....lol ! For me life doesn't always have things conveniently put in little boxes.
I've no real interest in what someone who hasn't trained with someone else thinks of them or cares to classify them as.
I know what I've experienced with a multitude of seniors over the year - and I know who in my opinion stands out.
I've just chipped in to say how much Dans course resonated with me and was in my opinion in line with the teachings of Pierre which I consider myself very fortunate to have received, I've only done this because certainly in the UK I'm the only Aikido person to host Dan to date so am in a unique position. (Alex Ferreras does lurk but he's CMA).
Regarding the definition supplied on modern Aikido I actually think Aikido v Modern Aikido is more about content rather than geograpic location or even pre/post war. If you check with Henry Ellis you'll see that Pierre came across with Abbe Sensei when Aikido first came to UK. If training after the war makes it 'modern' Aikido then since this was 1952 .....all Aikido in the UK would be modern Aikido.
This isn't my view of course...but everyone is entitled to their own view and I'll not be losing any sleep over such a classification.
ps. Were you on the 1st course in London? glasses?
If you haven't read "Is O-Sensei Really the Father of Modern Aikido?" already, give it a shot. It is much more reasonable then "someone who hasn't trained with someone else thinks of them or cares to classify them as."
Here is the link again: http://blog.aikidojournal.com/2011/1...tanley-pranin/