How appliable is aikido for self-defense?

[Hanzou]

The issue with looking for similar video on YouTube for any aiki art, is that the effectiveness of the aiki-based movements comes at times when there isn't resistance. If there's resistance, we move to where there isn't any, and that's where the "aiki" shows up. So, if you saw me doing defensive work and I stuck to purely aiki-based technique, then it would look odd to you. I'd get someone off-balance, and move around "too much" (moving from one point where there was no "aiki" to another point where there was an opportunity for it). Even with a partner completely committing to the attack in a realistic manner, it will always look suspect.

The only time it doesn't, is if I tell my partner to use what he knows to keep me away from all the aiki opportunities. If she does that, then I feel that type of resistance and respond with non-aiki technique (strikes, Judo-style throws, etc. - all within the purview of any aiki-jujutsu based art). Problem is, it no longer looks like "aikido", because I've moved away from the aiki techniques. Then, it might as well be Jujutsu in that video. Many folks will claim that this is a better test of aikido arts, but it's actually not a realistic sort of resistance. For most techniques, I can remove the aiki opportunities by stepping with the right foot at the right time, and I can often stay one step ahead of the other person, blocking all the "aiki". But that takes a lot of knowledge, and a comprehension of those aiki opportunities, something extraordinarily unlikely to be found in an attacker.

So, I can either practice realistic resistance, giving me access to aiki and producing a video that often looks unrealistic. Or I can practice unrealistic resistance that makes me work more on the other areas of my art, and get a video that looks more realistic. We train both ways, but if you ask me for a video of aikido, well, I'd want you to see the "aiki" part.

The issue with trying to find sport evidence is largely that if you took someone who understood their Aikido well, and who had trained with resistance, they won't often go to the purely "aikI" techniques with most trained fighters, because that's the hard part to get to (and working hard to get to it is contrary to the concept of "aiki"). So, if they understand the techniques in depth, they're more likely to look like Jujutsu much of the time, so you'd not see something that "looks like" Aikido. Add to that the fact that, in most of Ueshiba's Aikido, there are fairly advanced breakfalls to make it easier to take a large number of falls (and which, frankly, make the technique look all the more impressive but are mostly done to make it easier on the receiver)...well, you won't see those same falls from someone who's actually trying NOT to be thrown (as in a competition). So, again, it won't look like Aikido. The reality will almost never look like the practice.

How about just a vid of an Aikidoka submitting someone who is trying to knock their head off or take them to the ground?

A challenge match along these lines;

 

[drop bear]

Actually it's in my interest to have people think I am far less good than I am, I don't want people knowing the extent of any skills I have.

You Tube would only prove something if everyone posted up rather than only those who are narcissists. Even then the camera work would all have to be done by the same people so give a level playing field. Most people really really cannot be bothered posting up videos of themselves doing stuff and why should they?

When you are selling a product you generally want it to sound as good as you can. Martial arts is a product that does not have a standard.

On you tube you still get to see a representation of what is out there. there are thousands of akido videos from different practitioners. It is not like there is not Akido evidence out there.

 

[drop bear]

The issue with looking for similar video on YouTube for any aiki art, is that the effectiveness of the aiki-based movements comes at times when there isn't resistance. If there's resistance, we move to where there isn't any, and that's where the "aiki" shows up. So, if you saw me doing defensive work and I stuck to purely aiki-based technique, then it would look odd to you. I'd get someone off-balance, and move around "too much" (moving from one point where there was no "aiki" to another point where there was an opportunity for it). Even with a partner completely committing to the attack in a realistic manner, it will always look suspect.

The only time it doesn't, is if I tell my partner to use what he knows to keep me away from all the aiki opportunities. If she does that, then I feel that type of resistance and respond with non-aiki technique (strikes, Judo-style throws, etc. - all within the purview of any aiki-jujutsu based art). Problem is, it no longer looks like "aikido", because I've moved away from the aiki techniques. Then, it might as well be Jujutsu in that video. Many folks will claim that this is a better test of aikido arts, but it's actually not a realistic sort of resistance. For most techniques, I can remove the aiki opportunities by stepping with the right foot at the right time, and I can often stay one step ahead of the other person, blocking all the "aiki". But that takes a lot of knowledge, and a comprehension of those aiki opportunities, something extraordinarily unlikely to be found in an attacker.

So, I can either practice realistic resistance, giving me access to aiki and producing a video that often looks unrealistic. Or I can practice unrealistic resistance that makes me work more on the other areas of my art, and get a video that looks more realistic. We train both ways, but if you ask me for a video of aikido, well, I'd want you to see the "aiki" part.

So when I described ramped up. that was kind of on the mark.

When someone wants to see a martial art. they want to see it work on someone who does not want it to work. This is the whole self defence thing.

You even do it in Akido. but it is an example of how it might work.
so if i look up Akido self defence. I get what should be a person attacking and an akido person stopping them.

But those of us who have been around know that a demonstration like that does not work like that in a fight. And so want to see resisted training. So that we can get an idea that it does work.

You have to understand that lots of people have spent years training some systems. (not just akido) with the idea that at some point this sort of training will pay off. Then go do a boxing,kickboxing,judo,basically anything live and get man handled by some noob. And start to get a skeptical.

There is a point where the old excuses become just that.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So when I described ramped up. that was kind of on the mark.

When someone wants to see a martial art. they want to see it work on someone who does not want it to work. This is the whole self defence thing.

You even do it in Akido. but it is an example of how it might work.
so if i look up Akido self defence. I get what should be a person attacking and an akido person stopping them.

But those of us who have been around know that a demonstration like that does not work like that in a fight. And so want to see resisted training. So that we can get an idea that it does work.

You have to understand that lots of people have spent years training some systems. (not just akido) with the idea that at some point this sort of training will pay off. Then go do a boxing,kickboxing,judo,basically anything live and get man handled by some noob. And start to get a skeptical.

There is a point where the old excuses become just that.

I think part of the issue with videos is simply that aikidoka want to post videos that show Aikido. And the self-defense side doesn't show it well - the aiki gets buried in the movements. I've worked out with folks from Ueshiba's Aikido who could handle a good, commited attack with intension, but it rarely looked anything like the videos you see.

I'm just guessing, because I've not seen many videos that show the messy-looking results when Aikido's aiki principles are used against an attacker who's giving a relatively realistic attack (meaning continuing the attack with whatever's logically next, trying to take the defender out). The ones I have seen, there are usually a lot of comments like, "That's not Aikido." I think they want it to look like a Seagal film, or they don't believe it's Aikido.

 

[drop bear]

I think part of the issue with videos is simply that aikidoka want to post videos that show Aikido. And the self-defense side doesn't show it well - the aiki gets buried in the movements. I've worked out with folks from Ueshiba's Aikido who could handle a good, commited attack with intension, but it rarely looked anything like the videos you see.

I'm just guessing, because I've not seen many videos that show the messy-looking results when Aikido's aiki principles are used against an attacker who's giving a relatively realistic attack (meaning continuing the attack with whatever's logically next, trying to take the defender out). The ones I have seen, there are usually a lot of comments like, "That's not Aikido." I think they want it to look like a Seagal film, or they don't believe it's Aikido.

Yeah. And it is a rude shock to someone who has drilled and scenarioed to go live. happens to our students as well. Great on the pads sucks when the punches are going both ways.

Everybody wants it to look like a segal film. MMA fighters would like martial arts to work like that.

It doesn't. And the reality does not sell as well as the fantasy.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

How about just a vid of an Aikidoka submitting someone who is trying to knock their head off or take them to the ground?

A challenge match along these lines;

The problem is that none of the Aikido I've seen (frankly, any of the aiki arts) has much in the way of submissions that are safe to use on a resisting opponent. I don't teach submissions - I teach destructions. I can't even do those safely at speed against someone who's at my skill level if they are trying to resist me, because there's a small angular difference between them stopping me and me breaking their hand. The relatively few usable submissions we would have means they're unlikely to show up. I'd be limited to strikes, maybe some throws (most sport-trained folks will know how to stay away from most of those), and the few submission-able locks. I'd mostly just depend upon body movement and play a defensive game. Someone with sport training will have a lot more weapons that are usable for a challenge, because the challenge is really a sport situation.

The challenge match (or any kind of sparring) just isn't a good analog to defending against an attack in the street. It's the best we have for doing resistive training, but it's not the same, at all. What I teach and train in would suck for competition, because it's not trained for it. Heck, I'd probably spend all of my time thinking through possibilities of what I can actually use without risking injury to them (if I don't stop in time) or to me (if I do stop in time, and they don't stop).

 

[drop bear]

The problem is that none of the Aikido I've seen (frankly, any of the aiki arts) has much in the way of submissions that are safe to use on a resisting opponent. I don't teach submissions - I teach destructions. I can't even do those safely at speed against someone who's at my skill level if they are trying to resist me, because there's a small angular difference between them stopping me and me breaking their hand. The relatively few usable submissions we would have means they're unlikely to show up. I'd be limited to strikes, maybe some throws (most sport-trained folks will know how to stay away from most of those), and the few submission-able locks. I'd mostly just depend upon body movement and play a defensive game. Someone with sport training will have a lot more weapons that are usable for a challenge, because the challenge is really a sport situation.

The challenge match (or any kind of sparring) just isn't a good analog to defending against an attack in the street. It's the best we have for doing resistive training, but it's not the same, at all. What I teach and train in would suck for competition, because it's not trained for it. Heck, I'd probably spend all of my time thinking through possibilities of what I can actually use without risking injury to them (if I don't stop in time) or to me (if I do stop in time, and they don't stop).

This does my head in. So the art that is billed as being able to defeat an attacker without doing unnecessary damage to him. Cant spar because their moves are too deadly.

 

[Steve]

Just to he clear. I said YouTube is evidence but im not suggesting its the only kind of evidence.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. And it is a rude shock to someone who has drilled and scenarioed to go live. happens to our students as well. Great on the pads sucks when the punches are going both ways.

Yep. This is why I'm an advocate of eventually adding in some sparring of some sort, to let folks get a chance to see what will be different when they are facing a trained opponent. But be clear, that's what they're working on when they spar. An untrained opponent will have different movements, different reactions. I don't know if that matters as much in non-aiki arts, but it's a vital difference for us. If I only train to encourage my opponent into reactions by anticipating the reactions of trained martial artists, I'll get the "wrong" reactions from untrained, undisciplined folks, and will miss the aiki opportunities there. Since the latter are the more likely attackers, I have to spend a lot of my time there, and learn to make the adjustments to trained fighters.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This does my head in. So the art that is billed as being able to defeat an attacker without doing unnecessary damage to him. Cant spar because their moves are too deadly.

I didn't say too deadly. I said not safe to use against a resistive opponent. I can't speak entirely to Ueshiba's art, as my experience there is limited. But I do know that many of the techniques they use have the same issue. If I have you in a hand lock (3rd Set Wrist Lock for us, not sure what the Japanese name is they'd use, but I know they have it), you could probably defeat it. If I keep going at it (like I could with an Arm Bar), there's a VERY short distance between your successful resistance and you having a broken bone in your hand. This technique is the one I've seen cause the most injuries in the dojo, even without resistance. Techniques like that aren't safe to use in a challenge, because who wants to injure someone just to show it works?

This isn't anything unusual about Ueshiba's Aikido, nor any other aiki arts. Most arts contain things like this. The issue is when we expect an art to convert to sporting use, and we expect all to be able to do so similarly. I suppose if I were sadistic or sociopathic, so that I didn't care about hurting others, I'd be able to use all my weapons, and I'd be on a more even footing with folks who train for sport (none of us would have to second-think our instincts during the match). But I have a conscience, so I have to edit what I use, just like I do when "defending" against a white belt (where at least 40 of the 50 Classical Techniques aren't usable, because they don't know them).

I'll be clear on my view of the philosophy you're referring to. That philosophy, so far as I can tell, came later in Ueshiba's teaching, as a result of increasing influence from the Omoto religion. His earliest students show little evidence of it. It's an ethical principle, which I feel got out of hand: the highest ethical ground is to be able to defend yourself without harming your attacker. It's an ideal, and requires a large disparity in skill between attacker and defender, in my opinion. I do not subscribe to that philosophy, and I think most in NGA subscribe to it only as an ideal, since we teach breaks and other destructions as a matter of course. Too much emphasis on that principle will certainly render the art unusable for self-defense, except to the most skilled practitioners.

 

[drop bear]

Yep. This is why I'm an advocate of eventually adding in some sparring of some sort, to let folks get a chance to see what will be different when they are facing a trained opponent. But be clear, that's what they're working on when they spar. An untrained opponent will have different movements, different reactions. I don't know if that matters as much in non-aiki arts, but it's a vital difference for us. If I only train to encourage my opponent into reactions by anticipating the reactions of trained martial artists, I'll get the "wrong" reactions from untrained, undisciplined folks, and will miss the aiki opportunities there. Since the latter are the more likely attackers, I have to spend a lot of my time there, and learn to make the adjustments to trained fighters.

We just spar untrained guys. untill they are trained. then spar trained guys.

There is a difference but it is a nuanced one. But we rely on positional dominance. So it is easier to get on to a guy who isnt attacking in the right way.

The issue you would have is they would clam up. And just hold a position. On the ground that is called lay and pray. And is tactic no.1 for noobs.

 

[drop bear]

I didn't say too deadly. I said not safe to use against a resistive opponent. I can't speak entirely to Ueshiba's art, as my experience there is limited. But I do know that many of the techniques they use have the same issue. If I have you in a hand lock (3rd Set Wrist Lock for us, not sure what the Japanese name is they'd use, but I know they have it), you could probably defeat it. If I keep going at it (like I could with an Arm Bar), there's a VERY short distance between your successful resistance and you having a broken bone in your hand. This technique is the one I've seen cause the most injuries in the dojo, even without resistance. Techniques like that aren't safe to use in a challenge, because who wants to injure someone just to show it works?

This isn't anything unusual about Ueshiba's Aikido, nor any other aiki arts. Most arts contain things like this. The issue is when we expect an art to convert to sporting use, and we expect all to be able to do so similarly. I suppose if I were sadistic or sociopathic, so that I didn't care about hurting others, I'd be able to use all my weapons, and I'd be on a more even footing with folks who train for sport (none of us would have to second-think our instincts during the match). But I have a conscience, so I have to edit what I use, just like I do when "defending" against a white belt (where at least 40 of the 50 Classical Techniques aren't usable, because they don't know them).

I'll be clear on my view of the philosophy you're referring to. That philosophy, so far as I can tell, came later in Ueshiba's teaching, as a result of increasing influence from the Omoto religion. His earliest students show little evidence of it. It's an ethical principle, which I feel got out of hand: the highest ethical ground is to be able to defend yourself without harming your attacker. It's an ideal, and requires a large disparity in skill between attacker and defender, in my opinion. I do not subscribe to that philosophy, and I think most in NGA subscribe to it only as an ideal, since we teach breaks and other destructions as a matter of course. Too much emphasis on that principle will certainly render the art unusable for self-defense, except to the most skilled practitioners.

Yet there are arts that can do that. virtually anything grappling can put a guy on the deck and keep them there.

 

[Steve]

Yep. This is why I'm an advocate of eventually adding in some sparring of some sort, to let folks get a chance to see what will be different when they are facing a trained opponent. But be clear, that's what they're working on when they spar. An untrained opponent will have different movements, different reactions. I don't know if that matters as much in non-aiki arts, but it's a vital difference for us. If I only train to encourage my opponent into reactions by anticipating the reactions of trained martial artists, I'll get the "wrong" reactions from untrained, undisciplined folks, and will miss the aiki opportunities there. Since the latter are the more likely attackers, I have to spend a lot of my time there, and learn to make the adjustments to trained fighters.

The inherent flaw here is that you're presuming to know how an undisciplined and untrained person will attack. That raises all kinds of issues..

 

[Gerry Seymour]

We just spar untrained guys. untill they are trained. then spar trained guys.

There is a difference but it is a nuanced one. But we rely on positional dominance. So it is easier to get on to a guy who isnt attacking in the right way.

The issue you would have is they would clam up. And just hold a position. On the ground that is called lay and pray. And is tactic no.1 for noobs.

That makes sense. It's a different issue with aiki arts - we have to be able to reliably predict where the "voids" are going to show up, which give us aiki opportunities. And since we have to train new students to take falls in order to safely throw them much, by the time we get to most of the techniques, they no longer react entirely like an untrained person. By the time we're trying 5th Set techniques on them, they are nothing like untrained folks. We have to spend a lot of effort learning and understanding what creates different untrained reactions (is it a reaction to pain, an attempt to cover up from an attack, etc.?) so we can replicate those and practice each later. The trained reactions are a bit easier - we get students in who have training in other arts, and if we compare their early reactions (and even some they keep later) to those of us who have been training in NGA a long time, we can see a reasonable range of "trained" responses. And, of course, all of those tend to show up in sparring and randori.

 

[drop bear]

That makes sense. It's a different issue with aiki arts - we have to be able to reliably predict where the "voids" are going to show up, which give us aiki opportunities. And since we have to train new students to take falls in order to safely throw them much, by the time we get to most of the techniques, they no longer react entirely like an untrained person. By the time we're trying 5th Set techniques on them, they are nothing like untrained folks. We have to spend a lot of effort learning and understanding what creates different untrained reactions (is it a reaction to pain, an attempt to cover up from an attack, etc.?) so we can replicate those and practice each later. The trained reactions are a bit easier - we get students in who have training in other arts, and if we compare their early reactions (and even some they keep later) to those of us who have been training in NGA a long time, we can see a reasonable range of "trained" responses. And, of course, all of those tend to show up in sparring and randori.

Judo does that more than us. But then they cant double leg. So it evens out.

And you could walk into a judo school and get manhandled by their black belt. without having to count your limbs afterwards.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The inherent flaw here is that you're presuming to know how an undisciplined and untrained person will attack. That raises all kinds of issues..

I don't presume any such thing. I study it. Some of the study is from new students (how do their reactions differ from those with training), some are from observing videos, some are from just trying stuff on other students without warning them (poke someone in the kidney, and you get a specific reaction that gives a clue to part of their reaction to being punched there). There are innate reactions (the way people's bodies react to pains and impacts in certain areas) and there are some that are more variable (some people cover, some people flinch away, some people orient toward). These are all reactions that can be studied and replicated with some reasonable realism. It's not quite the same as having a truly untrained person reacting naturally, but there's no way to get those in a regular stream, so we do what we can. It's certainly not perfect, but what is?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yet there are arts that can do that. virtually anything grappling can put a guy on the deck and keep them there.

Yes, and if they don't train destructions, then they can pull out all their weapons in a contest. I can't. My brain wants to go for the destructions, but I can't go there, so my reactions are slowed, and some of my best-trained pathways aren't usable.

I never said we can't submit someone. But submission is not a self-defense strategy in most cases. I'll either put them down and get away, or I'll put them down so they stay there (destructions, etc.). So I have a few submissions (as I said earlier), but they are a very small part of my toolbox. I could train differently and be able to compete, but competition isn't my objective, so I don't train for that.

 

[drop bear]

Yes, and if they don't train destructions, then they can pull out all their weapons in a contest. I can't. My brain wants to go for the destructions, but I can't go there, so my reactions are slowed, and some of my best-trained pathways aren't usable.

I never said we can't submit someone. But submission is not a self-defense strategy in most cases. I'll either put them down and get away, or I'll put them down so they stay there (destructions, etc.). So I have a few submissions (as I said earlier), but they are a very small part of my toolbox. I could train differently and be able to compete, but competition isn't my objective, so I don't train for that.

Cop out.

I train an art that does as much damage as anybody elses and somehow manage not to leave a trail of broken bodies in my wake.

And I don think I am the exception.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Judo does that more than us. But then they cant double leg. So it evens out.

And you could walk into a judo school and get manhandled by their black belt. without having to count your limbs afterwards.

Yes, and that is kind of my point. They don't practice destructions, so they just do their thing. Nothing wrong with what they do. It's not what we do, and there's just much of ours that doesn't belong in a competion. I won't use wrist locks in randori with someone in NGA because of the risk of injury, so it's not about our art versus someone else's. We just have some tools that don't translate.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Cop out.

I train an art that does as much damage as anybody elses and somehow manage not to leave a trail of broken bodies in my wake.

And I don think I am the exception.

Do you practice destructions?