View Single Post
Old 03-01-2006, 03:04 PM   #257
Adam Alexander
Dojo: none currently
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 499
United_States
Offline
Re: ?? Exaggeration in Aikido ??

Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
heh heh. There are no "secrets" in martial arts. .
Your memory that short? I thought we just blew briefly over that one in another thread.

Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
Only good training. You've worked long and hard to get these secrets? How long was that again? .
I'd say approximately 3,650 hrs. Give or take a couple hundred.

Approx. one quarter in mat time; a little over a quarter solo training; about half book studies.

That doesn't include time spent thinking (focusing) on techniques/movements beyond that.


Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
I have to wonder, if your philosophy is to keep your knowledge so close to your chest and not give it away, then what are you doing on the forum. .
I offer a little guidance and a different perspective to others. Check my history.

Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
It seems you're happy to put forth very strong and some would say conceited views, but when challenged resort back to "well I'm not going to tell you because you're not worthy nyah nyah" .
I'd say as it applies to Aikido, I'm convinced of it's potential. I'd say of myself, that of experienced enough to know that I can handle some situations. Conceited? No. That's a misperception of those "some" you refer to.

Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
Which is it, you want to contribute to the discussion and further knowledge or you don't..
Again, check my history.

Quote:
Michael Fooks wrote:
As for knowing someone capbable of performing technique infallibly each and every time - not so much a set up. I personally think such a claim is ridiculous. But as you've previously implied that "doing" aikido properly may not be something anyone is currently capable of, I just was curious which particular sillyness was behind the latest comments - the belief that someone can be infallible, or the belief that the value of aikido lies in a faraway land no one can ever reach.
Exactly, it's impossible to "know" someone could do it infallibly everytime. I figured that to be the set-up. As for the next set-up in that argument...I'll skip that one too.
  Reply With Quote