PDA

View Full Version : No-touch throws


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


Ian Williams
04-01-2004, 11:59 PM
Can someone please explain the concept behind this? I've heard references to them in a lot of aikido text but have not yet had it explained..
:eek:

p00kiethebear
04-02-2004, 12:19 AM
Yeah...

My favorite one is where i'm driving with my uke in the passenger seat without his seatbelt. I slam on the brakes and he gets thrown through the windshield....

We can only do it once though...

From what i've seen, the no touch throw's usually involve a very strong kiai...

Ian Williams
04-02-2004, 12:41 AM
eh hem... yes.. well.. in the balance thread, bob wrote
But you can also cause him to react in such a manner that he falls in trying to right himself. Taint easy, but I've seen it done
Is this the sort of thing they mean?

bob_stra
04-02-2004, 12:48 AM
eh hem... yes.. well.. in the balance thread, bob wrote

Is this the sort of thing they mean?
Dunno ;-)

But the "make him fall over when he's trying to recover his footing" thing is *very* well documented. The IOUF tapes have oodles of "how to" on them.

http://www.themartialist.com/pecom/iouf-1.htm

The "no touch throw" stuff...well...maybe... did you happen to see the "Segal Mountain Dew" commercial ;-)

William Westdyke
04-02-2004, 01:52 AM
I'll try to sum up my views on this quickly. Here goes. Not having to do violence. Allowing the attackers energy to work against them. Being able to harm someone then deciding not to. To me, this is the core of the Aikido spirit. As far as "no-touch throws" go... they ARE the core of Aikido. We have all seen them done, but why they work always seems like magic. Not that I can do it, but, I think using the THREAT of violence to throw someone is exactly what we all aim to achieve. So, "what is a no-touch throw?" Its throwing someone by the threat of injury. (i.e. save yourself or DIE!) Why is it shown or in any way important? It gives us a glimpse at the perfection, even O'Sensei wanted to achieve.

Of course this is just my two cents on the issue.

William

Edward
04-02-2004, 05:22 AM
No touch throws usually require a lot of cooperation from uke,IMHO. ;)

MaryKaye
04-02-2004, 06:46 AM
At Chinn sensei's seminar last weekend he spent a moderate amount of time on the no-touch throws. It seemed to me that the point he was making was that nage's body language is important in all of the techniques, and no-touch throws isolate this aspect particularly strongly. We spent a lot of time on all the throws working on "what is nage trying to say to uke? How can he say it more clearly?"

The lower-ranked people like myself enjoyed seeing the no-touch throws done, but the results of trying to do them ourselves were pretty funny. My training partner actually got it to work once--I went down nicely without conscious effort, to my surprise--and then fell on top of me full-length as he had apparently not been expecting success either!

While I can't know what was going on in sensei's ukes' minds, my impression was that he surprised each of them at least once with a no-touch throw and they went down anyway. They certainly looked shocked when they hit the floor. So I am not convinced that conscious cooperation is required. However, some degree of awareness is--if you are oblivious to the danger you get hit instead of thrown. Late in the seminar two of the juniors were practicing this with a fourth dan and it seemed to become less and less feasible to throw us because we were so tired that we were indifferent to being hit.

Mid-seminar Chinn sensei asked "Do you think this would really work in combat?" After a bit of silence I said "Maybe" and that seemed to be the general consensus. I don't think we study them for their martial effectiveness so much as for their power as a teaching tool--much the same way as we use kokyu dosa. What I saw seemed very effective, but there would potentially be problems with an attacker who was insensitive for whatever reason (drunk? drugged? crazy-angry? exhausted?) And they are much harder than ordinary throws. I havne't been shown many things that I flatly couldn't do, but some of the no-touch throws were among them.

Mary Kaye

Ghost Fox
04-02-2004, 07:28 AM
During my time in Aikido Iíve only managed the no-touch throw twice, and both time by accident.

The first Uke was attacking with a Yokomen and I wasn't as focused as I shouldíve been. My reflexes took over and got me out the way really fast and I entered with the line of the attack. The uke was really trying to hit me, so when I wasnít there he fell into a forward roll.

The second time uke was coming at me with a hard Yokomen, again not exactly all there and I dove into a Sudori. Uke was surprised and dived over me to avoid me making contact with his body.

These experiences taught me that the no-touch throw is about leading and vanishing at the last moment and probably works better with committed attacks that go from the top to the bottom, like Shomen and Yokomen. Also, I think surprise and natural movement play a large part. Of course in both instances my attempt to duplicate the technique failed, Iíll probably be training another 6 years before figuring it out again.

Charles Hill
04-02-2004, 07:31 AM
George Ledyard has a really good article on his website about atemi that deals with this subject. I highly recommend it.

Charles Hill

aikidocapecod
04-02-2004, 08:42 AM
I remember my first "no touch throw" Ahhh I remember it well as it was done to me!!! My sensei at the time, Len Rose Sensei, and a couple of his students were doing a demonstration for a large group. He asked only that when we attack him, stay in control, but make it an honest serious attack.

At one point, he wanted munetsuki. So I tried to hit his mid section hard. Naturally, when my fist got to the target, the target was no longer there. But what was there was his open hand. And his open hand was coming with great speed towards my face. Somewhere in my collection of "most memorable moments" photos, there is a picture of me about 4 feet off the floor...parallel to the floor and I am face up looking at the ceiling. I seemed to hang in the air for a long time before the floor came up to meet me....

It was my first experience with a No-Touch throw.....

thatoldfool
04-02-2004, 09:32 AM
This no touch throwing brings to mind a question. I read this thread, and then was cleaning my apartment, thinking about it...

In Aikido, we're taught to "keep contact" during the movement. However, in my experience, the few "no touch" throws i've experience were because nage "disappeared" - and I did *not* "feel" him. When trying to duplicated the technique, that seemed to be the case - that contact had to be broken unexpectedly for the above to work.

In retrospect, contemplating it now, keeping contact seems to be largely for uke's benefit. I train with one ikkyu, who coincidentally is also a taoist, after regular class, who is excellent at no-touch throws. Especially with a lot of momentum, flipping break falls are especially difficult to take, as there's almost no central pivot point, resulting in jarring falls. Even forward rolls are accompanied by the "my god, it feels like i'm falling off a cliff" feeling.

So...*scratches head* what do you fellow Aikidoka think? Contact for the sake of uke, or "ghost" movements for the sake of....a certain philosophical essence of Aikido?

aikidocapecod
04-02-2004, 09:57 AM
This is just my opinion....but is it possible that "keeping contact" can be mental or physical? Also, when one extends, does that extension stop at the fingertips?

When I practice, I try not to think that any ki I may have stops at my partner, but rather it extends well past my partner. So in a "no-touch" throw, perhaps our extension is in "contact" with partner.....

Just a thought.....

mantis
04-02-2004, 10:14 AM
But what was there was his open hand. And his open hand was coming with great speed towards my face.
I've had the same experience also.

In my opinion, this is the single most effective aikido technique there is.

It's the basis for all of the 17 in tomiki aikido.

John Boswell
04-02-2004, 11:31 AM
These experiences taught me that the no-touch throw is about leading and vanishing at the last moment and probably works better with committed attacks that go from the top to the bottom, like Shomen and Yokomen. Also, I think surprise and natural movement play a large part.
Damion Lost said it well above.

People like to take something such as a "no touch" throw and make it mystical when its a simple (though not so simple) matter of intention, leading the uke, uke's committed attack and getting off line.

We do many kokyu nage throws and techniques and a committed attack is always helpful. BUT, if you capture the uke's mind with your intention (read also: ki), get off line and extend properly, they will end up throwing themselves because:

A) Nage got the hell outta the way.

B) Uke's energy is redirected up or outward.

C) Uke is left with no choice in the end!

Face it, your yokomen strike comes full force (or whatever attack) and Nage blends well leading you to think he's there... but gets off line at the last second. A good blend leads the uke to follow you around, though his strike is now hitting nothing... and the energy flows onward, drawing the uke into a roll/fall.

Timing and intention are vital on Nage's part, but its fun when you see it and experience it! Nothing mystical at all, just a matter of perception. ;)

aikidoc
04-02-2004, 12:04 PM
No touch throws are possible with a committed attack, good mind lead and impeccable timing by the the nage.

cbrf4zr2
04-02-2004, 02:42 PM
No touch throws are completely dependent on the uke. You'll never convince me otherwise. IMO there are only two no touch throws. An iriminage atemi in which uke goes into an ushiro ukemi, and sudori. But both are entirely dependent on uke.

When I first started aikido and received the "hand to the face" (as I called it in the beginning) atemi, I would simply duck my head forward and continue on my line. I was then told how that was improper ukemi. Now, to make nage look good I will do it "properly" but if I am feeling particularly lazy I will still from time to time not take ushiro ukemi, and duck through it.

I have yet to see sudori work well against a beginner. They always stop the attack and catch themselves, or they trip over you. In either case there was not a no touch throw executed.

willy_lee
04-02-2004, 06:38 PM
When I first started aikido and received the "hand to the face" (as I called it in the beginning) atemi, I would simply duck my head forward and continue on my line. I was then told how that was improper ukemi. Now, to make nage look good I will do it "properly" but if I am feeling particularly lazy I will still from time to time not take ushiro ukemi, and duck through it.
I have similar reservations about this. To assume that uke will always react this way to an attempted punch in the face seems to me naive. I think you can only guarantee that uke will fall back if nage is getting knocked out.
I have yet to see sudori work well against a beginner. They always stop the attack and catch themselves, or they trip over you. In either case there was not a no touch throw executed.
Is sudori where nage drops down in front of uke, like a body block? This also bugs me -- if uke really wants to get you, wouldn't he gladly take the trip, since he's landing on top of you? On your back, even.

=wl

wendyrowe
04-02-2004, 06:57 PM
I've had no-touch throws done to me by my Sensei, and it was definitely surprising. Once or twice I've done one to my partner, but only on the rare occasion when everything worked perfectly. (I look forward to the day when I can do them at least most of the times when I try for one.)

In all cases, they were (as others have posted) due to committed attacks and nage suddenly not being where uke expected. Uke attacks, nage enters, uke instinctively braces or adjusts balance to avoid a takedown -- then nage's arm or hip or whatever never makes the expected contact, and uke falls over the other way.

Charles Hill
04-02-2004, 08:24 PM
When I first started aikido and received the "hand to the face" (as I called it in the beginning) atemi, I would simply duck my head forward and continue on my line.
This sounds to me like the person doing the atemi is making some kind of mistake. I believe the point of this kind of throw is that the thrower actually makes contact with the "throwee`s" face. If it is a "no touch" throw, the throwee still believes that he/she is going to be hit and that`s why he/she takes the ukemi.

Again, Mr. Ledyard explains all this in a very clear way in his article. (That is, if I understood it correctly.)

Charles Hill

willy_lee
04-02-2004, 11:18 PM
I believe the point of this kind of throw is that the thrower actually makes contact with the "throwee`s" face. If it is a "no touch" throw, the throwee still believes that he/she is going to be hit and that`s why he/she takes the ukemi.
Yes, but I think Edward's point is that some people will not throw their head backwards even if they believe someone is trying to plant a fist in their face.

ESPECIALLY if they are coming in with full speed and intent.

Look at boxers or wrestlers. They'll pull their head back to avoid a jab at distance. But if he was charging at you, why would he do that? He would try to slip the punch and keep coming in.

The only way (as I see it) to guarantee that their body does the ukemi is to place your hand on their face and drive the back of their head into the mat.

I'm not saying no-touch throws never happen. I do think though that Edward makes a good point regarding these particular types of no-touch throws.

=wl

batemanb
04-03-2004, 01:27 AM
I was going to say that it doesn`t always require a co-operative uke, but when I re-read the paragraph I changed my mind. It does require a co-operative uke, but not in the sense that uke falls over because they think they have to. The co-operation here is an uke who is confident in his ukemi enough that he can give an honest committed attack, and who is prepared to empty his mind. For tori`s part, musbi, good mai ai and good timing are all key.

There`s another thread on here about balance, that is also fundamental to doing no touch throws.

Doing an Aikido technique is best done when there is no conflict between tori and uke. What so often happens in keiko is that tori is so focused on doing the technique that they don`t nearly move enough in the first instance. In this case tori`s body becomes the point of conflict, blocking uke`s natural unhindered movement, the technique becomes a struggle because uke ends up fighting with uke (and himself).

If uke is honest and committed in their attack, they will try and cut you down, their mind is so intent on this that they are not thinking about anything else, they have no preconception of what defence you are doing, i.e. they are not stopping you doing the technique in their mind before you start(even though they probably do know what you are supposed to be practicing). Hopefully you make your connection with them (musbi) at the instant they attack, if your ma ai is good and your timing right, the instant you move, assuming you move enough, you will create a void and uke will fall into it, the right combination of the points above will lead uke into a nice kokyu nage or aiki nage (no touch fall).

In my opinion, a no touch throw is the pinnacle of Aikido technique. It means that I have led uke`s mind and body to become dependant upon me for their balance, even though there is no physical contact between us, the no touch throw occurs when I remove the dependancy.

Regards

Bryan

Goetz Taubert
04-03-2004, 03:04 PM
If you want to see some spectacular photographs of "to touch" throws, look at the pictures in "The breath od life" by K. Nishino ISBN 4-7700-2022-8.

He's is doing this to five scholars attacking simultaneously and he surely doesn't need to "step out" in the very last moment of attack to do this.

This is also an example, that "no touch throw" is not restricted to particular technique or willing-to-cooperate uke.

willy_lee
04-03-2004, 03:11 PM
If it is a "no touch" throw, the throwee still believes that he/she is going to be hit and that`s why he/she takes the ukemi.

Again, Mr. Ledyard explains all this in a very clear way in his article. (That is, if I understood it correctly.)
Actually, from my reading of his article, he explains quite clearly that this form of no-touch throw is quite dependent on uke being trained to respond in this way.

From the article: If one tried to throw an untrained partner without touching him it would merely manifest itself as a strike which hit. The partner would not understand that the agreement exists that I run the strike in just such a way that there is just one "out", to take the fall.
And I would add, it could manifest itself as a strike which misses, or hits but doesn't do what you intend.

=wl

Doka
04-03-2004, 04:03 PM
No touch throws?

Ha ha ha ha ha!!! :D

No such thing!

OK, there is the thing where you move off line and Uke over-extends himself and falls. That is not a throw!

This is a Ki myth!

Goetz Taubert
04-04-2004, 05:16 AM
@ Mark Dobro

Your "No such thing!" statement seems to be your personal myth (perhaps on a restricted knowledge base).

So better don't have a look at the mentioned book, to keep your view of the world stable.

Doka
04-04-2004, 05:59 AM
Next I will be hearing that people can levitate!

My knowledge base is limited - only 22 years of martial arts!

shihonage
04-04-2004, 06:48 AM
No touch throws?

Ha ha ha ha ha!!! :D

No such thing!

OK, there is the thing where you move off line and Uke over-extends himself and falls. That is not a throw!

This is a Ki myth!
I tend to agree.

There has to be a tremendous difference in skill between attacker and defender in order to pull that off.

A valid situation which would allow for this to happen would be a severely drunk guy vs. a sober Aikidoka.

But a sober guy ? No freaking way.

PeterR
04-04-2004, 07:38 AM
Next I will be hearing that people can levitate!

My knowledge base is limited - only 22 years of martial arts!
You mean you can't - obviously 22 years of the wrong MA. ;)

I actually did a no touch throw this very day. Young man unbalanced himself trying to successfully avoid my strike, I shifted my body and came at him again. Bad situation made worse - I didn't manage to touch him but he was on his butt. He was sober by the way and not over-extended.

It was a crude example but the real no touch throws are basically variations on the same theme. A matter of timing and understanding uke's response. It's easier if uke is well trained to respond in certain ways but that is not a requirement. By that I don't mean faking it but the more you know your uke the easier to predict his actions.

However, I do agree that there is no such thing as a no touch throw in the sense that it can be taught. There has to be real intent in the initial attack and real fear of getting hit subsequently. Sometimes in the process of executing an actual throw (and I am specifically thinking of some of Shodokan's atemi waza) the above come together with near perfect timing and voila.

Excuse me while I float out the door. ummmmmm.

SeiserL
04-04-2004, 10:45 AM
IMHO, what I have experienced as "no touch" throws wre accomplished by taking the uke's balance. Flinching to avoid atemi is one way. Staying just out of range enough to over extend uke and then emptying the space is another. Most of it depends on timing.

I have personally never experience the "no touch" throw that is supposed to be by "ki".

Goetz Taubert
04-04-2004, 02:05 PM
This is how a spectacular no touch throw may look like.



(hope the link works, if not try the adress: [url]www.nsihinojuku.com (http://www.nishinojuku.com/english/e_keyword/e_key_top.html[/URL), english version, chapter taiki

Goetz Taubert
04-04-2004, 02:08 PM
This is how a spectacular no touch throw may look like.

hope the link works, if not try the adress: www.nsihinojuku.com, english version, chapter taikino touch throw (http://www.nishinojuku.com/english/e_keyword/e_key_top.html)

Chris Birke
04-04-2004, 03:31 PM
To me, the idea of a no touch throw (where it's described as exploiting the unbalance of uke) is more valuable as a means to understanding all MA than any specific technique.

I think those can who see it as an issue of ki fall into two main camps;

one (to which I'm obiviously biased) who agree with my above statement and see ki as the action of understanding the relationships needed for "no touch" to happen,

and two who have a different understanding of ki wherein it functions as an influence that causes a no touch throw.

In one, the no touch throw is there waiting to happen, and understanding ki is being able to see the path to it.

In the other, ki can completely create the no touch throw.

I don't put much weight in the second theory, but I know some people who do and I'd gladly hear from them (so far no one has really posted).

As for more of my personal thoughs (which I know you guys never get sick of hearing...) the concept of no touch is invaluable.

//

If a baseball player falls down to get away from a wide ball (doing 90) is it a no touch throw? If he didn't fall, he'd get hit. I don't think that is what's important. What's important is that he THINKS he has to fall.

The ball could be a hologram, it could be shot out of the air by an incredibly skilled sniper, or some other bullox, - the is no absolute certainty that it would hit him.

What's important is that its credible enough to force the player down one course of action, and one line of thought.

Once I started thinking of it that way, it left throws and became applicable to everything.

If I can recognise what I can get to happen, then I don't have to make it happen.

//

In another way, you ever hear someone say "he was in the right place at the right time."

For me. "No touch", ki, aikido, etc, is about realising that here, now, where I am, IS the right place and the right time.

//

Pragmatic fighting note; chin down, hands up. You can palm (or if you really want pain) punch, as much as you want during the time it takes someone to shoot. Your hands will be worse for the wear than their head.

Entering with your head down, or ducking, is good technique.

Training with good technique isn't how Aikido is trained. You do the bad technique because it is a common place for your partner to find themselves in.

I think this is a contested distinction, but it's where I fall in on things. Oooh... New post time.

thatoldfool
04-04-2004, 04:35 PM
To add a bit of non empirical data to this mix - :) - the more i think about it, the more no touch throws seem like a manifestation of Taoism's "wu wei" concept. Mr. Birke's comment describes it very well:

"Once I started thinking of it that way, it left throws and became applicable to everything.

If I can recognise what I can get to happen, then I don't have to make it happen."

...

Josh Bisker
04-04-2004, 08:17 PM
Actually, from my reading of his article, he explains quite clearly that this form of no-touch throw is quite dependent on uke being trained to respond in this way.

=wl
Yeah, Mr. Ledyard does write that you'd just hit the dude if he were an "untrained partner" who doesn't understand the martial options of the situation, but I don't think that is supposed to mean an "aikido-trained partner." It seems from the tone of the passage that a "trained parter" could be differentiated from an "untrained" one as being someone with some degree of experiential martial understanding. If we want to extrapolate, maybe a street-thug (i kind of hate these kind of extrapolations, but maybe they're useful?) who has experience in combat situations would have the "training" to recognize the kind of 'get hit or fall' options that he has narrowed himself down to.

So the no-touch is not so much a technique as this: a small window of opportunity for a comparatively peaceful solution to a confrontational moment, an opportunity which results from an aggressor recognizing the choices before him and abandoning his attack in favor of falling. Maaaaaaaaaybe.

-josh

PS: Do you know the Johnny Cash song with your name in it? "Well yes oh yes my name is Willy Lee / If you got a warrant just read it to me." It may be "Will E Lee" but hey, we take what we can get. Cocaine Blues is the name of the song, famous from the Live at Folsom record.

Josh Bisker
04-04-2004, 08:24 PM
ooo, that baseball analogy is good stuff!

willy_lee
04-05-2004, 12:35 AM
If we want to extrapolate, maybe a street-thug (i kind of hate these kind of extrapolations, but maybe they're useful?) who has experience in combat situations would have the "training" to recognize the kind of 'get hit or fall' options that he has narrowed himself down to.
Maybe... or he would have the training to recognize that another option is to duck or slip :)
PS: Do you know the Johnny Cash song with your name in it?
I do know it. Actually I think Hank Williams sang it first.

William Burroughs also used Willy Lee as one of his alter-ego's names.

p.s. Are you on the Oberlin in London program now?

p.p.s. I'm a former Obie myself...:)

=wl

stuartjvnorton
04-05-2004, 02:18 AM
I have yet to see sudori work well against a beginner. They always stop the attack and catch themselves, or they trip over you. In either case there was not a no touch throw executed.
I always thought a "no touch" sudori was one where you dropped too early & they saw you coming.

Then they jumped over you because they were too nice to kick the bejeezus out of you instead.

Charles Hill
04-05-2004, 03:47 AM
It's easier if uke is well trained to respond in certain ways but that is not a requirement.
I agree with Peter on this. I recently watched one of those home video shows that had a clip of a young man almost walking into a tree branch. He wasn`t watching where he was going and turned his head to the front at just the right (wrong?) moment and somehow flipped his body up to avoid hitting the branch. It looked just like an aikido ukemi but being untrained, he landed on his back and hit his head on the ground.

This says to me that if the timing is correct, a no touch throw could be possible, even on the street.

Charles Hill

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 04:47 AM
I have been doing Aikido 9 years learning from high ranked and extremely experienced Aikikai sensei, but still know I am on rung 1 of 20.

However, I think no one bar Mr. Murray has even touched on understanding this ghost/no touch stuff.
This is just my opinion....but is it possible that "keeping contact" can be mental or physical?
Sorry Ladies and Gents, but THE REST OF YOU HAVEN'T GOT ANYWHERE CLOSE. I am not trying to critise, just trying to bring something to the thread.

After watching videos of Tohei and O'sensei, meeting a very old (80 odd!) Japanese aikidoka, learning from my sensei and discussing with close friends, I'm certain the key is the most fundamental concept in Zen Meditation. I hope this helps. :)

PeterR
04-05-2004, 04:58 AM
Mu?

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 05:08 AM
Mu?
Ha, ha... have you been looking at my dojo name Peter?! ;)

You are right Peter that is the key, but let me help in a more general way as well. Most people on here has been talking about affecting the other person using threat of force, all this type of business. That is MANIPULATION, you have to CHANGE your mindset and think of LEADING. Think of CIRCLES. :)

I don't want to just spell it all out on a public forum, ghost technique is probably the highest level of Aikido and learning it is a very personal thing. I'm not saying I can do it to everyone at all, but I KNOW I AM ON THE RIGHT TRACK. :cool:

PeterR
04-05-2004, 05:29 AM
Actually Mark I didn't see your Dojo name - but interestingly Shodokan Aikido is distilled down to the concept of Mushin Mugamae.

Mu is probably the only connection to Zen Bhuddism that Aikido has - Ueshiba M. briefly attended a school run by the Shingon sect but his spiritual connection was, as we all know, Omotokyo.

Frankly to me Mu does not suggest leading at all but a removal of expectations - both of your opponents actions and your response.

What is being discussed are situations where no touch throws would work in a non-cooperative setting. Some say impossible, I say under the right circumstance but leading (as you term it) is not one of them.

Hey its an opinion but we are on different tracks.

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 05:59 AM
Frankly to me Mu does not suggest leading at all but a removal of expectations - both of your opponents actions and your response.
I wasn't suggesting that, my reply obviously wasn't worded clearly enough. The "general help" was mean't to be general aikido, which carries through into high level technique. You have to understand that Mu is the tool. :cool:
What is being discussed are situations where no touch throws would work in a non-cooperative setting. Some say impossible, I say under the right circumstance but leading (as you term it) is not one of them.
I'm sorry but I think you obviously don't understand ghost technique at all then. It's a very high level skill which has to be developed firstly through understanding (which I have I hope) and secondly through experience/practise (which I am working on and probably will be for the next 5-10 years!!!). :D
Hey its an opinion but we are on different tracks.
You aren't on the right track then. Sorry I want to be honest in my opinion and I would like everyone to be on the right track, but it's not something that comes without working for it. :blush:

Hanna B
04-05-2004, 07:08 AM
"Hey its an opinion but we are on different tracks."

"You aren't on the right track then."

Always great to discuss with people who know what humbleness is...

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 07:23 AM
"Hey its an opinion but we are on different tracks."

"You aren't on the right track then."

Always great to discuss with people who know what humbleness is...
That is a typical smart comment which I don't see has any value. I am just trying to be CORRECT on what is a little known subject. Why don't you tell us our thoughts on this subject then and try to add some value to the thread? :straightf

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 09:10 AM
*Hannah B deleted her reply?* :(

I'm sorry I don't buy that at all, it's just dodging the issue. Please understand I am not trying to be awkward. My point is that I have not read anywhere on this thread (apart from in Mr. Murray's post) that anyone really has a clue how to do this technique! :eek:

That is totally understandable. It is a high level technique requiring a lot of understanding and practise in a specific area that isn't taught widely. It seems that some people on this thread think that just because they can't do it, it can't be done. I know specifics of this technique and have given some brief help. It's your choice whether to make use of it or not. :(

Hanna B
04-05-2004, 11:03 AM
If ten aikido people say "ki", they probably mean ten different things. If ten people say "aiki"... if ten people say "resistance"... if they say "cooperation"...

What is true in your dojo might not be true outside of it. What is true in one training environment, is not true in another. This is something that the "softer" aikido styles often are more aware of than the "harder", but all ways of doing aikido technique is adapted to a certain way of uke behaviour. "Resistance", the variants I have seen, is also a behaviour that has consequenses. Ways of getting loose from a statically resisting uke's grab does not work if uke is concentrating on following rather than resisting, etcetera.

Some of your previous posts made me believe you are in a more or less Ki Society based line of aikido. Peter Rehse, for instance, is in Tomiki/Shodokan. What reason do I have to believe that the two of you are talking about the same things at all, that you mean the same things although you use the same words? Not much. Or maybe you sometimes talk about similar things but describe it so differently, that the other one does not understand.

This is one of the reasons why it is risky to declare that someone else is wrong, no matter how convinced one is of being right.

Btw, I have performed no contact throws in other budo than aikido. It required what I would call a "committed attack" without though of what uke knew would happen. Some people would probably call that "cooperation". Or maybe you do need cooperation (whatever that is) when training this... all but the first time you do the technique.

Leading... maybe. I do not have to word enough clearly defined to use it.

I am on thin ice here, but I could argue that Peter Rehses definition of "non-cooperative setting" probably is more or less sparring-based. The concept of sparring has some interesting complications. It is just another training methology, with some similarities and some differences to the so-called reality.

So I settle on that in different training settings different things are possible and impossible. It is all just training settings. In reality... hey, I don't know enough about aikido used in so-called reality to talk about it.

Mark Balogh
04-05-2004, 11:23 AM
I'm sorry but this is all low level thinking, you cannot perform stuff like Ghost technique if you are thinking about rubbish like 'uke's committed attack makes him fall over'. Anyone with an ounce of skill isn't going to fall for that. Obviously I am not directing this at Aikidoka who posted, who are still learning the basics. ;)

Hannah, I know you are making a point about my tone but I am just trying to cut through the BS. I just get so frustrated with Aikido these days. All these things the masters (O'sensei, Tohei, Shioda, Osawa, Yamaguchi) could do are well possible, but only after loads of study and training. No one seems to be bothering from what I read here. Maybe no one is showing you (even worse). :(

Someone who knows a bit about this no touch skill, who is of high grade/experience please post here. :(

Magma
04-05-2004, 11:58 AM
Mark -

You're making a lot of noise.

If you really wanted to prove that in your nine years of training you have learned *something* - *anything* - try applying a no-touch-technique in your conversations.

Bring people around to your point of view without actually touching them... or, worse, *beating* on them as you have been (calling ideas "rubbish", etc.), while falling prey yourself to the logical fallacy of an "appeal to authority" ("my sensei knows more than yours... in fact, he threw yours last week... without touching him!").

As much as you wish otherwise, it is your attitude, language, and demeanor on this thread - and not your claims of certitude or righteousness - that demonstrates to us how much of an authority we should think you on this subject.

Let's just say that my opinion of you (formed after reading this thread) and your opinion of you differ. Probably greatly. Then again, I'm right. I'm on the right path. And my sensei knows more.

Of course, you can try to change my mind through conversation, but not with the brute force you have displayed thus far. You haven't displayed conversational-aikido but conversational-shootfighting. Tell you what, try a no-touch-conversation. You sit there and look at your screen without typing and try to connect with me and "throw" me in conversation. I'll wait.

*rolls eyes*

Until then, realize that while you follow the gourd, some people follow the shoe. There will probably be people on the side laughing at you both.

(shameless Life of Brian reference)

cbrf4zr2
04-05-2004, 12:01 PM
All hail the master shihan Mark!

Hi, I'm Mark I know more than you, blah blah blah, you puny mortals know nothing of which I speak. If you were were to hear the true words of Aikido Spirits your ears would become fire and your head would explode.

Look Ghost Man, you fly your Mastery over here stateside, and I will stand in front of you. You make me fall without touching me whatsoever, and I will pay your entire trip cost. Sound like a good plan?

aikidocapecod
04-05-2004, 12:04 PM
Let's talk about outside the aikido world...

I know this has happened to many...if not most people here....

You are walking down a city street.....big tall building beside you. As you come to the end of a building, somebody walking on a converging side street, also along the building walks right in front of you. She/he could not have seen you, and you could not have seen her/him.

There is a sidestepping piroutte(sp) and you both lose balance trying to avoid the other. I know that in some cases one or both have met the sidewalk.

Is this not a "no touch" throw? Or in this case a "no touch" fall?

The original question asked was to explain a "no touch" throw. While some may not believe in the existance of such a thing, that does not make those who do believe in the possibility of "no touch" throws wrong.

"No touch" throws do not require a compliant Uke. They do not require a Nage with 30 years of experience. At times a "no touch" throw may happen quite by accident. At other times the attempt to cause a "no touch" throw may result in an unintentional smack to the head.

(That is NOT a no touch throw!!! :-)

But....they do exist in and outside of the world of Aikido.

And watch out next time rounding the corner of a tall building!!!

Hanna B
04-05-2004, 12:44 PM
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.

aikidocapecod
04-05-2004, 12:52 PM
On the contrary Hanna, I think you are quite correct. If Uke has her/his mind someplace else instead of a commited attack, then Uke will provide very little partnership in practice.

Sure, Nage can use a little muscle to get Uke moving and thereby get the desired results, Uke on the mat....if that is Nage's only goal.

So, getting back to the point of this thread, What is a "no touch" throw....and taking your view into consideration, if Uke is not commited to an honest attack, a "no touch" throw is not possible.

John Boswell
04-05-2004, 01:44 PM
One important topic keeps coming up and that is the subject of Committed Attack.

I've only been to one seminar in my life, due to location and money, but I know enough to know that as Uke, when you throw a punch in aikido... you need to follow through with it for the nage to execute his/her technique.

At this seminar, I saw a nidan test in which there was a 1st kyu uke throwing a punch (munitski) and stopping his attack right at the place of supposed "impact". In doing this, uke came to a complete halt and locked down. This guy is ONE STEP from being black belt! What the hell kind of attack is that?

It's not one, that's what it is.

So, for those of you out there that do not believe in this "no touch" throw thing, can you really tell me that your uke is giving a commited attack or are they going through the motions?

It isn't something mystical at all. It isn't hard to believe either, if you just think about it. HELL! Mr. Miagi from Karate Kid did the same basic thing at the end of the movie when he got outta the way of the punch from the other sensei... letting him punch the car windows instead? Committed Attack. If you get one, you can do all kinds of stuff.

It's not unreal to expect someone seriously throwing a punch to end up throwing themselves instead. It happens in boxing all the time, it can happen anywhere.

cbrf4zr2
04-05-2004, 02:35 PM
At this seminar, I saw a nidan test in which there was a 1st kyu uke throwing a punch (munitski) and stopping his attack right at the place of supposed "impact". In doing this, uke came to a complete halt and locked down. This guy is ONE STEP from being black belt! What the hell kind of attack is that?
John -

Not sure how you are instructed to throw punches, but the way I've been taught to throw them, munetsuki should not finish with you still moving forward. Uke may have needed to be closer in order to punch through the target, but at the end of munetsuki you are locked down. You should not (at least in my style) have so much forward extension that you are tippy. If the 1st kyu was in fact "locked down" then either A) the intial ma ai was completly botched OR B) the nidan was behind in his technique. Because, you will be off balance at some point during an attack as uke. This is the point at which the technique being performed is to be executed. Of course, that point will vary in size due to rank, and due to athleticism and body style.

In fact, in our organization we do Ki tests at the end of the suburi at for 6th Kyu to make sure that uke is "locked down" as the attack culminates.

Doka
04-05-2004, 04:11 PM
John -

Not sure how you are instructed to throw punches, but the way I've been taught to throw them, munetsuki should not finish with you still moving forward. Uke may have needed to be closer in order to punch through the target, but at the end of munetsuki you are locked down. You should not (at least in my style) have so much forward extension that you are tippy. If the 1st kyu was in fact "locked down" then either A) the intial ma ai was completly botched OR B) the nidan was behind in his technique. Because, you will be off balance at some point during an attack as uke. This is the point at which the technique being performed is to be executed. Of course, that point will vary in size due to rank, and due to athleticism and body style.
I think the essence of this is that you need your timing and position to be right to allow you to extend the attack (in Ni technique), extending and leading your Uke. Even if the technique is focused on the point of impact (like in some style of Gung Fu), if your timing and positioning are good you can extend and throw your Uke.

As for no touch throws, I am the unbeliever! Why, because I believe that if you do not touch someone you don't throw them.

If a ball is flying towards me and I move out of the way so it misses me, have I thrown it behind me?

If a bullet is fired out me, but I have moved out of it's line, have I thrown it too?

If me Uke attacks me and I am not there, have I thrown my Uke?

I say no to the above. This is because I see a throw as a physical action. In the above examples I have caused them to happen by not being there. A throw is something that you couse to happen by being there.

Osu!

To Mark Balogh

9 Years is not very long in martial arts. You have been talking to people with over 20 years in martial arts, none of which would (or have) tell you that you are wrong and they are right, because there is not just one way! Aikido, like other martial arts, does not have just one path. Things will work in one environment (or dojo) and fail in another. It is amazing what you can do when your Uke knows what they are supposed to do!

:ai:

MaryKaye
04-05-2004, 04:16 PM
(I'd suggest not responding to trolls.)

I think there are at least two distinct kinds of throws under discussion, and separating them might make things clearer. This is a beginner's stab at doing so and I welcome correction from more experienced people.

We do a jo-nage where uke reaches for the jo, trying to get hold of it--he finally suceeds just as it is whipped over his head and down behind him so that he must fall. If uke is making a genuine effort to catch the jo this can work as a no-touch throw. Uke falls because he kept reaching for the jo an instant too long and lost his balance due to its unexpected movements. I think the throws people have been describing where nage is "just not there anymore" are like this one.

At the seminar a week ago we did several different no-touch throws (or rather, the yudansha did them and people of my rank mostly failed to do them). These seemed to be of a quite different kind where nage moves toward uke very suddenly and assertively and uke falls due to flinching or reacting movements. I noticed that the falls were unusually hard. You could easily see the difference between a successful use of the throw and a compliant uke falling anyway, because our normal falls are a lot softer--we don't slam into the mat like that.

The thing both kinds have in common is requiring a strongly committed attack. If you are just sort-of following the jo around you'll never fall. If you think you're going to grab it and do something clever with it (as in a practice where the instructor is encouraging us to reverse him if we can) then you're committed enough to go down.

In Chinn sensei's seminar he spent a lot of time trying to get a strongly committed attack, which he defined as one which would make nage want to move. He showed this with kata tori, the shoulder grab, which was strange since there's not a harmful blow involved. I can say from experience that when Chinn sensei comes at you to grab you, there is a strong tendency to back up. We junior people were not nearly as consistent in being able to do this, which is part of why we couldn't make the no-touch throws work. (And when my seniors came at me with full commitment I was the one flinching....)

Anyway, I'd say these are two different animals. They both require "leading uke's mind" but so does everything else we do; and the mechanics of why uke falls are quite different.

Mary Kaye

Doka
04-05-2004, 04:35 PM
Like I said, I don't buy this "No touch throw" thing. It is mostly Uke reacting how is expected. To reiterate, my view is:

"A throw is something that you couse to happen by being there."

To qualify that - if you enter towards someone striking and they fall over trying to avoid your strike, that is not a throw! They simply fell over avoiding your strike!

Anyway, what the hell does it matter what you call it? As long as you are not telling me you can throw someone with your magic "Ki" power! (apart from Peter who can even levitate! :))

:ai:

Doka
04-05-2004, 04:46 PM
in Ni technique
LOL! :D

I did it myself! I know that some will be saying "NI technique?"

This is where the energy of the attack is forwards, like a push, towards Sh'te/Tori/Nage (how many names? Anyone know of more? :)), as opposed to Ichi technique, where the energy is backwards, like a pull, away from Sh'te/Tori/Nage (see what I mean? :))!

And I have practiced in numerous schools of Aikido! D'oh! :D

Mark Balogh
04-06-2004, 04:14 AM
I just can't believe what I am hearing on this forum, it's like a childs playground.

1) In my first e-mail I commented that my level is such that I don't consider myself anything but a serious student of Aikido.

2) I offered what I consider a very important point on the subject. NO ONE HAS COMMENTED ON MY POINT. Is it because no one understands it? Then several of you try to ridicule me.

3) My attitude is deliberate. Everyone on here thinks they know what a Ghost technique is. From my training, what has been taught to me and my experience NO ONE HAS TOUCHED ON HOW TO DO IT (bar again the only person on here who seems to have any idea, Mr. Murray). If you realise you don't know, you can start to figure out HOW TO.

4) I wish I had never posted and kept the conversation between myself and other instructors (close friends) in my association which was happening on e-mail prior to this threads creation. :(

Chris Birke
04-06-2004, 04:30 AM
It's ok Mark, some day you'll show them.

Mark Balogh
04-06-2004, 04:38 AM
It's ok Mark, some day you'll show them.
Give me 5-10 years of working on it and I hope to be able to do just that. :)

PeterR
04-06-2004, 04:41 AM
3) My attitude is deliberate. Everyone on here thinks they know what a Ghost technique is. From my training, what has been taught to me and my experience NO ONE HAS TOUCHED ON HOW TO DO IT (bar again the only person on here who seems to have any idea, Mr. Murray). If you realise you don't know, you can start to figure out HOW TO.
The thing is several of us know exactly what you are talking about - we just don't agree. We are not less experienced, less capable, less skilled or particularily dense.
4) I wish I had never posted and kept the conversation between myself and other instructors (close friends) in my association which was happening on e-mail prior to this threads creation. :(
Here's the rub. I have never seen no touch techniques performed outside of the parameters I laid down (timing) where uke was not pre-trained to believe its possible. In other words part of the same organization, or close friend, or or. If you limit your conversation to the above your beliefs will never be challenged. And really if you don't like being challenged you shouldn't hang out red flags to the bull.

Mu.

Mark Balogh
04-06-2004, 04:52 AM
Anyway, I'd say these are two different animals. They both require "leading uke's mind" but so does everything else we do; and the mechanics of why uke falls are quite different.

Mary Kaye
Finally, more sense. :)
The thing is several of us know exactly what you are talking about - we just don't agree.
The concept I am talking about I have recieved from 2 different Sensei, one 80 year old japanese student of O'sensei and my current teacher. O'sensei and Tohei can be seen doing it on video. So how do they do it then Peter? It isn't fake. I think I have the majority of the answer but you disagree....So how? :confused:

PeterR
04-06-2004, 05:17 AM
Uke was cooperative - plain and simple.

Fake is not the word I would use - preconditioned is. Yes even with Ueshiba M. or Tohei K.

A simple question - could the same technique be done against a martial artist outside of a selected group - could it be done to me?

Hanna B
04-06-2004, 05:23 AM
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Hanna B
04-06-2004, 05:29 AM
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Col.Clink
04-06-2004, 05:29 AM
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.
I disagree Hanna, I think you are quite correct.

Being committed is one thing, having intent behind it, is the other, which you don't hear alot about. Sure I can commit to attack someone, but my level of intent to hurt them, will determine the response.

If a person is commited to an attack, (that means full force), and their intention is to strike a specific point with that force and hurt you (maybe more so), then if your timing is correct, and you have lead them to believe you are going to move a specific way and don't, (see Larry's post re: buildings) i think it is possible to move/throw/make them fall, using nothing but their own ENERGY and whatever INTENT you planted in THEIR head to cause unbalance, ie. no touch.

Not saying that's how it works, just how I think it might work

No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!

or am I being silly now?

cheers

Col.Clink
04-06-2004, 05:29 AM
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.
I disagree Hanna, I think you are quite correct.

Being committed is one thing, having intent behind it, is the other, which you don't hear alot about. Sure I can commit to attack someone, but my level of intent to hurt them, will determine the response.

If a person is commited to an attack, (that means full force), and their intention is to strike a specific point with that force and hurt you (maybe more so), then if your timing is correct, and you have lead them to believe you are going to move a specific way and don't, (see Larry's post re: buildings) i think it is possible to move/throw/make them fall, using nothing but their own ENERGY and whatever INTENT you planted in THEIR head to cause unbalance, ie. no touch.

Not saying that's how it works, just how I think it might work

No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!

or am I being silly now?

cheers

Hanna B
04-06-2004, 05:29 AM
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Maybe the discussion would be helped if you defined what you mean by "cooperating". I assume you do not mean "faking".

Hanna B
04-06-2004, 05:29 AM
Peter: a more precise version of your question. Could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Maybe the discussion would be helped if you defined what you mean by "cooperating". I assume you do not mean "faking".

PeterR
04-06-2004, 05:58 AM
No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!
Just to be clear. I stated quite early on that the threat of pain and injury can lead to no touch throws both inside and outside the dojo - timing is all important but the threat must be there. Mark's contention is that its not necessary but a matter of leading. I disagree.

Mark Balogh
04-06-2004, 06:03 AM
Uke was cooperative - plain and simple.

Fake is not the word I would use - preconditioned is. Yes even with Ueshiba M. or Tohei K.

A simple question - could the same technique be done against a martial artist outside of a selected group - could it be done to me?
Peter, I am not aiming this at you as a person, but honestly, I find your views I unbelievable. We are talking about O'SENSEI HERE!!! His feats are well documented and his abilities almost magical because of highly developed and refined skill. He trained extremely hard, he had vision, he had compassion.

Don't you think that there is a little more to it than what you say? I am just at a loss, maybe I have been lucky to have some excellent tuition filtered down to me through the Aikikai (in fact, I'm sure I am) but I am just lost for words.

Today I will try and help you, but I am leaving this thread now, I can see it is not a place for me, or what I have been taught. :ai: :ki: :do:

Chris Birke
04-06-2004, 10:13 AM
*sigh* If only these conversations took place in person, preferably in a bar; the AiKiPub. Things would be so much better...

*wipes tear from his eye*

Goetz Taubert
04-06-2004, 11:15 AM
So again, just to add another aspect of no touch throw, barely adressed in this thread:

Click on the chapter Taiki and wait for the picture to load up.

You ain't seen nothing yet (http://www.nishinojuku.com/english/e_keyword/e_key_top.html)....

Magma
04-06-2004, 11:59 AM
Mark -

Such hero worship is what colors your perception of what you see on film (of Morihei Ueshiba). I look at that and see a man first, so my perception is different than you who sees... "O-SENSEI!!" ...with his magically delicious aikido technique.

Tell me this, if you're still around: Were I to stand - *just* stand - in front of O-Sensei, would he be able to throw me without touching me?

What if I closed my eyes?

Both questions deserve to be answered, I think.

L. Camejo
04-06-2004, 01:01 PM
Lol, reading this thread has been positively hilarious.:D I think trolls have a purpose in the world - comic relief:p.

As far as no touch throws go, I have done them a few times with the "right" Ukes. Following Peter's take on the thing, I really believe it to be a matter of knowing (maybe even mentally projecting/otherwise controlling) how the Uke should react and by timing the technique in such a way to utilise Uke's conditioned reflex action in a way that helps you to complete the technique.

Personally I tend to hide my techniques from Uke (i.e. not let em know how I am going to respond until it's too late to resist) by using body language (mugamae), posture, metsuke etc. In these cases Uke does not even know what technique is happening by the time he is off balanced and on the way to the floor. In these cases, no touch throws don't happen for me mostly, as Uke gets no time to react.

However, if I take the same approach but change my timing to allow Uke a split second to see what is coming and react to it, I can get off the throw without having to touch him. The problem is in getting Uke to consistently react in a way that helps the technique instead of hinder it. I remember hearing stories from my instructor about competitors who would step into a shomen ate and take the hit instead of risking arching backward and losing balance to give Toshu a Yoko (partial point).

In one situation I was able to pull off Aigamae Ate (Irimi nage) during full resistance randori. Even as it was happening I realised that what caused Uke to hit the deck was the surprise of seeing the hand so close to his face after attacking, he instinctively pulled his head back, unbalancing himself and as I kept moving through he fell (Ushiro ukemi) just before my hand could touch him. Another person may have decided to duck under my hand, turn out or try something else that would feel natural to them, but not necessarily help my technique.

So I guess the key to getting this regularly is being able to be in the place to give Uke only one option to respond, the one that you want - just like in normal touch techniques.

The fear of Uke getting hit though is important at some level here I think. Ever try a no touch throw with a Bokken? Tends to work much easier :).

Just my thoughts.

L.C.:ai::ki:

Doka
04-06-2004, 01:52 PM
Mark "IF I SHOUT LOUD ENOUGH I MUST BE RIGHT" Balogh - Bye!

I wonder if we are all now on his ignore list? :D

By the way, if you don't touch Uke you don't throw Uke, they just fall over! :)

:ai:

- (the other) Mark ;)

cbrf4zr2
04-06-2004, 02:03 PM
So again, just to add another aspect of no touch throw, barely adressed in this thread:

Click on the chapter Taiki and wait for the picture to load up.

You ain't seen nothing yet (http://www.nishinojuku.com/english/e_keyword/e_key_top.html)....
I have some oceanfront property in Kansas for sale. PM me.

Bronson
04-06-2004, 02:46 PM
Let's talk about outside the aikido world...
The best no-touch throw I ever saw was during a pro-baseball game. The pitcher grazed the batter's head, the batter charged the pitcher and threw a big haymaker punch. The pitcher ducked and the batter went sprawling. It brought a tear to my eye it was so nice :rolleyes:

Bronson

kironin
04-06-2004, 03:16 PM
Uke was cooperative - plain and simple.

Fake is not the word I would use - preconditioned is. Yes even with Ueshiba M. or Tohei K.

A simple question - could the same technique be done against a martial artist outside of a selected group - could it be done to me?
I haven't really followed this thread because I have been very busy, but I have had the experience of doing no-touch throws on people not pre-conditioned and on people from other other martail arts. It works. That's all I know. I am not sure what the hoopla is about here.

Now there are some caveats. The first was, I wasn't trying to do a no-touch throw, it just happened because my lead was bang on at that moment and they followed. I am sure if I had been trying to do it, it would have failed in such a non-cooperative situation.

Perhaps not as stringent as those rarer cases but still useful as a challenge are when I do it when it feels right with a student who doesn't know it's coming (only if I really trust their ukemi). They are expecting contact.

The second caveat is that in regular training, where you do the no touch throw over and over again. Yes, I agree with Peter, Uke is being cooperative just like any other kata practice. The point is to work on the timing and connection so that in a real free-for-all your technical training on leading will allow the possibility of a no-touch throw to occur. You are training yourself to lead someone's mind through the visual sense rather than the kinesthetic sense. Just like any other technique in randori, it's likely to fail if you TRY to do it or ANTICIPATE doing it rather than simply be doing what is appropriate and it occurs because of the interaction between nage and uke.

I am very clear with students about what exactly is going on. That like anything we do, there is a continuum. Initially, nothing you do will be no-touch without some form of cooperation. As you get better, occasionally you get it just right, but still within the confines of cooperative practice. Eventually, in cooperative practice you have it down most of the time. Only then in free situations will start to be a possible outcome. It's never gonna be a guaranteed outcome. You can only raise the odds through training and always be prepared to follow through when it doesn't happen.

best,

Craig

ps.

Close your eyes and I guarantee it won't be no touch. ;-) though that can be like uke just standing there and neither grabbing nor striking.

Goetz Taubert
04-06-2004, 04:50 PM
@ Edward Frederick

Nice proposal! I'll give you a black painted pair of glasses for your oceanside property. :cool:

So you can put them on quickly beeing confronted with pictures, you may not like. Hope you'll feel better soon.

willy_lee
04-06-2004, 05:30 PM
The second caveat is that in regular training, where you do the no touch throw over and over again. Yes, I agree with Peter, Uke is being cooperative just like any other kata practice. The point is to work on the timing and connection so that in a real free-for-all your technical training on leading will allow the possibility of a no-touch throw to occur.
I like very much of what you are saying, but I wonder: is there any good in training no-touch throws in regular (kata) training then? Wouldn't it be better to train the touching throw, and explain (later) that this can manifest itself without actual contact under quite specific circumstances? You can still work on timing, connection, and leading, but students won't be tempted to try no-touch throws when they can't.

Just throwing that out there :)
I remember hearing stories from my instructor about competitors who would step into a shomen ate and take the hit instead of risking arching backward and losing balance to give Toshu a Yoko (partial point).And if people will do this to avoid a point in a contest, they may do this in a real fight too. Lots of situations where you'd rather take a punch in the face, especially if you can slip it enough so it doesn't hit flush, than fall down onto the ground, where you have lost mobility, initiative, face, are vulnerable to boot parties, etc. Unless nage has a knife. That changes lots of things. :)

=wl

Chris Birke
04-06-2004, 06:44 PM
"Wouldn't it be better to train the touching throw, and explain (later) that this can manifest itself without actual contact under quite specific circumstances?"

Hmm... that seems pretty logical.

"And if people will do this to avoid a point in a contest, they may do this in a real fight too. Lots of situations where you'd rather take a punch in the face, especially if you can slip it enough so it doesn't hit flush..."

A strike to the jaw, neck, eyes, groin is too much, but I'd cover that and take one or two of almost anything else if it meant I was getting close enough for neck or body control. I've shot on people who hurt their hand punching my the top of my head. (sprawl first, THEN strike!)

Lots of strikes (often taught as "devistating") are actually more "nearly useless" against someone who is pissed off or trained.

The best example of this is the rear elbow strike as a defense to the bear hug.

I had to bite myself not to laugh when I watched a teacher set this up then wiggle in an attempt try to make it look deadly and convincing. The point of the elbow made no contact with anything. No space was created. It was more of a rear tricep strike... "This is absolutely why you never want to get this close to an Aikidoist!" *sigh*

kironin
04-06-2004, 06:46 PM
I like very much of what you are saying, but I wonder: is there any good in training no-touch throws in regular (kata) training then? Wouldn't it be better to train the touching throw, and explain (later) that this can manifest itself without actual contact under quite specific circumstances? You can still work on timing, connection, and leading, but students won't be tempted to try no-touch throws when they can't.

Just throwing that out there :)

=wl
Well, maybe it's not politically correct in some corners but I think no-touch throws are by and large a waste of time for beginners to practice in general. It's really for upper kyu levels and dan levels to begin glimmer what is possible. At that point kata training should be taking on more subtle nuances of interaction and students are already very familiar with "touch" throws. If anything you are trying top get them to start to really appreciate how little force is necessary if rhythm and connection are good.

There really is too much to teach already to less experienced students without trying to get them to grok no-touch throws. They may see it happen and sometimes as I may add it in to demonstrate what's possible given the principles they are learning and what is a natural extension of what they are learning.

Craig

willy_lee
04-06-2004, 07:00 PM
Well, maybe it's not politically correct in some corners but I think no-touch throws are by and large a waste of time for beginners to practice in general.I like this very much! Especially from someone who teaches Ki Aikido :)
I've shot on people who hurt their hand punching my the top of my head.I've heard people advocate head-butting into punches. If you're getting hit anyway, might as well try to break his hand for it. :)

Boxers are taught to keep a relaxed fist until just before impact. If you force the impact before a boxer expects it, you may well crunch some knuckles. And your forehead is one of the thickest bits of bone in your body.

=wl

Doka
04-06-2004, 07:00 PM
One thing that is definitely of benifit for beginers to practice is no touch avoidance. Moving off the line of attack without palming it!

It is often the hardest lesson my students have found to learn - to move!

As for the no touch "causing Uke to fall" - well that is all about timing and position. If the attacker is trained as a striker (which most Aikidoka are not!), then this is virtually imposible, as a trained striker (eg. Kung Fu, not football :)) will attack on balance. The throwing EVERYTHING in to it attacker will be easy, as he throws himself at you, you are not there, he falls, but you haven't thrown him (stuck record, I know ;)).

It can work, but why risk it? Palm the attack and maintain control. I believe control to be a vital part of Aikido, on the part of Uke (not to hurt their Sh'te/Tori/Nage :D) and on the part of Sh'te/Tori/Nage :D to have control over their Uke and themselves (so as to not their Uke).

Peace :ai:

PeterR
04-06-2004, 07:26 PM
One thing that is definitely of benifit for beginers to practice is no touch avoidance. Moving off the line of attack without palming it!

It is often the hardest lesson my students have found to learn - to move!
Oh yes. Lots and lots of taisabaki drills for us.

I also agree with the difficulty of dealing with a trained striker. In fact unbalancing a grabber by not being where he expects is a cake walk when compared to someone who understands how and when to deliver a punch or kick. Of course the opposite side is that someone who trains long and hard at anything is not usually the type to go chasing after little old me. A wild puch is just like a grab in this respect.

Chris Birke
04-06-2004, 08:49 PM
That's why mirco crocop is a scarey, scarey man.