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 06-07-2003, 02:03 AM   #26
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,021
Japan
Offline
Quote:
Sean Orchard (deepsoup) wrote:
I don't think I'd describe it as complicated though, I think its really quite simple, just immensely difficult!
I used the word complicated in that it sure has more bits and pieces than any form of push-up you care to name.

That particular exercise is one that seems to evolve as your Aikido progresses - just like ones understanding of [name deep profound book here] each time you read it.

We have one newly promoted Shodan that makes it feel like a power exercise although he is using all the elements correctly - just its what he feels he needs to work on.

My personal current emphasis is the forearm rotations and using those to break balance.

There is a yondan that is working on still another aspect of the forearm rotation.

For those that don't do this exercise imagine if you will everybody doing a series of 8 balance breaking movements, interchanging with your parner, left and right, at speed. You deal with all body types and personalities - Aikido at its most basic. There is a reason we do this exercise multiple times in a lesson.

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2003, 11:58 AM   #27
ikkainogakusei
Location: All over CA
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 137
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Wilbanks wrote:
You mean like this?

"Do not fall for the fundamentalist verbosity. Do the research yourself. If you find that the exercise is backed up by scientific corroberative data, then go for it."
Okay Kevin, follow the line of reason.
Quote:
Rhetorical tactics such as (x...y) rel(y) on the assumption that one would not make the effort to find this information and acquiesce
If I am encouraging others to do the research (your quote of me, first box), how does this rely on the possibility that these others not make the effort to find this information (my assertion of you)?
Quote:
Kevin Wilbanks wrote:
I actually have a professional credential in strength and conditioning.
Though admirable that you have gotten a professional credential it does not guarantee authority. Some people might assume that a professional credential is difficult to attain and requires a significant level of effort, like becoming a Registered Nurse. Many professional credentials require less training than becoming an Emergency Medical Technician (that's a single1-semester course). Some professional credentials can be as easy as a weekend seminar.

The National Council of Strength and Fitness does a weekend seminar to certify trainers and churns up plenty of personal trainers for places like 24 Hour Fitness. The Nat'l Assoc. for Fitness Certification will send one books and videos to do at home for a professional credential. One might assume that since an organization like the Nat'l Strength and Conditioning Assoc. requires a BS/BA degree, that it would only certify university graduates most qualified to work as professional personal trainers. Sadly, someone can have a degree in liberal arts, or perhaps journalism to qualify to take the 190 multiple choice question exam.
Quote:
...and I find 'doing the research myself' as you describe much harder than you make it sound.
No more difficult than spending the number of hours to get ...say a gokyu rank. (30 hours over time?)
Quote:
In practice, most non-scientists lack both the time and knowhow to find and interpret such studies, and the studies usually address far more narrow and specific questions than the recreational/novice trainee is asking.
Sure, going to a scientific journal might have a narrow focus, but finding books backed by an organization like the American College of Sports Medicine would have a depth and breadth of information appropriate for info gathering.
Quote:
The issues in my post were broad enough that I think explanatory clarity and just plain making sense are far more important. We're talking general training paradigms here, not specific rep/set protocols.
They might have been broad but they were delivered as if by a physician from the 1940's, expressing authority rather than suggesting possibility, and when one questions such information, the lay-person is brow-beaten with volcabulary or rhetorical debate tactics. Bummer.
Quote:
This is not a professional scientific forum. If you find that the verbosity inhibits your understanding, ask for clarification.
^ Ad Hominem innuendo.

Uh, no if you've read any post that I've given (not that you have to) you'd know that I'm confortable with verbosity and quite loquacious myself. I am happy to ask for clarification when necessary. As for my understanding of kinesiology, exercise physiology, motor-learning, neuromotor control, and biomechanics, I think it's adequate enough for this forum.
Quote:
If someone makes a claim about specific categories of athletes, I don't think asking for one example is argumentatively unfair at all.
Yes, but have you noticed that the thread is 'what's your hardest warmup exercise?' and not 'tell us what is right or wrong about our warmup and we'll take it on faith that you're right.' People are simply discussing a difficult aspect of a particular warmup. There are plenty of threads which ask for input, why nudge in here?
Quote:
Speaking of rhetorical tactics, what about your post, which consists completely of innuendo and ad hominem attack, and fails to address a single content point?
I have addressed content points with you before and you seem to conveniently ignore the referenced information or backpeddal and spin. In any case, my objection is not the content but the delivery and context.


"To educate a man in mind, and not in morals, is to educate a menace to society." ~Theodore Roosevelt
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2003, 01:24 PM   #28
Kevin Wilbanks
Location: Seattle/Southern Wisconsin
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 788
Offline
Perhaps you should follow the line of reason. You were calling what I said into question and exhorting others to instead do the research themselves. You know well that no one is going to go out to a research library and pore over journals to try and find information about specificity, PNF, and isolationist training/rehabilitation paradigms, so such an exhortion is a similar tactic to asking someone for examples who likely has none.

I was not invoking my credential as any kind of guarantee of authority, nor did I make even a hint of an argument from authority. I presented this information because, as someone who is involved in the field and even subscribes to one of the main journals, I find doing the research as you describe it a lot of work, and often difficult to translate into practical information about how to work out or train people. To someone who doesn't even know the name of the journals, or who doesn't even understand basic concepts and terminology of exercise science, your suggestion is absurdly impractical... but it sure makes you sound like a picture of wisdom and equanimity.

I fail to see how you can be so squeamish about the rigorous dialectical/debate style of learning, yet so fond of doing the same yourself, yet with so little emphasis on content and so much on personal attack. It seems a hypocritical pose. I have never seen it written in stone that one must slavishly stick to posted thread topics either. These are conversational message boards, and sometimes conversations drift. If someone makes claims or recommendations which I think are misleading or possibly dangerous, I see no problem with arguing against them.

As far as your conclusion goes, that's just more vague slander and innuendo. My version of what happened is quite different. I recall that you kept taking the debate into abstruse, academic directions that had little conceivable practical relevance to actually doing exercise, or the nature of the debate which you were trying to join. In any case, once again, you have offered another post which elaborately says little more than "I don't like you."
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2003, 03:26 PM   #29
Matt Gallagher
Dojo: Shudokan
Location: UK
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 20
Offline
Why, oh why didn't I take the Blue pill?


Zanshin
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2003, 03:38 PM   #30
ikkainogakusei
Location: All over CA
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 137
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Wilbanks wrote:
Perhaps you should follow the line of reason. You were calling what I said into question and exhorting others to instead do the research themselves.
yes
Quote:
You know well that no one is going to go out to a research library and pore over journals to try and find information about specificity, PNF, and isolationist training/rehabilitation paradigms, so such an exhortion is a similar tactic to asking someone for examples who likely has none.
Eh, no. I said do research that was coroborated scientifically, not 'go to a research library' not 'find these specific things' and not to look at esoteric exercise science journals. There are books which are backed through more than opinion, that will allow one to follow references, yet will not be so microcosmic as to be minutely useful to a training program.

Books which are written by people in the field of biomechanics and exercise physiology are readily available and can be written to the level of novice to expert. If a person uses a baloney tester and looks at the qualifications of the writer, how many times that writer has been referenced in other fitness books, and looking at the date and breadth of references then it allows them to be more active in their own health.
Quote:
I was not invoking my credential as any kind of guarantee of authority, nor did I make even a hint of an argument from authority.
'kay.
Quote:
I presented this information because, as someone who is involved in the field and even subscribes to one of the main journals, I find doing the research as you describe it a lot of work, and often difficult to translate into practical information about how to work out or train people.
I think you find doing the research which you have projected as my description may be difficult, but doing research is no more difficult than finding any other information. It's good that you subscribe to one journal, I'd like to encourage you to read more than one, if this is your field of work. ; )
Quote:
To someone who doesn't even know the name of the journals, or who doesn't even understand basic concepts and terminology of exercise science, your suggestion is absurdly impractical...
Again, your projection of my assertion is impractical. I did not require what you assume.
Quote:
but it sure makes you sound like a picture of wisdom and equanimity.
Not my intent, not my status, but thanks for the compliment.
Quote:
I fail to see how you can be so squeamish about the rigorous dialectical/debate style of learning, yet so fond of doing the same yourself, yet with so little emphasis on content and so much on personal attack.
Again I'm not attacking your person. I do not know you as a person. This is me still not attacking you as a person. It_is_the_manner_in which you choose to present, and_the_context.
Quote:
If someone makes claims or recommendations which I think are misleading or possibly dangerous, I see no problem with arguing against them.
But no one made a claim of 'this is a good way to improve' they were all discussing 'this was hard'. Now, I agree that the push-ups described is frightening, but it wasn't recommended.
Quote:
As far as your conclusion goes, that's just more vague slander and innuendo.
I don't think there is anything vague about it. What would you like me to clairfy?
Quote:
My version of what happened is quite different. I recall that you kept taking the debate into abstruse, academic directions that had little conceivable practical relevance to actually doing exercise, or the nature of the debate which you were trying to join.
Uh, let's see...I started with 'weight training is fine, cardio is good, ...specificity of training requires a closer look.' you then said "It seems that countering this kind of cartoonish thinking is my job here" Now, I started by dicussing things in general terms, then you insisted (by cartoonish I assume) that I was oversimplifying and lacking depth. With that I gave references and depth. You then leapt to the 'too much' side, which lead into a loop where you conveniently meander between too much and not enough.
Quote:
In any case, once again, you have offered another post which elaborately says little more than "I don't like you."
Nope. Again I don't know you, I cannot judge you as a human being, and wouldn't. Instead I'd like to say that your tactics in discussing fitness are poor, and limited.


Last edited by ikkainogakusei : 06-10-2003 at 03:42 PM.

"To educate a man in mind, and not in morals, is to educate a menace to society." ~Theodore Roosevelt
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 12:53 PM   #31
Kevin Wilbanks
Location: Seattle/Southern Wisconsin
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 788
Offline
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
But no one made a claim of 'this is a good way to improve' they were all discussing 'this was hard'. Now, I agree that the push-ups described is frightening, but it wasn't recommended.
I see a warning about nikkyo pushups as a public service. As far as the full-blown polemic which set you off goes, you may want to review the record: just prior to that Dave recommended exercises which I consider relatively useless, and also called them 'the best', based upon what I see as an uninformed training philosophy. Looked like fair game to me.

Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
Instead I'd like to say that your tactics in discussing fitness are poor, and limited.
Poor and limited, or just not to your taste? I submit that the art of polemic and adversarial debate has an illustrious history in western thought, and many of my favorite thinkers practice(d) it. I would argue that it is only a poor vehicle when one party gets emotional and goes ad hominem becasue they can't stand the heat. If all parties involved stick to the subject and keep their skins thick, it can be a much more efficient way of learning than methods in which one buries points of conflict under layers of apology and PC happy talk. I see the kind of rhetorical flourish that you find so horrific as just part of good sporting intellectual fun. Since I think most things intellectual are optional in life, I'm afraid doing it your way would make it too dull for me to find worth pursuing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 01:01 PM   #32
Dave Miller
 
Dave Miller's Avatar
Dojo: UCO Budo Society
Location: Oklahoma
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 204
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Wilbanks wrote:
You know well that no one is going to go out to a research library and pore over journals to try and find information about specificity, PNF, and isolationist training/rehabilitation paradigms, so such an exhortion is a similar tactic to asking someone for examples who likely has none.
Actually, my statement was based on my workouts with a friend who is a former trainer with the US women's volleyball team. He has been involved in the Pan Am games and was in Seoul, I believe. He is also an avid cyclist. I have another friend from whom I gleaned some of my info who, althoug never in the olympics, was nationally ranked ameteur mtn. and road cyclist.

DAVE

If you're working too hard, you're doing it wrong.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 02:37 PM   #33
ikkainogakusei
Location: All over CA
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 137
Offline
Quote:
Kevin Wilbanks wrote:
just prior to that Dave recommended exercises which I consider relatively useless, and also called them 'the best', based upon what I see as an uninformed training philosophy. Looked like fair game to me.
Before that Matt Gallagher asked for a secret, which you replied to, and then began to descend into the false authority position as if what you said is a given in the whole of the industry, which is inaccurate. Later, I'll admit, you said 'in my view..' which lends itself to possibility, but these moments are rare. Additionally, you have made assertions, which others have responded to counter, and you back off (e.g. scientific studies on glucosamine, or anatomical vs. kinesiological function of the obliques), good for you. The problem is that if there's no calling you on something you seem to prefer to make false blanket statements, and bully others with jargon.
Quote:
Poor and limited, or just not to your taste?
Yes, all three (sans just).
Quote:
I submit that the art of polemic and adversarial debate has an illustrious history in western thought, and many of my favorite thinkers practice(d) it.
Yes, but this isn't a debate forum.
Quote:
I would argue that it is only a poor vehicle when one party gets emotional and goes ad hominem becasue they can't stand the heat.
Well, if that was inneundo ad hominem, I'll try to not get emotional.

My argument is not the discussion, but the misleading manner in which you deliver it. I am imparting that pretending that the advice you give as an absolute is fallacious, and bullying those who are seeking advice is in poor taste.
Quote:
If all parties involved stick to the subject and keep their skins thick, it can be a much more efficient way of learning than methods in which one buries points of conflict under layers of apology and PC happy talk.
Uh, didn't you say...
Quote:
I have never seen it written in stone that one must slavishly stick to posted thread topics either.
You don't need to bury points, just clarify. Do not pretend that something is absolutely useless or useful. Even people who hold doctorates in their respective fields involving exercise science disagree, and are not clear on some things, to pretend and to insist that something is an absolute is in poor form.
Quote:
I see the kind of rhetorical flourish that you find so horrific as just part of good sporting intellectual fun.
But less sporting when you decide to debate fitness with people who are not in the industry. Kind of like a shodan going to a young kids class and plowing through them with no restraint. Maybe fun, but really not sporting.
Quote:
Since I think most things intellectual are optional in life, I'm afraid doing it your way would make it too dull for me to find worth pursuing.
What I would ask then Kevin is; what do you get out of it, if not to provide information to your community?

Last edited by ikkainogakusei : 06-11-2003 at 02:46 PM.

"To educate a man in mind, and not in morals, is to educate a menace to society." ~Theodore Roosevelt
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 04:08 PM   #34
Kevin Wilbanks
Location: Seattle/Southern Wisconsin
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 788
Offline
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
Before that Matt Gallagher asked for a secret, which you replied to, and then began to descend into the false authority position as if what you said is a given in the whole of the industry, which is inaccurate. Later, I'll admit, you said 'in my view..' which lends itself to possibility, but these moments are rare.
Let's look at this, and see exactly what kind of obfuscatory game you're playing. Here's the quote in question:

"Of course, to me the question is: why bother? What carryover to the dynamic variety of activities involved in Aikido can one expect from developing the ability to hold your body in a static v-shape for long periods of time? I would say almost none."

I cannot find a way to interpret this in which unanimous agreement in the whole of the fitness industry is implied. I didn't sign my post with an NSCA-CSCS at the end either. Moreover, I think I laid out the issue such that my line of reasoning is pretty clear, and the absurdity of expecting significant carryover in this situation is apparent.

At the risk straying back to the actual subject, it's analogous to expecting static lateral holds with a dumbbell to improve your tennis game. Absurd. Anyone with any grasp of the concept of the principle of training specificity should be able to see this. Although I can't speak for the industry and didn't pretend to, I can't imagine anyone outside of a well-paid Pilates spokesperson disagreeing with it. If there's a good argument to the contrary, I'd like to hear it.
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
Additionally, you have made assertions, which others have responded to counter, and you back off (e.g. scientific studies on glucosamine, or anatomical vs. kinesiological function of the obliques), good for you. The problem is that if there's no calling you on something you seem to prefer to make false blanket statements, and bully others with jargon.
Talk about argumentative flourish. I "prefer to make false blanket statements"? Who prefers to make false statements? I admit the possiblity that some of my statements may be false - to me this is trivially true and not worth constantly reiterating - but to imply that I state falsely, knowingly is pretty dirty pool, in my book. The way a debate works is that false statements are challenged with evidence or convincing counter-arguments. No convincing counter: falsehoods win the day. If the assertions are really false, vigilant polemicists will bring them down on another.
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
My argument is not the discussion, but the misleading manner in which you deliver it. I am imparting that pretending that the advice you give as an absolute is fallacious, and bullying those who are seeking advice is in poor taste. Uh, didn't you say... You don't need to bury points, just clarify. Do not pretend that something is absolutely useless or useful. Even people who hold doctorates in their respective fields involving exercise science disagree, and are not clear on some things, to pretend and to insist that something is an absolute is in poor form.
As far as the implication of authority goes... I don't understand. Are you implying that you or a significant portion of the onlookers is too philosophically naive to understand that when I say something it is me who is saying it, which is by definition my opinion? Who else's opinion would it be? Do you expect me to wax self-effacement with every single statement? I geniuinely believe and advocate what I genuinely believe and advocate, so why wouldn't I do so with confidence?
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
But less sporting when you decide to debate fitness with people who are not in the industry. Kind of like a shodan going to a young kids class and plowing through them with no restraint. Maybe fun, but really not sporting.
I do debate in other places with people far more knowledgeable than me. I'm a little more careful in expression, but I still get handed my ass sometimes. Different game. Different learning opportunity. As far as sport goes, one man's is apparently not another's.
Quote:
Jane Tao (ikkainogakusei) wrote:
What I would ask then Kevin is; what do you get out of it, if not to provide information to your community?
Fun. Distraction. Self-education, if nothing else. And, no regrets, as I'm not offering any information or expression disingenuously. I fear if I attempted to adhere to your code of wishy-washy expression for the preprogrammed and neutered that last one would be out the window.

Last edited by Kevin Wilbanks : 06-11-2003 at 04:11 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 04:11 PM   #35
akiy
 
akiy's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 5,835
Offline
Hi folks,

Can people kindly take your discussion/argument regarding personal issues to private messages or private e-mail? There's nothing to prove by posting them here, publically. Thank you.

-- Jun

Please help support AikiWeb -- become an AikiWeb Contributing Member!
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 04:20 PM   #36
ikkainogakusei
Location: All over CA
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 137
Offline
Quote:
Jun Akiyama (akiy) wrote:
Hi folks,

Can people kindly take your discussion/argument regarding personal issues to private messages or private e-mail? There's nothing to prove by posting them here, publically. Thank you.

-- Jun
Sure Jun, my apologies.

"To educate a man in mind, and not in morals, is to educate a menace to society." ~Theodore Roosevelt
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 04:22 PM   #37
Kevin Wilbanks
Location: Seattle/Southern Wisconsin
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 788
Offline
Quote:
Jun Akiyama (akiy) wrote:
Hi folks,

Can people kindly take your discussion/argument regarding personal issues to private messages or private e-mail? There's nothing to prove by posting them here, publically. Thank you.

-- Jun
Is this really using up that many electrons? There may not be anything to prove, but it's a lot more fun. Arguing with someone you don't know in private seems kinda solipsistic and pointless to me - without the addition of an exhibitionist element, it just doesn't have the same zing.

Hey, it's your board. Censor away. This is starting to seem like some sort of deconstructionist etiquitte game: who can outsop the milksops on a higher level of analysis? Any bystander handy who fancies himself a meta-meta-meta-milksop?
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2003, 04:33 PM   #38
Dave Miller
 
Dave Miller's Avatar
Dojo: UCO Budo Society
Location: Oklahoma
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 204
Offline
Quote:
Jun Akiyama (akiy) wrote:
Hi folks,

Can people kindly take your discussion/argument regarding personal issues to private messages or private e-mail? There's nothing to prove by posting them here, publically. Thank you.

-- Jun
No problem, Jun. Sorry.


DAVE

If you're working too hard, you're doing it wrong.
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Seminar with Frank Doran, Shihan - Aug. 8-10, 2014 at Sunset Cliff's Aikido, near San Diego's finest beaches



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
Hardest training Dojos ronmar General 21 07-21-2003 12:40 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:28 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