My personal opinion is:
- The "60 degree angle" is certainly not canonical. I gave a couple of examples, and the one's above are good too.
- It's really not about the angle. The important material that Ueshiba was discussing had little to do with that.
I remain unmoved and uninterested in the assertions of those who claim they received " inside teachings" yet who's writing and skills portray anything out of the ordinary. Their skills should at the very least support their own claim of superior competency. John Steven's opinion of a thousand year old teaching being assigned to standing in hanmi is yet another example of what is missing in Aikido.
Since he decided to tell everyone here that ...you...are not qualified to discuss these things, and I'm here on the island-you can tell him if he would like to get a real explanation for all that he missed- I will be happy to cross hands with him and teach him what his own teacher was doing and he obviously does not grasp; either historically or physically.
This recent list of posts on shaminism, berserker mentality, traditionalism and home brewers...were off in the weeds, but at least they were interesting and fair handed. Now we see these completely erroneous and ignorant statements that six direction training and spiraling meant hanmi and swirling the legs...reminds me once again that these discussions really belong in the hands of those capable of actually doing and expressing unusual power.
Good writing skills are no qualifier for good Budo- not that they are mutually exclusive either. While we all enjoy our budo chroniclers, when we confuse their abilities at turning a good phrase with actual skills we can get into dangerous waters.