View Single Post
Old 08-10-2005, 05:02 PM   #8
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 118
Question Re: "Traditional budo" and "Fighting art"


Aikidokas who do a "little kata" can still train to be "combat effective"? Why would they not? As far as not being able to sense pressure mid-technique, and change direction accordingly is irrelevant, for kata in itself is not a complete training anyway. Tai chi chuan practitioners practice kata forms for just that reason, to develop chi/ki to be able to sense and "explosively"respond to attacks (wingchun). I'm not disagreeing that realistic physical contact is key to prepare for physical combat, but you should not disregard the use of kata as "junk"training.

"This whole area is very subtle...judo is Budo...but it can also be practiced as 'just sport'. Junk the kata, forget the belts, test only through competition, forget the japanese terms, bowing, etc. You'd still have a pretty high percentage grappling art. But would it still be budo? Personally, I have my doubts, but I also don't know how to express the reasons for those doubts."

Looks to me here like you are not sure what budo is, because you seem to be concerned only with the physical core of the training. I would rather learn a technique from a high ranked person, won't you? How do you know who that is if there are no belts? So, if a guy walks in of the street and uses Karate, and kicks the shit out of my Sensei. I should ask him how to do Aikido?

"As to lacking in combat effectiveness...well, to go with the pressure testing idea, you should get on the mat with some of those you think are lacking...let me know how it comes out."

Can you elaborate more on what this means?

"Hi Roy, see my post on the 'other' thread for my disagreements."

No thanks
  Reply With Quote