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 > General

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 01-27-2015, 07:02 PM   #1
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Aikido: Striking all along?

First, I will define what I mean by striking or striking based arts.

Striking based martial arts differ from grappling/throwing on one simple characteristic, grabbing the opponents is not part of the main syllabus or curriculum. Karate for example has throws and other such takedowns, but its primary offence is applying force through the medium of a fist or leg rather than grab and throw. Judo is the opposite, where force is applied through the grips and the body as it drives into a throw or takedown.Therefore, when I say 'striking', I mean that the style or martial art focuses mainly on delivering force through a punch or kick, notwithstanding any throws or takedowns that may or may not exist in styles repertoire.

Based on this definition, It is my opinion that aikido is primarily a striking art. Now most people would likely point out the '90% atemi and 10% throws' quote from O Sensei, my opinion however, is that Aikido is and always was a striking martial art, akin to karate or boxing forms from both the East and West, rather than a grappling style as most aikidoka, me included, would believe. I will not go into detail here but I would state two of my main points regarding this belief.

Firstly, blending. The idea of blending in aikido is unique when compared to martial arts like judo or jujitsu as both these grappling arts do not have compliance when it comes to techniques training. Granted there may be some compliance when it came to katas or class, however judo for example, practices full resistance when it came to sparring. This is the same for any other similar art such as wrestling or brazilian jujitsu. No grappling art ever teaches 'blending' as Aikidoka understand it throughout the curriculum, sooner or later, resistance will be introduced leading up to full out combat.

However, martial arts like Tai Chi have drills and two man forms where both martial artists would not resist and fight, but blend and flow, these include drills like push hands, two man forms or sticky hands in Wing Chun, all of them espousing the same idea of blending and harmonizing so as to build sensitivity, all prevalent in boxing forms that focus on the 'internal' rather than the 'external' aspects of combat. This is one reason why I believe that Aikido is actually a striking art primarily, rather than a grappling art as most aikidoka have believed.

The second reason is the techniques used in Aikido. As most aikidoka who have tried to use Aikido in combat could attest, trying to apply a kotegaeshi or a nikyo is nigh on impossible, especially if the opponent is bigger and hell-bent on not getting locked in the first place. This is not because the techniques do not work, but it is due to the way we are taught to apply them. A grappler would get in close and use clinches and other such techniques to set up the lock. Aikidoka do not do that, most of the set ups for the locks are unrealistic and involve the opponent over-committing to an attack, which is why when we attempt to apply these techniques in real life, it usually devolves into a wrestling scuffle that is almost childish to look at.

So why do we use such unrealistic training methods in regards to entry? Surely if we were to execute a throw or lock we would use the same methods as ALL grappling arts would use when setting up their throws and takedowns? Two reasons come to mind in regards to this question. One, Aikido is bullshit, which any aikidoka would shoot down in the blink of an eye. Or two, aikido is not a grappling art in the first place.

To describe how each of the techniques are actually striking techniques would be impossible. But I would like to point out that firstly, Aikido's ideas on footwork, speed and timing are based around striking rhythm and movement. Secondly, most of the entering movements are not practical if one were to try to apply a throw, one need only look at judo to see what is a proper throw set-up. However, if one were to see them as set-ups for strikes to vital points or counter-BLOWS rather than counter-THROWS. I believe that it will begin to make a tad more sense for any aikidoka wondering what the heck is going on.

This is just a short preview of an essay I am going to write in regards to my opinion. That essay would be a little more detailed with examples of technical applications. I will leave a link to the essay when it is done.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2015, 07:13 PM   #2
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,059
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

I've never thought of aikido as a grappling art. We're often told not to grab. We don't train in grappling techniques. Nor do we train in striking techniques.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2015, 07:56 PM   #3
Erick Mead
 
Erick Mead's Avatar
Dojo: Big Green Drum (W. Florida Aikikai)
Location: West Florida
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,568
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

I tend to agree, generally. It strikes me ( ) that the difference of aikido from conventional striking arts is that the mechanism is not blunt force impact, but cut and thrust. Where karate would have an impact, aikido creates a shear. This aspect has consequences to the mechanics of action. Where impact creates linear reaction mechanics, shear creates spirals and torsion.

Cordially,

Erick Mead
一隻狗可久里馬房但他也不是馬的.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2015, 09:59 PM   #4
Cliff Judge
Location: Kawasaki, Kanagawa
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,267
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

I think your striking/grappling dichotomy only applies to sports martial arts. Unless there are rules that stipulate how you are allowed to deliver force, there is no sense in limiting your options. Whether you are looking at civilian self-defense systems (Tai Chi, Karate, or jujutsu in the late Edo period) or warrior traditions, the conceptual vocabulary dealing with delivery and reception of force is way more complex than "you can punch and kick, or you can pick 'em up and throw 'em!"

The physical techniques that are trained in a particular martial art are not a really important defining characteristic, either.

I think Aikido aligns better with the older warrior traditions of Japan than with modern sport fighting arts. it makes more sense if you look at it as a distant cousin of a sogo bujutsu school than as a pugilistic or wrestling type system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:23 AM   #5
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

@Cliff Judge

I do not mean striking and grappling in the fighting sense but in the context of what we should aim for in the process of training. Presently alot of aikidoka are training with the thought that aikido is some form of grappling or wrestling art when in fact we should be gearing towards being able to strike instead of focusing on the grabbing aspect of training.

I disagree on the point of importance of technique, not in a practical combative sense, but in the sense of training, if we do not know what we are training in or for, it would most likely result in stagnation of a martial art. It is the reason I think, why most martial arts are seen as irrelevant to this day and age.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:25 AM   #6
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
I've never thought of aikido as a grappling art. We're often told not to grab. We don't train in grappling techniques. Nor do we train in striking techniques.
Which is the point, we should see aikido as a striking art and train towards that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 09:25 AM   #7
NagaBaba
 
NagaBaba's Avatar
Location: Wild, deep, deadly North
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,182
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
@Cliff Judge

I do not mean striking and grappling in the fighting sense but in the context of what we should aim for in the process of training. Presently alot of aikidoka are training with the thought that aikido is some form of grappling or wrestling art when in fact we should be gearing towards being able to strike instead of focusing on the grabbing aspect of training.

I disagree on the point of importance of technique, not in a practical combative sense, but in the sense of training, if we do not know what we are training in or for, it would most likely result in stagnation of a martial art. It is the reason I think, why most martial arts are seen as irrelevant to this day and age.
I completely disagree with your thesis. You are mixing up principles (90% ATEMI 10% IRIMI) with actual techniques (striking in the vital points). Aikido techniques are based on the sword as S.Takeda was a phenomenal swordsman. Actually execution of each aikido technique is in every aspect (position, distance, footwork, timing power generation etc.) similar to cutting with a sword.

Nagababa

ask for divine protection Ame no Murakumo Kuki Samuhara no Ryuo
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 09:41 AM   #8
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote: View Post
I completely disagree with your thesis. You are mixing up principles (90% ATEMI 10% IRIMI) with actual techniques (striking in the vital points). Aikido techniques are based on the sword as S.Takeda was a phenomenal swordsman. Actually execution of each aikido technique is in every aspect (position, distance, footwork, timing power generation etc.) similar to cutting with a sword.
And you use a sword as a striking or offensive weapon. So that actually supports my thesis does it not? Aikido is in essence a striking art using principles of swordwork instead of the pugilistic styles that is prevalent in modern combat.

In Bajiquan, fist techniques and spear combat are intricately linked, in the show kung fu quest baji masters prided themselves on spear work. this, in a way, shows the link between weapons and fist techniques. Relating it back to aikido, sword techniques and principles are applied to bare handed concepts. This supports my view that aikido is primarily striking rather than grappling.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 09:42 AM   #9
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,059
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Which is the point, we should see aikido as a striking art and train towards that.
Why? Why should we "see aikido as a striking art"? I've trained in striking arts; aikido is not really like them except, perhaps, in a rather intellectualized sense (and at that level, it's equally "like" many other things as much as a "striking art"). How does it help our training to force aikido into this "striking art" label? Why not just leave the labels out -- it's not as if you get extra points for them, after all -- and just seeing aikido as what it is, without labels?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 09:54 AM   #10
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
Why? Why should we "see aikido as a striking art"? I've trained in striking arts; aikido is not really like them except, perhaps, in a rather intellectualized sense (and at that level, it's equally "like" many other things as much as a "striking art"). How does it help our training to force aikido into this "striking art" label? Why not just leave the labels out -- it's not as if you get extra points for them, after all -- and just seeing aikido as what it is, without labels?
This is a personal thing, not just for me but for aikidoka in general. If one wishes to train without labels, train for the sake of training as in health, general fitness, hobby or what have you then go for it.

But for martial artists like me, aikido is first and foremost a martial art, which means that it is effective for combat in any situation, and if we want to make aikido effective, we need to understand in what context is aikido meant to be used. Boxers are effective because they know what are their strengths, and work to maximize that strength to the fullest. Same for BJJ, Muay Thai etc. If we wish to make any martial art, aikido or otherwise combat effective, we need to know what exactly are the principles meant for when the shit hits the fan so that we can focus our training effectively. Otherwise, we are just training pointlessly, which to me is an epic waste of time. Although others may beg to differ and I won't contend on that, because like I said, reasons for training are personal.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 10:30 AM   #11
Cliff Judge
Location: Kawasaki, Kanagawa
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,267
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
If we wish to make any martial art, aikido or otherwise combat effective, we need to know what exactly are the principles meant for when the shit hits the fan so that we can focus our training effectively.
This is exactly why I think you have gone off the reservation with this "Aikido as striking art" thing.

Last edited by akiy : 01-29-2015 at 09:49 AM. Reason: Fixed quote tag
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 10:31 AM   #12
NagaBaba
 
NagaBaba's Avatar
Location: Wild, deep, deadly North
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,182
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
And you use a sword as a striking or offensive weapon. So that actually supports my thesis does it not? Aikido is in essence a striking art using principles of swordwork instead of the pugilistic styles that is prevalent in modern combat.

In Bajiquan, fist techniques and spear combat are intricately linked, in the show kung fu quest baji masters prided themselves on spear work. this, in a way, shows the link between weapons and fist techniques. Relating it back to aikido, sword techniques and principles are applied to bare handed concepts. This supports my view that aikido is primarily striking rather than grappling.
Did you ever practice a sword? You don't strike with sword, you CUT. This is completely different world in every aspect from striking. It have nothing to do with offensive or defensive, now you are mixing up with strategy and tactics

Nagababa

ask for divine protection Ame no Murakumo Kuki Samuhara no Ryuo
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 10:44 AM   #13
lbb
Location: Massachusetts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,059
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
This is a personal thing, not just for me but for aikidoka in general. If one wishes to train without labels, train for the sake of training as in health, general fitness, hobby or what have you then go for it.
Meaning if we don't buy your labels, or even the need for labeling in general, we're training for "health, general fitness, hobby or what have you"?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
But for martial artists like me, aikido is first and foremost a martial art, which means that it is effective for combat in any situation, and if we want to make aikido effective, we need to understand in what context is aikido meant to be used.
You've just contradicted yourself, first saying that aikido is "effective for combat in any situation" and then that "we need to understand in what context is aikido meant to be used". Any situation? How does aikido do against IEDs? Fuel-air bombs? Bow and arrow at fifty paces?

And then there's your appropriation of the term "martial artist" as if you were the one to decide what that is, and what a martial artist's concerns need to be. Evidently, you feel that to be "martial artists", we must first and foremost be concerned with the arbitrary category into which our martial art fits. This, to me, is like saying that the effectiveness of a truck for hauling dirt depends on the color of its paint.

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Boxers are effective because they know what are their strengths, and work to maximize that strength to the fullest. Same for BJJ, Muay Thai etc.
None of which depends on deciding which pigeonhole to jam your "martial art" into.

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
If we wish to make any martial art, aikido or otherwise combat effective, we need to know what exactly are the principles meant for when the shit hits the fan so that we can focus our training effectively.
That's fine, although I'd submit to you that there are many varieties and volumes of shit for which aikido is quite useless. But it's transparently false that people must have a theoretical understanding of principles in order to do something. You can drive a car, I assume, but how much do you know about internal combustion engines? You've been walking all your life; can you describe in detail the anatomy of your legs? A theoretical understanding may assist your understanding if applied appropriately, but it's not necessary -- much less labeling.

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Otherwise, we are just training pointlessly, which to me is an epic waste of time. Although others may beg to differ and I won't contend on that, because like I said, reasons for training are personal.
No, we're not training pointlessly. You may not get the point, but that doesn't mean that there isn't one.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 11:14 AM   #14
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
And you use a sword as a striking or offensive weapon. So that actually supports my thesis does it not? Aikido is in essence a striking art using principles of swordwork instead of the pugilistic styles that is prevalent in modern combat.
No, a sword -- at least a traditional Japanese sword -- is NOT a "striking" weapon. It is a cutting/slicing weapon, as you would quickly discover if you handled a live blade for more than a few seconds. Try to "strike" with it, and it's likely to either bounce off the target or get stuck in it. Slice, and the edge glides right through.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 11:26 AM   #15
kewms
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,316
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Might I suggest that your time might be more productively spent in training, rather than in analysis?

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 12:00 PM   #16
jonreading
 
jonreading's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido South (formerly Emory Aikikai)
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,073
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

A couple of things to consider:
1. Aikido is an "aiki" art. I think the best categorization would be that.
2. You have established several scenarios of aikido that are probably (unfortunately) true, but not the embodiment of the art. I am not sure if this is intentional but it certainly sets up some number of incorrect conclusions.
3. Much of the curriculum of aikido is based upon a variety of initial movements, some body controls and some strikes. Some styles also use weapons, which have their own properties. I would look rather at the variety of contact with which aikido trains, not necessarily a specific attack.

  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 12:06 PM   #17
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,257
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
But for martial artists like me, aikido is first and foremost a martial art, which means that it is effective for combat in any situation....
Regardless of reasons for training, I disagree with your assertion or thesis that a martial art is by definition effective for combat in any situation (lances against napalm?).
In fact each martial art by definition is a system, with its own curriculum and principles, and will have unique strengths and weaknesses based on its focus.
To call a sword an implement for striking is I think to misunderstand the use of the sword.
At root, your basic fallacy is assumption of dualism: "a martial art must be grappling or striking."

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 12:45 PM   #18
Timothy WK
Location: Chicago, IL
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 184
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Ellis Amdur also brought to my attention O Sensei's words: "Aikido is 90% atemi". According to him, understanding it in a way that "Aikido is 90% of strikes" is mistaken, because if one develops what he calls the "Aiki body", one should be able to develop power, perform transfers of forces, and even apply percussion using any body part, and in any position. Philippe Gouttard recently explained to me that since etymologically, atemi is the union of two words: ateru (touch / reach / hit) and mi (body), one should consider that one is executing an atemi every time one touches a partner. We thus find the idea that the essential art of the technique is considered an atemi.
http://www.guillaumeerard.com/aikido...tice-in-aikido

--Timothy Kleinert

Aikido & Wujifa qigongs
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 01:12 PM   #19
phitruong
Dojo: Charlotte Aikikai Agatsu Dojo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,896
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Timothy Walters Kleinert wrote: View Post
i was going to mention Ellis Amdur's Taikyoku Aikido video. it's quite interesting with his presentation of atemi hidden in plain sight within aikido practices. the question for the OP is do you recognize it or not? does your aikido practice understand it or not? my aikido practice, through Saotome sensei lineage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjk_cLB8yHw, is quite flexible in term of what can and cannot.

"budo is putting on cold, wet, sweat stained gi with a smile and a snarl" - your truly
http://charlotteaikikai.org
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 01:27 PM   #20
jurasketu
Dojo: Roswell Budokan
Location: Roswell GA
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 106
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Man. Maybe I misread the responses here, but I think I see a lot of unnecessary vitriol towards the OP regardless of the merit of his arguments. If we want to promote thoughtful discussion on Aikiweb, I think we need not to be so dismissive and snarky. Just saying.

All paths lead to death. I strongly recommend taking one of the scenic routes.
AWA - Nidan - Started Aikido training in 2008
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 02:59 PM   #21
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Cliff Judge wrote: View Post
This is exactly why I think you have gone off the reservation with this "Aikido as striking art" thing.
Because I decided to use a my own words as it were?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:07 PM   #22
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Szczepan Janczuk wrote: View Post
Did you ever practice a sword? You don't strike with sword, you CUT. This is completely different world in every aspect from striking. It have nothing to do with offensive or defensive, now you are mixing up with strategy and tactics
How do you get your sword to cut the opponent? Standing at a distance and swinging wildly? Or using footwork, timing, agility and mental strength? A sword cuts, a fist hits, truly here is a difference. However, does the principle behind behind getting your sword to the target or the fist to the face differ? On a technical level perhaps, but when one looks deeper, the principles are the same. That is why all traditional martial arts incorporate weapons in the training, because what one does with the fist will translate into how one uses a weapon. I am not talking about strategy and tactics here, I am talking about training and how one goes about preparing one's body to utilize effectively, strategy and tactics. By training in weapons, one improves his fist technique. There is a correlation between the two areas and as aikidoka or any other martial artist, this is something that should not be neglected.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:15 PM   #23
Cliff Judge
Location: Kawasaki, Kanagawa
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,267
Japan
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
Because I decided to use a my own words as it were?
No, I just think if you focus on moving and organizing your body in such a way that you could deliver strikes, you will work against your goal of developing the effective Aikido you want.

Quote:
Hansel Wong wrote: View Post
How do you get your sword to cut the opponent? Standing at a distance and swinging wildly? Or using footwork, timing, agility and mental strength? A sword cuts, a fist hits, truly here is a difference. However, does the principle behind behind getting your sword to the target or the fist to the face differ? On a technical level perhaps, but when one looks deeper, the principles are the same. That is why all traditional martial arts incorporate weapons in the training, because what one does with the fist will translate into how one uses a weapon. I am not talking about strategy and tactics here, I am talking about training and how one goes about preparing one's body to utilize effectively, strategy and tactics. By training in weapons, one improves his fist technique. There is a correlation between the two areas and as aikidoka or any other martial artist, this is something that should not be neglected.
At the level where the principles are the same, grappling is the same too.

Last edited by Cliff Judge : 01-28-2015 at 03:18 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:36 PM   #24
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Mary Malmros wrote: View Post
Meaning if we don't buy your labels, or even the need for labeling in general, we're training for "health, general fitness, hobby or what have you"?
Labels are what people want to place on what they wish to do. By saying that you wish to train in aikido, you are already labeling yourself. When you say 'I want to train for (x) reason." Doesn't that label you as training for that specific reason? But then I may be wrong as I did not really understand that point Sincere apologies for that.

Quote:
You've just contradicted yourself, first saying that aikido is "effective for combat in any situation" and then that "we need to understand in what context is aikido meant to be used". Any situation? How does aikido do against IEDs? Fuel-air bombs? Bow and arrow at fifty paces?
Aikido is a martial art, which means that it was used in battlefield situations way back when. Not bare-handed mind, but alongside weapons, formations and any of the other techniques that concerned military affairs in the day. To translate a martial art effectively from ancient battlefields to modern battlefields is not impossible, but to do so one must understand how the martial art worked, once we understand the principle, we can adapt it to suit whatever situation we face. IEDs? Ukemi maybe to absorb the shock of the fall if you are blown into the air? Bombs? situational awareness perhaps? Bow and arrow? That is a bit harder and depends on circumstances, but stepping off the line of fire would help yes? The possibilities are endless, but to break form, one must first understand the form. Which is why we need to understand the fundamental principle of aikido in order to translate it effectively.

Quote:
And then there's your appropriation of the term "martial artist" as if you were the one to decide what that is, and what a martial artist's concerns need to be. Evidently, you feel that to be "martial artists", we must first and foremost be concerned with the arbitrary category into which our martial art fits. This, to me, is like saying that the effectiveness of a truck for hauling dirt depends on the color of its paint.
I don't decide what is a 'martial artist', but we are practicing 'martial arts', which I do not think makes us dancers... I'm not sure though... Could be wrong. Your analogy is a tad off. It is the difference between using a car to haul dirt and a truck to run races. A boxer knows that his strengths lie in his punches, so he focuses on punching, and in a combat situation, he does not suddenly kick or try to grapple. So as aikidoka, if we do not even know how our techniques are to be applied in a combat situation, it would be like turning up at the Singapore formula 1 night race with a pick-up truck.

Quote:
None of which depends on deciding which pigeonhole to jam your "martial art" into.


That's fine, although I'd submit to you that there are many varieties and volumes of shit for which aikido is quite useless. But it's transparently false that people must have a theoretical understanding of principles in order to do something. You can drive a car, I assume, but how much do you know about internal combustion engines? You've been walking all your life; can you describe in detail the anatomy of your legs? A theoretical understanding may assist your understanding if applied appropriately, but it's not necessary -- much less labeling.

If you were driving for general purposes, then you do not need to know about engines. But what about if you are a mechanic? I may have been walking all my life, but if I need to help people to walk after an injury, I would need to know anatomy would I not? This then is the difference between training for leisure, and training to bring your art to the next level.

Quote:
No, we're not training pointlessly. You may not get the point, but that doesn't mean that there isn't one.
Perhaps I put it wrongly, the term pointlessly refers to people like fighters, who need to focus on training what works, people who want to teach martial arts, in which case they need to know what we are training and why we are doing so, so that they may pass on the art to the next generation, and idiots like me who hold delusions of bringing the aikido to the next level because of passion and love for the art, in which case, I need to know what the path was, so that I might forge the trail that is to be.

I'm poetic, apologies.

Last edited by akiy : 01-29-2015 at 09:52 AM. Reason: Fixed quote tags
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2015, 03:38 PM   #25
earnest aikidoka
Location: singapore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 97
Singapore
Offline
Re: Aikido: Striking all along?

Quote:
Katherine Derbyshire wrote: View Post
Might I suggest that your time might be more productively spent in training, rather than in analysis?

Katherine
and what then do you hope to achieve with training?
  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
If you could buy just ONE book about Aikido techniques, what would it be? Karol Kowalczyk Techniques 45 02-01-2014 12:35 AM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 24 Peter Goldsbury Columns 6 07-07-2013 06:40 PM
A Consideration of Aikido Practice within the Context of Internal Training Ellis Amdur Columns 71 03-21-2013 09:15 PM
I'm Leaving Aikido Daniel Ranger-Holt General 122 10-07-2010 09:01 PM
Transmission, Inheritance, Emulation 12 Peter Goldsbury Columns 32 05-16-2009 07:05 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:26 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2016 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2016 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