If that is true then there are only two possibilities.
1) He started running before they took the shot.
2) He started running after they took the shot.

If nr.2 is true, then he's twice as fast as a Neo in Matrix. If nr.1 is true, the shooters were not doing thier best.

Is there a nr.3? :rolleyes:

/Patrik

fact-based analysis
 

No. 3 would be O'Sensei's account of the event.

No mention was made regarding the state of mind of the shooters. Based on the information given, any opinions on their "state of mind" would be pure speculation.

Neo is a fictional character in a fiction-based film.

``Aikido Shugyo,'' an autobiography is non-fiction. Gozo Shioda was a real, living, breathing person; as was O'Sensei. Doesn't seem to be any fictional characters here.

No, it sure wouldn't! We're talking movement of the body here, not peoples account of the story!!!

There is only two ways if the story is true.

1) He moved before they fired.

2) He moved after they fired.

The only logical or remotely possible nr.3, would be that he moved exactly when they fired. Either way wouldn't have made a big difference. We're talking fractions of a second here! There is only before, during and after.
Nope. No fictional characters. But the event, as you believe it happened, is truly fictional.

Give me a straight answer to this question Mike: Do you honestly believe that O'sensei really moved that distance so fast? If you do, then how is it possible for a human body to travel that fast? :eek:

Ever read the law of relativity (english sp?). Surely he must have moved faster than light, for this trick to work? That is, unless it was somehow rigged. By o'sensei or by the shooters. Or perhaps Scotty beemed him down? :D

/Patrik

PS. Do you also believe that Elivs is alive? People claim to have seen him you know. Then it must be true. (I'll bet people will still be seeing the King, even after his would-be 140th birthday).

Abstract:

In this experiment we will show that man can move faster than bullets... (pad out)

Introduction:

Pad out with info on aikido, O'sensei, gun speeds, reaction times etc

Method:

(basicly)... we took 6 men, give them guns who fired at o'sensei

Results:

Gun1: discharged - missed - shooter thrown

Gun2: discharged - missed

Gun3: discharged - missed

Gun4: discharged - missed

Gun5: discharged - missed

Gun6: discharged - missed

O'sensei: Unharmed

Conclusions:

O'sensei moved faster than the bullets... (pad out)

possibly follow up experiment with more guns, different guns, tie his legs together, blind fold him etc etc etc.

________________________________

my point is...

had the shooting been written out like a scientific experiment would more people have believed it?

It turns out that people are more willing to believe the eye witness accounts of scientists, who have studied a subject for years and write in a more formal manner. than eye witness accounts of others who have studied for years and dont get their accounts published in journals.

why? probably because science follows 'doctine'.

Science said the world was the center of the universe. anyone who said otherwise was ridiculed (sp?). Anyone and anything that goes against science or the general belief system of the masses is made fun of and shunned. People want to believe that they are 'right' and make fun of anything that encroaches upon that which they think they know.

I have read, with interest, the entire thread. It has been very entertaining... but i am wondering. Have people gained from it? do people ask themselves... why do I believe this? (either side) and how does believing it help me get where I want to be or be who I believe I want to be?

the beliefs dont effect what you know, or who you are... they distract you from it. but its a fun ride anyway.

I started with a point... it kinda got lost and I went on a tangent as usual.

oh well...

hehehe

thanks

Kev Price

Great post, Kev!

Some people might "need" these stories to help motivate them in their practice. Or perhaps to keep "the mystic (sp?) of Aikido" alive.

Science have come a long way. Sure, they're not always accurate in these days eitherb but I've yet to see them beeing wrong about what speed a person can move by his own two feet...

I like this story as much as the next guy. But I can't believe that someone outran bullets fired directly at him. Especially when someone states that the bullets were fired with accuraracy (never mind my spelling :) ) so they'd hit if he'd stand still.

Like I said in my first post, It's too over the top to believe. And I don't need to believe them, to recognize o'senseis greatness.

/Patrik

I think it was a very clever bit of misdirection, not due to the efforts of anyone involved but merely due to the way stories change over time.

So, lets for a moment assume the story is true and accurate on all levels, nevermind personal bias on the part of the story teller, because I have not read a version of the story relayed by one of the shooters or any of the other eye witnesses.

This is my fictional, totally made up account of what I think might have realy happened, taking into consideration that O'Sensei was a sword and martial arts master.

O'Sensei is standing against a wall, approximately 25 meters from a line of 6 military sharp-shooters, armed with revolvers.

1: A revolver works with a rotating barrel, when the trigger is pulled, the barrel rotates to place a bullet under the hammer, while the hammer pulls back to a certain level before slamming back into the bullet. This is quite a long process (relatively speaking) and is quite audible in a quiet room (as I guess the shooting range was at that time)

2: For six men to fire simultaneously, they either had to have a squad leader announcing "Ready, Aim, Fire" or one of the six needed to do it.

Taking into consideration O'Sensei's extensive sword training and his level of awareness, both of these would have been on his mind at the time. He could start moving at the exact moment the squad leader starts pronouncing the first letter in Fire! or he could move during the word Fire!

There would be a brief pause between the word fire and the actual gunshots due to the mechanics of the revolvers.

Taking into consideration that all of these 6 men were unwilling to kill O'Sensei, I believe they would not have made an effort to "lead" him even if they had seen him move as the Fire! announcement came.

So the only thing O'Sensei needed to do was get out of their line of fire, assuming that they were aiming at either his head or his torso, a crouch into the form of a "ninja" as described in the story would have been enough.

Crossing the distance of 25 meters in 2 or 3 seconds is entirely possible, considering that even non-athletes can easily run 50 meters in 6 or less seconds and in the confusion and noise of the gunshots that would have been easy. Also, take into consideration, when you hear a sudden loud noise you automatically close your eyes. This might explain why the story teller could not see O'Sensei move.

I believe that it was a highly controlled, highly prepared test of reflexes and awareness for O'Sensei which has been given an almost mystical element over time.

This is the version I am choosing to believe.

Would any of us be able to do it? Yes, with enough of the right kind of training we would.

Would it be useful in a street altercation with an armed thug? Definately NOT.

speed of light
 

If O'Sensei really said he did it, then I believe he did. As far as how he did it, he explained that in the story.

I'm not out to convince anyone that this story is true, as some of you have assumed.

The fact of the matter is that I don't need to believe this story as some have also incorrectly assumed. But if people want to discredit the story, provided by a highly reputable shihan in aikido and containing direct quotes from O'Sensei, then I would need to see something more than conjecture and opinions by relative unknowns to convince me that the story is totally false or that O'Sensei was engaged in some form of fraudulant activity, which, by not believing the story one would seem to be implying.

In the 100 meter dash, it took Carl Lewis 2.96 seconds and Ben Johnson 2.85 seconds to run 20 meters. For 50 meters, it took Carl Lewis 5.56 seconds and Ben Johnson 5.55 seconds.

-- Jun

Re: speed of light
 

[quote=" But if people want to discredit the story, provided by a highly reputable shihan in aikido and containing direct quotes from O'Sensei, then I would need to see something more than conjecture and opinions by relative unknowns to convince me that the story is totally false or that O'Sensei was engaged in some form of fraudulant activity, which, by not believing the story one would seem to be implying.[/QUOTE]Mike, people have, time and again in this post shown you more than conjecture. It's called physics. Perhaps you should take a class.

Today, if I wanted to test Ueshiba's bullet speed I would put him in front of a gun locked in a vice in order to remove human error or the human urge not to kill people. At some point, I would pull the trigger (or have it set up on a random timer somehow) and see what happens. Assuming the bullet hit the target and Ueshiba was not there we would know the answer. I might even go a step further and put a pressure sensor under his feet to trigger the shot. Of course it would also be videotaped. In other words, I'd remove the human element which according to Ueshiba's words should not have mattered anyway.

There are a lot of examples of people being shot at and not hit. Some of the numbers I've read about in regards to the Civil War are remarkably surprising in terms to how few shots fired actually hit someone. Most of that is probably due to humans unwillingness to kill humans. On the other hand, if you've ever hunted and tried to shoot something you'll understand just how hard it is to hit a moving target. If the story reads correctly then Ueshiba was a moving target.

See the book On Killing for more information.

Yes, I actually had second thoughts about my "non-athlete" statement there, sorry, but still, O'Sensei did not just have to run the distance, a leaping forward roll would have probably covered atleast 5-10 meters in a very short time.

The point I was trying to make though was that it was not a test to see if he could "dodge bullets", rather it was a test of his awareness and timing.

And maybe... O'Sensei had the same level of fitness and ability as those great athletes you mentioned, he was afterall, an incredible martial artist long before unifying his training into Aikido.

Again I apologise for my less than accurate statement. Still though, I used to run 50 meters in 8-10 seconds back when I was 12, I just assumed that an adult with a larger stride would be able to cover more distance quicker.

Even if o'sensei was a bit faster than Carl Lewis (=unlikely), it still doesn't explain why he didn't get shot... since he still had to run straight towards the shooters, right?

If their aim was any good, he'd been hit even if he was fast enough to come as near them as 0.1 m.

Or did he run a few yards to the left first and then straight towards the shooters? If he was THAT fast, he probably had time to stop for tea first... :)

Ta kung,

the way I read it, he only dodged one bullet. The bullet from the first person that fired... that is the same person that was thrown.

He got off the line of that bullet and moved towards the shooter.

Thats how I read the story anyway

1: Due to the shooters not wanting to realy kill O'Sensei they probably would not have "lead" him if they had seen him move.

2: They all probably only fired 1 shot anyway, they were not shooting and shooting and shooting at him desperately trying to hit him.

3: In a firing squad, its customary to take aim only on the torso and the head, a duck into the shape of a "ninja" as described in the story would have been enough to allow the bullets to pass over him.

4: If the shooters were not wearing ear-muffs, it is quite possible that they all closed their eyes in reflex to the loud noise as well.

O'Sensei's timing needed to be absolutely spot on to pull this off convincingly and survive afterwards, however given these theories, I am sure he could have done it.

Also take into consideration that we dont have a version of this story from the shooters, only from one bystander who happened to have been a close friend and student of O'Sensei. So its quite possible that the shooters did see him running at them at high speed but they were unwilling and not ordered to shoot at him again.

On the paintball thing, there are martial artists who can catch paintballs that are fired at them. Australian Athony Kelly caught 23 paintballs fired at him in 2 min. Range was 20 metres, speed was min 200 ft per sec. Review in Guinness book of Records.

Cheers Aubrey

So what?
 

Mike:

I want to start by saying that I don't have any interest in changing your mind. I just wanted to explain why I didn't share your belief in that account of this incident. So my question to you now is this: why is it important to you that I believe it? Why do you care? I think we would agree that Ueshiba O'Sensei was an unparalleled martial artist. We would probably also agree that Aikido is the ultimate martial art (for us). So what if I don't believe Ueshiba O'Sensei dodged bullets? I believe in his teachings, in his art and in his example. Isn't that all that matters?

Rob

PS: you asked who has studied the unreliability of eyewitness accounts. I refer you to http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/ for the definitive expert on the matter.

assumptions and misconceptions
 

As I stated in post No. 57 on this thread:

"I'm not out to convince anyone that this story is true, as some of you have assumed."

Why do I care? I answered this in post 37 on this thread:

"Those that wish to discredit not only O'Sensei, along with an aikido shihan without reason are on very thin ice."

Re: assumptions and misconceptions
 

Thin ice with whom? You? If I was able to discredit them I would take the chance of being on thin ice with you. Sadly we lack evidence either way and the evidence and facts that you keep talking about to support your beliefs have yet to surface.

The thing that bothered me about your posts in this thread was their confrontational nature and the "Because I SAID SO!" form of reasoning.

You might think that you provided supporting evidence but you never did, all you ever had was exactly the same as anyone else here had - a story - but you took it upon yourself to self-righteously defended people that you have probably only ever read about.

The thing is that everyone here has the right to believe whatever they want, you have no right to get all agro and confrontational when someone doubts something you take for a fact. If people did have the right to act the same way you did, think how scary religious fundamentalism would be (not thats its not scary already)

Aikido falls victim to the same hyperbole and exaggeration as any other martial art or endeavor....actually I would believe its far worse as some aikido incorporates intangibles such as spirituallity and life energies (ki)as proven tenets. Physical and Battlefield exploits grow greater with time along with the story tellers appreciation of his/her audience.

get over yourself
 

I never said they didn't. I only questioned the incredibly flawed reasoning behind their disbelief.

Re: assumptions and misconceptions
 

Please forward all my expressions of dissent to the shihan of your choice. Somehow I doubt they care if I believe it, either. Should my disbelief create such ill will in any of them that they seek me out to physically punish me for my human right of critical thought, then I'm really in the wrong martial art.

I think the main point of this story is not about dodging bullets, but about Ueshiba recognizing that the shooters couldnt hit him. You could say the shooters lacked "fudoshin". I think the best part of it was the fact he could recognize this and attempt such a dangerous thing. Even if the story is false, it still helps us understand what we need to develop and focus on in our training.

What's more dangerous? Disbelieving something without "proof" or believing something just because someone says so?

This sounds like the "fallacy of popular appeal", doesn't it? Just because multiple people believe something doesn't make that something "right". That simply isn't proof of anything.

Is it okay to be a sheep? Or is it okay to be blind? Or is there a middle ground in there somewhere?

Being blind sheep can't be that good :)

Phillip, doesn't your argument work both ways?

Just because many people dont believe it, or it goes against popular oppinion of what is possible. Does not mean that it isnt true.

The same argument, of 'following the crowd' can be used by both sides of the argument

oopss.. cant finish my argument.. been told to work :p