Jan 2 2011, 04:29 AM
QUOTE(Reuben @ Dec 27 2010, 05:09 PM)
I've been training Aikido for some 17-18 years and in a MMA system called CMD for the past 2 years or so and I would thoroughly recommend trying out different martial arts before deciding which suits you better rather than trying to find out which 'is the best'.
Other martial arts I've tried are jujitsu and brazilian jujitsu for a few months and hapkido and taekwando for a few lessons.
Now I don't profess to be an expert but thought it would be good to share my experiences from training in a traditional environment into a more modern environment.
What surehit says is absolutely true. The reason why muay thai/boxers/wrestlers generally fare better in fights is because they are trained in resisting environments where the other side is under no obligation to play along. The MA practitioner gets used to having not all his techniques work, getting hit and a solid understanding of distancing, limitations of each other's physiques and most importantly the stress of being in a fight.
That's not to say other martial arts are not effective, but often in traditional schools, this fully resisting element is not there or there's a whole set of rules that limit the types of attacks each other can make.
Generally the more rules you have in your training environment, the less prepared you are for an all out real fight.
For example Aikido, the way it is taught traditionally is that you watch a technique performed against a specified attack and then you emulate it. Your partner offers little resistance and is told that resisting will lead to serious injury. When a technique is done properly, this is true but often what happens is that the practice becomes a bit of a dance and even the ukes are 'trained' to offer little resistance so that the nage (person doing the technique) often does not develop a proper understanding of the technique when full resistance is applied.
Some techniques are just impractical (yonkyo for example only works on certain types of people). Others require an extremely dedicated attack.
Now I understand Aikido is not suitable for a sparring art. It is more for self defense where your attacker is out to really hurt you and dedicates himself to the attack. Someone who probes and throws non-committal attacks requires a more aggressive form of Aikido that takes the initiative (and raises the question of whether it's then really 'Aikido').
Now this doesn't mean that Aikido isn't effective. I have attempted to incorporate Aikido when horsing around in sparring, and it is surprising how many principles and locks can be applied on a fully resisting opponent if they don't quite expect it. The same applies with all techniques in general. With a jab cross combo, if someone knows you're about to do it, they can counter. Any sort of attack, when anticipated can be countered. The difference is that a jab cross doesn't necessarily give up much and is quick while an Aikido technique generally requires the Nage to commit to the technique more and is more 'telegraphed' to set up. What you find is that there's only a subset of moves that you can use regularly while the others are highly situational.
Now I see a lot of interest in krav maga and talks of how's its like a killer art. It's indeed a fine art and I mean no disrespect but the same people who extol the virtues of KM often b**** on Aikido for reasons that it's fake etc etc.
I've seen quite a few videos of Krav Maga, and if you take a look the way they train is also similar to Aikido in the sense where you perform a fixed attack and then do your technique on your opponent. The principles look similar, get off the line of attack and then counter. In fact many of the opening entries are similar to Aikido except that instead of a throw, they will knee you, punch you and etc etc.
See this video:
There's kote-gaeshi there, kokyu-ho, several variants of irimi-nage and there's no surprise there since they are indeed the most effective Aikido techniques that are easy to learn. Heck there's even sankyo there.
But take a look deeply at the attacks the 'attackers' are throwing in these 'real life demonstrations' and more often than not you'll find people doing thrusting with their knives and then just leaving it there without a quick withdraw. Or they do their attacks and then freeze allowing the practitioner to pull of a quick succession of moves. Situational training. Same with kungfu, aikido and most other traditional martial arts. Nothing wrong with that as long as you realize the limitations of such training.
When you see Krav Maga or kungfu sparring, it kinda looks like a kickboxing match or even just a street brawl and that's because many of the techniques are situational. Gone are the fancy beautiful moves you see in demos or katas or instructionals. What it comes down to are solid principles and understanding of fight mechanics rather than pure technique. And there's nothing wrong with that. But it's also wrong to think 'OH YA MILITARY USES THIS SO ITS LIKE AUTOMATICALLY AWESOME'. Same with Aikido, in a real street fight, you won't see beautiful rolls and throws, you might even see a few botched attempts and sloppy throws or lots of transitions from one technique to the next when one technique doesn't work.
Real fights look ugly!
If someone is looking for a martial art to get to combat effectiveness quick and to do damage, Aikido isn't for you and I would recommend an art that gets plenty of sparring in. If you are patient and want an art that is rewarding and will eventually lead to effectiveness, then take up Aikido by all means but I do recommend taking a sparring based art as well so that you recognize the limitations of both. Please avoid arts that don't allow you to test crap out because 'EVERYTHING IS SO DANGEROUS AND WILL KILL U'. More likely than not. it's complete bull.
it's not pretty ... at allOther martial arts I've tried are jujitsu and brazilian jujitsu for a few months and hapkido and taekwando for a few lessons.
Now I don't profess to be an expert but thought it would be good to share my experiences from training in a traditional environment into a more modern environment.
What surehit says is absolutely true. The reason why muay thai/boxers/wrestlers generally fare better in fights is because they are trained in resisting environments where the other side is under no obligation to play along. The MA practitioner gets used to having not all his techniques work, getting hit and a solid understanding of distancing, limitations of each other's physiques and most importantly the stress of being in a fight.
That's not to say other martial arts are not effective, but often in traditional schools, this fully resisting element is not there or there's a whole set of rules that limit the types of attacks each other can make.
Generally the more rules you have in your training environment, the less prepared you are for an all out real fight.
For example Aikido, the way it is taught traditionally is that you watch a technique performed against a specified attack and then you emulate it. Your partner offers little resistance and is told that resisting will lead to serious injury. When a technique is done properly, this is true but often what happens is that the practice becomes a bit of a dance and even the ukes are 'trained' to offer little resistance so that the nage (person doing the technique) often does not develop a proper understanding of the technique when full resistance is applied.
Some techniques are just impractical (yonkyo for example only works on certain types of people). Others require an extremely dedicated attack.
Now I understand Aikido is not suitable for a sparring art. It is more for self defense where your attacker is out to really hurt you and dedicates himself to the attack. Someone who probes and throws non-committal attacks requires a more aggressive form of Aikido that takes the initiative (and raises the question of whether it's then really 'Aikido').
Now this doesn't mean that Aikido isn't effective. I have attempted to incorporate Aikido when horsing around in sparring, and it is surprising how many principles and locks can be applied on a fully resisting opponent if they don't quite expect it. The same applies with all techniques in general. With a jab cross combo, if someone knows you're about to do it, they can counter. Any sort of attack, when anticipated can be countered. The difference is that a jab cross doesn't necessarily give up much and is quick while an Aikido technique generally requires the Nage to commit to the technique more and is more 'telegraphed' to set up. What you find is that there's only a subset of moves that you can use regularly while the others are highly situational.
Now I see a lot of interest in krav maga and talks of how's its like a killer art. It's indeed a fine art and I mean no disrespect but the same people who extol the virtues of KM often b**** on Aikido for reasons that it's fake etc etc.
I've seen quite a few videos of Krav Maga, and if you take a look the way they train is also similar to Aikido in the sense where you perform a fixed attack and then do your technique on your opponent. The principles look similar, get off the line of attack and then counter. In fact many of the opening entries are similar to Aikido except that instead of a throw, they will knee you, punch you and etc etc.
See this video:
There's kote-gaeshi there, kokyu-ho, several variants of irimi-nage and there's no surprise there since they are indeed the most effective Aikido techniques that are easy to learn. Heck there's even sankyo there.
But take a look deeply at the attacks the 'attackers' are throwing in these 'real life demonstrations' and more often than not you'll find people doing thrusting with their knives and then just leaving it there without a quick withdraw. Or they do their attacks and then freeze allowing the practitioner to pull of a quick succession of moves. Situational training. Same with kungfu, aikido and most other traditional martial arts. Nothing wrong with that as long as you realize the limitations of such training.
When you see Krav Maga or kungfu sparring, it kinda looks like a kickboxing match or even just a street brawl and that's because many of the techniques are situational. Gone are the fancy beautiful moves you see in demos or katas or instructionals. What it comes down to are solid principles and understanding of fight mechanics rather than pure technique. And there's nothing wrong with that. But it's also wrong to think 'OH YA MILITARY USES THIS SO ITS LIKE AUTOMATICALLY AWESOME'. Same with Aikido, in a real street fight, you won't see beautiful rolls and throws, you might even see a few botched attempts and sloppy throws or lots of transitions from one technique to the next when one technique doesn't work.
Real fights look ugly!
If someone is looking for a martial art to get to combat effectiveness quick and to do damage, Aikido isn't for you and I would recommend an art that gets plenty of sparring in. If you are patient and want an art that is rewarding and will eventually lead to effectiveness, then take up Aikido by all means but I do recommend taking a sparring based art as well so that you recognize the limitations of both. Please avoid arts that don't allow you to test crap out because 'EVERYTHING IS SO DANGEROUS AND WILL KILL U'. More likely than not. it's complete bull.
Quote
0.0262sec
1.10
6 queries
GZIP Disabled