Don't think aikido is effective self-defense

I have seen some aikido down in New York City and it looks less than effective to me. Everyone seem to cooperate and go slowly and the techniques don't seem like they would really work. It looks great, might be great exercise and a wonder spiritual discipline, but self-defense I wonder?

Sure it is! Just because you are seeing a classroom setting where people are cooperative doesn't mean Aikido isn't combat effective. Perhaps you just haven't hit the right dojo. If these guys are to sedate try some more aggressive dojos. There are some that will scare the hell out of you with their intensity and you may end up re-thinking your problem with cooperative Uke's.

I agree, like in any Martial Art, it is the instructor who creates the atmosphere in the dojo, if you are looking for an art that is effective in the street for self-defense then focus more on finding an instructor that teaches the art in that aspect. Some instructors are more interested in the spiritual aspects of Aikido, some more into Aiki-Jutsu.

My opinion is that once you are a recognized beginner (in aikido beginner = shodan) then you can start to practice aikido. Up until then, you are practicing techniques that illustrate the core principles in aikido.

So as far as judging a dojo by the instructor, be sure your eyes are keen enough to discern the difference between aikido exercises and aikido techniques. I doubt you'll know the difference at first.

Consider this: Would you want a dojo to teach dan level techniques to newbies who haven't grasped the principles? Beginners can't take the ukemi. A good teacher reaches everyone in the class. That may mean a class in the basics.

I guess my point is that aikido isn't always soft. The priniciples take a while to learn. Atemi is a huge part of it. Timing is a huge part of everything. Once you have them you can then train full on. After 5 years your ukemi should be good enough to take it. Then you can dish it out as well.

So I don't think sitting in on one class will answer the question whether aikido is street effective or not. Try it and see if it speaks to you.

--Chuck

Another thing to consider when viewing Aiki techniques, is something my sensei told me with regard to living to practice another day. "It is important to stay ahead of the technique as uke." This may look like cooporation from the outside, when it is in fact survival. A new student getting a grasp on a technique is unlikely to get it right, however, the possibility exists that they may just do it right by mistake...the result of which is uke getting crushed if they are not escaping properly...and this also helps nage to figure out what the technique looks like when done properly.

As to Aikido being effective on the street...if you are in a situation where your opponent understands the technique you are using, they have an opening and may counter you, or at least know which way to fall to live through it. Without this knowledge however, even the basic aiki techniques done with marginal proficiency will suffice...it may not be pretty, but it will do.

Beyond that, there is another matter to consider when judging the effectiveness of a technique or art form in a comparitive way. There are many styles and techniques that can be used to win in battle...all of which require the heart to do so. The heart of the warrior always take precedence over the art of the warrior.

Regards,

Amos

Amos-san,

Well said. I have been on the receiving end of a kote-gaeshi(sp?) and later wished that I had been more accepting of the tecnique. The same can be said of any style. I practice Kyusho/Tuite Jitsu and have used it on a few occasions to defend myself, but others in our organization have problems making the techniqes work in class.

Its not the size of the dog in fight...but the size of the fight in the dog!

Regards,
Scott

Ohayo gozaimas'Shinjin
Where are these more agressive schools located,I like hard core schools .Or are there any videos available to see these combatants at work.
I'd appreciate any info, thankyou.
Your Brother in the Arts [IMG]http://bbs.fightingarts.com/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

One must remember that the founder stated theat "the principle object of aikido is to build a paradise on earth by making friends..." Those who would seek to find in aikido a method of self defense have to consider deeply the real purpose behind the art.

thx

Arnet

Hello,
Trying to build a paridise on earth utilizing a Martial Art,is just like when we were fighting in Nam for peace.
Your Brother in the Arts

It most definately depends on the teacher! My instructor is a genius at aikido, fighting anarmed and w/katana. He is a master, though he refuses to admit it. But he scares me sometimes because he is just that good. But he has been teaching me to be strong and not afraid. Which is hard because aikido has this way of wearing you out and exhausting you to the point of wanting to give up. It is painful but part of life is learning to live with your pain and being survivor. That is what's trying to be taught. I think that aikido is a very effective form of self defense as well an effective spiritual method. I feel much stronger as a person as well as just physically.

aikido is very effective for self defense, no question about it.

[QUOTE]Hello,
Trying to build a paridise on earth utilizing a Martial Art,is just like when we were fighting in Nam for peace.
Your Brother in the Arts[unQUOTE]

Oh dear.
What of the beautiful paradox that is the martial arts??

We learn to fight so that we never have to...

Budo.

Aikido works as an effective method of self defense, even combat. Ask the Tokyo riot police who have two sections especially trained in Aikido. One group uses Yoshinkan style Aikido (as founded by Gozo Shioda) and the other uses Shodokan Aikido (as founded by Kenji Tomiki).
Tomiki style Aikido is sometimes called Sport Aikido because it includes randori, (just like Judo). It even has Shiaii (Tournaments) in which you defend yourself from at attacker with a rubber tanto (dagger). This attacker knows every technique you know and will do his best to counter every technique you can throw at him. (Pun intended.) After defending for 3 minutes, it becomes your turn to take the dagger and attack your opponent. Points are scored for clean "kills" to the heart only, or for clean Aikido throws. It is extremely challenging and really tests your skill.
However, you cannot compete at this kind of level until you have at least three or five years experience, just to handle the energetic breakfalls without being creamed. Even the best practitioners have to start slowly and safely as beginners, or they'd all be hospitalized. Whatever style.
Think about it.
Gedanate.
More info on my web site at http://www.gedanate.com/aikido.html

[This message has been edited by gedanate (edited 01-18-2002).]

I know that this question has already been asked, but it has not been answered. What are the good Aikido and/or aiki-jutsu schools in New York? I have heard that there are some very good schools here, but have been unable to locate them. I think that others posting here would appreciate hearing about all posibilities.

Thank you


[This message has been edited by jonasrenma (edited 06-14-2002).]

Whether Aikido is effective or not is a good topic.

I'm a big believer in Jeet Kune Do Concepts. I teach an Aikido class, but I also teach Jui Jitsu, Boxing, Kickboxing, and Kali/Escrima/Arnis.

One of the first things that needs to be understood about Aikido is that most Aikido techniques are based on a "comitted attack". Usually the Uke (attacker) needs to provide directed energy (such as moving forward). So often times Aikidokas have difficulty dealing with "non-comitted" attacks (such as a boxer's jab).

The simple truth is that it just takes a greater understanding of Aikido and fighting in general to be able to apply Aikido against different types of attacks.

JKD takes the approach of "using the superior art at the moment". This doesn't mean that I can't use Aikido on the ground. It just means that because of my background in wrestling & Brazilian Jui Jitsu I can see where I can apply Aikido while on the ground. When dealing with a boxer - because I boxed for several years before learning Aikido you can see places where Aikido can be applied (example: closing the gap and getting to the clinch). A person that hasn't had some experience boxing is going to have a really difficult time closing the gap on a boxer. The same theory applies to grappling, and weapons.

Note: There are a lot of people that practice Aikido for reasons other then self defense. Some practictioners are heavily geared toward self defense, and incorporate concepts from other arts. Some practitioners do Aikido for the mental, spiritual, physical benefits. This applies to the students, as well as the teachers. A lot of instructors like the soft aikido that is very spiritual, and several instructors like Combat Aikido.

Other similar arts (joint manipulation type arts):
Kali-Silat
Pentjak Silat
Bando

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Brewer:
Hello,
Trying to build a paridise on earth utilizing a Martial Art,is just like when we were fighting in Nam for peace.
Your Brother in the Arts [/QUOTE]

I strongly disagree with you here. The best martial artists I have ever seen have won every fight they've been in... by not fighting at all.

Peace and Love

I mainly study shotokan karate, but have dabbled a little in several other arts. I took one aikido class as I was looking for a new dojo once, and learned one move. Though I don't know what it's called, it's the one where the uke comes in with an over-hand chop, and you perform and up block with your opposite side (your left to his right), catch his wrist, step into him, and use your body's torque to throw him across you to the ground. This is a basic attack for anyone holding almost any weapon imaginable. My training partner and I were sparring once with foam daggers and he attacked me overhand like that, and I must say I was quite impressed with the simplicity (and much pleasing effectiveness [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG] ), of that move. Needless to say, it surprised the hell out of him, too!Like others have said, it's all in what you take from it.

Peace and Love

I have tried judo, hapkido, hanmudo and taekwondo (from one to three years each)for now, and i have seen alot of aikido techniques and practising. After all my intrest in martial arts i've constantly made the notice that if one want's to be able to defend himself on the streets, he has to be VERY good in martial arts, or just learn it the hard way, in the streets. I've been very disappointed how little martial art skills have to do with actual fighting, especially if the combat style is of the art is not very realistic.
I have to say that i agree with aikido not being a very good art of self-defence, it does have its own values, but does it work? The confession i got from a relative, a keen aikido trainer was a depressed "nope..".

Michael,

I have been studying a Shorin based style of karate for almost a decade, half of my life. I would indeed be depressed if I found out I could defend myself no more than an untrained, unfit and a more reckless person of my age.

For how long has your relative been practiscing aikido? I am sure aikido has effective techniques. The base of the style is Daito Ryu Aikijujustu, and there is more focus on flow and redirecting energy.

Some techniques we practisce we stole. Some of the books have techniques I have practisced and know to be effective. Your relative needs more practice.

Which martial art is the most effective? The one the common man on the street has the most irrational fear of. Unless they carry a weapon or are a street crim.

Aikido is very effective, the only problem is that it takes a veeery long time to be able to use it effectively for self defence. If someone starts doing Aikido and expects to be able to defend themselves in only 2 or 3 years they had better try karate or something, while you may learn some things to help if you are attacked you don't know how to use them effectively so they probably won't work.
The power of Aikido when done by a master is incredible, I have seen many Aikido Shihan train and felt their power and believe me it works!!!. The major problem is people these days want everything "now", they're not willing to put in the decades of training it takes to master the Martial Arts.
As for the comments on co-operation, In one of his books Dave Lowry describes Ukemi as "falling on your own terms" this is so true, the reason we learn Ukemi is to be able to react to whatever may come from our opponent in this way you can minimize the injuries you recieve and react to unexpected situations automatically.
If your looking to learn self defence quick, learn boxing it will be very effective on the street and it takes comparitively less time to learn the basics.
Just some thoughts!!

I've taken some aikido, but the majority of my martial arts experience has been in other, more aggressive styles, particularly Kenpo, karate-do, jiu-jitsu and others. After taking one ten-week class of aikido, I found my skills had dramatically improved in the other arts I studied. I think it is important to remember that aikido is more than just a connected series of self-defense techniques. Like karate-do, it is as much a path to enlightenment as a way of keeping oneself alive. For example, when one is attacked on the street, there are a myriad responses one might have. However, if one has not the relaxation and presence of mind, if one panics or freezes, counters become very difficult. I found aikido to be very effective in cultivating exactly this kind of focused-calm.

Remember, the deeper lessons of the martial arts are often those that don't involve kicking, punching, grappling, etc.

This is like the chicken and the egg. you can find just as many who believe Aikido works in the street as those who don't. I will not partake in the debate but offer some points to ponder. I have a Dan Ranking in Aiki as well as other arts, though my other arts are much higher than my Aiki. I trained for 8 years in Aiki, both Jujutsu and Aikido, as well as Karate, Torite, Jujutsu, San Jitsu and Chin Na.
My point is this, don't always view Aikido as it is displayed, and don't always view it's creator as a soft little old sweet grandfather. O'Sensei Ueshiba, reinvented himself after the war. Look at some of his pre-war techniqies and you will find atemi waza(striking and kicking) in his Aikido. he was a very tough and hard individual early on, but most Aikido is based on his later years.
Look at the INTENT of the practioner. A break, is a lock continued. If my intent is to break, I can do it with an Aiki technique. If my intent is to restrain, I can do the same thing. When viewing a throw, look at where the person is being throw. In the dojo it is on the mat, in a parking lot in can be into a wall or through a windsheild, or on top of a car. People uneducated in ukemi waza could get hurt. If my intent is to throw someone into a car, it is possible to do so. Intent on 'how' you do the technique can vary from person to person. I am not saying however that what you see in dojo practice is the same as what you see on the street. My disposition changes greatly on the street, as I have no one in the dojo(for the most part) I want to hurt, but don't mind doing what is necessary on the street.
My advise is to train with others outside the dojo, many times Aiki practioners practice in isolation, only with other Aiki people. Try using what you do on Karateka, Brazillian Jujutsuist, Chinesse practioners and watch their response to what you do. That is the education. I once met a Shaolin Temple student and we were freestyling a bit. I did a Sankyo throw a bit too fast and his feet left the ground before I was ready to throw him. The lesson was great one, I had found that not everyone rolls the same, and he found how quick that lock became a throw. I was impressed with his ukemi, he with my throw. We learned from one another. Keep this in Mind.
verbal garbage from a Martial Art addict

Aikido, like any authentic martial art, can be used as an effective form of self defence, but only by people skilled in its application. Try using a ju-jutsu or karate technique with little or no skill and you'll soon wish you hadn't bothered. All martial arts take time to learn and understand. Where Aiki differs from some other arts is in the time it takes to achieve this degree of skill.

True martial arts are about more than simply defending yourself against back street thugs. The time it takes to learn the techniques of the art also improves so many other things. Co-ordination, balance, speed, timing, proper breathing, fitness, calmness under pressure, self discipline, self confidence and respect for yourself as well as others are all important life skills that are improved by studying a martial art.

If all you are after is to better defend yourself against attack and you want a quick fix self defence style, go on a self defence course which teaches simple, effective techniques from across the whole spectrum of the martial arts.

Yours In Budo

ANY martial art requires years of dedicated practice to be effective as self defence. Forget the petty 'mine is better than yours' stuff. Aikido schools differ because some instructors learned a style from the older, bodily weaker founder whilst some styles derived from his younger and more dynamic years. My own Aikido preference? Seek out a Yoshinkan school for tough street self defence. In the Shudokan school, our black belt gradings include many diverse skills, including defence from random attacks with a live steel tanto - perfect for application to street defence today.

However, never forget that Morihei Ueshiba became the best martial artist of his generation because of his SPIRIT. Technique without spirit is empty. You should also ignore all ideas of 'winning' in 'competitive sports' in Aikido. The spirit of Aikido is just that, spiritual harmony and personal development. Sports have rules - martial arts deal with real life. Nuff said.

I agree with those who say it takes sometime to develope Aiki and use it effectively. I think it is CONTROL that is the tough thing to learn. Indeed there are 'hard' styles of Aiki, but still it is a control factor. A break is nothing more than a lock, continued.
However, the idea that it takes a longer time to learn certain techniques is somewhat questionable. I have seen Nidans and Sandans in Aikido who have practiced for 10-15 years and their technique is not appreciably better than some Brown Belts. In some Aikido schools, the Black Belts "swish" their Hakama's around, look good, correct but don't improve one bit. If you do martial arts for 20 years and your technique looks the same as it did 10 years ago, you haven't improved and you haven't trained for 20 years. You trained for 10 and glided for another 10. It does take time to develope control and refine technique, but if done wrong 10, 15 or 20 years won't make you better. A Shihan in Aiki told me it is better to do one thing good and know what you are doing than 10 things bad and not know

The effectiveness of Aikido depends on experience and level of mastery.

Does a mechanic overhaul transmissions on his first day of training?

My Sensai once said " In Aikido, the attacker provides the energy and we simply provide the direction." I love that statement.

I thank O' Sensai and the Universe everyday for bringing the practice/philosophy of Aikido into the world. I don't want to fight people anymore. I feel much better about things too. But know this, there are some very experienced people where I practice, and I have no doubts as to their skills lethalness. Not to mention that our instructors like to incorporate lots of different things into the lesson, which serves to really broaden the martial arts foundation for me.

Have you guys ever seen "the seven samurai"?

But how effective is Aikido compared to Wing Chun, which was built as a deadly offensive art.

I don't think you can compare arts against each other. I talked with a Grandmaster once and he said that styles were not created to face other styles. While I see what he is saying, I think several Ryu-ha from Japan's early years were exactly created to combat other Ryu-ha. However if you look at any Aiki art it is hard to compare against any other non Aiki art. It's how the art is practiced, not a general comparison. I saw a small extremely rough Aikido Shihan injure 3 of his uke's because they could not keep up with his technique. It was at a time where there were severe critics of Aikido. I think he was trying to prove a point. I have also seen Aikido done like Tai Chi, and doubt very seriously if these Aikidoka could even defend themselves. I saw Shotokan karate combined with Aikido and the result was pretty functional, and this is odd because I think Shotokan and Aikido are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Also, it depends on the practioner. A good Aikidoka versus a medicore Karate-ka the Aikidoka may win out. Based on the purpose of the art, they are often hard to compare, and each one in his own art believes his art to be the best and most effective. Any art that punches and kicks will have an advantage over one that doesn't. Any art that locks, will have an advantage over one that doesn't. It seems to me you need a striking art-locking art-grappling art and weapon art to be complete.

I'd have to agree with you here, Lou. It is more or less impossible, not ot mention pointless, to compare two martial arts and decide on a winner. Wing Chun may well have been designed as a deadly offensive art, but aikido is firmly based on an equally deadly defensive art, so how can you say which is better? It's the artist that is important in a fight, and not necessarily the art.

Aikido contains within it the elements to defend yourself very succesfully. The "problem" lies in that Aikido requires restraint on the part of it's practitioners. It's easy to break a jaw or gouge an eye, it's not so easy to show an attacker the error of his ways while protecting both you and him from his aggression. Also, most Aikido stylists never practice their techniques against other styles, thus leading to the stereotyped rude awakening of Aikido vs Boxing (or beerbottle, or single leg takedown, etc.) You fight how you train.

True Aikido War Stories

(To support the discussion as to whether Aikido is a good self-defense)

* 6th kyu student (mellow Deadhead & trained in the dojo for about a year) and owner of a local pizza restaurant closing up shop at 2AM with a few customers still in the store. Drunk comes in off of the street. "Dude, we're closed."
Drunk gets unreasonably aggressive. "No, dude, we're closed." Drunk grabs for student. "It was like Sensei said -- time slowed down & it was like he was handing me a sankyo." Student takes the sankyo (pain compliance hold) into a come-along towards the door. Drunk grabs hold of a stanchion to resist [BIG mistake]. Student cranks on sankyo harder; drunk yelps in extreme pain and student escorts drunk outside store. Drunk winds up outside yelling to customers inside "Did you see what he did to me?" Customers laugh at drunk and also express concern for student's well being.

Female 4th kyu student in a bar. Student's hair on the top of her head is grabbed from behind. She clamps the hand onto her head bends down and ducks under the arm into shiho nage. Other woman shocked as she hits the floor. Bouncers intervene.

3rd kyu getting razzed by his friends about the inadequacy of Aikido as self defense at the pool table. Liquor is definately involved. Student demonstrates ikkyo [1rst pinning technique]; result -- friends generally unimpressed. Later, and outside the bar, an ambush is executed by the biggest 6-foot 3-inch guy. He grabs student from behind & student goes for ikkyo, but the big guy's seen it & resists ikkyo. Student quickly changes technique to udegurami (shoulder entanglement) with tenkan. Big guy shreds his nose and cheek on the pavement. Student apologizes profusely.

* nidan student -- a prodigy in Aikido. This guy's Aikido is what Mozart was to the piano. Even the shihans notice this guy at seminars. Student's in a bar. See's his friend getting into trouble & starts to walk over to help. WHAM! Student gets sucker punched in the side of the head -- puncher gave it all he had and when he doesn't see the 5 foot 2-inch nidan hit the floor, he runs like hell.

The point in these stories is that Aikido seemed to work. But, as in the last story, no matter how much and well you've trained, combat is truly chaos and the unexpected sucker punch happens.

Aikido looks wimpy, but all of those rolls and breakfalls that uke takes are all good conditioning for the punches that the Aikido student thought he was going to avoid surprises his face/body.

May I also direct to www.aikidoonline.com and the Aikido Works article by Carlo Fargnoli (NYC policeman)?

I must say in my my experiences with aikido, is that it works. When you are practicing the techniques, you are doing so with an experienced partner, who most importanly knows how to fall in different techniques. On the street,(and I speak from experience.) dong aikido techniques easily ...turn down your offender from further attack. For example when you do tenchi nagi, itead of them gracefully rolling back, the offender will resist, then be thrown in a vigorous way.

Also you should watch the black belts practice, they dont practice softly, and if you watch correctly, you'll see all of the blended strikes to the pressure points of the body, as well as seeing the uke get airborn. In aikido we practice according to each's level, I wouldnt do irimi and launch a first time learner into the air and hurt him. But in retrospect when going against someone with similar experience as me, I hold nothing back.

I trained in Aikido for only three months and from the people there as well as other Martial Artists I know who go to different Aikido schools is that they came across very arrogant.

Although this put me off initially I persevered (well if you can call 3 months perseverence).

I finally left when the instructor found out that I also trained in Karate, and I basically got ridiculled for the rest of the lesson and was asked to demonstrate moves to try and illustrate how bad karate was, not to be rude I reluctantly agreed to show some basics. It didn't really work the way the instructor wanted as even though I stuck with very basic moves that I would show to a beginner and not performing them at full speed they were getting through on people that had been there for 9 years or more - don't worry I wasn't being macho or anything I didn't hurt anyone, or intend to, it was quite embarrassing really.

After that I just didn't want to train at a place that was so openly hostile to other Martial Arts.

it was like "Aikido is it, everything else is rubbish!"

I'm not suggesting that is the same as the people on this board - in fact just coming to a forum to discuss the art shows that they are not arrogant.

Maybe just a bad experience/club.

Most definately a bad club, U.F.F and I can see why you didn't stay. Unfortunately some aikido is also bad, and that might explain why the people there try to belittle other arts - to cover the inadequacies that they know are there in their style.

I am glad to see you have the sense and decency not to tar all aikidoka with this same brush though. All too often people see one style/school they don't like and then condem the whole art.

Your right I never condem arts, (maybe taebo - billy blanks was better as a b-movie actor).

Its just ashame that clubs and people like this do exist.

I admit I have not read the whole thread, but I can only imagine how many times this has been debated in martial arts forums.

There is a man in the dojo that my club is affiliated with who works with troubled youth, many of whom are quite violent. He uses Aikido on almost literally a daily basis. It definitely works for him. He has told me that disarming a knife or a broken bottle from someone is very possible with someone with some skill, but when you have disarm someone with a syringe it can be a whole different ballgame.

I've also heard that the harder the style of Aikido, the more applicable it is "on the street." Well, the man I am talking about is Ki Society. Ki-Aikido has not failed me, though I have failed it on one occasion.

Peace.

Aikido is definitely not effective! lol

I think that this sod is right. Modern aikido has little or no chance of being effective for self defence. It is far too complicated, far to reliant upon the over commiting of the attack and far too concerned with being gentle to your opponent. Compare it with other arts such as karate and its deficiencies are glaringly obvious.

Budo

Cato>

Hmm...

Did something ... changed recently?

Would you like to talk about it?

If you want me to stop beating around the bush...

did you stop taking some medications? [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/eek.gif[/IMG]

Get back onto it!

-raccoon

I think it is important to maintain an open mind in training, and everything else for that matter, and to be able to admit when you have been wrong. If you learn something that goes against what you previously thought, shouldn't you say so?

Yes, open mindedness is all good, and if you really think you are wrong, yes, I think you should admit it and correct it. BUT, are you serious about what you said, or are you just waiting for someone to give you a go?

My English sucks. I can't tell if you are serious or kidding even if it would safe my life. So why don't you give me a hand in here?

Do you really think Aikido doesn't work?

-raccoon

Aikido as practised in most dojo has as much to do with self defence as knitting does. Big sweeping tenkan movements and huge circular kaiten movements are not realistic for self defence. The same it true of many techniques from karate, TKD, and Judo. They have no place in self defence. I have yet to see anyone make them work outside the dojo.

No doubt O'sensei could make this nice, flowery aikido work very well, but he was an exceptional martial artist. Most of us aren't. An average martial artist will get a nasty shock when they try to apply their neat techniques on the street, be it aikido, karate or anything else.

Aikido and karate are nice to practice for aesthetic reasons, but for self defence you need aiki jutsu or ju jutsu [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Budo

How about Krav Maga and SCARS etc? There is even ISC in my town. Is THAT 'Martial arts"

Well, very effective streetwise, but somehow it doesn't fit my bill of "martial arts"

-raccoon

From my limited knowledge, krav maga is certainly a martial art, and is certainly effective. I have no idea what scars is.

As ever this long standing debate concerning martial arts and combat sports has yet to be resolved. I think the debate also needs widening to include modern styles of traditional arts. It is precisely because traditional styles have moved away from their martial origins that people feel the need to train in more "real" styles. Aikido is high amongst the culprits for this. So, is aikido, or even martial arts in general, effective for self defence? Probably not.

Budo

Cato, I can emphasize with your frustration. My personal approach goes like this: Train very hard in some simple street proven moves and tactics. For this I use boxing, wrestling, and some of the more intelligent martial arts moves. But I also train techniques that might be difficult or impossible to set up, but which there is a possibility of "falling into", if you catch my meaning. Ikkyo is a perfect example. I'm not going to TRY ikkyo on someone, but IF I find myself in a position where it is safe and appropriate, and my body feels right with it, then I'll hit it. Also, I think Aikido is a great "less than lethal" option. Maybe it's not so great against biker gangs, but against my overly agressive very drunk uncle, it works just fine!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
I think that this sod is right. Modern aikido has little or no chance of being effective for self defence. It is far too complicated, far to reliant upon the over commiting of the attack and far too concerned with being gentle to your opponent. Compare it with other arts such as karate and its deficiencies are glaringly obvious.

Budo[/QUOTE]


I disagree... to some extend.

I guess it depends on how you use it.

Would a karateka expects himself to perform pinan shodan from start to finish when he is fighting 4 attackers? No, it’s a kata, a sequence of movements for practice and study. Do you expect yourself to perform kaiten-nage ura exactly the way you are taught on the mats when you are on the street? No, it’s just a kata, it’s a learning tool. What are fundamentals of aikido are the step - tenkan, the slide and pivot, the deep root, the “ki” in hara, the flowing motion. It’s the ukemi you take; it’s the way you catch the elbow and control.


Like Sensei Lou pointed out in other threads, aikido techniques are very symbolic. Through katas, karate masters pass on the old knowledge. O’Sensei did the same. Kote gaeshi is a kata. Shiho nage is a kata. Iriminage is a kata. There are ethics in those katas. Don’t be there; step off the line. Blend in, harmonize. Face the same way, see from the same angle. Guide gently, don’t force or destroy. These are no more than katas that carry his pacifist message. Katas aren’t techniques, and shihonage isn’t aikido basic. So perhaps we can stop whining about how aikido doesn’t work in the real world. It's how you use it. If a karateka tries to perform his whole kata in self defense, he isn't going to be any more successful than an aikidoka.

If all aikido is a kata, where are the techniques? Or are you of the school whereby aikido doesn't have techniques, just principles? In which case, why bother to learn the kata at all?

Budo

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
If all aikido is a kata, where are the techniques? Or are you of the school whereby aikido doesn't have techniques, just principles? In which case, why bother to learn the kata at all?

Budo[/QUOTE]

Sorry I wasn't more clear. If, punches, kicks, jabs, blocks etc are techniques in karate; then step - tenkan, slide and pivot, block/catch at elbow; extend ki from center, hand movements to manipulate the hand on your wrist... I think it's fair to call those the basic techniques in aikido. To summerize... it's how you move your body. I don't think it's that conceptual, and I think chaining them up in katas are good way to learn how can they be used. But at the end of the day, you still have to choose the right technique to use in the right time/ position - which goes back to my point about not being too rigid to perform the whole kata.

-raccoon

If you can, find an aikido club with rougher people there, the people you train with affect your aikido, as it is them who attack you.

Myself and another guy in the class have been training together in the week, we are both hoping aikido can help us in self defense. We agreed that we would 'fight' each other, 1 attacking anyway wew want, and would in a fight, and the other using techniques to defend, to make our progress more parctical.

I tell you, the difference atemi makes, wow.

The first day we trained, he was attacking, and I was sorta guessing and thinking of the technique to use before the strike comes, this would only work with alot of luck, I found myself getting caught all the time.

So I tried something else, which my instructor has said from day 1, 'move your body'. As an attack was coming in, I was making sure I was moving to a safe area, away from the attack, only when I had done this, did I realise that situation you put yourself in, opens up a defense, say you move to the live side of a punch, when avoiding it, trying to keep contact, ripping on a shionage. Next time you train in aikido, forget about the technique, just move out of the way, you'll find then, that there are plenty of techniques you can use for the position you are in.

As you said about the teacher, my instructor wasnt in on Friday, and the 3rd instructor was there, I almost walked out because he was so soft, just what some people are like

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
An average martial artist will get a nasty shock when they try to apply their neat techniques on the street, be it aikido, karate or anything else.
Budo[/QUOTE]

Are you saying that someone who has spent the last 10 years studying aikido or karate would only be classed as having average ability when it came to defending themselves in a violent confrontation?

LOL...nice one mate.
When was the last time you saw a shodan in either having problems with your AVERAGE bully let alone someone who has a higher grade.

"Dont tar everyone with the same brush" we are all idividuals with different qualities.Its not the MA that wins the fight but rather the person involved.

I think if you are doing something for self defence your wasting your time.

If you need to defend yourself, its already to late and you may as well throw in the towel.

Self defence is a mind set. It puts you into a point of I can not create an opening so I must therefore wait for one to appear.
Here is an old but still true adage.

"The best defence is a good offence".

This is for NAUMatt, the move you are talikng anout is gedan ate. its a great powerfull move were the attacker is thrusted in the floating rib where you shoulder is the weapon upon inpact....

A martial art is only as effective as the person applying it.

A lot of the responses in this thread demonstrates an incredible lack of understanding that a "training method" is only an approximation of a "realistic situation". In many cases, it is merely a choreographed response to a ritualistic attacking movement.

And the purpose for it is simply for the safety of the participants. If you were you hurt/damage your training partners, how many training partners would you have to train with by the end of the year? (Also, think insurance and law suits here people!!!!).

Despite the ritualistic attack-response, it IS still possible to obtain the full benefit of the training as if it were a real situation.

If in doubt as to the effectiveness of a "soft" martial art - just train with kids.... :-))

[QUOTE]Originally posted by martinnitram:
aikido is very effective for self defense, no question about it.

[/QUOTE]

I've seen some that was and some that wasn't, big fat teachers who get winded doing a simple demo with a young woman white belt, people who try to have a casual conversation in the middle of practice--WHILE throwing and being thrown.

And I've seen the real thing in Japan, when it was hotter in the dojo than the summer outside. No fatties in that dojo.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michael:
I have to say that i agree with aikido not being a very good art of self-defence, it does have its own values, but does it work? The confession i got from a relative, a keen aikido trainer was a depressed "nope..".[/QUOTE]

The problem is how distant American (or Western) training tends to be from the original. Morihei Ueshiba talked a lot about ethics, but he and all his students knew a lot about struggling and conflict. They were very strong and physically fit and they were still very close to the samurai culture (Morihei was born about 1885 and the samurai period ended in 1868). So they all had a technical and mental foundation that has NEVER been developed in the west.

With that foundation, talk of ethics had a completely different meaning than it does for someone with NO foundation in samurai technique and attitude. Moreover, instructors who come here from Japan find people who are so tied up in semantics of "ethics and morality" that they want to lecture attackers. And without the technical/mental foundation, that talk is empty. But the instructors have to teach to the market, so they weaken and soften the techniques and there is no resistance in training, so most of what you see here is only aikido in name.

Now, there can be a lot of benefit to dedicated training in non-combative aikido, but smarmy, misplaced self-assurance seems to be a likely by-product of that kind of training.

If you want the real thing, go to Tokyo and enroll in Shioda's hombu school. Even if you don't understand what they're saying you'll get better training than from someone whose words you understand but whose practice misses the point.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
It is precisely because traditional styles have moved away from their martial origins that people feel the need to train in more "real" styles. Aikido is high amongst the culprits for this. So, is aikido, or even martial arts in general, effective for self defence? Probably not.

Budo[/QUOTE]

But aikido never really changed. It is still what Morihei did. It's just that very few teachers really understand what Morihei did. Don't expect to see real aikido in the US. What they show here is tailored for people who like to talk about moral concepts without ever dirtying their hands with truth.

Actually, it's hard to find the real thing even in Japan now. But real aikido really works.

Thats something that folks ALMOST ALWAYS overlook.

The role of the teacher in the practice/training.
Everyone wants to talk about how "effective" say Krav Maga is, as if each and every Krav Maga school worldwide was EXACTLY the same in terms of quality.

Or they wish to point to their local aikido school--and then draw vast sweeping, horrifically inaccurate generalizations about ALL aikido (insert he art of your choice here) from it.

i truly believe the mechanics of aikido allow it to be an effective form of self-defense, however, i have often found it hard to prove this to be the case in a non combat situation, where many skeptics like to pick apart the technique's flaws.

First, skeptics say that the uke doesn't struggle or show enough resistance. And even the beginners will say, "I could've blocked that" or "It doesn't hurt, this wouldn't work", but then if you step back and look at the situation this practice is taking place in, you are usually practicing the technique at around 20% of the actual speed the technique is meant to be done on the street, and often times the effectiveness of the technique is determined by the sincerity of the attack.

Aikido realistically cannot be practiced at the same intensity as other martial arts because of the actual power of these techniques. The more effort the attacker puts into an attack, the more brutal the technique's effect has, and I know that i would rather attack at 95% having some control and just be put into an uncomfortable pin rather than at 100% and have an arm bent in the wrong direction and have my face smashed into the mat.

There are no pads or equipment that can lessen the damage of joint manipulation, whereas in striking styles, you can wear head gear and gloves to reduce the damage. All we have is a mat and the uke's preparation, which is why it often seems orchestrated.


My sensei always taught us that we have to practice the techniques in big, methodical, often unrealisticly exaggerated movements so that when we are in a combat situation, our panic won't be able to completely reduce our movements and techniques. Which is one reason some skeptics may say our techniques are not effective in a real situation without knowing this.

Of course an attacker in the street doesn't wind up before his attack or follow through as though hes attempting to punch through your body like in class, but these are done to practice in class aikido techniques, you apply them in a real life self defense situation differently and to the best of your ability, and they may not work perfectly like in class, but they are still effective.

I can say from personal experience that often times in a stale mate during a struggle, I am able to use an aikido or judo principle to gain the advantage, not necessarily a praciticed technique. Also, I would never try any of the more fast moving dangerous techniques because I know the person on a street most likely doesnt know what youre doing like they do in class, and their arm would be broken.

It has been to my surprise that people show more resistance (usually in a poor spirited way) in class than an average attacker or opponent not trained in aikido does on the street.

The person on the street you're fighting doesnt know that when you grab his wrist for example, you intend to move him off balance and place his arm in an uncomfortable position, hence he rarely resists in time to prevent the technique. This is missed by skeptics in the classroom where everything seems predictable and obvious.

I think the main point to be made is that if you actually analyze the techniques of aikido, yes they have true potential of hurting someone and can be used as self defense.

Now of course you cannot perform the techniques exactly as you learned in class on someone who is attacking you on the street. But, you can adapt and apply what you learned in class.

Take this analogy. In english class, you learn the basics of writing an essay such as paragraphs, grammar, punctuation. This can be seen as the basic foot work and movements of aikido.

Then you learn to write certain types of essays, narrative, objective, or argumentative and so on. This can be compared to the different techniques of Aikido such as throws, joint locks, strikes, and so on.

Finally, you use these techniques and tools to write an essay, one might be about your biggest influence, one might be about hamlet, and one might be an argument for a certain policy. This can be compared to the different situations you practice the aikido techniques, such as the uke doing a front strike or side strike or wrist grab and how the nage reacts.

Now, after all this, when you are a journalist on the field for example, will you be asked to write an essay on hamlet again? no, but you will be able to apply the basic techniques you learned to similar situations that are different and you adapt to write the new essays you set out to write. Just like in aikido, will you be faced with the same attacks as you are faced in class? not always, but you will have the tools and basics that you can adapt and apply to any situation, it may not be what you do in class, but it is still aikido being applied effectively.

I believe that Aikido is most effective as a means of restraint in some situations that a police officer, bouncer, protection specialist, etc. may get into. Some of the defences that I practiced while taking Aikido were not effective in a situation where the opponent wasn't being cooperative. In my opinion Aikido has some practical applications in self defense but is not a complete method of practical self defense. Some of the techniques would get you hurt on the street. As an example we did this technique wherein a person would grab your wrist from behind and then you would kneel down and pull the attacker over your head. In a real situation or uncooperative attacker the attacker could simply switch to a rear choke hold and over power the defender.
As a reality check Aikido practitioners should get a trusted friend to say okay attack me this way and don't let cooperate with me. See the results of that. A simple tackle would handle most Aikido students.

Check this thread on Bullshido. It has info and clips of some resistant aikido training. The clips are very interesting (and quite contreversial with some Aiki-folk).

http://bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=14772&highlight=resistant+aikido+clips

Simple movements to implement, such as shenage (spelt right?) are incredably easy to use from verbal/ first contact period of a fight, when person has grabbed onto shirt etc. using an aikido technique in a situation like this would count as self defence, so from personal experience, it is effective dependent upon circumstances.

Cooperation and going slow are an essential part of learning any martial art. Without those steps, no one could learn techniques properly.

However, in the end, techniques learned slowly in a cooperative environment have to be applied effectively against actively resisting opponents. And this is where aikido often fails. Most aikido training never gets beyond the cooperative phase. If you never apply what you are learning against actively resisting opponents, you are not really learning all that much.

Agree in principle, but you kinda have to be careful of just how you define "actively resisting."