Aikido in an MMA setting

Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/07/08 06:43 PM

Believe it or not I have a friend who is in an ideal candidate: He has been doing MMA for 4.5 years and and Aikido for 10!

Problem is something I touched on earlier: So called "ethical issues". Morihei Ueshiba, founder of Aikido, wasn't big on competitions. I think that is the biggest problem for Aikido being used in MMA. There is a culture within most Aikido schools that exists which views any sort of involvement with combat sport negatively. So they keep Aikido away from it.

Case in point: My friends instructor (my old teacher too) told him he wouldn't teach him Aikido anymore if my friend were to try and enter an MMA competition again. Wasn't in keeping with the spirit of Aikido apparently. All of which is fine, except the school is Tomiki school, meaning that the Sensei says its ok to compete in Aikido competitions!!!

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/07/08 10:31 PM

Dig it, but you don't have to compete to spar/test. Perhaps these schools also have something against sparring. Well no, they do randori...so perhaps they just have something against realistic sparring.

Posted by: schanne

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/12/08 09:08 AM

I don't see it either, too uke oriented and pre arranged. I love to watch Aikido and have incorporated many of their techniques into our SD system but for MMA purposes...nope.
Not saying you can't sneak a technique in here or there to assist your nomal takedowns or locks.

Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/12/08 12:23 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-0bjAFgIZ8

This is Tanto Randori. Some decent moves in here (nice throw at 00:25).

I think the movements are there in Aikido, they just need to be effectively trained. As with a lot of TMA, I think a good whack of what is taught in Aikido re movements would fall by the way side if it was trained realistically (though I do think principles, such as staying centred, would still be useful).

The way Aikido is trained in its current format would not be suitable though against MMA.

Or would is it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxYkZP25X2g

There you have it, stone cold proof! Top Aikido guy doing a number on a top MMAist

Posted by: schanne

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/12/08 02:49 PM

"The way Aikido is trained in its current format would not be suitable though against MMA".

Then one could say if that is true how effective is it in a real encounter...but that's another topic

My man Steven Seagal, wish that fat sucker would loose some wait for his movies! Those big old leather trench coats he has to wear don't fool me!!!

No offense Seagal Sensei

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/12/08 07:59 PM

Just a short comment... not directed at anyone particularly...

The topic started out ok, then quickly degenerated into technicalities and techniques.

If you're considering using the movements/principles of Aikido in an MMA setting, then I would suggest the focus on "technique" is not going to get you anywhere.

Aikido is not about the technique, and certainly not about wrist manipulations - the technique is a "front" thru which the real stuff is hidden. Just as the wrist is a way to get to the real goal of aiki - kuzushi on contact. Technique is merely a distraction from the real essence of the art.

The principles of movement and anatomical juxtapositions are the same with any martial or pugilistic art as they are with Aikido. The human body only works and responds in so many ways.

The best thing I can say is that there is a group of people in Tokyo using similar principles in an MMA setting. The format is different and looks nothing like Aikido, but the principles are the same.

Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/13/08 06:00 AM

Spot on Eyrie I agree in full. I was careful (I think) to say "movements" of Aikido, rather than "techniques" of Aikido. As has been said before, Aikido is a system of body movement as much as anything else.

I think that philisophy would be a constant regardless of setting e.g. dojo, MMA gym, everyday world.

When I said the way Aikido is currently trained would not be best suited to MMA, I meant that most Aikidoka don't use train to use Aikido against MMA. Although the principle is constant in Aikido, its better to have an idea what you are up against!

Good to hear from you again Eyrie!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 06/15/08 08:33 PM

It's a complex issue... best suited for what? There are rules (written and unwritten) in sportive engagements... and I would think certainly in MMA/Vale Tudo, as there would be in Shodokan shiai.

The only real guiding principle in Aikido is not to harm your training partner intentionally. Otherwise, there are no real "rules" in Aikido.... and you would have to take the bull on in his own field.

However, I think what you're really trying to get at is if you can take the "body skills" of Aikido and apply it MMA or any format.... and the answer is yes.

Note I said "body skills" and not technique. Technique is useless. Body skill is something else altogether. And if you're not training your body skill (read "gongfu") in Aikido, then you're wasting your time. The body skill is what makes the techniques work... not the other way round.

Don't get me wrong, you need both body skill and technique though.... which is why contests/competitions are pretty pointless... it's not about Aikido vs MMA or whateva, it's about pitting your bodyskill and technical know-how against another person's bodyskill and technical know-how. And as with everything, there is some element of luck involved.

However, if we're talking "no rules", and you don't have to protect the other person from themselves, then it's a completely different matter.

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/23/08 04:20 PM

Well said Eyrie. You hit the nail on the head. This type of thread really misses the crux of the matter. When you add competition into any "Martial Art", you turn the Art into a "Martial Sport". Martial Sports, whether mma, taekwondo, judo, Timiki Aikido etc are fine, if that is your passion. They can be effectively used for self defense. But, when you add rules to the equation, your now confining yourself to the limits defined by the rules of the your particular martial sport.

For me, the beauty of Aikido is the freedom that O'Sensei gave us in studying Aikido. Some will argue, but one of O'Sensei's greatest techniques he gave us is the concept of circular movement. Aikido incorporates circular movement into all of it's technique. The greater our understanding of circular movement, the greater our universe.

I get totally pumped when I watch a student gain understanding of how the devlopment of their personal ki through breathing techniques while learning to "focus without focusing", enables him or her to toss this 350 lb Texan across the dojo, after they evade my attack using that simple circular pivot, and counters with any of 10,000 or more techniques.

O'Sensei taught us to "train until we forget" and that "we are all in the race together". Let's not get caught up in the "what ifs". Let's enjoy our art for what it is.

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/23/08 05:51 PM

Might you be putting a little more into the "rules" argument than is actually warranted?

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/24/08 03:21 PM

I'm not quit sure I follow your point exactly. Are not "rules" the exact reason you won't find an Aikidoka competing in an mma match?

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/24/08 05:58 PM

I'd argue that there are probably other reasons why aikidoka don't compete in MMA than merely the "rules".

But since we're on that topic, what is it specifically about the rules that makes an aikidoka unwilling or unable to compete?

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 12:25 AM

I guess I would have to answer that by saying alot of it is the philosophy of Aikido. If I remember correctly, you stated that you have studied Aikido for several years yourself, and this will probably be repetitive to you. Of course Aikido itself is defined as "the way of harmony and peace" We are directed by O'Sensei himself to Avoid all conflict if possible, and if not possible, to hurt rather than maime, maime rather than kill, and kill rather than be killed. Competition defeats the purpose of an Aikidokas training. If an mma guy for instance shoots a single or double leg take down for instance, I can sprawl and attempt to force the attacker to the ground with pressure on the neck and shoulders, underhook and throw, spin behind etc. But, I can't evade the sprawl, atemi strike with whip fingers to the eyes, snap a push kick to the groin, fish hook a cheek etc, because those things are outside mma rules. Most of an Aikidokas locks and holds, to be applied properly without turning the hold into a wrestling match depend upon the distraction created by an atemi strike, a slap or push kick etc to set the throw up. Rules on the other hand stop an Aikidokas Takemusu. I look forward to your thoughts. FYI, I have family in both Carolinas. It's a great part of the country.

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 10:00 AM

Eyrie... Are you going against Zombie Zero's request at the top of the forums?

Of course, I never directly trained with O'Sensei. He passed away in 1969 and I began my study under Suenaka Sensei in 1971. Your last quote is a paraphrase of a principle Suenaka Sensei taught me many years ago, which in turn is based upon principals taught to him by O'Sensei. It's a simple description of how I teach my class. For reference see Suenakas "Complete Aikido" pgs 103 through 104. Also see the attached link. It's been around for years, in print and on the web in various formats, and also expresses my "Aikido Philosophy"

http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC04/Dobson.htm

In my 37 years of study, I have been very successful in using "verbal Aikido" to avoid most confrontaions. I do confess that being 6'3 and 300 lbs probably helped. I have also been fortunate enough through those years and having worked as a bouncer and corrections officer to defend myself and others when fighting was necessary. I still contend that my style is far from what you called "new-age "aiki-is-lovey-dovey", and much closer to what the Founder intended.

Posted by: Taison

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 11:27 AM

No offense meant regarding the style, but most practitioners I've seen usually have an excuse or another not to compete in an MMA setting.

I used to think Aikido was an art developed to kick the cr@p out of untrained people, but Eyrie, through his 'verbal aikido' proved me wrong.

You know what I believe?

A little theory, I nicknamed 'natural evolution'. What happens when you put aikido inside the cage? It will suck at first, then 10,000+ techniques will be reduced to around 10-15 (maybe less), the art will focus more on atemi BASED on boxing instead of the overhead chop cr@p which is usually taught, and that after a while most likely, the techniques which were bred under these conditions resembles judo, while the locks resembles those done in BJJ.

It's a natural evolution of any art that enters the MMA setting. For example, there's a HUGE difference between goju-ryu karate and Daido juku. Their resemblence? The name 'karate', other than that. Not much.

Anyways, I'm going to side with Kogas here. Why doesn't aikido enter the MMA setting? Afraid of a little 'functional' 'natural evolution' of the art you hold dear?

And don't come with the same excuse where techniques are limited by rules. Methinks, there hasn't been any well-conditioned aikido-ka that could go into the cage and prove that their technique is functional under 'safer fighting simulations'.

~Donnie

Posted by: harlan

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 11:35 AM

How long does it take to become effective in aikido?

Posted by: Ames

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 11:50 AM

Good point Taison. It also goes to what eyrie is trying to convey: the techniques are there to lead you towards a deeper understanding, you could say of movement and timing--I think these are the stregths of Aikido. The question is, does the current method by which Aikido is generally trained promote this understanding, or does it engender in the student a desire for the replication of 10,000 techniques?

--Chris

Posted by: Taison

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 12:17 PM

TexasAikido,
Here's a little example of 'natural evolution' that occured due to individual progression;

Judo has around 64 official throws.

A black belt judo-ka only drills around 10 or so throws that he feels most comfortable with and actually shows the results he wants. Why is this? Why not practice all the 64 throws? Randori on a larger scale.

What would happen if Aikido did the same thing and filtered out the 10,000 techniques and ended up with 7? Sure, you could argue Tomiki aikido does sparring as well, but do they do it as intense and fixated as judo-ka do it? Do they have national and international tournaments? Judo's randori is about winning and using the best and most effective technique in order to win. Aikido's sparring is testing what works under pressure, but not about winning.

'Natural evolution' is a natural change which will continue on always. It changed gongfu into okinawan karate, okinawan karate into kyokushin, and kyokushin into daido juku.

The only limiting factor is how much are you willing to embrace the change?

You said in order for aikido to function properly under MMA settings, you'll need to create distraction using atemi, well, that's what judo-ka are doing inside the cage to get their throws off. It's a natural evolution. Figures, doesn't it?

Chris,
My MA understanding is like a cup water compared to Eyrie's vast ocean. There's technique and principals. I'm striving for technique but to do that I need to understand the principals but by the time I understand the principals, the techniques will come naturally. What I think Eyrie is trying to say is that a lot of aikido-ka are trying to force this process and just skip principals and go for the techniques, thus resulting in 'cheap replicas'.

Harlan,
How long? Don't know but if I remember right, I asked a Shihan that in Bangkok, and he said around 20 years. Sigh~

~Donnie

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/25/08 11:14 PM

I can only answer this question from my own perspective. If I gave you or anyone else here the impression that I was quoting Ueshiba directly and not interpreting his teachings to mean what I said above, I apologize. But, I did give you a citation and explanation of where I derived my interpretation and the condensation of a broad philosophy into the single sentence that you quoted.

As far as dodging the question about rules keeping an Aikidoka from competing in an mma match, I gave you the answer to that above also. Again, from my perspective, I wouldn't take Aikido, a self defense oriented art into an mma competiton where the rules keep me from doing whatever is necessary to defend myself. MMA rules prohibit to many counters that an Aikidoka might need to use to defeat the attack of an mma proponent. It's that simple. This same thought was put out there by several other people in this thread. I don't believe that Aikido can be succesful in an mma environment, when the mma environment is 180 degrees opposite to what traditional Aikido teaches. I can't speak for the Tomiki guys because I haven't seen nor practised the style. Again my opinion only. As soon as you attempt to take traditional Aikido into a competition, your no longer doing "Aikido".

Posted by: TexasAikido

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/26/08 07:43 AM

Tomh777, I did not mean that at all. This is an Aikido thread and I reference the statement in context of Aikido. I could have feferenced the quote to my interpretation of the Old Testement 10 Commandments also I suppose, and then the Muslims and Buddist etc. could all have a go at me too. j/k.

Eyrie, you are so right. "Every technique has a counter, every counter a reversal" The point I was making is that when you enter a sport, the rules of he sport dictate and limit your counters. If I'm going to take Aikido into an mma setting, I'm probably going to evolve along the lines that Taison laid out earlier and John alluded to also.

But, if were outside the "Octogon", do I think Aikido could work as a self defense against an mma guy? I know it would, especially in context of what you said earlier...Quote "Don't get me wrong, you need both body skill and technique though.... which is why contests/competitions are pretty pointless... it's not about Aikido vs MMA or whateva, it's about pitting your bodyskill and technical know-how against another person's bodyskill and technical know-how. And as with everything, there is some element of luck involved." end Quote.

As a side note, you guys have to show me how you do the Quote thing is these posts. It would save some typing.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/26/08 09:44 AM

Quote function -

http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...page=0&vc=1

Posted by: Taison

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/27/08 08:07 AM

Everytime you post Eyrie, a part of me feels like buying a ticket and fly to Aussie land and just sit infront of your door until you teach me a thing or two...

-Taison out

Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/27/08 01:42 PM

I think the whole "20 years" thing is an answer to scare off the black belt hunters i.e. someone who wants to go to class once a week and get a black belt after 18 months, just so he can tell everyone he has a black belt!!! I don't think after 20 years the penny drops and someone realizes what it is they have been trying to do.

In my experience it is more of a "How long is a piece of string?" answer.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/27/08 07:08 PM

Folks, can we split the posts regarding "how long" to its own thread please?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/29/08 08:48 PM

Are you asking WHY not spilt the thread? Or why NOT spilt the thread?

Coz "how long" doesn't have anything to do with being in an MMA setting?

Posted by: harlan

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/30/08 07:08 AM

Sorry. I asked 'how long' because the little Aikido talk I've run across seems to make it sound that it takes a long time to become proficient in aikido. Seems to me that those professional MMA fighters are pretty young(ish)....and only spend a couple of years training.

Just wondering if there was a mismatch between the two 'styles' in training time, or focus of techniques.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/30/08 07:20 AM

It's still irrelevant to the topic, harlan.

How long does it take to re-wire your body movement? My counter question would be How often do you train?

Let's say it takes around 5000 hours of practice to be moderately proficient in a manual skill. BTW, you should read this book... interesting stuff...

If you train 8 hours a day, 6 days a week - how long would it take to get up to 5000 hours? About 2 years?

If you train 4 hours a week - how long? 24 years?

Posted by: iaibear

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/30/08 03:46 PM

I have trained four hours a week in two different Aikido dojo. The first six years was in a school where the sensei taught the testing syllabus. Before I left there I had the 5th Kyu, 4th Kyu, and most of the next two as part of my motor memory with reflex responses.

At the second dojo, after eight additional years, I have not added even one more Kyu technique to my motor memory. On the contrary, I have forgotten an awful lot in eight years. If they have even touched on one, I would not know it because they never name sets of movements nor do they repeat them often enough to have them become familiar.

So please rethink this "how long to you practice?" bit. I learn by repetition, a thing the second dojo does not teach.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/30/08 04:21 PM

Harlan,
that's why I often call it "Mixed Partial Arts"... While lots of MMA guys know some jujutsu and punching skills, they seldom appear to be deep in the arts, other than in the combat aspects of it (randori).

As for Aikido, if someone would study body mechanics before studying Aikido, they would have a much easier time with it, but they try to do Aikido like they do karate, or don't have any understanding of how the body works and how the technique of Aikido is accomplished. I have a private student right now that's a green belt, and he's more competent than many of the black belts in kempo that are training in our school. The reason, I've trained him in body mechanics and then sent him off to do TKD on "off days", and then spend a half hour before class with him when we have Aikido class. His level of skill is moving exponentially compared to the others in the class.

As Eyrie said, it's all about learning movement, and if you can't redirect energy, then Aikido techniques wouldn't do you much good in a MMA contest. There's little if any blocking in MMA, and they seem to think their "badge of courage" is to be able to take a shot and stay standing, but if they redirected that shot, it would be the other guy going down.

Unless you practice Aikido, you would have a hard time understanding which principle to use to develop a technique for MMA, so while the method is very adaptable to the skill set, it takes some adaptive study to work against jabs, etc. that you encounter in MMA. Since Aikido is not a contest art, the attacks and "redirections" are usually smoother than what you encounter in MMA. The idea in Aikido isn't to "do something" to someone, but "with someone"... and while you can leave somebody's shadow in the mat, we don't usually practice to throw that hard on a normal basis... only in the good schools.

The focus in Aikido is "blending"... the focus in MMA is "ground and pound"... so, yes, there is a difference. Nothing that couldn't be adapted though... it depends on how you want to train.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 07/30/08 09:02 PM

@mattj
I'd suggest that the problem is people's perception and understanding of the training modality, rather than any inherent problem with the methodology. Besides, the goal of Aikido is radically different to MMA. And if people want to do MMA competition then they should train in whatever way they deem appropriate for MMA competition.

@iaibear
1. You're not putting in enough hours

If you want to get better quicker, you're going to have to do more than 4 hours a week. When I was coming up thru the ranks, I was doing 2hrs x 4 sessions a week and I still felt that wasn't enough. Each year we had 2 training camps, one in summer, the other in winter. We would train 8-9 hrs a day over a 3 day period. If you want to get any good, quickly, you'd have to put in the hard yards and train at THAT level of intensity 8-9 hours EVERYDAY. Here's a little secret... train to the point where you are so facked you cannot stand up, and then "it" will happen. You know how runners get their "second wind"? You will have to break thru the physical/mental barrier first in order to move effortlessly.

2.If you're looking at "motor memory", "trained reflexes" and "techniques" you're wasting your time. You're looking at the wrong end of the stick. Aikido is none of those. Fundamentally it's about re-wiring your body to move effortlessly - which paradoxically requires a lot of real effort.

The "techniques" are not something you "do" to someone. As Grady said (BTW, good to hear from you Grady!), it's done "with" another person. Like paired kata. The "technique" of Aikido is basically an expression of movement. Just like karate kata is an expression of movement - they are both part movement wiring training and part actual technique application. If you want to get good, quickly, you need both solo and paired movement exercises.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, do the aiki-taiso on your own time, outside of formal classes. This is the solo component of Aikido - just like karate kata can be performed individually. That's karate's solo component. The taiso is designed to allow you to re-wire your body movement. Do it slowly, with no "muscular" effort. i.e. "relax" or if you prefer "loose".

The focus is to use these 4 things to accomplish movement - ground reaction force (GRF) to push from your center (instead of your shoulders), weight transfer from your center to your hands (instead of your shoulders), intent and breath - the same 4 things that Tohei's 4 points are pointing to (keep one point, relax completely, weight underside, extend ki). BTW, these things are interrelated - if you don't have one, you don't have the others.

The other important aspect is weapons works... since the weapon is an extension of your arms (and therefore body), practise with a weapon keeping in mind the above 4 things. I.E. wield the weapon as if it were your arms. BTW, the longer the weapon, the better. But since we're not using "muscular" effort, I'd suggest a much lighter weapon to start with.

During formal classes, you're working on re-wiring your body to respond sensitively under dynamic circumstances WITH a partner. Your partner is there to give you bio-feedback and no more. If anything, you should be working more on your ukemi than on "technique".

The better your ukemi, the better your nage waza because the skills of sensitivity to forces, tai-sabaki, ashi-sabaki are precisely the same. Plus, everything you are supposed to be doing in your solo training comes to bear in paired work as well.

3. The real trick to getting good, quicker, is to make these things part of your EVERYDAY movement. When you pick up a coffee cup, use the GRF to push your center, and from you center to your hands to lift the cup. When you close the fridge door, or open a door that pushes the other way, push from the ground to your center to your hands. If you're paying attention, that is the first half of the motion for funekogi-undo. When you have to pull the door to open it, use the 2nd half of funekogi.

4. You really don't need to remember all those techniques anyway, not that there is much to remember, once you have re-trained the way you move "normally", the technique will happen. The original Daito-ryu techniques Ueshiba taught pre-war numbered somewhere in the 2300+.

Aikido only has 6 joint-lock/pins and 8 formal throws (shiho, irimi, kokyu, kaiten, kotegaeshi, tenchi, koshi, juji), each of which can be executed from 3 basic grabs (katate, kata, ushiro) and 3 basic strikes (yokomen, shomen, tsuki) - everything else is a variation of the principles contained therein. The entry and exit will be slightly different for each of those, but the technique (what happens in the middle) is the same.

You could spend a lifetime exploring the depth of such a small number of techniques, and still cover the enormous breadth of technical applications, precisely because the principles are the same.

So, I would suggest studying the principles contained in the technique, rather than trying to remember the technique. Once you grasp the principles, you'll know not only the technique, but also the variations and potential counters because you can extrapolate those from the principles of movement.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/03/08 05:15 AM

eyrie,

If I am ever on trail for my life, I want you as my lawyer.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/03/08 07:12 AM

Gee fileboy... I'm not sure whether to take that as a compliment or not.

I'm no lawyer... but if you're ever on trial for your life... I'd recommend pleading GUILTY then move for a mis-trial owing to incompetent representation.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/03/08 07:33 PM

Well, no teacher is able to teach you everything... at some stage you have to figure it out for yourself. It's the process of Shu-Ha-Ri - a paradox in itself. Learning the "form" (some would say "dead" form). Breaking from form. Returning to form. God forbid a teacher who spoon feeds everything to students and produces "martial artists" who can't think for themselves!

I guess that's why a lot of people just plain s-u-c-k at it...

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/04/08 07:25 PM

Er... "figure it out" doesn't mean "guess". LOL. It means research, test, experiment, analyze - all the good stuff you're meant to be learning how to do at school.

Surely, you would be familiar with "lab work" if you're doing/you did Organic Chem? Dojo work is lab work. Solo work is lab work.

Posted by: iaibear

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 07:22 AM

If you want to see "guess" you should watch a batch of Sensei's upper belts demonstrate Shihonage. Now there is a variety of opinions/guesses for you.

Posted by: Nate_S

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 12:19 PM

I don't understand this whole none competition thing. How can good hearted competition be bad. It seems like an attempt to avoid facing some harsh realities of the weaknesses of an art. I am not talking about formal comps but something informal. I did Hung Gar for a long time and found the same problem. We even sparred live but only within our own school. We developed bad habits because we assumed that something worked univserally but it didn't. Ultimately you can say I would do this and this but how many Aikido practioners here have tried to use Aikido against skill practioners(say 2+years of formal training)of other Arts, not just MMA but any other art in a live or nearly live situation? If not why. Don't you want to know if it will work? Wouldn't that contribute to your art? Are you saying that Aikido is perfect as it stands? That you have nothing to learn from others? Isn't that an arrogant approach to the arts?

As far as Aikido in MMA let me change that and say in a street fight against someone with MMA training (Muay Thai, BJJ, Boxing, Wrestling). Well, I don't see it happening. without forward movement and the way that MMA practioners use their hands (hard to grab), it would be very difficult to perform typical Aikido movements. Some have already mentioned it here. Some moves will work but there are other , better moves from other arts that would work better.

Posted by: Taison

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 01:30 PM

Actually, I could imagine you using some of Aikido's principles from the clinch.

For example, while having an overhook of your opponents arm, you could deliver an elbow strike, and then follow with some type of, err, jointlock aikido style.

But then again, it's not technique we're discussing, it's principles.

-Taison out

Posted by: Nate_S

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 02:58 PM

How often do you practice elbowing from the clinch and then moving to a joint lock as a person resists? Are you good at it, I mean Aikido as a whole? The question isn't could you imagine how it could be used. The question is can it be done effectively using the principles of Aikido.
Principles and theories are not realities. Have you done it, have you seen it done? I know aikido is heavy on philosophy but it is a martial arts right. At some point doesn't someone in the Aikido community ask: "can this work in a real situation?" Hell, you might be able to do it. I can only say I don't think you can because:

1. A MMA trained fighter say who has 4 years experience has practiced elbow strikes both striking and defending against them from every position say one hour a week so say 150 hours total plus has sparred another 100 hours using them. During that same time how often has the average Aikido practitioner practiced with them? I am assuming it is quite small so it is unlikely that you would be effective against him/her.
2. Takedown/throws/joint locks from the clinch. Same as above a MMA trained fighter or even some of the good combat martial arts such as Krav have spent hours upon hours developing skills and muscle memory for these moves and know what works and doesn't in much more realistic situations. For instance they know that standing joint locks (both people standing) are very difficult because the person can move there body out of them and that it is much better to take them down and them joint lock them. If that is what you were thinking then go back to my earlier comment.

In the end I don't think Aikido practitioner can say they know they can either if they haven't done it.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 06:21 PM

Nate -

Check here regarding joint locks in sparring. While it is fairly light contact, it is still resistant:

http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...=1#Post16001527

I have personally found greater success with joint locks (wrist locks to be specific) on the ground. I have not found finger locks to be high percentage at all.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 09:38 PM

Taison,
as a Judo player, you probably know more of Aikido than you realize. Balance is balance, and kuzushi and leading are "similar", just accomplished using different methods. The pins and hold-downs of both judo and aikido are applied in much the same way, so it isn't too far off to think you "understand" where the principles derive.

I have trouble explaining Aikido techniques to practitioners of Aikido, so I'm sure that explaining it to people whose base arts are "grappling" would be equally as troublesome. Application is found in randori, and the "techniques" in henke waza (change of techniques) as you "redirect" someone's energy into a pin or throw. All of it...Judo, Aikido, and MMA are methodologies of body mechanics.

A few years back, we did a lot of grappling in Aikido training at one of the major dojos where I trained... and while the MMA crowd would swear it was BJJ, and I was familiar with it as Judo, it was pure Aikido training. Only the methods of application were different... the results were the same.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/05/08 09:55 PM

Can I just say that there seems to be a preponderance on "technique" and how techniques are or should be executed, in some of the preceding posts.

Ueshiba coined the term "Takemusu Aiki", which essentially means spontaneous martial movement stemming from Aiki, or the application of Aiki.

So, to address iaibear's dilemma... no two movements of the same technique is going to "look" the same. Heck, I can't even do the same movement exactly the same way each time, because uke's dynamic is different each time. (One argument for having really good uke and ukemi is for that reason).

And in answer to Nate's question... that's true... I can't say that I know it will work, because I don't. Not because I don't know that any specific technique would work, but because the dynamics of the situation might be such that it would invalidate any attempt to apply a specific technique but not another "more spontaneous" technique. IOW, I won't know what "technique" to use until "it" happens.

Because "technique" is hard to pull off when you're fixated on it. So I tend to work at a far more basic level... like balance...

Besides, a wristlock/finger lock is only a means to the center.

Posted by: Taison

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 01:49 PM

Grady,

I do aikido without knowing it because of principles~

Arch = half-circular rotation

In a clinch~
1) The tori (uke?) holds their left hand on your neck.
2) You grab the wrist(or sleeve if judo) with your left hand, and using your neck as fulcrum, apply pressure on their left elbow.
3) While applying pressure, do a counter-clockwise arch with your left foot to bring the uke to his knees.
4) Pull them forward to make them prone on the mat by rotating counter-clockwise with your left foot a bit more. You should be ina position similar to this. Lift your left knee and position it behind their neck while doing a clockwise arch with your right knee.
5)Now, slip your left hand at their elbow and control the arm with an overhook of your left arm.
6) Apply pressure to the elbow using the overhook.
7) Deliver a todome (strike) at their face or throat, or go for juji-gatame.

Now when I did this technique in randori people used to ask me "Aikido?" my reply was "Judo..."

I swear to god, it's a technique in judo, but there's aiki in it alright

Another thing I find people asking if it's Aiki is my counter lapel technique.

1) Tori grabs my lapel with his left hand.
2) While holding their wrist with my left hand, I raise my right arm over their left and then overhook their arm.
3) While overhooking, I do a counter-clockwise rotation while still controlling their wrist and applying pressure.
4) If done right, the opponent will drop to their knees and I can pin them down face first to the mat where I can for waki-gatame .

If it was jujutsu, you could elbow strike them with your left arm, or if it was aikido it would've already been a complete lock.

That's actually the only two things people have actually commented that's Aikido and not judo but I swear to everything holy; I learnt that from Judo nowhere else. The only difference between my Judo and Kodokan's is that we did a lot of wrestling takedowns and leg locks. But that's it!

-Taison out

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 02:33 PM

Until i actually SEE aikido used effectively I'm going to consider it generally ineffective overall.

Let me see it, until then you guys are just full of hot gas.

Posted by: Nate_S

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 02:53 PM

No, that isn't what I meant. I know no one knows whether they will win a specific fight. I mean is there a reasonable expectation that a particular style of Skills will work. I use the term style of Skills rather then techniques to acknowledge your point that particular moves away change based on the situation.
However, this whole "Takemusu Aiki" response does not answer my question. I am not talking about minor variations of technique I am taking about the general skill sets learned in Aikido. Can they be functionally used in a real self defense situation?
Let me put it in terms of my martial art. Take the Jab. I can do it high, low, slightly hook it, do it in combination with various other kicks and punches in various orders. I am not referring to a specific "jab to the head, followed by a cross the body" technique. I am talking about the ability to throw a jab and the ability to mix it with other strikes is a skill set. I know these skill sets work in various forms because I have used them full speed against resistance in sparring, MMA fights and to a very limited degree in street situations. I have also seen others use these skill sets used effectively. No techniques or skill set works all the time but I think it is important to know whether a move has at least a high probability of working.
The questions is can Aikido say the same thing about Aikido effective techniques. Yes MMA is not street fighting but honestly it is very close particularly as it is practiced several years ago. I have never seen a single example of unique aikido skill sets being used effectively. What I mean by Unique Aikido skill sets are styles of movement and techniques that are unique to Aikido or Aikido off shoots. For instance a Atemi, Kokyunage, Shomeh uchi waza,….ect… Can these be performed by anyone in a realistic situation? If you can only say “well, every so often you might catch a guy by surprise” then you have to be honest with yourself and admit that it is an ineffective skill set.
I think Aikido practitioners if they honestly examined their art would find that a majority of their skill sets are ineffective no matter how they modify them or use them. The one that do work are those that are similar to Judo and full contact styles of Jujitsu (Brazilian isn’t the only one) and it would be better if they just studied them. They will not do that though and will continue to deign it because the have too much invested and to much personal status rapped up in their art. I know I went through the same thing with Hung Gar.
I am sure someone is going to give me the old “that’s your opinion and we are all entitled….ect..” but the problem is that Aikido schools are out there selling their services as self-defense arts when in reality they are closer to tai chi. Which is fine but you need to be clear to your students. If you think I am wrong so be it, show me something that would make me think otherwise. Just one clip of someone defending themself from a full speed not preplanned common strike combination or takedown using Aikido. Is that too much to ask. I am sure I will get some convoluted answer about the how it would violate the “Spirit of Aikido” or it is “too deadly”. The shocking this is that I don’t think most Aikido practitioners really want to know.
PS that video clip that you refered too the one called Randor and Irikumi, that is a Karate video and is right inline with what MMA guys study and doesn't use akido moves. Is that the one you were refering too?

Posted by: Nate_S

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 03:11 PM

O and one other thing lets not call it a competition how about a “demo”. I have found hundreds of Demos of Aikido vs. X and it is always choreographed dance. Just do it for real, jsut once. at least have the other Aikido guy try to actually hit him.

Posted by: iaibear

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 09:05 PM

Granted, I am speaking of movies. Steven Segal, think what you want, has been in many action films which positively are choreographed. But when he puts down the current villain, I have found myself identifying by name the Aikido technique he is using. Sometimes I can say I did that one last night. Does that still mean it cannot work?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 09:55 PM

Well, ALL MA forms and techniques are choreographed to an extent... for learning purposes. How else would a beginning student learn how a technique works or how a kata is to be performed without some sort of choreography? Choreographed movement exists for a reason. But choreographed technical movement is one thing. Application is one thing. Even though there will be overlaps and actual application *may* look like the choreographed movement, it's not quite the same thing. One is completely dynamic and the other is a "snapshot" of what *could* happen in a dynamic situation.

A technique "works" so long as there is a solid basis in principles AS IT APPLIES to the context and dynamics of a PARTICULAR circumstance. The question is whether the same technique will still work when the circumstances and dynamics are different? If NOT, will the general principles within the technique still apply? If NOT, will principle and technical variation be required to make it work? Now extrapolate that to a situation where reaction time and combative distance is rapidly decreased. What would make it work in that situation? IF NOT, what else would work? Simple answer - it takes skill and experience.

Heck, even jumping high kicks, and 360º spinning heel hooks to the head can work in some circumstances, which is why I keep saying the focus should be on skill - i.e. do you have the ability in any given circumstance to pull it off?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 10:48 PM

Punch...kick...holddown...throw...choke What particular "skill" do you think Aikido doesn't have the answer for, would be my question.

Eyrie and I both know the answer, and while you guys seem to think Aikido is a "soft" art, you've never gotten in a situation where the randori is for real using Aikido techniques.

"Done for real", you're looking at broken arms, ripped out rotator cuffs, broken wrists, broken necks, broken elbows, ruptured spleens... the list goes on. What you guys are used to viewing are the "demo arts" of Aikido, not the "application" of Aikido. All you've seen is the "tame" side of the art.

Irimi nage can be a dynamic technique, even done in the "demo mode"... add a couple of elbow strikes into the process, and you'll get a free ride in the ambulance. Instead of "projecting" someone using their arm, you simply strike through the elbow, and you've got a major elbow repair. Do shihonage and rotate the shoulder away from the shoulder instead of toward the spine, and you'll have an armload of torn rotator cuff... Like any other martial art, there is "dojo" techniques, and "self defense" techniques, and the SD techniques of Aikido are NASTY. You get crippled at every turn.

When I introduced Aikido into one of the organizations where I practiced jujutsu, I earned the nickname "Dr. Pain", and that was from a "temperate" application of Aikido techniques. Turn someone loose with "full blown" Aikido techniques, and you'll call the medics every time you touch somebody if they aren't skilled in ukemi and in the uke arts of defending against Aikido techniques.

Segal Sensei was a godan when he made most of his movies, and he's moved over into the softer side of things now, but rerun a few of his old movies, and you'll get some idea of how this stuff really works... and by the way, his uke was trained to take the techniques he was using, and it was "choreagraphed"... try taking those as "surprises" and see how well you respond.

This discussion is like driving a race car... it's easy to talk about, but it's a little more complicated when you get in one and have to maneuver it on the track in traffic, and face the wrecks and dangers of high speed driving. Aikido is practiced in a controlled manner to prevent injuries, and to keep you from running out of ukes.

Many of the rules of MMA are written to keep both fighters "moving forward"... and Aikido works off correct body spacing and body mechanics, which means you often step back, turn around, redirect, and do a lot of things not seen in MMA techniques. That doesn't mean you can't get hurt from the techniques, they're just done differently... so don't discount what you haven't seen done for real. Over the years, I've seen a lot of people hurt trying to do them "carefully", so it's no problem to make them dangerous. It very simply goes against the philosophy of training found in the art.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 11:31 PM

One of the reasons I always liked Saito Sensei's Aikido is because he threw people using their heads... a lot. My kind of guy...

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/06/08 11:58 PM

Seigo Yamaguchi (my teacher's teacher) used his uke as "live bokken".

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 05:18 PM

Once again wrist and eyrie go on a tangent listing their theories. Theories = hot gas. I suppose you guys could beat Anderson Silva too huh?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 07:20 PM

Chris,

I agree... if the principles are sound, and the techniques work, but if you can't apply them outside a dojo environment - it's hardly the fault of the art, the techniques or the principles. In the words of Hiroshi Ikeda "Aikido works, YOUR Aikido doesn't".

I also agree... the art is in your hands. Not just Aikido, but any MA. And all self-professed practitioners of MA should often engage in serious soul searching. It's always easy to shift the blame to the art, the effectiveness of the teaching methodology, or even the teacher - when the problem is usually much closer to home - YOU. Teachers can only show you the door to learning and discovery. They're not going to carry you over the threshold and hold your hand to the destination. YOU have to make that journey yourself. Sadly everybody wants to be spoonfed.

@Brian... so YOU think YOU can beat Silva or any of the pro-MMA guys with your strawman argument? Perhaps you'd like to share some of your "theories"... and maybe address the core principles of Goju and how they pertain to technique and whether such principles/techniques can work in an MMA environment?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 08:05 PM

Brian,
can Silva only beat people 31 years his senior? He's 33, and I'm 64... but he'd get more of a fight than you might imagine... and by the way, Silva isn't invincible. Ask Luiz Azeredo, Daiju Takase, Ryo Chonan and Yushin Okami... they all beat him.

A better idea would be for you to try him out... you're 34, he's 33... then you can brag about what you did. As for "hot gas", you don't need any from me or Eyrie... you've got your own supply. I consider it cowardice to pick a fight between two other people... when I pick one, it's with me and whoever I have the issue with.

Eyrie,
like most of the "blackboard black belts" their "dojo technique" usually sucks pond water when you see it for real... and they don't "have it" if they take it outside the dojo. I've been knocked on my ass a lot of times through 45 years of training, so somebody showing up and doing it again isn't anything new to me... it just doesn't happen much any more. And if what I've seen from these "masters" on U-tube is what's passing for "technique" these days, it'll be a while before it happens again... they just shouldn't cry if the go home hurt. It's easy to be tough if you're sending somebody else in to do your fighting.

What these guys haven't figured out is the difference between martial arts and martial sports. They've only trained all padded up so nothing caused any damage, and even wear gloves and pads when they fight "full contact". I never had that luxury, so when I got kicked or punched, it was for real. Their mindset is "to win", mine is to remain undefeated... so fights can go on forever.

I may not be as good as I once was, but I'm still better than some of these clowns will ever be. They just don't understand reality because they've never been there.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 08:52 PM

I think the real problem is people use the word "alive" without truly understanding what it really means. I'd like to see these people try playing with THEIR IDEA of "alive" with a shank, or a live blade and see where that gets them. The fact that I can cut you doesn't mean I have to. And IMO, the fact that you realize THAT I COULD is being "alive".

The other point people don't understand is what "resistance" really means. If anyone purports to practice "aiki", they would know how hard it is to fight an empty jacket... simply because there is NO resistance. They have no concept of the strategy involved - offering or giving up one part of your body (i.e. "no resistance") and taking up a vantage position for an unguarded offensive. They also have no concept of changing lines of force to be in agreement with what uke is giving you and redirecting that force into a hole. By the same token, there is nothing more I enjoy than uke resisting me... IF they can.

That's because most amateurs engage in linear thinking that force must be met with force, in a war of attrition, and that force against resistance is a necessary criteria for sound technique. They could be further from the truth. Only dumba$$ rednecks believe that brute strength is the answer to dominance. In a contest of strength, the stronger person will obviously win. And I'll readily admit I'm a wimp.

They have no idea what "investing in loss" means and how that is actually an advantage in fighting, or how "effortless" it can be.

I'm not as young as I was, but I'd dearly love for one of these keyboard warriors to fly me to their home turf or come down and play on my home turf and prove me wrong. If they can get the better of me in whatever format, beers and dinner is on me. But I'm still waiting... Meanwhile I'll just keeping "pushing wind"...

I won't tell you the time I rolled freestyle with a 5th dan Goju-man. All I will say is that he was all Go and no Ju, and after 3 mins he was gassed while I quite effortlessly put him in a leg lock (oops, that's right Aikido has no "leg locks" LOL!) much to his consternation. Perhaps because I was but a lowly "white belt".

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 09:33 PM

I consider these kinds of discussions to be at the same level as one I watched in a movie once, where some teenage boys were discussing a battle between superheroes. The question was "Who do you think would win a fight between Mighty Mouse and Superman?"... to which one of them authoritatively said "SUPERMAN, of course... Mighty Mouse is a cartoon... Superman's a real guy"...

That's some of these guy's version of reality.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 10:35 PM

In the history of this site I have never heard two guys so full of doodoo.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/07/08 11:13 PM

And once again you have succeeded in degenerating into personal sniping. If you can't argue the point without descending into ad hominem attacks, then I'm done. You win OK?

BTW Brian, this Goju-man was the local representative of Higaonna himself. But hey, what do I know?

@MattJ - oh gee, I'm fresh out of ukes - broke the last batch and they didn't come back. How bout you come over with a uke of your choosing and bring a camera? Lest we have any arguments about the uke's ability? Or spring for my airfare and I will gladly oblige you with the opportunity to kick my a$$ and prove once and for all that ALL Aikido sux because we practice dead forms in a dead format with no resistance. Fair enough?

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/08/08 02:35 AM

I'm sure the guys name escapes you,right? What were the circumstances surrounding the encounter? He was probably trying to take a whitebeltd head off right and his story coincides with yours. Once again, just empty hot gas.

Wouldn't it be much easier to post a video rather than have us get on a long flight for a 20second fight?

Got any good aikido names from mma you want to drop?

Aikido is what is and it is what you make it,but I haven't seen any good ones, only those with Steven Segal syndrome. Impress me and put up!

Posted by: janxspirit

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/08/08 05:09 PM

I don't think Aikido would work well against wrestlers. I'm not sure Aikido would work so well against judo players, either.

I personally think the Aikido of Osensei must have been different somehow from that practiced today.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/08/08 07:54 PM

How is a video of what I do/can do germane to this discussion topic? What would a video prove anyway? Surely, I don't need to beat up some poor schmuck on video just to prove a point. So I can save you the trouble up front and just tell you it WILL look FAKE. Not that you could see what I'm doing anyway, since most of my preceding posts have gone over your respective heads. Or, perhaps more likely, Grady and I drank out of the same koolaid bucket, coz we seem to be the only ones who are deluded.

The offer still stands though. Bring me a uke (or several to be sure) of your choosing so there is no dispute as to the ability of uke, and NO QUESTION as to the authenticity or that uke was just tanking for me.

Otherwise, feel free to WIN this argument anytime...

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/08/08 10:16 PM

My question would be even simpler... with all the video of people doing Aikido already posted on the web, why can't these masters of martial arts see what we're talking about? If they're doing karate, do they have to break somebody's elbow before they know that a particular technique will do just that? What about crushing someone's trachea? Do you have to leave a student on the floor gasping for air before you know it's a lethal technique... or send one to the morgue?

What's driving these guys nuts is the fact that they don't understand how Aikido works, why it's powerful, or how it's adapted to fighting outside of what they recognize as "fighting"... it's back to the argument of whether Mighty Mouse or Superman would win the battle of superheroes... there's simply no line of reality for them because they've never experienced it, so everything "Aikido" is either magic or BS to them. "It looks fake" is the most common comment, until they get some experience on the mat. Then, a little pressure on the pin or a little "oomph" into a projection, and their eyes are opened up to the realities of possibilities.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/08/08 10:55 PM

Well Grady... either we've been drinking the koolaid or our lenses are rose-colored glass. People generally see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. The thing is, neither of us are saying that it's entirely foolproof. Can anyone get hurt doing it for "real"? Well... duh... Obviously it takes some skill and experience, as does everything else in life. But for some reason, that point seems to have been lost.

I would agree that most people are part-time martial artists. Most aikido is too insular and people could generally do with a good dose of reality and train outside their dojo and in other arts. In fact, I would say it's good for anyone doing MA and to use other arts to inform your primary art. I did it, and it's given me a far better appreciation of the art than I would ever have had.

But apparently "MMA" is th3 ult!m@t3 test of one's MA skill and aikido sux because it is ineffective, doesn't train alive and does these soft flowing BS techniques that no one in their "right" mind thinks will work EVA.

And of course they are right... coz it's a d!ck swinging competition and who's got the biggest nuts.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/09/08 09:56 PM

Quote:

Once again, let me save you the trouble by saying it WILL LOOK FAKE. Until you provide me with a uke of your choosing, I see no point in proving the unprovable to you. I've had black belt jujitsuka try to pull me into the guard, while I remained standing, and then tried to do all manner of things to no avail. And when I pinned him to the ground with ONE finger, all he could say was "Hmmm... that's effective". I had people put all manner of joint locks on me, and look on in disbelief as I shut down their attempt and reverse it with no hint of resistance on my part until it was too late.

Sounds awesome. I will accept any BJJ black belt you can find in Australia. It is very easy to find out if they are real BJJ black belts or not.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060428001330/http://bjj.org/a/alpha.html#N

As I'm quite sure you can't read my mind, kindly do not assume what I may or may not think about anything.

Put up a video, I would love to see it.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/09/08 10:34 PM

I have no intention nor desire to satisfy your curiosity to prove a point. IF I do put up a video, it will be at a time of my choosing and not before.

Till then, you may feel free to consider this argument won in your favor.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/09/08 11:20 PM

I've taught enough Aikido students to know that just seeing Aikido work doesn't do anything for a newbie. Even after some months of training, they still don't understand how to use the energy, how to extend it, or have the skills to make it work other than in rote training. Once they "get it", their level of understanding goes up exponentially, but it's something that has to be felt, experienced, and applied. Now, "application" could take many forms, for many Judo techniques actually use aiki principles, so someone who didn't know better would say... "He didn't use Aikido, he used judo.. or jujutsu.. or karate"... so there has to be a "level of understanding" before any of it wouldn't look like either magic or another art. At about the brown belt level, the skills begin to "come in", and there are some rudimentary abilities developed that are usable in self defense situations... not really much before then.

If you took a picture or video of a "nuclear accelerator", and explained how it works, what it uses, and how the parts fit together, most people still wouldn't understand nuclear fission or be able to use that machine to do what it's designed to do. It doesn't mean it won't work as advertised, it just means that somebody that isn't knowledgeable in the science (or art) would not be able to make it work against some contrived "test"... and just "turning one on" is more dangerous than we could imagine. Think of Aikido as the "nuclear accelerator"...

I do some rudimentary Tai Chi, but I certainly don't understand all the nuances of it, or have it developed to a level where I would depend on it to protect me from a MMA practitioner. That's not true of jujutsu or Aikido, however, because I have 46 years of jujutsu training and 24 years of Aikido... and I promise you that throwing a "change up" (henke waza or change of technique) provides an almost limitless supply of things to do to attackers that will work, and work well.

Tohei was chief instructor at the Aiki-kai, and my teacher was his student and uchi deshi. My training partner was trained by Sogunuma Sensei, who was O'Sensei's uke for many years, so I've had world class instruction, and 24 years experience at it. I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S HAPPENING, so I can look at a video and understand the nuances of the application. Until you've trained to at least a brown belt level, Matt, it doesn't matter what you watch... you won't understand how it works. I can say that with authority, because anytime someone mentions chi, or ki, or leading energy, "the three skeptics" go off like bottle rockets. Rather than admitting you don't understand it, you simply state it doesn't exist as a fact, and base all your arguments from there. You can do some Aikido techniques with strength, but it's not Aikido to do them with forcible strength... Aikido is an art of leading energy. The more you put into the attack, the more effect will be seen in the application... Newton's first law... to every force applied, there is an opposite and equal reaction... so when you join with the force applied, it tends to double the applied force, and when it's redirected, as the attacker you will have trouble keeping up.

What looks like a soft block in Aikido is actually a method of blending with the attacker, or capturing his attack... but if all you know is karate, you will call it a block and go off on your tangent that "this stuff doesn't work against (insert martial art here). What you don't know about Aikido would fill volumes, however.

As much as Eyrie or I would both want to convey an understanding of Aikido to you, you'll have to get it the way everybody else does... with practice and instruction... and that's not being haughty, or arrogant, just practical... you have to learn it the same way everybody else did. There's no magic bullet made just for you...

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 06:26 AM

Quote:

As much as Eyrie or I would both want to convey an understanding of Aikido to you

Gee thanks Grady...

I'm not trying to convey any understanding of anything. I'm simply arguing the point that:

1. Aikido is derived from a number of armed and unarmed arts... That Aikido (pre and post war) is based largely on Daito-ryu is a generally accepted fact. That modern Aikido bears little resemblance to some Daito-ryu factions is also a generally accepted fact. That modern Aikido bears some resemblance to certain Daito-ryu factions is an interesting observation in itself.

2. Since Aikido waza (in whatever shape or form) is largely based on jujitsu and aikijujitsu techniques, why would it not be plausible that such techniques would work generally?

3. Techniques are snapshots of one of many potential solutions in a given circumstance. Hence the potential for variations and the necessity of spontaneous adaptation based on dynamic and constantly changing circumstances.

4. Therefore, the focus should be on principle rather than actual technique, since techniques are merely the embodiment of physical principles.

5. Above all, skill and experience in any given format is the defining factor and not what technique, what style of technique or how a technique might be performed. IOW, Aikido vs MMA is not necessarily a (con)test of one technical style over another, but a comparison of bodyskill and fighting experience in other contestable formats.

6. Chance plays a large part in any encounter, as does skill, size and weight differential. Someone will get hurt, and people should always expect that it isn't always going to be the other person.

7. The external omote version of waza for general public consumption is not the defining representation of the art and any assessment based on that assumption is both narrow-minded and naive.

And thanks for the prompt:

8. That the laws of physics and kinesiology still apply even if the skeptics want to call it "ki magic". Just because it's soft, subtle and beyond the level of current comprehension doesn't make it BS.

I'm not interested in placating anyone who wants to resort to name-calling, low-balling or taunts for videographic evidence which proves nothing. But I'm quite happy to discuss this with anyone who wishes to argue these points in an adult and academic manner.

BTW, to avoid further misunderstanding, my anecdotes were not offered as "proof" that Aikido is th3 invicible MA or that I'm the uber Aikimaster - which I'm most definitely not... I'm just a beginner. They were merely to illustrate the point that correct application of principle and appropriateness of technique for the given dynamic can work and has worked for me.

There were plenty of times where it did not, thru no fault of the art - either my timing was off, I had a momentary mental lapse, I was at a significant weight/size disadvantage, or that the other guy was just plain better or got damned lucky that one time. But it was always about learning about my own shortcomings and never about winning or losing.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 08:53 AM

Eyrie,

It is statements like these that make me want you as my lawyer:

"the focus should be on principle rather than actual technique, since techniques are merely the embodiment of physical principles."

"Above all, skill and experience in any given format is the defining factor and not what technique, what style of technique or how a technique might be performed."

I can hear you now:

"Your honor, it is a crude oversimplification to characterize my client as having 'cut off the victim's legs with a carrot peeler.' In point of fact, my client was merely expressing his displeasure with the victim, albeit with resort to principles belonging to a somewhat unconventional and therefor unfamiliar alternate modality."

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 12:24 PM

Quote:

Gee thanks Grady... I'm not trying to convey any understanding of anything.

Eyrie, I think that the problem here is one of the conveyance of information that can be analyzed... it's like we're speaking one language and the people who constantly dismiss the information are speaking another one. They simply have no frame of reference, so they dismiss everything as magic or BS.

All of the points you make are correct, but without a frame of reference for the information in practice, I doubt seriously if the other readers understand what the arguments put forth. That's all I was saying. I had done Judo for 22 years before I started Aikido, and I had to reprogram my brain to understand what was going on... so I seriously doubt that someone with no frame of throwing arts reference would understand the principles any better.

My apologies.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 01:01 PM

Quote:

They simply have no frame of reference, so they dismiss everything as magic or BS.

Lord, lord, lord. Woe unto us complete ignoranamuses. If only I had done martial arts, to have a frame of reference. OH WAIT - I have done martial arts before. And Eyrie says that since Aikido and jujitsu are related, they should work in a similar fashion. Which means (since I study jujitsu), that by extension, *I* should be able to understand Aikido, right? So wouldn't that qualify as "frame of reference"?

Perhaps a video would at least help? I mean, we'll *never understand* anything until we're complete experts (like you and Eyrie are!), but perhaps a demo would open a door for us weak, pathetic keyboard warriors*.............

O Please take us out of the dark, great ones! PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE!!!

* keyboard warriors? haven't Brian and I met and trained with other forum members? i guess that doesn't count. anyway..........

Posted by: Ames

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 02:07 PM

First off, I'd like everyone on both sides of this argument to stay away from personal attacks and insults please! This is the only warning. Anymore and this thread is locked or the part of your post the personal insult will be deleted.

Now that that is out of the way, eyrie I'd like to go over your points.

Quote:

2. Since Aikido waza (in whatever shape or form) is largely based on jujitsu and aikijujitsu techniques, why would it not be plausible that such techniques would work generally?

Absolutely not. Not at all. There are several reasons why this is inplausible. First, the 'internal' element has been removed from modern Aikido. I think Amdur is writing a book about this. Suffice to say, that though some techniques 'look' alike, they are pretty diffirent in actual aplication.

Further, I'll say right now that I think Daito Ryu suffers from the same problems as Aikido: not enough resisitence, too much clinging to culturally constructed 'ideal' attacks. The so called 'self defence' curriculum of Daito Ryu is not taught till 20 years in. What does that tell you? Futher more NONE of this material is covered by Aikido.

I'm not going to make a value judgement regarding the 'worth' of either art; suffice to say I think both are similar in how well they would work up against your average BJJer: not very.

Quote:

3. Techniques are snapshots of one of many potential solutions in a given circumstance. Hence the potential for variations and the necessity of spontaneous adaptation based on dynamic and constantly changing circumstances.

True. But other arts directly teach this "spontaneous adaptation" without leaving it up to the student to 'figure out'. Further more, so-called 'alive' arts teach this adapting under higher pressure and more realistic situations. Therefore, the student of these arts learns more 'real world' applcabilty. The average Aikido student has no idea what to do against a low line Thai shin kick, or even a boxer's jab. The answer to the student who asks about this is that they would just 'use the principle, not technique' in these situations. Personally I don't think the street is the best place to figure out how to use your tecniques against resistence.

Quote:

. Therefore, the focus should be on principle rather than actual technique, since techniques are merely the embodiment of physical principles.

Okay. But what principles are these? What seperates Aikido principles from those of other grappling arts? Not much, I'd say.

Quote:

5. Above all, skill and experience in any given format is the defining factor and not what technique, what style of technique or how a technique might be performed. IOW, Aikido vs MMA is not necessarily a (con)test of one technical style over another, but a comparison of bodyskill and fighting experience in other contestable formats.

This is unclear. MMA is not a "technical style" at all. It is a system. The system came about do to various placing techniques under high pressure situations and rejecting what, about experimentation, did not work. The 'bodyskill' these practioners thus perform is generally of an extremely high level, whereas even the high level Aikidoka cannot manifest their 'bodyskill' in an alive manner against these 'atheletes'. Again, perhaps I'm cunfused about what you're trying to say, in which case please clarify.

Quote:

6. Chance plays a large part in any encounter, as does skill, size and weight differential. Someone will get hurt, and people should always expect that it isn't always going to be the other person.

The MMA practioner is FAR more aware of this fact than the average Aikidoka. The average MMA player learns this lesson, on a pragmatic level, every training day. For the average Aikidoka this is either never thought about, or remains obscured in theory. BECAUSE THEY NEVER TEST THEIR ART.

Quote:

7. The external omote version of waza for general public consumption is not the defining representation of the art and any assessment based on that assumption is both narrow-minded and naive.

Wrong. And, to be honest, this is exactly the thing that will (and should) kill Aikido.

Please, which is more "narrow-minded"? The person who innocently and honestly asks to be shown the 'heart' of youre art? Or the person that says 'only after twenty years of daily practice'?

The rhetorical side-stepping of the TMA's must come to an end. I think a lot of us are getting downright sick of it. Eyrie, I know that you are just trying to inform us of your opinion. I know that you are not purposely trying to misinform. However, this argument is so flawed I hardly know where to begin.

I will, in an effort to not bog this post down, just say this: The omote should represent the ura, especially in a high level practioner. I have never seen, nor felt anything is all my years of training that will allow me to come to the conclusion that there is some secret, 'indoor-student' only, version of Aikido. Further, even if there is, thousands (THOUSANDS!) of students have not been allowed to experiance or learn this aspect of the art. This includes those who have gone on to become teachers. If this secred, 'deadly' form of Aikido exists, someone should come forward and demonstrate it against a resisting practioner of another style. Until then, I feel this line of argument should be halted as it is unprovable and, therefore, completely without merit.

Quote:

8. That the laws of physics and kinesiology still apply even if the skeptics want to call it "ki magic". Just because it's soft, subtle and beyond the level of current comprehension doesn't make it BS.

I don't think it's beyond the level of any but the ignorant. The thing is that this 'softness' is also manifested in high level Judo, and BJJ players; all of whom are able to 'use' these skills in a far shorter amount of time.

--Chris

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 02:17 PM

Better than a video, Matt... try this...

Take I-83 to the South Queen St. exit (Exit 16A), and take Rt. 74 South. Follow Rt. 74 south for 1.5 miles. After passing a Burger King on your left, turn left into the parking lot of the Arlington Shopping plaza. The dojo is in Suite #3.

That's Keith Engle's dojo, who is listed on his website as a sandan. He allows people to come visit and watch his classes, and I'm sure he would be more than willing to answer your questions about Aikido. That way, you don't have to be a complete [censored] about things, and he's a neutral player. His dojo is afflilated with my old teacher's association and as far as I know, I've never met the man. It's the Sesquananna Aikido Dojo, and near where you are.

As far as I know, all you have to do is show up and watch.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 02:28 PM

Awesome. So when will you and Eyrie be there? I still think just putting up a video would be easier than all that travel (not much to do here in PA, either), but whatever floats your boat. Let me know when you guys get here.

BTW - are you guys assuming that I have never even seen, much less participated in, any Aikido classes?

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 04:48 PM

Seems like a lot of sh*t-slinging going on. I got out of this thread before this started happening and its degenerated from there on.

Folks, just to make you guys happy, I will concede the Aikido is the super art and training method that you guys say it is. Only that, you never "see" it anywhere, as its taught and trained. However,you'll probably say that it IS seen (as I've heard, considering that it is the principles, not the techniques...)

Thus, if aikido looks just like BJJ, boxing, Greco-Roman, freestyle wrestling and muay Thai, then I'd say you're right!!! Holy f*ck! Aikido is GREAT, lol! Randy Couture is an AIKIDO MASTER!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 09:13 PM

Finally, the voice of reason and something meaty to sink your teeth into!

Re: waza I'll grant you that the 'internal' element has been largely removed from modern Aikido - we have K. Ueshiba to thank for that, and the reasons for Tohei's departure as Aikikai CI. Politics aside, Tohei set about creating a curriculum specifically to develop the internal side. The unfortunate thing is, most see it as some sort of separate and independent thing to aikido itself, and fail to reconcile it with the technical aspects. I've had the pleasure of participating in a Tohei aligned group here, and sadly, I saw very little aiki in terms of waza and pretty much non-existent martial application. But I also understand the various reasons for this, notwithstanding the fact that most of the students present were fairly low level mudansha.

That it "looks" different is neither here nor there... everyone "looks" different to some extent, BUT as long as the basis for movement is grounded in sound principles of fighting and combat... which it obviously isn't if most Aikido is being criticized for that. But that's not to say it's not something that can't be gleaned from it. Although I would agree that it is not something that the 'average' practitioner with little to no prior or post experience, would be able to fathom.

Quote:

Further, I'll say right now that I think Daito Ryu suffers from the same problems as Aikido: not enough resisitence, too much clinging to culturally constructed 'ideal' attacks. The so called 'self defence' curriculum of Daito Ryu is not taught till 20 years in. What does that tell you? Futher more NONE of this material is covered by Aikido.

I think that's a rather broad generalization. Funny thing perception... I see some Daito-ryu as having too much resistance and very little aiki. But I think there are other reasons for this, which are not germane to this discussion. I do want to comment though on the "culturally constructed 'ideal' attacks". IMO, and maybe it's just the way I see things, such "attacks" are merely learning constructs. Although I agree, at some stage such learning constructs should be dispensed with in order to "move beyond". However, it also needs to be balanced with the inherent need to maintain necessary standards of transmission to future generations. The same argument can be made of any kata or forms based MA. Again we can thank the junior Ueshiba men for maintaining the long dead, static waza snapshots, the same reasons for the steady demise of Edo-period jujitsu which led to the creation of Judo, which I believe were much to the Founder's consternation that led him to say "This is NOT my Aikido".

Quote:

I think both are similar in how well they would work up against your average BJJer: not very.

Which is the reason I'm against looking at technique as set responses, because IMO, they are not. Unlike jujitsu, which are essentially set responses, counter-responses to various attacks, IMO, Aikido is not fundamentally that and probably deserving of the criticism directed towards it in that respect. Although one would expect that aikijitsu as a would be more adapted to dealing with such things, and one can only fathom what those reasons might be.

Quote:

But other arts directly teach this "spontaneous adaptation" without leaving it up to the student to 'figure out'. Further more, so-called 'alive' arts teach this adapting under higher pressure and more realistic situations. Therefore, the student of these arts learns more 'real world' applcabilty. The average Aikido student has no idea what to do against a low line Thai shin kick, or even a boxer's jab. The answer to the student who asks about this is that they would just 'use the principle, not technique' in these situations. Personally I don't think the street is the best place to figure out how to use your tecniques against resistence.

There's a couple of good points here, which I'll address separately.

1. It's hardly "spontaneous" in the true sense (and I think what the Founder intended), if it's a previously "learned" response. I don't think we're talking about the same thing here, although I do understand what you mean.

2. I would agree, learning in the way you suggest in far more conducive to creating good fighters. I would also agree that the 'average' Aikido student is not going to know how to deal with these 'real world' situations. Since we're talking about 'average' and not 'above average' or even 'exceptional'. Mind you, when I say look to principle, I also mean figure out how and why a particular technique works and when and why it doesn't work - not just what principles the technique is attempting to convey. I merely raised the point to highlight the issue and necessarily aiming just that little bit higher than just being 'average'.

3. IMO, the post-war changes reflect the Founder's personal convictions to move beyond war. The paradox is, to understand what the alternate reality to war is, one must study the ways of war. The criticism of Aikido is predictably and deservedly justified in that respect - too much (airy-fairy) focus on the alternate and idealistic reality to the detrimental exclusion of the other, more realistic and banal reality.

4. Re: testing. Again I point to the generally insular nature of most Aikido dojo. The difficulty I think is the balance between what has to be taught as part of a "standardized" curriculum and what could be taught, within the limitations of actual contact time in the dojo. If I come across as defending Aikido and/or its training practices, believe me when I say that I am also highly critical of the way most things are taught and done within the 'average' aikido dojo. I think the dojo is THE place to test these things, and not enough is being done in that respect. But since it's not my dojo, I can choose how I fit in or leave, which I did. Of course, one could say "that's not what Aikido is, or why we practice what we do"... which I both agree and disagree with. Not that I'm vacillating, but because Aikido is what it is, but that technical skill and bodily skill are necessary criteria which enable what is essentially a choice to act or not act. Far too often the 'average' Aikidoka gravitates to the "non-conflict" option, when the distinction is far less clear, or sometimes at odds with what is sometimes necessary. The stark reality is, it ain't always pretty, and sometimes you just have to do what you have to do in order to make that option a reality.

Quote:

Okay. But what principles are these? What seperates Aikido principles from those of other grappling arts? Not much, I'd say.

Precisely. Most MA revolve around a small subset of identical principles - circularity/sphericity, lineal power, spiral power, lines and angles of attack, spatial distancing, equilibrium etc. to name a few.

Quote:

This is unclear. MMA is not a "technical style" at all. It is a system. The system came about do to various placing techniques under high pressure situations and rejecting what, about experimentation, did not work. The 'bodyskill' these practioners thus perform is generally of an extremely high level, whereas even the high level Aikidoka cannot manifest their 'bodyskill' in an alive manner against these 'atheletes'. Again, perhaps I'm cunfused about what you're trying to say, in which case please clarify.

The point I'm trying to make against those that maintain the "techniques" of aikido don't work in such formats, is that bodyskill drives technique, rather than the obverse. As to why a "high-level" aikido practitioner cannot manifest their "bodyskill" against a "trained athlete" is not for me to speculate.

Quote:

The MMA practioner is FAR more aware of this fact than the average Aikidoka. The average MMA player learns this lesson, on a pragmatic level, every training day. For the average Aikidoka this is either never thought about, or remains obscured in theory. BECAUSE THEY NEVER TEST THEIR ART.

I agree. But it's hardly a fault of the art, and more a laxity on the purported teacher's part and complacence on the students' part. Both of which are inexcusable IMO.

Quote:

Quote:

7. The external omote version of waza for general public consumption is not the defining representation of the art and any assessment based on that assumption is both narrow-minded and naive.

Wrong. And, to be honest, this is exactly the thing that will (and should) kill Aikido.

The comment was leveled at the skeptics that define aikido by the outward visual representation of various omote waza. But I would agree that the focus on the omote waza is the killer of Aikido. As the late Terry Dobson opined when he wrote... "the form of Aikido is the killer of Aikido". Hence, the source of my constant irritation on the excessive focus on various "techniques". Sure you need *some* technique, and only if such technique serves its true purpose, and not some elaborate "dance of energy" between two complying and consenting individuals.

Quote:

The omote should represent the ura, especially in a high level practioner. I have never seen, nor felt anything is all my years of training that will allow me to come to the conclusion that there is some secret, 'indoor-student' only, version of Aikido. Further, even if there is, thousands (THOUSANDS!) of students have not been allowed to experiance or learn this aspect of the art. This includes those who have gone on to become teachers.

Actually, it's MILLIONS. Over 2 million to be precise. But is it really a fault of the art, or the persons who purport to transmit it? I agree that the ura is present in the omote (and vice versa) and that no "secret indoor" technique exists separately to that which is generally available for public consumption. As Ellis writes, it is clearly hidden in plain sight. Unless, of course, you consider the obverse, that what is being presented is clearly what NOT to do (and can get you killed!), and that some other, more logical solution exists (which BTW, if you were savvy enough you *could* glean), that is not shown to the general public.

Quote:

If this secred, 'deadly' form of Aikido exists, someone should come forward and demonstrate it against a resisting practioner of another style. Until then, I feel this line of argument should be halted as it is unprovable and, therefore, completely without merit.

Surely you jest? Are we going back to the days of having to prove one's mettle in a battle to the death and signing death waivers? Most people have not killed anything in their entire life... OK, maybe roaches and bugs don't count. But a living, breathing, bleeding thing? How many "average" MA practitioners have killed, bled, gutted, and dismembered an animal, much less another human being? It is as much a compunction of human nature to kill and hurt another than the existence of "deadly" forms. Such mythical beasts, as "deadly forms" of anything, do not exist - except in Man's base desires for power and domination. If there's any killing to be done, let's slay some sacred Aikido cows instead.

Quote:

I don't think it's beyond the level of any but the ignorant. The thing is that this 'softness' is also manifested in high level Judo, and BJJ players; all of whom are able to 'use' these skills in a far shorter amount of time.

If by 'softness' you mean Aiki, then sure, one only has to look at old footage of Mifune to see that it's aiki in action. Unfortunately, I don't see it in a lot of modern judo players, much less BJJ players. But if by 'softness' you mean pliancy and the ju of judo/jujitsu then yes.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/10/08 11:28 PM

Quote:

Folks, just to make you guys happy, I will concede the Aikido is the super art and training method that you guys say it is. Only that, you never "see" it anywhere, as its taught and trained. However,you'll probably say that it IS seen (as I've heard, considering that it is the principles, not the techniques...)

Thus, if aikido looks just like BJJ, boxing, Greco-Roman, freestyle wrestling and muay Thai, then I'd say you're right!!! Holy f*ck! Aikido is GREAT, lol! Randy Couture is an AIKIDO MASTER!

Such wonderful maturity John... Is it any wonder with such shining beacons of forum behaviour, from current and former moderators no less, that this place has descended into the hallowed depths of Ad City for the unwashed masses of pre-pubescent and testosterone-challenged wannabees?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/11/08 12:12 AM

Apparently I misquoted Dobson... the quote should read "the form of aikido is the enemy of aikido"... but it may as well be the killer too.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/11/08 10:22 PM

Ames,

Quote:

First off, I'd like everyone on both sides of this argument to stay away from personal attacks and insults please!

It's pretty hard to do when people continually misconstrue what you say or take statements out of context to formulate a perceived insult. When I make statements about frames of reference, etc. it's not an insult, it's a matter of taking a snapshot of the art and understanding where it differs from other arts using the context of Aikido training and martial arts vs dojo arts training. Everybody's played baseball at some time or the other, but not everybody has played semi-pro or professional baseball... and there's a hell of a difference between playing on the schoolyard and in the major leagues. The same is true in martial training.

Studying with an acknowledged master of an art is a much higher level of learning from learning at "Joe Blow's dojo", otherwise none of the masters would be making tours to teach seminars at the different schools. While I acknowledge that not everybody makes their living doing martial arts, the guys who do, and are acknowledged masters bring a lot more information with them than "good old Joe Schmuck" down at the local shopping center dojo.

Quote:

First, the 'internal' element has been removed from modern Aikido.

If it has, it's the practitioner's fault, not the failing of the art. I train all over the place, and find most of the Aikido schools to still have good internal training, especially if they're conducting business in the traditional format. What I find missing more, is the focus on continuous movement and leading of the energy in a technique... they are broken into pieces during the kihon instruction, and the students try to do them all as separate parts... which defeats the whole concept.

Quote:

Since Aikido waza (in whatever shape or form) is largely based on jujitsu and aikijujitsu techniques, why would it not be plausible that such techniques would work generally?

Ames,We (you and I) disagree here, because as a student of body mechanics, I know that if I do certain things with the limbs of an uke, I will get the desired results... it's mechanical... got nothing to do with internal and external application. I teach a lot of classes simply instructing students to "twist the wrist" for the desired result. Often, the direction one is pointing a finger is the difference between whether the technique works or not, but the nuances aren't always that subtle. I have a teaching syllabus for my style of jujutsu which incorporates a lot of the mechanical movements of both judo and Aikido, along with those of tuite and a few other "grapple and pin" arts. There again, it's a matter of the quality of information you have... not the fault of the technique.

Quote:

The 'bodyskill' these practioners thus perform is generally of an extremely high level, whereas even the high level Aikidoka cannot manifest their 'bodyskill' in an alive manner against these 'atheletes'.

Wow! That must be why so many of them show up in Aikido randori... its the same argument of "your stuff doesn't work because nobody using OUR system uses YOUR system"... so it doesn't wash. To be honest, in all my years of training, I haven't seen much that Judo didn't have an answer for, and I practiced that for 30+ years... and I got into Aikido because I could throw harder and with less effort. Once I met Toyoda Sensei, who was one of Tohei's deshis, I learned what the "old Aikido" was all about... and it's a whole scale level higher than what's shown in public. Broken arms and necks don't occur because of restraint... not because the techniques won't break them. In training, it's more reasonable to throw your uke than shovel him up on a stretcher... but either option is available. Most Aikido is practiced at the level where it's more reasonable for an uke to fall than to resist and try to remain standing... but in application, you can come through the technique with the speed and power to remove that option... leaving them with broken limbs, neck, or back.

Quote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Chance plays a large part in any encounter, as does skill, size and weight differential. Someone will get hurt, and people should always expect that it isn't always going to be the other person.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MMA practioner is FAR more aware of this fact than the average Aikidoka. The average MMA player learns this lesson, on a pragmatic level, every training day. For the average Aikidoka this is either never thought about, or remains obscured in theory. BECAUSE THEY NEVER TEST THEIR ART.

That's wrong on so many levels I don't know where to begin... but let's start with "testing the art"...

When was the last time you had "live blade knife randori"?... or handed your uke a jo, or a bokken and told them to attack you? I realize that's not a MMA skill, but if that "system" is so superior, why not let somebody try that and see how they fare? Oh, yeah... swordfighting isn't part of the MMA cirriculum, so their "weapons" training is limited to BJJ, wrestling, Judo and punching skills, right? What part of the "system" focuses on taking swords and knives from people... or sticks... or weapons of any kind?

Now, the kind of Aikido I practice also involves Judo grappling skills... why, because in discussions with Toyoda, he realized that there were some deficiencies in only using the "traditional attacks", and unlike many of the other Aiki masters, he remembered guys like Mifune coming over to study with them to "fill the holes" in Judo training... so he had us teach a lot of grappling skills in our training, along with the Aikido. Pure Aikido?... no, not at all... but like any other cross training, it fills the voids in "the system".

Quote:

I don't think it's beyond the level of any but the ignorant. The thing is that this 'softness' is also manifested in high level Judo, and BJJ players; all of whom are able to 'use' these skills in a far shorter amount of time.

The concept of softness (ju) is often misrepresented or mis-taught in a lot of different martial arts. Where, as you say, we see it at the higher levels of all arts, why does it take so long for these other arts to develop that same concept? Because Aikido talks of "20 year techniques", it doesn't mean that the technique takes 20 years to develop... it means that it takes 20 years to master... and by master to mean "applicable anytime". Irimi concepts are such techniques, and while a yellow belt can take your head off with one of them, it doesn't mean they have the skill level to use it at any time.

Most of Aikido is hiding right out in plain sight... and the critics of it most often from other arts don't have the body movement skills that Aikido requires (specialized movements taught in Aikido) to make the techniques work. That's not saying other arts don't have skill sets that are effective, it's simply stating that there are specialized movements that are taught in Aikido that generate the power of the techniques, and simply "doing something that looks exactly like what you did" doesn't mean you did... it only means you think you did.

I've taught techniques to students who would do the technique exactly like I showed it to them, and the next time they did it, they did it wrong... and swear they did it "exactly the same way". What they did was "go through the same motions... not the same movement"... and it's easy to see where they fail to follow instructions. It isn't conscious on their part, but part of the "untraining" they have to go through to learn the movement skills of Aikido.
All of that is part of those principles Eyrie and I keep talking about. It's a learned skill, but when we start talking about it's relationship with the internal energy, the nutcases go off like bottle rockets.

Little if anything is ever said about punching in Aikido by the critics because most of the time, whoever they've "tested their art against" didn't use the striking skills of Aikido against them during their test. "Aikido striking" is a specialized skill in itself, and not a "boxing skill". It's deigned to break the uke's neck, and if someone is using a correct movement to enter, it's a given that the guy would go off the mat on a stretcher... so I often wonder when I hear about these people who "showed off their Aikido and it was weak" what they left out. Clearly they were either holding back or poorly trained.

Over the years, I've trained in a lot of different arts with a lot of different instructors and teachers. Every one of them had holes in their training or system, and each one that was a "complete" system was a mixture of several arts at some level... so I suppose that Aikido has a weakness somewhere... problem is that in the 24 years I've been practicing it, I've found the weakness to be in application, not in principle or technique. Bad timing... too short or long of a step... bad entry... poor movement... a dozen different things that can go wrong... but it's a matter of practice, not a weakness in the art.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/11/08 11:07 PM

Wrist,

Respectfully, if the art isn't producing as a whole then it is a weakness in the art. If out of 50 aikido dojo's there are only two worth a crp then there is a weakness in the art. How many aikidoka will turn out good or decent vs. the terrible?

I thought we were talking about aikido in an mma setting anyway?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/11/08 11:43 PM

Brian,
I see a lot of MMA players in our dojo, and they don't all seem to be at Randy Cotoure's level either... does that mean MMA is a weak art, or that they aren't performing at the higher level? Our dojo's owner's daughter is married to Carlos Machado, but that doesn't mean he and Carlos have the same skills, even though they've studied together. Would you judge BJJ based on his skills or Carlos'? They do the same techniques, Carlos just does them better.

When I hear these stories about somebody "testing Aikido", I never hear the details of who or at what level the Aikido rep was... which usually means some shodan, who is just getting to the point of acquiring some of the skills. Dig a little deeper into the art, like a yondan or godan, and I'm sure they'd be glad to wipe the mat with somebody's attitude. While I'm not a Steven Seagal fan, his early movies were made when he was a godan, and the intensity level of the techniques is about right as shown in the movies.

Look past the weapons stuff he does, and focus on the actual Aikido techniques against street attacks. Technically, they're pretty good, and a good measure of what to expect from "real Aikido". It's not the "friendly" kind practiced in most dojos during classes, just like boxing is a bit different from gym practice sparring. There's a big difference when you're being hit for real.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/11/08 11:50 PM

Grady... Chris does Hakuho-ryu Aikibudo...

and I suspect he's playing devil's advocate rather than being deliberately antagonistic... but I could be wrong.

I think one particularly problematic aspect that a few detractors, and a lot of aikido noobs, have is distinguishing between techniques for learning principles, actual application (which is seldom, if ever, demonstrated and practiced in the 'average' dojo), practice, and training (both of which are seldom explored except at places where jiyuwaza/randori is an integral part of the curriculum).

As Lou Klaff (SenseiLou) used to say often when he posted here... there is a BIG difference between learning mode, training mode, and practice mode. The issue is knowing the difference and playing how you practice.

The other problematic aspect is the typical Japanese (AND Chinese) teaching paradigm of "steal it if you can". When I did jujitsu, my teacher seldom taught everything... and would often openly admit to holding back. Similarly in the Aikido training I received... the way the Japanese "taught" anything was engineered in such a way that you had to learn how to "steal technique".

FWIW, I only did a few months of jujitsu, but stole enough in terms of principles and some technique... enough to extrapolate jujitsu waza (that he hadn't yet shown me!) and applications to the extent that he was able to say to me, even though I had been there a short time, he was very impressed with my progress. And before I left to move to where I'm currently living, his parting words to me were to integrate what I'd learnt of his jujitsu into my Aikido (or vice versa).

IMO, this mentality of stealing technique is integral to sifting the wannabees, from the average and the exceptionally gifted, and creates better martial artists overall. The unfortunate thing is that one needs to learn how to steal (and what to steal) first. And I don't think anyone can get past this, without first gaining the prerequisite knowledge and experience of the art and science of combat. The problem is Aiki(do) is just so different to what a lot of folk label as "fighting" and almost counter-intuitive to any reasonable person's definition of "fighting"...

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 12:01 AM

Quote:

Respectfully, if the art isn't producing as a whole then it is a weakness in the art. If out of 50 aikido dojo's there are only two worth a crp then there is a weakness in the art. How many aikidoka will turn out good or decent vs. the terrible?

Um... that's kinda flawed logic. You know what a Bell curve is? Or how it applies in education and learning circles? So, using your same flawed logic... is that a weakness of the school, curriculum or education system that only a handful of students top the grade, or is it a performance issue related to either lecturers or students, or both?

Quote:

I thought we were talking about aikido in an mma setting anyway?

Because *some* people insist on steering the discussion towards the (in THEIR opinion) "questionable" effectiveness of aikido - as an art - generally, based on bogus statistics (2 out of 50?), rather than focus on how aikido could be applied/not applied in an MMA format. Subtle difference Brian... REAL subtle difference.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 09:47 AM

Eyrie -

Quote:

Surely you jest? Are we going back to the days of having to prove one's mettle in a battle to the death and signing death waivers? Most people have not killed anything in their entire life... OK, maybe roaches and bugs don't count. But a living, breathing, bleeding thing? How many "average" MA practitioners have killed, bled, gutted, and dismembered an animal, much less another human being?

This is not a logical line of argument, because this assumes that all Aikido people are able to impose their style on MMA people (for the purpose of this thread). But that is precisely the point here - most Aikido people of similar training time do not have nearly the same "bodyskill" (or whatever you want to call it) as MMA people. If they can't do it in a competition, what is the likliehood they could do it for real - remember that MMA people would be operating under the same "kill or be killed" rules.

Quote:

If by 'softness' you mean Aiki, then sure, one only has to look at old footage of Mifune to see that it's aiki in action. Unfortunately, I don't see it in a lot of modern judo players, much less BJJ players. But if by 'softness' you mean pliancy and the ju of judo/jujitsu then yes.

Which is of no practical difference whatsoever. And Grady's comments about "live blade randori" are just ridiculous. MMA and Aikido both have open-hand elements, so "limiting" Aikido to those open hand elements is hardly being unreasonable. And no one is stopping any godan Aikido guys from stepping up and 'wiping somebody's attitude on the mats'. Remember, YOU guys are the ones making the outlandish claims with no proof here.

Quote:

Um... that's kinda flawed logic. You know what a Bell curve is? Or how it applies in education and learning circles? So, using your same flawed logic... is that a weakness of the school, curriculum or education system that only a handful of students top the grade, or is it a performance issue related to either lecturers or students, or both?

His logic isn't flawed, you are twisting his argument. He didn't say anything about Aikido people being "top grade". He said "good or decent" - you know, the BIG part of the bell curve. And Brian wasn't making any scientific statistic, he was making a generalization. A fairly accurate one in my experience. I also think it's fair to question the "effectiveness" of the art, since we don't see it being applied in MMA (in any recognizable way). Could or could not is not typically an argument entertained on these forums.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 12:29 PM

Quote:

And Grady's comments about "live blade randori" are just ridiculous.

Part of the testing procedures. Certain levels used single attackers, other levels used multiple attackers... not as ridiculous as you might think. Much of it is what Aikido was designed for.

Quote:

MMA and Aikido both have open-hand elements, so "limiting" Aikido to those open hand elements is hardly being unreasonable.

Again, you show your ignorance of the actual technique and principles of Aikido. The empty hand techniques are exactly the same as the "weapons" techniques, only the spacing of the steps is different. About 95% of Aikido is straight from swordfighting, and utilizes the grips and movements of that art, as well as the movements of jujutsu systems developed off them.

Many of the grips and techniques of Aikido are applied as sword taking techniques to disarm someone armed with a knife or sword... so where's the "limiting the techniques to empty hand techniques" leave you there? We don't need a weapon to use the "weapon technique" to start with... just in case you didn't know...

Quote:

A fairly accurate one in my experience. I also think it's fair to question the "effectiveness" of the art, since we don't see it being applied in MMA (in any recognizable way).

Well, a mirror image of that would be "how much MMA do you see being practiced in Aikido?" Obviously if the credibility of Aikido is remiss by not being practiced in MMA, the MMA system would be likewise remiss by not being practiced in Aikido. Applying the same logic to both sides gives you the same answer both ways. I only see a few actual karate techniques being practiced in MMA... so does that mean that karate is also useless? It's not hard to craft the argument in any fashion you want, but it would help if you actually understood Aikido and what it's designed to do, what its capabilities are, and how it works.
Once you get there, I'm sure your arguments would be "spot on"... and that's not "nobody knows anything about martial arts except Grady and Eyrie", it's you actually having that frame of reference I talked about. You clearly have no idea what Aikido is capable of, or how its designed, or how the techniques are adapted to fighting situations. If I'm wrong, take a few minutes and explain the punching and kicking techniques of Aikido. You can make a believer out of me by simply sharing your knowledge rather than attempting to "compare" it with something else.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 02:39 PM

Grady -

Quote:

Part of the testing procedures. Certain levels used single attackers, other levels used multiple attackers... not as ridiculous as you might think. Much of it is what Aikido was designed for.

That's swell. But in the context of this thread (Aikido in MMA), it is indeed ridiculous to be talking of live sword technique. BTW - how much 'live sword randori' do Aikido schools normally do?

Quote:

Again, you show your ignorance of the actual technique and principles of Aikido. The empty hand techniques are exactly the same as the "weapons" techniques, only the spacing of the steps is different.

Strawman. I never mentioned anything about the empty hand techniques being different from the sword techniques. I was referring to the idea that Aikido is not always practiced with a sword. Please stop trying to twist my words.

Quote:

Well, a mirror image of that would be "how much MMA do you see being practiced in Aikido?" Obviously if the credibility of Aikido is remiss by not being practiced in MMA, the MMA system would be likewise remiss by not being practiced in Aikido.

What kind of gabble is this? Who is questioning MMA's effectiveness in Aikido? Do you know of any MMA people that have lost to an Aikidoka? This is possibly an even more ridiculous line of logic than the sword randori thing.

You know, the funny thing is that earlier in this thread, *I* actually defended Aikido's ability in MMA (footwork), but now I'm being thrown in with the haters, LOL. I'm not a hater, but if you and Eyrie are going to make BS claims, then back them up or shut up.

BS is what I'm against.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 07:05 PM

I'll try this one last time, without much hope of it even remotely getting through your strawman arguments and feints.

MMA is designed as a sport. Aikido's roots are in a different framework, designed from a battlefield art. It's techniques are not designed to choke somebody out, pin them to submission, or turn the encounter into a punching/kicking contest.

Quote:

That's swell. But in the context of this thread (Aikido in MMA), it is indeed ridiculous to be talking of live sword technique. BTW - how much 'live sword randori' do Aikido schools normally do?

Depends on the school and the teacher. You were discussing how MMA's movement was superior to Aikido, so how do you think a MMA player would fare against exactly what Aikido was designed to defense? I watch a lot of MMA, and I don't think they'd survive long trying to do a takedown against a sword or knife... so maybe the "keep moving forward" theory isn't the only way to fight.

Quote:

Strawman. I never mentioned anything about the empty hand techniques being different from the sword techniques. I was referring to the idea that Aikido is not always practiced with a sword. Please stop trying to twist my words.

Back at you... my comments were to show that we don't have different techniques for armed combat and unarmed combat... they're the same technques and principles.. just applied differently... just like fighting tall people and short people, if you're working at "your level", their height makes no difference. It's all about application. The rote technique is the same all the time.

What's clearly the objective you have here isn't to see if Aikido is effective as a martial art against MMA, but a "my art can whip your art" scenario. Fine. Have at it. Clearly you only want to think in the framework of "win or lose", and I'm beginning to see why... the framwork of your thinking is not structured toward the different levels of training in the same manner as Aikido.

In Aikido, we do basic movement, rote technique, practice, randori, and then application randori. Out there somewhere is also "functional practice". As skills progress, we have tactical practice and practices against weapons. The intensity of each type of practice increases, and the dynamics as well. At the higher levels, it's a matter of survival, not "combat"... and that's where you get those broken necks and arms, etc. I was talking about. It's just as easy to kill with the technique as to throw with it... which is why you have to have high-level ukemi skills... and playing at that level is how I got some major league injuries... because I zigged when I should have zagged. Nobody's born knowing how to do it... it's all learned skills, and the higher the level of them, the more dangerous... and I haven't seen much in MMA that we didn't see in Judo over the years, at least when it was practiced as a self defense art instead of a contest.

Fighting's fighting... and how well you do it is always going to be more dependent on how good you are at what you do than the art itself. Every fighting system I've seen has weaknesses, and they all focus on their strengths, so spin the argument to whatever you want.

"We all die... but not everybody really lives"...from Braveheart. I'm having a great life, and doing what I like to do, and doing it quite well. Come see me sometime, we'll train.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 08:25 PM

Quote:

I'll try this one last time, without much hope of it even remotely getting through your strawman arguments and feints.

Oy. What are you, 6 years old? "I know you are, but what am I?" Feel free to point out any strawman arguments I have made.

Quote:

MMA is designed as a sport. Aikido's roots are in a different framework, designed from a battlefield art. It's techniques are not designed to choke somebody out, pin them to submission, or turn the encounter into a punching/kicking contest.

Ehhhh......really? I have seen lots of pins, submissions and even strikes in Aikido. I'm looking at John Steven's book "Aikido - The Way of Harmony". I guess you should tell him and Shirata Rinjiro that they're doing it wrong.

And modern MMA is derived from Brazilian Vale Tudo, which was often fought in street fights there.

Quote:

Back at you... my comments were to show that we don't have different techniques for armed combat and unarmed combat... they're the same technques and principles..

What do you mean "back at you"? Again, *I* never said there was any difference. My AKK weapons training was basically the same as the empty hand stuff. Same as Aikido, and many other arts.

Quote:

the framwork of your thinking is not structured toward the different levels of training in the same manner as Aikido.

So you think you can read my mind now, like Eyrie? LOL.

Quote:

Fighting's fighting... and how well you do it is always going to be more dependent on how good you are at what you do than the art itself. Every fighting system I've seen has weaknesses, and they all focus on their strengths, so spin the argument to whatever you want.

I'm really not trying to "spin" anything. Offering my views from my experiences, nothing more. I agree that fighting is fighting, but if people of a given style train in a consistent manner, then you can generalize. Aikido folk are *generally* at a disadvantage against MMA folk, especially in the MMA environment. Very high-level Aikido folk may do well......but we haven't seen it.

Flame on.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 09:57 PM

Gee Matt, and your generalization of ALL aikido as ineffectual, based on your limited exposure and experience is somehow more valid? Talk about statistical and empirical validity...

Ikkyo = straight arm bar, Nikkyo = bent wrist lock, Sankyo = vertical lock, Gokyo = gooseneck/mao de vaca in BJJ, Rokyo = Judo's wakigatame, Iriminage = iriminage in jujitsu, Shihonage = shihonage in judo/jujitsu, Aikiotoshi = sukuinage in judo/jujitsu, Koshinage = koshinage and Kotegaeshi = kotegaeshi in anybody's language - there's only so many ways to twist the wrist.... if that's not "principle" and/of "technique" then what is?

That the "average" aikidoka's application of such techniques is ineffective is moot. It's hardly the fault of the art, and more to do with either the teaching method, or the student's skill level or ability, or BOTH. Again, like fileboy, you insist on equating your limited observation and experience of a general lack of ability with a blanket generalization of ineffectiveness of the art. And that makes your "empirical evidence" more valid HOW?

If all you got to go on is an empirically tenuous, limited and subjective observation and experience, that aikido "technique" is ineffective, because the person(s) applying it were ineffective, therefore the art is ineffective, and therefore would not work, then I see this discussion going nowhere... FAST.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 10:37 PM

Eyrie,
don't confuse him with facts. He has the "definitive text" on Aikido... John Stevens' "The Way of Harmony", so I'm sure his level of knowledge about the subject is far superior to those of us mere mortals who have been practicing for nearly a quarter of a century with mere students of O'Sensei's chief instructor's deshis and the like. To think... I could have saved myself all that practice, and training by just going to Amazon...

silly me.

I AM confused about one thing, however... if Aikido is so weak, why did guys like Mifune and the Kodokan instructors come study with O'Sensei? Was that to improve their superiority complex? Surely it wasn't to improve their technique... since Aikido is so "weak".

When Toyoda Sensei and I practiced together, I always felt like I'd been hit by a steamroller... so I can only imagine what practicing a "strong" art would have done to me. Luckily, I had only gotten black belts in karate, Judo, and Jujutsu before I started Aikido training... so I had something to fall back on in case the Aikido didn't work out... almost makes me want to turn in my teaching licenses. I wouldn't want anybody to mistake something I did in Aikido for one of those other superior arts... and now, you've gone and told on me by citing which techniques are "common" to "other arts"... and I thought we were friends...

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 10:43 PM

Quote:

Such wonderful maturity John... Is it any wonder with such shining beacons of forum behaviour, from current and former moderators no less, that this place has descended into the hallowed depths of Ad City for the unwashed masses of pre-pubescent and testosterone-challenged wannabees?

I detect sarcasm, lol. Touche'. However, why exactly IS the post so "immature"?

A. Because I said an expletive?

B. Because I worded it like I did?

C. Because that was a convenient way of slamming a post that was nothing but the plain truth and you just didn't feel like dealing with it?

If it's A, I am a bad guy and you obviously are in a better position to judge. If its B, deal with it. My guess is, C.

-John

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 11:18 PM

My bad... I should keep my mouth shut

You're right, if these self-styled experts on the ineffectiveness of Aikido could not glean that from the countless YouTube videos, then there's no sense in pointing out the obvious.

As if John Stevens is the only definitive and authoritative source of Aikido. Even his teacher, Shirata, openly admits to being a part-time martial artist and not a very good one at that.

I don't know about you, but I'm outta here. Seems like this place is justifiably deserving of its reputation as an advertising haven for its predominantly pre-pubescent, testosterone-challenged VTG Mortal Kombat audience.

I guess I naively expected that current and former mods would attempt to raise the level of discussion rather than degenerate into name-calling, art-bashing, video and off-line challenges. Or at least have the maturity and decency to front up to the target of one's challenge, as is the accepted protocol for issuing challenges in the "real" MA world.

Anyhow, I've got work to do, and training in between. Haven't got time to engage in same circular arguments regarding the inefficacy of Aikido.

Posted by: dafeiquan

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/12/08 11:56 PM

Howdy all,
Total noob to this forum (1st post!) and somewhat new to Aikido, but thought I'd throw my $.02 into the flame pit

Aikido as I see it is a "formless" martial art, which is based on principles of physics and body mechanics rather than specific techniques which only apply in a finite set of situations.

The toughest problem to solve in Aikido is how to teach such a formless martial art in a structured way. For this, some basic techniques are taught that work as specific applications of Aiki principles, but may rarely manifest themselves in a streetfight.

Because Aikido is more of a framework than an instruction manual, what one strives to learn through the study of Aikido is how to apply the principles (maintaining your balance, compromising your opponents' balance, focusing your power through the coordination of seemingly unrelated muscles, etc.) rather than specific techniques (like Tsuki Kotegaeshi). I think this is lost on many people, including some black belts who still believe that Aikido is about individual techniques.

In any fight, whether MMA or a real fight, aiki principles can help one maintain their balance, compromise their opponent's balance, and subdue their opponent with less effort than the struggling that tends to occur otherwise. The difference between Aikido and other MAs is that Aikido is devoted solely to exploring the worlds of balance, energy, and control. I believe this actually makes it more flexible than MAs that teach only a finite set of techniques.

As I said earlier, take this with a grain of salt. But maybe not too big a grain

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 10:48 AM

Eyrie -

Quote:

Gee Matt, and your generalization of ALL aikido as ineffectual, based on your limited exposure and experience is somehow more valid? Talk about statistical and empirical validity...

Again, twisting my words and making strawman arguments. I did not say *ALL* Aikido - I said generally. "Generally" does not mean "all". And "generally" does not imply any scientific statistical analysis - I was very clear to mention that I was talking from my experience. Perhaps if you and Grady were'nt so emotional, you might be able to read my posts objectively.

Quote:

if that's not "principle" and/of "technique" then what is?

Not sure what your point is. Most "principles" of martial arts are similar - no disagreement there. But if you take practitioners of two styles, and one of them does not practice with resistance, it is likely that the other will be more effective. Regardless of how similar the principles are.

Quote:

That the "average" aikidoka's application of such techniques is ineffective is moot.

That is totally wrong, it is EXACTLY the point.

Quote:

If all you got to go on is an empirically tenuous, limited and subjective observation and experience, that aikido "technique" is ineffective, because the person(s) applying it were ineffective, therefore the art is ineffective, and therefore would not work,

Therefore, we should all ignore your and Grady's chest beating about beating Anderson Silva and 5th-degree Goju guys? Can't have it both ways, my friend.

Quote:

As if John Stevens is the only definitive and authoritative source of Aikido. Even his teacher, Shirata, openly admits to being a part-time martial artist and not a very good one at that.

Another strawman. I never said Stevens was "the definitive and authoritative source of Aikido." Merely pointing out that he learned from "the source" of Aikido, and would be considered by most people (except you and Grady apparently, LOL) as a reliable source.

Might want to switch to decaf, guys. And I'm quietly enjoying the irony of Eyrie (who has never met anyone on the forum or even posted a video, but writes of defeating jujitsu black belts and Goju 5th degrees) talking about all the other "VTG"s here.

Grady -

Quote:

He has the "definitive text" on Aikido... John Stevens' "The Way of Harmony", so I'm sure his level of knowledge about the subject is far superior to those of us mere mortals who have been practicing for nearly a quarter of a century with mere students of O'Sensei's chief instructor's deshis and the like. To think... I could have saved myself all that practice, and training by just going to Amazon... silly me.

Shirata Rinjiro was a direct student of Ueshiba, as was Stevens (I could be wrong about that), so I consider them good sources. Not sure what your point is.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 12:43 PM

LOL!!!

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 03:31 PM

Grady so far, has been one of Eyrie's most outspoken allies on this thread!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 08:20 PM

FWIW, I have no emotional dog in this fight

But I do want to address the following logical fallacies in the general line of argument.

The following assertions were made, that:
A. Most aikidoka are generally ineffective
B. Aikido techniques are ineffective
C. Therefore Aikido is ineffective

Even though assertion A is a fallacious biased sample, let's say for argument's sake, I grant you A - that the bell is skewed to the left. To which I have already addressed this argument that the causative effect could be either the result of poor teaching standards or low student quality - and to which no one has made a counter-argument.

Even if A is true, there is no proof that assertion B is true on its own merit. It is a logical fallacy to assert that B is true because A is true. Or that A is true because B is true. Grady & I have also addressed this argument as being a deficiency in skills and experience and/or application. Again, no one has made a valid counter-argument.

In any case, even if either A or B are equally true, it certainly does not imply that C is true. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc!

If you, Brian or John wish to address any of these arguments, feel free. Or if people wish to continue the childish behaviour, feel free too - just don't expect a direct response.

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 09:14 PM

Quote:

FWIW, I have no emotional dog in this fight

Sure you don't.

Quote:

The following assertions were made, that:
A. Most aikidoka are generally ineffective
B. Aikido techniques are ineffective
C. Therefore Aikido is ineffective

Actually, that is not at all what I was saying. My assertions would be more like:

A. While Aikido footwork is very applicable, Aikido joint locks are difficult to get against resistance

B. Many Aikido people do not practice against resistance/realistic intent

C. Therefore Aikido will not do well in MMA

Quote:

To which I have already addressed this argument that the causative effect could be either the result of poor teaching standards or low student quality - and to which no one has made a counter-argument.

I am not disagreeing wih that. In fact, systemic lack-of-resistance training in Aikido causes low student quality. Not a fault of the art. But at the same time, if that's how it's commonly done, this means there is little practical difference to Aikido folk trying their hands against MMA folk. They will most likely lose. You are arguing semantics.

Quote:

Even if A is true, there is no proof that assertion B is true on its own merit. It is a logical fallacy to assert that B is true because A is true.

The logical fallacy is yours, because I am not making that argument. However, if the training is *systemically lacking something*, then B would be true in practical terms, by default.

Quote:

In any case, even if either A or B are equally true, it certainly does not imply that C is true. Cum hoc ergo propter hoc!

By strict definition, no. But in practical terms.........

Quote:

If you, Brian or John wish to address any of these arguments, feel free. Or if people wish to continue the childish behaviour, feel free too - just don't expect a direct response.

Don't worry - I'm quite used to not getting a direct response out of you.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 09:33 PM

Quote:

A. While Aikido footwork is very applicable, Aikido joint locks are difficult to get against resistance

B. Many Aikido people do not practice against resistance/realistic intent

C. Therefore Aikido will not do well in MMA

How about dispensing with the sarcastic stabs and stick to the argument?

A. Neither footwork or joint-locks can be proven to be true or false. Sure footwork helps IF you can get out of the way (once again a skill and experience issue). Yet, mao de vaca (gokyo), jujigatame (juji), omoplata (ikkyo) - the staple jointlocks of BJJ - can work against resistance?

B. Sweeping generalization. Proof?

C. Prove cause/effect between A, B and C?

Quote:

I am not disagreeing wih that. In fact, systemic lack-of-resistance training in Aikido causes low student quality. Not a fault of the art. But at the same time, if that's how it's commonly done, this means there is little practical difference to Aikido folk trying their hands against MMA folk. They will most likely lose. You are arguing semantics.

Proof? Again you're making an non-causative assertion:
A. No resistance training in Aikido - unproven
B. Therefore Aikido is likely to lose - speculation

Quote:

The logical fallacy is yours, because I am not making that argument. However, if the training is *systemically lacking something*, then B would be true in practical terms, by default.

Causative proof? A lacks B. Therefore C is true? Where's the causal relation between A, B & C?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/13/08 10:35 PM

John, let me give you a bit of a history lesson.

Ueshiba Sensei (O'Sensei) "discovered" Aikido from his martial arts studies using the jujutsu techniques and swordfighting skills of his training. Professor Kano developed Judo as a sport by blending numerous styles of jujutsu together and taking out many of the "damaging" techniques of those styles. Mitsugo Maeda developed Brazilian Jujitsu from Kodokan Judo and Sumo, which were the only two arts he trained in. He never actually trained in jujutsu as an art, other than what was included in Judo.

Tohei Sensei, was chief instructor at the Aikikai while O'Sensei was there and training. After many years together, Tohei broke away from the Aikikai to concentrate on the "internal" elements of Aikido, and began the practice of "Shin Shin Toitsu" Aikido. No one had better technique at the Aikikai than Tohei.

While teaching and conducting demonstrations, O'Sensei used Sogunuma Sensei as his uke (partner) to demonstrate techniques. Sogunuma trained my training partner.

When Tohei established his Aikido dojo, he took in a number of "deshis" (live in students), one of whom was Toyoda Sensei, who eventually became my teacher and good friend, who established the Aikido Association of America.

Now, that being said... all of my Aikido knowledge is 4th generation,(from both directions) which is about as close as anyone can get now to the founder since Ueshiba Kisshimaru is now dead.

When I began studying Aikido, I had already studied martial arts for 22 years... so I had some basis of comparison. I already had black belts in karate, judo, and jujutsu, and teaching licenses in jujutsu... so I had a frame of reference to judge the veracity of techniques against an "existing standard". It wasn't just "do this and it works like this"... I already had 22 years of hard core training "to resist" the techniques of Aikido.

If I'm an "outspoken ally" of Eyrie, it has a basis of understanding exactly what he's talking about and only needing to disagree with him when he's wrong. I don't need to go find a book to find an opinion, I had 3rd generation instruction, and my 4th generation understanding of Aikido guides me.

I learned early on in my martial arts training to seek out the best teachers, because at the time, there weren't too many martial arts schools out there. I've travelled for hours to train for an hour, and then drive back just to train with somebody that "knew something". I slept on dojo floors, people's couches, and in the seat of the car "seeking information".

While a lot of these internet wizards might talk a good game, I'm a student of masters... and not those that just organized a group and gave themselves a title, but legitimate, skilled, martial arts experts. On labor day, I'll be starting my 46th year of training, bad hips, torn rotator cuffs, twice broken ankle and all.

These guys on the FA boards all talk about respect, and then show less than any newbie in any MA school I've ever trained in. They're "google fu" experts, and while they can craft an argument, they don't know $hit most of the time, and especially when talking Aikido.

When I was training with Toyoda, we did what Sensei called "the old Aikido", which was what Tohei had taught him as the original techniques he and O'Sensei worked out. When I say "the technique is designed to break arms or necks", it's because that's exactly what it was designed to do. Like Professor Kano, he took those aspects out of the training to protect the players... but the technique still works the same way, and if you "step through" (in a lot of cases) you get a whole different result than if you practice the "dojo brand" of it's implementation. Just like you can throw, lock, and pin somebody and cause injury using Judo, Aikido will do it in a heartbeat... if you ignore the philosophical and spiritual aspects of the training. Most of these "style wars" are nothing but a pi$$ing contest anyway, and the ones who expose themselves are those "google fu" experts. Unfortunately, many of the readers don't have any (or limited) experience either in what's being argued, so they can read all the posts and never know which one's the idiot. Usually, it's the ones with "pals"... and what they actually "know" is how to gang up, start the name calling, and start challenging the veracity of what's said by somebody who actually has experience at what's being discussed... and just because you've done six months of Aikido at Joe Blow's dojo doesn't make you an "authority". I've taken nidan level players (2nd degree black belt) and taught them more in one class than they learned in several years of practice in many cases. It's an art of nuances and body mechanics. When you do it wrong, it's weak... when you do it right, it's explosive.

I don't argue with Eyrie, because most of the time, what he says is right... and if I disagree, more than likely, it's more esoteric than considering what he said as being "wrong"...(you say tomato, I say to-mah-to) type of thing...

I just spent several months off the board and in the "lurking mode", and this thread has shown me that's probably what I should do again. Clearly, I'm not going to teach anybody anything on a discussion board, and it's completely fruitless to argue with idiots who have to go look up information from people I've trained with and been out to dinner with. If they aren't dead, I'll simply call them on the phone and ask them if I need information.

p.s. to MattJ...
John Stevens never trained with Ueshiba. He was Shirata Rinjiro's student, who did. His only other teacher (his words) was Hanzawa Yoshimi who was the CI at Sendai University where he started Aikido in 1973. He did, however, train with a lot of high level Aikidoka from the Aikikai during his studies. Just so you know. WT

Posted by: JKogas

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/14/08 06:32 AM

Grady,

No NEED for a history lesson. I just made a general point. People can take it however they so choose.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/14/08 07:17 AM

Quote:

I just made a general point.

Hardly... it was a pointed remark aimed at discrediting Grady, because you do not accept my arguments. And since Grady's arguments are along the same lines as mine, therefore Grady is, guilty by association, and therefore also wrong. How else did you think the average rational person was going to take it?

Need I remind people that the thread topic is

Quote:

a technical thread concerning using the movements/principles of Aikido in an MMA setting

Posted by: MattJ

Re: Aikido in an MMA setting - 08/14/08 07:54 AM

Eyrie -

Dispense with the sarcastic jabs? You first. You get what you give, bro.

I am once again disavowing your attempts to turn my statements into some kind of scientific/statistical/strawman analysis, which I have repeatedly denied was my intention. I don't understand why you keep trying to make me out to be saying something that I'm not. I offered my interpretation for clarity, since the conclusions that YOU were saying I made were completely inaccurate. But I'm not trying to make a friggin doctoral thesis about it.

I did find this interesting, though:

Quote:

B. Sweeping generalization. Proof?

I have already explicitly acknowledged this to be a generalization, so this is clearly more semantic bullsh1t on your part. However, I assume YOU have proof that all Aikido DOES practice with resistance, since you apparently disagree with me? And again, if you have proof of Aikido people winning in MMA (thus showing it's effectiveness in MMA), please share. I choose not to hold my breath at this point.

Grady -

I stand corrected about Stevens. I mis-read a quote from one of his books talking about training experiences with Ueshiba, which I had interpreted to mean that Stevens had trained with Ueshiba. He was actually referring to other people. This interview quotes him as beginning Aikido in 1973, after Ueshiba died in 1969:

http://www.aikido-world.com/articles/JohnStevens-interview1.htm

I don't feel that this materially undermines my argument, since the book I referred to earlier was written in concert with one of Ueshiba's direct students, and not by Stevens alone.

Aikido in an MMA setting