Aikido and Realistic Attack

[TKD_McGee]

Aikido is more like mind and spirit stuff.... its not offensive.

 

 

[Shaolin]

On 2002-02-27 08:35, Cory Reynolds wrote:

On 2002-02-27 00:35, Shaolin wrote:

Well to me joint locks = grappling

 

Joint locks are commonly used in many different kinds of martial arts. It's a technique, not an actual form of martial arts. Grappling usually begins standing on your feet and then commonly both fighters end up on the ground. In classic Aikido, the defender always remains on their feet, only in more recent times when some jujitus restraints have been added to some styles of Aikido has this changed SLIGHTLY.

 

I'm speaking in terms of range. There is, generally, kicking range, punching range, trapping range, and grappling range. Aikido operates in the latter range.

 

Since the begining in Aikido people have done Aikido from all sorts of positions including sitting. There is no restriction in this art as to body position e.g. standing, sitting etc. and the principles work in just about any position.

 

Aikido unlike Wing Chun is a defensive system - there is no attack in Aikido. Seagal has studied traditional Aikido but he also knows how to punch.

 

Jim

 

[Shaolin]

On 2002-02-27 06:59, KSN Doug wrote:

 

Not a bad video. However, though I'm not a BJJ practioner, it didn't look like the grappler got quite in the right place for a take down.

 

That's probably because he was hit about 15 times in his center of gravity before he had a chance to.

 

Jim

 

 

[Aikidoka]

Whether or not aikido includes strikes depends on which style you study. Traditional aikido (aikikai) was a tool for spiritual development and was designed by the founder (Morihei Ueshiba) to further his understanding of the Omotokyo religion. However, Ueshiba's skill was so high that his defensive and 'unrealistic' martial art had become lethal in the amount of power he could release, and the Emperor pronounced him the greatest martial artist in Japan. The style Seagal studies is Yoshinkan and is much closer to the parent art of Daito Ryu aikijujitsu, including more atemi (strikes) and chokes, etc. I too study both aikido and wing chun and feel they compliment each other very well. Some of the techniques even overlap, as jujitsu originated from kung fu's 'chin na' (grappling) techniques. Aikido, however, takes much longer than most arts to become combat effective, because it sacrifices striking for the prevention of injury to the opponent. When mastered it becomes an incredibly effective art, capable of generating devastating power with little strength and dealing with five opponents at once. In answer to the original question, attacks are normally taught to a limited extent using hand strikes, kicks, tanto, jo and bokken but the emphasis is on developing effective defence. An aikidoka becomes skilled at knowing when an attack is about to be executed and in drawing an over committed attack. In wing chun, this commitment would never be given, so fighting someone who knows wing chun is an aikidoka's worst nightmare!

 

[ This Message was edited by: Aikidoka on 2002-02-27 13:15 ]

[Cory Reynolds]

On 2002-02-27 12:48, Shaolin wrote:

 

Since the begining in Aikido people have done Aikido from all sorts of positions including sitting. There is no restriction in this art as to body position e.g. standing, sitting etc. and the principles work in just about any position.

 

Seagal has studied traditional Aikido but he also knows how to punch.

 

Come on, you're talking about exercises that are used to help you get better at Aikido. Are you suggesting that you get down and kneel when someone attacks you? I didn't think so. The principles CAN work from any position, but that doesn't mean that you would want to do them from any position.

 

And Seagal learned the latter form of Aikido that is characterised more by the use of physical body power combined with the redirection principles used in traditional Aikido.

 

 

[ChangWuJi]

On 2002-02-27 02:38, Bon wrote:

 

 

There's no biting in the UFC, but doesn't the Gracie's open challenge with no holds barred and remaining undefeated prove the effectiveness of the art ?

 

 

 

 

 

LOL Kimura broke Helio Gracies arm in a challenge match in Brazil with the Kimura Lock.

 

as far as the Gracies not being beaten in a challenge match, think of the time this was done? no one knew anything about BJJ, most of Ricksons fights were shady especially the ones against Hugo Duarte, like when they fought on the beach with Ricksons boys with him, one minute Hugo has the advantage, the next the camera mysteriously cuts off and comes back with Hugo out with sand on his face, Ricksons Posse is always with him when he fought the challenges, you dont know for sure if they lost or not the Gracies are good business men and they market things to make them look good like the first UFC's, look at Ryan Gracie he dosn't even want to fight Wallid Ismail now days when the level of fighting and jiu-jitsu is beyond levels they were fighting in the past. blah blah blah who cares? i don't, they are a thing of the past, you've got better BJJ players now days like Sperry, Noguiera, Carlsons students and so on. Royler got schooled buy Barett Yoshida at Abu Dahbi, though he lost cause of the ridiculous point scoring, Barett had Royler hanging on for dear life with his techniques.

 

 

[Angus]

Hahaha, it's funny reading stuff that people write when they have no idea what they're talking about. Shaolin, ur too funny dude. It's

 

*B*JJ by the way.. That stands for Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. I dunno what this GJJ stuff is all about.

 

It's like people seeing SPORT TKD and mistaking it for real TKD...

 

Aikido's great by the way, we apply it in this new freestyle i'm doing.

 

Angus

 

 

[Shaolin]

On 2002-02-27 17:31, Angus wrote:

 

Hahaha, it's funny reading stuff that people write when they have no idea what they're talking about. Shaolin, ur too funny dude.

 

You're quite funny yourself. I don't suppose you'd like to be a little more specific and indicate what you are talking about... I get the feeling you disagree with something I said - fine. It might be helpful if you actually gave an example, if you can, of what you mean instead of just making ignorant remarks.

 

Jim

 

 

 

_________________

 

 

Moy Yat Ving Tsun

 

Rest in peace dear teacher, dear friend, dear brother, and dear father: Moy Yat Sifu

 

 

 

[ This Message was edited by: Shaolin on 2002-02-27 20:50 ]

[Bon]

On 2002-02-27 16:43, ChangWuJi wrote:

On 2002-02-27 02:38, Bon wrote:

There's no biting in the UFC, but doesn't the Gracie's open challenge with no holds barred and remaining undefeated prove the effectiveness of the art ?

 

LOL Kimura broke Helio Gracies arm in a challenge match in Brazil with the Kimura Lock.

 

I was making a point that BJJ is effective..

 

Interesting to note that he was defeated by a grappler with a lock and not a striker knocking him out don't you think ?

 

BJJ can be applied standing up, it's a misconception that it only works on the ground! It would be quite easy to grab some mother ****er and choke him while using him as a shield to another opponent, then deal with the next.

 

[Aikidoka]

I see this topic has caused a lot of argument that has little to do with the original question. However, if I may add a point to my post, aikido evolved as I said, from Daito Ryu aikijujitsu. This style was essentially an extension of sword techniques into unarmed hand-to-hand techniques, hence such attacks as cutting with the hand blade (such as shomen-uchi, yokomen-uchi and gyakuyokomen-uchi). Jujitsu was also, essentially, a method for a disarmed samurai to defend himself against an armed agressor. Because of this, aikido was originally designed to be used against an attacker who was armed and who would attack with commitment. Therefore aikido is more difficult to apply to faster, less commited attacks, such as the karate straight punch or the boxer's jab. However, skilled aikidoka have beaten fast striking opponents, as well as lost to them.