Ki-Aikido or Taiji - effectiveness in developing Qi?

Mike Haft wrote: Fun isn't it Even more fun when you learn how to do it Unfortunately these descriptions, all the way from descriptions of Takeda, to Ueshiba to Dan rarely describe how you got sent back 5' Do hips move? Arms? Something has to move or it's telekinesis. That's the problem with talking about it instead of being there and doing it sadly. Mike

That is a good question, not sure what moved when somone does this. All I know is that I cannot see any movement. Once Dan did this to me for a demonstration to the group. This time both his feet were on the ground and he placed both his hands on my chest with his arms fully extended and feet stationary. Then with no movement I could see, he sent me flying backwards atleast 10 feet. I didn't fall, but I wasn't close from it. It felt like I was hit by a truck. The weekend before he did the same thing to me, but that time there was a wall about 5 to 6 feet behind me. Not only did Dan "run me over" with his internal push/punch (not sure what to call it), but I then slammed into the wall which didn't feel much better.

FWIW, I am no small guy. 6'-1", 195lbs and pretty solid to boot.

Tim Mailloux wrote: That is a good question, not sure what moved when somone does this. All I know is that I cannot see any movement. Once Dan did this to me for a demonstration to the group. This time both his feet were on the ground and he placed both his hands on my chest with his arms fully extended and feet stationary. Then with no movement I could see, he sent me flying backwards atleast 10 feet. I didn't fall, but I wasn't close from it. It felt like I was hit by a truck. The weekend before he did the same thing to me, but that time there was a wall about 5 to 6 feet behind me. Not only did Dan "run me over" with his internal push/punch (not sure what to call it), but I then slammed into the wall which didn't feel much better. FWIW, I am no small guy. 6'-1", 195lbs and pretty solid to boot.

Difficult to figure out without seeing it. But here's a tip, with his hands on your chest and feet stationary. Watch his hips next time. Tell us what you saw (if anything). If neither his knees, hips or elbows move (and they don't have to move far) then it really is telekinesis and I'm stumped as to what he's doing.

Try looking at this clip

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snYlMC6gUoM

watch Akuzawa's hips when the guy is holding his wrists and he moves him. Specifically, look at how his upper body moves in relation to his hips. Those are the sorts of things that move when you do this stuff in my experience.

Mike

Mark Murray wrote: Well, I was trying to make a point with Don. And I also prefaced things by saying that it wasn't necessarily true. Beyond that, I have seen, done, and felt aikido "ki" unbendable arm and it ain't even close to the internal stuff I'm talking about. The stuff I saw doesn't even compare to the body structure at all. The pathways might be, oh, .01% close to it. Might. And even if you somehow manage to get the pathways working correctly, you're only doing 1/1000th of the whole internal skillset. (Yeah, the numbers are guesses.) Mark

With these comments like these, it tells me you don't know what you think you know. unbendable arm is a baby step that can be taught in two minutes.

Mike Haft wrote: Try looking at this clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snYlMC6gUoM watch Akuzawa's hips when the guy is holding his wrists and he moves him. Specifically, look at how his upper body moves in relation to his hips. Those are the sorts of things that move when you do this stuff in my experience. Mike

There's a both/and point here...In that video there is clearly some hip and torso....Having experienced Ark......He does not need to move his hips to release power.....It has to do with the spine and maintaining and using internal tension...

Craig Hocker wrote: With these comments like these, it tells me you don't know what you think you know. unbendable arm is a baby step that can be taught in two minutes.

Perhaps. The Internet is full of people who don't know what they think they know. And people who don't know what they think they know of other people. I only know what I know now and that may change tomorrow. I may be right or wrong at any point in time. I fail over and over again in my training, but I'm still there doing it with like minded people and having fun at times, and hard work at others. That's more important to me than what people think of me on the Internet.

YMMV,
Mark

Jeremy Hulley wrote: There's a both/and point here...In that video there is clearly some hip and torso....Having experienced Ark......He does not need to move his hips to release power.....It has to do with the spine and maintaining and using internal tension...

Actually I was just pointing to an example of what I was talking about and I happened to have seen him do it in that vid not more than 30 min earlier. I wasn't intending to comment on everything he does, just that example. Incidentally he does have to move something to release power or it's telekinesis. I referenced that vid because it was about how his hips moved in relation to his upper body that was important, it showed where the movement he made started from within his body (hips/centre probably lower than that but it first becomes visible in that clip with his hips).

The comments you and others make about internal tension are interesting because they show you that what he is doing is subtly different from what Tohei style stuff is about i.e. relax completely, meaning internal tension = bad. That said however the two skills are related and if you can do one you can do the other IMO. I know that a lot of what I've seen on the vids of Akuzawa I can do to some extent (obviously it's impossible to tell exactly without being there and feeling it) but they appear to be subtly different uses of the power and internal skills you develop with Tohei style mind and body training i.e. same stuff slightly different application and emphasis. Which brings me back to the question I keep asking myself. Is fajin needed to effectively execute aikido waza? Do you actually need to be able to explosively release power? I think if you watch Tohei and the watch the founder one of the differences is fthat. Tohei tends not to release power explosively (as described elsewhere on these foums). You see him do it sometimes but not often.

It's especially obvious if you watch the founder performing the rowing exercise in the aikidojournal footage, Terry Dobson is standing opposite him IIRC. Then watch Tohei doing the same exercise. A few years ago I was watching this clip whilst my teacher was here visiting and we talked about it. He said of O Sensei's performance of the exercise "It's tension, Tohei doesn't do it that way."

IMO you tend not to see this explosive release of power in ki aikido. But that makes sense does it not? The aim of aikido is to utilise the attackers power and throw them away or restrain them, in order to do this you must have a coordinated mind and body which is calm and relaxed. Why would you need to generate your own power when your partner is doing it for you? I've often thought that this explains a lot of the differences you see between Tohei and O Sensei. I've just never been able to understand why it worked out that way.

Regards

Mike

Mike Haft wrote: The comments you and others make about internal tension are interesting because they show you that what he is doing is subtly different from what Tohei style stuff is about i.e. relax completely, meaning internal tension = bad. That said however the two skills are related and if you can do one you can do the other IMO. I know that a lot of what I've seen on the vids of Akuzawa I can do to some extent (obviously it's impossible to tell exactly without being there and feeling it) but they appear to be subtly different uses of the power and internal skills you develop with Tohei style mind and body training i.e. same stuff slightly different application and emphasis.

Exactly... there is a wide range of ways to do these things and an Aikido practitioner has to be somewhat clear that karate's way of training is not necessarily Aikido's way of training these skills, and so on

Which brings me back to the question I keep asking myself. Is fajin needed to effectively execute aikido waza? Do you actually need to be able to explosively release power? I think if you watch Tohei and the watch the founder one of the differences is fthat. Tohei tends not to release power explosively (as described elsewhere on these foums). You see him do it sometimes but not often. It's especially obvious if you watch the founder performing the rowing exercise in the aikidojournal footage, Terry Dobson is standing opposite him IIRC. Then watch Tohei doing the same exercise. A few years ago I was watching this clip whilst my teacher was here visiting and we talked about it. He said of O Sensei's performance of the exercise "It's tension, Tohei doesn't do it that way." IMO you tend not to see this explosive release of power in ki aikido. But that makes sense does it not? The aim of aikido is to utilise the attackers power and throw them away or restrain them, in order to do this you must have a coordinated mind and body which is calm and relaxed. Why would you need to generate your own power when your partner is doing it for you? I've often thought that this explains a lot of the differences you see between Tohei and O Sensei. I've just never been able to understand why it worked out that way.

That's a good observation. I mentioned that same evidence of explosive power usage by O-Sensei, a year or so ago (maybe it was on Aikido Journal, though). It brings up a lot of thoughts. First of all, Ueshiba appears to be capable of *some level* of explosive power (I don't want to get into exactly what that level is, since it's a side-issue). Since Ueshiba didn't really teach much (that we know of..... we could be wrong!) of the ki/kokyu skills, the fact that he didn't appear to teach the higher levels of those skills should be no big surprise. Personally, I'd be careful to note that Ueshiba is the standard for a martial art called "Aikido", not Tohei. If Ueshiba had some ability at power-release skills, then that indicates power-releases are a part of Aikido. However, I think we're way ahead of ourselves since it's obvious (and archived) that a huge percentage of Aikido yudansha aren't even sure if ki/kokyu skills apply to Aikido.

In terms of Ueshiba using power-release skills and Tohei not using them, let me venture a comment reflecting my opinion: I think Tohei's "soft" approach to ki development is correct and that Ueshiba's approach was closer to Tohei's than it was to Akuzawa's approach..... but it has to be understood that the approaches and permutations of these skills cover a pretty broad spectrum. My opinion is that it's important to look at the approach that Ueshiba used and back-engineer into a close approximation of that approach, even if you get your "foot in the door" knowledge from a tenser approach.

Insightful post, Mike.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

Cady Goldfield wrote: You have a chance to feel this stuff, ...

Again, what does that have to do with not seeing internal gurus win UFC-ish competitions with their superior movement?

Justin

Kevin Leavitt wrote: My purpose of training is not to compete in MMA, I am way too old for that.

And I typcially always say UFC-ish event, considering those are probably the pinnacle of aggressoid competitions, and if one wins there one can probably win anywhere, but that can be relaxed a bit, since a lot of the internal gurus are claiming that one of their many skills is that they cannot be pushed over or thrown, they could compete in a less hazardous environment where throws are involved, like judo, sumo, or taijiquan push hands.

Justin

Mark Murray wrote: Think about internal power that can be taught where you'll see some results in months not years. And you'll see some results in competing and fighting, not just static drills.

Except we don't seem to see results from in competing and fighting, at least not going by the largest fighting organizations in the world (UFC, Pride, etc.).

Justin

Tim Mailloux wrote: He stood there on one leg and let me push / pull any part of his body (hands, arms, torso) in any direction I saw fit. He didn't budge. Yet while he was still on one leg, and i was still pushing / pulling with all my might, he sent my flying backwards 5 feet out of the blue.

Sounds cool! We'd love to see the video of that event so we can get an objective look at the parameters in which the situation took place.

Justin

Mike Sigman wrote: Insightful post, Mike. FWIW Mike Sigman

lol, thanks. I do sometimes know what I'm talking about I hope, pain in the backside that I can be (Road-rage I've heard of. Can you get web-rage?).

The credit for the insight goes to my teacher not me. I remarked to him that Tohei and Ueshiba looked different, he explained why to me. It's not the first time I've mentioned it here though. Maybe it got lost in the noise of the web-rage. Shame cos I should know better really <sigh>....

Mike

deleted double post

Persistent questioning about why internal skills aren't seen in UFC and Pride do prompt some musings about when we will see this stuff, if ever, in the commercial fight ring. I'm guessing it may be a little while before the stuff shows up in UFC or becomes a trend in the professional fighting universe. Such things have been kept closely guarded for centuries, and only with the Internet, and particularly due to Western curiosity in tandem with the Internet, is the subject of genuine internal skills becoming known to a wider circle now. And even so, that circle is a drop in the bucket of world population. Few know about or care about the existence of this stuff in the first place; the martial arts world itself is insignificant in the face of the general human population! (Despite some of us thinking that the sun orbits around our particular and peculiar interest... )

Besides few knowing that this stuff even exists, UFC-type bangers usually seem to want something they can put into their repertoire quickly. A sophisticated and refined grasp of internal skills, and their successful integration into a fighting system, are the slower road of the "artiste," not the commercial fightring-banger who wants and needs them "yesterday." The idea of conditioning for an unnatural set of internal movements to effect power is too alien to most, and particularly to those who have spent their professional and martial lives focused on the more obvious uses of muscle and gross motor movement.

Perhaps most of all, there is the difficulty of finding a teacher who has those skills and is willing to teach them, even if you do know that such skills exist. You'd have to be highly motivated to find a place to learn them, and that would, of course, come after being alerted to their existence in the first place and believing that they were worth pursuing to add juice to your game. But, the cat is out of the bag, and it's bound to find its way into the commercial bang-and-roll arena, but not overnight. Eventually, if it isn't already happening, one or more of the more insightful fighters will train and have the skills.

In the meantime, everyone should go to the video/dvd store and rent Jackie Chan's The Big Brawl. There are no internal skills whatsoever demonstrated there, but it's one of my favorite predecessors to the UFC concept.

I kinda speed read some posts, and if someone has already mentioned it, I apologize in advance....

But I don't recall anyone mentioning anything about the difference between developing qi for health purposes and qi for martial purposes - which I presume is the question being asked - which is a more effective means of developing qi for martial purposes. Sorry, should I say "ki"?

Even though it is the same thing, i.e. "ki", and based on the same principles, I don't think it's exactly the same thing in terms of martial usage and application. Or is it?

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable would care to comment?

Ignatius Teo wrote: I kinda speed read some posts, and if someone has already mentioned it, I apologize in advance.... But I don't recall anyone mentioning anything about the difference between developing qi for health purposes and qi for martial purposes - which I presume is the question being asked - which is a more effective means of developing qi for martial purposes. Sorry, should I say "ki"? Even though it is the same thing, i.e. "ki", and based on the same principles, I don't think it's exactly the same thing in terms of martial usage and application. Or is it? Perhaps someone more knowledgeable would care to comment?

Dunno about being more knowledgable but I'll give it a go, qi and ki are exactly the same thing IMO. Developing it for martial purposes also improves your health I think. If you try developing it for purely health purposes you're likely to end up with geriatric oriental dancing that you sometimes see people doing in parks. In other words I don't think you can properly understand a lot of this stuff when not physically interacting with a partner or teacher and martial applications tend to push you to improve yourself more (it hurts when you get it wrong is pretty good motivation!).

As I said previously, ki aikido has a systematized curriculum and teaching methodology that is fairly standard accross the board, it was expressly designed by Koichi tohei for transmission of ki principles. Tai Chi in my experience basically depends on the instructor you find, there is no set method for teaching it and it varies from teacher to teacher as to how (and if) they do it. It is entirely possible that Tai Chi is a far superieor method but just less consistantly taught, whereas if you walk into any ki soc derived dojo you'll see the same exercises being used and the same teaching theory (well very similar at least).


Regards

Mike

Justin Smith wrote: And I typcially always say UFC-ish event, considering those are probably the pinnacle of aggressoid competitions, and if one wins there one can probably win anywhere, but that can be relaxed a bit, since a lot of the internal gurus are claiming that one of their many skills is that they cannot be pushed over or thrown, they could compete in a less hazardous environment where throws are involved, like judo, sumo, or taijiquan push hands. Justin

Actually, I think it makes sense to see this showing up in judo. A judo guy who can't be thrown at all would be hard to miss. It would be funny to see a guy win the olympics and then say he never trained judo, it was all internal strength.

Don Magee wrote: Actually, I think it makes sense to see this showing up in judo. A judo guy who can't be thrown at all would be hard to miss. It would be funny to see a guy win the olympics and then say he never trained judo, it was all internal strength.

More likely that they'd penalize you for being too "passive." I competed in a Judo comp back in college, at the time I was doing Iliqchuan, and had a tiny tiny grasp on structure. Combine that with Sam's liking to always have "hands on top" I used the sticking hands he drilled into us to keep the other guy from getting a grip on me...surprise surprise I got warned for "stalling" lol. The kid from the other camp was one of Jason Morris's students and was pretty frustrated that he couldn't get a grip to execute a clean throw.

Isn't it odd that Aikidoka have unilaterally failed to represent their art in any substative way in BJJ or MMA or Judo bouts. Yet defend their own arts validity... while being unable to represent.
Yet these same men, here, now, are rather weakly asking those with internal skills to do the very same thing- they cannot do. Further using it as a measure of valdity or standard for that they themsleves cannot manage to meet.
What I have found truly odd is that many here have openly denegrated those who use their skills agianst "aikidoka" as being no real measure at all?
Here on Aikiweb!!
I guess that's very telling logic

Internals in more demanding venues
I've responded to this stuff before. Rob has as well. We have repeatedly told of meeting with Judoka, Bjjers, MMAers, Karateka etc etc. Addressed the very same questions and doubts; It wasn't believed then nor will it be here. To respond to men who have read it before and then see them ask the same questions over and over is evidence enough. Its troling. And it cuts to the very heart of the matter. In the established Martial arts-there is no real interest in the truth.
Sinclair wrote"
It's difficult to get a man to understand something, if his salary is based on his not understandning it.

So it is here.The arts are ruled by men with a vested interest-not necessarily money or salary-to not believe something they do not understand.
Years ago men were sucked into believing the clap trap handed to them by Martial teachers. That the protectionism, in-house isolated training, single style training method and twenty years of repeating the kata would produce......something.
Then the UFC and pride
No one was willing to believe that in a few years training time-young men could be trained to virtually take these teachers apart.
It was unthinkable.
It changed the way men thought about the "twenty year man" Asian model.

Now we have internal skills. A very small hitherto unknown group of men from the Asian arts have become independant. They are equipped, with skills of a type that most in the arts have no real knowledge of and cannot address with their arts skills. Moreover these internal artists are choosing to pursue it in more modern combative forms. And they have just begun to openly show-most of those in the conventional arts lack the skills to handle the internal knowledge,and now a few are combining it with MMA.
It is unthinkable.

There are interesting days ahead

Ignatius Teo wrote: I kinda speed read some posts, and if someone has already mentioned it, I apologize in advance.... But I don't recall anyone mentioning anything about the difference between developing qi for health purposes and qi for martial purposes - which I presume is the question being asked - which is a more effective means of developing qi for martial purposes. Sorry, should I say "ki"? Even though it is the same thing, i.e. "ki", and based on the same principles, I don't think it's exactly the same thing in terms of martial usage and application. Or is it? Perhaps someone more knowledgeable would care to comment?

Mikes Sigman had a brief say here:

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showth...ans#post164980

He says its the same kind of animal.

I think a common theory is that there are different variations of the way you train ki that will yield somewhat different results qualitatively (e.g. original yoga - completely nonmartial example). But it's all based on the same basic phenomena of activating muscles and fascia (and stuff???) deep inside the body that are not normally directly used in untrained people.

Dan Harden wrote: Now we have internal skills. A very small hitherto unknown group of men from the Asian arts have become independant. They are equipped, with skills of a type that most in the arts have no real knowledge of and cannot address with their arts skills. Moreover these internal artists are choosing to pursue it in more modern combative forms. And they have just begun to openly show-most of those in the conventional arts lack the skills to handle the internal knowledge,and now a few are combining it with MMA. It is unthinkable. There are interesting days ahead

Personally I've never cared less about competition, UFC, whatever, found it interesting at first then just wasn't anymore. If someone wants to compete, fine, I don't. I also don't think you need to fight in a ring to prove yourself unless you have self-esteem issues. I don't need to be tested that way, life is enough of a test in itself IMO.

However, if I've interpreted it right the above statement is simply incorrect: "Now we have internal skills" ? They have been a part of aikido since it's beginning and have been actively taught for 50 years at least. Are you referring to MMA guys now having internal skills? When you say 'using it in more modern combative forms', that might be new though. On the other hand there is no reason to assume that modern combative forms are superior to older ones, they're just different. MMA will one day be a TMA, like it or not it will happen. Think about how much UFC has changed since the beginning. You might say that MMA will re-invent itself and constantly change to meet the new challenges. Fine. I can't think of anything more important than doing that, which is why I do that with my aikido.

All arts are designed to be fit for purpose, aikido's purpose as stated by it's founder is "the true victory of self-mastery" it isn't about winning fights in competitions. Aikido waza work well in most self-defense situations for most people most of the time (I know a guy who saved himself from getting stabbed with 6 months of aikido training, fortunately for him the muggers weren't well trained MMA/UFC warriors, but how many muggers are?). Aikido waza might not be too great in the ring but I'm not getting in the ring am I? I'm also not stupid enough to offer my wrist to someone who comes up to me in a bar and decides he doesn't like my face. Why would I do that? Wrist holds are training tools for learning principles (most especially internal ones). I don't have a sword in my belt when I walk down the street so why would I expect someone to grab my wrist to stop me from using a sword I don't have? Give some credit to common sense. Even aikidoka have it after all

Mike

MMA will one day be a TMA, like it or not it will happen.

MMA already IS a "TMA." There have always been MMA, ever since mankind figured out he could bean his enemy with a rock, pike him with a pointed stick AND kick him in the head.

With the refinement of fighting arts over the past several thousand years, the means have gotten more sophisticated, but virtually NO new "pure" art ever arose just of itself, from a vacuum; it was the product of an innovator who took his inspiration from a variety of sources (the sum of which we can call "MMA"). MMA is the way of the open-minded innovator who wants only to be as effective as he can be as a fighter. This is not necessarily for commercial purposes -- it is a discipline that is also pursued purely as "art," just like aikido or any other system. It's just not institutional in structure or approach.

We need to be more specific about what's being referred to when you say "MMA." People are equating it with a very recent, Western, televised form of commercial fighting sport in which fighters mix it up with a little grappling, a little p/k, etc. When you talk about the commercial ring and whatever skills are tailored for that milieu, that's a somewhat different critter, IMO. If that is the new trend, then some other term needs to be made up to keep this separate from the age-old tradition of drawing from multiple sources of martial inspiration to tailor one's highly personal system of bujutsu.

Cady Goldfield wrote: MMA will one day be a TMA, like it or not it will happen. MMA already IS a "TMA." There have always been MMA, ever since mankind figured out he could bean his enemy with a rock, pike him with a pointed stick AND kick him in the head.

Fair enough. I don't think it's quite that simple and allow me to explain why. I may be doing MMA as an idea an injustice.

If you replace MMA for a second with the phrase 'keeping it real' then there are plenty of people in the aikido world who do that or at least try to. Sometimes they get stuck by the no-competition idea and have to find excuses as to why they don't enter them and you often hear 'my art is too deadly' or whatever. I've never said anything like that and never will. IMO If you know what you're doing then you know how to 'keep it real' without going to competitions or whatever, so when people ask me why I don't got to competitons I say "I don't care to play at being tough". Works for me

I dislike the reality of the MMA approach when combined with competiton, not because I don't think that 'keeping it real' is a good idea but because whenever I've seen people who follow, or attempt to follow this idea in combination with competition they cherry-pick techniques that they think will work for a specific set of rules in the ring and often throw out perfectly good and worthwhile things because they have some undefined criteria of 'what works'.

I met a guy who brazenly claimed his UFC whatever cherry-picking was far superior to aikido and claimed that aikido wristlocks were pointless and 'ineffective', he nearly screamed when I put a nikyo on him. Now that's an isolated case but the reason I mention it is because it demonstrates the weakness of the idea of combining MMA with competition IMO. How do you define 'effective'?

What if I took my sword into the ring? Is the other guy gonna be allowed to bring one? Isn't that just kendo or fencing? What if he brings a gun and I bring a bigger gun? Surely the most effective MA is nuclear war?

YMMV

Mike

To add to the discussion concerning judo/bjj and aikido.

This is difficult to discuss as it requires hands on to really discuss the concept...

I think UFC, BJJ, and Judo type events do teach us a great deal about what works and does not work in a fight.

That said, we must be careful as thinking this represents the totality of fighting spectrum.

As Rob discusses getting called for passiveness...I agree.

It is one of my frustrations in dealing with BJJ when competing.

I should post the video of my fight in the European BJJ Open that I lost. I got very frustrated because the guy I was fighting would not fight me, he danced around, would not take risk. Ref broke up the fight and told us to fight 4 minutes of a 5 minute fight wasted dancing around. So, being the warrior that I am..I said screw it and started shoving him around the flow trying to off balance, shot, he sprawled, passed my guard, and won.

Anyway, when teaching closing the distance and fighting in my combatives class I spend time discussing the fact that you have to know why you are fighting, or not fighting. You don't always want to commit, you may want to disengage...or be passive...it depends.

There is much that goes on in fighting and we must be careful to assume that training paradigms don't overtake us.