi) that leads me on to the randori vid lol that exercise is not only to do with putting folks on their behinds or slamming them or hammering them down it is to build up the Aiki as in the blending the moving the redirecting of force and also the looking for the openings if they are there and when they are there to apply any tech and that could be just to move out the way (yes simple but effective) or to redirect into one of the other dudes coming at you from the other side ... and there by as well as building up the Aiki side it is building up your spacial awareness and the total scene.
> 
> Yes to most the many running about like idiots, trying to grab etc the nage looks like to  some as the palour tricks in vids  (like you see Ueshiba do and Shioda do) that has nothing to do with them trying to look like super beings at all absolutely not lol all it is showing is if you know how to apply Aiki and blend and redirect then you can throw off many and not by pure strength ...also the demos you see with Ueshiba with a jo and folks holding on to it then he throws them ...that is not fighting tech lol that is again Aiki principles and allowing him to throw ...nothing to do with a real life situation just showing what is possibly if you apply Aiki and not ever intended as the look of the super human. Also the vid when Shioda made RFK's bodyguard look a dork ...all Shioda did was drop his centre use the position of strength he was in use the weakness of the body guard (he was in socks and pants on mats there by his purchase was not ideal he was bigger than shioda so to get the leverage he was looking for from pure strength he had to try and go low and that was his downfall Shioda dropped his centre and merely used what he was given to his advantage lol...no big secret mystery at all he blended with what he was given and achieved the result.
> 
> Aikido is and never was an Art that meets things directly head on and the peace love and harmony bit is rooted in oomoto but with slightly different ideas of what all that means than the normal westerner would take it as ...jee even I 35 years ago thought hmmm how can slamming a person into a mat show any of that or how can trying to break an elbow be close to that , but from the founders outlook and his philosophy it is lol, also do note that latterly he really did go deep into oomoto hence why his early deshi have a different take on things and even they in later life changed as Ueshiba kinda intended you can practice Aikido from 10 to 100 and still get Aikido and to take the ideas into everyday life , ok many do not want to do that or miss that bit or gloss over it but it there Aiki is not just about combat lol it is about way more ... and that is up to the student if he or she chooses to go the whole path or  not.
> 
> Every person everyday uses Aiki at some point it is just called different names and it is assumed that Aiki is purely martial arts ...it isn't and never was lol just it is associated with them almost exclusively and especially in the west



That is how reasonable people respond. Maybe there is hope for you yet.

Since you've finally managed civility, I'll respond in kind.  First, you've asked several times about my training history. I've discussed this at some length here in the past so I'll just give you the cliff notes.

Started with Wing Chun some 25 years ago, Sam Kwok lineage, and have carried that on to this day. I also boxed a lot a a local club throughout my teens. I got into bjj some years later, as well as Mui Thai, in the days before they called it MMA. My outside training dropped off for a couple years until I started training at the pool house. Basically a bunch of MMA and karate guys that got together for hard sparring twice a week.

Now, at 41, I train an hour of Dutch style muithai followed by a half hour of submission grappling(basically wrestling and bjj together) 4 nights a week, and focus on my personal synthesis of MMA and Wing Chun Fridays and Sundays for an hour or so each with my bob and my wife(I get her to hold pads and the shield for me(she is becoming quite the little kickboxers too).
Over all that time I've also done 'this and that' but not enough I'd say I practice those systems.

 I'm not going to pretend to know anything about aikido on any sort of intimate level, but I never claimed to. I'm just a student of the fight game with a very critical eye, and a constant desire to get an edge on my skills game.

I WANT you to be right. I just need evidence before I can come on board.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

now disabled said:


> that is true it is more difficult to apply Aiki when the other guy knows that to as both are going to be looking for that


Yes. And that really applies for anyone with reasonable takedown defense, as well.


----------



## now disabled

Martial D said:


> That is how reasonable people respond. Maybe there is hope for you yet.
> 
> Since you've finally managed civility, I'll respond in kind.  First, you've asked several times about my training history. I've discussed this at some length here in the past so I'll just give you the cliff notes.
> 
> Started with Wing Chun some 25 years ago, Sam Kwok lineage, and have carried that on to this day. I also boxed a lot a a local club throughout my teens. I got into bjj some years later, as well as Mui Thai, in the days before they called it MMA. My outside training dropped off for a couple years until I started training at the pool house. Basically a bunch of MMA and karate guys that got together for hard sparring twice a week.
> 
> Now, at 41, I train an hour of Dutch style muithai followed by a half hour of submission grappling(basically wrestling and bjj together) 4 nights a week, and focus on my personal synthesis of MMA and Wing Chun Fridays and Sundays for an hour or so each with my bob and my wife(I get her to hold pads and the shield for me(she is becoming quite the little kickboxers too).
> Over all that time I've also done 'this and that' but not enough I'd say I practice those systems.
> 
> I'm not going to pretend to know anything about aikido on any sort of intimate level, but I never claimed to. I'm just a student of the fight game with a very critical eye, and a constant desire to get an edge on my skills game.
> 
> I WANT you to be right. I just need evidence before I can come on board.




Ok no issues 

As I said maybe seeing where aiki is going on is not apparent in other situations or fights and I have always sais that the classical Aikdo from the dojo does not essentially work however the principles do and you from your back ground will most likely use them just think of them in different ways 

I hold two Aikido ranks from different places they are not that high but I have studied Aikido for 35 years and wel it has been good to me and yes I have used it


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> Oh mant ...myself included coud spend a lifetime trying to get Aiki "right" and never master it lol...


If a new student asks you the following questions, what will be your answer?

- Why do you want to spend your life time to master Aiki?
- If fighting skill is your goal, will you take Aikido as your path?


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> - Why do you want to spend your life time to master Aiki?
> - If fighting skill is your goal, will you take Aikido as your path?



My path is Aikido or was it a different path now but still a path


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

now disabled said:


> My path is Aikido or was it a different path now but still a path


What make you to decide to take Aikido as your path? In other words, how will you convince a new student to take Aikido path?


----------



## now disabled

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What make you to decide to take Aikido as your path? In other words, how will you convince a new student to take Aikido path?




I wouldn't convince or try to convince any body as that is not the way I work ...the choice is theirs alone.

Why did I chose Aikido ....that I could fill a book with really ...but personal development, the teacher (original one) the potential I saw in that art for me as a person and my own deeper reasons (which are my path)


----------



## now disabled

this is how to defeat any tech and is super technical and the guy is awesome he used every skill in the book and even showed respect after he won


----------

