|
| ||||||||||||
aikido,demonstration,jo Aikido DemonstrationAikido Demonstrationtags:A very good Aikido demonstration. Knife, katana and jo techniques included. While it is just a demonstration these techniques are applicable and very effective at self defense. I don't know who the Sensei is for this particular one as I don't recognize him from my training. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aikido
Comments  who voted for this video thesnipe
- Farhad2000
- Deano
- wildmanBill
- HistNerd
- redthing
- firefly
- gwaan
- joedirt
- viewer_999
- pyrex
- pho3n1x
- Fiver2
- rembar
- michie
- MojoeMAN
- ant
- Oatmeal
- siftbot
- Shepppard
| Friends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote                 Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 14. Seric
(141 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments        | |||||||||||
Stumble This
No offense meant to you personally, TS, I'd be willing to upvote this for being a demonstration, but aikido is not exactly well-respected in the application-focused section of the martial arts community for being effective at self-defense.
About the effectiveness comment. I personally feel that in the right situation aikido works, however that's not what this art is truly about (just like many others). I stated the techniques are effective to show that the attackers in this video aren't going head over heals just to look cool, it's to save against injury as well.
I do believe in the possible effectiveness of many of aikido's techniques and concepts. I have learned a decent amount of aikido, sparred against a number of aikidoka, and discussed aikido theory 'til my ears bled, but my real issue is the manner in which aikido is trained. Without real resistance or hard sparring, how can one learn to apply such techniques effectively in a combat or self-defense situation?
If one were to argue that aikido is meant as a philosophy/religion/way of life, and that sparring is contrary to this meaning of aikido, then that's fine, but that means that that version of aikido will continue to be non-functional in a combat/self-defense sense. Otherwise, aikidoka need to spar and train against lots of resistance for aikido to begin to approach any sort of functional use in a true fighting sense.
One example of this is the kote mawashi. (In English this is the inward wrist-turn lock, and anatomically is a pronating lock.) Applied in a compliant setting, it is really nice, and results in a very painful lock that is nearly impossible to escape once a secure grip is established and the rotation is begun. In a sparring setting standing up, it is a bitch to get the proper hold and lock it in, due to its nature as a fine-motor movement (which is known to be difficult because of the loss of such small control due to the effects of adrenaline, as opposed to gross-motor movement, which is relatively amplified), and wrist control in that particular direction and manner almost never occurs when an opponent is punching or pushing with real intent. In addition, with somebody resisting full force, kote mawashi is countered by a number of simple and natural reactions, including sidestepping before the attacker can line up side by side with his opponent, clearing the attacker's grabbing hand with one's own free hand, stepping straight in for an over-under clinch to perform a leg reap a la judo o-soto-gari or ko-soto-gake, re-grabbing the attacker's grabbing hand and arm-dragging a la freestyle wrestling, punching the attacker in the face with the free hand, ripping one's arm free, or any combination of the above. Hell, you could probably use something straight from aikido like kote gaeshi to counter kote mawashi. I'm not saying mawashi will never work, I'm just saying, somebody attempting kote mawashi must be aware of these counters, and be ready to provide a counter-attack should that fail.
Of course, it's easy for somebody to look at what my breakdown of kote mawashi and say, "Oh, well, in that situation, if my opponent resisted my a with b, I would just counter his b with my c," and we can continue on down the road of hypothetical rock-paper-scissors 'til kingdom come. But my point is, I've countered a kote mawashi when somebody has tried to use it against me in a live setting. Hell, I've used mawashi as a gimmick submission hold when grappling on the ground. I'll often attack with it from guard, especially after going for a juji-gatame (straight armbar), when my opponent will counter by turning his elbow sideways so I can't lock in the hold, and I'll grab the wrist, lock in a secure grip, and begin switching my hips as if going for an omoplata to apply pressure. I've found that using this wristlock, as with most wristlocks, is easier on the ground because I have more control over my opponent with my legs wrapped around his body or trapping his arm at the elbow to isolate the limb, controlling his movement, than if we were standing or clinched up, and because I have more time to secure the hold on the wrist than when an opponent can step out or pull his arm out, and because I can use the full rotation of my body immediately to apply the lock. I know this particular setup and attack works (skip 'til the end, the sub flow begins around 30 seconds from the end), just like I know I can counter a standing attack of mawashi reasonably well, because I've pulled it off while fighting with a fully-resisting opponent. And of course aikido has many more counters and re-counters to mawashi than I know. But if one has not actually played this situation out against a fully resisting opponent, how does one know one can do it, and how can one have developed the proper muscle memory and/or reaction without having gone through the real, resistance-included motions? The techniques are all there in aikido, but I feel that many aikidoka are missing out on the point that learning the techniques and combinations isn't everything, they need to learn how to actually apply them.
I like Yoshinkan and Tomiki aikido and similiar substyles of "hard" aikido that practice sparring regularly and have even begun attempting to implement sparring in tournaments, even though I believe their attempts are somewhat misguided. I also respect aikidoka who do not spar but also acknowledge that they are not practicing for self-defense or practical application, but rather for the cultural and spiritual development - I don't understand it, but I respect it. I only take issue with aikidoka (as well any other martial artists) who claim to have effective self-defence and/or combat skills, yet have never pulled a single move off against anybody other than a person whose designation begins with the letter "u" and rhymes with "boo-kay". In those cases, I'll take my judo along with a heaping of resistance, thank ya kindly, and leave the magic pants for others.
Aikido has the potential to be "real world effective", especially as a foundation for other martial arts. The basics, such as using your "center", using your opponent's energy and the flowing (circular) movements, can be a distinct advantage that some other martial arts seem to forget about.
Unfortunately, for aikido, the demonstrations seem far too choreographed to someone who hasn't experienced it, as if uke is helping nage by being easy to throw. Though it has to be slightly scripted, to show the actual techniques, I can say for certain that when engaging an experienced aikidoka you generally end up doing what they want you to do simply because your choices are move with them or break your own arm.
I believe that aikido is all about the style and way in which it is taught. It all boils down to philosophy. I personally think there is no point in sparring with aikido, especially this kind of "hard" aikido. It goes against the main philosophy of aikido, "the way of peace and harmony." It teaches focus, centering, physical awareness and the use of minimal resistance to let yourself escape from an attack and stay calm. I always liked the teaching that the true aikidoka will never let himself get into a corner in which he would have to defend himself. Another states "If you have to resort to aikido you've already lost the battle."
While this isn't always practical it is a code to live up to and hopefully live by. I believe that yes, if you're going to battle someone picking a fight and beat him up, aikido is not the right sport for you. However for most people that I have seen in my aikido class they are not the ones wanting to try to fight at all. In fact in my dojo if you come in with the attitude of "I'll use this as soon as I leave these doors" you won't be staying very long. This traditional aikido training teaches one to be able to break away from an attacker (maybe immobilize him for awhile), not stay in a prolonged fight or spar, and run to get help. Of course some people argue (and this isn't towards rembar) "well that's a sissy way to fight" and you can think that, I feel it's taking a high road.
Again I just want to emphasize I think that if one was to take this style as a way of life it may impact on the effectiveness of the art in a physical fight, but that is not what this art was meant for. There is the bridge between aikido and jiujitsu which takes jiujitsu aspects into a form to not hurt the attacker. Some sections encourage the more violent follow through, but I don't think it is the majority. I still do think however that in a street confrontation (not two martial arts specialists sparring) against someone like a common drunk at a bar, traditional aikido could be very effective to get away from an initial attack.
I'm more on the combat sports side of things as it were, but it's nice to see some people from the other side with their heads screwed on right these days.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NR05_kOpTKY
Sure, those techniques would be great for self-defense when your attackers do a 360 from a tap on the shoulder.