This is true

Glad you found the videos useful!

Thanks!

Thanks, Todd!

Thank you!

Thanks!

Thanks a lot!

Thanks Vien!

Person that most impacted my transition from aikido to BJJ+Muay thai and later into FMA was T.K. Chiba (founder of Birankai federation). Fantastic, old-school teacher, and he always was hellbent on explaining that aikido's heritage is a weapon art first, and unarmed second. The unarmed part was revolutionary when these techniques first were defined, because it was giving a figthing chance against someone armed with a blade when you didnt have your weapon. But ultimately, you should have a mindset that you go for your primary weapon first, and if you have nothing else, you use unarmed techniques. I'll say, his summer training camps ended up forcing me to train more with staff, spear, knife and sword than with unarmed stuff. Just like in FMA, weapons are teaching tools to understand the combat mindset to apply to unarmed training in an exact same fashion. Sadly, "traditionally" (most of aikido schools and teachers) dont go for that mindset.

Congratulations, that's a great first step! Glad you enjoy the channel!

Thank you, Rashid!

I appreciate your information. I made it to Brown prior to the school. Did training in Judo up to green,which pairs very well. In playing with my own journey to get the Aikido more functional, I find (and it was a point my instructors constantly made) was the need to use atemi, and nuit just as distraction, but good functional atemi that would provide an opening for a lock. You may address this in your other stuff, if so, im sure I'll come accross it. Thanks for your content.

Thanks, glad you're enjoying the videos! I look at all weapon situations, unarmed facing armed, armed facing armed and armed facing unarmed.

Tim was a huge help- but his focus is on unarmed martial arts. My journey has been about learning the importance of context. Tim's focus is different than the focus of Aikido.

@@ChuShinTani That's true. My sensei always said that Aikido is Kenjutsu without the sword, but I tend to think that's only part of the story.

In my experience, you are correct- it's only part of the story!

I'd also love to know witch you'd choose if you could only pick one art for all 3

I would guess by striking you mean unarmed striking, but I think it's valuable to keep in mind that striking is best done with something hard and/or sharp in the hand. But if it has to be unarmed I'd pick Muay thai- you're going to get the best return on investment. Grappling really depends on how old you are and what your goals are. In General I'd say BJJ because it's widely available, there are lots of people doing it (more training partners) and the context can generally deal with lots of grappling situations. As far as "dealing with weapons" again there are lots of details to hash out before I could give an educated answer, but grossly- for non projectile weapons I choose a good HEMA school, for modern concepts I'd look into Shiv Works, and start training pistol. Sorry those answers are not more concise, but there is A LOT of ground to cover there.

@@ChuShinTani I appreciate the time you took to answer my question. I was talking about none projectile weapons. We came up with very similar answers as far as non armed striking I'd say Muay Thai, grappling I'd say BJJ, and as far as knife fighting I have way less experience but I'd probably pick Kali. I have like to no knife fighting training, just from watching KZfaq videos and practicing on my Century Bob. I'd just assume a knife fighting art would be the best since besides my firearm, a knife is the only weapon I keep on me. Hopefully it never gets to the point where I have to use either of them though lol. I've trained in mma for about 3 years when I was a teenager, boxing for 2 years, Muay Thai for 2 or 3 years, and Bjj on and off for around 6 years now. I feel pretty confident that I can defend myself against an unarmed attacker and as far as guns are concerned I live in Texas and grew up shooting probably way too young lol. I have a firing range in my back yard so I practice different situations all the time so I'm confident with a firearm as well. I would love to learn a knife fighting style but theres nothing around where I live. The closest thing would be a Krav Maga gym and I've trained with several of those guys in the past and they suck as fighting so that doesn't give me much hope lol

You should check out craig douglas and shivworks if you haven't already.

This is a comment I see a lot- and I think it comes from a place of not understanding the situation. First, the word Atemi means simply to hit the body. However when most people say Atemi they mean (as I believe you do here) unarmed striking. If you understand the true meaning of the word Atemi you will see there is lots of Atemi being done in this video (I even highlighted Michael cutting my wrist to see the Atemi he was making on me). Now if you mean unarmed striking (like boxing) you are correct we didn't do it in this practice. There are many reasons for this, but the most important as far as this practice goes is that if we make it about the striking: A: the focus (if we did unarmed striking) would be on attrition and not skill/technique- if I can take more punches than Michael can I win, if he can take more than me he'll win. The purpose here is to see if the technology used in Aikido can work in a live situation. would striking make doing a technique easier to do, yes BUT his striking would make it easier for him to resist- so it's a wash. B: If I am striking him unarmed and he is striking me armed- it's a bad trade for me (weapon beats first). If I am holding his weapon hand with one hand and punching him with the other it's a bad trade unless I am stronger than him (see reason A)- and I'm less likely to control the weapon by using only one of my hands. So the only Atemi that we are allowing here is Michaels- the reason is because those strikes are precisely the ones that Aikido techniques should stop.

Keep up the good work!

Michael does atemi many times in the video. If you have a weapon, using it to make atemi is a great idea, if you don't have a weapon, most of the time it's better to use your hands for grabbing. I think it's important to understand the difference between boxing and atemi- it can be a tricky subject! Thanks for the comments!

That's a question I had for a really long time... and I'll tell you all about it in the next two videos! Thanks for watching!

Sometimes, yes.

Rokas and I are planning to meet up and do some video's in the near-ish future. Glad you enjoyed it!

I thought like this for a long while. In part two of this series that's exactly what I thought. But there are still lots of problems with this idea- I'll get to those in part three.

@@ChuShinTani all is worth to be explored. Surely the striking part is heavily lacking in aikido and I recall that Weshiba had the art created as a war art. I think that the intention of aikido was a flowing martial art that focused on an ever ready upright stance. Missing the striking teachings is a huge loss.

Yes the striking must be a part of your Aikido- but not unarmed striking. The upright flowing part I believe comes from an aesthetic that has a functional root.

@@ChuShinTani Yes, I thought as well that Aikido striking is mostly weapon striking like swords and short swords. I think the whole Aikido trope is: stay stable, face multiple enemies with your sword/spear, move in an efficient way to face the right number, prevent them to disable your weapon and use their attempts at disarming you as a chance to throw them to deal a fatal strike. In a way Aikido should be more suitable for "Hema" competition than unarmed martial art.

I came to my understanding of Aikido in three stages- what you are describing is my second stage of understanding- and I must say you are pretty preceptive because most people don't get the truth of the above statement you are making.

Sorry about that one...

We chat pretty regularly.

Glad someone caught that!

If you have to strike an opponent in order for a technique to work, it's a very bad grappling technique. If you have to do a technique after you strike someone, you're not very good at striking. If you are struggling to force technique it's called fighting.

Punches and kicks hurt and bruise, blades eviscerate and decapitate. Unarmed strikes are a joke compared to weapon strikes- if you're full of adrenaline only the most powerful strikes will stop you (exceptions being lucky strikes that knock you out). With a blade even a grandma can kill with very little force. If you had to kick box with a K1 kickboxer, I doubt anyone would take you seriously- however if you had a blade in your hand and he didn't- I wouldn't bet against you.

@@ChuShinTani You overestimate the effectiveness of weapons, particularly knives. A human pumped full of adrenaline can take multiple slashed and stabs just as easy as a punch to the face. Even easier according to multiple people who've described being hit with a blade. I've yet to hear someone say they got stabbed one time and they gave up the fight. Take the elderly woman who was stabbed in the neck with something like a 6+in knife and didn't even know it until somebody stopped her in a store and told her. My original point wasn't about the effectiveness, it was about the presence. If you grabbed the wrist of my hand holding a knife, or anybody's in a real fight, I would immediately deck you with the other hand, or throw an elbow, a headbutt, or a knee. You didn't account for any of that on the video, which eliminates the legitimacy of the art being displayed in the given context. The example of me (untrained in striking) with a knife versus a professional kickboxer is completely inaccurate in my opinion. I would still get destroyed, unless I land a lucky shot to the throat or the face or a vital organ. Even then, it's almost always gonna take more than one to stop any fighter who's worth their salt. I like the idea of the video, and it's a solid step in the direction of trying to un-meme aikido, if you will. I just find that the necessary variables were omitted, rendering any conclusion moot. I understand this was from 2007 and I'm sure you've refined your art since then, I just wanted to share the criticism that went through my mind while watching.

Do you think unarmed strikes are better than armed stiles is my point. If you punched a guy six times in the chest unarmed vs six times armed which would be more successful. You have a point about striking- but In my opinion once you've become accustomed to being struck you will ignore all but the most powerful shots. Would unarmed striking change the outcome between us in this situation, maybe- but those changes would have been outside of what we were trying to figure out.

Indeed, but Tomiki's work didn't answer all of the questions I had- just like Ueshiba's work didn't answer all of Tomiki's questions, and Takeda's work didn't answer all of Ueshiba's questions and on and on.

@@ChuShinTani fair enough, I would keep an eye on Tomiki Aikido though, it's evolving, and surprisingly quickly! Thank you for the reply, and I wish you all the best in your endeavours.

Aikido wasn't created for anything. It's an idea from a man, who already had an extensive knowledge of martial arts. If anything it's a different approach to training then traditional jujitsu, BJJ, or Judo.

I see how you might feel that way- I actually feel the opposite.

It works best with a weapon in the hand.

The knife work could be seen as a form of experimental archeology to reveal how the techniques work, not contained in manuscript as in HEMA but passed down from person to person

Lmfao. You didn't even watch the video.