The notion that you have to throw/submit yourself in Aikido or get your wrist broken

[Gerry Seymour]

The thing is you do kind of have to have a backup if your slick move fails anyway. So it is not the end of the world if your slower than 100% wrist lock doesn't take.

And if you have everything else on point. E.g. the Russian wrist snap. You don't need the lock.

And you do kind of need these elements to be on point because if you don't they will just clench their fist and you won't get that wristlock.

Which is what OP was basically describing.

Agreed, on all points. When I teach techniques, I always teach that the entry and control are more important than the finish. At each of those points (really, arbitrarily divided into 3 segments - it's many points along the way), you can choose one of several options. So, when practicing wrist locks, for instance, the focus is on the control that improves the situation. If the wrist lock fails (isn't available), you can just go to another option. If the control fails, you're not in good shape.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I've seen all of her videos and I'm just amazed at what she gets away with and how people buy into that stuff. I can only assume that people who take her classes have never been in a real fight either as a kid or an adult.

I'm not sure in what scenario I would find myself pinned against the wall facing the wall, unless I'm getting arrested. I run attack scenarios and I've yet been able to pin any of the students against the wall like that. Seems like something more out of the movies. Maybe someone can shed some light on that.

The pinning against the wall drill might be useful for creating a limit/complication when looking at movement and escapes. Like other drills, it's not so much about whether that scenario mirrors an anticipated scenario so much as whether there's something useful to learn from it. Think of it like an MMA fighter learning to work against the cage. If they've never practiced it, they'll have to learn the advantages and disadvantages on the fly.

That said, what I saw looked like a bunch of beginner drills performed with too much focus on moving to the next drill, rather than doing something in the current drill.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not so. At least not in my case.

In my case it's more like this.

I have trained with 2 shodan level Aikidoka, and neither one of them could pull off any standing locks on anyone, not even the new guys.

There is hundreds of hours of sparring footage, in which it doesn't work.

There are thousands and thousands of recorded MMA and grappling matches in which such things never take place.

And in fact, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of this sort of thing working in the wild whatsoever.

That is more than enough to convict in any court of law.

IMO, standing locks are just a way to practice the mechanics of the lock with low risk. For most locks, if the person is standing upright, the lock's not going to be a good choice. Once you've broken their structure enough (which often means a knee touches the ground, or some other big change), the locks are more available. There are some situations where locks become available standing, but anyone with fight training is likely to nullify those. Against the average gumby, they're more likely to show up (according to cops I've trained with).

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The only thing I can say is that maybe someone who knows how to apply it will post video on Youtube. My perspective comes from my own experience of what I see vs what may be out there. How many people have we seen spar and actually use Jow Ga techniques? So when it comes to Aikido, I'm thinking the same thing. There may be others out there who just haven't posted a video of them sparring.

I like this one. But unfortunately I don't know enough about Aikido to know if that's what he was doing.

if he's actually using it Aikido (in the video above, then that video gives a much different perspective than the video below.

The only thing I'm sure about is that Joint locks works, and how it's applied is going to determine reliability. I don't think it's a bunch of made up Joint locks and arm twists. I also believe that it's going to be rare to find someone passionate enough to actually learn how to be functional with the system. Most people rather mix and match systems, which is nothing wrong with doing that. It's just that doing so, may cause a person to give up on the applications of the system instead of trying to figure it out.

I recognize the top video as Aikido. The main difference between the approaches, is that the guy in the bottom video is trying to get to techniques, while the guy in the top video is just controlling the opponent until something shows up. Mind you, no punching in the top video, which might change things up.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That’s Dan “the Wolfman” Theodore, a BJJ black belt who is on a bit of a crusade to show that certain traditional techniques like the standing wrist locks from Aikido can work. He will be the first to tell you that in order to make them work you need solid grappling/wrestling skills and plenty of live sparring experience.

He's doing a good job, and I agree with that underlying requirement.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

All due respect to Wolfman, but every video I see him in, he's using those "Aikido" techniques on people much smaller and less experienced than him.

I find the second video much more interesting, because you had two people of about equal size and experience, with an Aikidoka instructor who could do next to nothing against a trained MMA fighter.

The guy in the second video abandons all premise of Aikido in the interaction.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I could tell he has a passion for it. He enjoys the journey of learning and understanding the techniques he uses. It's people like him that TMA's need more of. Someone who is willing to go beyond what is just taught. Someone who has the passion to understand something through actually trying to use it and understand it. He wouldn't be as good as he is had he just bought into the talk that Aikido is useless and written it off.

I don't know if Aikido practitioners have the same problem that I had with Kung Fu, but for me TMA is alway taught from a defense perspective where "attacker is always attacking first". For me this hyper defensive focus made it really difficult for me to learn Jow Ga. It wasn't until I started to train from an offensive perspective that things began to click. I didn't see a lot of what I see now because I was always trying to counter and react.. It's easier for me to do kung fu when my opponent reacts to me. In general, I think it's easier to know my opponent will react to me than for me to figure out what he's going to do based on how I react to him.

Aikido is always shown as someone attacking the practitioner and in general I think that's just the incorrect mindset for trying to be successful with TMA in general. I think that what you are seeing is this perspective change which will give the techniques a different look based on how we usually see it in demos

I can't speak to what the original intent was, since I wasn't there, but I think the practice of working from the input of an attack has become exaggerated. IMO, you use all your tools. If you press the attack at least part of the time, they're more likely to respond with something that opens up some of the Aikido approaches. If you just wait and do nothing, they have too much time to pick apart your defense.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

All it takes is a good high school or college wrestler. They will not be able to sweep him.

I've been able to pull that off, and my ground game is mediocre.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It is not a bold assertion at all. The surface makes a huge difference.

Pavement isn't lava.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I get it. You claim there are other grappling options to them against a wrestler when there's not a mat. I contend that these are highly idealistic assumptions against someone that works takedowns all the bloody time and is equally skilled at what he is doing as the jiuijitsu guy is on the ground. And yes, even if you introduce techniques that he is less familiar with.

There will always be outliers but my money is on the wrestler. That is all!

Wrestlers are not immune to takedowns. In fact, the ruleset they train for causes them to make opportunities for takedowns they're not used to. Are they harder to take down than some folks? Yep. Not harder than getting a takedown on a similarly skilled Judoka, IMO.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you are looking for that flowing look that Aikido has, to show up in a fight, then I'm going to tell you that you aren't going to see that. Anyone who trains a TMA and can use the techniques, will tell you that the technique will remain but the crisp movie like movements are going to be the first victim in martial arts application.

I think this is where a lot of folks (I think we're all guilty of it at times) say, "Okay, so that's kind of the same technique, but it's not X system, clearly." Some drills don't look as much like the application (exaggeration of principles, limitation of movement, etc.). Some systems use more of those drills. Oddly, even when things don't look the same, they often feel more or less the same to the person doing them.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think for most people, for it to be considered "effective" it needs to be shown at the highest levels of martial arts.

That would be MMA.

I think you're confusing "highly effective" or "most effective" with "effective". There are techniques that work reasonably when there's a skill differential in your favor, but have better alternatives for working against more highly skilled folks.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If anecdotes were reliable all TMAs would be filled to the brim with trained killers doing 'too deadly for the cage' techniques.

Once you require other forms of evidence that narrative quickly evaporates.

Someone's personal experience isn't anecdotal to them. Just saying.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Do you have any clip to show that?

In the following picture, when white uses leg to lift blue, blue can also use his foot to step into white's groin (symmetry). This is one example that technique X can be used to counter technique X itself.

Really, not so much. Blue's feet were on the ground, pushed down by the force of white's weight dropping. That's what sets up the throw.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

@Alan Smithee
@Kung Fu Wang
@gpseymour

Alan this is mainly for you. It talks about some of the dangers that come with applying joint locks and it may share light on why some people go with the lock in training. I personally like it because it shows just how little movement is needed to get the lock started.

It talks about your opponent "doing something stupid" in an effort to escape a wrist lock. My biggest fear when teaching kids wrist locks is that they will play around with it and quickly apply it to their partner and injuring the partner. Even when I teach adults wrist locks I warn them multiple times, "do not quickly do this joint lock" and "do not be a smartass, and try to resist it by overpowering it." Then I tell them, if your partner thinks it's funny to resist it by over powering it, then release the lock. In general with Joint locks, there's a correct way to escape and a really painful way to escape.

People who train wrist locks for function will tell you the similar warnings like what's in the video and what I stated. I don't think you would be happy if your training partner broke your wrist. It's been my experience that people will only train stuff like this with people they can trust.

I find it interesting that he calls the second one "Aikido style", when literally all of the locks he showed are in Aikido.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Really, not so much. Blue's feet were on the ground, pushed down by the force of white's weight dropping. That's what sets up the throw.

The issue is timing. When your opponent puts his foot on your belly, he just exposes his groin. This give you a chance to put your foot into his groin. Your groin attack prevent him from his body rotation.

This is a traditional concept to use a throw to counter itself.

For example, when your opponent applies foot sweep on you, he is standing on one leg and you can sweep his rooting leg. His foot sweep just put him in single leg balance. This will give you a good foot sweep opportunity. Of course your foot sweep has to reach to his rooting leg before his foot sweeping leg can reach to your leg. That's "timing".

Other examples are:

- front cut counter front cut.
- hip throw counter hip throw.
- twist spring counter twist spring.
- leg lift counter leg lift.
- foot sweep counter foot sweep.
- pull guard counter pull guard.
- ...

If you know how to play a GO game, you should understand that if you just land your spot on a symmetry position, you cannot loss (except there is only 1 center spot).

Here are examples that when you apply hip throw, it gives your opponent to use hip throw to counter you too.

​

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

When I teach techniques, I always teach that the entry and control are more important than the finish.

I always believe if I can put my opponent's body into a 30 degree angle, the gravity will do the rest of the job for me, and I don't have to finish the throw. This way, my opponent doesn't have to deal with 200 impact on the ground daily. My training session can last longer.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think for most people, for it to be considered "effective" it needs to be shown at the highest levels of martial arts.

Some techniques require

- more body strength than others (such as shin bite).
- better timing than others (such as foot sweep).

A shin bite takes less timing than a foot sweep does. But shin bite require extra shin bone training. Which one is more effective? It's just a trade off IMO.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I think you're confusing "highly effective" or "most effective" with "effective". There are techniques that work reasonably when there's a skill differential in your favor, but have better alternatives for working against more highly skilled folks.

Agree! A hip throw is very easy to be countered by an experienced opponent. But a leg lift is very difficult to be countered even by an experienced opponent.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The issue is timing. When your opponent puts his foot on your belly, he just exposes his groin. This give you a chance to put your foot into his groin. Your groin attack prevent him from his body rotation.

This is a traditional concept to use a throw to counter itself.

For example, when your opponent applies foot sweep on you, he is standing on one leg and you can sweep his rooting leg. His foot sweep just put him in single leg balance. This will give you a good foot sweep opportunity. Of course your foot sweep has to reach to his rooting leg before his foot sweeping leg can reach to your leg. That's "timing".

Other examples are:

- front cut counter front cut.
- hip throw counter hip throw.
- twist spring counter twist spring.
- leg lift counter leg lift.
- foot sweep counter foot sweep.
- pull guard counter pull guard.
- ...

If you know how to play a GO game, you should understand that if you just land your spot on a symmetry position, you cannot loss (except there is only 1 center spot).

Here are examples that when you apply hip throw, it gives your opponent to use hip throw to counter you too.

​

If uke can get his foot onto your groin (or anything else), then you shouldn't be doing tomoe nage. The throw depends upon a circumstance that would make that foot placement all but impossible. From the way you describe it, it sounds like the guy's on his back reaching up with a foot, but that's not how the throw is used.