AikiWeb Aikido Forums

AikiWeb Aikido Forums (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/index.php)
-   General (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Aikido & Judo (http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12533)

xuzen 05-08-2007 01:47 AM

Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Taigyo wrote:
There seem to me to be two ways that Judo techniques can be made to work, the first primarily rely on leverage and force, employing sweeping legs, hip fulcrums, etc as the primary factors in making the techniques work. Tskuri, kuzushi and timing are important and contribute significantly to the sucess of techniques, but in terms of how the technique is being made to work they are of secondary importance.

The second way relies primarily on tskuri, kuzushi, and timing and the throw itself is almost of secondary importance. This is exemplified in the famous (infamous?) Mifune sensei video, where if you watch carefully the uke are pretty much done for before Mifune sensei ever steps in for the "actual" throw. He sets them up so well that the actual sweeping leg, or hip fulcrum or whatever just finishes the job.

Of these two the second is much harder to learn (may take a lifetime). In the bad old days of Jujutsu, if your method of fighting took 10 years of practice before you could make it work, you would be seriously short of students (high mortality rate during the learning curve). So the techniques had to be functional at two levels. The first could be relatively quickly learned and employed fairly effectively. After a single lesson learning a throw such as ogoshi, the student is way ahead of an untrained opponent. If the student continues his study perhaps he can reach the second level at least occasionally.

So, if there really are two levels of technique, then the second level is usually considered the higher, more desirable level (at least in the realm of self improvement or art which both Judo and Aikido strive for). In my somewhat limited knowledge of Aikido techniques it strikes me that they are mostly pretty mechanically simple. Very little in the way of reaping legs, hip fulcrum, etc are evident. They do not provide the raw mechanical advantage that can be exploited using strength and speed. This may be a basic characteristic of the root art, Daito Ryu (about which I know even less), but most other jujutsu schools I have seen tend to be more like Judo technique and employ many of the same mechanical principles.

So to continue my house of cards. The primary goal of Aikido is personal development, this being the case, perhaps Ueshiba sensei sought to skip over the first level of technique and try to push students towards the second. Perhaps there is a deliberate "handicap" there so you do not rely on sweeping legs or hip fulcrums, but in order to make the techniques work have only kuzushi, tskuri, and timing to do it with and so are forced to learn them (presumably without being distracted by strength-based technique). Since the primary goal of Aikido is not self-defense, and we live in much safer times immediate efficacy was not as important as it was in Jujutsu.

It is primarily low-level Aikido that sucks in terms of effectiveness, as would be expected if Ueshiba was taking the strategy that I suggest. High level Aikido is quite effective and powerful, but takes a long time to learn. Also, if people take off on their own (as evidenced by the plethora of different Aikido schools) before they fully grasp the higher level, they do not have the basic mechanical advantages to fall back on, and so you end up with empty dancing about because the techniques do not work unless you can use them at the higher level, and no one knows how so there is basically nothing there.

So in the end perhaps it is just a different route to the same end, perhaps that is what Kano sensei meant.

But of course I could be full of hooey.

Source

It seems in the judoforum, there is a healthy debate going on about aikido and judo. To me, the above poster made some very good remark about the topic above. Personally, I tend to agree with the original poster of the reference material. What do you think? Do you agree?

Some of the Judo people do seem quite interested in our little art (aikido).

Wrt to this paragraph..
Quote:

It is primarily low-level Aikido that sucks in terms of effectiveness, as would be expected if Ueshiba was taking the strategy that I suggest. High level Aikido is quite effective and powerful, but takes a long time to learn. Also, if people take off on their own (as evidenced by the plethora of different Aikido schools) before they fully grasp the higher level, they do not have the basic mechanical advantages to fall back on, and so you end up with empty dancing about because the techniques do not work unless you can use them at the higher level, and no one knows how so there is basically nothing there.
Does this paragraph express why it take such a darn long time to be able to effortlessly use aikido successfully? Or is it a convenient excuse to explain why so many new students find executing aikido techniques on non-compliant partner?

Boon.

Upyu 05-08-2007 02:15 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Good god...this kind of debate again.
If you subscribe to what Mike, Dan and others were talking about then maybe the reason why most people never are able to use Aikido successfully is because the "core" skills are just simply not being taught ;)

Edward 05-08-2007 02:26 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Having done both, I believe the main difference is that in Judo you have to force the kuzushi on a resistant opponent who plays by the same rules, while in aikido the kuzushi is mainly self-caused by the attacker if Nage's Tai Sabaki is well timed and executed.

However, when you take into consideration Judo Kata, especially the self-defense ones (forgot the names), the same principles apply for both arts. The reason why aikido does not have hip throws (apart from koshi nage) according to a high ranking shihan I met previously is that it adds an unnecessary element of risk to be toppeled by the attacker for instance when executing an ippon seoi nage, the attacker might be able to take you down to the floor, and the situation becomes more complicated with multiple attackers. Sutemi waza in this context become very dangerous. That's why aikido limits the body contact as much as possible and emphasizes keeping one's balance and distance for safety reasons.

PS. Curiously enough I have personally used aikido in real life situations twice and it worked like a charm, while in the same time it is almost impossible sometimes to throw someone who wants to be a smart a** at the dojo and have to surprise them with a Judo-like hip throw to force the technique on them.

Amir Krause 05-08-2007 02:44 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
I think there is a lot of truth in the quate you brought. Aikido often demands the practitioner to be perfect for the technique to work, at least against a non-copmliant attacker.

I would not claim Aikido techniques skip the technical level, since there are a lot of "technical details" such as hip movement and associated motorics in most techniques, without which the technique would be most difficult to apply.

But, Aikido does put a lot of emphasis on Kuzushi, Mai, timing etc.

Amir

L. Camejo 05-08-2007 05:33 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Interesting subject.

Many of Ueshiba M.'s students started Aikido with prior training in fighting arts and had the core mechanics for good fighting technique on starting Aikido. In this light one could just take them further along towards the "Aiki" aspects of the training. For those without that knowledge the (Aiki) Jujutsu type "fight science" foundation needed to be set. Even today this happens in my dojo, students who come knowing how to fight (especially from a Jujutsu/Judo background) just need to learn how to use Aiki strategy and tactics, balance control, timing, ma ai, kuzushi etc. more efficiently or differently than they did. Those who do not know this start at the ground floor.

Quote:

It is primarily low-level Aikido that sucks in terms of effectiveness, as would be expected if Ueshiba was taking the strategy that I suggest. High level Aikido is quite effective and powerful, but takes a long time to learn. Also, if people take off on their own (as evidenced by the plethora of different Aikido schools) before they fully grasp the higher level, they do not have the basic mechanical advantages to fall back on, and so you end up with empty dancing about because the techniques do not work unless you can use them at the higher level, and no one knows how so there is basically nothing there.
This may be correct to a point but I don't think that the issue so much is teachers who leave before learning the effective stuff, since this (the jutsu aspect) should be addressed at the beginner levels imho before one gets into the pure timing, ma ai, kuzushi and internal power expressions exhibited at the higher level. Imho low level Aikido technique should resemble Jujutsu in free practice but it should be no less effective in how it operates. High level Aikido would be the clean, perfect timing waza that we often see in demos but done where the attack is real and the response is spontaneous. I think a lot of people use the whole "it takes years to learn" approach to explain away their own lack of understanding or lack of desire to do what is necessary to understand the sound physical application of Aiki principles. For those who have put in the effort the thing is just fascinating in its application and only gets better. I think the Judoka may have realised this also.

Just my thoughts.
LC:ai::ki:

ChrisMoses 05-08-2007 09:20 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Robert John wrote: (Post 177743)
Good god...this kind of debate again.
If you subscribe to what Mike, Dan and others were talking about then maybe the reason why most people never are able to use Aikido successfully is because the "core" skills are just simply not being taught ;)

I think there are two 'core' concepts here actually. What judo can offer is a lesson in the core principles of kuzushi, tsukuri, kake. What judo offered nihon jujutsu was a pared down set of throws that got at the heart of what made for a good jujutsu throw. Once you learned those lessons, approaching the specifics of a particular line of jujutsu became much easier because you could understand why the pieces of a technique were done the way they were. I think a lot of jujutsu ryuha also took the lessons they learned in judo and applied them back into their arts however, so you see a lot of meiji era jujutsu that looks very judo-y. Even some older ryuha incorporated these principles back into their arts.

The other set of 'core' teachings you bring up would be the internal dynamics/skills. You watch videos of Mifune, and you realize that some of these guys had it, but others just developed enough musculature to be able to throw without it. I would imagine that Kano's love of Western education probably didn't do many of the more esoteric training methodologies any good, as they probably didn't fit into the PE training paradigm he was shooting for. I could be wrong however, if you look at the Kosen Judo guys, they sure do some weird stuff as solo and paired exercises. I'm sure a lot of them approach it just like lifting weights, but many of them could be done with the eyes turned inwards as interesting internal training tools. It could also just be gay pr0n, but I digress... (Anyone whose seen the exercises in question will get the joke there.) ;)

If you're able to find a teacher and dojo that get both sides of that however, you're going to be getting some very good stuff (a la Mifune...). I don't believe it's enough to just know what's going on inside, particularly for a jujutsu art (which I consider aikido and judo to be subsets of). I think it would be easier to transition from non-applied internal practitioner to practical fighter with the striking arts. With grappling/throwing arts however there is an almost equal need to understand the principles of the interaction in order to understand how to apply those internal/baseline skills. For example, I feel kuzushi is just as important in aikido waza as judo waza. You may get kuzushi differntly (or not) but it is just as critical. Aikido without kuzushi is just kansetsuwaza and not really different from any other form of jujutsu *whose goal is to injure the joints of the attacker*. Applying internal power/fa jing/ mad ki-blast skillz to an improperly done joint throw will only result in damage to the joint and injury. This, I believe, is outside the framework for aikido, and yet, it's how most people do their waza.

Unfortunately, I don't see either sets of what I consider to be core skillsets/principles being taught much in aikido anymore.

jonreading 05-08-2007 11:00 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
I think there is truth to the judo post. I think you get out of training what you put into training. I think many of O'Sensei's students were fairly good fighters before training aikido, so it would make sense they did not require that training within their aikido training.

I see a lot of aikido people who say, "aikido is not about fighting." If you don't put fight into your training, I don't think you'll get fight out of your training. The confusion comes when those who do not excel in aikido claim their handicap results from the art, not their skill. Add to that confusion those who claim their ignorance of fighting results from the art, not their skill.

Walker 05-08-2007 12:44 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
I've always taken a page from Tomiki sensei who was well versed in both arts. He said that aikido was judo at a distance. Building off what Chris wrote then aikido becomes more difficult because one has to apply the priciples of judo over more distance and with less contact.

I wonder if the internal skill set that Rob mentions might be better classified as atributes rather than skills. If so then the skills of aikido or judo would be greatly enhanced when performed by someone with the atributes produced by the core skill set.

DonMagee 05-08-2007 01:18 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
I always look at it as keeping a range were aikido is usually trained is much harder then the range where judo is trained. It is usually easy to clinch, aikido as I see it trained is ment to be used before the clinch. It is hard to keep people in that range.

Personally I am so used to judo that once we clinch I don't even bother trying aikido stuff, the judo stuff is easy enough.

xuzen 05-08-2007 09:45 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
In my observation...

Judo train RAN-DORI first and then KATA later.

Aikido train KATA first then RAN-DORI later.

[This could explain why the effectiveness vs time graph would favour the Judoka. But after a length of time, their skill gap may reduce] - highly speculative

Darn! I just wish them Japan folks would organize a 10 men match up between Kodokan and Shodokan school consisting of university players. That would be a fantasy match come true.

Hmmm.. since we are at it, I would also wish to see a 10 men match up between amateur MMA fighters and the Senshusei trained riot cops.

So... is this possible? Popcorn anyone?

I'll go do some push-up or something....

Boon.

Ron Tisdale 05-09-2007 07:42 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Hi Boon...I think the riot cops would lose. The main point of that course for them (as tough as it is) is to train their spirit (or so I've been told), not to make them uber deadly. ;)

MMA atheletes are the cream of the crop...anyone not training for that venue is going to have a hard time. Some will get lucky and pull of enough of a clean waza to prevail...but most will likely get caught in something basic in MMA, but not trained in aikido. Just the way it goes...

Best,
Ron (my opinion only, humble or otherwise...)

L. Camejo 05-09-2007 09:04 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Of course the Kodokan stands no chance vs the Shodokan.:)

Especially if we get to bring bokken. :D
LC:ai::ki:

Paul Sanderson-Cimino 05-09-2007 09:08 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
From my limited experience, it seems a lot easier to throw someone at judo range than at aikido range.

Matthew White 05-09-2007 08:59 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
It's my understanding that Ueshiba was pretty much a rough-n-tumble badboy. Tons of muscle stacked on tons of more muscle. On top of that he had plenty of training. So he had the leverage/strength/speed thing down. But as he aged it occurred to him that he wouldn't have that forever, and since he had the understaning of kuzushi/tsukuri/ma-ai/etc... he reasoned that those elements would allow the weaker, smaller, slower person to overpower the larger.

It is my opinion that if you first train a person to rely on strength, speed, and leverage, you must then "untrain" them so that they dispose of those elements when executing waza. If one starts out training for the "inner" elements first, the "outer" elements become icing on the cake, or extra tools in the tool box. I think that was Ueshiba's thinking.

Upyu 05-09-2007 09:07 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Matthew White wrote: (Post 177916)
But as he aged it occurred to him that he wouldn't have that forever,

More like he got his a$$ tossed around by Takeda and realized that speed/leverage/technique simply didn't cut it when you faced someone who could move with the "core" of their body. :D

gdandscompserv 05-10-2007 05:26 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Robert John wrote: (Post 177918)
More like he got his a$$ tossed around by Takeda and realized that speed/leverage/technique simply didn't cut it when you faced someone who could move with the "core" of their body. :D

Wow, it's almost as if you were there.

RoyK 05-10-2007 06:32 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Ricky Wood wrote: (Post 177944)
Wow, it's almost as if you were there.

Isn't losing to Takeda the reason O'sensei became his student?

tarik 05-10-2007 08:14 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Paul Sanderson-Cimino wrote: (Post 177872)
From my limited experience, it seems a lot easier to throw someone at judo range than at aikido range.

Whereas, for me, in my limited experience, it's the other way around. Yet I'm told they're the same (with different distances), so approaching it that way seems to be slowly helping.

Edward 05-10-2007 08:39 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Tarik Ghbeish wrote: (Post 177960)
Whereas, for me, in my limited experience, it's the other way around. Yet I'm told they're the same (with different distances), so approaching it that way seems to be slowly helping.

In my equally limited experience, aikido throws are much easier to apply than judo throws, if you get it all right, and assuming Uke delivers honest attacks. Judo throws are more difficult as they require to twist the body and knees in not so natural angles, but I would say they are more efficient against an uke who is not delivering honest attacks. I always reserve the right to apply an Ogoshi or an Uchi Mata in such cases.

Chuck Clark 05-10-2007 11:53 AM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
In my experience, if you're twisting the body and knees at "not so natural angles" you are not doing judo properly. Form follows function and function follows form. Perhaps your natural angles are different though...

Edward 05-10-2007 12:12 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Chuck Clark wrote: (Post 177994)
In my experience, if you're twisting the body and knees at "not so natural angles" you are not doing judo properly. Form follows function and function follows form. Perhaps your natural angles are different though...

While it is almost certain that I do not do judo properly, what I mean to say is that most aikido throws are done from a "natural" hanmi or posture while judo throws in my understanding require to bend the knees and stick the hip out to one side while the torso twists the other way (as in a classic ippon seoi nage for instance). At least for me this is not exactly as "natural" a position as the triangular aikido stance and straight upper body from which most throws are executed. But again I might be doing it wrong.

Ron Tisdale 05-10-2007 12:27 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Wow, it's almost as if you were there.
Well, the people like Sagawa who were there spoke of Ueshiba in a corner, weeping. Now, the two never liked each other much from what little I understand, so I would take it with a grain or three of salt...but still, it is said that Takeda had a major impact on Ueshiba.

Best,
Ron

tarik 05-10-2007 01:15 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Edward Karaa wrote: (Post 177996)
While it is almost certain that I do not do judo properly, what I mean to say is that most aikido throws are done from a "natural" hanmi or posture while judo throws in my understanding require to bend the knees and stick the hip out to one side while the torso twists the other way (as in a classic ippon seoi nage for instance). At least for me this is not exactly as "natural" a position as the triangular aikido stance and straight upper body from which most throws are executed. But again I might be doing it wrong.

Watch the Mifune Sensei videos and his demonstration of all the basic techniques. His posture looks pretty darn "natural", if you ask me. ;)

He looks like he's taking a walk in the park compared to most judo I've watched.

ChrisMoses 05-10-2007 01:16 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Quote:

Edward Karaa wrote: (Post 177996)
While it is almost certain that I do not do judo properly, what I mean to say is that most aikido throws are done from a "natural" hanmi or posture while judo throws in my understanding require to bend the knees and stick the hip out to one side while the torso twists the other way (as in a classic ippon seoi nage for instance). At least for me this is not exactly as "natural" a position as the triangular aikido stance and straight upper body from which most throws are executed. But again I might be doing it wrong.

That doesn't really sound like a classic version of ippon seio nage. Elbows, shoulders, knees and toes are all pretty much in alignment if you're doing it right. I think there's just as much potential for correct/non-damaging movement in aikido and judo. Conversely, there's just as much room for horkin' and twisting, thus all the senior aikido folks who can't sit in seiza... Twisting and knees = sad knees.

Edit: linky goodness: http://www.judoinfo.com/video/gokyo/SeoiNage1.wmv

Chuck Clark 05-10-2007 01:23 PM

Re: Aikido & Judo
 
Some people do what I call "weight lifting" judo (and aikido) that makes them use their body in ways that facilitate static lifting and rotating movements. This, to me, does seem awkward and uncomfortable.

Ippon seoinage need be nothing more than turning around while lowering your hips a bit and looking around your shoulder as you turn. Nothing in your body should be out of line. Granted you have to do that turn at the right time in the right place in coordination with what the other person is doing... Watch Mifune Kyuzo Sensei do it on film. You shouldn't redesign the human structure in order to do budo efficiently. I'll admit, I learned similar ways to what you're describing for the first ten years or so that I did judo. Thankfully I found teachers that corrected that and it continues to work better and better for the past forty years.

Addition: after posting this I see that a couple of folks beat me to it...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:28 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.