some exercises for getting the structure going and why they're done

Charles David Henderson wrote: Hint, The picture already posted has an informative caption.

"Honbu Student James Huang slices one up" in the section "April 25, 2004 Demonstration at The Japanese Garden in Sherman Oaks, CA"?

If we take James at his word, I'd say so. No reason to doubt him, myself.

Charles David Henderson wrote: If we take James at his word, I'd say so. No reason to doubt him, myself.

How has your knowledge benefited you in doing Aikido to such an extraordinary level that anyone would be interested in following it? People tell me you are nothing out of the norm. So if all your knowledge has resulted in you being nothing but average. ...what exactly is the point? I am not saying that being average is bad, it just seems oddly out of place to persistently try to dialogue with men who's own methods have left them widely known for being extraordinary It's one of the reasons I rarely engage you. In a comparison of methodology; the end results have already been decided. Can you offer us any advice that has produced extra-ordinary results in you that have been vetted by a wide range of practioners: yondan to shihan?

Dan,

This is EXACTLY what is said about you, so what gives?

You ask for credentials from the man, but when the same question is put to you, you do not respond.

You are more than welcome to come to our dojo, bring whoever to witness the training event, and we will document the experience.
We will pay for your lodging and meals.

Mark Murray is a student of yours, and he knows our methodolgy very well, so any questions ask your student for the particulars.

We have multiple disciplines, Kenpo, Shodokan and Albo Kali Silat. We require a waiver prior to training, we will eagerly be awaiting your response.

Train well,

Mickey

Michael Gelum wrote: This is EXACTLY what is said about you, so what gives?

Waaaahhhh????

Who says that about Dan?

Surely no one who's laid hands on him.

I can tell you, I've met a lot of aikido guys and I've felt very few anywhere near his level of power. And he's given me his credentials.

I doubt there are many aikidoka in America who wouldn't benefit by a few hours training with Dan.

Best to you.

David

Thanks for your input, Dave...

Michael Gelum wrote: Dan, This is EXACTLY what is said about you, so what gives? You ask for credentials from the man, but when the same question is put to you, you do not respond. You are more than welcome to come to our dojo, bring whoever to witness the training event, and we will document the experience. We will pay for your lodging and meals. Mark Murray is a student of yours, and he knows our methodolgy very well, so any questions ask your student for the particulars. We have multiple disciplines, Kenpo, Shodokan and Albo Kali Silat. We require a waiver prior to training, we will eagerly be awaiting your response. Train well, Mickey

Mr. Gelum
1. I did not ask for the mans credentials-I could care less.

2. I asked him about his methods and whether they have been vetted by people outside of his own dojo or anywhere else where they might be considered unusual. Not the least of which would be in a non-cooperative environment.
3. Mine have been many times over.

4. I have offered to go see the man on his own turf and buy him dinner in the past. I thought this time he might like to compare notes.

As far as vetting of methods; I was asked to put up or shut up several times...so I did...many times now. As a result, I am actively teaching shihan, and both junior and senior teachers in various arts as well as MMA guys who seem to have found value in my methods for their personal pursuits. This was the source of my asking Eric for some sign of support for his. Since we are both discussing methods out of the norm it seems a reasonable request.

As for your offer....I have a full schedule as it is. What possible motive would I have to come see you? I certainly don't need to prove anything anymore and I am very sceptical that there is anything you have that I care about. Thank you for your offer though.

Dan

Just for the record. . .

To James Huang:

Dan Harden wrote: Well then pray tell...who do you train with? What have you trained? Where are you located

Mark Murray wrote: I believe the person being discussed is Erick Mead. Mickey, For the record, while I hold my Kali instructor in very high regards, he is well below Dan's level and abilities. I have tried multiple times to arrange visits as I thought he and you would love the experience and training and atmosphere. Mark

So when are you guys coming to Spain for some serious holidays?

Michael Varin wrote: Just for the record. . . To James Huang:

Guess there was some confusion regarding the conversation.

Mickey's post #54 was a quote by Dan but in it, Dan was replying to Erick Mead, NOT James Huang. See:
http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...16&postcount=7

Dan replied to Mickey on post #57.

Then, Michael Varin tried to show that Dan's reply of "I did not ask for the mans credentials" was wrong by pasting a different post from Dan that was directed to James Huang. This is the confusion. James Huang was not part of this section of conversation.

Hope that clears things up a bit.

Mark

i hereby nominate this thread for "Strangest Thread of the Year"

Josh Phillipson wrote: i hereby nominate this thread for "Strangest Thread of the Year"

The year's not over yet!
I'd nominate it as one of the more interesting threads, that's for sure!

Mark Murray wrote: Mickey's post #54 was a quote by Dan but in it, Dan was replying to Erick Mead, NOT James Huang. See: http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showpo...16&postcount=7 Dan replied to Mickey on post #57. Hope that clears things up a bit. Mark

No. But since you asked:

Dan Harden wrote: How has your knowledge benefited you in doing Aikido to such an extraordinary level that anyone would be interested in following it?

Your first mistake is presuming that I am interested in any "following" or having whatever ability I do have made the subject of the universal acclaim that some people seem obviously to hunger for. There is a word for this assumption of my motivation in such a response: Projection.

Dan Harden wrote: People tell me you are nothing out of the norm.

If you knew my "people" you would name names -- and we have done this presumptive argument of yours to death -- I am not in the business of showmanship, but understanding things for the sake of understanding, and saying what I see when I see it.

I have nothing to sell. Not even my ego.

It's one of the reasons I rarely engage you. In a comparison of methodology; the end results have already been decided.

Mazeltov. I missed any methodology you have detailed. You are very, very clear about your ability to impress people with your ability to do damage to them.

I don't need aiki to do that -- in fact I do not need anything but a pen, in my line of work, to do people a great deal of damage. Bun bu itchi. Thankfully, however, that is a responsibility that I take care to exercise in a professional manner, which requires sometimes misperceived measures to avoid the necessity, rather than merely seeking out opportunities to display my ability to do it simply because I can.

(TEST: If my psychological observation above is correct, those operating in that mode have read this last as a implied boast of my physical ability in the topic at hand -- rather than the critical moral comparison of approaches that it actually is).

I will once again be in Florida several times this winter...would you care to compare methods in an open room with senior level practioners and teachers that can help you to support your continued attempts here in a more meaningful fashion? Sincerely Dan

This is a BIG state. Apart from that, anyone who cares can PM to ask me the reasons I was given from those I trust far more -- and have trained with -- to politely decline your kind, ... kind invitation. I train with people I trust. I do not trust you and I have been given reasons sufficient for me.

You have two levels of reputation -- whether you know it or not - one that Mark M.and David O. have bought into and demonstrate here -- and another one that is circulated in other channels, and confirmed, unfortunately by your manner and debate tactics here.
FWIW, I have no such basis to make the same statement as to , Mike S. (or Ark or any of his adherents) despite the fact that we also tend to talk past one another far too much. Suffice it to say that the difference is an indication of a sharply "selective" expression of your good will in "training." As for my confirmation -- as a man argues, so does he fight -- in my book. And ad hominem is not clean argument.

By all means, let me know when and where and I may come watch if it is not too far and my schedule permits. Who knows ? Maybe your charm in person will refute the reports given to me ad overcome your perceived manner here. I would love to see your demonstration of aiki-age from holding the back of your knee -- very clever -- so post a video of that and you will go far in projecting some good will toward those in my circles.

But you already know who they are, I suppose ?

Eric
Thank you for a considered reply. It is unfortunate that you decided to resort once again to comments about my personality and now my credibility. Is that something you need to do Eric? A direction you need to go in to discuss a subject?

Erick Mead wrote: Your first mistake is presuming that I am interested in any "following" or having whatever ability I do have made the subject of the universal acclaim that some people seem obviously to hunger for. There is a word for this assumption of my motivation in such a response,

Other than your own interjections and defense, where do personalities and egos and much else come into play here, Eric?. In fact, I question whether that is a dodge. I was talking about a recognition of your skills. Were they exceptional; it would be unaviodably recognized wherever you went. If you have the skills that equal the men you are trying to converse with it, you would stand out and be known and you simply could not avoid it. These are shihan level skill and inescapable. Noticed at a touch. In fact you could not even function in any setting without being outed or known.
Simple queston really, no need to make a fuss.

If you knew my "people" you would name names -- and we have done this presumptive argument of yours to death --

I know lots of people, I prefer NOT to name names.

I missed any methodology you have detailed. You are very, very clear about your ability to impress people with your ability to do damage to them.

Damage? Really? How is that. I have gone to great pains to decribe nuetralizing peoples efforts. Example: in the yonkyo thread. I think you are trying to stretch a point to make some sort of case here.

Snip your self agrandized writing accumen and how it equals to your martial skills.

This is a BIG state. Apart from that, anyone who cares can PM to ask me the reasons I was given from those I trust far more -- and have trained with -- to politely decline your kind, ... kind invitation. I train with people I trust. I do not trust you and I have been given reasons sufficient for me.

Really. Since you chastised me for not namig names how does this play out? Further you are insinuating I am not to be trusted. You seem to continue to make up your own standards of personal attacks. Would you like to attack my wife and son next? I am frequently shocked at what levels you are permitted to go to here.

By all means, let me know when and where and I may come watch if it is not too far and my schedule permits. Who knows ? Maybe your charm in person will refute the reports given to me.

This is a personal attack Eric. You are basically stating that you have been told by people who attended seminars that I am not safe. That is ad hominem and damaging to my name. State the people or places or retract it. I call B.S.! Either you or those talking to you are lying. plain and simple.

I would love to see your demonstration of aiki-age from holding the back of your knee -- very clever -- so post a video of that and you will go far in projecting some good will toward those in my circles.
Many have seen it, felt it and could be added to your list of "People you have heard from." I wonder.....why aren't they?
But Eric, Let me askyou; you decry the needfor your perosnal use, and motivations of having to "prove something" then proceed to ask me for it? All while stating- I- debate unfairly. How odd and convenient.

Lets review
1. I and others discuss some principles that are quite obviously outside the norm in Aikido. By choice you interject into the discussions with theories that none of us, or those who train with us recognise as being relevant to developing those skills.
You prevail none the less.

2. The training methods of the people you have mentioned; ark Mike and myself, have benefited people across the board and they (now numbering several hundred people) have stated so here on aikiweb. Your own methods have benefited no living human being I know. I continue to mention it out of concern and caring for those that might be led astray. It's just not fair for you to continually interject what is apparently misleading information to an unknowing public.
Several of us have offered to vet you or have you vetted so we can move on and talk more positively in a friendly non-confrontational manner. You know...the same standard Aikiweb held me to years ago. but you just will not particpate in that venue, while continually butting in to the one on the net. It seems very plain. I think it's time to step up Eric.

Dan

(sigh) criminy guys... how many ad hominem dead horses can we beat in one thread?

Dan Harden wrote: By all means, let me know when and where and I may come watch if it is not too far and my schedule permits. Who knows ? Maybe your charm in person will refute the reports given to me. This is a personal attack Eric.

No. It is the explanation you asked for as to why I am concerned about you, confirmed by your manner of response, demonstrated, yet again. You may not like the reputation that I have been given about you, but reputation is a curious thing. One cannot attack it -- one can only repair it. As you see, I am willing to judge for myself, but your manner here toward me means that I will, if ever, do so on my terms, not yours.

Dan Harden wrote: Several of us have offered to vet you or have you vetted... Dan

I am not a farm animal, this is not a sumo stable, and having answered your question, I will agree with Janet and let dead horses lie in peace.

I question your methods and theories and your ability to use them and who might speak for them...you attack my character,.

The standard has been set here for several of us who were willing to go out on a limb and challenge the status quo about movement, methods and aiki. Hundreds demanded seminars to back up what was being said.
Personally, I have done about a dozen of them..
You have no provable success rate of unusual skill..
You have nothing left ...but to try and tear down mine.
You were asked to step up in several venues that I had nothing to do with...you declined.
I think that's all that needs be said..
Dam

Dan Harden wrote: I question your methods and theories and your ability to use them and who might speak for them...you attack my character,

I speak for myself and have no need for any one else to speak for me. I made a mechanical observation and suggestion not directed to anyone. You did not undertake to rebut or qualify my mechanical observation. Iinstead, you decided to introduce the personal note toward me. Then you demanded, again, that I submit to your judgment and demanded why I had not submitted to you before now.

Since you asked, I explained my reasons -- because your reputation, from those who have volunteered it to me, is not all that you tell us that it is. Nor yet is it what those who already agree with you report. I don't doubt them -- I just note how you deal with disagreement here which only confirms the reputation reported. Maybe that reputation volunteered to me is wrong and undeserved -- but you are doing nothing to correct it here.

Anyone reading this can judge for themselves.

I really don't care.

I don't mind to butt in, but Erick, your mechanical statements and wizardry in physics bore the hell out of me and don't help me one bit in my training. May because I'm a 文系　type of guy.

I think Dan's question to you is pretty valid and simple: does it help people?

If not, why do you bother wasting time writing your equations and scientific terms? Why do you fill up threads with your scientific theories (especially if you don't care to have a following?)? Why do you write things that can potentially mislead people (personally I don't think you can mislead them, I think you speak your own language when it comes to describing the phenomena of aiki) into the path of stiffness, wrong movement, etc.?

I'm curious now.

Lorel Latorilla wrote: I think Dan's question to you is pretty valid and simple: does it help people? If not, why do you bother wasting time writing your equations and scientific terms? Why do you fill up threads with your scientific theories (especially if you don't care to have a following?)?

Really, it reminds me of a guy who's never been in the military writing on an Army forum, telling combat vets how to handle the problems in Iraq.

Or a guy who's not a doctor giving surgeons advice on placing arterial stents...

If you can't do it yourself, why confuse the messages from people who can?

If I post anything along these lines, it's pretty much concrete and I usually phrase it as a question for feedback. I finally took everyone off my "ignore" list, but I frequently skip posts from people whose previous contributions have been low on meaningful content.

Best to you and the Aunkai folks.

David

Is this picture a joke?

http://www.aikiweb.com/gallery/showp...511&fromforums

Looks posed, but....

Is that Ron Ragusa?

Best wishes.

David

Lorel Latorilla wrote: I don't mind to butt in, but Erick, your mechanical statements and wizardry in physics bore the hell out of me and don't help me one bit in my training. May because I'm a 文系　type of guy.

So was I, I wrote my major thesis on Oyomei (Wang Yang-ming). But I was also an NROTC middie destined to fly and so I had a heavy physics and math minor -- better physics than math.

Lorel Latorilla wrote: I think Dan's question to you is pretty valid and simple: does it help people?

I don't think that was his question .. but yours is fair -- and yes, as I apply it, it does help people. I am unaware of any measure of "X helps better than Y" but it helps without question, because it refines my observations and corrections.

I don't know how to refine my observations except by working on slicing the language I use to note them finer and more closely tied to objective categories -- which is the only point of my writing here --- practice in doing just that with the concepts that I use to observe and correct -- myself as well as others.

Lorel Latorilla wrote: Why do you write things that can potentially mislead people (personally I don't think you can mislead them, I think you speak your own language when it comes to describing the phenomena of aiki) into the path of stiffness, wrong movement, etc.?

I think you are largely right that dealing with it this way is less accessible in one way -- mechanics not is not as familiar as it should be. But it is more accessible in another way that traditional Eastern concepts are not -- anyone can check my concepts because I did not invent them. I just find that many aspects of them do apply to what I experience and observe, and I derive the application of them from those observations.

In my experience, almost anyone will default to "muscling" and stiffness when uncertain (for whatever reasons), unless they have learned to trust the body's own abilities to move without their "preditctive" intervention seeking some set end result . Call it "scared-baby-grip n' grab syndrome" My corrections and observations given on this basis seem to work pretty well for folks here who find themselves struggle to be effective without "muscling" typically when they find themselves second-guessing something unexpected or uncertain in dealing with a partner's energy.

When I point out a couple of things that I see, they seem to move and report moving their partners more effectively, with less care about the unexpected interaction, with greater ease, less tension, more coordinated and less stiff, against committed energy. I would say empirically that they find it helpful. I would not do it otherwise -- what good would it be?

One reason it may help is that by explaining the mechanics they can just trust that the body will necessarily move the way it moves -- unless they get in its way... Which allows them to simply orient their bodies correctly and simply be more sensitive to what they feel occurring -- without some mental "plan" of action as to what to do with it. It also happens that it changes the nature of their movement in clear ways. Whether better or worse or the same as anything else I really don't much care. It works for the purpose intended.

If I did not have the evidence of my own eyes -- I would have to give the critics of my language due weight for being too detailed and technical, but I can't, because the way I use it helps them -- not to talk like I write -- but to move better and more easily and more dominating in opposition.

Erick Mead wrote: So was I, I wrote my major thesis on Oyomei (Wang Yang-ming). But I was also an NROTC middie destined to fly and so I had a heavy physics and math minor -- better physics than math. I don't think that was his question .. but yours is fair -- and yes, as I apply it, it does help people. I am unaware of any measure of "X helps better than Y" but it helps without question, because it refines my observations and corrections. I don't know how to refine my observations except by working on slicing the language I use to note them finer and more closely tied to objective categories -- which is the only point of my writing here --- practice in doing just that with the concepts that I use to observe and correct -- myself as well as others. I think you are largely right that dealing with it this way is less accessible in one way -- mechanics not is not as familiar as it should be. But it is more accessible in another way that traditional Eastern concepts are not -- anyone can check my concepts because I did not invent them. I just find that many aspects of them do apply to what I experience and observe, and I derive the application of them from those observations. In my experience, almost anyone will default to "muscling" and stiffness when uncertain (for whatever reasons), unless they have learned to trust the body's own abilities to move without their "preditctive" intervention seeking some set end result . Call it "scared-baby-grip n' grab syndrome" My corrections and observations given on this basis seem to work pretty well for folks here who find themselves struggle to be effective without "muscling" typically when they find themselves second-guessing something unexpected or uncertain in dealing with a partner's energy. When I point out a couple of things that I see, they seem to move and report moving their partners more effectively, with less care about the unexpected interaction, with greater ease, less tension, more coordinated and less stiff, against committed energy. I would say empirically that they find it helpful. I would not do it otherwise -- what good would it be? One reason it may help is that by explaining the mechanics they can just trust that the body will necessarily move the way it moves -- unless they get in its way... Which allows them to simply orient their bodies correctly and simply be more sensitive to what they feel occurring -- without some mental "plan" of action as to what to do with it. It also happens that it changes the nature of their movement in clear ways. Whether better or worse or the same as anything else I really don't much care. It works for the purpose intended. If I did not have the evidence of my own eyes -- I would have to give the critics of my language due weight for being too detailed and technical, but I can't, because the way I use it helps them -- not to talk like I write -- but to move better and more easily and more dominating in opposition.

1) How does it help people? I'm guessing it has to do with helping 'refine' your observations, in that case--how does the refinement of observations help you make gains in aiki/IP?

2) I do not find your observations more helpful and accessible than Eastern concepts (gotta watch the Orientalist tendency here, Erick). Sure Eastern concepts are not literal, but who is to say metaphors are not accessible? In my experience, the idea of an energy flowing through your body is more phenomenologically 'convenient' than ...whatever it is you talk about. I'd like to hear others opinions on that.

3) "In my experience, almost anyone will default to "muscling" and stiffness when uncertain (for whatever reasons), unless they have learned to trust the body's own abilities to move without their "preditctive" intervention seeking some set end result . Call it "scared-baby-grip n' grab syndrome" My corrections and observations given on this basis seem to work pretty well for folks here who find themselves struggle to be effective without "muscling" typically when they find themselves second-guessing something unexpected or uncertain in dealing with a partner's energy. "

So you're essentially saying that what you write helps people learn how to relax their muscles when they are met with a force? Who are these people? Can they chime in with their ideas? This is not a challenge--I'm curious how people here can translate tediously written essay on body mechanics and apply it to real life application in the form of internal tanren. Are these people vetted by those who STARTED the conversation on internal bodyskill in the first place (Rob, Mike, Dan, etc.)? Have these people met the known internal guys here? Even if they're reporting to be more 'effective', how do you know that what they're doing is similar to what Dan, Mike, and Ark are doing? I think it's a big leap to think that what these guys are doing is similar to what the internal guys are doing. Unless, you're supposing, of course, that one can gain a semblance of internal skill by reading your science textbook.

David Orange wrote: Is this picture a joke? http://www.aikiweb.com/gallery/showp...511&fromforums Looks posed, but.... Is that Ron Ragusa? Best wishes. David

Ron advises me by PM that the picture is not a joke, nor staged, but a regular part of their dan testing. The person in the photo is not Ron but one of his students.

David

Lorel Latorilla wrote: 1) How does it help people? I'm guessing it has to do with helping 'refine' your observations, in that case--how does the refinement of observations help you make gains in aiki/IP? 2) I do not find your observations more helpful and accessible than Eastern concepts (gotta watch the Orientalist tendency here, Erick). Sure Eastern concepts are not literal, but who is to say metaphors are not accessible? In my experience, the idea of an energy flowing through your body is more phenomenologically 'convenient' than ...whatever it is you talk about. I'd like to hear others opinions on that.

I like both sets of language. I think it's a matter of taste. I've never read Erick as saying one way of describing things is necessarily better than another, except as a matter of personal taste in learning style.

So you're essentially saying that what you write helps people learn how to relax their muscles when they are met with a force? Who are these people? Can they chime in with their ideas? This is not a challenge--I'm curious how people here can translate tediously written essay on body mechanics and apply it to real life application in the form of internal tanren. Are these people vetted by those who STARTED the conversation on internal bodyskill in the first place (Rob, Mike, Dan, etc.)?

I'm guessing he's saying: useful is as useful does. Personally, I think language is purely supplemental. The act of learning internals (I presume) is purely physical. However, finding a set of language you feel comfortable with can add new ways of applying the attention to the practice. My hunch is the language sets used are almost completely arbitrary when it comes to actually learning how to perform, which makes them interchangeable based on personal taste. These conversations have always seemed pretty straight forward to me: Erick comments on what he believes; people talk about how he's demonstrated ignorance. And maybe they're right, but I never see any corrections about what he's said that's incorrect. I've said it before and I'll say it again, maybe Erick doesn't have a clue about how to do IP/IS/aiki...do/whatever, I have no position to know, but on a forum of words such as this, I'd just like to see the words themselves corrected. As I see it, unless I'm planning on visiting him, his physical ability is almost meaningless. To pull out another tired analagy: if I want to talk about flight, but cannot fly, I'm entitled to do that. I'm allowed to tell folks, yes, i know something about flight, even if I've never dropped flaps and gone stick and rudder.
I've never seen Erick say he's an amazing teacher or student of aikido.
I still do not understand the infatuation so many folks seem to have with disliking Ericks posts.
I enjoy them.
Maybe folks should just get over it?
My two bits...another time 'round.
Take care, folks,
Matt