PDA

View Full Version : Aikido for self-defence?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!


graham
09-19-2006, 06:31 PM
Please, this is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

Here's the thing: I work part-time in Community Development and part of my role is looking at violence on the estate, from spouse abuse, to bullying, to over-eager debt collectors. I'm expected to make some observations/suggetions regarding self-defence lessons, but I'm a little unsure what to say.

On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.

Am I making any sense? Are there any Aikido-based (or related) courses/styles out there? If you had to recommend, e.g., a self-defence course for women, what would you go with?

This is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

eyrie
09-19-2006, 07:27 PM
On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.


Why do you feel that "something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short term"? It almost begs the question as to (1) the effectiveness of Aikido techniques and (2) that such techniques cannot be effectively learnt in the short term.

I appreciate that it's not a question of "will Aikido work on the streets", but the way you've framed the question begs the response.

Perhaps the question should be, how would you teach Aikido-derived techniques (or ethical SD responses) such that participants can effectively defend themselves within a short time frame....?

Michael Hackett
09-19-2006, 07:36 PM
Perhaps it would be worth your while to check with Robert Koga Sensei and his program of "Practical Aikido". He's located in Fallbrook, California and has a pretty informative website. A long ways from California to England, but he does have books and videos out that could prove helpful. Good luck with your project.

graham
09-19-2006, 07:44 PM
Why do you feel that "something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short term"?

Partly my experience with other martial arts compared to my (limited) experience with Aikido. ISTM, that Aikido takes longer to get into - and I'm quite happy with that. However, I'm open to being proven wrong.

Perhaps the question should be, how would you teach Aikido-derived techniques (or ethical SD responses) such that participants can effectively defend themselves within a short time frame....?

That's a much better way to put it. Thanks.

George S. Ledyard
09-19-2006, 09:11 PM
On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.

Traditional judo wouldn't be that much better than traditional Aikido for you and probably not as useful. It sounds like the average confrontation for the folks in your line of work would be inside an apartment, clode quarters and probably with a number of subjects around.

From a use of force perspective, judo would be a disaster. Throw the subject into a cabinet or onto the coffee table and you have a serious injury. Also, in domestic situations it is quite common to have to simultaneously deal with the subject, his abused wife who is now attacking you, the subject's unemployed and drunk brother who lives there, etc. The number of weapons available in the typical domestic environment is substantial. Kitchen knives are the weapon of choice in many domestic disputes gone over the line.

Aikido would be a much better art to study than judo for this type of situation. This is why the early days of judo being the basis for the defensive tactics taught at police academies are gone. Some grappling skills would be a good idea but the predominent focus of the training for such an environment should be on good defenisve covering, solid impact techniques, practical techniques for moving a subject around, takedowns for cuffing or pinning, some solid pinning techniques, some takedowns that don't require that you go down with the subject, some weapons defense, etc

Unless you can find a defensice tactics program that is open to non-law enforcement folks, there isn't much that fits this bill completely. Mixed martial arts would have more of these elemnts than any other single art that I know of but it is almost devoid of escort techniques and is very weak on dealing with multiple attackers.

In the long run Aikido has the most to offer someone doing this type of job but you nmeed to train with someone who is serious about the Aikido as a martial art and you will need to train for some time to be any good.

In general, law enforcement and security training is mostly feel good BS. The only thing that one can do effectively in a short trem training program is to knock someone out. You cannot train someone to do any spohisticated tailoring of the force being used in a short term program. If the interest is solely in saving yourself a really good scenario based training with an armored opponent can take you a long way. If the interest is also in protecting the subject, then any short term training is BS. Period.

hapkidoike
09-19-2006, 09:50 PM
It has always seemed to me that if you want to "protect" yourself, and are willingly walking in to a dangerous environment on a daily basis it is best to carry a gun. I don't do, nor have I ever done it, given that I dont walk into dangerous situations every day, but anything less and you end up being the dumb one who just brought a knife to a gunfight. And the amount of training requred to safely and effictively handle a pistol is fairly short and straightforward (as opposed to martial arts in general) from my experience (which is alot more with rifles and pistols than with eastern martial arts). Just get the proper training and don't draw your weapon unless your gonna kill somebody.
peace
ikeman

DaveS
09-19-2006, 10:30 PM
It has always seemed to me that if you want to "protect" yourself, and are willingly walking in to a dangerous environment on a daily basis it is best to carry a gun.
Somehow, I don't think that advice would go down well with people looking at community development on estates in the UK.

I might be way off the mark here, but in the short term at least, the benefit of self defence classes might be less that the individual taking the class is more likely to 'win' in a violent situation and more that they get better at controlling themself and not totally wigging out in a violent or potentially violent situation.

There might also be a related point about reducing people's fear of violence by giving them some experience of dealing with (a controlled version of) it - move people from having an irrational fear of violence to a more proportionate one. I'm not sure about this, though.

The obvious thing to avoid is telling people that you've taught them to defend themselves so they can now go and pick fights with impunity...

Kevin Wilbanks
09-19-2006, 10:43 PM
Somehow, I don't think that advice would go down well with people looking at community development on estates in the UK.


In Florida, Texas, and some other states here, it simply goes without saying... at least in any community without a gate around it.

hapkidoike
09-19-2006, 10:45 PM
In Florida, Texas, and some other states here, it simply goes without saying... at least in any community without a gate around it.

I am speaking from a purely Alaskan standpoint.
Sorry
ikeman

Gernot Hassenpflug
09-19-2006, 11:00 PM
Maybe the idea of self-defence itself is more important to most people, since the majority are not prepared to work too much towards self-defence. So something that will make people feel good, but not so good that they want to go out and show everyone how good they are :-) For those that want something more, there are no easy answers, but then those people are the ones that can take such problems in their stride.

Kevin Wilbanks
09-20-2006, 01:42 AM
Please, this is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

Here's the thing: I work part-time in Community Development and part of my role is looking at violence on the estate, from spouse abuse, to bullying, to over-eager debt collectors. I'm expected to make some observations/suggetions regarding self-defence lessons, but I'm a little unsure what to say.

On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.

Am I making any sense? Are there any Aikido-based (or related) courses/styles out there? If you had to recommend, e.g., a self-defence course for women, what would you go with?

This is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

I'm wondering if there isn't a flaw in the underlying assumption behind the original question. I don't know anything about the rates of violence in the community you are talking about. However, it seems like the kind of problems you cite would be better solved by means that address the problems at a more fundamental level, which could result in preventing the situations from coming to the point where one needs to use physical self-defense techniques. This is a principle straight out of the Art of War - the best general wins without fighting:

Spousal abuse would probably be best addressed by couples counselling or convincing the abusee to get out of the relationship. Bullying could be largely addressed by school policies and by helping the victims to understand how certain kinds of behaviors and responses attract and reinforce the bullying behavior. Over-eager debt collectors? How about basic consumer economic education about how credit works and how to live within a budget?

If the problem has more to do with random violence perpetrated by thugs and inadequate law enforcement, then I could see making the emphasis about martial arts. However, the kinds of problems you are describing seem like the kind that should be divided up into more specific categories and addressed by education and changing the way people think about the problems. It may sound idealistic, but as others have pointed out here, there is no quick way to teach people to be martial arts masters, so efforts in that direction are likely to be even less useful.

stelios
09-20-2006, 02:16 AM
About a year ago there was this person that started training with us, first encounter with Aikido. After about six months he was still trying all his best to use all his manual force and always resist as uke and be very violent in execution as nage. At that moment my teacher (without pointing at him directly) said that throuout his life he was not teaching self defence but Aikido, something he did not intend to change. The person in question left our dojo soon after this statement.
I too believe that Aikido is not a means of self defence. For me it is an ethical approach to self and third party preservation.

graham
09-20-2006, 02:36 AM
Traditional judo wouldn't be that much better than traditional Aikido for you and probably not as useful. It sounds like the average confrontation for the folks in your line of work would be inside an apartment, clode quarters and probably with a number of subjects around.

Thanks for those thoughts, George. My experiece with Judo is about 6 months many moons ago.
If the interest is solely in saving yourself a really good scenario based training with an armored opponent can take you a long way. If the interest is also in protecting the subject, then any short term training is BS. Period.

Sorry if I was unclear, but I am not thinking of myself. I'm been studing Ki Aikido - and loving it - for about 6 months. But I've been asked to make suggetions regarding self-defence and martial arts on the estate. Because I love Aikido and because its philosophy is badly needed round here, my inclinaiton is to suggest it, or something based on it. However, I know that people are thinking of something that could be offered to women who needed to protect themselves long enough to leave the house, or Mothers who wanted to defend themselves from their drugged-up kids without causing them physical harm, etc.

graham
09-20-2006, 02:41 AM
Michael, thanks for the suggestion regarding Koga. His material looks very interesting.

Isaac, I'm afraid that I wouldn't even want to take a knife to a gun fight. I'm not sure how that advice relates to the abused spouse, who wants to defend herself long enough to survive until next weels counselling session, without unduly provoking her husband.

Excellent thoughts, David. Thanks.

ivobear
09-20-2006, 02:52 AM
I would like to give my opinion ... sorry by my english ...:blush:
First I have to point out that the martial art grow with the intention on self knowing, self defense is only a "fortunate coincidence" ... got it about a discussion had with a kiudoka that said that put the arrow in target is only a "fortunate coincidence" ...;)
For self defense we need a mental intention (psychology), nobody can change our interaction with other, but we can learn to understand the danger, first self defense is avoid a danger, then if is not possible have resolute action, see the animal, they escape if they can and if they can not they fight for their life.
We are human, then not so able in fight, many time we do not understand if our life are in real danger or not, our experience say that if we stay quite we will live well (bad parent? No, only our culture) ... Yes, of course, if a guy with a gun ask for my money I prefer to give him my money the loose my life ... but a police man should have a different choice, he has a gun and know how to use it (luckily I not, I do not need to know).
Also for self defense we first have to have the help for any body, do not say "He is a robber", but say "Help, fire", in crow psychology think that a robber can rob you because he has better genealogy then you, but help any body against fire ... it is not my idea, it is any police department course.
Understand, sorry well understand if we have any chance on improve the situation, this is the most difficult thing to learn, a boy could know that a kick in right place should improve the situation or let him escape, but do not abuse by that, need have a own superiority or decrees the opponent superiority with psychology, should be a kick but some time it is enough look in eyes without any fear ... fear have a smell, something like hormone, Adams Douglas teach "DON'T PANIC" ... ;)
How teach or learn that ??? It is difficult, need to have a better self consideration, it is only a psychology level, not a knowledge or athletic ability, you have to know that you can kick in right place, but you have to know that is a your responsibility and understand when and why kick some body, know where kick is not enough, you have to know that it is your responsibility on kicking and getting the consequence ... it works, it does not work, it works too much or I do not know what other.
As for a police man need a gun and know how to use it, self defender need have his weapons and know how to use them. Police man has a big reasonability on use a gun and self defender has the same responsibility on use their weapons.
Finally in my opinion it is possible a self defense course, but need more then a couple of class and need a psychology support.

eyrie
09-20-2006, 06:41 AM
Kevin Wilbanks makes a good point. Perhaps other de-escalation or avoidance methods are needed. In any case, presupposing the need for an SD or MA program before community/social needs are defined would be putting the cart before the horse.

Perhaps this site may be of further help: http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/

graham
09-20-2006, 07:34 AM
I'm wondering if there isn't a flaw in the underlying assumption behind the original question. I don't know anything about the rates of violence in the community you are talking about. However, it seems like the kind of problems you cite would be better solved by means that address the problems at a more fundamental level, which could result in preventing the situations from coming to the point where one needs to use physical self-defense techniques.

Absolutely, Kevin. I couldn't agree more. In fact, my primary area in this topic is debt relief tactics and my wife has been involved in the setting-up of a counselling group for abused women. We are also trying to get the appropriate specialist groups talking together to see if we can get a group/course set up for "abusers".

I'd see the possibility of self-defence classes as merely one of the angles. I'm simply at the point now where others have asked my opinion of this - knowing my background - and I'd like to be able recommend something aikido-based.

SeiserL
09-20-2006, 07:44 AM
IMHO, I would have to agree that Aikido takes longer to learn as a practical effective means of self-defense.

The FMA (Filipino martial arts) may be faster and more practical, though certainly not aiki.

I would strongly suggest teaching escape and evasion as self-defense long before teaching physical fighting techniques.

jamiebest
09-20-2006, 09:10 AM
Many schools teach a "self-defense" course designed to control violent students which seems to be based on Aikido techniques under the title "Non-Violent Crises Intervention"...though it's not all inclusive, (it is a short course (6 to 8 hours) and focues a few "situationally" effective techniques) it is proven effective...so, I don't think a similar course for abused spouses that focused on evasion and escape would be hard to develop. Consider visiting a local dojo and talk to them about this...I'll bet you could brainstorm a quick course in a very short amount of time.

Ron Tisdale
09-20-2006, 09:30 AM
I would strongly suggest that you contact Ellis Amdur (he posts on this site and e-budo and AJ). He works in similar situations I think, and has a wealth of experience he may be able to share.

Best,
Ron

George S. Ledyard
09-20-2006, 01:30 PM
I would strongly suggest that you contact Ellis Amdur (he posts on this site and e-budo and AJ). He works in similar situations I think, and has a wealth of experience he may be able to share.

Best,
Ron
Ron is correct, as usual. Ellis and I have taught together and he has the best training in dealing with emotionally distraught and disturbed subjects that I know of. It is excellent.

The problem with almost all training geared for self defense with intent to injure as little as possible, including verbal deescalation, is that you cannot do it very well if you are scared.

When I get people to train, the first thing I do is to teach them to go to the center and knock the opponent out. The techniques are basic Model Mugging style techniques. Once a person has been "empowered" by knowing that they don't have to think of themselves as victims any more, THEN they lose some of the fear that prevents them from effectively using verbal or low level fgorce physical tools.

Most training of the type you are talking about is geared to help people who are the typical "prey" for predatory types. they are weak, out of shape, or small of stature. They lack self confidence, etc.

These are the very people who are the most unable to do lower level responses to conflict. I would check out if there are any model mugging, powerful choices type training programs who would run some clinics for your folks.

Regular Aikido training or any other martial arts training, if it were real enough to do some good, these folks won't do it. They will quit becaue it will make them have to stretch too much. A seminar type approach is much better. It would typically take two days of scenario work with an armored instructor to give them a working set of skills. You can get some substantial breakthroughs in this manner.

Teaching people to restrain their drug / alcohol crazed kids, who are often as big or bigger than they are would be a joke unless they were willing to put in some substantial time and effort. They'll either be hurt or hurt the kid or both.

I don't mean to be pessimistic but this is part of how I make my living. I have done police and security, executive protection, juvenile corrections, ultra low level force training for schools... Most training that is done out there is completly useless. It is done to remove liabilty from an agency, not to impart real skill.

Most of the women's self defense programs out there are garbage and only impart a false sense of security. Do it right or don't do it. Remember, it's not what you don't know that kills you in a confrontation, it's what you don't know you don't know. Feel good training is simply dangerous.

DonMagee
09-20-2006, 01:30 PM
Judo is an great self defense tool and skill in judo is quickly developed. However a good judo player requires fitness, agility, speed, and a little strenght. Even if judo is said to not require any of that. The people who do best at judo in the begining are athletic wrestler type people. The others can catch up and even suprass them, but athletic people simply have more tools to go to when their technique fails.

We use the term self defense very loosely. What exactly is self defense? Is it escape? Is it a MMA match on the street? Is it death to all attackers? Is it "Coming home alive"? I would suggest addressing the needs of your students. What are the threats, and what are the goals.

For example, police goals are most likley (in my non police mind) really two things. 1) restraining people, and 2) defending themselves from attackers. With the second one really being keeping people from getting your gun, making distance, drawing gun. So for a police officer, I would suggest using wrist locks and 'come along' type holds on non resisting people, and full on grappling with submissions for resistance attackers. Which is usually what I see on cops. For people that might run, then control the wrist or hand in a way that gives them control, for people who do run or attack, then take them down and go 2 or 3 on one and cuff the attacker.

For a woman worried about walking home alone. I would suggest ground grappling training and awareness training. Obviously my thinking is that rape is a concern.

What ever techniques I come up with for this self defense need, I would then need to come up with a way to persent this to them as quickly as possible. This means I would probably not teach the aikido way. The focus on ukemi would be an afterthough in my mind. I wouldn't focus on techniques that require high percision or small motor skills. I would focus on attacks to areas where there is room for error. Most people who want self defense are not willing to put in a year or two. They want a month tops.

So I would say find the techniques that address the concern, then find a way to present it quickly. I perfer the SBG way.

Introdouce, Isolate, Intergrate. show them the technique, let them try it on each other, build up resistance, get them to spar in some fasion (If if it's against you only and you are all padded up.) If your ukemi skills are up to par you could teach them this way and introduce the technique, isolate it on each other without the throw, then go all out on you with you having the skills to take the ukemi.

One last thing. It is important to not inflate their ablity, confidence, or hopes. Do not teach knife defenses, or gun defenses to civies. Dont' tell them they are invincible. Doing that is a diservice.

Demetrio Cereijo
09-20-2006, 01:31 PM
I've seen some people here who have LEO oriented training in their dojo (Mr. Ledyard and Mr. Valadez come to mind, and probably others).

Could you ellaborate a bit about the diferences (if any) between this LEO oriented training and civilian training for SD: aiki based?, methodology, technical approach, physical conditioning, civilians allowed ....

It's only out of curiosity, i'm not a LEO but i have some training partners who work in this field but we don't have different classes for them.

Thanks.

dps
09-20-2006, 01:48 PM
Shouldn't any short term defensive training take into consideration the skills and abilities the individual already has? For example if a person is able to run like hell, then their defensive strategies should aim toward that ability.

George S. Ledyard
09-20-2006, 04:36 PM
I've seen some people here who have LEO oriented training in their dojo (Mr. Ledyard and Mr. Valadez come to mind, and probably others).

Could you ellaborate a bit about the diferences (if any) between this LEO oriented training and civilian training for SD: aiki based?, methodology, technical approach, physical conditioning, civilians allowed ....

It's only out of curiosity, i'm not a LEO but i have some training partners who work in this field but we don't have different classes for them.

Thanks.
Most of it has to do with totally different Use of Force issues. A civilian, in most states (although this is changing), is expected to move away from a threat if possible. So there is very little need for a civilian to learn low level restraint techniques. Low level force restraints and takedowns are used for arrest and control of a subject who e-ggressive, in other words, he wants to get away. LEO use the same kind of impact techniques anyone would once they are in an actual self defense situation with an aggressive or aggravated aggressive subject. Their jobs call for taking custody of the violent subject after they remove the threat presented so they are expected to be able to de-escalate.

Civilians can use force lawfully to remove a threat to themselves and others. They can use as much force as a "reasonable man" would think was necessary to remove that threat. Then they are expected to get away from the threat.

So civilian self defense starts with techniques that are designed to be used against someone who is assaulting you physically. There might be some verbal de-escalation involved but the fundamental assumption is that if you are having to defend yourself, then the threat was serious enough to use some heavy impact techniques and potentially injurious techniques to defend yourself. If a "reasonable person" would perceive that the threat contained a reasonable likelihood of serious bodily harm or injury, then deadly force may be use for as long as the threat is active.

Law enforcement, security officers, club security, bond enforcement agents, etc have a "Continuum of Force" that starts much lower down than the typical civilian. They are expected to go towards the threat, not away from it. They may use whatever force is reasonably necessary to affect a law purpose. If they have probable cause (that a crime has been committed), they may detain a subject and may use force if the subject resists that detention. So Law enforcement Officers especially, use low level force techniques every day. A civilian would have very few cases when that would be called for.

Ketsan
09-20-2006, 07:56 PM
How about Krav Maga? From what I've heard that's fairly quick to learn because it's based on your natural reactions.
Personally I think Aikido is a bad choice in this case. As mentioned before it takes a long time to become competant but more importantly Aikido uses a lot of room you might not have in a house both from a perspective of being able to evade an attack and also from the perspective of trying to throw or take someone down.

Kevin Leavitt
09-21-2006, 03:40 PM
George Ledyard wrote:

[QUOTE]Most of the women's self defense programs out there are garbage and only impart a false sense of security. Do it right or don't do it. Remember, it's not what you don't know that kills you in a confrontation, it's what you don't know you don't know. Feel good training is simply dangerous[QUOTE]

Can't emphasize this point enough.

statisticool
09-21-2006, 10:23 PM
On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.


Even though I'm sure I've said it myself before, I always cringe when I hear the "short term" argument, and wonder about the "short term" argument, because I think of me not getting into fights in the short term, in fact during any term, so I wonder if those who say this martial art isn't good in the short term... are they looking for fights?, moving into a crime laden community?, training to be police officers?, training for MMA fights?, what exactly?

Basically that if you've never got into fights before, training in a martial arts that takes you longer to get proficient in fighting does not equate to saying you are going to suddenly get into fights so you should take another martial art.


Justin

philippe willaume
09-25-2006, 07:29 AM
Please, this is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

Here's the thing: I work part-time in Community Development and part of my role is looking at violence on the estate, from spouse abuse, to bullying, to over-eager debt collectors. I'm expected to make some observations/suggetions regarding self-defence lessons, but I'm a little unsure what to say.

On the one hand, I love the philosophy of Aikido and feel that a non-violent ethic and technique would be ideal. However, I also feel that a short course in something like Judo will more quickly give effective self-defence techniques in the short-term.

Am I making any sense? Are there any Aikido-based (or related) courses/styles out there? If you had to recommend, e.g., a self-defence course for women, what would you go with?

This is not meant to be an 'does Aikido work on the streets?' thread.

Hello, Graham
For what it is worth,
I think there is a kind of self defeating argument in the question.
From a self defence for dummies point of view, it really boils down avoiding the three “stupids”; Doing “stupid” things, with “stupid” people, in “stupid” places.
The physical confrontation aspect is very very often a matter, as George said, is a feel good factor though has some reason able chance of success, but the idea is to avoid fighting.

So from the problem you describe we are already in a few “stupid” cases, that self defence teaches us to avoid. So I think you need to have a fighting approach to the problem.

Like plenty of other thing, fighting is just doing the right thing at the right time and so is horse riding, flying a light aircraft, caring for animal in a zoo and so on.

Part of the problem is how to do the right thing but this is comparatively very easy to finding when the right time is. It just comes with experience and abilities to conceptualise and transfer knowledge from one skill set to another.

Regardless the martial arts you are talking about, military/riot control system seems to be more effective but it is designed to be used by in situation where you want to obliterate the opposition by people who do not have any qualms using it and where repercussion for the perpetrator will be light or no existent. That system can then be steam lined and only retain techniques that put the earnest on the being broken on the recipient of the technique. This is made easier in modern time by the relative scarcity of efficient hand to hand fighter in the opposite forces.

This is hardly the case, for us, average quidam, as there will be massive repercussion if we are found having been using undue force and we are not usually geared up with the will to inflict harm.

For a reason that escapes me, it seems to me that there is a belief that you can sum up what is most lethal in most art, that a given small set of technique is the best thing since sliced bread in the history of hand to hand or that because exponent of a given art are winning competition at a point in time, it make that composed system, fat free version, or art the ultimate fighting technique.

Open hand technique is like any weapon, it does not work on it’s own merit, it is only as efficient as its exponent. Basically it is only going to be as good as you are going to be able to use it. For me techniques are the expersion of what you want,
If you want to make a martial arts works in self defence, you need to have the set of mind of the wanting win and the technical abilities to perform controlling techniques. Basially the result of the application of the technique must be strictly the expression of what you want to achieve. I.e. control.
And I am not aware of any short cut for that. It takes time to learn to recognise the situation and having the technical abilities to conform the technique to the stick result you want to achieve.

phil

graham
09-25-2006, 06:42 PM
Thanks for the answers/discussion, folks. I'll be sure to contact Ellis Amdur.

Does anyone have any experiece in, or opinion of, Taiho Jutsu? (I noticed that it's recently come under the umbrella of the BAA (http://www.taihojutsu.org.uk/39.html) in the UK.)