Re: Frustrated by unconvincing aikido
First time I've looked back at this thread as I thought it wouldn't generate much response, but as it has I thought I'd better reply to some of what has been said.
To Mark - good job O'Sensei did question effectiveness of technique
To Ian - thanks for that. I realise that my own aikido is really what I should be concentrating on, and in fact apart from writing the initial post that is what I have done and intend to do.
To Dan - good points that I agree with. Some exercises are not designed as actual combat moves designed to teach a specific point. we do that all the time in class.
To Greg - aye I'm with you there
To John - thanks for that. I agree that you can take someone's balance without touching them, in fact I've even done it to someone who attacked off balance and I stepped out of the way and they fell over - nice. The no-touch throw we were shown was in no way like this in that you had to throw yourself on the ground at the correct time. Nage could have done the move without uke's involvement.
To Jo - It was the "shihan's" attitude which made me even more dismissive of the style. I genuinely asked for some more explanation when she approached as I knew myself I didn't have a clue what I was supposed to be learning but the attitude was one of "I'm a higher grade, you do it like this" and I *still* didn't know what I was supposed to be doing.
To David - thank you for that. I shall try to continue to train and question
To Szczepan - thanks for the support
to "jon" - hmm seemed to have touched a nerve there. I have to say that I'm not involved in any other forums - only lurk here. Not wanting to start anything - no hidden agendas - just wanted to say what I felt after attending a seminar. The only place I've ever seen the term fruity applied to aikido is on this forum. I wanted to try and use a term which was less disrespectful than some I've heard of. at the end of the day I found the aikido shown unconvincing and the shihan arrogant. The fact that she was a she is neither here nor there.
to Larry - I agree that it's in the technique and not the rank.
To Mary - I think I tried to say originally that I realise that it's just a rant of mine and that it won't change anything. It's a free world and people can do what they want I just thought I could get off my chest what I felt - which I did nicely, and I will take your advice and not get too caught up in what other people consider aikido - good advice, thank you
to "jon" - oh dear.
to Charles - thanks for the support
to "jon" - more oh dear
to Xu - nope afraid it's not si wilson here - although as I'm posting anonymously you'll never know :-)
to Darren - yeah I was just letting off some steam. I'd never witnessed anything like this so I guess the next time it won't be as much of an eye opener. Brilliant seminar though (well I've only been to two so who am I to say)
to John - that sounds like the shihan I met!
to Brandon - from what I've read about various martial arts there seems to be two ways of approaching the ability to fight well - from an internal self development path such as tai-chi to an external self develop patch such as karate. Both paths ultimately leading to the same end point. However I reckon alot of tai-chi practitioners are never going to reach a good level of fighting abiilty because a) they don't want to, and b) it's hard to find a tai-chi teacher who teaches it like that. Whereas the karate person has more chance of reaching the fighting ability. I guess I think that the style of aikido I saw demonstrated was like more tai-chi. Howver not many tai-chi students would argue that what they were learning was not improving their fighting ability whereas students of this type of aikido *would* argue with that. Overall though I will jsut get on and train hard myself
to Ian - I have to agree that the testing of effectiveness as the only way of testing effectiveness - if you catch my drift
to Yann - I don't think I ever want to be in a real fight as I'm to old and have avoided them for too long to start now. Seems that O'Sensei's direct students thought it was a good idea though. I'm not suggesting anyone should go out and do that but I do think that if that's the way someone wants to test that what they've learned works then that is the only way to do it. At least have some boundaries and do it in the dojo - say single attacker no weapons - off the top of my head.
to "jon" - I have to disagree with you about realistic attacks. O'Sensei gained knowledge through real fights are you saying he would have done just as well only training in a dojo?
to James - yes I agree
to Kevin - agreed that training purely realistically it's going to take a lot of time and luck to get good, hence alll the other training besides "realistic" attacks. But at the end of the day isn't that what you're training for.
to Lorien - thanks for noticing that I tried to be as least offensive as I could but still express what I felt. Her being female was not the issue at all. I would have loved to take ukemi with her but she seemed only prepared to work with willing partners. Agreed about getting out of the way though!
to "jon" - my initial post *was* my attempt to politely express what I felt. I didn't name names or places as that is specifically not allowed on this forum - I've seen Jun asking people not to do this a few times. Not really sure what I expected or why I wrote it apart from "here's what another aikidoka thinks". I wasn't impressed by either the arts shown or the students and I was annoyed that I just couldn't come out and say what I thought in an open forum. Bit like not being able to say that a flim I have seen is crap for reasons a, b , c. I can't seem to do that to aikido without seeming like a woman hating troll!
to "questioner" - yes I know ... should have just kept my mouth shut and got on with it - don't worry will do in the future.
to jean - the more I do aikido the more I feel like I know nothing about it! I don't hate "fruities" at all - just don't think what they're doing is particularly martial. But that's too general as I've only seen one group who I would apply that term to maybe I should qualify the statement and say that I've only seen one group who I thought were not martial and that was at that seminar. And yes I'm afraid she was rude. In my opinion it was because her tecnique was not able to do the talking for her but that's only my opinion. But like you say it was a learning experience and I have to thank her for that.
Well thank you all for posting - I really wasn't expecting so much as I clearly stated that it was a rant - apologies to anyone who got upset it was not my intention to do that.
Lesson learned - train harder