Aikido hate

[Flying Crane]

I've sat in to watch classes at three different aikido schools. Two of the three were impressive. One was not. From that brief experience, I saw two thirds of the aikido schools were impressive vs. one third that was not. I would say that the way most aikido is trained is not dumb.

 

[Tez3]

Two of the three were impressive. One was not. From that brief experience, I saw two thirds of the aikido schools were impressive vs. one third that was not

That would be a fair summation of all styles really.

 

[drop bear]

Whatever, DB. What I can't do is have a reasonable argument with someone who really doesn't bother to understand. There are many training tools that aren't competition. There are techniques and methods that don't work in competition and do work elsewhere.

You dont understand competition and the complexity of proccessing the information gained from it.

So you are sort of right with your statement but also sort of wrong.

 

[drop bear]

I'm sorry but I don't understand your question. Is it possible for you to rephrase it for me?

Take Care,
Osu!

There are martial arts that work better than others. I cant just do TKD and think i can compete in wrestling.

 

[drop bear]

Okay, I think I see where you and I are differing on this one, Steve. See, I don't think of the competitive points as where to develop most things (except better live readings). Drills and practice are where we develop the skills, and the competitive element is where we test them out. Given how scarce aiki opportunities are (as I define them) in competition with folks who understand grappling, it's not a particularly good place to develop that feel. In fact, it's more likely to foster folks taking the leverage route rather than the aiki route.

I think I need to take some time and refine how I explain my definition of aiki - it seems to confuse everyone but me when I use words to explain it (meaning they get a different definition from my words than the one I'm trying to give).

As for the variety of competition, I agree with you for the most part. I just have no interest in competitions, so have limited that variety to rolling/sparring/playing with folks from different arts on an informal basis, rather than entering competitions. Competitions add some elements that matter less in a short self-defense encounter (the stamina to stay with someone at my own level for several rounds, for instance). I don't know - maybe if I'd had these discussions 20 years ago, I'd have a different attitude. But I do know people who trained their skills without entering competitions, using other training methods, and developed skills that served them well in real encounters (again, looking mostly at LEO's and bouncers). The real differentiator has been testing their skills in various ways, training with good intensity, and being willing to look for flaws in their technique rather than just polishing endlessly without regard to effectiveness. Most of them had experience in more than one art, giving them a more informed filter for evaluating the techniques and applications in each.

Aiki is so hard a concept? Because of it mystical nature.

 

[drop bear]

I think the point is though, that many Aikido dojo's DO some level of pressure testing, usually in the way of multiple attackers, or sometimes, just one attacker with multiple attacks. Heck, this weekend, after lunch on Saturday at the seminar, one of my Sensei's, a Sandan, and I were stretching out (2 hour lunch breaks are simply too long...get stiff), and all of a sudden he started attacking me.......Didn't tell me which attack, just attack, and I had to respond and throw, and then he would attack again. Did that for like 10 minutes which was a nice way to warm up for the afternoon. It may not be competition, but still, it's not just static practice either.

Which will give you the equivilent level of skill development.

 

[drop bear]

Capoeira is an interesting case. I've been studying the art for about 8-9 months now, with an instructor who definitely regards it as a fighting art and teaches the combative applications. The thing is, it's not just a fighting art. It's also a cultural art and a game. For that reason I wouldn't necessarily recommend it to an average person who just wanted to develop fighting ability as quickly as possible. Some of the time and energy spent on the cultural art/game aspects of the art is time not spent on immediate optimization of fighting skills. (Some of it does have carry-over because it builds physical attributes which are useful for all aspects of the art including fighting.)

Speaking as someone whose primary martial foundation is in BJJ and Muay Thai, I do think that Capoeira will improve my abilities as a fighter, but it will probably always be a supplemental art for me.

BTW - Capoeira and MMA are not mutually exclusive. Only a few fighters have had much success in the cage with pure Capoeira, but these days no one in MMA fights with a pure style. Several high-level MMA fighters have Capoeira skills - Jose Aldo and Conor McGregor come to mind.

It is not conservative. So you can fight a guy who you are better than or is also not fighting conservatively. But if you matched a high percentage fighter of equal skill you would get mangled.

You will probably find that reflected in your BJJ for MMA where you start to play safe and wont jump off mount for that arm bar for example.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One Aikido black belt was my student. One time I gave a public demo, when I threw him, I could feel that he did a jump to help my throw. I asked him why, he told me that all Aikido training involve such cooperation.

All demo are 1/2 fake and 1/2 real. The 1/2 fake is your opponent gives you that opportunity. The 1/2 real is you have to finish it. If your opponent helps you to finish, that's 100% fake by definition.

 

[Ironbear24]

There are martial arts that work better than others. I cant just do TKD and think i can compete in wrestling.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I always thought that too.....Honestly, I didn't even think twice about it. However, apparently, the use of the term doka in Japanese, did not imply what I thought it did?? Maybe the guy was just giving me grief? I dunno. Just what I was told.

We have some folks on here who are pretty knowledgeable about Japanese usage. Maybe one of them can help us out.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Think about something like delivering feedback to a problem employee. We offer soft skills over and over, training management on this fundamental skill. But it really only takes a few minutes to share a feedback model so that the manager gets it. Some degree of role playing or scenario training is very helpful for two main reasons. First, it gives the manager a chance to receive some coaching on the spot. Second, it usually makes clear that talking about what you'd say is way easier than saying it.

But, all that goes away if the skill is never applied in context. The real skill development occurs when a manager is determined to apply the skill, and as they do, they improve.

EDIT: I want to add that following a period of application, additional coaching and feedback can be very effective.

I can't think of a single skill that is learned otherwise, with the sole exception of some "martial arts" or "self defense" skills.

Well, when the context being trained for is self-defense, competition doesn't replicate it any better than well-committed "attacks" in the dojo. Both are approximations. Each has advantages and disadvantages. For me, in the dojo, I can get people to deliver specific attacks to train them, as well as to test them. The guy in the other corner isn't necessarily going to give me what I need to test against. But he will be more surprising than someone I train with all the time, and he's unlikely to wuss out on his attack (unless he just sucks).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I've heard this before, but in 99% of the Aikido demonstrations I see on video, the striking attacks delivered by uke appear to me like they would represent very poor swordmanship body mechanics (as well as being delivered at the wrong range for a sword cut). Admittedly my own sword skills are rudimentary at best, but I see some pretty glaring issues if the attacks are supposed to represent sword cuts. (The defenses against wrist grabs do make more sense if we imagine the context is an attacker trying to prevent your from drawing your sword. I could buy that explanation.)

Have you noticed the same thing? If so, do you think it has something to do with the fact that the majority of Aikido practitioners don't also practice a sword art? I know some people do cross-train with Aikido and a sword art, so I would expect those individuals might teach uke to present a better simulation of a sword based attack.

From what I've heard, the sword skills in Ueshiba's art now are not good (I don't know enough to make that judgment). Without good sword training to back them, they wouldn't be likely to stay solid. Besides that, swinging your arm like there's a sword in it would make a particularly awkward strike, so I think they approximated the motion, while trying to get as close as they could to the strikes in question.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

One Aikido black belt was my student. One time I gave a public demo, when I threw him, I could feel that he did a jump to help my throw. I asked him why, he told me that all Aikido training involve such cooperation.

All demo are 1/2 fake and 1/2 real. The 1/2 fake is your opponent gives you that opportunity. The 1/2 real is you have to finish it. If your opponent helps you to finish, that's 100% fake by definition.

If that's what he was taught, something was missed. In Ueshiba's Aikido, the high/jumping breakfalls actually are for the benefit of the uke, not the audience. They take pressure off joints earlier and give the uke more time to create a softer fall. There's less of that in NGA, simply because of the difference in how we execute techniques. There are only a few places where launching into a fall is useful.

Now, in demonstration, they often amp that up a bit (actually, many grappling schools seem to jump into falls in demo's).

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

many grappling schools seem to jump into falls in demo's.

I have been for my teacher's demo partner for many years. I have not even once to "jump into fall". Even today, I still don't know how to do that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Just find this clip online. At 1.29 and 1.49, the Judo guy uses leg skill "cut" to take his opponent down.

 

[Ironbear24]

Just find this clip online. At 1.29 and 1.49, the Judo guy uses leg skill "cut" to take his opponent down.

I sometimes have trouble with this technique. I find if I don't put my foot higher than he had then they don't fall but stumble back and struggle to catch their balance.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I sometimes have trouble with this technique. I find if I don't put my foot higher than he had then they don't fall but stumble back and struggle to catch their balance.

If you don't control your opponent's upper leg, his knee joint is still free and he can escape out of your "cut". This is why sometime to just control your opponent's lower leg is not good enough. All he needs is just to bend his leg at his knee joint, your cutting leg will go below his knee.

 

[drop bear]

Well, when the context being trained for is self-defense, competition doesn't replicate it any better than well-committed "attacks" in the dojo. Both are approximations. Each has advantages and disadvantages. For me, in the dojo, I can get people to deliver specific attacks to train them, as well as to test them. The guy in the other corner isn't necessarily going to give me what I need to test against. But he will be more surprising than someone I train with all the time, and he's unlikely to wuss out on his attack (unless he just sucks).

No. If you are talking a full contact competition the attacks are not aproximations of attacks. They are attacks.

This sort of misunderstanding is half the issue.

 

[drop bear]

Apples and oranges.

Not if it is the person and not the style.

 

[Psilent Knight]

There are martial arts that work better than others.

I half agree and half disagree. In certain sporting contexts with rules I agree that certain martial arts will work better than others in that setting. In an open bareknuckle, knockdown rules competition I think ITF Taekwondo would fare better than Aikido for example. But in a no rules altercation outside of the dojo or sporting setting then it becomes LESS about the art and MORE about the individuals who are engaged in the altercation.

I cant just do TKD and think i can compete in wrestling.

And vice versa of course. But if a TKD practitioner and a wrestler get involved in a physical altercation with each other and one of them soundly beats the other then that person is a better overall fighter than the guy who got his a-- kicked. I want to reiterate that it is more than just a particular martial art. Much, much more. There are physical attributes that MUST be taken into consideration as well as non physical attributes such as aggression, pain tolerance and fighting experience.

BJ Penn, who is a BJJ specialist, recently got his butt kicked by Yair Rodriguez whose background is TKD. Most uneducated mma fans would have the whole world believing that BJJ is the best thing since sliced bread and that a BJJ specialist would beat a TKD specialist 8 or 9 times out of ten. But Penn lost and lost badly. Does that mean BJJ is worthless and TKD is a better art than BJJ? Of course not. Rodriguez was simply the better fighter and there are REASONS that he was a better fighter. Most of those reasons have to do with Rodriguez having better physical attributes (due to age difference no doubt) and being successful at fighting HIS fight instead of fighting BJ's fight.

In the fight between BJ and Rodriguez it was not TKD being better than BJJ and neither did BJJ lose to TKD. BJ Penn (as an individual fighter) lost to Yair Rodriguez (as an individual fighter).

Take Care and Have Good One Today,
Osu!