PDA

View Full Version : AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


MrIggy
02-05-2018, 05:42 AM
Some interesting view points on the way various Aikido techniques are used that might not have a credible martial effectiveness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSokOfplxA8 - Yokomenuchi Shihonage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvdGmZy1IGc - Katatori Ikkyo

dps
02-05-2018, 12:39 PM
I watched both videos.
The number one reason a technique does not work is because the opponent is not unbalanced before the technique is applied. If your opponent is unbalanced and you are balanced you are then in control of the opponent and can apply any technique you want, Aikido or otherwise.

dps

Mary Eastland
02-06-2018, 02:08 AM
self serving

ninjedi
02-06-2018, 11:43 AM
I would tend to agree, the reason the techniques in these videos are not working is because he is not doing them correctly. Uke is standing upright with both feet firmly planted in almost every demo.

shizentai
02-07-2018, 03:19 AM
Yeah, yeah, it's true that many techniques will work once the opponent is unbalanced. Yet some techniques have far worse chance of unbalancing said opponent than others. It is a delusional yet typical Aikido viewpoint that all techniques have the same chance of successful execution.

In fact, the only parts of traditional Aikido that actually work in reality, are the beginnings of techniques, not the techniques themselves. Deflections, redirects, defensive footwork and positioning with counter strikes and closing of openings.

Chances of you doing shiho nage to a haymaker or ikkyo to a collar grab in real life are extremely low. Extremely.

This is probably why Tenshin Aikido makes a big deal out of drilling deflections. They do work. They're the cornerstone of Aikido's effectiveness as a defensive system. From them it may be possible to transition to some techniques, SOMETIMES, and not at all in the manner that traditional Aikidoists are accustomed to.

lbb
02-07-2018, 09:35 AM
It is a delusional yet typical Aikido viewpoint

Oh boy. :rolleyes:

Demetrio Cereijo
02-07-2018, 12:47 PM
I watched both videos.

Guy talks too much.

Does he at any moment performs the techniques in a functional, alive way?

Rupert Atkinson
02-08-2018, 12:38 AM
The techniques of Aikido are there to develop aiki. They are not really techniques of self-defence. But if you have a measure of some aiki, and put it into say, Jujutsu, then you will have something. Otherwise, even Jujutsu is just 'crunch uke with levered force'.

dps
02-08-2018, 04:20 AM
The techniques of Aikido are there to develop aiki. They are not really techniques of self-defence. But if you have a measure of some aiki, and put it into say, Jujutsu, then you will have something. Otherwise, even Jujutsu is just 'crunch uke with levered force'.

The techniques of aikido are used to develope aiki but are not for self defense. Therefore aiki is not for self defense? If aiki is for self defense then why can't you put aiki into the Aikido techniques and have something?

dps

dps
02-08-2018, 04:26 AM
Guy talks too much.

Does he at any moment performs the techniques in a functional, alive way?

No.

dps

MrIggy
02-08-2018, 08:35 AM
The techniques of Aikido are there to develop aiki. They are not really techniques of self-defence. But if you have a measure of some aiki, and put it into say, Jujutsu, then you will have something. Otherwise, even Jujutsu is just 'crunch uke with levered force'.

What are we going to do about the statement of Yukiyoshi Sagawa who said that only amateurs think they can achieve Aiki through techniques?

dps
02-08-2018, 10:34 AM
What are we going to do about the statement of Yukiyoshi Sagawa who said that only amateurs think they can achieve Aiki through techniques?

Ignore it.

dps

Rupert Atkinson
02-08-2018, 10:54 AM
What are we going to do about the statement of Yukiyoshi Sagawa who said that only amateurs think they can achieve Aiki through techniques?

It is absolutely correct. The Aikido 'techniques' are not the techniques he was talking about. He was talking about Jujutsu techniques.

Rupert Atkinson
02-08-2018, 10:57 AM
The techniques of aikido are used to develope aiki but are not for self defense. Therefore aiki is not for self defense? If aiki is for self defense then why can't you put aiki into the Aikido techniques and have something?

dps

Well, you could - that is what some people try to do. But the Aikido techniques themselves are insufficient for self-defence. If I were young again I would spend my life first targeting aiki and then trying to put it into Judo/Jujutsu etc. I did try ... but it took me too long to figure it all out. Too old now. I was led down the wrong paths until I eventually broke free for myself.

MrIggy
02-08-2018, 03:53 PM
Well, you could - that is what some people try to do. But the Aikido techniques themselves are insufficient for self-defence.

Hm, somebody should have told that to several of the people I know who had to use them one way or another.

If I were young again I would spend my life first targeting aiki and then trying to put it into Judo/Jujutsu etc. I did try ... but it took me too long to figure it all out. Too old now. I was led down the wrong paths until I eventually broke free for myself.le I know who had to use them in the

First, Jujutsu as in JJJ or BJJ?

Second, why would you want to put something as complicated as aiki into something that already works on the good old basic physics of leverage and gravity?

MrIggy
02-08-2018, 03:56 PM
It is absolutely correct. The Aikido 'techniques' are not the techniques he was talking about. He was talking about Jujutsu techniques.

And the techniques in Aikido are in fact jujutsu techniques of Daito ryu, it's been said by multiple people that the techniques themselves aren't enough to gain an aiki body.

Essentially someone should try first for a couple of years to concentrate only on gaining aiki then on implementing it in techniques.

MrIggy
02-08-2018, 04:11 PM
Ignore it.

dps

Why?

Jeremy Hulley
02-09-2018, 09:51 AM
For reference Bernie Lau who was a Seattle police officer for years certainly made shihonage and ikkyo work against resisting opponents.

ninjedi
02-09-2018, 10:25 AM
Essentially someone should try first for a couple of years to concentrate only on gaining aiki then on implementing it in techniques.

Isn't that akin to putting the cart before the horse?

Do we not gain aiki by training, learning techniques?

If you want to race in the Daytona 500, you first have to learn how to drive.

RonRagusa
02-09-2018, 02:33 PM
Do we not gain aiki by training, learning techniques?

The prevailing view among aiki first proponents is no, you can't develop aiki via the practice of technique. Personally, I think that's just a marketing gimmick. There are many ways of training mind and body to work in unison in order to develop aiki, the study of aikido being just one.

Ron

shizentai
02-09-2018, 10:36 PM
Oh boy. :rolleyes:

You can't counter the objective truth with "oh boy".

Nicholas Eschenbruch
02-10-2018, 02:51 AM
You can't counter the objective truth with "oh boy".

Oh boy :p
I wish I had the objective truth about anything really.

What is shown on those initial vids is shown to beginners in the three major lineages I have been exposed to (Nocquet, Saito, Yamaguchi).

MrIggy
02-10-2018, 09:32 AM
Isn't that akin to putting the cart before the horse?

Do we not gain aiki by training, learning techniques?

Nope, as Ron also confirmed, by the words of aiki people you don't gain aiki by doing techniques.

If you want to race in the Daytona 500, you first have to learn how to drive.

And aiki would be the driving part actually. However, in all respect to them, you didn't NEED aiki to successfully perform the techniques, it mostly comes down to what is determined as successful in the given context.

MRoh
02-10-2018, 12:20 PM
The techniques of aikido are used to develope aiki but are not for self defense. Therefore aiki is not for self defense?

The techniques of aikido derived from jujutsu, some of them exist in several ryuha.
What is unique in a specific ryű is the way they are combined with a special way of taisabaki or bodymechanic.
The techniques were created to be used in real fight.
The method of training or executing them in Aikido is a different matter, but the origin is the same.
In aikido they are used as a training tool to develope bodyskills, maybe to develop aiki if it's correctly done.
Developing fighting skills is another aim, even aiki is not a garant for being able to fght.

MrIggy
02-11-2018, 10:25 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1LpFp4nifM - here's a one on Ushiro Kubishime:

Demetrio Cereijo
02-11-2018, 11:01 AM
B-movie Aikido + crappling.

I'm not sure if these guys are delusional or trolling.

MrIggy
02-15-2018, 11:50 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ptIEYM2JPI - munetsuki hijinage or chudantsuki udekimenage

Nicholas Eschenbruch
02-15-2018, 12:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ptIEYM2JPI - munetsuki hijinage or chudantsuki udekimenage

Igor, if you keep posting, can we have your opinion please?


I'm not sure if these guys are delusional or trolling.


There seems to be an odd market niche for people who cannot leave aikido because they have committed to it as their profession, and now they come up with this type of stuff instead of just moving on.

Michael Hackett
02-15-2018, 01:19 PM
First of all I detest his vulgarity in his presentation. Believe me after years in the Marines I can use a particular four-letter word as a noun, verb, or adjective in dozens of ways. While I have that "skill" I don't exercise it in a public forum. I think a person can convey a good, strong message without all the profanity.

Secondly, his application is simply poorly done. No, it didn't work and that isn't a surprise to me. Done well with an attacker who isn't specifically expecting that response is usually effective.

I will grant that some aikido techniques aren't as effective as others in an actual "combat" situation, but all of this is simply incorrect in my opinion.

MrIggy
02-15-2018, 02:45 PM
Igor, if you keep posting, can we have your opinion please?

There seems to be an odd market niche for people who cannot leave aikido because they have committed to it as their profession, and now they come up with this type of stuff instead of just moving on.

With some things I agree, with some things I don't. Happy?

Mary Eastland
02-16-2018, 05:44 AM
What does happy have to do with it? This guy is not doing aikido...he should just leave it be. If you are going to disparage something you should at least have a good understanding of what it can do. He does not.

MrIggy
02-16-2018, 06:33 AM
What does happy have to do with it? This guy is not doing aikido...he should just leave it be. If you are going to disparage something you should at least have a good understanding of what it can do. He does not.

I meant happy with my answer. What is he doing then if not your general Aikido techniques with some of his "own flavor". Seriously, what is Aikido supposed to be in your mind?

Mary Eastland
02-16-2018, 10:17 AM
He is not leading. He is using muscle and his language is negative.

Rupert Atkinson
02-16-2018, 11:55 AM
The simple way I see it is - Aikido doesn't really have techniques. Jujutsu has techniques. And Jujutsu has aiki-waza, which are learned after you learn the techniques. Judo also has a token 5 aiki-waza in on of its katas. The Way, was to learn the techniques, then learn the aiki-waza, and if you were good, the aiki-waza you learned, in time, would modify the way you performed all the techniques.
Ueshiba junked the techniques, and if he kept some, he performed them like aiki-waza and called it Aikido. Not Jujutsu. Sure, some of the things we do look a bit like techniques, but the aim of all the 'stuff' in Aikido is to develop your aiki. Ueshiba used it that way, I believe.
If you look at nikyo - in Jujutsu it will be done with a kick and/or punch. But our way is to develop the aiki-ness of it and just do the nikyo part. But the reality is, for self-defence, that kick and punch that got junked would be pretty useful. But by practicing nikyo separately, we get to a high level of doing it that if combined with the kick/punch would make it pretty effective. Anyway, the purpose of Aikido is to learn/improve aiki, but without Jujutsu it is pretty ineffective for self-defence. I believe that to practice Aikido for self-defence to be a huge mistake. One day, someone will wake up and listen.

dps
02-17-2018, 07:48 PM
The simple way I see it is - Aikido doesn't really have techniques. Jujutsu has techniques. And Jujutsu has aiki-waza, which are learned after you learn the techniques. Judo also has a token 5 aiki-waza in on of its katas. The Way, was to learn the techniques, then learn the aiki-waza, and if you were good, the aiki-waza you learned, in time, would modify the way you performed all the techniques.
Ueshiba junked the techniques, and if he kept some, he performed them like aiki-waza and called it Aikido. Not Jujutsu. Sure, some of the things we do look a bit like techniques, but the aim of all the 'stuff' in Aikido is to develop your aiki. Ueshiba used it that way, I believe.
If you look at nikyo - in Jujutsu it will be done with a kick and/or punch. But our way is to develop the aiki-ness of it and just do the nikyo part. But the reality is, for self-defence, that kick and punch that got junked would be pretty useful. But by practicing nikyo separately, we get to a high level of doing it that if combined with the kick/punch would make it pretty effective. Anyway, the purpose of Aikido is to learn/improve aiki, but without Jujutsu it is pretty ineffective for self-defence. I believe that to practice Aikido for self-defence to be a huge mistake. One day, someone will wake up and listen.

I agree 100% with what you have said except the highlighted sentence. I have used Aikido without any kicking or punching successfully on untrained attackers.

Rupert Atkinson
02-17-2018, 11:13 PM
I agree 100% with what you have said except the highlighted sentence. I have used Aikido without any kicking or punching successfully on untrained attackers.

I didn't say you can't do it. Rather, it is not Aikido's purpose. They say that ballet is the art of making unnatural movement look natural. Well, making Aikido into self-defence is the same thing. You can do it if you want ...

Demetrio Cereijo
02-18-2018, 05:08 AM
I have used Aikido without any kicking or punching successfully on untrained attackers.

Untrained attackers suck. One does not need to train in a Budo to deal with them, being in decent shape and the will to survive is usually more than enough.

dps
02-18-2018, 06:07 AM
Untrained attackers suck. One does not need to train in a Budo to deal with them, being in decent shape and the will to survive is usually more than enough.

Being in decent shape and the will to survive during a fight will get you bloodied.

dps

dps
02-18-2018, 06:13 AM
Sure, some of the things we do look a bit like techniques, but the aim of all the 'stuff' in Aikido is to develop your aiki.

Then what do you do with it after you develope your "aiki"?

dps

Walter Martindale
02-18-2018, 08:09 AM
Untrained attackers suck. One does not need to train in a Budo to deal with them, being in decent shape and the will to survive is usually more than enough.

If you mean untrained in the sense of "unfit" - sure. If you mean "untrained" in the sense of having not a lot of "martial arts" training, I suspect a work-hardened pub-brawling general laborer with a pipe-wrench or a pool-cue might present more problems.

Demetrio Cereijo
02-18-2018, 08:50 AM
If you mean untrained in the sense of "unfit" - sure. If you mean "untrained" in the sense of having not a lot of "martial arts" training, I suspect a work-hardened pub-brawling general laborer with a pipe-wrench or a pool-cue might present more problems.

That's why I wrote "decent shape" and "usually".

You are a rowing coach. Don't you think your guys could handle the average unarmed guy?

Rupert Atkinson
02-18-2018, 10:46 AM
Then what do you do with it after you develope your "aiki"?

dps

It is called Aikido = The Way of Aiki.

You have to keep developing it if you do Aikido. That is what it is. Go do Jujutsu / Judo and see if you can make it work for you. Think / work on it. But don't bring the Jujutsu back to Aikido. Keep if for yourself. Encourage others to go on their own journey.

Walter Martindale
02-18-2018, 11:37 AM
That's why I wrote "decent shape" and "usually".

You are a rowing coach. Don't you think your guys could handle the average unarmed guy?

Physically yes, easily. Until the first time they got hit on the nose. They train to row fast and unless they have some background experience in not getting hit, they are vulnerable to anyone with a quick fist or snappy kick to the shin, knee, or “naughty bits.”

I actually started rowing partly because of the experience of doing a newaza practice with a rowing guy. He didn’t know anything but was so strong I couldn’t control him.

After a year of rowing training I went back to a judo session and essentially beat up the other four guys in the dojo, twice each, before I started getting tired. Including my sandan sempai. I was ikkyu. I’ve coached kiwi rowers who had strong rugby backgrounds. They could handle themselves but they were also accustomed to very rough sport.

Without some background hardening up and getting used to being knocked about, I suspect many rowers wouldn’t know what to do in a scrap, because it’s not something they normally do.

MrIggy
02-18-2018, 01:24 PM
I actually started rowing partly because of the experience of doing a newaza practice with a rowing guy. He didn't know anything but was so strong I couldn't control him.

After a year of rowing training I went back to a judo session and essentially beat up the other four guys in the dojo, twice each, before I started getting tired. Including my sandan sempai. I was ikkyu.

This reminds me of a situation when a big strong local rower and a Judo guy, who was a black belt at the time, got into some argument and the Judo guy went at him and the rower just grabbed him for the neck and pushed him back against a wall. The Judo guy couldn't move an inch.

I know personally a couple of rowers, scary strong people.

Walter Martindale
02-18-2018, 03:35 PM
This reminds me of a situation when a big strong local rower and a Judo guy, who was a black belt at the time, got into some argument and the Judo guy went at him and the rower just grabbed him for the neck and pushed him back against a wall. The Judo guy couldn't move an inch.

I know personally a couple of rowers, scary strong people.

Seriously... I'm in my 60s now and in terrible shape but .. a friend was in the 1984 gold medal men's 8+. Shortly after the 84 Olympics, we tested him on a rowing machine that had a strain gauge attached to the driving mechanism to see how much force he was exerting. In 1992 we tested a woman who was 1991 world champion in the pair.

He averaged 800N of force, 30/minute, for six minutes.
We only tested force production on the women for 2 minutes because they were in the middle of selection races for the 92 Olympics, and we didn't want to make them tired - the one averaged 600n of force, 30/minute for 2 minutes.

That's 81 kg of pull (179 lb) for the guy - 30 per minute for 6 minutes.
61 kg of pull (134 lb) for the woman... for 2 minutes.. She retired after the 96 Olympics with 3 gold medals.

That may not be a lot of force if you're considering weight lifting - but - do it for 6 minutes...

But they're (ok, they were) rowers, not fighters... They'd be able to control someone, but wouldn't know what to do.

Riai Maori
02-18-2018, 09:21 PM
I've coached kiwi rowers who had strong rugby backgrounds. They could handle themselves but they were also accustomed to very rough sport.

LOL...that was me. I would row in the summer and come winter be all set for the rugby season. Super fit. I would have to strap on ankle weights for the road runs so my rugby team mates could be competitive. As the rugby season wore on, my fitness level receded.:p

MRoh
02-19-2018, 04:50 AM
nikyo [/I]- in Jujutsu it will be done with a kick and/or punch. But our way is to develop the aiki-ness of it and just do the nikyo part. But the reality is, for self-defence, that kick and punch that got junked would be pretty useful.

Why do you think they got junked? The photo is definitely representative for the way how Ueshiba performed techniques..

http://www.aikidotakemusu.org/sites/default/files/styles/c06-carre/public/img/tr01-01.jpg

Demetrio Cereijo
02-19-2018, 05:39 AM
The photo is definitely representative for the way how Ueshiba performed techniques..

Are there still people who cares about how Ueshiba performed tecniques?

MRoh
02-19-2018, 06:27 AM
Are there still people who cares about how Ueshiba performed tecniques?

Iwama people are quit keen in keeping the old way of performing techniques alive.
And of course there are many other people who care about how Ueshiba perfomed techniques, my teacher for example points out, if there is a difference between what he does and how O Sensei did it. If there is, it is for a good reason.

They point is that the punching techniques were not junked by Ueshiba, he performed atemi-techniques his whole live.
Indeed I never saw him kicking, but that is because he said that both feet belong on the ground.

ksy
02-19-2018, 10:16 AM
Iwama people are quit keen in keeping the old way of performing techniques alive.
And of course there are many other people who care about how Ueshiba perfomed techniques, my teacher for example points out, if there is a difference between what he does and how O Sensei did it. If there is, it is for a good reason.

They point is that the punching techniques were not junked by Ueshiba, he performed atemi-techniques his whole live.
Indeed I never saw him kicking, but that is because he said that both feet belong on the ground.

"he performed atemi-techniques his whole live." oh c'mon, show me one where he uses atemi and i'll show you one where he doesnt. Or we can start discussing on what exactly constitutes atemi or continue the "atemi or not" discussion which would take this thread off course.

In all honesty, i see nothing wrong with being aware of openings during techniques, i think a shot to the ribs is so wicked. The trouble with a kick/punch approach is that some instructors will use the strikes as a catch all 'escape clause" to command an uke to behave like "like hold on real tight, if u let go i'll hit you!" thus ensuring the uke holds on like a madman with a death-grip like a he's gonna fall off the building if he let's go. Or the strike is the go to approach to "unbalance" an attacker ie from a front hand grab ie hit uke and then do technique without taking into account variables like size differences between defender n attacker, whether it was a lousy punch etc as if the atemi was all powerfull.

Having said that a lot of daito ryu technique has atemi included. Do you think that after the war, O Sensei could have changed/ did away with some stuff as O Sensei only discovered the real spirit of aikido in 1950 as in the interview here (conducted in 1957) -
"During the Sengoku Period (1482-1558-Sengoku meaning "warring countries") local lords used the martial arts as a fighting tool to serve their own private interests and to satisfy their greed. This I think was totally inappropriate. Since I myself taught martial arts to be~used for the purpose of killing others to soldiers during the War, I became deeply troubled after the conflict ended. This motivated me to discover the true spirit of Aikido seven years ago, at which time I came upon the idea of building a heaven on earth. "

Or when Sadao Takaoka (after the war) commented about sensei "When I trained with him he was so soft that I asked him if I would be able to produce as much power as he had before the war if I did this training. O-Sensei replied “Before the war I trained with strength without understanding. Now that strength is not necessary. This is Takemusu Aiki!”. " O sensei further explained "In the year that the war ended I became ill and my spirit became weak. As I thought of going to heaven an angel came to fan my flames. When I tried to leave even then a lone priest appeared and told me to return. He explained that it was too soon to see his face, that I was not yet cultivated enough.

After that I recovered from my illness. When I thought to go to offer prayers at the Aiki-jinja I saw a white man on the front path. Looking closely I saw that another Ueshiba holding a wooden sword standing in kamae, and when I went to strike him I was struck. When I struck again I was struck again. When I took a stance the next time he vanished suddenly. From that time my techniques became soft. The is Sho-chiku-bai Kenpo (“the Pine-bamboo-plum method of the sword”).

Also from Shigenobu Okumura, who commented "O-Sensei also followed the teachings of Omoto (Omoto-kyo), and there was something called “The Budo of the Gods does not kill” (“jinbu fusatsu” / 神武不殺). However, at that time he couldn’t say such things. At the university it was required that techniques “for killing” were taught, and of course the Military Police Corps (憲平隊) had to be taught Aikido for the purpose of throwing down the opponent. For that reason, when I was repatriated after the war and met O-Sensei, who was working in the fields of Iwama, he said “I was rebuked by the gods. They told me start over from the beginning! The Budo that kills is prohibited!”

"I was rebuked by the Gods!". It's seems obvious that something 'change d' from the period OSensei left the military and went to back to iwama (1942-1950). and not only change BUT Osensei had to start over.

If O sensei had to start over, then maybe what he did in the past was closer to daitoryu and what he was trying to reinvent was closer to his version of "aikido". years back, I read some comments that Osensei changed because he got old and couldnt do the physical stuff but from my readings, he changed because he wanted to (or maybe he didnt want to face the wrath of the Gods themselves!).

Saotome commented on the "dark side of aikido" here
http://tampaaikido.com/articles/balance-from-destruction-secret-teachings-of-o-sensei/

*some stuff taken from the aikidosangenkai.org website.

MrIggy
02-19-2018, 11:14 AM
Iwama people are quit keen in keeping the old way of performing techniques alive.
And of course there are many other people who care about how Ueshiba perfomed techniques, my teacher for example points out, if there is a difference between what he does and how O Sensei did it. If there is, it is for a good reason.

They point is that the punching techniques were not junked by Ueshiba, he performed atemi-techniques his whole live.
Indeed I never saw him kicking, but that is because he said that both feet belong on the ground.

Depends on the situation, a comment from a Daito ryu group on one of O'Sensei's challenge matches:

Igor-san, I cannot present You the source right now, but I've heard that story in 1990-ties (where Internet was not developed yet so publicly), the content was more-less like that:
once one Japanese guy challenged UESHIBA Morihei for a fight, and UESHIBA has agreed. When that guy started to prepair his best stance for the fight, UESHIBA said "OK, attack me, I'm ready" and was just standing and looking on him. The guy said, "Please, prepair yourself for the fight, I cannot attack You because You're standing totally unprotected!" - but Ueshiba did nothing and had not changed his position. The guy asked again, "Please, don't stand like that, because it is actually too much dangerous for to be attacked", but Ueshiba did nothing again. Finally after the 3rd such a request, Ueshiba has kicked his balls and came away.

Also some of his prewar students have been said to have used kicks like Rinjiro Shirata - "His atemi (including kicks) came out of nowhere, perfectly timed and dead-on." from: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22687

and Minoru Mochizuki:

"When Tadashi Abe traveled he always carried a knife with him, this was not for his own protection, he carried it to hand to his shocked opponent, he would say "please, this is for you". Abe said that an opponent with his bare fists was no challenge, a man with a knife was "very interesting".

"According to Minoru Mochizuki...:

There was a man named Tadashi Abe who passed away recently. I had the following encounter with him when I visited the Iwama dojo to greet O-Sensei after my return to Japan when the war ended. O-Sensei was pleased to know that I had come back safely and welcomed me warmly. I stayed there over night. That night an evil-looking man with a monk-like hairstyle came to the room where I was staying and asked permission to come in. When I gave him permission this man came in.

"My name is Tadashi Abe. Sensei, could I ask you a direct question?". I told him to ask me anything. He asked if I was really studying aiki jujutsu seriously. At that time the art was not yet called aikido. When I replied I was, he said:

"Ace you really? I have heard about you, Sensei, for a long time. I heard that you have had experience in actual fighting situations. I think it is strange that a person like you feels satisfied with an art like aiki jujutsu." When I asked why he thought so he said that Ueshiba Sensei or Mr. Morhiro Saito would not be able to stand against him in a match even for three minutes because he would defeat them with one blow.

"You're quite boastful, aren't you?", I replied. "You feel confident that you can defeat Ueshiba Sensei?", I added. He said that he thought it would be easy for him to defeat Sensei and added:

"Although I have been observing Ueshiba Sensei for a long time, I don't feel like practicing an art like aiki jujutsu. I feel confident that I can defeat him with one boxing punch. I hear that you emphasize actual fighting. Is that true?"

I replied as follows:

"I have been in many street-fights but I wouldn't include them in the category of actual fighting. I have also drawn a sword and stormed the enemy camp."

Then he asked me whether or not aikido was really useful for fighting. When I replied that aikido was very useful not only for fights but also in times of war, he said my answer didn't convince him. So I suggested that he attack me and stood there telling him to come anyway he wanted. He asked me to adopt a ready stance. I told him:

"Don't say unnecessary things. There is no way for someone to defeat his enemy if he tells him what to do. Attack me as you like!"

Abe still mumbled: "Sensei, can I really strike you? Strange... You have openings everywhere..." Then he took a stance and suddenly came straight in. I dodged the blow and kicked him with my leg. He groaned and fell. I applied a resuscitation technique and massaged him.

"How can a person like you who faints when he catches a little kick last in a fight?"

"Sensei, does aikido also have kicking techniques?"

"You fool! What do you mean by such a question? We use kicking techniques or anything else. I even used artillery. Martial arts, guns and artillery are all aikido. What do you think aikido is? Do you think it involves only the twisting of hands? It is a means of war... an act of war! aikido is a fight with real swords. We use the word 'aiki' because through it we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately. Look at Sumo. After the command is given ("Miatte! Miatte!), they stand up and go at each other in a flash. That's the same as aiki. When a person suddenly faces his enemy in an mental state free from all ideas and thoughts and is instantly able to deal with him, we call that aiki. In the old days it was called 'aiki no jutsu'. Therefore, artillery or anything else becomes aiki." "Is that so... I think I understand." "If you still don't understand, come to me again." After that he was afraid of me and bowed to me from far off. When I went to Europe he asked me to take him as well.
"
from Aikido Sangenkai

ksy
02-19-2018, 12:07 PM
Depends on the situation, a comment from a Daito ryu group on one of O'Sensei's challenge matches:

Igor-san, I cannot present You the source right now, but I've heard that story in 1990-ties (where Internet was not developed yet so publicly), the content was more-less like that:
once one Japanese guy challenged UESHIBA Morihei for a fight, and UESHIBA has agreed. When that guy started to prepair his best stance for the fight, UESHIBA said "OK, attack me, I'm ready" and was just standing and looking on him. The guy said, "Please, prepair yourself for the fight, I cannot attack You because You're standing totally unprotected!" - but Ueshiba did nothing and had not changed his position. The guy asked again, "Please, don't stand like that, because it is actually too much dangerous for to be attacked", but Ueshiba did nothing again. Finally after the 3rd such a request, Ueshiba has kicked his balls and came away.

Also some of his prewar students have been said to have used kicks like Rinjiro Shirata - "His atemi (including kicks) came out of nowhere, perfectly timed and dead-on." from: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22687

and Minoru Mochizuki:

"When Tadashi Abe traveled he always carried a knife with him, this was not for his own protection, he carried it to hand to his shocked opponent, he would say "please, this is for you". Abe said that an opponent with his bare fists was no challenge, a man with a knife was "very interesting".

"According to Minoru Mochizuki...:

There was a man named Tadashi Abe who passed away recently. I had the following encounter with him when I visited the Iwama dojo to greet O-Sensei after my return to Japan when the war ended. O-Sensei was pleased to know that I had come back safely and welcomed me warmly. I stayed there over night. That night an evil-looking man with a monk-like hairstyle came to the room where I was staying and asked permission to come in. When I gave him permission this man came in.

"My name is Tadashi Abe. Sensei, could I ask you a direct question?". I told him to ask me anything. He asked if I was really studying aiki jujutsu seriously. At that time the art was not yet called aikido. When I replied I was, he said:

"Ace you really? I have heard about you, Sensei, for a long time. I heard that you have had experience in actual fighting situations. I think it is strange that a person like you feels satisfied with an art like aiki jujutsu." When I asked why he thought so he said that Ueshiba Sensei or Mr. Morhiro Saito would not be able to stand against him in a match even for three minutes because he would defeat them with one blow.

"You're quite boastful, aren't you?", I replied. "You feel confident that you can defeat Ueshiba Sensei?", I added. He said that he thought it would be easy for him to defeat Sensei and added:

"Although I have been observing Ueshiba Sensei for a long time, I don't feel like practicing an art like aiki jujutsu. I feel confident that I can defeat him with one boxing punch. I hear that you emphasize actual fighting. Is that true?"

I replied as follows:

"I have been in many street-fights but I wouldn't include them in the category of actual fighting. I have also drawn a sword and stormed the enemy camp."

Then he asked me whether or not aikido was really useful for fighting. When I replied that aikido was very useful not only for fights but also in times of war, he said my answer didn't convince him. So I suggested that he attack me and stood there telling him to come anyway he wanted. He asked me to adopt a ready stance. I told him:

"Don't say unnecessary things. There is no way for someone to defeat his enemy if he tells him what to do. Attack me as you like!"

Abe still mumbled: "Sensei, can I really strike you? Strange... You have openings everywhere..." Then he took a stance and suddenly came straight in. I dodged the blow and kicked him with my leg. He groaned and fell. I applied a resuscitation technique and massaged him.

"How can a person like you who faints when he catches a little kick last in a fight?"

"Sensei, does aikido also have kicking techniques?"

"You fool! What do you mean by such a question? We use kicking techniques or anything else. I even used artillery. Martial arts, guns and artillery are all aikido. What do you think aikido is? Do you think it involves only the twisting of hands? It is a means of war... an act of war! aikido is a fight with real swords. We use the word 'aiki' because through it we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately. Look at Sumo. After the command is given ("Miatte! Miatte!), they stand up and go at each other in a flash. That's the same as aiki. When a person suddenly faces his enemy in an mental state free from all ideas and thoughts and is instantly able to deal with him, we call that aiki. In the old days it was called 'aiki no jutsu'. Therefore, artillery or anything else becomes aiki." "Is that so... I think I understand." "If you still don't understand, come to me again." After that he was afraid of me and bowed to me from far off. When I went to Europe he asked me to take him as well.
"
from Aikido Sangenkai

pre war fight stories, pre war students who were already trained fighters. guns and artillery, hmmm... Just like Shioda using his back, if you are good enough, i guess your arse could be a weapon, aiki-arse :D . I could even be an aiki-ice cream eater. imho generalization could go too far sometimes. Nice story about Osensei kicking someone in the balls but afaik, O sensei was never famous for his kicking technique unlike Fong Sai Yuk with his 'shadowless kick'.

MrIggy
02-19-2018, 08:41 PM
pre war fight stories, pre war students who were already trained fighters. guns and artillery, hmmm... Just like Shioda using his back, if you are good enough, i guess your arse could be a weapon, aiki-arse :D . I could even be an aiki-ice cream eater. imho generalization could go too far sometimes. Nice story about Osensei kicking someone in the balls but afaik, O sensei was never famous for his kicking technique unlike Fong Sai Yuk with his 'shadowless kick'.

Only the one with O'Sensei was prewar and actually both prewar and postwar students were trained, mostly in Judo or Kendo of coursel, via school curriculum. Some others like Mochizuki were more heavily trained. The fact that O'Sensei wasn't "known" for a certain aspect of fighting in the conceptual sense as in other martial arts doesn't mean that he didn't apply those aspects when they suited him. Not to mention certain principles of Sokaku Takeda's Daito ryu:

Sokaku Takeda's Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu has three principles:

1. Don't stand in front of your enemy.
2. Crush him down to your feet, don't throw him away.
3. Use your legs to finish him.

MRoh
02-20-2018, 02:21 AM
[I]Igor-san, I cannot present You the source right now, but I've heard that story in 1990-ties (

That*'s the problem...
It's all storys.

With regards to Tadashi Abei, I also heard that he was a good fighter, and in his book he showed a lot of atemi techniques, including kicks.
But I practiced karate for some years, and I must say that the kicks are poorly executed.

Use your legs to finish him.

Normally in daito ryu the legs are used to control uke, not to stomp him to dead.

MrIggy
02-20-2018, 03:39 PM
That*'s the problem...
It's all storys.

I really don't see the problem, two of them are from credible sources, John Stevens and Minoru Mochizuki, the one with O'Sensei wasn't even about the kick it was more about the attitude with which he fought. In fact all of those stories were more about the attitude of fighting rather than "what is and what isn't" Aikido. But I get your point, everything should be always taken with a grain of salt.

With regards to Tadashi Abei, I also heard that he was a good fighter, and in his book he showed a lot of atemi techniques, including kicks.
But I practiced karate for some years, and I must say that the kicks are poorly executed.

Which book?

Normally in daito ryu the legs are used to control uke, not to stomp him to dead.

It depends on who you ask, I got the info from here:
Hisa-den Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu (https://www.facebook.com/933452476733040/photos/a.1236467879764830.1073741828.933452476733040/1240803955997889/?type=3&theater)

plus the version of sankyo done in my dojo is basically taking uke down, kicking him in the head, then applying sankyo. Of course you don't actually kick him in the head you just mimic it.

Demetrio Cereijo
02-20-2018, 04:48 PM
Which book?

https://es.scribd.com/document/115122553/37667293-Aikido-Tadashi-Abe-L-Arme-Et-l-Esprit-Du-Samourai-Japonais-1958

Starting at p. 43.

MRoh
02-21-2018, 01:13 AM
I really don't see the problem, two of them are from credible sources, John Stevens

Maybe, but If you read his book "Abundant Peace" you know that there are some storys in it, that no one can really believe.

taking uke down, kicking him in the head,

Original finishing technique was controlling the opponent
with the legs while having the hands free for cutting the throat or taking the head....
Finishing with a kick and than applying sankyo makes no sense

MrIggy
02-21-2018, 09:51 AM
Maybe, but If you read his book "Abundant Peace" you know that there are some storys in it, that no one can really believe.

I didn't read that book but yes I have heard of some of the more mythical stories.

Original finishing technique was controlling the opponent
with the legs while having the hands free for cutting the throat or taking the head....

OK then.

Finishing with a kick and than applying sankyo makes no sense

Well it's not finishing, the kick is basically an atemi. Similar to when Saito goes here with a punch, instead of a punch we go with a kick. The hand placement and movement is a bit different of course: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m75lQ1oK0CU

MrIggy
02-21-2018, 09:53 AM
https://es.scribd.com/document/115122553/37667293-Aikido-Tadashi-Abe-L-Arme-Et-l-Esprit-Du-Samourai-Japonais-1958

Starting at p. 43.

Thanks Demetrio, the back kicks remind me of Savate.

Demetrio Cereijo
02-21-2018, 01:00 PM
Thanks Demetrio, the back kicks remind me of Savate.

Probably because the demonstrator is a French student of Abe, so the kicks have more of a Savate flavor than of Japanese Karate.

I see Saito being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD78wnhje9s

go to 5:45

And IIRC there was at least a kicking technique in Budo Renshu.

MRoh
02-22-2018, 02:47 PM
Well it's not finishing, the kick is basically an atemi. Similar to when Saito goes here with a punch, instead of a punch we go with a kick

You can do that, there are lots of possibilities for kicking, for knees, ellbows, fists.
I just said I never saw Ueshiba doing kicks, atemi with his fists a lot.

In Budo Renshu, I couldn't find any drawing with a kick.

Demetrio Cereijo
02-22-2018, 04:13 PM
In Budo Renshu, I couldn't find any drawing with a kick.

It's in the explanation of technique #68 in this edition (http://www.editions-tredaniel.com/techniques-de-budo-en-aikido-budo-renshu-p-3942.html). Translators: Chikako Tsuji & Gerard Blaize.

MRoh
02-23-2018, 07:26 AM
It's in the explanation of technique #68 in this edition (http://www.editions-tredaniel.com/techniques-de-budo-en-aikido-budo-renshu-p-3942.html). Translators: Chikako Tsuji & Gerard Blaize.

Yes thank you, I have a copy of this edition.
Its also an atemi, but not for finishing.
In the soden techniques of the Takumakai there are a lot of kicking atemi.
Video (https://youtu.be/MKPZlArZtw4)

jonreading
02-24-2018, 06:22 AM
First, I think there is always validity to the generalized comment that martial training performed inexpertly may not have the intended effect. Ask any judo or jujutsu player how many techniques they chain together when she plays... It is probably more interesting to note that aikido people may not understand the actual success ratio of applied techniques.

Second, I happen to believe that aiki is not what is trained in aikido. Y'all know this by now. For me, the problem is that aikido looks to technique to generate "aiki" and that is also the [arguable] difference between an aikido arm bar and a jujutsu arm bar - at some point, we use "aiki" to generate our movement. The problem is that jujutsu can be effective without aiki. This leaves some with a, "grass is greener on the other side," perspective - why not change instruction of an arm bar from modern aikido to the more effective jujutsu? Most of us cannot perform the aikido waza the way they were originally instructed. Demetrio makes a comment that I think is important - who cares what the old man did? It is a valid point and something that should contribute to the way you practice.

Aiki is not aikido. Self-defense is still fighting. If I gouge out my partner's eyes and perform the most terrible nikyo ever witnessed, is that still nikyo? At some point, we need to be critical of why a technique is (or is not) successful.

MRoh
02-24-2018, 10:47 AM
who cares what the old man did? It is a valid point and something that should contribute to the way you practice.


If the old man would have done just normal jujutsu armbars, we would not know about him or Aikido, so maybe we should care.

MrIggy
03-01-2018, 01:06 AM
Here's an episode about uchi kaiten nage (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjlTLu431vc)

ksy
03-07-2018, 04:40 PM
Only the one with O'Sensei was prewar and actually both prewar and postwar students were trained, mostly in Judo or Kendo of coursel, via school curriculum. Some others like Mochizuki were more heavily trained. The fact that O'Sensei wasn't "known" for a certain aspect of fighting in the conceptual sense as in other martial arts doesn't mean that he didn't apply those aspects when they suited him. Not to mention certain principles of Sokaku Takeda's Daito ryu:

Sokaku Takeda's Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu has three principles:

1. Don't stand in front of your enemy.
2. Crush him down to your feet, don't throw him away.
3. Use your legs to finish him.

daito ryu principles are fine but if u read what i wrote earlier, and despite common knowledge, i don't believe he was teaching exactly what he taught in pre war/ww2 days after 1950. Osensei stated that "the secret of Aikido is not how you move your feet, it is how you move your mind".

MrIggy
03-08-2018, 08:55 AM
daito ryu principles are fine but if u read what i wrote earlier, and despite common knowledge, i don't believe he was teaching exactly what he taught in pre war/ww2 days after 1950. Osensei stated that "the secret of Aikido is not how you move your feet, it is how you move your mind".

And if in the process of moving your mind you happen to move your foot towards someone else's body to perform atemi how does that change anything?

jonreading
03-08-2018, 10:40 AM
Jumping back into this conversation...

I think the general idea is that aikido should have something *unique* (or at least demonstrably different) from sister arts. As a reference to the comments about movement using the mind, there are several varied references to elevation of body power (notably internal power) using the mind/body connection. Depending on who you ask, this can be a number of things. In tai chi, "Yi leads qi. Qi leads movement." I think O Sensei has a few quotes similar to this, advocating for the mind to move energy and energy to move the body.

In answer to the general question, whether you move this way with your hand or your foot, the comments implies that you should move using mind/body connection. This is a rare way to move, so the effect of the movement should be notably different than unconnected movement.

RonRagusa
03-08-2018, 02:04 PM
This is a rare way to move, so the effect of the movement should be notably different than unconnected movement.

Rare and not readily apparent to an outside observer. The effects however, are obvious and viscerally felt by your partner.

Ron

Bernd Lehnen
03-08-2018, 03:03 PM
That*'s the problem...
It's all storys.

But I practiced karate for some years, and I must say that the kicks are poorly executed.

.

Hi Markus,
There is also a second booklet by Abbe about nikkajo.

Well,
from a martial viewpoint, many modern karate kicks are poorly executed. They then create and give a feeling of false strength and are attractive to look at. Good for business.

Egami was perplexed how easily the two old men, be it his own karate-teacher, be it O-Sensei, could drive him around, him the thoroughly trained iron hard, with seemingly no effort. That made him rethink and change everything for the better. From then on he was looking for pointed sliding aiki effectiveness, not for strength in execution. Technique became second.
Good Savate never had to fear Karate or any other stile. But for westerners Nakayama and his competitive stile and others alike were more easily understood and thus became widespread. Westerners and especially Americans have a knack for the athletic touch….
Oh, and by the way, Shorinji Kempo's kicks do not look overwhelmingly either, but have you ever received one? People have died in normal training, I was reliably told, though they are very careful there with their partners.
A good kick or another technique may look like nothing, you may not even become aware of it…
By the way, our common teacher was a fantastic kicker, when he was younger, though he only did it openly, as soon as someone like Tada or Noro afforded this. Noro could have pierced you with his naked toes…
No limits … but self-restriction and self-control , an all important part in real martial arts.
Martial arts in their strictest sense are dangerous without this, and after you ran your stomach into a knife someone might say," oh, look! the man has guts …."

Best,
Bernd

Erick Mead
03-09-2018, 09:55 AM
... why would you want to put something as complicated as aiki into something that already works on the good old basic physics of leverage and gravity?

...I happen to believe that aiki is not what is trained in aikido. Y'all know this by now. For me, the problem is that aikido looks to technique to generate "aiki" and that is also the [arguable] difference between an aikido arm bar and a jujutsu arm bar - at some point, we use "aiki" to generate our movement. The problem is that jujutsu can be effective without aiki.

The prevailing view among aiki first proponents is no, you can't develop aiki via the practice of technique. Personally, I think that's just a marketing gimmick. There are many ways of training mind and body to work in unison in order to develop aiki, the study of aikido being just one.

Ron I could say that the utility of the jujutsu techniques in Aikido (which is what they all are) provide a base template so it can become clear in contrast when aiki is or is not present in performing the technique. Without that essentially fixed base of technique for comparison, however, the student would really be totally at sea in trying to develop what aikido strives for - which is aiki. Whether the teacher can perform it with aiki is a different question from whether they can point to what the student is doing or should be doing to perform it themselves.

In my experience Ikeda (and Hooker IMO) unmistakably could do the former, but I never found they could well-articulate for students how they did what was being done. This is not surprising - even for them. Human dynamic performance and stability is notoriously unconscious and reflexive. It is hard to get at with ordinary conscious perception and description. You have to take step back and not just feel what you feel in the action, but in a sense, watch yourself feeling and acting in a way that finds the "blind spot" and uses other tools to fill in what is not being seen in ordinary perceptions.

Nothing they have taught me is in anyway inconsistent with my own account, which takes a more technical, but also I believe a more demonstrable view. By this I mean that it permits one to point at and show the student first what they ARE actually doing (mostly unconsciously) "You're doing THIS - don't do that." Then you describe what they SHOULD be doing, as you then show them and let them feel: "Do THIS - and not THAT." But having a conceptual template to provide allows the student the same "step back" to help their own training and the developing coherence of their own structure.

To address the difference conceptually, I have come to sum it up this way: I agree that most jujutsu (including judo) is largely leverage, coupled forces and gravity. Coupled forces, judo's specialite' de la maison -- opposite and offset linear forces (^-v) -- basically act like a leverage dynamically without a fixed fulcrum, or you can view the inertia of the target serving as a quasi-fulcrum in motion - if you want a slightly technical description. Leverage in this sense takes a structure, isolates and focuses force on it to make it fail locally, whether at a joint or at the support on the ground .

Aiki -- unlike linear ideas like force-couples or leverage -- forms a field. Not a field of woo-woo or ghosties. It is a mechanical field - a field of stress, more specifically of torque stress. Such a field has both certain mandatory physical and neural feedback conditions to create it, to maintain it, deploy it and manipulate it. Those conditions we call aiki.

Like all fields it has many apparently non-intuitive effects or actions that happen in ways and places in which the manner of action is deeply unclear -- like magnetic force. In contrast to the isolating, focused power of leverage, a field forms a large but relatively diffuse potential spread though all connected structures and which is coherent throughout its reach. Its power flows in a concentrated manner only through those parts that lose their coherence with the field.

A field of stress, like any other field, allows action to result anywhere within the coherent field. An electrical circuit grounds its power through even the strayest of small connections -- if that connection interacts with the field and has a clear conducting path to ground. Such stray contacts can be immensely destructive if the power within the the field flows, especially through any weak or unsuitable path that does not make itself coherent with the field.

The human body has reflexive structural organs that may be analogized to circuit breakers (muscle spindles & Golgi tendon organs) which will involuntarily sacrifice stability to save physical structure when they sense a potential has developed for such a catastrophically ill-suited grounding of the mechanical field power through exposed parts of the structure. Tripping those breakers in succession we call kokyu tanden ho and with results that have all the naive mystery of magnetic levitation - despite the rigorous explanation available for the action.

Leverage within the body of the aiki practitioner is antithetical to the development of the field effect that aiki manipulates. Leverage has counter-posed forces or rotations. This internal opposition of stress breaks the coherence that defines the field; it stops the torque stress from being communicated coherently through the structure. The stress field collapses. In a target, their use of leverage amplifies their vulnerability for the same reason. This collapse can concentrate at the point of opposed force or rotations any stress that did develop in the field.

Conversely, aiki-on-aiki allows a fully coherent field or circuit between people. This is not necessarily immediately damaging to either. If the path to ground is well-suited and coherent, the circuit can conduct its power without any harm, and can do significant work. But it also allows a contest of relative skill over who has better command of both their own coherence and the diffuse effects of the field between them, and which can better exploit any vulnerabilities created by even slight losses of coherence in the target at any point in their structure. If that happens, the power potential of the much larger stress field they are capable of managing can flow like a dam break.

Rupert Atkinson
03-10-2018, 11:39 AM
I happen to believe that aiki is not what is trained in aikido. Y'all know this by now. For me, the problem is that aikido looks to technique to generate "aiki" and that is also the [arguable] difference between an aikido arm bar and a jujutsu arm bar - at some point, we use "aiki" to generate our movement. The problem is that jujutsu can be effective without aiki. This leaves some with a, "grass is greener on the other side," perspective - why not change instruction of an arm bar from modern aikido to the more effective jujutsu? Most of us cannot perform the aikido waza the way they were originally instructed.

Ah ha ... someone else is of the same opinion. We have a lot of work to do to change people's minds. My book was written with the idea to develop aiki- it's about looking for and developing training ideas that might get you (and me) along the way. The online version is now more comprehensive as I occasionally add stuff.

Something to consider - when Ueshiba junked Jujutsu, how did he come to decide upon the waza in Aikido we have today? I know his son created the syllabus we have today, but that was based upon what Ueshiba was doing. I have my own thoughts ...

RonRagusa
03-11-2018, 01:27 PM
For me, the problem is that aikido looks to technique to generate "aiki"

Aiki, in my view, is a product of mind/body coordination and technique is a way of focusing the application of aiki rather than a way of generating it. You can generate and apply aiki without doing any technique at all.

Ron

jonreading
03-12-2018, 09:02 AM
That's the rub, right?

The problem is that either you can manifest aiki (albeit the quality can vary), or you can't. With this ultimate outcome in our personal training, it's about finding the path to manifest aiki. It's also about holding ourselves accountable to a metric of accomplishment to provide critical feedback and drive change. Even if that critical feedback is negative.

Thought exercise - if everyone in your dojo performs ikkyo omote in a manner that feels similar (albeit varying quality of skill) it leaves us with a question, is everyone in the dojo manifesting aiki? Or, is no one in the dojo manifesting aiki? Everyone with whom I have worked out who had aiki felt materially different. Even within a dojo, you can feel the difference between students training in IP and students who are not.

This threads connects a couple of issues because I think at its base level, we recognize the limitations of aikido waza. I don't agree with the premise of taking something and calling it aikido. I like jujutsu and it is has several good arts within it. I like aiki better, which is why I choose aikido. Now we can also talk about aiki, because that should be the separator in our movement from other arts.

I think instead of being critical of the skill, we should instead consider training body movements. They are not the same - it is also why people who move with full body connection feel different.
If we get academic for the moment, we all know that the curriculum we have is not from M. Ueshiba, but rather largely from his early student base and his son. To some extent, I happen to believe that Ueshiba was probably not teaching precisely what we would call kata (waza), but rather more in line with applied body movement (waza). There are many citations of students indicating that early dojo life was not kata-oriented. The difference is that Ueshiba was moving with full body connection (i.e. aiki) and eventually the student body did not possess that skill. The [successful] outcome of the movement could be contrived and that contrivance was the evolution of aikido. We now have this period of time where other martial arts can test our stuff and we become limited to the conditions of the contrivance. I don't like "right" or "wrong", because to each his own. But, we should not ignore this gap.

In a contemporary thread, Cliff made an interesting comment criticizing kata instruction from Ueshiba regarding rear attacks. I don't think he is necessarily wrong - Ueshiba was showing what he could do with respect to rear attacks. Except I would change one word, "he" should be "we". Ueshiba was showing what "we" can do if we properly train aiki. I happen to believe the old guys who said technique didn't matter are dead on - when you move with aiki your entire world expands and you can experiment with any attack.

My earlier comment regarding Ueshiba is a challenge. If we train to understand what he did, can we do what he did? Or, do we instead spend time nit-picking the reasons why not?

RonRagusa
03-12-2018, 01:49 PM
The problem is that either you can manifest aiki (albeit the quality can vary), or you can't.

I think there's a quantitative component involved and that the manifestation of aiki isn't binary (can or can't).

Everyone with whom I have worked out who had aiki felt materially different. Even within a dojo, you can feel the difference between students training in IP and students who are not.

Agree. The differences are obvious. Students who are manifesting aiki move and feel differently from those who are mechanically practicing technique.

This threads connects a couple of issues because I think at its base level, we recognize the limitations of aikido waza.

Like I said earlier, waza isn't the engine, it's the tool that focuses and applies the power generated by the engine. I think students, if not given instruction in mind/body coordination at an early stage of their study, see technique as an end in and of itself. That being said, Aikido techniques are excellent tools for learning the application of aiki due to the nature of their forms. It's one of the things that sets Aikido apart from other arts in which the mastering of technique is the primary focus.

The difference is that Ueshiba was moving with full body connection (i.e. aiki) and eventually the student body did not possess that skill. The [successful] outcome of the movement could be contrived and that contrivance was the evolution of aikido. We now have this period of time where other martial arts can test our stuff and we become limited to the conditions of the contrivance. I don't like "right" or "wrong", because to each his own. But, we should not ignore this gap.

I think Ueshiba M purposely held back teaching aiki skills as an integral part of Aikido training because he wanted his students to discover for themselves the nature of aiki and their own Aikido. But that's just speculation on my part.

Getting back to the original topic of this thread, AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series, I have to agree with Lenny Sly; for what he's looking to do, Aikido doesn't work. It's not because Aikido is lacking though, it's more likely that what he wants Aikido to be is something it was never designed to be.

Ron

MrIggy
03-12-2018, 02:27 PM
.

Getting back to the original topic of this thread, AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series, I have to agree with Lenny Sly; for what he's looking to do, Aikido doesn't work. It's not because Aikido is lacking though, it's more likely that what he wants Aikido to be is something it was never designed to be.

Ron

Meaning what? It was never meant to be a "functional" martial art just with the techniques and without the knowledge of Aiki? You do realize that there are people claiming that Daito ryu/Aikido techniques are "obsolete", or plain and simple useless even with Aiki, that mma is the only "real deal" and that the "connective body" training should be used in that particular fashion. Not to mention all the other "combatives" nonsense I've bee hearing people talk about without having an actual clue about what combatives are.

RonRagusa
03-12-2018, 06:04 PM
Meaning what? It was never meant to be a "functional" martial art just with the techniques and without the knowledge of Aiki?

Yes.

You do realize that there are people claiming that Daito ryu/Aikido techniques are "obsolete", or plain and simple useless even with Aiki,

Yes.

that mma is the only "real deal" and that the "connective body" training should be used in that particular fashion.

Performance in many activities is enhanced with aiki.

Not to mention all the other "combatives" nonsense I've bee hearing people talk about without having an actual clue about what combatives are.

Since I'm not interested in combatives I don't pay any attention to that stuff.

Ron

MrIggy
03-13-2018, 03:02 AM
Performance in many activities is enhanced with aiki.

So I heard, but I'm currently interested in the martial activities.

Since I'm not interested in combatives I don't pay any attention to that stuff.

Ron

So far I can say that's the best approach.