Re: Internal Power Development Methods
I think you missed my point and since it seems to be a sensitive issue I will attempt to expand on it.
You see it as a put down of him, I see it as two different topics within the martial arts, and some times they overlap. As I -also- said, "There are a lot of great martial artists; some are very powerful, others have sophisticated figthing skills, which can be very impressive and feel magical, some have highly refined weapons work etc. but they are not internal guys. While other Maers have developed particular *aspects* of internal movement in their overal skills- it doesn't mean they are the possessor of *everything* by way of IP/Aiki. There are guys who are simply magicians with their arts, it does not make them complete internal experts. Where does technical brilliance of movement in fighting fit in?
My point being- regardless of the quality and sophistication- not all movement is internal, not all internal movement is the same. And where highly refined technical brilliance overlaps with highly developed but singular internal skills, it can confuse a lot of people.
There are any number of men who are excellent at their craft. Opinions vary, but I could probably list a couple of dozen that I personally like. Is there a requirement that they all have to be internal MAers now? Is that the new standard? That would be ridiculous.
There are any number of Koryu guys I like to watch; do all of their movements have to be highly refined internal movement now? Can't I just appreciate the internal aspects here and there, while also appreciating their art?
Of people who train internals; not all of them are the same either. There are ways to train the body that are not part of what aikido movement is, there are ways to train that are more in keeping with aikido movement. There are several things I know how to do that really have nothing to do with aikido movement.
I guess the only question is who knows what is what, can do things and explain the difference. I understand your approach; "that aikido people are the best judge of what is fitting for aikido." I say it all the time myself. I think the difference is that when I make the statement there is always an implied qualifier; something like this:
It does no good to try and explain a body of skills that most MAers are completely unaware of, cannot do, and do not know how to train. They are being exposed to a myriad of approaches from several people who themselves have chosen to accent or develop certain areas over others with different personal end goals in mind. Here's where it gets tricky
Some may be very powerful and impressive, but in the end it may turn out to be not the correct approach for aikido. Some, aikido people may like power so they will pick that method, they can call it correct all day long with no one to stop them, but it doesn't make it correct. Now, each of those teachers may have their own opinions of what they do, what the other teachers are doing, and where it all fits into aikido; the power guy may just might say one thing, while the soft guy says another.
Who is going to be the best judge of all of that?
Who do you listen to among the many voices?
The internal guys know more about the subject then the aikido teachers, the aikido teachers know more about what they want in their art, but since they don't know internals, there will be some mistakes made, there will be some correct choices made, and some will change their mind (some already have).
In the end you are your best guide.
So when asked I look at all of that and think "There's no real way to wind your way through that maze other than to just go do it."
So I say "Aikido teachers are ultimately the best judge of what they need for their art."
I've watched some pretty strong opinions here change dramatically over time. I just don't think its over yet.
I see it as a process; not an absolute. Growth and understanding can be difficult. I think all of us will be having a different discussion in a few years when more people start to understand power V soft power.