Aikido hate

is this the old, if they don't do it in mma it doesn't work argument ?

MMA is an easy way to provide visable evidence that something is happening. Lots of fights lots of different siuations and lots of it on video.

It is the same dynamic no matter where you take it. Unless you want to suggest gloces or a ref or rules or something changed that outcome.
 
there is also the 80/20 rule of economics'. They being that training so you can deal with 80% of attackers makes good sense in the use of time and resources. And 80 % of people are not trained fighter and even if they are they won't be very good ones
you know that's not a real rule. Right? You can literally apply it to anything. Did you know that 20% of martial arts styles have 80% of the students?

20% of techniques cause 80% of the injuries. You can literally make up anything. :)
 
MMA is an easy way to provide visable evidence that something is happening. Lots of fights lots of different siuations and lots of it on video.

It is the same dynamic no matter where you take it. Unless you want to suggest gloces or a ref or rules or something changed that outcome.

at least by the time it gets to big shows and on you tube, they are a self selecting group of elite athletes , not uncommonly jacked up on steroids. And full of rage

heavy weight boxing champs would struggle against them, but then we don't get. Boxing doesn't work because its not in mma. Of mmaers competing in karate comps for that matter.
 
I'll say this off the bat: depending on why you want to learn it, Aikido is a very good martial art, as far as self-defense goes. From all I've seen and read, it's deceptively technical. My two cents on the OP's central question is that any "hate" Aikido receives from MMA fans stems from the fact that the style isn't known to effectively transition into MMA training; I remember saying in another thread that Aikido was meant purely to defend against and safely neutralize the common thug, and I stand by that statement. The thing with Aikido is that you have to think about how./why it was developed, and what techniques and principles were stripped from it (Aikijujutsu/Japanese Jujutsu -> Judo -> Brazilian Jujitsu -> Aikido -> Small Circle Jujutsu). As well-suited for defending yourself Aikido is, it simply lacks in offensive options.

And to answer another question I read earlier (to paraphrase, "Why Steven Seagal is bad for Aikido?"), I personally think that numerous personal failures/shortcomings aside, his movies portray Aikido in a negative and hypocritical light. Out of all the stuff he's accused of lying about, one of the very few truths is that he was/is a very talented Aikido practitioner, and was indeed one of the very first Westerners to run a dojo in Japan. Having said that, the depiction of Aikido in his movies is basically everything that it's against; excessive violence, aggression, and the deliberate harm of others. While there are a lot of con artists who'll try to promote their own bastardized version of Aikido featuring chi energy/no-touch KO's, Steven Seagal can be considered just as bad a role model for the art.
 
you know that's not a real rule. Right? You can literally apply it to anything. Did you know that 20% of martial arts styles have 80% of the students?

20% of techniques cause 80% of the injuries. You can literally make up anything. :)
well yes it is a real rule,its called the law of diminishing returns
 
It's actually called the Pareto principle, and it is misused like crazy.
I knew that but,couldn't spell pareto, yes it is, but not by me, I used it correctly. There is an optimal point, where investing addition resources', in this case time and,effort. To be good enough to defends against an attacker you will probably never be attacked by is pointless,
 
at least by the time it gets to big shows and on you tube, they are a self selecting group of elite athletes , not uncommonly jacked up on steroids. And full of rage

heavy weight boxing champs would struggle against them, but then we don't get. Boxing doesn't work because its not in mma. Of mmaers competing in karate comps for that matter.

Which is nice but has nothing to do with my point. Which is up to and including elite athletes people are not even getting out of the way of big winging right hands. Let alone entering and throwing people off it.

Steroid rage should work in Aikidos favor by the way. Rage was one of the components that makes Aikido work.
 
god you have got slow reactions haven't you, you need to work on that, start by practicing catching a ball

Given I am top 9% I will suggest everyone does exept you. Which is what i said earlier.

I noticed your score is missing by the way.
 
Last edited:
I knew that but,couldn't spell pareto, yes it is, but not by me, I used it correctly. There is an optimal point, where investing addition resources', in this case time and,effort. To be good enough to defends against an attacker you will probably never be attacked by is pointless,
did you know 80% of people who use the 80/20 rule eat 20% of the world's cashews? It's true. Science FTW!
 
Which is nice but has nothing to do with my point. Which is up to and including elite athletes people are not even getting out of the way of big winging right hands. Let alone entering and throwing people off it.

Steroid rage should work in Aikidos favor by the way. Rage was one of the components that makes Aikido work.
no, they are going to beat anyone up, boxer karate, judo and,aikido, but its only ackidio that gets the flack.
rage might be bad, but rage backed up with big muscles is a hard, combination
 
Given I am top 9% I will suggest everyone does exept you. Which is what i said earlier.

I noticed your score is missing by the way.
top 9% of the people who have taken the test or top 9% of the actual population? The average is between 2 and 3 10 ths of a second and you are at 5 10 ths of a second

my conscious reaction time is less than 2ths

my point was that sub conscious reaction time is quicker, but some what hard to measure
 
no, they are going to beat anyone up, boxer karate, judo and,aikido, but its only ackidio that gets the flack.
rage might be bad, but rage backed up with big muscles is a hard, combination

Because I have an Aikido instructor telling me that he can reliably counter something that those guys can't

With no indication of how he can possibly achieve it.

Aikido should get flack if they can't do what they say they can do. Especially if that person is trusting that instructor to give them a skill they may actually need.
 
top 9% of the people who have taken the test or top 9% of the actual population? The average is between 2 and 3 10 ths of a second and you are at 5 10 ths of a second

my conscious reaction time is less than 2ths

my point was that sub conscious reaction time is quicker, but some what hard to measure

Do the test.
 
Just want to point out that a really really good batter misses almost every time. They get three strikes every at bat and even then don't hit more than 1/3 of the time.

I think the key is to expect to fail and prepare for contingency.
Yes, but he's dealing with a small object coming nearly straight in, not attached to a person who can be disrupted. And "miss" includes when he actually hits it, but someone catches it, or it goes where he doesn't want it to. Not much like what we face when dealing with punches.
 
I am with Drop Bear on this, I can't think of any reason to consciously train against a sloppy attacker over a good one and an art that relies on the attacker giving away his own balance (which would be the "aiki" part of Gerry's training if I understand correctly) would be highly unreliable.

There's a saying in French that goes "he who can do more, can do less", which means here that if you can handle a good hook punch for example, you'll be even more able to deal with a sloppy haymaker.
Very different openings available from a good hook and a sloppy haymaker, when dealing with taking structure for a throw. You can apply one to the other, where they cross over, but that doesn't make the tools for one obsolete. Interestingly, the only real difference is how they end up at the point of the technique.

And I'd agree. If an art is only useful if the guy gives up his balance on his own, it's going to have major weaknesses.
 
Not really. Not if you are relying on your subconscious to do too many things at too fast a rate. You do train to react quickly. But being quick in a fight you use tactics to trick the system a bit.
None of that changes that your previous statement isn't really accurate.
 
I don't know how baseball batters think about baseball. But you are talking about 2 pretty big changes in response. Entering and using someones weight against them requires you to move your whole body.

Most people cant do it.

We can see it because the big energy given strike is a common strike.

And yet nobody enters and does anything cool with it.

You see it most often with a mid kick catch.

That is a pretty small movement with a really big result. Yet you dont see it happen all that often.
I'm not sure how showing skilled people throwing skilled punches is supposed to be a counter, given I've said those are a different animal.

As for moving the whole body, pretty much all throws use that. Try to do a takedown without it. Heck, a wide range of punching involves stepping in, too. So, I'm not sure what your point is about having to move the body. We all do it, kind of a lot.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top