Erm... Dan, that's Inoue Kyoichi hanshi 10th dan. He's one of the most powerful masters of Yoshinkan, and one of the original uchi-deshi's of Shioda Gozo. He was Yoshinkan's 2nd kancho, and was the chief Aikido instructor of Tokyo Metropolitan Police. In terms of expertise, no one questioned him. Please do your research before critizing a grandmaster.
Inoue sensei helped Shioda sensei formulate the kihon doza, which was based heavily upon the basic movements as taught by O-sensei. These are the crown jewel of Yoshinkan and the foundational movements of our techniques. We practice them until they're ingrained in our reflexes, and these movements will bleed into the techniques, which contains all of the motions. Shioda kancho has once said that to improve quickly, just do all the movements 1000 times a day.
I know it looks robotic and cumbersome, but remember that this holds true for all of Yoshinkan, and yet Yoshinkan is acknowledged by the Tokyo riot police as their required martial art. I've felt both the power that comes from these movements as demonstrated by my sensei, and my own improvements as I trained with them.
I highly encourage you to try them out before saying they're useless. These movements help focus your centreline and reduce floppy movements, and just training for a month should show visible improvements to your Aikido.
My interest is in whether or not Yoshinkan's hiriki no yosei is at all similar to the one described in O-sensei's book. Since Shioda Gozo was training with O-sensei at the very beginning of Aikido, and definately learned the original elbow power development, he must've incorporated them into the hiriki no yosei of Yoshinkan.
I know -exactly- who he is. and what those are. I see flaws and always have seen flaws in them. In fact I can point them out and correct them and have done so and shown a better way. His movement lacks the conditioning of both Ueshiba and Shioda needed to do even the limited expression in that kata. There are others here beside me who see it as well.
I am not looking at how robotic in nature. That's kata, and that's okay. There are tell tale indicators for things that are not there and failures in the movements.
Why can't you see those?
In terms of expertise, no one questioned him. Please do your research before critizing a grandmaster.
I accept your standard. Do your own.
Let me ask you:
1. When do you "trust" in others?
2. How do you trust in others?
3. How do you vet the opinions of others?
5. Actual skill?
6. Reputation with 40 years of cooperating uke in kata demonstrations?
7. Or reputation from standing in rooms with adversarial people bent on taking you apart and never succeeding?
8. How about fighting....with aiki?
There will always be teachers who critique other methods-that is NOT criticizing the teacher. Why do you think there are so many methods of aikido? There is NO disrespect on my end. NONE.
What you are really saying is who am I
to critique him
I am routinely cautioned not to tell the truth, to either avoid or lie about what I see, and down play what I have done and can do. Why? Because people are sensitive to the truth about their teachers and the arts. And pick any art, it isn't just about Aikido.
What does that
The truth is there are men who can literally take apart some of the most famous Japanese bad-asses out there-by using the aiki from Ueshiba's aikido. If that shocks you I can only say that when discussing deeper training, true power and aiki... you might be in for some serious awakenings long past any one particular master class teacher or any one art.
For a positive spin...look a it this way.
What if the aiki...in Ueshiba's aikido could actually be world class powerful and take apart most methods in traditional budo and you could learn it in a relatively short time frame?
What if...the best method to learn was from.......Westerners and not