Video evidence of Aikido's suckage.

[Mr. Cynical]

ArtHic

Shuma-Gorath

nightwing773

uh, yes. martial arts isn't just about people beating each other up, it's about knowing how to defend yourself, but avoiding the situation where you need to. Martial arts is made up of mental aspects, not just physical, and it makes you a better person in general if you accept that. Katsu Hayabi is a principle taught in Aikido, check it out.

You haven't grasped the concept of MARTIAL ARTS.

MARTIAL ARTS are NOT about avoiding fights, they are about fighting in general. HENCE THE TERM MARTIAL. I don't see what is so hard about this. Punching equals hurt, kicking equals hurt, throwing equals hurt, grappling equals hurt. YOU DON'T EFFIN LEARN TO HURT PEOPLE IN ORDER TO BE A BETTER PERSON. GET THE EFF OVER IT.

Oh, and Aikido DOES suck. In fact, I almost see no obligation to call it a Martial Art anymore.

Actually, martial arts are practiced in order to keep yourself alive. Since you use the term martial, which derives from Mars - The god of war - you should know that punching and kicking does little to no good when the other person comes at you holding a knife or a gun.
And they will come at you armed if they judge you as a threat because of your training. It is only natural to try and gain the advantage. Even in MMA the mount (on top) is strategicaly the best position.
Now the true merrit of Aikido is this: it teaches relaxation and self control. In the army they instructed us to be calm when shooting. Modern fighting sports do not have a curriculum for this; they rely on adrenalin, which again is very natural.
Furthermore do not expect Aikido or any other Art to be taught publicly on its all. A lot of masters keep secrets for themselves. Yould you give your gun to somebody else?
Finally I have to say that a lot of the so called "masters" do fail to meet expectations. But I cannot accuse the art of Aikido. From the other hand I've seen kick boxers and strong-men humbled by the likes of older and more fragile practitioners of 'subtle' martial arts. You do not want to mess with those guys. But you can always share a joke with them.

The only thing worth reading in that rant has been known by everyone long before. And Aikido still sucks.  

[ArtHic]

Mr. Cynical

ArtHic

Shuma-Gorath

nightwing773

uh, yes. martial arts isn't just about people beating each other up, it's about knowing how to defend yourself, but avoiding the situation where you need to. Martial arts is made up of mental aspects, not just physical, and it makes you a better person in general if you accept that. Katsu Hayabi is a principle taught in Aikido, check it out.

You haven't grasped the concept of MARTIAL ARTS.

MARTIAL ARTS are NOT about avoiding fights, they are about fighting in general. HENCE THE TERM MARTIAL. I don't see what is so hard about this. Punching equals hurt, kicking equals hurt, throwing equals hurt, grappling equals hurt. YOU DON'T EFFIN LEARN TO HURT PEOPLE IN ORDER TO BE A BETTER PERSON. GET THE EFF OVER IT.

Oh, and Aikido DOES suck. In fact, I almost see no obligation to call it a Martial Art anymore.

Actually, martial arts are practiced in order to keep yourself alive. Since you use the term martial, which derives from Mars - The god of war - you should know that punching and kicking does little to no good when the other person comes at you holding a knife or a gun.
And they will come at you armed if they judge you as a threat because of your training. It is only natural to try and gain the advantage. Even in MMA the mount (on top) is strategicaly the best position.
Now the true merrit of Aikido is this: it teaches relaxation and self control. In the army they instructed us to be calm when shooting. Modern fighting sports do not have a curriculum for this; they rely on adrenalin, which again is very natural.
Furthermore do not expect Aikido or any other Art to be taught publicly on its all. A lot of masters keep secrets for themselves. Yould you give your gun to somebody else?
Finally I have to say that a lot of the so called "masters" do fail to meet expectations. But I cannot accuse the art of Aikido. From the other hand I've seen kick boxers and strong-men humbled by the likes of older and more fragile practitioners of 'subtle' martial arts. You do not want to mess with those guys. But you can always share a joke with them.

The only thing worth reading in that rant has been known by everyone long before. And Aikido still sucks.

It's what you make of it.  

[Keyboard Warrior]

ArtHic

Hylonomus

If you pit a pure fighter vs a mixed one the mixed will always win, it's very simple. No fighting style covers everything you need to know, punches, kicks, strikes, grapples, throws, locks, ect. It's better to have a wide range of training for every situation in the fight, then just rely on you opponent only coming at you with what your used to training against.

Depends on the rules.
A fighter will overcome an athlete in a no rules match, but he has little chance in an athletic setting. A lot of kung fu styles emphasize on striking weak spots. If you add rules to avoid injuries, well...
A lot of people mistake MMA as combat. They are not, at least in the way they are practiced today (kick boxing plus grappling).
In other words: A kick in the groin ends whatever dispute.

PS: Most internal martial arts cover every aspect of fighting.

A kick in the groin ends any disputes that DON'T involve an adrenaline rush....unfortunately, most(if not all) fights involve such adrenaline rushes. And at any rate, how the ******** is someone who doesn't practice their techniques at full speed, full contact, with a fully resistant opponent really going to deal with someone who does? Last I checked, you kung fools don't practice your d34dly techniques in such a manner....you rely on compliant drills.

If you don't train alive and resistant how will one over come the adrenal dump or the "fight of flight" syndrome?  

[ArtHic]

Keyboard Warrior

ArtHic

Hylonomus

If you pit a pure fighter vs a mixed one the mixed will always win, it's very simple. No fighting style covers everything you need to know, punches, kicks, strikes, grapples, throws, locks, ect. It's better to have a wide range of training for every situation in the fight, then just rely on you opponent only coming at you with what your used to training against.

Depends on the rules.
A fighter will overcome an athlete in a no rules match, but he has little chance in an athletic setting. A lot of kung fu styles emphasize on striking weak spots. If you add rules to avoid injuries, well...
A lot of people mistake MMA as combat. They are not, at least in the way they are practiced today (kick boxing plus grappling).
In other words: A kick in the groin ends whatever dispute.

PS: Most internal martial arts cover every aspect of fighting.

A kick in the groin ends any disputes that DON'T involve an adrenaline rush....unfortunately, most(if not all) fights involve such adrenaline rushes. And at any rate, how the ******** is someone who doesn't practice their techniques at full speed, full contact, with a fully resistant opponent really going to deal with someone who does? Last I checked, you kung fools don't practice your d34dly techniques in such a manner....you rely on compliant drills.

If you don't train alive and resistant how will one over come the adrenal dump or the "fight of flight" syndrome?

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.  

[Mr. Cynical]

ArtHic

Keyboard Warrior

ArtHic

Hylonomus

If you pit a pure fighter vs a mixed one the mixed will always win, it's very simple. No fighting style covers everything you need to know, punches, kicks, strikes, grapples, throws, locks, ect. It's better to have a wide range of training for every situation in the fight, then just rely on you opponent only coming at you with what your used to training against.

Depends on the rules.
A fighter will overcome an athlete in a no rules match, but he has little chance in an athletic setting. A lot of kung fu styles emphasize on striking weak spots. If you add rules to avoid injuries, well...
A lot of people mistake MMA as combat. They are not, at least in the way they are practiced today (kick boxing plus grappling).
In other words: A kick in the groin ends whatever dispute.

PS: Most internal martial arts cover every aspect of fighting.

A kick in the groin ends any disputes that DON'T involve an adrenaline rush....unfortunately, most(if not all) fights involve such adrenaline rushes. And at any rate, how the ******** is someone who doesn't practice their techniques at full speed, full contact, with a fully resistant opponent really going to deal with someone who does? Last I checked, you kung fools don't practice your d34dly techniques in such a manner....you rely on compliant drills.

If you don't train alive and resistant how will one over come the adrenal dump or the "fight of flight" syndrome?

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.

Oh how convenient.

"I understand, but you're wrong".

"Don't use THIS type of language on me".

Joint locks? Please. If you do joint locks on a resistant Uke it will NOT break bones. Not unless you've actually performed them with resistance of course.

What are your MAs anyway?  

[Keyboard Warrior]

ArtHic

Keyboard Warrior

ArtHic

Hylonomus

If you pit a pure fighter vs a mixed one the mixed will always win, it's very simple. No fighting style covers everything you need to know, punches, kicks, strikes, grapples, throws, locks, ect. It's better to have a wide range of training for every situation in the fight, then just rely on you opponent only coming at you with what your used to training against.

Depends on the rules.
A fighter will overcome an athlete in a no rules match, but he has little chance in an athletic setting. A lot of kung fu styles emphasize on striking weak spots. If you add rules to avoid injuries, well...
A lot of people mistake MMA as combat. They are not, at least in the way they are practiced today (kick boxing plus grappling).
In other words: A kick in the groin ends whatever dispute.

PS: Most internal martial arts cover every aspect of fighting.

A kick in the groin ends any disputes that DON'T involve an adrenaline rush....unfortunately, most(if not all) fights involve such adrenaline rushes. And at any rate, how the ******** is someone who doesn't practice their techniques at full speed, full contact, with a fully resistant opponent really going to deal with someone who does? Last I checked, you kung fools don't practice your d34dly techniques in such a manner....you rely on compliant drills.

If you don't train alive and resistant how will one over come the adrenal dump or the "fight of flight" syndrome?

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.

I don't understand how you have to be so damned careful when doing joint locks....Brazilian Jujitsu practitioners practice joint-locks, yet they manage to do it in an alive, resistant manner. Sambo practitioners practice joint locks, yet they also train in an alive resistant manner....so what's aikido's excuse? What's kung fu's excuse? What's ANY style's excuse for not training alive and resistant? If you don't train alive and resistant then how do you know if the technique you've learned will actually work? Until you test it and prove it works, it just remains theory.  

[TaeKyon]

ArtHic

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.

As Keyboard has pointed out, joint locks/submissions need not be practiced "carefully" (which would be completely contraditory to Jiu Jitsu training and the other arts mentioned) they can be practiced full force, full speed, and against a resistant opponent. Moreover, what about basic striking techniques? What is Kung Fu and other TMA's excuse for not practicing these techniques full force when there's plenty of protective gear to allow such practice of techniques w/out having to worry about being too dangerous? The human body is a lot more resilient than some people argue it is.

As for "well placed kicks" ending "most adrenaline rushes" is naive to simply dismiss with such an argument. Yeah, it's very possible to drop someone who's got his adrenaline going but it's also very possible that a single kick isn't going to stop an assailant who's got his endorphins kicking and is momentarily resistant to a surprising amount of pain, as most biologists will tell you. But I understand your ignorance.  

[ArtHic]

TaeKyon

ArtHic

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.

As Keyboard has pointed out, joint locks/submissions need not be practiced "carefully" (which would be completely contraditory to Jiu Jitsu training and the other arts mentioned) they can be practiced full force, full speed, and against a resistant opponent. Moreover, what about basic striking techniques? What is Kung Fu and other TMA's excuse for not practicing these techniques full force when there's plenty of protective gear to allow such practice of techniques w/out having to worry about being too dangerous? The human body is a lot more resilient than some people argue it is.

As for "well placed kicks" ending "most adrenaline rushes" is naive to simply dismiss with such an argument. Yeah, it's very possible to drop someone who's got his adrenaline going but it's also very possible that a single kick isn't going to stop an assailant who's got his endorphins kicking and is momentarily resistant to a surprising amount of pain, as most biologists will tell you. But I understand your ignorance.

Thank you.  

[ArtHic]

Keyboard Warrior

ArtHic

Keyboard Warrior

ArtHic

Hylonomus

If you pit a pure fighter vs a mixed one the mixed will always win, it's very simple. No fighting style covers everything you need to know, punches, kicks, strikes, grapples, throws, locks, ect. It's better to have a wide range of training for every situation in the fight, then just rely on you opponent only coming at you with what your used to training against.

Depends on the rules.
A fighter will overcome an athlete in a no rules match, but he has little chance in an athletic setting. A lot of kung fu styles emphasize on striking weak spots. If you add rules to avoid injuries, well...
A lot of people mistake MMA as combat. They are not, at least in the way they are practiced today (kick boxing plus grappling).
In other words: A kick in the groin ends whatever dispute.

PS: Most internal martial arts cover every aspect of fighting.

A kick in the groin ends any disputes that DON'T involve an adrenaline rush....unfortunately, most(if not all) fights involve such adrenaline rushes. And at any rate, how the ******** is someone who doesn't practice their techniques at full speed, full contact, with a fully resistant opponent really going to deal with someone who does? Last I checked, you kung fools don't practice your d34dly techniques in such a manner....you rely on compliant drills.

If you don't train alive and resistant how will one over come the adrenal dump or the "fight of flight" syndrome?

Damn good points.
But please don't quote with l33t.
I'm not from your part of town (the US that is) and I don't know how schools teach there. I can only talk about my experiences and trust me, I'm covered.
Regarding the practice of techniques, you need to be very careful when practicing (e.g.) joint locks, or else bones could (and in some instances have right in front of me) break.
And most adrenaline rushes have ended with a well placed kick, as most European hooligans will tell you.
But I understand your scepticism.

I don't understand how you have to be so damned careful when doing joint locks....Brazilian Jujitsu practitioners practice joint-locks, yet they manage to do it in an alive, resistant manner. Sambo practitioners practice joint locks, yet they also train in an alive resistant manner....so what's aikido's excuse? What's kung fu's excuse? What's ANY style's excuse for not training alive and resistant? If you don't train alive and resistant then how do you know if the technique you've learned will actually work? Until you test it and prove it works, it just remains theory.

No argument there. Again I will point out that I do not understand how they teach in the United States. Techniques should be practiced (and are in my school) under the assumption that the oponent will come at full force, being stronger, faster and generally better than you.
Now about kicking a guy in the balls. That was a technique a friend who works as an "enforcer" pointed out to me. In his line of work it proved to be a lifesaver. Plus it is something my teacher tought me to be very aware of. I don't have to be kicked there to prove how effective it is.
Now about practicing cereful; even in BJJ they start slow.
I wonder how they teach catch wrestling in the US.  

[nightwing773]

My academy is an oddball in the rough for training with resistance. If you've ever seen The Last Samauri or Glory, then you've seen how they shoot at the people they're training to use guns, to enforce in their minds what it's really like in battle.

Well, in our academy, we can all randomly attack each other, and we all have the rule, if you get taken down by an attacker because you can't remember your moves and can't do anything of value, you get 200 knuckle push ups.

It's a discapline thing that we have with the higher ranks, which is all we have at our academy anymore. all first dan and up.... rolleyes oh well, it still works for us. I wish more academies had things like that, because I agree with that point.  

[ArtHic]

nightwing773

My academy is an oddball in the rough for training with resistance. If you've ever seen The Last Samauri or Glory, then you've seen how they shoot at the people they're training to use guns, to enforce in their minds what it's really like in battle.

Well, in our academy, we can all randomly attack each other, and we all have the rule, if you get taken down by an attacker because you can't remember your moves and can't do anything of value, you get 200 knuckle push ups.

It's a discapline thing that we have with the higher ranks, which is all we have at our academy anymore. all first dan and up.... rolleyes oh well, it still works for us. I wish more academies had things like that, because I agree with that point.

Interesting. Do you also train outside?  

[Zealth]

Most of the arguments in this thread are ridiculous. Were I to take them to an extreme, so-called "Martial Arts" would be an idiotic pursuit. It would be far more effective to learn how to shoot a gun and use a knife. That would be the ultimate end to the proposed "purpose" of Martial Arts, and I'd suggest you keep both of those weapons at your side. Anything else could be argued away as bullshido.

As I understand it, the kind of martial arts we all practice is only useful as self defense. Using it to attack another individual would be stupid, as there is no promise that your training would be effective in the attack.

I don't mean to call anyone an idiot in this thread per se, but the atmosphere is far to demeaning in this thread. In other words, calm the ******** down.  

[Mr. Cynical]

Zealth

Most of the arguments in this thread are ridiculous. Were I to take them to an extreme, so-called "Martial Arts" would be an idiotic pursuit. It would be far more effective to learn how to shoot a gun and use a knife. That would be the ultimate end to the proposed "purpose" of Martial Arts, and I'd suggest you keep both of those weapons at your side. Anything else could be argued away as bullshido.

Marksmanship and using any other weaponry with skill falls under the catagory of Martial Arts.

Zealth

As I understand it, the kind of martial arts we all practice is only useful as self defense. Using it to attack another individual would be stupid, as there is no promise that your training would be effective in the attack.

Prove that boxing and wrestling cannot be used in an offensive situation. In fact, prove that Muay Thai, BJJ, ect. cannot.

Zealth

I don't mean to call anyone an idiot in this thread per se, but the atmosphere is far to demeaning in this thread. In other words, calm the ******** down.

The point of this thread is to demean Aikido. So, no.

What do you do?  

[Zealth]

Mr. Cynical

Marksmanship and using any other weaponry with skill falls under the catagory of Martial Arts.

That's why I called them the "Ultimate End" to Martial Arts.

Mr. Cynical

Prove that boxing and wrestling cannot be used in an offensive situation. In fact, prove that Muay Thai, BJJ, ect. cannot.

I don't need to. I stated that "there is no promise that your training would be effective on the attack." I am not stating that it wouldn't be. What I am suggesting is that in a world where Martial Arts is an acceptable form of attack, and there are no laws preventing my "Ultimate Ends" of Martial Arts, it would be more useful to master both marksmanship and knife fighting. Thereby, it would be nearly useless to attack someone by any other means.

Mr. Cynical

The point of this thread is to demean Aikido. So, no.

What do you do?

I object to the point of the thread. There are useful skills to be learned in Aikido, which were obviously not shown by the premise video. The "Master" was a complete idiot if this video wasn't a joke, as suggested before.

It shouldn't matter what I do, but I'll state it anyway. I am a fencer. I have no disillusions about it being a true Martial Art. I am a fencer of sport, and while the skills I learn could be effective, I'd rather not find out.

You could say that we practice fencing at full speed and full contact, so I do have a leaning towards such things when speaking of Martial Arts. Waving your arms around and... apparently knocking out all of your students is not a Martial Art. That is a badly choreographed fight scene not worthy of stage play. However, such video "evidence" is not representative of Aikido or those who practice it on a whole.

That being said, I have found that focusing on one Martial Art is ineffective were one to enter a full contact hostile situation, i.e. a bar fight. But if someone pulls a gun in a bar fight, the chances are that he will win.  

[Mr. Cynical]

Zealth

That's why I called them the "Ultimate End" to Martial Arts.

Ah. Mistake on my part.

Zealth

I don't need to. I stated that "there is no promise that your training would be effective on the attack." I am not stating that it wouldn't be. What I am suggesting is that in a world where Martial Arts is an acceptable form of attack, and there are no laws preventing my "Ultimate Ends" of Martial Arts, it would be more useful to master both marksmanship and knife fighting. Thereby, it would be nearly useless to attack someone by any other means.

Oh I see what you are saying. My bad again. (Work is killing me here). However, I think you're trying to say that it'd be pointless to train anything that is (modern) weapon related rather than useless (that's what I got out of that because of the statement below about Aikido). And I still disagree IF that is the case. There are plenty of reasons to not just focus on weapons, such as non-lethally diffusing the situation before it actually occurs (offensive) AND after it occurs(self defense). Of course this is only if the opponent has no weapon, in which case you should carry a weapon anyway. But again, to say that it's useless to attack someone by any other means is denying every range of fighting, which in turn is illogical.

Zealth

I object to the point of the thread. There are useful skills to be learned in Aikido, which were obviously not shown by the premise video. The "Master" was a complete idiot if this video wasn't a joke, as suggested before.

It wasn't a joke. AND to contest your argument, I could easily say that your point of the knife and marksmanship is similar to Judo and Aikido. Why take Aikido when Judo is pretty much the end result of good Aikido? And before you come back with the "not everywhere has a judo place", I will contest here and now that not everywhere has a range or Kali/whateverweaponartschool. Aikido's training methods are completely out dated, unrealistic, and the benefits that you can gain are found in other MA.

Don't get me wrong, people can have fun with Aikido, I don't object to that. But there are way more effective training methods out there IF you're doing this for more than the reason of having a good time.

Zealth

It shouldn't matter what I do, but I'll state it anyway. I am a fencer. I have no disillusions about it being a true Martial Art. I am a fencer of sport, and while the skills I learn could be effective, I'd rather not find out.

I was just curious. No offense intended.

Zealth

You could say that we practice fencing at full speed and full contact, so I do have a leaning towards such things when speaking of Martial Arts. Waving your arms around and... apparently knocking out all of your students is not a Martial Art. That is a badly choreographed fight scene not worthy of stage play. However, such video "evidence" is not representative of Aikido or those who practice it on a whole.

No, but the average practioner of the MA determines it's effectiveness. As it turns out, Aikido has one of the lowest effectivness, due to esoteric beliefs, stubbornness to evolve, and of course bad training methodiology.

Zealth

That being said, I have found that focusing on one Martial Art is ineffective were one to enter a full contact hostile situation, i.e. a bar fight. But if someone pulls a gun in a bar fight, the chances are that he will win.

And I agree. Like I said, denying ANY range of fighting (grappling/striking/weapons) is illogical.