Rippiripper they both hurt. Now, the chances of getting a lock on cleanly in a real fight are low-ish (for most locks), but that's why you train: to improve the odds.
@@iatsd yeah but if your training does not include full speed, full power, nor it includes sparring, then you are not actually improving the odds of anything. That's the problem with traditional martial arts
Ah what if it wasn't the point? Those are not self defense methods, not even ancient battlefield techniques, but refined movements based on ancient warfare with the goal of polishing one's mind and body. If you reduce it to an applicable self defense method, you're just comparing an apple and a strawberry. The most common interpretation among high level practionners is this one: www.guillaumeerard.com/aikido/articles-aikido/real-fighting-is-not-the-primary-purpose-of-budo/
Rippiripper Two problems with your statement. First, you're assuming an end goal that may not be relevant to any given student. Second, what makes you think traditional martial arts don't include that? Are you going to trot out the "aikido doesn't include sparring" line as well?
I have no doubt these locks can be effective + extremely painful + would not like to tangle with these guys. However, every demo I have seen involves semi compliance - one extends an arm so the other can catch it & apply a lock. Would this work against a wildman (or multiple attackers) in the street, full of hatred, with an altered pain threshold ? Until you have seen people like this going berserk in real life, it is difficult to comprehend how much pain + how many strikes they can tolerate. A noble art perhaps - but please do NOT rely on this to save your life
Well with sertain locks you have no choise but to be compliant, cause struggling to much might result in you getting a broken arm. If someone tries to force himself out of a lock the practitioner can always just break the joint. And if the tecnique doesnt work for whatever reason you can always switch to different techniques and tactics. Although i agree that its important to practice against resisting opponents, some techniques you cannot apply safely against a fully resisting opponent. Then the practitioner either spares him resulting in the technique not working, or the practitioner breaking the attackers joint.
Interesting response. Having served 7 years as a soldier, 23 yrs as a Police officer, most of it on the street, I can tell you that human beings can fight on AFTER being shot, stabbed, with broken bones, struck repeatedly with batons AND blood loss. Aikido moves may be effective, I have felt wrist locks & know how painful they can be, however I feel they are for use against a semi compliant subject + NOT for when you are being punched, bitten, kicked by a vicious attacker. It is not easy for someone who wears the gi, has invested in it's history + culture, to accept that his or her chosen 'art' has severe limitations. In general, the Eastern martial arts are a starting point only. Real combat training is to be found in systems taught by the Armed Forces - where there are no rules + proven to be effective against an enemy in war ( & constantly updated). There are interesting YT clips that show Aikido guys against MMA fighters (some are fake ) which you might find interesting. Best wishes
The point here is that Budo come from arts of war and were not designed as self-defense. Some disappointed Aikidoists, those with the biggest voice apparently, bring such MMA/SD debates on the table, but the problem is not the art, it's them and their teachers. Interestingly, the question of the effectiveness of Aikido is a very tiny minor subject in Japan. Why? Because it's not the point and Aikidoists are not being lied about what they practice. Ancient arts were designed as arts of war. Modern arts as arts for self-development. But none of them were designed as efficient modern combat techniques or self-defense methods: none of them. Some people want them to be what they're not, but in the end, you can't criticize an apple not tasting like a cherry. Those concepts are not completely mutually exclusive. All arts have a degree of efficiency in some context, but it's not the primary goal. Same as criticizing a 9mm for not being able to shoot accurately a target at 50m. It will have a degree of efficiency, but it's not designed to be used this way.
An interesting + worthy addition to the never ending discussion. I must plagiarise this for the next time I need to sound well informed on this subject. I will take full credit of course + hope that you live too far away to punch my lights out. My go to self protection move is be somewhere else - quickly ....
Until you experience an Aikijujitsu practitioner applying a lock , you have no idea how much it hurts !
In an actual fight or in a choreographed practice?
Rippiripper they both hurt. Now, the chances of getting a lock on cleanly in a real fight are low-ish (for most locks), but that's why you train: to improve the odds.
@@iatsd yeah but if your training does not include full speed, full power, nor it includes sparring, then you are not actually improving the odds of anything. That's the problem with traditional martial arts
Ah what if it wasn't the point?
Those are not self defense methods, not even ancient battlefield techniques, but refined movements based on ancient warfare with the goal of polishing one's mind and body.
If you reduce it to an applicable self defense method, you're just comparing an apple and a strawberry.
The most common interpretation among high level practionners is this one: www.guillaumeerard.com/aikido/articles-aikido/real-fighting-is-not-the-primary-purpose-of-budo/
Rippiripper Two problems with your statement. First, you're assuming an end goal that may not be relevant to any given student. Second, what makes you think traditional martial arts don't include that? Are you going to trot out the "aikido doesn't include sparring" line as well?
these are text book type examples. it's a showcase of the discipline. meant to provide a clear insight.
Love the screaming in the background! ;-)
I have no doubt these locks can be effective + extremely painful + would not like to tangle with these guys. However, every demo I have seen involves semi compliance - one extends an arm so the other can catch it & apply a lock. Would this work against a wildman (or multiple attackers) in the street, full of hatred, with an altered pain threshold ? Until you have seen people like this going berserk in real life, it is difficult to comprehend how much pain + how many strikes they can tolerate. A noble art perhaps - but please do NOT rely on this to save your life
Well with sertain locks you have no choise but to be compliant, cause struggling to much might result in you getting a broken arm. If someone tries to force himself out of a lock the practitioner can always just break the joint. And if the tecnique doesnt work for whatever reason you can always switch to different techniques and tactics. Although i agree that its important to practice against resisting opponents, some techniques you cannot apply safely against a fully resisting opponent. Then the practitioner either spares him resulting in the technique not working, or the practitioner breaking the attackers joint.
Interesting response. Having served 7 years as a soldier, 23 yrs as a Police officer, most of it on the street, I can tell you that human beings can fight on AFTER being shot, stabbed, with broken bones, struck repeatedly with batons AND blood loss. Aikido moves may be effective, I have felt wrist locks & know how painful they can be, however I feel they are for use against a semi compliant subject + NOT for when you are being punched, bitten, kicked by a vicious attacker. It is not easy for someone who wears the gi, has invested in it's history + culture, to accept that his or her chosen 'art' has severe limitations. In general, the Eastern martial arts are a starting point only. Real combat training is to be found in systems taught by the Armed Forces - where there are no rules + proven to be effective against an enemy in war ( & constantly updated). There are interesting YT clips that show Aikido guys against MMA fighters (some are fake ) which you might find interesting. Best wishes
The point here is that Budo come from arts of war and were not designed as self-defense.
Some disappointed Aikidoists, those with the biggest voice apparently, bring such MMA/SD debates on the table, but the problem is not the art, it's them and their teachers.
Interestingly, the question of the effectiveness of Aikido is a very tiny minor subject in Japan. Why? Because it's not the point and Aikidoists are not being lied about what they practice.
Ancient arts were designed as arts of war. Modern arts as arts for self-development. But none of them were designed as efficient modern combat techniques or self-defense methods: none of them.
Some people want them to be what they're not, but in the end, you can't criticize an apple not tasting like a cherry.
Those concepts are not completely mutually exclusive. All arts have a degree of efficiency in some context, but it's not the primary goal. Same as criticizing a 9mm for not being able to shoot accurately a target at 50m. It will have a degree of efficiency, but it's not designed to be used this way.
An interesting + worthy addition to the never ending discussion. I must plagiarise this for the next time I need to sound well informed on this subject. I will take full credit of course + hope that you live too far away to punch my lights out. My go to self protection move is be somewhere else - quickly ....
No need to join the military to learn how to fight, theres boxing, kickboxing, mma, brazilian jiujitsu and judo gyms everywhere.
Demonstration
Before :Dance?hahaha..After :Japanese Krav Maga...