Quote:
Nicholas Eschenbruch wrote:
FWIW I have never understood the self-congratulatory pride some people take in claiming that static should be exclusively practiced for ages. If you so please, go ahead, but why imply that other approaches are inferior?
|
Just to be clear, my teachers have me do static practice of various kinds as a regular part of our training, and I enjoy it very much. I do not understand why flowing or free training must be postponed until the tea leaves read auspiciously.
If there are dojos where static training is never employed at all, I can't imagine that being a very good idea either, and if that's what Lee and James are decrying then I agree.
It seems like the internal power folks draw from Chinese martial arts a concept of "soaking in" ki through a certain kind of practice, and perhaps the kihon training is a way to do that same type of thing, just without solo work and putting the mind in charge and things.
So I am not really criticizing the approach that James and Lee are advocating, I just disagree with the idea that this is "O Sensei's Aikido" (at best it is Saito Sensei's aikido?) and I really don't think you are going to win any arguments about martial effectiveness taking that approach. I also think its an "Aiki-jutsu-budo" approach moreso than a style that focuses on timing, flow, and using atemi to get people to move.