principle

There was a lot of talk about Principle when I first started my Aikido study.  Same hand, same foot.  Unbendable arm.  Keep your hand in the center, blah, de boring blah.    The principle based argument is that you can go into a pool cue and broken bottle problem and solve it like a nerd with a calculator.  Just because you are aware of "principle",  and can apply it.  On this I will have to pull the Bullshizznit card.

Principle only enters into the picture when you cast aside all the ifs, ands, or buts.  Take Judo for instance.  I have been thrown around by Judo folks, and a good judo player can make you pay for every step you take.  My only solution to a judo player is to hit the guy first, probably in the nuts, or knees, or some other dirty play that you wouldnt do on a dojo mat.

Because the Judo guy trained in an environment where he didnt have to worry about getting his nuts caved in, he is free to get sensitive in a way that he can feel a weight transfer going on. He was given the luxury of not getting slapped in the face or across the ear hole every time he came to grips.  Because he didnt have to deal with that sort of thing he became good at that sensitive thing that judo guys are good at.  He started identifying triggers, and bad situations, and potentials.

I suppose, if the judo guy was facing Cleetus in the trailer park who isnt a trained puncher, yet wants to punch, and chooses punch poorly, the judo guy could probably have an easy go at it.  But line the 2 day a week for six years judo player against Mike Tyson in some sort of road rage fender bender event, then the Judo guy would probably take whatever lady luck would throw at him.

The principles would fail him once he recieved a blow that felt like the impact of a white rhino.  

So when the principles fail, you look for another principle.  And you cast aside all the ifs, ands, or buts that go along with it.  Because principles can get contaminated pretty easy.  Clear water muddies up the best.

What if a guy swings at you, what if a guy pulls a knife, you cant do that against a judo player( as if everyone you ever will meet will be a judo player), that would never work in an MMA match,  what if he uses his elbow,  but if you do this then the guy might do that.  

Recently,  I have started doing some BJJ.  It got me thinking about where is the best place to start learning all this martial arts crap.   I asked a guy who has been doing it for a couple of years what he would do here, and here, and here, what if I did this, or this, or this.  And on the ground he had a lot of immediately provable, understandable answers.  Offbalance is an immediate effect on the ground, putting too much pressure on a guy has an immediate effect, getting handsy has an immediate effect.

It got me thinking about BJJ, about how it was a pretty complex interaction yet pretty darn simple.  I started thinking that all the things that happen on the ground, principle wise, would probably transfer to the stand up game, and if they didnt, then you needed to think along another principle line.  Because on the ground it is pretty clear cut who knows what to do, and who doesn't.   And that BJJ is pretty much all mat time, from day one, everyone can get after it and start looking at things and proving whether something will work or not.

Judo is probably the next best, but there is a lot of time taken to learn how to fall safely in order to absorb a technique and understand the function and effect of a technique.  It becomes uke driven.  I cant honestly say whether BJJ is an Uke driven art.  Anyone can lay on the ground and rassle around.  I can say that it is dumbass driven, because once you commit an error in judgement and another guy knows it and knows what to do about it, then you are toast.

So I think I have identified probably a overreaching principle in the martial arts.  That is the Recognition of Error Principle, and the, What to do about it Principle.

Like I said, I'm working off of the idea that BJJ is probably the best martial art to access these two principles. Judo functions off of a guy trying to keep his balance, keep standing, so its probably the second best.  A guy will have to learn how to fall down safely to explore the neighborhood.  I assume it takes a good while maybe a couple of years to get the feel for standing ukemi.

Aikido is probably about the worst to route to explore principle.  How long does it take to get comfortable being stiff armed in the face, or fall over a twisted wrist.  And from two guys squaring off, separated, how much can you recognize an error, and what in the helll can you do about it.

Tomiki put the atemi waza in as the underpinning of his Aikido.  Because they function much like karate.  A guy drops his guard and you hit him.  Only to score a competive point you have make the guy fall down.  I have always had a problem with my Karl Geis Ryu brethren on this point.  If you are practicing a non-competitive form of aikido then why arent the atemi waza percussive?

 I dont know how many times I have been at a clinic, or get together and some one wants to show yet another take on Gedan Ate and I get paired up with a guy that is way to fat to put a gedan ate on.  He is never going to generate the energy to throw a gedan ate.  The obvious solution is elbow the guy in his obvious bread basket and work from there.  And really I think, that the Atemi waza suck in the KG-ryu because no one wants to take the ukemi for them.  The 23 kata lets a guy circle out of them.  It kind of takes the teeth out of the entire system.

So the first error recognition is when a guy drops his guard.  Just like karate, you hit him.  You dont stick your arms out and feel for it like you can in Judo, or feel for it holistically on the ground in BJJ.   Otherwise you have to be in reactive mode, dodge at the very barest margin, hoping for a catastrophic miss.