Other arts view of Aikido

[Despairbear]

Greetsings all,

I have encountered a opinion in my travels that Aikido is not an "effective" MA, that is has no purpose. Many people seem to regarde Aikido as a "defenceive" MA to be some how less than most other forms. Or that Aikido exists only for people to "worship" O'Sensei. Now I in no way agree with these ideas, my question is have you encountered this in your training, and if so do you think there is a way that we as martial artists can help to bring understanding to people about that art of Aikido?



Despair Bear

 

[GouRonin]

I used to think that all Aikidoists were gay @ssed fruity homos. I mean really, all that flowing around and dncing made me think that these guys had a thing for wearing dresses and doing breakfalls.

But I met a guy who did some neat stuff and showed me why it works, and then made it work on me. (He was an Aiki-ju-jitsu guy, he's on here as well) These guys drop themselves out of respect for what the technique COULD do to them. The problem as I see it is that some of these guys never leave that stage and when they get in trouble they don't understand why their opponent doesn't drop.

It's like that in any art. You have the people who actually do it and those that play. How many times have I seen American Kenpoists who look like they're "slappy-slappy" masters? (Get it? Slappy-slappy, tapi-tapi? Oh man, I am on a roll today!)

So the stuff does work, but as with many arts, it's the practitioner, not the art, that does the work.
:soapbox:

 

[Despairbear]

Out of respect for what that throw could do, odd way to put it. In my dojo we fall and roll to protect our selves from broken bones. If you don't know how to protect your self in a fight your gonna get hurt really bad. Obiviously we take it at a pace that each student can deal with and injurys are minimal.




Despair Bear

 

[GouRonin]

I say respect in the manner that if some guy is cranking you with a wrist lock you front roll as was his intention or you deal with the broken wrist.

 

[Mao]

As for thinking that aikidoka are gay @ssed sissy boys or whatever, Oh well, some are! But then there are those types in many other arts as well. I would be curious to know how many people who don't think that aikido "really" works ever spent much time in the style. Mayhap they are too insecure in themselves to wear kulots/skorts.
"Hey, whatya wearin' under yer kilt"
I can tell you from experience that once you truly understand the escence of aikido you can make it rather devestating.........or not. It is a stlye that one needs to spend more time at to become very effective than some others. Many people are too impatient. "We'll throw no attacker before his time."
Hey Gatorade, lets dance! :boing2: :lol: :wavey: :boing1:

 

[Cthulhu]

I think we have to keep in mind that aikido is almost by definition a budo, where the development of the individual takes precedence over self-defense and combat applications. Some of the techniques (as normally performed) would not work if the attacker simply let go.

Having said that, how effective the art is depends on the person doing it. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to make the moves effective for self-defense. I guess ultimately the art is what you make of it.

Cthulhu

 

[Mao]

Cthulu, inasmuch as what you said has been stated above twice, I agree with you that it is what you make it. This is so with many other styles also. Alot of styles have movements in them that one may not necessarily use in reality. It is not always as easy as you hit me, I hit you and we all live happily ever after. I personally believe that if you can control/contain an attacker without killing him everyone is better off. This brings to mind the dilema that police officers have with their use of force continueum.

 

[Rubber Ducky]

Originally posted by Cthulhu
I think we have to keep in mind that aikido is almost by definition a budo, where the development of the individual takes precedence over self-defense and combat applications.

Although Aikido is a budo, it is meant to work. There are prominent Aikido Shihan who have stated publically that if the techniques don't work, then it's not Aikido.

Think about it, if the techniques and training are meant to teach us something, then those teachings are in the techniques - if the techniques don't work then the teachings are missing, or at least flawed.

Some of the techniques (as normally performed) would not work if the attacker simply let go.
[/B]

That's why my instructor says "There is always atemi". He spends a great deal of time explaining why you hold on, it's ukemi in the truest sense of the word. You are receiving the technique while keeping yourself safe, letting go often opens you up for something worse. Generally letting go means that a throw turns into an elbow, a neck crank, a choke, something other than merely taking the ukemi as specified. Uke holds for a reason, and if uke doesn't hold some people will happily give you that reason

Pierre

 

[Despairbear]

Yes an attacker can just "let go" and a throw may stop there. Your goal has been achived, your attacker is in a position to do you no harm. Yes you can cause an opening with an atemi alowing you to perform a throw or lock but why do you feel the need to defend your self from some one who is not attacking you? I was asked once by a new student "What would you do with Aikido if I just stood here and did not grab you or anything?". My Responce was "Nothing".



Despair Bear

 

[Rubber Ducky]

Originally posted by Despairbear
Yes an attacker can just "let go" and a throw may stop there. Your goal has been achived, your attacker is in a position to do you no harm. Yes you can cause an opening with an atemi alowing you to perform a throw or lock but why do you feel the need to defend your self from some one who is not attacking you? I was asked once by a new student "What would you do with Aikido if I just stood here and did not grab you or anything?". My Responce was "Nothing".



Despair Bear

Well just because an attacker has let go that does not mean he is in a position to do you no harm. In fact I would assume just the opposite. If someone has shown the intent to attack, and attacked, then does not protect themselves properly during the technique being performed, it just means they do not know the proper ukemi - it doesn't mean they are harmless. The technique still needs to be "finished" somehow.

I had a friend ask me "What would you do if I did this?" then swing at me. He stopped before he hit me, so I did nothing. Then he said "You didn't do anything" and I replied "You didn't hit me". But that is not the same situation as being part way through a technique on someone and having them let go - the technique was initiated because someone attacked you, so finish it. If they let go, change techniques.

Pierre

 

[Despairbear]

Interesting point, I think we are talking about a philisophical choise here not nessisaraly a martial one. When I am using Aikido my goal is not to throw or lock-up my attacker, my goal is to keep myself safe. If an attacker lets go during a throw my goal has been reached, his/her attack did not harm me. Obviously I am not going to put my self in a open position but if some one is not attacking you why shoudl you need to defend your self? Again I think this is a philisophical point rather than a martial one.



Despair Bear

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Despairbear
but if some one is not attacking you why shoudl you need to defend your self? Again I think this is a philisophical point rather than a martial one.

It's both; this is why martial artists are encouraged to read treatises on philosophy and/or strategy such as the Book of Five Rings and so on. The philosophy you cite leads to one strategy, whereas others may feel that "the best defense is a strong offense" which leads to different strategies. Your martial strategy follows from your philosophy.

 

[Rubber Ducky]

Originally posted by Despairbear
Interesting point, I think we are talking about a philisophical choise here not nessisaraly a martial one. When I am using Aikido my goal is not to throw or lock-up my attacker, my goal is to keep myself safe. If an attacker lets go during a throw my goal has been reached, his/her attack did not harm me. Obviously I am not going to put my self in a open position but if some one is not attacking you why shoudl you need to defend your self? Again I think this is a philisophical point rather than a martial one.



Despair Bear

I suppose you could consider it philosophy, but I don't think so. I also feel no need to initiate a technique on someone who has not attacked me, well except in practice, but I'm not going to assume that the attack is over just because the agressor has poor ukemi.

So, is the goal of Aikido to simply halt that one, stand-alone, attack or to neutralize the entire spectra of attack that the agressor has brought to the table? I think the goal is to neutralize the spectra, that is control the agressor through technique (physical or otherwise) and negate any possible attack.

As a hypothetical:

Suppose someone grabs me in the classic barroom double wrist grab (prelude to a headbutt) and I initiate tenchi nage. I get the off balance, but uke lets go of the "ten" hand leaving me unable to finish the throw. I am still in danger here, so my response is to continue the natural motion of the "ten" hand and smack uke right in the chops - I've been taught that the action of the "ten" hand is atemi and uke holds on to avoid the smack. From here I can throw as usual, but uke gets the smack.

Perhaps this is a bad example because it is obvious that you are still in danger, but I think it is illustrative.

Suppose, then, that uke is surprised by the fact that he is off-balance and lets go of both hands in desperation. Now you are no longer immediately under attack, but I feel that you still have to do something. My answer would still be atemi.

I think we're on the same page, it could just be semantics.

Pierre

 

[Mao]

Many of the aikidoka that I have trained with have never practiced another style. Some think that aikido is the end all to beat all. Please keep in mind that I love aikido. In class recently I was asked what if someone is just throwing jabs at you. This persons thought was that you would simply track the jab back and try kotegeish. When I demonstrated that it may not be that simple, i.e. I was moving aroung and following up the jab, he was at a loss. He apparently got stuck in the mode of " I'll strike at you and hold still long enough for you to do a technique on me". My point was that it isn't always that easy. It would be nice if every attack was a commited one and you had plenty of intent or momentum to work with. Atemi is very important sometimes. Combat is very "alive" and constantly moving, changing. That's way we train,eh? The more ways of movement you learn, the less likely you'll be taken by complete surprise on the street. Of course if one can control an attacker and not mame or destroy them, everyone is better off. If one can.

 

[Despairbear]

Aikido is a martial art, if you take the martial out something vital to Aikido is lost. In my dojo we practice with jabs, random attacks, attacks with bottles, pool cues, or what ever else we think of. Yes combat should be fluid and alive you will never truely know what your opponet is going to do so you should be ready for almost anything. Personaly I love to cross train out of Aikido, I think it makes my Aikido that much better. Aikido grants a great freedom in comabt, the freedom of options.





Depsair Bear

 

[tshadowchaser]

Anyone who views Akido as as harmless has never been put in a wrist locck or been trown by a practictioner of the art. Look at where the art came from and the changes that took place in its development ( fom a combat art to the more peaceful art we see today) if one can not see that most techniques can be painful or deadly than they are not really looking.
No I do not practice this art::
Shadow

 

[Despairbear]

Yes the throws and locks in Aikido can be deadly, but one of the greatest thing about Aikido (in my opnion) is the ability to ajust the level of damge you do to your attacker. Last night a drunken relative tryed strike me (thats it people keep drinking......grumble) It was not apropeate for me to floor this person nor was it propper fror me to break their arm or wrist. I was able to control the person with out harm to myself or them and in doing so I was able to show them what a mistake they had made with out physical harm.






Despair Bear

 

[GouRonin]

If you drop one relative just once with everyone watching they tend to leave u alone the rest of the time.

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by GouRonin
If you drop one relative just once with everyone watching they tend to leave u alone the rest of the time.

I choked a bully purple once in high school using a slight modification of a technique I had learned in a short course on jujitsu. It changed his attitude for the rest of the year as well as the attitudes of those around him. It's simply amazing what oxygen deprivation can do.

I did aikido for about a year before I badly sprained my wrist doing karate. That made aikido difficult and I never got back to it.

 

[Mao]

Ya' know,
It's never to late to take up such an obviously superior style again.