# Oh Lord, where to start with Aikido?



## cypher

So, I've done TKD, both Bujinkan and Genbukan Ninjutsu and frankly, have always been attracted to the flow of aikido (and yes I like Steven Seagal but the interest was there before I saw his movies). That said, there's something like 16 different flavors. As this is not Pokemon and I can't "catch 'em all" I thought I'd see what ya'll think.

I'm looking for practical, (aka I can save my *** if need be) along with some weapon work (I've personally always liked the sword and the bo (big stick)). In my local area there is an Akikai Iwama Ryu dojo, a Ki Aikido dojo and a Yoshinkan dojo...

I believe the practical aspect would rule out the Ki dojo but I'm not sure about the Yoshinkan version. Can folks more knowledgeable than me please share their insights?


----------



## oaktree

What area are you in?
aikido can work in a realistic encounter same as budo taijutsu or tkd, the problem lays in how uke feeds you an attack.
You have waza and goshin jutsu which is self defense. If you are looking for an aikido style that you can actually use in a realistic encounter, you need one that focus on goshinjutsu and not an uke who feeds you a weak shuto and offers no resistance and throws himself during ukemi. I mainly practice daito ryu aikijujutsu and not aikido however, I do practice some aikido but we don't go soft


----------



## cypher

I'm in Kitchener Ontario Canada


----------



## oaktree

There is a hakko ryu in that area there is supposedly a daito ryu aikijujutsu school but not sure about them. Personally, I think hakko ryu is closer in line with daito ryu and the training is more in line with koryu then aikido and also more realistic. 
Affiliates | Tokumeikan
Some sword schools around you that would be a better fit for sword as aikido teaches aikido principle with the sword but it's not the same as an actual sword school. That is why I train in Katori shinto ryu kenjutsu.


----------



## Jenna

Hi @cypher.. So you are attracted to the aiki flow and but you want something that is a viable art in your defence, right? Within all your three options, you have the potential to satisfy your two or three basic criteria.. most styles will use bo or jo.. several basic Aiki strikes are straight mirrors for sword work.. sword practice itself varies though from place to place.. go see..

The potential issues I believe in satisfying your criteria lie not with Aikido in any of its variants.. I am biased and will always direct you closest to the source of Aikido, like on the face of it you have that option: Aikikai/Iwama.. Then again, you may find the Yoshinkan fits more with your current arts because it can tend to be more staccato in nature.. like techniques can appear on the surface less contiguous compared to pure Aikikai style..

So the issues ultimately in satisfying your criteria might lie not the style and but TO WHAT END THAT STYLE IS TAUGHT.. Some sensei like dancing their students around the mat to no obvious end.. some are rigid in implimentation or in their technique and pass it on thus.. Please do bear in mind also though that Aikido as observed can often appear soft.. it must be understood that ukemi is not for show and but for uke to fall without harm and roll out of danger and avoid harm.. to some one observing this can often appear like play or flamboyance.. done right it permit you to escape from most technique unharmed.. problem is some times in some dojos randori *IS* soft and it *IS* play and flamboyance.. And so how do you tell which is which??  It is difficult unless you are the one feeling it..

My suggestion if you are new to Aikido is take a trip to each dojo. If you can and satisfy for your self that the sensei has no shyness when you ask about how his or her Aikido can be practically -NOT JUST THEORETICALLY- used in defence and is able to show you, or demonstrate on a student then that is possibly the best research you can do.. Please look out if the sensei is in any way reticent or avoidant.. you know like they seem to operate in the void of their dojo and seem out of touch with the day-to-day threats you might face.. if that sensei seem vague in any way about how her Aikido can be used practically well.. you know what to do..

Hope you find what you are seeking


----------



## frank raud

I would check with Kevin Blok Sensei in Windsor if he has anyone teaching nearby. Blok Sensei was a direct student of Gozo Shioda.


----------



## Kinghercules

I grew up in TKD and we had Aikido techniques that were part of the curriculum.  I would say go with Yoshikan Aikido but Im bias because my teacher trained with Gozo Shioda.  But go check out both places as Jenna said above and see which one you like.


----------



## slink

I've never set foot in a Ki Aikido dojo so I can't speak from experience but I've yet to see a Ki demo where it appeared to be martially applicable.

For practical use I would prefer Yoshinkan over Iwama Ryu but Iwama Ryu is still good stuff.  If you're wanting weapons work then Iwama Ryu would be the better choice.  While it may vary from school to school in general Iwama guys do a lot more weapons work than Yoshinkan (or any other kind of Aikido that I've tried).


----------



## cypher

Thanks guys, especially Jenna! As with most hobbies, life gets in the way, in this case moving Mum to Kitchener and then moving in to take care of her. As I want to be mostly local, I and my wife are going to check out Golden Triangle as that is an Aikikai studio and direct lineage (as much as possible) is important to me. They're also part of the Canadian Aikido Federation, also good. And I've heard good things about the teacher from my old Ninjutsu Sensei.


----------



## Hanshi

cypher said:


> Thanks guys, especially Jenna! As with most hobbies, life gets in the way, in this case moving Mum to Kitchener and then moving in to take care of her. As I want to be mostly local, I and my wife are going to check out Golden Triangle as that is an Aikikai studio and direct lineage (as much as possible) is important to me. They're also part of the Canadian Aikido Federation, also good. And I've heard good things about the teacher from my old Ninjutsu Sensei.






I don't know if this will help but I will give you my take on it.  First I'll mention that I'm 70 years old, which means nothing, but I am now permanently disabled.  I still do some teaching and as much training as I'm able to.  I can no longer take falls or even go to the mat.  With that out of the way, I'll say that aikido is mostly all I can do, nowadays.  I'm too old and crippled up to fight or run away and I walk with a cane (a wonderful weapon).  If s-d is called for I use a weapon first.  

Although I am a 6th dan in aikido, I hold even higher ranks in jujitsu and karate which was my first art some 56+ years ago.  So it's a good idea to absorb a martial mentality and skill set from the more "violent" arts, so to speak.  I have no favorite technique or method but I do have a simple strategy.  If I must use aikido or jujitsu on the street it will be done as hard and violently as possible.  The idea of being careful of injuring someone or being compassionate is valid ONLY IN THE DOJO.  I've studied and ranked in quite a few martial arts and when someone asks me what style I am/use I say truthfully that I have no style.  I have techniques that I can still perform and use and that's all.

What I'm getting at is that you must have excellent striking and/or kicking skills plus the willingness to use them and go all the way.  Self-defense is really about "will" and not so much about "skill".


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Hanshi said:


> I have no favorite technique or method but I do have a simple strategy. If I must use aikido or jujitsu on the street it will be done as hard and violently as possible. The idea of being careful of injuring someone or being compassionate is valid ONLY IN THE DOJO.


Agreed. I'm surprised at how the "harmony" translation of "aiki" has been translated to a philosophy of non-injury to an attacker. Philosophically, that's a nice idea, but it has to take a back seat to survival, IMO. In all the other aiki arts, the aiki is a physical principle. So far as I'm aware, only in Ueshiba's Aikido has it been taken to that extent. Your attitude is a realistic approach to self-defense.

Your comment about needing a base in what you call the "more violent" arts is also spot-on, from what I know. There's a theory (I think Stan Pranin is a proponent of it) that Ueshiba didn't teach much in the way of strikes and the simple, direct violence of combat because most of his early students already had a base in that. He wasn't excluding those things from the art, but subsequent instructors only taught what he did, so they left those things out.


----------



## pgsmith

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. I'm surprised at how the "harmony" translation of "aiki" has been translated to a philosophy of non-injury to an attacker. Philosophically, that's a nice idea, but it has to take a back seat to survival, IMO. In all the other aiki arts, the aiki is a physical principle. So far as I'm aware, only in Ueshiba's Aikido has it been taken to that extent. Your attitude is a realistic approach to self-defense.



  You're absolutely correct in that. What I learned from back in my aikido days, was that Ueshiba changed his aikido to more closely match his ideals as he aged. As his spiritual outlook became more peaceful, so did his aikido. The lines of aikido that come from his earlier students tend to be much more aggressive than the hombu Aikikai version, which follows his later idealistic outlook.


----------



## oaktree

I like to give an interesting thought using Daito Ryu ippon Dori, kihon has a strike, omote has no strike but still linear while ura has the spin,  I do wonder if aikido is a higher redefined version of Daito Ryu in regards to being based on taijutsu vs kenjutsu. Just a thought


----------



## Jenna

Hanshi said:


> If I must use aikido or jujitsu on the street it will be done as hard and violently as possible.


Can you define please how you might do your Aikido as violently as possible?



Hanshi said:


> The idea of being careful of injuring someone or being compassionate is valid ONLY IN THE DOJO.


Why do you think basic compassion or taking care not to inflict unnecessary injury might be concepts valid only in the dojo?

Thank you


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> Can you define please how you might do your Aikido as violently as possible?
> 
> 
> Why do you think basic compassion or taking care not to inflict unnecessary injury might be concepts valid only in the dojo?
> 
> Thank you



I can't speak for Hanshi, but my approach has always been that in self-defense the focus is on surviving the incident. I use what I consider to be clearly enough to achieve my goal of survival. If the person is clearly inept, I can afford to change my focus to protecting them. If they are earnestly attacking with intent to do me harm, protecting them limits my selection of tools. No matter how good I am, being gentle to someone trying to hurt me with a knife will never be an acceptable choice for me. That is an extreme, but it makes the point clearer. They put me in a position where hurting them is the most likely way to stop their attack with the least injury to me.


----------



## Juany118

gpseymour said:


> I can't speak for Hanshi, but my approach has always been that in self-defense the focus is on surviving the incident. I use what I consider to be clearly enough to achieve my goal of survival. If the person is clearly inept, I can afford to change my focus to protecting them. If they are earnestly attacking with intent to do me harm, protecting them limits my selection of tools. No matter how good I am, being gentle to someone trying to hurt me with a knife will never be an acceptable choice for me. That is an extreme, but it makes the point clearer. They put me in a position where hurting them is the most likely way to stop their attack with the least injury to me.


I think I get it.  Example for a technique that I learned in Aikido and a similar form exists in other arts.  Basically it amounts to a standing cutting arm bar but I am currently brain frying on the Aikido technique name.






Now I can do it like the video shows, which will do limited injury or I can do it in such a way that I hyperextend the wrist and potentially dislocate the shoulder, if I have a wrist lock applied with my "outside" hand and simultaneously yank hard while executing the take down as seen in the video, or you could also hyperextend the elbow by not rakeing along the tendon as in the video by by apply a good solid strike to it.

Now I would only do the later if there was a weapon involved or if the person was being actively aggressive towards me or another (vs trying to escape) and made it clear that aggression was likely to continue but you can go from protecting the opponents safety to injuring them with just a couple simple changes.



Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I can't speak for Hanshi, but my approach has always been that in self-defense the focus is on surviving the incident. I use what I consider to be clearly enough to achieve my goal of survival. If the person is clearly inept, I can afford to change my focus to protecting them. If they are earnestly attacking with intent to do me harm, protecting them limits my selection of tools. No matter how good I am, being gentle to someone trying to hurt me with a knife will never be an acceptable choice for me. That is an extreme, but it makes the point clearer. They put me in a position where hurting them is the most likely way to stop their attack with the least injury to me.



Nope.

You are shutting down a threat. So the hurting is geared towards that end. So for me. If I rush a guy and power bomb them into the deck I will probably hurt them because I am relying on speed,suprise and agression to get a quick task done before they can react.

If you are controlling a limb then your ability to hurt them diminishes because you are focusing on them not hurting you. Here you would be securing a position of safety. 

You dont really get a good hurting position untill you have a dominant position. Once you have a dominant position you are not really under the same sort of threat.

Now I have broken an arm and dislocated some joints absolutely ripping on arm locks. But for the most part people come off pretty well.

Unless I just wanted to beat on them.


----------



## drop bear

Juany118 said:


> I think I get it.  Example for a technique that I learned in Aikido and a similar form exists in other arts.  Basically it amounts to a standing cutting arm bar but I am currently brain frying on the Aikido technique name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I can do it like the video shows, which will do limited injury or I can do it in such a way that I hyperextend the wrist and potentially dislocate the shoulder, if I have a wrist lock applied with my "outside" hand and simultaneously yank hard while executing the take down as seen in the video, or you could also hyperextend the elbow by not rakeing along the tendon as in the video by by apply a good solid strike to it.
> 
> Now I would only do the later if there was a weapon involved or if the person was being actively aggressive towards me or another (vs trying to escape) and made it clear that aggression was likely to continue but you can go from protecting the opponents safety to injuring them with just a couple simple changes.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk



His shoulder has to be lower than yours for that to work. So the rubbing the tricept is pretty meh..

I mean it is irritating but not really devastating.


ignore the rubbish about BJJ being the answer to everything. just a convenient video of police fighting on arm bars.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Juany118 said:


> I think I get it.  Example for a technique that I learned in Aikido and a similar form exists in other arts.  Basically it amounts to a standing cutting arm bar but I am currently brain frying on the Aikido technique name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I can do it like the video shows, which will do limited injury or I can do it in such a way that I hyperextend the wrist and potentially dislocate the shoulder, if I have a wrist lock applied with my "outside" hand and simultaneously yank hard while executing the take down as seen in the video, or you could also hyperextend the elbow by not rakeing along the tendon as in the video by by apply a good solid strike to it.
> 
> Now I would only do the later if there was a weapon involved or if the person was being actively aggressive towards me or another (vs trying to escape) and made it clear that aggression was likely to continue but you can go from protecting the opponents safety to injuring them with just a couple simple changes.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


In NGA, we have a complicated name for that: "Arm Bar."


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> Nope.
> 
> You are shutting down a threat. So the hurting is geared towards that end. So for me. If I rush a guy and power bomb them into the deck I will probably hurt them because I am relying on speed,suprise and agression to get a quick task done before they can react.
> 
> If you are controlling a limb then your ability to hurt them diminishes because you are focusing on them not hurting you. Here you would be securing a position of safety.
> 
> You dont really get a good hurting position untill you have a dominant position. Once you have a dominant position you are not really under the same sort of threat.
> 
> Now I have broken an arm and dislocated some joints absolutely ripping on arm locks. But for the most part people come off pretty well.
> 
> Unless I just wanted to beat on them.


Why the "nope"? You didn't say anything materially different than I said. Those breaks and dislocations are injuries. Many who train in Aikido will say that those are to be avoided. My point is that I don't bother to avoid them so long as there's a real danger. As you said, there comes a point where the danger has been nullified, and that's when a different approach is available.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> His shoulder has to be lower than yours for that to work. So the rubbing the tricept is pretty meh..
> 
> I mean it is irritating but not really devastating.
> 
> 
> ignore the rubbish about BJJ being the answer to everything. just a convenient video of police fighting on arm bars.


That was his point, I think. There are ways to be nice with it and ways that aren't as nice. The nice ways create discomfort to help get the person into a position for control. The less-nice ones often focus on taking the arm out of the fight.


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> That was his point, I think. There are ways to be nice with it and ways that aren't as nice. The nice ways create discomfort to help get the person into a position for control. The less-nice ones often focus on taking the arm out of the fight.



No he was trying to pressure point the arm because he was hitting the arm bar wrong.

Arms mostly dont go out of fights. Unless you have them trapped right. If you watched the video. You will see police hanging on arms for dear life. They are not using momentum based breaks.

There are ways to do it so the arm doesn't slip out because they are some sweaty junkie. and ways that are not so secure.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

drop bear said:


> No he was trying to pressure point the arm because he was hitting the arm bar wrong.
> 
> Arms mostly dont go out of fights. Unless you have them trapped right. If you watched the video. You will see police hanging on arms for dear life. They are not using momentum based breaks.
> 
> There are ways to do it so the arm doesn't slip out because they are some sweaty junkie. and ways that are not so secure.



I meant Juany, not the video. 

And agreed on the application. Often, folks struggle with Arm Bars because they ignore the basic principle you pointed out: the shoulder must be lower than the wrist, or you don't have control. 


Gerry Seymour
Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido


----------



## drop bear

gpseymour said:


> I meant Juany, not the video.
> 
> And agreed on the application. Often, folks struggle with Arm Bars because they ignore the basic principle you pointed out: the shoulder must be lower than the wrist, or you don't have control.
> 
> 
> Gerry Seymour
> Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido



Yeah but he goes wierd on this idea. Hurting the guy doesn't allways stop the threat.







At some point you want to shut down their ability to attack. That is not allways the most violent response. It could be a positional response.


----------



## Juany118

gpseymour said:


> In NGA, we have a complicated name for that: "Arm Bar."


Lol, yeah but my old teacher would occasionally use a Japanese term, I just can't remember it since its been some 20 years.


----------



## Juany118

gpseymour said:


> I meant Juany, not the video.
> 
> And agreed on the application. Often, folks struggle with Arm Bars because they ignore the basic principle you pointed out: the shoulder must be lower than the wrist, or you don't have control.
> 
> 
> Gerry Seymour
> Shojin-Ryu, Nihon Goshin Aikido


Exactly.  Usually we use those maneuvers when we are being nice because at academy's they only show the nice way.  They also usually only teach the first armband shown in the video, which you can muscle against, hence why you will usually see officers "hanging on for dear life" while they try to overcome force with force.  However recently combative systems have started training what the video shows.  That works btw not only because of the pressure on the tendon but because the human brain likes dealing with "straight" or "round", not both at the same time.  When you push down and rotate the arm at the same time it causes some confusion and also assists in the take down.

That all said some officers like me pay their own dime.  I studied Aikido and still practice it, Kali also has a fair amount of take downs.  I also work with 2 guys who are BJJ guys and one who is a black belt in Ryushinkan.  So when we do stuff, if we have to, we have the training and experience to use momentum based maneuvers.  I only had one occassion where I could justify breaking a shoulder though, usually when that kinda thing is justifiable we can use not only a taser but a baton and that was before we had tasers (can't even remember if they were common place) and our batons were not expandable, they were the old PR-24s and I didn't have the opportunity to get it out of the car before stuff went pear shaped.  Today I would just use the expandable baton or taser and be done with it.  Times change over 18+ years.

PS--- @drop bear is correct, hurting someone doesn't always stop the threat, but under the circumstances, if you apply that technique right and it breaks/dislocates something while you take them down, it puts you in a more dominant position to transition to other control techniques.  Your use of force doesn't stop until the threat stops.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Juany118 said:


> Lol, yeah but my old teacher would occasionally use a Japanese term, I just can't remember it since its been some 20 years.


Nikkyo, I think. I've been in Ueshiba-lineage schools where they use the Japanese. The founder of NGA was a translator in Japan in the 40's (armed forces), and his instructor had him teach the Japanese students English names for the techniques. So, we've always just used the English names.


----------



## Jenna

gpseymour said:


> No matter how good I am, being gentle to someone trying to hurt me with a knife will never be an acceptable choice for me. That is an extreme, but it makes the point clearer. They put me in a position where hurting them is the most likely way to stop their attack with the least injury to me.



I understand what you are saying thank you  and but I would not see it like this.. I think gentle is the only way in Aikido.. I am always going to be softer than a bladed weapon, how hard can I be against tempered steel anyway? The gentle is woven in the technique.. there is pain yes and but you are just neutral when it is complete the pain is in his resisting what you have applied.. Me it is not my intention to apply pain.. is my intention to let him walk away so he can save face.. For me is opposite of tapout where I might bend him so much to the point of breaking either tapout or pass out.. no.. if the technique work then I am just standing neutral.. talk to him if he want.. we can be calm.. if he move at me again then he induce his own pain in the lock that he is in, yes? 

I do not know.. is not my experience that hurting him make him stop.. is my experience reason with him make him stop.. though maybe I am not in same situation you are in. In my situation people get angry that is what make them lash out at us at me at others.. Hurting do not diminish that anger.. just make it worse.. they call police here a lot.. some police the best ones.. they are calm.. they are gentle! Speak calm, act calm.. that is best way nobody get hurt everybody walk, save face.. Other police not so much.. they come in ready to fight.. is wrong mindset, right?? Fighting be about winning.. And you disadvantage your self from start if there is need to win, yes?? Police who come in like this with this mindset almost like all of these people are bad people.. they are like stormtroopers yes they win by force and but there is lot of trouble with violence.. Aikido technique successfully applied for me permit a moment just enough so like.. ok stop! everybody be calm.. It is like I give you a moment to reassess.. You understand me?? Not sure I am too clear on this.. Anyway.. I do not know maybe is just I am not in your situations like knives and things..  Just my experience is all x


----------



## Juany118

Jenna said:


> I understand what you are saying thank you  and but I would not see it like this.. I think gentle is the only way in Aikido.. I am always going to be softer than a bladed weapon, how hard can I be against tempered steel anyway? The gentle is woven in the technique.. there is pain yes and but you are just neutral when it is complete the pain is in his resisting what you have applied.. Me it is not my intention to apply pain.. is my intention to let him walk away so he can save face.. For me is opposite of tapout where I might bend him so much to the point of breaking either tapout or pass out.. no.. if the technique work then I am just standing neutral.. talk to him if he want.. we can be calm.. if he move at me again then he induce his own pain in the lock that he is in, yes?
> 
> I do not know.. is not my experience that hurting him make him stop.. is my experience reason with him make him stop.. though maybe I am not in same situation you are in. In my situation people get angry that is what make them lash out at us at me at others.. Hurting do not diminish that anger.. just make it worse.. they call police here a lot.. some police the best ones.. they are calm.. they are gentle! Speak calm, act calm.. that is best way nobody get hurt everybody walk, save face.. Other police not so much.. they come in ready to fight.. is wrong mindset, right?? Fighting be about winning.. And you disadvantage your self from start if there is need to win, yes?? Police who come in like this with this mindset almost like all of these people are bad people.. they are like stormtroopers yes they win by force and but there is lot of trouble with violence.. Aikido technique successfully applied for me permit a moment just enough so like.. ok stop! everybody be calm.. It is like I give you a moment to reassess.. You understand me?? Not sure I am too clear on this.. Anyway.. I do not know maybe is just I am not in your situations like knives and things..  Just my experience is all x


The only thing I would say is "speak calm, act calm" certainly can work if the person has not yet decided to attack you.  If someone has decided they are going to make a victim of you and has initiated action allowing him to save face may not be a concern for them at this point.  They may be using that force as a tool to commit another crime against your person (robbery, rape etc).  They maybe under the influence of a substance making them incapable of sound reasoning.

If there is any doubt as to the state of mind of the assailant I think assuming you can talk them down is asking for trouble.  

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


----------



## Jenna

Juany118 said:


> The only thing I would say is "speak calm, act calm" certainly can work if the person has not yet decided to attack you.  If someone has decided they are going to make a victim of you and has initiated action allowing him to save face may not be a concern for them at this point.  They may be using that force as a tool to commit another crime against your person (robbery, rape etc).  They maybe under the influence of a substance making them incapable of sound reasoning.
> 
> If there is any doubt as to the state of mind of the assailant I think assuming you can talk them down is asking for trouble.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


Yes I understand what you say and thank you for your courteous reply   Your actions are independent of the varying state of mind of others tho yes??  Like me, I attempt to apply technique exactly the same.  He do not have to be reasonable to reason.  He only have to understand the consequence of his lack of reason is the pain he inflict upon his self in so doing.  Maybe though you have to deal with other people who are addled by drugs or substance ingestion or mental health issues?? I do not have this.. is not my situation.. I am not very well prepared for hypotheticals.. so I cannot comment on every situation because I have not been in every situation.  I deal this way with people here.  There are mental health issues yes, that is what I work with here.  I have not had violence from that.  I have had violence from anger.  I do not think they wish to make a victim of me though is not pertinent their reasons?? Here they are angry, they often have no accommodation or are refused entry here that is why they are angry.. To me an attack is an attack do not matter for what the reason is behind it, me being violent in response exacerbates it. I have seen it!  You have not found this?? 

You can explain this for me?? like if, in order to keep your safety, your violence is necessarily greater than their violence then you create your own victims like this right?? 

Me I do not choose me as victim or them as victim.. is not a choice like that.. I like everybody walk away..


----------



## Juany118

Jenna said:


> Yes I understand what you say and thank you for your courteous reply   Your actions are independent of the varying state of mind of others tho yes??  Like me, I attempt to apply technique exactly the same.  He do not have to be reasonable to reason.  He only have to understand the consequence of his lack of reason is the pain he inflict upon his self in so doing.  Maybe though you have to deal with other people who are addled by drugs or substance ingestion or mental health issues?? I do not have this.. is not my situation.. I am not very well prepared for hypotheticals.. so I cannot comment on every situation because I have not been in every situation.  I deal this way with people here.  There are mental health issues yes, that is what I work with here.  I have not had violence from that.  I have had violence from anger.  I do not think they wish to make a victim of me though is not pertinent their reasons?? Here they are angry, they often have no accommodation or are refused entry here that is why they are angry.. To me an attack is an attack do not matter for what the reason is behind it, me being violent in response exacerbates it. I have seen it!  You have not found this??
> 
> You can explain this for me?? like if, in order to keep your safety, your violence is necessarily greater than their violence then you create your own victims like this right??
> 
> Me I do not choose me as victim or them as victim.. is not a choice like that.. I like everybody walk away..



Verbal de-escalation or walking away (if possible) is preferred but there is a problem.  Now the idea of reasoning with someone can also work if violence is initiated by say the drunk who wants to fight over an imagined slight but there are circumstances where it will not.

First: There are people who actually chose you to be a victim.  The violence is simply a tool to achieve that other goal.  I am not speaking here of the drunk who feels like you somehow insulted them.  I am talking about the person who wants to rob you, molest you, what have you.  The fact they are using violence as a tool usually means they are accustomed to not only using it on others but having it inflicted upon themselves.  They can often also be under the influence of controlled substances which can diminish pain response.  When they move to violence there is not reasoning with them they only have one of two things in mind.  1. They still want to accomplish the initial goal and will try to free themselves to continue the attack.  2. If you have total control they will still fight to try and free themselves to flee in order to avoid arrest.  Regardless of what you say to them or how you say it they will not simply stop and walk away.  Once they initiated their violence their thoughts become very binary.

Second, and this is more common in my occupation, you may run into someone one some sort of substance, PCP, K2, Bath salts etc, that is essentially temporarily psychotic due to a chemical substance that they are abusing.  Sometimes these people will not even feel the pain and they are literally incapable of reason, de-escalation is not an option because they often can't even speak coherently let alone think coherently.

The long and the short of it is that the motive is important because the motive will directly inform how they react to your action.  The robbery suspect will either seek to continue their robbery attempt or flee before police arrive.  The person who is literally out of their mind due to an illicit substance will not be thinking at all, they will just be pure action.  The drunk reacting to an imagined slight will likely be open to a way out/saving face if not too intoxicated.

The difference between my using force and others, and it's maybe why I have learned the above, is that if "verbal judo" fails I often don't have the option to walk away so am often forced to confront violence.  The motive of the violence has a very strong influence on how the scenario plays out.  This isn't to say that you just pound them into a bloody mess or break them, just that you need to expect, if your art is one based on control, that you will have to maintain control with a person who will continue to resist until someone shows up with hand cuff.


Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear

Juany118 said:


> The only thing I would say is "speak calm, act calm" certainly can work if the person has not yet decided to attack you.  If someone has decided they are going to make a victim of you and has initiated action allowing him to save face may not be a concern for them at this point.  They may be using that force as a tool to commit another crime against your person (robbery, rape etc).  They maybe under the influence of a substance making them incapable of sound reasoning.
> 
> If there is any doubt as to the state of mind of the assailant I think assuming you can talk them down is asking for trouble.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk



Can't hurt.

I have been mangaling guys and was still able to reason with them. Depends how good you are at both.

And considering untrained tradies can do it. It is probably not that big an ask for proffesionals to do it.


----------



## Juany118

drop bear said:


> Can't hurt.
> 
> I have been mangaling guys and was still able to reason with them. Depends how good you are at both.
> 
> And considering untrained tradies can do it. It is probably not that big an ask for proffesionals to do it.


I already said "it can't hurt" but you need to be prepared for the continued resistance.  If you expect the "talking down" to work and it doesn't, things can go sideways very quickly.


----------



## KangTsai

Juany118 said:


> I think I get it.  Example for a technique that I learned in Aikido and a similar form exists in other arts.  Basically it amounts to a standing cutting arm bar but I am currently brain frying on the Aikido technique name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I can do it like the video shows, which will do limited injury or I can do it in such a way that I hyperextend the wrist and potentially dislocate the shoulder, if I have a wrist lock applied with my "outside" hand and simultaneously yank hard while executing the take down as seen in the video, or you could also hyperextend the elbow by not rakeing along the tendon as in the video by by apply a good solid strike to it.
> 
> Now I would only do the later if there was a weapon involved or if the person was being actively aggressive towards me or another (vs trying to escape) and made it clear that aggression was likely to continue but you can go from protecting the opponents safety to injuring them with just a couple simple changes.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk


How would that technique do if it was executed with a kimura grip on the arm?


----------



## Juany118

KangTsai said:


> How would that technique do if it was executed with a kimura grip on the arm?



You could do a standing kimura grip takedown I am sure, but I think it would be different enough to be considered it's own techique with the same result.

One of the reasons for a technique like the one shown in the video is so that you give yourself space for weapon retention.  I may not be thinking clearly due to exhaustion (just finished a 14 hour shift on 4 hours of sleep) but every execution of a kimura grip I am picturing has the suspect now with their free arm in closer proximity to my body such as here





and here





When I picture myself dropping them I picture that orientation not changing much and instead of being able to remain more "vertical" I may find myself more prone with him, which while still a dominant position is something I try to avoid, not only for retention purposes but it is awkward, and painful, to be bouncing around on the ground with all the crap around your waist plus if I have to disengage for whatever reason its more awkward.  With the weapons that would be on the duty belt that just makes me twitchy for a LE application.  Not "forbidden" but I would likely only go there if I absolutely had to (if that makes sense.)


----------



## KangTsai

Juany118 said:


> You could do a standing kimura grip takedown I am sure, but I think it would be different enough to be considered it's own techique with the same result.
> 
> One of the reasons for a technique like the one shown in the video is so that you give yourself space for weapon retention.  I may not be thinking clearly due to exhaustion (just finished a 14 hour shift on 4 hours of sleep) but every execution of a kimura grip I am picturing has the suspect now with their free arm in closer proximity to my body such as here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When I picture myself dropping them I picture that orientation not changing much.  With the weapons that would be on the duty belt that just makes me twitchy for a LE application.  Not "forbidden" but I would likely only go there if I absolutely had to (if that makes sense.)


 No I meant that straight-arm takedown except the arm is held in place with a kimura grip. That's a standing jointlock, and could still be viable for retention if it was used for a throw or trip from that position.


----------



## Juany118

KangTsai said:


> No I meant that straight-arm takedown except the arm is held in place with a kimura grip. That's a standing jointlock, and could still be viable for retention if it was used for a throw or trip from that position.



Oh I see what you are saying now.  I think it could work, here is my only question.  Again a little tired, but for an application as seen in the video, I think if you got the guy down you would run the risk of being "married" to him until another officer arrived because it could (note I said could I might experiment with it to confirm or deny) be a bit more awkward to transition to one of your hands going for cuffs, a taser what have you.  

Also I edited my post while you were responding.  If you used that grip its puts you a bit more prone than than I prefer with all the gear on because to maintain the grip properly you have to go down with him to a greater extent.  I could definitely see it being something I would find viable though if say another officer was already present so transitioning to tools wasn't an issue and the fact that some of the risks of being more prone are mitigated as well.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> I understand what you are saying thank you  and but I would not see it like this.. I think gentle is the only way in Aikido.. I am always going to be softer than a bladed weapon, how hard can I be against tempered steel anyway? The gentle is woven in the technique.. there is pain yes and but you are just neutral when it is complete the pain is in his resisting what you have applied.. Me it is not my intention to apply pain.. is my intention to let him walk away so he can save face.. For me is opposite of tapout where I might bend him so much to the point of breaking either tapout or pass out.. no.. if the technique work then I am just standing neutral.. talk to him if he want.. we can be calm.. if he move at me again then he induce his own pain in the lock that he is in, yes?
> 
> I do not know.. is not my experience that hurting him make him stop.. is my experience reason with him make him stop.. though maybe I am not in same situation you are in. In my situation people get angry that is what make them lash out at us at me at others.. Hurting do not diminish that anger.. just make it worse.. they call police here a lot.. some police the best ones.. they are calm.. they are gentle! Speak calm, act calm.. that is best way nobody get hurt everybody walk, save face.. Other police not so much.. they come in ready to fight.. is wrong mindset, right?? Fighting be about winning.. And you disadvantage your self from start if there is need to win, yes?? Police who come in like this with this mindset almost like all of these people are bad people.. they are like stormtroopers yes they win by force and but there is lot of trouble with violence.. Aikido technique successfully applied for me permit a moment just enough so like.. ok stop! everybody be calm.. It is like I give you a moment to reassess.. You understand me?? Not sure I am too clear on this.. Anyway.. I do not know maybe is just I am not in your situations like knives and things..  Just my experience is all x


Reason won't stop someone who is angry. That part of their brain is literally not engaged (limbic system overrides the executive center). And I won't stop to talk to someone who has a kinfe and is using it to try to hurt me. If I get a chance to break the arm holding the knife, I will break it. In NGA (remember, not a derivative from Ueshiba, but a cousin art), "aiki" is not a concept of philosophical gentleness, just one of physical blending and using the momentum of the attack. 

Now, if my initial response puts them on the ground and under my control, the game has changed. Once I have control, I can afford to become gentle. If I manage that without doing harm to them, I prefer that, but I don't actively change my approach during the attack to avoid their injury.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> Yes I understand what you say and thank you for your courteous reply  Your actions are independent of the varying state of mind of others tho yes??


Actually, no. If their state of mind is calm, they don't attack, so I have no need to react to that attack. If they are angry or desperate enough to attack, effective defense should take their likely responses into account. The attack is all about their state of mind, so the defense should be, as well - otherwise, you risk responding to something that's not present. Aiki is all about responding to what is presented.


----------



## Jenna

Juany118 said:


> Verbal de-escalation or walking away (if possible) is preferred but there is a problem.  Now the idea of reasoning with someone can also work if violence is initiated by say the drunk who wants to fight over an imagined slight but there are circumstances where it will not.
> 
> First: There are people who actually chose you to be a victim.  The violence is simply a tool to achieve that other goal.  I am not speaking here of the drunk who feels like you somehow insulted them.  I am talking about the person who wants to rob you, molest you, what have you.  The fact they are using violence as a tool usually means they are accustomed to not only using it on others but having it inflicted upon themselves.  They can often also be under the influence of controlled substances which can diminish pain response.  When they move to violence there is not reasoning with them they only have one of two things in mind.  1. They still want to accomplish the initial goal and will try to free themselves to continue the attack.  2. If you have total control they will still fight to try and free themselves to flee in order to avoid arrest.  Regardless of what you say to them or how you say it they will not simply stop and walk away.  Once they initiated their violence their thoughts become very binary.
> 
> Second, and this is more common in my occupation, you may run into someone one some sort of substance, PCP, K2, Bath salts etc, that is essentially temporarily psychotic due to a chemical substance that they are abusing.  Sometimes these people will not even feel the pain and they are literally incapable of reason, de-escalation is not an option because they often can't even speak coherently let alone think coherently.
> 
> The long and the short of it is that the motive is important because the motive will directly inform how they react to your action.  The robbery suspect will either seek to continue their robbery attempt or flee before police arrive.  The person who is literally out of their mind due to an illicit substance will not be thinking at all, they will just be pure action.  The drunk reacting to an imagined slight will likely be open to a way out/saving face if not too intoxicated.
> 
> The difference between my using force and others, and it's maybe why I have learned the above, is that if "verbal judo" fails I often don't have the option to walk away so am often forced to confront violence.  The motive of the violence has a very strong influence on how the scenario plays out.  This isn't to say that you just pound them into a bloody mess or break them, just that you need to expect, if your art is one based on control, that you will have to maintain control with a person who will continue to resist until someone shows up with hand cuff.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk



First, thank you for your thoughts, I am grateful for your conversation  And yes verbal deescalation is preference of course you are correct I agree, and largely I do not disagree with your sentiment nor your statements.  All I would do is offer my experience or opinion as alternative and not gospel.  
Like if someone is not in good position to respond to verbal reasoning, and there are two reason that come to mind for me here and those are alcohol and anger (there are plenty other) then for all the things I do not know, I do know one thing.. that violence to them do not make the job of deescalation any easier at all.. it make it some times impossible! yes??  Then it become a spiral of not deescalation and but ESCALATION until the greater force win.. I do not like that.. I do not see winning only victim.. 

Also , I think if someone want to rob me they want items that are of value.. if they want to molest me they seek to satisfy their sexual predilections.. yes this may include a form of domination however that is a specific diagnosis which is dominance and not victimhood per se.. in any case I am willing to accept that there can be instance in which an idividual may actually have as a primary goal the desire to induce victimhood in me..ok  I set argument aside for a sec.. it is just that it do not matter to me what is their motivation.. I cannot know this and nor can you until you are applying your techniques yes and by which stage you are already in the middle of it, yes? I mean only that I am uncertain in any preparation what benefit arise from being clairvoyant over their intent?? Maybe I have misunderstood..

However -and again I think our exerience differ- I do not deal with what it seem you deal with so I cannot speak to that.. In my experience it is more likely that someone might like you say continue to their "goal" if that is what it actually is, if I am aggressive towards them.  For me I have found it easier to pacify someone who have come in a state of fury or violence by immobilisation.. In Aikido as I utilise it, this can be done neutrally or actively or in tandem depending upon the persons decisions after immobilisation.. we can talk.. I have done this.. pain is not requisite.. we can just stop here and take a moment, some time they need moved around.. some time their resisting needs reapplication or application of other technique.. for me it work!  Drunk yes.. same thing.. after a moment or after they struggle they have sufficient reasoning to either know they are not going to do nothing or I have had people lapse into that stupor they do. If police need to come then that is fine.. nobody be hurt.. I am not prepared to accept any inevitability in what you say is binary thoughts.. Is very easy to induce this way of thinking in a person for sure by responding to their violence with more and greater of your own.. this will def do it!

So yes you say you deal with people on substances.. yes I understand this thank you for explaining.. you have differing set of circumstances I do not know nothing about.. I am not spokesperson for nothing and nobody.. is just opinion and experience of Aikido as I do it 

Still disagree about motive of a person.. I do not need to know this.. it do not help me to know it.. Is for court to ascertain that.. My mindset is the same.. I do not wish for anyone to be hurt me or them.  That is incorrect mindset to possess you would say???


----------



## Jenna

gpseymour said:


> Reason won't stop someone who is angry. That part of their brain is literally not engaged (limbic system overrides the executive center). And I won't stop to talk to someone who has a kinfe and is using it to try to hurt me. If I get a chance to break the arm holding the knife, I will break it. In NGA (remember, not a derivative from Ueshiba, but a cousin art), "aiki" is not a concept of philosophical gentleness, just one of physical blending and using the momentum of the attack.
> 
> Now, if my initial response puts them on the ground and under my control, the game has changed. Once I have control, I can afford to become gentle. If I manage that without doing harm to them, I prefer that, but I don't actively change my approach during the attack to avoid their injury.



I think physiological processes arising from limbic system cannot be engaged forever.. peak then fall, this is not correct?  Like anger is a flow it cannot be a perpetual state.. it cannot be maintained without stimulus.. If you persist violently with someone who is angry then YOU are the stimulus, yes?? 

Is not impossible to have compassionate intent for someone who apparently wish to harm you, you do not agree??  As martial artists we have no obligation to consider these things???


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> I think physiological processes arising from limbic system cannot be engaged forever.. peak then fall, this is not correct?  Like anger is a flow it cannot be a perpetual state.. it cannot be maintained without stimulus.. If you persist violently with someone who is angry then YOU are the stimulus, yes??
> 
> Is not impossible to have compassionate intent for someone who apparently wish to harm you, you do not agree??  As martial artists we have no obligation to consider these things???


If they have reached what is referred to as "emotional hijacking", it is a slow process to reverse it (a chemical process), unless another strong emotion (like fear) is introduced. Anger is actually a threat response system gone awry. If I prolong the physical interaction, yes, I'll feed back into that system. However, my point is that if they're trying to hurt me I need to end it quickly (and sometimes that quickest path is injury to them). So, the level of my response is designed to shorten the engagement. If I happen into a short path that ends with a harmless immobilization, that's excellent. If what's presented doesn't lead that way, I'll end the attack with whatever means I have at hand, and being willing to injure them opens up more options.

If I have a chance to choose (and that can happen), then I'll choose the less-injurious methods so long as they are equally likely to protect me. My primary goal is self-defense, so I go with what gives me the highest chance of that end. Protecting them where I can is a close second, but always second.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Jenna said:


> He do not have to be reasonable to reason. He only have to understand the consequence of his lack of reason is the pain he inflict upon his self in so doing



My issue with pain compliance techniques is that reaction to pain can vary immensely depending on the individual and the situation. Some people, especially under the effects of drugs, alcohol, or adrenaline, will ignore ridiculous levels of pain (up to and including broken bones) and keep on fighting. Others will not. A lot depends on their mindset.

My preferred way to avoid having to hurt an assailant is to avoid or defuse the situation before it develops. If that fails but I feel like my skill level is sufficient to control my attacker without injuring them or risking injury to myself, then there are approaches to pin someone using leverage without relying on pain compliance. If I didn't feel like that was a safe option, then I would move directly to rendering someone structurally incapable of harming me - either rendering them unconscious or breaking the limbs they are using to attack me.

If you've had successful experiences relying on pain compliance to end an attack, then that's great. I would just keep in mind that there are situations where that approach will probably not work.


----------



## slink

gpseymour said:


> Nikkyo, I think. I've been in Ueshiba-lineage schools where they use the Japanese. The founder of NGA was a translator in Japan in the 40's (armed forces), and his instructor had him teach the Japanese students English names for the techniques. So, we've always just used the English names.


----------



## slink

gpseymour said:


> Nikkyo, I think. I've been in Ueshiba-lineage schools where they use the Japanese. The founder of NGA was a translator in Japan in the 40's (armed forces), and his instructor had him teach the Japanese students English names for the techniques. So, we've always just used the English names.


In reply to #27 if you're talking about an Arm Bar then it would be Ikkyo.  The NGA equivalent to Nikkyo would be Jacket Grab and also First Wrist.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

slink said:


> In reply to #27 if you're talking about an Arm Bar then it would be Ikkyo.  The NGA equivalent to Nikkyo would be Jacket Grab and also First Wrist.


Hey, you know the NGA techniques and the equivalents! Thanks!

Something I've been meaning to ask someone: would NGA's 3rd Set Wrist also fall into Nikkyo? I've never fully comprehended what the differentiations are among the techniques by the Japanese names.


----------



## slink

I've never encountered the 3rd Set Wrist anywhere other than in NGA so I'm not really sure.  Here are some folks who say that it's Nikkyo.

Classical Techniques ~ Blue Belt Set


----------



## Gerry Seymour

slink said:


> I've never encountered the 3rd Set Wrist anywhere other than in NGA so I'm not really sure.  Here are some folks who say that it's Nikkyo.
> 
> Classical Techniques ~ Blue Belt Set


I've always considered it a variation of the same technique as the 1st Set Wrist and Jacket Grab (which are truly two variations of the same technique).


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

A video showing Aikido movement in real life:
The Instinctive Edge


----------



## Jenna

Brian R. VanCise said:


> A video showing Aikido movement in real life:
> The Instinctive Edge


Very deft, love to watch those.. Could be Aiki yes kote gaeshi or similar JJ maybe? Awesome plus also he is Professor of Defence against the Dark Arts! ooh yes please and thank you! Can I be apprenticed pretty pretty please??


----------



## O'Malley

Isn't it shiho nage?


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> Very deft, love to watch those.. Could be Aiki yes kote gaeshi or similar JJ maybe? Awesome plus also he is Professor of Defence against the Dark Arts! ooh yes please and thank you! Can I be apprenticed pretty pretty please??


Yes, it's apparently kote gaeshi. The movement matches movement I've seen in Ueshiba's Aikido, as well as some JJ, so I'm with you on that. The "toss" at the end of the kote gaeshi is a movement we use to lock after that throw (and I think I've seen at an Aikikai dojo, as well), and apparently works well as a finish if the throw doesn't do the work.


----------



## O'Malley

My bad, shiho nage is done by spinning the other way around and twisting the arm to the outside. So kote gaeshi.

...right?


----------



## drop bear

Brian R. VanCise said:


> A video showing Aikido movement in real life:
> The Instinctive Edge



I like how the officer obviously has extensive martial arts training as evidenced by one movement.

Otherwise that is pretty much my only disarm.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

O'Malley said:


> My bad, shiho nage is done by spinning the other way around and twisting the arm to the outside. So kote gaeshi.
> 
> ...right?


Correct, assuming I'm visualizing your description correctly.

EDIT: You're lucky - I actually know the Japanese names for only a few techniques, and those two are among them.


----------



## Jenna

O'Malley said:


> My bad, shiho nage is done by spinning the other way around and twisting the arm to the outside. So kote gaeshi.
> 
> ...right?


Hey I think you could be forgiven for seeing shiho nage here because it is quick.. though is more like kote gaeshi you know simple twist of the wrist if you watch so uke go in the direction of his fingers hopefully straight down neatly in his own space though (even this technique done wrong encourage lot of flamboyant ukemi though that is for another day! )

Shiho nage he would have stepped under so uke whole arm would be bent at elbow on it self and taken uke down backwards (usually though there is other stuff you can do for sure)

Wishes x


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Jenna said:


> Hey I think you could be forgiven for seeing shiho nage here because it is quick.. though is more like kote gaeshi you know simple twist of the wrist if you watch so uke go in the direction of his fingers hopefully straight down neatly in his own space though (even this technique done wrong encourage lot of flamboyant ukemi though that is for another day! )
> 
> Shiho nage he would have stepped under so uke whole arm would be bent at elbow on it self and taken uke down backwards (usually though there is other stuff you can do for sure)
> 
> Wishes x


Agreed. Shiho nage can also be done with a pivot, rather than stepping under the arm (so, bringing arm over, rather than you under), which would be closer to the movements in this video - it works with the pulling-back of the arm. More technical, and requires more precision, IME.


----------



## Spinedoc

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. Shiho nage can also be done with a pivot, rather than stepping under the arm (so, bringing arm over, rather than you under), which would be closer to the movements in this video - it works with the pulling-back of the arm. More technical, and requires more precision, IME.



In hamni handachi, you can even execute shihonage by moving uke around you. Here's a ryotedori version, but it can be done from katate dori. You simply hyperextend uke's wrist with a slight lassoing motion. They will move, because the alternative is worse......This is one of my faves....


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Spinedoc said:


> In hamni handachi, you can even execute shihonage by moving uke around you. Here's a ryotedori version, but it can be done from katate dori. You simply hyperextend uke's wrist with a slight lassoing motion. They will move, because the alternative is worse......This is one of my faves....


True enough, assuming they don't lose balance and fall on you (probably a likely scenario outside the dojo). The same can be done from standing, if the right position presents itself. Both are less technical than the version I was referring to, but require a more specific start, IME.


----------

