College aikido

Quote:

So, eyrie, how many would I have to seen beaten down (I did not overpower all of them myself; many were beaten down by others) before you would consider my sample large enough to be representative? 100? 1,000? 10,000? I suspect unless I had personally beaten up every aikido practioner alive today, you would not be convinced. If I had, you would probably tell me that while I did well agianst today's aikidoka, I would have been kicked to the curb by the "real" aikidoka of yesteryear.

No, you missed the point. And you are responding emotionally and not logically, since you obviously cannot fault the logic of the argument I put forth. And the logic is quite simple. You are making a sweeping generalization in saying that aikido as an art is ineffective, because the few you "beat" are ineffective. Even as a theoretical hypothesis that aikido is ineffective, you have too many variables to make any definitive conclusion. And if you're going to put forth a hypothesis, then the onus is on you to ensure that it cannot be refuted.

Quote:

Your standards of evidence are illigical, impossible--far more stringent than those required by science.

No, what is impossible is your logic leap from A to B with no real basis in logic. So we are to accept your argument, prima facie, no questions asked?

Quote:

A scientist understand any two hydrogen atoms bonded to an oxygen atom make water. He or she does not insist on testing every single hydrogen and oxygen atom in the universe for confirmation.

Strawman. Is all water really H2O? Heavy water (deuterium oxide), looks like water, but it has a different chemical composition and exhibits different properties. What about super-heavy water (tritium oxide)? 3H2O is most certainly not the same as H2O... and due to its highly corrosive nature, I seriously doubt you'd want to drink it. So yes, maybe you should test it's pure H2O first... unless you're willing to guarantee that all water is H2O.

Quote:

how many times are you willing to put your hand on a hot stove before you conclude hot stoves cause burns? Following your logic, having it happen once, or even several times, proves nothing. After all, how can you be 100% sure that somewhere in the world there is a hot stove that won't burn your hand?

Strawman! So, if I went down to the local TKD school and beat every single student, does that make TKD ineffective? Or did that entire school just suck? What if, after beating all the students, and then took on the sabunim, and lost? Does that make aikido ineffective? Or is TKD really effective after all...?

Quote:

I don't believe you live your life that way (you'd be long dead if you did), and I don't believe you would apply such impossible standards to anything but your beleoved aikido.

Ad hominem. Again, you are projecting an emotional response. Whereas I'm arguing against your faulty logic.

Please, google "logical fallacies" before debating with me. .. because until then I don't think you will see the flaws in your arguments.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 10:07 PM

Before this gets out of hand, further derailed or locked, I should point out that not everyone studies a MA for the same reasons. Everyone's reasons and goals for pursuing a MA is DIFFERENT.

If practical SD is your cup-o-cha, find a MA to suit. If you want to study something like iaido/kyudo for aesthetic or meditative reasons, do it. If you want to do taiji for health, do it. Just don't come here and wave your banner of practicality.

Bottomline, do something that you will enjoy and stick at for a few years. Or better yet, find a club or teacher that match your personal preferences and goals.

Everything else people may say is inconsequential fluff... do what YOU love and everything else falls into place. May your training be fulfilling and give you endless enjoyment... which is far better than learning something for the sake of learning something, or worse yet, for the wrong reasons.

Posted by: TKD_X

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 10:37 PM

i would also like to respectfully ask that ATA taekwondo not be considered an accurate representation of all TKD systems. it unfairly makes all TKD look bad when it isn't.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 11:40 PM

IMO, nothing really is an honest representation of anything.

Fundamentally, all MA are based on variations of the same principles and philosophical doctrines. Each art tends to focus on specific aspects and specialize in specific areas which provide a perceived strategic and/or tactical advantage.

But if you're going to compare apples to apples, make sure it's the same genus and species...

Posted by: Prizewriter

Re: College aikido - 06/16/08 04:07 AM

All of which is compounded by the fact Fileboy has admitted in the past using TKD in a SD situation. As I recall, he kicked an attacker in the head during a confrontation.

http://www.fightingarts.com/ubbthreads/s...part=3&vc=1

From Fileboys post in the above thread:

"Lord knows I have plenty of criticisms to make of TKD. However, believe it or not, kicking to the head is not as crazy as it sounds. The one time I ever used a TKD techniques to get out of a jam was when a nutjob approach me in a park and I whacked him in the head with a round kick. He went down and stayed down. Although it all happened too quick to analyze in complete detail, one thing stands out to this day: I could tell the guy never saw the kick coming. This sounds strange until you realize most people are not martial artist and do not expect to get kicked in the head."

Walking, talking contradiction!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 06/16/08 05:03 AM

Look, every MA will give you some basic level of pugilistic skill. They all work off the same basics... footwork, bodywork, what to do with the hands and feet, response under pressure etc.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 06/26/08 04:50 PM

Actually it was ITF taekwondo. I stuck with it because I loved the art--loved the patterns, the discipline, the whole training process. But I would never describe it as a particularly practical art.

Posted by: Ames

Re: College aikido - 07/01/08 02:24 PM

fileboy: Rather than lock this thread straight away, I thought I'd wait to see if perhaps you would qualify your argument a little more. You didn't. Same old "all Aikido sucks because I've met dozens and they all sucked."

There are a lot of problems with an argument such as this. Firstly, the fact that the data you supply to validate your claim as to the worthlessness of Aikido, as regards its self defence capabilities, is completely subjective and, therefore, worthless.

Secondly, you seem to have absolutely no first hand knowledge of the art itself. I would very much like you to detail one or two specific instances in which you yourself witnessed a dedicated, long term (i.e. competent) Aikidoka beaten easily for you to decide the art has 0% value for self defence. My guess would be it was in TKD class, or some 'friendly' sparring time after or before class. In any of these sceanerios Aikido is at a MAJOR disadvantage before the engagement even began.

--Chris

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 07/13/08 03:28 PM

Ames, I cannot imagine what would qualify as "objective" data in an area like this. How can any martial art be "objectively" evaluated? Impossible. Your demand for objective evluation is therefor a red herring.

Likewise, you seem to define those with "first hand knowledge" as long-term aikido practioners. Another red herring: any long time aikido practioner is, by definition, someone who believes 100% in their art.

So it seems that in order to voice an opinion, I would have to be a dedicated, long-term practioner of aikido who had somehow devised a purely objective (whatever that means) measure of aikido's efficacy. An impossible, and therefor fraudulent, standard.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 07/13/08 09:02 PM

I see... and that makes your subjective opinion, based on your anecdotal evidence, a valid fact... because you say so?

Posted by: aikiflips

Re: College aikido - 07/21/08 12:12 PM

Y'know, if you say it's no good then that's fine. I'm willing to accept that. All I know is that it's worked for me, so I like it. =) Really there's a lot that goes into a conflict that could have absolutely nothing to do with the marital art that they're using. Maybe they're not very good, maybe they're nervous, maybe they have some other mental block? Congratulations on your victories!

A lot of marital arts, TKD included were started as serious defenses against attackers and the ones which have survived since old times really shows that their art was resiliant, whether it was mere conditioning, a few good ideas to keep in mind, or if it was a hard-core military art. That art has been studied for years on end by people who believe in it and use some or all of the concepts. I s'pose there are some who use it to physically resolve conflict, there are some who use the philosophical concepts to either avoid or diffuse a situation. Whatever you use it for, however you use it, is your own choice.

Speaking from experience, there are a lot of people who don't train for even something such as sparring. I've had vastly different experiences getting into the ring as opposed to inside the dojo and out on the street. Each one has taught me a lot and has offered me new insight into how I learn and how I teach. The biggest hurdle is getting experience cross-training with different arts. Where TKD may be more intuitively a fighting art, Aikido takes time and a breadth of experience that is often not taught in the dojos. Come to think of it, most internal/soft arts are like that, with a harsh learning curve at the beginning. Finding a school or even a training partner who's able to work with you to expose some weak links in your training is absolutely necessary with any art to evolve not only yourself but the art as it exists in present-day. I'll reiterate, everyone practices for a different reason, so some people may just practice to make themselves feel better through comraderie and exercise or meditation. That's cool too. Do what makes you happy and F-ck the rest. =) (Lil Miss Sunshine)

Ease up a bit though, there's really no need to be contentious on the threads. To the original poster, good luck and maybe you'll enjoy your time in there as much as I have! (I got started in college too!)

-Kevin

Posted by: westway50

Re: College aikido - 07/27/08 09:04 PM

i would absolutely advise u to go check it out. you should do it for a few weeks and see how you like it. i started last year and i was like one of the very few people who stayed after seeing what it is like.

practicality wise, my instructors even say that it is not so practical. but you really do learn alot of practical things like entering and stuff. sometimes you will have a position where you can use an aikido move, which was amazing to me the first time i experienced that.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 03:41 AM

Eyrie,

What I am saying is that there is no evidence of any kind whatsoever you would accept. Aikido is not your art, but your religion. Fine--good luck to you.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 04:58 AM

I love it when people resort to personal snipes when they cannot argue the point in an adult and academic fashion.

Aikido is just one of the many things I do for fun, personal interest and enjoyment and as a form of physical activity... when I'm not doing other stuff. A religion, if I had one, is no one's business but my personal relationship with whichever deity I prefer, if I had a preference, and is germane to this discussion HOW?

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 11:17 AM

Eyrie,

I was not resorting to personal snipes. You demand an "adult" and "academic" discussion of this subject but automatically dismiss any evidence that does not support your view as invalid. Of course people are going to become frustrated by that!

Here is my suggestion: I offered personal experience to suggest aikido might not be effective. Can you give me any first-hand experience of aikido's effectiveness?

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/11/08 02:05 PM

Eyrie,

It was not a cheap shot because I used the word "religion" figuratively, not literally. What I meant was that for you, aikido's efficacy is a matter of deeply held faith and not based on empirical evidence.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/11/08 06:55 PM

It's still a cheap shot ad hominem, calling into question my objectivity based on a presumption that it is clouded by some deeply held "faith". FYI, I do and have done a number of MA - not just Aikido. My objectivity is based on equally empirical TESTING, not just from observation AND experience in a number of MA - and not without due regard to system and theory of MA in general.

So what makes YOUR "empirical" evidence more valid than mine??? Because I simply don't agree with it?

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/13/08 01:48 PM

What did your empirical tests consist of?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/13/08 07:25 PM

Besides not being germane to this topic, I asked you first... (see my post #16004155 in this thread)... to which I still have not had a response.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 02:59 PM

Eyrie,

I have offered you plenty of evidence to back up my doubts about aikido's efficacy, on this thread and on others. So have many other posters. You have, without exception, dismissed every bit of it as insufficient, biased, unscientific, uninformed, dishonest, etc, etc ad nauseum.

So I ask you again, what would be a good test of a martial art's efficacy? I'll bet my left arm you will not be able to come up with one.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 06:14 PM

No... you're deflecting the question. You generalized the efficacy based on your own unsubstantiated and personal anecdotal evidence. I asked who these aikidoka you "tested" were, what rank were they, how long they had trained for, in what format was the "test" conducted, what were the specific rules of engagement. See post #16004155.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 08:04 PM

Eyrie,
these guys just don't change. No matter what information you give them, they've got their mind made up that Aikido sucks (probably because they tried it and sucked at it), so the "test" for them is simple... Is it Aikido?... then it sucks.

Another one of my pastimes is shooting...pistols primarily, but long guns as well (.300 Winchester Magnum). I'm sure that using those skills, I couldn't defeat them at any distance either, based on their thinking (or the lack thereof).

We train in a school with about 650 students of all different arts... kickboxers, kempo, BJJ, MMA, but none of them who have seen me or our Aikido class train have ever made the claims that we read here. They are both more respectful, and give us a wide berth when it comes to "confronting us" and/or issuing challenges... and they've seen me train. Wonder why that is?

Our class is usually warming up at the same time as the kickboxing class, and when warming up on a heavy bag, I've noticed that they stop their punching training to watch mine... wonder why? I know I'm hitting it with more power and more solidly, so I'm almost sure they don't think that "Aikido striking" is too weak.

It says a lot about how much these guys actually know when they're that "hard headed" about Aikido being weak just because it's softer than grappling (at least as far as they know).

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 08:40 PM

Well, it's hard to point out flaws in someone's logical reasoning... which is the reason I'm taking this particular tack. Often, the emotive response is precisely what these people are accusing me of. It's got nothing to do with whatever perceived "vested" emotional interest I have, but the logic of their reasoning.

Assertion: I've bested some aikidoka in contests - which is questionable on a number of fronts - and I'm not talking about the veracity of such a claim - which I don't doubt. Which is why I asked the specific questions - who, how long, what format, rules etc.

Conclusion: Because A, therefore aikido = ineffective. Yet another cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacious argument.

It's like saying, and let's take an extreme example: The majority of poor people are in the minority racial groups. Poor people often resort to crime to survive. Therefore all racial minorities are criminals.

Huh? Come again?

Let's say that again: The majority of aikidoka practise Aikido. Aikidoka are generally ineffective. Therefore Aikido is ineffective.

BTW, IL isn't far from SC is it...?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 10:06 PM

Yeah,
getting to the logic of some people's arguments is like looking for a particular needle in a haystack full of needles. The premise is, however, that the argument is actually made from logic and not simply from simple predisposition. When they can't (or won't) supply the details, it's usually B-S.

IL is about 600 (+ or - 300) miles from SC, depending on where in IL you're going. It's a big state, and you can drive for 13 1/2 hours getting to Chicago from here, which is in the middle of the state. (That's where Toyoda Sensei's dojo is). He used to fly into Charlotte or Raleigh, NC and I would drive about north 2 to 4 hours to train with him. He would also go to Atlanta,Ga., which is about 2 hours South.

Posted by: erg

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 04:01 PM

In my experience women tend to adapt to Aikido more quickly than men. I've been told that this is because they tend to be less rigid in body and mind. I encourage you to find a reputable Sensei and give it a try.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 05:05 PM

Eyrie,

Here are answers to your questions, inorder:

1) Who were they? Is this a request for names, social security numbers and so on? They were aikido practioners from Chicago.

2)How long had they trained for? The average was 6 to 7 years. One older student I know trained for 16 years.

3)The "test" format varied, but usually consisted of one-on-one free sparring. We engaged each other from two to three minutes at a time, or until one participant called "time out."

4)The rules of engagement: I try to hit you; you try to stop me.

In every case and with every aikido practioner, they were IMMEDIATELY overwhelmed. Most had to submit within a minute or so; a few persisted and were knocked down, kocked into walls and, in one case, knocked cold for about 10 seconds.

Okay eyrie. Now you want tell me why this all proves nothing.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 07:57 PM

1. Your statistical sample is limited to a small localized area. Statistically, it cannot be held to be valid because of the inherent statistical bias with small samples.

2. There is a significant variance in experience between you and your opponents. If you have 25 years experience, a fairer contest should be with opponents closer to the same number of years experience as you. An average of 6-7 years indicates low level yudansha (I'm guessing shodan to nidan level). So your "statistical sample" is already inherently biased because you're comparing apples to oranges.

3. I would think that a fairer test format would entail a minimum of 3 rounds of 3 mins each. Winner should be decided on points scored, and adjudicated by at least 3 independent judges. Varying points should be awarded on hits to head, body, submission by pinning/locking, throwing to the ground etc.... as one would normally in any other competition format. It certainly raises the question of test validity in my mind, especially if the format was varied to begin with.

4. See #3. I would have thought that the "rules" would encompass some measure of safety for the combatants. Another question I have is did your opponents knowingly participate given these limited rules and conditions? I wouldn't have. If I knew it was going to be an a$$-beating contest, with a rule that practically says "stop me if you can", I certainly would...

You certainly cannot generalize that aikido as an art is ineffective, based on questionable test validity, limited sample sizes, and the obvious skill/experience differential. What makes you think that such a gross generalization can be valid? Rationally? Logically?

I'm not begrudging you that you may have had "wins" against a few aikidoka in the Chicago area, with far less fight experience than you, even if we only have your say-so. But that's hardly indicative of aikido in general. Fundamentally, you are saying:

A. I beat a few aikidoka - OK granted
B. Therefore Aikido is ineffective - illogical conclusion

It is illogical to conclude B, because the jump from beating a few aikidoka in a limited area, based on limited testing, does not equate to "most" aikidoka or the art of aikido in general. Statistically it is not significant enough to make that conclusion. It is a sweeping generalization.

At a stretch, the most you can say is that the standard of aikidoka in the Chicago area, based on limited sample testing, is fairly low compared to you.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 09:06 PM

Since Fileboy is in Chicago, he should go to the AAA's main dojo at 1016 W. Belmont Avenue and show the guys teaching the police tactical seminars how ineffective their Aikido is. Telephone number is 773-525-3141. Stephen Toyota is the chief instructor there now... Toyoda Sensei's son. I'm sure he can arrange for you to find a few "qualified Aikidoka" for you to prove your mettle.

Let them know what your rules are for "testing their art" and let them know they can unload on you. Let us know how you make out.

P.S. I'd take my insurance card with me.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 11:46 PM

"A. I beat a few aikidoka - OK granted
B. Therefore Aikido is ineffective - illogical conclusion

It is illogical to conclude B, because the jump from beating a few aikidoka in a limited area, based on limited testing, does not equate to "most" aikidoka or the art of aikido in general. Statistically it is not significant enough to make that conclusion. It is a sweeping generalization."

So, eyrie, how many would I have to seen beaten down (I did not overpower all of them myself; many were beaten down by others) before you would consider my sample large enough to be representative? 100? 1,000? 10,000? I suspect unless I had personally beaten up every aikido practioner alive today, you would not be convinced. If I had, you would probably tell me that while I did well agianst today's aikidoka, I would have been kicked to the curb by the "real" aikidoka of yesteryear.

Your standards of evidence are illigical, impossible--far more stringent than those required by science. A scientist understand any two hydrogen atoms bonded to an oxygen atom make water. He or she does not insist on testing every single hydrogen and oxygen atom in the universe for confirmation.

Eyrie, how many times are you willing to put your hand on a hot stove before you conclude hot stoves cause burns? Following your logic, having it happen once, or even several times, proves nothing. After all, how can you be 100% sure that somewhere in the world there is a hot stove that won't burn your hand?

I don't believe you live your life that way (you'd be long dead if you did), and I don't believe you would apply such impossible standards to anything but your beleoved aikido.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 11:53 PM

As always Brian, nothing substantial to contribute except personal snipes and insults. Perhaps the entire Aikido forum should be locked to prevent Bull-shi-to trolls like you from hijacking the threads with your personal vendettas and zealotry.

There is nothing ironic about my comment. In fact I spoke to the jujitsuka I mentioned, not long ago. We are still good friends and he is still blown away by the stuff I've showed him.

So, if you want names, I can give it to you via PM. Feel free to verify my account of events with them. There is no need to drag innocent names thru this muck that you and your cohorts insist on stirring up in a public forum.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 12:02 AM

VTG eyrie,

I was talking about the irony that you want names, etc...even though you yourself make claims about beating godans in goju when you were a whitebelt. Hogwash!

The thread has drifted so much that I have nothing meaningful to contribute except to point the irony in your posts. It means alot to me!!

Back to you and fileboy doing this.

It's a HUGE contribution to the forums!!

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 01:17 AM

"Strawman! So, if I went down to the local TKD school and beat every single student, does that make TKD ineffective? Or did that entire school just suck? What if, after beating all the students, and then took on the sabunim, and lost? Does that make aikido ineffective? Or is TKD really effective after all...?"

Actually, TKD is Not a particularly effective martial art. I suspected that for years, but was not able to admit it to myself until I started studying judo. While strong kicking skills are a fine thing to have, they are nowhere near as critical to self-defense as boxing and (especially) wrestling skills.

Eyrie, I think what happens sometimes is we devote so much time and energy to an art, bind it so tightly into our sense of identity, that we cannot bear to admit we have been wasting our time. In this sense at least, martial arts CAN be like religion for some people. I think you are one.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 02:23 AM

It seems you are not getting the point no matter how I spell it out, because it is not the answer you want to hear. Your postulation simply cannot be validated on logical grounds, and time and time again you resort to innuendo and insinuations that it is my "religion" that I'm defending, rather than looking at the logical flaws in your statements.

The problem is you can't and won't see the flaws in your reasoning. No, I think what happens is that people put their blinders and perceptive filters on and base their subjective conclusions about something, even when it is clearly pointed out to them that their reasoning is flawed.

I'm done arguing with you. Feel free to bag anything you don't understand, don't want to understand, and don't care to understand... even when it has been pointed out that you are clearly wrong.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 03:34 AM

Whatever you say, eyrie. God bless.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 06:37 PM

I notice that they glossed over the opportunity to go test their theory against Aikidoka teaching the police tactical classes and acted like that post never happened. I'm sure they would find those guys very helpful in their effort to discredit Aikido in general.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 07:54 PM

They also conveniently glossed over the fact that it's a logical fallacy based on the reasons I outlined. Or that logical debate is not the same thing as scientific rigour.

But somehow, my personal experiences are less valid than theirs. And the fact that I haven't generalized that all jujitsu and goju are ineffective, has also been conveniently glossed over.

They're just peeved that they can't logically prove or debate the veracity of their BELIEF, so they have to resort to forum stalking, hurling insults and innuendo, and beating down into submission any and all opposition.

What gets me is this: since Aikido is so ineffective, why continue

???

BTW, for those interested, 3H2O is still H2O, as is 2H2O (deuterium oxide) The (superscript) 3 (or 2) indicates the number of neutrons present in the hydrogen atom, making it an isotope. Certainly 2 hydrogen atoms bonded with an oxygen atom makes water. But the presence of additional neutron(s) in THE hydrogen atom changes the physical and chemical properties of water altogether. So 2 hydrogen atoms + 1 oxygen atom is not always "water". Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 09:14 PM

If you make an assertion and attempt to pass it off as fact, be prepared to back it up logically. Otherwise, anyone can say anything and not be held accountable. As a former moderator, you of all people should know that. If I ask, edited pending admin action ... and on a public forum... what does that imply or insinuate? If you don't understand that fundamental point that I'm making... then I don't know how else to make it clear, so that you understand.

BTW, ROTFL... I think you just proved my point. Who's stalking who, and who's paraphrasing who because they can't come up with a logical argument?

Posted by: MattJ

eyrie has crossed the line - 08/16/08 09:52 PM

Only making the point that you do the same things that you criticize others for. As for your extremely low-class and reprehensible wife-beating comment.......talk about insults and innuendo. At least I have actual experience with Aikido people to form an opinion. What you did was slander.

You have truly shown your colors. Amazed that you would stoop so low.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 10:42 PM

eyrie,

That is the worst personal attack I have witnessed on these forums. Your ass should banned immediately you piece of sh1t.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:10 PM

I see your edumakayshun has served you well, or may be not so well, since you also missed the point. I suggest to read my post again... perhaps this time a little more s-l-o-w-l-y.

Posted by: Zombie Zero

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:20 PM

The next person who posts anything even remotely insulting is going on a 24-hour vacation.

Posted by: harlan

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:20 PM

Uhmmm...guys...I know this is getting kinda personal...but just wanted to interject something.

Regarding the 'wife beating' comment...that is kinda a classic, and well-known example of a certain type of interaction. Another in the same veing is 'have you stopped kicking your dog yet?' And I didn't think it came across as a personal thing.

Just my .02 pennies from someone with no stake in the conversation.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 12:22 AM

Precisely... it was an example to elucidate a point, and not a personal insult directed at Matt. And I think I'm owed an apology for being called a "piece of sh1t".

Posted by: Ed_Morris

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 02:43 AM

...unless someone can prove you are a peice of sh1t.

but I don't think anyone can, since no one has actually met you in person.

Posted by: Taison

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 04:51 AM

Being on middle ground here;

Eyrie wasn't insulting anyone.

He's arguing follow a strict set of principals; Logical Fallacies.

I did it in university and trust me, I know what's it's like trying to argue with a master in this subject. It's like having your own words backfire at you.

Eyrie, you should become a lawyer.

Probably would freak out both the judge and jury.

~Donnie

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 04:23 PM

Taison,
http://www.kampaibudokai.org/KampaiBudokai/Saotome.htm

Just because Matt can be a smarta$$ doesn't make him smart. The whole view of how little any of these guys know about Aikido and what it can and can't do would stagger the mind.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 07:53 PM

A much better idea would be to stick to the thread topic... instead of using it as a soapbox for various personal agendas. Start a new thread if you (read "anyone") want to do that.

Posted by: harlan

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 07:56 PM

Are you volunteering? LOL!

You know...I just noted...kogas and grady are only one state apart. I'd pay for the gas mileage for the two of you to meet up and videotape it. A meetup between kogas/aliveness and aikido. A clash of the titans...so to speak?

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 08:17 PM

No need to put me on administrative leave, John... I'll do it myself. Apparently it's okay for Matt, Brian, Fileboy, and a few others to snipe and snort at everyone else, but they need "administrative protection" for their stupidity... and I stand by the statement... just being a smarta$$ doesn't necesarily mean that you're smart... goes for anybody, not just Matt.

The question was regarding Fileboy's trumpeted victories over Aikido players in Chicago... I gave him a place to go find qualified Aikido people to test his theory... complete with address and phone number... but I gusess that's "insulting" to make him do it with people teaching police tactical classes instead of shodan level Aikido students.

Sorry if it offends your sensibilities, but the total sum of what this bunch doesn't know about Aikido would fill volumes. They're worse than teenagers.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 09:11 PM

Let me clarify this a second time: I did not personally whollop a large group of aikido practioners.

Throughout the years I studied taekwondo and (later) judo, my fellow students and I would often visit other schools and train with students from other arts. This was something MAists all over town did. Frankly, it was my relative helplessness before certain judoka that got me interested in judo.

Among the people we trained with were several aikido practioners. I am sorry to say this, but what was most remarkable about them is how quickly and completely they collapsed in the face of any attack. What else can I do but question aikido's effectiveness?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 10:18 PM

Perhaps this is not obvious, but there is a difference between "training", a friendly "test" of skill, and an all-out beat-down. Judging by the embellishments you used, and your word choices, e.g. "they were IMMEDIATELY overwhelmed"... it leads one to wonder if such people you were "training" with assumed it was a friendly "test" of skill, when in fact it was intended to be an all-out beat-down on your part.

What is remarkable is despite having the logic flaw pointed out, no matter how you vaguely attempt to reword it, you are still saying the same thing - Aikido is ineffective, rather than the more accurate statement that the aikidoka you supposedly "trained" with were ineffective.

In fact, I would be more willing to accept that statement as a prima facie argument than what you are blatantly generalizing.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 09:30 AM

So everyone else I trained with over the years, from taekwondo practitioners to judoka to karateka, got the idea, but the aikidoka didn't? How strange!

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 09:45 AM

Grady,

I never claimed to know much about aikido. I have seen some aikidoka and was less than impressed. I can only go by my limited experience in the art.

I started training in goju because I was very impressed by their training and abilities in comparison to the tkd I was doing.

eyrie,

funny that you keep wanting to 'demonstrate' on us. It's convenient that you are in in "australia" and have never met anyone in person from the forums,very peculiar. VTG all the way and I stand by my earlier post, you won't be getting any apology from me.

Posted by: iaibear

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:22 AM

Several years ago a friend on line wrote that she was taking up Aikido after several years in a competitive MA. She was shocked that in the first few classes she was expected to "beat" everyone in the class one after another.

I carefully explained to her that it was a form of practice (ex. Tsuki Kotegaeshi). The two words in the name are important. The first is the style of attack (punch) and the second is the style of defense (twisting the wrist). It was a way to learn to respond to people of all sizes and skills. "Beating" had no part in it. That was a concept she had never encountered before.

But, of course, no one had told her that.

Posted by: harlan

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:32 AM

LOL! Funny...I just went to a seminar attended mostly by karate and kung fu practicioners. One fellow stood out...a very nice...but extremely uncoordinated and hapless fellow. A young aikidoka of only 4 years. No one would work with him...so at one point I walked over and presented myself as a partner. 'Hi...you look like you need someone to beat on. Can I be of service?'

It wasn't just that the concepts were foreign to him...but also the 'way of moving' was different as well.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 03:56 PM

eyrie's post hopefully will be addressed accordingly.

Also, I hope we can keep this debate open without anymore insults or personal attacks. I'll do my part.

Since we are still talking about aikido's effectiveness and eyrie and wrist have both said that good aikido is hard to find then couldn't we assume that the art is lacking in effectiveness overall? No different than any other ma imo.

Posted by: Dereck

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 04:14 PM

That I can agree with.

As an example, TKD has seen its fair share of bashing and to be honest most warrant it however this does not mean the art is ineffective. I've seen first hand what good quality TKD and its effectiveness. With that said I'm sure that Aikido may suffers from the same problems; as I'm sure other martial arts do.

Posted by: Zombie Zero

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 04:14 PM

Dereck,

That comment was not directed at you, or anyone in specific.
It was a reminder for everyone to try and be civil.
This thread is getting out of hand.

As far as eyrie's comment, I have edited it out. I was not privy to certain information when it was made, and did not realize the gravity of it. Now that I do, I'm going to speak to the parties involved, and will make a decision based on those conversations.

Z

Posted by: Dereck

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 04:17 PM

ZZ, I know is was not directed at me and understood, however I wanted to make sure that you knew I was willing to accept the consequences for my actions in order to defend my friend Matt.

Posted by: Dereck

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 06:12 PM

Well then great minds think alike.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 09:23 PM

Quote:

Since we are still talking about aikido's effectiveness and eyrie and wrist have both said that good aikido is hard to find then couldn't we assume that the art is lacking in effectiveness overall? No different than any other ma imo.

Brian, first of all, I'm not the instigator of this animas, and your statement above is the first "reasonable" approach to the question so far in this discussion. I disagree that the art is lacking, but certainly some of the practitioners are... which is exactly what Eyrie has repeatedly said.

Martial arts to me are combat arts... not dojo arts, not "sports", and certainly not what I see practiced in 90 percent of the dojos out there. "Real" Aikido is like "real" jujutsu... it's designed to dispatch the uke to the netherworld. It is, however, practiced with restraint so that you stay healthy enough to practice.

To people who don't practice "with intent", they'll never understand what martial arts really are. If they understand, then they will practice a different way, and it will show in how they perform and in the strength of their technique. It has nothing to do with the inability of the art to do what it was designed to do, it is the fault of the practitioners.

This coming labor day marks 46 years of practice for me. I started out when martial arts were still practiced "as taught in Japan and Okinawa", and it wasn't "all padded up" or "touchy-feely"... we knocked the crap out of each other, and when you got thrown, it was "with force". It was taught as fighting, not as a pastime, or "way to get fit"... we were in shape from doing hours of exercises in order to survive the techniques. "Fighting full contact" took days to heal up, and black belts meant something about your actual technical knowledge of what you were doing. It didn't mean you had learned the 57 things on their list...

I spent years "going where the information was"... searching out master level instructors so I got the best information out there... and you're right that "not everybody has the same quality of instruction" in their arts... but that still doesn't make the art remiss... only the practitioners.

A lot of Aikido was designed to allow a swordsman to escape from the center of a circle of swordsmen, and to defend himself against the weapons both with the sword and empty handed. It wasn't designed to "score points" or "beat" someone, it was designed to kill or injure them... break their necks, their arms, throw them into another swordsman... all kinds of options that are seldom practiced in general today. O'Sensei took a lot of that out of the "dojo training" in an effort to spread the art and to adapt it to his personal religious philosophy... but the power of Aikido is in the practitioner if it is to be manifested at all. His discoveries of technique and ki projection were astounding, and few if any have reached the level that he mastered himself... just as few Goju practitioners have mastered Higonna Sensei's level of understanding. Does that make Goju a weak art?.. of course not... the proof is in the players. If all they do is "looks like" (insert art here) then it will be weak. If it's practiced at the level of the master instructors, it will remain strong.

Matt made plenty of smarta$$ comments about "Aikido people using swords", etc. which only shows his ignorance of the art. Yes, we do use swords... it's based on swordfighting... we use bokken's in dojo practice, just like we use wooden tantos for knife techniques. When the skill level increases to a certain point, we change to live blades. We also use jo as a training tool, and to help us in understanding the actual application of energy through the body mechanics of Aikido technique.

Again, this argument reminds me of the argument between teenage boys about whether a match between Mighty Mouse or Superman would be won by Superman "because he's a real guy". (From the movie "Stand by me"). Karate, Judo, Kempo, BJJ, and all the other arts are all designed differently to do different things. Karate is a hitting art... Judo is a throwing art and grappling art... Kempo is a combination art of those things... Aikido is an "energy art", and all those things are in it... whether or not they're practiced by the Aikidoka that have supposedly "collapsed" when tested.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 09:56 PM

eyrie,

Meh, I won't bother with you. You know well what you did with malicious intent. No need to backtrack now. You've shown your true colors, once again.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:14 PM

Quote:

Brian, first of all, I'm not the instigator of this animas, and your statement above is the first "reasonable" approach to the question so far in this discussion. I disagree that the art is lacking, but certainly some of the practitioners are... which is exactly what Eyrie has repeatedly said.

No he has not,neither have you.

Quote:

Martial arts to me are combat arts... not dojo arts, not "sports", and certainly not what I see practiced in 90 percent of the dojos out there. "Real" Aikido is like "real" jujutsu... it's designed to dispatch the uke to the netherworld. It is, however, practiced with restraint so that you stay healthy enough to practice

We see ma in the same light then. So, is it "some" or is it 90%?

Ofcourse everyone practices with safety in mind, I hope. We'd all be in a leg brace like me if we didn't,lol.

Quote:

To people who don't practice "with intent", they'll never understand what martial arts really are. If they understand, then they will practice a different way, and it will show in how they perform and in the strength of their technique. It has nothing to do with the inability of the art to do what it was designed to do, it is the fault of the practitioners.

I understand that completely,but if 90% of the practitioners are at fault then how is the art effective anymore? How is it good if you are the only one good at it? (exaggeration)

Quote:

This coming labor day marks 46 years of practice for me. I started out when martial arts were still practiced "as taught in Japan and Okinawa", and it wasn't "all padded up" or "touchy-feely"... we knocked the crap out of each other, and when you got thrown, it was "with force". It was taught as fighting, not as a pastime, or "way to get fit"... we were in shape from doing hours of exercises in order to survive the techniques. "Fighting full contact" took days to heal up, and black belts meant something about your actual technical knowledge of what you were doing. It didn't mean you had learned the 57 things on their list...

Do you ever tire of telling everyone how old you are, how much experience you have and all the bravado posturing? Is it an old person thing? The whole, "when I was your age we didn't wear pads". LOL! You act like you are the only person who has ever trained hard. I had the crap knocked out of me on a regular basis, but I don't need to say "I've been at this for 17yrs!! Yeah, and I'm HARD FRIGGIN' CORE HOMESKILLET, BELIEVE THAT!!!"

Quote:

I spent years "going where the information was"... searching out master level instructors so I got the best information out there... and you're right that "not everybody has the same quality of instruction" in their arts... but that still doesn't make the art remiss... only the practitioners

Yep, apparently 90% of them.

Quote:

A lot of Aikido was designed to allow a swordsman to escape from the center of a circle of swordsmen, and to defend himself against the weapons both with the sword and empty handed. It wasn't designed to "score points" or "beat" someone, it was designed to kill or injure them... break their necks, their arms, throw them into another swordsman... all kinds of options that are seldom practiced in general today. O'Sensei took a lot of that out of the "dojo training" in an effort to spread the art and to adapt it to his personal religious philosophy... but the power of Aikido is in the practitioner if it is to be manifested at all. His discoveries of technique and ki projection were astounding, and few if any have reached the level that he mastered himself...

You lost me on the ki thing. Swords again?? Ok, I'll take your word for it. I hereby proclaim that aikido is effective against swords as long as you have 46yrs of experience and a good ki projection, got it!!

Quote:

just as few Goju practitioners have mastered Higonna Sensei's level of understanding. Does that make Goju a weak art?..

No, only about 30% ineffective imo.

Quote:

Again, this argument reminds me of the argument between teenage boys about whether a match between Mighty Mouse or Superman would be won by Superman "because he's a real guy". (From the movie "Stand by me").

Plus Superman is much bigger!! Mightymouse is pretty fast though, it's a tossup.

Quote:

Karate, Judo, Kempo, BJJ, and all the other arts are all designed differently to do different things. Karate is a hitting art... Judo is a throwing art and grappling art... Kempo is a combination art of those things... Aikido is an "energy art", and all those things are in it... whether or not they're practiced by the Aikidoka that have supposedly "collapsed" when tested.

Does only 10% of aikidoka believe aikido is an energy art?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:17 PM

LMAOMTOAOA @ your desperate attempt to stick up for one of your homeskillets...

If I ever do get to the US of A, AR won't be on my list of "to visit" places... it appears there's nothing worth seeing over there....

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:19 PM

Quote:

LMAOMTOAOA @ your desperate attempt to stick up for one of your homeskillets...

If I ever do get to the US of A, AR won't be on my list of "to visit" places... it appears there's nothing worth seeing over there....

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:44 PM

Quote:

No he has not,neither have you.

We have... you didn't get it.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 10:49 PM

Quote:

I disagree that the art is lacking, but certainly some of the practitioners are... which is exactly what Eyrie has repeatedly said.

You have said some, then Grady says 90%, then he says some...?

Remember, you think I'm uneducated and slow. Ya'll have ta talky slow far mes ta understands ya caus im so dum!!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 11:03 PM

Um... no... 90% is YOUR spin on it. Point out where Grady says 90% of anything... and in its entire context if you please.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 11:20 PM

Quote:

Martial arts to me are combat arts... not dojo arts, not "sports", and certainly not what I see practiced in 90 percent of the dojos out there. "Real" Aikido is like "real" jujutsu... it's designed to dispatch the uke to the netherworld. It is, however, practiced with restraint so that you stay healthy enough to practice.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 11:34 PM

Quote:

Martial arts to me are combat arts... not dojo arts, not "sports", and certainly not what I see practiced in 90 percent of the dojos out there.

I didn't say "90% of the Aikido dojos"... 90% of dojos (in general). Aikido dojos are a small part of that. If Aikido is remiss as a "contest art", it's by design.

Apparently the "I'll do my part" was B-S, as usual. Clearly none of you guys can have a civil conversation without the personal sniping and insults.

Quote:

Also, I hope we can keep this debate open without anymore insults or personal attacks. I'll do my part.

Yeah, right...

Add a black belt in lying to your resume' of "martial skills"... or is it just a short memory span?

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 11:47 PM

Quote:

I didn't say "90% of the Aikido dojos"... 90% of dojos (in general). Aikido dojos are a small part of that. If Aikido is remiss as a "contest art", it's by design.

That was about as clear as mud. You didn't leave out aikido dojo's before.

BTW, don't you hate it when I speak generally? Yet you do it and it's ok? WTH??

Quote:

Apparently the "I'll do my part" was B-S, as usual. Clearly none of you guys can have a civil conversation without the personal sniping and insults.

Where were my personal insults at smiley?

Seriously? What did I say that wasn't true? Maybe it was too true for you,but true none the less,but it wasn't personal.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 12:26 AM

Quote:

Do you ever tire of telling everyone how old you are, how much experience you have and all the bravado posturing? Is it an old person thing? The whole, "when I was your age we didn't wear pads". LOL! You act like you are the only person who has ever trained hard. I had the crap knocked out of me on a regular basis, but I don't need to say "I've been at this for 17yrs!! Yeah, and I'm HARD FRIGGIN' CORE HOMESKILLET, BELIEVE THAT!!! "

Really? I'm scared to death...

Quote:

Maybe it was too true for you,but true none the less,but it wasn't personal.

That's it... accuse me of exactly what you're doing... you're big, bad, HOMESKILLIT... you sound more like curly fries... don't forget to tell everybody how old you are...

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 12:48 AM

Grady,

You said

Quote:

Apparently the "I'll do my part" was B-S, as usual. Clearly none of you guys can have a civil conversation without the personal sniping and insults.

Still, where were the insults? You don't like what I say and you don't agree with me,so ou tske things personal, that's the problem here.

Quote:

Really? I'm scared to death...

It wasn't meant to scare you or anyone else, WTH???. It just proves that all the posturing on the internet is foolish. That was my point. There is no need to list your years of training and how tough you are in every other post you make.

Quote:

That's it... accuse me of exactly what you're doing... you're big, bad, HOMESKILLIT... you sound more like curly fries... don't forget to tell everybody how old you are

You lost me again, I have no idea what curly fries sound like.
I'm not doing the posturing here, you do it on a regular basis. Look back at any thred where you have more than five posts and I'll bet you state how long ou have trained and how rigorous your training has been. You also make claims of beating high ranking matial artists, people stopping their training because you are hitting the heavy bag wih so much force, etc..it's just silly isn't it?

Are you going to return to the thread now?

What % of aikido dojo's d you believe to be showing real aikido that is combat effective since you have ruled out what you said earlier.

Were you talking about every other art? Which arts were you referring to?

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 03:01 AM

Quote:

Are you going to return to the thread now?

What's the point? Almost every post after fileboy's interjection is not on topic anyway. Now it seems it's degenerated to downright nitpicking, because *some* people can't understand the parameters of the argument, or refute the alternative argument.

Personally, I think this thread should be locked or deleted. Those who say that aikido is ineffective, can feel free to do so. After all, they seem to have firmly made up their mind, and simply will not accept any argument EVEN if it generally agrees with their opinion.

Either they are, or pretending to be, intellectually incapable, or just plain unreasonable, or they're just trolling for a reaction.... and given the past behaviour of some members here... I'm not in the least bit surprised at any or all of the above possibilities.

Posted by: wristtwister

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 06:34 AM

Quote:

Either they are, or pretending to be, intellectually incapable, or just plain unreasonable, or they're just trolling for a reaction....

I was actually giving Brian an opportunity to discuss the issue, and, as usual, it degenerated into sniping and misrepresentation, so I have to agree. No one's changing their minds... least of all anyone with actual Aikido experience to any depth... so as you say, the naysayers should just feel free to think Aikido ineffective. It would be great to see their faces when they find out otherwise.

I just took off a couple of months from the boards for exactly the reasons shown in this thread. It has nothing to do with reasonable argument or debate, just personal sniping and a few jerkoffs who simply don't like me. In less than two weeks, I've been called objectionable names, and simply railed against by arguing things not even involved in the discussion... so I think I'll go back into retirement here. There are dozens of other places where I don't get this crap, and people actually discuss the topics.

non illigitum carborundum

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 07:01 AM

neca eos omnes, deus suos agnoscet

Posted by: JasonM

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 08:15 AM

ok, so you guys are making me work and having to look up the darn latin.

neca eos omnes, deus suos agnoscet
"Kill'em all, and let God sort'em out"

non illigitum carborundum
"don't let the [censored] grind you down".

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 09:20 AM

Bye again Grady. Take your toys and go home. Won't miss ya bud!

Still don't see where I or anyone else said all aikido was ineffective.

We can only base our opinions on our own experiences,but that's not good enough for you guys. You want us to believe in aikido as much as you do without any basis for believing it. I would like to think that some aikido is effective. I would like to believe Steven Segal was as good as his movies too,but Gene Lebell and some stuntman proved that wrong didn't they,lol.

I'm sure there are good aikidoka out there with good training methods, I just haven't witnessed any and you guys are pi$$ed at me for it. Gotta love it!!

Posted by: JasonM

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 09:49 AM

Lebell took out Segal? Odd I never heard of this. Also, never cared for Segal anyway.. If there is a vid would love to see it.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 09:59 AM

I'll try and find the information.

Basically Lebell and Segal were yapping at eachother, Lebell ended up choking him out. Then he did it again after Segal got up and mouthed some more. Duh>>>...

Did you know that Gene Lebell also ran around with Bruce Lee on his shoulders after Bruce ran his mouth on the set of "Green Hornet"? LOL!!

Posted by: JasonM

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 10:49 AM

wow, didn't know that. I would love to see or read about Lebell choking out Segal. Can't stand the guy anyway....

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 10:35 PM

Quote:

Still don't see where I or anyone else said all aikido was ineffective.

I have already pointed out fileboy's post #16003988 in this thread. How about yur post #16009339 in the Aikido vs MMA thread? Implying or insinuating is as good as saying it, as I quite easily demonstrated with the [CENSORED!!!!] comment, despite the fact that it was without malice or ill-intent, and simply to illustrate the implications of making an insinuation.

Quote:

We can only base our opinions on our own experiences,but that's not good enough for you guys.

Certainly, no one is begrudging your opinion, or that it's not good enough. But what makes your opinion more valid than mine or Grady's? Are our experiences not good enough for you either? Or because our respective experiences do not agree with yours?

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 10:49 PM

Quote:

I have already pointed out fileboy's post #16003988 in this thread. How about yur post #16009339 in the Aikido vs MMA thread? Implying or insinuating is as good as saying it, as I quite easily demonstrated with the [CENSORED!!!!] comment, despite the fact that it was without malice or ill-intent, and simply to illustrate the implications of making an insinuation.

If implications or insinuations are just as good then you have alot of people to apologize too on here double standard dude.

Quote:

Certainly, no one is begrudging your opinion, or that it's not good enough. But what makes your opinion more valid than mine or Grady's?

My opinion will always be more valid than yours or Grady's, that's just the way it is. As if you never "begrudged" my opinion. Have you read your posts before submitting them dd?

Quote:

Are our experiences not good enough for you either? Or because our respective experiences do not agree with yours?

So, what percent of an art has to be effective for an art as a whole to be effectve? 90? 50?

Nope, only 10 for you guys and it's golden!! Ready to take on mma and the marine corps!!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 11:06 PM

Quote:

My opinion will always be more valid than yours or Grady's, that's just the way it is.

I see... well I see no point in arguing with you then... coz ur always right... and as I suspected just being deliberately argumentative.

Quote:

So, what percent of an art has to be effective for an art as a whole to be effectve? 90? 50?

Just one person (not 1%) would be enough to question the entire premise of your theory. But since you're always right, the point is moot.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 11:13 PM

Oh come on, that was purposefully sarcastic! It was just a rediculous answer to a silly question EYRIE.

Quote:

Just one person (not 1%) would be enough to question the entire premise of your theory. But since you're always right, the point is moot.

The point has been moot for days. I can't argue with a wall. I need fenikushopoopoo or whatever to headbutt the wall 47 times and crack it. He did aikido for about 10minutes so I'm sure he'll be awesome!!!

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 11:39 PM

Opinionated AND sarcastic to the point of ridiculousness... and yet YOU continue to persist in making onanistic remarks.

I was going to make some snide comment about how this is probably a reflection of your personal life and relationships... but what's the point? You won't get it either. All you're concerned with is oneupmanship... so feel free to WIN this argument ANYTIME.

Posted by: BrianS

Re: College aikido - 08/19/08 11:49 PM

Brian takes GOLD!!

Posted by: tomh777

Re: College aikido - 08/20/08 12:37 AM

Gentlemen,
As a relatively novice part time martial artist I enjoy the discussions on this board and feel that I gain wisdom and insight from many of you with countless more hours of training and devotion to martials than I have. However, this recent flaming, grandstanding, insulting one another and having your arguments in front of everybody is getting to me. Forgive me for sounding like a traditionalist but doesn't treating one another with honor and respect usually come with the territory of practicing martial arts as well?

Just a thought

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/20/08 01:03 AM

Honor are respect are plenty important, but they should never be used to justify compromising even more important values: honesty and truth.

Too often, "respect" in the martial arts takes the form of lying--i.e. "all arts are equally good" or "it's the artist, not the art." Every other area of human activity (with the possible exception of religion) is considered fair game for critical analysis. Disagreements--even contentious ones, are understood as part of the search for truth. However, in the martial arts, it seems more important to keep the peice than seek the truth.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/20/08 02:17 AM

Wow... just wow...

Never mind "respect" or "honesty" - it's the unequivocal lack of probity or moral rectitude demonstrated by insinuating that if someone's perception of the "truth" is different from yours, they're lying???

And what makes YOUR VERSION of the truth THE TRUTH?? Ironic that you should mention "critical analysis" when you don't subject your own arguments to the same.

Posted by: fileboy2002

Re: College aikido - 08/20/08 02:53 AM

Christ, eyrie, don't you ever sleep?

Look, using $20 words like "probity" and "rectitude" does not make you honest. The fact remains that I, as well as other posters, have offered you evidence to support our views about aikido on this and countless other threads many, many times. Your reaction is always the same: rejection. You reject any and all evidence as insufficient, unscientific, unrepresentative, biased, dishonest, uninformed etc, etc.

You remind me of Michael Behe, an "intelligent-design" proponent. In a recent court case, Behe persisted in saying the theory of evolution could not account for the bacterial flagellal motor, despite confronted with dozens of peer-reviewed studies that did just that! His reason: he found the 50+ studies cited "insufficient."

Eyrie, this is why I describe your faith in aikido as religious. No amouny of evidence of any kind, from any source, would ever shake your faith.

Posted by: eyrie

Re: College aikido - 08/20/08 03:06 AM

And your equal rejection of the counter-arguments as invalid, AND insinuating that anyone who doesn't agree with YOUR point of view is a LIAR, makes you a better, more honest, person???

Where did I suggest your ANECDOCTAL evidence was dishonest??? Please...

anecdotal evidence is NOT scientific evidence, show me where I asked for "scientific evidence"... I only asked you to substantiate your "claim".

In fact, which part of this did you not comprehend? I've highlighted the pertinent bits.

Quote:

What is remarkable is despite having the logic flaw pointed out, no matter how you vaguely attempt to reword it, you are still saying the same thing - Aikido is ineffective, rather than the more accurate statement that the aikidoka you supposedly "trained" with were ineffective.

In fact, I would be more willing to accept that statement as a prima facie argument than what you are blatantly generalizing.

Now who's being dishonest? You can't even accept the fact I have conceded part of the argument you put forth, and instead persist in twisting my words.

For the record, I'm not rejecting "any or all evidence"... don't put words in my mouth. I'm simply asking you to substantiate your argument LOGICALLY - which is not an unreasonable request given this medium.

Obviously YOU don't understand THAT point either.

College aikido

College aikido - 06/12/08 11:46 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/13/08 12:30 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/13/08 06:12 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/13/08 06:12 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/13/08 11:16 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/14/08 05:30 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/14/08 06:21 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/14/08 11:10 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/14/08 03:52 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/14/08 08:56 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 01:05 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 04:55 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 09:12 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 09:30 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 09:30 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 09:45 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 07:44 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 08:00 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 08:39 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 10:07 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 10:37 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/15/08 11:40 PM

Re: College aikido - 06/16/08 04:07 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/16/08 05:03 AM

Re: College aikido - 06/26/08 04:50 PM

Re: College aikido - 07/01/08 02:24 PM

Re: College aikido - 07/13/08 03:28 PM

Re: College aikido - 07/13/08 09:02 PM

Re: College aikido - 07/21/08 12:12 PM

Re: College aikido - 07/27/08 09:04 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 03:41 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 04:58 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 11:17 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/10/08 09:54 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/11/08 02:05 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/11/08 06:55 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/13/08 01:48 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/13/08 07:25 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 02:59 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 06:14 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 08:04 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 08:40 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/14/08 10:06 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 04:01 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 05:05 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 07:57 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 09:06 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 11:27 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 11:46 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/15/08 11:53 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 12:02 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 12:43 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 01:00 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 01:17 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 02:23 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 03:34 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 09:37 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 06:37 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 07:54 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 08:34 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 09:14 PM

eyrie has crossed the line - 08/16/08 09:52 PM

Re: eyrie has crossed the line - 08/16/08 10:31 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 10:42 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:10 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:20 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/16/08 11:20 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 12:22 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 02:43 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 04:51 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 05:09 AM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 04:23 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 06:59 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 07:53 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 07:56 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 08:17 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 09:11 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/17/08 10:18 PM

Re: College aikido - 08/18/08 09:30 AM