Mixing Aikido with other martial arts

Kevin Leavitt wrote: You are correct you don't need to go to any other art to round out your training in aikido.

Sorry if I'm being thick, but could you expand on that a bit - I'd always taken it as read that there are going to be some things that you can't do with aikido and some situations that you can't deal with using aikido - to give an extreme example, you learn very little that would help you in a gunfight (afaict - I never intend to be in one). To be possibly more controversial and less extreme, I thought that there was a general consensus that aikido lacked groundwork... or am I missing your point. (Probably...)

David Sim wrote: Sorry if I'm being thick, but could you expand on that a bit - I'd always taken it as read that there are going to be some things that you can't do with aikido and some situations that you can't deal with using aikido - to give an extreme example, you learn very little that would help you in a gunfight (afaict - I never intend to be in one). To be possibly more controversial and less extreme, I thought that there was a general consensus that aikido lacked groundwork... or am I missing your point. (Probably...)

"Sensei, does aikido also have kicking techniques?"

"You fool! What do you mean by such a question? We use kicking techniques or anything else. I even used artillery. Martial arts, guns and artillery are all aikido. What do you think aikido is? Do you think it involves only the twisting of hands? It is a means of war... an act of war! aikido is a fight with real swords. We use the word 'aiki' because through it we can feel the mind of the enemy who comes to attack and are thus able to respond immediately. Look at Sumo. After the command is given ("Miatte! Miatte!), they stand up and go at each other in a flash. That's the same as aiki. When a person suddenly faces his enemy in an mental state free from all ideas and thoughts and is instantly able to deal with him, we call that aiki. In the old days it was called 'aiki no jutsu'. Therefore, artillery or anything else becomes aiki." "Is that so... I think I understand." "If you still don't understand, come to me again." After that he was afraid of me and bowed to me from far off. When I went to Europe he asked me to take him as well.

From "Reminiscences Of Minoru Mochizuki", available here.

Best,

Chris

Kevin Leavitt wrote: Good comments and observations Dennis. I would tend to agree with you, I am one of those "5 to 10 year" guys you are referring to. n.

Kevin, I have read some of your postings and I do not believe you are one of the people I was talking about. Those people as self delusional and I don't see that in you at all.

I don't see how it is possible to train multiple arts and not mix them. I've had this conversation before with my aikido instructor about my judo training. There is really no way to say this is a judo technique or this is a bjj technique. You cant' say ikkyo is a aikido technique it exists in jujitsu as well (what hasn't come from some form of jujitsu when you think about it). I think aikido is simply the mindset behind your motions.

When I'm in competition, I dont say ok this is judo so I'm going to use judo. Or this is bjj so I'm going to use bjj. I just act. When I am showing somone a technique I dont say, ok this is a judo technique or this is a bjj technique or this is an aikido technique. I just say, this is something I found that works in this situtaiton.

At the core the principles of centering, relaxation, and balance (weight on my side) are present no matter if I'm in a bjj competiton, or a judo competition, or sparing mma. I've been told you build your own aikido. I've been told you build your own judo. I've heard many a judoka say someone's judo is strong. There is no reason to remove or seperate something simply because you dont think it meets the worlds definition of your art. Martial arts are ment to grow beyond their creators. I look at them the same way I look at open source programming. I have a base of source code that I can change, modify, or combine with others to make a program that does what I need. Then, I have the choice of keeping it to myself or giving it back to the community to disect, critisize, or use as they see fit.

As I've said before I think it all comes down to finding something you enjoy, working at it as hard as you can, then being honest to yourself about your weaknesses and finding ways to improve them. If you are a judo guy, and your weakness is striking, you dont want to train judo harder. You want to go find someone who can teach you how to punch. The same goes to your aikido. Maybe your aikido instructor has no ground training. I personally woulnd't trust someone's teaching on something they have never done. Theory just doesn't work well with me. I would go experiance ground work with someone who has trained in it for a long time, then figure out how to bring it back into my aikido.

To David Sims,

What Christopher Li said! Wow..that was great!

Dennis Hooker can probably explain better than I as I am a lowly kyu guy in aikido! But to me, I have found aikido to be very complete in it's goals to transmit aikido and it's philosophy.

You have to keep your eye on the ball, so to speak. I really don't like sounding like one of those eastern philosophy guys that offer up koans or questions as an answer!

You are correct that if I were going to become the best at shooting, I would go to the best handgun school I could...not an Aikido dojo! So, it would seem the inverse logic would be "therefore, aikido cannot be complete as a martial art because it cannot be all things!".

Keeping your eye on the ball, look at it this way. In a good handgun school, what do you work on first? Learnng how to coordinate breathing, posture, and timing. You will spend hours in "kamae" an d "ma'ai" learning how to connect this things, bending from the knees with a straight back, breathing, spine alignment...connecting your arms with your hips and body!

Sound familiar? so, the principles of aikido are all there!

I didn't appreciate this really until I got heavily involved into some good military weapons training, and BJJ.

Aikido, minus the philosophical part, is simply a methodology for learning correct body mechanics and how they relate to various inputs. It is universal in nature and applies to all.

So at least in good schools with competent instructors, it is complete as it teaches universal "theory" that is 100% correct.

When you have instructors that claim to be doing aikido, but lack the experience to teach correctly, they will then bridge the gap with something else sometimes to answer that deficiency. THEN, you are in danger of teaching someone something that is NOT dynamically correct within the context of aikido, therefore, that is NOT aikido.

What I study, and why I study it, is that I teach soldiers that need the ability and skills to "bridge that gap". Aikido really cannot teach you to fight well or deal with the realities of many fights or situations. It is not designed too! If you are concerned with "effectiveness" then you have to do some "risk management/assessment" and come up with those things that improve your odds or help you "bridge the gap". It may be a non-lethal weapon such as mace, tazer, or a Lethal weapon such as a handgun. Empty hand you may study some other arts that have proven to have good methodologies for developing effective fighters rapidly, such as BJJ.

That said, what I believe Dennis Hooker is saying is this: Simply acknowledge the fact that this is the case, and don't call it aikido. Failure to understand this, IMO, shows a lack of understanding of the teacher concerning fighting, self defense, and combat in general. They are in a real danger of building there students a shaky base in both aikido and in whatever else they are "bridging the gap" with.

One thing I am always clear with the guys I teach is this. Approach every training time with an understanding your objective for training. I have had classes where we practiced walking in buddy teams down the road and covering down in "overwatch" from a distance. I have had classes where we back a guy into the corner and not let him out. I have had classes where we do kokyu tanden ho for the whole class (they hate it!). It is NOT aikido though!

Many people studying martial arts in the U.S, I believe (sorry if I insult anyone, that is not my intent), do not really understand why they are studying martial arts or aikido. I know it was the case for me when I started years ago. We all have certain expectations or desires, we are all guilty of projecting those desires and expectations on others and on our training. When we do that we come into conflict.

I think that happens alot in aikido.

Sorry for the rambling!

Dennis Hooker wrote:

Kevin, I have read some of your postings and I do not believe you are one of the people I was talking about. Those people as self delusional and I don't see that in you at all.

Thank you, I apprecitate it from someone as honest and experienced as you!

Sorry I did not mean to imply that you were focusing on me. It never crossed my mind! It is a self label as I certainly fit that mold! I do, however, think (maybe I am deluded???), that I am not one of those guys either!

This is a very, very interesting subject to me though. Last summer when I was home, Mike Lasky and I had a small conversation concerning aikido and it's parochialism and the line you walk between tradition, and customs, and how the Japanese influence in areas such as ettiquette and politeness can influence the art and distance it from criticism and outside influences.

As I am not a sensei or instructor, I am some what out of place commenting on this, but it is important for our leaders in aikido to provide answers and guidance to students in this area. I think sometimes many instructors probably have been too institutionalized in the art of aikido to provide wisdom in this area. It was NOT the case for my instructors. In my first month of Aikido, Saotome sensei answered it in a very interesting way that sold me on staying the course, although it has been difficult at times to see things properly over the years!

Thanks again for your comments and respect Dennis!

Mark Murray wrote: Well, I didn't take the original question as you did. I took it that the person wanted some martial art that would be complimentary to Aikido. That's a whole different world than someone asking for another martial art to take because Aikido wasn't a complete system. Mark

I wasn't referring to the original question but rather to some of the responses. By the way, I have your position in the reason for doing secondary arts. I feel fine with Aikido and have no concern about grappler's, karate strikes or Thai kick boxers. I read yesterday what the secret defense of martial arts is in Funakoshi senseis' book and that is the same defense I employ against all attacks. It has worked for me since I left home over 30 years ago without failing me once.
Best wishes,

Mark Murray wrote: I never knew that certain companies have certain techniques that are official use only. Hey, you get to learn something new every day. On that topic (sorry for jumping off topic here), I wonder what would happen if the person being apprehended got very violent to the point of life-threatening and your son did use other techniques besides the official ones? In that instance, I think, knowing a martial art would be very beneficial. Hopefully you'd never have to use it, but like the old adage ... I'd rather have it and not have to use it than not have it and need it. Mark

Actually, that has happened to my son. His boss and co-workers know he does Aikido. Once, they were in a terrific struggle with a very big guy. The company techniques were ineffective. When the guy started to topple both my son and his boss and they all fell down, the security boss yelled, " Robert, use your stuff !!!" My son used a nikyo from the ground and then rolled it into a kata osae and that was the end of that.
My son has been attacked in the mall, at a park and walking home (we live in Houston) and used Aikido successfully each time although he did inflict an injury one time on his assailant but he was only 17 at the time and didn't have the control that he does now.

"Aikido really cannot teach you to fight well or deal with the realities of many fights or situations."

That's a blanket statement, offered with no evidence, that can't be proven. Different teachers instruct in different ways and there are some very innovative Aikido teachers out there. My own instructor has incorporated into his Aikido moves against judo sweeps, close range punching, all kind of take downs and techniques that can be done from the ground, including techniques against those who resist Aikido locks and holds. He tested those out over 50 years against practitioners of all arts in his private training. What you are saying though may be true for a lot of people.

fair enough Jorge.

I probably did not explain what I meant well enough. I am referring to traditional aikido methods as commonly practiced in most dojos. The type that Dennis Hooker refers to. I am focusing solely on the methodology and effciency of teaching. There are better, more efficient methodologies out there that can bring you up to speed faster than traditional aikido methods. I can offer plenty of evidence as I have experienced this myself.

Training with my instructors, they had the answers that you talk about too in aikido, it is not about the skill or techniques, or answer that are lacking, simply the methodology of transmission. The "bridging the gap" is what I am talking about. In my experiences, if you are solely concerned with specific issues of fighting and combat, there are better models.

That is all I was really trying to say. Not that aikido is incomplete or has a inability, just not the most efficient model.

That Ueshiba... couldn't fight at all.

*wink*

Hey guys.

Lots of awesome points and perspectives. I'm big on seeing something from more than one point of view and I think this thread is a good example of how seeing something from a different perspective gives you a new way of looking at things.

I know I had my questions answered.

Just to clarify and sum up my points- The main reason I was asking about other martial arts was due to the possibility that I may not get to practice Aikido as much as I wanted to

I got side tracked with debating (somewhat over my head) the effectiveness of Aikido in self-defense and with limited exposure (IE my orange belt). Kevin I think you knew where I was coming from looking at the whole thing from a military limited-time need fast results perspective. There is still a good argument for sticking solely with Aikido as well, it's up to the individual in the end I figure.

Just a point about that. I think cross training or exposure to other martial arts will help an Aikido student defend themselves better against someone who may be proficient in said martial arts. It's one thing to defend yourself against a wild untrained"punch but I figure it's another story to defend yourself against someone who knows what their doing.

Grant Wagar wrote: I think cross training or exposure to other martial arts will help an Aikido student defend themselves better against someone who may be proficient in said martial arts. It's one thing to defend yourself against a wild untrained"punch but I figure it's another story to defend yourself against someone who knows what their doing.

I am interested in the concept that some in the martial arts world seem to have, that they really need to train themselves up against 'the skilled attacker'. Who are all these trained martial artists that go around attacking innocent bystanders?

If you want to 'spar' with someone from another MA with aikido then perfect your aikido and see how well you can make it work against the different types of attack thrown at you. A long term project for sure, but worth it as in the end you will at least be profficient in 1 art.

A fight is not sparring, aikido used for real in a fight has no rules, if your aikido is good enough, the chances are you will come out of it fairly well. Reading Shioda Sensei's book Aikido Shugyo helped me appreciate this.

If anyone wants self defence in three months, aikido is not the art for you. I'm not sure what is in that short a time frame. And any art that gives an over inflated sense of confidence, could lead folk into standing and fighting when other options would be wiser.

The confidence to be effective with aikido can take a long time. But hey, that's just the nature of the art. Does any other MA out there invite as much 'missunderstanding' about it's effectiveness.

I totally agree with Dennis Hookers post, particularly in relation to good Scotch!!

Don't mix Aikido with other martial arts there is nothing wrong with it as it is. If you have competent instruction your Aikido should be fine, like a fine single malt scotch it does not mix well with stuff, you just ruin the scotch.

Fine malt whiskey takes many years to develop, every last drop should be savoured. Aikido is similar.
In fact sitting sipping a good scotch after aikido practice induces the finest if internal glows. While you are doing this, you can ponder away to your hearts content

Just a few thoughts,

regards

Mark
p.s. it's early in the day..I haven't been drinking!

Mark Freeman wrote: I am interested in the concept that some in the martial arts world seem to have, that they really need to train themselves up against 'the skilled attacker'. Who are all these trained martial artists that go around attacking innocent bystanders? If you want to 'spar' with someone from another MA with aikido then perfect your aikido and see how well you can make it work against the different types of attack thrown at you. A long term project for sure, but worth it as in the end you will at least be proficient in 1 art. A fight is not sparring, aikido used for real in a fight has no rules, if your aikido is good enough, the chances are you will come out of it fairly well. Reading Shioda Sensei's book Aikido Shugyo helped me appreciate this. If anyone wants self defense in three months, aikido is not the art for you. I'm not sure what is in that short a time frame. And any art that gives an over inflated sense of confidence, could lead folk into standing and fighting when other options would be wiser. The confidence to be effective with aikido can take a long time. But hey, that's just the nature of the art. Does any other MA out there invite as much 'misunderstanding' about it's effectiveness. I totally agree with Dennis Hookers post, particularly in relation to good Scotch!! Fine malt whiskey takes many years to develop, every last drop should be savored. Aikido is similar. In fact sitting sipping a good scotch after aikido practice induces the finest if internal glows. While you are doing this, you can ponder away to your hearts content Just a few thoughts, regards Mark p.s. it's early in the day..I haven't been drinking!

Mark,
What you have expressed is what I have said over and over in different ways. Aikido is enough for the ordinary person. By reading some threads, you would think the world has run amok with skilled experienced martial artists attacking innocent bystanders. A lot of people are worried about something that will never happen. I am 50 years old and have never been attacked by a BJJ person, a Karate person or a Wing Chun person. I have been in fights as a kid. I was raised in a neighborhood that was like some parts of the Bronx. We saw fights every day. I still remember seeing girls fighting with can openers trying to cut each others faces but in all that, I was never on the ground (except once from a good right cross and I got up quick) and I was never attacked by another martial artist. It could happen but those scenes of large groups of martial artists fighting are from the movies. I am not saying it couldn't happen. I am saying that it probably won't. I was at a restaurant once in a group dinner and there was a guy who commandeered the conversation and started talking about all the fights he had been in. When he was finished, the Shihan said to him in front of everyone, "I am from a land where they practice fighting arts as part of the culture and I have never been in a fight in all my life." Everyone got quiet in there and it was apparent what he was trying to communicate.
In real fighting, there aren't any rules and one reason we didn't like close contact was because the hands can hit in many places where sport martial arts don't allow and the mouth is also an instrument that can bite when two people are too close or are wresting. In the gang culture where they are almost never alone, rolling on the ground is a bad idea. A well trained Aikidoist will do just fine in the world I grew up in. Heck, I did fine and I didn't learn Aikido until after I left that world. The biggest thing I learned there was to stay in groups, don't look at anybody in the eyes for more than a glance, always know what's going on around you, and stay away from any trouble you see and anyone you know is trouble.
Best,

IMO, it is not the trained martial artist in the world that you have to worry about, it is the guy that is not trained, but knows how to seize the advantage and exploit your weakness that is your concern.

Having trained this way on occasion I can tell you that my 12 plus years of martial arts training did not amount to much once I was at the disadvantage.

In some scenarios I died, in others I was able to turn the tables. Situational training is a unique perspective on things and frankly is not really a way to train unless you are have indentified a risk in a particular area that has a high probability of occuring.

You cannot prepare for every type of situation you will incur. At best I think you can prepare you mind to act appropriately and do what you do out of habits developed. It might require you to die a noble and respectful death and have the people you left behind reflecting on the positive impact you left on the world. It might have you surviving, turning the tables and living to tell the story on another day. Budo prepares us adequately in that way, but I don't really believe it will do much to prepare for an actual assault.

In the military we spend our lives really training, learning the skills of our trade, learning how to be leaders, followers, learning how to follow a code of values and respect. We spend time with our families in our communities and generally being good citizens (most of at least!). When the time comes for us to fight, we use that preparation and life we have led, put it aside, do what we have to do. It might see us in a bad situation, or a good situation. We may find we were trained well, or we might find we did not do enough, or we may make a mistake.

Budo is really about the same thing.

Situational training is fine, but being a warrior or a budoka requires much more than learning a few effective skills if you want to survive HOLISITICALLY.

Jorge Garcia wrote: Mark, I am 50 years old and have never been attacked by a BJJ person, a Karate person or a Wing Chun person.

Ahh but you see, as a requirement of my bjj training, I have to find and attack random people on th street every day. We are barbarians you know!

But seriously, that is a good point. Most people will never be attacked. But the question comes: Why do so many martial art instructors (aikido suffers this as well) make such a big deal about the self defense portion of their art, if self defense is really not a concern? Shouldn't we tell these people to go get some stun gun training? If somone goes into the majority of dojo's in america and tells the sensei they are there for self defense, they will usually be told that their art can make you invincible (more of less). This is why we see hundreds of people who seem to think they are invincible because they study aikido, or TKD, or BJJ. If self defense is a major concern, then it should be addressed to the highest level, including an attack by chuck norris, bruce lee, and helio grace at the same time.

Don Magee wrote: Ahh but you see, as a requirement of my bjj training, I have to find and attack random people on th street every day. We are barbarians you know! But seriously, that is a good point. Most people will never be attacked. But the question comes: Why do so many martial art instructors (aikido suffers this as well) make such a big deal about the self defense portion of their art, if self defense is really not a concern? Shouldn't we tell these people to go get some stun gun training? If someone goes into the majority of dojo's in america and tells the sensei they are there for self defense, they will usually be told that their art can make you invincible (more of less). This is why we see hundreds of people who seem to think they are invincible because they study aikido, or TKD, or BJJ. If self defense is a major concern, then it should be addressed to the highest level, including an attack by chuck norris, bruce lee, and helio grace at the same time.

Thanks Don,
When you wrote,"Why do so many martial art instructors (aikido suffers this as well) make such a big deal about the self defense portion of their art, if self defense is really not a concern? Shouldn't we tell these people to go get some stun gun training? If somone goes into the majority of dojo's in america and tells the sensei they are there for self defense, they will usually be told that their art can make you invincible (more of less). This is why we see hundreds of people who seem to think they are invincible because they study aikido, or TKD, or BJJ."

This makes my point. We should tell people the truth and I do. I talk to them every day and tell them the truth. 98 % of the walk ins have the wrong idea about what martial arts can do and what they are. I know they can help you with self defense but not in the short run and they won't make you unbeatable but if you train long and hard and God is watching over you, yes, in that once in a lifetime incident, I believe Aikido could be the vehicle that could save you if your life was threatened, on your feet or on the ground. Just don't get in two or three of those once in a lifetime incidents because then, you might get hurt!
Best wishes,

If somone goes into the majority of dojo's in america and tells the sensei they are there for self defense, they will usually be told that their art can make you invincible (more of less).

I myself have never heard this. And I practice a fairly rigorous style of aikido. But my teacher, the senior students, the visiting shihan...none of them have ever made this statement or anything like it.

I suggest that you are pulling our legs. The alternative is...

Best,
Ron

Hey everyone. As a fellow martial artist I have been practicing for about 15 years. Up until 2002 I had never practiced Aikido.I really enjoy Aikido, and I know it is effective in a fight. I spent 8 years in Taekwondo, and 9 years in Kenpo. Using what is appropriate for the actual situation will be more realistic, and practical. As we all know you don't use a knife in gun fight, but I do believe a level of zanshin, and I agree long term training is the key. Noone can disagree with that but to learn true self-defense or "combat" in 2-3 months for sure is not realistic even for the protege'. Someone might be proficient in their respective art, but to actualize it is another. I have been an instructor, in both Taekwondo, and Kenpo and in no way do I make my students believe the art they learn is invincible, because we are all human, and can experience pain, unless you are Tank Abbott, or just plain numb. I see alot of people that train and think they are invincible, and have a false sense of security. My advice is be humble, use your mind first.

Regards Jamie

Self-defense is a concern, moreso than it should be. But yet, everyday we hear terrible stories on the news of muggings, rapings, murders, and so forth. We don't hear the comparative statistics that make a big-city murder about as likely as a stroke or car accident, or a shark attack. So many people come to dojo in fear looking for the perfect defense; in joking I always tell them, "Crane kick. If done properly, no can defense." (terrible Karate Kid joke...) Serioulsy though, many dojo take advantage of the sensationalism of self-defense to attract students. I would tend to agree the promotional angle exists much more than we would like to think...

Without going to deep on the subject, BJJ, Jujuitsu or other complimentry arts. Dont go there until you master basics in Aikido! The more different from Aikido the better (so they say). But me, I say master the basic waza of Aikido and incorporate it with traditional jujitsiu or anything that comes close, add thai kickboxing and you are a winner. BUT NEVER TAKE ANYTHING UNTIL YOU ARE FAMILIAR (and comfortable) WITH THE FULL CRITERIA oF your AIKIDO! Just an opinion from a loweeee!
Ask G................... man ,he has all the answers! (Ranked TOO!)

Ron Tisdale wrote: I myself have never heard this. And I practice a fairly rigorous style of aikido. But my teacher, the senior students, the visiting shihan...none of them have ever made this statement or anything like it. I suggest that you are pulling our legs. The alternative is... Best, Ron

I have. No one actually says "you'll be invincible" but the effect is the same: "the art allows the small guy to throw the big guy,you'lll learn to defend against multiples and yeah we do knife defense" etc etc. The totality of the response - without the appropriate discussion of how size strength, resistance and the randomness of a fight can alter things from day to day practice, corresponds in the fertile mind of an MA newbie to - you'll be able to take on all comers.

Jamie wrote:

Noone can disagree with that but to learn true self-defense or "combat" in 2-3 months for sure is not realistic even for the protege'.

Yes you can, we do it all the time with the Army Combatives program. Again, we are talking about a very limited scope of skills that can get you by in combat and also pretty much hold your own in general. It can be done. We teach a 40 hour a week period of instruction. So, for the average guy that does a couple of classes three times a week for an hour or two, this might take 9 months or a year.

Self defense and basic fighting, combat skills are not all that difficult to teach.

Matt McDowell wrote:

Without going to deep on the subject, BJJ, Jujuitsu or other complimentry arts. Dont go there until you master basics in Aikido!

I'd also say the exact opposite, don't go to aikido until you master BJJ!

I think it all depends on the individual, their abiities, time and goals. Also the instructor's abilities and quality.

True learning aikido can be a good base to understanding the principles of dynamic movement and center, balance and all that...it will take you a long way into learning an art such as BJJ. But with a decent BJJ instructor you are doing these things already.

BJJ can tend to get to lean toward power, muscles etc...but done correctly it really is not much different from aikido.

Nope. Definitely haven't seen that where I train. But I have seen something similar to what you mention somewhere I used to train. It was when the UFC first came out...I remember a bunch of students standing around discussing how they felt the Sensei would fair...it seemed a bit idealistic at the time...more like a pipe dream now.

In most of the places I am familiar with now, that kind of idealism/naivete would simply draw some rather strange looks, and perhaps get you pulled aside for some much needed coaching on what Budo is and is not.

Best,
Ron

New guy here.

What would y'all say to a schedule with...
Aikido 2x a week
Judo 1x a week
Taichi Daily

I've practiced them all separately at one time or another and found myself rotating through the list over the years.

Taichi offers great MA foundation, but generally lacks practitioners that want to explore the grosser applications.

The stand-up Judo practice always reminded me of a more robust push hands and through Aikido I actually get to do a lot of the joint locks and throws in the form.

The reasons why I tend to migrate from one to the other is probably obvious and is rooted in wanting to have it all I guess.

I suppose the drawback is the progress one would make in pursuing all these at the same time. But what I'm really after is a 'holistic' approach: internal training + external application.

Belts aren't important and likely one day I will do Taichi exclusively. But right now I want to make progress in the self-defense thing and keep the Taichi real too

any comments?