Aikido.. The reality?

[jobo]

Yes. It is precisely why.

This is the schedule for Tiger muay thai. Which is a premium MMA training facility.

Training Schedule - Tiger Muay Thai & MMA Training Camp, Phuket, Thailand

It objectively offers a better service.

you cant say it objectively better unless your comparing it to something else, better is a comparative( and subjective) term

it doesnt seem better for either of us being some distance away

 

[jobo]

No. Objectively the sports car is better.

Subjectively you can't drive it.

If you put the same driver in different cars he will perform differently.

no objectively the sports cars isnt better,unless you apply a subjective measure to make it so,

 

[drop bear]

you cant say it objectively better unless your comparing it to something else, better is a comparative( and subjective) term

Better is a measurable term. More facilities. More training opportunities it has produced more successful martial artists it has trainers with better credentials it is bigger.

Real measurable objective differences.

 

[jobo]

Better is a measurable term. More facilities. More training opportunities it has produced more successful martial artists it has trainers with better credentials it is bigger.

Real measurable objective differences.

better is not measurable, it's a value judgement on what you belive is most important and only has any meaning at all when in direct comparison with some like thing

 

[drop bear]

no objectively the sports cars isnt better,unless you apply a subjective measure to make it so,

Subjecive like one is physically faster?

 

[Hanzou]

And this is why the rokus thing is so telling.

He trained to do Aikido for ten years or something. And at the end of that training he could not do the things he was told he would be able to do.

He trained MMA, BJJ and whatever for about a year. And was able to do the things he was told he would be able to do.

And the aims are are pretty similar if you think of them as meta.

Could he punch people, defend punches, throw people on the ground, apply submissions. Could he use someone's weight against them, create a mechanical advantage to become stronger than his opponent. Could he face an unknown opponent in a full contact fight.

All this basic fighting fundamentals that are necessary to win a confrontation.

This is some really simple ideas made really complicated by clever marketing so that people get confused with what they are actually achieving.

it is also telling that people call him a “douche” or ignorant for going through that and bringing his experience public. Interestingly, nothing that happened to Rokas was surprising, it’s only a revelation to people who buy into the nonsense that all martial arts are created equal.

 

[jobo]

Subjecive like one is physically faster?

this is what I'm trying to explain to you

you have immediatly come to the conclusion that faster is better, that's a subjective assessment,

it's not even necessarily true that sports cars are faster than saloon cars

yet you based your answer on two non objective thought processes and reached subjective conclusion

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Also I frankly doubt if Rokas had much success goofing around with his untrained friends.

Based on his initial attempts against the MMA guy, I'd entirely agree.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And this is why the rokus thing is so telling.

He trained to do Aikido for ten years or something. And at the end of that training he could not do the things he was told he would be able to do.

He trained MMA, BJJ and whatever for about a year. And was able to do the things he was told he would be able to do.

And the aims are are pretty similar if you think of them as meta.

Could he punch people, defend punches, throw people on the ground, apply submissions. Could he use someone's weight against them, create a mechanical advantage to become stronger than his opponent. Could he face an unknown opponent in a full contact fight.

All this basic fighting fundamentals that are necessary to win a confrontation.

This is some really simple ideas made really complicated by clever marketing so that people get confused with what they are actually achieving.

I think a lot of this comes down to some pretty habitual mythology in more "traditional" arts (not koryu stuff - I know nearly nothing about them). It's not unusual to hear an instructor saying things that suggest MA works like in the movies. And sometimes this even comes from folks who know better (have heard some of this language from a cop who was also a golden gloves boxer). I think it's a matter of learned speech patterns, and it often doesn't mean the same thing to the instructor (who's saying it) as to the student. Maybe it's because too many instructors really enjoyed the bad MA movies of decades past (I still love to watch those). If there's no resistive training, students get this muddled message. Sometimes they get it even with resistive training.

It's something that can be fixed a couple of ways (I prefer both), and neither are all that hard. First, the instructor can be careful to counter this tendency. Talk about limitations. Talk clearly about how much effort is needed to get some types of results (no student is likely to reach my level without putting in the hours I did - and I'm probably not going to reach my first instructor's level, because he trained like a fiend for decades). Secondly, play with folks outside your school and outside the art/system you're training. Get some resistive training time with folks who know stuff, and get that reality check. Find out who's better than you, and what systems or approaches give you problems.

Without that second step, you can end up creating a next generation of instructors who overbought the capabilities of their training (and perhaps of the system they learned) and now pass that belief on to students who buy into it a bit more.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Subjecive like one is physically faster?

That's a really good measure if you're looking for the fastest car. I like some speed in a car, but beyond a point it's meaningless to me. An old 911 is faster than I'll ever make use of, so a brand new supercar doesn't become any better for me. For Jordon Maron it does, but it's not all about straight-line speed for him (you can supertune many cars to beat a supercar off the line - there's a whole category of "sleeper" cars that are built just for that purpose).

So, we can objectively measure speed, but what we do with that (how we figure it in the definition of "better") isn't objective.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

At 1:20

Thanks for sharing that. Good content, and some things I want to make sure I point out whenever I have students again.

 

[O'Malley]

I understand that, and also thought Tamaki did impressively well all things considered. I would like to see Greg going full blast though. At the end of their friendly back and forth, he didn't break Tamaki's headlock, which assured me that he was just playing around.

Agreed. TBH I think he was underestimating Tamaki and didn't want to embarrass him. Several times he stopped and asked "can I do that to you? Can we go to the ground?" and Tamaki was like "go ahead, it should be my problem!". As much as I'd love to see an aikidoka throw Greg around, we're not there yet. However, I think it's a good start and that aikidoka should emulate guys like Tamaki, if they want to train for functionality.

Indeed, which makes me wonder why they aren't. Also I do believe that Aikido only has one choke? Is that true, and if so why?

My intuition is that, firstly, groundwork was not common at the time and that, secondly, the founder of aikido focused on maintaining mobility so that you're less vulnerable to multiple opponents. This latter reason explains why you don't see much groundwork nor chokes in aikido as they make you less mobile for extended periods of time. BTW it's another reason for not seeing aikido as an art that focuses on joint locks/pins. In aikido, you should ideally be able to disengage and move around at any point of the technique (for example we can jump out of our pins instantly), or change it to suit the circumstances.

There exists a notebook of a Japanese admiral that recounts how Ueshiba took a bunch of folks who knew judo for study sessions and tried to develop counters against judo. Unfortunately, the techniques are lost today and you can't reconstitute them from the notebook so there's no way to see if he actually came up with anything of value. But he was aware of judo's groundwork and chokes, here's him demonstrating one:

I've just started watching some of Chris Hein's videos after seeing his interview with Rokas, he discusses the same training issues and makes the very cogent point that Aikido is its own thing, its own set of skills and that its not something to force into being a swiss army knife for MMA or many of the other mistaken premises that usually frame these discussions. After hearing his interview I'm actually much more optimistic and excited about the whole of the Aikido community and its future in martial arts. The interview is here if you are interested.

I am of the firm opinion that following Chris Hein's teachings is one of the best ways to get worse at aikido. For context, he received permission to teach by the same guy who gave permission to Rokas. I think that Hein's approach completely misses the point. Instead of thinking "ok so here is what is consistently taught in aikido, and here's the context in which it was taught, are my practice and context different?", he thinks "ok this is my practice, how do I make up a context that works for it?". This leads to an afwul lot of mental backflips and shaky rationalisations.

A pretty dumbfounding result of that process is one of his recent drills. A has a sword/weapon, B is unarmed. B mindlessly lunges at A, who has to use aikido to prevent B from hurting him. Yeah.

Another one of my pet peeves with Hein is his complete inconsistency with aikido teachings. He bases most of his technical insights on the premise that "aikido's purpose is to escape/create distance, so we can have a peaceful conversation". This is something he pulled out of his hat, which he presents as the rational interpretation of aikido ("aikido that makes sense"). I'd be open to this innovation if it didn't break one of the core concepts of aikido, which is "irimi" (entering). In aikido, you enter your attacker's attack. Sometimes you enter so deep that you end up behind him. It is one of the core principles of aikido, Ueshiba and about every single disciple of his said so. It's black-and-white clear. It's so anchored in the art that you can trace it back to Takeda's Itto-ryu training. It also makes sense from the point of view of other martial arts. So, if your whole approach revolves around the opposite of irimi, you're not doing aikido.

It would be ok if he had taken responsibility for his creation (and maybe had called it with another name) but the way he presents it as a general interpretation for aikido is harmful for the art. He provides easy answers that may make sense if you don't know better, but actually make you understand the art less. To top it off, he makes up pseudo-Japanese terms that don't have any sense (like "haragi") and he uses some existing terms wrong (e.g. he calls disarms "kaeshi" whereas, for everyone else, "kaeshi" are technique reversals). So, I would avoid him.

Judo, Bjj, Boxing, Wrestling, Muay Thai, Kyokushin, etc. does just in the MMA space. What's the problem with Aikido? Is it a martial art designed for fighting or not? If not, then it should be advertised as such along the lines of Yoga or Tai Chi.

I don't think aikido was designed as a fighting system. At best, it was a body conditioning method that made you a stronger fighter (including by granting you uncanny heaviness, relaxedness and power) and gave you a bunch of general ideas, techniques and principles (e.g. enter, keep mobility, present a smaller target, use weapons, etc.) that you could then refine in application. For several reasons (one of them being the founder's ties with fascist terrorist groups and war criminals), that austere form of training was changed into a social, self-development-bar-gymnastics type of activity.

I believe that most aikido teachers and students are interested in the latter, more peaceful form and that's ok. Most don't even advertise it as self-defense anymore. However, the problem is when you make claims about effectiveness against an attacker, because you have to deliver and people have the means to compare it to MMA.

Cool. Where are the Japanese exponents then who are utilizing the "unpacified" version?

There might be (and some instructors have solid technique, in kata form) but I haven't seen many aikidoka do decently in a live environment (Bruce Bookman and Tamaki being exceptions). Also, the best instructors aren't necessarily in Japan anymore.

Except we have modern exponents of Bjj who are actually superior to the Gracies. Where's the Aikidoka mirroring Ueshiba's martial feats?

I've seen some aikido people replicate some of his body mechanics but no one in sparring.

I give him credit for stepping up to the plate and testing his art on the world stage. I wish others in the Aikido community would do the same.

Same here. The problem is that most don't care, the training methods that have been passed down are very sub-standard, and the talent pool is dwindling. Also, not having competition, or even a technical standard, makes technical development difficult as you can't assess what you're doing.

Hi
Don’t want to derail the discussion, but could you share an example video of the “C” concept (can’t quite visualise it)
Thanks
D

I'd guess it's a form of tenkan?

And this is why the rokus thing is so telling.

He trained to do Aikido for ten years or something. And at the end of that training he could not do the things he was told he would be able to do.

He trained MMA, BJJ and whatever for about a year. And was able to do the things he was told he would be able to do.

And the aims are are pretty similar if you think of them as meta.

Could he punch people, defend punches, throw people on the ground, apply submissions. Could he use someone's weight against them, create a mechanical advantage to become stronger than his opponent. Could he face an unknown opponent in a full contact fight.

All this basic fighting fundamentals that are necessary to win a confrontation.

This is some really simple ideas made really complicated by clever marketing so that people get confused with what they are actually achieving.

Agreed. The disconnect between promises and delivery is aikido's biggest problem.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ok. How many days a week can you train?

Sorry how many days a week is training available.

Because here we have an objective measure that if one place trains 6 days a week and one trains two days a week. The one that trains 6 is offering a better service.

Agreed, if you want to train more days or want that flexibility. That second should be mostly universal, I'd think, though the question is how much it matters to the individual.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yes. It is precisely why.

This is the schedule for Tiger muay thai. Which is a premium MMA training facility.

Training Schedule - Tiger Muay Thai & MMA Training Camp, Phuket, Thailand

It objectively offers a better service.

Better than someplace that offers 3 classes per day? To some folks, yes (those who can use the additional classes). But to someone who works 9-5, all the weekday daytime classes don't actually factor as additional service to them. So we could call it better, but it may not be so for an individual.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Objectively the sports car is better.

Not to me. I don't have much love for sports cars. They are better at going fast and cornering hard, but I don't need a car that can go that fast or corner that hard, and the compromises required to produce that are negatives for me.

So, we're back to "better" being subjective unless we qualify the context. A sports car is almost certainly objectively better on a racetrack than the cars I prefer. I think they are inferior for daily driving.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

"kaeshi" are technique reversals

On a side note, I think you've maybe pointed out a common mis-usage in NGA. We use the term "ura" for reversal. In your understanding is that a mis-use of the term? I suspect we have a number of places where the terms have become loan words with only a shade of their original meaning. Which is fine within the art - words only mean what folks agree they mean.

 

[Hanzou]

but the act of gauging is its self subjective, I dont know how to make it simpler for you

if cosmology for instance has a high degree of subjectivity in it why does the db science of fight assessment not ?

This is how I gauge;

We have a Bjj technique, the Omoplata;

Is it legit? Well let's see. We have the Omoplata in MMA;

Omoplata in a street fight;

Yep, that's a legit technique. Thanks Bjj.

 

[jobo]

This is how I gauge;

We have a Bjj technique, the Omoplata;

Is it legit? Well let's see. We have the Omoplata in MMA;

Omoplata in a street fight;

Yep, that's a legit technique. Thanks Bjj.

what's your defintion of legitimate? that its parents were married !

 

[Hanzou]

I don't think aikido was designed as a fighting system. At best, it was a body conditioning method that made you a stronger fighter (including by granting you uncanny heaviness, relaxedness and power) and gave you a bunch of general ideas, techniques and principles (e.g. enter, keep mobility, present a smaller target, use weapons, etc.) that you could then refine in application. For several reasons (one of them being the founder's ties with fascist terrorist groups and war criminals), that austere form of training was changed into a social, self-development-bar-gymnastics type of activity.

I believe that most aikido teachers and students are interested in the latter, more peaceful form and that's ok. Most don't even advertise it as self-defense anymore. However, the problem is when you make claims about effectiveness against an attacker, because you have to deliver and people have the means to compare it to MMA.

See, people say stuff like this, but here are Aikido schools in Atlanta deliberately advertising itself as a fighting art (I chose Atlanta because I'm currently eating a peach);

Aikido is a Japanese Martial art based on techniques derived from traditional Samurai battle tactics. Developed in the early 20th century by Morihei Ueshiba (known as O’Sensei), Aikido is a purely defensive art. Rather than meeting force with reciprocal force, the practitioner blends with and redirects the power of the attack resulting in the attacker either being thrown or immobilized. Thus, it is the attackers own force and aggression which causes his/her downfall. Because of this principle of “active non-resistance”, Aikido can be effectively performed even against larger, stronger attackers. At the higher levels of the art, it is equally effective against multiple attackers.

Aikido is not a sport or a game. There are no tournaments or competitions. Rather, practice is conducted in a spirit of mutual respect and cooperation. Aikido is distinguished by a highly developed moral code which seeks to protect the assailant while simultaneously neutralizing his will and ability to attack.

While Aikido is an extremely effective martial art, self-defense is considered the foundation rather than the ultimate goal of our practice. Aikido is path or “way” which, if practiced diligently, can enhance all aspects of one’s life.

https://www.aikidocenterofatlanta.com/

So if you know nothing about Martial Arts, this sounds amazing, and an effective tool to protect yourself even against multiple attackers!

Here is another school in the same city;

Aikido is a true budo (pronounced “boo-dough”) or martial way of life, evolved from the historic tradition of Japanese warrior arts into an effective and enlightened form of self-defense. With Aikido, it is possible to subdue a much larger aggressor using minimal effort, but the ultimate goal of Aikido is to resolve conflict safely and effectively without promoting violence to solve problems. When studied in earnest, Aikido is not merely a science of techniques and tactics for self-defense but a discipline for perfecting the spirit.

https://www.peachtreeaikikai.com/aikido

Again we have Aikido being advertised as a form of self-defense, and we get the additional little nugget that you can subdue someone much larger with MINIMAL effort.

If I knew nothing of MA, Aikido would seem like an amazing and effective fighting style that will allow me to subdue multiple opponents with minimal effort. Is it any surprise that we end up with people like Rokas who spend years in the syste, can't accomplish what is advertised, and begin to question the system?

 

[Hanzou]

what's your defintion of legitimate? that its parents were married !

If someone can pull off the Omoplata on their back when a sweaty killer is punching them in the face, then yes I view it as a legitimate technique. Why? Because that means that if I'm on my back and a sweaty killer is punching me in the face, if I do the technique right, I can also potentially pull off the technique and snap their shoulder.