Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Non-Aikido Martial Traditions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-20-2007, 09:09 PM   #626
Josh Reyer
 
Josh Reyer's Avatar
Location: Aichi-ken, Nagoya-shi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 644
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
I'm quite aware of what the translation says. My point is that you are arguing off of translated terms that are idiomatically imprecise. If I was translating Ueshiba's words in this case, I, too, would use "non-resistance", but if I was arguing whether something was counter to his words or not, I'd use his actual words, not a translation.

Quote:
Source? If its from Second Doshu's "Aikido" why don't you post the original of the quoted translation and we can all parse it? I do not not have access to a Japanese version of the text.
Ueshiba's words, from the Seibukan website:

合気道は無抵抗主義である。無抵抗なるが故にはじめから勝っているのだ。

If you need more convincing I'll happily stop off at the library today, pick up the Japanese edition of "Morihei Ueshiba and Aikido", and quote Ueshiba's interview directly.

Quote:
All of these terms mean "resist" or "resistance" in varying connotations closer to the sense that Pranin's translation used in English. I have no idea which was used in the interview transcript
Then don't argue from "what Osensei said", because you don't know what he said, only what it was translated as. Arguing from someone's words is a tricky enough business among native speakers of that person's language. Adding translated words only muddies the waters further.

Quote:
Who did?
I guess you responded to that before clicking on my link...

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2007, 09:35 PM   #627
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Just for the record, I'd like to note one comment in the translated interview. O-Sensei says: "I sat down and said to Tenryu, "Please try to push me over. Push hard, there's no need to hold back." Since I knew the secret of Aikido, I could not be moved an inch."

Notice that Ueshiba is saying that the "secret of Aikido" has to do with an ability to stand immoveable while being pushed. That is jin, the essence of the kokyu force. That jin/kokyu is used as the power to the strategic techniques of Aikido, techniques which do not offer any brute resistance but which draw their great "kokyu power" from the essence that Ueshiba is talking about as "the secret of Aikido".

FWIW

Mike Sigman
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 05:53 AM   #628
statisticool
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 534
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

[quote=Mike Sigman;169293]O-Sensei says: "I sat down and said to Tenryu, "Please try to push me over. Push hard, there's no need to hold back." Since I knew the secret of Aikido, I could not be moved an inch."

Regarding this

Quote:
Notice that Ueshiba is saying that ...
Well, we notice that what you type is your interpretation of the translator's interpretation of the text, not Ueshiba's direct words.

Quote:
... the "secret of Aikido" has to do with an ability to stand immoveable while being pushed.
That's one interpretation. If you already believe being immobile is the secret of aikido, then you will interpret it that way. From reading that, it sounds like the secret of aikido is also the secret of sumo.

You might want to ask yourself why would being immobile in a martial art that obviously, if you've ever seen it, values being highly mobile, be its secret?

My interpretation is that it sounds like Ueshiba is saying

secret of aikido -> being immoveable

and not

secret of aikido = being immoveable, as you believe.

That is, whatever he is calling the secret of aikido led to him being immoveable (ie. the translator's "since"), but the secret itself isn't being immoveable.

Quote:
That is jin, the essence of the kokyu force.
Is that anything like saying "sushi, the essence of shui zhu yu"?

Could you please, please, try and put your Japanese and Chinese terms in regular ol (non-quoted) terms from a basic physics class so those of us that don't speak these foreign languages can hope to udnerstand these secrets? Thanks.

A secret of internal strength?:
"Let your weight from the crotch area BE in his hands."
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 07:38 AM   #629
Tom H.
Location: Rhode Island
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 72
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Justin Smith wrote: View Post
You might want to ask yourself why would being immobile in a martial art that obviously, if you've ever seen it, values being highly mobile, be its secret?
From my experience with this unpopular resistance & immovability training, it's only the other guy who thinks you are immobile, and that's because you've decided you to stop and smell the flowers, not because you are resisting his efforts to move you. Conversely, when you do start walking again, he can't stop you. It's not because you are opposing him at every turn, but because you are keeping your body in "natural" harmony and you've decided to walk over to the next interesting flower.

Once you've got that body, then you can start doing the fun stuff. If the other guy has it, too, things may get interesting.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 07:56 AM   #630
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,408
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
I'm quite aware of what the translation says. My point is that you are arguing off of translated terms that are idiomatically imprecise.
Then your argument is with Stanley Pranin -- not with me. But, in any event, the original also bears the same interpretation he gave it and that I see in its translated form.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
If I was translating Ueshiba's words in this case, I, too, would use "non-resistance", but if I was arguing whether something was counter to his words or not, I'd use his actual words, not a translation.
For which I thank you.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
Ueshiba's words, from the Seibukan website:

合気道は無抵抗主義である。無抵抗なるが故にはじめから勝っているのだ。
Thank you. As I said, 抵抗 is a systemic characteristic, like electrical resistance, for which it is also used. A systemic characteristic exists throughout the whole and in each part.

Acknowledging his use of muteikou 無抵抗 in this passage, it does not change anything about my point from the text of the interview. The term used in that interview translated as "absolute"by Pranin is "tettei" 徹底 = "thoroughness/completeness" 徹底 した無抵抗主義" states a principle (主義) of nonresistance (無抵抗) existing with (した) "thoroughness/completeness" (徹底) or throughout the whole of the body. The proper connotation of the kanji 徹底 is nonresistance that "penetrates to the bottom/root/foundation"

His use of tettei 徹底 in the interview may be used to strengthen the statement, such that there should be no partial degrees of nonresistance in the different parts, or it may be merely an emphasis on the systemic nature of the principle already implicit in teikou 抵抗. The statement is open to both interpretations in this context where he was correcting an apparent misimpression of the interviewer.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
If you need more convincing I'll happily stop off at the library today, pick up the Japanese edition of "Morihei Ueshiba and Aikido", and quote Ueshiba's interview directly.
Again, thank you very much. Please take no further trouble, although, if you have any pointers to any other original texts of O Sensei online, I will happily take them. I am satisfied with the excerpt text you gave, and very appreciative to have thisportion of the original stateemnt to work with on this important point.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
Arguing from someone's words is a tricky enough business among native speakers of that person's language. Adding translated words only muddies the waters further.
I am glad we clarified that.

Last edited by Erick Mead : 02-21-2007 at 08:07 AM.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 08:18 AM   #631
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Tom Holz wrote: View Post
From my experience with this unpopular resistance & immovability training, it's only the other guy who thinks you are immobile, and that's because you've decided you to stop and smell the flowers, not because you are resisting his efforts to move you. Conversely, when you do start walking again, he can't stop you. It's not because you are opposing him at every turn, but because you are keeping your body in "natural" harmony and you've decided to walk over to the next interesting flower.

Once you've got that body, then you can start doing the fun stuff. If the other guy has it, too, things may get interesting.
Very nicely said Tom.
It is hard enough describing this stuff-many times to folks its like talking a different language. Your "visual" of being walked through incorporates at least two argument points that are being discussed here
1. That it is, in fact, moving energy and not static
2. That it is a powerful, connected body, in motion that causes the other person to have to move.
I would only add that the amount of resistance that the "other person" lets call him uke creates some facinating effects in the interplay.
There truly is no static robotic actions involved.
What remains truly sad is that those in AIkido don't have a clue as to what he was really doing in the first place.
Is it any wonder they argue?
Cheers
Dan
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 08:50 AM   #632
ChrisMoses
Dojo: TNBBC (Icho Ryu Aiki Budo), Shinto Ryu IaiBattojutsu
Location: Seattle, WA
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 906
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Justin Smith wrote: View Post
Could you please, please, try and put your Japanese and Chinese terms in regular ol (non-quoted) terms from a basic physics class so those of us that don't speak these foreign languages can hope to udnerstand these secrets? Thanks.
How's this, "In order for ones aikido to be great/better/like the founder's one needs to understand how to use the support muscles of the body to control ones movement, rather than depending on 'beauty' muscles and simple inertia. These skills seem to be easiest to come by through solo exercises that force the practitioner to simultaneously learn to propriocept with greater accuracy and develops the structures within the body necessary for efficient martial movement. Unfortunately, you must learn these things in person, as it is far too easy to think one is doing something right and rely on what one already knows, thus the confusion."

I agree with your comment about secret of aikido and being immovable. I suppose if he was being less guru-like, he might have said something along the lines of, "Because I understand and have internalized the underlying principles of movement in aikido, I can stabilize my structure in such a way that it would take a great deal of energy for someone external to myself to move me in a meaningful way, while I am however sprung and able to move with great speed and efficiency at a moment's notice." I don't think anyone here is arguing that simply being immovable is the secret of aikido, but rather that IF you REALLY understand how to do aikido, these kinds of parlor tricks are trivial.

Chris Moses
TNBBC, "Putting the ME in MEdiocre!"
Shinto Ryu Iai Battojutsu
TNBBC Blog
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 09:03 AM   #633
Josh Reyer
 
Josh Reyer's Avatar
Location: Aichi-ken, Nagoya-shi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 644
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
Then your argument is with Stanley Pranin -- not with me. But, in any event, the original also bears the same interpretation he gave it and that I see in its translated form.
For which I thank you.
No, my argument is with you. Stan Pranin supervised a capable translation that adequately gave an idea to English speakers of what Ueshiba said. You are the one who has been using the idiomatically imprecise term to argue with Mike et al.

Let me give you another example. In Iwama style uke is taught to grab tori/nage very strongly and very solidly. Tori should be unable to move unless moving correctly, and without trying to muscle through the technique. In English this could very well be described as training with "resistance" (hell, we had a whole thread about it). But in Japanese it would never be described using 抵抗. That's the difference in idiom.

So, if you want to argue that what Mike, et al are describing is against the principles of 無抵抗, then great. I absolutely disagree with that position, but at least you're on firmer linguistic ground. If you are using the term "non-resistance", then I think there's a fundamental problem.

Quote:
Thank you. As I said, 抵抗 is a systemic characteristic, like electrical resistance, for which it is also used. A systemic characteristic exists throughout the whole and in each part.

Acknowledging his use of muteikou 無抵抗 in this passage, it does not change anything about my point from the text of the interview. The term used in that interview translated as "absolute"by Pranin is "tettei" 徹底 = "thoroughness/ completeness" 徹底 した無抵抗主義" states a principle of nonresistance that exists "thoroughly" or throughout the whole of the body. Or using the proper connotation of the kanji 徹底 = nonresistance that "penetrates to the bottom/root/foundation"

His use of tettei 徹底 in the interview may be used to strengthen the statement, such that there should be no partial degrees of nonresistance in the different parts, or it may be merely an emphasis on the systemic nature of the principle already implicit in teikou 抵抗. The statement is open to both interpretations in this context where he was correcting an apparent misimpression of the interviewer.
There is nothing inherently "systemic" about 抵抗. The Daijirin definition is quite simple.

(1)外から加えられる力に逆らったり、張り合ったりすること。手向かうこと。さからうこと。
「―すると撃つぞ」「官軍に―する」
(2)そのまま素直には受け入れがたい感じ。反発したい感じ。抵抗感。
「そういう言い方には―がある」
(3)運動する物体に対し、運動と反対の方向に作用する力。抗力。
「空気の―を少なくする」「摩擦―」
(4)「電気(でんき)抵抗」の略。

If you grab my hand, and I pull away, that's 抵抗. If you try to push me, and I try pushing back, that's 抵抗. If you try to push me and I pull, that's not 抵抗. If you swing your sword at me and I bat it away with my sword, that's 抵抗. If you swing at me and I move to the side, it's not 抵抗. If I use ukenagashi to let it slide off my sword, it's not 抵抗. If you try to push me and I simply let the energy from that push go into the ground, that's not 抵抗.

What you should be paying attention to is not the 徹底, but the 逆らわない, which is where Ueshiba describes what he means by 無抵抗. 逆らう sakarau means to oppose the flow or movement of something. So, now, we flip back ten pages or so in this thread, and see the dangers of non-idiomatic discourse. In your discussion with Ignatius, your premise was that what Ignatius was suggesting was resistance. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't; that's not particularly an argument I care about. But what Ignatius (and Mike) was describing was certainly not 抵抗, and at no point suggested any kind of 逆らう of the partner's energy.

Last edited by Josh Reyer : 02-21-2007 at 09:07 AM.

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 03:38 PM   #634
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,408
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
No, my argument is with you...
Well, thank you Joshua. This debate is worth the time.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
Let me give you another example. In Iwama style uke is taught to grab tori/nage very strongly and very solidly. Tori should be unable to move unless moving correctly, and without trying to muscle through the technique. In English this could very well be described as training with "resistance" (hell, we had a whole thread about it). But in Japanese it would never be described using 抵抗. That's the difference in idiom.
--- And that is 180 degrees out from the instance of "resistance" TO the attack I am speaking about and that O Sensei refers to in the instant quote. I, too trained in Iwama style, and I can make your wrist turn pale if need be. The training was, as you say to move freely even in a very firm attack, but the response I learned that allows that, is by no means, resistant at all.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
So, if you want to argue that what Mike, et al are describing is against the principles of 無抵抗, then great.
I do. Based on what they say one should train to do as a matter of first principle -- to become a spring or prop against the ground.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
I absolutely disagree with that position, but at least you're on firmer linguistic ground. If you are using the term "non-resistance", then I think there's a fundamental problem.
This is equivalent to saying that one cannot think about aikido -- except in Japanese. I demur to even lift a hand to that straw man. What English term would you propose in its place, since you disagree with Pranin, or at least with me, about its usage in this context?

But, I will take it in the spirit you have offered and not resist dealing with the concepts in the Japanese.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
There is nothing inherently "systemic" about 抵抗.
Which would only reinforce attention to his use of tettei 徹底 completeness/thoroughness to eliminate that ambiguity. And as we well know, idiomatic Japanese is normally utterly lacking in ambiguity.

And # 4 definition is support for a systemic concept --
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
(4)「電気(でんき)抵抗」の略。
Abbr. for resistance to electricity. My arguments on interpreting "non-resistance" are largely geometric in application. "Resistance" in an electrical sense is also very dependent on the shape and orientation of the conductor.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
The Daijirin definition is quite simple.
(1)外から加えられる力に逆らったり、張り合ったりすること。手向かうこと。さからうこと。
See discussed below.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
(3 ) 運動する物体に対し, 運動と反対の方向に作用する力。
Well that certainly applies to my objection: "against an object in motion, power opposite the direction of motion." Seems to me he is an object in motion at the point his intedned push comes into contact with my body

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
If you grab my hand, and I pull away, that's 抵抗. If you try to push me, and I try pushing back, that's 抵抗. If you try to push me and I pull, that's not 抵抗. If you swing your sword at me and I bat it away with my sword, that's 抵抗. If you swing at me and I move to the side, it's not 抵抗. If I use ukenagashi to let it slide off my sword, it's not 抵抗.
Agreed thoroughly, with the only quibble being the assumption that the grab and pull bakc does not result in a tug of war, in which case it is 抵抗.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
If you try to push me and I simply let the energy from that push go into the ground, that's not 抵抗.
And there is where we disagree. If you are a static intermediate structure between two objects pushing at one another (Newton's Third Law I believe) through your structure, your structure is necessarily and unavoidably exerting equal and opposite force against BOTH of them. If you are a eighty-year old man and you become the intermediary for the hammer and the planet, then you likely break something along the way.

Your structure is pushing back in each case. If not, then you are being moved somewhere, because you are not resisting. Basically, those are the two choices in repsonse to applied force, either resist or accelerate.

If you resist only partially, then you "vector add" as Mike refers to it, to manipulate the line of force through the body to the ground. Per the # 1 definition -- because there is a component of force opposed (さからうこと) in that model, the muteikou 無抵抗 lacks tettei 徹底. The non-resistance does not have thoroughness/completeness.

It is, in part, in competition (張り合ったりすること) with the push and therefore not muteikou that is thorough (徹底した無抵抗). It is, in part, opposing the outside force (外から加えられる力に逆らったり), and also therefore not muteikou that is complete. (徹底した無抵抗).

If you do not resist at all, but act only perpendicularly or tangentially (of like sign) to all forces or rotations, then no component of your force is ever acting against or in opposition to the outside force at all. The relative strength of your structure does not come into play (other than to maintain its own integrity). There is no component of your force, whether static fascial strain ( Mike's "springs model") or muscular counter-exertion, (which we all agree is bad) in response.

Either of the latter is 抵抗 in the sense of the Daijirin usage of 抵抗 : 運動と反対の方向に作用する力, and also of the first usage listed as outlined above.

Let me hasten to add that atemi are not per se 抵抗. If applied on a clear line where no force is being exerted by the opponent, atemi can be applied with 無抵抗 -- the strike is not resisting any "force form the outside." He might be resisting my strike with his structure when he gets hit -- but that is only if he is not doing aikido at the time.
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
What you should be paying attention to is not the 徹底, but the 逆らわない, which is where Ueshiba describes what he means by 無抵抗. 逆らう sakarau means to oppose the flow or movement of something.
But what Ignatius (and Mike) was describing was certainly not 抵抗, and at no point suggested any kind of 逆らう of the partner's energy.
I am trying to read his entire concept in context together with all its parts. The entire phrase is: 徹底した無抵抗主義 で相手に逆らわない。 He essentially repeats the earlier phrase "principle of thorough/complete nonresistance" "so" (で) that "it does not oppose" (逆) the attacker. 無抵抗 is primary, and which 逆らわない "comes from" (で) -- as the result or expression of 無抵抗.

Sakarau 逆 is also the same kanji as "gyaku" which is its primary usage and involves a positional concept -- implying the geometric interpretation of I am giving it 無抵抗で... 逆らわない -- offering NO opposing component of force, at all. That means tangents of like sign or purely perpendicular components. "Juji" 十字, in other words. That brings up another favorite image he uses in the Doka where he referred to the art as "jujido": "cross sign of the way", or "way of the cross sign," and in several other Doka as merely Juji
Quote:
John Stephens, "Essence of Aikido" wrote:
天 地 の
精 魂 凝りて
十 字 道
世 界 和 楽 の
むすぶ 浮橋

Ametsuchi no
seikon korite
jujido
sekai waraku no
musubu ukihashi.
That gives a further context and connection to my fundmamental geometric premise on what constitutes effective, physical, and aggressive 無抵抗 non-resistance in response to an attack.

Bottom line -- a push will move you somehow unless you resist it somehow. To move parts of your structure around (as we see O Sensei doing in the videos offered previously) to dissipate his push the attacker need not be able necessarily to shift your stance (which we also see in O Sensei's videos offered).

The question is what part(s) you allow him to move, and more importantly in what order or direction. And whether you decide to let some parts "not resist" ahead of time or "out of order" from his perspective.

Wherein lies the art -- rather than the physics -- of aikido.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 05:41 PM   #635
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
...If you are a static intermediate structure between two objects pushing at one another (Newton's Third Law I believe) through your structure, your structure is necessarily and unavoidably exerting equal and opposite force against BOTH of them. If you are a eighty-year old man and you become the intermediary for the hammer and the planet, then you likely break something along the way.

Your structure is pushing back in each case. If not, then you are being moved somewhere, because you are not resisting. Basically, those are the two choices in repsonse to applied force, either resist or accelerate.
I think the best way to describe the structure is "sprung"...rather than "rigid". Obviously there are varying degrees of "springiness" and "rigidity"... But it has to do with conservation of linear momentum and elastic (or in varying cases... partially elastic) collisions - a combination of Newton's 1st and 3rd laws...

It's like that suspended ball bearing contraption, whereby if the ball on one end is swung and hits the other balls, the balls in the middle remain stationary, and kinetic energy is transferred to the opposite end ball and so on. Obviously there will be some loss of KE, and conversion to PE, but the total momentum and energy within that isolated system is conserved. I think...

If the opposite end ball is somehow prevented from swinging, perhaps by being in contact with a wall, then KE is transferred to the wall. And because the wall (ground?) is THE rigid structure, Newton's 3rd law applies, and the KE is transferred back to the first ball, causing it to swing back (i.e. the 1st law).

So, your structure is not "pushing" back... or rigid, but sprung. You're just the balls in the middle. And you are merely attempting to manipulate the kinetic energy, thru your structure, against the ground and back, so that the total momentum is more or less conserved, thus restoring "harmony".

Well, at least how I understand it... my physics sux, so I could be way off the mark...in terms of the physics...

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 07:42 PM   #636
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote: View Post
I think the best way to describe the structure is "sprung"...rather than "rigid". Obviously there are varying degrees of "springiness" and "rigidity"... But it has to do with conservation of linear momentum and elastic (or in varying cases... partially elastic) collisions - a combination of Newton's 1st and 3rd laws...

It's like that suspended ball bearing contraption, whereby if the ball on one end is swung and hits the other balls, the balls in the middle remain stationary, and kinetic energy is transferred to the opposite end ball and so on. Obviously there will be some loss of KE, and conversion to PE, but the total momentum and energy within that isolated system is conserved. I think...

If the opposite end ball is somehow prevented from swinging, perhaps by being in contact with a wall, then KE is transferred to the wall. And because the wall (ground?) is THE rigid structure, Newton's 3rd law applies, and the KE is transferred back to the first ball, causing it to swing back (i.e. the 1st law).

So, your structure is not "pushing" back... or rigid, but sprung. You're just the balls in the middle. And you are merely attempting to manipulate the kinetic energy, thru your structure, against the ground and back, so that the total momentum is more or less conserved, thus restoring "harmony".

Well, at least how I understand it... my physics sux, so I could be way off the mark...in terms of the physics...
Hi Ignatius
My physics suck as well. I'll let you and Gernot keep making your excellent analogies and detailed explanations. You do a far better Job than me.

The above example while pretty nifty doesn't really cover willful dissapations or vectoring of forces in the body. Nor compression power releases.
One thing about the ball transfer effect, and how it can be misunderstood is how it realtes to hardness. I'll use an example thats close to home for me -blacksmithing. With a hammer and anvil you test to measure quality of tempered hardness.You drop the hammer on the anvil and watch to see the rebound off the surface. If you have a nice hard but tempered steel surface and a hard but tempered steel hammer- it rings and bounces almost as high as it was dropped. If you have a cheap, pig iron anvil face that is soft it will not transfer the energy back up and bounce the hammer as high. This becomes important because when moving hot steel you want the energy transfer to be absorbed in the steel so it moves with less effort.
Now with a human body between the ground and the force-if you are "hard" by flexing-your dead meat.
So that leads to wonderful questions of clear power-Sagawas "Tomie no Chikara." Just "what" is hard so that the rebound is clear enough (like a teacher expressed to me) to ring a bell.
How do we make "Tomie no Chikara" real? Why would Sagawa even discuss it?
And just what can we use to enhance that uhm...hardness- in an expansive manner? And how can all that work in the inverse to absorb?

What isn't really being discussed is how "sensitive" it leaves you to someones force. Because of an enhanced zero-balance point or what the CMA call central equilibrium- input is more easily read and more easily "changed." I don't talk about it much because I don't play aiki-games so much anymore, but the sensitivity is tailor made for Aikido.

For me the real fun stuff is how other aspects of good structure can be utilized once achieved..... in another venue... to kick, hit, throw, and choke.
But it's still all power, and its all fun
Cheers
Dan

Last edited by DH : 02-21-2007 at 07:48 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 08:04 PM   #637
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Hi Dan,
Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
The above example while pretty nifty doesn't really cover willful dissapations or vectoring of forces in the body. Nor compression power releases.
One thing about the ball transfer effect, and how it can be misunderstood is how it realtes to hardness.
Thanks for the forging metaphor... WRT doing a better job explaining... you are too kind.... and yes, I was keeping it simplistic.

Whilst we are on the subject of metaphors, what parallels do you see between forging steel and forging the body?

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 08:52 PM   #638
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote: View Post

Whilst we are on the subject of metaphors, what parallels do you see between forging steel and forging the body?
Well,none actually. I think it’s a way overplayed axiom
All that stuff about
"The iron brags about facing the tortuous furnace and the heat...
The steel blade? Looks back and smiles."

Or "Through tortuous discipline, fire and coaxing, thus the blade is born..."
Yadda yadda Actual forging is addictive but a whole lot of hot, hard sweaty work.

I think the real key to learning this stuff is repetitive, gradual work. Ya have to learn without stress at first to slowly get your body to hear and respond in new ways. It's the best way to learn this stuff not beating it ala forging. Even fighting with it has to be a process or you'll just go back to isolated flexing.
It's why I don't really want to teach people. I'm having too much fun to waste my time with technique junkies. I look for other people who are just as challenged by it as me and who will eat it up and work it.
Cheers
Dan

Last edited by DH : 02-21-2007 at 09:01 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 09:48 PM   #639
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,408
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Ignatius Teo wrote: View Post
I think the best way to describe the structure is "sprung"...rather than "rigid". Obviously there are varying degrees of "springiness" and "rigidity"... But it has to do with conservation of linear momentum and elastic (or in varying cases... partially elastic) collisions - a combination of Newton's 1st and 3rd laws...

It's like that suspended ball bearing contraption, whereby if the ball on one end is swung and hits the other balls, the balls in the middle remain stationary, and kinetic energy is transferred to the opposite end ball and so on. Obviously there will be some loss of KE, and conversion to PE, but the total momentum and energy within that isolated system is conserved. I think...

If the opposite end ball is somehow prevented from swinging, perhaps by being in contact with a wall, then KE is transferred to the wall. And because the wall (ground?) is THE rigid structure, Newton's 3rd law applies, and the KE is transferred back to the first ball, causing it to swing back (i.e. the 1st law).

So, your structure is not "pushing" back... or rigid, but sprung. You're just the balls in the middle. And you are merely attempting to manipulate the kinetic energy, thru your structure, against the ground and back, so that the total momentum is more or less conserved, thus restoring "harmony".

Well, at least how I understand it... my physics sux, so I could be way off the mark...in terms of the physics...
Actually, I think the elastic collision analysis you are using is basically correct for what you are doing, or at least how it is described. And I do get the "spring" aspect. The Tthird Law applies in each succesive collision, and each ball in turn must bear its share of resisting the reaction load through its structure to push the next one in the line. It is also bearing the countering reaction push from the end ball's inertia that is accelerated by the impulse transmitted. If its structure is not strong enough, the middle ball breaks and a great deal of energy is eaten up in the fracture loads. If you do not believe this, substitute an egg for one of the ball bearings in the middle sometime. I suggest using hardboiled, or have lots of paper towels on hand.

The problem is that even springs are subject to the Third Law. and the reactive push comes from the elastic strain deformations of the structure that the effective "spring" undergoes. An actual spring is just more obvious in its elastic deformation than the more rigid (but still highly elastic) ball bearing. But overloaded springs (of whatever construction) also snap, just as rigid tubes or spheres do.

The question in a resisting mode -- even in linear elastic collisions, which you properly describe -- is determining the limiting load for the structure. True non-resistance does not have that limit, because it never bears a load that would significantly limit it. So it is safer and more effective for doddering old men -- as Ikeda urges us to plan for.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 11:12 PM   #640
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

But... there is no resistance Erick... and you'd be surprised how much load a properly trained body can withstand... But then again, we're not talking about the body having to withstand the load, and instead, spreading the load across the frame and fascia structures to the ground, which bears the main brunt of the load.

And by all accounts, O'Sensei was still extremely strong, even in his old age... despite the fact that he had to be carried in and out of the dojo. But then, you only really need as much strength as you do to remain standing.... it's the getting up outta bed and down part that's the problem..

So, no, I don't plan on being a doddering, slobbering and incontinent old man when I'm 60, 70 or 80... hopefully I'll still be running 40-50kg bags of chicken feed up the hill, and push starting the missus' ol' heap of shi'te (the ol' 1 tonne ute) UP the inclined driveway, just using the ground, when I'm well past my prime... (oops... wait a minute... I AM past my prime...but HEY this boy don't need to take them little blue pills!)

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2007, 11:19 PM   #641
TomW
Dojo: Kodokan
Location: Portland, OR
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 51
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
The problem is that even springs are subject to the Third Law. and the reactive push comes from the elastic strain deformations of the structure that the effective "spring" undergoes. An actual spring is just more obvious in its elastic deformation than the more rigid (but still highly elastic) ball bearing. But overloaded springs (of whatever construction) also snap, just as rigid tubes or spheres do.

The question in a resisting mode -- even in linear elastic collisions, which you properly describe -- is determining the limiting load for the structure. True non-resistance does not have that limit, because it never bears a load that would significantly limit it. So it is safer and more effective for doddering old men -- as Ikeda urges us to plan for.
Erick, your physics is on the money. The thing with the analogy and one of the reasons Iggy's is overly simplistic, is that springs, ball bearings, anvils etc. are inanimate objects and the human body is not.

Taking the example of Ueshiba sitting on his rear with his feet in the air and the Sumo tori (not sure if that's the correct term) pushing on his forehead. Ueshiba's rear end is essentially a pin connection with no moment resisting capacity, and he had no bracing system to resist the lateral loading (there's some non-resistance fore you), but he didn't fall over, as an inanimate object would have under the same conditions. So....he either redirected the force vector such that it ran through him, "bounced off the ground" and returned equal and opposite or, he defied the laws of physics with some woo woo ninja tricks. I dunno, but I'm sticking with the physics. Seems clear to me that there's a little more than just waza and the party line "non resistance" going on here.

Just my two cents, YMMV, etc., etc,

Tom Wharton
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 04:39 AM   #642
Gernot Hassenpflug
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 319
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Dan Harden wrote: View Post
Hi Ignatius
My physics suck as well. I'll let you and Gernot keep making your excellent analogies and detailed explanations. You do a far better Job than me.
Ah, I've been staying out of this because I can't do this stuff yet. The last thing I'd want to do is make any of my private analogies public, some of them might not be work-safe LOL

And in the absence as yet of a pithy English translation, it should be "Tomei no Chikara" (the invisible power).

Regards,
Gernot

Last edited by Gernot Hassenpflug : 02-22-2007 at 04:42 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 05:14 AM   #643
Mike Sigman
Location: Durango, CO
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,123
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Gernot Hassenpflug wrote: View Post
Ah, I've been staying out of this because I can't do this stuff yet. The last thing I'd want to do is make any of my private analogies public, some of them might not be work-safe LOL

And in the absence as yet of a pithy English translation, it should be "Tomei no Chikara" (the invisible power).

Regards,
Gernot
It's also referred to as the hidden/invisible power by the Chinese.

Mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 05:30 AM   #644
Gernot Hassenpflug
Dojo: Aunkai, Tokyo
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 319
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Oh, now that's interesting! I'd assumed it was Sagawa's or the publisher's idea for a cute title. This is the only place I've seen this reference, all other Japanese references I have seen (i.e., the usual magazines, interviews available to the public in Japan) refer in some way to ki or aiki. Is the expression widespread in all Chinese martial arts, or only in some?
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 06:20 AM   #645
DH
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,394
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

I think of it as "clear" power.
Which is a wonderful play on words.
It is clear in the sense that one wants to be as smooth and unhindered as possible, so there is a clear current. To be invisible to the force and the ground-not entirely true but an ideal for some things. That was the "ringing the bell thing." They touch the hand of a good player and bong!!...off they go as they "clearly" hit the air-supported-by- the-ground.
In another sense to have no intention- till you do. So your are clear to feel.

Then the other notion that it is clear, transparent, and all but invisible to the opponent to see and perceive.

Some of which BTW a good grappler understands. Personally, I always liked being perceived as a meathead grappler-at least by the guy coming to play.
Dan

Last edited by DH : 02-22-2007 at 06:29 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 08:18 AM   #646
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,408
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Tom Wharton wrote: View Post
Erick, your physics is on the money. The thing with the analogy and one of the reasons Iggy's is overly simplistic, is that springs, ball bearings, anvils etc. are inanimate objects and the human body is not.

Taking the example of Ueshiba sitting on his rear with his feet in the air and the Sumo tori (not sure if that's the correct term) pushing on his forehead. Ueshiba's rear end is essentially a pin connection with no moment resisting capacity, and he had no bracing system to resist the lateral loading (there's some non-resistance fore you), but he didn't fall over, as an inanimate object would have under the same conditions. So....he either redirected the force vector such that it ran through him, "bounced off the ground" and returned equal and opposite or, he defied the laws of physics with some woo woo ninja tricks. I dunno, but I'm sticking with the physics.
I am with you. Your catalog of the possibilities is just not quite complete. His butt is not a pin, but a hinge. One hinge at the ground, one hinge at the shoulder/neck, one hinge at the head/neck, and a hinge at the push connection, There are also potential hinges at the attacker's wrist, elbow and shoulder. O Sensei also has quasi-hinges in the waist/spine It is fairly isolated in this posture, but it is useable to control the hinge at the ground by counterwieght of the legs.

Three hinges are within his immediate control. If he takes control of the connection hinge by kokyu methods (which the video demonstrates -- he does not allow the pusher to establish a stable connection) he then has four hinges to manipulate. He has created a four-hinge "arch" which is, in fact, a mechanism. It will not support the load statically and it will not bear weight except along one supercritical funicular path without the whole arch collapsing.

His use of kokyu ensures that it is the other side of the arch that does the collapsing part. If he has the proper funicular shape for his own weight load and connects to the push with motion tangentially up or down or sideways, his structure remains intact and their structure collapses from the applied rotation.

Because he took the linear momentum and coverted it to angular monentum at the point of connection with perpendicular force or tangential rotation, he never bears the linear force of the push on his side of the connection, and he does not violate the Third Law. Pure math likes linear forces. Engineering mechanics has non-zero-dimension material substances and non-point action. Therefore the moments and shears tend to control the solutions more than the linear forces.

He just sits there on his butt and rolls the the connection into the ground or into the sky with his head (ten chi), and that propagates the kokyu rotations up the chain of the attacking arm, where any inconsistent joint rotations will instantly hinge the wrong way and then collapse, because they are applying a substantial load to that joint that is inconsistent with the induced rotation. Kuzushi.

Although we are talking about angular momentum, rather than linear momentum -- the attacker can no more easily stop transfer of angular momentum up the chain of his arm than the ball in the middle of the "clacking balls" inertial toy, described earlier, can stop transmitting the linear momentum to the next ball in the line. Stiffening in an attempt to dampen it actually makes it worse by reducing the effective radius of the propagating wave of angular momentum transfer in the limb, creating a "shock" toward his center, like the cracking of the whip.

IF he grounded the forces in that scenario and formed a pinned joint at the ground, as you suggest he would effectively REMOVE one hinge under his control, and thus would be LESS able to avoid being moved or toppled.

Last edited by Erick Mead : 02-22-2007 at 08:20 AM.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 08:39 AM   #647
Josh Reyer
 
Josh Reyer's Avatar
Location: Aichi-ken, Nagoya-shi
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 644
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
--- And that is 180 degrees out from the instance of "resistance" TO the attack I am speaking about and that O Sensei refers to in the instant quote. I, too trained in Iwama style, and I can make your wrist turn pale if need be. The training was, as you say to move freely even in a very firm attack, but the response I learned that allows that, is by no means, resistant at all.
I do. Based on what they say one should train to do as a matter of first principle -- to become a spring or prop against the ground.
I was not referring to Iwama style ukemi being the same kind of resistance as Mike and Ignatius are talking about. I was making a reference to the idiomatic difference between "non-resistance" and 無抵抗.

Here, let me try again, completely removed from aikido so there can be no misunderstanding. In English it's perfectly acceptable to say "I can't resist eating another piece of chocolate cake." It is not acceptable in Japanese to say チョコケーキのもう一個を食べるのを抵抗できない. You could say it, and you might get a native speaker to understand what you're saying, but that's a usage of 抵抗 that isn't natural to the Japanese idiom.

To whit, in English we can say "resistance" and "non-resistance" as glosses for 抵抗 and 無抵抗, but we can never assume that they mean exactly the same thing in all situations and all cases. What very well might be resistance in English may not be 抵抗 in Japanese, and vice versa.

Quote:
This is equivalent to saying that one cannot think about aikido -- except in Japanese. I demur to even lift a hand to that straw man. What English term would you propose in its place, since you disagree with Pranin, or at least with me, about its usage in this context?
Erick, with all due respect, you seem to have this habit of not reading very closely and putting your own little spin on what the other person is saying. I would appreciate it if you would read a little closer.

I do not disagree with Pranin. If you would reread my previous post, I said that that the translation capable, and the words adequate to convey the basic idea of the original. If you would reread my post previous to that, you'd see that I said that if I was doing the translation, I too would use "non-resistance". Hell, I did use that word, here. Once again, my beef is not with the word. What I'm trying to say is that any word, while adequate to convey ideas, would be wholly inadequate to base an argument on "what Osensei meant".

I am not by any means saying that aikido can only be discussed in Japanese, or can only be thought about in Japanese. If I may engage in a bit of snark, thank you for answering my argument with a reductio ad absurdum. God knows that has never happened in an internet discussion before.

Now that the snark is out of my system. Far from believing aikido can only be thought about in Japanese, I'm in fact in favor of minimizing "dojo Japanese" as much as possible; I don't think it really helps. No, what I am saying here is that the minute you appeal to authority in an aikido discussion with an "Osensei said...", then I believe you have to go to the Japanese, or at least be cognizant that you are not actually quoting Osensei, but a translation of what he said, with all the signal loss that goes along with that.

無抵抗主義, which is something Ueshiba repeats, can be translated as "principle of non-resistance". It can also be translated as "principle of passive resistance". Whoa, now we're suddenly in a completely different realm with our physics analogies, aren't we? Now, in English, we have to choose: is it "non-resistance", is it "passive resistance"? Well, it's not Ueshiba's problem. He simply said 無抵抗, with all that encompasses.

Quote:
And # 4 definition is support for a systemic concept -- Abbr. for resistance to electricity.
#4 is support for its use as an abbreviation for a technical term. Nothing more, nothing less.

Quote:
Well that certainly applies to my objection: "against an object in motion, power opposite the direction of motion." Seems to me he is an object in motion at the point his intedned push comes into contact with my body
I don't see it that way. If that's the case, Ueshiba not moving when Tenryu pushes him is 抵抗. Obviously what is paramount is the energy given in the push. That is what is not 抵抗された.

Quote:
Agreed thoroughly, with the only quibble being the assumption that the grab and pull bakc does not result in a tug of war, in which case it is 抵抗.
Needless to say. He grabs me and pulls, I push with his pull. Not 抵抗. If he says, "Yikes!" and tries to push, I pull. No 抵抗. He says, "Zoinks!" and tries pulling again, I push. No 抵抗.

Quote:
And there is where we disagree. If you are a static intermediate structure between two objects pushing at one another (Newton's Third Law I believe) through your structure, your structure is necessarily and unavoidably exerting equal and opposite force against BOTH of them. If you are a eighty-year old man and you become the intermediary for the hammer and the planet, then you likely break something along the way.
This would be convincing if you truly understood what Mike, Ignatius, Dan, and others are trying to say, and what they do. I'm afraid I don't believe that is the case. So this particular segment of the discussion will have to wait until you've met someone doing what they do.

Josh Reyer

The lyf so short, the crafte so longe to lerne,
Th'assay so harde, so sharpe the conquerynge...
- Chaucer
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 08:53 AM   #648
Eddie deGuzman
Dojo: Kuroishi/Kitakyushu
Location: Kitakyushu
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 47
Japan
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

As it is typically used, Dan is right. "Toumei na" means transparent or clear. I think "transparent" lends interesting connotations, easy to see-through.

Cheers,
Eddie
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 02:20 PM   #649
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,408
United_States
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
What I'm trying to say is that any word, while adequate to convey ideas, would be wholly inadequate to base an argument on "what Osensei meant".
Neither you nor I can divine what he meant unless it is contained in what he "said" or contained in the kihon of the art as he passed it on to his heirs and students. I give him credit for saying what he meant, and will approach the problem accordingly.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
無抵抗主義, which is something Ueshiba repeats, can be translated as "principle of non-resistance". It can also be translated as "principle of passive resistance".
"Passive resistance" would be typically be judou 受動 teikou 抵抗. 受 indicates receiving or accepting (also pronounced uke) and 動 indicates change or motion. Also, merely as a conceptual matter, even if you were right the further usages for the concept of "passive" are not helping your argument here. The other word for "passiveness" is ukemi 受身 "accepting or receiving position"

As you know, negation in Japan is a funny thing. One just does not say "no" in polite company. The common negative word "iie" いいえ can affirm, negate or beg off -- depending on context. Same with the onyomi kanji form hi 否.

Mu 無 on the other hand is not nuanced. It is unequivocal. Nothing, zero, not at all, empty set. The comprehensive and curt negation of mu 無 is part of the shock value of its use in Zen stories where "Mu." 無 is the answer to the whole koan.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
He simply said 無抵抗, with all that encompasses.
Semantic overstretch does not aid your argument. And you have not even tried to address the emphatic use of tettei 徹底.

Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
Needless to say. He grabs me and pulls, I push with his pull. Not 抵抗. If he says, "Yikes!" and tries to push, I pull. No 抵抗. He says, "Zoinks!" and tries pulling again, I push. No 抵抗.
In the cited interview we have been discussing, the interviewer states his question with that assumption analogizing judo's principle of "If he pulls, you push; if he pushes, you pull." O Sensei's answer was to correct him by stating his adherence to 徹底した無抵抗主義 -- "principle of complete/thorough/absolute non-resistance."

It is this same point that Second Doshu (who also participated in that interview) made about the difference between judo and Aikido in the appendix to his book "Aikido."
Quote:
Kisshomaru Doshu wrote:
"Push when pulled, and pull when pushed." ... Jujutsu literally means "the techniques of suppleness," while judo means "the Way of suppleness".
When the same concepts are explained by the principle of Aikido, it is, "TURN when pushed, and ENTER when pulled."
In other words irimi/tenkan is the fundamental. See text here: http://www.aikidoonline.com/Archives...03_doshu2.html

In Pranin's translation of the interview, which is not in the excerpt you gave me, Second Doshu says this and then is joined by his father's comment emphasizing the point again:
Quote:
O Sensei interview wrote:
[Kisshomaru]:The opponent is left totally powerless, or rather, the opponent's power is led in the direction you want to take him. So the more power the opponent has, the easier it is for you. On the other hand, if you clash with your opponent's power you can never hope to win against a very strong person.

O Sensei: Also, in Aikido you never go against the attacker's power. ...
Quote:
Joshua Reyer wrote: View Post
So this particular segment of the discussion will have to wait until you've met someone doing what they do.
Putting off the threatened rejoinder to another day? That would be 受動抵抗 .

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2007, 06:05 PM   #650
eyrie
 
eyrie's Avatar
Location: Summerholm, Queensland
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,126
Australia
Offline
Re: Baseline skillset

Quote:
Erick Mead wrote: View Post
...hinges...funicular shape...tangentially... applied rotation....angular monentum... tangential rotation....rolls the the connection into the ground or into the sky...kokyu rotations up the chain...joint rotations....transfer of angular momentum up the chain....effective radius of the propagating wave of angular momentum...cracking of the whip....pinned joint
I dunno Erick, you're still arguing from the same position. IT's not any of those things...

Here's a clue... I'll use a technical example for the moment, since you seem to be fixated still on technique. Take a simple wrist lock, like kotegaeshi, for example. If uke is floppy (or even "strong"), you can turn the wrist all day and you will not get kuzushi. You might wrench the wrist out and sprain/tear a few tendons, but I guarantee you he will not go over and maybe he'll punch you in the head a couple of times for your trouble. Try it. As a static exercise of course.

As a condition of this exercise, you are NOT allowed to move your feet, turn your hips, shift your body, turn/rotate your wrists, flex or rotate any joints - yours or uke's. You must start from the position of already having uke's wrist in the lock. Likewise, uke must only stand there in a relaxed manner and allow you to put the lock on, without attempting to negate it in any way, even to the extent of taking ukemi. i.e. he will fall when he has absolutely no choice but to.

The question is, how do you "lock" the entire connection from the wrist to the foot, so that all intervening joints CANNOT flex, turn, pivot, unhinge or rotate. Then how do you, with that entire structure locked, make him bear weight on one foot and tip him over?

Again, I'm only using AN example of technique as an application of the baseline skills. It's not about a particular technique or techniques in general. And any armchair postulations about how it *might* work will become immediately apparent.

BTW, a simplistic answer of "just use kokyu" just won't cut it...

Last edited by eyrie : 02-22-2007 at 06:08 PM.

Ignatius
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aikido Transmission and Class Size Kevin Leavitt General 30 03-02-2007 09:14 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:47 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate