Zenchin,
Good post!
I have a friend that trains with Kushida in Michigan.
One of their dojo was in a bad part of western Detroit, and one night Kushida got robbed after class. Well, it was an attempted robbing. Kushida handed the man the wallet, and when the man reached for it, Kushida broke the man's wrist.
Another time this one instructor at the same dojo was attacked by a guy during class. He blocked the attack and palm-thrust this guy in the face, bouncing him off the wall.
How about Aikikai?
I trained with Mistunari Kanai, who was a live-in student of Ueshiba's for 10 years and an 8th dan in Aikido. (RIP too. I just did a web search and found he died this year) I only trained at the school for a little over a month in between boxing and BJJ. I was not very impressed at all with what was being done there.
The techniques are effective once you mastered them.That's true by definition...and often the first response of something that doesn't work. The original post asked about anyone whose been tossed around by an aikido guy, so it may be best to assume that the question is about effectiveness.Combat Aikido never heard of it. If the implication is that aikido is used in combat, that's misleading. Aikido is not used as the primary empty hand fighting style of any military force on the planet, and IMO, any "effective" style should be capable of working against a resisting opponent in other arenas (street, sport, etc....)Jason DeLucia's Aikido, a mma oriented Aikido.Jason has an mma record that speaks for itself. What about his students? What evidence is there that Jason DeLucia's Aikido is that much "better"? (If it's because they spar, so do the Tomiki folks)Saito's dojo emphasizes bokken (wooden sword) and jo (staff). No other Aikido instructor has such a detailed system of Aiki weapons.That's open to debate. Mitsugi Saotome has a detailed weapons system that also adds two swords to traditional bokken and jo practice. Shoji Nishio is also know for his weapons work. Kenji Tomiki's Aikido, the competitive form of aikido. To call Tomiki Aikido competitive is simplistic, IMO. They do incorporate sparring and do have several different forms of shiai (empty hand, knife and kata) but most Tomiki stylists do not compete in anything, ever. As far as techniques that cannot be executed in practice, I've been told by Tomiki stylists that's not the case. There are techniques that are banned in shiai, but all shiai do that.How about Aikikai?Aikikai is a generic, catch all term often used by organizations that have an affilation with Hombu Dojo in Tokyo Japan. There's too much variation, IMO to make an accurate generalization about Aikikai effectiveness, goals or training methods.
What about Roy Suenaka's school?
"The techniques are effective once you mastered them."
That's true by definition...and often the first response of something that doesn't work.
---------
Ok, I guess that's true for all martail arts? In order to clarify my point, I'm saying that because of the footwork, and the touch that is required in doing the techniques that aikido has a steeper learning curve than say Judo, wrestling, and BJJ.
But my question concerns your use of "something" are you saying that all of Aikido does not work, or that the statement has a universal truth for all martial arts or all techniques...that "something" equals an obvious fact.
"Combat Aikido, never heard of it."
Combat Aikido is what Jason Delucia calls his aikido method.
---------------
"If the implication is that aikido is used in combat, that's misleading. Aikido is not used as the primary empty hand fighting style of any military force on the planet, and IMO, any "effective" style should be capable of working against a resisting opponent in other arenas (street, sport, etc....)"
Which modern armies uses an empty hand fighting style? If you are referring to Russian Systema, that art is very Aikidoish.
---------------------
"IMO, any 'effective' style should be capable of working against a resisting opponent in other arenas (street, sport, etc....)"
The Japanese police train officers in Yoshinkan Aikido. They must think that it has a place in a real world confrontation.
Why do you think that a Black belt in aikido can't use his training against a resisting opponent?
"Kenji Tomiki's Aikido, the competitive form of aikido.
To call Tomiki Aikido competitive is simplistic, IMO. They do incorporate sparring and do have several different forms of shiai (empty hand, knife and kata) but most Tomiki stylists do not compete in anything, ever."
Do you have this same attitude toward Judo?
Are you saying that Judo is ineffective because most people train for personal pleasure and exercise?
What about BJJ? Is BJJ less effective because they have people who train for self-defense, and may never enter a MMA fight?
re: techniques work when masteredOk, I guess that's true for all martail arts?Yes. It is. But my reference was it is often used as a generic statement in McDojos to mask poor training methods and poor instruction. (And yes, my use of "McDojos" means all martial arts....)Which modern armies uses an empty hand fighting style?All modern armies cover basic hand to hand fighting to some degree. The US Army, for example, uses what is basically bjj 101But the point is, "combat" preceding a style is often a marketing ploy rather than a different style or training method. The Japanese police train officers in Yoshinkan Aikido. I've been told that judo is the art they are trained in. In either case, there's a distinction that needs to be made. Could a cadet take the training course and then pass a 5th kyu exam or a yellow belt test? I'm betting no. Are the Japanese police really being trained in aikido or judo or something else?Why do you think that a Black belt in aikido can't use his training against a resisting opponent? I never said they couldn't. I hold rank in aikido, I'm well aware of what a shodan can and cannot do.Do you have this same attitude toward Judo?Yes. And bjj and boxing and muay thai.... Calling Tomiki "the competitive style of aikido" implies that other styles of aikido do not have competition --- shiai --- which is not true. It further implies that everyone who trains Tomiki competes, again, not true.That's like suggesting all boxers are pro fighters or all bjj'ers compete in vale tudo. Some do, but most do not. That's not a knock on the art or it's practioners. It's a statement of fact. BJJ, Boxing, Judo, Aikido, etc. are martial arts....different people have different goals and insofar as the art nurtures your goals, all is good.
"I've been told that judo is the art they are trained in."
Actually they are given the choice to taking up kendo, yoshinkan,
or judo. amongst other things.
I thought the rule was Japanese cops must be have a shodan and a sandan in kendo or judo. So, you can be kendo shodan judo sandan or vice versa. It's the riot cops that train the aikido.
"IMO, any 'effective' style should be capable of working against a resisting opponent in other arenas (street, sport, etc....)"
Please examine the following:
Article title:
Being a Totem Gaijin: 1
by Peter Goldsbury
The Japanese police take official courses in judo, kendo and taiho-jutsu. Very bright students take the Yoshinkan Senshusei course, but this is really aimed at the riot police and aikido training itself is not considered.
http://www.aikidojournal.com/index.php?id=99
also see
http://budogu.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/page48.html
---------------------------
Yoshinkan Aikido Used by Security types and police defensive tactics
http://www.ecbudokai.com/meet_sensei.htm
http://www.mnsi.net/~chudo/Instructors.html
http://www.seikeikan.com/USHistory.htm
http://www.budovideos.com/shop/customer/pages.php?pageid=10
http://www.jimmccoy.com/aikido.cfm
-------------------------------
HISTORY OF AIKIDO IN JAPAN
http://www.aikidojournal.com/encyclopedia.php?entryID=324
http://www.misogi-aikido.com/shioda2.htm
Is Aikido an effective martial art?
Yoshinkan Aikido founders view on the question.
http://www.misogi-aikido.com/shioda2.htm
Gozo Shioda trained under Ueshiba when the latter was at his peak while in his vigorous 50s. Therefore, the techniques he learned from the founder of aikido were rather different from those taught by Ueshiba during the post-war years. Not surprisingly, Yoshinkan Aikido is clearly distinguishable from that practiced in the Aikikai system under the leadership of Ueshiba's son, the present Aikido Doshu. The discussion of when the technique of Morihei Ueshiba was at its peak--before or after the war--continues unabated and in the end, any conclusion reached must be a subjective one. Regardless of where one stands on this issue, many will certainly agree with the opinion voiced by Shioda in an interview appearing in "Aiki News" several years ago: "Today's aikido is so dimensionless. It's hollow, empty on the inside. People try to reach the highest levels without even paying their dues. That's why it seems so much like a dance these days. You have to master the very basics solidly, with your body, and then proceed to develop to the higher levels.... Now we see nothing but copying or imitation without any grasp of the real thing...."
Certainly the dance-like movements often seen today as representative of aikido technique, though perhaps pleasing to the eye, fail to impress practitioners of other martial arts as to their efficacy. Gozo Shioda's position on this issue obviously remains crystal clear and the teaching curriculum at all Yoshinkan dojos places great stress on inculcating basic technical skills while building the minds and bodies of trainess.
Please examine the following: You don't know how big a hole you're digging.Anyone in the US can tell you that LE techniques are chosen for legal reasons more so than if a technique will work. Primarily, LE deals with a compliant subject. When that is not the case, they call for backup or use other tools (impact weapon, chemcial spray, firearm) depending on the force continuum of their department.I'd also point out that several of the people you noted have backgrounds in other arts, which makes it very difficult to determine if they are effective because of aikido or in spite of aikido. Even the Japanese riot police, according to the article you cited, only take aikido after showing progress in judo and kendo...arts that have a different training method. Is Aikido an effective martial art? Typical. Like most aikidoists you want to answer the question with quotes from others. Ask a bjj'er if bjj is effective (or a boxer about boxing, a wrestler about wrestling). They'll answer with quotes, personal experience and statistical results of hundreds (thousands?) of documented matches.
"Typical. Like most aikidoists you want to answer the question with quotes from others. Ask a bjj'er if bjj is effective (or a boxer about boxing, a wrestler about wrestling). They'll answer with quotes, personal experience and statistical results of hundreds (thousands?) of documented matches."
Documented matches in aikido? Aikido doesn't have matches except for Tomiki, and you felt like competition within the art was worthless. Also, you said, "Jason has an mma record that speaks for itself. What about his students? What evidence is there that Jason DeLucia's Aikido is that much "better"? (If it's because they spar, so do the Tomiki folks)" Which meant to me that an aikido practicioner in MMA doesn't prove anything to you.
Personal experience?
Well, showing you that there are people in the world using aikido in real world situations didn't convince you, and you don't know me from squat, so my saying that aikido is effective won't mean anything either. So, why do it?
"Ask a bjj'er if bjj is effective (or a boxer about boxing, a wrestler about wrestling)."
And the keyboard warriors can't agree on if they are effective. BJJ ineffective against groups. Boxing ineffective on the ground. Wrestling ineffective against submission artists.
Aikido has its place in the scheme of things. The effectiveness of the art is all in how you train it.
Aikido doesn't have matches except for Tomiki, and you felt like competition within the art was worthless.Learn to read, KKM. I never made such a statement.Which meant to me that an aikido practicioner in MMA doesn't prove anything to you. Learn to think, KKM. Jason has an extensive background in other arts before turning to aikido. How do we know his MMA success is due to aikido? We don't. Now, take someone who has only trained aikido and put them in MMA and we'll have one example. I've heard rumors that an aikidoists competed in one of the first UFC and lost, but I'm not 100% sure about that. Other than that, I don't know anyone who competed in MMA, submission wrestling, etc... that was an aikidoist. Doesn't mean it hasn't happend, but if it has, it must be fairly rare.Well, showing you that there are people in the world using aikido in real world situations didn't convince you, and you don't know me from squat, so my saying that aikido is effective won't mean anything either.Again, reading comprehension, KKM. I've never made a statement about aikido's effectiveness --- either pro or con on this thread. So, why do it? It was fun.The effectiveness of the art is all in how you train it. Finally, you've said something intelligent. Now, what training produces effectiveness? Does aikido train that way?These are questions you can answer for yourself, if "effectiveness" is something you even want from aikido --- and there's nothing wrong with not wanting to be "effective". (I know a lot of people who train muay thai and boxing just for a good workout, for example --- which I think is just great)
"I've heard rumors that an aikidoists competed in one of the first UFC and lost, but I'm not 100% sure about that."
I remember that. He was an alternate match, or something, and we never got to see the fight.
Pick any environment and specific goal. Some arts will be "better" than others within that framework. Just like it's misleading to say "all cars are good". That is NOT true when one considers an environment and a purpose.
If someone asks me, "what martial art should I study" or "I can train X, Y or Z...what should I choose" .... to me the only honest answer is determine what their goals are and then find match that way.
There is no 'good' or 'bad' art.
PC rubbish.
There are "good" and "bad" arts once someone clearly defines an environment and purpose. Some strategies are more effective than others, some approaches are significantly better than others. There may be exceptions to the rules, but let's not pretend that those exceptions are anything but exceptions.
I'm just saying I don't believe all arts are "good".
Pick any environment and specific goal. Some arts will be "better" than others within that framework. Just like it's misleading to say "all cars are good". That is NOT true when one considers an environment and a purpose.
I meant any generic environment and purpose.
First off, only Ueshiba could do his aikido by definition anyone else would do their aikido.
Secondly, there are a number of accounts that several of Ueshiba's uchi deshi were martially effective as they took part in a number of duels and won (Tohei immediately comes to mind).
"Seagals Path Beyond Thought video was the first time Ive ever seen Aikido students do a type of sparring drill...and even I thought that they had limited styles of prearranged attacks....and Seagal isnt traditional in his teaching...he gears it for the street."
Finally, Tomiki Style aikido (Shodokan Aikido) has always had "sparring" (randori) as part of their training method. On that basis alone, I would suspect they are much better prepared than most.
I attended a Seagal seminar (week long in Santa Monica, CA...back in the day). What Seagal taught was the same as what any other shihan I've seen taught. That is to say, he didn't do anything different, nor was the training method any different. Talking to his students, I don't believe that the seminar was "watered down" in any way. Seagal may have changed his approach between then and when "Path Beyond Thought" was released, but I doubt it.
For example....let's say, improving physical fitness. The training method of so-called "sport" systems (boxing, muay thai, judo, bjj, sambo, etc....) will consistently produce results. Aikido will either not produce results or not produce as dramatic results, based on my experiences.
Go to any aikido board and ask if they train defenses against boxing punches or kicks, and you will find that most aikidoka will say they do.
I notice that Jahz hasn't posted again on the thread that he/she started (are we being trolled?)...and I have no desire to discuss if aikido is martially effective.
Again, reading comprehension, KKM. I've never made a statement about aikido's effectiveness --- either pro or con on this thread.
Ueshiba's technique evolved over time. There is a profound difference between his "pre-war" and "post-war" style. He was, by all accounts, martially effective during both time periods...so I don't buy this explaination.
Sport-based training methods are very effective.
Jason has an mma record that speaks for itself. What about his students? What evidence is there that Jason DeLucia's Aikido is that much "better"? (If it's because they spar, so do the Tomiki folks)
Learn to think, KKM. Jason has an extensive background in other arts before turning to aikido. How do we know his MMA success is due to aikido? We don't. Now, take someone who has only trained aikido and put them in MMA and we'll have one example.
To call Tomiki Aikido competitive is simplistic, IMO. They do incorporate sparring and do have several different forms of shiai (empty hand, knife and kata) but most Tomiki stylists do not compete in anything, ever.
Tomiki Style aikido (Shodokan Aikido) has always had "sparring" (randori) as part of their training method. On that basis alone, I would suspect they are much better prepared than most.
As far as techniques that cannot be executed in practice, I've been told by Tomiki stylists that's not the case. There are techniques that are banned in shiai, but all shiai do that.
If someone desires effective technique they should find a school that cultivates it. The fact that the McDojo down the street can't fight doesn't mean that I dismiss the art they are teaching, even though there are 10 McDojos (at least) to every one legit school.
I wouldn't disagree with your grappling group (judo, bjj, wrestling) creating a good grappler. In my mind all three of those arts do, at least in sporting settings. (BJJ seems to also work well in military settings, as the "soldier ground" indicates bjj use in army combatives)
Finally, something intelligent. Now, what training produces effectiveness? Does aikido train that way? I would take issue with karate, muay thai, kung fu all creating good strikers. Muay thai does. Kung fu? I only know of one, Cung Le....and even my little city has more than one kung fu studio. Karate? Same problem as kung fu. For every good karate striker I know, I can find two or three karate schools full of people who aren't effective.
Now, one could argue that 99% of all the kung fu/karate schools are terrible (McDojos, if you will) and with proper training methods that would not be the case, and maybe that's even true.
You don't know how big a hole you're digging.
Typical. Like most aikidoists you want to answer the question with quotes from others. Ask a bjj'er if bjj is effective (or a boxer about boxing, a wrestler about wrestling). They'll answer with quotes, personal experience and statistical results of hundreds (thousands?) of documented matches.
I never said they couldn't. I hold rank in aikido, I'm well aware of what a shodan can and cannot do.
Learn to read, KKM. I never made such a statement.
wow....you can cut and paste. Now, do you have any original thoughts?