# Aikido and Law Enforcement



## Spinedoc (Dec 30, 2015)

Interesting topic…..

I was having a good discussion with an old friend about Aikido, and it's effectiveness, and he laughed. He is a senior agent with the FBI and has been with them for almost 20 years. He remarked that "I don't know how you can consider it 'ineffective' considering so many police departments teach a component of Aikido with entire courses designed such as those by Koga for specific police training. Hell, the Tokyo police have a dedicated 11 month program in Yoshinkan Aikido called Senshusei. Granted many of these programs also mix in Judo, Krav Maga, and even BJJ to a smaller degree, however, Aikido remains one of the primary arts taught. We wouldn't do that if it didn't work". 

He went on to acknowledge that Aikido didn't work in every scenario, but that these courses were taught for 2 reasons. "One, they are effective, and while they don't make someone a 'master' of aikido, they do teach a variety of techniques perfect for most police encounters. Two, police administrators tend to love Aikido because of the emphasis on not harming the attacker….this leads to fewer lawsuits (eye roll)". 

He finally remarked that Aikido worked well "during arresting techniques, along with other arts like Aikijujutsu, Judo, and Hapkido that can also be useful. BJJ, I don't personally feel is as helpful for most law enforcement situations, it might be helpful to have at least a little understanding of it, but I cannot think of any police officer that would EVER intentionally go down to the ground unless there were no other options, this isn't a cage (snickers).."

I've known him since undergrad 20 years ago. He's always been bright, and has been with federal law enforcement for a long time. 

I thought his insight was interesting. NOW, I was in the military many years ago, but have never worked in law enforcement. 

I thought this might make for an interesting, stimulating conversation. In the immortal words of Picard….."ENGAGE".


----------



## Kenpoguy123 (Dec 30, 2015)

Aikido probably would come in handy for the police since they can't actually punch a guy they're arresting so they'd need to use restraining techniques such as locks and pins. But saying that aikido isn't all their training they'll be trained in other things as well ways to arrest and tackle a suspect that are allowed. My instructor is a police officer and he says they are taught more about how to control a situation that how to actually fight. 

But I guess some bits of aikido would work for police officers but It also depends on how they're trained in it


----------



## punisher73 (Dec 30, 2015)

Much will depend on the person and how they have trained their art and understanding how to properly apply it and knowing situations where it isn't strong.

I remember reading a story of an old Japanese Aikido master and his school being challenged by a boxer.  One of the other students fought him and was soundly defeated because he was trying to redirect the punches as they came in.  The boxer still wanted to fight the instructor and he went next.  He used Irimi and very quickly beat the boxer.  The master understood his art's strengths and weaknesses and didn't try to apply techniques in a situation that they weren't designed for. 

Another quote from an aikido master.  A student said that "Aikido doesn't work".  The instructor replied "Your Aikido may not work.  Mine works just fine".

I have met people of all arts that could make it work for themselves in situations "on the street", and people of various arts that are supposed to be so good that didn't do too well in situations.  

All that being said, many of the restraint techniques of Aikido do work very well in restraining a suspect and are used by various agencies.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Dec 30, 2015)

Let's make sure we are comparing apples to apples. First and most important is that law enforcement officers are not in a street fight, so the comparison of "effective" is relative to the situation.  An officer is stepping into a situation and needs to assert controll. This is drastically different than self defense situations.
Second point, aikido has no exclusive property rights to joint locks. Many styles have them. So the question is,,,are the joint locks effective on there own merit or does the aiki give exclusivity of making something work for law enforcement?  I will assume they are being taught the basic 3 or 4 wrist locks and never learn anything that resembles aikido.
Now in Japan ,,,that is something all together different.


----------



## Steve (Dec 30, 2015)

I have to say, this thread seems a lot like a petty and not so subtle slam against bjj.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 30, 2015)

Akido or at least the standing restraints shown to me are akward as all get out to put on. 

You can. Mabye put them on if you have dominant wrestling. But otherwise you are using low percentage wristlocks against high percentage being punched in the face.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve said:


> I have to say, this thread seems a lot like a petty and not so subtle slam against bjj.


so the opposite of 90% of the other threads around here lately where certain BJJ fanboys run into all other style threads telling them they are crap and BJJ is the only real MA......


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Akido or at least the standing restraints shown to me are akward as all get out to put on.
> 
> You can. Mabye put them on if you have dominant wrestling. But otherwise you are using low percentage wristlocks against high percentage being punched in the face.


have you ever had someone trained in Aikido use them in you?  I thought the same thing until I went to a dojo and asked if I could resist while the instructor tried Aikido techniques on me.  Well it hurt and I didn't want to resist anymore.  Now most of the lower level students couldnt get the techniques in fast enough to work effectively yet But the higher ranks could.


----------



## Steve (Dec 30, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> so the opposite of 90% of the other threads around here lately......


first, I think you're exaggerating just a bit.  Second, makes it okay exactly how?

We're Hanzou to post this same, completely unsubstantiated anecdote, swapping only BJJ for aikido, you and several other posters, who mostly don't train in either art, would raise all kinds of hell.  

It's a bunch of petty ********.  In my opinion.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve said:


> first, I think you're exaggerating just a bit.  Second, makes it okay exactly how?
> 
> We're Hanzou to post this same, completely unsubstantiated anecdote, swapping only BJJ for aikido, you and several other posters, who mostly don't train in either art, would raise all kinds of hell.
> 
> It's a bunch of petty ********.  In my opinion.


so Don't click on it.  If the mods allow  BJJ guys to run around here like thugs then so be it take your medicine.  Besides the only knock on BJJ I saw was it wasn't great for Police work.....I agree.


----------



## Spinedoc (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve, I never meant any offense, and certainly did not intend to "slam" BJJ. I'm actually taking BJJ now in addition to Aikido, and find the combination fun and complementary. I also did not state that Aikido is effective in all situations, but rather that law enforcement seems to prefer it. This should not be taken as meaning the same for all self defense situations! I also posted this, as I would love to have other law enforcement folks on here chime in. I don't know if my friends opinion is common in law enforcement or not? BJJ has its uses, and is perfect for many situations, but like all arts, it is not perfect for every situation!!!!


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 30, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> so Don't click on it.  If the mods allow  BJJ guys to run around here like thugs then so be it take your medicine.  Besides the only knock on BJJ I saw was it wasn't great for Police work.....I agree.



Someone's a little over-sensitive.....


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

Hanzou said:


> Someone's a little over-sensitive.....


I agree prob the guy that read 4 posts on the thread pics out 1 small comment about BJJ and crys that we are picking on it


----------



## Steve (Dec 30, 2015)

Spinedoc said:


> Steve, I never meant any offense, and certainly did not intend to "slam" BJJ. I'm actually taking BJJ now in addition to Aikido, and find the combination fun and complementary. I also did not state that Aikido is effective in all situations, but rather that law enforcement seems to prefer it. This should not be taken as meaning the same for all self defense situations! I also posted this, as I would love to have other law enforcement folks on here chime in. I don't know if my friends opinion is common in law enforcement or not? BJJ has its uses, and is perfect for many situations, but like all arts, it is not perfect for every situation!!!!


i honestly don't see how it could be interpreted as other than a love fest for aikido and an opportunity to bash BJJ, regardless of what you intended.   The unsubstantiated anecdote where some anonymous authority opines that aikido is good and BJJ is bad seems like a terrible way to start a balanced discussion.  

I'd also say that regardless of what your "friend" says, some LEO must think it's useful. At least a quarter of the people I know who train in BJJ work in law enforcement.  

I can't speak to aikido, as I don't train in it.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 30, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> have you ever had someone trained in Aikido use them in you?  I thought the same thing until I went to a dojo and asked if I could resist while the instructor tried Aikido techniques on me.  Well it hurt and I didn't want to resist anymore.  Now most of the lower level students couldnt get the techniques in fast enough to work effectively yet But the higher ranks could.



I did once back in the day. I was told to grab the guys wrist. And being the noob that I was hung on for dear life. After a while he told me to let go and said I wasn't suited to akido.


----------



## Steve (Dec 30, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> so Don't click on it.  If the mods allow  BJJ guys to run around here like thugs then so be it take your medicine.  Besides the only knock on BJJ I saw was it wasn't great for Police work.....I agree.


 Tit for tat, or taking medicine as you say, isn't a great foundation for a discussion.   Exactly my point.   I appreciate your honesty.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve-:Love fest for Aikido-it absolutely is. As a bash on BJJ i didn't see that at all until reading you comment, and even then it seems like a stretch. That comment was definitely a bash on BJJ (and I read it more as a joke than an actual bashing) , but the rest of his post wasn't, and neither were any of the other comments before it. I get where you're coming from..any time I see someone post about SKK I assume it's a bash nowadays, but this time I don't think it was.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 30, 2015)

Complimentary is the key. You can't catch punches out of mid air and an arm won't isolate itself so you need a method to do this before you can really apply akido. I like clinch work and arm drags. Which give me time to get the wrist or amlock on.


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 30, 2015)

What I find funny about this is that the wrist locks employed in aikido are perfectly legal/allowed in BJJ. Once upon a time, I studied aikido for a bit... The Aikikai flavor. It's good for what it is... Practicing wrist locks and falling over and over and over. A BJJ guy can really do the same thing to control someone but they're prepared to defend themselves in a wider range of situations (i.e. Grappling range from standing to the takedown to the ground).


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 30, 2015)

punisher73 said:


> I remember reading a story of an old Japanese Aikido master and his school being challenged by a boxer.  One of the other students fought him and was soundly defeated because he was trying to redirect the punches as they came in.  The boxer still wanted to fight the instructor and he went next.  He used Irimi and very quickly beat the boxer.  The master understood his art's strengths and weaknesses and didn't try to apply techniques in a situation that they weren't designed for.


With this story, you have to remember that it's possible another boxer who was better than the first could beat the Aikido Master, or the situation could be reversed: Aikido practitioner beats boxer easily, goes to fight boxers coach and loses quickly. A member of any art has the possibility of being beaten by a member of another art if that person is a better practitioner and/or fighter.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve said:


> I can't speak to aikido, as I don't train in it.


Yet here you are


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

Steve said:


> Tit for tat, or taking medicine as you say, isn't a great foundation for a discussion.   Exactly my point.   I appreciate your honesty.


The mods and "Mentors"  seem ok with it when BJJ is doing the bullying but 1 small paragraph out of the 1st four posts got you squealing like a pig lol


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 30, 2015)

kuniggety said:


> . A BJJ guy can really do the same thing to control someone but they're prepared to defend themselves in a wider range of situations (i.e. Grappling range from standing to the takedown to the ground).


So can someone training in Aikido......Here come the BJJ mafia


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> So can someone training in Aikido......Here come the BJJ mafia



I'm not part of the "BJJ mafia". I said I've even studied aikido. It's just that it doesn't take more than 5 minutes looking at the curriculum of the two arts to see that aikido is more of a specialized art than BJJ. It's great at what it is. But aikido in a clinch fight or ground fight? I don't think so.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

kuniggety said:


> . But aikido in a clinch fight or ground fight? I don't think so.


Why would you want to in the first place?


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Why would you want to in the first place?


The original post was about aikido being better than BJJ in a LE setting. For learning a couple of techniques to subdue a resisting person, aikido probably is the first pic. What happens as soon as that person tackles you, trips you, pulls you into a headlock, etc etc? When you're intentionally engaging a person and trying to subdue them, you often don't really have a choice in the matter for it to turn into either a clinch or ground fight. That's my point and why I think it doesn't make any sense to dismiss BJJ (or substitute any other submission grappling system... Sambo, judo, catch wrestling, etc).


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Why would you want to in the first place?



OK. The theory is position before submission. So to gain time and leverage to get what is a standing submission. You want to fight from a dominant position.

The clinch is one way of achieving this.

If you have a good clinch gain your ability to apply standing armlocks increases.






OK. So ignore the transition into throws and look just at the arm position that is being created. These entries from good clinch work set up the arm control. And this can be done on a trained guy really fighting you off.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

kuniggety said:


> The original post was about aikido being better than BJJ in a LE setting.


No it wasn't the topic had nothing to do with BJJ


> For learning a couple of techniques to subdue a resisting person, aikido probably is the first pic. What happens as soon as that person tackles you, trips you, pulls you into a headlock, etc etc?


So in your limited Aikido training you know they have zero defense for this?  





> When you're intentionally engaging a person and trying to subdue them, you often don't really have a choice in the matter for it to turn into either a clinch or ground fight.


You absolutely do have the choice most if the time.  Ive been a cop for 15 years and a DT instructor I very rarely get into a clinch In fact I cant remember the last time I was in a clinch or on the ground


> That's my point and why I think it doesn't make any sense to dismiss BJJ (or substitute any other submission grappling system... Sambo, judo, catch wrestling, etc).


He didnt dismiss anything but In my opinion given the choice of styles BJJ wouldnt my first choice


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> OK. The theory is position before submission. So to gain time and leverage to get what is a standing submission. You want to fight from a dominant position.
> 
> The clinch is one way of achieving this.
> 
> ...


I ment if your an Aikido fighter why would you go to a clinch its not a strengh of your style. I wasnt saying anything good or bad about the clinch itself.  It is however very bad for police work Im not letting anyone hang out that long near my gun.


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> No it wasn't the topic had nothing to do with BJJ





> He finally remarked that Aikido worked well "during arresting techniques, along with other arts like Aikijujutsu, Judo, and Hapkido that can also be useful. BJJ, I don't personally feel is as helpful for most law enforcement situations, it might be helpful to have at least a little understanding of it, but I cannot think of any police officer that would EVER intentionally go down to the ground unless there were no other options, this isn't a cage (snickers).."



Okay man.



> So in your limited Aikido training you know they have zero defense for this?


It was long enough to have a copy of the official aikikai curriculum and I have a handful of books on aikido.



> You absolutely do have the choice most if the time.  Ive been a cop for 15 years and a DT instructor I very rarely get into a clinch In fact I cant remember the last time I was in a clinch or on the ground



It's good to know that you're so good that no one can ever get the first move on you. Not everyone is so awesome.



> He didnt dismiss anything but In my opinion given the choice of styles BJJ wouldnt my first choice



He did, in fact, dismiss BJJ.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

kuniggety said:


> Okay man.


1 small paragraph and it was mentioned in passing.. It will be ok your world wont end if we have a few threads not about the majesty of BJJ


> It was long enough to have a copy of the official aikikai curriculum and I have a handful of books on aikido.


So your practically an expert huh



> It's good to know that you're so good that no one can ever get the first move on you. Not everyone is so awesome.


Well not just me.... since I was a DT instructor I reviewed all use of force reports in my department.  Cops getting taken down was pretty rare.



> He did, in fact, dismiss BJJ.


LOL you will fit in fine around here


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> 1 small paragraph and it was mentioned in passing.. It will be ok your world wont end if we have a few threads not about the majesty of BJJ



It's just a true/false thing. Nothing subjective about it.



> So your practically an expert huh



I don't pretend to be an expert, only that I'm literate. Some particular instructor can teach some extra stuff but it's not part of the aikido curriculum. Are you trying to say there's some secret scroll/techniques only available to Dan level practitioners in aikido?



> Well not just me.... since I was a DT instructor I reviewed all use of force reports in my department.  Cops getting taken down was pretty rare.



Okay. I agreed that some basic wrist lock techniques would be a good fit to teach. It could be chin na and not aikido. I think it's silly to not prepare for the worst case scenario. I thought that I could hold my own in a fist fight until the first time I walked into a BJJ class and realized I didn't know my head from my *** as soon as they got the clinch or took me down to the ground. I'll say it again - I'm not espousing BJJ. Catch wrestling, judo, sambo, etc can be substituted right in there.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

kuniggety said:


> It's just a true/false thing. Nothing subjective about it.


yes and even the OP said he wasnt picking on poor little BJJ. 




> I don't pretend to be an expert, only that I'm literate. Some particular instructor can teach some extra stuff but it's not part of the aikido curriculum. Are you trying to say there's some secret scroll/techniques only available to Dan level practitioners in aikido?


No Im saying its stupid to think you know everything in a system because you read a book



> Okay. I agreed that some basic wrist lock techniques would be a good fit to teach. It could be chin na and not aikido. I think it's silly to not prepare for the worst case scenario. I thought that I could hold my own in a fist fight until the first time I walked into a BJJ class and realized I didn't know my head from my *** as soon as they got the clinch or took me down to the ground. I'll say it again - I'm not espousing BJJ. Catch wrestling, judo, sambo, etc can be substituted right in there.


All thoes are fine so is Aikido.In my opinion Judo is the best single system for Law enforcement however there is no Perfect system so taking things from several systems is better for Law Enforcement.  BJJ being towards the bottom mainly because we cant use chokes and pulling off some techniques with a full gun belt and vest isnt easy.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> ...Here come the BJJ mafia


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

There is no place in Law Enforcement for Brazilian Jiu-jitsu.
There is no place in Law Enforcement for Aikido. 

There is only a place in Law Enforcement for Defensive Tactics, the department's Use of Force Policy, the department's Use of Force Continuum and how you write your report.

What we teach and how we teach varies with departments. Probably the only thing we teach the same is the first rule of Law Enforcement - finish your tour and make it home to your family alive.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Buka said:


> - finish your tour and make it home to your family alive.


Some places dont even want you teaching that anymore


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Some places dont even want you teaching that anymore



I know. Ain't it nuts?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

What police officers need in the way of martial arts is different from what most martial artists need, often police officers are looking to take down someone to be able to safely control them. A police officer's view is wider than a civilians, there is more to think about than just 'surviving', you think about the safety of your colleagues, the public and the person you are arresting, there is a duty of care to all of them that is not there for a civilian who is defending themselves. A greater onus is placed on police officers even in dangerous situations that again is not there for civilians so the methods they use have to be as fool proof as they can make them. Just training a martial art isn't enough, you can learn a takedown from a number of styles but you have to learn a takedown with a specific purpose when arresting for example. Often in the UK on the television you will see that it takes as many as six officers to restrain someone, this isn't because any martial art is useless or that the officers aren't trained in control and restraint that a civilian can do, it's because like prison officers, nurses in mental hospitals etc the police have to control but not harm. Yes one officer can just punch out the offender, they could drop them MMA style etc etc but the law doesn't allow for that. The law and duty of care says that we have to have a safe restraining technique, ie one officer holding the head, one or two the legs another the arms, it looks unnecessary compared to an MMA fight for example but it is done for _everyone's_ safety.
Policing isn't street fights, it's not an MMA competition or a boxing bout, it's a specialised profession where what is taught is taught for a reason not for fashion. Unless you are or have been a police officer it's often hard to grasp the concepts behind what they do.


----------



## Spinedoc (Dec 31, 2015)

Okay…clarification. There was no "bash" of BJJ. My friend merely opined that for law enforcement work, BJJ is not as well suited as standing arts, as he didn't think there was ever a reason in a law enforcement situation to try and go to the ground. His words were "that's usually a really bad idea". That being said, he also said that most LE agents should learn a little BJJ as things don't always go as planned. He thought that Aikido, Judo, and Krav Maga were most suited to LE work. He said that many agencies tended to prefer Aikido as there is not intent to harm the attacker. Administrators look for ways to reduce legal exposure of agents/officers, and Aikido helps them do that. 

#1 at no point did we even talk about the effectiveness of Aikido in all street and self defense applications. We merely discussed it's uses in law enforcement…that was it. 

#2 He also said that the Aikido techniques that LE uses are taught as part of courses, both DT, as well as seminars teaching "arrest control"….he mentioned someone named Koga as had attended several of his seminars, and that by NO means did it make someone a "master" of Aikido. 

#3 He thought LE officers should learn more MA techniques overall, and should try to blend various systems. He did remark that officers/agents spent "most of their time on the range firing a gun that they will rarely ever use in the line of duty, but very little time at all on physical control and submission techniques that they will use almost daily"….

I didn't post this to BASH BJJ…I posted this to get others opinions and to start a discussion about the effectiveness of Aikido in Law Enforcement. 

That was it.


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

Buka said:


> There is no place in Law Enforcement for Brazilian Jiu-jitsu.
> There is no place in Law Enforcement for Aikido.
> 
> There is only a place in Law Enforcement for Defensive Tactics, the department's Use of Force Policy, the department's Use of Force Continuum and how you write your report.
> ...


Wise words.   I'm sure that there are LEO out there who train in any number of martial arts styles.  As I said before, I have no idea how many, but I can attest that many of the people I know who train in bJJ are LEO. They must see some value in their training.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

Police officers aren't taught 'martial arts' or 'self defence' they are taught* control and restraint* techniques, now these may well be found in many different martial arts but there is no single martial art that suits policing.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Buka said:


> There is no place in Law Enforcement for Brazilian Jiu-jitsu.
> There is no place in Law Enforcement for Aikido.
> 
> There is only a place in Law Enforcement for Defensive Tactics, the department's Use of Force Policy, the department's Use of Force Continuum and how you write your report.
> ...



Ours was more. It is cheaper to hospitalise a guard than hospitalise a patron.

And we were trained accordingly.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I ment if your an Aikido fighter why would you go to a clinch its not a strengh of your style. I wasnt saying anything good or bad about the clinch itself.  It is however very bad for police work Im not letting anyone hang out that long near my gun.



For restraint and control you would make it a strength. It really is the only way you can make standing armlocks reliable against a guy who is fighting you.

It is very unlikely you will catch a punch out of mid air and manipulate a wrist.

The best way to protect a weapon. (I used to carry a bat ) is to be dominant in the clinch. This is the core principle of grappling. If I control the grapple I can do what I want. If he controls it then he can do what he wants.

The best way to avoid a clinch. Is to be dominant in the clinch.

You will notice I have a theme starting to happen here.


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> Yet here you are


When did you start training aikido or bjj, ballen?  Yet, here you are.   I'm addressing the specific statements in the OP that BJJ is not useful for LEO. 

Had the OP stuck to aikido, there would be no problem.   But he chose otherwise.  I think it was an unfortunate reaction to other, also unnecessarily contentious threads.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> The best way to protect a weapon. (I used to carry a bat ) is to be dominant in the clinch. This is the core principle of grappling. If I control the grapple I can do what I want. If he controls it then he can do what he wants.



You are talking civilian, police work is different, there's pepper spray, cuffs, Taser and baton to use to defend yourself (of course some officers are armed), there's other colleagues as well. Police officers do not aim to grapple/clinch with those they are arresting, they aim to cuff them and chuck em in the back of the wagon with as little fuss as possible. We aren't talking 'street' fights here nor are we talking 'bouncer'/security guard.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> You are talking civilian, police work is different, there's pepper spray, cuffs, Taser and baton to use to defend yourself (of course some officers are armed), there's other colleagues as well. Police officers do not aim to grapple/clinch with those they are arresting, they aim to cuff them and chuck em in the back of the wagon with as little fuss as possible. We aren't talking 'street' fights here nor are we talking 'bouncer'/security guard.



Would you be able to be specific in the differences ?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 31, 2015)

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please return to the original topic. Further off-topic posts or personal attacks will result in infraction points being issued and closure of the thread.

Mark A. Cochran
Dirty Dog
MT Senior Moderator


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> I have to say, this thread seems a lot like a petty and not so subtle slam against bjj.



If there was any slam against BJJ, it was pretty darn gentle compared to some of the criticism of Aikido in other threads. I don't think it's anything any BJJ practitioner would need to get irate about.



Spinedoc said:


> He finally remarked that Aikido worked well "during arresting techniques, along with other arts like Aikijujutsu, Judo, and Hapkido that can also be useful. BJJ, I don't personally feel is as helpful for most law enforcement situations, it might be helpful to have at least a little understanding of it, but I cannot think of any police officer that would EVER intentionally go down to the ground unless there were no other options,


I've known LEOs who have trained in BJJ, others that have trained in Aikido, Ninpo Taijutsu, Karate, Wrestling, etc, etc. All of them seem to feel that their chosen art has been useful for them on the job. Given that most cops aren't particularly expert in any form of unarmed combat, probably any art that is trained to a high level has the chance of providing an advantage.



drop bear said:


> But otherwise you are using low percentage wristlocks against high percentage being punched in the face.





drop bear said:


> Complimentary is the key. You can't catch punches out of mid air and an arm won't isolate itself so you need a method to do this before you can really apply akido. I like clinch work and arm drags. Which give me time to get the wrist or amlock on.



I suspect the best time to apply Aikido in a law enforcement context is _before_ anyone starts throwing punches.



kuniggety said:


> The original post was about aikido being better than BJJ in a LE setting.



I took the main point of the post as being about reaffirming that Aikido is useful in a law enforcement setting. Given some recent threads being much more critical of Aikido, that doesn't seem to be inappropriate. There was one comment in passing indicating that the officer being quoted thought that BJJ was less useful (although not useless) in that setting. It didn't seem to me that the post was primarily about BJJ at all.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

If a style isn't so good for a particular purpose it isn't, simple. It doesn't however negate that styles usefulness or strengths. It is horses for courses, one doesn't use a fork when a spoon would be better after all. If BJJ isn't as good as Aikido for policing why does it matter? What is important is that police officers have and use the best resources they can for the job. It isn't important which style is supposedly best, it isn't  really even important what non police officers think, it only matters that the people who do their darndest to keep you all safe are themselves as safe as possible. It really is very unattractive to see people taking offence over a perceived 'insult' and not seeing the bigger picture of officers safety.


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If there was any slam against BJJ, it was pretty darn gentle compared to some of the criticism of Aikido in other threads. I don't think it's anything any BJJ practitioner would need to get irate about.


agreed that this isn't anything to get irate about.  But I don't agree that judging one slam relative to others is a good way to go, as in, this one is mild compared to others.   And while the title of the thread is aikido and law enforcement, the OP ranges into discussion of hapkido, judo and bjj, as well.   The OP boils down to two primary assertions.  First, that aikido is "effective" for law enforcement.  

Second, that BJJ is of very limited use, and that the street is not a cage (snicker).  


> I've known LEOs who have trained in BJJ, others that have trained in Aikido, Ninpo Taijutsu, Karate, Wrestling, etc, etc. All of them seem to feel that their chosen art has been useful for them on the job. Given that most cops aren't particularly expert in any form of unarmed combat, probably any art that is trained to a high level has the chance of providing an advantage.


i would defer to the experts on this.   As I've said, I can only speak to what I know, which is that there are many LEO who are very skilled in BJJ.   


> I took the main point of the post as being about reaffirming that Aikido is useful in a law enforcement setting. Given some recent threads being much more critical of Aikido, that doesn't seem to be inappropriate. There was one comment in passing indicating that the officer being quoted thought that BJJ was less useful (although not useless) in that setting. It didn't seem to me that the post was primarily about BJJ at all.


i think there are two points raised in the OP as I explained above. but I don't know how any part of such a short post could be considered in passing.  But I'm concerned about this idea that it's okay to even the tally sheet.  Given that there have been some critical threads about one style, it's okay to even the score?  I don't agree.  By all means, let's have a talk about how effective aikido is.  Whether the post was primarily about aikido or not, it was unnecessarily also about BJJ. 

Respectfully, tony, you arent disagreeing as much as you're just reframing and minimizing.  It's a slam, but it's a very mild slam.   It's a point, just not the primary point.    And sure, given recent threads, why not?


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

I'd like to comment further. As I said, there's isn't room in Law Enforcement for Aikido or Brazilian Ji-jitsu. But not because they're not effective. I've taught, and used, aspects, parts, techniques and principles from both in the Defensive Tactics I taught for many years. But they are not referred to by names either in teaching or report writing. The way to go is to call anything what-so-ever to do with securing/controlling an arm as "an arm technique, restraint, hold" or whatever. If you mention, in writing, a Martial Arts term that YOU did, you're asking for serious trouble. It's a procedural and liability issue. At least in the venues I've worked and taught.

And you have to be sort of inventive when trying to get the go ahead to implement different methods of training. As was said, you can't be teaching an officer a rear naked choke. But you can teach him how to fight off a rear naked choke. And since classes are in groups, they pair off. One of them has to be doing the choking.
I rolled with all my guys. We also did every kind of stand up fighting we had at our disposal. I brought in other guys with deep fight training to teach, too. But it was always just called DT.

There are certain ways things need to be done in Law Enforcement training. DT is actually considered a necessary liability in many departments, especially by a lot of higher ups. It makes things rather difficult. And from what I've heard from my guys still on the job, it's getting worse.


----------



## geezer (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> ....t's a slam, but it's a very mild slam.   It's a point, just not the primary point.    And sure, given recent threads, why not?



I didn't really take it as a slam. More of a broad generalization reflecting an honest opinion. If someone stated that _my_ core art of Ving Tsun was not as generally useful in policework as arts that focus on control and submission over striking, I'd flat out agree. That's not a slam, rather it's like Tez observed, "different horses for different courses."

BTW my step sister's "significant-other" is a state DPS officer with considerable MMA and BJJ experience, and he instructs empty-handed  skills in his department. He has pointed out to me _specific situations_ in which BJJ skills are _very_ useful in policework.  I didn't read anything in the OP that would contradict that.


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

That's, me, my Section Head and two Lieutenants in 1991. I brought in a BJJ guy to help redesign our DT program. They didn't know who he was other than my teacher. They loved it, they okay-ed  it (after going through the legal department) and it worked out well. We just didn't use any terms other than "takedown, control, joint lock etc"


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I suspect the best time to apply Aikido in a law enforcement context is _before_ anyone starts throwing punches.



Only sort of. You just don't know if someone will flip out when you grab them. So you are avoiding punches before they are throwing them if you can.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> You just don't know if someone will flip out when you grab them.



Perhaps as a bouncer you_ grab_ people but police officers prefer not to, not every arrest or stop is violent, approached the right way most people are actually more amenable than you'd imagine, it comes down to being trained properly how to approach people and not just charge in like a second rate punch drunk bouncer in a cheap brothel.
Police training is long and covers a lot of aspects, it spends a lot of time on how to approach people, how to speak to them and how to arrest properly, as a result there aren't as many incidents as there could be. It also ensures convictions stand and aren't screwed up by improper arrests and charging.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> When did you start training aikido or bjj, ballen?  Yet, here you are.   I'm addressing the specific statements in the OP that BJJ is not useful for LEO.
> 
> Had the OP stuck to aikido, there would be no problem.   But he chose otherwise.  I think it was an unfortunate reaction to other, also unnecessarily contentious threads.


actually I have been training exclusively in BJJ for about a year it fits my schedule better.  2nd I have in the past training Aikido.  3rd I am a police officer soooooo your opinion is invalid.  I just hope from now on I,see the same level of outrage from you in other arts when the BJJ thugs show up.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> agreed that this isn't anything to get irate about.  But I don't agree that judging one slam relative to others is a good way to go, as in, this one is mild compared to others.   And while the title of the thread is aikido and law enforcement, the OP ranges into discussion of hapkido, judo and bjj, as well.   The OP boils down to two primary assertions.  First, that aikido is "effective" for law enforcement.
> 
> Second, that BJJ is of very limited use, and that the street is not a cage (snicker).
> i would defer to the experts on this.   As I've said, I can only speak to what I know, which is that there are many LEO who are very skilled in BJJ.
> ...


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Perhaps as a bouncer you_ grab_ people but police officers prefer not to, not every arrest or stop is violent, approached the right way most people are actually more amenable than you'd imagine, it comes down to being trained properly how to approach people and not just charge in like a second rate punch drunk bouncer in a cheap brothel.
> Police training is long and covers a lot of aspects, it spends a lot of time on how to approach people, how to speak to them and how to arrest properly, as a result there aren't as many incidents as there could be. It also ensures convictions stand and aren't screwed up by improper arrests and charging.



I am pretty sure this thread is about grabbing people. If you want to do a thread about not grabbing people. You are welcome to do so.

Otherwise I have asked for specific differences in police use of force and what I would use and did not receive an anser. So I will just assume their isn't one.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> For restraint and control you would make it a strength. It really is the only way you can make standing armlocks reliable against a guy who is fighting you.
> 
> It is very unlikely you will catch a punch out of mid air and manipulate a wrist.
> 
> ...


except if someone is actively resisting I'm not trying to arm bar him.  I have too many other tools at my disposal first.  Taser, OC spray, strikes, baton, more police, whatever it takes to end it fast.  Im not getting into a grappling contest with anyone.  My job isn't to fight you it's to end a fight as fast as possible.  Once I have you under control then arm bar or wrist lock to keep control is appropriate.


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> actually I have been training exclusively in BJJ for about a year it fits my schedule better.  2nd I have in the past training Aikido.  3rd I am a police officer soooooo your opinion is invalid.  I just hope from now on I,see the same level of outrage from you in other arts when the BJJ thugs show up.


I expressed my frustration in the Roy dean aikido bjj thread, as well.  The general tone of the discussion in that thread was bad, too.   BJJ Teacher Roy Dean on Aikido.... | Page 2 | MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

A year of bjj, that's really cool.   I hope you found a good school and are enjoying yourself.   But, do you really think that you're learning very little that will be useful to you in your job?   How often are you able to train?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I am pretty sure this thread is about grabbing people. If you want to do a thread about not grabbing people. You are welcome to do so.
> 
> Otherwise I have asked for specific differences in police use of force and what I would use and did not receive an anser. So I will just assume their isn't one.



Really? I gave you an answer we don't 'grab' at people and Ballen has reiterated  exactly what I said before about spray, baton etc.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Tez3 said:


> Really? I gave you an answer we don't 'grab' at people and Ballen has reiterated  exactly what I said before about spray, baton etc.



What do you mean you don't grab at people. Are you saying you don't make physical arrests?

I have used baton handcuffs on the job as well. And I still grabbed at people.

So say to walk it through you are arresting someone and he said no I don't want to be arrested and if you try I will fight you.

What are your actions from there?

Say you are dealing with this guy.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> A year of bjj, that's really cool.   I hope you found a good school and are enjoying yourself.   But, do you really think that you're learning very little that will be useful to you in your job?   How often are you able to train?


I didnt say only a year I said a year exclusively a year.  I train 2 to 3 days a week and I never said it wasnt useful I said it not the best choice.  1st we a limited by G.O. that I cant use any chokes, so it narrows down my options 2nd pulling off some techniques in a full uniform, duty belt, and vest can be complicated.  3rd going to the ground on purpose in some neighborhoods is not a good idea for my health.  Any traing is better then no training but if I were to suggest to someone what stye to train in for police work choice #1 is cross train but if I could only pick 1 style Judo would be #1 in my opinion.  Stand up art like Okinawian Karate #2


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> So say to walk it through you are arresting someone and he said no I don't want to be arrested and if you try I will fight you.


I ask 1st
I order 2nd
You want to fight I taze you 3rd 




> Say you are dealing with this guy.


He was passivly resisting they handled it just fine.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I ask 1st
> I order 2nd
> You want to fight I taze you 3rd
> 
> ...



I think they handled it fine as well. But they also grabbed the guy. Which according to tez cops don't do or something.

Otherwise I still think hands on control is a vital skill. And again if you control the clinch You can even get to a weapon more easily.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I didnt say only a year I said a year exclusively a year.  I train 2 to 3 days a week and I never said it wasnt useful I said it not the best choice.  1st we a limited by G.O. that I cant use any chokes, so it narrows down my options 2nd pulling off some techniques in a full uniform, duty belt, and vest can be complicated.  3rd going to the ground on purpose in some neighborhoods is not a good idea for my health.  Any traing is better then no training but if I were to suggest to someone what stye to train in for police work choice #1 is cross train but if I could only pick 1 style Judo would be #1 in my opinion.  Stand up art like Okinawian Karate #2



Judo over wrestling?

Or just generic stand up grapple arts over ground ones?


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I think they handled it fine as well. But they also grabbed the guy. Which according to tez cops don't do or something.
> 
> Otherwise I still think hands on control is a vital skill. And again if you control the clinch You can even get to a weapon more easily.


That wasnt a clinch and they were not "grabbing" him they were guiding him into the car. Grabbing in terms of use of force and police work means something far more agressive


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Judo over wrestling?
> 
> Or just generic stand up grapple arts over ground ones?


Yes I dont want to wrestle with anyone.  plus there are not alot of adult  wrestling schools around here


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Complimentary is the key. You can't catch punches out of mid air and an arm won't isolate itself so you need a method to do this before you can really apply akido. I like clinch work and arm drags. Which give me time to get the wrist or amlock on.



You have stated that twice now.  Have you ever seen a technique where you would move into a strike, blocking the arm, then grabbing the wrist, fist, or both? 

I guess your art doesn't train that.  Of course that doesn't mean your art is no good.  I would guess it means your art emphasizes different techniques.  Perhaps instead of moving toward a strike to begin your defense you step back and kick.  Whatever doesn't matter.  Different MA emphasize different techniques.  If all techniques were in all arts there would only be one.  Maybe that would be easier; we would only have to argue whose daddy could beat up somebody else's dad.    But I wonder how many years it would take to advance past white belt?



drop bear said:


> What do you mean you don't grab at people. Are you saying you don't make physical arrests?
> 
> I have used baton handcuffs on the job as well. And I still grabbed at people.
> 
> ...



I'm having difficulty figuring out which side of the argument you want to be on.  I think the best thing I can do is direct you back to ballen0351's answer to your question.  I agree with him.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

oftheherd1 said:


> You have stated that twice now. Have you ever seen a technique where you would move into a strike, blocking the arm, then grabbing the wrist, fist, or both?
> 
> I guess your art doesn't train that. Of course that doesn't mean your art is no good. I would guess it means your art emphasizes different techniques. Perhaps instead of moving toward a strike to begin your defense you step back and kick. Whatever doesn't matter. Different MA emphasize different techniques. If all techniques were in all arts there would only be one. Maybe that would be easier; we would only have to argue whose daddy could beat up somebody else's dad.  But I wonder how many years it would take to advance past white belt?



I have trained in arts that that block parry lock. Spent years training it.

I just don't rate your chances of blocking catching and doing anything to an arm before the other arm cracks you. And I am sorry about that because I would love that stuff to work.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

oftheherd1 said:


> I'm having difficulty figuring out which side of the argument you want to be on. I think the best thing I can do is direct you back to ballen0351's answer to your question. I agree with him.



I am not on a side.

Why are there even sides? That is just dumb


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I have trained in arts that that block parry lock. Spent years training it.
> 
> I just don't rate your chances of blocking catching and doing anything to an arm before the other arm cracks you. And I am sorry about that because I would love that stuff to work.


If you train at it then its one fluid seamless movement its not block, stop, catch, stop, do something


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> That wasnt a clinch and they were not "grabbing" him they were guiding him into the car. Grabbing in terms of use of force and police work means something far more agressive



Lol. OK then I am guiding people. Guide them into the ground. Guide them out of the pub.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> If you train at it then its one fluid seamless movement its not block, stop, catch, stop, do something



punching is one fluid movement as well. That arm is gone by the time you can capitalise on it.

Then all you have done is give the other guy a free go in the hopes you might get that arm next time.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> punching is one fluid movement as well. That arm is gone by the time you can capitalise on it.
> 
> Then all you have done is give the other guy a free go in the hopes you might get that arm next time.


We will just have to disagree I've seen it done had it done to me


----------



## Spinedoc (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I have trained in arts that that block parry lock. Spent years training it.
> 
> I just don't rate your chances of blocking catching and doing anything to an arm before the other arm cracks you. And I am sorry about that because I would love that stuff to work.



Who said anything about grabbing it? The first tenet in Aikido is to blend and get into a safe position.... Tai Sabaki... Many, if not most of our techniques involve no grabbing at all. They only require contact, not grabbing. At higher levels, we practice them without grabbing at all, even the attacker (uke)......just making contact. Moving someone with energy only, no grab!


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2015)

Spinedoc said:


> Who said anything about grabbing it? The first tenet in Aikido is to blend and get into a safe position.... Tai Sabaki... Many, if not most of our techniques involve no grabbing at all. They only require contact, not grabbing. At higher levels, we practice them without grabbing at all, even the attacker (uke)......just making contact. Moving someone with energy only, no grab!



Well apparently guiding is the new grabbing now. 

The idea is to be able to pull off a standing arm restraint basically.  And that is a tough prospect.


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I didnt say only a year I said a year exclusively a year.  I train 2 to 3 days a week and I never said it wasnt useful I said it not the best choice.  1st we a limited by G.O. that I cant use any chokes, so it narrows down my options 2nd pulling off some techniques in a full uniform, duty belt, and vest can be complicated.  3rd going to the ground on purpose in some neighborhoods is not a good idea for my health.  Any traing is better then no training but if I were to suggest to someone what stye to train in for police work choice #1 is cross train but if I could only pick 1 style Judo would be #1 in my opinion.  Stand up art like Okinawian Karate #2


well, I'm glad you've joined the dark side.   I hope you stick with it.  

I would love to train some judo, and have seriously considered finding A good school somewhere around here.   I can easily see how the emphasis on throws and grip fighting would be helpful.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> well, I'm glad you've joined the dark side.   I hope you stick with it.
> 
> I would love to train some judo, and have seriously considered finding A good school somewhere around here.   I can easily see how the emphasis on throws and grip fighting would be helpful.


I like BJJ I just hate the BJJ attitude of "nothing else works"
When I was training Judo Some high anking Gracie Blackbelt from  the midwest he owned like 4 or 5 schools in like Missouri or Nebraska (I feel bad I can't remember his name) moved out here to train with my Judo teacher for 3 months he trained daily with him.  He said takedowns are severely lacking in BJJ.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> Well apparently guiding is the new grabbing now.
> .


Its not the new anything its just different


----------



## Steve (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I like BJJ I just hate the BJJ attitude of "nothing else works"
> When I was training Judo Some high anking Gracie Blackbelt from  the midwest he owned like 4 or 5 schools in like Missouri or Nebraska (I feel bad I can't remember his name) moved out here to train with my Judo teacher for 3 months he trained daily with him.  He said takedowns are severely lacking in BJJ.


I hear you, but don't think most bjj guys have an attitude that nothing else works.   Hanzou, the martial talk poster child for bjj, often goes out of his way to give credit to judo, wrestling, sambo and many other styles in his posts.   It's a training style issue in my opinion, where some styles are competitive and others are not.   For what it's worth, I agree with hanzou in this.   I think that the competitive element of judo, bjj, and wrestling are very important, and where it is missing, the style suffers.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 31, 2015)

drop bear said:


> I have trained in arts that that block parry lock. Spent years training it.
> 
> I just don't rate your chances of blocking catching and doing anything to an arm before the other arm cracks you. And I am sorry about that because I would love that stuff to work.



If you trained that for years and never acquired the skill to make it work, I am at a loss for words.  You said "arts," which arts and what level did you attain in each?  I'm just trying to understand.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Steve said:


> I hear you, but don't think most bjj guys have an attitude that nothing else works.   Hanzou, the martial talk poster child for bjj, often goes out of his way to give credit to judo, wrestling, sambo and many other styles in his posts.


Its not just here Its far worse on some BJJ facebook pages I read.  But even in my gym our instructor will make commemts sometimes bout how perfect BJJ is then I remind him if its so perfect why does he offers Muay Thai and boxing.  We laugh then later he hurts me


> It's a training style issue in my opinion, where some styles are competitive and others are not.  For what it's worth, I agree with hanzou in this.  I think that the competitive element of judo, bjj, and wrestling are very important, and where it is missing, the style suffers.


I don't know I've met quite a few very  good martial artists that don't compete.


----------



## kuniggety (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I like BJJ I just hate the BJJ attitude of "nothing else works"
> When I was training Judo Some high anking Gracie Blackbelt from  the midwest he owned like 4 or 5 schools in like Missouri or Nebraska (I feel bad I can't remember his name) moved out here to train with my Judo teacher for 3 months he trained daily with him.  He said takedowns are severely lacking in BJJ.



One of the problems with BJJ is just the fact that the curriculum is so large. It's not set in stone and is constantly evolving. Judo curriculum? Part of BJJ. Sambo leg locks? Part of BJJ. Wrestling take downs? Part of BJJ. Aikido style wrist locks? Part of BJJ. I briefly studied at a Gracie academy and the focus was on the clinch and take downs from it. I studied a bit with a school in Bangkok and they did clinch too. My main school has been Axis which is pretty competition heavy and pull guard a lot (but were also taught some of the judo throws and wrestling take downs). Now I'm training at a UFC gym and out of the only handful of classes I've gone so far we've practiced single and double leg take downs a couple of times. You can have black belts who spent 10+ years getting there but they're still not going to be experts at everything.


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> I didnt say only a year I said a year exclusively a year.  I train 2 to 3 days a week and I never said it wasnt useful I said it not the best choice.  1st we a limited by G.O. that I cant use any chokes, so it narrows down my options 2nd pulling off some techniques in a full uniform, duty belt, and vest can be complicated.  3rd going to the ground on purpose in some neighborhoods is not a good idea for my health.  Any traing is better then no training but if I were to suggest to someone what stye to train in for police work choice #1 is cross train but if I could only pick 1 style Judo would be #1 in my opinion.  Stand up art like Okinawian Karate #2


----------



## Buka (Dec 31, 2015)

Hindsight being what it is, I'd choose Judo as well. Sure wish I had me some hindsight.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 31, 2015)

Buka said:


> Hindsight being what it is, I'd choose Judo as well. Sure wish I had me some hindsight.


Me too about Alot of things not just Martial Arts.....


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> What do you mean you don't grab at people. Are you saying you don't make physical arrests?
> 
> ]



You go out of your way to misunderstand me yet again, I don't know why you  always have to make it personal, others say the exact same thing as me and you don't make a fuss. Please notice grab is in inverted commas, think about what that means. Police officers don't go 'grabbing' people in the way you mean. You may be using 'grab' as a slang term for nabbing, pinching or any other term for arresting someone but the actual physical act of grabbing is not one police officers prefer to do, do you understand that? There's a number of reasons of that, you've had it explained to you by different people, what don't you understand? ah of course that it's not BJJ!


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> You go out of your way to misunderstand me yet again, I don't know why you  always have to make it personal, others say the exact same thing as me and you don't make a fuss. Please notice grab is in inverted commas, think about what that means. Police officers don't go 'grabbing' people in the way you mean. You may be using 'grab' as a slang term for nabbing, pinching or any other term for arresting someone but the actual physical act of grabbing is not one police officers prefer to do, do you understand that? There's a number of reasons of that, you've had it explained to you by different people, what don't you understand? ah of course that it's not BJJ!



You demean people for no good reason. That is why you get the responses you do.

OK. So what on earth is "grabbing" people vs grabbing people?

When I say grabbing people I mean hanging on to them. Which for me is kind of an essential part of applying a standing restraint. 

Standing restraints is generally why akido is considered more suitable than say bjj in OP,s post for police.

Whether or not police like to grab people or not is kind of a footnote in this discussion. So OK. Yes police should try to resolve issues without resorting to physical violence. But should the police need to get physical then..........


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> If you trained that for years and never acquired the skill to make it work, I am at a loss for words.  You said "arts," which arts and what level did you attain in each?  I'm just trying to understand.



I got an orange belt in jjj,something similar in judo. Did hocks system for four years. Taught it full time for one. Done three different karate's. Yellow cord thing in capoeira,6 years of mma mabye five or six years of boxing kicboxing and muay Thai.

I am not sure why you are at a loss. Fighting is a different game to training. There is all sorts of stuff you get away with in training that you won't get away with at full speed.

Look I was knocking guys over in the dojo. Wristlock this arm bar that. It just did not translate to fully resisted oponants.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> You demean people for no good reason. That is why you get the responses you do.



No I only get these responses from you and I'm not the only one you reply to like this as you know. You have been called several times by people for your attitude. You attack me and make everything personal. The rule here is to debate the post not make it into a personal argument because you don't like what someone writes because you disagree with what they say.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> I got an orange belt in jjj,something similar in judo. Did hocks system for four years. Taught it full time for one. Done three different karate's. Yellow cord thing in capoeira,6 years of mma mabye five or six years of boxing kicboxing and muay Thai.
> 
> I am not sure why you are at a loss. Fighting is a different game to training. There is all sorts of stuff you get away with in training that you won't get away with at full speed.
> 
> Look I was knocking guys over in the dojo. Wristlock this arm bar that. It just did not translate to fully resisted oponants.



That's impressive.  I don't know what that translates into.  I am inclined to think it is better to stick with one system to higher levels.  Normally that would allow a person to gain confidence and proficiency in that art.  Studying other arts then should not distract from the primary art, but give additional tools to add to the primary art.  I am not convinced studying several arts to lower levels would be as advantageous as studying one art to a higher, proficient level.  But since I haven't tried it, you may have the advantage over me.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Jan 1, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> He was passivly resisting they handled it just fine


I think the suspect wanted the Police to stop handling it.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 1, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> I like BJJ I just hate the BJJ attitude of "nothing else works"



In fairness, I think that's not so much a BJJ attitude as it is the attitude of a certain vocal minority of BJJ practitioners. Most of the high-level BJJ practitioners I know hold black belt or black belt-equivalent rank in at least one other system and are appreciative of the skills and knowledge to be found in other arts.

Helio Gracie, along with his sons, was a big salesman for the idea that jiu-jitsu always beats everything. (Perhaps because it was to his financial advantage to do so.) However I think the wider BJJ community has started moving away from this concept.



ballen0351 said:


> When I was training Judo Some high anking Gracie Blackbelt from the midwest he owned like 4 or 5 schools in like Missouri or Nebraska (I feel bad I can't remember his name) moved out here to train with my Judo teacher for 3 months he trained daily with him. He said takedowns are severely lacking in BJJ.



There are exceptions - instructors who place as much emphasis on takedown skills as on ground skills - but they are unfortunately in the minority. One of my current projects is working on upgrading my mediocre takedown skills so I can spend more time teaching my students to be better at takedowns.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> That's impressive.  I don't know what that translates into.  I am inclined to think it is better to stick with one system to higher levels.  Normally that would allow a person to gain confidence and proficiency in that art.  Studying other arts then should not distract from the primary art, but give additional tools to add to the primary art.  I am not convinced studying several arts to lower levels would be as advantageous as studying one art to a higher, proficient level.  But since I haven't tried it, you may have the advantage over me.



Probably for a different thread.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> No I only get these responses from you and I'm not the only one you reply to like this as you know. You have been called several times by people for your attitude. You attack me and make everything personal. The rule here is to debate the post not make it into a personal argument because you don't like what someone writes because you disagree with what they say.



No. You get that response from others. You took a snipe at me in the post where you were confused why you get the hard time that you do.

"here's a number of reasons of that, you've had it explained to you by different people, what don't you understand? ah of course that it's not BJJ!"

Apparently there is a rule about that. People have pulled you up on this. You just flatly deny you are doing it.

Anyway you asked I answered. So in the intrest of getting back on topic. Let's get back on topic.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> No. You get that response from others. You took a snipe at me in the post where you were confused why you get the hard time that you do.
> 
> "here's a number of reasons of that, you've had it explained to you by different people, what don't you understand? ah of course that it's not BJJ!"
> 
> ...



You realise none of that makes sense? I don't at all consider I get a hard time from anyone here, I find the conversations stimulating on the whole, nearly always informative and apart from a couple very friendly. You make a point of picking me out, of making it personal which would be fine if I actually knew what you were talking about.  You have said several times now that you consider 'conversation' on here to be sparring and someone preferably you has to win. Ok you win and back you go on ignore lol, byeee.


----------



## Skullpunch (Jan 1, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> That's impressive.  I don't know what that translates into.  I am inclined to think it is better to stick with one system to higher levels.  Normally that would allow a person to gain confidence and proficiency in that art.  Studying other arts then should not distract from the primary art, but give additional tools to add to the primary art.  I am not convinced studying several arts to lower levels would be as advantageous as studying one art to a higher, proficient level.  But since I haven't tried it, you may have the advantage over me.



This depends on the goal.  You may want to be just a boxer or just a muay thai fighter, but if you want to be the best *striker* you can be it would benefit you to work on both, even if you advance more slowly in each style.

Same with mixing up the ground and the standup.  As much as I'm a fan of judo and bjj, I'm not terribly fond of the idea of looking like a retarded octopus when I throw fists.

Also, where are we drawing the line when you compare multiple arts at "lower" levels vs. one art at a "higher" level?  That makes a big difference.  If I have a purple belt in 2 grappling based arts and 2 striking based arts and you have a 3rd degree black belt but in only one art, we have a very different discussion on our hands than if we make my purple belts into orange belts (the belts here are a subjective metaphor for skill level, not to be taken literally).


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> This depends on the goal.  You may want to be just a boxer or just a muay thai fighter, but if you want to be the best *striker* you can be it would benefit you to work on both, even if you advance more slowly in each style.
> 
> Same with mixing up the ground and the standup.  As much as I'm a fan of judo and bjj, I'm not terribly fond of the idea of looking like a retarded octopus when I throw fists.
> 
> Also, where are we drawing the line when you compare multiple arts at "lower" levels vs. one art at a "higher" level?  That makes a big difference.  If I have a purple belt in 2 grappling based arts and 2 striking based arts and you have a 3rd degree black belt but in only one art, we have a very different discussion on our hands than if we make my purple belts into orange belts (the belts here are a subjective metaphor for skill level, not to be taken literally).



I did a lot of striking to a high ish level and then suplimented with arts that took my fancy. So bulk boxing kicboxing and some other stuff.

I was looking for the right fit and they hadn't invented mma yet.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Probably for a different thread.



Well, considering the way this thread has already drifted, it's probably OK for you to comment on my thoughts.  Then if there is sufficient posts/interest about it, one of us can start another thread.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 1, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> This depends on the goal.  You may want to be just a boxer or just a muay thai fighter, but if you want to be the best *striker* you can be it would benefit you to work on both, even if you advance more slowly in each style.



That may be.  But isn't boxing a very rule regulated art, striking waist and above, and Muay Thai a much less rule regulated striking art using any part of the body one can bring into play, including hands, elbows, knees and feet, against any part of the opponent's body?  I'm not sure trying to blend them will make one the best striker one can be.  But then I am neither a boxer nor a Muay Thai student.



Skullpunch said:


> Same with mixing up the ground and the standup.  As much as I'm a fan of judo and bjj, I'm not terribly fond of the idea of looking like a retarded octopus when I throw fists.



Well, I don't really know much about Judo nor BJJ, but if they don't teach striking sufficient to accomplish the goals of the art, that would seem to be a disconnect.



Skullpunch said:


> Also, where are we drawing the line when you compare multiple arts at "lower" levels vs. one art at a "higher" level?  That makes a big difference.  If I have a purple belt in 2 grappling based arts and 2 striking based arts and you have a 3rd degree black belt but in only one art, we have a very different discussion on our hands than if we make my purple belts into orange belts (the belts here are a subjective metaphor for skill level, not to be taken literally).



Have you studied an art to 3rd Dan?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Well, considering the way this thread has already drifted, it's probably OK for you to comment on my thoughts.  Then if there is sufficient posts/interest about it, one of us can start another thread.



Fair enough. I just did what was available depending on where i was at,at the time.  You can do a system fo 20 years and still be crap.  It gets complicated.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> That may be. But isn't boxing a very rule regulated art, striking waist and above, and Muay Thai a much less rule regulated striking art using any part of the body one can bring into play, including hands, elbows, knees and feet, against any part of the opponent's body? I'm not sure trying to blend them will make one the best striker one can be. But then I am neither a boxer nor a Muay Thai student



Martial arts dont blend.  They compromise. So the best method for avoiding punches is not the best method for avoiding knees.  

The best fighters are the ones that can transition between methods.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 1, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> In fairness, I think that's not so much a BJJ attitude as it is the attitude of a certain vocal minority of BJJ practitioners. Most of the high-level BJJ practitioners I know hold black belt or black belt-equivalent rank in at least one other system and are appreciative of the skills and knowledge to be found in other arts.
> 
> Helio Gracie, along with his sons, was a big salesman for the idea that jiu-jitsu always beats everything. (Perhaps because it was to his financial advantage to do so.) However I think the wider BJJ community has started moving away from this concept.


I disagree its far more prevalent than just a few vocal minority.  Its not as widespread here on MT with just a few posters in the BJJ mafia but on other sites and inside the gyms its very common and makes me hate actually training in BJJ if I could find other styles with morning classes I would not train BJJ at all. BJJ has nothing special I can't get from other styles at a cheaper price except a better schedule from my life



> There are exceptions - instructors who place as much emphasis on takedown skills as on ground skills - but they are unfortunately in the minority. One of my current projects is working on upgrading my mediocre takedown skills so I can spend more time teaching my students to be better at takedowns.


Same thing he was doing.  He though Judo had the best takedowns so he sought it out.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> OK. So what on earth is "grabbing" people vs grabbing people?
> 
> When I say grabbing people I mean hanging on to them. Which for me is kind of an essential part of applying a standing restraint.


For me if I walk put my hand on you and guide or lead you away Im not "grabbing" you.  Like in the video you posted they were not really hoding on they were just guiding him and were using little to no force  You take off running and I have to physically hold on to keep control and your struggling then I'm grabbing you.  I'm touching you either way but the intent is different


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> For me if I walk put my hand on you and guide or lead you away Im not "grabbing" you.  Like in the video you posted they were not really hoding on they were just guiding him and were using little to no force  You take off running and I have to physically hold on to keep control and your struggling then I'm grabbing you.  I'm touching you either way but the intent is different



Either way. You should have the flexibility in your training system to do both. The same two on one arm control I use to make sure some sick grandma can walk to an ambulance is the same control I use to put down thugs.

Obviously there is a force continuum at play here.

Grabbing,"grabbing" is pretty much a pointless distinction in this case. It was a deliberate attempt to distract off the topic. Basically tez was trying to say that the grabbing "grabbing" I use in crowd control is a different grabbing "grabbing" that you use in police work. So therefore she is right and I am wrong.

Mabye if I was wondering why I was suddenly suplexing everybody I come in contact with. But in deciding whether or not bjj is more suited to police work than akido. Well not so much as both grabbings get used.

Now most of these grabbings are a con job anyway. Nobody cares if you get your head busted in grabbing people so long as you don't hurt the guy you are grabbing.

The industry trainer swears blind that these methods will work flawlessly. The company accepts that on faith and the beurocrats set that as the working standard. And the person who actually has to use these methods faces injury at one end of the spectrum and a law suit at the other.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 1, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Either way. You should have the flexibility in your training system to do both. The same two on one arm control I use to make sure some sick grandma can walk to an ambulance is the same control I use to put down thugs.
> 
> Obviously there is a force continuum at play here.
> 
> ...


No


----------



## Skullpunch (Jan 2, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> That may be.  But isn't boxing a very rule regulated art, striking waist and above, and Muay Thai a much less rule regulated striking art using any part of the body one can bring into play, including hands, elbows, knees and feet, against any part of the opponent's body?  I'm not sure trying to blend them will make one the best striker one can be.  But then I am neither a boxer nor a Muay Thai student.



Yes but they compliment the biggest holes in one another's style.  If you look at the vast majority of pure muay thai fighters their movement is very limited, footwork is a major issue and the quality of hand strikes tends to be very, very poor compared to a boxer.  In terms of pure striking, these are the two major issues with muay thai and if a muay thai fighter loses a striking battle to a fighter from another style of equal skill level it will probably have a lot (if not entirely) to do with one of these weaknesses.

Boxing, on the other hand, is about as tried and true as they come for filling the above gaps and as for the weaknesses....well you probably already know this.  No kicks, clinch is used for stalling instead of control and/or striking, those are the holes muay thai covers up.





			
				oftheherd1 said:
			
		

> Well, I don't really know much about Judo nor BJJ, but if they don't teach striking sufficient to accomplish the goals of the art, that would seem to be a disconnect.



IMO the goal of training in an art should be up to the practitioner.  But if you want to be well rounded then it's anywhere from difficult to impossible for one art to accomplish this better than multiple arts.





			
				oftheherd1 said:
			
		

> Have you studied an art to 3rd Dan?



Me personally?  No, and I probably never will because focusing entirely on one style doesn't suit me.  But I have trained with people on that level.  Now my question to you....have you studied 4 arts that complement each other and fill all of the holes in one another's systems to the purple belt level?  The 3rd Dan may be able to wreck the 4x purple at what he's good at, but the 4x purple should be able to wreck the 3rd dan at everything else.  Me personally, with the goals that I have and my reasoning for practicing martial arts, I'd rather be the latter.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 2, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> Now my question to you....have you studied 4 arts that complement each other and fill all of the holes in one another's systems to the purple belt level?  The 3rd Dan may be able to wreck the 4x purple at what he's good at, but the 4x purple should be able to wreck the 3rd dan at everything else.  Me personally, with the goals that I have and my reasoning for practicing martial arts, I'd rather be the latter.


What single arts have you studied that were so lacking it needed 3 other styles to make it up?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 2, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:
			
		

> Well, I don't really know much about Judo nor BJJ, but if they don't teach striking sufficient to accomplish the goals of the art, that would seem to be a disconnect.


In regards to this, not sure about BJJ beyond what I can see, but judo teaches striking specifically to accomplish the goals of the art. Those goals are being able to perform them in the air, but not during sparring. To many people, this does not accomplish their goals, even though the goals of judo are accomplished.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 2, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> Me personally?  No, and I probably never will because focusing entirely on one style doesn't suit me.  But I have trained with people on that level.  Now my question to you....have you studied 4 arts that complement each other and fill all of the holes in one another's systems to the purple belt level?  The 3rd Dan may be able to wreck the 4x purple at what he's good at, but the 4x purple should be able to wreck the 3rd dan at everything else.  Me personally, with the goals that I have and my reasoning for practicing martial arts, I'd rather be the latter.



Ok, so my thoughts reading this.
First: What style's ranking system are you using. A purple belt in BJJ means a different thing to me than a purple belt in american kenpo, and boxing doesn't have belts so that doesn't mean much. How many years of dedicated training are you comparing to a purple belt? For the rest of this, I will assume that you mean an 'intermediate' level.

Second: Certain (many) systems are in fact well rounded. True, its possible that the art may have a focus on one element more than another, but so will any fighter. IMO, learning one art that encompasses almost everything to its fullest and be experienced with every skill than learning a bunch of complementary arts to a beginner or intermediate level and be at a beginner or intermediate level with each skill.

Third: How do you manage to find four complementary arts near you, and if you are a beginner, how do you know that each teacher's way of practicing is complementary to each other. This is why I'm against the idea of cross training until you're experienced..you can't tell if the movements you're being taught may contradict each other somehow.

Fourth and final: Let's assume you're practicing one of the arts that does specialize, like Judo. If you're competitive (and if you're not, you wouldn't care about this argument at all), you will likely have learned ways to defend against other styles. At the Judo school I went to, many people were competitive in non-judo tournaments as well, so once a week they would have randori where they allowed atemi, just to practice against it. While this is not something normally found in Judo, it was very clear participating that they were all judoka. I am primarily a striker who has decent/intermediate takedown defense, who faced against them. I realized after a couple months that against people who had only reached a certain level, if I was on my game I would win by using my strikes to my advantage, and change ranges constantly so that they could not get a good grip. However, when I was facing people who had reached a certain level (and some of these have only ever practiced the one art), they could pretty easily get a grip on me while I was changing ranges, because they had learned how to adapt while still using their judo. 
The short version of that last one is: If you're a 3rd Dan who can wreck at what you're good at, you definitely know enough to make someone who has no expert specialty fight you in the way that you're good at.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 2, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> I disagree its far more prevalent than just a few vocal minority. Its not as widespread here on MT with just a few posters in the BJJ mafia but on other sites and inside the gyms its very common and makes me hate actually training in BJJ if I could find other styles with morning classes I would not train BJJ at all. BJJ has nothing special I can't get from other styles at a cheaper price except a better schedule from my life


I think a lot may depend on where you train. At my gym I hear no bashing of other arts and many of the BJJ practitioners have expressed respect for or interest in a variety of other systems. The same goes for most of our affiliated gyms in the area. The school in Frankfort (run by a BJJ/Judo black belt) hosted a seminar by an Aikido instructor to help improve their students wristlocks.  My gym co-hosted a seminar with Judo Olympian Neil Adams. My friend who runs a school in Lawrenceburg is very proud of his Karate lineage. The head instructor from one of the other schools here in Lexington also teaches and practices Tae Kwon Do.  Another BJJ instructor from Louisville just commented to me last week how much he loves certain moves from Wing Chun.

In contrast, back in my days training in the Bujinkan it was commonplace for teachers and students alike to proclaim the superiority of ninjutsu over all the other "partial arts", as they called them. Going back even further to my very first martial arts lessons (in Tae Kwon Do), the instructor started out my orientation by explaining how Tae Kwon Do practitioners always defeated practitioners of other arts in competition because of the superiority of their kicks.

There are always people who will proclaim the superiority of their own art. Sometimes it's a marketing tactic. Other times it's because they want to feel superior by association with the "superior" art. Other times it's just that they are just passionate about their chosen art and somehow think that if they just keep telling other people how great it is then everyone else will fall in love with the same art as much as they have. My experience is that BJJ practitioners are no more prone to this than practitioners of other arts.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 2, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> My experience is that BJJ practitioners are no more prone to this than practitioners of other arts.


Have you been reading the posts here for the last year or so


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> Have you been reading the posts here for the last year or so


Yep.

Hanzou (BJJ purple belt) regularly jumps into threads to proclaim the worthlessness of kata, the superiority of arts that perform well in MMA (BJJ, Boxing, Wrestling, Sombo, Judo, Muay Thai, Kyokushin, etc), question the value of arts that don't perform well on MMA, and generally declare the superiority of BJJ. He's the only regular poster on Martial Talk I've seen do this.

Steve (BJJ purple belt) can get touchy at perceived slights to BJJ, but he doesn't attack other arts. He does strongly advocate the practice of free sparring in any art and feels that practitioners who do this tend to perform better, regardless of their art.

Brian Van Crise (long time BJJ practitioner) is also a practitioner and advocate of a wide variety of other arts.

Kuniggety (BJJ blue belt) has no posts cutting down other arts that I have been able to find. I have read a number of his posts saying positive things about various other arts.

Drop Bear, who seems to be one of the guys you like to argue with, is not a BJJ practitioner. He's an MMA practitioner whose foundation is more karate and wrestling than BJJ.

Buka (long time BJJ practitioner and fan, but I'm not sure if he holds rank) identifies primarily as a karate guy and does not denigrate other arts.

MJS (BJJ practitioner, not sure of rank) trains in other arts and I've never seen him cut down other arts or declare the general superiority of BJJ.

AlphaBJJ (BJJ black belt) - just reviewed all his comments. Not a one proclaiming the superiority of BJJ over other arts.

Myself (BJJ black belt) - have never denigrated other arts or declared BJJ to be the best. Have expressed interest in a wide range of martial arts and admiration for a wide range of martial artists.

I may have missed a few, but that's most of the BJJ practitioners I can think of who have posted here significantly over the last year. I count precisely one who is guilty of what you are complaining about. (And even he has another half-dozen or so arts besides BJJ that he will recommend.)


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Yep.
> 
> Hanzou (BJJ purple belt) regularly jumps into threads to proclaim the worthlessness of kata, the superiority of arts that perform well in MMA (BJJ, Boxing, Wrestling, Sombo, Judo, Muay Thai, Kyokushin, etc), question the value of arts that don't perform well on MMA, and generally declare the superiority of BJJ. He's the only regular poster on Martial Talk I've seen do this.
> 
> ...



Not that your bias....You see what you want Tony but  Your right You BJJ guys are a delight


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> Not that your bias....You see what you want Tony but  Your right You BJJ guys are a delight



So.. I'm biased in favor of thinking that we don't think BJJ is the only thing that works even though we really think that? We all have biases, but that would be an awfully peculiar one.

I just reviewed the posting history of every BJJ practicing regular poster here that I can think of. Whether we are a "delight" or not is a matter of personal taste and opinion. Whether any particular one of us has declared BJJ to be "the only thing that works" (as you originally stated was a common BJJ attitude) is a matter of objective verifiable fact.

If you like, I can find quotes from almost every poster listed above (even Hanzou!) crediting various arts besides BJJ as being effective. I'll bet cash money that you can't find a single quote from any of them saying that BJJ is the only thing that works. Even Hanzou, who I freely grant is obnoxiously evangelical in his promotion of BJJ, has about a half-dozen other arts that he frequently advocates as being effective.

If you insist on arguing that the BJJ practitioners here are proclaiming a  preposition ("BJJ is the only thing that works") that most of us have explicitly denied, but can't produce a single quote from one of us expressing that opinion, then I think you are the one who is only seeing what you want to.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> So.. I'm biased in favor of thinking that we don't think BJJ is the only thing that works even though we really think that? We all have biases, but that would be an awfully peculiar one.
> 
> I just reviewed the posting history of every BJJ practicing regular poster here that I can think of. Whether we are a "delight" or not is a matter of personal taste and opinion. Whether any particular one of us has declared BJJ to be "the only thing that works" (as you originally stated was a common BJJ attitude) is a matter of objective verifiable fact.
> 
> ...


I've said several times its not just here at MT in fact I said its not as bad here as other places I suspect because there isnt alot of BJJ guys here, but yes even here Ive seen several posts from some of the crew on your list speaking poorly of other styles on many occasions. 
  I'm not going to look them up for you Tony your mind is set and Honestly I don't care if you see it or not your not my daddy I dont need or want your approval.  Im not shocked a black belt in BJJ doesn't see other BJJ practitioners doing wrong since your not looking for it so of course you don't see it.
So you believe what you want that there is no culture problem in BJJ and I will believe as I See it.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> even here Ive seen several posts from some of the crew on your list speaking poorly of other styles on many occasions.



"Speaking poorly of other styles" (presumably specific styles) is not the same thing as saying "BJJ is the only thing that works." Hanzou frequently speaks poorly of many other styles, but he also recommends a number of arts besides BJJ as being effective.

As far as anyone on that list besides Hanzou denigrating other styles, I just went on an extended search through their posting histories and couldn't find anything.



ballen0351 said:


> I'm not going to look them up for you



In other words, you can't back up your accusations.

I, on the other hand, would be happy to provide plenty of quotes from the people on that list mentioning other arts besides BJJ that are effective and denying the idea that BJJ is the only thing that works. Just say the word.



ballen0351 said:


> I don't care if you see it or not your not my daddy I dont need or want your approval.



What in the world does this have to do with my approval? Do you do this in your offline life - accuse people of bad behavior and when they defend themselves and ask for an example of what you are talking about, say "you're not my daddy, I don't need your approval"? I can't imagine that goes over well.



ballen0351 said:


> Im not shocked a black belt in BJJ doesn't see other BJJ practitioners doing wrong since your not looking for it so of course you don't see it.



As mentioned above, I just spent time specifically looking for it. If you or anyone else can find something I missed, please point it out.

I have black belts in three arts. I've seen bad behavior from practitioners of all those arts. No more and no less than from practitioners of any other art, mind you. I practice the arts I do because I enjoy training in those arts, not because I imagine my fellow practitioners are morally superior or better behaved than practitioners of any other martial art.



ballen0351 said:


> So you believe what you want that there is no culture problem in BJJ and I will believe as I See it.



That's fine. You have your experiences and I have mine. You train at one school and I train at another.

But if you are going to publicly accuse people on this forum of a specific behavior, it behooves you to be able to back it up.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> "Speaking poorly of other styles" (presumably specific styles) is not the same thing as saying "BJJ is the only thing that works." Hanzou frequently speaks poorly of many other styles, but he also recommends a number of arts besides BJJ as being effective.
> 
> As far as anyone on that list besides Hanzou denigrating other styles, I just went on an extended search through their posting histories and couldn't find anything.


you didnt look hard enough.  And talking poorly of other styles is just as bad as claiming BJJ is the best its all a pattern of behavior that I see from the BJJ mafia crowd



> In other words, you can't back up your accusations.


No it means your minds made up and I dont care your part of the prob so of course your not going to admit to the prob existing


> I, on the other hand, would be happy to provide plenty of quotes from the people on that list mentioning other arts besides BJJ that are effective and denying the idea that BJJ is the only thing that works. Just say the word.


Knock yourself out.  See how touchy you BJJ guys get when someone doesnt bow before the great and powerful BJJ gods its comical



> What in the world does this have to do with my approval? Do you do this in your offline life - accuse people of bad behavior and when they defend themselves and ask for an example of what you are talking about, say "you're not my daddy, I don't need your approval"? I can't imagine that goes over well.


Approval was a poor word choice I don't need you to agree with my you dont know me you  don't know where I train you don't know the people I know that train BJJ you don't go to the gyms I do.  Perhaps you folks in KY are nicer then the folks in the DC metro actually having been to KY I know you people are nicer 
Either way BJJ crowd in general that I deal with act like a bunch of bullies head over to some other well known forums and read some posts (oops I did it again I forgot to bow before the BJJ alter)




> I have black belts in three arts. I've seen bad behavior from practitioners of all those arts. No more and no less than from practitioners of any other art, mind you. I practice the arts I do because I enjoy training in those arts, not because I imagine my fellow practitioners are morally superior or better behaved than practitioners of any other martial art.


I never said you believed you were morally superior and honestly I dont care why you train what you train its irrelevant to the topic





> That's fine. You have your experiences and I have mine. You train at one school and I train at another.
> 
> But if you are going to publicly accuse people on this forum of a specific behavior, it behooves you to be able to back it up.


Like I said I have formed my opinion from more then just MT.  There was a post the other day on Jiu-Jitsu Times page asking why BJJ was more expensive 75% of the answers were "Cause its better"  My own BJJ instructor bashes TKD and Karate all the time in class.  So exit your bubble and stop pretending it doesn't happen.  

On that feel free to keep posting you cant change my opinion since well its mine and really means nothing to anyone else.....except you apparently


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

As far as abrasive derailed threads go, this one's a corker.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

If I may be so bold as to relate a little history lesson to you fellas. In 1970 the art of Style-bashing was born, perfected and became more popular than Fantasy Football is today. We, Karate guys, started it, it was OURS. All you late comer, band wagon jumpers stole it.

Then an awful thing happened. Tragic, really. People started to train together. Style bashing and hate were restricted to the much smaller world of charlatans. And there just weren't enough of them around to propagate our love to slander. Alas, it was sad.

Nice to see some nostalgic, born again, resurrection, even if it's only on the net! Hate on, my brothers, hate on.

Tony, from a post above - yes, I have rank in BBJ. I am a dirty white belt, have been for a long while. Damn proud of it, too.

But.....I hate dirty white belts in other arts. They suck.


----------



## Steve (Jan 3, 2016)

Buka said:


> As far as abrasive derailed threads go, this one's a corker.


Yeah, but much needed.   debunking this bjj mafia myth is long overdue, and I appreciate it.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

Steve said:


> Yeah, but much needed.   debunking this bjj mafia myth is long overdue, and I appreciate it.



I don't really understand how that term, BJJ Mafia, came about.


----------



## Skullpunch (Jan 3, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> Ok, so my thoughts reading this.
> First: What style's ranking system are you using. A purple belt in BJJ means a different thing to me than a purple belt in american kenpo, and boxing doesn't have belts so that doesn't mean much. How many years of dedicated training are you comparing to a purple belt? For the rest of this, I will assume that you mean an 'intermediate' level.
> 
> Second: Certain (many) systems are in fact well rounded. True, its possible that the art may have a focus on one element more than another, but so will any fighter. IMO, learning one art that encompasses almost everything to its fullest and be experienced with every skill than learning a bunch of complementary arts to a beginner or intermediate level and be at a beginner or intermediate level with each skill.
> ...



First:  I'm using the belts as a subjective measure of skill rather than something to be taken literally.

Second:  The systems that are well rounded are blends of multiple other systems anyway and it's good to blend them but many professionals also believe there is benefit to having segments of the training day focused on one discipline and then another on the next.  Another problem with the well rounded systems of which you speak is finding instructors that are actually capable of making you good at everything.

Third:  It's not that hard.  Many MMA clubs have 4 or more arts in one training center, and if it's a serious training facility then the trainers will have a lot of experience at what they do and at cross training and be able to guide you accordingly.  I don't necessarily object to what you say about being experienced at one thing and then cross training but I'm talking about being decent at multiple disciplines vs being really good at just one.

Also, "4" is something of an arbitrary number here.  You can make it 2 if you want as long as they fill one another's holes.  A wrestler/boxer's advantage over a guy who only knows one thing is still pretty clear to me.

Fourth:  It's not that black and white.  For every instance like this there are one or more instances of a high level judoka who would get KO'd in under a minute by a boxer/wrestler because he can't score a takedown and can't strike with him, even if the boxer/wrestler isn't as good at either discipline as the judoka is at his one.  Or a wrestler who doesn't know any striking or submissions who takes down a striker/bjj practitioner because he doesn't want to strike with him, then gets choked or armbar'd after the takedown.  Or a 10 year karate practitioner who can't stay on his feet against a guy with just a couple of years of wrestling and a year of submissions and would end up with a dislocated shoulder.

If what you say were 100% true, about how a 3rd Dan knows enough to make someone with no one specialty fight you in your own specialty, then there wouldn't be any need for cross training, nor would there be any need for hybrid systems that incorporate more than one discipline.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2016)

Buka said:


> In 1970 the art of Style-bashing was born, perfected and became more popular than Fantasy Football is today. We, Karate guys, started it, it was OURS. All you late comer, band wagon jumpers stole it.


Hey! Helio Gracie mastered the art of style-bashing, trash-talking, and outright slander back in the 1930s. You karate guys are a bunch of imitators.

Unfortunately the skills of slanderous trash-talking style-bashing are being neglected in many academies these days. At this rate these vital skills may be lost in another generation. I'm thinking of selling an instructional video for students who haven't had the opportunity to learn the techniques that Helio considered vital. As an added bonus, I will include methods for running down other BJJ practitioners who teach or train at competing academies.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hey! Helio Gracie mastered the art of style-bashing, trash-talking, and outright slander back in the 1930s. You karate guys are a bunch of imitators.
> 
> Unfortunately the skills of slanderous trash-talking style-bashing are being neglected in many academies these days. At this rate these vital skills may be lost in another generation. I'm thinking of selling an instructional video for students who haven't had the opportunity to learn the techniques that Helio considered vital. As an added bonus, I will include methods for running down other BJJ practitioners who teach or train at competing academies.



Thank God you are a true renaissance man. I will gladly write a blurb to go with your cover art.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2016)

BTW - we seem to have gotten pretty far away from the original topic of the usefulness of Aikido training for LEOs. I'd love to hear from any LEO Aikidoka who want to explain what skills, techniques, or attributes from their Aikido training that they find useful in their jobs.


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

Not to hog the board here, but as a former LEO who taught DT....

We used a lot of yielding to power to move an aggressor where you wanted him. I don't remember what the Aikido term is because we purposely didn't use any foreign terms in our training. We also used controlling the head, which was first taught to us by some Aikido guys. (Similar methods of head control came from other arts as well)

Another thing I learned from an Aikido guy  - If I was pushed down backwards, and needed to stop rolling, or momentum, so I could draw my weapon, was to kick my heels hard towards my butt. Stopped the motion, cold - easy draw of weapon from there. Again, no idea of the proper name.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 3, 2016)

ballen0351 said:


> My own BJJ instructor bashes TKD and Karate all the time in class.  So exit your bubble and stop pretending it doesn't happen.



If it bothers you so much, just challenge him to a friendly sparring match, and promise to use nothing but Okinawan Karate against him.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2016)

Wow...

Lots of people in various arts bash, talk down, denigrate, and generally describe other arts as poopy heads.  Yeah, it is as childish as that sounds.  The motto of the American Bando Association is that just "As no one nation or people has a monopoly on sunlight, no one system, school, or doctrine has a monopoly on truth."  Might be worth keeping that idea in mind...

In law enforcement, I can probably come up with a good dozen or more ways to handle any given call, and all are "right" in that they are legal, they comply with the regulations and general orders, are safe, and get the job done.  And just as soon as I think I've listed them all -- someone will come up with another.   Martial arts aren't much different...

So... let's try to return this thread to the topic before it gets locked and infractions get handed out.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> If it bothers you so much, just challenge him to a friendly sparring match, and promise to use nothing but Okinawan Karate against him.


for starters that's pretty rude it's his school he can say what he wants in his school who am I to tell him he can't.  2nd it doesn't bother me it was just an example of the BJJ mentality


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 3, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> Yes but they compliment the biggest holes in one another's style.  If you look at the vast majority of pure muay thai fighters their movement is very limited, footwork is a major issue and the quality of hand strikes tends to be very, very poor compared to a boxer.  In terms of pure striking, these are the two major issues with muay thai and if a muay thai fighter loses a striking battle to a fighter from another style of equal skill level it will probably have a lot (if not entirely) to do with one of these weaknesses.
> 
> Boxing, on the other hand, is about as tried and true as they come for filling the above gaps and as for the weaknesses....well you probably already know this.  No kicks, clinch is used for stalling instead of control and/or striking, those are the holes muay thai covers up.
> 
> ...



Not being a boxer nor a Muay thai practitioner I cannon confirm nor deny what you say, but it just sounds a little off to me.


Skullpunch said:


> Yes but they compliment the biggest holes in one another's style.  If you look at the vast majority of pure muay thai fighters their movement is very limited, footwork is a major issue and the quality of hand strikes tends to be very, very poor compared to a boxer.  In terms of pure striking, these are the two major issues with muay thai and if a muay thai fighter loses a striking battle to a fighter from another style of equal skill level it will probably have a lot (if not entirely) to do with one of these weaknesses.
> 
> Boxing, on the other hand, is about as tried and true as they come for filling the above gaps and as for the weaknesses....well you probably already know this.  No kicks, clinch is used for stalling instead of control and/or striking, those are the holes muay thai covers up.
> 
> ...



Not being a boxer nor a Muay thai practitioner I cannon confirm nor deny what you say in your first paragraph, but it just sounds a little off to me.

I really cannot agree with your second paragraph.  By the time you reach 3rd Dan in an art, you should have a lot of skills.  That should include how to overcome methods that may not normally be a focus of your own art.

In your third paragraph, I just don't believe you are correct.  I don't know what a purple belt equates to, but there is no way a non-black belt should best a 3rd degree black belt with any regularity, much less consistently, unless the 3rd Dan has not been properly taught and promoted.  And no, I haven't studied 4 arts, much less tried to find 4 that compliment each other.  I don't feel my art has deficiencies that require that.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 3, 2016)

Skullpunch said:


> First:  I'm using the belts as a subjective measure of skill rather than something to be taken literally.
> 
> Second:  The systems that are well rounded are blends of multiple other systems anyway and it's good to blend them but many professionals also believe there is benefit to having segments of the training day focused on one discipline and then another on the next.  Another problem with the well rounded systems of which you speak is finding instructors that are actually capable of making you good at everything.
> 
> ...



I just realized we may be talking apples and oranges to each other.  Are you talking about MMA competitions?  If so, perhaps study in several arts, even to the equivalent of lower belts might be advantageous.  After all, there are rules about what techniques can be used, and allowing an opponent to tap out.  Nothing wrong with that.  I was thinking more along the lines of the OP's question.  Again, you may say there are rules, and there are,  but use of force by law enforcement isn't competition.  And the win should always be slanted toward the law enforcement officer.  I believe grappling arts like Aikido would be more advantageous.  I have never studied Aikido, so I can't say for certain that it would help.  Apparently none of our own members who are in law enforcement have either.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Steve said:


> Yeah, but much needed.   debunking this bjj mafia myth is long overdue, and I appreciate it.


except it wasn't and your one of the biggest well 3rd biggest actually offender


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Double post


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2016)

Buka said:


> I don't really understand how that term, BJJ Mafia, came about.


some members here like to run over other style sections to troll styles they don't know anything about it reminded me of the Mafia shaking down or "taxing" neighborhoods


----------



## Buka (Jan 3, 2016)

We all have such passion about what we do! (wouldn't it suck if we didn't? No, really I mean, c'mon.)

Sometimes we need to puff our chests and smoke cigars, and sometimes we need to chill.


----------



## Chris Parker (Jan 4, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Hey! Helio Gracie mastered the art of style-bashing, trash-talking, and outright slander back in the 1930s. You karate guys are a bunch of imitators.
> 
> Unfortunately the skills of slanderous trash-talking style-bashing are being neglected in many academies these days. At this rate these vital skills may be lost in another generation. I'm thinking of selling an instructional video for students who haven't had the opportunity to learn the techniques that Helio considered vital. As an added bonus, I will include methods for running down other BJJ practitioners who teach or train at competing academies.



There's a lot of things here that I'd love to comment on, but I feel the most important is this.

Helio Gracie was a limey, no good, idea stealin', credit hogging, uncreative so-and-so. He in no way whatsoever mastered anything of the kind… he was a rank amateur at it… ha!

Musashi was ripping rival schools to bits in the Gorin no Sho... spending much of the book doing so… I mean… have you read that thing? Lots of stuff on how everyone's doing it wrong… what schools to avoid… some rather pointed comments at some of his bigger rivals…


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 4, 2016)

Chris Parker said:


> There's a lot of things here that I'd love to comment on, but I feel the most important is this.
> 
> Helio Gracie was a limey, no good, idea stealin', credit hogging, uncreative so-and-so. He in no way whatsoever mastered anything of the kind… he was a rank amateur at it… ha!
> 
> Musashi was ripping rival schools to bits in the Gorin no Sho... spending much of the book doing so… I mean… have you read that thing? Lots of stuff on how everyone's doing it wrong… what schools to avoid… some rather pointed comments at some of his bigger rivals…


Well ... Helio did originally claim to be the one guy in Brazil who had truly learned the ways of the samurai. I suppose that may have included the ancient arts of trash-talking.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 4, 2016)

hmm...title of thread is "Aikido and Law Enforcement"

Should be retitled Train wreck

There is so much I would like to comment on here, but seeing as no one posting seems to want to take any responsibility and admit that they may be looking at things with a blind eye I will only comment on one post here




Buka said:


> If I may be so bold as to relate a little history lesson to you fellas. In 1970 the art of Style-bashing was born, perfected and became more popular than Fantasy Football is today. We, Karate guys, started it, it was OURS. All you late comer, band wagon jumpers stole it.
> 
> Then an awful thing happened. Tragic, really. People started to train together. Style bashing and hate were restricted to the much smaller world of charlatans. And there just weren't enough of them around to propagate our love to slander. Alas, it was sad.
> 
> ...



I started training in the early 70s, I was just a kid then and I do not remember much style bashing at all, well none that was not meant with actual physical bashing at some point, which is probably why it did not occur much. But today, with the anonymity of the web it seems to be the "in" thing to do. Anyone can show up, no matter the skill level, say what they want collect a group of like minded posters on the topic and there ya go..... rather sad actually...as well as disappointing...

I miss the training in the 70s....and you know, it was not to bad in the 80s either...... no enjoying it so much these days....I miss cross style meet ups, they were a blast...but you can't do that today...to many web based egos and arm chair martial artists running around......

Now I await one of my 3 least liked people on MT today to comment, call me a troll, pat themselves on the back for it, and feel great about themselves since they feel they have succeeded at something, put me in my place and shown me what for......



Now if there was only someway to make this the first post of this thread, at least then it would be on topic here at page 7


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 4, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> Interesting topic…..
> 
> I was having a good discussion with an old friend about Aikido, and it's effectiveness, and he laughed. He is a senior agent with the FBI and has been with them for almost 20 years. He remarked that "I don't know how you can consider it 'ineffective' considering so many police departments teach a component of Aikido with entire courses designed such as those by Koga for specific police training. Hell, the Tokyo police have a dedicated 11 month program in Yoshinkan Aikido called Senshusei. Granted many of these programs also mix in Judo, Krav Maga, and even BJJ to a smaller degree, however, Aikido remains one of the primary arts taught. We wouldn't do that if it didn't work".
> 
> ...



Actually a good friend of mine, who is now retired from law enforcement, trained two things, Uechi-ryu  and Aikido. He liked Aikido much better for his job since it was rather effective for his needs and it was much less likely to get him sued when he used it.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 4, 2016)

Steve said:


> Yeah, but much needed.   debunking this bjj mafia myth is long overdue, and I appreciate it.



If you have operated by dogma. And someone questions that you are going to have nowhere to go but to accuse the questioner of what amounts to heresy.

Questioning the validity of a method or suggesting a better one is just a normal person being helpful. It is insulting the style,taking shots at the instructor and basically kicking the whole concept of tma in the head.

Hence the bjj Mafia is born. Now my guess is that there are posters who have never had to explain their methods past "I am an expert you don't understand therefore I am right and you should not question" And it is kind of freaking them out.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 4, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> With this story, you have to remember that it's possible another boxer who was better than the first could beat the Aikido Master, or the situation could be reversed: Aikido practitioner beats boxer easily, goes to fight boxers coach and loses quickly. A member of any art has the possibility of being beaten by a member of another art if that person is a better practitioner and/or fighter.



I agree, which is why I posted the story, it is about the person and not the art, and understanding your art.

I never said that Aikido was the "be all, end all".  It was used to illustrate that Aikido does have worth and can be applied in a "street situation" where everyone is not complying with each other like in many aikido dojos.  This is also the reason that it is still used by some departments and agencies, they have success with what they use it for.


----------



## mdavidg (Jan 15, 2016)

Yoshinkan Aikido (hard style) is the only martial art taught to most of the police force in Japan.  Also, there are a couple of Aikido styles that have grown with the times and are probably closer to what the founder originally taught. Tenshin Aikido as well as a style called Nihon Goshin Aikido. There's a great article called the 16 styles of Aikido that is a good read. It will show you all of the styles of Aikido currently taught and will also give you an idea of how far Aikido had come. 


The Sixteen Styles of Aikido


----------



## Buka (Jan 16, 2016)

I enjoyed that article. Thanks.


----------



## mdavidg (Jan 24, 2016)

Sorry, I was about to make an almost duplicate post until I realized I had already posted before.


----------



## Buka (Jan 25, 2016)

Several things I've noticed..

I've worked with a lot of guys from a lot of different departments. When we talk, the discussion eventually gets to DT training.
What I've come to realize is the DT instructor usually has a background in one martial art or another. I haven't seen any one art, or a few arts, that seem more common than others.

When a person goes through the academy process they experience how DT is taught and they're supposed to use it if necessary on the job. This is regardless if they have any martial background themselves. 

Hardly enough time is given to DT training - to most department suits it's considered a necessary liability. 

When an officer starts on the street they usually find that the DT training ain't what it's cracked up to be. They have that AHA moment.

If a department's DT instructor has a background in Ameri-do-te, it's not because Ameri-do-te is the most suited for police work, it's because the DT guy happened to be in the right place at the right time (job wise) and got the gig and just happened to be a student of that art. It doesn't matter, though, because he won't be teaching that art, he'll be teaching DT.

DT instructors are usually sent someplace, some LE training center, to be certified in DT. If you take any fifty of these places the person(s) doing the teaching/certifying will have different backgrounds in MA (or not). But it won't matter because they're only doing DT, not a Martial Art.

The two places I've lived the most are Boston and Hawaii. Worked in Law Enforcement in both. In Hawaii, back in the eighties and nineties, I found that the majority of DT was taught by a long time cop, long time Aikido practitioner. (forgive me, I forget his name) Everyone I spoke to had nothing but raves to say about him or his training. Back in 2007 I learned that my buddy, Russell, was now the DT instructor. His background is in BJJ, we were dojo mates. It's not because BJJ is the new in thing, or any better or worse than Aikido, not because there are any more schools of that type. It's because Russell happened to get the gig. He gets the same rave reviews. He doesn't teach BJJ, he teaches DT.

In Boston it's the same way. There's just more people. The best DT guy I know, who worked inside the prison system for thirty years, has a background in classical Okinawan Karate. And still actively trains in it. But he does DT at work when necessary....which was just about every damn week. Second best DT guy I know has a thirty year background in boxing and Kung-fu. (I know, odd mix)

So to me....it's all good.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2016)

My armchair .02

Styles like Aikido seem to work fine when you are dealing with what I call the "maybe" people.

Those are the types between the totally compliant "yes" people and the actively resisting "no" people.

The NO types can also be divided into "soft no" types...the ones who tighten up, refuse to follow commands, want to wrestle away and the "hard no" types who are punching, kicking, using weapons etc.

Aikido/small circle JJ/joint manipulations seem to work ok on the maybe...soft no types. 

Unless you are highly skilled though they seem to be much harder to pull off on the hard no types.

If you have to go toe to toe unarmed with a hard no type its my opinion that more MMA style techniques work better for the wider set of people who may have to use it.

Edit: I think that Aikido may also be good for preemptively dealing with a NO type if you are able to go hands on and control before he/she "flips out" on you. Or if you are guiding someone you believe to be a YES person who is just waiting to suddenly go NO on you. BTDT lol!

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 25, 2016)

Tgace, thanks for that. That's a great reply.

As far as Aikido's effectiveness, I was talking about this with a friend on the East Coast, and I think people struggle to make Aikido work in real life situations for a few reasons. One is definitely soft practice. The other reasons are more nuanced and complicated though.

I agree with you about the need for high skill with actively fighting opponents. I've been experimenting with this for a little while. I've noticed in sparring that maai and timing are EVERYTHING. Not just important, but ABSOLUTELY imperative to making a technique work. I've sparred with a few of the judo guys asking if I could use Aikido, and while I've succeeded a few times, I've also failed many times. What I noticed though, was the failure was mine, not Aikido's. What I mean by that was...if you allow the distance to close, if you allow it to close down to a clinch level distance, Aikido breaks down. Sure, if you have a 5th and a Dan after your name maybe you can make something work at that distance, but for the rest of us....not so much. You have to react BEFORE that distance closes down. Also, if your timing is off, even a little....it falls apart. Many of the techniques actually do work in sparring, however, the distance, reaction, timing, and speed have to be absolutely perfect for it to work. If one of those fails, the technique fails. You have to react exactly at the right time and with the right distance, blend perfectly at speed, and execute without any hesitation. If you allow the opponent even a half second to regain his footing/balance, or to establish some resistance, then you have to do something else. Sometimes at least when sparring so far, you merely transition into another technique once you feel the resistance. IE; if the person is actively resisting the application of sankyo, then merely quickly transitioning into kotegaeshi.

Point is, I think it can work, but sparring really, really illustrates the need for flawless maai and timing. I'm even more convinced that it takes at least 8-10 years of practice continually to really make it work on a consistent basis.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> Tgace, thanks for that. That's a great reply.
> 
> As far as Aikido's effectiveness, I was talking about this with a friend on the East Coast, and I think people struggle to make Aikido work in real life situations for a few reasons. One is definitely soft practice. The other reasons are more nuanced and complicated though.
> 
> ...



Absolutely.

A very skilled Aikido practitioner can probably make his art work against any LE scenario like some guy who decided to come off the car swinging/drawing a weapon/tackling him. But as a general rule most of us are not as good as we may think/wish we are. LOL!

I've made a wrist lock work here or a takedown work there, but I've also had abysmal failures because I just wasn't that skilled. Having a solid skill set in simple grappling and striking can cover over some rather wide training gaps for the "average" cop/martial artist who may just be learning the basics of an art like Aikido but will still have to do SOMETHING effective if they are attacked.

That's just my .02 of course....


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 25, 2016)

Tgace said:


> Absolutely.
> 
> A very skilled Aikido practitioner can probably make his art work against any LE scenario like some guy who decided to come off the car swinging/drawing a weapon/tackling him. But as a general rule most of us are not as good as we may think/wish we are. LOL!
> 
> ...




Agreed, and your comment on striking made me think of one area where I have a big gripe with the Aikido community as a whole. O'Sensei, as a general rule, trained experienced martial artists who already had significant experience in another martial art. He wasn't concerned with training them how to strike as they already knew how to do that. I know from this sparring experience, that many, if not most Aikido techniques also require an atemi to set up the technique. Every seminar I've been to, talks about this as well....Most teachers talk about it....here's the problem...very few of them actually practice it. When I am practicing Aikido with one of our other senior students, we have both given each other permission to actually smack and strike, not hard enough to knock each other out, and not full force, but not some light tap either. It's amazing how much more effective your shihonage becomes when you actually hit the other guy with a knife hand to the jaw before you execute it. I think it's sorely missing in a lot of Aikido practice.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 25, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> Agreed, and your comment on striking made me think of one area where I have a big gripe with the Aikido community as a whole. O'Sensei, as a general rule, trained experienced martial artists who already had significant experience in another martial art. He wasn't concerned with training them how to strike as they already knew how to do that. I know from this sparring experience, that many, if not most Aikido techniques also require an atemi to set up the technique. Every seminar I've been to, talks about this as well....Most teachers talk about it....here's the problem...very few of them actually practice it. When I am practicing Aikido with one of our other senior students, we have both given each other permission to actually smack and strike, not hard enough to knock each other out, and not full force, but not some light tap either. It's amazing how much more effective your shihonage becomes when you actually hit the other guy with a knife hand to the jaw before you execute it. I think it's sorely missing in a lot of Aikido practice.



Layers. (Like an onion) the next issue is you strike they counter and you use that to open an attack. And so on.


----------



## Steve (Jan 25, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> Tgace, thanks for that. That's a great reply.
> 
> As far as Aikido's effectiveness, I was talking about this with a friend on the East Coast, and I think people struggle to make Aikido work in real life situations for a few reasons. One is definitely soft practice. The other reasons are more nuanced and complicated though.
> 
> ...


If the margin for error in the technique is so small, is it really you or is it the Aikido?  Your post is really intriguing because you say you concluded it's absolutely not the aikido... but your entire post leads me to the exact opposite conclusion.  If it "takes at least 8 to 10 years of practice continually to really make it work on a consistent basis," how can it be you?   Something isn't right.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> If the margin for error in the technique is so small, is it really you or is it the Aikido?  Your post is really intriguing because you say you concluded it's absolutely not the aikido... but your entire post leads me to the exact opposite conclusion.  If it "takes at least 8 to 10 years of practice continually to really make it work on a consistent basis," how can it be you?   Something isn't right.



The idea is that it is a longer road but a higher gain at the end.

I am not sold on it.

Edit.

What he is suggesting is consistant with a lot of styles anyway.


----------



## Steve (Jan 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> The idea is that it is a longer road but a higher gain at the end.
> 
> I am not sold on it.
> 
> ...


Sure.  I get it.    But I can't think of anything in the realm of human activity that takes 8 to 10 years just to do it at a level of fundamental application.  Shoot,  it only takes 9 years or so to become a surgeon.   And that includes about 5 years of OJT where you're actually doing the job.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> Sure.  I get it.    But I can't think of anything in the realm of human activity that takes 8 to 10 years just to do it at a level of fundamental application.  Shoot,  it only takes 9 years or so to become a surgeon.   And that includes about 5 years of OJT where you're actually doing the job.


It always seemed to me that Aikido was more of a "doctorate level martial art" than it was intended to be a "white belt on up" art. 

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 25, 2016)

mdavidg said:


> Yoshinkan Aikido (hard style) is the only martial art taught to most of the police force in Japan.  Also, there are a couple of Aikido styles that have grown with the times and are probably closer to what the founder originally taught. Tenshin Aikido as well as a style called Nihon Goshin Aikido. There's a great article called the 16 styles of Aikido that is a good read. It will show you all of the styles of Aikido currently taught and will also give you an idea of how far Aikido had come.
> 
> 
> The Sixteen Styles of Aikido


Just a clarification - the article doesn't show lineage properly. Nihon Goshin Aikido, so far as we know, is not descended from Ueshiba's Aikido. Both are descended primarily from Daito-ryu Aiki-jujutsu, and both carry the Aikido grouping designation created by the Butokkukai in the early 1940's. The lineage is a small issue, but important since most people reading that article might assume it is an offshoot of Ueshiba's art.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 25, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> Agreed, and your comment on striking made me think of one area where I have a big gripe with the Aikido community as a whole. O'Sensei, as a general rule, trained experienced martial artists who already had significant experience in another martial art. He wasn't concerned with training them how to strike as they already knew how to do that. I know from this sparring experience, that many, if not most Aikido techniques also require an atemi to set up the technique. Every seminar I've been to, talks about this as well....Most teachers talk about it....here's the problem...very few of them actually practice it. When I am practicing Aikido with one of our other senior students, we have both given each other permission to actually smack and strike, not hard enough to knock each other out, and not full force, but not some light tap either. It's amazing how much more effective your shihonage becomes when you actually hit the other guy with a knife hand to the jaw before you execute it. I think it's sorely missing in a lot of Aikido practice.


I had a similar discussion with someone in Ueshiba's Aikido (Aikikai, as I recall). He and I both had the same reaction - that training strikes was missing in many dojos. Our art is similar enough, and I can see the biggest difference in our application is often atemi.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 25, 2016)

Tgace said:


> My armchair .02
> 
> Styles like Aikido seem to work fine when you are dealing with what I call the "maybe" people.
> 
> ...


I'm curious what you mean when you refer to "MMA style techniques". What I see in MMA is punch/block/kick techniques and some large joint manipulations. I don't see any of those as being out of scope for Ueshiba's art - I think they aren't taught enough in most of the dojos, but they are there.

I also see a lot of ground work, and I can't speak to whether specific ground work was ever part of Ueshiba's art, though the principles certainly aren't foreign to the basics of his art.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 25, 2016)

Another aspect that is worth considering. last night I was wrestling a new guy. And surprisingly I could make basically anything work. 

When that guy has defences of his own it severely limits what I can pull off.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 25, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'm curious what you mean when you refer to "MMA style techniques". What I see in MMA is punch/block/kick techniques and some large joint manipulations. I don't see any of those as being out of scope for Ueshiba's art - I think they aren't taught enough in most of the dojos, but they are there.
> 
> I also see a lot of ground work, and I can't speak to whether specific ground work was ever part of Ueshiba's art, though the principles certainly aren't foreign to the basics of his art.




What I would categorise as mma style akido.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> What I would categorise as mma style akido.


It seems a reasonable application of the physical principle of aiki, but I'm not sure how that is a response to my question to the other poster.


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 25, 2016)

Steve said:


> Sure.  I get it.    But I can't think of anything in the realm of human activity that takes 8 to 10 years just to do it at a level of fundamental application.  Shoot,  it only takes 9 years or so to become a surgeon.   And that includes about 5 years of OJT where you're actually doing the job.



PhD physics? You're talking 4 years undergrad….a 2 year master's, and then 5-7 years in PhD……Then 1-2 years postdoc….

Even surgeon varies wildly. Cardiac surgeon? That's 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3 years general surgery residency, then 5-6 year cardiac fellowship. Neurosurgery is 4, 4, and then 7 years residency. Point is…there are a lot of careers that can take that long.


----------



## Steve (Jan 25, 2016)

Spinedoc said:


> PhD physics? You're talking 4 years undergrad….a 2 year master's, and then 5-7 years in PhD……Then 1-2 years postdoc….
> 
> Even surgeon varies wildly. Cardiac surgeon? That's 4 years undergrad, 4 years medical school, 3 years general surgery residency, then 5-6 year cardiac fellowship. Neurosurgery is 4, 4, and then 7 years residency. Point is…there are a lot of careers that can take that long.


lol.  Yeah.   I understand where you're headed, and I fully acknowledge the idea of lifelong learning.  But even a 1st year resident can Perform a successful surgery after 4 years of training and a little ojt.  You took great pains to describe the difficulty of successfully applying aikido for all but the most skilled.   

Once again, I'm not reacting to the length of time.   I'm reacting to your own description of the unlikeliness of success for all but the most experienced. 

If it's taking an incredibly long Time for students to achieve even fundamental success, it's one of three things.   either the training is inherently flawed, the trainees are in over their heads or you're learning something other than what you think you're learning.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 25, 2016)

drop bear said:


> What I would categorise as mma style akido.



There's also Wakigatame;


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> It seems a reasonable application of the physical principle of aiki, but I'm not sure how that is a response to my question to the other poster.



You change the methodology so that you are no longer only receiveing energy. But instead also controlling position. 

Controlling position is more of  wrestling, bjj,mma concept and is sometimes referred to the will game. Where the strongest will wins the scramble.

So they go full noise on you. You respond by going full noise on them.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2016)

Its amazing..... bullies seem to be everywhere..... and here... like everywhere...they get really mouthy in groups...... I have little use for bullies..... 

And Steve..... I grew up in a healthcare family..... have doctors in it today..... worked in hospitals me self for many years.... you can be a 20 year experienced surgeon.... and still not be that good.......same for any profession......


----------



## Buka (Jan 26, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> Its amazing..... bullies seem to be everywhere..... and here... like everywhere...they get really mouthy in groups...... I have little use for bullies.....



Yeah, you're right, they generally suck. But you know, sometimes running into a bully can be a whole lot of fun. Breaks up the same old same old.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> Its amazing..... bullies seem to be everywhere..... and here... like everywhere...they get really mouthy in groups...... I have little use for bullies.....
> 
> And Steve..... I grew up in a healthcare family..... have doctors in it today..... worked in hospitals me self for many years.... you can be a 20 year experienced surgeon.... and still not be that good.......same for any profession......


Xue, there are incompetents in every field.  I think you missed my point.  It's more to do with evaluation of the testing and training model.

If you have a training model that does not reliably produce the expected results, you're either not teaching what you think you're teaching, not testing what you think you're testing, or your trainee pool, as a group, is in over their head.

What stood out was the assertion that it was not the aikido, it was him, coupled with what to me is a pretty detailed explanation of a systemic issue.   If it takes 8 to 10 years of continual practice to make the techniques work consistently (my impression from spinedoc's post is that is typical), it suggests that the issue isn't that you have a body of students ill suited for aikido; it's not the students.  It could be that the techniques are not suitable for the purpose. Or, it could be that the training methodology is inherently flawed.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'm curious what you mean when you refer to "MMA style techniques". What I see in MMA is punch/block/kick techniques and some large joint manipulations. I don't see any of those as being out of scope for Ueshiba's art - I think they aren't taught enough in most of the dojos, but they are there.
> 
> I also see a lot of ground work, and I can't speak to whether specific ground work was ever part of Ueshiba's art, though the principles certainly aren't foreign to the basics of his art.



Gross vs fine

Greco Style Wrestling, BJJ Style Groundwork, Muay Thai Style Kick boxing, Western Boxing......

A few months in almost anyone of those and (IMO) a person fresh off the streets has a better chance of coming out on top in a fight than months or years of almost any other "skilled technique based" martial art.

While timing and technique is obviously important in any martial art/sport, arts that don't require exquisitely precise timing/technique to work give a person something they can hit the streets and use far faster.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2016)

Of course "philosophy" in an Art is going to vary.

But...

I've always thought that if actual fighting ability is what you claim to teach, your students better be able to fight pretty quickly. If you are touting the "it takes years of practice and a lifetime of dedication" line it better mean to achieve the higher level techniques of your art...not to attain simple "surviveability ".

No Army would ever have been fielded if all the soldiers needed 10 years of training to be combat worthy. Sure it may take years of experience/training to become a veteran Special Forces operator, but there is a difference between proficiency and expertise.


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 26, 2016)

Tgace said:


> While timing and technique is obviously important in any martial art/sport, arts that don't require exquisitely precise timing/technique to work give a person something they can hit the streets and use far faster.



Agreed, which is why we (our dojo at least) no longer advertise Aikido for self defense purposes. We used to do that in the community education classes, but then everyone was confused when they realized that they couldn't just come for a couple weeks and learn how to master self defense.

We advertise it as a Japanese martial art. We tell students when they come that learning Aikido is a long, long process, and that it will take a lot of time to become proficient. For me? That is the single best thing about Aikido. That subtlety, that nuance. That's what I love.

Even the owner of the facility we rent space from, who runs TKD and HKD schools and is 6th dan in TKD and 4th dan in HKD and who studied Aikido back in the 1970's, said about Aikido several years ago. "Aikido is a great martial art, but it just takes so damn long to become pretty good at it".

For me, I'm in no rush. I love the long, slow route.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> Xue, there are incompetents in every field.  I think you missed my point.



actually, I think you missed mine


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> Sure.  I get it.    But I can't think of anything in the realm of human activity that takes 8 to 10 years just to do it at a level of fundamental application.  Shoot,  it only takes 9 years or so to become a surgeon.   And that includes about 5 years of OJT where you're actually doing the job.


I get the point you're trying to make, but there's a problem with your comparison. A surgeon is studying full time (with tons of overtime) to become qualified.  You won't find many aikidoka who train 70 hours per week for 9 years straight. If you did find someone like that, I wouldn't mess with him.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I get the point you're trying to make, but there's a problem with your comparison. A surgeon is studying full time (with tons of overtime) to become qualified.  You won't find many aikidoka who train 70 hours per week for 9 years straight. If you did find someone like that, I wouldn't mess with him.


Thanks, Tony.  I think you guys are getting a little hung up on the length of time, and yes, that's part of it.  But once again, it's the length of time coupled with the insistence that the system is not at fault for the lack of results.  I am saying that, in my opinion, if it takes 8 to 10 years to possibly achieve some consistent success, that it is not the student at that point.  There is something systemic at work.

And once again, this isn't necessarily an Aikido thing.  I mentioned earlier that it could be one of three things.  Really, it's four, but I'm presuming that aikido CAN work and isn't inherently flawed.   That suggests that the training model is flawed and you aren't learning what you think you're learning, or the measurement of proficiency isn't consistent with what you are actually being taught.  Or the students are out of their depth, such as if you took a bunch of high school freshmen and threw them into medical school.  Nothing else would account for the lack of results.

Someone mentioned in an earlier thread that the original intent of Aikido was that people start by becoming proficient martial artists in some other style... that the training presumes a level of expertise.  That might make sense.  I mean, if this is true, it COULD be like taking high school freshmen and throwing them into the deep end at med school.  Some few might make it, but most would lack the foundation to make sense of what they're learning and also lack the skills to cope with the volume of work.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

Xue Sheng said:


> actually, I think you missed mine


Maybe so, Xue.    When you referred to an individual instance of incompetence (alliteration is completely by accident there), I presumed you missed that central to my point is that spinedoc wasn't talking about a one-off, but was speaking to a consistent trend.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> Thanks, Tony.  I think you guys are getting a little hung up on the length of time, and yes, that's part of it.  But once again, it's the length of time coupled with the insistence that the system is not at fault for the lack of results.  I am saying that, in my opinion, if it takes 8 to 10 years to possibly achieve some consistent success, that it is not the student at that point.  There is something systemic at work.
> 
> And once again, this isn't necessarily an Aikido thing.  I mentioned earlier that it could be one of three things.  Really, it's four, but I'm presuming that aikido CAN work and isn't inherently flawed.   That suggests that the training model is flawed and you aren't learning what you think you're learning, or the measurement of proficiency isn't consistent with what you are actually being taught.  Or the students are out of their depth, such as if you took a bunch of high school freshmen and threw them into medical school.



But if ten years is the time it takes then it isn't anyone's fault. It is what the system produces in that time frame.

If it take longer to be an akido fighter than a rocket scientist. That would just be considered a given. Wouldn't it?


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> But if ten years is the time it takes then it isn't anyone's fault. It is what the system produces in that time frame.
> 
> If it take longer to be an akido fighter than a rocket scientist. That would just be considered a given. Wouldn't it?


If you could document success in that time, sure.  But if the margin of error is so small that even a competent aikidoka would need to manage the range and avoid the clinch or his aikido would break down, such as spinedoc said, I don't get the impression that there is reliable success, even after 8 to 10 years. 

As I said, it's not the time frame.  It's the time frame combined with dubious results, and this occurred to me only after reading spinedoc's account of the difficulty in applying aikido.  I'm not (or not trying to) add anything to it.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> If you could document success in that time, sure.  But if the margin of error is so small that even a competent aikidoka would need to manage the range and avoid the clinch or his aikido would break down, such as spinedoc said, I don't get the impression that there is reliable success, even after 8 to 10 years.
> 
> As I said, it's not the time frame.  It's the time frame combined with dubious results, and this occurred to me only after reading spinedoc's account of the difficulty in applying aikido.  I'm not (or not trying to) add anything to it.



You would definitely want to see 10 year akidoka clean house before you made that commitment. Or be more focused on the process than the result.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> Thanks, Tony.  I think you guys are getting a little hung up on the length of time, and yes, that's part of it.  But once again, it's the length of time coupled with the insistence that the system is not at fault for the lack of results.  I am saying that, in my opinion, if it takes 8 to 10 years to possibly achieve some consistent success, that it is not the student at that point.  There is something systemic at work.
> 
> And once again, this isn't necessarily an Aikido thing.  I mentioned earlier that it could be one of three things.  Really, it's four, but I'm presuming that aikido CAN work and isn't inherently flawed.   That suggests that the training model is flawed and you aren't learning what you think you're learning, or the measurement of proficiency isn't consistent with what you are actually being taught.  Or the students are out of their depth, such as if you took a bunch of high school freshmen and threw them into medical school.  Nothing else would account for the lack of results.
> 
> Someone mentioned in an earlier thread that the original intent of Aikido was that people start by becoming proficient martial artists in some other style... that the training presumes a level of expertise.  That might make sense.  I mean, if this is true, it COULD be like taking high school freshmen and throwing them into the deep end at med school.  Some few might make it, but most would lack the foundation to make sense of what they're learning and also lack the skills to cope with the volume of work.


Speaking as an outsider, I suspect that it's a bit of each.

1) Some Aikido practitioners train as a spiritual path and/or a cultural art. For those people the length of time necessary to become reliably combatively proficient is beside the point.

2) Aikido's strengths as a martial art are (IMO) focused on certain niche areas of application. If you are trying to force it outside of those areas it is not going to be so reliable.

3) I really do suspect there is something to the idea of Aikido as a graduate level art for people who already have solid combative skills. As I mentioned earlier, I can look at high-level Aikido practitioners and see useful stuff I might be able to learn from them - but I have 34 years of a fairly well rounded martial arts career under my belt.

Another thought related to #3. Ueshiba spent a lot of years as a rough-and-tumble martial artist who fought challenge matches and worked as a mercenary before he moved into his "peace and harmony with the universe" phase. Many Aikido practitioners may be trying to practice what he taught in those later years - but I suspect it may not work so well (combatively)  for those who don't have the prior combative background that Ueshiba had.

That's speculation from an outsider, though. I'd be curious what Spinedoc thinks of my theorizing.


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Speaking as an outsider, I suspect that it's a bit of each.
> 
> 1) Some Aikido practitioners train as a spiritual path and/or a cultural art. For those people the length of time necessary to become reliably combatively proficient is beside the point.
> 
> ...


I suspect you're right and I'm glad you said it.


----------



## Spinedoc (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Speaking as an outsider, I suspect that it's a bit of each.
> 
> 1) Some Aikido practitioners train as a spiritual path and/or a cultural art. For those people the length of time necessary to become reliably combatively proficient is beside the point.
> 
> ...



VERY interesting Tony. I think there is merit to what you say. I'm going to post something in the Aikido forum as pertains to this very topic that was just written by the eminent Stanley Pranin.


----------



## Hanzou (Jan 26, 2016)

Steve said:


> lol.  Yeah.   I understand where you're headed, and I fully acknowledge the idea of lifelong learning.  But even a 1st year resident can Perform a successful surgery after 4 years of training and a little ojt.  You took great pains to describe the difficulty of successfully applying aikido for all but the most skilled.
> 
> Once again, I'm not reacting to the length of time.   I'm reacting to your own description of the unlikeliness of success for all but the most experienced.
> 
> If it's taking an incredibly long Time for students to achieve even fundamental success, it's one of three things.   either the training is inherently flawed, the trainees are in over their heads or you're learning something other than what you think you're learning.



Just to piggy back on this; Wouldn't most students be instructor level after ten years of practice? Isn't there a significant problem if an art is producing a crop of *instructors* who are only just becoming competent in their art?


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Just to piggy back on this; Wouldn't most students be instructor level after ten years of practice? Isn't there a significant problem if an art is producing a crop of *instructors* who are only just becoming competent in their art?


Interesting point.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Jan 26, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Just to piggy back on this; Wouldn't most students be instructor level after ten years of practice? Isn't there a significant problem if an art is producing a crop of *instructors* who are only just becoming competent in their art?


Good point.  I've talked about this in detail in threads on the subject of expertise.   In a nutshell, how can someone who has never had to use skills in context be an expert on those skills?  I think I used the analogy of a pilot instructor who has never flown a real plane, and only has hours logged on a simulator?  Can this guy fly a plane?  Maybe.  But is he competent to teach other people how to fly a plane?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Another thought related to #3. Ueshiba spent a lot of years as a rough-and-tumble martial artist who fought challenge matches and worked as a mercenary before he moved into his "peace and harmony with the universe" phase. Many Aikido practitioners may be trying to practice what he taught in those later years - but I suspect it may not work so well (combatively) for those who don't have the prior combative background that Ueshiba had



Sacrificed effectivness because the ideal is more important?  Which is not necessarily a bad thing


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2016)

I don


drop bear said:


> You change the methodology so that you are no longer only receiveing energy. But instead also controlling position.
> 
> Controlling position is more of  wrestling, bjj,mma concept and is sometimes referred to the will game. Where the strongest will wins the scramble.
> 
> So they go full noise on you. You respond by going full noise on them.


I don't know that controlling position is "more of" a concept for any of those arts. I think it depends how the Aikido is trained. Controlling position is certainly within the province of the principles of Aikido - I've always seen it as one of the principles that would be more emphasized in self-defense training and less so when a class is studying what I refer to as "pure" Aikido - focusing only on the principle of aiki to the detriment of any other, so as to develop the ability to find the most "aiki" movement in any given situation.

I expect controlling position is more emphasized in competition training, since the opponent is similarly trained, so controlling position becomes a bigger issue.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Sacrificed effectivness because the ideal is more important?  Which is not necessarily a bad thing


Not bad, so long as the students are aware of it. Most of us know we aren't learning the very most devastating things we could, because we don't want to kill everyone who attacks us - we learn some of those devastating responses, as well as a range of other responses.

I do wonder if someone who has mastery in Yoshinkan (the hardest style of Ueshiba's art I know of) might be the best to master the combat use of the softer styles - following more of Ueshiba's path.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Speaking as an outsider, I suspect that it's a bit of each.
> 
> 1) Some Aikido practitioners train as a spiritual path and/or a cultural art. For those people the length of time necessary to become reliably combatively proficient is beside the point.
> 
> ...



I'm perhaps marginally less of an outsider on this, Tony, so I'll chime in, too. I think you have made some good points. #1 leads us to styles like Shin Shin Toitsu, which is essentially an internal Aikido, and I suspect many of the practitioners are there for the harmony, not the martiality. 

#2 is true of many arts, and those that try to cover all ground (like my own) will obviously not be as effective in a niche as a specialized art - for instance, our ground work will never equal what you see in BJJ, nor our strikes equal what you see in Shotokan Karate. 

#3 goes back to some comments I've made, and my own feeling on the matter. I think the interpretation of "aiki" I see in most of the mainline Aikido I've seen is only effective once you master it - and we all know how long mastery can take. If the Aikido is trained with a fairly pure focus on that use of aiki, I would expect students to struggle with self-defense until they can find aiki effortless. If the art is trained so that aiki is the higher level of the art (leaving the original jujitsu techincal bits available) then Ueshiba's art can be effective fairly early in someone's training. I expect this latter is part of what differentiates Shioda's version.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I don
> 
> I don't know that controlling position is "more of" a concept for any of those arts. I think it depends how the Aikido is trained. Controlling position is certainly within the province of the principles of Aikido - I've always seen it as one of the principles that would be more emphasized in self-defense training and less so when a class is studying what I refer to as "pure" Aikido - focusing only on the principle of aiki to the detriment of any other, so as to develop the ability to find the most "aiki" movement in any given situation.
> 
> I expect controlling position is more emphasized in competition training, since the opponent is similarly trained, so controlling position becomes a bigger issue.



See for me way back at the start of this thread. I mentioned that controlling the position is important to rack on restraint and control as well.

In competition it is about being first. So that optimally you are attacking and they are defending. Like tennis when you get them running from one side of the net to the other.

But because you are equally trained your attackis matched by their defence and it is less of a game of technique but who is going to give up first.

 here the attack/defend concept.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 26, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I get the point you're trying to make, but there's a problem with your comparison. A surgeon is studying full time (with tons of overtime) to become qualified.  You won't find many aikidoka who train 70 hours per week for 9 years straight. If you did find someone like that, I wouldn't mess with him.


I'd like to take this a bit further, too. I think it depends also upon the student. I was reasonably competent in NGA (my primary art) within 3-5 years, and then took another 8-10 years to really come to understand it. I can't blame that on the art, because I know others who reached that level earlier. I had wandered down a path of misunderstanding the art for a while, getting frustrated because I wasn't making progress (rather, was making it VERY slowly). When I realized I'd been looking at it wrong, I made a lot of progress in a single year.

I can't say whether this comes into play in the timing originally mentioned by the OP, but if we evaluated areas of my competence at about 6 years, you might have wondered about the art. But if you compared me to folks who'd been training the same amount of time, you might have understood the issue wasn't the art - it was me.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 26, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> Not bad, so long as the students are aware of it. Most of us know we aren't learning the very most devastating things we could, because we don't want to kill everyone who attacks us - we learn some of those devastating responses, as well as a range of other responses.
> 
> I do wonder if someone who has mastery in Yoshinkan (the hardest style of Ueshiba's art I know of) might be the best to master the combat use of the softer styles - following more of Ueshiba's path.



Don't know it is a tricky dynamic.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 26, 2016)

*Personally, I have a dozen or so friends* that practice either aikido or Budo Taijutsu that work in law enforcement.  All have been happy with their chosen system as an adjunct to their defensive tactics training.  They have all used it!  Myself, I have used wrist locks a few times in handcuffing people.  Tgace gives a very good description in his earlier post in this thread on his opinion of people that certain skill sets work on.  Someone who is soft or a maybe is easy to work with and utilize come a longs and wrist locks.  Someone who is a no person and very combative would be a significantly harder challenge. 

* If you are an Aikido practitioner who works hard at your craft I have total confidence that if you utilize it in the manner it was designed for that you will be successful.   *Not one bit of doubt here!


----------

