Are competitive Sport Martial Artists superior?

[O'Malley]

The issue is people can still use Gracie BJJ effectively today. And so don't really rely on Royce to flagship the style.

Because GJJ was transmitted effectively. Ueshiba was a poor teacher and most of the time nobody knew what he was talking about. Plus, his son deliberately changed the techniques to make them easier.

Plus, the core of his method (which is basically Daito Ryu), that is his body conditioning techniques, was seldom taught, even more rarely understood and almost never practiced to any significant degree. After years of research I've finally found someone that showed me some stuff, so I would need to train really hard for a while, then test it out in a competitive setting. But my progress has been painfully slow, to be honest, and my time is not infinite.

 

[Hanzou]

Because GJJ was transmitted effectively. Ueshiba was a poor teacher and most of the time nobody knew what he was talking about. Plus, his son deliberately changed the techniques to make them easier.

Plus, the core of his method (which is basically Daito Ryu), that is his body conditioning techniques, was seldom taught, even more rarely understood and almost never practiced to any significant degree. After years of research I've finally found someone that showed me some stuff, so I would need to train really hard for a while, then test it out in a competitive setting. But my progress has been painfully slow, to be honest, and my time is not infinite.

If Ueshiba's disciples are acknowledging that he was a poor teacher, why not be more open to altering the system instead of doggedly adhering to his method of teaching?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If Ueshiba's disciples are acknowledging that he was a poor teacher, why not be more open to altering the system instead of doggedly adhering to his method of teaching?

Unfortunately, I don't know many in the Aikido world who admit or understand this, though it does appear to be the case. I suspect he seemed to be teaching well to some (they thought they were picking up what he intended), but core information was lost. Or he left it out, which would be about as bad, from what I understand of the base of Daito-ryu.

I think some folks picked up some of the key principles, but my knowledge is too thin to understand whether what those folks passed on includes the core of Daito-ryu.

 

[drop bear]

Because GJJ was transmitted effectively. Ueshiba was a poor teacher and most of the time nobody knew what he was talking about. Plus, his son deliberately changed the techniques to make them easier.

Plus, the core of his method (which is basically Daito Ryu), that is his body conditioning techniques, was seldom taught, even more rarely understood and almost never practiced to any significant degree. After years of research I've finally found someone that showed me some stuff, so I would need to train really hard for a while, then test it out in a competitive setting. But my progress has been painfully slow, to be honest, and my time is not infinite.

My theory why bjj is transmitted effectively was that it was advanced by the students and the competitors. More so than the masters.

So as soon as say someone started smashing fools with leg locks. Everyone ran out there and learnt leg locks.

 

[caped crusader]

After years of research I've finally found someone that showed me some stuff, so I would need to train really hard for a while, then test it out in a competitive setting.

Can't wait to see this.
Don't keep us waiting too long.

 

[caped crusader]

 

[caped crusader]

The original Video of this fight has been out there for a while but I like this fight break down. His training on the mats competition or otherwise stood him in good stead.

 

[O'Malley]

If Ueshiba's disciples are acknowledging that he was a poor teacher, why not be more open to altering the system instead of doggedly adhering to his method of teaching?

Big question. I think that a lot of factors come into play. First, excessive respect towards the "creation" of Ueshiba (although almost 100% of what he did was Daito Ryu, except he expressed the concepts in terms of his Oomoto-kyo religion rather than the original Taoist-derived stuff). Second, an ostensibly strong focus on the "spiritual aspects" of the art, despite a lack of comprehension of these aspects. Third, a lack of technical leadership, as the biggest names in aikido have always had diverging methodologies and ideas. Fourth, the ego of masters that prevents them from questioning their own practice. Fifth, and most importantly, a lack of a common goal. Every aikidoka trains for different purposes and the only thing that kind of brings us together are lineage and a few common techniques (that everyone does differently anyway). You can't have any quality control when there's no quality standard.

Unfortunately, I don't know many in the Aikido world who admit or understand this, though it does appear to be the case. I suspect he seemed to be teaching well to some (they thought they were picking up what he intended), but core information was lost. Or he left it out, which would be about as bad, from what I understand of the base of Daito-ryu.

I think some folks picked up some of the key principles, but my knowledge is too thin to understand whether what those folks passed on includes the core of Daito-ryu.

Well, nobody knows what was going through his head. He did teach some basic conditioning but it was always very cryptic (for example he practiced very important and specific stretching exercises in front of his students but he did so as part of his morning prayer, so nobody picked that up). He talked about the physical principles behind the stretching, but using Daoist metaphysical imagery (that he learned from daito ryu but that originated in China) coated in terminology from Oomoto-kyo (= a small religious sect with incredibly complex mythology). For example, instead of saying "hold your head that way and let your body sink that way" he'd say "stand on the floating bridge of Heaven that brings together Izanagi and Izanami". It's indeed technical information, he'd repeat it often but how the hell were his students supposed to know what he meant? You'd need knowledge of both Daoist and Oomoto cosmology, as well as hands-on technical instruction.

And for trying to do the stuff myself, it is a freaking complex, boring and strict form of training with slow progress, even with guidance. There's no need to hide anything, as the secrets keep themselves and make you work damn hard for the slightest results. And Ueshiba further coated that with layers upon layers of mystical BS. Frankly, I don't think he was that interested in teaching in the first place and he just enjoyed the attention. When in a good mood, he'd show some stuff. If I understand the guy's personality (based on several biographies and interviews with subject-matter experts) he saw himself as some kind of half-god and therefore it didn't matter if people didn't get it, as long as he'd ascend to godhood, but hey if they managed to grasp some stuff good for them.

My theory why bjj is transmitted effectively was that it was advanced by the students and the competitors. More so than the masters.

So as soon as say someone started smashing fools with leg locks. Everyone ran out there and learnt leg locks.

Agreed. Competition provides an art's community with a common goal towards which they can work. Innovation is encouraged and successes feed the art. Ironically, aikidoka like to talk about spontaneity but aikido is one of the most stale martial arts around. And also, when one looks at iconic daito ryu masters like Takeda or Ueshiba, those guys gravitated towards other skilled martial artists and frequently exchanged with them. If they were alive today, there's a good chance they'd do MMA.

That's why I think Tomiki was onto something with his idea of competition. It provides a common ruleset to train your timing and distancing, deal with resistance, exchange, innovate, challenge yourself and bring together people from all lineages. The rules may not be perfect, but nothing prevents us from improving them over time.

But even here, there are big obstacles. The biggest and most authoritative aikido organisation (the Aikikai, run by the founder's descendants) is violently against competition. Part of this is due to the decades-old decision to position aikido as "the non competitive martial art" for marketing purposes. Part of this is for fear of losing influence (and the money of affiliates) to the bodies that would organise said competitions. And another problem is that the Aikikai is trying to tap into the funds of the Olympic Committee and would see the emergence of "sports aikido" organisations as a threat to its wallet.

 

[caped crusader]

want to see anyone trying Aikido with Mike...

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My theory why bjj is transmitted effectively was that it was advanced by the students and the competitors. More so than the masters.

So as soon as say someone started smashing fools with leg locks. Everyone ran out there and learnt leg locks.

Agreed. I do think one issue TMA's (including the moderately traditional ones) run into is that we tend to really like the tradition, so we depend upon folks with many years in that tradition to guide evolution. But the longer we are in the tradition, the less likely we are to innovate.

 

[hoshin1600]

I've stated my opinions on Aikido several times over the years, I'm not interested in repeating it again.
My point however still stands. The opinion that competitive MA is better than others is only a bias toward the presupposition that fighting is the only goal of martial arts. We know this is not true.

 

[Hanzou]

I've stated my opinions on Aikido several times over the years, I'm not interested in repeating it again.
My point however still stands. The opinion that competitive MA is better than others is only a bias toward the presupposition that fighting is the only goal of martial arts. We know this is not true.

I always find it odd when people attempt to separate martial arts from fighting when the very thing we’re talking about teaches people how to break limbs, choke people, or kick folks in the face.

 

[_Simon_]

I always find it odd when people attempt to separate martial arts from fighting when the very thing we’re talking about teaches people how to break limbs, choke people, or kick folks in the face.

Is a person that practices and refines their writing style aiming to be the best objective calligrapher, the #1 selling author or poet, the most literal and clearest communicator, newspaper editor, or using it as a vehicle of expression, a therapy, simply to improve their own writing or learn how to write again after a debilitating accident?

Of course MA involves fighting. Some people aren't interested in the pragmatic, measurable outcome-based training. As said earlier, the fighting aspect can be a means or an end, or somewhere inbetween.

 

[drop bear]

I've stated my opinions on Aikido several times over the years, I'm not interested in repeating it again.
My point however still stands. The opinion that competitive MA is better than others is only a bias toward the presupposition that fighting is the only goal of martial arts. We know this is not true.

No it doesn't. You created that presupposition yourself.

If you want to create some measure for. I don't know whatever. Then create that and fairly compare the systems.

You can't create this void and then just fill it with whatever you want.

 

[Hanzou]

Is a person that practices and refines their writing style aiming to be the best objective calligrapher, the #1 selling author or poet, the most literal and clearest communicator, newspaper editor, or using it as a vehicle of expression, a therapy, simply to improve their own writing or learn how to write again after a debilitating accident?

Of course MA involves fighting. Some people aren't interested in the pragmatic, measurable outcome-based training. As said earlier, the fighting aspect can be a means or an end, or somewhere inbetween.

Okay, but if you're refining your writing style, your aim is to be a better writer, regardless of what your goal is. The very fact that you're spending time improving a skill means that your aim is to improve THAT skill.

Now, what is my aim if I'm in Japanese pajamas learning how to break someone's wrist? You can slap all the fancy/enlightened/religious junk you want to that practice, but the bottom line is that your aim is to become very good at snapping someone's wrist, and causing harm to that person. When I'm rolling around on a mat perfecting a triangle choke, my aim isn't to become the next Rickson Gracie or Gordon Ryan, my aim is to become proficient at choking someone unconscious (maybe even to death) with my legs.

Why are we playing these silly games? You're learning a martial art because you want to become proficient at fighting. You can apply fighting to a multitude or activities, from self defense, to competition, to confidence building, to discipline, but it ALL revolves around fighting. If you wanted to become a better person or get in shape via a nonviolent activity, you'd be doing calligraphy or ballet. You wouldn't be learning how to literally hurt, maim or kill people.

 

[Steve]

I always find it odd when people attempt to separate martial arts from fighting when the very thing we’re talking about teaches people how to break limbs, choke people, or kick folks in the face.

I agree. I always think about Moby Dick, a symbol of many things, but still also a whale. The story doesn’t work if you can’t read it literally first, and then explore the other meanings.

Is a person that practices and refines their writing style aiming to be the best objective calligrapher, the #1 selling author or poet, the most literal and clearest communicator, newspaper editor, or using it as a vehicle of expression, a therapy, simply to improve their own writing or learn how to write again after a debilitating accident?

Of course MA involves fighting. Some people aren't interested in the pragmatic, measurable outcome-based training. As said earlier, the fighting aspect can be a means or an end, or somewhere inbetween.

no but they are writing. The problem is that not all MA does involve fighting. And where it doesn’t take the development of fighting skill seriously, any other ancillary benefits will be undermined because the activity itself lacks integrity.

 

[hoshin1600]

No it doesn't. You created that presupposition yourself.

If you want to create some measure for. I don't know whatever. Then create that and fairly compare the systems.

You can't create this void and then just fill it with whatever you want.

I dont understand what you mean by creating a void. But here is an example of what I mean.
My 70 year old aunt practices and teaches Taichi. She started when she was in her 50s. She has no, nor has she ever had any interest in fighting. Tai chi is a recognized martial art.
It is absolutely impossible to convince her, that her art has NO Value because she can't fight. That argument is preposterous. Values are not universal, they are expressed through the individual. values can be shared among a group, but that does not invalidate the values of others. And that is persicly what the "all about fighting" argument is trying to do. Hanzo is trying to invalidate other people's values and substitute his own. Partially out of ignorance, where those within his group share his values of competence of fighting so he thinks that's the ONLY view point and partially out of an immature and narcissistic attempt to put others down to increase his self perception of superiority.
Some people Value fighting and some people don't.
I'm pretty sure all the Koryu sword practitioners on this sight and around the world, are well aware that a gun is better in a fight than a sword. I'm also pretty sure they don't care because real combative fighting is not the point.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Okay, but if you're refining your writing style, your aim is to be a better writer, regardless of what your goal is. The very fact that you're spending time improving a skill means that your aim is to improve THAT skill.

Now, what is my aim if I'm in Japanese pajamas learning how to break someone's wrist? You can slap all the fancy/enlightened/religious junk you want to that practice, but the bottom line is that your aim is to become very good at snapping someone's wrist, and causing harm to that person. When I'm rolling around on a mat perfecting a triangle choke, my aim isn't to become the next Rickson Gracie or Gordon Ryan, my aim is to become proficient at choking someone unconscious (maybe even to death) with my legs.

Why are we playing these silly games? You're learning a martial art because you want to become proficient at fighting. You can apply fighting to a multitude or activities, from self defense, to competition, to confidence building, to discipline, but it ALL revolves around fighting. If you wanted to become a better person or get in shape via a nonviolent activity, you'd be doing calligraphy or ballet. You wouldn't be learning how to literally hurt, maim or kill people.

For some people, it really isn’t. Sometimes, folks just like the discipline the process requires. Some just like the physicality. Some like the flow of it - a sort of moving meditation. And some really like the philosophy. And some like a combination of those things.

Which is why some don’t really care how good their training prepares them for a fight.

 

[hoshin1600]

This argument reminds me of an old consumer report, that tried to convince me that I should get rid of my corvette for a 1992 chevy Malibu. Because the corvette was not roomy, did not have good cargo space, poor gas mileage, did not seat a family of 4 and was 2x more expensive and thus was not worth the money.

 

[Hanzou]

For some people, it really isn’t. Sometimes, folks just like the discipline the process requires. Some just like the physicality. Some like the flow of it - a sort of moving meditation. And some really like the philosophy. And some like a combination of those things.

Which is why some don’t really care how good their training prepares them for a fight.

All of that relates to fighting dude.

Let's take Aikido for example;

The discipline the process requires.... of snapping someone's wrist with little effort.
Enjoy the physicality .......... of snapping someone's wrist.
The flow ...... of redirecting a punch and snapping someone's wrist.
The philosophy....... of being so incredibly good at snapping someone's wrist that you'll only do it if absolutely necessary.