Joe Rogan smack talking TMA's like kung fu

[JowGaWolf]

My guess is if someone came at you at these angles and you struck them hard in the face in a similar manner, then the would experience something similar to what is being demonstrated. The only problem I see with Aikido is the same problem I see with most martial arts and that is knowing how to actually apply the techniques outside of demo mode.

 

[drop bear]

My guess is if someone came at you at these angles and you struck them hard in the face in a similar manner, then the would experience something similar to what is being demonstrated. The only problem I see with Aikido is the same problem I see with most martial arts and that is knowing how to actually apply the techniques outside of demo mode.

From guys who should in theory be able to counter that. Because they do akido as well.

 

[Tez3]

Are we going through every style comparing them unfavourably to BJJ? I'm sure we can find just the bad videos to show how deficient everything is to BJJ, we can ignore anything good about a style, we can ignore the effectiveness for the sake of the argument. If that's what we are doing can we just do it in one post please I'm bored with this drip feed of poison against other styles.

 

[RTKDCMB]

There's quite a few Aikido techniques that are based on an opponent grabbing you, and you doing a series of movements to get them off of you.

That could have something to do with Aikido being a defensive art.

 

[RTKDCMB]

The only problem I see with Aikido is the same problem I see with most martial arts and that is knowing how to actually apply the techniques outside of demo mode.

Since this is an Aikido thread now:

Start at 2:58.

 

[Hanzou]

As I said before, sacrifice throws can be done without tori grips, grabs or grapples by any other name....

Sumi gaeshi and uki waza are able to make use of a defensive stance or modified jigotai which has no grip on the uke's judo gi.

If your uke has a solid grip on you, you can throw em.

Bear in mind, that according to the IJF Referee Commission.

They say that when a throw is successfully executed, resulting in a nice, clean throw onto Uke's back, it is Ippon even if Tori does not have a grip.

This ruling should tell you something. Its legal to throw without grips.... what is the case on the street.

If a guy really wants to hang onto me... I will take him for a mean ride. If I was a bjj man like you... drop right down into sumi gaeshi... into top mount

Now for the record, I have given you four judo techniques that violate your assertion that you HAVE to grab to throw, or takedown.

I am not your personal researcher. I have been a good sport, and shared multiple or various ways a judoka player can do it.
You can find more no_grip judo techniques. I have... and tested such.

Even if I grant you all of those moves could be done without gripping your opponent. 4 variations of standard Judo throws isn't "numerous".

 

[Hanzou]

The first attack appears to be like a "clothes line" stike to the face

The second attack he touches them and presses down. Full Screen of what you posted

the attack after this he horse collars the guy. You can see him grab the back of the guys uniform around the neck area

And in either case he's barely touching them. So even if I grant that there's contact being made, the simple fact is that what we're witnessing there is almost exactly like the no touch ki stuff. I mean, there's a few times in that vid where someone just barely touches him and they go flying in an opposite direction. It also happened quite a few times in that Segal video as well. In some cases it actually looks like a strike, which completely takes the opponent to the mat.

Let's, compare that and the other Aikido demonstrations posted to a Judo demonstration;

There's a huge difference.

Tapping/hitting someone on the head and them falling down isn't grappling.

 

[Hanzou]

Are we going through every style comparing them unfavourably to BJJ? I'm sure we can find just the bad videos to show how deficient everything is to BJJ, we can ignore anything good about a style, we can ignore the effectiveness for the sake of the argument. If that's what we are doing can we just do it in one post please I'm bored with this drip feed of poison against other styles.

Showing Ueshiba and Watanabe performing Aikido is bad? The founder of the style and the one of the highest ranked Aikido instructors alive are demonstrating bad Aikido?

Interesting.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Tapping/hitting someone on the head and them falling down isn't grappling

Depends on the technique being as a student would you want the instructor to literally spear hand you in the throat to show that it would hurt. As BJJ student do you want some to break your arm to show you that it works? As an Aikido student do you want to run at me full speed so I can grab your head and torque your neck for real.?

 

[RTKDCMB]

Let's, compare that and the other Aikido demonstrations posted to a Judo demonstration;

Yeah, lets:

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, lets:

The second video is fake.

 

[Hanzou]

As BJJ student do you want some to break your arm to show you that it works?

We have the tap out to prevent that from happening. We don't tap their elbow, and have them wince in pain and spin around on the floor.

As an Aikido student do you want to run at me full speed so I can grab your head and torque your neck for real.?

Are you implying that Aikidoka aren't really throwing/taking down their students in their demonstrations?

 

[Hanzou]

Yeah, lets:

1st video: Nick Lowery is a high ranking Aikidoka and a big proponent of Ki techniques. He wrote an article defending Watanabe's ki demonstrations from critics, and often says that he's been thrown at a distance from ki attacks himself. I'm not surprised that he's applying similar concepts to Judo.

I would also note that what he was doing was a drill, not a demonstration.

2nd video: Fake.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Are you implying that Aikidoka aren't really throwing/taking down their students in their demonstrations?

No they are most like real but not done with full force and not all of the techniques in martial arts can be demonstrated through full or partial contact. You will never see someone do a contact demo of eye poking, not even a light one. What you most likely will see is someone showing an eye poke and the person reacting to the eye poke as if it really hit them even though it's clear no contact was made. The purpose of this is not to actually do the technique but to help students understand the technique. There are other techniques that are like this.

The pain that BJJ gives when simulating arm breaks isn't so you can tap out. The pain helps the student applying the technique to know that they are doing the technique correctly. We have a similar thing in my school when we practice Chin Na. We'll apply the technique that destroys the joint slowly, because it doesn't take a lot of effort to rip a joint. When we apply the technique the student in the joint lock will let us know if we are doing the technique correctly by the amount of pain that shows on his face.

You should really do some research instead of just trying to put everything down. I would even recommend taking a free trial at an aikido school or a kung fu school that teaches joint locks, so you can have a better understanding of Martial arts in general. People in this post are researching and telling you things that a serious martial arts student should be able to understand. It's not their responsibility to educate you via "proving that what you say isn't correct." If you think something isn't correct, you should be asking how does this work? What is going on with that technique? Why does that guy look like he's throwing someone with no hands? These are questions that someone would ask if they truly wanted to understand either own martial art or someone else's martial art style. This are the question that will help you determine what is fake and what would actually work.

 

[TSDTexan]

Even if I grant you all of those moves could be done without gripping your opponent. 4 variations of standard Judo throws isn't "numerous".

There are numerous, that is a fact. I am not your reasercher. Feel free to do your own homework. It might help you not make general absolutes that have massive holes in them.

I have found 15. I have been told by a Judo coach that there are more still.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I've "thrown" someone in sparring with no-touch before. Actually, he got mad, came at me off-balance, I got out of the way, and he overextended, tripped, and threw himself headfirst into a wall. If I had been an advanced practitioner at the time I might have been tempted to take credit for moving with the perfect timing to cause him to throw himself. Realistically, though, I was a beginner and the other guy was just being a klutz.

Here's my impression of how the "no-touch" thing gets started as something an advanced practitioner is demonstrating as if it were a reliable skill:

1) Student starts training. Is encouraged as uke to feed big overcommitted attacks without trying to keep their balance or regain their balance & structure if that abalance and structure is compromised by tori.

2) Student spends time being uke for real techniques that really hurt. (wrist locks, clotheslines, etc).

3) Student is taught to take big fall to receive said real techniques, rather than exploring smaller movements for regaining balance and structure. (To be clear, sometimes those big falls may really be necessary.)

4) Student starts subconsciously moving in advance of the technique as uke, to throw himself before the pain hits.

5) Student starts subconsciously unbalancing himself in advance of the actual kuzushi in order to play the part of a "good" uke who is feeding a properly "committed" (i.e. overcommitted) attack.

6) Instructor notices the techniques he is demonstrating working easier and easier, but fails to realize it is due to the uke becoming mentally conditioned to go with the move. Attributes the change to his own skill.

7) Dogma within the school allows for the possibility of mystical powers (whether that is framed as an interpretation of "ki" or something else).

8) At some point the uke becomes so mentally conditioned to anticipate and go along with tori's move that he throws himself before contact is made. Both student and teacher attribute this to the instructor's skill or mystical powers rather than uke's mental conditioning. From this point on the whole thing feeds on itself.

I witnessed and experienced some of this during my time in the Bujinkan. I wasn't particularly advanced, but I had a few training partners who I could sometimes get to fall without actually applying the technique or even making contact in some cases. What I'm seeing in the movement of the no-touch Aikido demonstrations matches what I saw happening in the Bujinkan.

To be clear, the actual techniques of the Bujinkan (just like those of Aikido) absolutely require contact. The no-touch thing is a delusional trap that some practitioners fall into if they don't correct uke when he starts being conditioned to unconsciously go with the technique. Unfortunately, being high-ranked doesn't mean someone is immune from falling into a delusion. In some cases it probably makes the trap that much more tempting.

 

[TSDTexan]

And in either case he's barely touching them. So even if I grant that there's contact being made, the simple fact is that what we're witnessing there is almost exactly like the no touch ki stuff. I mean, there's a few times in that vid where someone just barely touches him and they go flying in an opposite direction. It also happened quite a few times in that Segal video as well. In some cases it actually looks like a strike, which completely takes the opponent to the mat.

Let's, compare that and the other Aikido demonstrations posted to a Judo demonstration;

There's a huge difference.

Tapping/hitting someone on the head and them falling down isn't grappling.

This is like saying cops arent "really" good with their firearms. They only practice on paper targets and not real humans.

In the same way placeholder attacks have value.

If you (a prospective student) signed a wavier to not sue me if I blinded you, or crippled you, I would still have an internal moral confict. I would have to be a benevolent sociopath to willfully injure or out right cripple my students for their well being some day, in a "hypothetical" future fight.

A number of judo throws can be modifed easily so they (uke) don't land on their back.... but upon their head, neck and shoulders.

That is what they were modified out of.
Killing blows.
Throwing a guy in armor and helmet, who is probably armed, while on the battlefield while unarmed.

You do NOT want him getting back up to re-attack you.
Either broken necks, separated shoulders, shattered collarbones was the goal.

Also failing to kill him, meant you likely disarmed him, which means recovering his weapon and dispatching your debilitated enemy was the follow up.

Returning Judo to Jujutsu's lethality isnt too hard. Do we want to practice at such intensity on our uke's?

If we do, they will be blinded, crippled or dead.

Placeholder attacks dont mean the art is false... it means a safer training session that lets the Uke go home alive and relatively well.

When a combative sport is too civilized for too long a mentality change happens. Part of the skepticism of the MMA combative sports crowd is that
what we do works. Prove what you do works.

If I take a pefectly healthy cadaver (heart attack victim), and I Ippon throw him on his head shattering his neck in five places, there will still be critics... "non resistant opponent".

Same throw modified to not kill: aww.. you threw him but I dont see how that could hurt anyone. Look your opponent is getting back up.

Most judo throws are imperfect. Perfect form is extremely rare. They still work, even when the ideal form is not exacuted.

Now if Aikido was such a fail. As some MMA proponents say... Why did so many Judoka transition into it or cross train right before and after WW2?

In their own words Judoka considered Aikido to be valid SD.
Which raises a question... why would Judoka feel the need for another MA to get SD? Judo is a beast.

 

[Hanzou]

The pain that BJJ gives when simulating arm breaks isn't so you can tap out. The pain helps the student applying the technique to know that they are doing the technique correctly.

Yeah, but that has little to do with what you mentioned earlier. You asked if we break arms to show if an arm lock works. We have the tap out system in place so that we don't need to break arms.

You should really do some research instead of just trying to put everything down. I would even recommend taking a free trial at an aikido school or a kung fu school that teaches joint locks, so you can have a better understanding of Martial arts in general. People in this post are researching and telling you things that a serious martial arts student should be able to understand. It's not their responsibility to educate you via "proving that what you say isn't correct." If you think something isn't correct, you should be asking how does this work? What is going on with that technique? Why does that guy look like he's throwing someone with no hands? These are questions that someone would ask if they truly wanted to understand either own martial art or someone else's martial art style. This are the question that will help you determine what is fake and what would actually work.

Nice lecture, but where exactly did I put AIkido down? I simply said that I don't consider it a grappling style, and proceeded to give reasons for that opinion. Nowhere did I mention anything about effectiveness or fakery.

 

[Hanzou]

This is like saying cops arent "really" good with their firearms. They only practice on paper targets and not real humans.

In the same way placeholder attacks have value.

If you (a prospective student) signed a wavier to not sue me if I blinded you, or crippled you, I would still have an internal moral confict. I would have to be a benevolent sociopath to willfully injure or out right cripple my students for their well being some day, in a "hypothetical" future fight.

A number of judo throws can be modifed easily so they (uke) don't land on their back.... but upon their head, neck and shoulders.

That is what they were modified out of.
Killing blows.
Throwing a guy in armor and helmet, who is probably armed, while on the battlefield while unarmed.

You do NOT want him getting back up to re-attack you.
Either broken necks, separated shoulders, shattered collarbones was the goal.

Also failing to kill him, meant you likely disarmed him, which means recovering his weapon and dispatching your debilitated enemy was the follow up.

Returning Judo to Jujutsu's lethality isnt too hard. Do we want to practice at such intensity on our uke's?

If we do, they will be blinded, crippled or dead.

So are you saying that the Aikido attacks in demonstration and practice are choreographed, or done at full force?

For comparison's sake, Rousey's Judo throws were full force, as in she was actually throwing someone. In those demonstration vids, are they throwing themselves, or is the thrower really throwing them?

Placeholder attacks dont mean the art is false... it means a safer training session that lets the Uke go home alive and relatively well.

When a combative sport is too civilized for too long a mentality change happens. Part of the skepticism of the MMA combative sports crowd is that
what we do works. Prove what you do works.

If I take a pefectly healthy cadaver (heart attack victim), and I Ippon throw him on his head shattering his neck in five places, there will still be critics... "non resistant opponent".

Same throw modified to not kill: aww.. you threw him but I dont see how that could hurt anyone. Look your opponent is getting back up.

Most judo throws are imperfect. Perfect form is extremely rare. They still work, even when the ideal form is not exacuted.

Now if Aikido was such a fail. As some MMA proponents say... Why did so many Judoka transition into it or cross train right before and after WW2?

Who said anything about Aikido being a "failure", or that it was false?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Yeah, but that has little to do with what you mentioned earlier. You asked if we break arms to show if an arm lock works. We have the tap out system in place so that we don't need to break arms.

You are still missing the point. Not every technique is going to have a tap out option. by your logic these techniques are useless because the guy barely touches or doesn't touch at all when demonstrating a technique. Take note of the techniques where the person doesn't tap out. Take note of the techniques where the person doesn't make contact.

Nice lecture, but where exactly did I put AIkido down?

Your posts #762
"In Aikido, that arm bar is being performed because Uke was too stupid (or to slow) to let go of Tori's wrist." Your words from post #707
Your post #709
You don't have to say it directly in order to imply it your actions speak towards your focus. Just like the way you approach all of your discussions in the the same manner as a debater does, not caring about what the reality of a martial arts fighting style, nor having the desire to research beyond the argument you want to have. Then when things get "tight" for you, you change the focus and make statements like. "Who said anything about Aikido being a "failure", or that it was false?" and "Nowhere did I mention anything about effectiveness or fakery." Now with statements like this the argument no longer becomes about Aikido but about how you didn't directly say that Aikido is fake.

This is your MO