Aikido hate

Ok everybody uses a version of Aki in martial arts. Counterpunching uses Aki. So every martial artist is versed in attacking in a way that maximizes their chances of hurting you and leaves them the least vunerable to counter attack. This is just a common sense aproach to training.
"attacking in a way that maximizes their chances of hurting you and leaves them the least vunerable to counter attack" doesn't describe what aiki is, to me. Striking arts rarely evidence any aiki - it's not terribly useful for strikes, though it will happen at times. It's not exactly rare in any grappling art, though many don't actually work with it much, so they are less likely to make full use of it. Aiki is an approach to getting them moving with very little effort. It's more about finding the place where there's no resistance (or, better yet, where they are actually giving the force/momentum/energy needed to throw them, so you don't have to).
It sounds like you are trying to say what doesn't work in training will work in self defence due to some sort of fundimental shift in the dynamics of fighting.
I'm not saying that one can't use competition training for self-defense. I'm saying it doesn't work for developing aiki, because once someone knows what they are dealing with, they can remove most opportunities for aiki. It's a limitation inherent in training aiki. This is one of my problems with the schools that focus on aiki, without building alternatives, and claim to be helping develop self-defense skills. Aikido works for self-defense, but not if it's limited to only the purely aiki movements (except, perhaps, for those with extreme skill levels). Strikes, leverage (Jujutsu/Judo style throws and locks), etc. round out the possibilities.

I think a reasonable comparison would be a haymaker sucker punch. It can work, even on a trained person, when standing in a bar. It's unlikely to be effective in the middle of a boxing or MMA round, because it's not going to be a surprise. Unless you've set them up for it with a lot of other work, that haymaker isn't going to connect. In a surprise situation, though, it's a much higher percentage move.
That is not the case. If anything moves are harder to pull off if someone is attacking full noise.
That's a quirk of aiki. It's actually easier to execute the core principles (not the exact techniques, the principles that make them work) when someone comes "full noise", as you put it. Someone punching to take a head off gives the kind of weight commitment that makes an Aikido throw feel easy to the thrower.

If your system only works against a trained oponant or only works against an untrained oponant then you dont have a well rounded system. And you will loose application.
Again, kind of my point. Pure aiki training is not a good solution for self-defense, IMO. Now, that trained opponent will usually give what Aikido needs when he's angry. You can see that when high-level MMA competitors get out of control at photo ops and stuff. Those guys would never give that kind of weight commitment to an opponent in the cage, but when they are shoving, they often over-commit their weight.

Yes striking creates opportunities for pressure and aki.

Grappling also creates oppotunities for pressure and aki.

Grappling doesn't actually create as many opportunities for aiki, unless the person does something stupid like pull away as hard as they can. It will create openings for leverage throws and the like. Look at what happens in Judo competitions. They eventually manage a throw, but rarely is it because their opponent over-committed their weight somewhere. If I grapple with someone trained, they'll likely drop/control their weight (far less chance of aiki). If I grapple with someone untrained, they'll likely get more tense and muscle things (again, less chance of aiki). I need them moving for aiki, and strikes do a better job of that.
 
As with most things it comes down to ignorance. If you look on wikipedia at how it describes Aikido you can quickly see why MMA fighters hate it:



People see words like "religious beliefs" and "life energy" and immediately group Aikido with "chi magic" practitioners.
Do you think one of the largest Aikido organizations being the Ki Society might have something to do with that?
 
Hello everyone,
Why does Aikido get so much hate?

64z_E-.gif


Ueshiba was doing the exact same stuff btw.

Going a little bit further, the martial culture nowadays is if you got the goods, prove it on the mat. Unfortunately, the Aikido community tends to shy away from that, and it invites ridicule.
 
You can't develop any true MA skill if you only train when your opponent cooperates with you and not train when your opponent does not. If there are Aikido tournament, Aikido reputation will be different.

Here you go, Wang:

Tomiki Aikido Federation - Events

Tomiki aikido has tournaments. Will you stop the hate now?

J/K I know you don't hate...

As it happens, Tomiki aikido is what I do, but we don't do tournaments... we tend to train Police Officers, Security/personal protection detail people, prison gurard and detention officers, etc. One of the guys I'm proud to know and I call one of my instructors is a 40 year veteran of various Sheriff Offices in Oklahoma, the Oklahoma Department of Corrections (if I've got that dept. name right, I may not), and spent some start-up time as a street police officer. His arts... judo and Tomiki aikido. In his career he's had over 750 prisoner removal from cell situations, 1,000+ felony warrant arrests, and so manyscraps in the street dealing with dumb people he stopped counting at ~3,000. And... he's never once, not once, put someone in the hospital. He admits to more than a few instances of road rash on faces, but that's it.

Pooh-bear/teddy bear aikido might not be effective on the street, if a school/dojo has lost sight that it derives straight from a battlefield MA... I've been in and trained at those schools, and where people are aghast at this question, "So, how would you modify that for the street encounter, or for a larger opponent?" Eyes roll, there are heavy sighs, uncomfortable glances around the dojo floor, and then a senior student will typicall speak up and say, "We do traditional aikido here. We are continuing the purity of the art form which O-Sensei created." Or some other such nonsense, imo. Quite obviously, they've not done their own reading on Morehei Ueshiba. He was a soldier, and a good (read, vicious) one. He was effective, he killed int he line of duty and afterwards, sometimes with his weapons, sometimes unarmed with his skills.

It's the people who make aikido good/bad for SD, not the art itself.
 
I use wristlocks from aikido while doing BJJ. So, there.

I finished an aikido SD drill the other day with a nifty shimewaza I learned in BJJ about 10 years ago called the "Bow & Arrow choke." So, there too.

BJJ = Brazilian Jujitsu = Brazilian Jujutsu
Aikido = nice, restrained Aikijujutsu
Aikijujutsu with a hangover or used by a mean old man = pain & maiming, followed by The Void.

So, it's the person.
 
I agree with Frank's post above. I'd have clicked Agree, but I wanted to point out to Drop and Gerry that I think that they actually agree, just can't quite see that they do, which I admit, I find funny.

Drop on your counterpunch comment, I completely agree. Drum-technique counterpunching is certainly aiki (i.e. harmonizing, blending...) an attack is fired and as it is entering the space of the defender the defender turns With the strike in yin-yang fashion... entering to deliver his own shot.

On Gerry's comment, I may disagree slightly with you about there not being as much aikiopportunity in grappling situations, and you pointed at judo competitions. If by "not as much" you meant by amplitude, I agree... the windows of opportunity are much, much smaller... but, if you meant frequency of aiki being present.... I have to disagree with that. There are many, many more such aiki openings available when you actually have hands on, or other contact with the opponent. Opponent in this is either the guy you've enjoyed randori for fun training with for the past 20 years or the guy who just jumped on your back with a knife intending to neck stab you thrice and take your stuff including your lady.

You've written something like this before, that for aiki to exist, an actual attack must exist, or something like that. Thinking judo, when someone drops into jigotai (defensive posture), they can't attack you (with judo, anyway) unless they leave that posture, i.e. stand-up back to natural posture to enter to throw, or go to the ground for a sacrifice throw. So, this bears out your idea, that the attack (which is not present with a based opponent) cannot be used to have an aiki-based technique.

*Note before people take my thought out of context: based stances work wonders for strikers. *Mr. T voice* "I pity the fool that tries to throw Bill Maddox when he's grounded. Good luck with that, sucka!"


Where was I going... Oh, yeah. Same-same. I think that Gerry and Drop are saying the same thing, and having a hemispherical difference of nomenclature to get their opinions conveyed, as I agree with most everything they've said back and forth. But, maybe I'm schizophrenic enough to have multiple points of view in my head at the same time. Probably a Career path thing.
 
BJJ and MMA are very mainstream at the moment, and some of those guys are the biggest Aikido haters out there
The situation between me and Aikido is personal and I'm not going to our dirty laundry, but Aikido knows what it did. It knows.

(I know too, Aikido. Our mutual "friends" told me all about it. Don't try calling me to apologize, the restraining order is still in effect.)
 
Look, I'm not saying I was 100% perfect all the time. But when you think you know a martial art and you can trust it with your girlfriend ... and your best guy friend ... and your parrot ... and your prize-winning rutabaga - and then you have to find out through social media that trust was undeserved ... it hurts, that's all I'm saying.
 
I agree with Frank's post above. I'd have clicked Agree, but I wanted to point out to Drop and Gerry that I think that they actually agree, just can't quite see that they do, which I admit, I find funny.

Drop on your counterpunch comment, I completely agree. Drum-technique counterpunching is certainly aiki (i.e. harmonizing, blending...) an attack is fired and as it is entering the space of the defender the defender turns With the strike in yin-yang fashion... entering to deliver his own shot.

On Gerry's comment, I may disagree slightly with you about there not being as much aikiopportunity in grappling situations, and you pointed at judo competitions. If by "not as much" you meant by amplitude, I agree... the windows of opportunity are much, much smaller... but, if you meant frequency of aiki being present.... I have to disagree with that. There are many, many more such aiki openings available when you actually have hands on, or other contact with the opponent. Opponent in this is either the guy you've enjoyed randori for fun training with for the past 20 years or the guy who just jumped on your back with a knife intending to neck stab you thrice and take your stuff including your lady.

You've written something like this before, that for aiki to exist, an actual attack must exist, or something like that. Thinking judo, when someone drops into jigotai (defensive posture), they can't attack you (with judo, anyway) unless they leave that posture, i.e. stand-up back to natural posture to enter to throw, or go to the ground for a sacrifice throw. So, this bears out your idea, that the attack (which is not present with a based opponent) cannot be used to have an aiki-based technique.

*Note before people take my thought out of context: based stances work wonders for strikers. *Mr. T voice* "I pity the fool that tries to throw Bill Maddox when he's grounded. Good luck with that, sucka!"


Where was I going... Oh, yeah. Same-same. I think that Gerry and Drop are saying the same thing, and having a hemispherical difference of nomenclature to get their opinions conveyed, as I agree with most everything they've said back and forth. But, maybe I'm schizophrenic enough to have multiple points of view in my head at the same time. Probably a Career path thing.
I actually think DB and I agree a lot. Unfortunately, I feel at times he has this idea of what I do and teach that isn't in line with what I do and teach, and that notion leads to not understanding me. In this thread, for instance, he seems to be trying to convince me that training only things that work with a committed (over-committed, for the trained folks) attack isn't a good idea. I agree. In fact, that's the point I made in my first post on this thread.

As for what aiki opportunities exist inside grappling, I think that comes down to a definition of "aiki", and I've yet to find two people who had the same definition of it as a physical principle. What I define as "aiki", I find vanishes when people get all stiff. They then open up a whole range of other principles, instead (leverage, openings to strike, etc.). When they resist those principles by moving, the aiki openings come back. Now, I know a lot of folks would put more into the "aiki" group than I do, and I'm okay with that, as long as we understand which definition we're using at any given point.
 
Tomiki aikido has tournaments. Will you stop the hate now?
I respect all MA styles that test their skill in sport format.

One day an Aikido friend Armando Flores and a Karate friend visited me. I told them that there was a local Karate tournament. All 3 of us put gloves on and went to competed in that tournament. Armando didn't understood Karate tournament rules and punched on his opponent's face so hard, drew some blood, and got disqualified in his 1st fight. In few days, my Aikido friend was kicked out of his Aikido Association. He then went to far east and trained his Aikido with top master. This is how I know that Aikido guys were not allowed to compete in tournament back in 1973.

Today my Aikido friend is "Sensei" now.


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JP3
Tomiki aikido has tournaments. Will you stop the hate now?
I don't hate Aikido. I have many students who came from Aikido background. Steve and I were both white belt in YMCA Karate class back in 1972 when I was a UT student. I do know a little bit about Aikido.

Steve McAdam (7th degree black belt) was the first member of the UT Aikido Club, which started in 1972. He has been the chief instructor since 1988. His training in Seidokan Aikido emphasizes gentle, small, and efficient movements.

Steve.jpg
 
Follow me here. Once again, people who have no experience with either MMA or aikido are criticizing MMAists for criticizing aikido from a position of ignorance, from a position of ignorance.

In other words, if you have no actual experience with MMA, then perhaps you should avoid doing the very thing you are criticizing others for doing.

You don't need to practice what they do in order to hear their opinions about something. It's very common in the martial arts community for MMA people to bad mouth anything "TMA".

We've seen it here a number of times too, you can't simply ignore it or write of people stating the obvious because they haven't trained it.
 
You don't need to practice what they do in order to hear their opinions about something. It's very common in the martial arts community for MMA people to bad mouth anything "TMA".

We've seen it here a number of times too, you can't simply ignore it or write of people stating the obvious because they haven't trained it.
First, Google confirmation bias. Second, stereotyping the practitioners of one art in defense of another is hypocritical. Third, even aikidoka acknowledge there are problems with how aikido is often trained.
 
First, Google confirmation bias. Second, stereotyping the practitioners of one art in defense of another is hypocritical. Third, even aikidoka acknowledge there are problems with how aikido is often trained.

Who here is stereotyping? The guy literally said in his post that this is what he is hearing from MMA guys. That is him talking about what he had experienced with these individuals.

Giving constructive criticism as the aikidoka do about their training doesn't mean that aikido is bad either. Everything has stupid training methods that some will agree are fine, and some will agree that they are bad.

Martial arts is one of those things that many people regardless of style have different views on how to do something. These are things you cannot simply just deny. I mean when you have people like Joe Rogan invite aikido and tae Kwon do people onto their shows for the sole purpose of telling them their style is ****.

Then well, sadly stereotypes exist for a reason. It's very common in my generation too, you practice something that isn't MMA and the majority will say you're wasting your time and should just do MMA because it's better.
 
It's very common in the martial arts community for MMA people to bad mouth anything "TMA".

It might be around your way but it's not everywhere, don't forget many MMA people have a TMA background. What you are doing, as someone has already said, is confusing the fan boys with the MMA practitioners. The fan boys for the most part have verbal diarrhoea with mental constipation. :rolleyes:
 
It might be around your way but it's not everywhere, don't forget many MMA people have a TMA background. What you are doing, as someone has already said, is confusing the fan boys with the MMA practitioners. The fan boys for the most part have verbal diarrhoea with mental constipation. :rolleyes:

They aren't fanboys if they are doing it.

I mean is Joe Rogan a fan boy then?
 
You don't need to practice what they do in order to hear their opinions about something. It's very common in the martial arts community for MMA people to bad mouth anything "TMA".

We've seen it here a number of times too, you can't simply ignore it or write of people stating the obvious because they haven't trained it.

It is very common for the TMA community to bring up how rotten a bunch of guys the MMA community is.

You just did it in your post.
 
"attacking in a way that maximizes their chances of hurting you and leaves them the least vunerable to counter attack" doesn't describe what aiki is, to me. Striking arts rarely evidence any aiki - it's not terribly useful for strikes, though it will happen at times. It's not exactly rare in any grappling art, though many don't actually work with it much, so they are less likely to make full use of it. Aiki is an approach to getting them moving with very little effort. It's more about finding the place where there's no resistance (or, better yet, where they are actually giving the force/momentum/energy needed to throw them, so you don't have to).

I am not trying to describe aki. I am describing balanced striking.

And i am sorry if it nullifies aki. But everyone employs it.
 
I actually think DB and I agree a lot. Unfortunately, I feel at times he has this idea of what I do and teach that isn't in line with what I do and teach, and that notion leads to not understanding me. In this thread, for instance, he seems to be trying to convince me that training only things that work with a committed (over-committed, for the trained folks) attack isn't a good idea. I agree. In fact, that's the point I made in my first post on this thread.

As for what aiki opportunities exist inside grappling, I think that comes down to a definition of "aiki", and I've yet to find two people who had the same definition of it as a physical principle. What I define as "aiki", I find vanishes when people get all stiff. They then open up a whole range of other principles, instead (leverage, openings to strike, etc.). When they resist those principles by moving, the aiki openings come back. Now, I know a lot of folks would put more into the "aiki" group than I do, and I'm okay with that, as long as we understand which definition we're using at any given point.

You keep thinking this golden opportunity will somehow just come along.

And for some mysterious reason your training partners keep denying you this.

That is not a big surprise.

It is unlikely to happen in a street fight either. The other guy denying you the golden oportunity is pretty much half of fighting.
 
I am not trying to describe aki. I am describing balanced striking.

And i am sorry if it nullifies aki. But everyone employs it.
No need to apologize. It's the point I was making. It does take away a lot of aiki opportunities, and that's why aiki techniques are easier when someone is angry, desperate, or trying to end something fast. Those conditions lead people to make mistakes they are less likely to make when they are being methodical. When someone is methodical, it takes pressure to create movement for the techniques, or patience to wait for the right opening. Or you go with the leverage and sacrifice techniques. Or you just switch to striking (my preference with someone who is a better grappler than striker).
 
Back
Top