The big disconnect. Or a follow up from Aikido vs MMA.

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm not sure that,screw driver hammer comparison holds up, you can very much judge the quality of a,screw driver by if it bends when you hit it with hammer, a good quality screwdriver should be impervious to a few hammer blows, admittedly you are using it to compare screw driver not hammer against driver, but still!

My best screwdriver is electric. It does a better job driving screws than anything I own, and can drive more screws deeper into harder wood than I could ever do by hand. Hitting it hard with a hammer will do damage to it. It's still a better screwdriver than any of the ones that would be unharmed by the hammer.

 

[hoshin1600]

to test something is really trying to apply the scientific method. one of the challenges of this is to develop a proper test that will give proper results. aikido vs bjj doesnt do this and it doesnt impress me. if you want a fair comparison, put the bjj guy and the aikido guy side by side have them both fight a boxer, a TKD guy, a guy with a knife and one with a machette together at the same time, and last event ..a guy with a gun. tally up the results and see were we stand.
against 2 assailants one with a machette and one with a knife my money will be on the skilled aikido guy every time.

 

[hoshin1600]

I go back and forth on that last point. If we view Aikido as an add-on (what I think it originally was), then I agree with you. If we view it as a stand-alone art (the way it is most commonly taught), I think it needs a dominance and control game of some sort. It needs a vehicle to make the aiki more available and useful, and to fill the areas where it isn't.

agreed, but aikido can be the core art with something else added on. aikido doesnt have to re invent the wheel ,you can add like i believe your art has some, judo and then add some skill in Bjj. we do not have to redefine and recreate aikido

the only reason i see that people want to recreate it is because they believe aiki as it stands is invalid

 

[jobo]

My best screwdriver is electric. It does a better job driving screws than anything I own, and can drive more screws deeper into harder wood than I could ever do by hand. Hitting it hard with a hammer will do damage to it. It's still a better screwdriver than any of the ones that would be unharmed by the hammer.

only with in the limitation of its design, ! Electric screw driver are pretty good at putting screws in, but next to useless at getting rusty or damaged screws out, at which point you want one that you can hammer to get some purchase. With. They are also weak at driving slotted screws,it just ends badly if you try

that said i own a early 90s bosh electric screwdriver that is next to useless at driving screws electrically( not enough power) , but its so robustly made. That it excels at just being a,screwdriver you can hammer to get rusty damaged screws out of door hinges.

there are a whole class of screw driver made to be hammer , they have a metal top to them, and of course. The impact driver, which has no other purpose than being hammered

nb, get a gimlet, it makes driving screws by hand a piece of cake and isn't prone to splitting the wood like a powerful electric one might

 

[wab25]

One thing we need to do, is to have good expectations. Not all arts have the same expectation. Testing our arts is great. The problem is applying one arts expectations to another art and then judging usefulness based on the outcome. We start with Aikido vs MMA, in an MMA style test. Thats like taking an MMA fighter and putting him in a boxing match, under boxing rules with boxing expectations. That didn't work out so well for McGregor. (well, except for his pay check) Should we then conclude that MMA is useless because McGregor got stopped in a boxing match? Its the same as putting a judo guy in a kickboxing match. Has not turned out well for Ronda Rousy. Are we to conclude that Judo is useless because she was knocked out in a kickboxing match. (technically it was MMA, but there was very little Judo involved)

The point is that Judo is great for throwing, choking, and grappling. Not so great at punching and kicking. BJJ is great on the ground, not so much at punching, kicking or getting people to the ground. Boxing is really good for punching... not much else though. Kickboxing is great for kicking and punching, but throwing, pinning and arm baring, no so much.

Aikido is interesting, in that many people have the wrong expectation of it. Even many who practice or teach, have the wrong expectation of it. Its not about arm bar throws, wrist throws or really any finishing moves. Aikido is about blending, and taking the other guys balance through blending with him. The instant he touches you, you are in the process of taking his balance by blending with him. The parts about the guy falling down, flying through the air or tapping, are not the point. Yes, he does that to protect himself. But more importantly, he does that to learn the blending... the main point of the art. If you can blend, and take the guys balance there are any number of martial attacks to use, at the point. Some look like aikido, some look like boxing, some like karate or judo or really whatever. The finish is not what aikido is about, it is the blending and entrance. The reason they have the finishes that they do, is that those more fully demonstrate and teach the principles of aikido... not because they are martially effective.

The BJJ guy in the first video, talked about how he took the principles of aikido and applied them in BJJ. He even thought BJJ guys should learn the blending ideas. He got it. There are lots of pieces to being a complete martial artist. Throwing, grappling, pinning, ckoking, punching, kicking, trapping... Different arts focus on the different pieces in different ways. Whether an art is successful and useful should be based on whether that art can contribute its principles to the practitioners. Aikido gave the BJJ guy the principles of blending and off balancing, which he was successfully able to apply in BJJ and other arts. That is the success of Aikido. It is the same for Judo. If studying Judo can make you better at throwing and choking... it is useful. As martial artists, we need to choose what is of most worth for each of us to study. It may be different for each of us. It may change over time. But I would not say Judo is useless and must change, since it can't produce a good boxer.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

only with in the limitation of its design, ! Electric screw driver are pretty good at putting screws in, but next to useless at getting rusty or damaged screws out, at which point you want one that you can hammer to get some purchase. With. They are also weak at driving slotted screws,it just ends badly if you try

that said i own a early 90s bosh electric screwdriver that is next to useless at driving screws electrically( not enough power) , but its so robustly made. That it excels at just being a,screwdriver you can hammer to get rusty damaged screws out of door hinges.

there are a whole class of screw driver made to be hammer , they have a metal top to them, and of course. The impact driver, which has no other purpose than being hammered

nb, get a gimlet, it makes driving screws by hand a piece of cake and isn't prone to splitting the wood like a powerful electric one might

That all fits the point. A tool can be good for its purpose, and fail the "hit it with a hammer" test. And it might not be great for related purposes, so if you need to do those things, another tool might work better.

 

[jobo]

That all fits the point. A tool can be good for its purpose, and fail the "hit it with a hammer" test. And it might not be great for related purposes, so if you need to do those things, another tool might work better.

no any tool of quality can take being hit with a hammer, just coz you have a crappy elecy driver doesn't change that

 

[Gerry Seymour]

no any tool of quality can take being hit with a hammer, just coz you have a crappy elecy driver doesn't change that

You're judging it as "crappy" by a test that has no relevance to its utility. I've owned it for a decade. It has never failed, and has driven screws I'd never have tried to drive by hand. It has survived falls from ladders, etc. with only scrapes. But give me a decent hammer, and I could crack the case with one blow. But that doesn't matter. It's still a good screwdriver. There are certainly tougher ones (like the one I had before it), and they are also heavier and cost more, so there's a trade-off. My previous electric driver would probably have taken a half dozen decent hammer shots (unless I got lucky and caught it just right), but wasn't as good at driving screws. Since the point of the driver is to drive screws, this one is more functional. If I need to warm up my hammer, there are better places to do that than my screwdriver.

 

[hoshin1600]

One thing we need to do, is to have good expectations. Not all arts have the same expectation. Testing our arts is great. The problem is applying one arts expectations to another art and then judging usefulness based on the outcome. We start with Aikido vs MMA, in an MMA style test. Thats like taking an MMA fighter and putting him in a boxing match, under boxing rules with boxing expectations. That didn't work out so well for McGregor. (well, except for his pay check) Should we then conclude that MMA is useless because McGregor got stopped in a boxing match? Its the same as putting a judo guy in a kickboxing match. Has not turned out well for Ronda Rousy. Are we to conclude that Judo is useless because she was knocked out in a kickboxing match. (technically it was MMA, but there was very little Judo involved)

The point is that Judo is great for throwing, choking, and grappling. Not so great at punching and kicking. BJJ is great on the ground, not so much at punching, kicking or getting people to the ground. Boxing is really good for punching... not much else though. Kickboxing is great for kicking and punching, but throwing, pinning and arm baring, no so much.

Aikido is interesting, in that many people have the wrong expectation of it. Even many who practice or teach, have the wrong expectation of it. Its not about arm bar throws, wrist throws or really any finishing moves. Aikido is about blending, and taking the other guys balance through blending with him. The instant he touches you, you are in the process of taking his balance by blending with him. The parts about the guy falling down, flying through the air or tapping, are not the point. Yes, he does that to protect himself. But more importantly, he does that to learn the blending... the main point of the art. If you can blend, and take the guys balance there are any number of martial attacks to use, at the point. Some look like aikido, some look like boxing, some like karate or judo or really whatever. The finish is not what aikido is about, it is the blending and entrance. The reason they have the finishes that they do, is that those more fully demonstrate and teach the principles of aikido... not because they are martially effective.

The BJJ guy in the first video, talked about how he took the principles of aikido and applied them in BJJ. He even thought BJJ guys should learn the blending ideas. He got it. There are lots of pieces to being a complete martial artist. Throwing, grappling, pinning, ckoking, punching, kicking, trapping... Different arts focus on the different pieces in different ways. Whether an art is successful and useful should be based on whether that art can contribute its principles to the practitioners. Aikido gave the BJJ guy the principles of blending and off balancing, which he was successfully able to apply in BJJ and other arts. That is the success of Aikido. It is the same for Judo. If studying Judo can make you better at throwing and choking... it is useful. As martial artists, we need to choose what is of most worth for each of us to study. It may be different for each of us. It may change over time. But I would not say Judo is useless and must change, since it can't produce a good boxer.

exactly.. to test validity we need to use more than one metric.

 

[jobo]

You're judging it as "crappy" by a test that has no relevance to its utility. I've owned it for a decade. It has never failed, and has driven screws I'd never have tried to drive by hand. It has survived falls from ladders, etc. with only scrapes. But give me a decent hammer, and I could crack the case with one blow. But that doesn't matter. It's still a good screwdriver. There are certainly tougher ones (like the one I had before it), and they are also heavier and cost more, so there's a trade-off. My previous electric driver would probably have taken a half dozen decent hammer shots (unless I got lucky and caught it just right), but wasn't as good at driving screws. Since the point of the driver is to drive screws, this one is more functional. If I need to warm up my hammer, there are better places to do that than my screwdriver.

the manufactures will as part of the test process hit it with a hammer to see what impact resistance it has, there fore hitting with a hammer IS a relevant test

 

[Gerry Seymour]

the manufactures will as part of the test process hit it with a hammer to see what impact resistance it has, there fore hitting with a hammer IS a relevant test

Not to its function at driving screws, it isn't. Just because a test is used, that doesn't make it valid.

 

[hoshin1600]

the manufactures will as part of the test process hit it with a hammer to see what impact resistance it has, there fore hitting with a hammer IS a relevant test

i was in the construction trade for over 10 years. your full of it. only a moron hits the tools he makes his living from with a hammer. they will all break. any tool not used for its intended purpose gets ruined.

 

[hoshin1600]

how the F did this thread turn into a hardware store dialog.

 

[Steve]

Let me re frame the issue.
A gun is a tool.
A knife is a tool. So is BJJ so is Aikido. You don't test a screwdriver by smashing it with a hammer an then say "see the screwdriver didn't hold up to the hammer, the hammer is the best"
Because the screwdriver is bent and broken. You can't test aikido with bjj. The equivalent would be to pull a firearm on you from across the room and say...ok do some of that ju jitsy stuff and see if you can stop this bullet.
The way I see it is aikido and bjj are different tools. They apply to different aspect of the defensive spectrum in a violent encounter. Aikido is good for the initial contact (it's a facilitator for what ever is next) bjj is good for the middle (establishing dominance and control ) then a little ground and pound is great for the finnish. I used the example of use the aiki move as a facilitator then run but it could also be to gain distance to draw my firearm. Aikido is best used for a different purpose then bjj. That's why you can't just pit one again the other on a mat and see which one is better. They really have different functions.

You might not test the screwdriver by smashing it with a hammer. But if someone asked you to connect two boards together with a nail, and then handed you a screwdriver to do it, you'd test the screwdriver AS a hammer. Using your analogy, the idea is that if you only have aikido because that's what you train, you are choosing to use it in multiple contexts. If you have BJJ, that's the tool you have.

Otherwise, your analogy is a great argument in favor of cross training for self defense. After all, who has just one tool?

I agree with most of that, except - and this is a point Drop Bear makes better than me - someone doesn't have to be a skilled, trained martial artist to come with controlled attacks. Of course, there's a difference between facing someone who is a skilled and controlled fighter, and someone who actually knows what you do and how to counter it.

The rest is good points. When I spar, I can stop a lot of techniques that absolutely work, because I can recognize them coming and know exactly how to counter them. You see this a lot in how Judo has progressed, and the rules they've had to put in place in competitions to avoid stalemating. I seem to remember there being some rules to that end in BJJ competitions, but I know far less about those. If someone is angry, they (according to video evidence, my own experience, and most of the discussions I've had with folks who deal with angry people getting physical) tend to focus mostly on attack, often (though not always) even to the point of exposing themselves to techniques and counters that wouldn't show up sparring even with an untrained person.

IBJJF rules prohibit stalling. You'd get a warning and then a penalty point.

There are other rule sets for BJJ that penalize passivity in other ways. Submission only tournaments do not reward defense and encourage competitors to attack for submissions.

 

[drop bear]

Well, no, all that will show you is which person is better. On that particular day.



Chic-Chic-POW beats pretty much all unarmed systems.

Do you see how those two statements conflict?

 

[drop bear]

Except that you, in the past, have argued that there's no value in adding situational SD training to MMA. You're now saying almost exactly something I've said before, and something you've argued (in complete ignorance) that I don't do.

Show me where i have said there is no value in adding situational defence training to MMA.

Are you saying you do add situational defence to MMA?

 

[drop bear]

to test something is really trying to apply the scientific method. one of the challenges of this is to develop a proper test that will give proper results. aikido vs bjj doesnt do this and it doesnt impress me. if you want a fair comparison, put the bjj guy and the aikido guy side by side have them both fight a boxer, a TKD guy, a guy with a knife and one with a machette together at the same time, and last event ..a guy with a gun. tally up the results and see were we stand.
against 2 assailants one with a machette and one with a knife my money will be on the skilled aikido guy every time.

My money is on the guy with the machete.

 

[drop bear]

i was in the construction trade for over 10 years. your full of it. only a moron hits the tools he makes his living from with a hammer. they will all break. any tool not used for its intended purpose gets ruined.

That is because you have all the tools. Ask a bush mechanic and he will use what is available.

Mental elasticity

 

[jobo]

Not to its function at driving screws, it isn't. Just because a test is used, that doesn't make it valid.

if its beoke it can't drive screws, of course its impact resistance is related to its function

 

[Dirty Dog]

Do you see how those two statements conflict?

No. I don't. It's simply recognizing the reality that if I shoot you from 100 yards away, you're not likely to be able to do much about it with unarmed combat skills.