Do We Need To Invent A New Training? Yes/No/Maybe/How?

Dan Harden wrote: Mr. Ternbach I get hesitant in over-reaching and using strong analogy to describe the current movement. Why can't it be simple? What is preventing us from having fun exploring the roots of the art and leaving it at that?....

Mr. Harden,
I see no reason why it shouldn't be simple and fun and I think your approach which seems to emphasize training the senior aikido trainers first is a good one.

Dan Harden wrote: ....To hell with these people all caught up in the system....

That's likely to be more problematic unless you have the support of a number of shihans who can deal with the system while you focus on what you are about; but you seem to be on your way to achieving that already.

Dan Harden wrote: ...How great is it to be rocking the house and them not being able to do a damn thing to you while they rank each other and hold meetings...and we are free and laughing at the same time and shooting past their best efforts!!....

Sounds like your already doing exactly that so in a way you seem to be livin' the dream you you dreamed--that's enviable.

Dan Harden wrote: I think Ueshiba would be cracking up!...

That's a mystery to me but I do like the idea that O Sensei is looking down on us and is enjoying what he sees.

Cheers!

R.Ternbach

Matthew Gano wrote: I think Dave put it well. I depends on what you want to work on. I think those are some good ideas. I used to take my heavy bag and spin it as fast as I could so I could see what it felt like to interact with a spinning target. I'd hit it or "jam" it in a kind of two-handed shomenuchi, playing around with the spin and against the spin. I would also play with rope or power cords to try and move the whole cord using wave/spiral motions, trying to use my center and to have a sense of connecting through the whole length. Coincidentally i tried this the other day and was dissapointed at how badly I was at controlling the cord. I used to be able to make the wave travel the whole length, but not any more.

wow Matthew. I thought I was speaking nonsense.
Actually the idea is of using this heavied bag with its strap and attempt, as i make it spin, to perform tenkans - at some given times the strap will end on my shoulder.

I don't mean in the least one may learn aikido by arraying, eventually, a whole set of these training ideas, however they may be less immaterial or useless they seem. I was expecting folks saying to me I was uttering complete nonsense

At any rate, if you can tenkan with a heavy spinning bag obstructing you, probably this may be benefical in improving at least your tenkan while enduring some dynamic resistance.
Maybe.

Jon Reading wrote: I think a couple of interesting points have developed that I would like to address. First, I believe O'Sensei absolutely wanted to wanted aikido to attract a larger demographic. He said as much in numerous interviews and altered his curriculum to allow for better consumption by the lesser trained non-martial community. O'Sensei's aikido was derived from his exposure to multiple martial arts, from which he mixed the overlapping principles and developed an art. O'Sensei realized (and rightfully so) the methods and training avenue he took to arrive at his aikido was not a path that could be consumed by many, particularly by non-martial and incompetent martial artists. One can argue the extend to which aikido has been altered from the aikido O'Sensei expressed, but what we do today is not what O'Sensei did. Give credit to the fact that the aikido O'Sensei began disseminating post-war and Doshu continued was consumable en mass and today we have a large training population because of that curriculum. Second, I believe this large training population has created a technical issue that is damaging the dissemination of proper aikido. Simply put, more poor aikido people are disseminating the art than good aikido people. Again, you can argue the number but we are in the process of rebuilding a competent teaching population. From my perspective today's training population includes a number of incompetent individuals, many whom are quite satisfied in their incompetence. I do not believe O'Sensei expanded the world of aikido to people so so they could not "get it." How many people do you know train aikido? How many of those people can do aikido? Not armchair quarterbacks; I mean understand, apply, and execute aikido principle on and off the mat, no excuses, no whotifs. 1 in 4? 1 in 10? 1 in 20? Now how many of those competent people are good? That's a small number...(...)

Jon, you are writing in a more competent manner what I sensed and was trying to convey in a less competent one.
Ueshiba is responsible for the type of Aikido we have because, exactly, he seems to have accepted a non combative manner of training, in order to attract the wider audience.

Whereas this is benefical in a stage where you have to make a new Martial Art popular and widely known, it becomes more than an hindrance for martiality over time.
I think this is what happened, why much of the aikido we see is too fictional, so that most of pupils grow utterly unware that the technniques they are learning in that manner, would fail against a determined attacker.

I fully understand we have an economical issue here - if we start training in a more "realistic" way, we may lose paying pupils who are in just for some convenient and consolatory self-complacent delusion that they would know how to survive a fight.
yet, we might gain more who are martial oritented, perhaps.

Nobody knows what the net outcome could be, eventually: more pupils, or less?
Certianly, we'd have a more effective aikido when facing real and violent situations.

But we are caught exactly in this economical grip - it's stifling aikido, probably. And I have no solution, because I agree money matters.
Perhaps, two levels of aikido? Tahi-Chi-Aikido (would be legitimate a pursuit), and Real Aikido classes for those who want the full martiality, both in the same dojos at different class hours?

Jon Reading wrote: We can go right on pretending that our aikido is great. We can use pejorative language and dismiss those who remind us we are not wearing clothes. The elitist intellectual inside us wants to rationalize our aikido as competent. I couldn't throw my uke because he had bad energy... or she was not being sensitive... or he was resisting... How about because I didn't correctly apply the technique?

I agree - I cannot find anymore who in this thread quoted Ueshiba remarking that aikido works, and that it's only my aikido that doesn't.

Although I personally consider Ueshiba responsible for the flawed (to my eyes) way of training that too many dojos have, if I would think that aikido could not work, I would quit instantly with my endless efforts to find a way out of the quandary I found myself trapped in once I decided to learn aikido and I found all dojos where their training seemed to yield as its only outcome an unusable aikido in a real situation - at least unusuable to a guy like me who long ago was used to get punches on his face by attackers that at times could be truly furious: they were in to incapacitate deliberately, at least temporarily, my brain functionality...

You won't shiho nage easily those!

But I do feel that aikido may work.
What doesn't work, is the way we train. In too many dojos we seem to train in a manner that is bound to produce a nearly complete lack of effectiveness under real fire.

It's not aikido that doesn't work. It's our way to face it what doesn't.

Alberto Italiano wrote: Ueshiba is responsible for the type of Aikido we have because, exactly, he seems to have accepted a non combative manner of training, in order to attract the wider audience.

my personal opinion is that after the war, his view of fighting changed, especially when witness the aftermath of the two nuclear bombs. as i grew up in a rather vicious war, i can assure you that when you were on the receiving end of a B-52 bombing run, you would desperately want peace. maybe he saw that aikido could be a vehicle for fighting, not against others, but against oneself and to transform oneself to be a better human being. that's my opinion which might be completely off the track.

as for training, we can use the 80/20 rules. we won't be able to satisfy the 20 percent of the outer fringes where folks either wanted extreme realism to their training (which they can find it in other venues) or the taichee health conscious. so if we can define the curriculum that hold the 80 percent folks who are not at either extreme ends. one of the key for good training is to expose folks to other practices, be it other aikido dojos or other arts. you might lose folks, but if you are confident enough with your aikido, then your folks would recognize it and learn better. in my organization, ASU, we are encourage to try other stuffs as the leaders in the organization demonstrated by example.

Phi Truong wrote: my personal opinion is that after the war, his view of fighting changed, especially when witness the aftermath of the two nuclear bombs. as i grew up in a rather vicious war, i can assure you that when you were on the receiving end of a B-52 bombing run, you would desperately want peace. maybe he saw that aikido could be a vehicle for fighting, not against others, but against oneself and to transform oneself to be a better human being. that's my opinion which might be completely off the track.

I think you have hit the nail squarely upon the head with this observation Phi.

Best,

Ron

Phi Truong wrote: my personal opinion is that after the war, his view of fighting changed, especially when witness the aftermath of the two nuclear bombs. as i grew up in a rather vicious war, i can assure you that when you were on the receiving end of a B-52 bombing run, you would desperately want peace. maybe he saw that aikido could be a vehicle for fighting, not against others, but against oneself and to transform oneself to be a better human being...

ditto

Ron Ragusa wrote: I think you have hit the nail squarely upon the head with this observation Phi....

ditto

Ron Ragusa wrote: I think you have hit the nail squarely upon the head with this observation Phi. Best, Ron

I think so too.
That was the "flaw" with Ueshiba - that's why aikido ended up forfeiting martiality in so many cases - Ueshiba, unwillingly, disseminated this "virus". You don't lose WW2 and stay the same ever again.
First he lost his samurai world and his sword - then he lost WW2. He is a man who has seen his whole world vanish - twice.

Alberto Italiano wrote: I think so too. That was the "flaw" with Ueshiba - that's why aikido ended up forfeiting martiality in so many cases - Ueshiba, unwillingly, disseminated this "virus". You don't lose WW2 and stay the same ever again. First he lost his samurai world and his sword - then he lost WW2. He is a man who has seen his whole world vanish - twice.

Hi Alberto -

Interesting observation. What I find difficult to understand is why you and others are looking to shoehorn Aikido into a form that it clearly wasn't designed to fit. If fighting proficiency is your primary objective there are better arts and training systems available for achieving that goal.

Personally, I consider Ueshiba's "virus" to be more a "gift" to a world that is awash in violence and ways to inflict violence. One man started with a vision of using his art to make the world a more peaceful place to live. Today that vision endures and continues to slowly spread via the transmission of his art from generation to generation.

Best,

Ron

Phi Truong wrote: my personal opinion is that after the war, his view of fighting changed, especially when witness the aftermath of the two nuclear bombs. as i grew up in a rather vicious war, i can assure you that when you were on the receiving end of a B-52 bombing run, you would desperately want peace. maybe he saw that aikido could be a vehicle for fighting, not against others, but against oneself and to transform oneself to be a better human being. that's my opinion which might be completely off the track. as for training, we can use the 80/20 rules. we won't be able to satisfy the 20 percent of the outer fringes where folks either wanted extreme realism to their training (which they can find it in other venues) or the taichee health conscious. so if we can define the curriculum that hold the 80 percent folks who are not at either extreme ends. one of the key for good training is to expose folks to other practices, be it other aikido dojos or other arts. you might lose folks, but if you are confident enough with your aikido, then your folks would recognize it and learn better. in my organization, ASU, we are encourage to try other stuffs as the leaders in the organization demonstrated by example.

Phi.
I agree with the first paragraph.

On the second I would say 80% want want health and wellness and peace, both inner and outer. Far from extreme I would think.

Regards.G.

Alberto Italiano wrote: I think so too. That was the "flaw" with Ueshiba - that's why aikido ended up forfeiting martiality in so many cases - Ueshiba, unwillingly, disseminated this "virus". You don't lose WW2 and stay the same ever again. First he lost his samurai world and his sword - then he lost WW2. He is a man who has seen his whole world vanish - twice.

Ciao Alberto,

FWIW, I have to respectfully disagree with the you on a number of grounds because it's my strongly held belief you don't forfeit martiality you wake up from the nightmare of it.

Peace,

R.Ternbach

Ron Ragusa wrote: Hi Alberto - Interesting observation. What I find difficult to understand is why you and others are looking to shoehorn Aikido into a form that it clearly wasn't designed to fit. If fighting proficiency is your primary objective there are better arts and training systems available for achieving that goal. Personally, I consider Ueshiba's "virus" to be more a "gift" to a world that is awash in violence and ways to inflict violence. One man started with a vision of using his art to make the world a more peaceful place to live. Today that vision endures and continues to slowly spread via the transmission of his art from generation to generation.

I can speak only for myself, of course.
Ueshiba's problem, needs not to be our problem. We are already grateful to him for his gift - which should not prevent us from considering also the human side of Ueshiba - with compassion, not with polemic intentions, yet also with the intention not to succumb to it only because his all too human problems and fears go in bundle with his gifts.
We can keep the gifts, and honour him for those, and correct the problem.

Nothing prevents anyone from pursuing an extremely peaceful aikido - But I deny that wanting to experience an aikido usable within extremely aggressive or violent settings would mean to be untrue to aikido or to be aggressive or violent.

The Gospels said (matthew 11:12) "and the violent bear it away" - by wanting an aikido that can deal with violence, we want a world where the violent doesn't take it away.
Rubricating those who want an aikido able to deal with extreme violence as violent themselves, means to have confused the attacker with the defender.

For, if one would have ever wanted to use violence, one would never go for aikido in the first place: because aikido has no attacking techniques.

So, if you want aikido, you want defense.
And if you want an aikido usable against extremely violent ukes, you want an aikido that can defend you under any type of fire - and not obnly against mild one.

I don't want my umbrella to protect me only against dew - i want it to be usable also under the thunderstorms.

I hope this makes sense

Graham Christian wrote: Phi. I agree with the first paragraph. On the second I would say 80% want want health and wellness and peace, both inner and outer. Far from extreme I would think. Regards.G.

True, most people prefer to live in health and wellness and peace. (I dare to say 99% even)

But I wouldn't say that 80% of aikidoka are only looking for that in aikido (at least not where I train). It is a part, sure, but they are also training to improve their chances in a dangerous situation.

Alberto Italiano wrote: I can speak only for myself, of course. Ueshiba's problem, needs not to be our problem. We are already grateful to him for his gift - which should not prevent us from considering also the human side of Ueshiba - with compassion, not with polemic intentions, yet also with the intention not to succumb to it only because his all too human problems and fears go in bundle with his gifts. We can keep the gifts, and honour him for those, and correct the problem. Nothing prevents anyone from pursuing an extremely peaceful aikido - But I deny that wanting to experience an aikido usable within extremely aggressive or violent settings would mean to be untrue to aikido or to be aggressive or violent. The Gospels said (matthew 11:12) "and the violent bear it away" - by wanting an aikido that can deal with violence, we want a world where the violent doesn't take it away. Rubricating those who want an aikido able to deal with extreme violence as violent themselves, means to have confused the attacker with the defender. For, if one would have ever wanted to use violence, one would never go for aikido in the first place: because aikido has no attacking techniques. So, if you want aikido, you want defense. And if you want an aikido usable against extremely violent ukes, you want an aikido that can defend you under any type of fire - and not obnly against mild one. I don't want my umbrella to protect me only against dew - i want it to be usable also under the thunderstorms. I hope this makes sense

Ha ha. Alberto. You remind me of Musashi in your attitude.

A good read if you have the time.

Regards.G.

Graham Christian wrote: Ha ha. Alberto. You remind me of Musashi in your attitude. A good read if you have the time. Regards.G.

Musashi? is he the guy who wrote the book of the 5 rings?
if so, his is one of my favourite sentences: "nothing is more obvious in a man than what he tries to conceal".

Not only it's so true, but I think that any martial background (in my case boxing, if duh we want to consider that martial, though not very artistic - although some named it "the noble art") reveals immediately to you whence that observation comes from - if you can get acquainted with fire, as long as you are, you can foresee things to come. Your opponent becomes an open book - all his intentions that he tries to conceal, are immediately apparent to you.

The reason it happens, is that you read your foe by reading yourself first - you read yourself in him, in his position.

I think it was still in that book that I found the expression "i find it very stupid to die with a weapon till sheathed by your side". Well, yes: I don't want to die under a violent attack, with a kotegaeshi still stored into my quiver!

Alberto Italiano wrote: So, if you want aikido, you want defense. And if you want an aikido usable against extremely violent ukes, you want an aikido that can defend you under any type of fire - and not obnly against mild one. I don't want my umbrella to protect me only against dew - i want it to be usable also under the thunderstorms. I hope this makes sense

If you want to learn that, you have to train like that. I think there is no ther way.

Perhaps yoseikan? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6l7...eature=related

Dave de Vos wrote: If you want to learn that, you have to train like that. I think there is no ther way. Perhaps yoseikan? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6l7...eature=related

They hit each other.
I don't want to hit anyone - not even with an atemi.

Pure aikido techniques against opponents allowed to do whatever they want.
At any rate, here we have only ki-dojos.

I have to hope the Gods of the Vedas will one day supply me with an aikidoka who thinks similarly, who lives here, and who wants to train with me. Chances? zero.

Morale: I will never learn the aikido I dream of, and I will never get a belt, for I refuse of buying one

To explain it better: remove hitting from tori's part in this case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fN7yn0XOSMQ

Add an uke who behaves as aggressively as tori.

Whereas I fully understand it is needed to apprehend the techniques in a more relaxed setting too - yet, experiencing daily this more aggressive setting regardless of your experience, ought to be a daily and unavoidable part of the training.

Because training in order to conquer fighting awareness inside violent situations, is as much important as refining a technique and consequently in no case can be dismissed or reserved for later stages: it is the foremost thing you need, even more than technical perfection.

In this regard, it's not important how refined your techiniques are - it only matters that every time, after you have worked to refine them too, you are faced with a situation where you are required to attempt what you can within a controlled and yet "extreme" & violent attack.

Technical perfection and awareness of the firestorm ought to go as parallel exigencies, whose training moments are both included in each training session.

Alberto Italiano wrote: Morale: I will never learn the aikido I dream of, and I will never get a belt, for I refuse of buying one

Start your own dojo? You seem to have a very clear idea of what aikido should and should not be, so why not do your own thing? Find a few friends and go nuts in a garage or something.

Gerardo Torres wrote: Start your own dojo? You seem to have a very clear idea of what aikido should and should not be, so why not do your own thing? Find a few friends and go nuts in a garage or something.

Thus far this thread has been an interesting one - and certainly not exclusively for my merit (if any) although also for the fact it offers an ex-boxeur insight into how his background fits and fits not with the current majority of dojos (whose lack of martiality is not something I am alone to have mentioned here).

I don't think that the folks who have been so kind to reply here, have done that out of a lack of interest - because for a lack of interest there is always the wonderful opportunity of ignoring a thread.

Everybody hops in providing an insight - and actually many different intellectual branches have stemmed out of this thread's occasion; I find it a positive fact.

As for threads, you know: it's not even a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. It's a matter of using the thoughts of a thread in order to develop one's own. You speak of a rose, I speak of gardening. I don't say I don't like your roses.
Of course, nobody can always agree about everything - but between disagreement and vulgarity there is usually a limit that no one here has trespassed thus far.

It's so truly refreshing seeing that we can also prove we can fix this shortcoming of ours, and provide a decent thread with the adequate amount of vulgarity it was lacking and badly missing.
I only regret that, in order to arrive at this point, we needed your contribution, Gerardo: for none of us here has been able, before, to attain that level.

So I really thank you for your profound perspective about these issues, and I also think I have found the right dojo for me: evidently, yours.

Well done, Gerardo. Thank you for your insightful understanding of this matter. We have now solved it.

ps tell me the truth - judging from the quotation you selected above, it seems it was the "buying a belt" thing that truly stinged you, wasn't it?
If so, don't worry: I hadn't you in mind - nor anyone else on this thread for that matter.

Alberto Italiano wrote: ...In this regard, it's not important how refined your techiniques are - it only matters that every time, after you have worked to refine them too, you are faced with a situation where you are required to attempt what you can within a controlled and yet "extreme" & violent attack. Technical perfection and awareness of the firestorm ought to go as parallel exigencies, whose training moments are both included in each training session.

A-

Have you considered Krav Maga?

-R

Rudy Ternbach wrote: A- Have you considered Krav Maga? -R

To my understanding that's disarm techniques. Actually, incorporated into aikido already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZNrq20g4Qg

Alberto Italiano wrote: To my understanding that's disarm techniques. Actually, incorporated into aikido already...]

As I understand it, KM takes a lot from aikido and other martial arts as well and tests its effectiveness against each, hence MMA.

e.g.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNkU9zyHuWw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxJDejeXJeI&NR=1

Alberto Italiano wrote: Morale: I will never learn the aikido I dream of

You have to build it yourself, as one with the limitations you have imposed has not been developed yet.

Rudy Ternbach wrote: As I understand it, KM takes a lot from aikido and other martial arts as well and tests its effectiveness against each, hence MMA. e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8a3h1y9l7g&feature=fvst

As a KM practitioner, they don't use a lot from aikido. There are very few...if any...wrist locks in the basic civilian program. The military/law enforcement program will have more of those things due to the nature of the profession i.e Police Officer. It's pretty much basic combatives that are present in many martial arts and/or MMA. The weapons techniques, specifically the gun disarms, are far different than anything that I have been expose to while I was in aikido. Just a FYI.