I'm not sure I follow... how is this different from training for the same total amount of time with a test in the middle? Are we to assume that the day of the test is the primary means of getting feedback to correct 'bad technique'?
Sorry but that's not what I meant. The point is that there are various stratagems for claiming one's dojo, organisation, nationality etc is better than another. If you have a different technical syllabus or way of doing things that requires more time to learn then we're not comparing like for like.
Heat is a consistent phenomenon that we can relatively easily agree upon in our measurements. Wherever you stick the marks on your thermometer, we could convert them over into Celsius and even account for things such as differing air pressure affecting the results. Not so the case with aikido gradings: the interpretation of what constitutes aikido and the ease with which it can be transmitted is variable. For example, my Seifukai grading booklet has sections for ten kyu
grades in Aikido (all empty btw
). How does that match up with say, Tada Shihan's take on the Hombu minimum requirements? Both scales are measuring different skills. The Aikikai's minimum requirements simply provide a small measure of common ground that balances the different viewpoints we get of the founder through his descendent students with the ability to come together and train as one family.