Joe Rogan smack talking TMA's like kung fu

[drop bear]

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.

The tap out in sub wrestling is a bit different. You could say it simulates breaking an arm and therefore the same as akido simulating a wrist lock throw.

And there you would be correct.

But in sub wrestling you are actually holding holding someone down and hurting them regardless whether they want to get out or not. So they are not going with the technique to assist it.

So in terms of evidence you can say that if your technique holds someone down and hurts them it is a viable technique without having to move into theory at all.

Same with sparring and striking. I can in training punch a guy until he stops attacking me. Regardless what he wants to do. He is not going with that technique.

And from there we can build up self defence theories.

So young Luke here attacks poor eli. Eli has actually defended himself to a point he can leave the situation.

 

[Hanzou]

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.

Except we weren't talking about "every technique". We were talking about arm locks.

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

LoL! Saying that the attacker is too stupid or slow to let go of the defenders wrist has nothing to do with the effectiveness of Aikido. I merely said that to point out that if someone is attacking you, you start performing an Aikido technique, and they refuse to release your wrist, then the idiot deserves all the pain coming his way.

BTW, I would apply the same to Bjj. If someone has me in a headlock, and I begin to counter the headlock by moving into a shoulder lock, the attacker would be either too stupid or too slow to release the headlock before I dislocate his shoulder. I take it the goal in Aikido would be to get the attacker to release the wrist, just like it would be Bjj's goal to get out of the headlock. Getting thrown to the concrete, or getting the shoulder dislocated are merely the consequences of being a stubborn attacker.

 

[TSDTexan]

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?



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

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?



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

Neither choreographed nor full force. Aikido randori is not kata. It is live sparing with some of the dangerous attacks partlly aborted with the uke behaving in a manner consistent with said atack.

An atemi to the eyeball is going to shut a guy down for a moment. The Uke does simulation wrt this.

Ukes do throw themselves to avoid breaks. The do have the option of resisting... which would be very harmful.

So if the Aikido tech is truely a throw (not a lock or break)... and is exactly done... the uke will go flying whether he wants to or not.

Same as Judo.
You should look into competitive aikido. Very resistant ukes. Aka Tori on Tori fighting.

I am not speaking for all Aikido right here, just what I have been exposed to...

These days Aikido lower level randori typically simulates multiple unskilled attackers.

Only higher dan tests, or older past era's lower level randori saw multiple skilled attacker type uke In the match up.

It is chaos from the word Go!

3 or more men charge you with the attempt to kick punch or tackle you. They win if they successfully pin and hold you on the ground, and you cannot break free.

Your job is remain on your feet and stay in constant motion while being highly efficient with attack window opportunities.
You win by staying on your feet by showing a measure of control over your opponents.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I take it the goal in Aikido would be to get the attacker to release the wrist, just like it would be Bjj's goal to get out of the headlock.

I don't know the answer to that. I found these two videos. Is this along the lines of what you were thinking?

 

[drop bear]

Neither choreographed nor full force. Aikido randori is not kata. It is live sparing with some of the dangerous attacks partlly aborted with the uke behaving in a manner consistent with said atack.

An atemi to the eyeball is going to shut a guy down for a moment. The Uke does simulation wrt this.

Ukes do throw themselves to avoid breaks. The do have the option of resisting... which would be very harmful.

So if the Aikido tech is truely a throw (not a lock or break)... and is exactly done... the uke will go flying whether he wants to or not.

So at what stage does uke learn to defend these attacks?.Or the other guy learns to counter that defence?So that you develop a layered approach to sell defence.

So to go to a wrestling scenario. I double leg. You sprawl. I switch to single. You get a leg out. I switch to knee tap and get the takedown.

 

[Hanzou]

I don't know the answer to that. I found these two videos. Is this along the lines of what you were thinking?

No, this;



Interestingly, that top vid is almost exactly how we do standing headlock defense in Bjj.

 

[drop bear]

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.

I have witnessed this maaing and bjjing. You notice when you get a big new guy who dosent feed you anything and just clamps you.

You have to use different technique.

 

[drop bear]

No, this;



Interestingly, that top vid is almost exactly how we do standing headlock defense in Bjj.

Guy on top let's the guy on bottoms elbow out. Fighting for that escape is different technique.

And a good example of how resisted technique is different to non resisted.

 

[drop bear]

Guy on top let's the guy on bottoms elbow out. Fighting for that escape is different technique.

And a good example of how resisted technique is different to non resisted.

The escape we use still not resisted though.

Wait that was a bad explanation. Neither technique is the escape.

If I could find scarf hold actually being defended which I cant.

But the correct technique generally looks like this.

 

[Hanzou]

Guy on top let's the guy on bottoms elbow out. Fighting for that escape is different technique.

And a good example of how resisted technique is different to non resisted.

The guy on the bottom's elbow is out because that's a headlock, not a Kesa Gatame/Scarf Hold. The latter is a far more secure hold, so it would require a different set of escapes.

 

[TSDTexan]

So at what stage does uke learn to defend these attacks?.Or the other guy learns to counter that defence?So that you develop a layered approach to sell defence.

So to go to a wrestling scenario. I double leg. You sprawl. I switch to single. You get a leg out. I switch to knee tap and get the takedown.

Uke is the attacker ... Tori in Judo or Nage (in aikido) thrower, defender.

Uke is learning the defense by receiving the defense.
The word Uke means "receive" or commonly defined: one who takes the fall.

A more nuanced translation is "one who gains knowledge through suffering"

Uke (literally "one who receives", [and the thrown one] ) and nage (the thrower) have a very special relationship.

Unlike many martial artists who competes with an opponent and trains against an opponent, traditionally the aikidoka trains with a partner who simulates an attacker.

There is no competition in aikido, no pitting of one person against another. Instead, each partner is half of a whole, each having equal responsibility for the learning experience.

The uke exists to enhance the learning of the partner.

Yes, he or she is learning a number of things that are specific to that role. But in essence his primary role is to act as the check and balance on the partner's developing skills and to provide constant feedback to the partner.

Half of one's training is in the role of uke. If you are doing something different in each role, your body simply gets confused about what it should be doing.

Sometimes you are the yin... other times the yang.

Uke and nage should be doing exactly the same thing in terms of principle so that training in each role is still creating enhanced martial skills.

Somehow this got really distorted in modern Aikido.

Aikido so often these days is all about a nage striving to execute incredibly complex techniques against an uke who attacks like a martially handicapped person.

This fundamentally limits the level of the practice to something extremely basic regardless of the years of effort put in. Very sad.

What is wanted is to have a nage who can execute technique against an opponent who is using the same principles that he is using.

From the practice perspective this is precisely when the training gets worth the while.

Ukes should be taught from the very start how to attack properly. This is too often not the case.

Since one of the fundamental principles of Aikido is "kuzushi on contact", ukes should be taught how to grab in such a way that they can break the balance of the nage just with the grab itself, which is what an Akidoka should be trying to do if he grabbed a real life agressor.

Nage should be allowed to try to strike the uke when he grabs. If uke's grab doesn't allow him to defend against a punch or kick from nage, it isn't being done properly.

But much of what I see these days are examples of the attacker simply giving up right in the middle of his attack and it is terrible.

The Uke's job is to keep the attack continuous until it is brought under control by the nage. This is how uke gives feedback to nage.

Once one is past the beginner level of the art, if one leaves an opening anywhere in one's technique he should either be struck instantly or reversed.

In beginner practice, one should point out the openings but leave out the reversals simply because if a senior keeps reversing a technique the beginner never actually gets to do it and one doesn't ever learn to do something by not doing it over and over.

But about the notion that the uke takes falls.

The fall is simply how the uke keeps himself or herself safe when nage gets kuzushi.

Uke provides feedback to the partner.

That is the role of uke. It takes the form of maintaining ones balance when the nage doesn't get kuzushi properly.

It takes the form of striking the nage when he or she is presents an opening. But they need not be all out punches.

In training the objective for the uki was simply tap the nage on the head to let him know he was open to a punch.

An uki didn't have to punch his lights out to let him know. Within Randori and in general, traditionally akido isnt a fight or competition... it is communication.

Its been said by masters in Aikido is 90% strikes, and that was corrected to say 100% strikes. Instead of each and every punch, there was a substitute made in their places.
This was summed up up in Saotome Sensei's statement: "Every throw you do in Aikido is a strike or strikes that you CHOOSE not to do."


I would say Aikido is 10 percent atemi plus 90 percent atemi.

Saotome Sensei frequently said that if you knew the other guy would not, or could not strike you, ALL techniques were stoppable.

This is what it means when someone says the proverb "Aikido is 90% atemi". Atemi is implicit in every movement Aikido does.

It is uke's job as part of his training not to put nage in the position of having to make the atemi strikes explicit from either person's role.


Back to aikido being an art that shamelessly snatches from martial arts....
Saotome Sensei is firmly on record over 40 years saying that: " Aikido has no "style". "

Saotome Sensei will do a class that looks like the softest T'ai Chi and then do a class that looks like the hardest karate.

He can throw you with a classic judo throw and he can send you flying with barely a touch.

It's ALL Aikido as far as he is concerened.

At its heart, Aikido is like most other Japanese martial arts in that it is imbued with "sword mentality".

One cut, one death is the model for Japanese sword and it influences all the other arts.

In karate, Funakoshi always said "one punch, one death". In Aikido it gets changed a bit by becoming Kuzushi on contact

(contained in the phrase Katsu hayabi, sometimes translated as instant victory).

The Aikidoka wins in the instant he came into contact (and that can actually be before the physical touch) then in that instant that moment in time he chose to manifest the technique in a way that is creative rather than destructive.

But he had that one moment when he could have destroyed the opponent.

If that moment wasn't there, the rest was just wishful thinking and the Aikido is just a dance.

 

[Hanzou]

Couldn't it be also argued that Aikido's striking and weapon training make it far different than grappling arts?

 

[TSDTexan]

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.

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.

And then there is the contrary position

Re:
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.

My comment: Bad instruction from the sensai

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

My comment, the Nage or Tori needs to be able pick up on this and question the uke to help the uke observe and correct this. A good aikido sensai sould be able to spot this from across the room.

 

[JowGaWolf]

And then there is the contrary position

View attachment 19493

Re:
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.

My comment: Bad instruction from the sensai

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

My comment, the Nage or Tori needs to be able pick up on this and question the uke to help the uke observe and correct this. A good aikido sensai sould be able to spot this from across the room.

I don't fully understand #1 and #4 but I'm definitely taking the picture with the Chinese proverb lol

 

[TSDTexan]

Couldn't it be also argued that Aikido's striking and weapon training make it far different than grappling arts?

Having more branches does not mean its not the same kind of tree.

Supplemental training doesn't negate its core.

The difference for bjj, is Dr. Kano cherry picked from unarmed techniques only. And reserved striking to dan ranks, but had Karate Masters come and teach selected atemi.

He could have retained weapons either as kata or as part of the Do. Turning the weapon into a philosophy or spiritual discipline, from a tool of war.

Bjj could have inherited weapons just like it has striking in its DNA.

If the grappling were totally absent your point would be valid.
If the grappling composes less then 25% of techs or grappling isnt taught until after BB rank your point would be valid.

Someone could study all of traditional aikido and never transfer knowledge of weapons to his students.

Thats branch of aikido, would still be a grappling art.

There are Aikido teachers who believe aikido was never meant to have strikes, and say its not part of the art.

Are they wrong? Yes and no. Its a fact the original art has strikes. And their own aikido art is strikeless, and is still recognizable as Aikido.

 

[TSDTexan]

I don't fully understand #1 and #4 but I'm definitely taking the picture with the Chinese proverb lol

It was put up to share. This I have as a print in my study.

Of course, skeptics will say wires on the guy or weights in the basket.

Who knows...

 

[ballen0351]

Couldn't it be also argued that Aikido's striking and weapon training make it far different than grappling arts?

There are strikes in Judo so should it make judo far different the, grappling arts

 

[Hanzou]

There are strikes in Judo so should it make judo far different the, grappling arts

Restricted to kata, which is reserved for upper ranks, and some gyms don't even practice anymore....

 

[Hanzou]

double post.

 

[ballen0351]

Restricted to kata, which is reserved for upper ranks, and some gyms don't even practice anymore....

Nonsense Judo has strikes. Period. So again should we not consider it a grappling art?