View Single Post
Old 07-15-2008, 05:21 AM   #47
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
Re: Seiseki Abe Sensei video....whats going on here?

Hi George
I was up late and missed reading your post explaining the practice. I guess its worse than I thought. I was hoping it was all a joke or some kind of singular-thought nutty-exhibition for the comic.

As a sensitivity drill -where are the benefits that you couldn't devise a better method for? Or would you adopt this in your school as well?
What if you stood there and kept your balance, and worked your way in to try and throw him? What would change? Does he have enough aiki to throw a retained balance, noncooperatve,( meaning no ukemi-destroyed) aiki trained man? Could he take the balance of someone playing ...him in the same manner? Would he respond to a superior trained power output by throwing himself and calling it good?

In my mind a more useful approach for sensitivity like that is to dodge perceived power ( if you can't neutralize it) while managing myself and fit into and dominate the space between his output, Either that or sensing his openings and powering right through the man. Hell, even displacing through positioning is a better option. Going negative and throwing myself seems like the stupidest thing a man could do.
Why on earth, would anyone choose to fall down as a response to power output?
Why not train to increasingly absorb it and stay ahead of it and redirect, neutralize, and reengage and so forth as a sensitivity Training drill? Wouldn't you think that dealing with and managing his force, neutralizing it and countering and throwing HIM seems the better option to throwing yourself on the ground as a "drill."

It's bad enough to see inept to marginally successful throws based off of volunteerism, and an ukemi-destroyed structure. Aerial throws as a response to input just seems to be a huge step backward. .

Can you tell me a single benefit to that type of training that you personally do not know a superior method to use?

Last edited by DH : 07-15-2008 at 05:24 AM.
  Reply With Quote