Aikido against a boxer

[Gerry Seymour]

Pretty close from what i just looked up.

That's way too philosophical for me.

Anyway, from a superficial standpoint, I'm with you. Blending - as I learned the term - is a recognizable approach. I didn't see much of it in the MMA guy (and none of it in the Aikido guy). The pivot outside shown in that video is probably the most extreme version. The clearest version I know of is simply this: I punch with a right round, and you step forward with your right (to my left - close to my shoulder), then pivot as my punch causes me to pivot. If you added a technique with that (just think a simple arm drag on my punching arm as you pivot), you'd be blending your movement with mine to accelerate what I do into something I can't easily resist (too much circular/angular momentum). I'm hoping that's a clearer picture than I think it is.

Others may have a different definition of "blending", and might fit better what the MMA guys is doing in the video.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. If you look at the ankle pick. It has that soft entry.

Single leg has the same sort of motion.

Yes, I see it in the first bit of that video - he has already broken the structure at the top (with head control). Given that broken structure, it will work with that softness. Since I only work mine from below, I don't get to take head control in it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

so if someone isn't interested in learning to use Aikido for fighting, why do we care if he only learns it as a cooperative dance?

When the communist Chinese government made traditional CMA into modern Wushu dancing, fewer people in China want to train the traditional CMA. The Traditional CMA started to die out. It's much easier to control the Chinese population if all Chinese don't know how to fight.

We don't live in a communist country. We still have free speech here. It's our responsibility to express our opinion even if others may not like to hear it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

There are 2 things wrong in this grab. IMO, there is no value to train a grab counter if that grab is wrong to start with.

I disagree, but I think only slightly. There's no "wrong" way to grip. There are more and less effective methods, but pretty much any grip can happen, and you deal with whatever you're given. In that exercise (like many exercises in Aikido practice), they've stylized it, removing the actual attack - the guy's not actually DOING anything with that grip. I've always found that odd, because it means there's really not an attack to work with. It's an okay exercise for "fiddling", but not much direct practical use.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

When the communist Chinese government made traditional CMA into modern Wushu dancing, fewer people in China want to train the traditional CMA. The Traditional CMA started to die out.

We don't live in a communist country. We still have free speech here. It's our responsibility to express our opinion even if others may not like to hear it.

Yes, and my opinion is that if they want to practice Aikido as a movement practice, rather than as combat preparation, that's just fine. Maybe later in my life I'll be interested in that, too - might be more fun than taking up dance.

 

[Spinedoc]

Pretty close from what i just looked up.

This is called Tai no Henko Tenkan, and is a fundamental kihon movement in Aikido. I disagree with his explanation, but the basics are there. It's a same side wrist grab, and you tenkan to blend with his forward movement. Think of me holding a sword, and you come in to grab my wrist and your energy is all coming at me. I simply blend and tenkan....it is NOT a technique in and of itself, but can set up many techniques.

 

[drop bear]

Yes, and my opinion is that if they want to practice Aikido as a movement practice, rather than as combat preparation, that's just fine. Maybe later in my life I'll be interested in that, too - might be more fun than taking up dance.

Yeah but if the only reason they fall over is because they are trying to be nice. That is also no longer aiki. That is acting.

The core principal is gone.

That would be pretty cruel if you were not upfront about that.

There is a difference between not training to fight and not training anything.

 

[drop bear]

This is called Tai no Henko Tenkan, and is a fundamental kihon movement in Aikido. I disagree with his explanation, but the basics are there. It's a same side wrist grab, and you tenkan to blend with his forward movement. Think of me holding a sword, and you come in to grab my wrist and your energy is all coming at me. I simply blend and tenkan....it is NOT a technique in and of itself, but can set up many techniques.

It was more the philosophy than that particular move. I grab your leg and lift it and push you back.

You move backwards with me until the movement is no longer pushing you backwards but is bringing you on top of me

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah but if the only reason they fall over is because they are trying to be nice. That is also no longer aiki. That is acting.

The core principal is gone.

That would be pretty cruel if you were not upfront about that.

There is a difference between not training to fight and not training anything.

They are actually being thrown, though in at least some of the throws, they have to be nice enough to hang around for the throw. Some of the throws done in that environment are quite powerful. The core principle is there, but in some cases that's all that's there (and I think in some cases that's actually the point). And if that's what they want to work on, it doesn't bother me.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not talking about no-touch, so much. There is some legitimate use of that in seeing how uke's movement affects him, but it's not really a throw. But if people understand it for what it actually is (rather than thinking it's effective fighting skill), I still don't have a problem with them doing it.

EDIT EDIT: Okay, I've had coffee, and finally noticed your first sentence.
You are correct that there's not really aiki in that, IMO. They're down to studying uke's movement and how it affects structure. It can be an interesting "fiddling" exercise, and sometimes can even be useful fiddling, in understanding how structure breaks down without using strength (leaving that in reserve). But it is fiddling, to me.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It was more the philosophy than that particular move. I grab your leg and lift it and push you back.

You move backwards with me until the movement is no longer pushing you backwards but is bringing you on top of me

Philosophically, that's actually pretty close. For me (and again, maybe not to others - maybe not to Aikido), blending adds energy rather than just accepting it. So, accepting that backwards push and adding your body weight into a throw changes it into blending. This type of blending is not uncommon in collegiate and Olympic wrestling. And it's a core principle (expressed a bit differently) you can see in Judo competition.

 

[Spinedoc]

Yeah but if the only reason they fall over is because they are trying to be nice. That is also no longer aiki. That is acting.

The core principal is gone.

That would be pretty cruel if you were not upfront about that.

There is a difference between not training to fight and not training anything.

Yeah, and Watanabe Sensei is not really considered appropriate Aikido by many. Here's Tissier Shihan in an interview. You can tell he's trying to be politically correct and nice, but he basically in so many words says its rubbish.

Mario Lorenzo – From a technical point of view, which aspect do you think Aikido will gravitate to: physical, speed, or technique?
Sensei Tissier : Diversity is the strength of Aikido. There are people who practise Aikido just because it’s not too physical. Many of these people couldn’t practise another sport. There are others that have worked physically before and for them that aim is included in Aikido. I’m almost 60 and I feel a sportsman. I’m not saying I practice a physically demanding Aikido, but I feel like somebody who has done sports his whole life. We are interested in keeping an aspect of the practice based on physical work.

A short time ago I went to Amsterdam with the Doshu, we are the same age. He did an aikido demonstration which was extensive, quick and precise with all the characteristics of a sportsman.

Mario Lorenzo - In South America we can see that those who emphasize too much on the “KI” in their practice are not technically serious. Do you see this in other countries? And what do you think of Watanabe Sensei‘s “no touch Aikido”?
Sensei Tissier : They are two different things. On the one hand people who talk about ki, and on the other the ones who practise aikido like Sensei Watanabe. He developed something in which he is especially interested in: it isn’t a ki work but one of anticipation, sensations, whether you like it or not, or whether it works or not. It works when you know the code, but martially it doesn’t work. Being in Japan I worked a lot with him, Watanabe wasn’t like this before. He is a physically solid practicant who wanted to develop something different. I think that if I were head of an examination table I wouldn’t take what he produces.

Now, people who talk and make constant reference on ki around the world are looking for something to justify their lack of technique. Because we all have ki, everything is ki (opening his arms), the problem with ki is its fluency. How does ki flow? When there is no block. When somebody is doing a technique and doesn’t handle it, this person doesn’t have an unblocked body. The objective of the technical aspect of the sport is to unlock every body part where there might exist a block. Someone who performs an exercise with stiff shoulders will not have a real ki flow.

Sensei Christian Tissier visited South America last December, Article, Christian Tissier Shihan 7° Dan Aikïkaï, Aïkido

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, and Watanabe Sensei is not really considered appropriate Aikido by many. Here's Tissier Shihan in an interview. You can tell he's trying to be politically correct and nice, but he basically in so many words says its rubbish.

Mario Lorenzo – From a technical point of view, which aspect do you think Aikido will gravitate to: physical, speed, or technique?
Sensei Tissier : Diversity is the strength of Aikido. There are people who practise Aikido just because it’s not too physical. Many of these people couldn’t practise another sport. There are others that have worked physically before and for them that aim is included in Aikido. I’m almost 60 and I feel a sportsman. I’m not saying I practice a physically demanding Aikido, but I feel like somebody who has done sports his whole life. We are interested in keeping an aspect of the practice based on physical work.

A short time ago I went to Amsterdam with the Doshu, we are the same age. He did an aikido demonstration which was extensive, quick and precise with all the characteristics of a sportsman.

Mario Lorenzo - In South America we can see that those who emphasize too much on the “KI” in their practice are not technically serious. Do you see this in other countries? And what do you think of Watanabe Sensei‘s “no touch Aikido”?
Sensei Tissier : They are two different things. On the one hand people who talk about ki, and on the other the ones who practise aikido like Sensei Watanabe. He developed something in which he is especially interested in: it isn’t a ki work but one of anticipation, sensations, whether you like it or not, or whether it works or not. It works when you know the code, but martially it doesn’t work. Being in Japan I worked a lot with him, Watanabe wasn’t like this before. He is a physically solid practicant who wanted to develop something different. I think that if I were head of an examination table I wouldn’t take what he produces.

Now, people who talk and make constant reference on ki around the world are looking for something to justify their lack of technique. Because we all have ki, everything is ki (opening his arms), the problem with ki is its fluency. How does ki flow? When there is no block. When somebody is doing a technique and doesn’t handle it, this person doesn’t have an unblocked body. The objective of the technical aspect of the sport is to unlock every body part where there might exist a block. Someone who performs an exercise with stiff shoulders will not have a real ki flow.

Sensei Christian Tissier visited South America last December, Article, Christian Tissier Shihan 7° Dan Aikïkaï, Aïkido

It is also an extreme version of what I see in a demo or a grading though. So where that is noticeable the concept is a lot more common than than people think.

And it becomes not about fighting but about learning the thing you are supposed to be trying to learn.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And it becomes not about fighting but about learning the thing you are supposed to be trying to learn.

That is a real risk with all TMA (and newer arts following the same pattern). It's less a problem if competition is involved, or at least some live sparring - so long as the rules used don't create a similar issue.

 

[drop bear]

That is a real risk with all TMA (and newer arts following the same pattern). It's less a problem if competition is involved, or at least some live sparring - so long as the rules used don't create a similar issue.

A real risk with martial arts in general. Now that I can notice it. Brcause we almost never do it live unless i have completely disregarded the person. It astounds me how often it pops up. Like a huge blind spot.

The fix is simple. If you loose. You loose. If as the defender you get knocked to the ground and subbed. Then that is what happens. There is no shame in that. It is part of the process.

If you only get an inch. Then you have gained that inch.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

A real risk with martial arts in general. Now that I can notice it. Brcause we almost never do it live unless i have completely disregarded the person. It astounds me how often it pops up. Like a huge blind spot.

The fix is simple. If you loose. You loose. If as the defender you get knocked to the ground and subbed. Then that is what happens. There is no shame in that. It is part of the process.

If you only get an inch. Then you have gained that inch.

Yeah. This is a problem with a common approach to SD training and testing. At a given rank, it's expected you'll properly defend a given % of the attacks. This is fine for scenario attacks, because the limitations placed on the "attacker" make it harder for them to succeed (rather than them using their whole skill). But if the testing stops there, there's an unrealistic assumption that all defenses are at that level.

I recently participated in a class where a student asked to do a defense line with multiple knife-wielding attackers. We agreed, and we all came at it seriously, and we all got murdered on nearly all attempts - which is really what should happen if people with any skill come at you in a coordinated fashion in that exercise. I could see the students were disturbed by it, so I took a few minutes afterward to discuss it with them. I basically said, "We all sucked at that, because being attacked by two people with knives will always suck." Too often we (those of us in the SD-focused side of MA) stay too long on the beginners' drills and don't visit the full-resistance stuff, even in simulation. The exercise was still a lot of fun - mostly for the attackers.

 

[oftheherd1]

It's boxing. Something can always go wrong. Trained fighters do stupid things sometimes in the ring. I'd assume a person from the stands is a bit less predictable (not trained in the rules, etc.), but they're probably not going to go completely nuts.

Probably not. Well, unless their name is @pgsmith.

 

[pgsmith]

Probably not. Well, unless their name is @pgsmith.

Made me realize how deeply some responses can get ingrained though.

 

[Ryback]

Hello everyone!!
I would like to share some thoughts with you about the subject of the thread...
Even though it's pretty clear to me why such a topic is very attractive, I think that such comparisons are a bit hard to make....
First of all there is a distinction between a martial art and a combative sport and in this case Aikido is a martial art and Boxing is a sport so it is a comparison between two different things.
One thing that we should make clear is what do we mean when we say "Aikido vs Boxing"? Is it in a sparring context or in a self defense context.
Aikido has no sparring (ok, with the Tomiki exception) and there are a lot of reasons for that but if we could gather them all under one phrase it could have been "because it is not a sport"! But if, for argument's sake, we would try to compare Aikido with Boxing is a sparring frame what would we have?
If the boxer was allowed to use all of his Boxing then the aikidoka should have been allowed to use all of his Aikido in order to make the comparison, and Aikido is not only tai-jutsu. So I would there be any reason to talk about a boxer using short fast jabs or strong punches or whatever against a person with a bokken or a jo?
Now in the second scenario, when it is a self defense situation and the attacker happens to be a boxer... Well, if it's a real situation, you don't know beforehand that you are gonna be attacked, you don't know what are your attacker's skills and he doesn't know that you are an Aikidoka, so he would not attack thinking how not to be taken into Kote gaeshi or shiho Nage or whatever... He would simply attack with what he has and the aikidoka would defend according to the level of his skill and ability....
Still, if there could be an answer to the whole thread I think that if an aikidoka is getting attacked with punches and strikes, he shouldn't try to stay away from them but enter! Dive into the attack, deflecting the strikes and get himself into a position where he can apply an Aikido technique...
All of the above of course is just my opinion, a reflection of my personal experience, every opinion is respected...

 

[drop bear]

Hello everyone!!
I would like to share some thoughts with you about the subject of the thread...
Even though it's pretty clear to me why such a topic is very attractive, I think that such comparisons are a bit hard to make....
First of all there is a distinction between a martial art and a combative sport and in this case Aikido is a martial art and Boxing is a sport so it is a comparison between two different things.
One thing that we should make clear is what do we mean when we say "Aikido vs Boxing"? Is it in a sparring context or in a self defense context.
Aikido has no sparring (ok, with the Tomiki exception) and there are a lot of reasons for that but if we could gather them all under one phrase it could have been "because it is not a sport"! But if, for argument's sake, we would try to compare Aikido with Boxing is a sparring frame what would we have?
If the boxer was allowed to use all of his Boxing then the aikidoka should have been allowed to use all of his Aikido in order to make the comparison, and Aikido is not only tai-jutsu. So I would there be any reason to talk about a boxer using short fast jabs or strong punches or whatever against a person with a bokken or a jo?
Now in the second scenario, when it is a self defense situation and the attacker happens to be a boxer... Well, if it's a real situation, you don't know beforehand that you are gonna be attacked, you don't know what are your attacker's skills and he doesn't know that you are an Aikidoka, so he would not attack thinking how not to be taken into Kote gaeshi or shiho Nage or whatever... He would simply attack with what he has and the aikidoka would defend according to the level of his skill and ability....
Still, if there could be an answer to the whole thread I think that if an aikidoka is getting attacked with punches and strikes, he shouldn't try to stay away from them but enter! Dive into the attack, deflecting the strikes and get himself into a position where he can apply an Aikido technique...
All of the above of course is just my opinion, a reflection of my personal experience, every opinion is respected...

If someone's aikido fundamentally doesn't work. Why would a stick help them. Give two people who can't fight a Jo. And the winner will probably be the most aggressive or athletic guy.

If the Aikido guys Aikido does work then he won't need the stick.

This really is not rocket science.

 

[Ryback]

If someone's aikido fundamentally doesn't work. Why would a stick help them. Give two people who can't fight a Jo. And the winner will probably be the most aggressive or athletic guy.

If the Aikido guys Aikido does work then he won't need the stick.

This really is not rocket science.

Not really... Weapons are part of Aikido, we don't use them because Aikido doesn't work, Aikido is not only tai-jutsu... 2/3 of Aikido are weapons... There are bokken techniques, there are Jo techniques and also Tai-jutsu and everything in between, bokken against Jo, disarming of the bokken, disarming of the Jo, avoiding being disarmed while you are using a bokken or Jo, you name it. It's all there in Aikido menu, that's why it is a martial art and not a sport. Who says that you use weapons because your other techniques wouldn't work? You use weapons and anything else because a martial art is about surviving not about "being a fair game" that's one huge difference between martial arts and sports...
So if the comparison is between Aikido and Boxing and the boxer is using all of his Boxing skills, then the aikidoka should use all of his Aikido skills or else we are diminishing Aikido into something that it's not.
And I believe, and that's just my opinion that a boxer would have a hard time fighting against a bokken or Jo...