Aikido and Shoot Fighters

I was just wondering if anyone out there has seen or developed an aiki-defence against a BJJ or wrestling type shoot fighter. I realize the first response would be to keep proper ma'ai and all that, but apart from this best case scenerio what would your response be? I was a pretty descent wrestler in high school, and I think if someone shot really deep in on me I'd probably have to throw the technical side of my Aikido training out the door, and resort to the wrestling techniques that I know work for me. The problem that I could see is that those damn BJJ guys would choke me out before I knew what the hell is going on (sorry, no offence to any BJJ guys, I have a lot of respect for what you do). So anyway, I would never want to get into a wrestling match with one, ever. I highly doubt that I will ever get into an altercation with a BJJ practitioner, so this question is not pragmatic but really purely hypothetical. I'd appreciate any thoughts that you guys have out there.

Thanks,
Joe Jutsu

Well, Joe, this question poses a real problem. The suggestion is that BJJ is a better art than aiki for grappling. I wouldn't accept that. On the other hand I also wouldn't accept that aiki is a better art than BJJ. This is why I really don't like these type of hypothetical questions.

Having said that I do feel that there is a lot of hype at play here as well. BJJ has recieved an awful lot of positive press, aiki arts tend to get as much negative as positive press. It can create the impression that the wrestler has the advantage in Kumi uchi.

I think that overlooks an important point. Before a wrestler can wrestle he/she has to take hold of their opponent. Aiki arts are very efficient at dealing with an opponent who grabs hold of you. What is to say that the wrestler will still want to wrestle if his elbow has been shattered by sankyo, or his wrist broken by kote gaeshi? Remember that aikido locks are really aiki jutsu breaks.

I would also counter that it is impossible to leave out ma'ai and tai sabaki but still consider you are doing aiki.

I do however conceed that aikido is only an idealisation of a martial art and as such may well struggle to overcome a determined wrestler, but aiki jutsu is a different matter entirely.

Budo

Wise words Cato.

In the end, try it, cross train with BJJ or wretlers and see what happens.

I don't think its much to worry about as I expect most muggers aren't trained in BJJ or wrestling...

but they might be...

Cato-
I've been away from the computer for a few days, so I wish I could have responded more quickly. But I believe I worded my question wrong. I was not implying to ignore ma'ai in the least, I believe that this is one of the most effective tools in the aikidoka's bag o' tricks. Let me try again.

A friend and I are drinking Guiness in his backyard at a barbecue. Enter beautiful young lady that catches my attention. My friend, who has been secretly set on showing that his wrestling skills are more honed than my aikido skills, shoots in and grabs a leg or two looking for a takedown. At this point, what technique would you think plausible to attempt. I would be thinking sprawl, then pancake (which probably could be modified a bit to be like koshinage). But I was just curious, as my dojo does not address this kind of attack. If I would have had the awareness at the time, keeping proper ma'ai would have probably let me avoid the situation. But Guiness and women are always a distraction for me anyway [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG].

I apologize if I implyed that BJJ was superior, it was not my intent. It just seems to me that they focus on the ground combat more, where (at least my aikido) the emphasis is on standing technique.

Thanks.

Having done both, Aikido, Brazillian Jujutsu and my favorite Sambo, I can only say this. If you get on the ground with a ground fighter, Aikido doesn't work that well on your back, or on your stomach. Now this is not an opinion but fact as I have trained with ground fighters and only used Aikido on the ground, and was not very succesful, kotegaeshi, sankyo don't work as well on the ground as standing up, ant this IS an opinion, I think it has to do with the direction of the energy at you. Its really hard to have large cirlce techniques work on the ground. However Aikido is great for trying to stop going to the ground, this works and the direction of energy is somewhat different. I called an Aikido friend of mine, who is a Shihan in Aikido and asked if he would just do ground work with me as an experiment. He would not just go to the ground, and start there but said if I could get him to the ground he would be a part of the experiment. Getting him down was not as much a problem as I had thought, showing one thing to have him react and moving on to something else, and he was down. While down I gave him some locks just to see, and once again an opinion, he couldn't get the lock to work because he couldn't get his body into the lock. Standing up, Aikido uses the hips to apply such locks as sankyo and kotegaeshi, I took his hips away on the ground and the sankyo did not get me to tap. I played with arms bars and here he manged to stall the lock for a bit, but by changing mounts(I prefer side mount)I easliy got the bars, and the key here, he had no escapes for the chokes. When we stood up I asked him to stop the chokes, which he did, and arm bars as well. So this is not Aikido bashing Cato, so don't bring the wrath of Cato on me, but Aikido doesn't work as well on the ground as standing up. Once again my opinion is this, Aikido needs energy and the space to work around a persons body, techniques are not taught from being on top of someone, or under them, so its hard to say how it would work if taught that way. To sum up, when I was seriously applying Sambo techniques on the ground, my Aikido friend had a hard time dealing with them. That is not to say all Aikido is weak that way, I know of a Sensei in California who studied Aikido in Japan and is currently training with the Gracies. I am sure he would have been more of a contest, but Traditional Aikido is not meant to be a ground art. An intersting note here, I asked my friend to tell me what was the most difficult to defend against. He had me do all sorts of techniques and he tried to stop them. The one thing he could not handle, and he said was the hardest thing for him to deal with was a face grab, where I pulled his head down and grabbed his face. The hardest technique for him to deal with was no technique at all, a face grab. Kind of interesting I thouhgt.

Aaaah, the old Guinness and women distraction - works every time, that one. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG]

Given the circumstances you describe Joe, I think there is no martial art that can hope to teach a defence to the "sneaky attack by your mate whilst your not looking" sort of scenario. Learning about a martial art is just a way of improving your chances, not making you invincible. There will always be circumstances which you can't overcome. Anyone who tells you their martial art equips them to deal with anything is, quite simply, lying.

I honestly believe that there is no single supreme art, and that you must choose the art that best suits you, your way of thinking, and your way of moving. My reasoning behind that is so when you are faced with a novel situation, you are better able to adapt your art and cobble together some kind of response. It is, if you like, more natural. You can't ever learn a technique that deals with this and another for that. I have a bit of problem with these mixed martial arts styles because I think they try to do just that. They seem to teach that you must learn punching so you can fight a boxer, grappling to fight a wrestleer and so forth. I think that is wrong. I believe in a fight you should stick to what you're best at, in order to maximise your chances. Of course, there are plenty of people who will disagree.

So, going back to the question, (sorry, I often digress quite a bit) your mate attacks you with what is essentially a double handed, two leg grab (morote gari if you want to be all martial artsy about it), what can you do? Not much really from an aikido point of view. As Lou rightly says, aikido doesn't deal with that kind of attack. No doubt by the time you realiosed what had happened and how it came about, you were already on your way to the ground, looking very uncool and having little chance of impressing the ladies with your manly fighting prowess. Content yourself with this thought if you can: It really would've made no difference what MA you trained in, the result would've been the same. Ouch.

Budo

There may certainly be no "superior" art, but there ARE more efficient methods of training. Bear that in mind.

If aikido would train more realistically against strikes, I might develop a better view of the art. As it is, I don't see it being that effective.

Is there a style of aikido which trains against boxing attacks (not static attacks, but dynamic boxing attacks where the opponent is trying his best to knock you out?). If so, and the aikido practitioner is consistently able to execute his maneuvers, then THAT is a style of aikido which is truly street relevent!!

Thanks,
-John

[This message has been edited by JKogas (edited 05-02-2003).]

JK - You're absolutely right. Realistic attacks in training are essential for realistic defence outside the sanitised world of the dojo.

I know you are an experienced martial artists so I hope you will agree with me when I say that MA training is a progression, new skills build on earlier established ones. That is nowhere more true than in aikido. In the early stages of training the attacks are highly idealised, but with a reason. Aiki depends upon the practitioner being able to feel the energy and direction of an attack in order to harmonise (synchronise, if you prefer) with it.

Clearly it would be impossible to learn this without some kind of help. By attacking in the manner so often seen in aikido, the practioner is allowing his partner to "feel" the attack. Nage knows that the attack will be going in a certain direction and so can learn to accept and harmonise with any attack from that same direction.

That is why there is so much misunderstanding about co-operative training in aikido. Co-operative training exists in every art going. Think of it as being similar to the pre-arranged one and three step training in karate. Tese are the kihon waza of aikido. Karateka don't stop practising the basics once they achieve shodan, so why would we expect aikidoka to do so?

The progression comes from within randori, much like karate kumite. Randori is the essence of practical training. Attacks are harder, faster, less proscribed and completely random. This is where people begin to misunderstand the whole art. Randori is fundamental to aikido training, but it doesn't teach new skills, only puts into practice those you already have. It is the fine tuning process which turns a series of movements into a way of fighting.

Too many people get hung up on thinking all training has to be randori. It doesn't because if it where then technical ability would go out of the window. Some people who train in martial arts are content just being able to fight rough and dirty. They think it enables them to take their training onto the street. That's fine, but it isn't what aikido is all about. Aikido is about self improvemnet across the board, not just in fighting ability.

I hope that helps clear up any preconceptions about the validity of aikido for self defence. You need to understand the training before evaluating the art.

Budo

Great post Cato-

The "unrealistic attacks" seen in Aikido did worry me abit when I started practicing. Until one day in the dojo an ikkyu and I were talking before class, and he had me attack him with an "all out come to knock me out" roundhouse punch. Sure, he knew it was coming, but as soon as I tried to punch him I was staring up at the ceiling, thinking "what the..." I still don't know what technique he did on me, perhaps I'll ask him if I see him this week. But his response was very appropriate to the energy of my attack, which was not a traditional aikido attack. My point has always been, IMHO, one should study aikido more for the aiki principles than the techniques. The principles work, period. Some of the techniques I would never dream of applying outside the dojo, but they do serve to help me develop ability to blend, flow, etc. My sensei does not give us any false illusions about these techniques. That's why there are so many versions of kaiten nage, for instance.

On a quick sidenote, I completely agree with what Cato said about randori. Most of the time, I practice at my university aikido club, where we have enough turnover that most people on a given day are really too "green" to take either nage or uke's role. I feel like my practice has been lacking over the past few months because of this, not wasted, but lacking. I can't wait for finals to get over so I can start practicing in our mother dojo again!!

I'd still be curious what aikido techniques somebody would apply against someone going for a takedown. I'm in ki society, so alot of our names for techniques are a bit different, so a description of the technique would be greatly appreciated [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG].

2 cents worth. I think training can be divided into different parts, 1. learning 2. practicing 3. training. I see these all being different. I agree with Cato about the co-existing relationship between uke and nage in the dojo. I think that this relationship is imperative as you get feedback of what and how things are progressing. I disagree with Cato in the fact that this relationship does not exist in Karate. In the Karate dojo you do know the attack is coming, but there is little or no feedback. You goal in Karate is to help yourself and not worry about what your partner does. Depending on the person, some may correct or offer advice, but for the most part, you are trying to blow away your attacker, or take his head off in the attack. My Sensei says if your learning you can advise, if your practicing, shut up and attack, and if you are training, take his head off. The relationship with uke/nage is not the same in a Karate dojo. However, if you look at the study of kata, you can see the same relationship to how to practice. Step one, learn the pattern, step two-add speed, step three add power. In the dojo, you need to learn the technique and here you need feedback. I disagree with my Sensei as I think there needs to be a relationship in the practice stage, does it hurt, do you have my balance etc. However in the training stage, it needs to be more realistic, no feedback, everyone just attacks, reacts and counter attacks, and swiching back and forth. In randori or training mode, you need to see if your technique works, but if you are just trying to work on your technique, you need the information feedback. I encourage a uke/nage relationship in my dojo, I feel its real important, but when we go into randori(we do Jujutsu randori which is a bit different than Aiki randori) no body knows what the attacks are, and on the other side, no one knows the techniques. This gives a more realistic effect to training. I will only let student who feel comfortable with their techniques, go beyond the practice stage. When they are ready, we kick in randori. I usually tell people in private what attack to use, and then tell nage what to use, other times any attack, any technique goes. We even go to the effort to change the angles of attack. For us, there is a building block stage, learn the technique, the concepts and the principles of that techniqe. Practice that techniqe, get it to work for you, then when comfortable its time to train for real.

Sorry Lou, once again I didn't make myself as clear as I should have. I don't know enough about karate training to make any presumption about it, I was just trying to make the point that every art has a certain amount of training that is pre-arranged. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't karate have training wherein both the attack and the defence are pre-determined, like a two person kata almost?

I'm just trying to impress upon people that there is more depth to aikido training that many seem to think. A lot of practitioners from other styles are real quick to critize aiki for it's co-operative nature, yet seemingly fail to recognize anything similar in their own art. I think people need to understand what aikido is before they try to discredit it. The techniques used to train aikido are not so differenet from the techniques used to train karate, or many other arts. Basics, pre-arranged fighting and free fighting. People seem to get stuck on stage two when they think of aiki training. They are wrong.

I know how most karate folk are very sensitive about critiscism of their art, and will think I'm trying to undermine it. I'm not, but nevertheless pre-arranged sparring is a form of co-operative training.

Budo

Cato I agree, pre-arranged technique is indeed co-operative. I think that it is essential to have this also. My point is not a better or worse scenario, but that Karateka are not concerned with relationship between uke and nage. Uke is there to fight and not help his partner, which I agree is not always the best scenario. The bottom line here is this, no matter all the rhetoric about samenesses and all, there is a definite different mind set in Karate then in the Aiki arts, not good, bad or indifferent, but indeed different. The Aiki arts offer a deeper meaning into principles and concepts and its relation to nature, than the Karate Arts. There is the criticism that the Aiki Arts have too much co-operative attacks. One one hand this is true as most Aiki-doka don't take it to the next level and always train in a co-operative mood. The criticism is unjust as you can learn much from co-operative training. Its all a question of mind set, and really, I don't think things will change until each other train in the others arts. It would be an eye opening experience for both, Aikidoka and Karateka to change places for a day. I work Aiki principle in my striking art, no question, I see the value of Aiki training, but I also know they tend to just go through the motions and not train as best they could

advice to aikido stylist regarding brazilian jujitsu or any jusjitsu stylist-never give them your back.
If they get behind you, you will be chocked out. If they go for the chocke,drop your chin and turn towards the elbow and shoulder of their arm.

Sorry to disagree, but the 'misconception' of tucking your chin will not avoid a choke by someone who is trained to choke. We pull the hair back before we choke anyway, to expose the throat. I have worked chokes on many people who thought tucking the chin would stop the choke just to be surprised how easy it is to counter this. Number 1 when they tuck the chin, pull their head to expose the neck. You can also finger the eyes and pull their head back to choke. One of my favorite tricks is to use my forearm blade and roll it on the chin they are tucking, which the move and allow the choke. Another thing to do is to cover their mouth with your hand, they grab your hand and you choke with the other arm. We practice resisting chokes all the time and working chokes when someone tries to counter. If you get in the choke position, tucking your chin may get you a second, but if someone knows how to apply chokes its a mild inconvience.

you can also miss piggy them-dig finger into area where nose meets upper lip.
if tucking chin gives you extra second-that's one more than you had before. point is tuck chin-get out of choke as fast as possible.

As I see it, tucking your chin in to aviod a particular shime waza merely gives your attacker with the opportunity to perform a kubi kansetsu waza instead. Most aikidoka wouldn't force the technique once the opening for it has passed and will simply move on to any technique that presents itself. We must be careful not to move from the frying pan into the fire when countering aiki techniques.

Budo

You are smart cato. I know a guy who has his pic taken with Royce Gracie. He is unstopable in brazilian Jujutsu. His name is Glen hamby. He learned from the Gracie's and is my teacher. I would take jujutsu over any karate except for maybe jeetkundo.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dawgzog:
You are smart cato. I know a guy who has his pic taken with Royce Gracie. He is unstopable in brazilian Jujutsu. His name is Glen hamby. He learned from the Gracie's and is my teacher. I would take jujutsu over any karate except for maybe jeetkundo.[/QUOTE]

Well dawg, if your last sentence implies you would take grappling over striking, that is your preference. But please realize that jeet kune do is not karate and jujutsu is not the only grappling art. Also, most people have this false misconception that grappling is better than striking simply b/c Royce Gracie is a good fighter and did well in the first UFC's. If that is why you believe grappling is superior, think of this: Pride is another competition almost exactly like UFC and their heavyweight champ, Nogeira (who is an amazing BJJ grappler), was defeated by a russian who used nothing but strikes. That is just one example. My point is that grappling is not superior to striking, just as striking is not superior to grappling.

AND JEET KUNE DO IS NOT KARATE.

Can't we all just get along? Obviously not I just had a seminar and guess what, every body categorized or labeled themselves as a striker or a grappler. What has happened to the idea of being 'well rounded'. Why can't one strike and grapple. What the Gracies did back when was make the martial community aware of ground fighting. If you watch now, a metamorphisis has taken place. Stikers, Karate-ka are now learning BJJ and other ground arts, and grapplers are learning effective striking. Someone mentioned Pride, and if you watch pride you will see grapplers get beat, but also strikers lose to an arm bar. I study Sambo, and suppliment it with my Karate and my Jujutsu. I use to apologize for my ecclectic training, but not anymore, the best fighter is one who is well rounded and can strike lock and grapple. Its a shame to label oneself, and leave out valuable information that may assist in your training. I am currently working on grounding and pounding, a striking art for the ground, so to counter grappling, or grapple to counter striking. either way, its not one vs the other, its the accumilation of knowledge

You are of course quite right, Lou. If people want eclectic training that is their perogative, and there is nothing wrong with that. If it is important to be a well rounded fighter then cross training would appear to be a must.

As you know, I don't cross train because I like to think that by not doing so I preserve the authenticity and integrity of my art. I feel it gives me all I need to be able to better defend myself, and I also feel I get more from my training than just a way to kick ass. And that is, I think, where MA are seriously losing the plot these days.

MA's have become competitive in a destructive way, one that causes practitioners to look down on any other art they encounter, citing a lack of ground fighting or of an ability to strike "properly" in people such as me, who only train in one way.

So paradoxically I think it is the cross training that is undermining MA's in general. Without doubt cross training is designed to make better fighters, but not necessarily better artists. Much of the traditional value of MA training has been lost in the never ending pursuit of the one true ultimate street effective art that can be learnt in two years.

Budo

This is all bull started my the Gracie family to increase their revenues at the dojo. BJJ is better than another art? I don't think so. What makes an art better? An Aikidoka can beat a BJJ or the other way around it just depends. What makes an art effective is how well it works in the streets. They are both effective. Aikido has a long history in the war.

I hate these ignorant patriotic extremists who try to advertise with a lot of mouth about thier art. The Gracies should hire them as advertising executives. If they want them to work for them at all.

Shotokan, you need to either re-read your history books or check the validity of your sources. this is the second post where you are giving out wrong information. Aikido was never used in a war, it evolved from Daito Ryu which was used in the early Japaneese wars as hand to hand combat when one lost his sword. Aikido as it is, was not officially created till after World War II, AND war goes directly against Aiki principle. Aiki itself is harmonious energy and unless we all pull our energys together to bomb the hell out of someone, or redirect the bombs back at them, its not Aiki. Aiki is as much philosophy and spiritual in nature as physical. Someone is feeding you some bad information, or you need to do some serious research. Your posts are way off on all Aikido facets.|Re: Aikido and Shoot Fighters|senseilou|senseilou|Thu Aug 7 13:24:00 2003|68.98.234.245|0|0|0|0 0023000037000022|0023000037000000|23|532|Lou's absolutely spot on, shotokan. Aikido doesn't have any direct history in war, it only has a borrowed one from the arts it was created from.

The issue of which martial art is better, more authentic or more true than any other is a miasma into which we have gone before and never results in anything positive being achieved. People have every bit as much right to train in BJJ as they do anything else, and if it is, as you say, all hyberbole people will soon realise it and stop training in it.

The truth is that martial arts in general can do without this internicine strife. We should perhaps concentrate our energies into learning to live alongside one another, accepting each others prejudices without rancour and just train as we ourselves choose.

In my experience, I can learn a lot from talking to people from other styles, even if I don't agree with some of the things they say or do. It is all about letting go of the complex that tells me I do the best art, and anything else is inferior. Every art has its place. (yes, even new ones [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif[/IMG])

Budo

Guys if grappler use grappling to take the fight to the ground, can't you use grappling to keep it stand up with the same level of sucesses?

If you understand grappling sufficiently, yes you can use your grappling skill to keep standing.

For the "grappler" to grapple he has to take hold of you. Aikido teaches us effective ways to deal with people grabbing hold of us, in fact we often encourage them to do so so we can employ our aiki. It is in no way a "given" that the grappler will be able to grapple an aikidoka to the floor in the first place.

Budo

and if he does?

...if that is what he trains for then he has the advantage. But it is a big "if".

In my view mixing a little ground fighting with your aikido will not be enough to overcome the advantage that a grappler has on the floor. You have to train exclusively for ground fighting if you want to fight on the ground. Then you condede the advantage to the aikidoka when yyour both standing up. Aikido tries to negate the need to fight on the ground, rather than giving ways to do so.

Budo

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
For the "grappler" to grapple he has to take hold of you. Aikido teaches us effective ways to deal with people grabbing hold of us, in fact we often encourage them to do so so we can employ our aiki. It is in no way a "given" that the grappler will be able to grapple an aikidoka to the floor in the first place.

Budo[/QUOTE]


I would agree with this only if your training is against a grappler that is actively trying to "grapple" you. However, if one trains with another aikidoka in a static manner; wrist grab, lapel grab, double wrist grab etc..., then you might be surprised should you be grabbed differently.

Training should include grabs where your balance is broken initially and the uke tries to keep your balance and take your position...

For years we trained escaped from a bear hug where the uke grabbed you from behind and waited for you to "escape". Things changed when we investigated why someone might use a bearhug. We found that some people might "pop" you from behind to take your balance, then squeeze your solar plexus to taje your air and then dump you onto the ground...

Chris

I think this is old ground that has been done to death already.

I do Shotokan Karate-Do and Freestyle wrestling.

I am not an Aikido practioner but please allow me to answer this...
Does this make Aikido ineffective?
Here it is guys...

What does a boxer need to know to win against a boxer?
ANS: Boxing/Kickboxing etc

What does a wrestler/BJJ artist need to know to win against a wreslter? BJJ artist?
ANS: Wrestling/BJJ etc

What does a karateka need to know to win against a karateka?
ANS: Karate/Kung Fu etc

To win over another art/skilled fighter we need to know an art that specializes in the range that that art/skilled fighter fights in...Each art has a range it specializes in. To have a chance you need to know the art or another art that also specializes in that range.


Now in the NHB/UFC/Pride you need to know all of them to win because the guys down there are cross trained and you face fighters from all styles...

Does the fact that Aikidoka's have failed to come up with a defense for BJJ/Shootfighing style attacks means Aikido is ineffective?(mostly the charge and tackle takedowns)? The answer is no...

The sport techniques that grapplers use on tv are designed to win (they depend on rules to keep them safe)...and it so happens that once they take the fight on the ground they are in their specialized range...but the techniques used in Aikido were designed to keep the practioner safe and that is what is more important (especially because there aren't any NHB/Pride/UFC rules in effect to keep you safe in a real fight)

For example Aikidokas prefer to stay on their feet...this is safer than going to the ground because on you feet if the pressure is too much you can back up and make a run for it...whilst on the ground you are trapped either by your opponents grip or his weight...(something that isn't desirable in a non-submission fight i.e you can't submit)

That's right the insane thing about taking submission style fighting to the streets is that in an actual fight there is no submission. Therefore ground fighting should only be used as a last resort.

(a good example is the BJJ gaurd where the BJJ practioner is taught to just lay there and avoid the pounding until the pounder gets tired or leaves an opening for a finish/and if he can't get out he will simply submit...this is a dangerous concept to take to the streets because when your attacker gets into the mount and starts pounding you he won't stop when you tap out or start crying for mommy.)

[On the ground your movements can easily become restricted if you end up getting mounted or grabbed. It's as simple as that. To get out of the mount will require great stamina, strenght, damage and (time...something there won't be alot of especially if you attacker decides to yeild a hidden knife/other weapon)]

Which is why you should try to stay on your feet, where you can use them in case you need to run (i.e if the pressure should become too much [remain mobile, don't imobilize yourself unnecessarily])...even the BJJ guys won't fight on the streets like that...on the streets it's always about surviving the encounter while receiving as little damage as possible from the attacker...(something Aikido specializes in [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG])

Will you meet professional wrestlers/BJJ/Shootfighting guys on the street? No! Do you need to develop counters against the charge and tackle takedowns when most fights begin at conversational range? No!!! You only need to know BJJ/Shootwrestling if you are fighting an expert wreslter/grappler...If the fight goes to the ground on the streets you only need the same concepts you use when you do stand up grappling (to have a chance) because you won't be fighting a Gracie or any of those expert grapplers or wreslters you see on pay per veiw.

NB:
However, don't overlook cross training in or at least sampling BJJ/Shootwrestling/wrestling etc They will increase your chances if the fight should go to the ground simply because that's the range that these arts specialize in.

p.s

My regards to all

In sport martial arts [NHB/UFC/Pride/K-1/boxing ring/kickboxing ring/Karate tournament] use the rules to stay safe...but on the streets use your Aikido and common sense.

Stay safe [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

-Shotokan

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-17-2004).]

Shotokan, you are entitled to your opinion, but the statements you make show how little you know or understand about Bjj.
Bjj is based on pre-WWII judo.As such it has many techniques for stand-up fighting,dealing with kicks and punches.It's focus is on proper body positioning, "feeling" the opponents balance and disrupting it(hmmm,sound a little like some other art,but which one?) Basicly, if you are using muscle to force a technique, you are not doing BJJ.

As for the guard.Its purpose is not to merely flop on your back and try not to get hit.From the guard I am controling my opponents hips-the center of gravity where balance comes from.If I can control your center of balance I can keep you from effectively striking, unbalance you so I can escape or maneover you into a position for a lock.Yes, a lock, not submission hold,since submission hold seems to confuse some.A submission hold is the name for the technique in a tournament,NHB event-when used in real self defense it is a lock or break(ie. during practice we do armbar with control to point where partner taps out to keep arm from breaking-in street I would not stop or do it with more speed,snapping the arm).
Bjj may not have the spiritual, esoteric elements of Aikido, but like many other arts the some of the principles are pretty damn close.


Ps. Feel better Shotokan-someone responded to this thread and other post about this thread. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/wink.gif[/IMG]

[This message has been edited by nekogami13 (edited 01-17-2004).]

Sorry if you took it that way I didn't mean to say anything bad about BJJ...the BJJ guys can use techniques to save them in the streets too...and yes I am aware of BJJ's stand up techniques...(not much different from Judo)...

I did make reference to the Pride/UFC/NHB to illustrate that this "my art can beat yours is a stupid topic to start with"...(something the Gracies do alot of [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]...if I have any rotten feelings it's not against BJJ it is against the Gracies...I actually like other BJJ artists)

Besides other great BJJ trainers that I know don't like the Gracies either [sort of jealous of the attention they are getting]

About the "gaurd" [not just the BJJ gaurd but Judo, Ju Jitsu, Sambo, Freestyle, even if a Karateka or non-martial artist]...heck everyone's gaurd. (I used the BJJ gaurd because it made it easier to explain my point)...There just isn't much you can do in this position to escape/protect yourself from the pressure and damage of an attack. Therefore the martial artists who look at pay per veiw should realize that their aren't any NHB/Pride/UFC rules to protect them on the streets [it's like entering a toughmans boxing match] and hence if you want to survive you can't fight like those NHB/Pride/UFC pro fighters. (Your strategy to stay safe has to be different)

A determined attacker only needs a few seconds to end the fight...you need more than a few seconds to get out of his mount too (a postion you are likely to assume in any all range fight). Do the math.

Sorry I always stray away from my topic "alittle" [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG] Just note the the biasedness in my voice wasn't against BJJ but the Gracies and those NHB/UFC/Pride style fights.

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-17-2004).]

(a good example is the BJJ gaurd where the BJJ practioner is taught to just lay there and avoid the pounding until the pounder gets tired or leaves an opening for a finish/and if he can't get out he will simply submit-Shotokan

That is your statement about the guard.I was never taught to just lay there, whether I had someone in my guard or otherwise. As for stand up being alot like judo, bingo-got it in one.BJJ is based on old(pre olympic)judo,before they removed a lot of techniques(grapevining, etc)
I did not take it as an attack on BJJ.I merely believe you do not understand it and only have experienced it thru viewing a NHB event.While NHB is exciting for some to watch, you do not see or experience the essence of the art. Much like watching an aikido class and dismissing it as useless.

Lets be practical here. You are at the grocery store, in the parking lot and you get in an altercation in the parking lot so you go to your guard in the parking lot. Not real pheasible is it. While BJJ has self-defense application, and is derived from early Jujutsu and Judo it has been amended to use in competition. The guard is great if you get thrown to the ground and need to stop someone from getting in the mount or on top of you, but to fight on the ground may not be too safe in public. My first BJJ instructor had just got here from Brazil.He went to the mall and got into a disagreement with a man who was obviously harrassing him and taunting him. My instructor, drove him to the ground, got into the mount and started to choke him out. He got arrested, and charged with assault, yet the other person instigated it. The cop told my instructor that when he went to the ground with the man, that made him the agressor. BJJ is unquestionably a good art, and can be self defense applied, but the guard is mainly used in competition. Otherwise, its a transition position to get superior body positioning. As I said in the other post, you just can't compare the 2 arts.

Sorry my misunderstanding [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/frown.gif[/IMG]

"I merely believe you do not understand it and only have experienced it thru viewing a NHB event"-Quote

You are right [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/frown.gif[/IMG]

-Shotokan

What can you do from the gaurd? Use my e-mail if you like.

[This message has been edited by Shotokan (edited 01-17-2004).]

http://subfighter.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=12#cat

Videos of techniques from guard,few for when you are in guard.May have to register to download/watch,but it is free.

Thanks

[QUOTE]Originally posted by senseilou:
Can't we all just get along? Obviously not I just had a seminar and guess what, every body categorized or labeled themselves as a striker or a grappler. What has happened to the idea of being 'well rounded'. Why can't one strike and grapple. What the Gracies did back when was make the martial community aware of ground fighting. If you watch now, a metamorphisis has taken place. Stikers, Karate-ka are now learning BJJ and other ground arts, and grapplers are learning effective striking. Someone mentioned Pride, and if you watch pride you will see grapplers get beat, but also strikers lose to an arm bar. I study Sambo, and suppliment it with my Karate and my Jujutsu. I use to apologize for my ecclectic training, but not anymore, the best fighter is one who is well rounded and can strike lock and grapple. Its a shame to label oneself, and leave out valuable information that may assist in your training. I am currently working on grounding and pounding, a striking art for the ground, so to counter grappling, or grapple to counter striking. either way, its not one vs the other, its the accumilation of knowledge[/QUOTE]

I agree w/you in being a well rounded martial artist.This to me, is the stumbling block of most martial artists.they want to "belong".Its that age old desire to "be part of a movement", or club.I trained originally in tae-kwon-do(3 years.)-this was enough to win fights, but as i grew as a martial artist, i realized that i would have to take responsiblity for my own "way." and from thence, i studied What I WANTED TO STUDY.this included MANY arts.And eventually, i found my own "way".I believe EVERYONE SHOULD DO THIS.you must tailor make your combat "style"..........to YOU.

[This message has been edited by TerryhLee (edited 06-20-2004).]

I dont often reply to posts but this one is great.
Firstly the style vs style thing.
"the style doesn't make the student the student makes the style" don't know who said it but its true. A grappler wont beat an Aikidoka because he is a grappler, the person will beat the person because of their skills. There are many misconceptions about Aikido and that is partly Aikido's fault as there are a few different schools, some of which don't focus on the Martial applications. I can assure you it works and in some occasions really hurts. In fact most of the time we are executing an arm or kneck break exactly the same as in other martial arts, but rather than destroy the limb/person we simply let the person go/fallover.
But Aikido is about people, the sword work is classed as a "conversation" you feel the person pushing, you respond, they respond etc....It is very cooperative at the start but the reason for that is the essence of Aikido. You do not want to be using your strength, if you feel someone resisting, pushing against you, you will register this as "wrong" and change technique to harmonise with their new direction. At higher levels the "opponent" does respond and you must adapt your technique.
But Aikido is about people, not having conflict. In the above situation you are worried that your friend wrestle's you to the ground why? becuase you think he will impress the chick? Use your Aikido...go with him, let him leg lock you, tap out get up and say "phew I nearly spilt my guiness" then meet the blonde, harmonise with her and lead her ......
Aikido is a very effective Martial art. It doesn't really involve ground fighting as we specialise in the range before that. Every stle has its strengths and weaknesses its up to you to find and understand them.

I had a mate who is a rugby player try running at me to tackle me, same as a bjj, or, it looks the same.

I had never defended like this before, so I reacted naturally

to tackle someone to the ground, you have to lead with a shoulder, or you'll get kicked in the head

when he dropped his shoulder, i stepped to that same side and pulled off the best kaiten age ive ever done, much to his distress :-)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Robaikido:
I had a mate who is a rugby player try running at me to tackle me, same as a bjj, or, it looks the same.

I had never defended like this before, so I reacted naturally

to tackle someone to the ground, you have to lead with a shoulder, or you'll get kicked in the head

when he dropped his shoulder, i stepped to that same side and pulled off the best kaiten age ive ever done, much to his distress :-)[/QUOTE]

I've heard that kaitenage is generally the preferred response to a tackle, but to me it sounds very hard to pull off. I tip my hat to you sir [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Joe

It was different to the technique in the dojo, where you take the arm back first, then tak the head and throw

I took the head and arm at the same time, and turned them both sharply anti-cloclwise, if that makes sense

I was happy to see the result :-D

Me on an Aikido forum? Never!

Actually, at purple belt on up, BJJ starts feling like Aikido on the ground. Believe it or not. Of course, 95% of BJJ players never get past blue.

Most BJJ Black Belts are poetry in motion when it comes to fluidity and effortless movement.

Ive been training aikdo for about 5 years now (1st kyu) and recently started taking a Mixed Martial Arts Class (Combo of bjj, wrestling and kickboxing) to suppliment my aikido.

Ive been going about 5 months now and i can tell you first hand that aikido does help keep you standing and you can get ikkyo, tenchi, kaiten and irimi style techniques on MMA guys if they dont see it coming. Nikyo and yonkyo DO NOT WORK ON MMA GUYS AT ALL even when standing up. I know because ive been trying for months and have never sucessfull gotten one on.

If you go to the ground with a trained grappler YOU WILL LOOSE, the instinctive things untraied people do on the ground are a godsend to a trained grapper especially if you land underneath and try pushing upwards.

If you have to fight a grapler irst you need to learn how to sprawl to avoid being taken down and the irimi, irmi, irimi [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Id advise anyone who is serious about the martial applications of aikido to cross train in a floor orientated martial art (BBJ, Sombo, or MMA) for at least a few months. A couple of months will get you good enough at defending that you can defend a takedown disengage and get to good miai again. In fact in the 5 months ive been training in floorwork I can now defend myself quite sucessfully against guys who have been training a good while longer than me (I still cant beat them yet). But against newbies with no previous floor work I just dominate. Serpiusly give it 3 or 4 months and youll have enough floor work to beat the "average joe" most of the time on the ground.

Luck,

AikiGhost,

When you say that

"Nikyo and yonkyo DO NOT WORK ON MMA GUYS AT ALL even when standing up"

are you claiming that the two locks are fundamentally flawed or do you think there is some secrect to MMA that allows one to be immune to these locks?

Chris

[QUOTE]Originally posted by csinca:
AikiGhost,

When you say that

"Nikyo and yonkyo DO NOT WORK ON MMA GUYS AT ALL even when standing up"

are you claiming that the two locks are fundamentally flawed or do you think there is some secrect to MMA that allows one to be immune to these locks?

Chris[/QUOTE]

MMA guys are too good at closign the distance on you before you can make the Nikyo and yonkyo work, getting under the center of the tchnique or tying up the applying arm. Most of the times ive tried to get nikyo on the other guys at mma club even in half speed "transitional sparring" the can stop the technique and take you to the ground (where you do not want to be against a MMA/BJJ guy) by a leg grab. Iriminage works as it goes for the head and gets behind the defences. Ikkyo seems to work because you are taking them off balance instantly. As for yonkyo it probably doesnt work because the MMA guys I trin with can ignore a hell of a lot of pain. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

I may be wrong, as Ive said Im only a 5 year aikido practicioner, but these MMA guys train so hard and so "anything goes" that I cant see me being able to use nikky or yonkyo effectively on them for a long time.

Im certanly glad I decided to do some cross training though, the floor is a completely different world [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Luck,

I think I see where Chris is going with this. First of all when you talk about MMA, you are saying all MMA can stop this or it won't work. WRONG. Not all MMA practioners are all the same. My son, who is 22 weighs about 130 got a MMA practioner to tap out with a nikkyo lock applied from the ground. The practioner was a professional boxer but also trained in Sambo. He tapped him out!!It all depends on how you train and what you know. Maybe its because you don't know how to do the lock from different positions. Also, MMA are sport oriented, so many things are not allowed. Finger locks are outlawed, and I have used them extensively on the ground. Its not fair to lump all MMA practioners in one group. You have sport guys who train for sport, but there are others who cross train and its for other purposes(self-defense being one). I personally have gotten several kickbboxers to submit to my Nikkyo, so its all how you apply it. Now my Nikkyo is not 'pure Aikido' version of Nikkyo, mine more Jujutsu oriented. Everyone should not be lumped into a group or tagged with a label. And Chris, you and I know there is nothing fundementally wrong with Nikkyo. Yonkyo is another story. It only works half the time anyway and I wouldn't use it at all. Its like looking for pressure points in a fight, it just takes too long.

I would like to agree with senseilou. A lot of these MMA guys have certain strengths and weaknesses, but that does not mean that Aikido techniques are not applicable. I have personally found in competition that nikyo works well. Many ground fighters are looking for the triangle, jujigatame, chokes, and key lock. A much smaller percentage is concerning themselves with things like Nikyo. You may find that many of the smaller joint locks in Aikido are excellent on the ground especially against someone trained in competition style grappeling since many of them are not allowed in matches, fighters are not expecting them.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe Jutsu:
I was just wondering if anyone out there has seen or developed an aiki-defence against a BJJ or wrestling type shoot fighter. I realize the first response would be to keep proper ma'ai and all that, but apart from this best case scenerio what would your response be? I was a pretty descent wrestler in high school, and I think if someone shot really deep in on me I'd probably have to throw the technical side of my Aikido training out the door, and resort to the wrestling techniques that I know work for me. The problem that I could see is that those damn BJJ guys would choke me out before I knew what the hell is going on (sorry, no offence to any BJJ guys, I have a lot of respect for what you do). So anyway, I would never want to get into a wrestling match with one, ever. I highly doubt that I will ever get into an altercation with a BJJ practitioner, so this question is not pragmatic but really purely hypothetical. I'd appreciate any thoughts that you guys have out there.

Thanks,
Joe Jutsu[/QUOTE]

I'd just like to say that Joe do what I do- I am a dedicated Aikidoka but I cross train so to speak.Ive worked with wrestling/grappling and juijitsu and tae kown do and a little hap ki do. I dont think any one art ever has all the answers! But a combination of things with one art that fits u more than the others is probably best! Study some ground technique and add into your tool box! It cant hurt. And I hope you do know there are some deffenses that I have seen aginst a leg attack. And something to remember is that Aiki is not totally non agressive! O'Sensei Aikido was 80%( I think that's the quote) atemi! So hit his hind parts right in a vital spot! Nose, ears, solar plexus etc.....I know he's not really thought of much now but back in the day when he was in shape and stuff Seagal was awesome and he added some karate stuff into his Aiki. It was more street wise Aikido. Being in harmony doesnt mean u totally dont do anything. Hope I helped.

Training 5 years of aikido is probably not long enough amout of time to get your nikyo and yonkyo working on anyone - even in the aikido dojo. Eventually, these techniques work on anyone - given the proper situation - but initially they were brilliantly designed by O-sensei to NOT WORK WITH SURFACE LEVEL UNDERSTANDING.

When my sensei does these techniques on me, I do not feel any pain - but I have no choice but to take ukemi. I suppose I could resist a nikkyo by twisting my arms away - but that would invite an elbow into my chest or something less desireable.

I know that aikido works very well. I still have a lot of work to do to be able to apply what I practice in the dojo to these outside situations. The MMA folks are a great resource to work out with and practice how to deal with sophisticated kamakazi-style fighting attacks. Aikido folks can be great resources to MMA folks as well. Find friendship seminars and attend them. If you cannot find them, get some started!

Rob

If shot in on nothing beats a good old fashioned crossface. Once free of his grip the cross face can easily become irimi nage or hadaka jime

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Shotokan:

About the "gaurd" [not just the BJJ gaurd but Judo, Ju Jitsu, Sambo, Freestyle, even if a Karateka or non-martial artist]...heck everyone's gaurd. (I used the BJJ gaurd because it made it easier to explain my point)...[/QUOTE]

There is no use of the guard in Sambo or Western wrestling. In Western wrestling, you can win by a pin, so obviously the guard is not used. In sambo, you get points for pinning--ditto. The guard is unique to BJJ and judo. It was apparently a feature of the ne-waza of Fusen-ryu jujutsu, which was later incorporated into Kodokan judo. Even in the early 1900s, when judoka/jujutsuka and catch wrestlers began exchanging ideas and techniques (largely through competitions), modifications were made. For example, when judo's juji-gatame was added to catch wrestling as the "Japanese armbar", it was applied while lying on one's side, because the wrestler couldn't have both shoulders touching the mat (in Professional catch, one could win by either submission or pin).

In any event, the guard as it is used in submission grappling and MMA/NHB is from BJJ, which in turn comes from judo. However, BJJ resembles "old" judo, in that groundwork is given way more emphasis. Hence, emphasis on the guard.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
I have a bit of problem with these mixed martial arts styles because I think they try to do just that. They seem to teach that you must learn punching so you can fight a boxer, grappling to fight a wrestleer and so forth. I think that is wrong. I believe in a fight you should stick to what you're best at, in order to maximise your chances. Of course, there are plenty of people who will disagree.[/QUOTE]

So then, you're basically saying that you disagree with the methods and tactical approach of the Ancient Greek pankration (which is where all this cross-training began, THOUSANDS of years ago).

Pankration means "all powers" for a good reason--it was much like modern MMA/NHB. You had to be competent in all areas of unarmed combat--striking, throwing, takedowns, and ground wrestling/subs. You might have specialized in only one or two aspects (as many of the top fighters today do), but you still had to have a solid understanding of all areas, in order to survive.

The Romans continued with this tradition, with their own version of the same event (the pancratium).

And the last time I checked, the Greeks and Romans knew a thing or two about combat.

In fact, the Romans made great use of cross-training in their military as well. Legionaries typically fought as heavy infantry with sword and shield, but they were also instructed in things like basic archery, basic slinging, and basic horsemanship. Some legionaries also had to serve in dual roles--as both heavy infantry, and sometimes as specialist light infantry (antesignani). They also knew (and used) combative wrestling. The Romans were as "eclectic" as they came, and that's why they had an Empire that lasted so long.

So, I really have to laugh when people bring up MMA/cross-training--the so-called "eclectic" approach--as if it's something new. Obviously, it's not.

Fighters have used that approach for a very long time.




[This message has been edited by Armed_Man_Piker (edited 10-29-2004).]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cato:
For the "grappler" to grapple he has to take hold of you. Aikido teaches us effective ways to deal with people grabbing hold of us, in fact we often encourage them to do so so we can employ our aiki. It is in no way a "given" that the grappler will be able to grapple an aikidoka to the floor in the first place.[/QUOTE]

No offense meant, Cato, but if you genuinely believe that, then you must be pretty naive as to what grapplers train in, and what they are capable of.

[QUOTE]...if that is what he trains for then he has the advantage. But it is a big "if".[/QUOTE]

LOL--grapplers TRAIN FOR takedowns and throws! BJJ players, shootfighters, freestyle & Greco-Roman wrestlers, samboists, etc--they're all out to either dump you on your head, or otherwise bring you to the ground, and finish you from there. Unless an aikidoka trains to defend against both single- and double-leg shoots (as common in freestyle), as well as against throws and takedowns from the clinch (as common in Greco-Roman), he's going to get taken down--simple as that.

[QUOTE]
In my view mixing a little ground fighting with your aikido will not be enough to overcome the advantage that a grappler has on the floor. You have to train exclusively for ground fighting if you want to fight on the ground. Then you condede the advantage to the aikidoka when yyour both standing up. Aikido tries to negate the need to fight on the ground, rather than giving ways to do so.[/QUOTE]

If you want to avoid going to the ground, then you have to train in things like Western wrestling, judo, sambo, etc.




[This message has been edited by Armed_Man_Piker (edited 10-29-2004).]

Quote:

---

I was just wondering if anyone out there has seen or developed an aiki-defence against a BJJ or wrestling type shoot fighter. I realize the first response would be to keep proper ma'ai and all that, but apart from this best case scenerio what would your response be?

---

I would say irmri as he shoots and try and time it so you get his back. Alternately like you said keep miai, althoug thats pretty tough against a trained shooter.