# Is Aikido a martial art?



## Brian King

An interesting article by Sensei Henry Ellis. 5th dan Traditional Aikido.
Lots of material for thought by an 'old school' Sensei plus a few 'war stories' from back in the day.

Is Aikido a Martial Art ? - Moosin

Regards
Brian King


----------



## K-man

I think Henry Ellis has made some excellent observations in his articles. I am fortunate to have a teacher who teaches Aikido as a martial art. In terms of ability I would say he is as good a martial artist as I have met. Everything he teaches is from a martial point of view and includes atemi. Every technique we train is tested against total resistance.

On the other hand I have met many high ranking Aikidoka who have no ability to make things work against even the slightest resistance. Maybe they could do something against an untrained person but maybe not. That is the 'dance crowd' that Henry Ellis is talking about. 

To me, Aikido is definitely a true martial art if practised the way it was practised years back. Unfortunately a lot of schools don't teach realistically and that reflects badly on Aikido in general.
:asian:


----------



## jezr74

Good read Brian.


----------



## tshadowchaser

Many people today have never seen or heard of hard Aikido training and therefor have only a "modern" view of what it is and what it once was


----------



## K-man

tshadowchaser said:


> Many people today have never seen or heard of hard Aikido training and therefor have only a "modern" view of what it is and what it once was


We certainly don't "lock the doors" and test it in the way the article states but the application of the techniques can be full on. The main problem as I see it with the training we do, is the damage to joints. In my case elbows in particular have been my major impediment. My knees were damaged in a double leg takedown some months back, something you might not expect from Aikido, and I'm still training with support on one.
:asian:


----------



## Hanzou

Article said:
			
		

> It is my opinion that Abbe Sensei would not have studied Aikido as it is today.




Neither would I. Really a shame what happened to the art, based on all the stories I hear of old school Aikido.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> [/FONT][/COLOR]
> Neither would I. Really a shame what happened to the art, based on all the stories I hear of old school Aikido.


Thank God for that. Can you imagine how insufferable you would be if you had the first clue about Aikido?
:hmm:


----------



## hussaf

I hate when I visit aikido dojo and I get treated like a child because I don't naturally understand the story of how and why uke is supposed to move as nage ineffectually moves around


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Thank God for that. Can you imagine how insufferable you would be if you had the first clue about Aikido?
> :hmm:



Clearly my attitude towards Aikido is shared by many, including some veteran Aikido practitioners who lament about the "good old days".


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> Clearly my attitude towards Aikido is shared by many, including some veteran Aikido practitioners who lament about the "good old days".


Fortunately not all schools are as bad as you believe. Your attitude to Aikido and other martial arts is deplorable. There are many martial arts I wouldn't train for any number of reasons and that includes Karate in some forms. Just you won't find me bagging them. If you have nothing constructive to say, why say it at all?


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> Fortunately not all schools are as bad as you believe. Your attitude to Aikido and other martial arts is deplorable. There are many martial arts I wouldn't train for any number of reasons and that includes Karate in some forms. Just you won't find me bagging them. If you have nothing constructive to say, why say it at all?



I didn't say "all Aikido schools". Also I wasn't "bagging" Aikido, I was simply agreeing with the article.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> I didn't say "all Aikido schools". Also I wasn't "bagging" Aikido, I was simply agreeing with the article.





> Originally Posted by *Article*
> It is my opinion that Abbe Sensei would not have studied Aikido as it is today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Hanzou*
> Neither would I. *Really a shame what happened to the art*, based on all the stories I hear of old school Aikido.
Click to expand...

No that's not bagging. So what do you call it? I call it offensive for a start.

But let's look at the articles again ...



> Originally Posted by *Article*
> * I believe that we now have two aikido&#8217;s, traditional aikido which if truly traditional (this word is much abused) is the martial side of Aikido, the soft fantasy and dancing style of Aikido should simply be categorized as an &#8220;Art&#8221;.*
> 
> 
> Those who are true *traditional Aikidoists will take no offence at this article*, yet the dancers will probably be offended and I care little for their feelings as I honestly believe that this soft Aikido has no more right to call itself a martial art than has synchronized swimming has a right to be in the Olympics.


I take no offence at the article. I think it is factually correct. 


> Originally Posted by *Article*The reason that I am so critical and vociferous about Aikido is that every day I see these people watering down this great martial art that I have spent most of my life studying, teaching and promoting for the past 46 years. I am often asked &#8220;Sensei, which do you think is the best and worst martial art&#8221;.
> 
> 
> I always make the same reply, *"**All the martial arts are good, if there is a problem with any martial art, then it can only be the people who represent that particular art who misrepresent their art".*


Here is Henry Ellis teaching. I'm expecting that you agree that this is good Aikido ...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q-hEuTx6bOg

Perhaps Abbe Sensei may still have studied Aikido in a traditional Aikido school after all.

So do you agree with all of the article or just the parts that fit your perception?


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> No that's not bagging. So what do you call it? I call it offensive for a start.
> 
> But let's look at the articles again ...
> 
> 
> I take no offence at the article. I think it is factually correct.
> 
> Here is Henry Ellis teaching. I'm expecting that you agree that this is good Aikido ...
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q-hEuTx6bOg
> 
> Perhaps Abbe Sensei may still have studied Aikido in a traditional Aikido school after all.
> 
> So do you agree with all of the article or just the parts that fit your perception?




I think you're looking for a conflict where there is none. My experience with Aikido lines up with Ellis' misgivings about how a lot of Aikido is practiced. The only Aikido I've seen in person and interacted with is the dance-like stuff that Ellis abhors. Thus, I understand Ellis' frustration with how Aikido has evolved, because it really doesn't resemble a martial art as practiced in many Aikido schools.

However, you have to understand the perspective I'm coming from. I'm coming from a martial art that constantly demonstrates its techniques on opponents trained and untrained in it. Its used against everyone from boxers to wrestlers with devastating effect. When it is demonstrated, it is done in a very practical method which is very hard to argue against.

Aikido simply doesn't do that. So when I look at that Ellis video, it doesn't really impress me. It's an old guy throwing around an overweight guy who is clearly his student. It is a demonstration that tells me nothing about the effectiveness of Aikido. Is it good Aikido? I suppose so. Is it something I would like to invest time into learning? Not really because it doesn't look "real" to me. I would like to see Ellis utilize those abilities against a wrestler or a boxer, but that never happens. Instead, all we have are stories, and folk tales about the masters of old performing these incredible feats of ability that somehow can't be re-created in the modern day. After listening to that stuff for years in karate, I'm done with it. I need more than stories of frail masters throwing body builders around like rag dolls, I need to see it to believe it.

His son Rik is trying to take Aikido into the MMA world, but looking at his fight vids, he looks like the typical MMA fighter. He then goes on to make a variety of excuses as to why you don't see Aikido in his fighting style. It really doesn't help the situation, it just makes things worse.

I'm sorry, but I'm a skeptic. This article gives a reasoning behind my skepticism. Again, it's not my intention to "bag" on Aikido, this is merely my view as an outsider looking in. I would like to believe in Aikido. I just can't. Maybe someday someone will come out of the shadows and dominate boxers, wrestlers, Judokas, kick boxers, and others with their great Aikido skills. When that happens, I will be a believer.

Hopefully this helps you understand where I'm coming from.


----------



## ballen0351

hussaf said:


> I don't naturally understand the story of how and why uke is supposed to move as nage ineffectually moves around


Perhaps this attitude is why they treat you like a child


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> However, you have to understand the perspective I'm coming from. I'm coming from a martial art that constantly demonstrates its techniques on opponents trained and untrained in it. Its used against everyone from boxers to wrestlers with devastating effect. When it is demonstrated, it is done in a very practical method which is very hard to argue against.


:BSmeter:


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> :BSmeter:



[video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PLP_DInpPHE[/video]

Where's the BS?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> [video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PLP_DInpPHE[/video]
> 
> Where's the BS?


Your entire elitist post was BS.  Stop with the "my arts the only art that tests itself".  Its nonsense.  And spare me the Youtube "proof"  I can make a video of my Dog beating down someone and show it as proof that my dog fu style is the best.


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Your entire elitist post was BS.  Stop with the "my arts the only art that tests itself".  Its nonsense.  And spare me the Youtube "proof"  I can make a video of my Dog beating down someone and show it as proof that my dog fu style is the best.



What was elitist about my post? I was merely explaining my view of Aikido through my experience and perspective. The video I posted is an example from that perspective that you called "BS".

If you wish to see a truly elitist post, look no further than your response to Hussaff.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> What was elitist about my post? I was merely explaining my view of Aikido through my experience and perspective. The video I posted is an example from that perspective that you called "BS".
> 
> If you wish to see a truly elitist post, look no further than your response to Hussaff.


No the BS was your nonsense that your art "TESTS" itself and aikido doesnt.  Your Art is no better or worse then any other.  So spare me the tap out t-shirt wearing BS.  You dont like Aikido great dont train in it but to say its not tested is nonsense how do you know?  Ive personally used it as a police officer against real life bad guys not in a cage with rules, refs, time limits, advance notice, and corner men.  Guess what it worked so there you go a real life "test"  Sorry it wasnt recorded and put on youtube.  Guess what Ive used things from BJJ and Goju in real life to so go ahead and check them off as "tested" as well


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> No the BS was your nonsense that your art "TESTS" itself and aikido doesnt.


 
Where did I say that Aikido doesn't test itself? I simply said that I have certain requirements to buy into the claims made by martial arts. Aikido hasn't met those requirements, and the OP article gives an interesting theory as to why that is.



> Your Art is no better or worse then any other.  So spare me the tap out t-shirt wearing BS.



And no where did I say it was. 



> You dont like Aikido great dont train in it but to say its not tested is nonsense how do you know?  Ive personally used it as a police officer against real life bad guys not in a cage with rules, refs, time limits, advance notice, and corner men.  Guess what it worked so there you go a real life "test"  Sorry it wasnt recorded and put on youtube.  Guess what Ive used things from BJJ and Goju in real life to so go ahead and check them off as "tested" as well



Well that's the problem isn't it? It's never recorded or verified. It's simply more tales of greatness and ability from days gone by with no proof whatsoever to show for it. 

Again, I  sympathize with the article's author, and his view of modern Aikido is very similar to my experiences with modern Aikido.


----------



## hussaf

ballen0351 said:


> Perhaps this attitude is why they treat you like a child



If that's how you think a guest should be treated, you are a poor quality human.


----------



## ballen0351

hussaf said:


> If that's how you think a guest should be treated, you are a poor quality human.


Awwww poor hussaf i didnt mean to hurt your little feelings buddy however If you come in already determined that the movements are ineffectually moving about then why bother even going?  That neg attitude you have is pretty clear on an internet forum then Im sure its crystal clear to the members of the school so Id prob just thank you for coming and ask you to leave since you seem t have made up your mind already.  
How many schools have you visited that treated you so bad?


----------



## hussaf

Nice attitude.  Real high level person.  Keep that harmony and love alive.  Seriously, who does personal attacks on an Internet forum?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Where did I say that Aikido doesn't test itself?


LOL do you even read what you type?


> However, you have to understand the perspective I'm coming from. I'm coming from a martial art that constantly demonstrates its techniques on opponents trained and untrained in it. Its used against everyone from boxers to wrestlers with devastating effect. When it is demonstrated, it is done in a very practical method which is very hard to argue against.
> 
> Aikido simply doesn't do that.



Sure seems like your saying its not tested to me


> I simply said that I have certain requirements to buy into the claims made by martial arts.
> Aikido hasn't met those requirements, and the OP article gives an interesting theory as to why that is.


I have not seen anyone here making any claims about Aikido except you implying its not effective and "doesnt look real" to you.




> And no where did I say it was.


Sure you did again try reading your posts
_" I'm coming from a martial art that constantly demonstrates its techniques on opponents trained and untrained in it."
"I would like to invest time into learning? Not really because it doesn't look "real" to me."
"__ Instead, all we have are stories, and folk tales about the masters of old performing these incredible feats of ability that somehow can't be re-created in the modern day. After listening to that stuff for years in karate, I'm done with it. I need more than stories of frail masters throwing body builders around like rag dolls, "_
So not only did you bash Aikido but you took a shot at Karate in general



> Well that's the problem isn't it? It's never recorded or verified. It's simply more tales of greatness and ability from days gone by with no proof whatsoever to show for it.


Sorry thats real life man I dont have a ring, cameras, lighting, camera men, time limits, rules, refs to save me, Im out in the real world with real bad guys that actually want to hurt or kill not just win a match.  Your welcome to come ride around with me if you and see for yourself


> is very similar to my experiences with modern Aikido.


Which is very little


----------



## ballen0351

hussaf said:


> Nice attitude.  Real high level person.  Keep that harmony and love alive.  Seriously, who does personal attacks on an Internet forum?


Umm you do  LOL


> you are a poor quality human



remember


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Awwww poor hussaf i didnt mean to hurt your little feelings buddy however If you come in already determined that the movements are ineffectually moving about then why bother even going?  That neg attitude you have is pretty clear on an internet forum then Im sure its crystal clear to the members of the school so Id prob just thank you for coming and ask you to leave since you seem t have made up your mind already.




And in my school we'd make him roll against the students in the class, or even the senior students if he so desired. If he beats us, then we would learn from Hussaf. If we beat him, maybe Hussaf is humbled and becomes a student. We wouldn't kick him out simply because he's a skeptic. This isn't a religion.

I would love it if Aikido took some of the attributes of its Judo and Bjj siblings. I think it would do the art a lot of good. However, that's just my opinion.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> And in my school we'd make him roll against the students in the class, or even the senior students if he so desired. If he beats us, then we would learn from Hussaf. If we beat him, maybe Hussaf is humbled and becomes a student. We wouldn't kick him out simply because he's a skeptic. This isn't a religion.


Has nothing to do with being a skeptic it has to do with being disrepectful.  you come inwith your mind made up then there is nothing I can teach you.  You come in as a skeptc but with an open mind then thats totally different.  I was a skeptic when I first went to an Aikido school but I kept an open mind.


> I would love it if Aikido took some of the attributes of its Judo and Bjj siblings. I think it would do the art a lot of good. However, that's just my opinion.


You been to alot of Aikido schools to make that opinion huh?


----------



## hussaf

ballen0351 said:


> Umm you do  LOL
> 
> remember[/COLOR]



Sorry for being defensive.  I'm usually better than that.  You can continue being the thread bully unchallenged.  Enjoy.


----------



## ballen0351

hussaf said:


> seriously, who does personal attacks on an internet forum?


lol you do


> you can continue being the thread bully


----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


> Sure seems like your saying its not tested to me



For the sake of argument, does Aikido ever test itself in that way? If not, why not?



> I have not seen anyone here making any claims about Aikido except you implying its not effective and "doesnt look real" to you.



Then you clearly didn't read the OP.


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> For the sake of argument, does Aikido ever test itself in that way?


I just told you I used it in real life thats a test


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

*ATTENTION ALL USERS: 

 Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful. 

 -Brian R. VanCise 
 -MT Moderator- *


----------



## ballen0351




----------



## Hanzou

ballen0351 said:


>



Nice documentary, but not really what I was looking for. 



ballen0351 said:


> I just told you I used it in real life thats a test



Personal anecdote. Got anything more objective?


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Nice documentary, but not really what I was looking for.


I wasnt posting it for you.  Your not looking for anything because your minds made up already no amount of "proof"  will matter to you


----------



## tshadowchaser

And now back to a discussion on the OP and the article    PLEASE


----------



## ballen0351

Hanzou said:


> Personal anecdote. Got anything more objective?



Hmm nope that's really all I need to know it's effective.  Have you tried it and it's not worked?  Or are you using your years of vast YouTube watching as proof?


----------



## ballen0351

tshadowchaser said:


> And now back to a discussion on the OP and the article    PLEASE



Sure I think what the article was saying is what some try to pass of as Aikido isn't the Aikido he was taught.  It wasn't the Aikido that was 1st taught to the masses.  I think you can find bad examples of every style out there.  You can find people teaching something they call XYZ that has little resembliance to what others consider XYZ.  So does that mean the style is bad or that school is bad?


----------



## tshadowchaser

Over the years Aikido became more and more less violent in the way it was taught and some of the original techniques where not shown as often. The whole mental state of the founder changed over time and as it did his teachings changed, thus  what was taught after was changed because the students where not influenced by his former attitude.


----------



## Hanzou

tshadowchaser said:


> Over the years Aikido became more and more less violent in the way it was taught and some of the original techniques where not shown as often. The whole mental state of the founder changed over time and as it did his teachings changed, thus  what was taught after was changed because the students where not influenced by his former attitude.



Prime example;






Quite a big change from the "hell dojo" years.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> I hate when I visit aikido dojo and I get treated like a child because I don't naturally understand the story of how and why uke is supposed to move as nage ineffectually moves around


I think there is a misunderstanding in the role of Uke and the methodology of the training using a compliant partner. Those that have been around a while might recall my advice to people asking about finding a good school. I copped some stick for my suggestion. For me, if I was looking for a school I would be looking at the quality of the senior students to see whether they could actually do the techniques. Then I would ask them respectfully if they could demonstrate the technique on me while I was resisting. That is using my physical strength to resist. Normally that would be done softly and slowly. If my partner could do that I would have no qualms at joining that school. 

In this example I am a non compliant Uke and I think this lies at the heart of the problem. Henry Ellis mentioned it as well when he was talking about 'dance' and people throwing themselves about before they were thrown.


> *Aikidoists are often accused of practicing  Choreographed Aikido and to be honest I must admit that these claims are very often justified,* with Uke (attacker) preparing to break fall long before he makes his attack, and most of them attack off balance , therefore making any multiples of techniques possible with the minimum of effort and of course this makes Tori (defender) look fantastic.
> 
> 
> What is really sad is that these people believe that this is good Aikido.
> 
> 
> Kenshiro Abbe Sensei would always say to us that two students are training at the same time, one is Uke who is learning and improving his attacking techniques and his opponent Tori is also learning and improving his defensive techniques, whilst we were training with Abbe Sensei if Ukes foot or heel came off the mat as he attacked Abbe Sensei would give the offending leg a good whack with a shinai (bamboo sword) he would then say  My English is very bad but my shinai speaks fluently!.
> 
> 
> If Uke attacks on balance then it is obvious that Toris technique must be good and strong to throw him, and as Abbe Sensei said so many times  two students are training .



I don't expect people who haven't trained Aikido to a reasonable level to understand what Henry Ellis is saying here, but _often accused_ is the key. To do all the fantastic rolls you see in Aikido requires Uke to 'take a dive'. In real life against the technique is happens so fast you are straight on the ground, in a painful heap. That shows Tori can perform the technique but does little for Uke. Receiving well in Aikido is a highly developed skill. I admit I am hopeless at it because I am too old and too stiff to perform the acrobatic feats you see. But I do try to receive for my partner so that my partner can learn the technique and in blending with my partner's technique I am learning to go with my partner's strength and not clash, the fundamental rule of Aikido. This is part of the training and it is where a lot of Aikidoka let themselves down. The techniques are never tested. Uke attacks and Uke goes down regardless as to whether the technique was performed correctly. If the technique is not corrected then we just have a bad dance. The other part of learning to receive is learning to reverse the techniques. That is you as Uke attack, Tori takes ikkyo, for example, you blend with his movement and reverse the situation so now you have ikkyo.

If you have felt being "treated like a child" in an Aikido school, I would be walking away. Sure it is a little complicated but a good instructor should be able to explain clearly the basic theory of Aikido practise.
:asian:


----------



## seasoned

*In the event that you missed this a few posts back,* read and heed.


----------



## hussaf

I guess what I was referring to was the frustration derived from some shihan applying weak technique and he, and many of his students, expect me to as Uke to move a certain way because "nage could destroy me" if I didn't have the presence of mind to fall down the correct way during ikkyo - vice actually, you know, falling down the way in which nage throws me.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> I guess what I was referring to was the frustration derived from some shihan applying weak technique and he, and many of his students, expect me to as Uke to move a certain way because "nage could destroy me" if I didn't have the presence of mind to fall down the correct way during ikkyo - vice actually, you know, falling down the way in which nage throws me.


I'm with you. I'd be out of the place quick smart. There is a time for total compliance and there is the time for total resistance. A good school will balance the two.

I trained with a 4th dan Hapkido guy a few months back. None of his stuff was effective. It relied on strength to work and I was strong enough to stop him even though he was a lot bigger and younger. Same happens in Aikido. You will see it a lot at demonstrations where a top level practitioner will only demonstrate with his own Uke. That way he will always look good.
:asian:


----------



## hussaf

It's not my school.  But I travel a lot for work and visit many dojo.  It's just frustrating that a nage puts me in a certain position then kicks me because I'm not where he wanted me to go, saying he could kill me and I need to protect myself and I'm just sitting there trying not to counter the **** out of his mediocre technique.  It's good training to bite your ego, but I feel like a visiting shihan should set a better example.  The frustrating part is that's just the culture.  Even his uchi deshi was pulling the "as Uke it's your job to stay connected with me because I can kick or punch you.". I'm sorry, I don't know the play preprogrammed in your head, and the oblivious disgust by the uchi deshi I was working with suggests poor training.  When I was uchi deshi I was taught to find ways to help students understand what's being taught...not repeat the same thing over in the same way and expect others to understand.  But thread relly: the excuse for this is "this is a martial art."  I've done martial arts my whole adult life, just simply coming up with stories as to why Uke is supposed to move a certain way and say "nage will kill you" does my make it martial.  it makes it delusional.  Nage is responsible for what happens to Uke, regardless if Uke is too flimsily, resisting, neutral or attempting  countering.  Coming from a martial background it's frustrating that people can be so adamant and trick themselves into thinking they are the "real deadly" martial school of aikido.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> It's not my school.  But I travel a lot for work and visit many dojo.  It's just frustrating that a nage puts me in a certain position then kicks me because I'm not where he wanted me to go, saying he could kill me and I need to protect myself and I'm just sitting there trying not to counter the **** out of his mediocre technique.  It's good training to bite your ego, but I feel like a visiting shihan should set a better example.  The frustrating part is that's just the culture.  Even his uchi deshi was pulling the "as Uke it's your job to stay connected with me because I can kick or punch you.". I'm sorry, I don't know the play preprogrammed in your head, and the oblivious disgust by the uchi deshi I was working with suggests poor training.  When I was uchi deshi I was taught to find ways to help students understand what's being taught...not repeat the same thing over in the same way and expect others to understand.  But thread relly: the excuse for this is "this is a martial art."  I've done martial arts my whole adult life, just simply coming up with stories as to why Uke is supposed to move a certain way and say "nage will kill you" does my make it martial.  it makes it delusional.  Nage is responsible for what happens to Uke, regardless if Uke is too flimsily, resisting, neutral or attempting  countering.  Coming from a martial background it's frustrating that people can be so adamant and trick themselves into thinking they are the "real deadly" martial school of aikido.


Understand exactly. The fact is, you are hanging on to a wrist for the sake of the exercise, not that someone will kill you. In real life those throws will not occur because you would just let go. It *is* your job as Uke to stay connected but often that is just not possible. 
:asian:

Edit.  I must apologise .. I assumed from your posts that you were a relative beginner. If I were you I would have sat him down on his **** and walked out ... or something like that.


----------



## hussaf

Oh man, I'm not even talking about grab techniques.  I mean like shomenuchi and nage does a 180 pivot and I'm supposed to keep pressure against his blocking hand because, if I don't, he'll jab me in the face.  That's fine, I get it, I've done karate longer than aikido but how do you expect someone to just know that.  you can't call it realistic and martial because it's not a natural relation for me as Uke.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> Oh man, I'm not even talking about grab techniques.  I mean like shomenuchi and nage does a 180 pivot and I'm supposed to keep pressure against his blocking hand because, if I don't, he'll jab me in the face.  That's fine, I get it, I've done karate longer than aikido but how do you expect someone to just know that.  you can't call it realistic and martial because it's not a natural relation for me as Uke.


Sounds like a poorly performed tenkan without the irimi to set it up. 
:hmm:


----------



## hussaf

I just don't see the reason for a full on 180 pivot on shomen.  But yeah we are basically facing in the same position and I as Uke am only slightly more off balance than nage.  Granted nage's hand is atop mine but really, backhand me in the face from that distance and see what it actually does to me.....not much,
particularly since nage's hips are in the wrong direction to generate power.  I dunno, I just don't like acquiescing to a narrative as Uke.  when I was uchi deshi and Otomo to a Yoshinkan 7 th dan the rules were basically attack as hard as you can and you go where the teacher puts you...with just a couple exceptions... for Ukes sake.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> I just don't see the reason for a full on 180 pivot on shomen.  But yeah we are basically facing in the same position and I as Uke am only slightly more off balance than nage.  Granted nage's hand is atop mine but really, backhand me in the face from that distance and see what it actually does to me.....not much,
> particularly since nage's hips are in the wrong direction to generate power.  I dunno, I just don't like acquiescing to a narrative as Uke.  when I was uchi deshi and Otomo to a Yoshinkan 7 th dan the rules were basically attack as hard as you can and you go where the teacher puts you...with just a couple exceptions... for Ukes sake.


Unless it is purely an exercise in receiving. Occasionally we will do something similar with shomenuchi iriminage where we do follow around, the rationale being that the attack has failed and you as Uke are still trying to attack.  
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wsv-fDnY7vA
Do you still train Yoshinkan?
:asian:


----------



## hussaf

yes.  As much as I try I don't like the ASU and USAF squat down follow around thing on iriminage.


----------



## Argus

hussaf said:


> It's not my school.  But I travel a lot for work and visit many dojo.  It's just frustrating that a nage puts me in a certain position then kicks me because I'm not where he wanted me to go, saying he could kill me and I need to protect myself and I'm just sitting there trying not to counter the **** out of his mediocre technique.  It's good training to bite your ego, but I feel like a visiting shihan should set a better example.  The frustrating part is that's just the culture.  Even his uchi deshi was pulling the "as Uke it's your job to stay connected with me because I can kick or punch you.". I'm sorry, I don't know the play preprogrammed in your head, and the oblivious disgust by the uchi deshi I was working with suggests poor training.  When I was uchi deshi I was taught to find ways to help students understand what's being taught...not repeat the same thing over in the same way and expect others to understand.  But thread relly: the excuse for this is "this is a martial art."  I've done martial arts my whole adult life, just simply coming up with stories as to why Uke is supposed to move a certain way and say "nage will kill you" does my make it martial.  it makes it delusional.  Nage is responsible for what happens to Uke, regardless if Uke is too flimsily, resisting, neutral or attempting  countering.  Coming from a martial background it's frustrating that people can be so adamant and trick themselves into thinking they are the "real deadly" martial school of aikido.



Welp, a few months into Aikido now, and this post accurately sums up my... minor frustrations with it? I'm content to just be humble and learn as well, and it is good stuff at the end of the day, but I cannot help but think that many Aikidoka really have a poor understanding of martial arts in general. I feel that Aikido is an art that you should probably enter with previous training, lest you fall into a really narrow and artificial perspective on martial arts.

Of course, I'm sure there are some good, pragmatic Aikido schools out there. But in general, the culture seems to have absorbed a whole lot of borderline fantasy interpretations.


----------



## K-man

Argus said:


> Welp, a few months into Aikido now, and this post accurately sums up my... minor frustrations with it? I'm content to just be humble and learn as well, and it is good stuff at the end of the day, but I cannot help but think that many Aikidoka really have a poor understanding of martial arts in general. I feel that Aikido is an art that you should probably enter with previous training, lest you fall into a really narrow and artificial perspective on martial arts.
> 
> Of course, I'm sure there are some good, pragmatic Aikido schools out there. But in general, the culture seems to have absorbed a whole lot of borderline fantasy interpretations.


I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
:asian:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

K-man said:


> I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
> :asian:



Beautiful movement K-man!


----------



## Tony Dismukes

K-man said:


> I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
> :asian:



I might have nitpicks about some of the material, but it's obvious that the instructor knows what he's doing.


----------



## hussaf

Argus said:


> Welp, a few months into Aikido now, and this post accurately sums up my... minor frustrations with it? I'm content to just be humble and learn as well, and it is good stuff at the end of the day, but I cannot help but think that many Aikidoka really have a poor understanding of martial arts in general. I feel that Aikido is an art that you should probably enter with previous training, lest you fall into a really narrow and artificial perspective on martial arts.
> 
> Of course, I'm sure there are some good, pragmatic Aikido schools out there. But in general, the culture seems to have absorbed a whole lot of borderline fantasy interpretations.



I love aikido, but I don't often recommend it to people because you have to be willing to find a good teacher.  I don't mind training at a variety of dojo because I've been training aikido for 15 years and other martial arts longer.  Also realize dojo are a living thing - there are slow months and great months of training.  sometimes all it takes is a guy to come back from paternity leave or a military deployment to completely change the atmosphere of class.  

But having a true master as an instructor makes a huge difference.  By "master" I mean someone who has dedicated their entire adult life to that martial art and spent much of that seeking out and training with the highest level instructors in the world.


----------



## Hanzou

K-man said:


> I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
> :asian:



That looks great. Unfortunately there's no where you can go to see it applied against a fully resisting opponent.


----------



## K-man

Hanzou said:


> That looks great. Unfortunately there's no where you can go to see it applied against a fully resisting opponent.


I am often the resisting opponent, like most of the time! All you have to do is call in. I'd love to take a break and let some other bunny have a go.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

K-man said:


> I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
> :asian:



I have tried to understand this for a long time. May be you can help me on this here. Here is the Aikido clip:






 If we compare it with the Judo "Osoto Gari", the "cutting - backward hooking" motion is missing in the Aikido clip. 






If we compare it with the Shuai-Chiao "front cut", both the "cutting - backward hooking" motion and the "forward stepping" motion are missing in the Aikido clip. 






What's your opinion on this?


----------



## Chris Parker

K-man said:


> I hesitate to paste what I know to be good Aikido because people with no understanding will often jump in to criticise but for what it's worth, this school is reality based.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fPei-spftzg
> :asian:



Always fun to see Mal in action&#8230; I am curious, though, would you class this example clip as "reality based", or is it something else in the class?



Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have tried to understand this for a long time. May be you can help me on this here. Here is the Aikido clip:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we compare it with the Judo "Osoto Gari", the "cutting - backward hooking" motion is missing in the Aikido clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we compare it with the Shuai-Chiao "front cut", both the "cutting - backward hooking" motion and the "forward stepping" motion are missing in the Aikido clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your opinion on this?



Er&#8230; what makes you think that the technique should be the same in the first place? The Aikido waza is not Judo&#8230; nor is it Shuai Chiao&#8230; expecting different systems to be the same is just, well&#8230; wrong.

In other words, there's nothing "missing" from the Aikido technique at all. You're just unable to see the difference between arts, or why they're different. This has been a long standing issue with your posts, John&#8230;


----------



## K-man

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have tried to understand this for a long time. May be you can help me on this here. Here is the Aikido clip:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we compare it with the Judo "Osoto Gari", the "cutting - backward hooking" motion is missing in the Aikido clip.


With the Aikido version, when you enter properly you take your opponent's centre. I've never had to use the hook although I do teach it in Karate and Krav.



Kung Fu Wang said:


> If we compare it with the Shuai-Chiao "front cut", both the "cutting - backward hooking" motion and the "forward stepping" motion are missing in the Aikido clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your opinion on this?


As Chris said it's two totally different MAs. Taught in the way we train it is an internal style so despite the video where Mal is hitting with kokyu, normally we do it with no strength and no strike. The reasoning is that you can always add the strike if required. Despite Judo being 'soft' in theory, I have never seen it trained softly.
:asian:


----------



## K-man

Chris Parker said:


> Always fun to see Mal in action&#8230; I am curious, though, would you class this example clip as "reality based", or is it something else in the class?


 Obviously there are only a few guys that he can hit like that but in reality we don't have to. I'm not sure what event was filmed as I wasn't there. But I can say that in all my years training no one has hit me as hard as Mal. However, as I said, we don't have to hit to put guys on the floor. Hitting is the 'reality' if it is required, but the other 'reality' is working with a committed attacker. I was explaining in another thread the difference between different modes of attack but in fact you need to be at a reasonable level to receive this style of attack.
:asian:


----------



## Buka

There are styles that are better suited for me personally, than other styles. It doesn't have anything to do with the style, really, it's me. It's how I move naturally, and how I choose to move. I have been going to a bootload of dojos for a long time. Haven't been to one yet where at some point I didn't say, "Oh, that's nice, I WANT that."  If you've been training Martial Arts for a while you can incorporate (steal) almost anything into what you do and how you fight.

I am not suited for Aikido, at least the Aikido around here. But I've been stealing from Aikido for as long as I can remember. (don't plan on stopping anytime soon, either)

Me thinks....if you can't find something in the way another person fights, you ain't looking hard enough. Or maybe you ain't looking at all.


----------



## hussaf

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I have tried to understand this for a long time. May be you can help me on this here. Here is the Aikido clip:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we compare it with the Judo "Osoto Gari", the "cutting - backward hooking" motion is missing in the Aikido clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we compare it with the Shuai-Chiao "front cut", both the "cutting - backward hooking" motion and the "forward stepping" motion are missing in the Aikido clip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your opinion on this?



That's not really a traditional aikido technique, it's more of a hybrid variation.  

He's propping the close leg and not letting Uke regain balance, which makes Uke fall.  Similar principal in sasae tauri Komi ashi or tai otoshi - blocking their ability to gain balance while guiding Uke to have a need for that balance point.  

The aikido guy's upper body looks a little like he's doing aikido's iriminage.  He's really not, as he's in front of his uke's hips, it's more like a kokyunage or just a generic throw.

You two of the following to throw someone down: height, width, depth.  Aikido and judo generally take care of all three.  In O soto gari, you move off uke's center line and behind their hips - width and depth.  You load up all their weight on one support leg by pulling their arm down and into our center.  At that point you disrupt that balance load point with a seeping leg.  In the aikido move iriminage, everything is basically the same, except that back leg.  Instead of stepping forward to sweep that close leg, you step across, behind, forward (C step) uke's hips while your chest, armpit and tricep is atop uke's sternum pointed towed uke's far shoulder.  Keeping Uke tight to you, your are simply advancing at such a length and angle Uke can't keep balance and falls.  while falling you guide him away with your arm.  

Generally aikido people have uke's head in their center instead of pulling down uke's arm like in O soto. 

Some aikido schools home their arm around uke's neck when throwing.


----------



## K-man

hussaf said:


> That's not really a traditional aikido technique, it's more of a hybrid variation.
> 
> He's propping the close leg and not letting Uke regain balance, which makes Uke fall.  Similar principal in sasae tauri Komi ashi or tai otoshi - blocking their ability to gain balance while guiding Uke to have a need for that balance point.
> 
> The aikido guy's upper body looks a little like he's doing aikido's iriminage.  He's really not, as he's in front of his uke's hips, it's more like a kokyunage or just a generic throw.
> 
> You two of the following to throw someone down: height, width, depth.  Aikido and judo generally take care of all three.  In O soto gari, you move off uke's center line and behind their hips - width and depth.  You load up all their weight on one support leg by pulling their arm down and into our center.  At that point you disrupt that balance load point with a seeping leg.  In the aikido move iriminage, everything is basically the same, except that back leg.  Instead of stepping forward to sweep that close leg, you step across, behind, forward (C step) uke's hips while your chest, armpit and tricep is atop uke's sternum pointed towed uke's far shoulder.  Keeping Uke tight to you, your are simply advancing at such a length and angle Uke can't keep balance and falls.  while falling you guide him away with your arm.
> 
> Generally aikido people have uke's head in their center instead of pulling down uke's arm like in O soto.
> Some aikido schools home their arm around uke's neck when throwing.


You are right that this is a form of Kokyunage but it is still Iriminage technically. I think if you look carefully you see all of the technique even if it is an advanced form of it. The right foot is moving behind but we don't intentionally touch Uke's leg. Unless you are pushing on the neck he doesn't step back anyway. Depending on the entry the left arm may be resting on Uke's arm but we don't ever grab it, and we don't push against the sternum. Any pressure allows Uke to resist. If you look at the right hand it it turned out to keep weight on the outside unlike Seagal's signature move where he just strikes down, usually on a shorter opponent. As I said earlier, we train internally so as you move in with intent Uke tends to move slightly towards the attack. Broken timing then makes him move back as the anticipated clash doesn't occur and it is pretty much that backward movement that causes him to fall. Mind you, it took me several years to get to the stage I could make that happen consistantly.
:asian:


----------



## hussaf

Sternum is our guide point for orientation (elbow past sternum) as our basic iriminages (sokumen and shomen) aren't done to the head at all.  To your point about beginners, from the sidelines it looks a lot like iriminage is done by smashing Uke with your elbow to hand area, so we coach people to try and have their elbow past uke's sternum ( ie centerline, but give them a specific thing to look for) so nage is throwing with their entire body instead of just the arm.

If that guy that technique at my school, everyone would call it iriminage, but by our organizations definition it technically wouldn't be...but that would only be addressed if asked or like during questioning of a black belt exam...more like intra-organizational trivia.


----------



## Chris Parker

K-man said:


> Obviously there are only a few guys that he can hit like that but in reality we don't have to. I'm not sure what event was filmed as I wasn't there. But I can say that in all my years training no one has hit me as hard as Mal. However, as I said, we don't have to hit to put guys on the floor. Hitting is the 'reality' if it is required, but the other 'reality' is working with a committed attacker. I was explaining in another thread the difference between different modes of attack but in fact you need to be at a reasonable level to receive this style of attack.
> :asian:



Okay&#8230; not to take this too far off topic, but nothing there is really anything to do with reality based training, I must say. Hence my question, really&#8230; "hard", even what might be seen as "realistic" training doesn't equal reality based training&#8230; they really are different things&#8230; 

So, with that in mind, can you expand on what makes Mal's approach to teaching Aikido "reality based"? I should point out that I don't have any preference for it to be, or not to be, RB-style training&#8230; but if it is, I'm curious.


----------



## K-man

Chris Parker said:


> Okay&#8230; not to take this too far off topic, but nothing there is really anything to do with reality based training, I must say. Hence my question, really&#8230; "hard", even what might be seen as "realistic" training doesn't equal reality based training&#8230; they really are different things&#8230;
> 
> So, with that in mind, can you expand on what makes Mal's approach to teaching Aikido "reality based"? I should point out that I don't have any preference for it to be, or not to be, RB-style training&#8230; but if it is, I'm curious.


I suppose it is the old answer ... 'it depends'. It depends on how you define RB. My definition is a little loose. I would say it is reality based if the training is such that it is conducted in a way that would transition into street fighting seamlessly if required. Now we don't train scenario stuff so for some that may mean it is not really RB. My definitition is that if you can work your magic on someone who is really trying to hit you, or stop you, then it is a fair way toward reality based. It is still a fair way short of what we do in our Krav, but hey, it leaves most Aikido way behind. We don't do a lot of 'hard'. That's there if you need it. I'm happy to go with the 'realistic' tag if you like. I just spent a week in NZ training with a mob of karate guys. My Aikido stuff slotted in nicely with the training we were doing there.
:asian:


----------



## Chris Parker

Okay. For the record, when you're looking at the categorisation of "reality-based", that's not really what's meant&#8230; but, as I said, that's really getting off topic here. Perhaps for a different thread.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

hussaf said:


> That's not really a traditional aikido technique, it's more of a hybrid variation.
> 
> He's propping the close leg and not letting Uke regain balance, which makes Uke fall.



Let's just talk about the physical "throw" and leave the "style" out of this discussion. When you push your opponent's upper body down, to make him fall, you can

- block/trip his leg while his leg is still on the ground.
- sweep/hook his leg off the ground.

What's the difference here?

When you 

- block/trip your opponent's leg, it's easy for your opponent to escape his leg out of your block/trip.
- sweep/hook your opponent's leg off the ground, it's harder for your opponent to escape his leg out of your sweep/hook.

IMO, if your opponent has the same level skill as you have, the more that you can restrict his leg mobility, the better chance that your throw will work on him.


----------



## K-man

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Let's just talk about the physical "throw" and leave the "style" out of this discussion. When you push your opponent's upper body down, to make him fall, you can
> 
> - block/trip his leg while his leg is still on the ground.
> - sweep/hook his leg off the ground.
> 
> What's the difference here?
> 
> When you
> 
> - block/trip your opponent's leg, it's easy for your opponent to escape his leg out of your block/trip.
> - sweep/hook your opponent's leg off the ground, it's harder for your opponent to escape his leg out of your sweep/hook.
> 
> IMO, if your opponent has the same level skill as you have, the more that you can restrict his leg mobility, the better chance that your throw will work on him.


I think what you have here applies at the base level but not in this case. I don't trip and I don't sweep. 
:asian:


----------



## Spinedoc

Depends on the dojo. My Sensei was profoundly influenced by Saito Sensei, and so we have a more Iwama style flavor. While we may not train with hard resistance with beginners, as you advance, the resistance increases and continues to do so.

Again, I can only speak for my dojo. Additionally, the attacks are very prescripted for beginners, but as you advance, there is often variation thrown in.


----------



## JP3

Guys, I just read from Sensei Ellis' O/P to the end of this thread. It's always amazing to me the organic way in  which these threads mutate from the O/P to where we end up perhaps 4 pages in or so.

On the end of the thread, I can see the difference in what KFW is saying about the advantage of having uke's limb "hooked" or trapped, if you will, and also the advantage in KM's approach of doing neither, so maybe I know stuff.  At the beginning, I've had my own experience with what I'll call "Pooh-Bear" schools with no RB training at all, and in my personal opinion, their people suffer (in a reality sense) from it. But... they may not actually even be aware of the lack. Anyway, go back tot he discussion of iriminage, it's intriguing.


----------

