Joe Rogan smack talking TMA's like kung fu

[Hanzou]

What's not TKD, the picture you posted in post #635 or the videos in post #645 or something else?

The picture I posted.

 

[Hanzou]

Well if Hanzou doesn't think Aikido is grappling then it must not be since apparently he has the final say. I guess all you Aikido folks havejust been pretending all these years.

Actually that's a debate that has been ongoing within Aikido itself. Especially after the rise of grappling styles within MA. There are Aikidoka out there that would classify Aikido as something different than Judo, Wrestling, Bjj, Sambo, etc.

Given the nature of the style, they have a solid argument.

 

[Xue Sheng]

The picture I posted.

Then I apologize for insinuating that you were wrong about TKD since you were not talking about the posted videos and I have no idea where that picture comes from

 

[Hanzou]

Who said anything about "taking down" 3 attackers. (Which of course is a groundfighting specialist's only option) There are other things besides a takedown.

When I say "take down", I'm not talking about a grappling take down, I'm talking about taking them out, or beating them down.

There are lots of options like giving someone a broken nose, or a debilitating / knock out strike.

Or simply fighting on your feet, negating attacks, doing an occasional throw or sweep and wearing the untrained attackers out.

That sounds like the plot of a bad karate movie. What if they're not "untrained"? What if thug#1 wrestled in high school, and thug#2 did some boxing at his community Rec Center? You don't need to take an Asian martial art to be "trained".

Some of the Karate based styles actually test the multiple attackers scenario at Dan rank tests (2 vs 1 at 1st Dan, 3 vs 1 at 2nd dan), and bring in outside instructors from other arts, as well as Karate.

The guest instructors are told well in advance that the the testee will be at defending at full speed and full power and acting as the test were a live fire event. (Which is why only mid and high Dan's are usually brought in)

You mean like this?

 

[Hanzou]

Then I apologize for insinuating that you were wrong about TKD since you were not talking about the posted videos and I have no idea where that picture comes from

Apology accepted.

That pic is from a UK Goju-Ryu dojo.

 

[TSDTexan]

If there is one thing I love about BJJ, it's how quickly those guys can tie me up and tap me out, if they manage to get me down with a firm grip on me.
BJJ is a fantastically effective grappling sport, that I'm always eager to get dominated by.

Somethings just never sound right.

 

[TSDTexan]

When I say "take down", I'm not talking about a grappling take down, I'm talking about taking them out, or beating them down.



That sounds like the plot of a bad karate movie. What if they're not "untrained"? What if thug#1 wrestled in high school, and thug#2 did some boxing at his community Rec Center? You don't need to take an Asian martial art to be "trained".



You mean like this?

No. I mean untrained as in any discipline for any time worth mentioning... Because statistics tell us there are billions more non martial artists than martial artists, and your putting words in my mouth if you are arguing that I mean " just Asian ma" when I refer to untrained. Nice strawman.

Secondly, I was there, in the middle of a dog fight, getting my butt pretty much handed to me to the degree I had gone purely defensive, and that my Master started hurting people badly. After hurting two fellows badly he crushed the ringleader's will to fight, through applied Korean Karate... And they bailed.

He wouldn't have been able to do so, so easily, if they had more formal training than mere street fights, using numbers rather than skills.

Running for him wasn't a viable option, with a student partially pinned and fighting from his knees.

Master always relished a good fight, even before he became an accomplished MA. This was what he considered a weak challenge. He was disappointed that they were common street thugs.
Instead of disciplined fighters.

You are mistaken in your stated position that no MA style trains for multiple attackers. While ground fighting specialists have an advantage in 1 on 1.. It is a mistake to view all ma as training for 1 on 1. A careful review of Kata tells us that system founders expected multiple attackers.

As more than a few MA have a battlefield pedigree this should not surprise us.

The first time I did (Aikido) randori and had three people charge me from across the mats was a particularly wakeup moment. My Aikido Sensei said "A judoka assumes a single competition opponent, an aikidokoka has an implied assumption of many"

 

[Koshiki]

Somethings just never sound right.

Haha, wow, yeah, that's yup. I think I'll just step out of this conversation now--- Wait, what's that??? A bear??? Everybody look over there!!!!

 

[ballen0351]

Actually that's a debate that has been ongoing within Aikido itself. Especially after the rise of grappling styles within MA. There are Aikidoka out there that would classify Aikido as something different than Judo, Wrestling, Bjj, Sambo, etc.

Given the nature of the style, they have a solid argument.

So grappling master what should we call it?

 

[Hanzou]

So grappling master what should we call it?

The Akidoka preferred the term "seizing" over grappling.

Again, they make a strong argument.

 

[Koshiki]

While Aikido is pretty divorced from the grappling found in most grappling-centered arts and sports, and actually reasonably distinct from the stand-up grappling of most other Japanese arts, it does still entail, shall we say, a liiiiittle bit of an emphasis on manipulation of the enemy, throws, and joint locks.

Which, generally speaking, is what has traditionally been considered grappling...

I'm not saying it absolutely is grappling, as I'm no Aikidoka, but I am saying that if it's not grappling, I don't know what to call it...

Just to hopelessly try to tie this thread back together: I wonder what Joe Rogan thinks it should be called?

 

[Koshiki]

The Akidoka preferred the term "seizing" over grappling.

Huh, "seizing," really? Weird. Well, I guess there's my answer. Still looks like fluid grappling to me. I'm not saying it's a form of grappling I particularly find effective for me, but I guess I tend to view the contact components of arts as either striking or grappling.

"Seizing." Weird. Learn something every day... Do you happen to know why? A quick google of "Aikido Seizing" turned up all sorts of stuff like, "Aikido - seize the initiative," or, "seize the shoulder," neither of which is overly enlightening.

Also, I've been saying the word "seizing" in my head so much that it doesn't sound like a word anymore. Super Duper Semantic Satiation!

 

[Hanzou]

While Aikido is pretty divorced from the grappling found in most grappling-centered arts and sports, and actually reasonably distinct from the stand-up grappling of most other Japanese arts, it does still entail, shall we say, a liiiiittle bit of an emphasis on manipulation of the enemy, throws, and joint locks.

Which, generally speaking, is what has traditionally been considered grappling...

I'm not saying it absolutely is grappling, as I'm no Aikidoka, but I am saying that if it's not grappling, I don't know what to call it...

Just to hopelessly try to tie this thread back together: I wonder what Joe Rogan thinks it should be called?

Frankly, in those circles, Aikido is generally referred to as "crappling".

 

[ballen0351]

The Akidoka preferred the term "seizing" over grappling.

Again, they make a strong argument.

Where are you seeing this? I know several people that train in Aikido and ive trained in it off and on I've never heard this.

 

[Drose427]

Where are you seeing this? I know several people that train in Aikido and ive trained in it off and on I've never heard this.

Youtube

 

[JowGaWolf]

How come Rogan, an 'expert' in TKD didn't address this issue? Or better yet, demonstrate these...?

Yep that a good question. For someone to be an "expert" in TKD not diving deeper into his own style is strange. Had he done so he wouldn't have been "surprised" about it's limitations.

Not because the animal stuff doesn't work (Rogan outright humilates the monkey style on YT). It's that competent animal style kung fu is way over the avergage practitoner's heads.... as evidenced by that 2-man kung fu form vid.

One of the forms I know actually has part of the monkey style in it, but it's no where near like what most people see. It's just a small piece Mark 0:41 and 0:48 (not me in the video) That small piece by itself is difficult to learn. It took me a about 6 months just to learn it where I feel comfortable with doing it. It will take about 6 months to learn how to generate the necessary power to make it useful and another 4 or 5 months just to know what situations are best suited for this technique in a fight.

 

[Koshiki]

The monkey style practitioners I know are without a doubt the most impressive martial artists I have ever met, in terms of real, full-contact application. They do five variations of monkey, each practitioner following on or more of the paths that suit there own abilities and skills.

I can't speak with authority or depth on the style itself, but I can say that those guys TRAIN and, while they don't sport-spar, when you anything-goes spar with them, they are always in control. They're fast, fluid, tough, very adaptive, and unpredictable beyond belief. Some of the stuff they do works just because it seems so out there that you just would never expect anyone to ever do it.

And then, watching them "play" with each other, you realize just how restrained and polite they were being with you...

I usually feel pretty on top of my game, when sparring, but I have never felt like anything but an eager student with any of their more advanced students/teachers.

And yes, when they spar, it is still very obviously monkey; it's fluid, it's jumpy, it's climby, it's weird and distracting, and at no point does it ever become anything like the faux kickboxing we're familiar with.

 

[Hanzou]

Where are you seeing this? I know several people that train in Aikido and ive trained in it off and on I've never heard this.

Again, its nothing official or anything, just something I've heard from some Akidoka that I've run across, and that I've seen repeated in a few forum posts.

Another one is "trapping".

 

[Koshiki]

Again, its nothing official or anything, just something I've heard from some Akidoka that I've run across, and that I've seen repeated in a few forum posts.

Another one is "trapping".

I have heard both the term "to seize" and the term "to trap" many times, and yes, some of them from my one Aikido buddy, but always in regards to specific technique, not an entire style of [what is usually considered] grappling.

To seize something, in stand-up grappling, is usually just a way of saying "grab it." At least in my experience.

To Trap is usually a more specific meaning, implying that you assume control of a (usually) limb without grabbing or seizing it. You see a lot of what I'm talking about in Win Chun and Jeet Kun Do, at least as I've seen it practiced.

Here's the first example I found with a quick search. In the count of the initial drill, the "three" is where the trapping occurs, or can occur.

I'm not saying no Aikidoka use the terms trapping or seizing to describe their entire art, just that, based on my personal experience, most people use those terms for basic elements of upright grappling, along with many others, and that that could be what these guys were talking about, rather that Aikido is "all trapping," or "all seizing." Maybe?

Although, you're right, after more googling, I did find one instance of someone on here saying that, yes, Aikido is grappling, but that as an Aikidoka, they prefer the term "Seizing." Seemed more like one guy's personal take though, rather than a strong debate within the actual Aikido community.

 

[Koshiki]

is aikido a grappling martial art? | MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

Wait, my mistake. The thread I found was about whether Aikido is grappling. The overwhelming consensus was that yes, it is quite obviously grappling. Chris Parker, at one point, mentioned that it is based on "seizing" which he defined as "grabbing, holding, pulling, pushing, squeezing, choking, pinning etc." He then offered that, by definition, grappling is technique which is seizing based.

Baku, the poster I was thinking of, then said that he'd never thought of using that terminology before, but that he liked it. I don't think he's actually an Aikidoko though, I'm not sure how I got the impression that he was...

Anyhow, I'd be interested to learn more about the terms usage within Aikido because I both love the Martial Arts, and find linguistics to be entertaining at worst, and essential to communication and thereby civilized democracy at best.