Aikido hate

[Gerry Seymour]

Who am I to challenge that, since I'm not one either. I'm much more practical physicist than traditionalist.

In the way I understand aikido, as I mentioned in the other thread, aikido people don't do two things that judo people (and other folks as well) do -- Lift & Pull. One of our favorite saying is this trite little thing, "Aikido People are Pushy."

I'll give you, it's possible to execute ippon seoinage with neither lift nor pull -- especially if you catch a guy in the act of punching. All you need do is blend, drop a smidge and turn. Blop, thrown puncher. You've got to catch him actually "punching" though. Same-same with hip throw.

The problem my mind's eye is having is with... maybe it's not so much the clinch itself, as that "can" happen in a free-standing state out against nothing at all, in the middle of the ring if you want a visual. It's the up against the cage thing. I can't see either one working in an aikido-way off the cage. Judo? Absolutely. Guy holding the pressure against the cage suddenly releases the pressure, and uses the potential, which will pop the guy off the cage, to enter and throw.

Drop... I'm still in thought about your comment about the clinch having aiki in it. I'm reviewing mental videotapes, using a different perspective. I'll get back to you on that.

I agree entirely about the against-the-cage part, JP. There's very little opportunity there for what I'd call "aiki", except in the broader sense where "aiki" is the same as "ju" (using good technique rather than strength).

And with the Aikido versions of those throws (I hope I'm remembering what ippon seoinage is), they can also happen off some of those long leads that Aikido uses, if they move themselves into the center while they have the person moving - creating the same dynamic as catching the person punching. It's a bit of a stretch if no adaptation is made, I'll grant you, but it (to my mind) still fits within their basic principles and movement.

I like the point about pushing vs. pulling and lifting. I need to give that some consideration. I think as I've improved my technique, I may be teaching less pulling and lifting than I used to, and that's probably not a good thing. Maybe time for me to go play with someone with some Judo. I keep threatening to visit @Tony Dismukes, as he's within a day's drive. Maybe I'll take a couple of days after my current project and see if we can connect.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

After writing all these posts, and generally liking doing so as a thought exercise, I am led to write something else.

To be perfectly honest, aikido people, if we're going to stay aikido people, should not want to try to expirement with this whole MMA vs. Aikido thing. It's cross/counter to what we're trying to instill.

That being said, I DO think it's a good idea to have these other skill sets in your tool box.

I'm just struggling to reconcile the two positions.

I think this is especially true if you accept that Aikido's best performance is as a finishing layer for someone with other training. In that case, the rest of this become a moot point, since the art isn't meant to cover even some of those fundamental areas.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

For those who've asked in the past, I can use this material to explain one of the differences between Aikido (Ueshiba's art) and Nihon Goshin Aikido (Morita's art). This would look odd in most Aikido dojos. The body positions, close distance, and even the foot sweeps would seem out-of-place. It actually fits nicely in most NGA schools. We work at three distances, two of which (elbow and wrist) are common in Aikido. The third (shoulder) is that Judo/clinch/creepy distance stuff. Aikido spends less time in that distance, and has few tools that are designed to initiate from that distance. We have more Judo influence, and are more likely to be comfortable in there, even in front (behind the shoulder, Aikido folks wouldn't be uncomfortable, either, I think). We're not clinch fighters, but we're a little better prepared to work from a clinch.

 

[JP3]

I agree entirely about the against-the-cage part, JP. There's very little opportunity there for what I'd call "aiki", except in the broader sense where "aiki" is the same as "ju" (using good technique rather than strength).

And with the Aikido versions of those throws (I hope I'm remembering what ippon seoinage is), they can also happen off some of those long leads that Aikido uses, if they move themselves into the center while they have the person moving - creating the same dynamic as catching the person punching. It's a bit of a stretch if no adaptation is made, I'll grant you, but it (to my mind) still fits within their basic principles and movement.

I like the point about pushing vs. pulling and lifting. I need to give that some consideration. I think as I've improved my technique, I may be teaching less pulling and lifting than I used to, and that's probably not a good thing. Maybe time for me to go play with someone with some Judo. I keep threatening to visit @Tony Dismukes, as he's within a day's drive. Maybe I'll take a couple of days after my current project and see if we can connect.

Ahh... I'd be worried that Tony is going to pull your wings off and stick a pin through you into his mat. Might nnot be a good idea. Those BJJ guys in their own house, ya know...

J/K. Sounds like a good time.

 

[JP3]

I think this is especially true if you accept that Aikido's best performance is as a finishing layer for someone with other training. In that case, the rest of this become a moot point, since the art isn't meant to cover even some of those fundamental areas.

I think I am going to adopt this position.

Aikido is a finishing art. So to speak.

I like that a lot. It helps me to answer Drop's questions about what I'd do, as an aikido guy, aikidoist, aikidoka, aikidoken aikidork, whatever.

Guy comes in throwing bombs, I'm going full Muay Thai on him, with a nice frosting of aikido principles. I'm out of the dude's way, and then he's catching my own stuff obliquely. That's the plan. Funny thing is, that's the plan for everyone with sense, isn't it? Nobody just stands there and gets hit except Rocko...

But, then Gerry... what do we do with beginner students, green as new spring grass, who've never done anything else vefore? And, they really have no interest? It's a knotty problem.

 

[drop bear]

I think I am going to adopt this position.

Aikido is a finishing art. So to speak.

I like that a lot. It helps me to answer Drop's questions about what I'd do, as an aikido guy, aikidoist, aikidoka, aikidoken aikidork, whatever.

Guy comes in throwing bombs, I'm going full Muay Thai on him, with a nice frosting of aikido principles. I'm out of the dude's way, and then he's catching my own stuff obliquely. That's the plan. Funny thing is, that's the plan for everyone with sense, isn't it? Nobody just stands there and gets hit except Rocko...

But, then Gerry... what do we do with beginner students, green as new spring grass, who've never done anything else vefore? And, they really have no interest? It's a knotty problem.

I have made the point though about there is no such things as Aikido principles. There is fighting principles.

Or they are at least different principles.

It is like having a diet that only consists of eating blue food. You can but that is you trying to subjigate reality to your whims.

If you think you are speaking english. You are not. It is french and Russian and chinese. Whatever makes the conversation work.

 

[Chris Parker]

There's a lot that I'd want to say over the last half dozen pages or so, but I'm going to restrict it to one, as I see it, major misunderstanding from quite a number of people here.

Oh, Drop I forgot to mention. According to most, and who am I to argue with them, you can't do aikido close to another person, so you can't do it in a clinch, by definition.

Aikido at its core is a movement art, we move to cause things to happen. If you can stop us from moving, we lose. That simple. So, for most aikido people the clinch means game over. So, the lesson here is... you probably need something else, other than aikido, if you get caught and stopped, or held, or grabbed, or elsewise put in a position where you can't move where you want.

Hmm... hubris, perhaps?

Look, this speaks specifically to what I wanted to talk about, which is the misapplication and misunderstanding of "kuzushi", especially as it pertains to Aikido... because these clips are a very good example of not understanding what the difference is, or why JP3 said that Aikido isn't so useful in the clinch... as what is shown is really nothing like Aikido...

Let's begin with kuzushi... as most people misapply it. To start, the term itself doesn't really mean what is thought by most... nor is it by any means a universal idea. The term kuzushi really refers to "breaking down", and in Judo comes from the terminology of Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu (as does Uke and Tori, for that matter...), and is used there to refer to an initial action applied against a stationary body/opponent in order to break down their structure, and begin to start their momentum towards a direction, which the judo-ka then takes advantage of in order to affect a throw. By contrast, the term kuzushi is used in Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu to refer to the breakdown and application of their (somewhat long) kata, showing the hidden aspects (in a way similar to the karate idea of bunkai.... again, a largely misapplied term).

The thing is, kuzushi is applied when both partners are starting from a stationary, solid, balanced structure and position.... so it's required in arts such as Judo, where the initial position is stationary. There, kuzushi is applied offensively, aiming to take an opponent from balanced and solid to unbalanced and broken (structurally)... but Aikido is approaching things from a different direction. There is no kuzushi, as known and understood in Judo.

This is because, in Aikido, the practitioner doesn't start with the opponent in a stationary position...they're already moving towards you. Aikido is based upon, not upsetting the opponents balance, but taking their incoming energy (movement, momentum, however you want to describe it), extending it, and redirecting it. This means there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place. It's not about doing anything to them, but allowing them to provide their own path to their defeat. If they don't attack, or provide any energy coming in, all good... everyone gets to go home!

This is why even the only "sporting" version of Aikido still has designated attackers and defenders.... typically with the attacker armed with a knife.... but Judo competition doesn't. Judo is offensive as much as defensive... you work to create a throw... Aikido doesn't... it just takes what is given.

Which takes up to the videos above. Neither of them show anything even like Aikido, or Aiki principles in action. As a result, using them to show how correct you are, really doesn't do you any favours, Drop Bear.... all is shows is that, every time you've said you "use Aiki", or have any understanding of it, and are told that you don't, well, it shows that you don't have any understanding of it... and you don't know what it is to know if you use it or not (I'm going to say flat out that you don't, by the way).

In both clips what is shown is more akin to the idea of kuzushi, as seen in Judo... in both cases, Mr Nelson applies pressure to force the opponent to break their structure, and uses some pretty good timing and mechanics to take advantage of their then compromised structure.... but that's not what Aiki is. Aiki would require that the energy/momentum is something that is brought in by the attacker... which is why Aikido operates from a further distance, really.

In other words, Drop.... no, that's not anything like a good or accurate representation of Aikido (or Aiki) being used from the clinch... instead, it's a good example of why Aikido isn't that suitable for clinch work at all.

I have made the point though about there is no such things as Aikido principles. There is fighting principles.

Which would be staggeringly incorrect.

Or they are at least different principles.

I don't have a clue what you're meaning by this... again, there's no context to your comment.... are you saying that the Aikido principles that you don't think exist are different principles, and therefore do exist, or.... huh?

It is like having a diet that only consists of eating blue food. You can but that is you trying to subjigate reality to your whims.

It's really not.

If you think you are speaking english. You are not. It is french and Russian and chinese. Whatever makes the conversation work.

Uh... what? Seriously, what are you talking about? If we think we are speaking English, we're actually speaking Russian? Dude... make some effort to have some kind of context for your ramblings, I beg of you....

 

[drop bear]

There's a lot that I'd want to say over the last half dozen pages or so, but I'm going to restrict it to one, as I see it, major misunderstanding from quite a number of people here.







Hmm... hubris, perhaps?

Look, this speaks specifically to what I wanted to talk about, which is the misapplication and misunderstanding of "kuzushi", especially as it pertains to Aikido... because these clips are a very good example of not understanding what the difference is, or why JP3 said that Aikido isn't so useful in the clinch... as what is shown is really nothing like Aikido...

Let's begin with kuzushi... as most people misapply it. To start, the term itself doesn't really mean what is thought by most... nor is it by any means a universal idea. The term kuzushi really refers to "breaking down", and in Judo comes from the terminology of Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu (as does Uke and Tori, for that matter...), and is used there to refer to an initial action applied against a stationary body/opponent in order to break down their structure, and begin to start their momentum towards a direction, which the judo-ka then takes advantage of in order to affect a throw. By contrast, the term kuzushi is used in Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu to refer to the breakdown and application of their (somewhat long) kata, showing the hidden aspects (in a way similar to the karate idea of bunkai.... again, a largely misapplied term).

The thing is, kuzushi is applied when both partners are starting from a stationary, solid, balanced structure and position.... so it's required in arts such as Judo, where the initial position is stationary. There, kuzushi is applied offensively, aiming to take an opponent from balanced and solid to unbalanced and broken (structurally)... but Aikido is approaching things from a different direction. There is no kuzushi, as known and understood in Judo.

This is because, in Aikido, the practitioner doesn't start with the opponent in a stationary position...they're already moving towards you. Aikido is based upon, not upsetting the opponents balance, but taking their incoming energy (movement, momentum, however you want to describe it), extending it, and redirecting it. This means there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place. It's not about doing anything to them, but allowing them to provide their own path to their defeat. If they don't attack, or provide any energy coming in, all good... everyone gets to go home!

This is why even the only "sporting" version of Aikido still has designated attackers and defenders.... typically with the attacker armed with a knife.... but Judo competition doesn't. Judo is offensive as much as defensive... you work to create a throw... Aikido doesn't... it just takes what is given.

Which takes up to the videos above. Neither of them show anything even like Aikido, or Aiki principles in action. As a result, using them to show how correct you are, really doesn't do you any favours, Drop Bear.... all is shows is that, every time you've said you "use Aiki", or have any understanding of it, and are told that you don't, well, it shows that you don't have any understanding of it... and you don't know what it is to know if you use it or not (I'm going to say flat out that you don't, by the way).

In both clips what is shown is more akin to the idea of kuzushi, as seen in Judo... in both cases, Mr Nelson applies pressure to force the opponent to break their structure, and uses some pretty good timing and mechanics to take advantage of their then compromised structure.... but that's not what Aiki is. Aiki would require that the energy/momentum is something that is brought in by the attacker... which is why Aikido operates from a further distance, really.

In other words, Drop.... no, that's not anything like a good or accurate representation of Aikido (or Aiki) being used from the clinch... instead, it's a good example of why Aikido isn't that suitable for clinch work at all.



Which would be staggeringly incorrect.



I don't have a clue what you're meaning by this... again, there's no context to your comment.... are you saying that the Aikido principles that you don't think exist are different principles, and therefore do exist, or.... huh?



It's really not.



Uh... what? Seriously, what are you talking about? If we think we are speaking English, we're actually speaking Russian? Dude... make some effort to have some kind of context for your ramblings, I beg of you....

You may want to stay away from practical applications of martial arts. You don't have the tool set to understand it.

You just prioritise the wrong things to be able to make it work.

 

[Chris Parker]

You may want to stay away from practical applications of martial arts. You don't have the tool set to understand it.

You just prioritise the wrong things to be able to make it work.

Son, do you have any idea what you're talking about?

 

[JP3]

Chris, before I respond... can you please tell me which line of Aikido you do/practice/teach? Not the specific style, but out from under which student of O-Sensei's did your line come from? I think that's dispositive.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ahh... I'd be worried that Tony is going to pull your wings off and stick a pin through you into his mat. Might nnot be a good idea. Those BJJ guys in their own house, ya know...

J/K. Sounds like a good time.

I fully expect - nay, anticipate - that outcome. My hope is that I can manage to make him sweat for it, just a bit, part of the time. Or maybe I can manage to keep standing, where, let's face it, I'm probably outclassed to a lesser degree.

 

[Martial D]

Hello everyone,
Why does Aikido get so much hate? I realize that BJJ and MMA are very mainstream at the moment, and some of those guys are the biggest Aikido haters out there. No offense. It all boils down to: Did any of the MMA fighters do aikido?" Some people go as far as calling it ********, ineffective, a waste of time, etc. Really? I visited the local Aikido school, and I loved the atmosphere. I'd like to know what your opinion of this art is. I believe most (if not all) arts can be applied in certain scenarios. I have to admit that I am not one of those people that dream of killing/dismantling others. That's the last thing I want to to.

Thank you in advance.

I feel a lot of this has to do with their most visible spokesman being such an utter dbag.

From there it's the interesting phenomenon of couch warriors feeding off each other, where people that have never practiced an art pass judgement based on what they have heard from other couch warriors (who sometimes have a YouTube channel to excellerate the process)

However, and I know this might not be a popular statement, some martial arts just aren't suited to live combat. I've sparred with a few legit aikido guys, and I've yet to be flipped by one.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

aikidork

This is my favorite, BTW. I'm going to start using it to refer to students.

But, then Gerry... what do we do with beginner students, green as new spring grass, who've never done anything else vefore? And, they really have no interest? It's a knotty problem.

That's a bit different in NGA. There's a striking base and a bit of Judo influence in our art. And I'm a bit different from most in NGA, in that students spend a few weeks getting some simple stuff before they get their first NGA technique. I haven't gotten the progression the way I want it yet (just not enough yet iterations in a small program), but the idea is to build a functional foundation for the aiki-based portion of the curriculum.

IMO, this would work with Aikido, as well. If a student comes in without a foundation, a short pre-aiki prep curriculum can give them a functional base to work from. If Ueshiba had taught beginners when he first formed the art, I think we'd see it in the curriculum today.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

The thing is, kuzushi is applied when both partners are starting from a stationary, solid, balanced structure and position.... so it's required in arts such as Judo, where the initial position is stationary. There, kuzushi is applied offensively, aiming to take an opponent from balanced and solid to unbalanced and broken (structurally)... but Aikido is approaching things from a different direction. There is no kuzushi, as known and understood in Judo.

This is because, in Aikido, the practitioner doesn't start with the opponent in a stationary position...they're already moving towards you. Aikido is based upon, not upsetting the opponents balance, but taking their incoming energy (movement, momentum, however you want to describe it), extending it, and redirecting it. This means there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place. It's not about doing anything to them, but allowing them to provide their own path to their defeat. If they don't attack, or provide any energy coming in, all good... everyone gets to go home!

Some thoughts ...

In Judo's Nage no Kata, there is no kuzushi applied to a stationary opponent. Uke provides the initial movement/energy for the throw. Tori just adds a little extra redirection at the moment of execution.

In uchikomi drills, the Judo practitioner does apply kuzushi to a stationary target, however this is a drill to develop certain body mechanics, not application. The receiver does not respond with any realistic attempt to stay rooted.

In application, the Judoka may apply kuzushi to a (relatively) stationary opponent, but that initial kuzushi will not usually produce a throw unless the opponent is unskilled or weaker/smaller. Rather (as I discussed in a previous comment) it's the opponent's reaction to that initial kuzushi which can be exploited to complete a throw. In this case the Judoka is extending and redirecting the opponent's energy, just as an Aikido practitioner might. (The biggest difference is that the Judoka provokes the opponent to provide that energy instead of standing around waiting for it.) More often than not against a skilled practitioner, the Judoka will have to add significant additional force to make sure the opponent is not able to recover before being thrown, but sometimes the timing is just right so that the throw feels effortless like the opponent is doing all the work of throwing himself. That's what I think of as an aiki moment within the Judo realm and at least a couple of Aikido practitioners up-thread seemed to agree with me. Personally I suspect the purpose of the Nage no Kata is to remind Judo practitioners to strive for those moments and I have had other Judo practitioners agree with me on that idea previously.

As far as the idea that in Aikido "there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place", that only works in demonstration with a cooperative uke or sometimes in application with a really incompetent attacker. A competent attacker may provide incoming energy, but they won't break their own structure. The receiver will have to do something to compromise that structure besides just capturing their energy. In many cases, this is where atemi comes in, or should. I suspect the reasoning behind the statement that "atemi is 90% of Aikido" is that without atemi the opponent's structure will not be sufficiently compromised for the Aikido practitioner to just capture their energy and use it. On this theory, atemi in Aikido is primarily for purposes of kuzushi.

Not saying I'm right in all this. I don't practice Aikido and I'm a mediocre Judoka at best. However I've gotten indications that at least some Aikidoin and Judoka agree with me. (Others definitely disagree with me. In conclusion, Aikido is a land of contrasts.)

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I fully expect - nay, anticipate - that outcome. My hope is that I can manage to make him sweat for it, just a bit, part of the time. Or maybe I can manage to keep standing, where, let's face it, I'm probably outclassed to a lesser degree.

I figure I'll pick your brains for what you consider the most important details of your highest percentage aiki techniques. In exchange I'll offer any knowledge I have on any subject that interests you. After that if you want to get a little freestyle action going, that's cool. I always learn a lot from the different energy I get from sparring someone from an unfamiliar style. I'll just keep my inhaler handy so I don't run out of steam too quickly.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I figure I'll pick your brains for what you consider the most important details of your highest percentage aiki techniques. In exchange I'll offer any knowledge I have on any subject that interests you. After that if you want to get a little freestyle action going, that's cool. I always learn a lot from the different energy I get from sparring someone from an unfamiliar style. I'll just keep my inhaler handy so I don't run out of steam too quickly.

That's my inclination, too. I just wouldn't want to miss the opportunity to play. Even when I'm in a situation where I'm certain to lose reliably (like rolling with a BJJ black belt), there's something for me to learn from the nature of the failure.

 

[hoshin1600]

in Aikido "there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place", that only works in demonstration with a cooperative uke or sometimes in application with a really incompetent attacker. A competent attacker may provide incoming energy, but they won't break their own structure. The receiver will have to do something to compromise that structure besides just capturing their energy.

my thought is that in aiki the Tori does break the structure but in a more subtle way than judo. (keep in mind all of these are general statements that do not always apply).
from what i see in Judo there is at times a reversal of force/ energy that facilitates the throw. left to right or front to back. in aiki you dont see that much. you get a more gradual vector that over time/distance the uke loses his structure.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

As far as the idea that in Aikido "there is no kuzushi, as the opponent has already provided the break to their own structure by attacking in the first place", that only works in demonstration with a cooperative uke or sometimes in application with a really incompetent attacker. A competent attacker may provide incoming energy, but they won't break their own structure. The receiver will have to do something to compromise that structure besides just capturing their energy. In many cases, this is where atemi comes in, or should. I suspect the reasoning behind the statement that "atemi is 90% of Aikido" is that without atemi the opponent's structure will not be sufficiently compromised for the Aikido practitioner to just capture their energy and use it. On this theory, atemi in Aikido is primarily for purposes of kuzushi.

Not saying I'm right in all this. I don't practice Aikido and I'm a mediocre Judoka at best. However I've gotten indications that at least some Aikidoin and Judoka agree with me. (Others definitely disagree with me. In conclusion, Aikido is a land of contrasts.)

Hey Tony, enraged, adrenalized attackers wishing great bodily harm or death often provide kuzushi during their attack. Rarely do they attack in a systemized manner or spar. Instead they attack with intention and adrenalize the attacks are usually larger. This is what person practicing Aikido would take advantage of. That or the opponent grabbing them and then applying a larger adrenalized strike. Either case allows an Aikido practitioner to do what they do very well!

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Hey Tony, enraged, adrenalized attackers wishing great bodily harm or death often provide kuzushi during their attack. Rarely do they attack in a systemized manner or spar. Instead they attack with intention and adrenalize the attacks are usually larger. This is what person practicing Aikido would take advantage of. That or the opponent grabbing them and then applying a larger adrenalized strike. Either case allows an Aikido practitioner to do what they do very well!

Yep, that's why I said it sometimes will work in application against an unskilled attacker to rely totally on the attackers energy without any additional kuzushi the way Chris described. The problem is, you can't count on the attacker compromising his own structure that badly every time. You have to be willing to add some kuzushi or atemi to break the opponent's balance when necessary.

 

[drop bear]

Son, do you have any idea what you're talking about?

You did what to my mother?

And yeah i think I have a fair idea what I am talking about here.