View Full Version : Aikido so misunderstood
It seems to me that Aikido is perhaps one of the most misunderstood jujutsu styles. Perhaps it's because it's packaged with all that ceremonial overhead and the way the practice of aikido is demonstrated: the running attack, the beautiful, almost touchless motions and the beautiful falls the uke takes. The modern stylists look at it, scoff or perhaps chuckle and decide that this would never work in a real life self defense situation.
They may be right. What they see may not work in every day situation. However, it seems to me that they're missing the point. Aikido seems to demonstrate the idealized attack scenario so that the concepts and the principles of timing, circular arm movements, wrist twists and foot work can be taught and understood. This is where there is tremendous value in Aikido.
Aikido-ka are the timing and footwork specialists. Those modern practitioners who so readily dismiss aikido would do well to train in Aikido to fine tune their joint locking, timing skills and foot work. I wouldn't view any style as the end all in self defense. Every style emphasizes something. Train with the specialists to enhance your own self defense skills. Take the principles and apply them in your own way. Train with Aikido-ka to perfect your timing, train with judo guys to perfect your throws, train with BJJ guys to perfect your ground fighting skills. Then, take what you've learned and make it your own. Apply it in ways that you deem effective.
I am not an aikido practitioner, so I don't have anything to promote. As I've matured in my understanding of the arts, I began to appreciate what Aikido has to offer. Don't miss the forest for the trees. My 2 cents.
I have seen a lot of aikido training in which the perfection of timing was the attacker learning how he could help the defender do it all perfectly. Sure they blended pefectly, they have done it that way for years.
But against an unwilling non-compliant opponent it can be much much harder.
Aikitech
11-01-2006, 10:17
I have seen a lot of aikido training in which the perfection of timing was the attacker learning how he could help the defender do it all perfectly. Sure they blended pefectly, they have done it that way for years.Those Uke who overly compensate for the Tori's inability to apply technique by diving and attacking without any martial intent are doing their partner a disservice imho. However there are many schools who train to and are pretty versed at maintaining effective coordination, timing and tsukuri even if the attacker attempts to use his free will and be non-compliant.
Regarding timing and blending for the person whose role is the attacker (Uke); this is actually very important since Aikido kaeshiwaza is based on being relaxed and in coordination with the movements of one's partner right up to the point just before his waza becomes effective (i.e. the last point before the technique places you totally off balance and out of control).
As a result, although diving and false "blending" to make poor waza look good is a poor method of practice, the relaxation and connection developed during the role of Uke is critical in understanding the movement of one's partner and the waza, revealing to the Uke the points where counter techniques can be applied without experiencing resistance if any. By making the counter waza a part of the other person's motion he feels nothing to resist against. This can only be achieved by relaxation, connection and timing as Uke or attacker. It should be practiced however without Uke needing to overcompensate for poor waza on the part of Tori.
But against an unwilling non-compliant opponent it can be much much harder.Once again it comes down to how one trains.
A person versed at sensitivity. timing and placement does not encounter resistance/non-compliance because the aggressor's balance is broken and the attack is nullified at or before the moment of contact. The attacker gets no opportunity to resist since his mind becomes preoccupied with restoring his own balance. If percussive atemi is applied then we can add pain to the list of things the mind will become distracted with, even for an instant, while waza is completed.
Just my 5 cents.
:bow:
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 10:18
It seems to me that Aikido is perhaps one of the most misunderstood jujutsu styles.
Sorry for being a stickler here, but aikido is not a style of jujutsu. It is a "do", not a "jutsu".
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 10:25
Aikido-ka are the timing and footwork specialists. Those modern practitioners who so readily dismiss aikido would do well to train in Aikido to fine tune their joint locking, timing skills and foot work. I wouldn't view any style as the end all in self defense. Every style emphasizes something. Train with the specialists to enhance your own self defense skills. Take the principles and apply them in your own way. Train with Aikido-ka to perfect your timing, train with judo guys to perfect your throws, train with BJJ guys to perfect your ground fighting skills. Then, take what you've learned and make it your own. Apply it in ways that you deem effective.
Timing is timing.. lots of arts teach you timing; boxing, fencing, bjj, judo, kendo etc. Much of the aikido timing/distance theory comes from sword and spear. Most arts that are effective rely on good footwork and timing. I don't see aikido as having a monopoly on this.
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 10:41
Once again it comes down to how one trains.
A person versed at sensitivity. timing and placement does not encounter resistance/non-compliance because the aggressor's balance is broken and the attack is nullified at or before the moment of contact. The attacker gets no opportunity to resist since his mind becomes preoccupied with restoring his own balance. If percussive atemi is applied then we can add pain to the list of things the mind will become distracted with, even for an instant, while waza is completed.
Just my 5 cents.
:bow:
I hear this argument alot. The problem is, as a fighting strategy, this hinges on the ASSUMPTION that you are going to be able to take your attackers center. A skilled karateka, judoka, etc. is not going to strike or grab you in a way that compromises their center of gravity. This also does not address intentional fakes or jabs used to set up techniques. The difference in training is, in judo randori and karate sparring, players are used to using multiple attacks to set up techniques, it can be a part of fighting strategy. From my own experience with aikidokas, if the initial attempt at taking the attackers center fails and the fight continues, they are often at a loss, turning the fight into a striking/grappling match.
Aikido's "fighting strategy" is nonexistent. Aikido's "fighting strategy" is to not fight.
It does teach very good principles of combat, however.
Jeff Cook
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 11:35
Aikido's "fighting strategy" is nonexistent. Aikido's "fighting strategy" is to not fight.
It does teach very good principles of combat, however.
Jeff Cook
True to a point. What is a fighting art but a collection of techniques and a strategy that teaches you to apply them? Any pre determined set of motions used to deal with physical aggression aimed at your person could be called a strategy. Even if your aim is to run away, that could be a pacifist strategy :p If you engage your aggressor, you are in a conflict. Even if you are strictly defensive. You do not have to initiate attack to participate. Although with regards to not fighting, there are many motions I have seen in Yoshinkan aikido for example, where the attacker is struck pre-emptively under the chin with the palm, or tripped while they are entering.
I agree with aikido in principle. I simply think that always training with non-resisting partners creates bad habits. Taking the center of a non-compliant can be significantly more difficult, and should be addressed in training if you intend to use your art for self-defense. jmo...:bow:
Aikitech
11-01-2006, 12:07
Jeff is correct. If one's mindset from an Aikido perspective is to fight (read - struggle) then you've already abandoned your strategic paradigm for Aiki waza and will probably be unsuccessful in your efforts to resolve the conflict.
I hear this argument alot. The problem is, as a fighting strategy, this hinges on the ASSUMPTION that you are going to be able to take your attackers center.If this is your only experience of Aikido tactics then I can see where you may have a problem understanding things. In ours and very much of Aikido training there is no assumption of anything. Balance is taken through deep study of the elements of combat and application of Aiki principles in view of those elements. "Centre" as you put it, is taken by one who truly understands the application of elements like metsuke, tai sabaki, kuzushi, atemi, tsukuri, ma ai control and timing. Your assumption above is not about the taking of one's balance but of one who gives/throws it away easily. This is not what I was referring to in the least and though it may be a part of training in some Aikido, this sort of training does not characterize a significant portion of Aikido practice imo.
A skilled karateka, judoka, etc. is not going to strike or grab you in a way that compromises their center of gravity. This also does not address intentional fakes or jabs used to set up techniques. The difference in training is, in judo randori and karate sparring, players are used to using multiple attacks to set up techniques, it can be a part of fighting strategy. From my own experience with aikidokas, if the initial attempt at taking the attackers center fails and the fight continues, they are often at a loss, turning the fight into a striking/grappling match.If this is from your experience I can understand, but please note this is not the case in very many places. Aikido that depends upon the goodwill of an attacker to be effective is not Aikido imo. Jab, fakes and resistance training are commonplace in certain schools of Aikido also, both from the roles of attack and defence.
From my experience with Karateka and Judoka when you set them up well and lead their minds into going full force with their attacks (not off-balance attacks btw) the next thing they know is that they are looking at the dojo ceiling or pinned face down on the floor. However, having trained a little bit in Karate and done quite a bit of Judo I'd not assume that the weakness of my opponents represented a weakness in their arts per se, even though my experience says otherwise. This is why it is good to discuss and to research these things on one's own.
Gambatte.:bow:
David, I am not disagreeing with you.
Ueshiba said that if you have to resort to physical technique, you have failed to apply the highest principles of aiki-budo. If you do fail, then it is incumbent upon the aikidoka to teach the attacker the error of his ways. I don't think aikido has a strategy to do that, generally speaking. I think aikido has many good principles for dealing with aggression, as taught through technique. By learning these principles, you *may* learn how to create and adjust your own personal strategy. But I don't believe aikido really sets out to teach any "fighting strategy" to its adherents.
At least, that was my experience in two aikido dojo that I attended as a student.
Jeff Cook
aikiwolfie
11-01-2006, 13:02
Aikido's "fighting strategy" is nonexistent. Aikido's "fighting strategy" is to not fight.
It does teach very good principles of combat, however.I think Jeff hit the nail on the head here. In my experience of Aikido I have always been told not to get bogged down in a wrestling match. It's not about going toe to toe with someone. It's about awareness, balance, control and power.
David, I am not disagreeing with you.
Ueshiba said that if you have to resort to physical technique, you have failed to apply the highest principles of aiki-budo. If you do fail, then it is incumbent upon the aikidoka to teach the attacker the error of his ways. I don't think aikido has a strategy to do that, generally speaking. I think aikido has many good principles for dealing with aggression, as taught through technique. By learning these principles, you *may* learn how to create and adjust your own personal strategy. But I don't believe aikido really sets out to teach any "fighting strategy" to its adherents.
At least, that was my experience in two aikido dojo that I attended as a student.
Jeff Cook
Bingo! Jeff's got it right on the button! Don't think of Aikido as teaching you how to fight, think of it as teaching you how to move. Aikido is an exaggeration of movements that underscores a set of principles that can be used in self defense. This is not to say that these movements can't be modified, shortened, etc. However, if you look at what they do, it's a perfect blend of timing, footwork, balance and circular arm movements all in one.
Think principles, not techniques.
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 13:27
Good points all of you.:bow: I think we are arguing opposite sides of the same coin.
Many of the principles we are discussing can be applied to taijiquan as well. Still, push hands training manages to be both cooperative and non-compliant simultaneously. As does rou shou training in baguazhang, sticky hands in wing chun, and the slow motion training in systema. The training operates within a set of guidelines, but the attacks are not telegraphed and partners are expected to be non compliant. How, as aikidoka, do you manage being a good uke and still keep a "live" feel to your training? Or am I missing the point altogether :o (wouldn't be the first or the last time:rolleyes: )
Ron Tisdale
11-01-2006, 13:50
Sorry for being a stickler here, but aikido is not a style of jujutsu. It is a "do", not a "jutsu".
The above is a false distinction, which most researchers has corrected since Draeger first created it. Aikido is most definately a style of jujutsu, and a grappling art (though at a wider ma ai than judo and some other styles of jujutsu).
As for non-cooperative practice, I have practiced with some Roppokai members...how is this conundrum solved in your Daito ryu practice?
Best,
Ron
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 15:09
The above is a false distinction, which most researchers has corrected since Draeger first created it. Aikido is most definately a style of jujutsu, and a grappling art (though at a wider ma ai than judo and some other styles of jujutsu).
As for non-cooperative practice, I have practiced with some Roppokai members...how is this conundrum solved in your Daito ryu practice?
Best,
Ron
Forgive my ignorance, but do the budo arts not usually place specific emphasis on moral/personal/developmental aspects or components that were absent in the original battlefield arts of japan? Kyudo for example being primarily about meditation rather than archery?That is where I was under the impression they differed.
As for the Roppokai, training is done in a cooperative manner from what I have experienced thus far. While I feel that I grasp at least part of what is going on conceptually, I have yet to get the the point where I can apply much of the basic roppokai "aiki" technique even on fully compliant partners in a learning environment. Applying it on a resisting opponent would not do me much good at my skill level. But hey, if it were easy it wouldn't be so interesting ;) (fortunately, I have 19 years experience in other martial arts to save my butt :D ) Out of curiosity, which branch of the Roppokai were the guys you trained with from? you can pm me if you like.
Cheers!
:toast:
Ron Tisdale
11-01-2006, 15:21
Forgive my ignorance, but do the budo arts not usually place specific emphasis on moral/personal/developmental aspects or components that were absent in the original battlefield arts of japan?
No, this is part of the false distinction. This whole thing got blown out of context based on a distinction that Draeger created. There are do arts that concentrate on the skills above the "way", and jutsu arts that have just as much do in them as anything else. As I said...false distinction.
The gentleman I am referring to no longer trains with the Roppokai...so I'll leave it at that.
Best,
Ron
D. Jordan
11-01-2006, 15:29
No, this is part of the false distinction. This whole thing got blown out of context based on a distinction that Draeger created. There are do arts that concentrate on the skills above the "way", and jutsu arts that have just as much do in them as anything else. As I said...false distinction.
The gentleman I am referring to no longer trains with the Roppokai...so I'll leave it at that.
Best,
Ron
Interesting. Thanks for the information.
No, this is part of the false distinction. This whole thing got blown out of context based on a distinction that Draeger created. Hey, Ron!
Sorry to hear about your neck. Get better soon.
A fascinating article relating a deeper history of the DO/JUTSU controversy is Bodiford's "Spirituality and Religion: Japan" in An Encyclopedia of Martial Arts, edited by Green. I've written about this here: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4217 . I suggest reading the Bodiford original, it's a very exciting, insightful read which ought to be sine qua non for anyone wanting to touch upon martial arts "philosophy" in any form. But briefly,
Samurai had become unwelcome in Meiji (1868-1911). They were conservative dinosaurs in a time of cataclysmic change. Nitobe Inazo, a Quaker, wrote Bushido, in English, to reconcile Jpn values with Christianity. After the Jpn womped the Russians, however, an event inspiring peoples throughout the colonial world where whites had theretofore been regarded as undefeatable, values of the samurai were reconsidered. "Bushido" (Nitobe had thought he invented the term which had alternately been referred to as "budo", "samuraido", etc.) was appropriated by the politicos and "DO" took on the meaning of emperor worship (Here, Bodiford explicitly corrects Draeger who denies this history).
A police superintendent wrote that "bujutsu" ought to be written "budo" and this soon occured. In the 30's, the term "dojo" became widespread; borrowed from Buddhism, it lent a patina of spirituality to the rough business of preparing an army of suicidal maniacs. Constabularies regularly policed dojo to enforce the requirement that they have KAMIDANA at the front of their practice area, and bowed to it before and after class.
Offers new perspective to the standard "harmony of the universe, self-perfection thing", doesn't it? Kano, founder of judo, must have rolled over in his grave and it's said that Ueshiba Morihei retired to the countryside to avoid being part of the prostitution of his art thus.
Evidently, after the war, many martial artists acquiesed to the association of their arts with Zen through what had become "The Ways", not because it was actually so, but in order to rehabilitate their practice with the appearance of social utility. YMMV.
IMHO, I think the whole idea of "Aikido" has been misinterpreted. Aikido as a martial art does take into account the movements of the opponent. If someone attacks you for instance, Aikido teaches how to move accordingly and realistically.
That being said though many of the basic controls (talking Yoshinkan here) such, Ikkajo, Sankajo, Nikajo, etc, can be applied to an opponent who is static. We practice Ikkajo to a point where we can apply it to someone punching, or attacking with a weapon. The guys I train with are all martial artists in their own right (Karate, Kung Fu, Hapkido, etc) so when they throw a punch its at full speed. Yes, I've been hit a few times :o but I'm getting better! ;)
The point I'm trying to make is, Aikido is a martial art with techniques that ARE effective. Like any art it just depends on how you train. If anybody read last months "Black Belt" magazine, you might have seen on article on Tang So Doo, and how they practice "One step Sparring". Thats exactly how we train our techniques, its one step sparring. Even a technique as basic as Shiohnage is practiced, Uke grabs Tori, Tori back hands Uke in face, and then goes on with the technique. In the Tang So Doo article, the TSD master was talking about the benefits of this kind of sparring. Getting a total beginner into the dojo and practicing joint manupulative techniques at full speed is an invitation to send your whole class to the emergency room. Again, going back to the basic controls in Aikido, all of them work against the joints, if you try to use these techniques against a fully resisting opponent, one of two things will happen.
1) If Tori is inexperienced it won't work. His technique will not be sharp enough.
2) If Tori is inexperience it will work in the wrong way. He'll hurt Uke badly which is not constructive for anybody.
ALL that being said though, O'sensei did say that In a real fight, 70 percent is Atemi and only 30 percent is technique. I believe this to be true. Aikido (the real Aikido) will teach strikes as part of the curriculum, purely because in a real fight your going to have to throw a few punches, low kicks, knees, etc and your technique has to be ruthless. For instance all the first controls in Yoshinkan are not taught on their own, but as a basic starter control. We are taught that the control will only work for a while. If you're a bouncer or a security guard that's ok. But if your in a fight for your life, the technique moves onto another pinning or breaking technique. ie. we are taught combinations. All the while though strikes are incorporated.
In conclusion, have to say that yes, Aikido does teach "dynamic movement" in combat, but when you close in with a real Aikidoka, he will have some nasty tricks up his sleeve.
Aikido, like any other martial arts teaches you a set of principles. Principles of movement, balance, etc. As any other martial artists, the Aikido practitioners tend to specialize in a particular set of principles. They work those sets to death and they become really good at them. I like studying with various specialists to help me fine tune various aspects where I may be lacking. As I become better at these aspects, I incorporate them into my own skill set and then I apply these principles in self defense action.
This is where I think that Aikido gets so misunderstood. Folks view it as "self defense". It's not. BJJ is not self defense. Boxing, wrestling, karate, etc is not self defense. What these arts offer are various aspects and principles that one learns and applies to his own body, abilities, preferences, personality, situation and circumstance. It is that application that makes for self defense.
Aikitech
11-02-2006, 04:24
Again, going back to the basic controls in Aikido, all of them work against the joints, if you try to use these techniques against a fully resisting opponent, one of two things will happen.
1) If Tori is inexperienced it won't work. His technique will not be sharp enough.
2) If Tori is inexperience it will work in the wrong way. He'll hurt Uke badly which is not constructive for anybody.Of course if you're inexperienced and attempt to apply any waza on a fully resistant opponent without first developing your abilities through limited forms of resistance you are just irresponsible. For those who do know their technique thoroughly however these waza can be used very successfully against the fully resistant while still giving one the chioice of controlling the opponent without injury or destroying the joint if this is what it takes to end the conflict. It again comes down to the degree and type of one's training.
...in a real fight your going to have to throw a few punches, low kicks, knees, etc...This to me sounds like another example of entering the kick/punch or fight/struggle mindset when engaging an opponent. Imho for the Aikido strategic/tactical paradigm to work efficiently one cannot allow oneself to get into the "toe to toe, throw a punch here, block a kick there, counter" combat mindset, especially if the opponent is a better striker than you. You will in fact be playing his game and will probably lose if he is a better striker.
One must detect and create openings in the attacker's offence/defence by using the various principles of Aiki and exploit those openings in an instant. Aikido's tactical paradigm is more likened to the use of a sword as expressed through empty hands rather than the close grabbing and holding or stand off trading of blows as evidenced by other empty handed methods. It's about stepping in and cutting down the opponent in a single stroke.
This does not mean that throwing strikes/knees a la muay thai or karate fashion will not work for self defence, but I don't think that this paradigm and the "Aikido" strategic/tactical approach to combat are the same things.
An example of this happened years ago when I faced a Judoka who wanted to test my waza once. At the time (before I started Jujutsu) I knew that if he could get too close and get hold of me or get me to the ground it would be the end of the fight for me. So I got him to play my game instead, I baited/led him by leaving an arm just within reach of him and when he went for it, took his balance and dropped him with kotegaeshi. The reason this worked is because he got drawn into my game without knowing. I did some judo before so I know the urge to grab would be natural, I merely set him up to grab me how I wanted him to from a ma ai that worked for me. If he changed things or did not fall for my ploy I'd have to adapt instantly while staying within my own tactical paradigm.
This is part of what I mean. If facing a striker the same applies, you do not play their game. Get them to play yours.
Just my 5 cents.
:bow:
Webmaster
11-06-2006, 19:10
The "dojo" names portion of this thread was split into a separate topic here (http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=18666).
The "dojo" names portion of this thread was split into a separate topic here (http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=18666).
Wow! Great moderator's hat. Does it deflect those pesky Gamma rays?
Webmaster
11-07-2006, 10:11
Wow! Great moderator's hat. Does it deflect those pesky Gamma rays?
No, it is the rays from the Mind Control Satellite that I am more concerned with. After reading some of the wacko black helicopter conspiracy nonsense lately in the Politics forum, you can't take any chances. :cool:
The black helicopter thing has been around since the sixties.
Ron Tisdale
11-07-2006, 13:24
The Tin Foil Hat responses have been split off here...
Oh, wait...I'm not a moderator! Oops....
B,
R :)
Webmaster
11-07-2006, 13:33
The black helicopter thing has been around since the sixties.
No kidding, and there are still folks that there that think it's real. Now, I am off to get a Bilder Burger for lunch? ;)
The Tin Foil Hat responses have been split off here...
Oh, wait...I'm not a moderator! Oops....
B,
R :)
Hopefully this one will be the last for this thread, but thread drift is a force of nature that is hard to counteract. :)
Ah, but the point is not to counteract the thread drift, the point is to redirect it!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.