How appliable is aikido for self-defense?

[drop bear]

That's true. I'm talking about the ones that actually put a joint at risk. Anything that simply immobilizes can be used fairly safely, but an arm bar is not among those. And in many self-defense arts, immobilizations are used less than destructions (which are practiced as pain compliance in the dojo).

all sorts of things are used in self defence martial arts that can't be trained live. and the result is this.

that to a certain point is fine. but the core of what you do can't be theoretical. so in general you do the break theoretically from the arm immobilization. which is trained honestly.

that becomes this idea of position before submission.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

all sorts of things are used in self defence martial arts that can't be trained live. and the result is this.

that to a certain point is fine. but the core of what you do can't be theoretical. so in general you do the break theoretically from the arm immobilization. which is trained honestly.

that becomes this idea of position before submission.

That's one approach. Personally, I don't want any but experienced students coming close to a break position with any speed. They simply don't have the control for it. For immobilizations that don't have a break very close to them, those can be done with speed and full intent.

There's also the issue that "full resistance" is a problematic issue with some arts. The resistance I would offer is nothing like the resistance they're likely to get on the street. I can defeat most techniques with nearly zero strength (and eventually teach students to do the same). The theoretical attacker is unlikely to have that ability, so we have to actually add some simulated resistance. By that I mean offering resistance in other ways, besides the counters. An easy example of this is pulling the arm into a bent position with sheer muscle to prevent an Arm Bar. This opens some new opportunities - some of my favorites - that the aiki-based counters don't offer (obviously, there are different openings presented by those).

So, if I only test with 100% of my resistance, I would only offer the aiki-based counters, and students wouldn't get to learn how to deal with the more likely types of resistance. It's an aggravating issue, because new students could actually produce that resistance (it's what they're more likely to do), but they tend to try to hard, and put themselves at risk, so we bail on the technique and do something different rather than risk the injury.

 

[drop bear]

That's one approach. Personally, I don't want any but experienced students coming close to a break position with any speed. They simply don't have the control for it. For immobilizations that don't have a break very close to them, those can be done with speed and full intent.

There's also the issue that "full resistance" is a problematic issue with some arts. The resistance I would offer is nothing like the resistance they're likely to get on the street. I can defeat most techniques with nearly zero strength (and eventually teach students to do the same). The theoretical attacker is unlikely to have that ability, so we have to actually add some simulated resistance. By that I mean offering resistance in other ways, besides the counters. An easy example of this is pulling the arm into a bent position with sheer muscle to prevent an Arm Bar. This opens some new opportunities - some of my favorites - that the aiki-based counters don't offer (obviously, there are different openings presented by those).

So, if I only test with 100% of my resistance, I would only offer the aiki-based counters, and students wouldn't get to learn how to deal with the more likely types of resistance. It's an aggravating issue, because new students could actually produce that resistance (it's what they're more likely to do), but they tend to try to hard, and put themselves at risk, so we bail on the technique and do something different rather than risk the injury.

that is still the same dynamic everybody else faces though. sparring hard dosent mean sparring sparking spazzy.

but to give up crazy arm breaks means you will be courting loss. mabye even against brand new guys.

courting loss makes you better if you can be humble.

 

[Hanzou]

that is still the same dynamic everybody else faces though. sparring hard dosent mean sparring sparking spazzy.

but to give up crazy arm breaks means you will be courting loss. mabye even against brand new guys.

courting loss makes you better if you can be humble.

That big boy needs to work on his cardio, and learn some Jiujitsu. He'd be a monster with just a little bit of training.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

that is still the same dynamic everybody else faces though. sparring hard dosent mean sparring sparking spazzy.

but to give up crazy arm breaks means you will be courting loss. mabye even against brand new guys.

courting loss makes you better if you can be humble.

All true. Remember, my original comments were to the idea of going 100%. I don't think that's a consistent reality in any training that doesn't include a ton of injuries. You look for where you can go 100%, and accept those losses that happen because you weren't willing to risk more (injury to yourself or your opponent).

 

[drop bear]

All true. Remember, my original comments were to the idea of going 100%. I don't think that's a consistent reality in any training that doesn't include a ton of injuries. You look for where you can go 100%, and accept those losses that happen because you weren't willing to risk more (injury to yourself or your opponent).

And this is where stuff becomes complicated. Generally when you are taught a move like a throw you are taught wrong so that you can get your brain around the mechanics of it. So to keep it simple. You learn a double leg pretty much on the spot. Which gives you the mechanics but doesn't really give you the throw.

When you actually try to do a double leg you run the guy across the room. There are angle changes and all sorts of added nuance that makes that throw work.

So the resistance plays an important roll in giving the correct feedback. Which if you don't have you don't train the depth of technique.

 

[the42cop]

Yes, that's one of the great things about Judo and BJJ workouts.

No joke! You can literally take an Olympic athlete and after 5 minutes of sparring they will want to throw up lol. It requires a level of fitness that I haven't found in anything else.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

And this is where stuff becomes complicated. Generally when you are taught a move like a throw you are taught wrong so that you can get your brain around the mechanics of it. So to keep it simple. You learn a double leg pretty much on the spot. Which gives you the mechanics but doesn't really give you the throw.

When you actually try to do a double leg you run the guy across the room. There are angle changes and all sorts of added nuance that makes that throw work.

So the resistance plays an important roll in giving the correct feedback. Which if you don't have you don't train the depth of technique.

Yep. This is the same thing that happens even with more "complex" moves (they're not really as complex as they are taught, but that's another topic). The only real difference with the aiki arts is that we have to go another level (other arts do some of this - it's the major principle for us). When I go for a technique, I'm feeling the whole time for the "void" (my term - don't know if others use it or not).

Here's an example from yesterday's class. I introduced some white belts to a new (for them) drill. It's essentially a one-step attack to defend. The attacker gives a decent (not full-on, by an means - these are white belts) attack, and the defender defends it. The attack is meant to have intent, but to be a bit over-committed (they're not holding back to allow a second attack). If the defender doesn't defend (for instance, just blocks and pauses), the attacker follows up with another attack. Well, I went first to demonstrate it, and the first student resists the technique I was going for (an arm bar, I think). I had shoulder height and weight and her momentum, so I could fairly easily have gotten the arm bar without hurting her, but that's not where aiki is. Instead, I flowed to another technique and then felt "the void" (where her weight was creating an easy opening to make her fall), so I passed her arm further across and took her down by her head. She was resisting the whole time (misunderstanding the instructions), and I could have made either of the first two techniques work, but I naturally flowed with our joined movement until the void showed up.

 

[justkool141]

As long as its not Steven Seagal aikido is fine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jenna]

As long as its not Steven Seagal aikido is fine


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

why is it fine?

 

[JP3]

That's one approach. Personally, I don't want any but experienced students coming close to a break position with any speed. They simply don't have the control for it. For immobilizations that don't have a break very close to them, those can be done with speed and full intent.

There's also the issue that "full resistance" is a problematic issue with some arts. The resistance I would offer is nothing like the resistance they're likely to get on the street. I can defeat most techniques with nearly zero strength (and eventually teach students to do the same). The theoretical attacker is unlikely to have that ability, so we have to actually add some simulated resistance. By that I mean offering resistance in other ways, besides the counters. An easy example of this is pulling the arm into a bent position with sheer muscle to prevent an Arm Bar. This opens some new opportunities - some of my favorites - that the aiki-based counters don't offer (obviously, there are different openings presented by those).

So, if I only test with 100% of my resistance, I would only offer the aiki-based counters, and students wouldn't get to learn how to deal with the more likely types of resistance. It's an aggravating issue, because new students could actually produce that resistance (it's what they're more likely to do), but they tend to try to hard, and put themselves at risk, so we bail on the technique and do something different rather than risk the injury.

Jerry, I'm obviously missing something since you do aikidamage as I do, you're describing the arm-curling with resistance, which to me speaks directly to henari and gaeshi things being given to you by the "bad guy." A really simple one that can show up is bad guy punch, good guy evade/block slap out of the way..... whatever happens, and good guy ends up with hands on/over bad guy arm, who yanks it back as good guy tries to "do" something.

Right as the arm is coming back there is a huge hole in which a nasty kotegaeshi lives. It's worse with more resistance than less. I accidentally (really, it was) *** over tea-kettled one of my budedies one time when we were checking how/where the kinetic energy ... goes.

So, in your response to Drop above, I'm being thick and missing something you're trying to say.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Jerry, I'm obviously missing something since you do aikidamage as I do, you're describing the arm-curling with resistance, which to me speaks directly to henari and gaeshi things being given to you by the "bad guy." A really simple one that can show up is bad guy punch, good guy evade/block slap out of the way..... whatever happens, and good guy ends up with hands on/over bad guy arm, who yanks it back as good guy tries to "do" something.

Right as the arm is coming back there is a huge hole in which a nasty kotegaeshi lives. It's worse with more resistance than less. I accidentally (really, it was) *** over tea-kettled one of my budedies one time when we were checking how/where the kinetic energy ... goes.

So, in your response to Drop above, I'm being thick and missing something you're trying to say.

We don't use many Japanese terms, so I'm not at all sure what your first sentence is about. If you translate those for me, maybe I can clear up what I said earlier.

The second paragraph, I agree with entirely. That's where the "void" is. If the attacker pulls back hard, he falls hard. If he stiffens his arm he opens up other techniques, and I have more leverage for some moves (and joint locks generally hurt worse/become more destructive).

 

[Hanzou]

why is it fine?

Segal is a strange guy.

 

[Flying Crane]

Segal is a strange guy.

He is a strange guy. Ego-maniacal jerk might be more accurate, from what I understand.

I don't know the current state of his aikido now, but my understanding is that at least once upon a time, his aikido was quite formidable.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

He is a strange guy. Ego-maniacal jerk might be more accurate, from what I understand.

I don't know the current state of his aikido now, but my understanding is that at least once upon a time, his aikido was quite formidable.

From what I've seen, it looks solid. Of course, all I've seen is demos and some footage from seminars.

 

[Hanzou]

He is a strange guy. Ego-maniacal jerk might be more accurate, from what I understand.

I don't know the current state of his aikido now, but my understanding is that at least once upon a time, his aikido was quite formidable.

I hope he takes Randy Couture's challenge. Randy said he'd come out of retirement just to fight Segal. Bas Rutten was also interested in fighting Segal.

 

[Flying Crane]

I hope he takes Randy Couture's challenge. Randy said he'd come out of retirement just to fight Segal. Bas Rutten was also interested in fighting Segal.

Why?

 

[Hanzou]

Why?

Honestly, I would like to see Segal's Aikido being utilized against Couture's style to see how legit it truly is. As someone else has said, it has only been seen in demos and movies.

 

[Steve]

And spectacle. Nothing wrong with a little spectacle.

 

[Flying Crane]

Honestly, I would like to see Segal's Aikido being utilized against Couture's style to see how legit it truly is. As someone else has said, it has only been seen in demos and movies.

I mean, why do Bas and Randy want to fight him? He's a fat old man, well past his prime. Whether his aikido is still good or not, a younger martial athlete who fought professionally, a lot, is going to have a severe advantage. There's little doubt about the outcome, and even so would do nothing to establish whether Segal's aikido is legit or not, even when he loses.

What caused these guys to even make the suggestion? I can't imagine what they think they have to gain. If they win, well they beat up a fat old man, well past his prime. If they lose, they lost to a fat old man, well past his prime. Either way, their reputation is stained. I guess I don't get it.