Jujitsu or Aikido

[chris davis 200]

I've never seen riot police "flow" with their opponent, using their own energy against them

Granted!

But this is not their only role they are infact a special police force. (similar to SWAT)

Yoshinkan is far more JJ that Aikido in its approach to situations, It is quite close to DRAJJ.

A bouncer in a club could use it for control purposes. Certain tools will apply on street use But choices make up the need each has there own.

I work as a doorman and have used AJJ techniques to great effect. the problem i think in general when talking about grapling arts is that people tend to just think of the Throws and the ground work, But the standing locks and joint maniupulation is extremely effective and work a treat!

I do think that something where you remain standing and dont go to ground is far far more effective in a street situation than the BJJ type ground and pound stuff. this is why i rate TJJ and SOME Aikido.

9 times out of 10 you will not be facing one opponent, even if you think you are the guy will probly have mates around and they will end up hoofing your head off, if your ontop of their mate pounding his face!!!

Nearly everytime i have seen two guys hit the deck the mates who maybe arn't that hard on their own sudenly grow balls and start kicking like animals!!

anyways got a bit carried away!

cheers
Chris

[robertlee]

Standing locks and joint manuipliations against a strong or resetive opponent requires one to loosen the opponent up with a strike , many times. In a bar situation this with the bouncer act first or against a drunk then the tools require less set up . The less skills one has deturmines how well the tool works. An d Im not saying Akido does not work it just has to start fitting in to the fight . If you can not get the tools going and have been struck several good blows well its time to add a few striking tools to help complete it No one art has all the nessersary tools to round off the fighter. Use your Akido as the base art then employee the use of a extended use of other tools for personal use. To close the door to one style limits personal needs down the road. Its each to there own path A hungry person looks for more.

[chris davis 200]

Standing locks and joint manuipliations against a strong or resetive opponent requires one to loosen the opponent up with a strike , many times.

I do agree with you there. but Aikido and Aiki JuJutsu both use striking techniques for destraction and imobilisation. I also think that when someone has their arem locked and at the point of breaking they tend to stop swinging - if they do their arm is broken! simple.

The less skills one has deturmines how well the tool works. An d Im not saying Akido does not work it just has to start fitting in to the fight .

It is far better to know a few core techniques well than a huge amount of techniques poorly. IMO

If you can not get the tools going and have been struck several good blows well its time to add a few striking tools to help complete it No one art has all the nessersary tools to round off the fighter.

I would say that if you master one art and all of its principles then you have a complete system of movement which has evolved past the origional art anyway. this is what makes 'Masters' masters. this is what makes a real master such a superb fighter - you could study their art in order to form counters etc, but if they have become formless and instinctive then these origional techniques no longer matter. again this is my opinion but i have encountered a master that could deal with anything that i threw at him, i was not a problem, and having studied MA's intensley for 16 years this was very disconcerting. this guy had only learned one style but was still very much a complete fighter!

To close the door to one style limits personal needs down the road. Its each to there own path A hungry person looks for more.

A hungry person can get fat and inefficient. I am not really saying that one style does always have what it takes, this depends on your training and your teacher, but if you can look a long way down the road (and commit completely to your training) then one style may well be enough.

Cheers
Chris

[ap Oweyn]

Originally posted by terry
The most effective Aikido guy I have met is Cacoy Canete. He does Aikido footwork in the process of flogging his opponents. He also does some Aikido throw, but I think he relies more on Judo most of the time for throwing. In any case, there is usually at 15 or 20-to-1 ratio of hits with the stick to throws.

T

true. but cacoy canete also has a background in jiujutsu, boxing, karate, and obviously eskrima. it's a bit hard to isolate the variables in that combination.

in any event, i agree with you that he's a model of applicability. i wouldn't cross him.


stuart b.

[robertlee]

As the art was developed the Founder added to it slightly as the exposer found abetter aprouch . Some tools were discarded or modified. That is how it was. I spent years in traditional arts many of the same answers. I have enough to learn in this art why learn an other. All arts share the same structure to borrow is better The founder new that . Akido has a few good open hand strikes. that yes can upset the opponent. And yes IF you have the lock in place it becomes useful. But the space before is what I am concerned with. To apply it is what made it work. THE person makes there art work for them , not the art. There are many good fighter types in any art . But not every person becomes one . As masters go I do not beleive in that . I would only except that term as to the founder. One can allways improve so what then is the master if not yourself. A instructor is just a guide to help you develop . Respect him as he guides you . But the eyes must stay open . In the end it is you who finishes that journey. If you are happy not to explore Ten why did others change some of the aprouches to the way they teach Akido? That is why arts branch out. I beleive the founder of any art if they could see it now. Would ask why have you not opened the door to discover more. A small update brings growth Why do you think Uyesheba needed to change to form akido Then Tomiki adapted his concepts to form a different branch. Long ago the sword did great damage . Now the gun replaced it . The sword Is still used today . But the gun has it beat. To preserve is good .But to keep alive one must explore. I respect what you are saying and believe convictions. But just look back some and you will see . There has been changes in AkIDO as to what some thought would improve its structure

[doubleouch]

I think most of you guys still don't get it. Its not the art!!!!!! It's not the art!!!!!! It is the training methods!!!!! Train against active resistance. Train against someone who is trying to take your head off. Test everything in sparring. You will know right away what works and what doesn't! With the right training methods anything can work.
for those of you who dis bjj remember If you get in a fight the best way to never have to fight from your back is to know alot about fighting from your back. My bjj experience keeps me calm and active should I wind up falling down in combat. I know how to recover and stand back up without getting clobered.

[Sean J]

Well, the in my opinion the the training mehtods and "the art" are things you cannot divide. Otherwise arts that have basically the same techniques would not be so different as they sometimes are.

[doubleouch]

What? I don't understand what you are trying to say. training methods are certainly a part of the art. You can, however change them within an art. Arts like boxing, wrestling, judo and other arts that compete with resisting opponents regularly change and modernize their training methods.

[ryanhall]

I disagree that only the training methods matter. The concepts are the foundation of an art, and if they are not sound, then the art is not sound no matter how it is trained. All arts and styles are not equal. Say hypothetcially that a praying mantis gung fu man and a boxer fight. They have equal training methods and are physically similar. The boxer will likely win every time. Why? Simple. It is a superior art. There are only so many ways to move combatively, and fighting limp-wristed isn't one of them. The same could be said of traditional Chinese trapping. It is beyond most of us mere mortals, no matter how much we train it. The reality of things is: not all people are created equal, not all styles are equal, and life often isn't fair. It's like saying that a Honda with an experienced driver will beat a Ferrari with a rookie at the wheel. It just won't happen. They are in different leagues.

Ryan

[-YT-]

But, what if due to his lack of experience the rookie crashes the Ferrari, leaving the pro in the Honda to win??!!

[ryanhall]

Always possible, but that means that the Honda Master is banking on luck and his opponent's misfortune to win--not a very sound strategy.

[Kirves]

Originally posted by ryanhall
not a very sound strategy.

You think it is a better strategy to rely on a fast car without getting proper fast driving instruction, than getting a slower car but getting properly taught how to drive fast?

I think the most important thing would be to get the instruction on how to drive fast properly with any vehicle. Then I'd worry about having the fastest car around. It may be cool to have the fastest car, but may be disastroys if you don't really know what you're doing.

What this means in practice is this:

If I learn how to practice correctly, it eventually makes no difference if the art I learned it with was Muay Thai, JKD, BJJ, Escrima or whatever, as long as the training was 'alive' ( ) and realistic.

If I later found out that technically I really want to learn karate or hapkido, I would know how to make it work.

But if I learned the best art in the world from a McDojo and it's incompetent instructor without any 'alive (tm)' training methods, I would know the best techniques in the world but when the duff hits the fan, I'd have trouble pulling any of it off to save my life!

[Sean J]

Originally posted by doubleouch
What? I don't understand what you are trying to say. training methods are certainly a part of the art. You can, however change them within an art. Arts like boxing, wrestling, judo and other arts that compete with resisting opponents regularly change and modernize their training methods.

Then try and compare Shotokan and Goju Ryu Karate.

They basically have the same moves, still they end up looking totally different.

The same goes for traditional Jiu Jitsu and BJJ.

(Sorry for the spelling of Jiu Jitsu - I don't have Kanji signs on my PC)

Or how about Ueshibas Aikido and Keijutsukai Aikido (there you have the philosophy of loosening somebody up with a strike to make locks work better)

[Szczepankiewicz]

I have to agree with Ryan on this. If the fundamental physical principles of the art are flawed then the art itself is flawed. No matter how experienced a practicioner is in the respective art, they are still at a major disadvantage. Practice does not make Perfect. Practice makes Permanent.


A common flaw is non or light contact sparring. Another would be to incorporate one realm of action whilst ignoring others. A third is to try and convince sport practicioners that they are learning 'valuable' self defense. I firmly believe that each art brings something to the table that may be worthwhile, however banking on that single art and being an expert in it is no guarantee of anything.


Aikido is a wonderful art which has phenomenal footwork and flow. However, as I understand it, most Aikido throws take place with the arms of the tori extended away from their own centerline. To me this is inefficient as all get out and one of the reasons it takes forever to become proficient in the art.

So to tie it back in, an inexperienced Ferrari driver vs. a master Honda driver. All the Ferrari driver has to do is keep pace with the Honda until the Honda driver makes a mistake or one of innate shortcomings of the Honda manifests.

Odds are when the Ferrari driver finds the long straightaway he can pass the Honda and leave him far in the dust and each time he hits a straightaway increase the distance until the race is over.

As a novice in my art I have grappled with Judo Black Belts and sparred kumite with strikers who have outranked/out experienced me. Using simply the fundamentals of this art I study, I have held my own and better.

Who was that clown on FX that was letting people hit him in the throat to prove how much Chi control he had? I'd gladly square off with this 10th Dan any day of the week.

Spanky

[DRLashambe]

Everybody seems to be talking about the philosophies of different "arts." Has anyone read the Tao of Jeet Kune Do? It doesn't make sense to view an art as a whole. I've been taught by BJJ teachers, Thai Kickboxing teachers, Judo teachers, and Pankration teachers. Learning from these different schools haven't robbed me of the skills I learned in other schools, all the individual techniques are just things that I can pull out of my "tool box" and use whenever I need them. If a Systema student teaches me an escape, I don't have to learn the entire art to understand the one escape and start using it in my fighting. Use your techniques in realistic situations, and figure what does or does not work for you. Arguing over which "style" is better is exactly the kind of thinking that the Tao of JKD warns about.