# Real aikido street fight



## Brian R. VanCise

This is from a club called Real Aikido!

[yt]fN7yn0XOSMQ[/yt]


----------



## Nolerama

that's pretty cool


----------



## Jenna

Lovely.. thank you again Brian.. Yes they demonstrate a modified style and that is the club that the lovely Nataly is from also..


----------



## seasoned

Brian R. VanCise said:


> This is from a club called Real Aikido!
> 
> [yt]fN7yn0XOSMQ[/yt]


I can't seem to bring this video up, I don't know if it on your end or mine??


----------



## prokarateshop

yes, very cool.. I liked the arm wrist locks


----------



## chrispillertkd

Both videos were very impressive. I do like the fact that they are practicing in street clothes in the first video, especially.

Pax,

Chris


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

seasoned said:


> I can't seem to bring this video up, I don't know if it on your end or mine??



I think it must be on your end.


----------



## K-man

Great video. Pity aikido doesn't work! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Maybe somebody should tell them. :asian:


----------



## Knives

excellent video.


----------



## punisher73

Very nice, it is what I pictured it to be when I would hear the stories of how tough the early students of aikido were and the honbu was called the "hell dojo" for how hard they trained.


----------



## jks9199

I guess I'm the dissenting voice here.  Skilled practitioners, and slightly more realistic applications, and nice to see 'em in street clothes -- but still mostly the kind of routine aikido demos of single attacks with the attacker riding the defense out for my taste.


----------



## yorkshirelad

Jenna said:


> Lovely.. thank you again Brian.. Yes they demonstrate a modified style and that is the club that the lovely Nataly is from also..


The ninindori sequences were superb. I do however hate seeing tori give the weapon back to the uke after the execution of waza. It makes me cringe.


----------



## theletch1

jks9199 said:


> I guess I'm the dissenting voice here. Skilled practitioners, and slightly more realistic applications, and nice to see 'em in street clothes -- but still mostly the kind of routine aikido demos of single attacks with the attacker riding the defense out for my taste.


The same could be said for demos of most any martial art. There were a couple of multiple attacker situations in there.  I actually recognized every technique that was done in the first video... haven't watched the second yet and know from doing them that many of them could have been finished with little bit of torque on the joint in question.  I think that the only aikido demo that will ever meet with approval from a lot of folks will require the aikido-ka to leave a heap of bodies with destroyed joints all over the place.  Aikido is one of those arts that you either love or hate, I quess.


----------



## dbell

K-man said:


> Great video. Pity aikido doesn't work!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe somebody should tell them. :asian:



And why do you think that AiKiDo doesn't work?  I used AiKiDo only in a street fight in 1985 when in Korea and attacked by a fellow soldier, and I used it in the only other real fight I had, to great success.  The second was with another MA person and still did pretty good....

Why do you think it doesn't work?


----------



## Gordon Nore

The street clothes clip was interesting. Great ukemi. Everything was in close and tight -- could easily be taken for Hapkido. On the occasions that I've watched Aikidoka go at it on the mats, there's a sense of bigness to it. They use up all the available space. In combat though, space can be restricted and these guys have made that adaptation. You could almost call it Combat Aikido.


----------



## Tames D

dbell said:


> And why do you think that AiKiDo doesn't work? I used AiKiDo only in a street fight in 1985 when in Korea and attacked by a fellow soldier, and I used it in the only other real fight I had, to great success. The second was with another MA person and still did pretty good....
> 
> Why do you think it doesn't work?


 
I think you misunderstood. Re-read K-man's post.


----------



## dbell

Tames D said:


> I think you misunderstood. Re-read K-man's post.



Um, he says "Pitty it doesn't work.  Someone should tell them that." (or words to that effect...  But now that I look at his profile, I'm guessing he was being sarcastic to non-AiKiDo lovers?


----------



## theletch1

dbell said:


> Um, he says "Pitty it doesn't work. Someone should tell them that." (or words to that effect... But now that I look at his profile, I'm guessing he was being sarcastic to non-AiKiDo lovers?


 You got it.  So many people that never take the time to study the art of aikido dismiss it as being something that doesn't work.  The video shows an apparently effective use of the art.  His statement was tongue in cheek much like a bumblebee not being able to fly.  Logic would dictate that the bee is too big to fly with tiny wings but it can.  Logic (to those that don't study the art) would dictate that an art of "harmony" couldn't be used with devastating effect but it can.


----------



## Joab

I enjoyed the video a lot, I really did. The attacks weren't all that great, and the defenses looked far too complicated to work in a real assault. Still, I liked it, and hey, what do I know, as my profile says I'm still a beginner.


----------



## K-man

dbell said:


> And why do you think that AiKiDo doesn't work? I used AiKiDo only in a street fight in 1985 when in Korea and attacked by a fellow soldier, and I used it in the only other real fight I had, to great success. The second was with another MA person and still did pretty good....
> 
> Why do you think it doesn't work?


Thank you to my friends 'Tames D' and 'theletch' for correctly interpreting my cryptic comment. I have been studying aikido for nearly 3 years as an add-on to my karate. I find it fills in a lot of the gaps in the karate syllabus and explains a lot of the moves in the karate kata. It also teaches how 'softness' can overpower 'strength'. In many posts on this forum you will find mention that this doesn't work or that doesn't work. Poor old aikido bears the brunt of those comments because it looks contrived in many instances. It was refreshing to see a video that gives a more realistic view of aikido's presence as a true MA. Hence my 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 and the invitation for someone to go and tell these guys that what they have so beautifully demonstrated doesn't work. Hopefully that person may have left with some grass in his mouth and a new-found respect for aikido. 
I train aikido with some of Victoria's top karateka and our teacher can handle anything we can throw. I know aikido works. That's why I want to add its throws and locks to my repertoire. 
The problem is that in the real world there are many martial art schools that do not turn out martial artists. That is not the fault of any particular martial art, but more a reflection on the lack of knowledge and ability of the teacher. :asian:


----------



## Telfer

I've watched this clip several times and its really no different from what you would see in a Steven Seagal movie...which is choreographed.

It also appears that the video has been speeded up in spots.

Aikido with FULL resistance looks more like this:






And even here they are sparring with rules against striking, so its not even remotely realistic.

I'm not saying it cant work...only that its not pretty.


----------



## Jenna

Telfer said:


> I've watched this clip several times and its really no different from what you would see in a Steven Seagal movie...which is choreographed.
> 
> It also appears that the video has been speeded up in spots.
> 
> Aikido with FULL resistance looks more like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And even here they are sparring with rules against striking, so its not even remotely realistic.
> 
> I'm not saying it cant work...only that its not pretty.



I do not know what point you are making here?  You are _not _saying that it cannot work? Can I thus infer that you _are _saying it CAN work?  Because otherwise I am worried that I have been practicing something utterly irrelevant and useless for quite a long time now and would be keen to rectify that situation quickly so that I can go take up a proper martial art.  

I have not watched the video and so I apologise for posting something wholly pointless 

Jenna


----------



## Telfer

Jenna said:


> You are _not _saying that it cannot work? Can I thus infer that you _are _saying it CAN work?


Yes, its not so much as WHAT but HOW. Whether something works or not is influenced by many variable circumstances and conditions.

If I want to find out if the WHAT and HOW works in a realistic scenario with relative safety the only way to do it is with full contact competition.

It wont look like dancing.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Jenna said:


> I do not know what point you are making here? You are _not _saying that it cannot work? Can I thus infer that you _are _saying it CAN work? Because otherwise I am worried that I have been practicing something utterly irrelevant and useless for quite a long time now and would be keen to rectify that situation quickly so that I can go take up a proper martial art.


 
Don't stop training; embrace its supposed uselessness..... believe me it can and WILL work to your advantage :EG: and BOY the shocked look on the face of the other guy is well worth it 

And I know this from experience, I was the guy that, after sparring several Aikido people and defeating them, felt Aikido was useless...that was until a woman that was considerably smaller than me slammed on the floor a couple of times (it was very cool, and I am sure the look of complete surprise on my face was priceless). I then discovered that Aikido.... like all MA styles... if done right... works rather well.


----------



## theletch1

No, you're right, aikido in a "real" street fight isn't going to look like a dance... well, maybe the slam dancing of the '80s... but not anything like a Ginger Rogers/Fred Astair movie.  The fluidity seen in training and in clips that haven't been completely choreographed but are between aikido-ka is there because both parties have an idea of what is supposed to happen in that scenario and are (to at least some extent) going with the flow to keep things that shouldn't twist or bend in a certain way from twisting or bending in that particular way.  I'd be very disappointed to see ANY responsible martial artist of ANY style intentionally destroy someones use of a limb or joint for the sake of gratifying the morbid curiousity of those that have never taken the time to attempt to study an art.  As for me I'll keep on studying this art (not my first) because I've used it... physically and psychologically... to defend myself with great success.  If your ego is larger than your brain you probably won't find much in aikido to like.  Aikido requires that you truly understand the idea of giving in to get your way and that doesn't really stroke the ego.  Of course, once you truly understand that concept you don't need you ego stroked to feel good about yourself.


----------



## Yari

theletch1 said:


> No, you're right, aikido in a "real" street fight isn't going to look like a dance... ..... Of course, once you truly understand that concept you don't need you ego stroked to feel good about yourself.


 
THE whole part is good, very good indeed! loved reading.... I bow to your wisdom.

/yari


----------



## RoninX

dbell said:


> And why do you think that AiKiDo doesn't work?  I used AiKiDo only in a street fight in 1985 when in Korea and attacked by a fellow soldier, and I used it in the only other real fight I had, to great success.  The second was with another MA person and still did pretty good....
> 
> Why do you think it doesn't work?




I´m pretty sure almost anything would work once in a while. But to me, that´s not the true definition of effectiveness. To me, effectiveness is being able to excute a technique with a high success rate.

Put a Street fighter against a good Boxer, and the Boxer would be able to execute his boxing techniques 90% of the time.

Put a Street fighter against a Kickboxer, and the Kickboxer would be able to execute his Kickboxing techniques 90% of the time. 

Put a Street fighter against a BJJ guy, and the BJJ guy would be able to take him down and submitt him 90% of the time.

That´s effectiveness.

Now put a Street fighter against an Aikidoka, and i would love to see how many of his flashy throws an Aikidoka is able to score. 

You can love your art all you want, but don´t be delusional, my son. Aikido isn´t a practical art. And if you honestly believe otherwise, there´s something very wrong with you.

I´m sorry if i´m being a little aggressive, but i think this nonsense has to stop. The techniques in the video won´t work 90% of the time. That´s not self defense. That´s fancy moves, and they´re good for the movies, not to save someone´s life.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> I´m pretty sure almost anything would work once in a while. But to me, that´s not the true definition of effectiveness. To me, effectiveness is being able to excute a technique with a high success rate. Agree
> 
> Put a Street fighter against a good Boxer, and the Boxer would be able to execute his boxing techniques 90% of the time. Disagree
> 
> Put a Street fighter against a Kickboxer, and the Kickboxer would be able to execute his Kickboxing techniques 90% of the time. Disagree
> 
> Put a Street fighter against a BJJ guy, and the BJJ guy would be able to take him down and submitt him 90% of the time. Disagree
> 
> That´s effectiveness.
> 
> Now put a Street fighter against an Aikidoka, and i would love to see how many of his flashy throws an Aikidoka is able to score. Depends on your training and level of proficiency. Aikido throws are not flashy, just some of the falls. If the uke does not fall in a safe manner he will be injured. And, in aikido there is no sport, therefore no 'score'.
> 
> You can love your art all you want, but don´t be delusional, my son. Aikido isn´t a practical art. And if you honestly believe otherwise, there´s something very wrong with you. Can you please make an appointment for me as I must need urgent help! :erg:
> 
> I´m sorry if i´m being a little aggressive, but i think this nonsense has to stop. The techniques in the video won´t work 90% of the time. That´s not self defense. That´s fancy moves, and they´re good for the movies, not to save someone´s life.


I think the first thing that we need to address is that if you train for sport you are a sportsman. Boxing is a sport, BJJ is a sport, Kickboxing is a sport, Muay Thai is a sport. I would back a competent street fighter against any of them. Aikido as it is practised in most places is an art. It takes a long time to become proficient. I regularly train with some of this country's top martial artists but not one of them can lay a finger on my Aikido teacher. I'm now in my 5th year of aikido training, yet it is not my primary interest. My passion is Okinawan Goju karate and that also is not a sport, nor do we train it as a sport. I went through the competition stuff years ago and it finally got through my thick skull that competition does not equate to self defence. 

Aikido is a great way to understand the basics of karate if you are prepared to take the time. The beauty of aikido is that you utilise whatever comes to hand. Locks and holds are not locks and holds, they are joint destruction. Certain moves cause predictive response that we use in both karate and aikido. Most martial arts rely on speed and power. Aikido does not. If you blend aikido in with modern karate you almost get back to traditional karate.

I'm assuming from your post that you feel some martial arts are effective and aikido is not. Traditional MAs were NOT designed to use against other trained martial artists (weapon arts excepted). They were designed to be used against street thugs. Unfortunately many martial arts are now trained in such a way to virtually render them useless against an experienced street fighter. 

The techniques in the video will work most of the time and they will work even more often if your aikido training includes atemi.

Here's a clip that I consider puts karate and aikido together in an effective way. Not your classical aikido I will admit, but you will see the locks, holds and armbars, complete with atemi, trained in aikido.   



 
Perhaps you could post an example of what you think would be effective on the street for us to share. :asian:


----------



## Yari

RoninX said:


> ......flashy throws an Aikidoka is able to score.
> 
> ...... And if you honestly believe otherwise, there´s something very wrong with you.
> 
> ....... The techniques in the video won´t work 90% of the time. That´s not self defense. That´s fancy moves, and they´re good for the movies, not to save someone´s life.


 
Maybe we should define what Aikido is....

Aikido is many different styles, just like saying "car". A car isn't just a car, some cars are made for road driving, others made for off-roading, while others are just for show case. Some have a bit of all in in. Some of them you wash the car, making it look nice, drive in photogenic scenori, just for the show. 

Some styles of aikido will be "more for the show", some will be more the spiruality, some just for fun and so on.

When that is said, I belive that what you show on a video will never be the same as what you'll see in real life, since real life is much more dynamic. But this counts for evey style. What you learn (drills) will not look what you'll be doing in real life. 

For me Aikido is learning principles: Pre-emtive striks, liveness with opponent, redirects, punches, kicks, locks, breaks and changes of techiques, based on your opponents movements. 

These things I don't see in a lot of arts, and I see Aikido styles that dont do this too, but that doesn't mean that Aikido doesn't work

/Terje


----------



## tempus

Yes.  I do the fancy throws.  I flip in the air, roll out of throw, etc...  One thing some people are forgetting is if I did not do those things, my shoulder would be in pieces, my wrist broken, my elbow shattered and my face crushed against the ground.

In my style, if I am up against someone who is trained and the situation escalates where I have to defend my self, we are taught to kick in the groin, shatter the attackers knee and then use that energy into the techniques.

-Gary


----------



## Bill Mattocks

K-man said:


> I think the first thing that we need to address is that if you train for sport you are a sportsman. Boxing is a sport, BJJ is a sport, Kickboxing is a sport, Muay Thai is a sport. I would back a competent street fighter against any of them.



I agree.  One of the things our Sensei tells us that there are some really good street fighters out there, and they are forces to be reckoned with.  People who have been in hundreds of no-holds-barred fights in their lives tend to accumulate winning strategies and use their natural advantages to the point where they become quite effective against others.

I prefer the style I being trained in currently, but I don't discount the real-world effectiveness of other styles, or of truly B.A. individuals with no particular style at all other than whupping butt.


----------



## RoninX

> I think the first thing that we need to address is that if you train for  sport you are a sportsman. Boxing is a sport, BJJ is a sport,  Kickboxing is a sport, Muay Thai is a sport. I would back a competent  street fighter against any of them.



Yeah. And the fact of being sports doesn´t. invalidate their effectiveness.  How how exactly would a "competent" regular person defeat a kickboxer? With a weapon? Maybe. Anybody can beat anybody with a weapon.



> Aikido as it is practised in most places is an art. It takes a long time  to become proficient. I regularly train with some of this country's top  martial artists but not one of them can lay a finger on my Aikido  teacher. I'm now in my 5th year of aikido training



I´m not discussioning the definition of Aikido, and i don´t really care what Aikido is.



> Aikido is a great way to understand the basics of karate if you are  prepared to take the time. The beauty of aikido is that you utilise  whatever comes to hand. Locks and holds are not locks and holds, they  are joint destruction. Certain moves cause predictive response that we  use in both karate and aikido. Most martial arts rely on speed and  power. Aikido does not. If you blend aikido in with modern karate you  almost get back to traditional karate.



That´s all true inside a Dôjô. Outside of the dojo you will fail your joint destruction 85/90% of the time. 



> I'm assuming from your post that you feel some martial arts are  effective and aikido is not. Traditional MAs were NOT designed to use  against other trained martial artists (weapon arts excepted). They were  designed to be used against street thugs. Unfortunately many martial  arts are now trained in such a way to virtually render them useless  against an experienced street fighter.



I don´t feel, i know.

Let me correct you:

Traditional MAs were NOT designed to use against other resisting opponent. 



> The techniques in the video will work most of the time and they will  work even more often if your aikido training includes atemi.



I´ve never seen any evidence of this, and only people with zero experience in combat, or people who really what to belive this crap to feel better with themselvs would say something like that. The techniques don´t work, and dare anyone to prove otherwise. 

Do you want videos of boxing, karate etc being you used in a street fight? You can have it. Show me aikido being used in a street fight. But show me the most common techniques, like the join locks. I wanna see it.


----------



## RoninX

I almost forgot how delusional and obsessed this people are. Trying to argue with lunatics is a waste of time. Aikido doesn´t work, and any rational person could come to that conclusion.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RoninX said:


> I almost forgot how delusional and obsessed this people are. Trying to argue with lunatics is a waste of time. Aikido doesn´t work, and any rational person could come to that conclusion.


 
You sound very familiar.... have you been here before under a similar name that started with Ronin? Pressure testing sound familiar to you does it?

And for the record any rational person would not be intentionally starting arguments on a webpage


----------



## RoninX

Xue Sheng said:


> You sound very familiar.... have you been here before under a similar name that started with Ronin? Pressure testing sound familiar to you does it?
> 
> And for the record any rational person would not be intentionally starting arguments on a webpage




No! Roninx is my only and first nick.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> Yeah. And the fact of being sports doesn´t. invalidate their effectiveness. How how exactly would a "competent" regular person defeat a kickboxer? With a weapon? Maybe. Anybody can beat anybody with a weapon.


 
Where did I mention a weapon? A good street fighter will easilly beatup most people who train in the martial arts. The reason is that even in the ring you don't get the adrenal dump you get when someone is genuinely trying to kill you. The street guys are in that situation regularly and it is very hard to create the reality of that situation in the dojo. That's what makes a street fight so dangerous.

You are what you train. You forget to eye gouge, you forget to take out the trachea, you don't crush his nuts and you never take out the knees. These are four of the first things we target. 

And then, when you train for competition it gets ten times worse. in many competitions or tournaments you even learn to pull your punches or you aren't allowed to strike to the head. Great training for a street fight!


I´m not discussioning the definition of Aikido, and i don´t really care what Aikido is.

Then why comment if you don't care about aikido. Good aikido is good. BS aikido is the same as any other BS MA. You are generalising about a MA that it sounds like you have never trained or if you did it was in a BS dojo. 

That´s all true inside a Dôjô. Outside of the dojo you will fail your joint destruction 85/90% of the time. 

Crap! It takes very little more pressure than we use in the dojo to injure and very little more to destroy. The injury part, most people training aikido against full resistance will testify happens too frequently. 



> I'm assuming from your post that you feel some martial arts are effective and aikido is not.


I don´t feel, i know.

That's bordering on arrogance ... and is incorrect! 

*Let me correct you:*

*Traditional MAs were NOT designed to use against other resisting opponent.* 

Huh?? 

You obviously have never seen traditional MAs. WTF do you think people were training it for? To keep fit? It was pretty rough in asia before 1900. They had a hard enough time just living to waste time training an ineffectual method of self defence. Traditional MAs were taught to defend people in a lawless society. 

What do you think the bad guys did after they made the first move? Roll over! Give me a break. ALL traditional MAs were developed to use against people trying to bash or kill them! If you can't acknowledge that then you are in living in Fairyland. 



> The techniques in the video will work most of the time and they will work even more often if your aikido training includes atemi.


I´ve never seen any evidence of this, and only people with zero experience in combat, or people who really what to belive this crap to feel better with themselvs would say something like that. The techniques don´t work, and dare anyone to prove otherwise. 

I suppose I need to tell you what atemi is. Atemi is the same strike that you boxer or kickboxer or MMA fighter would use. It is the same knee to the head or groin that your Muay Thai fighter uses. The locks and holds are the same locks and holds that your BJJ grappler would use. Have you never seen those guys use an effective technique? Are you seriously trying to tell me those techniques don't work?

Do you want videos of boxing, karate etc being you used in a street fight? You can have it. Show me aikido being used in a street fight. But show me the most common techniques, like the join locks. I wanna see it. 

You obviously didn't watch Bas' video very closely. There are locks and holds there straight from Aikido or Jujutsu or whatever style of grappling you like to mention. They all come from the same base. I also said that it is mixed with karate, that is 'traditional' MA, all up close and personal. Not pretty but effective. 

Now, I have no idea of your MA background or training. I'm assuming from your profile it is Ninjutsu. I have no axe to grind there. It is a traditional MA and as effective as any other traditional MA. Please post a video of YOUR type of training against a street fighter.

I showed you mine now you show me yours. :asian:


----------



## Bill Mattocks

OK, guys, let's all take a deep breath here.  No need for personal insults.


----------



## Bruno@MT

RoninX said:


> I almost forgot how delusional and obsessed this people are. Trying to argue with lunatics is a waste of time. Aikido doesn´t work, and any rational person could come to that conclusion.



That is a novel thing to say for someone who lists Bujinkan as his main art.
There are many people just like you, claiming just the same thing about what you do.
But that is totally different of course


----------



## MA-Caver

Age old arguments about whether this art is more effective than that art is just plain moot. ESPECIALLY when one considers that the art itself is only as effective as the practitioner who implements it. Just like a gun is only as accurate as the shooter or anything else for that matter. 
Having been in street combats before and while my own art is JKDI I can only say what I see in the videos based on my experience. 
True that a combatant isn't going to roll with the punches or the flips or other techs that an aikidoist is going to use on them. THAT is what makes the art effective IMO. If the ukes did NOT roll with them or resisted as a real street thug would do then their arms would be broken, wrists twisted out of shape and so forth. 
When I was a uke for a Kenpoist (EPAK) who is on this forum I would invariably get her mad at me because I at times wasn't "rolling with the punches" as she expected. For every tech she performed/practised on me I could think of a counter. Yet I relented and did as a good uke should, roll with it and not resist so she could get the techs down as she needed to so to pass her test, which she had with flying colors (pardon the pun). 
Yet the question still rose in my mind based on my experiences, would she be able to effectively carry those out in a parking lot en-route to her car and was jumped by some thug wanting her wallet or worse. 
Same application goes with any other art. It's only as good as you are and your level of skill. 

Are the arts still worth studying? Absolutely. Which art? That's up to you. But saying this wouldn't work or that wouldn't work is groundless unless you yourself have actually tried it in real-life situations. 

So please, as Bill stated lets keep the conversations respectful, civil and mindful that your art is only as good as YOU are, likewise nearly every single art has their techniques based on true life applications by the GM's who created them years before (many) of us were born.


----------



## blindsage

RoninX said:


> Let me correct you:
> 
> Traditional MAs were NOT designed to use against other resisting opponent.


Really?  That's how you feel?



> Do you want videos of boxing, *karate* etc being you used in a street fight? You can have it.


Oh....I guess not.


----------



## RoninX

> That is a novel thing to say for someone who lists Bujinkan as his main art.
> There are many people just like you, claiming just the same thing about what you do.
> But that is totally different of course


I list Bujinkan as my main art, i don´t walk around saying it´s effective. There´s a difference, don´t you think? Yeah, because i´m able to find value in a martial art, despite it´s effectiveness. So, you don´t have a point. Plus, i haven´t update my info since 2008. That´s a long time, and nothing guarantees you i´m still on Bujinkan. The fact is that today i cross train in several arts.




> True that a combatant isn't going to roll with the punches or the flips  or other techs that an aikidoist is going to use on them. THAT is what  makes the art effective IMO. If the ukes did NOT roll with them or  resisted as a real street thug would do then their arms would be broken,  wrists twisted out of shape and so forth.


The question here isn´t about the Ukemi. I totally understand the Ukemi concept, and i agree with it. I´ve trained several "TMA", and Aikido was one of them.

The question is about the effectiveness of Aikido´s main techniques, wich i and many, many people doubt, based not only on logical thinking, but also on personal experience. I´ve spent more than 15 years looking to see anyone apply with an high success rate Aikido techniques on a resisting person, and i´m yet to see it. Unfortunately the only thing i keep seeing is people saying i don´t understand the art, and that they´ve used Aikido in the streets, bla, bla, bla, but none of them has been able to prove nothing they say. It´s all just talk. I´ve seen tons of aikido people getting beaten up, but zero Aikido people beating up somebody. Everytime i see an Aikido guy against a resisting opponent he is looking bad. 

The chances of an Aikido guy apply a technique on someone with no experience are very small, and the chances of the same technique being applied on someone from an effective martial art is almost zero.

I´ve seen a friend of mine, 2nd dan in Aikido, trying to apply some of the joint locks to other friends of mine, with zero experience, and not being able to succeed one single time. Most of the time he couldn´t even catch their wrists, and when he did, they only needed to resist a little bit, and that´s it, nobody is going to the ground. Yeah, yeah "he probably is a bad aikidoka, bla, bla, bla, bla". Well, cut the crap. I´ve seen tons of Aikidoka not succeeding when trying to apply aikido techniques on a resisting opponent, because the fact is: If you resist, you are not going down. At least, not 97% of the time.

But, hey, i understand you! I was also a guy who believed Koryu techniques were very effective, and no matter what others tried to say to me, i would just not believe them. I had to learn by myself.



> Really?  That's how you feel?


That´s how any non delusional person feels. Anyone with a basic understanding of how an alive situation works knows none of the "catch the arm and twist the wrist" works. That´s good for movies, but in reality, i´m still waiting to someone who proves i´m wong. 

I had 15 years old when i first took an Aikido class, and none of the students could take me to the ground. Yeah, i know, that´s a bad behavior, but at the time i liked to resist. They called their Sensei, a 4th dan Aikido master, and he couldn´t take me to the ground, and the only thing i did was to gently resist, using pure force, and nothing more than that. Zero technique; just counter force.

Aikido, Jujutsu, Ninpô: The only time in these arts anyone was able to take me down with a wrist lock was when agreed to go to the ground. Everytime i wanted to, i would easy break the lock. I don´t care what´s your rank; you will only take me to the ground with a joint lock if i agree to go to the ground. Joint locks are easy to break, and the only way they can work is with compliant opponents. Plus, most of the time you won´t even fail taking me down, because you won´t even be able to catch my arm or wrist, because that´s almost as impossible as aplying joint locks. If i want to punch you in the head, the only thing you can do is to run or to apply a non convencional Aikido technique, because more than 95% of what you train won´t work against someone trying to punch you. You have almost zero chances of catch an arm in full speed movement. This ain´t Steven Seagal´s movies.


----------



## jks9199

Just so you know -- it is possible to discuss things without being insulting or rude.  In fact, in these parts, it's kind of expected.  You may wish to consider this a word to the wise, before we see more direct moderator action taken.


----------



## MA-Caver

RoninX, this is not to start a fight or anything else just a question of your post and call it... polite counter point. 

You speak as if (if I am reading your post correctly) that the average street thug is an invincible, lightning fast, impossible to beat opponent. I wonder where you get that idea. 
I've fought these guys (or guys like them), homeless or drug-addicted, criminal types when I myself used to live on the streets, homeless. 
No, I didn't use any fancy techs against them, just what I was taught/practiced and improvised on the spot. Knife, 2X4, sticks, broken bottles whatever... a few of them were slow and clumsy to say the least, with others I was just plain damned lucky...with the scars to prove it. 
I got to watch more fights than I was ever in which was to say a few (less than 10)... they're messy, slow, clumsy and overall plain stupid. Some even laughingly tried some of the movie stuff they watched at some point in their lives and got their asses handed to them by some other guy who more-n-likely also watched a movie OR had some actual combat (military) training. After the fight was over, a lot when to the hospital and a couple I saw went to the morgue. 
What I'm saying here is not to give too much credit to the average thug. They're dangerous and they're vicious to be sure and should NEVER be underestimated. They should be dealt with as quickly as possible by *any* means necessary. 
Yet if your training (whatever it may be) allows you to perform a tech against them then don't hesitate and chances are... you're going to be able to do it. 
Is this fantasy world? :idunno: If it is why bother studying ANY MA? Especially if it's not going to work out there in the real world? 
Again, it's only as good as you make it to be. 
It's too bad with all the cameras and camera phones on the planet that nobody has yet caught a MA-ist doing their technique against an actual street fight. Or better clarify it's too bad that not ALL the arts have been "caught on tape" so we can see if they're ******** or not. 
Perhaps someday we'll get lucky and see it on You-Tube.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RoninX said:


> No! Roninx is my only and first nick.


 
Sorry, you sounded like someone else that was once on MT.

And I still don't understand anyone's need to bash other styles (although I do have a theory on it) and force their opinions on others... and it is just an opinion... but at least it is an entertaining read so type away, let the keys heat up and the vitriol flow


----------



## RoninX

Xue Sheng said:


> Sorry, you sounded like someone else that was once on MT.
> 
> And I still don't understand anyone's need to bash other styles (although I do have a theory on it) and force their opinions on others... and it is just an opinion... but at least it is an entertaining read so type away, let the keys heat up and the vitriol flow




I didn´t know disagreeing wasn´t allowed around here. If i see someone saying something i consider a nonsense, i will disagree. You can call it whatever you want, but i don´t think it´s bashing. It´s just giving an opinion. 



> You speak as if (if I am reading your post correctly) that the average  street thug is an invincible, lightning fast, impossible to beat  opponent. I wonder where you get that idea.



I think you didn´t understand me. I don´t think that. The thing is, i don´t think you need to be invincible or lightning fast to avoid an Aikido technique, because Aikido is THAT ineffective. I throw you a punch and you will not be able to catch my wrist or arm. I´m 100% sure. And i´m not lightning fast.



> It's too bad with all the cameras and camera phones on the planet that  nobody has yet caught a MA-ist doing their technique against an actual  street fight. Or better clarify it's too bad that not ALL the arts have  been "caught on tape" so we can see if they're ******** or not.




Actually, i´ve seen several videos of several MA being used, but never anything that has anything to do with Aikido. Every single footage i´ve seen on Aikido going against any resisting opponent who isn´t is class mate shows me the Aikidoka taking an *** whoop. But i don´t even need to see videos or real fights to come to the conclusion that something doesn´t work. The same way you don´t need to see someone throwing himself out of the window to come to the conclusion he won´ be able to fly. You just need to use logical thinking.


----------



## RoninX

Just look at this video that is supposed to be a "sparring" session:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NinO0vGum38&feature=related

1- The attacker is just horrible, and i doubt he has ever done any Taekwondo. But, although he is very bad, he is able to hit the Aikidoka several times, and only doesn´t hit him more times because he doesn´t want to. He has tons of chances of doing it. If he was going full speed, the Aikidoka would be gone.

2- The attacker isn´t fully resisting. Yet, the Aikidoka has an hard time doing anything to him. He barely can catch an arm, although he is "sparring" against someone showing very little resistance when grabbed.  A fully resisting opponent would not be taken down one single time.

Why should i believe Aikido is effective? I see no reason to do that.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RoninX said:


> I didn´t know disagreeing wasn´t allowed around here. If i see someone saying something i consider a nonsense, i will disagree. You can call it whatever you want, but i don´t think it´s bashing. It´s just giving an opinion.
> 
> 
> I think you didn´t understand me. I don´t think that. The thing is, i don´t think you need to be invincible or lightning fast to avoid an Aikido technique, because Aikido is THAT ineffective. I throw you a punch and you will not be able to catch my wrist or arm. I´m 100% sure. And i´m not lightning fast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, i´ve seen several videos of several MA being used, but never anything that has anything to do with Aikido. Every single footage i´ve seen on Aikido going against any resisting opponent who isn´t is class mate shows me the Aikidoka taking an *** whoop. But i don´t even need to see videos or real fights to come to the conclusion that something doesn´t work. The same way you don´t need to see someone throwing himself out of the window to come to the conclusion he won´ be able to fly. You just need to use logical thinking.


 
you really need to make it clear who you are responding to in your posts becasue the above makes it look like I said all that and I didn't. All I said was 



> *Typed by Xue Sheng*
> 
> Sorry, you sounded like someone else that was once on MT.
> 
> And I still don't understand anyone's need to bash other styles (although I do have a theory on it) and force their opinions on others... and it is just an opinion... but at least it is an entertaining read so type away, let the keys heat up and the vitriol flow


 
And after you responded to that you went on and responded to these



> *Not typed by Xue Sheng*
> 
> You speak as if (if I am reading your post correctly) that the average street thug is an invincible, lightning fast, impossible to beat opponent. I wonder where you get that idea.


 


> *Not typed by Xue Sheng*
> 
> It's too bad with all the cameras and camera phones on the planet that nobody has yet caught a MA-ist doing their technique against an actual street fight. Or better clarify it's too bad that not ALL the arts have been "caught on tape" so we can see if they're ******** or not.


 
Which I did not say, however you did make it look like I did since the only name associated with all three quotes was Xue Sheng. But then maybe that was your plan, I don&#8217;t know, more bashing and vitriol possibly to make yourself look better :idunno:

Now as for what I said; disagreement is fine but you are not just disagreeing, you seem to be on a bit of a crusade here for a reason I think I now know but then it is only speculation on my part. as for the other 2 quote you responded to and attributed to me I don't know what to tell you, I did not type those so I cannot respond. So in future when responding to me please use what I said, stick with facts and don't add stuff that I did not say

Thank you

And I have to be truthful, after reading all your posts on this topic I am still wondering if you have not been here before under another, similar, name


----------



## RoninX

Sorry. My bad.


----------



## dancingalone

Not sure what the argument is about since K-man has already acknowledged atemi is important to making joint locking work.  I do not know what the 'sparring' video was supposed to be an exercise in, but from my viewpoint, a specific lock is not something you chase.  Instead, you take the opportunity that opens up after you have struck the attacker yourself to finish with a lock if desired - and you could just as easily do it with another strike again.

There is a thread titled something like 'Erroneous Aikido' which addresses many of the complaints RoninX has.  Might be a good idea to read it instead of rehashing the topic in a bellicose fashion.


----------



## RoninX

According to the mod who just sent me a PM, i can´t say a style isn´t effective. I have to agree with the people who say it is, or otherwise i should shut my mouth. Opinions are only welcome if they´re favorable to style being discussed. It doesn´t matter if the style works or not; you should not say it doesn´t. The style could be the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth, but you gotta agree with anyone saying it works. You can´t have a contrary opinion, otherwise you will be "offending" people. 

So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.

Bye.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RoninX said:


> According to the mod who just sent me a PM, i can´t say a style isn´t effective. I have to agree with the people who say it is, or otherwise i should shut my mouth. Opinions are only welcome if they´re favorable to style being discussed. It doesn´t matter if the style works or not; you should not say it doesn´t. The style could be the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth, but you gotta agree with anyone saying it works. You can´t have a contrary opinion, otherwise you will be "offending" people.
> 
> So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.


 
:wavey:


----------



## elder999

RoninX said:


> So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.


 
...and take yer little red wagon with you! :wavey:


----------



## oaktree

RoninX said:


> According to the mod who just sent me a PM, i can´t say a style isn´t effective. I have to agree with the people who say it is, or otherwise i should shut my mouth. Opinions are only welcome if they´re favorable to style being discussed. It doesn´t matter if the style works or not; you should not say it doesn´t. The style could be the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth, but you gotta agree with anyone saying it works. You can´t have a contrary opinion, otherwise you will be "offending" people.
> 
> So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.


 
Why can't you say its ineffective? You have the right to say your opinion as long as its in a respectful manner and as long as your arguement follows some logic no matter how uninformed it is.

You do not have to agree with anyone and noone has to agree with you.
 If there is something you disagree with as far as the Mods are presenting themselves then you can speak with the owner of the site.

Reading your posts on this thread they do come off kinda of not polite so maybe if you reword your statements you can still discuss why you feel Aikido is not effective.


----------



## Bob Hubbard

RoninX said:


> According to the mod who just sent me a PM, i can´t say a style isn´t effective. I have to agree with the people who say it is, or otherwise i should shut my mouth. Opinions are only welcome if they´re favorable to style being discussed. It doesn´t matter if the style works or not; you should not say it doesn´t. The style could be the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth, but you gotta agree with anyone saying it works. You can´t have a contrary opinion, otherwise you will be "offending" people.
> 
> So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.



Misrepresent much?

This is the message you were sent. 



> Your post in the Aikido forum was reported to the moderation team.  This post is rude, inappropriate, and in violation of our forum rules, specifically Section 1.10.2:
> 
> Quote:
> *1.10.2 No Art bashing. *
> 
> No one art is "the best", no one "style" is the  best. All have their strengths and weaknesses. Do your research and find  what best fits your ability and need.
> It is strongly urged, that you refrain from this type  of behavior.  Further incidents can result in the issuance of  infraction cards, which can lead to the suspension or banning of your  account.
> 
> If you have any questions on this matter, please contact an administrator.



At no point were you told you could not say a style isn't effective.  Feel free to discuss the pros and cons of the styles you are familiar  with. Just do it politely and don't be an *** about it.


----------



## MJS

RoninX said:


> So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.


 
So, one would ask then....why are you involving yourself in this thread?  Let me remind you of the rules that YOU agreed to upon joining.  Specifically the part on trolling.

*4.5 Trolling / Inciting Conflict:


*No "Trolling." Please do not post any topic that disrupts the peace and harmony of this board. Do not create meaningless threads with the sole purpose of starting a dispute. This includes messages in profiles; signatures and / or posting comments that will intimidate, promote or generate hatred or flames among members. 

Those who attempt to start unnecessary conflicts in any of the forums, will be infracted. Repeat offenders may be suspended or banned.


----------



## Bruno@MT

RoninX said:


> According to the mod who just sent me a PM, i can´t say a style isn´t effective. I have to agree with the people who say it is, or otherwise i should shut my mouth. Opinions are only welcome if they´re favorable to style being discussed. It doesn´t matter if the style works or not; you should not say it doesn´t. The style could be the most pathetic thing on the face of the earth, but you gotta agree with anyone saying it works. You can´t have a contrary opinion, otherwise you will be "offending" people.
> 
> So, i´m done with this topic. I really have no need to discuss this, so i don´t really know why i´m doing it. I don´t train in Aikido, i don´t enjoy Aikido and i know it doesn´t work. So, i agree, there´s no reason for me to stay here.
> 
> Bye.



Nope. You don't have to agree with other people. If everybody agreed with everything, this wouldn't be a 'discussion' forum. However, calling people delusional, obsessed, etc is not a positive way to have a discussion. Neither is saying 'aikido is crap and none of it can work' because that is just not true. There are pros and cons to everything, and right and wrong ways to apply something.

There is one area in which I disagree with with one of our high profile members. What it is doesn't matter here. Based on our interpretation of the information we have, I think X while he thinks 'not X'. Fair enough. we discuss our viewpoints and try to come to a conclusion or agree to disagree in a respectful manner.

What we *don't* do is calling each other delusional and get rude and confrontational because the other guy does not agree.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> Just look at this video that is supposed to be a "sparring" session:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NinO0vGum38&feature=related
> 
> 1- The attacker is just horrible, and i doubt he has ever done any Taekwondo. But, although he is very bad, he is able to hit the Aikidoka several times, and only doesn´t hit him more times because he doesn´t want to. He has tons of chances of doing it. If he was going full speed, the Aikidoka would be gone.
> 
> 2- The attacker isn´t fully resisting. Yet, the Aikidoka has an hard time doing anything to him. He barely can catch an arm, although he is "sparring" against someone showing very little resistance when grabbed. A fully resisting opponent would not be taken down one single time.
> 
> Why should i believe Aikido is effective? I see no reason to do that.


I was not going to comment further, but, with a post like this .... I just couldn't help myself. I just hope the poster stays around long enough to to read it.

This video was posted as an example of how aikido is ineffective against TKD. The guys are wearing headgear so it would be possible to assume that a kick to the head was in the equation, although it was probably a bit of overkill on the part of the TKD guy (unless he was frightened he was going to land on his head which on reflection may have been likely). I've seen most things but an aikido guy doing high kicks to the head isn't one of them.

Now I don't know how effective this TKD guy is on a scale of 1-10 but I'll be the first to say, if I was in a tournament I'd slip the organisers a note to have him as my opponent. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Nevertheless, you can only spar what is in front of you and it was *RoninX'*s choice of video to use as an example of the ineffectiveness of aikido.
Now as I saw it, the aikidoka could have broken the TKD guys neck the first time or at the least choked him out. The TKD guy did trap aikidoka's head under the arm for a moment but anyone with grappling skills knows how easy it is to avoid those punches and escape, which aikidoka did before applying the arm bar which would have destroyed the shoulder. Three more arm bars followed for a total of five submissions vs none. Also, trying to apply locks against gloves isn't easy either.

Now as it played out, all of the TKD guys kicks were easily parried and two or three times his kick was caught. In a street fight, TKD guy dead, multiple times if the fight was for real. At the end of the day, TKD guy puffing badly, aikidoka ready to go again.

Now read the commentary above and reflect on the comment vs the clip. Did I watch the right clip or was I dreaming?

*"i doubt he has ever done any Taekwondo"*

The guy I watched was wearing a black belt!

*"If he was going full speed, the Aikidoka would be gone."*

And if the Aikidoka was going full speed the TKD guy would be in traction for months.

*"A fully resisting opponent would not be taken down one single time."*

Mmm! If in real life and a real situation I caught a leg like that, the guy would be in serious trouble and he could resist as much as he liked. I wouldn't need the arm bar!

*"Just look at this video that is supposed to be a "sparring" session:"*

Yep a BB TKD guy kicking hard and fast, and wearing gloves so he could punch given the opportunity, vs a guy just standing there who TKD guy knew wasn't going to kick or punch. Some match up if the aikidoka is as bad as *RoninX* thinks!

*"Why should i believe Aikido is effective? I see no reason to do that."*

Believe what you like, it's a free country! :asian:


----------



## Bruno@MT

Also important to consider:

Performing e.g a wrist lock against a static person who is resisting is stupid. It won't work unless you muscle through. Such lock are meant to be used against a moving opponent, OR you break his concentration (and his localized resistance) with an atemi. OR you just do a different technique which he is not resisting.

I'll say it again: trying to muscle through a resisting opponent is stupid. and that is why a) we don't do it and b) we don't resist too hard when practicing the technique by itself, because then we'll never be able to practice it in a controlled manner.


----------



## Bruno@MT

Here is a most excellent article comparing the modern and classical approaches, explaining where, why and how they are different.
http://www.grapplearts.com/Submission-Grappling-vs-ju-jutsu.htm


----------



## RoninX

> Now as it played out, all of the TKD guys kicks were easily parried and  two or three times his kick was caught. In a street fight, TKD guy dead,  multiple times if the fight was for real. At the end of the day, TKD  guy puffing badly, aikidoka ready to go again.


In a street fight an average person would be punching 2 or 3 times times as fast, resulting in the Aikidoka not being able to grab him. The "Taekwondoka" is going pretty slow, and even that way the Aikidoka is unable to catch most of his punches and kicks. 



> The guy I watched was wearing a black belt!


Wich proves nothing. Judging by the sloppy kicks, i doubt he really is a black belt in TKD. To me this seems more like an Aikidoka with a small past experience in any striking art, simulating what supposly would happen if these two arts met.



> And if the Aikidoka was going full speed the TKD guy would be in traction for months.


I don´t see why. The fight starts standing, and everytime they´re standing the Aikidoka gets hit several times, and fails multiple grab attempts. Plus, everytime the Taekwondoka´s gloves come close to the Aikidoka´s upper body, he stops punching, something he could easly do if he wanted to. 



> Mmm! If in real life and a real situation I caught a leg like that, the  guy would be in serious trouble and he could resist as much as he liked.  I wouldn't need the arm bar!


I don´t think you would be able to caught anything. In the video the Aikidoka barely is able to catch a sloppy slow leg. What makes you belive you would be able to catch a full speed leg, with a real intention of hitting you? Plus, in a street fight i doubt anyone would kick you. You should be more concerned about full speed non-compilant punches, wich are very, very difficult to grab. 



> Yep a BB TKD guy kicking hard and fast, and wearing gloves so he could  punch given the opportunity, vs a guy just standing there who TKD guy  knew wasn't going to kick or punch. Some match up if the aikidoka is as  bad as *RoninX* thinks!


Hard and fast? I didn´t see nothing of that. Pheraps we are seeing different videos, because the only thing i saw were sloppy and soft median speed kicks. 




> Believe what you like, it's a free country!


I believe in what makes sense, and i would believe in Aikido as soon as i start seeing someone really applying it. Until now, i´m yet waiting.


----------



## Xue Sheng

RoninX said:


> In a street fight an average person would be punching 2 or 3 times times as fast, resulting in the Aikidoka not being able to grab him. The "Taekwondoka" is going pretty slow, and even that way the Aikidoka is unable to catch most of his punches and kicks.
> 
> Wich proves nothing. Judging by the sloppy kicks, i doubt he really is a black belt in TKD. To me this seems more like an Aikidoka with a small past experience in any striking art, simulating what supposly would happen if these two arts met.
> 
> I don´t see why. The fight starts standing, and everytime they´re standing the Aikidoka gets hit several times, and fails multiple grab attempts. Plus, everytime the Taekwondoka´s gloves come close to the Aikidoka´s upper body, he stops punching, something he could easly do if he wanted to.
> 
> I don´t think you would be able to caught anything. In the video the Aikidoka barely is able to catch a sloppy slow leg. What makes you belive you would be able to catch a full speed leg, with a real intention of hitting you? Plus, in a street fight i doubt anyone would kick you. You should be more concerned about full speed non-compilant punches, wich are very, very difficult to grab.
> 
> Hard and fast? I didn´t see nothing of that. Pheraps we are seeing different videos, because the only thing i saw were sloppy and soft median speed kicks.
> 
> 
> I believe in what makes sense, and i would believe in Aikido as soon as i start seeing someone really applying it. Until now, i´m yet waiting.


 
HEY!!!

Wait just one minute here...you said



RoninX said:


> Bye.


 
already...

That's it.. I take back my :wavey:


----------



## Master Dan

seasoned said:


> I can't seem to bring this video up, I don't know if it on your end or mine??


 
How old is your windows browser and what type? what version of media players software are you using? If 3 years old you can get free updates. 5 years old they want to charge you.

Sad when you buy a new computer the preloaded software is already 2 years old?


----------



## St Matt

RoninX, you don't have to catch anything in Aikido and there are many tecniques that would simply put someone down that attacked with a punch or a kick or any other kind of attack. If it came down to a life and death situation an Aikidoka would drop the opponent using the best method for the attack including strikes of his own and then when the attacker is down wondering 'what just happened' the Aikidoka could, if need be, destroy the shoulder, wrist, neck etc. *Fight over!*

Don't get caught up thinking we have to catch punches because we don't.

Bottom line is Aikido DOES work and is deadly when applied properly!


----------



## fangjian

RoninX
IMO the learning curves are different.  Arts like Muay Thai and Bjj can give you some confident skills in a short period of time (which is to their advantage). Soft styles like aikido, taijiquan etc.  can sometimes take a bit longer. The development of fighting skill is focused on a different area. Often times also, people get sick of learning because it takes time. This is understandable. 

NOT ALL aikido schools practice the development of 'aiki' properly ( I don't think ).   From experience,  it is *not* easy to spar aikidoka who has developed this 'internal skill'. Aikidoka who have developed this skill are *so* rooted, it's difficult to clinch and take them down. 
.


----------



## pgsmith

I've never quite grasped the need of some people to put down other arts, nor the need for some people to vigorously defend their arts. What does it matter if someone thinks that aikido is ineffective? 

  Out of the countless number of martial artists that I've met over the years, both on-line and in person, I could count the number that have actually been in a "real street fight" on one hand. All but one of those were a LEO of some type. 

  If whatever martial art a person is doing increases their self-confidence, then they're doing something good for themselves. If someone, like ronin-x, feels the need to put down other arts to make themselves feel better, then they are obviously lacking in the self-confidence area and should be pitied for wasting their efforts. An argument over effectivity is both silly and impossible to win as there is only one real way to tell, and the vast majority will never get into that situation.

  Just my thoughts on it.


----------



## RoninX

St Matt said:


> RoninX, you don't have to catch anything in Aikido and there are many tecniques that would simply put someone down that attacked with a punch or a kick or any other kind of attack. If it came down to a life and death situation an Aikidoka would drop the opponent using the best method for the attack including strikes of his own and then when the attacker is down wondering 'what just happened' the Aikidoka could, if need be, destroy the shoulder, wrist, neck etc. *Fight over!*
> 
> Don't get caught up thinking we have to catch punches because we don't.
> 
> Bottom line is Aikido DOES work and is deadly when applied properly!




This is all theory. Anyone can creat theories without having to back them up. I can create theories to justify the most nonsense thing in the world. Every single cult in the world has their own theories. How much value do they have? 

I don´t need you to "explain" me things, because i know very well the purpose behind arts like Aikido. And i also know most of their theories. What i´m questioning is the validity of those theories. I´ve never seen an Aikidoka perform a wrist or arm lock on a non-compilant opponent. Never. I´ve never seen Aikido being successfully used in a real altercation. The only thing i see is theory, and people refusing to accept the surreality of their techniques. The only people who seem to give any kind of credit to this art is their own members.

Show me a few examples. Not one example, because everything can work once in a while. I want several examples. I can found several examples of a Muay Thai kick being successfully used in several situations. I can found examples of Boxing. I can also found examples of BJJ. But i can´t found examples of Aikido. Why is that?

Every single person i´ve talked to had their own little experiences, where they were able to perform Aikido techniques, wich makes it even more strange that there isn´t one single credible evidence about Aikido´s effectiveness.

It´s easy to create pretty techniques when an opponent isn´t trying to kill you. Yeah, i step off the way, i avoid the punch, i grab the wrist and i immobilize my opponent. Sounds delightful. Now let me see that outside a dojo or a movie. Let me see that against people who won´t let you do to them whatever you want. 


I honestly think people don´t wanna see the truth. It was their choice. I didn´t wanna see the truth for more than 10 years, because i loved my training, and i didn´t wanna admit it was ineffective. I´ve never tested those techniques, but for years and years i believed they would work just fine under certainly conditions. But that was nothing but pure theory, and with time i got tired of theory and decided that i wanted to learn something that i  know that works for sure. Something i can apply when someone is not gonna just let me do whatever i want.


I can double leg you at any time i want. I don´t need you to let me do it. Do you understand? The same duble leg i perform against a compilant opponent, i can perform against a non compilant opponent. If you are standing in front of me, i´m gonna hit the double leg at least 85% of the time, and there´s nothing you will be able to do about it, unless you are very good defending double leg takedowns. Now try to immobilize me with a wrist lock. Try to catch my wrist and make me hit the ground. You will fail 90% of the time. 

Of course, now you will answer with another theory a la Aikido, where you explain how such surrealistic moves would work. But the problem is that that´s all fantasy. That´s all things you create in your head in order to keep believing in what you train. Reality is too much for you. 

Oh, and yes, in Aikido there are some moves that could probably work. But those are probably the moves i see being less trained in aikido classes, and generally, when they are trained, they aren´t trained against non-compilant opponents. The lack of free sparring can make an effective technique ver ineffective. 


"i´m gonna use what works best"

Well...i don´t know about you, but if my style had 498 ineffective techniques and 2 effective techniques, i would start training only the effective. Or, at least, i would give major importance to them. 

Oh, and you´re going to punch me before you perform a wrist lock? Lol. Good luck with that. The average person can punch better than the average Aikidoka. With punches or no punches, you ain´t catching my wrists.


----------



## RoninX

pgsmith said:


> I've never quite grasped the need of some people to put down other arts, nor the need for some people to vigorously defend their arts. What does it matter if someone thinks that aikido is ineffective?
> 
> Out of the countless number of martial artists that I've met over the years, both on-line and in person, I could count the number that have actually been in a "real street fight" on one hand. All but one of those were a LEO of some type.
> 
> If whatever martial art a person is doing increases their self-confidence, then they're doing something good for themselves. If someone, like ronin-x, feels the need to put down other arts to make themselves feel better, then they are obviously lacking in the self-confidence area and should be pitied for wasting their efforts. An argument over effectivity is both silly and impossible to win as there is only one real way to tell, and the vast majority will never get into that situation.
> 
> Just my thoughts on it.




Then why the discussion forums? Do you think critical opinions aren´t important? Ok.


----------



## pgsmith

> Then why the discussion forums? Do you think critical opinions aren´t important?


  Everyone has an opinion. Some people know what they're talking about and I really enjoy reading their opinions. Some people have no clue and just enjoy putting others down to try and make themselves feel better. One of those handful of people that I mentioned earlier that has really engaged in hand to hand combat, is a LEO for the city of Dallas that I met at the aikido class I used to train at many years ago. He'd been training for about 8 years at that time, and said that his aikido training had helped him immensely in his job. I rather believe his opinion over yours. 

  Sorry you were dissatisfied with your prior training. Doesn't sound like you're very happy with your present training either.


----------



## RoninX

pgsmith said:


> Everyone has an opinion. Some people know what they're talking about and I really enjoy reading their opinions. Some people have no clue and just enjoy putting others down to try and make themselves feel better. One of those handful of people that I mentioned earlier that has really engaged in hand to hand combat, is a LEO for the city of Dallas that I met at the aikido class I used to train at many years ago. He'd been training for about 8 years at that time, and said that his aikido training had helped him immensely in his job. I rather believe his opinion over yours.
> 
> Sorry you were dissatisfied with your prior training. Doesn't sound like you're very happy with your present training either.



I doubt you´re qualified to say who does or who does not know what they´re talking about.


----------



## RoninX

And i think you understand what i mean by "effective". To me something effective is something you would be able to apply 70-80% of the time against the average person.


----------



## fangjian

RoninX

I have my own opinions that occasionally get me into trouble here on MT, and I am very critical of *all* styles. So from experience, don't bother continuing this 'debate'. It'll go nowhere. 

I am curious though. In your view, what do you think, or better, how do you think aikido could change to make it a more effective method of combat?  Is it just their techniques?  The strategy?  *How* those things are trained?  

What do you think they could change that will make it better?


----------



## RoninX

fangjian said:


> RoninX
> 
> I have my own opinions that occasionally get me into trouble here on MT, and I am very critical of *all* styles. So from experience, don't bother continuing this 'debate'. It'll go nowhere.
> 
> I am curious though. In your view, what do you think, or better, how do you think aikido could change to make it a more effective method of combat?  Is it just their techniques?  The strategy?  *How* those things are trained?
> 
> What do you think they could change that will make it better?




Hi

First, the training methodology should be changed. Sparring should represent at least 40% of the total training. Any martial art who doesn´t do sparring sessions on a regular basis should not claim effectiveness. People should learn how to apply those techniques against people who are really resisting them, wich rarely happens. If my opponents throws himself to the ground just because his wrist "hurts" a little, how am i supposed to learn? If i´m not used having people resisting, what will i do when somebody does it?

In my old Bujinkan days i would tap just because someone pressed a little bit a pressure point. I would do Ukemi, or also tap, if someone twisted my wrist a little bit. The reality, although all those things hurt, they don´t hurt enough to control the body of a furious person full of adrenaline flowing through his veins. If i wanted to resist to any of those locks, i could have to. They were not enough to control me, and they´re not enough to control someone decided to resist. 

This is the main thing that should be changed, but there are also tons of problems with Aikido´s technical arsenal. In my opinion, 99% of the stuff based on grabing wrists in movement are pure fantasy, and will not work 99% of the time. You will not grab my fist in movement. That´s for sure. You won´t be able to do it. I dare anyone to try it on me. You might kick my ***, but you will not do it by catching fists in movement. That won´t ever happen. 

I don´t like wrist locks, but some arm locks are actually pretty good, since it´s more easier to control a bigger joint. When you control an arm, you are controling a much bigger part of a person´s body. It´s more difficult for you ou to escape when you have a bigger percentage of your body being controled. 

If you are a police officer, for example, some Aikido techniques might be good to control the opponent. But, once again, not for catching flying fists. 

My main problem is with people posting videos like that in the first page, saying it is for "self defense". I feel that insults my intelligence, since i can´t picture anyone applying something like that outside a movie. I´m sorry. 

An Aikidoka expects his opponent to know nothing about martial arts, and that itself reveals a lot of the nature of the art. I won´t waste my time training something that can´t be successfully used against another good martial artist. That´s not effectiveness.

But, hey, to be honest? Aikido can be a geat hobby, since you don´t actually believe that what you´re doing would ever work in a real fight. Because when you do, there´s something wrong with your perception of what reality really is. Never in your life you will be able to catch some guy´s hand with a knife inside and twist his wrist until he goes to the ground. You try that, you die.


----------



## RoninX

Oh, and for someone who mentioned Bas Rutten, he himself said stuff like Aikido won´t work. He said it on MMA Live.


----------



## Tanaka

RoninX said:


> Hi
> 
> First, the training methodology should be changed. Sparring should represent at least 40% of the total training. Any martial art who doesn´t do sparring sessions on a regular basis should not claim effectiveness. People should learn how to apply those techniques against people who are really resisting them, wich rarely happens. If my opponents throws himself to the ground just because his wrist "hurts" a little, how am i supposed to learn? If i´m not used having people resisting, what will i do when somebody does it?
> 
> In my old Bujinkan days i would tap just because someone pressed a little bit a pressure point. I would do Ukemi, or also tap, if someone twisted my wrist a little bit. The reality, although all those things hurt, they don´t hurt enough to control the body of a furious person full of adrenaline flowing through his veins. If i wanted to resist to any of those locks, i could have to. They were not enough to control me, and they´re not enough to control someone decided to resist.
> 
> This is the main thing that should be changed, but there are also tons of problems with Aikido´s technical arsenal. In my opinion, 99% of the stuff based on grabing wrists in movement are pure fantasy, and will not work 99% of the time. You will not grab my fist in movement. That´s for sure. You won´t be able to do it. I dare anyone to try it on me. You might kick my ***, but you will not do it by catching fists in movement. That won´t ever happen.
> 
> I don´t like wrist locks, but some arm locks are actually pretty good, since it´s more easier to control a bigger joint. When you control an arm, you are controling a much bigger part of a person´s body. It´s more difficult for you ou to escape when you have a bigger percentage of your body being controled.
> 
> If you are a police officer, for example, some Aikido techniques might be good to control the opponent. But, once again, not for catching flying fists.
> 
> My main problem is with people posting videos like that in the first page, saying it is for "self defense". I feel that insults my intelligence, since i can´t picture anyone applying something like that outside a movie. I´m sorry.
> 
> An Aikidoka expects his opponent to know nothing about martial arts, and that itself reveals a lot of the nature of the art. I won´t waste my time training something that can´t be successfully used against another good martial artist. That´s not effectiveness.
> 
> But, hey, to be honest? Aikido can be a geat hobby, since you don´t actually believe that what you´re doing would ever work in a real fight. Because when you do, there´s something wrong with your perception of what reality really is. Never in your life you will be able to catch some guy´s hand with a knife inside and twist his wrist until he goes to the ground. You try that, you die.


Sparring is good way of training. But what you fail to realize when you were doing your wristlock drills is this... Those wristlocks would have been follow ups to atemi. Atemi is the great equalizer... it is a distraction. Doesn't even have to hurt that much, it can even be a slap. Now the issue here is that when you do the atemi they are distracted for a short time at which you would have to apply the wristlock VERY fast and to the point. Unlike "Juji gatame" where I can slowly apply it in a controlled manner to where I do not hyper-extend Uke arm. Wristlock cannot work like that on a resisting person. Wristlock can be resisted if it's not past the point of no return. So wristlock has to be done fast and unknowingly to be done against someone who isn't giving it to you. (which can cause injury)

Also you keep talking about not being able to grab wrist in movement. I have seen untrained martial artist grab someones wrist in movement. Where someone threw a strike at them and they caught it. Of course they didn't know what to do with it so they just held onto it and let go. So its far from impossible. My only issue with Aikido are the circular movements it uses. I like to be straight to the point and cause damage or get them out my way. But that's my own cup of tea.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> Oh, and for someone who mentioned Bas Rutten, he himself said stuff like Aikido won´t work. He said it on MMA Live.


That wasn't 'someone', that was me and you chose to ignore all my questions and my comments on the different techniques.

And your quote of Bas Ruten was also liberal with the truth. 



 
I'm afraid most of your comments show a total ignorance of many of the MAs and I often have to bite my tongue. 



> Sparring should represent at least 40% of the total training. Any martial art who doesn´t do sparring sessions on a regular basis should not claim effectiveness.


No problem with the first part, that is an opinion you can state.
The second part is your comment that is IMHO and many of the others, wrong.

If you are into a 'sport' martial art you would spar more than a traditional empty hand form of MA but to say what you stated has no basis that you could quote. 



> I don´t like wrist locks, but some arm locks are actually pretty good, since it´s more easier to control a bigger joint. When you control an arm, you are controling a much bigger part of a person´s body. It´s more difficult for you ou to escape when you have a bigger percentage of your body being controled.


Are you suggesting aikido doesn't use arm bars? Whether you like wrist locks or not is irrelevant. We train wrist locks against full resistance for the very reasons you state. If I can't make them work against resistance then they would be worse than useless. Done properly, they will work but unless you train resistance you won't know how to make them work.


> An Aikidoka expects his opponent to know nothing about martial arts, and that itself reveals a lot of the nature of the art. I won´t waste my time training something that can´t be successfully used against another good martial artist. That´s not effectiveness.


All civilian forms of self defence were designed to be used against untrained thugs. I asked you about that earlier but you declined to answer. If I want to fight another good martial artist I will train for that. That means train for sport. I did show you the type of training I favour ... that was the Bas Ruten video. You don't spar that type of self defence. I asked you about certain techniques in the video. You ignored the question. I asked you what you thought was an effective MA and you ignored the question.



> But, hey, to be honest? Aikido can be a geat hobby, since you don´t actually believe that what you´re doing would ever work in a real fight. Because when you do, there´s something wrong with your perception of what reality really is. Never in your life you will be able to catch some guy´s hand with a knife inside and twist his wrist until he goes to the ground. You try that, you die.


 I take exception to your continuous put down of other styles. You seem to be the master of the insult. As to unarmed SD against a knife. If your assailant has any knowledge of knife fighting there is a fair chance that most people will die and certainly you will be cut. No MA including Krav and Systema will guarantee you safety against a knife attack. Why pick aikido as the MA that is ineffective? At least Aikido regularly trains against knife attack.


> And i think you understand what i mean by "effective". To me something effective is something you would be able to apply 70-80% of the time against the average person.


I don't have a problem with you definition although I would be looking more to 95% for me. The inference is that Aikido would not be effective to that extent and that is an insult to all serious student's of Aikido. Aikido techniques are very useful means of controlling an attacker when you may not want to harm him.



> I doubt you´re qualified to say who does or who does not know what they´re talking about.


That's about on par with the rest of your posts. You know it all and anyone who questions your position isn't qualified to comment. 
Time gentlemen, please! :shrug:


----------



## Bruno@MT

RoninX said:


> And i think you understand what i mean by "effective". To me something effective is something you would be able to apply 70-80% of the time against the average person.



Do you mean an average person? or an average competition fighter?
It is one thing to talk about effectiveness against joe sixpack, and quite another to talk about effectiveness against a trained fighter.


----------



## RoninX

Bruno@MT said:


> Do you mean an average person? or an average competition fighter?
> It is one thing to talk about effectiveness against joe sixpack, and quite another to talk about effectiveness against a trained fighter.



Hi

An average person. Against someone who knows how to defend your technique you won´t be able to achieve such great success rate, unless you are a much more skilled than him.

For example: I can have a 100% success rate with a double leg takedown against an average person. But against a wrestler, i would fail most of the time.

On the other hand, i would fail catching the punch of an average person almost 100% of the time, let alone an experienced martial artist. 

When i can easly apply against a resistant opponent something i train in the Dojo, i call that effectiveness. I call that a technique that works. If i have trouble applying something to a person that will resist using no technique, only pure force, there´s something wrong with the technique i´m trying to apply.


----------



## RoninX

> Sparring is good way of training. But what you fail to realize when you  were doing your wristlock drills is this... Those wristlocks would have  been follow ups to atemi. Atemi is the great equalizer... it is a  distraction. Doesn't even have to hurt that much, it can even be a slap.  Now the issue here is that when you do the atemi they are distracted  for a short time at which you would have to apply the wristlock VERY  fast and to the point.




I´m sorry, but this is not how you train in Aikido. In Aikido your mindset isn´t prepared to use Atemi in the way you described. Plus, is there any evidence that adding Atemi the technique would wok? Most of these techniques seem to imply that to have to catch uke´s arm or wrist in movement. How exactly would this work with atemi? You hit first and then you try to grab the wrist? Even with your small half second distraction i see no reason why someone wouldn´t be able to resist. 



> Also you keep talking about not being able to grab wrist in movement. I  have seen untrained martial artist grab someones wrist in movement.  Where someone threw a strike at them and they caught it. Of course they  didn't know what to do with it so they just held onto it and let go. So  its far from impossible. My only issue with Aikido are the circular  movements it uses. I like to be straight to the point and cause damage  or get them out my way. But that's my own cup of tea.




I´ve seen two fighters being knocked out at the same time. What´s your point? I already said that anything can work once in a while. But, once again, that´s not my definition of effectiveness.




> That wasn't 'someone', that was me and you chose to ignore all my questions and my comments on the different techniques.
> 
> And your quote of Bas Ruten was also liberal with the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid most of your comments show a total ignorance of many of the MAs and I often have to bite my tongue.




Yeah. Bas Rutten saying most of what you train won´t work. Yes, because in case you haven´t noticed, what people do in Aikido is exactly what he is talking about. 



> No problem with the first part, that is an opinion you can state.
> The second part is your comment that is IMHO and many of the others, wrong.
> 
> If you are into a 'sport' martial art you would spar more than a  traditional empty hand form of MA but to say what you stated has no  basis that you could quote.


 
Correction: If you are into something that´s gonna be tested in real situations you should spar more. 



> Are you suggesting aikido doesn't use arm bars? Whether you like wrist  locks or not is irrelevant. We train wrist locks against full resistance  for the very reasons you state. If I can't make them work against  resistance then they would be worse than useless. Done properly, they  will work but unless you train resistance you won't know how to make  them work.



You can´t make it work against resistance. Send me a PM and come visit me. You won´t be able to do nothing. I will try to punch you in the face for 3 minutes, and if you manage to catch one single punch and throw me to the ground i will pay you a thousand euros. I´ve done this test. I´m 100% sure of what i´m saying. You can even be the best Aikidoka in the world, that you won´t be able to do nothing to me. 



> All civilian forms of self defence were designed to be used against  untrained thugs. I asked you about that earlier but you declined to  answer. If I want to fight another good martial artist I will train for  that. That means train for sport. I did show you the type of training I  favour ... that was the Bas Ruten video. You don't spar that type of  self defence. I asked you about certain techniques in the video. You  ignored the question. I asked you what you thought was an effective MA  and you ignored the question



Untrained thugs? Good luck when you find someone who knows how to beat you. Martial Arts are becoming more and more popular. So many people nowadays have trained something. That´s not the best mentality to have. And not even against a thug you would be able to apply whatever you´ve been training in Aikido. Prove me otherwise. 



> I take exception to your continuous put down of other styles. You seem  to be the master of the insult. As to unarmed SD against a knife. If  your assailant has any knowledge of knife fighting there is a fair  chance that most people will die and certainly you will be cut. No MA  including Krav and Systema will guarantee you safety against a knife  attack. Why pick aikido as the MA that is ineffective? At least Aikido  regularly trains against knife attack.




I´m sorry if for you this is an insult, but you can´t expect to come to a discussion forum without having people disagreeing with you. I think your martial art is ineffective, and until now i haven´t seen proof of otherwise. Deal with it! Thousands and thousands and thousands of people feel the same way. I´m not insulting you more than you are insulting me.



> I don't have a problem with you definition although I would be looking  more to 95% for me. The inference is that Aikido would not be effective  to that extent and that is an insult to all serious student's of Aikido.  Aikido techniques are very useful means of controlling an attacker when  you may not want to harm him.




Well, if that´s an insult to you, i admit i prefer to insult you than to insult my intelligence, pretending to believe in such a non sense. Lol. 95% of the time? Now you´re just going wild.


----------



## Yari

RoninX said:


> I´m sorry, but this is not how you train in Aikido. In Aikido your mindset isn´t prepared to use Atemi in the way you described. Plus, is there any evidence that adding Atemi the technique would wok? *Most of these techniques seem to imply that to have to catch uke´s arm or wrist in movement*. How exactly would this work with atemi? You hit first and then you try to grab the wrist? Even with your small half second distraction i see no reason why someone wouldn´t be able to resist.


 
Aikido has many ways, and depending on person and style atemi will differ. I've done styles without atemi, and styles with alot of atemi.

You state that most of the techniques *imply* to catch the arm.. nope is my answer to that. If that is what you got from training aikido, your barking up the wrong tree. Aikido doesn't imply.

/Terje


----------



## pgsmith

> I doubt you´re qualified to say who does or who does not know what they´re talking about.


  You are free to have all of the doubts you wish. However, since you you love to toss your opinions around as facts, how many times have you had to fight for your life? How many times have you had to apply your training outside of sparring or a ring? Between my youth with street gangs and my time in the military, I've been forced to engage in a number of life or death struggles. I believe this qualifies me more than you, who can only parrot what your MMA heroes and training partners tell you. 

  It's impossible to learn when you think you already know it all.


----------



## RoninX

Yari said:


> Aikido has many ways, and depending on person and style atemi will differ. I've done styles without atemi, and styles with alot of atemi.
> 
> You state that most of the techniques *imply* to catch the arm.. nope is my answer to that. If that is what you got from training aikido, your barking up the wrong tree. Aikido doesn't imply.
> 
> /Terje




Nope? Ok. Because that´s what i´ve always saw Aikidoka doing: Catching arms in movement. Your style must be different.


----------



## Tanaka

RoninX said:


> Nope? Ok. Because that´s what i´ve always saw Aikidoka doing: Catching arms in movement. Your style must be different.


That's because you're probably watching the Aikidoka work on the technique... Not mimic what he would do in a real encounter.

Tomiki Aikido has tons of sparring btw.


----------



## fangjian

Tanaka said:


> That's because you're probably watching the Aikidoka work on the technique... Not mimic what he would do in a real encounter.
> 
> Tomiki Aikido has tons of sparring btw.



What about Aikido in general?  Disregard whatever they do in the school of Tomiki. 

You never see people question what they do in Muay Thai or Sanda, and then those Muay Thai people say 'Oh well the southern school of Muay Thai....they spar....

That's because there's generally a bit of consistency with those arts. Is there a lot of inconsistency with all of the schools of Aikido?

When I did Aikido, after a year or two of solid foundation, when we randori, it was no joke. When you were surrounded by multiple people, if you had a good foundation, they were not feeding you gentle _shomenuchi _strikes. If you didn't move or defend properly, you got *RUN OVER.* 

Don't get me wrong I am critical of all styles. But to all of the mainstream _combat_ styles like Muay Thai, Bjj, etc. , I highly recommend to you to practice the randori that I  experienced in Aikido. Sparring with one other person has *great* value. But the randori I experienced in Aikido has *great* value too. 

Do most Aikido schools still train this way?


----------



## Tanaka

fangjian said:


> What about Aikido in general?  Disregard whatever they do in the school of Tomiki.
> 
> You never see people question what they do in Muay Thai or Sanda, and then those Muay Thai people say 'Oh well the southern school of Muay Thai....they spar....
> 
> That's because there's generally a bit of consistency with those arts. Is there a lot of inconsistency with all of the schools of Aikido?
> 
> When I did Aikido, after a year or two of solid foundation, when we randori, it was no joke. When you were surrounded by multiple people, if you had a good foundation, they were not feeding you gentle _shomenuchi _strikes. If you didn't move or defend properly, you got *RUN OVER.*
> 
> Don't get me wrong I am critical of all styles. But to all of the mainstream _combat_ styles like Muay Thai, Bjj, etc. , I highly recommend to you to practice the randori that I  experienced in Aikido. Sparring with one other person has *great* value. But the randori I experienced in Aikido has *great* value too.
> 
> Do most Aikido schools still train this way?



Yes I know about what you are talking about, because my uncle is Aikidoka. He tells me stories about how horrible randori sessions were. He told me one time he got injured ribs and jaw. He told me those guys were serious when they did the multiple attacker randori exercise. Especially when you test for black belt you may have people of higher rank attacking you.


----------



## fangjian

Tanaka said:


> Yes I know about what you are talking about, because my uncle is Aikidoka. He tells me stories about how horrible randori sessions were. He told me one time he got injured ribs and jaw. He told me those guys were serious when they did the multiple attacker randori exercise. Especially when you test for black belt you may have people of higher rank attacking you.


Haha. Yes. If you had a good foundation, they won't go easy on you. 



I've always thought that the most important range to be proficient in, is the clinch. If you partner or enemy is worried about their own balance they will not be attacking anything. 
When you look at a certain martial art you kind of judge what range they're good at. Judo is good at clinching, Muay Thai is good at Kickboxing/Clinching, ................

What is Aikido 'good at' ?
I've always thought Aikido was good at _Awareness_. At least when I was training, my sensei instilled in me, not to focus on this one person you are working with ( since sometimes attacks would come from multiple directions) .  So, Aikido taught me awareness of ambush type of attacks. Which is how it often goes down for real. 

I must admit though. The attacks and techniques used seem a bit peculiar. When I use to train, we would use attacks like haymakers, tackling, etc. along with the more traditional types. But when I watch most Aikido videos it's all about telegraphed shomenuchi and stuff. 
Even when I was grabbed by someone they were not just standing there, they were actually applying 'yonkyo' and pile-driving me into the mat if I didn't do anything. *ouch*

Anyone have a link to an old thread or anything about why these attacks are use with such prevalence?  Many other martial artist don't 'get it'.  * me included  *


----------



## Aiki Lee

RoninX, some kata that look like they wouldn't work against a real attack might be because not all kata in aikido or other martial arts are about the simulation of a fight. The technique you might be seeing may be teaching a concept that could be used in fighting but the way it is transmited is not necessarily the way it would look in a confrontation.

Some aikidoka are not efficient, but then so are some karateka, MMA practitioners, judoka, boxers and whatever. All styles of martial arts have lousy practitioners when you look for them.

Aiki principles are extremely useful for self defense, but like anything else you must train diligently in them.


----------



## K-man

As far as different styles of Aikido are concerned, it depends on when the teacher trained with Ueshiba Sensei. Up until the war, aikido was really quite violent as it derived from Daito Ryu Jujutsu. Ueshiba was trained by Takeda Sokaku as was one of his most notable students, Koichi Tohei. Any style of aikido from this stage of Aikido's development will look very different to the more esoteric later style when Ueshiba was heavily involved in Omoto Kyu religion. So, if you train Aikikai under Ueshiba's family line, then you probably won't train atemi. If you train a style that developed earlier, like we do, you will use all the strikes that you would use in another art such as Okinawan karate. We also train against total resistance.

Because the majority of aikido is probably Aikikai, most people would not be exposed to other styles. Tomiki Aikido was mentioned earlier. It is an earlier style. Saito style is post war. As such it is quite valid to describe different styles of aikido as it is to describe different styles of karate. (For example, Japanese Goju Kai karate and Okinawan Goju Ryu karate have the same origin and still have similarities but are totally different in application.)   :asian:


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> I´m sorry, but this is not how you train in Aikido. In Aikido your mindset isn´t prepared to use Atemi in the way you described. Plus, is there any evidence that adding Atemi the technique would wok? Most of these techniques seem to imply that to have to catch uke´s arm or wrist in movement. How exactly would this work with atemi? You hit first and then you try to grab the wrist? Even with your small half second distraction i see no reason why someone wouldn´t be able to resist.


Having just hit the wrong button, after a very long reply I am not in the best frame of mind. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 The attitude in the post hasn't helped my mood in the slightest. I feel I need to post the original because often (or almost always) the reply bears no reference to the issue.



> Sparring is good way of training. But what you fail to realize when you were doing your wristlock drills is this... Those wristlocks would have been follow ups to atemi. Atemi is the great equalizer... it is a distraction. Doesn't even have to hurt that much, it can even be a slap. Now the issue here is that when you do the atemi they are distracted for a short time at which you would have to apply the wristlock VERY fast and to the point.


 My mindset as a karateka or an aikidoka is; 
Number 1 = Evade (Tsabaki)
Number 2 = Strike (Atemi)
Number 3 = Control or destroy. 

That works for me! What is it about that simple sequence that fails to compute? Now something as simple as this common to karate or most other styles of MA. Now I ask you a question. If as a karateka I hit you hard in the throat, let's say as a knife hand (banned in MMA by the way), is it likely to be effective? In karate we'll call it shuto uchi.

If you say 'no' then we have a problem Houston! Thirty odd years of training totally wasted. :shrug:

If you say yes, I now put on my Aikido gi, and perform the same strike as before. BTW that's Atemi and in aikido we practise a lot of yokomen-uchi. Obviously it is not effective because aikido is not effective, right? :erg:

Now as a karateka I may or may not be skilled at grappling and applying locks so as a karateka I will just hit him again.

As an aikidoka, I'll just go for the arm bar and either control him or destroy a joint if I choose.

Either way, Goodnight Irene! (sorry Tez 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 )

And I don't believe in sparring as such but I'll address that later. I'm talking close quarters here.   :asian:


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> *My post:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't 'someone', that was me and you chose to ignore all my questions and my comments on the different techniques.
> 
> And your quote of Bas Ruten was also liberal with the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Your reply:*
> 
> Yeah. Bas Rutten saying most of what you train won´t work. Yes, because in case you haven´t noticed, what people do in Aikido is exactly what he is talking about.
Click to expand...

 
Again, you didn't comment on the techniques in the original vid I posted. And, you didn't hear what Bas said in the vid you posted!

I'll spell it out for you. The question was _"Aikido seems to have some useful and seemingly effective techniques for grappling and takedowns. Why don't you see these utilised in *MMA*?"_ 

This question relates to cage fighting, not street defence but we'll let that pass for the moment. What does Bas actually say? _" .... and, I'm sure there's moves that really work at close distance like those wrist locks, ... of course they've got moves that work, ..." _Then he goes on about not being able to catch punches and against MMA fighters that would be pretty impossible_." ... and that's why you don't see many aikido guys in the cage. They'd have to really change their style ... at close distance they might pull off some submissions but otherwise it's going to be very difficult."_

Bas Ruten DID NOT say what you said he said. You have totally misrepresented him to suit yourself.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> You said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sparring should represent at least 40% of the total training.
> Any martial art who doesn´t do sparring sessions on a regular basis should not claim effectiveness.
> 
> 
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No problem with the first part, that is an opinion you can state.
> The second part is your comment that is IMHO and many of the others, wrong. If you are into a 'sport' martial art you would spar more than a traditional empty hand form of MA but to say what you stated has no basis that you could quote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You replied:
> 
> 
> 
> Correction: If you are into something that´s gonna be tested in real situations you should spar more.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I don't agree that anyone except a competitor should do 40% of there training as sparring. If you are competing, fine, spar as often as you need. If you are not into sport I would argue that sparring has little benefit and in many cases is counter productive.
I have taken sports sparring out of my training because, IMHO, it has no value. 

If we were sparring to MMA rules there are many things we can not do:



The following are fouls, as set out by the Nevada State Athletic Commission:

Butting with the head
Eye gouging of any kind
Biting
Hair pulling
Fish hooking
Groin attacks of any kind
Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent. (see Gouging)
Small joint manipulation
Striking to the spine or the back of the head
Striking downward using the point of the elbow
Throat strikes of any kind, including, without limitation, grabbing the trachea
Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh
Grabbing the clavicle
Kicking the head of a grounded opponent
Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent
Stomping a grounded opponent
Kicking to the kidney with the heel
Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area
Holding the shorts or gloves of an opponent
Spitting at an opponent
Engaging in unsportsmanlike conduct that causes an injury to an opponent
Holding the ropes or the fence
Using abusive language in the ring or fenced area
Attacking an opponent on or during the break
Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee
Attacking an opponent after the bell (horn) has sounded the end of a round
Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee
Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury
Interference by the corner
Throwing in the towel during competition
I train my guys to bite, gauge, break fingers, crush testicles, head butt, tear the sides of cheeks, tear ears, crush the larynx, strike to the neck, take out the knees, utilise the point of the elbow etc etc etc. These are things you may need to do in a street fight and most of these techniques are found in the traditional martial arts. We engage in close combat fighting but it is not full force for obvious reasons. Why do we need to spar for at least 40% of the time and not practise any of the techniques that may in fact save our lives. Your statement is patent nonsense.

I've taken the liberty of correcting your last point. I hope you don't mind. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




_If you are into something that´s gonna be tested in real situations you should spar *less, not* more.  :asian:_


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> I posted:
> 
> 
> 
> All civilian forms of self defence were designed to be used against untrained thugs. I asked you about that earlier but you declined to answer. If I want to fight another good martial artist I will train for that. That means train for sport. I did show you the type of training I favour ... that was the Bas Ruten video. You don't spar that type of self defence. I asked you about certain techniques in the video. You ignored the question. I asked you what you thought was an effective MA and you ignored the question
> 
> 
> 
> Untrained thugs? Good luck when you find someone who knows how to beat you. Martial Arts are becoming more and more popular. So many people nowadays have trained something. That´s not the best mentality to have. And not even against a thug you would be able to apply whatever you´ve been training in Aikido. Prove me otherwise.
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure how I can be more specific. You continue to ramble like Muammar Gaddafi! He can talk for hours and say nothing!  Please feel free to take that as a compliment.  

What part of _"All civilian forms of self defence were designed to be used against untrained thugs."_ are you struggling with?

Do you agree or disagree? _"If I want to fight another good martial artist I will train for that. That means train for sport."_

_"I did show you the type of training I favour ... that was the Bas Ruten video. You don't spar that type of self defence. I asked you about certain techniques in the video. You ignored the question. I asked you what you thought was an effective MA and you ignored the question." _

I asked you about the arm bars etc in this clip. Did you really look at them? Just in case you didn't recognise them, they're the same ones we train in aikido.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




And, please, from your vast knowledge of the martial arts, could you please tell me which style YOU think might be effective.     :asian:


----------



## fangjian

I actively teach things like head-butting, eye-gouging, throat striking, downward elbow, and striking a down opponent. 

These concepts, I actually have techniques that we actually train all the time in drills and stuff.  Hopefully soon I can get some things so that we can actually strike instead of pulling our strikes. Maybe a helmet so we can head butt, goggles so we can eye wipe, etc. 

I've been to a few places that arrogantly claim MMA isn't _real_ fighting and then pull out a list of concepts that they _could_ hypothetically use. I have been watching a lot of Kun Tao and JKD videos in seeing how they respond with these concepts too. They are very good at it. They train it the best I have seen. 
Do you actively train these things?  

Admittedly of course, an MMA fight isn't exactly _real_ fighting. Real fighting is definitely more scary. There's no warning up for the fight. Medics on standby etc. 
A couple years ago, I was at a bar and some guy got in my face and started talkin *****. I actually got......scared. I train MMA FMA too. I immediately started to try to calm him down. Once he was calmed down, I walked to a nearby table and grabbed a couple beer bottles in case I needed to smash them on his face. My point is, all of my sparring and training didn't help and I still got scared. So then I realized the value of role playing. Having someone get in your face push you around and yell at you in your school. This is beneficial for training too. 

In conclusion I guess I think that, for general preparedness for self defense, MMA type training is good. But I don't think it is necessarily the best. But I *do* think it is one of the better methods of training and am wondering, how many other methods out there who criticize it actually train those illegal moves.

To everyone besides RoninX- Do you guys train those illegal moves that you feel the average MMA'er doesn't train?


----------



## Bruno@MT

Pretty much, yes. There's a whole list of targets we learn to hit, based on grade, the most basic ones first. In our partner drills, we target those areas. Not only the standard ones (nose, chin, sternum) but also the other ones (throat, eyes, ears, testicles). The idea is to learn to always attack the most appropriate area, based on position etc.

We don't spar as such, but form time to time we do pressure testing, scenarios, etc. One person is uke, the other is tori. There is a wide range of ways we test. For example, a while back, we did an escape exercise where uke was allowed to perform a hold and pin tori down on the ground. The goal of the exercise was for tori to escape.

When the sempai and I were up, he got both of my arms into a lock, and then choked me with my gi. A pretty hopeless situation as long as there are rules. Especially because the choke gave me little time. So what I did was to try and bite his throat and go for his jugular. He caught on to that and arched his head back. This allowed me to grab 2 fists full of hair and yank his head backwards and roll him off me. At that point I freed one hand and grabbed his throat. At that point the exercise was finished.

Other things include having an uke and a tori, and allow (a limited set of) random attacks. Or create a scenario where tori is presed against a wall, etc. Things like that. We don't often do these things because we see them as a test. Not as a regular training tool.


----------



## fangjian

Bruno@MT said:


> Pretty much, yes. There's a whole list of targets we learn to hit, based on grade, the most basic ones first. In our partner drills, we target those areas. Not only the standard ones (nose, chin, sternum) but also the other ones (throat, eyes, ears, testicles). The idea is to learn to always attack the most appropriate area, based on position etc.
> 
> We don't spar as such, but form time to time we do pressure testing, scenarios, etc. One person is uke, the other is tori. There is a wide range of ways we test. For example, a while back, we did an escape exercise where uke was allowed to perform a hold and pin tori down on the ground. The goal of the exercise was for tori to escape.
> 
> When the sempai and I were up, he got both of my arms into a lock, and then choked me with my gi. A pretty hopeless situation as long as there are rules. Especially because the choke gave me little time. So what I did was to try and bite his throat and go for his jugular. He caught on to that and arched his head back. This allowed me to grab 2 fists full of hair and yank his head backwards and roll him off me. At that point I freed one hand and grabbed his throat. At that point the exercise was finished.
> 
> Other things include having an uke and a tori, and allow (a limited set of) random attacks. Or create a scenario where tori is presed against a wall, etc. Things like that. We don't often do these things because we see them as a test. Not as a regular training tool.



Very cool. Thank you for sharing. I suspected as much from someone who trains Ninjutsu. Any Aikidoka here train these types of concepts?


----------



## Tanaka

I think all training is useful.
Kata, Sparring, etc.

We train to hit vital areas, but we also spar. This allows us to see what it is like against someone who doesn't give us what we want, and is trying to defeat/counter you.


----------



## Yari

RoninX said:


> .... Your style must be different.


 
Just my point..... Since Aikido is diverse compared to some styles, there are many differnet usages; you'll find using the term Aikido as a gerneral term not adequit.
It's that Aikido is so diverse that gives it so many usages.

/Terje


----------



## Yari

K-man said:


> ......_If you are into something that´s gonna be tested in real situations you should spar *less, not* more. :asian:_


 

I agree..

/terje


----------



## K-man

fangjian said:


> I actively teach things like head-butting, eye-gouging, throat striking, downward elbow, and striking a down opponent.
> 
> These concepts, I actually have techniques that we actually train all the time in drills and stuff. Hopefully soon I can get some things so that we can actually strike instead of pulling our strikes. Maybe a helmet so we can head butt, goggles so we can eye wipe, etc.
> 
> I've been to a few places that arrogantly claim MMA isn't _real_ fighting and then pull out a list of concepts that they _could_ hypothetically use. I have been watching a lot of Kun Tao and JKD videos in seeing how they respond with these concepts too. They are very good at it. They train it the best I have seen.
> Do you actively train these things?
> 
> Admittedly of course, an MMA fight isn't exactly _real_ fighting. Real fighting is definitely more scary. There's no warning up for the fight. Medics on standby etc.
> A couple years ago, I was at a bar and some guy got in my face and started talkin *****. I actually got......scared. I train MMA FMA too. I immediately started to try to calm him down. Once he was calmed down, I walked to a nearby table and grabbed a couple beer bottles in case I needed to smash them on his face. My point is, all of my sparring and training didn't help and I still got scared. So then I realized the value of role playing. Having someone get in your face push you around and yell at you in your school. This is beneficial for training too.
> 
> In conclusion I guess I think that, for general preparedness for self defense, MMA type training is good. But I don't think it is necessarily the best. But I *do* think it is one of the better methods of training and am wondering, how many other methods out there who criticize it actually train those illegal moves.
> 
> To everyone besides RoninX- Do you guys train those illegal moves that you feel the average MMA'er doesn't train?


We have full face headguards that we use. Fingers can still accidently reach the eyes but because that is more of a clawing action it is not normally a problem. We start the scenario from a 'touching' situation rather than sparring range. We do practise from full on bear hug or choke situations but I prefer to have people react as the choke or grab is occurring. What I mean here is that I prefer the guys to take action at the first indication of trouble than to react after they have been grabbed. So here we are using elbows to strike to the ribs. These could be prohibited in MMA. Grabs from the front bring in an automatic grab to the groin. (Most people I know go for hits to the groin but IMO these often don't connect and are often ineffective. A grab is a grab is a grab!)

If I was much younger and just starting I would possibly have gone down the MMA track because it gives a great range of training in one place, from grappling to punching and kicking. But the price is high. I have many friends with permanent injuries and damaged joints that will only impact more on them as they age. Even with aikido where we are careful, I am nursing elbow and shoulder injury. :asian:


----------



## K-man

fangjian said:


> Very cool. Thank you for sharing. I suspected as much from someone who trains Ninjutsu. Any Aikidoka here train these types of concepts?


I probably should have said, my previous post was what I train with the karate. In aikido the only "illegal to MMA" moves we train would be:

Small joint manipulation 
Striking to the spine or the back of the head 
Striking downward using the point of the elbow 
Throat strikes of any kind.
Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent 

After all, Aikido is for ladies and gentlemen ... not the common folk! :asian:


----------



## RoninX

> My mindset as a karateka or an aikidoka is;
> Number 1 = Evade (Tsabaki)
> Number 2 = Strike (Atemi)
> Number 3 = Control or destroy.
> 
> That works for me! What is it about that simple sequence that fails to  compute? Now something as simple as this common to karate or most other  styles of MA. Now I ask you a question. If as a karateka I hit you hard  in the throat, let's say as a knife hand (banned in MMA by the way), is  it likely to be effective? In karate we'll call it shuto uchi.


We are talking about Aikido. If you are also a Karateka, you don´t exactly fall into that category. Of course, if i train 10 martial arts, there are tons of things that i can do. But would i do those things if i only trained Aikido? I´m all for cross training, but here we´re talking about Aikido.




> I'll spell it out for you. The question was _"Aikido seems to have  some useful and seemingly effective techniques for grappling and  takedowns. Why don't you see these utilised in *MMA*?"_


If a wrist throw was really an effective technique, you would see it being used more often in MMA fights. A technique is a technique. You don´t twist somebody´s wrist in a cage, but you expect that to work in the street, against a thug. That´s your mentality. Nice. 



> I don't agree that anyone except a competitor should do 40% of there  training as sparring. If you are competing, fine, spar as often as you  need. If you are not into sport I would argue that sparring has little  benefit and in many cases is counter productive.
> I have taken sports sparring out of my training because, IMHO, it has no value.


If you are training expecting to control a resistant opponent under a real street scenario you should also train under a resistant opponent in your dojo. It´s basic logic. There´s a world of differences between applying something to someone who resist you and applying something to someone who doesn´t resist you. Isn´t even close. 



> If we were sparring to MMA rules there are many things we can not do:


And if you are not sparring at all you will still not doing all those things. Sparing helps to develop your instincts and teaches you how to adapt a technique under different circunstances. It teaches you the feeling of being resisted, and makes you try to adapt in order to overcome that.

Yes, you can grab your opponent´s balls. So what? The benefits of sparring are still there, and it´s better do it than not do it at all. 

A Judoka spars without hitting the opponent, but their throws are still effective in situations where strikes are allowed.



> I train my guys to bite, gauge, break fingers, crush testicles, head  butt, tear the sides of cheeks, tear ears, crush the larynx, strike to  the neck


Define "i train". Do you actually make them do that, or you only tell them to do that? The difference is huge, you know?



> What part of _"All civilian forms of self defence were designed to be used against untrained thugs."_ are you struggling with?


No Martial Art who defines itself as "effective" should presume all people they could face are untrained thugs. There are many trained people walking around doing ****. Martial Arts are very popular. "Ok, this is a good martial art, but it will only work against untrained guys. Against trained thugs you will get your *** kicked. Who wants to sign?" Yes, very appealing.



> Do you agree or disagree? _"If I want to fight another good martial artist I will train for that. That means train for sport."_


I generally train to be able to fight any person, martial artist or not. That´s effectiveness. A good martial art will give you a chance of defending yourself against any person. A real martial art would do good against a thug and against a real martial artist.




> _"I did show you the type of training I favour ... that was the Bas  Ruten video. You don't spar that type of self defence. I asked you about  certain techniques in the video. You ignored the question. I asked you  what you thought was an effective MA and you ignored the question." _


If you don´t spar that kind of self defense, you will never gonna be able to use it successfully. That´s for sure. Send a mail to Bas Rutten and ask him if you should spar for self defense. You will see the answer :ultracool


----------



## RoninX

Oh, and by the way: The whole Bas Rutten Self Defense stuff is more of a comical stuff. He doesn´t take it seriously, neither should you.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> Oh, and by the way: The whole Bas Rutten Self Defense stuff is more of a comical stuff. He doesn´t take it seriously, neither should you.


????????

Take your hand off it!

Bas Ruten's self defence is hardly comical. Where exactly is the part I should have laughed? I must have lost my sense of humour.





 
Not only are you obviously a martial artist without peer, but you could also be a comedian.


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> I posted:
> 
> 
> 
> I take exception to your continuous put down of other styles. You seem to be the master of the insult. As to unarmed SD against a knife. If your assailant has any knowledge of knife fighting there is a fair chance that most people will die and certainly you will be cut. No MA including Krav and Systema will guarantee you safety against a knife attack. Why pick aikido as the MA that is ineffective? At least Aikido regularly trains against knife attack.
> 
> 
> 
> Your reply:
> 
> 
> 
> I´m sorry if for you this is an insult, but you can´t expect to come to a discussion forum without having people disagreeing with you. I think your martial art is ineffective, and until now i haven´t seen proof of otherwise. Deal with it! Thousands and thousands and thousands of people feel the same way. I´m not insulting you more than you are insulting me.
> 
> AND ...
> 
> Well, if that´s an insult to you, i admit i prefer to insult you than to insult my intelligence, pretending to believe in such a non sense. Lol. 95% of the time? Now you´re just going wild.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The main problem, as I see it, you have absolutely no intention to enter into ANY discussion as you ignore all questions and just make statements with no relevence to the post.



> _"You can´t expect to come to a discussion forum without having people disagreeing with you."_


True, but in most cases we can discuss the pros and cons in an intelligent and civil manner. You seem to have a closed mind.



> _"I´m sorry if for you this is an insult .... I think your martial art is ineffective .... Deal with it! ..... I´m not insulting you more than you are insulting me."_


I'm sure some of the others on this forum might disagree!

But, thank you for your apology. It is obviously most sincere and I accept it for what it is worth. :asian:



> _"Well, if that´s an insult to you, i admit i prefer to insult you than to insult my intelligence ..."_


As you have adequately demonstrated, there is very little to insult! :asian:


----------



## RoninX

K-man said:


> ????????
> 
> Take your hand off it!
> 
> Bas Ruten's self defence is hardly comical. Where exactly is the part I should have laughed? I must have lost my sense of humour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not only are you obviously a martial artist without peer, but you could also be a comedian.




1- Bas Rutten has the instincts, strenght, speed, guts and overall MA experience to pull many of those things off.

2- Wrist locks doesn´t equal to Aikido. Many arts have wrist locks, and im pretty sure most of what Bas teaches in his "instructional" videos doesn´t have that much to do with Aikido. 

3- In some situations a transitory wrist lock can help you giving you an opportunity to strike your opponent. But, once again, this has very little to do with the way most Aikido dojo teach it, and i´m pretty sure Bas won´t gonna tell you to grab someone´s wrist while the guy is trying to punch you, something that is teached in Aikido, because that won´t work.

4- Bas Rutten said "some" of the things could work, wich is very differently from saying it´s effective. Plus, by the way he says it, he doesn´t seem to have any kind of experience on it. He is just talking hypothetically. Learn the difference.

5- "Some things might work" doesn´t equal to "this is an effective martial art". Learn the difference.

6- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNXRInrSSVU&feature=related
Bas Rutten is a funny guy and likes to Joke. Many things he shows on his videos don´t have the purpose to teach you how to defend yourself, but to entertain you.


----------



## St Matt

RoninX said:


> Ok. Because that´s what i´ve always saw Aikidoka doing: Catching arms in movement. Your style must be different.


 And that proves you have no idea what you are talking about!!

The next time you find yourself sparring with an aikidoka, constantly trying to hit him in the face, smuggly thinking 'he will never catch my wrist'. Don't be too shocked when his irimi-nage takes you clean off your feet without even going near your wrist and then pins you to the floor.

It does seem you are fishing and trying to get a bite now but seriously if you honestly think aikido is just catching fists and twisting wrists your making yourself look foolish. Don't knock other peoples arts, who knows maybe one day when that riot kicks off you may be glad of the help of a passing aikidoka. You just don't know!


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> 1- Bas Rutten has the instincts, strenght, speed, guts and overall MA experience to pull many of those things off.


That's very perceptive of you. If I thought for a minute that he wasn't a very capable martial artist I probably wouldn't pay as much attention to his methods that I do. 

FYI ... a bit of his CV.

TKD 2nd dan, Kyokushin karate 2nd dan.
Muay Thai professional career. Fought 16 times and won the first 14 by KO, 13 in the first round.

MMA career. Fought 33 times for 28 wins, 4 losses & 1 draw. 12 by KO, 13 by submission and 3 by decision.


I agree with you, it seems he does have the instincts, strength, speed, guts and overall MA experience to pull many of those things off. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






> 2- Wrist locks doesn´t equal to Aikido. Many arts have wrist locks, and im pretty sure most of what Bas teaches in his "instructional" videos doesn´t have that much to do with Aikido.


 
Let's look at wrist locks, arm bars chokes etc. We find then in Judo, JuJutsu, Ninjutsu, karate, BJJ, TCMAs, probably a dozen or more MAs and surprise, surprise Aikido. Where did they come from? Well basically they possibly all came from "old style Japanese Jujutsu which had developed over the centuries. Some claim they came from China but the source is really irrelevant. The truth is *THEY ARE ALL THE SAME*. Isn't that a coincidence? The human body moves in a limited number of ways and these techniques were developed to work off those moves. Another strange thing .. the old systems included atemi as an integral part. Daito Ryu was started by a real bad *** called Takeda Sokaku. He taught Ueshiba to a high level before Ueshiba developed Aikido. 

Isn't it strange then, that the locks, holds and throws work so well in submission MMA, Judo and JuJutsu, BJJ and even karate, but they don't work in Aikido. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	






> 3- In some situations a transitory wrist lock can help you giving you an opportunity to strike your opponent. But, once again, this has very little to do with the way most Aikido dojo teach it, and i´m pretty sure Bas won´t gonna tell you to grab someone´s wrist while the guy is trying to punch you, something that is teached in Aikido, because that won´t work.


 
Personally I haven't seen it teached in Aikido, EVER. Why on earth would you have a transitory wrist lock? If I get a lock in training it ends in submission. If I got a lock in a real fight it would probably end in joint destruction. I don't have a problem admitting that catching punches is a low probability activity. That's not the way you normally get hold of someone's wrist. You get holds at times when you can, you don't set out to get a hold. You do hit but you hit BEFORE the lock. That's often the set up. You might continue to hit after depending on the situation. And, I have to admit you're right again ... I'm also pretty sure Bas won't tell me to grab someones wrist while the guy is trying to punch me. But after he's tried to punch me, then I have a chance to capture a wrist if it is available.



> 4- Bas Rutten said "some" of the things could work, wich is very differently from saying it´s effective. Plus, by the way he says it, he doesn´t seem to have any kind of experience on it. He is just talking hypothetically. Learn the difference.


Thank you so much for the lesson. Truly, I will try to learn the difference. Now let's look again at what Bas actually said, and remember, it is in the context of cage fighting.

_



" .... and, I'm sure there's moves that really work at close distance like those wrist locks, ... of course they've got moves that work, ..." Then he goes on about not being able to catch punches and against MMA fighters that would be pretty impossible." ... and that's why you don't see many aikido guys in the cage. They'd have to really change their style ... at close distance they might pull off some submissions but otherwise it's going to be very difficult."

Click to expand...

_ Not quite what you said he said, but hey ... it's close, right?

And of course, Bas wouldn't have any idea about aikido would he? But, then he commented on something he doesn't understand? Hypothetically of course. And he actually said aikido has got moves that work, and he managed to win 13 MMA bouts by submission. Boy, am I confused!



> 5- "Some things might work" doesn´t equal to "this is an effective martial art". Learn the difference.


 
Yes master. If only I had your understanding I too could be a great martial artist. :asian:




> 6- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNXRInrSSVU&feature=related
> Bas Rutten is a funny guy and likes to Joke. Many things he shows on his videos don´t have the purpose to teach you how to defend yourself, but to entertain you.


Of course! How could I have been so stupid? Bas is a comedian like youself. :asian:


----------



## K-man

RoninX said:


> We are talking about Aikido. If you are also a Karateka, you don´t exactly fall into that category. Of course, if i train 10 martial arts, there are tons of things that i can do. But would i do those things if i only trained Aikido? I´m all for cross training, but here we´re talking about Aikido.
> 
> 
> If a wrist throw was really an effective technique, you would see it being used more often in MMA fights. A technique is a technique. You don´t twist somebody´s wrist in a cage, but you expect that to work in the street, against a thug. That´s your mentality. Nice.
> 
> If you are training expecting to control a resistant opponent under a real street scenario you should also train under a resistant opponent in your dojo. It´s basic logic. There´s a world of differences between applying something to someone who resist you and applying something to someone who doesn´t resist you. Isn´t even close.
> 
> 
> And if you are not sparring at all you will still not doing all those things. Sparing helps to develop your instincts and teaches you how to adapt a technique under different circunstances. It teaches you the feeling of being resisted, and makes you try to adapt in order to overcome that.
> 
> Yes, you can grab your opponent´s balls. So what? The benefits of sparring are still there, and it´s better do it than not do it at all.
> 
> A Judoka spars without hitting the opponent, but their throws are still effective in situations where strikes are allowed.
> 
> Define "i train". Do you actually make them do that, or you only tell them to do that? The difference is huge, you know?
> 
> No Martial Art who defines itself as "effective" should presume all people they could face are untrained thugs. There are many trained people walking around doing ****. Martial Arts are very popular. "Ok, this is a good martial art, but it will only work against untrained guys. Against trained thugs you will get your *** kicked. Who wants to sign?" Yes, very appealing.
> 
> I generally train to be able to fight any person, martial artist or not. That´s effectiveness. A good martial art will give you a chance of defending yourself against any person. A real martial art would do good against a thug and against a real martial artist.
> 
> 
> If you don´t spar that kind of self defense, you will never gonna be able to use it successfully. That´s for sure. Send a mail to Bas Rutten and ask him if you should spar for self defense. You will see the answer :ultracool


You obviously didn't understand one word of what I wrote because not one of your responses relates to the issue you were responding to. 

Please reread and try again! I'm not going to respond to this post! :shrug:


----------



## Yari

RoninX said:


> We are talking about Aikido. If you are also a Karateka, you don´t exactly fall into that category. Of course, if i train 10 martial arts, there are tons of things that i can do. But would i do those things if i only trained Aikido? I´m all for cross training, but here we´re talking about Aikido.


 
I train Aikido, and we train to break necks, arms, legs, backs, teeth, pock out eyes, ripe your hair off, stamp on your feet, bit, spit, throw, hit, punch, elbow, handplam, kick, knee and soo on, and it's all a part old school aikido...



> If a wrist throw was really an effective technique, you would see it being used more often in MMA fights. A technique is a technique. You don´t twist somebody´s wrist in a cage, but you expect that to work in the street, against a thug.


 
Wrist locks are effektive, and if grabing each other on the wrist was more effetiv, you would se that in MMA. But since techniques against wrist grabs are effektiv, youd be very stupid to try and grab on.




> A Judoka spars without hitting the opponent, but their throws are still effective in situations where strikes are allowed.


 

Ohh by the way, Aikido has "judo" throws too.. even the most basic aikido dojos I've practice with do them.

/Terje


----------



## MJS

*Admin Note:*

*Just an FYI....RoninX is no longer a member here.  That being said, he will no longer be able to reply to any threads here.  *


----------



## Aiki Lee

Was that your call? Do I owe you a drink?


----------



## Xue Sheng

MJS said:


> *Admin Note:*
> 
> *Just an FYI....RoninX is no longer a member here. That being said, he will no longer be able to reply to any threads here. *


 
Well in that case all I have to say is :wavey:


----------



## Yari

MJS said:


> *Admin Note:*
> 
> *Just an FYI....RoninX is no longer a member here. That being said, he will no longer be able to reply to any threads here. *


 
Thank you.


----------



## K-man

MJS said:


> *Admin Note:*
> 
> *Just an FYI....RoninX is no longer a member here. That being said, he will no longer be able to reply to any threads here. *


May I add my thanks for your stopping the guy and also thank you for cutting me some slack while I was trying to make sense of his nonsense (pun intended).      :asian:


----------



## chinto

interesting, but obviously torri and uki were training together. that was NOT a street fight.. 

for one thing i think the uki would have been broken and such at the end if it had been a real one... or at least hurting a lot more.


----------



## TheArtofDave

Wow I'm happy to see that ignorance to that level is not tolerated. Also very happy to see Aikido is indeed a very effective art but then again I knew it was because of having a couple of friends train in it. Not close friends. More like acquaintances. Any advice that can be given to a soon to be new student of Aikido? I'm likely to become a purist if I fall in love with the art after trying some classes.


----------



## K-man

TheArtofDave said:


> Any advice that can be given to a soon to be new student of Aikido? I'm likely to become a purist if I fall in love with the art after trying some classes.


Go to class with an open mind, don't expect to master the techniques any time soon and enjoy the journey.       :asian:


----------



## Aiki Lee

Aikido training is an exercise in patience. In order to be good at it you must repeat seemingly simple actions over and over and over again. Don't slack on your ukemi.


----------



## TheArtofDave

Thank you for the advice. I will be very patient and enjoy my journey whenever it comes


----------

