Aikido vs Your Striking Art

[Isshinryu88]

I only studied Aikido for a few months. I think that one thing to keep in mind is what it means for an Aikido person to "win". I think most Aikidoists would consider it a victory if they used their skills at zoning and movement to prevent an attacker from hitting them. It wouldn't matter that they applied a technique and threw the person around or not.

[Gilbert]

What are some good qualities Aikido would have against a striking art and what are some disadvantages it would have? In aikido do you spar full contact? And what the heck is Ki?

 

ok....ki is internal energy. it works. ive been in boxing for 7 years...but got interested in aikido. aikido is a gentle art. but very effective. it would be easy to take out a boxer. believe me. even if he is a good boxer. in aikido you do strike. but not like a mean idiot...but rather absorbing your opponents strike and strikin with shomen or shokomen. any art is good against anything if your a good fighter. but violence doesnt solve anything. unless you really have to fight and teach a lesson.

[Gilbert]

I think scraping to the sensei and so on, including how traditional things are, would depend largely on the dojo. I'm sure there'd be a few dojos around where everything is reasonably informal.

 

I'm sure you're correct that not all aikidoists are that formal, but the one here locally sure is. To the point that if the sensei wants a student to come out on the floor to demo a technique, they bow low from a kneeling posture, then walk out while on their knees, bow again to the sensei (basically almost kissing his feet literally), then stand and begin.

 

Sorry, that's not me.

 

On two seperate occasions I had the opportunity to work with the head Okinawan sensei of my system, and I was rather surprised on how laid

 

back he was. Sure, we did a certain amout of bowing at the beginning/end of class, and a few times in between, but it was really quite relaxed and rather informal, which for me, is the way that I prefer it.

 

I know others that like the strict "YES SIR/NO SIR" bit where the sensei is the God at the head of the class..."ALL HAIL SENSEI IN HIS INFINITE POWER AND WISDOM!!! sort of power trip. But again, that's not me.

 

ok your right...but the reason we do this is because we are showing respect..to O'sensei ueshiba.... he was the founder of this magnificant art..

 

like so many others...murihei ueshiba..is well respected by all aikido students..why do you think they call him o' sensei? (The Great Teacher)

[Gilbert]

I will redily admit that most Aikido styles are weak against a boxer's quickly recoiling strikes. But there are ways that Aikido throws and by extension some judo and jujitsu technniques can be easily applied using Aiki principles. The key to neutralizing trained fighters is to quickly access the fact that they have skill and then adjust your game plan to accomodate that fact.

 

Unfortunnately most 'pure aikido" styles don't have these tricks in their bag. I would suggest an aikijujitsu style before a more traditional aikido style based on that fact alone.

 

But that's just my two yen.

 

Yes that would be quite an interesting match up. Two completely opposite philosophies on fighting. I don't really know much about Aikido other than what I've seen in Steven Seagal flicks but an Aikido/Boxing fight would be pretty cool to watch.

 

man just reading this conversation cracks me up....ok....look. you really dont know nothing about aikido. im an aikido student and if i was figthing against a boxer. i wouldn't be standing like an idiot. i would keep my distance. when he attacked i would move in, apply my move punch him along the way if i was that mad and take him down....go home and watch my favorite show in time..(also..ive never heard that in aikido..when you fight in the street you should never punch no matter what..hahahah..whoever told you this lie..i cant believe you believed it. We do strike....and very nasty.

[Gilbert]

Ok.

 

An Aikido beatdown hurray!

 

Ok, firstly if the Aikidoka doesnt do a lot of Randori and Jiyu Waza (free fighting) then he's a dead man.

 

Second, the deadly boxers jab. It is indeed nasty, but that same jab is just as difficult for a BJJ, Judo, Krav Maga, TaiChi, MT and EVEN a boxer to deal with.

 

Thirdly, taisabaki is the answer to alot of the low cut kicks and jabs. Again lots of full contact training required.

 

Ki, well thats for another thread. But I personally believe its a word used to discribe balance, power, relaxation and a state of mind and not about floating in mid air!

 

Oh and Segal has great Aikido, shame he's such a *.

 

ok....why do you guys always say that we dont strike, we wait..blah blah blah...look in aikido you absorb the strike. you can counter attack apply a technique. punch his troat. his ear drum. kick his groin. kick his knee and break it. and the list go on...so...still think aikido are weak..didnt think so

Edited September 15, 2004 by Gilbert

[Gilbert]

Aikido teaches you how to move and to use your opponents force and balance against them. Controlling someone's balance is the most important aspect of fighting, without balance what good are you? Aikido teaches this well. It is not an easy art to learn, but once you do it can be devasting to an attacker.

 

i agree....

[Gilbert]

i've always considered aikido to be a superior art but if the aikidoka is weak i'll pummel him with my striking art.

 

i would be careful if i were you...dont underestimate any opponent.short or tall or whatever...hey..we have arms too we can strike if we wanted to...we have legs...we can kick if we wanted to. dont underestimate an aikidoka. you can walk out punched, kicked, and with something broken.

[Gilbert]

aikido...is a gentle art.. but were not soft..we can have an opponent like a rag doll. make him taste the floor, taste the wall...taste some fists..taste some kicks...taste some breakings he'll never forget. aikido is not weak....but ofcourse, why use unecessary violence. but if we have to..boy is our attacker going for a ride...

[Drunken_Apprentice]

aikido...is a gentle art.. but were not soft..we can have an opponent like a rag doll. make him taste the floor, taste the wall...taste some fists..taste some kicks...taste some breakings he'll never forget. aikido is not weak....but ofcourse, why use unecessary violence. but if we have to..boy is our attacker going for a ride...

 

Sounds like your dojo focuses on more combat oriented aikido than we did. The attacks we were usually given were these fully committed "I'm coming at you from across the room" type haymakers or simple wrist grabs and such. We did have similar questions about how aikido would handle the swiftness of a boxer or a WC guy because aikido seems to take best advantage of a strike with a good degree of commitment. Something like chain punching or a jab ... while not counter to this idea ... is certainly more difficult because of its timing and speed.

 

I commented somewhere else about aikido's lack of striking (I forget where). It certainly involves strikes, but to varying degrees depending on the teacher. Some use it only for distraction. Others show you when to apply it when you create the openings during application of technique. Others apparently go all out and you better hang on . Sounds like you're part of the last group, which seems a little more like Daito ryu. I was more of the second group ... but wondered why we never trained in the strikes we were supposed to use if the situation required it. I got the response of, "If you have to strike, it's no longer aikido." (Hey, if I have to use something other than aikido to keep my rear end from getting handed to me, I'll do it. Show me the atemi!!)

 

In any event, it's good to hear that the two styles are working so well for you.

[47MartialMan]

If you are interested in an art that is the viscious version of Aikido, look for a Daito Ryu Aikijutsu school near you. Aikijutsu is awesome.

 

I agree.