Yoko Okamoto

[Kung Fu Wang]

most breaks were accidental, rather than intentional, in nature.

Sometimes it's difficult for a judge to distinguish between

- accidental,
- intentional.

Sacrifice throw can be a good example. It's hard to tell whether this guy did it on purpose, or he just loss of balance.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

nteresting! I'm not an MMA expert by any stretch, but I do watch it some and read about it a bit more than that. It was my impression that regardless of legality, as a general rule, fighters give a brief opportunity to tap before applying a break and that most breaks were accidental, rather than intentional, in nature. Accidental in the sense that a break wasn't intended, merely submission. Are you saying that plenty of fighters would go directly to a break, with no opportunity for a tap, if they could, or simply that it would be legal for them to do so?

In my Hapkido school we did a lot of stand up grappling with strong resistance. In my experience, most locks could be applied sufficiently to cause pain and a reaction, perhaps brief control, but that they are generally unreliable (for anyone less skilled than my old instructor anyway) to be used as a means of sustained control or submission against a skilled and/or determined opponent. If applied with no attempt at submission (direct to break), I think they could be used to significantly damage the joint in question (wrist, elbow, shoulder) fairly easily. I have never injured anyone in this fashion, but I know people who have.

So, in a training context against strong resistance, you would apply the lock quickly, but let off short of damage, and if on the receiving end, you would tap very quickly and go with it if you knew the lock was set, because if it was taken further it would result in injury. This would not work in a serious competition or self defense situation because if you let off the pressure at all the lock doesn't work, just causes brief pain, and can be escaped easily, and nobody is going to submit to that. So, if you want the technique to work for sure, you either go immediately for a break with no opportunity to submit, or you don't use that technique.

Tony, I really respect your opinion and feel you're one of the most thoughtful and knowledgeable posters on MT, so I want to be clear that I'm not disputing what you're saying. I'm sure you know what you're talking about. I'm just trying to make sure I understand what you're saying and that I've represented what I was saying accurately.

Excellent question. Let me see if I can clarify the matter.

If you watch MMA at all, you will have noticed that the overwhelming majority (99.9%) of successful joint locks occur on the ground. There are two primary reasons for this.

The first is that being on the ground allows you to control your opponent's body position in such a way that escaping is much more difficult than would be the case for standing joint locks.

The second is that this ability to control the opponent's body allows you to practice the locks much more effectively in sparring. If you have full control of your partner, you don't have to snap the lock on with full speed. You can reach the point where you are putting your partner's limb in jeopardy, then slow down so that they have time to escape if possible and tap if they can't. The result is that your partner doesn't have to tap early* to a lock which isn't applied perfectly and can get better at escaping the lock while you can get better at shutting down the escapes. I drill into my students that if they have to go fast in sparring in order to get the tap, then not only are they more likely to injure their training partners, but they are cheating themselves out of learning the technique properly.

Since most standing joint locks don't give you the option of holding your opponent's body in place while you slowly apply the lock, you have to rely on speed to achieve the break before they escape. Not only does this make the technique more difficult, but it makes it much more difficult to develop functional skill in sparring because your partners have to tap early or take the chance of getting broken if they don't escape correctly. This is why we need holodeck technology - so that we can practice full speed standing wristlocks without breaking our friends.

*(There is a common saying - "tap early and tap often". However this is aimed more at beginning students who haven't yet learned to judge when a limb is in danger and when escape is or isn't reasonably available.)

Getting back to MMA - it's completely legal to apply joint locks at full speed without slowing down to give the opponent extra time to tap. It is the responsibility of the opponent to recognize when they are caught and to not wait until a joint is being hyperextended before they tap. In fact, a fighter is not even obligated to immediately let go when an opponent taps - the tap is a signal to the referee, who has the responsibility to stop the fight when the tap occurs. (This is due to the occasional unscrupulous fighter who will "phantom tap" in hopes that their opponent will release them but the ref won't see the tap. In practice, the majority of fighters will at least stop cranking the submission as soon as they feel the tap.)

Now, as far as whether fighters actually crank submissions full speed from start to finish or whether they give their opponent an extra moment to tap before completing a break ... that depends a lot on the disposition of the individual fighter and the situation in the moment. MMA fighters get pretty slippery after a few minutes in the cage and some of them are both pretty wily with their escapes and willing to take some damage (like a hyperextended elbow) if they can potentially win the fight despite an injury*. For this reason some fighters will consistently just crank a submission as hard and fast as they can and let it be the other guy's responsibility to tap in time. Others will be more merciful, especially if they are confident that they can maintain the control position and take their time applying the lock.

*Some notable examples:

Renzo Gracie vs Kazushi Sakuraba - Sakuraba caught Renzo with a standing Kimura and applied it full speed (as was necessary for a standing joint lock), breaking Renzo's arm and taking him to the mat. Renzo, being the bad-*** that he is, didn't tap. But once Sakuraba had Renzo pinned, he pointed out to the ref that Renzo's arm was broken and the fight was stopped.

Frank Mir vs Tim Silvia - Mir caught Silvia in an armbar from guard and applied the lock with continuous force (not particularly fast nor slow). Silvia refused to tap and was upset when the ref stopped the fight. The crowd began to boo ... until the instant replay showed that Mir had snapped Silvia's arm. Snapped as in, he didn't just hyperextend the elbow. He broke Silvia's radius in two and the broken tip of the bone came close to actually coming out of the skin. Silvia was apparently so hyped up on the pain-killing effects of adrenaline that he refused to believe that his arm was broken until he got to the hospital and saw the x-rays.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If you watch MMA at all, you will have noticed that the overwhelming majority (99.9%) of successful joint locks occur on the ground. There are two primary reasons for this.

The first is that being on the ground allows you to control your opponent's body position in such a way that escaping is much more difficult than would be the case for standing joint locks.

This is also true for the striking as well. When your opponent is on the ground, it's much harder for him to deal with your punch/kick.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm over 50, this scenario is pretty much irrelevant to me, but I think it does lead to a lot of miscommunication when one person says, "Aikido can be good for self defense", and the other person hears, "I can use Aikido to show up (or be) the bully in the bar!".

This guy? ha ha ha.

 

[MetalBoar]

Excellent question. Let me see if I can clarify the matter.

If you watch MMA at all, you will have noticed that the overwhelming majority (99.9%) of successful joint locks occur on the ground. There are two primary reasons for this.

The first is that being on the ground allows you to control your opponent's body position in such a way that escaping is much more difficult than would be the case for standing joint locks.

The second is that this ability to control the opponent's body allows you to practice the locks much more effectively in sparring. If you have full control of your partner, you don't have to snap the lock on with full speed. You can reach the point where you are putting your partner's limb in jeopardy, then slow down so that they have time to escape if possible and tap if they can't. The result is that your partner doesn't have to tap early* to a lock which isn't applied perfectly and can get better at escaping the lock while you can get better at shutting down the escapes. I drill into my students that if they have to go fast in sparring in order to get the tap, then not only are they more likely to injure their training partners, but they are cheating themselves out of learning the technique properly.

Since most standing joint locks don't give you the option of holding your opponent's body in place while you slowly apply the lock, you have to rely on speed to achieve the break before they escape. Not only does this make the technique more difficult, but it makes it much more difficult to develop functional skill in sparring because your partners have to tap early or take the chance of getting broken if they don't escape correctly. This is why we need holodeck technology - so that we can practice full speed standing wristlocks without breaking our friends.

*(There is a common saying - "tap early and tap often". However this is aimed more at beginning students who haven't yet learned to judge when a limb is in danger and when escape is or isn't reasonably available.)

Getting back to MMA - it's completely legal to apply joint locks at full speed without slowing down to give the opponent extra time to tap. It is the responsibility of the opponent to recognize when they are caught and to not wait until a joint is being hyperextended before they tap. In fact, a fighter is not even obligated to immediately let go when an opponent taps - the tap is a signal to the referee, who has the responsibility to stop the fight when the tap occurs. (This is due to the occasional unscrupulous fighter who will "phantom tap" in hopes that their opponent will release them but the ref won't see the tap. In practice, the majority of fighters will at least stop cranking the submission as soon as they feel the tap.)

Now, as far as whether fighters actually crank submissions full speed from start to finish or whether they give their opponent an extra moment to tap before completing a break ... that depends a lot on the disposition of the individual fighter and the situation in the moment. MMA fighters get pretty slippery after a few minutes in the cage and some of them are both pretty wily with their escapes and willing to take some damage (like a hyperextended elbow) if they can potentially win the fight despite an injury*. For this reason some fighters will consistently just crank a submission as hard and fast as they can and let it be the other guy's responsibility to tap in time. Others will be more merciful, especially if they are confident that they can maintain the control position and take their time applying the lock.

*Some notable examples:

Renzo Gracie vs Kazushi Sakuraba - Sakuraba caught Renzo with a standing Kimura and applied it full speed (as was necessary for a standing joint lock), breaking Renzo's arm and taking him to the mat. Renzo, being the bad-*** that he is, didn't tap. But once Sakuraba had Renzo pinned, he pointed out to the ref that Renzo's arm was broken and the fight was stopped.

Frank Mir vs Tim Silvia - Mir caught Silvia in an armbar from guard and applied the lock with continuous force (not particularly fast nor slow). Silvia refused to tap and was upset when the ref stopped the fight. The crowd began to boo ... until the instant replay showed that Mir had snapped Silvia's arm. Snapped as in, he didn't just hyperextend the elbow. He broke Silvia's radius in two and the broken tip of the bone came close to actually coming out of the skin. Silvia was apparently so hyped up on the pain-killing effects of adrenaline that he refused to believe that his arm was broken until he got to the hospital and saw the x-rays.

Thanks for the great reply. That's useful information.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

Thank you. Very much. That is an answer. While it's not my answer, it is your answer and that's what helps me to understand what you see as destruction in terms of Aikido.

This is also part of your answer. While I cannot comment about what is destroying Aikido (because I don't train it, nor do I teach it.). I can share some light on the sparring and competition perspective (not that you asked) but it may show a perspective that you have not thought about. I'm in agreement with your MMA comment as a lot of martial arts gets that.

So I'm an applications person. Being able to apply the technique helps build understanding of the technique. Also having someone who can apply the technique correctly apply it to me also helps me to understand what is happening. Again this is just me.

In my mind learning martial arts can be like cooking. Some of the people learn the recipe but never try to use it to cook. In Martial Arts. Application is the same as Cooking. Sometimes I can follow a recipe and things turn out bad. Then someone gives me a tip in the prep stage that helps me with the mixing that wasn't mentioned in the recipe. Application helps me to determine if I have it correct by giving me an outcome.

Sparring for me is individual focus - Can I do a technique? How can I improve my ability to a technique? When I try to do what I see, do I get the same results? In this sense, a person is gaining better understanding through applying.

Competition for me is. comparison focus - Am I better skilled than another person with what I know how to do."
I define sparring and competition differently because they are not the same and to me they don't serve the same purpose.

Somewhere in Aikido there is Application. Somewhere in Aikido there is technique. That is just the nature of it all martial arts There are techniques for movement, breathing, structure, and for fighting. This stuff can be done individually or as a whole. But the thing to focus on is that there are techniques and applications of techniques. There is also a yard stick in which to measure competency or understanding of what is taught.

My assumption is that you don't mind the yardstick. You just don't like that it's always being compared to MMA. if Aikido has testing then there's definitely a yard stick to measure. In terms of Aikido being Measuared to MMA, This used to get similar comparisons about Jow Ga in that way but I don't hear it as much, like almost never since I stopped teaching it. My yard stick is different from what you use, but my reply is the same.

I can't learn Jow Ga from MMA. When asked about Aikido and MMA. simply say that you can't learn Aikido from MMA.. This statement is true regardless of the focus ,be it fighting or spirituality. If an Aikido school doesn't train or focus on fighting or sparring then say that the school doesn't focus on that. Learn to kill those yardstick measurements by creating clarity.



Thank you.

Find an aikido dojo, head on down there and take some lessons. It will save you asking all these questions on the forum for which no answer will satisfy. If you want definitive answers to your questions, then experiencing aikido for yourself is the way to go. Otherwise you are just here on the forum wasting precious time going around, and around in endless circles 🗣️🗣️🗣️

 

[Oily Dragon]

This guy? ha ha ha.

That's not a bar.

Have you never seen Marked for Death??

 

[JowGaWolf]

That's not a bar.

Have you never seen Marked for Death??

I can't believe I've seen almost all of his movies. Scary

 

[Oily Dragon]

I can't believe I've seen almost all of his movies. Scary

Yeah I'm a big Keith David fan too.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

T

Yeah I'm a big Keith David fan too.

They Live with Roddy Piper 👍👍

 

[Oily Dragon]

T

They Live with Roddy Piper 👍👍

Spawn!

And most people don't know this, but Keith was trained at Juilliard.

People at the time underestimated the level of fine art involved in making Marked for Death. I think they still do.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Find an aikido dojo, head on down there and take some lessons. It will save you asking all these questions on the forum for which no answer will satisfy. If you want definitive answers to your questions, then experiencing aikido for yourself is the way to go. Otherwise you are just here on the forum wasting precious time going around, and around in endless circles 🗣️🗣️🗣️

It's not a waste of my time. The point of me Asking is to see how others see Aikido. If I take a class, then my answer is going to be how I see Aikido. I'm all about application, so right off the back I know that's where my focus will be. I'm not going to get a lot out of the spiritual side of Aikdo because of my current religious and spiritual beliefs.

If I take an Aikido class, then how I see Aikido will not be how someone else sees it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I was able to find some short cuts in Jow Ga, well they really aren't short cuts as much as cutting out exercises that make the learning process longer. Much of it being on the set up applying a technique. I'm not sure why that type of exercise is included in some Jow Ga schools but it causes more confusion than clarity and requires that student unlearns a behavior.. But what it sounds like to me is that there are nothing like that in Aikido.

Have you discovered better ways to help student to understand than what was explained to you?

There are some things I think I explain better, and most of aiki falls into that category. I also altered some of the classical forms (formal one-step kata that form the foundation of NGA) to let some of the principles come out earlier and more easily.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

It's not a waste of my time. The point of me Asking is to see how others see Aikido. If I take a class, then my answer is going to be how I see Aikido. I'm all about application, so right off the back I know that's where my focus will be. I'm not going to get a lot out of the spiritual side of Aikdo because of my current religious and spiritual beliefs.

If I take an Aikido class, then how I see Aikido will not be how someone else sees it.

Why do you want to see how others see Aikido?

What is the purpose of discovering what other people think?

What will you do with this information?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

What is the purpose of discovering what other people think?

What will you do with this information?

The "飄(Piao) - Floating hand" is one of the 30 principles used in the Chinese wrestling. I have always believed it's just a demonstration technique. I have asked many of my Chinese wrestling brothers. They all told me that they have never seen this technique been used in any tournament, or on the mat.

The information that I have received from my Chinese wrestling brothers can help me to confirm what I have believed is not just my personal bias but common sense.

This information can help me to decide whether I should spend more of my training time into this technique.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Why do you want to see how others see Aikido?

Because understanding how others see things is critical for good communications. It is necessary for reducing many of the ills of society. It reduces confusion and it's a great way to reduce assumptions about things.

Context is required for understanding. Most of the problems in this world come from those who do not wish to understand how others see things.

What is the purpose of discovering what other people think?

To have knowledge of how others see things.

What will you do with this information?

Process it and use it to Aid my understanding of Aikido as how others see it may shed light on the lack of clarity that I see it. This part I think I actually figured out so now I have clarity about Aikido that did have before. It didn't come from the videos that were shown. Those videos pretty much validated my though about Aikido and those who practice it. My answer came from understanding how others see it.

The assumptions that people often make is that they already know where to find the answer. My experience is that answers are often found in places where we lease expect it. I will use Jow Ga Kung Fu as an example. A lot of what I learned about applying Jow Ga techniques did not come from a Jow Ga Class.

The assumption is that if I have a question about Jow Ga, then the only places I can find that answer is in a book or from a teacher. My ability to apply Jow Ga techniques came from understanding how other systems attack me. This is why I say that it's better to spar System A vs System B. While people were sharing with me how their techniques work. I began to see how Jow Ga techniques solve that issue.

If someone wants to get under me to take my legs, then the solution is to lower my stance.. I low fighting stance is simply a modified horse stance. You can stand in a horse stance and change into a fighting stance through small adjustments of the feet.. Things like this I didn't learn through teachers. I learned through training, that learning process actually became more efficient when I sparred against non-Jow Ga students.

Family does not fight family.. Is what I tell students. If they want to learn how to use Jow Ga then they must spar outside of their systems so that they can better understand the Jow Ga applications.


So back to your question. What will I do with the information? Grow.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The "飄(Piao) - Floating hand" is one of the 30 principles used in the Chinese wrestling. I have always believed it's just a demonstration technique. I have asked many of my Chinese wrestling brothers. They all told me that they have never seen this technique been used in any tournament, or on the mat.

The information that I have received from my Chinese wrestling brothers can help me to confirm what I have believed is not just my personal bias but common sense.

This information can help me to decide whether I should spend more of my training time into this technique.

I have used a similar technique to this. My technique started from the person being on my back to grab around my neck. I first escape the grip by twisting under it and straighten the arm at the same time. This prevents the person from being their arm and pulling it back. As I step under I pull the arm like I'm pulling rope. I can choose to long pull or I can snap pull the arm. I was able to (toss) move the person maybe 5 or 6 feet. He stumbled for about 3 and then slid across the floor for the rest of the distance. This will work as long as the twist causes your opponent's elbow to point upward. A snap pull would have probably damaged ligaments in the arm or shoulder. When I did, I could tell that arm was pretty tight from the twist and that it wouldn't take much to make him follow that arm.. I know it's not the same as what you are showing here, but I'm guessing anything that involves twisting the arm like that would require elbow to be in a certain position.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The Chinese wrestling has the same issue. A throw is not the end of a fight. You will need to add in follow on

- striking, or
- control.

In the past 40 years, kick, punch, and follow on strike/control has been added into the Chinese wrestling system.

It's not that hard to add into the Aikido training. In other words, Aikido can be used in MMA if Aikido people want to.

There is a difference between

1. You want to do it but you can't.
2. You can do it but you don't want to.

I believe Aikido can be 2. Otherwise, the whole discussion in this thread won't have any meaning.

Aiki training is simply too slow a path to be feasible for something like MMA. Even if you updated the focus so training centered around the most available and reliable techniques, you’d still have to go the path of developing the aiki principles.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Aiki training is simply too slow a path to be feasible for something like MMA. Even if you updated the focus so training centered around the most available and reliable techniques, you’d still have to go the path of developing the aiki principles.

Is Aiki principle as simple as you force your opponent to move (in circle or in straight line). You then take advantage on his weight distribution? It happens all the time in wrestling.

 

[Taiji Rebel]

To have knowledge of how others see things.

Aikido is not one thing with one correct description. Take a 1,000 different Aikido schools and you’ll find a 1,000 different answers for Aikido. Certainly different groups that hang together have similar purposes. Yes some Aikido is not done for martial purposes by design, especially as Ueshiba aged he merged his own religious thoughts into his later teachings. You find a wide range of different aikido practices each coming from different era’s of Ueshiba teaching from different decades - Victor Smith