PDA

View Full Version : Is aikido unique?


Please visit our sponsor:
 

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


Don_Modesto
06-02-2004, 06:11 PM
If so how?

My answer:

Ethically--no: Most martial arts--especially GENDAI BUDO--claim pretty much the same ethic.

As a blend of Buddhist/Kami spirituality--no: That pretty much defines the MICHI.

As a blend of DR and Omotokyo--yes, pretty much by definition unique. (But I don't know how Omotokyo differs from other branches of Jpn spirituality...)

What say you?

Thanks.

Jordan Steele
06-02-2004, 07:25 PM
Wasn't this thread posted recently. Anyway, no I don't think Aikido is unique becuase it is relatiely modern in the martial arts world, however the person practicing it can make it unique. Aikido's techniques are not original or very complicated. A unique martial art would be something like Capoeira or some Kung Fu animal forms.

Mark Bilson
06-03-2004, 04:04 AM
The element that I believe makes Aikido unique is Takemusu Aiki............The concepts required to achieve Takemusu Aiki go beyond any thought process.................Once achieved it gives a person new eyes........

Mark Bilson
www.roleystoneaiki.com

drDalek
06-03-2004, 04:23 AM
The element that I believe makes Aikido unique is Takemusu Aiki............The concepts required to achieve Takemusu Aiki go beyond any thought process.................Once achieved it gives a person new eyes........

Mark Bilson
www.roleystoneaiki.com

Hey, how about defining what you believe "Takemusu Aiki" to be so that the rest of us know what you are talking about.

SeiserL
06-03-2004, 09:58 AM
IMHO, when we view the uniqueness of things, we create separation and distinctions that prevent us from seeing the common denominators that unify. Uniqueness also often implies ego judgement, that my uniqueness is better than your uniqueness. I thought that part of the belief system inherent in Aikido is to connect, harmonize, and unify.

While I see differences in emphasis, there are probably a lot more similiarities than uniquenesses.

I don't think Aikido is unique, it only my choice of training.

George S. Ledyard
06-03-2004, 10:26 AM
Hey, how about defining what you believe "Takemusu Aiki" to be so that the rest of us know what you are talking about.

Wynand,
This is a fundamental concept in Aikido. You should take the trouble to research this yourself. Virtually every good book on Aikido will have something about this.

Bronson
06-03-2004, 10:35 AM
Wynand,
This is a fundamental concept in Aikido. You should take the trouble to research this yourself. Virtually every good book on Aikido will have something about this.

I think Wynand was taking a poke at Mark re. this thread (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5734)....but I might be wrong on that.

Bronson

Mark Bilson
06-03-2004, 06:39 PM
Wynand,
I have already defined Takemusu Aiki and how to achieve it on the thread "takemusu Aiki basics". But you did not understand or comprehend my beliefs which are the result of my own personal training and walk on the path. Instead you chose to cast off my words as "spiritual mumbo jumbo".............when in fact they clearly define the path of Takemusu.........Your cup is full........enjoy your search........

Mark Bilson
www.roleystoneaiki.com

senshincenter
06-05-2004, 04:43 PM
If I may say so: The reasonable man can always mark differences without the need to condemn any one difference under another. Therefore, noting the uniqueness of something should not be an act that we should a priori intimately link with being unreasonable.

That the Founder believed his practice to be unique is beyond dispute. For example, he writes:

“The ‘aiki’ of which conventional martial artists spoke and the ‘aiki’ of which I speak are fundamentally different in both essence and substance. It is my sincere hope that you will ponder this deeply.” (Enlightenment Through Aikido, pp.29)

In my opinion, that difference, that which we are advised to ponder over deeply, is found within the last tenet of which Mr. Modesto wrote: the element of how Osensei’s martial praxis (i.e. Daito Ryu, etc.) was combined with the religiosity of Omoto-kyo.

If this thread was titled, “Did Osensei believe his art to be unique in comparison to other martial arts?” The answer is “yes”. If we answer “no” to the current question, “Is Aikido unique?,” it would seem that we would then have to go on in proving how Osensei was mistaken/wrong, rather than just saying “oh, all arts have something to offer, etc.” (no matter how true that may be). This is not to say that simply answering “yes” to these questions frees us from the Founder’s call to ponder things more deeply. In fact, an affirmation to these questions requires more contemplative-practice than were we to answer them in the negative.

The Founder, at his time, was unique, quite alone, when he flavored his martial arts training not (solely) with the traditional Buddhist, Confucian, and Shinto elements that nearly every other art did – when he spiced things greatly with Omoto-kyo theology. He, like the New Religion Omoto-kyo, and his art, were saying things and combining things in revolutionary ways. Borrowing heavily from Omoto-kyo, he marked his art and his training as completely distinct from what came before (at least in regards to what we are mostly aware of) when he said:

“Aikido is not the art of fighting using brute strength or deadly weapons, or the use of physical power or deadly weapons to destroy one’s enemies, but a way of harmonizing the world and unifying the human race as one family. It is a path of service that works through the spirit of God’s love and universal harmony by the fulfillment of each individual’s respective role.” (underline emphasis my own)

Most techniques of Aikido are found in other arts. Most arts can readily agree with what is said above but not underlined. However, when Osensei said the part I have underlined, well, no one was talking like that at that time (even today, few do – even within Aikido). No one combined a given set of techniques, a given way of training, a universal deity whose primary characteristic is Love, with a sense of having a mission in one’s life such that one is surrounded by divineness all around and within. Together, these elements mark Aikido’s uniqueness. In the face of all the other divergent and various expressions of the art we see today (those things that one is able to do with Aikido’s techniques, with the training, with the philosophy, etc., in apparently independent ways), an aikidoka must always return back to, reference back to, this combination of elements that truly mark Aikido as unique. For if not, the core message of Aikido, that from which its namesake is derived, will never be pondered over deeply enough – never deeply enough to understand what is Aikido and what is not Aikido (whether it goes by a different name or by the same name).

Thank you,
dmv

senshincenter
06-05-2004, 08:35 PM
I see that my emphasis did not come through in the paste. The part I think that makes Aikido unique as provided for in this last quote is the part of the quote that goes, "...but a way of harmonizing the world and unifying the human race as one family. It is a path of service that works through the spirit of God's love and universal harmony by the fulfillment of each individual's respective role."

sorry for the initial lacl of clarity.
dmv

kironin
06-06-2004, 02:42 AM
If so how?

My answer:

Ethically--no: Most martial arts--especially GENDAI BUDO--claim pretty much the same ethic.


I would say what planet are you living on ?

Claim it maybe. Expressed through actions of their forms maybe NOT.

but the most unique part to me, as contentious as the family can be,
is the sense of community that often welcomes me wherever I travel.

When I describe that sort of thing, karate teachers and others look at me like I am crazy. Unimaginable in their world.

Craig

Don_Modesto
06-06-2004, 01:04 PM
I would say what planet are you living on ?

...er, the one where Shioda Gozo drives the back of his UKE's into the fire hydrant, er, mat from a running attack;

...the one where Isoyama bounces his UKE's another 8 inches off his shoulders before dropping him onto the curb, er, mat. ;)

Claim it maybe. Expressed through actions of their forms maybe NOT.[/

Forms?

The devil can quote scripture to his ends. Thinking somehow that the way we READ OUT ethics from techniques implies that they are IN the techniques is mistaking the map for the terrain. Aikido can kill and stikers can modulate their strikes. There are no givens with form.

Watch the Aikikai's Saotome punch and kick his UKE in the Friendship Demo; some of those strikes would have broken a neck at UKE's velocity. Next, listen to folks who've seen the JKA's Oishi drive a punch into a man's throat reddening the skin above the carotic without hurting or even dazing him.

When Osensei said, "Aikido is the universe" he didn't footnote is with, "except for all that nasty kicking they do in the Ryukyus." If he created something new with aikido, I don't think it as in the ethical sphere.

But I agree on the congeniality of the aikido community.

Thanks for responding.

Hanna B
06-06-2004, 02:52 PM
However, when Osensei said the part I have underlined, well, no one was talking like that at that time (even today, few do -- even within Aikido). No one combined a given set of techniques, a given way of training, a universal deity whose primary characteristic is Love, with a sense of having a mission in one's life such that one is surrounded by divineness all around and within. Together, these elements mark Aikido's uniqueness. In the face of all the other divergent and various expressions of the art we see today (those things that one is able to do with Aikido's techniques, with the training, with the philosophy, etc., in apparently independent ways), an aikidoka must always return back to, reference back to, this combination of elements that truly mark Aikido as unique. For if not, the core message of Aikido, that from which its namesake is derived, will never be pondered over deeply enough -- never deeply enough to understand what is Aikido and what is not Aikido (whether it goes by a different name or by the same name).

What you are saying is that there hardly are any people who actually practise aikido...?

senshincenter
06-06-2004, 03:21 PM
Not trying to duck your question at all, and being as sincere as possible, I think that is a question that each of us have to answer only about ourselves. Though your question is interesting, I think it would be one that I would only entertain with a direct student - and then only so as to shine more light on our own perspectives and actions, etc., regarding our own practice in light of Osensei's. In other words, I think your question is a question for reflection, not necessarily for answering.

Sorry I couldn't be more help,
d

Hanna B
06-06-2004, 03:43 PM
Pardon me? :confused:



If I am practising ikkyo with an angry mind, trying to learn to get better than the others so that I feel proud of myself - either I am doing aikido, or I am not. I am not a hungry mind begging you to answer my questions and enlighten me. I am questioning your views on aikido and aikido training in general as this is what this thread is about. If you do not want this to be questioned - fine with me.

If aikido training (defined as doing aikido techniques) most of the time does not carry your hallmarks of aikido, then I do not think much of your beautiful "ethics" expressed in aikido training as a description of what is so special about aikido. Sorry!

I have ten years in aikido, but don't currently train in the art. When my current teacher told me and my training partner "Good! Now you look like two budoka who cooperate" I was shocked, because I thought cooperation was an aikido specific prestige word...

senshincenter
06-08-2004, 10:26 AM
I think you need to re-read what I just wrote. I wasn't at all talking "down" to you by trying to enlighten you, etc. Saying your question is a question of reflection is not a rejection of your question - it is a contextualization of your question. After all, there is a big difference between the questions, "Was the Founder's Aikido unique?" (which I proposed we should and could be asking) and "Do hardly any people practice Aikido today?" The first one deals with history, the second one deals with a subjectivity - one that though may be based upon historiography is still a personal view. Personal views are not facts. What Aikido was for the Founder can be asked and aswered. What Aikido is now or is becoming cannot be addressed outside of personal viewpoints. If however you asked me, "Are hardly any folks practicing Aikido as the Founder understood that term?", the answer, which I already gave in the first post, is factually, "Hardly any people are practicing Aikido today as the Founder understood that term." But to go from there to a statement on the practice of other folks concerning the validity of that practice, which is what I assumed is at the heart of your question, assumes that the Founder as a person is the final authority on what Aikido is and/or is to become. This latter assumption I do not agree with. And I can also say that such a monopolization of form and content is not at all what the Founder would agree with either. Both his Omoto-kyo influences and his own personal insights (made known in his writings) allow for great change, evolution, transformation, and expression of the art. To say that one can and should use personal viewpoints as a point of reflection is to give them validity. To say that one should or even can use them as a philosophical bedrock for judgments which carry with them the air of being testament is to say a load of junk. In saying that your question is a question of reflection, and not a question to be answered objectively, is to provide it with the former while saving it from the latter.

dmv

AsimHanif
06-08-2004, 02:54 PM
I think Aikido is quite unique. Much in the same manner as is jazz. Yes it has the ingredients of pre existing arts but the mix and results are revolutionary.

George S. Ledyard
06-08-2004, 09:43 PM
Aikido is obviously unique as no practitioner of any other martial art will admit that they have anything in common with Aikido. 50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong!

kironin
06-09-2004, 02:03 AM
...er, the one where Shioda Gozo drives the back of his UKE's into the fire hydrant, er, mat from a running attack;

...the one where Isoyama bounces his UKE's another 8 inches off his shoulders before dropping him onto the curb, er, mat. ;)
...
Watch the Aikikai's Saotome punch and kick his UKE in the Friendship Demo; some of those strikes would have broken a neck at UKE's velocity. Next, listen to folks who've seen the JKA's Oishi drive a punch into a man's throat reddening the skin above the carotic without hurting or even dazing him.


:crazy:

You know, thanks for reminding me why I put up with some of the nonsense and still remain in Ki Society where there is actually some connection between our words and our actions.

:D

Craig

Don_Modesto
06-09-2004, 09:17 AM
You know, thanks for reminding me why I put up with some of the nonsense and still remain in Ki Society where there is actually some connection between our words and our actions.

:) Ha!

Cute rejoinder.

Ron Tisdale
06-09-2004, 09:56 AM
You know, thanks for reminding me why I put up with some of the nonsense and still remain in Ki Society where there is actually some connection between our words and our actions.

Uh, I'm not sure how tongue in cheek you meant that...

From what little exposure I've had to Saotome Sensei's students, I'd have to say their words and actions match up pretty darn well. Even more so because Saotome Sensei is not afraid to push the boundries of technique. Safely.

Ron

Bronson
06-09-2004, 02:39 PM
Uh, I'm not sure how tongue in cheek you meant that...

I was thinking something similar to Craig's post. I don't do Ki society but Seidokan which was started by Rod Kobayashi Sensei, a student of Tohei Sensei.

One of the founding ideas behind Seidokan is the protection of uke. All the techniques that I can think of are done in a way that someone with NO ukemi skill could receive the technique with no (or at least minimal) injury. The possibility to escalate to something more damaging is there but our baseline technique is gentle.

In pursuit of his goal of aikido that didn't harm an untrained attacker Kobayashi Sensei modified techniques to meet that goal or removed techniques from the Seidokan syllabus that he felt couldn't be modified to meet that goal. Some of these modified/removed techniques are staples of aikido around the world.

Examples:
We don't do head controls in the standard syllabus
koshi nage have been removed
our standard kotegaeshi sits uke down instead of putting them into a breakfall
irimi nage has been modified to sit uke down and roll them back
little if any atemi in most dojo


Now, the instructors in Seidokan are free to add to the standard syllabus as they desire. So you can find dojo with atemi and what not. I'm talking about the standard techniques the organization requires on rank testing....the "official" syllabus.

So my point of this long ramble is that I agree with Craig in that we try to keep our training congruent with our philosophy. If we were always spouting about protection of uke and loving protection for the attacker (which we do spout off about :) ) but then learned our techniques in a way that would injure somebody who wasn't trained for it....it wouldn't feel "right".

For quite a while I had a bit of a problem with the fact that standard techniques in other styles had been removed from ours. Mostly I thought the exclusion of koshi nage was unnecessary. I figured that thousands of people around the world learned to take ukemi from koshi nage without injury, we could too. Then I started reading more of Kobayashi Sensei's writings and talking to my sensei about the history of Seidokan and what Kobayashi Sensei was trying to do with it. I realized that it took a lot of guts on the part of Kobayashi Sensei to really look at those techniques under the magnifying glass of his philosophy and to remove the ones that couldn't be modified to fit with his goal.

Wow, where did all that come from :D

Bronson

Ron Tisdale
06-09-2004, 02:52 PM
I guess I have a very different view of aikido..philosophically and on the mat (man, koshi is one of my favs! I don't do it very well...but it feels great to try!)

But thanks for sharing your views. I still haven't seen someone point out inconsistancies in what Saotome says and what he does. But I'll keep listening; I learn something new every day.

Ron

senshincenter
06-09-2004, 02:54 PM
Bronson,

Up front: I'm one of the opinion that Aikido's ideas of mutual benefit and/or non-violence is a matter of the heart-mind of the practitioner - not the architecture of one's waza. But I am very curious about what you have said. I do think that it is possible to develop an art that can address some self-defense situations without inflicting injury, etc., upon an attacker. The best I've seen at that, and perhaps outside of common sense, is Gracie BJJ - as far as their controlling of the opponent for the purposes of maintaining tactical dominance. You can hardly find a better balance of not injuring someone while defending yourself fully (preventing yourself from being injured). It's hard for me however to picture what you are saying concerning Aikido waza. I'm not sure I understand how you can make someone that doesn't want to sit down, sit down, without injuring them, with either kote-gaeshi and especially irimi nage. I can see it for someone that doesn't mind sitting down, and/or for someone that understands if they sit down things would stop hurting and the chance for injury would become very slim - but these are all ukemi skills. However, I can't see it for the person that is trying to "get you" and/or "stop you" (as in arrest and control situations for law enforcement agents) and has no knowledge whatsoever of ukemi, etc. Is there a video somewhere - on the net - where I could take a look at the modifications you are mentioning.

Also - what about techniques like Katagatame or Nikyo? Are these also left out of your curriculum (like koshi nage) or have they too been modified - and if so - in what way?

Please/thanks,
david

Joe Hansson
06-09-2004, 03:03 PM
Examples:
We don't do head controls in the standard syllabus
koshi nage have been removed
our standard kotegaeshi sits uke down instead of putting them into a breakfall
irimi nage has been modified to sit uke down and roll them back
little if any atemi in most dojo


Did they leave any aikido in this art? And whats wrong with taking ukemi, Is not ukemi essential to learning techniques and through them also aikido?

IMO aikido is unique both regarding ethics and otherwise from other budo. I do however believe that the founders aikido was less unique than the mainstream aikido of today is.

Don_Modesto
06-09-2004, 03:19 PM
I do however believe that the founders aikido was less unique than the mainstream aikido of today is.

Whoa!

Now there's another shoe waiting to drop...

Pray tell, how?

Bronson
06-09-2004, 03:50 PM
Up front: I'm one of the opinion that Aikido's ideas of mutual benefit and/or non-violence is a matter of the heart-mind of the practitioner - not the architecture of one's waza.

Agreed. But I would also say that we train the heart/mind through the physical in aikido. So how are we training our heart/mind to be loving and protective if our physical training is to dump the attacker on his skull :D

Before we get too far into this I'd like to say that the way we train is perfect, for me. I understand that it doesn't work for everybody and it doesn't have what others want. That's fine with me. They can train how they want and I'll respect that. I'm of the opinion that diversity in philosophy/techniques is a good thing overall and welcome the opportunity to experience other schools/styles methods. But, I will remain at hear an aikifruity :)


The best I've seen at that, and perhaps outside of common sense, is Gracie BJJ - as far as their controlling of the opponent for the purposes of maintaining tactical dominance.

Agreed again. My sensei has background in judo. Because of this we do chokes. There are others who don't think chokes are very aiki (whatever that means). My opinion on it is that a well executed choke will put an attacker out with no lasting damage---how much more aiki can you get.

It's hard for me however to picture what you are saying concerning Aikido waza.

I'll try but you'll have to excuse the limitations of my writing skill and the written word. :D

I'm not sure I understand how you can make someone that doesn't want to sit down, sit down, without injuring them, with either kote-gaeshi

Do you think it would be easier to get them to sit down...which is something they do everyday or flip over completely upside down...which is something most adults never do. The mechanics of the technique rely on the same stuff everybody else's does, timing, off balancing, positioning, etc. The biggest mechanical difference I can see is that instead of turning the wrist out to the side we bring the elbow straight down under the hand. This breaks the balance in a downward direction. Other people on the boards have described it as a variation of kotegaeshi, it just happens to be our standard version.

...and especially irimi nage.

Well, our irimi nage looks so completely different from anything resembling irimi nage I've seen that it really is more of a kokyu nage (I think they may have officially changed it to that actually). It's difficult to explain with only words but I'll try.

Uke attacks katate kosa dori

As uke comes in nage tenkans to position themselves hip to hip facing the same direction as uke. While doing this nage is leading uke's attacking hand away and down breaking uke's balance. As nage position's themself next to uke their free hand goes across ukes shoulders (think if you had put your arm across the shoulders of an old friend).

Now we are next to uke with their balance broken through their attacking hand and our other arm across their shoulders. At this point we do a hara drop. This is where we drop our weight down through their body and attacking arm. This buckles their knees and allows us to tip them backward.

Have you seen the Ki society "bounce" (for lack of a better word)? Our hara drop is like that only without the initial up. We suddenly drop our center from our normal standing postition and bounce it back up to our normal standing position. This is one of our main kuzushi methods.

I told you it was hard to describe :D It's like trying to describe a color to someone who's never seen it :confused:

... I can see it for someone that doesn't mind sitting down, and/or for someone that understands if they sit down things would stop hurting and the chance for injury would become very slim - but these are all ukemi skills.

Like so many techniques it requires proper disbalancing of uke. I really think we just disbalance in a different direction.

However, I can't see it for the person that is trying to "get you" and/or "stop you" (as in arrest and control situations for law enforcement agents) and has no knowledge whatsoever of ukemi, etc..

Again, near impossible to describe. I have no real life experience with controlling someone in anything like an arrest and control situation. We do have several officers in our dojo, a couple of them work in the jail setting, we also have someone who works in a psychiatric hospital and he has probably more out-of-dojo use of aikido than anyone I know. They have all related stories of how they were able to control a violent person while not causing them injury using the principles we follow. The cool thing for them is that nobody who witnessed it even realized any aikido technique had been applied.

Is there a video somewhere - on the net - where I could take a look at the modifications you are mentioning.

None that I'm aware of :(

Also - what about techniques like Katagatame or Nikyo? Are these also left out of your curriculum (like koshi nage) or have they too been modified - and if so - in what way?


Not sure what katagatame is but nikyo is still there. Let me clarify that our locks can (and do) still inflict pain but there is a BIIIG difference between pain and injury.

Hope that made some kind of sense :drool:

Bronson

kironin
06-09-2004, 03:57 PM
Examples:
We don't do head controls in the standard syllabus
koshi nage have been removed
our standard kotegaeshi sits uke down instead of putting them into a breakfall
irimi nage has been modified to sit uke down and roll them back
little if any atemi in most dojo


Now, the instructors in Seidokan are free to add to the standard syllabus as they desire. So you can find dojo with atemi and what not. I'm talking about the standard techniques the organization requires on rank testing....the "official" syllabus.
...



You are closer to Ki Society than you know. ;)

Pretty much what you described is the path outlined by Tohei Sensei, Kobayashi Sensei's teacher.

One point however, koshinage isn't really gone, a lot of the throws were converted to sudori moves and kokyunages where the throw happens by timing, position and lead.

Anyway the arguement in Ki Society against koshinage really isn't about safety of uke. Actually, if you know how to do koshinage well, it's quite possible to assist uke's landing so it is fairly soft and not any more potentially injurious than many other throws we do. That's certainly expected in judo and aikido classes I have been in where it was taught. The KS arguement against it is that it is a too easliy blocked throw by an uke who has a good understanding of mind and body coordination and that there are alternatives that are very hard to block.

By the way, if a 5th dan in Yoshinkan I know is to be believed, the Yoshinkan syllabus doesn't have any koshinage either. So it's not that universal in the aikido world.

Craig

kironin
06-09-2004, 04:03 PM
Have you seen the Ki society "bounce" (for lack of a better word)? Our hara drop is like that only without the initial up. We suddenly drop our center from our normal standing postition and bounce it back up to our normal standing position. This is one of our main kuzushi methods.


Up ?

we often throw by dropping one-point.

up or "bounce up" are considered poor ways of thinking about it.

think more like music -- the emphasis is on the downbeat.

Craig

kironin
06-09-2004, 04:20 PM
Bronson,
It's hard for me however to picture what you are saying concerning Aikido waza. I'm not sure I understand how you can make someone that doesn't want to sit down, sit down, without injuring them, with either kote-gaeshi and especially irimi nage. Please/thanks,
david


Very simple :cool:
You don't make them do anything. You go with what they are trying to do and lead it to place where their options to standup are gone.

In the last bit I am actually paraphrasing Chuck Clark Sensei (Tomiki orig.) or Dennis Hooker Sensei (ASU) or both.

You can certainly see some of this in 5 min. Aikido Journal video clip of Tohei Sensei tossing Yamada Sensei around in 1965 in Florida.

Craig

George S. Ledyard
06-09-2004, 05:02 PM
I'm not sure I understand how you can make someone that doesn't want to sit down, sit down, without injuring them, with either kote-gaeshi and especially irimi nage. I can see it for someone that doesn't mind sitting down, and/or for someone that understands if they sit down things would stop hurting and the chance for injury would become very slim - but these are all ukemi skills. However, I can't see it for the person that is trying to "get you" and/or "stop you" (as in arrest and control situations for law enforcement agents) and has no knowledge whatsoever of ukemi, etc. Is there a video somewhere - on the net - where I could take a look at the modifications you are mentioning.
Hi David,
I don't know precisely what these guys are doing but from the description it sounds a lot like what I did with the takedowns for our Defensive Tactics program. Most of the takedowns in our system will drop someone very effectively on his butt, not because he recognizes that it will be better for him to do so but rather because he has no choice but to do so. I have done them on a class of three hundred plus pound club security (read Bouncers) students who knew no ukemi whatever with no problem. My police students have also successfully executed these on the street.

Of course, like any technqiue, if you are talking about applying them on an opponent who is also well trained and has an understanding of how counters might work, then you may need some applicatio of atemi to effectively execute these techniques

kironin
06-09-2004, 05:45 PM
Of course, like any technqiue, if you are talking about applying them on an opponent who is also well trained and has an understanding of how counters might work, then you may need some applicatio of atemi to effectively execute these techniques


Or you need a more subtle understanding of relaxation and ki.

:straightf

Craig

senshincenter
06-09-2004, 06:13 PM
Thanks for the replies.

Well I can say now that I have seen what you have described. Those variations are actually quite common in and outside of Aikido. In fact, I have seen them more outside of Aikido than in Aikido. They are even present in arts like Krav Maga and Dennis Survival JJ - which make no such claims about not hurting folks, etc. – go figure.

Just a couple of points of clarification:

a. I was not referring to the choking aspect of GBJJ when I was talking about not harming an opponent. I would definitely include choking in the harmful category. When choking is practiced in the field, it is always risky because of the lack of customary feedback that one receives there - in comparison to what one receives in the dojo. It not so easy (much less than one would think who has not had field experience) to determine when one should stop choking - when an opponent has passed out - in the midst of an actual violent encounter. Department policies concerning chokeholds across the nation’s law enforcement agencies are enough proof of that - if one has not experienced this themselves. I was referring to the way GBJJ uses various strategies and tactics, along with the ground, to maintain a position of dominance. From said position, one the attacker can remain completely safe (even safe from pain), the defender can easily escalate in violence if they so desire (but do not at all have to in order to maintain their safety), and the defender face little to no chance of harm being inflicted upon them. By such a means - again by an art that posits it no such "moral" claims as those suggested here - a person trained in such tactics can very easily and within reason (granting a particular strategic environment) simply exhaust the will to violence out of an attacker without ever really attacking them back. I just do not see that kind of potential in anything that could be called an Aikido waza per se – not even in your variations. If you’d like to support the distinction being made by Mr. Hocker, I would think it would have to be done with something more akin to what I have just described (whether one wants to address the limited “street” applications of such a strategy or not).

b. Mr. Griffin wrote:

“Do you think it would be easier to get them to sit down...which is something they do everyday or flip over completely upside down...which is something most adults never do.”

And Mr. Hocker wrote:

“You don't make them do anything. You go with what they are trying to do and lead it to place where their options to standup are gone. “

Respectfully, there is some faulty logic going on here. Simply because a person does something more often per day than another thing (even if this other thing never happens in their lifetime), it does not follow that one (nage) will therefore be able to “expect,” “make,” “inspire,” or “allow” them to do a given thing by whatever it is he/she (nage) is doing. In other words, just because more people sit down every day than do a front breakfall, it does not mean that I can “expect” them, “inspire” them, “allow” them, “make” them, etc. to sit down when I do kotegaeshi on them. It would be one thing if the lock itself, or if the move itself, would put forth a biomechanical architecture that would directly anatomically position the attacker to sit down. I agree, allowing someone to sit down as a result of taking their balance, etc., would inflict little to no pain or injury – but that is not what you have in these variations. If you are having your uke “sit down” then it is because of them knowing ukemi and/or because of how your training assumptions are unknowingly contributing to the apparent “validity” of such a response. I do not think you need to be an aikidoka to realize this, or even a martial artist, it is just straight biomechanics. I imagine you are actually having your uke roll around their homolateral hip (rather than taking the breakfall and rather than sitting down) – and undoubtedly your variation of kotegaeshi allows for such a thing – but so too does the “standard” variation when done at slow speeds (so that the homolateral foot cannot act as a fulcrum for lift and/or rotation). While the standard variation done as slow speeds may have a chance of inflicting more “pain” – since more points of articulation are being affected – that should be no problem for you since you are allowing Nikyo to do the exact same thing (in a way).

In the same vein, leading a person to a place where their options to stand up are gone does not mean that they will sit down. It only means that gravity will have a direct vertical effect on their center of gravity and that that effect will take place outside of their base of support. The result of that can entail nearly any posture – a multitude of postures that has “sitting down” on the improbable side of things (particularly within the two techniques under discussion). (Note: The second you do not let an attacker fulfill their attack upon you, you are making that person do something they do not want to do – which is “not attack you”. When I used the word “make” I did not mean to imply “forcing a given technique upon an improperly fitted situation.”)

c. I too agree – a multitude of expression is a positive thing. I do not wish to discredit anything that you have found to be “just right” for you. We ourselves train in your version of Kote-gaeshi – quite often. We have many ways of doing that technique. However, with all due respect, I do not think that the distinction you are wishing to support with your post – the one between those versions of Aikido which find their uniqueness in the “protecting of uke” (itself supposedly located in a “consistency” of word and action) and those versions of Aikido which are different from the former in that they only offer what has to be considered a “contradiction” between what is said and what is done – is a valid one.

Due to the lack of a specifically determined anatomical positioning which has a person “sit down” – your versions are as every bit reliant on ukemi to prevent injury and/or pain as any other system’s versions (particularly if you allow for the slowing down of all waza no matter what the version) – this we can say even while not allowing for the fact that a lot of training goes into keeping the back of one’s head off of the street (which while maybe not a problem for your version of irimi nage, nevertheless remains a problem for your version of kotegaeshi). While your descriptions were excellent, the weight needed for the initial distinction, or contrast, that Mr. Hocker wished to draw is simply not there.

My position, as I stated up front, is that one should not look for it in this place at all. The heart of Aikido is in the heart of the practitioner – or not at all. Or more relative to our modern era: While rubber bullets may do something to decrease the mortality of a combative encounter, they do not make a person less violent, less filled with rage, less filled with hatred, less filled with anger, less filled with fear, etc. In fact, they may do the exact opposite – since fatalities are no longer the strong deterrent against extreme engagements that they used to be. We, at our dojo, train in what would most likely be called a very violent form of Aikido. Yet, I have not ever been in one actual physical encounter since my training has matured – not even one out of control verbal argument. None of my deshi have either – with nearly half of them being in law enforcement. Nor do we have clicks in our dojo, outcasts, least favorite uke, etc. I’m not sure what all that says, but it seems like it could at least afford some skepticism concerning the position that if you train hard, martially, traditionally, intensely, relying on uke’s great skill to protect him/herself, etc., so as to become quite proficient in human on human violence that you are inconsistent with the art or with the Founder’s understanding of that art. Some benefit of the doubt is in order – it would seem. And, perhaps in that doubt, one could gain enough perspective by which to more carefully reconsider the “consistency” (and the apparent “uniqueness”) of their own position which is different.

Thank you,
dmv

senshincenter
06-09-2004, 06:35 PM
Hi George,

Yes, I recognized the versions once they were described. As you know, our program deals more with the extremes of arrest and control (situations that are admittedly rare) - which obviously includes the last category of person you mentioned. However, we have found that a very stubborn person (one completely different from the 300 lbs+ training session attendee or the person that in the middle of noncompliance feels the weight of the State bearing down upon them and thereby begins the slow process of halting escalation and/or reducing resistance), a person of slight weight, slight build, and with no training experience whatsoever, can offer enough tactical considerations that getting them to "sit down" becomes less and less probable as the encounter continues. That is to say that we are finding this to be true of folks with no training whatsoever – folks just in possession of a nice strong will and/or a complete disregard for the weight of the State (e.g. the intoxicated, medicated, delusional, etc.).

To tie this back to the thread, I have to say again that I just do not see the distinction that Mr. Hocker is wishing to make. The latter resistant suspect I described, excluding atemi (for the sake of the argument), can fall down on their butt (in relative safety), can fall backwards and bang their head on the street, can fall flat on their face forward, can stay standing up and watch their arm go limp as joints and connective tissues are stressed beyond their limitations, etc. What keeps them safe, free of injury, even free of pain, is not the architecture of the tactic – it is the heart of the man or of the woman applying that tactic. I can understand the distinction, of course. However, the “proof” is lacking – the characteristics by which one can or should divide federations (and thereby determine their own uniqueness and the uniqueness of their expression of the art) are just not there.

Thanks for writing in George,
david

Fred Little
06-09-2004, 06:43 PM
Due to the lack of a specifically determined anatomical positioning which has a person "sit down" -- your versions are as every bit reliant on ukemi to prevent injury and/or pain as any other system's versions (particularly if you allow for the slowing down of all waza no matter what the version) -- this we can say even while not allowing for the fact that a lot of training goes into keeping the back of one's head off of the street (which while maybe not a problem for your version of irimi nage, nevertheless remains a problem for your version of kotegaeshi).

I think that David's cautionary perspective here is well taken.

For a look at one circumstance involving the use of aikido-like or aikido-derived "pain-compliance" techniques by law enforcement, as applied to people with no ukemi training (based on memory, I believe he was describing nikyo and kotegaeshi), I would strongly suggest a look at at:

Nat Hentoff. "The Torture Police." The Village Voice, September 19, 1989, page 24. Also: John Leo. "The Abortion Protestors and the Police." U.S. News and World Report, August 6, 1990, page 13.

The long and short of it is that when a bunch of white-bread Operation Rescue type folks found themselves on the receiving end of these techniques, the results were far from painless, the damage was more than just momentary, and the lawsuits went on for quite some time.

As some dead guy once said..."trust, but verify!"

Fred Little

kironin
06-09-2004, 06:53 PM
"You don't make them do anything. You go with what they are trying to do and lead it to place where their options to standup are gone. "

Respectfully, there is some faulty logic going on here. ...<snip>


Fine. Lots of nice words to convince yourself that you are right.
Take it up with the people who have 3-6 decades of experience who it comes from. It doesn't sound to me like you know what you are talking about but I won't argue, I'll just go off and train now...

as to the rest of what you wrote, I don't agree with it, but in your take on reality I can see why you are not looking for it there. I think more discussion would just be blowing pass each other because I have heard this all before.

best regards,
Craig

kironin
06-09-2004, 07:01 PM
To tie this back to the thread, I have to say again that I just do not see the distinction that Mr. Hocker is wishing to make. The latter resistant suspect I described, excluding atemi (for the sake of the argument), can fall down on their butt (in relative safety), can fall backwards and bang their head on the street, can fall flat on their face forward, can stay standing up and watch their arm go limp as joints and connective tissues are stressed beyond their limitations, etc. What keeps them safe, free of injury, even free of pain, is not the architecture of the tactic -- it is the heart of the man or of the woman applying that tactic. I can understand the distinction, of course. However, the "proof" is lacking -- the characteristics by which one can or should divide federations (and thereby determine their own uniqueness and the uniqueness of their expression of the art) are just not there.
david


You are of course assuming I have never trained with law enforcement types or had students who didn't have to go out and apply what I taught the next day.

I am just shaking my head sadly at this point.

Craig

George S. Ledyard
06-09-2004, 07:30 PM
a person of slight weight, slight build, and with no training experience whatsoever, can offer enough tactical considerations that getting them to "sit down" becomes less and less probable as the encounter continues. That is to say that we are finding this to be true of folks with no training whatsoever -- folks just in possession of a nice strong will and/or a complete disregard for the weight of the State (e.g. the intoxicated, medicated, delusional, etc.).


I don't disagree... What I am saying about how to "run" these techniques can apply to anyone. However, if the person involved decides to contract his body by bending, which is a common thing to do when resisting, then the techniques which would "sit the person down" won't be the ones applicable. In this event the subject will go to the floor face down because that is by far the most efficient.

The so-called sit down techniques are most applicable in two types of situation:

First, when the officer first decides to take the subject down. The entry is fast and the technique is applied quickly enough that the subject is on his way to the ground before he gets a chance to decide what he is going to do to resist. In other words, the physical resistance is defeated before it has a chance to manifest. This doesn't entail atemi per se but does contain what we would refer to as distraction technique.

Second, when the subject is actively attacking the officer in which case he creates far more openings than if he is simply e-gressive. In this case the application is more impactive with the entry entailing some use of atemi. This is actually easier than the above situation because you can really bop the subject at this level of force.

As for comments about more relaxation and more sophisticated understanding of ki sufficing to handle these situations with out atemi... Well, there's a reason that Yoshinkan Aikido and not Shin Shin Toitsu Aikido is the style most closely associated with law enforcement in Japan.

While there may be an individual around with O-Sensei level ability who could take a highly resistant subject down to the ground and control him while remaining relaxed and using no atemi because his ki power was so developed, this is almost completely irrelevant from a conventional law enforcement standpoint. An individual with this type of ability would almost certainly have trained four to seven days a week for 25 years or more. The average police officer will get around fifty to sixty hours of Defensive Tactics training in his academy program and then will receive two 8 hr in service refreshers each year. We would barely grant a person at this level a 6th Kyu. That's the average, so half the officers in the country will get less than that.

There is simply no scenario one could envision which would allow an officer to get to that type of skill unless he took the time to do it on his own. I would bet that the number of police officers training seriously in Aikido in the US would be less than a few hundred, maybe five hundred or so and absolute max 1000. (That's based on my own completely unscientific experience that most dojos only have one or two active duty officers training and many have none.)

If we start to talk about applying technique on someone in a martial arts context in which the opponent actually knows something about technique then one is in a dream world if he thinks that one could execute effective technique without atemi. But this is an old discussion and won't be resolved here.

senshincenter
06-09-2004, 07:58 PM
Dear Mr. Hocker,

I'm sorry if I am coming off the way you are suggesting. I don't think I have made any assumptions about you or your training - especially about whether or not you are a law enforcement agent and/or trained or instructed any, etc. In regards to what you have written, I am merely addressing your comments. I do not think I am making any statements about you the person or about your training (outside of what you have suggested in your comments). Please reread my comments.

Discussions about training can and should be as open, as non-dismissive, as non-confrontational, as void of defensiveness, as any other aspect about training. I do not feel we are talking past each other - especially if we can see that no personal matters are at issue here (not even my own take on reality, which was hardly offered). So I would very much like to hear what you feel you must remain silent about - so that I can consider it deeply and respectfully reply if warranted.

Attempting to be reasonable is not convincing oneself that one is right. If my reason fails or falters, believe me, I will be the first one to note it and to thereby make the necessary amends. After all, that is the sole capability of this forum. I am not as attached to my view as you are suggesting. This is not about me being right. When I say that a person can, within the kote-gaeshi being discussed thus far, fall as predicted (safely), but can also fall a whole lot of other ways as well (dangerously) - all depending on the situation - I am saying something that I consider to be a reasonable position (one completely in harmony with my own subjective experiences). Ten more years of experience - so that I hit your "magic" 3-6 years - is not going to make the laws of probability radically alter themselves such that this suggestion can be proven invalid and/or even self-righteous.

If I can summarize: You seemed to have suggested earlier that a uniqueness can be attributed to Aikido based upon the waza in question - particularly its architectural potential to be non-violent, peaceful, etc. This view of course cannot be attributed solely to you. It is quite a common view – which I’m sure you know as well. When others brought up the fact that many notable practitioners demonstrate a waza that can be considered no less violent than that found in other arts (that may or may not also be proclaiming a similar call to non-violence), you said that these folks, their aikido, and their waza, are representative of a contradiction between words and actions and that therefore they could not be used to dismiss your call and your reason to Aikido’s uniqueness. Naturally, therefore, people noticed the implication that somehow you were considering a different type of waza to be part of the uniqueness that marks Aikido – one different from what we are all used to, etc. Not speaking for him, Mr. Diffin, in good faith, attempted to offer at least two concrete suggestions that met your requirements and gave weight to your position that the aforementioned aikidoka (many with 3-6 decades of training and a direct tie to the Founder) do in fact show a contradiction between word and action, as well as giving validity to your suggested manner by which one can demonstrate Aikido’s uniqueness (i.e. non-violent waza architecture).

In addressing Mr. Diffin, I merely questioned the claims concerning the given architectures in question. By doing that, I reached a conclusion, completely my own, that held that said architectures do not lend themselves to either the statement that the aforementioned aikidoka are contradictory in their words/actions or to the position that Aikido can find its uniqueness via waza architecture. As you can see, nothing was assumed about your person – lest you are identifying your being with your comments concerning Aikido’s uniqueness (which I cannot account for in any way within this forum).

If I missed something, something you would feel would allow me to alter my conclusion, I would sincerely love for you to open up and speak your mind freely.

Much appreciation in advance.

senshincenter
06-09-2004, 08:01 PM
I agree George.
d

AsimHanif
06-09-2004, 11:13 PM
I think the point of Aikido is in its intent not necessarily in the results. Obviously sh#t happens but at least my intent is to do as little damage as my attacker allows. If my skill level is not that high, obviously I may not be able to afford the attacker the protection (cough, cough) he deserves.
In all my years of karate training, not once did one of my instructors mention anything about proctecting my attacker. The edict was to go through them with everything I have.
But now I'm wondering how can we even think of protecting our attacker in a serious situation, when we get so emotional on paper. I am guilty of this too.

Chris Li
06-10-2004, 12:18 AM
I think the point of Aikido is in its intent not necessarily in the results. Obviously sh#t happens but at least my intent is to do as little damage as my attacker allows. If my skill level is not that high, obviously I may not be able to afford the attacker the protection (cough, cough) he deserves.

Western thinking tends to be very black and white. It's important to realize that Japanese thinking tends to be somewhat better at handling paradoxical situations. Thus you have Morihei Ueshiba with his realization about "loving protection" in 1925 turning down an invitation to demonstrate to the imperial family in 1941 because the "real" techniques would end with the opponent dead (the demonstration ended up with Ueshiba breaking Yukawa's arm by mistake).

Morihei Ueshiba often lectured about the "great spirit of mutual loving protection" - note the "spirit". I have fair reason to believe, both from pre-war and post-war testimony, that he certainly didn't exclude the possibility of injury to an opponent. As for Koichi Tohei and the Ki Society, I've seen him do plenty of throws that would seriously damage an opponent unable to take the ukemi, and the same for other current and former Ki Society instructors (the 3-6 decade guys). Or maybe that's just showmanship :).

Best,

Chris

Joe Hansson
06-10-2004, 08:19 AM
Whoa!

Now there's another shoe waiting to drop...

Pray tell, how?

In the sence that Ueshiba sensei was a budoka practicing budo, many aikidoka of today practices something other than budo.

Ron Tisdale
06-10-2004, 08:52 AM
I can't speak to the 'official' syllibus of the yoshinkan as well as others, but I can say that I know at least one IYAF instructor (7th dan) who teaches variations of koshinage. If we're going by rank... :)

I think Steven Miranda might have some interesting thoughts on whether or not the yoshinkan teaches koshinage.

The concerns about applying it on someone smart and resisting are valid...trying most of the koshinage variations I've seen against a good judo player can lead to the person trying getting choked out. Learning the ways to avoid that is half of the fun!

Ron

PS I just checked the hombu dojo test syllibus for 2003...koshinage isn't in there as far as testing goes. We'll have to wait for Steven's input as to whether he's seen it taught in the yoshinkan...I certainly have.

RT

AsimHanif
06-10-2004, 11:13 AM
Chris,
I'm wonder if although Ueshiba Sensei intent in 1925 was to demonstrate "loving protection", in actuality it took him another 30 years to truly realize this level of practice?
From the perspective of my past teachers (karate) who were of Eastern decent, the life they were concerned about protecting was their own and their loved ones first and foremost. There is also the approach that "to kill swiftly is to be merciful".
In any event I agree with you. I think the ideals of O'Sensei were certainly lofty but who among us is has been able to attain that. Much like religious ideals- good to strive for.
Ironically I was just reading an Aikido Journal interview of Nishio Sensei where he addresses these very same points. His take on it is very interesting. I'd highly suggest it to anyone who hasn't read it. He even mentions a "leather jacket" incident with Tohei Sensei. It was very revealing.

Asim

Ron Tisdale
06-10-2004, 11:48 AM
Chris,
Ironically I was just reading an Aikido Journal interview of Nishio Sensei where he addresses these very same points. His take on it is very interesting. I'd highly suggest it to anyone who hasn't read it. He even mentions a "leather jacket" incident with Tohei Sensei. It was very revealing.

Asim


Which issue?

Thanks,
Ron

Steven
06-10-2004, 12:20 PM
I can't speak to the 'official' syllibus of the yoshinkan as well as others, but I can say that I know at least one IYAF instructor (7th dan) who teaches variations of koshinage. If we're going by rank... :)

I think Steven Miranda might have some interesting thoughts on whether or not the yoshinkan teaches koshinage.

The concerns about applying it on someone smart and resisting are valid...trying most of the koshinage variations I've seen against a good judo player can lead to the person trying getting choked out. Learning the ways to avoid that is half of the fun!

Ron

PS I just checked the hombu dojo test syllibus for 2003...koshinage isn't in there as far as testing goes. We'll have to wait for Steven's input as to whether he's seen it taught in the yoshinkan...I certainly have.

RT

Within Yoshinkan, we have 150 basic techniques that make up the core techniques required for promotion. However there are many other techniques that are taught. For instance, there is no buki-waza on the syllabus, yet many schools in the Yoshinkan do a lot of buki-waza and some even add it their their examination requirements, in addition to the Yoshinkan honbu dojo requirements.

Koshinage is a technique I've learned, teach and have been hammered with by Yoshinkan instructors at all levels. At my home dojo, koshinage was taught at all levels.

Bottom line is, there is a difference between what is taught at a basic level and what is required for promotion, based on the honbu dojo's requirements, and what each individual dojo decides it wants to teach.

Just because it's not on the general syllabus, doesn't mean it isn't taught.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it ...

Qatana
06-10-2004, 04:25 PM
Well i got lost in verbiage a while back but something about this thread is adressing my "issue of the week"- just about Every technique i have taken ukimi for in the last week has ended with me sitting gracefully down on the mat. Even when i upped the attack & resistance, i couldn't be"thrown" and i Want to Be! Am i really able to absorb so much of my own energy?
Well, this is what i'm training For- to be able to take ukemi with the full force of "me" behind it.
Just an observation.

kironin
06-10-2004, 05:48 PM
As for comments about more relaxation and more sophisticated understanding of ki sufficing to handle these situations with out atemi... Well, there's a reason that Yoshinkan Aikido and not Shin Shin Toitsu Aikido is the style most closely associated with law enforcement in Japan.


uh ? I can understand if you disagree with me, but I am puzzled why you think this is an argument for anything. Ki Society Aikido organization didn't exist before 1974. Yoshinkan and Shioda's association with right-wing elements and law enforcement go way back before that. That's history and who associated with who, that's hardly like someone sat down and did some systematic study of comparison/effectiveness.

In talking to one of Tohei Sensei's early Hawaiian deshi some years ago, he remembered clearly how he felt so small in the dojo because all the oter students were these big Hawaiian policemen. Suzuki Sensei, 8th dan, and a retired senior police officer, still conducts training for new recruits in the Hawaiian police force. Some classic police training manuals were written by Tohei Sensei trained police officers. Where there is history and association Ki Society has law enforcement connections also.

I don't this is an argument for much of anything in either case except that aikido in general can be useful or at least some police officers have found it useful or some police trainers think it is useful.

Craig

kironin
06-10-2004, 05:59 PM
Within Yoshinkan, we have 150 basic techniques that make up the core techniques required for promotion. However there are many other techniques that are taught. For instance, there is no buki-waza on the syllabus, yet many schools in the Yoshinkan do a lot of buki-waza and some even add it their their examination requirements, in addition to the Yoshinkan honbu dojo requirements.


Well, I figured it was more complicated.

and it's not like there haven't been plenty of people in Ki Society with Judo backgrounds (black belt level) and while koshinage is not on our standard core of testing techniques, I have been taught koshinage by some high ranking teachers as well as head throws, jujinage, iriminage.
It's just not on any examinations. And actually, some organizations within Ki society have added requirements to what is officially required by KNK HQ. so same, same

I think the arguement against koshinage is a good one. Just not absolute.

Craig

AsimHanif
06-10-2004, 08:49 PM
Ron,
it's a two part interview in the formerly AikiNews #60 and #91. If you can't access it, let me know.

kironin
06-11-2004, 01:28 AM
Ironically I was just reading an Aikido Journal interview of Nishio Sensei where he addresses these very same points. His take on it is very interesting. I'd highly suggest it to anyone who hasn't read it. He even mentions a "leather jacket" incident with Tohei Sensei. It was very revealing.
Asim

Revealling of what ?
We are talking about 1953. How do you know it wasn't a gift given him in Hawaii where such a thing as a leather jacket was not so valuable?
70 year old admonishes talented but still young 33 year old's reaction to having a prized gift stolen. Nishio Sensei finds the reactions of two 70 year old teachers telling though the comparison hardly seems fair.

The story is really about his justifications for quitting Judo.
:rolleyes:

Ron Tisdale
06-11-2004, 07:49 AM
Its also on local test requirements in yoshinkan dojo...the last time I remember being two years ago, in a rather complicated multiple attack evasion throw combination. As to the effectiveness arguement...I wouldn't want to take any of those associations too far. I think the participants here are a little too sophisticated to get far with that one.

Ron

Ron Tisdale
06-11-2004, 09:59 AM
Thanks Asim! That's a great interview. It really shows what a superb spirit Nishio Shihan has. I think it applies to this conversation in more ways than one...

RT

AsimHanif
06-11-2004, 11:15 AM
Yes, I thought it was really telling. It shows alot about our basic human conditioning on attachment to "things", instead of looking at the bigger picture- whether you agree with that big picture or not.
I believe this is what the uniqueness in aikido is all about.
Craig- you can read into as you will. I disagree. Peace.