Aikido hate

[Gerry Seymour]

You need a set of kudo hats.

I have one set of headgear similar to that. I thought I'd be able to wear my glasses under it, so I could spar with glasses on and allow head/face shots. Didn't work out. I'm still thinking it'll be useful for allowing face shots in more of the sparring sessions (troublesome for folks who have office jobs to go in with black eyes).

 

[Steve]

but we are back at the beginning. I would expect my oppoinent to over commit over extend and go of balance, coz that's what 90% of people will do. My techniques' will deal with that with ease, if they are using tight compact techniques'. Il give up and hand over my wallet. Because I am going to lose anyway. I am as you put it training for the street , why would I worry about defending against a trained fighter

Wait. I'm confused. I thought on the street, losing isn't an option.

 

[jobo]

Wait. I'm confused. I thought on the street, losing isn't an option.

let's have a reality check, there are people who will make mince meat of me and just about every other poster on here, all you can do is train physically and tecneque wise so that these people represent a small % of the population. And then rely on the fact that if you don't go round annoying people to the point where they want to hurt you, you are extremly unlikely to be attacked by them

 

[Steve]

let's have a reality check, there are people who will make mince meat of me and just about every other poster on here, all you can do is train physically and tecneque wise so that these people represent a small % of the population. And then rely on the fact that if you don't go round annoying people to the point where they want to hurt you, you are extremly unlikely to be attacked by them

Don't tell self defense guys that. They will excoriate you. The idea is, if you lose on the street, you die!!!

I've said the same thing you say above, and it really works them up.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Don't tell self defense guys that. They will excoriate you. The idea is, if you lose on the street, you die!!!

I've said the same thing you say above, and it really works them up.

What he says is true (had to view ignored content to see what you were talking about, Steve), though I question the logic in his earlier post. He implies he'd go physical before giving up his wallet, then try to give up the wallet if the other guy was more skilled. That's not going to work.

I'd give up the wallet if there was any real threat of violence that might be averted. No sense risking it, because (as is the actual point SD folks try to make) there's always a chance it goes south and someone ends up badly hurt or worse. And if you can't avert the violence, you don't get to back down because the other guy is better. My mindset for that moment is something a friend shared with me from Silat de Thouars (I think I spelled that right). It goes something like this: "I don't care what you have, who you are, or how good you are. It doesn't matter. You've forced me to act, and now I must destroy you." Okay, the last part is a bit over-the-top for my mindset, but if the attacker turns out to be highly skilled and presents a real danger, I'd do as much destruction as necessary to end it. He might finish me off, but he'll have to go through everything I have to do it.

 

[jobo]

What he says is true (had to view ignored content to see what you were talking about, Steve), though I question the logic in his earlier post. He implies he'd go physical before giving up his wallet, then try to give up the wallet if the other guy was more skilled. That's not going to work.

I'd give up the wallet if there was any real threat of violence that might be averted. No sense risking it, because (as is the actual point SD folks try to make) there's always a chance it goes south and someone ends up badly hurt or worse. And if you can't avert the violence, you don't get to back down because the other guy is better. My mindset for that moment is something a friend shared with me from Silat de Thouars (I think I spelled that right). It goes something like this: "I don't care what you have, who you are, or how good you are. It doesn't matter. You've forced me to act, and now I must destroy you." Okay, the last part is a bit over-the-top for my mindset, but if the attacker turns out to be highly skilled and presents a real danger, I'd do as much destruction as necessary to end it. He might finish me off, but he'll have to go through everything I have to do it.

why not, people who steal wallets for a living are lazy, why would they expend additional effort, risk someone coming to your aid or being a witness if they already have what they want,

 

[JP3]

So I get to deal with a much larger range of circumstances with a smaller range of strategies. And while none of my strategies will be considered neat-O they will be more likely to work.

I take that personally, Drop. Making fun of my attempts to euphemize, that's not right. I am stung.

However, a light when on. I think I've figured out the disconnect.

Everyone trains for trained fighters. At least, they should, imo. But, we talk about the mistakes untrained people make... we talk about that all the time. When? When we're converting untrained fighters into trained fighters, that's when. In class, training, sparring, mat time, free-roll, whatever it is. A student, training partner, whoever... does something incorrectly, we talk about why it's wrong, why it can be taken advantage of, how to fix it etc. So, the whole, entire time we're training people we are experiencing, talking about, and training to deal with untrained fighters.... while at the same time we are creating, and therefore having to learn to deal with, trained fighters.

At the core, the only difference between a trained fighter and an untrained one is fewer mistakes. We're agreed that if I/you/he/she can deal with the trained guy, then the untrained guy is/should be easier/simpler. There truly is no difference in what you're saying, and what, for example, Gerry is saying. You two are standing on the edge of a piece of paper arguing about which side is flat. They both are.

 

[JP3]

If you can pull that off I would be more convinced your theory could work..

OK, with all the back and forth this thread has undergone since it's creation, I've lost track.

Exactly what is "my theory?" In the 61 pages of this treatise, I think I've forgotten if I postulated something or other. If you'll remind me, I can reply, after being reminded. I really don't think I posted a theory. Anecdotes, sure.

 

[JP3]

Yeah well Geoff doesn't.

Do you really think he doesn't Know it? Or, is it that he just doesn't care about the risks of doing it the way he does it?

For me the best way was to always stand and talk, out of reach, focusing the other's attention on me.... while 2, maybe 3 of my other guys got in place behind them. For me, that's optimum. Granted, it doesn't always work out that way, meaning... into the breach you go. if you go down the barrel, you'd better get there before the other guy pulls the trigger.

 

[JP3]

Yep. The kind of stuff most of us would consider basics.

Back when I was bouncing, the most common... problem... if you will, with my other guys who were working with me (only one of them had any MA training, and his was kid-Judo, no striking at all, though he was still good at it) was to get too close, and stay there, engaging witht he person Way inside range.

And then they'd say, after the fight, which their position basically provoked, "Did you see that guy swing at me?"

Well, yeah, dumb-a$$ I did.

Just stay away from them, you don't even have to be far. One full walking stride is more than enough. They don't get the sense that you are pressing them and they "have" to react, they're not close enough to you that you'll get hit before you can move.

As you stated. Basics. Problems, basics... have to be learned.

New guy: "Man, John... I've never seen you get hit."
JP3: "Because I'm not standing where you're standing, that's why."

It ain't rocket science.

 

[JP3]

And you don't realise any of this which is why you think my comments are strawmen or irrelevant or mean or I am just too damn blond. Or whatever.

Let's try this again, after a re-boot. Maybe it'll work.

OK! Clarification sought....

"Blond?"

Did you mean Blind... or Blonde? Either one works, but the sub-text isn't the same.

 

[JP3]

Can I become an aikido intructor from watching videos? I would first need a grounding in Aikido.

Left turn... that made me remember those ads int he back of the Black Belt and/or Inside Karate magazines.

"Buy Master So & So's 10 VHS Tape Set and Become a Lethal Black Belt in just SIX MONTHS of at-home training!"

Made me laugh... carry on...

 

[JP3]

And yes I know guys who have used capo and some really inadvisable BJJ in the street.

First, what is roda, or a roda?

Next... why did those guys try that stuff "outside?" Intentionally not using "street" as people get wound up by that word.

 

[JP3]

Except that I've pointed out several times where you are, in fact, arguing against something I've not said - the very definition of "strawman argument".

Is it? The definition of strawman argument, I mean. Some of y'all use that term on here, and I admit to confusion. For me, the "Strawman" is a false front" acquisition of something, usually a business or piece of real property by a person using a shell entity, or front, or even another person with an agreement to pass the item/thing's ownership on after the hubbub goes down.

 

[jobo]

At the core, the only difference between a trained fighter and an untrained one is fewer mistakes. We're agreed that if I/you/he/she can deal with the trained guy, then the untrained guy is/should be easier/simpler. There truly is no difference in what you're saying, and what, for example, Gerry is saying. You two are standing on the edge of a piece of paper arguing about which side is flat. They both are.

I'm not sure that's true, there is an obvious bias on here that untrained fighter are an easier proposition.

example one
billy is an 280lb 6.2 chap. He is over weight, but has biceps in the 25" range. He spends all his time that he is not in the pub in hos home gym lifting weights and partakes in steroid use. He is slow moving but incredibly strong, if he actually get hold of you he will throw you about like a rag doll.

example two, jimmy is a supper fit 25yo, he plays football all winter and tennis all summer. He has fantastic cardio abilites, super fast reactions and great hand foot/ eye co ordination

both of these will give a "trained fighter a good run for their money. unless of Couse. He is stronger than billy and faster than jimmy

 

[JP3]

I have literally zero videos of any of my training.

Here's one, not me but a couple of my students. She's working her way up to dealing with full-power strikes in this.

 

[JP3]

I'm not sure that's true, there is an obvious bias on here that untrained fighter are an easier proposition.

example one
billy is an 280lb 6.2 chap. He is over weight, but has biceps in the 25" range. He spends all his time that he is not in the pub in hos home gym lifting weights and partakes in steroid use. He is slow moving but incredibly strong, if he actually get hold of you he will throw you about like a rag doll.

example two, jimmy is a supper fit 25yo, he plays football all winter and tennis all summer. He has fantastic cardio abilites, super fast reactions and great hand foot/ eye co ordination

both of these will give a "trained fighter a good run for their money. unless of Couse. He is stronger than billy and faster than jimmy

Agreed.

The course of prudence would suggest buying Billy a beer or 7 and telling him jokes rather than provoking him.... get him on your side. As for Jimmy, introduce him to your little sister as long as Jimmy isn't douchey.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Is it? The definition of strawman argument, I mean. Some of y'all use that term on here, and I admit to confusion. For me, the "Strawman" is a false front" acquisition of something, usually a business or piece of real property by a person using a shell entity, or front, or even another person with an agreement to pass the item/thing's ownership on after the hubbub goes down.

Yeah, that's the same principle. A strawman argument is when one puts forth an argument against something that's not the other person's stance. For instance, if you and I were debating whether someone would be better knowing only ground grappling (your stance) or only strikes (my stance). Let's say I'm making strong arguments about being able to end an attack without having to be on the ground in 80% of cases. You reply, "So, you're saying that only 20% of attacks ever end up with someone going to the ground?" It's not what I said, of course - I said that's the portion we could prevent from getting to the ground with expert striking. But arguing against the strawman is easier, so now you dig in and prove that more than 20% of attacks end up on the ground.

 

[drop bear]

I have one set of headgear similar to that. I thought I'd be able to wear my glasses under it, so I could spar with glasses on and allow head/face shots. Didn't work out. I'm still thinking it'll be useful for allowing face shots in more of the sparring sessions (troublesome for folks who have office jobs to go in with black eyes).

You get less black eyes after a while. And I have found nobody really cares that much. Hell we train with a model. And she spars.

Otherwise yeah make them wear the hat if they are that concerned.

 

[drop bear]

First, what is roda, or a roda?

Next... why did those guys try that stuff "outside?" Intentionally not using "street" as people get wound up by that word.

Either they believed their own hype or just got caught up in the moment or just thought it would be fun to try.

I have done it before. Pulled off a rolling guillotine once. But probably came close to killing the guy as I had the neck crank in mount when three bouncers jumped on me trying to help. I had to pop into a head stand to save his neck. And then got stuck there.

But otherwise so many failed wrist lock throws and arm lock attempts. Because I believed as Gpseymor does that the punch will be obvious and sit out there. For me to do something neat-O with.

It took a few to realise that it is a technique that you have to bait and then know its coming then hope you haven't messed it up. And quite simply save it for the sort of gumby you really didn't need to fight anyway.

And most of that was the training. You start with. Punch me as fast as you can with your right hand at my head when I am ready. And then watch my cool move.

Even resisted that can be pulled off. But it is a sham.