In days of yore when I was a callow youth I studied judo under many top class judoka.Great emphasis during this training period involved learing how to break the balance of an opponent.Failure to do so meant you had to use excessive force/power and expend energy ,You could of course throw a guy without taking his balance but this was hard work.If however your kuzushi, tsukuri , waza and timing were ok, you needed the minimum amount of strength to throw your partner.
Kenshiro Abbe 8th Dan for example was not a big man.His judo was remarkable.He could take on a line up of 15 men , all Dan grades, some much bigger than him , and throw them to a man walmost effortlessly.No brute force used, just good old Judo principles.Same applies in Aikido, take the persons balance and its easy peasy.Try and throw a man who has maintained good balance is tough. Cheers, Joe.
I don't mean to steer too much towards what is already better left to discussion in the internal version of this thread, only to draw towards a large question of what aikido should be. But do musubi, kuzushi, and throwing have to be separate things?
That is to say, if you can train the body to move in a way that it is always connected, that kuzushi happens to anything that comes into contact with it that is connected to a less degree (or not adequately prepared) - the kuzushi and the throw are thus one and the same - what then is left of this model of first take balance, then throw, as in judo? Is that more ideal than than judo recipe, is it just the same thing, or lesser - or none of the above?
Should aikido be just a process of learning how to mechanically throw a person (and, as Mr. Takahashi points out, can we even call it effective at that anymore?), or should it be a process that changes a person's mind and body so that, well, it just so happens people get thrown on contact?
All the same, some return to effective practice is called for, but to what ends and by which means I can't answer except beyond my own personal preferences.