View Single Post
Old 07-08-2000, 01:40 PM   #18
Aiki1's Avatar
Dojo: ACE Aikido
Location: Los Angeles
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 346
AikiTom wrote:
DJM, in my humble opinion, what you say MAKES Larry's point rather than countering it.
He's saying that little poke-in-the-eye gimmicks can't be counted on BECAUSE they are gimmicks and ignore/miss the principle behind the move. For instance, how would Tohei do that with a 6'4" uke? Kick him in the knee to bend him over, and then poke at his eye?
Ha! That's funny.

What's problematic here to me is that the simplest technique is to me the superior one, if for no other reason than that the more things you put into it, the greater the chance for error in what is already an unpredictable situation.
1) The Tohei example depends on too much. (I will say though that I've done no-touch kokyu/irimi-nages which are beautiful when you strike exactly toward the eyes to get an autonomic reflex where they throw themselves back,but you can't always count on hitting that anymore than finding the pain point in an old-fashioned yonkyo.)
2) I've seen Chiba Sensei in a number of videos do the technique you mention, but again it's dangerous in the sense that it's not efficient - once they're going down face-down, why do you need to reverse it? An unnecessary move,,a little show-boat-y to me. It almost require a very violent front-down move and an equally violent backward response to uke to work. Again, imho, simpler=better.
I agree. Also, there are many people (some boxers for instance) who will not respond to atemi like that. I use atemi, but I know it's limitations. It in and of itself is not a principle, but a tool.

Larry Novick
Head Instructor
ACE Aikido
  Reply With Quote