An Aikidoka's controversial journey into MMA: Is it helpful?

[Tony Dismukes]

I will say I think he has the order backwards, but that's not his fault. He'd have been much better off getting a base from something like MMA training, then adding Aikido training on top of that. Then he'd understand how to use that Aikido training properly. I suspect the reason he closed his dojo was that his aim had been to teach effective counter-fighting (defensive fighting). He found out he didn't really have that to teach, so he's gone back to school. Once he gains some real ability at fighting, I suspect some of his Aikido will start to show up again. He might even end up teaching again, offering Aikido (or at least some of the principles) as an advanced add-on.

In one of Ramsey Dewey's videos he mentions a student of his who holds a black belt in Aikido. One day Ramsey was watching the student spar and the guy pulls of some spectacular Aikido throw. (Ramsey doesn't specify exactly which one it was, but says it was one of those impressive ones that you never seem to see in free sparring.) Afterwards, Ramsey commented on it and his student responded that "Aikido only works when you already know how to fight. That's why I came to you - to learn how to fight."

 

[now disabled]

I don't know where to go with that,??? Does that mean that some where there is a GREAT a aikido fighter who could take on a good mma fighter using aikido and at least make a contest of it, ? Is this an actual identifiable person or a myth like say dragons, or just a conclusion that in a universe of infinite possibilities such a person must exist, possibly as close as a few million light years away

No just you ain't gonna see a classical Aikidoka in a ring lol ....at least I wouldn't think so

 

[now disabled]

You're right, only evidence would change it. I would imagine you are the same way about every other subject but this one.

Ok your right as always and the barb was not needed buy hey ho thats your way

 

[now disabled]

In one of Ramsey Dewey's videos he mentions a student of his who holds a black belt in Aikido. One day Ramsey was watching the student spar and the guy pulls of some spectacular Aikido throw. (Ramsey doesn't specify exactly which one it was, but says it was one of those impressive ones that you never seem to see in free sparring.) Afterwards, Ramsey commented on it and his student responded that "Aikido only works when you already know how to fight. That's why I came to you - to learn how to fight."

Now that I would agree with

 

[Martial D]

Ok your right as always and the barb was not needed buy hey ho thats your way

It wasn't a ''barb". I was assuming you were a reasonable person that forms his beliefs based on evidence and experience rather than a desire to believe. Am I wrong?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I don't know where to go with that,??? Does that mean that some where there is a GREAT a aikido fighter who could take on a good mma fighter using aikido and at least make a contest of it, ? Is this an actual identifiable person or a myth like say dragons, or just a conclusion that in a universe of infinite possibilities such a person must exist, possibly as close as a few million light years away

It's possible there is. My point is that it'd take an exceptional example to use purely the "aiki" side of things against a good fighter. It needs the foundation of fighting basics, so that you don't have to rely solely upon the aiki aspects. Reports from early Aikido suggest that some of those guys had that kind of ability, but it's hard to know how accurate any of that was, and how much was staged.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Using a Gracie is ummm wwell picking the cream of the top is it not

Royce Gracie is a very good BJJ fighter (much better than I am) and deserves credit for being one of the pioneers in modern MMA. That said, he's not one of the toughest Gracies and he was never one of the top BJJ competitors. There were plenty of non-Gracie BJJ practitioners in his generation who were better than he was. The boxer Royce beat in UFC 1 (Art Jimmerson) was arguably more experienced and accomplished in boxing at the time than Royce was in BJJ,

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Suwari waza isn't really ground tech and I doubt if folks would see it as ground tech

If it's on the ground, it's ground technique, from my point of view. In other words, if it's not standing (leaving kneeling, lying down, sitting), then it's useful for recovery from being put on the ground.

 

[now disabled]

It wasn't a ''barb". I was assuming you were a reasonable person that forms his beliefs based on evidence and experience rather than a desire to believe. Am I wrong?

Look Bro i cannot give you the vid evidence you desire ....if I start quoting tech names at you you'll just pop off find a dojo or demo vid and come back and say nope crap doesn't work ....so no matter what I say it never going to satisfy you ....

 

[now disabled]

Royce Gracie is a very good BJJ fighter (much better than I am) and deserves credit for being one of the pioneers in modern MMA. That said, he's not one of the toughest Gracies and he was never one of the top BJJ competitors. There were plenty of non-Gracie BJJ practitioners in his generation who were better than he was. The boxer Royce beat in UFC 1 (Art Jimmerson) was arguably more experienced and accomplished in boxing at the time than Royce was in BJJ,

Yeah what I was getting at was pulling that family into this was strange as the guy in the vid ain't no pro

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In one of Ramsey Dewey's videos he mentions a student of his who holds a black belt in Aikido. One day Ramsey was watching the student spar and the guy pulls of some spectacular Aikido throw. (Ramsey doesn't specify exactly which one it was, but says it was one of those impressive ones that you never seem to see in free sparring.) Afterwards, Ramsey commented on it and his student responded that "Aikido only works when you already know how to fight. That's why I came to you - to learn how to fight."

Great example. I agree with his statement, entirely.

 

[now disabled]

If it's on the ground, it's ground technique, from my point of view. In other words, if it's not standing (leaving kneeling, lying down, sitting), then it's useful for recovery from being put on the ground.

Hmmm ok but suwari waza ok I get your point ....I just don't look on it as ground tech as it has a specific set to it as in either seiza or hisa and yes if your in that and a person comes at you then ok but if you are on the ground atually "wrestling then I don't see it having alot of bearing yeah ok you can still try and do locks but well I can't see it as total ground work and I am the defender of Aikido

 

[Martial D]

Look Bro i cannot give you the vid evidence you desire ....if I start quoting tech names at you you'll just pop off find a dojo or demo vid and come back and say nope crap doesn't work ....so no matter what I say it never going to satisfy you ....

That is also correct, and this is nothing against you or against aikido, or anyone, but if a claim runs contrary to my experience I'm going to need actual evidence to change my mind.

Anyhow, I understand the emotional investment you have in this. You trained aikido for a good amount of years right? I was in your same boat once, defending classical WC to anyone that would listen. I get it.

 

[jobo]

It's possible there is. My point is that it'd take an exceptional example to use purely the "aiki" side of things against a good fighter. It needs the foundation of fighting basics, so that you don't have to rely solely upon the aiki aspects. Reports from early Aikido suggest that some of those guys had that kind of ability, but it's hard to know how accurate any of that was, and how much was staged.

Like I say I don't know where to go with your point or really what point your trying to make, there are exceptional people around in all sports, I can point a finger at them, saying for instance that it would take an exceptional athlete to run a 100 in 5 seconds is both true and pointless as that athlete has not this far existed, oit side of fantasy comics..

So if your point is, that this exceptional person exists where/ who is he or she, if your admitting in a convoluted way that they don't actually exist, then say so.

Your other point is if you mix aikido with other ma, it becomes effective, I'm accept that as truth, but that then still calls for a working example and begs the question why aikido with out the mix

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Hmmm ok but suwari waza ok I get your point ....I just don't look on it as ground tech as it has a specific set to it as in either seiza or hisa and yes if your in that and a person comes at you then ok but if you are on the ground atually "wrestling then I don't see it having alot of bearing yeah ok you can still try and do locks but well I can't see it as total ground work and I am the defender of Aikido

I’d consider it ground technique, but covering only a very small subset of the ground fighting context.

 

[now disabled]

I’d consider it ground technique, but covering only a very small subset of the ground fighting context.

Yes but it limited ...if you in hiza and a person comes at you from standing then yes it has it's techs there for sure and nothing really in the tech arsenal from standing cannot be really applied from hiza ...but if you have been taken down then I don't see anything in what I know that would get me outta the crap like you could with your background

 

[now disabled]

I’d consider it ground technique, but covering only a very small subset of the ground fighting context.

I'm trying to think of a situation where if I went into hiza it would be of any real advantage except for possibly taking away the chance for leg grabs ??? as really the ground is the last place I wanna be truly

 

[Martial D]

I'm trying to think of a situation where if I went into hiza it would be of any real advantage except for possibly taking away the chance for leg grabs ??? as really the ground is the last place I wanna be truly

I find it helpful to work things from the knees against a standing opponent.its a very common transitionary ground position, either having been forced there, gone there willingly and it didn't go according to plan(like say if you shoot a double and get sprawled on), or if you are on your way back to your feet from the ground.

The one thing about position is you don't always get to pick. It's good to drill from all positions you very well might end up in to save you from being smashed in those positions later.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hmmm ok but suwari waza ok I get your point ....I just don't look on it as ground tech as it has a specific set to it as in either seiza or hisa and yes if your in that and a person comes at you then ok but if you are on the ground atually "wrestling then I don't see it having alot of bearing yeah ok you can still try and do locks but well I can't see it as total ground work and I am the defender of Aikido

As I said, it lacks the "on your back" stuff, but the suwari waza gives a framework for learning to fight from other ground positions. The same basic principles that can be adapted from standing technique can be adapted from suwari waza, as well. It's unlikely to look like the training drills from suwari waza, but it's there.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Like I say I don't know where to go with your point or really what point your trying to make, there are exceptional people around in all sports, I can point a finger at them, saying for instance that it would take an exceptional athlete to run a 100 in 5 seconds is both true and pointless as that athlete has not this far existed, oit side of fantasy comics..

So if your point is, that this exceptional person exists where/ who is he or she, if your admitting in a convoluted way that they don't actually exist, then say so.

Your other point is if you mix aikido with other ma, it becomes effective, I'm accept that as truth, but that then still calls for a working example and begs the question why aikido with out the mix

I thought I made my point pretty clearly. Aikido - when stripped down to the classical and entirely aiki stuff - is at a handicap.

You seem to be taking my statement to be something it's not.