Aikido.. The reality?

[Hanzou]

My belief (from the outside, trying to decipher a logical path to what I see now) is that randori seen in Aikido was originally all about movement. That makes sense of the fact that the "attackers" don't really use any significant skill - they're just feeding attacks while using movement to force the subject to work on movement. I don't think that's how it's seen by most of the Aikidoka I've been around, but that's my view of it. And I think it's pretty good for that purpose, and is probably one of the more useful tools for developing movement to control a multiple-opponent scenario (where movement, controlling distance, and keeping as many as possible in front of you are important). If there were also Judo-style randori at other times, I wouldn't have an issue with this drill.

There's a similar principle in Bjj and Judo where the movement and motion of an exercise during randori can be interpreted into multiple types of actual attacks. In Bjj a major example of this would be positional dominance, where even though there isn't any striking, the basic principle is still sound, so you can easily apply the principles you learned in randori practice to a real situation.

From what I'm seeing in Aikido randori, the general forward movement can be interpreted as a punch, a charge, a kick, a tackle attempt, etc. Thus during randori you can do this forward charging attack and practice the principle, and then use this principle in a self defense situation. However, the foundation of this principle appears to be flawed, because it doesn't take into account the boxing style striking that is employed by modern martial arts, and instead relies on the style of striking commonly found in traditional Japanese and Chinese martial arts.

I also think there's some discussion of the efficiency of training (this is what I think whenever someone starts talking about years-in-service, comparing two arts, as has happened in this thread). Literally everyone I know who is involved in Aikido will readily state that Aikido is the long path (even when done "right", as I would define that). I don't know if it always was, but that's the expectation now. It's part of the identify of the art, I think. Unfortunately, having that view of an art likely removes most incentives to improve on training practices.

And even that is a dubious metric, because I'm not seeing any ancient Aikido wizards effortlessly tossing people around either.

 

[Hanzou]

I think the most absurd Aikido was from Tohei Koichi . If people believe this they will get badly hurt or killed outside on the streets.

If Aikido labeled itself as a spiritual exercise instead of functional martial art, stuff like this wouldn't be a problem.

If you're doing stuff like this and claiming to be a functional martial art, then yeah that's a problem.

 

[RagingBull]

If Aikido labeled itself as a spiritual exercise instead of functional martial art, stuff like this wouldn't be a problem.

If you're doing stuff like this and claiming to be a functional martial art, then yeah that's a problem.

yeah i agree... i remember the first Aikido group i visited near where i live. The Aikido "master" really wanted to be treated like some kind of Guru.
was like he was the big master.. he said to me, "we must be the better human being and not hurt the aggressor". I thought WTF? it was like dancing around the mats. I mean i get that the partner has to go with the technique in Aikido to practice. One of his students was a real jerk and when i tried to do anything he just purposely messed it up. I eventually just said to him if you carry on i will punch your face in. he moved away and was never my partner again. was a freak thought he was some spirituell god or something. was weird. I guess i am just a down to earth guy. anyway... the other group Iwama Ryu were better. normal people and it was fun to train but not for self defence.
I suppose the mentality of the Sensei rubs off on their students.

 

[RagingBull]

Bottom line is Aikido was changed from Daito Ryu to...Aiki Budo.... then Aikido as we know it today. The founder of Aikido wanted it to be spirtiuell & not for real fighting. The only Aikido i really think is of any use to a Caveman like me is Tomiki Aikido.

 

[RagingBull]

even then the Tanto Randori raises question marks . Look at the 1:53 mark.
A knife is very fast can change an angle in a split second. I see his Randori as competition. maybe useful for other things but if you have any chance against a knife in my opinion, escrima,kali...etc.

 

[JowGaWolf]

So if Aikido isn't geared towards fighting, what is it geared towards?

Once I can get an honest answer about this then I'll know what aspects of fighting it applies to. I'm not willing to accept an answer "just because someone says so. It has "to add up when I do the math." I'm fine with it having an indirect or direct effect on fighting so long as it "adds up" realistically. If it doesn't make sense realistically then either I'm looking at it correctly or the person who is telling me is incorrect about the interpretation.

I don't like complications in my martial arts. If something looks complicated in the context of fighting then usually something isn't being interpreted correctly either by the person telling me or by me. That's the positive side of thing. The negative side of things is that someone is full of it.

How can it make claims that a smaller/weaker person can beat a larger/strong person if it isn't geared towards fighting?

Once I understand more about some of the basics and foundations of Aikido, the better that I'll be able to answer this. I don't know if this is something that is based on assumptions from what they saw in video footage of Morihei Ueshiba or if this was actually something the founder said and believed. People automatically assume that someone who is smaller is also weaker and that's not always the case. I have tons of idea of why this is said and not all of it is good. I'll I'll just focus on the simple stuff for now. If the simple stuff can't be explained, then I don't think something as difficult as being effective as a person is smaller and weaker can be explained.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The founder of Aikido wanted it to be spirtiuell & not for real fighting.

Yeah anything spiritual is a complexity within itself, adding fighting to it just adds to the many doors of misrepresentations, assumptions, and opportunities to mislead. Trying to find "real spirituality" among a world willing to misuse it, can be very challenging. The same can be said about a good TMA martial arts school that actually focuses on fighting application.

 

[RagingBull]

Once I can get an honest answer about this then I'll know what aspects of fighting it applies to. I'm not willing to accept an answer "just because someone says so. It has "to add up when I do the math." I'm fine with it having an indirect or direct effect on fighting so long as it "adds up" realistically. If it doesn't make sense realistically then either I'm looking at it correctly or the person who is telling me is incorrect about the interpretation.

I don't like complications in my martial arts. If something looks complicated in the context of fighting then usually something isn't being interpreted correctly either by the person telling me or by me. That's the positive side of thing. The negative side of things is that someone is full of it.

Once I understand more about some of the basics and foundations of Aikido, the better that I'll be able to answer this. I don't know if this is something that is based on assumptions from what they saw in video footage of Morihei Ueshiba or if this was actually something the founder said and believed. People automatically assume that someone who is smaller is also weaker and that's not always the case. I have tons of idea of why this is said and not all of it is good. I'll I'll just focus on the simple stuff for now. If the simple stuff can't be explained, then I don't think something as difficult as being effective as a person is smaller and weaker can be explained.

it´s as simple as this a smaller guy can win because he is from nature more aggressive & probably has more fights under his belt. real fights not Dojo dancing. We can talk about physics all day , leverage ..etc but bottom line is a guy like say Gozo Shioda would never beat Mike Tyson in his prime !

 

[JowGaWolf]

even then the Tanto Randori raises question marks . Look at the 1:53 mark.
A knife is very fast can change an angle in a split second. I see his Randori as competition. maybe useful for other things but if you have any chance against a knife in my opinion, escrima,kali...etc.

out of all of the Randori. I dislike the Tanto Randori the most

 

[JowGaWolf]

it´s as simple as this a smaller guy can win because he is from nature more aggressive & probably has more fights under his belt. real fights not Dojo dancing. We can talk about physics all day , leverage ..etc but bottom line is a guy like say Gozo Shioda would never beat Mike Tyson in his prime !

I'm not asking how a smaller person can defeat a larger person. I'm asking how does Aikido interpret this

For example, If I teach a class on manipulating people, then me saying that a smaller weaker person can defeat a larger stronger person doesn't have the same interpretation.

If I teach a class on gun self-defense then it changes again.

 

[RagingBull]

out of all of the Randori. I dislike the Tanto Randori the most

it´s laughable when some Senseis say ..yeah we take his wrist & do this & that. A knife moves so fast & cuts quickly. look at some of these guys in jails with "shanks" stab a guy 10 times in seconds. people need to realise this !

 

[RagingBull]

I'm not asking how a smaller person can defeat a larger person. I'm asking how does Aikido interpret this

they say in my opinion it´s with KI or centrifugal force. like a spinning top.

 

[RagingBull]

If I teach a class on gun self-defense then it changes again.

this is not your original question it was about Aikido. weapons are a totally different animal. I am sure you know this as you edited your post.
sure in Aikido you have ken,jo,tanto but a gun or a knife is totally different.
even in these modern times the British Army still teaches Bayonet drills & the japanese called it Junkendo. not Aikido.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If Aikido labeled itself as a spiritual exercise instead of functional martial art, stuff like this wouldn't be a problem.

I think a more honest label is needed as well. TMA schools seem to get into trouble along similar lines. Some people are up front about which makes it easier for people who are interested in stuff like that to find them.

 

[RagingBull]

old video with the SLR but still tought even today & for good reason.

 

[Martial D]

While some people will overextend those who train mentally and physical aren't going to overextend.

Chaotic fight, The first guy to attack doesn't over extend. Through the chaos he keeps good footwork and a solid stance. Good luck on trying to make someone like that overextend. First thing he's going to do is use is footwork to close the gap so he doesn't have to overextend

Again. He doesn't overextend

When people specifically train into habit not to overextend, it's going to be very difficult to make them do so.

I think if you trained with real resistance your views would be different. I can find you a bunch of videos of one punch knockouts too, but that doesn't mean it will unfold that way every time.

 

[Hanzou]

Once I can get an honest answer about this then I'll know what aspects of fighting it applies to. I'm not willing to accept an answer "just because someone says so. It has "to add up when I do the math." I'm fine with it having an indirect or direct effect on fighting so long as it "adds up" realistically. If it doesn't make sense realistically then either I'm looking at it correctly or the person who is telling me is incorrect about the interpretation.

I don't like complications in my martial arts. If something looks complicated in the context of fighting then usually something isn't being interpreted correctly either by the person telling me or by me. That's the positive side of thing. The negative side of things is that someone is full of it.

Once I understand more about some of the basics and foundations of Aikido, the better that I'll be able to answer this. I don't know if this is something that is based on assumptions from what they saw in video footage of Morihei Ueshiba or if this was actually something the founder said and believed. People automatically assume that someone who is smaller is also weaker and that's not always the case. I have tons of idea of why this is said and not all of it is good. I'll I'll just focus on the simple stuff for now. If the simple stuff can't be explained, then I don't think something as difficult as being effective as a person is smaller and weaker can be explained.

We can look at the demonstrations and randori to see what aspect of fighting it applies to, and what the ideal of Aikido application is. You fight like you train.

This really isn't as difficult as you're trying to make it out to be.

 

[RagingBull]

This really isn't as difficult as you're trying to make it out to be.

he´s a thinker/philosopher not a practioner
but what ..if...or maybe this.... meanwhile he is dying

 

[Martial D]

So.. following the logic contained in jowgawolfs posts ..

Ballet is a system. Since it's a system with scripted movements it would be good for fighting, it just needs to be trained that way.

If ballet dancers can't fight, it's not that ballet isn't a good way of fighting, it's that the dancers aren't trying hard enough.

Extreme example? Maybe. Maybe not. Aikido has far more in common with ballet(scripted cooperative dance) than it does with fighting.

 

[JowGaWolf]

this is not your original question it was about Aikido. weapons are a totally different animal. I am sure you know this as you edited your post.
sure in Aikido you have ken,jo,tanto but a gun or a knife is totally different.
even in these modern times the British Army still teaches Bayonet drills & the japanese called it Junkendo. not Aikido.

I was just giving examples of how "a smaller person can defeat a larger person." If focus of Aikido is spiritual then "a smaller person beating a larger stronger person" may not even relate to fighting.