Does Steven Seagal still teach Aikido?

[Argus]

I see a very nice artistic side to softer Aikido which to me is what its all about. It's practice. an art form. The harder you come in the harder they will go down. In most I can clearly see a deliberate stopping movement particularly in defense against weapons. In reality a sword cut stops a centimeter off the floor, not with outstretched arms in a 'please grab this' action. Its a wonderful art. Even the best sword techniques are defensive taking advantage of a committed attack.

Only an untrained buffel swings a sword like that. In fact, whether in European or Japanese sword arts, strikes are linear in nature and end with the sword in front of the body, generally with the point facing the opponent. Why cut to the ground and leave yourself completely exposed to an after-blow?

Of course, these are generalizations, and technique varies from art to art, and technique to technique. But generally, swords are used in a delicate and intelligent manner. No need to swing them around like clubs; they're plenty sharp enough on their own.

 

[elder999]

Only an untrained buffel swings a sword like that. In fact, whether in European or Japanese sword arts, strikes are linear in nature and end with the sword in front of the body, generally with the point facing the opponent. Why cut to the ground and leave yourself completely exposed to an after-blow?

Of course, these are generalizations, and technique varies from art to art, and technique to technique. But generally, swords are used in a delicate and intelligent manner. No need to swing them around like clubs; they're plenty sharp enough on their own.

Oh my....

 

[Dirty Dog]

Only an untrained buffel swings a sword like that. In fact, whether in European or Japanese sword arts, strikes are linear in nature and end with the sword in front of the body, generally with the point facing the opponent. Why cut to the ground and leave yourself completely exposed to an after-blow?

Of course, these are generalizations, and technique varies from art to art, and technique to technique. But generally, swords are used in a delicate and intelligent manner. No need to swing them around like clubs; they're plenty sharp enough on their own.

Do you have any training or experience with either European or Japanese sword arts?

 

[elder999]

Do you have any training or experience with either European or Japanese sword arts?

I was thinking more along the lines of, Do you have any idea who it is you're talking to?

 

[moonhill99]

And Bruce Lee didn't grapple....

elder999 there is nothing wrong with some one taking Aikido with other martial art. But when person fights it would be MMA style not Aikido. The person may use some Aikido moves now and than with what ever other martial arts he or her is taking.

And I'm sure Bruce Lee did take many martial arts and knew many throws and wrist locks.

No one is saying there is no striking in aikido.

Like other members here are saying there are striking use for maintain maai, distract our opponent, unbalance them, and to provide openings for other techniques so on.

But keep in mind the philosophy of aikido is self defense using little of force needed.

It you can get the attacker on the ground and run away good. If the attacker is taken to ground and still comes after you than you may have to strike and take him to the ground again.

Even Japanese jiu jitsu that was for battlefield had limited striking because of use of body armor.

Some critics of Steven Seagal or at least in movies say he is too violent and that not the philosophy of aikido.

Now sure some aikido schools may put in more striking than others.

But really if the person is looking for striking and bit more rough style Aikijujutsu and ninjutsu may be better way to go. There are may throws and wrist locks in Aikijujutsu and ninjut and more striking and rough. If the person wants throws and wrist locks.

I think I know what you are imagining yes.. I would say if there is a chance for you to go try this for your self, that would be a useful learning to see if this style is for you. It is difficult or impossible to grade how a particular style can ever suit your personal MA needs by theorising over it here.

Yes when I mean aikido and old classic Japanese jiu jitsu, western modern jiu jitsu being mostly 90% throws,wrist locks, take downs and 10% striking.

My idea of more striking and rough is like this video.

‪Krav Maga‬ jiu jitsu

Or

Or

I think my self and others that want more striking and it being more rough hapkido, Aikijujutsu, ninjutsu,‪ Krav Maga‬ jiu jitsu may be better way to go.

And aikido being more soft and jiu jitsu normily dependance on the school where some can be soft or in the middle.

 

[moonhill99]

I've been studying Tenshin Aikido (Seagals Ideology or method of aikido) for almost a year now.

From my observations and experiences in the Tenshin style it differs from the more traditional aikido by being more compact and angular compared to some of the more traditional aikido schools.

Tenshin also has a couple extra deflections that the traditional schools dont seem to have as well.

Take note im a noob in aikido with a CMA background and these are just my personal observations of the differences that i see between the more traditional ideology and the Tenshin ideology.

Im also glad i found a Tenshin school since I enjoy training in it and it does greatly compliment my previous martial arts background.

What I did know or at least the critics that well may hate him or just say lies is he was teaching a more aggressive aikido.

 

[ST1Doppelganger]

What I did know or at least the critics that well may hate him or just say lies is he was teaching a more aggressive aikido.

I'd agree that the way my dojo does aikido is a bit more aggressive then some other aikido dojos but there's other styles of aikido out there that apply aikido just as aggressive as we do.

 

[tshadowchaser]

But keep in mind the philosophy of aikido is self defense using little of force needed.

yes that is what is taught now but the original Aikido was much more violent and brutal only evolving to this softer art we see in most schools over a period of many years.

 

[Argus]

Do you have any training or experience with either European or Japanese sword arts?

In German Longsword, yes. I'll give you that Lichtenauer is a bit unique, and that I'm somewhat ignorant of Japanese Sword Arts, but I'm not completely unfamiliar with them, and I do not see everyone cutting to the ground. Sorry, but I'd like an explanation here.

I'm sure Hyoho is an experienced Martial Artist. But, that doesn't mean everyone should simply defer to his opinion when he makes sweeping statements regarding all swordsmen without questioning him on it.

Now, I realize I made a few potentially sweeping statements myself (regarding strikes in JSA), though I thought I had qualified them well enough. But if someone knows better, he can just correct me.

And, you fellows shouldn't assume that someone isn't "qualified" to ask such questions. My goal here is to learn. So, for my part, I'll say things as I see them, ask questions about what I don't understand, and defer to anyone who instructs me better. Unless you have something to contribute, it would be better if you didn't make fun of anyone for questioning someone else simply because you view the latter individual as more authoritative.

 

[Xue Sheng]

In German Longsword, yes. I'll give you that Lichtenauer is a bit unique, and that I'm somewhat ignorant of Japanese Sword Arts, but I'm not completely unfamiliar with them, and I do not see everyone cutting to the ground. Sorry, but I'd like an explanation here.

I'm sure Hyoho is an experienced Martial Artist. But, that doesn't mean everyone should simply defer to his opinion when he makes sweeping statements regarding all swordsmen without questioning him on it.

Now, I realize I made a few potentially sweeping statements myself (regarding strikes in JSA), though I thought I had qualified them well enough. But if someone knows better, he can just correct me.

And, you fellows shouldn't assume that someone isn't "qualified" to ask such questions. My goal here is to learn. So, for my part, I'll say things as I see them, ask questions about what I don't understand, and defer to anyone who instructs me better. Unless you have something to contribute, it would be better if you didn't make fun of anyone for questioning someone else simply because you view the latter individual as more authoritative.

It might also help if one does not start a response like this too

Only an untrained buffel swings a sword like that.

By the way, what is a buffel?

 

[Argus]

> Xue

Eh, you're right. I should apologize for that. I didn't take note that the poster had prior training in sword arts, so I thought he was just freely speculating. As such, I didn't intend to direct that comment at him personally or his training.

A "Buffel," or "Buffalo" is the term used in German fencing -- or, at least in Lichtenauer's tradition, to indicate an untrained person who swings wide and to the ground, and telegraphs his strike; things we're repeatedly warned not to do, and shown how to take advantage of in various plays.

 

[Dirty Dog]

In German Longsword, yes. I'll give you that Lichtenauer is a bit unique, and that I'm somewhat ignorant of Japanese Sword Arts, but I'm not completely unfamiliar with them, and I do not see everyone cutting to the ground. Sorry, but I'd like an explanation here.

I'm sure Hyoho is an experienced Martial Artist. But, that doesn't mean everyone should simply defer to his opinion when he makes sweeping statements regarding all swordsmen without questioning him on it.

Now, I realize I made a few potentially sweeping statements myself (regarding strikes in JSA), though I thought I had qualified them well enough. But if someone knows better, he can just correct me.

And, you fellows shouldn't assume that someone isn't "qualified" to ask such questions. My goal here is to learn. So, for my part, I'll say things as I see them, ask questions about what I don't understand, and defer to anyone who instructs me better. Unless you have something to contribute, it would be better if you didn't make fun of anyone for questioning someone else simply because you view the latter individual as more authoritative.

Your questions didn't garner the responses that seems to be bothering you. Your unfounded, overgeneralized sweeping statements (such as you criticize in this post) did.
You don't need any qualifications to ask questions.
It does help to have some if you're going to make statements such as "Only an untrained buffel swings a sword like that. In fact, whether in European or Japanese sword arts, strikes are linear in nature and end with the sword in front of the body, generally with the point facing the opponent. Why cut to the ground and leave yourself completely exposed to an after-blow?" because the statements are what are technically called "wrong".

A European longsword with a straight blade is simply NOT used the same way as a Japanese longsword with a curved blade. And that's ignoring other European straight bladed weapons such as the rapier. Or the Gladius.

 

[Argus]

Good lord. I'm not going to walk on eggshells. Nor do I expect others to. I was simply trying to inform someone who I mistakenly assumed to be uninformed on the general nature of using a sword -- though I am still interested to hear what he has to say on the subject.

Did I not just address every one of those criticisms and freely admit that I made false assumptions and sweeping statements before you pointed them out?

And, I understand that a longsword and a japanese sword are not going to be used in the same manner. But I do see a lot of similarities between the two, and I think even Hyoho might agree. I'm interested to hear him bring up specific points on how they differ and why, and learn what it is he's talking about in regard to the nature of cuts in Japanese Sword Arts.

Also, I don't see how the use of the rapier or gladius contradicts any of my statements. Perhaps you could argue that for the saber or dussack. But, by and large, most weapons shared the same basic methodology in medieval, european fencing. (And no, that's not a sweeping statement -- or at least, not one that can't be backed up sufficiently.)

 

[K-man]

elder999 there is nothing wrong with some one taking Aikido with other martial art. But when person fights it would be MMA style not Aikido. The person may use some Aikido moves now and than with what ever other martial arts he or her is taking.

As Chris would say, grab a cup of coffee. This might take some time.

What is MMA style? I would suggest that MMA training equips the person to be competitive in all areas of competition. That is totally different to a person trained in Aikido and another style, say Karate. What are Aikido moves? A lot of what you see practised in Aikido are methods of training with a competent partner who has trained ukemi. That is totally different to what you would see in a real fight. Possibly the same could be said of Karate where a lot of the kihon (basics) is totally different to what you would see in a real fight.

Let's look at what you said ... "there is nothing wrong with some one taking Aikido with other martial art." Now, do you mean that Aikido is supplementing the other art or are you suggesting that the two arts are so dissimilar that you could possibly use either one alone?

Personally, I began Aikido to enable me to better understand and implement the techniques that are already in traditional Karate. As a result, if I was fighting it would be almost exclusively Karate. There aren't many techniques in Aikido that aren't already in Karate. If I could fight using just the skills of Aikido, could you tell the difference? Many of the strikes and punches of traditional Karate are in Aikido also, just you don't see them in normal training.

I think you have a preconceived idea of what you think Aikido should be and you are way off the mark of what good Aikido actually can be.

No one is saying there is no striking in aikido.

Good, because they would be totally wrong.

Like other members here are saying there are striking use for maintain maai, distract our opponent, unbalance them, and to provide openings for other techniques so on.

Mmm! I think you are repeating what I heard in one of the videos you posted.

Punches in Aikido are punches. If they succeed your opponent is hurt. If the punch is unsuccessful there is often the opportunity to move seamlessly into a technique that results in a lock, hold or takedown. Many of the techniques in Aikido provide the opportunity to strike. Just because we don't put them into effect doesn't mean they can't be extremely effective if you want to take the fight to a higher level.

But keep in mind the philosophy of aikido is self defense using little of force needed.

Mmm! Totally wrong. Most Aikido has nothing to do with self defence. Perhaps you could read some of the self defence threads if you don't understand what I am referring to.

It you can get the attacker on the ground and run away good. If the attacker is taken to ground and still comes after you than you may have to strike and take him to the ground again.

If you have taken the attacker to the ground, and have control, you have options. Almost all the techniques for taking your opponent to the ground have the option to cause joint destruction or to kick or punch. Why would you just let someone go if you thought they might attack you again?

Even Japanese jiu jitsu that was for battlefield had limited striking because of use of body armor.

I think I'll leave that one for Chris. He has far more understanding of battlefield tactics than me.

Some critics of Steven Seagal or at least in movies say he is too violent and that not the philosophy of aikido.

So Aikido is meant to be some wussy thing that doesn't hurt people? Steven Seagal has his critics for many reasons but his making Aikido effective on the street is not one of them. Forget the movies. They are there to entertain.

Now sure some aikido schools may put in more striking than others.

But really if the person is looking for striking and bit more rough style Aikijujutsu and ninjutsu may be better way to go. There are may throws and wrist locks in Aikijujutsu and ninjut and more striking and rough. If the person wants throws and wrist locks.

Again total misconception. A good Aikido school has everything that is needed, just that it isn't trained the way you think it should be trained. As to your reference to Ninjutsu ... way off the mark. That is a completely different set of arts.

Yes when I mean aikido and old classic Japanese jiu jitsu, western modern jiu jitsu being mostly 90% throws,wrist locks, take downs and 10% striking.

I won't bother arguing but I would suggest these figures have been pulled out of a hat.

My idea of more striking and rough is like this video.

‪Krav Maga‬ jiu jitsu

Or

Or

I think my self and others that want more striking and it being more rough hapkido, Aikijujutsu, ninjutsu,‪ Krav Maga‬ jiu jitsu may be better way to go.

These are just demonstrations. Hapkido and Aikido are very similar, depending on how they are taught, and are both descended from Aikijutsu. Ninjutsu and Krav are totally different.

And aikido being more soft and jiu jitsu normily dependance on the school where some can be soft or in the middle.

This sentence doesn't make sense to me.

 

[moonhill99]

As Chris would say, grab a cup of coffee. This might take some time.

What is MMA style? I would suggest that MMA training equips the person to be competitive in all areas of competition. That is totally different to a person trained in Aikido and another style, say Karate. What are Aikido moves? A lot of what you see practised in Aikido are methods of training with a competent partner who has trained ukemi. That is totally different to what you would see in a real fight. Possibly the same could be said of Karate where a lot of the kihon (basics) is totally different to what you would see in a real fight.

Let's look at what you said ... "there is nothing wrong with some one taking Aikido with other martial art." Now, do you mean that Aikido is supplementing the other art or are you suggesting that the two arts are so dissimilar that you could possibly use either one alone?

No what I was saying if you took Aikido and some other art and fighting in a cage, MMA or on the streets it would not be Aikido. Well you may use some Aikido moves now and then it would be mixed art fighting style.


Personally, I began Aikido to enable me to better understand and implement the techniques that are already in traditional Karate. As a result, if I was fighting it would be almost exclusively Karate. There aren't many techniques in Aikido that aren't already in Karate. If I could fight using just the skills of Aikido, could you tell the difference? Many of the strikes and punches of traditional Karate are in Aikido also, just you don't see them in normal training.

Okay I hardly see much striking in Aikido. The typical videos the attacker comes to strike and he gets taken down the ground. Some times they may hold the attacker on the ground. Well it true may be they are trying to do take downs and wrist locks moves and taking video of it and posting it. And when they are learning how to strike they are not taking video of it.

And any video of it bit more striking and rough like the real aikido videos people say it too gritty and that not what Aikido is about.

I think you have a preconceived idea of what you think Aikido should be and you are way off the mark of what good Aikido actually can be.

I respect what Aikido is and well I'm sure it is fun to learn a lot of those moves but in real street fight it would be more rough and gritty not so nice.

Mmm! Totally wrong. Most Aikido has nothing to do with self defence. Perhaps you could read some of the self defence threads if you don't understand what I am referring to.

I'm not sure on history what it was like before but any thing I read on the internet even the message board - AikiWeb Aikido Forums is Aikido is non violent art it not used to fight.

It is not used to fight. I don't know where some members here have not come across keywords on internet like soft art, harmony, love and peace art and self defense. If Aikido is a violent aggressive art than people at .aikiweb.com , martial arts instructors posting on their web site teaching aikido are wrong, posts are wrong and people are not uploading the violent aggressive videos on youtube.

If you mean you learn striking skills in aikido but don't train to use it on the attacker in class but out side of the class you can use it than may be you have point.

I would love for clarification where these keywords like soft art, harmony, love and peace and gentile art come from than? Or is some one posting wrong information on the internet and now it spreading like wiled fire and now everyone is getting wrong info?

Is it possible in past Aikido was more rough and now they changed it like you say it softer?

If you have taken the attacker to the ground, and have control, you have options. Almost all the techniques for taking your opponent to the ground have the option to cause joint destruction or to kick or punch. Why would you just let someone go if you thought they might attack you again?

So why is it most of videos I see the attacker go to the ground and they step back? Some times they may hold attacker on the ground.

Many people are criticizing the new aikido called real aikido being too rough.

So Aikido is meant to be some wussy thing that doesn't hurt people? Steven Seagal has his critics for many reasons but his making Aikido effective on the street is not one of them. Forget the movies. They are there to entertain.

From what I read you use little force than needed.

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka?
Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums

His movies conveys violent messages and is totally the opposite of what O-sensei or Aikido is teaching.

Even if 'it is just a movie'. If he were a true aikidoka, he could have made movies which shows how aikido can control a villian through non-violent means, and not just go, "Its time to die", and crack goes the neck.

I have friends whose only knowledge of Aikido is Steven Seagal, and they think Aikido is a deadly violent art which is totally the opposite of what it is.

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums


No matter what, Steven Seagal has contributed largely in making Aikido so famous. The guy is 7th dan after all. Of course the ones looking for a deadly art get quickly disappointed and leave soon. Some others completely misunderstand it too and try to make it a religion of peace and love


First, I would agree with those who have pointed out that, whether what they are seeking is really there, or not, many students first show up at an Aikido dojo because of Seagal Sensei's films. So he is doing, in a certain way, a service by spreading the word that Aikido exists.

Aikido Kotokai Texas

Aikido is performed by blending with the motion of the attacker and redirecting the force of the attack rather than opposing it head-on. This requires very little physical energy, as the aikido practitioner "leads" the attacker's momentum using entering and turning movements. The techniques are completed with various throws or joint locks. Aikido can be categorized under the general umbrella of grappling arts. Aikido derives mainly from the martial art of Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu. The founder early students' documents bear the term aiki-jūjutsu. Many of the founder senior students have different approaches to aikido, depending on when they studied with him. Today aikido is found all over the world in a number of styles, with broad ranges of interpretation and emphasis.

Aikido Plano Dojo Martial Arts - About Aikido Instructor


Aikido is the martial way of harmonizing with the aggression of an attackers energy. Aikido blends with and uses that energy against the attacker. It is one of the few martial arts in which the training eventually builds to deal with the threat of multiple attackers; a situation very different from those found in modern competitive martial arts.

Aikido is a disciplined study of the self, conflict, self defense, self preservation, aggression, combat and its resolution.

In addition to Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu, O sensei (M. Ueshiba) also studied the following:

Plano Aikido Center

Aikido is a martial art that emphasizes more than fighting skill. Rather, it seeks to blend with, control and then dissipate the hostile energy of one or more attackers. Focusing on method rather than strength, Aikido is particularly suited to women, children and the elderly. Explore a way of life committed to peace and harmony, personal improvement and self defense.
You are welcome to watch our classes or try for a week for free, no commitment. Just come with comfortable sport pants and a long sleeved shirt. One of our seasoned members will assist you during your practice. We will make sure that you feel comfortable among us.

As to your reference to Ninjutsu ... way off the mark. That is a completely different set of arts.

So where are these claims coming from soft art, love and peace and harmony? I thought Buddhism are anti- violence? If you attack them they would use it in defense way with little to no striking?

If you tried to attack Morihei Ueshiba would he just take you to the ground and hold you down? Or would he be bit rough on you may be give kick or two?

From what I read Morihei Ueshiba changed Aikido where there was less striking and more softer.

He become very religious and into peace thing.

If you are really into Buddhism than your martial arts should be soft.

I won't bother arguing but I would suggest these figures have been pulled out of a hat.

So the way they train Aikido is non-violent self-defence love and pence thing but the practitioner can choose to use more striking and be more rough out side the class? But in the class they teach striking but not practice when the attacker comes after you in class to strike?

These are just demonstrations. Hapkido and Aikido are very similar, depending on how they are taught, and are both descended from Aikijutsu. Ninjutsu and Krav are totally different.

So why does Aikido demonstrations ,promote videos or training is so soft compared to this level of being rough.

And yes most of the videos I see it seems the attacker goes for strike and they use throw,take down, wrist lock or hold. I don't see them take them to the ground and than use one or two strikes when they are on the ground.

Unless they teach striking but you don't use striking when a attacker goes after you.

Or may be in Japan they more into striking than the US. Or Aikido is changed and not what it was like before.

 

[Spinedoc]

No what I was saying if you took Aikido and some other art and fighting in a cage, MMA or on the streets it would not be Aikido. Well you may use some Aikido moves now and then it would be mixed art fighting style.

Well, no, not exactly, it would still be Aikido. What will happen is that it may not look like Aikido that we see in demonstrations or in practice. I've seen it used once in a real fight, and at the time, had no idea what the guy did. At a bar, a guy swung once, the aikidoka ducked and backed up with his hands up and then the guy tried to swing again, and I saw him (the attacker) fly into the wall hitting his back on the wall and landing on his head…Now, I know that it was a kaitenage that was executed at a very fast speed……Aikido is still aikido in a real fight, but it may look a little ugly.

Personally, I began Aikido to enable me to better understand and implement the techniques that are already in traditional Karate. As a result, if I was fighting it would be almost exclusively Karate. There aren't many techniques in Aikido that aren't already in Karate. If I could fight using just the skills of Aikido, could you tell the difference? Many of the strikes and punches of traditional Karate are in Aikido also, just you don't see them in normal training.

Okay I hardly see much striking in Aikido. The typical videos the attacker comes to strike and he gets taken down the ground. Some times they may hold the attacker on the ground. Well it true may be they are trying to do take downs and wrist locks moves and taking video of it and posting it. And when they are learning how to strike they are not taking video of it.

And any video of it bit more striking and rough like the real aikido videos people say it too gritty and that not what Aikido is about.

Well, Aikido is about harmony and not harming the attacker. It's about defusing a situation, and neutralizing while gaining control of an attacker. Most of all…it's about balance….and in way more ways than you think.

I think you have a preconceived idea of what you think Aikido should be and you are way off the mark of what good Aikido actually can be.

I respect what Aikido is and well I'm sure it is fun to learn a lot of those moves but in real street fight it would be more rough and gritty not so nice.

Of course it would, no one is saying it wouldn't.

Mmm! Totally wrong. Most Aikido has nothing to do with self defence. Perhaps you could read some of the self defence threads if you don't understand what I am referring to.

I'm not sure on history what it was like before but any thing I read on the internet even the message board - AikiWeb Aikido Forums is Aikido is non violent art it not used to fight.

It is not used to fight. I don't know where some members here have not come across keywords on internet like soft art, harmony, love and peace art and self defense. If Aikido is a violent aggressive art than people at .aikiweb.com , martial arts instructors posting on their web site teaching aikido are wrong, posts are wrong and people are not uploading the violent aggressive videos on youtube.

If you mean you learn striking skills in aikido but don't train to use it on the attacker in class but out side of the class you can use it than may be you have point.

I would love for clarification where these keywords like soft art, harmony, love and peace and gentile art come from than? Or is some one posting wrong information on the internet and now it spreading like wiled fire and now everyone is getting wrong info?

Is it possible in past Aikido was more rough and now they changed it like you say it softer?

Do you think martial arts are solely about fighting? I get the sense that you do, and that might reflect some of the disconnect here. Additionally, you have to take into context Japanese culture.

If you have taken the attacker to the ground, and have control, you have options. Almost all the techniques for taking your opponent to the ground have the option to cause joint destruction or to kick or punch. Why would you just let someone go if you thought they might attack you again?

So why is it most of videos I see the attacker go to the ground and they step back? Some times they may hold attacker on the ground.

One of the reasons that Aikido is often used by police, bouncers, or bodyguard types, is that you can defuse a violent situation, restrain someone, and not try to harm them. Aikido strives to not hurt the attacker (not that you won't cause pain…more on that later) and not try to kill or permanently injure them. I'm not sure which videos you watch, but we practice pins and submissions all the time. They aren't perfect and one of my classmates has perfected rolling out of the kotegaeshi pin, so I simply slam my knee into his kidney and it keeps him from rolling.

Many people are criticizing the new aikido called real aikido being too rough.

So Aikido is meant to be some wussy thing that doesn't hurt people? Steven Seagal has his critics for many reasons but his making Aikido effective on the street is not one of them. Forget the movies. They are there to entertain.

From what I read you use little force than needed.

Of course, why would you expend more energy than you need?

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka?
Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums

His movies conveys violent messages and is totally the opposite of what O-sensei or Aikido is teaching.

Even if 'it is just a movie'. If he were a true aikidoka, he could have made movies which shows how aikido can control a villian through non-violent means, and not just go, "Its time to die", and crack goes the neck.

I have friends whose only knowledge of Aikido is Steven Seagal, and they think Aikido is a deadly violent art which is totally the opposite of what it is.

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums


No matter what, Steven Seagal has contributed largely in making Aikido so famous. The guy is 7th dan after all. Of course the ones looking for a deadly art get quickly disappointed and leave soon. Some others completely misunderstand it too and try to make it a religion of peace and love


First, I would agree with those who have pointed out that, whether what they are seeking is really there, or not, many students first show up at an Aikido dojo because of Seagal Sensei's films. So he is doing, in a certain way, a service by spreading the word that Aikido exists.

Aikido Kotokai Texas

Aikido is performed by blending with the motion of the attacker and redirecting the force of the attack rather than opposing it head-on. This requires very little physical energy, as the aikido practitioner "leads" the attacker's momentum using entering and turning movements. The techniques are completed with various throws or joint locks. Aikido can be categorized under the general umbrella of grappling arts. Aikido derives mainly from the martial art of Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu. The founder early students' documents bear the term aiki-jūjutsu. Many of the founder senior students have different approaches to aikido, depending on when they studied with him. Today aikido is found all over the world in a number of styles, with broad ranges of interpretation and emphasis.

Aikido Plano Dojo Martial Arts - About Aikido Instructor


Aikido is the martial way of harmonizing with the aggression of an attackers energy. Aikido blends with and uses that energy against the attacker. It is one of the few martial arts in which the training eventually builds to deal with the threat of multiple attackers; a situation very different from those found in modern competitive martial arts.

Aikido is a disciplined study of the self, conflict, self defense, self preservation, aggression, combat and its resolution.

In addition to Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu, O sensei (M. Ueshiba) also studied the following:

Plano Aikido Center

Aikido is a martial art that emphasizes more than fighting skill. Rather, it seeks to blend with, control and then dissipate the hostile energy of one or more attackers. Focusing on method rather than strength, Aikido is particularly suited to women, children and the elderly. Explore a way of life committed to peace and harmony, personal improvement and self defense.
You are welcome to watch our classes or try for a week for free, no commitment. Just come with comfortable sport pants and a long sleeved shirt. One of our seasoned members will assist you during your practice. We will make sure that you feel comfortable among us.

As to your reference to Ninjutsu ... way off the mark. That is a completely different set of arts.

So where are these claims coming from soft art, love and peace and harmony? I thought Buddhism are anti- violence? If you attack them they would use it in defense way with little to no striking?

Buddhist's anti-violence? You do realize that most of the samurai were zen buddhists, the common folks often practice pure land buddhism, but zen buddhism is often credited for allowing samurai to die willingly in combat.

If you tried to attack Morihei Ueshiba would he just take you to the ground and hold you down? Or would he be bit rough on you may be give kick or two?

From what I read Morihei Ueshiba changed Aikido where there was less striking and more softer.

He become very religious and into peace thing.

If you are really into Buddhism than your martial arts should be soft.

Where on earth did you get that idea?

I won't bother arguing but I would suggest these figures have been pulled out of a hat.

So the way they train Aikido is non-violent self-defence love and pence thing but the practitioner can choose to use more striking and be more rough out side the class? But in the class they teach striking but not practice when the attacker comes after you in class to strike?

These are just demonstrations. Hapkido and Aikido are very similar, depending on how they are taught, and are both descended from Aikijutsu. Ninjutsu and Krav are totally different.

So why does Aikido demonstrations ,promote videos or training is so soft compared to this level of being rough.

And yes most of the videos I see it seems the attacker goes for strike and they use throw,take down, wrist lock or hold. I don't see them take them to the ground and than use one or two strikes when they are on the ground.

Of course not. Aikido is not about trying to destroy your opponent. It's about controlling a situation and not trying to maim your opponent.

Unless they teach striking but you don't use striking when a attacker goes after you.

Or may be in Japan they more into striking than the US. Or Aikido is changed and not what it was like before.

My replies in red above. Look to be frank, you've asked a billion questions, and many of the answers don't seem to be resonating. If you want to evaluate Aikido….PUT DOWN your computer, stop looking at videos and reading websites, and go sit in on or watch a class at your local dojo.

 

[K-man]

No what I was saying if you took Aikido and some other art and fighting in a cage, MMA or on the streets it would not be Aikido. Well you may use some Aikido moves now and then it would be mixed art fighting style.

You didn't answer the question. What is 'MMA style'? If I was fighting I doubt whether you could tell if I was using Karate, Aikido or Krav Maga. They all contain the same techniques. If I was using Aikido incorporating the Aikido strikes how would you differentiate it from my Goju Karate (hard and soft) where I utilise the locks and holds of karate?

Okay I hardly see much striking in Aikido. The typical videos the attacker comes to strike and he gets taken down the ground. Some times they may hold the attacker on the ground. Well it true may be they are trying to do take downs and wrist locks moves and taking video of it and posting it. And when they are learning how to strike they are not taking video of it.

And any video of it bit more striking and rough like the real aikido videos people say it too gritty and that not what Aikido is about.

I'm not of the school that believes YouTube has all the answers. What you see is irrelevant. I know what I have been taught and I know what I teach when I occasionally take Aikido classes. Almost every technique contains an atemi or the opportunity for atemi. Ueshiba is quoted as saying "Aikido is 70% atemi and 30% nage."

I respect what Aikido is and well I'm sure it is fun to learn a lot of those moves but in real street fight it would be more rough and gritty not so nice.

From what you have posted you have no idea of what Aikido is and its martial application. Of course it would not be so nice in its street application. That's why we are getting the criticism of Seagal. On the street it is real time, not training.

I'm not sure on history what it was like before but any thing I read on the internet even the message board - AikiWeb Aikido Forums is Aikido is non violent art it not used to fight.

And that is just 100% wrong. It's a bit like saying Tai Chi is a non violent art. Good grief! How do you think you counter violence?

It is not used to fight. I don't know where some members here have not come across keywords on internet like soft art, harmony, love and peace art and self defense. If Aikido is a violent aggressive art than people at .aikiweb.com , martial arts instructors posting on their web site teaching aikido are wrong, posts are wrong and people are not uploading the violent aggressive videos on youtube.

As I said, you have no idea and you don't understand what they are saying.

If I have you in an arm bar I can be gentle and just hold you or I can step it up and dislocate your shoulder or elbow. It's a question of degree. When we practise we aren't cranking up the power. In a life and death situation you are not going to be gentle.

If you mean you learn striking skills in aikido but don't train to use it on the attacker in class but out side of the class you can use it than may be you have point.

Not sure what you are saying here. In training we do most techniques soft and slow, without using strength. It either requires a compliant partner or a great deal of skill to do that. We don't use the strike to get compliance. On the street you may need to.

I would love for clarification where these keywords like soft art, harmony, love and peace and gentile art come from than? Or is some one posting wrong information on the internet and now it spreading like wiled fire and now everyone is getting wrong info?

No, you are just taking them out of context to fit your idea of Aikido.

Is it possible in past Aikido was more rough and now they changed it like you say it softer?

Yes it was. Ueshiba was licenced to teach Daito Ryu and that was a very nasty form of Aikijutsu. As Ueshiba's skill increased he became much softer and post war he also got caught up in his religious ideals.

So why is it most of videos I see the attacker go to the ground and they step back? Some times they may hold attacker on the ground.

Are you talking of videos of real fights or training videos?

Many people are criticizing the new aikido called real aikido being too rough.

Who are many people? Practitioners, instructors or outsiders?

From what I read you use little force than needed.

Naturally. Aikido is about using the other persons energy. Don't confuse 'soft' with 'weak'.

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka?
Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums

His movies conveys violent messages and is totally the opposite of what O-sensei or Aikido is teaching.

I disagree totally. He teaches under the Aikikai umbrella which is Ueshiba's grandson and Aikido's main branch.

Even if 'it is just a movie'. If he were a true aikidoka, he could have made movies which shows how aikido can control a villian through non-violent means, and not just go, "Its time to die", and crack goes the neck.

I have friends whose only knowledge of Aikido is Steven Seagal, and they think Aikido is a deadly violent art which is totally the opposite of what it is.

There is a difference between Hollywood and real life.

Steven Seagal a true Aikidoka - AikiWeb Aikido Forums

No matter what, Steven Seagal has contributed largely in making Aikido so famous. The guy is 7th dan after all. Of course the ones looking for a deadly art get quickly disappointed and leave soon. Some others completely misunderstand it too and try to make it a religion of peace and love

Note the word 'misunderstood'.

First, I would agree with those who have pointed out that, whether what they are seeking is really there, or not, many students first show up at an Aikido dojo because of Seagal Sensei's films. So he is doing, in a certain way, a service by spreading the word that Aikido exists.

Cool, guys turn up to be like Seagal. If they go to the right school they can train as he does.

Unless they teach striking but you don't use striking when a attacker goes after you.

How stupid would that be? Get real. If someone is attacking me there is a huge likelihood I will hit him.

Or may be in Japan they more into striking than the US. Or Aikido is changed and not what it was like before.

I think you need to get some first hand experience of Aikido from an experienced practitioner.

Aikido Kotokai Texas

Aikido is performed by blending with the motion of the attacker and redirecting the force of the attack rather than opposing it head-on. This requires very little physical energy, as the aikido practitioner "leads" the attacker's momentum using entering and turning movements. The techniques are completed with various throws or joint locks. Aikido can be categorized under the general umbrella of grappling arts. Aikido derives mainly from the martial art of Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu. The founder early students' documents bear the term aiki-jūjutsu. Many of the founder senior students have different approaches to aikido, depending on when they studied with him. Today aikido is found all over the world in a number of styles, with broad ranges of interpretation and emphasis.

Important to note ... "Many of the founder's senior students have different approaches to Aikido, depending on when they studied with him."

Aikido Plano Dojo Martial Arts - About Aikido Instructor

Aikido is the martial way of harmonizing with the aggression of an attackers energy. Aikido blends with and uses that energy against the attacker. It is one of the few martial arts in which the training eventually builds to deal with the threat of multiple attackers; a situation very different from those found in modern competitive martial arts.

Aikido is a disciplined study of the self, conflict, self defense, self preservation, aggression, combat and its resolution.

In addition to Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu, O sensei (M. Ueshiba) also studied the following:

Nothing wrong here.

Plano Aikido Center

Aikido is a martial art that emphasizes more than fighting skill. Rather, it seeks to blend with, control and then dissipate the hostile energy of one or more attackers. Focusing on method rather than strength, Aikido is particularly suited to women, children and the elderly. Explore a way of life committed to peace and harmony, personal improvement and self defense.
You are welcome to watch our classes or try for a week for free, no commitment. Just come with comfortable sport pants and a long sleeved shirt. One of our seasoned members will assist you during your practice. We will make sure that you feel comfortable among us.

So? This is advertising blurb.

So where are these claims coming from soft art, love and peace and harmony? I thought Buddhism are anti- violence? If you attack them they would use it in defense way with little to no striking?

Aikido is a 'soft' or 'internal' style of martial art. Harmony is the relationship between Tori and Uke, nothing to do with love or peace.

If you tried to attack Morihei Ueshiba would he just take you to the ground and hold you down? Or would he be bit rough on you may be give kick or two?

From what I read Morihei Ueshiba changed Aikido where there was less striking and more softer.

He become very religious and into peace thing.

If you are really into Buddhism than your martial arts should be soft.

Aikido is nothing to do with Buddhism. It is also nothing to do with Shinto or Omoto religions either. As Ueshiba got older his Aikido got softer, not weaker or less violent.

So the way they train Aikido is non-violent self-defence love and pence thing but the practitioner can choose to use more striking and be more rough out side the class? But in the class they teach striking but not practice when the attacker comes after you in class to strike?

In class is training, but it is not 'love' and although it is smooth it is also violent in as much as we are causing pain and we have the opportunity to cause injury. Outside class there are no rules.

So why does Aikido demonstrations ,promote videos or training is so soft compared to this level of being rough.

Again you are confusing 'soft' and 'weak'. The softness of Aikido is incredibly powerful. Because it is performed smoothly you don't perceive it as rough.

And yes most of the videos I see it seems the attacker goes for strike and they use throw,take down, wrist lock or hold. I don't see them take them to the ground and than use one or two strikes when they are on the ground.

You are seeing what you want to see. You are missing what is available if required.

Unless they teach striking but you don't use striking when a attacker goes after you.

How stupid would that be? Get real. If someone is attacking me there is a huge likelihood I will hit him.

Or may be in Japan they more into striking than the US. Or Aikido is changed and not what it was like before.

I think you need to get some first hand experience of Aikido from an experienced practitioner.

 

[moonhill99]

Well, no, not exactly, it would still be Aikido. What will happen is that it may not look like Aikido that we see in demonstrations or in practice. I've seen it used once in a real fight, and at the time, had no idea what the guy did. At a bar, a guy swung once, the aikidoka ducked and backed up with his hands up and then the guy tried to swing again, and I saw him (the attacker) fly into the wall hitting his back on the wall and landing on his head…Now, I know that it was a kaitenage that was executed at a very fast speed……Aikido is still aikido in a real fight, but it may look a little ugly.

What I was saying if you took aikido and other art say wing chun and 80% of the fighting is wing chun it was not really aikido fighting.

If you fighting was 40% Judo, 40% aikido and 20% wing chun you using mixed fighting style.

When I mean using aikido is using only aikido moves no other art.

Well, Aikido is about harmony and not harming the attacker. It's about defusing a situation, and neutralizing while gaining control of an attacker. Most of all…it's about balance….and in way more ways than you think.

This is what needs to be cleared up is Aikido hard or soft art?

Well true practitioner of karate or kung fu can go hard or easy on the person. But it is not taboo in school you should not strike more than one or two times and it better to put the person on the ground and move back or put the person on the ground and in hold than strike.

Do you think martial arts are solely about fighting? I get the sense that you do, and that might reflect some of the disconnect here. Additionally, you have to take into context Japanese culture.

All martial arts give you the tools, it up to the practitioner to choose how rough you want to go. Some schools may place a more emphasis on self defense or combat fighting

One of the reasons that Aikido is often used by police, bouncers, or bodyguard types, is that you can defuse a violent situation, restrain someone, and not try to harm them. Aikido strives to not hurt the attacker (not that you won't cause pain…more on that later) and not try to kill or permanently injure them. I'm not sure which videos you watch, but we practice pins and submissions all the time. They aren't perfect and one of my classmates has perfected rolling out of the kotegaeshi pin, so I simply slam my knee into his kidney and it keeps him from rolling.

Aikido today seems to be more self defense than fighting like you say in past where there was more striking and more rough . Where like some videos above like the hapkido,‪Krav Maga‬ jiu jitsu or Krav Maga above being more rough you could get into legal trouble fighting a bad guy on the street if go bit more rough in the self defense. Like a strike to throat or neck twisting so on or many strikes so on.

Buddhist's anti-violence? You do realize that most of the samurai were zen buddhists, the common folks often practice pure land buddhism, but zen buddhism is often credited for allowing samurai to die willingly in combat.

May be some other people know more on it but I'm sure hard core Buddhism or monk would never strike back. They would take pain of being attack than fighting back. They may take you to ground or hold you down but never strike back no matter what.

Buddhism like Hindu believe that pain,suffering, imperfect world,violence and wars is base on past bad needs of past life. And by doing good deeds you next life will be better. Meaning if you poor and have medical illness and lots violence you may have done some thing really bad in your past life.

Of course not. Aikido is not about trying to destroy your opponent. It's about controlling a situation and not trying to maim your opponent.

No one saying you have to destroy your opponent.

My Idea of aikido may be different of what really aikido is like.

 

[Hyoho]

Argus I welcome your comments but what I said is not sweeping statement. One should not get a sportlike or iaido like sword cutting action confused with kobudo/koryu when the intention is to cut through something/someone rather than "at it/them".

All the videos more or less show a deliberate stopping action in strikes and cuts. It looks like a "Here grab this please" action. The point I was tryng to make is that the harder and action is towards you the easier it is to deal with. A half hearted attack is dealt with half heartedly. Using extra energy on your own side rather defeats the objective of using the other persons force against them until it reaches the point of subduing them against other actions. Using a sense of realism in your practice will make you a better budoka. Its not all creative visualization on ones own.

I don't think posting YouTube videos help much in making ones point either. That is unless its all you do anyway.

Then again I have watched Ueshiba Sensei using a bokuto. He was without doubt a good kenshi. Maybe that part that he handed down has fallen by the wayside?

 

[elder999]

May be some other people know more on it but I'm sure hard core Buddhism or monk would never strike back. They would take pain of being attack than fighting back. They may take you to ground or hold you down but never strike back no matter what.

You are so precious!

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -Tenzin Gyatso, 14th and current Dalai Lama, May, 2001, Portland, Oregon, (and, about as :hardcore Buddhism AND "monk" as it gets....

My Idea of aikido may be different of what really aikido is like.

Yes. Get your nose out of the books, turn off the computer, and get to the dojo, for goddsakes.....