AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series

Jon Reading wrote: The problem is that either you can manifest aiki (albeit the quality can vary), or you can't.

I think there's a quantitative component involved and that the manifestation of aiki isn't binary (can or can't).

Jon Reading wrote: Everyone with whom I have worked out who had aiki felt materially different. Even within a dojo, you can feel the difference between students training in IP and students who are not.

Agree. The differences are obvious. Students who are manifesting aiki move and feel differently from those who are mechanically practicing technique.

Jon Reading wrote: This threads connects a couple of issues because I think at its base level, we recognize the limitations of aikido waza.

Like I said earlier, waza isn't the engine, it's the tool that focuses and applies the power generated by the engine. I think students, if not given instruction in mind/body coordination at an early stage of their study, see technique as an end in and of itself. That being said, Aikido techniques are excellent tools for learning the application of aiki due to the nature of their forms. It's one of the things that sets Aikido apart from other arts in which the mastering of technique is the primary focus.

Jon Reading wrote: The difference is that Ueshiba was moving with full body connection (i.e. aiki) and eventually the student body did not possess that skill. The [successful] outcome of the movement could be contrived and that contrivance was the evolution of aikido. We now have this period of time where other martial arts can test our stuff and we become limited to the conditions of the contrivance. I don't like "right" or "wrong", because to each his own. But, we should not ignore this gap.

I think Ueshiba M purposely held back teaching aiki skills as an integral part of Aikido training because he wanted his students to discover for themselves the nature of aiki and their own Aikido. But that's just speculation on my part.

Getting back to the original topic of this thread, AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series, I have to agree with Lenny Sly; for what he's looking to do, Aikido doesn't work. It's not because Aikido is lacking though, it's more likely that what he wants Aikido to be is something it was never designed to be.

Ron

Ron Ragusa wrote: . Getting back to the original topic of this thread, AIKIDO - The way that doesn't work! - The Series, I have to agree with Lenny Sly; for what he's looking to do, Aikido doesn't work. It's not because Aikido is lacking though, it's more likely that what he wants Aikido to be is something it was never designed to be. Ron

Meaning what? It was never meant to be a "functional" martial art just with the techniques and without the knowledge of Aiki? You do realize that there are people claiming that Daito ryu/Aikido techniques are "obsolete", or plain and simple useless even with Aiki, that mma is the only "real deal" and that the "connective body" training should be used in that particular fashion. Not to mention all the other "combatives" nonsense I've bee hearing people talk about without having an actual clue about what combatives are.

Igor Vojnović wrote: Meaning what? It was never meant to be a "functional" martial art just with the techniques and without the knowledge of Aiki?

Yes.

Igor Vojnović wrote: You do realize that there are people claiming that Daito ryu/Aikido techniques are "obsolete", or plain and simple useless even with Aiki,

Yes.

Igor Vojnović wrote: that mma is the only "real deal" and that the "connective body" training should be used in that particular fashion.

Performance in many activities is enhanced with aiki.

Igor Vojnović wrote: Not to mention all the other "combatives" nonsense I've bee hearing people talk about without having an actual clue about what combatives are.

Since I'm not interested in combatives I don't pay any attention to that stuff.

Ron

Ron Ragusa wrote: Performance in many activities is enhanced with aiki.

So I heard, but I'm currently interested in the martial activities.

Since I'm not interested in combatives I don't pay any attention to that stuff. Ron

So far I can say that's the best approach.

This an older discussion but I thought I would bring it back up because I feel Mr. Sly and his comments have great merit. After watching the series and several other videos from the "Rogue Warrior" channel, I guess I'm a little confused at some of the comments that I read. One of the comments stated that Mr. Sly was "self serving" while others went right to the excuse "it's because he's not doing it right, a favorite excuse and place to hide for the traditionalists when their techniques and the effectiveness of those techniques are called into question.

First off, where is he "self serving"? He's trying to show you why these techniques are not practical and why they will never work in a real life, outside the dojo altercation. He's trying to explain that nobody is going to attack or come at you in the manner that a majority of Aikido styles practice in and because of that, these techniques are just as useless as those attacks you practice against so diligently. Where is he doing the techniques wrong? Every time I hear this excuse it make me think of Jim Carrey when he played a Karate instructor on "In Living Color" One of his students stabbed him with a knife while he was demonstrating a technique and when the student asked him if he was ok he very quickly replied, "you attacked me wrong"!

I often (from a self defense perspective) wonder if the average Aikido practitioner has any grasp of reality. It's painfully clear that a large number don't and that most have never been in a physical altercation in their lives. It's even more alarming that they actually believe that what they practice on the mat, and in the manner in which they practice it, is going to actually work and come to the rescue if it ever happened. I'm sorry but stop being so damn naïve.

Although Mr. Sly can come across as rude and or belligerent (more often than not because of people and their comments) you might want to do yourself a favor and listen to what he has to say. I don't personally know Mr. Sly and I have never trained with him although we do train in the same Tenshin Aikido (Seagal Sensei) method. I have said this before and I will say it again, Seagal Sensei taught the method he did because he knew there was a more practical, efficient and effective way to do things.

Mr. Sly is trying to relay that method and for all of you delusional practitioners out there with your certificates on the wall, hakamas, blackbelts and false sense's of security, you might want to tune back in to the channel and listen up.

John Cox wrote: View Post This an older discussion but I thought I would bring it back up.... I often (from a self defense perspective) wonder if the average Aikido practitioner has any grasp of reality. It's painfully clear that a large number don't and that most have never been in a physical altercation in their lives. It's even more alarming that they actually believe that what they practice on the mat, and in the manner in which they practice it, is going to actually work and come to the rescue if it ever happened. I'm sorry but stop being so damn naïve. Mr. Sly is trying to relay that method and for all of you delusional practitioners out there with your certificates on the wall, hakamas, blackbelts and false sense's of security, you might want to tune back in to the channel and listen up.

Hi John,

There is a lot of truth in what you say. But even Segal's aikido is not good enough if it is misunderstood. I don't think he could seriously have gone into the cage or boxing ring with it for the execution of the technique. It is and remains a form of exercise ...

The same applies, by the way, IMHO to karate and other "classic" martial arts. In the Middle Ages, many small deadly wars were fought in Japan and quite a few fighters were well armed so that fistfighting could not do much. But if you could fight a famous opponent to the ground in a duel, he was pretty much at your mercy.
Then followed the "coup de grace" and the securing of the "evidence", but only in individual combat. Historically, in most of the mass struggles people seem to have been killed by stone throwing. In any case, the sword didn't play a major role though.

[

Igor Vojnović wrote: View Post Well it's not finishing, the kick is basically an atemi. Similar to when Saito goes here with a punch, instead of a punch we go with a kick

Markus Rohde wrote: You can do that, there are lots of possibilities for kicking, for knees, ellbows, fists. I just said I never saw Ueshiba doing kicks, atemi with his fists a lot. In Budo Renshu, I couldn't find any drawing with a kick.

Very few really know what Atemi means. They think it is something like a punch or a kick or a stab to the body.
When I look at old films by OSensei Ueshiba, there is a lot of Atemi, but with the whole body ...

Otherwise it seems to me as if he keeps saying, look what I'm doing and see, it works anyway.
So it is not the technique shown that matters to him. He is even supposed to have said that himself.

IMHO, Aikido requires - or under good guidance can foster - an extremely aggressive inner attitude, someone willing to fight, combined with the indomitable will not to destroy the partner, but to forge and purify each other with the partner, just like forging a good sword, so that both emerge stronger from the process. A type of MIsogi.

Fighting is different and whoever uses Aikido technique as self-defense is already half lost ...
Why has even OSensei always used his own ukes for demonstrations?

Best,
Bernd

Hi,
I am a simple English speaking person. Some of the thread have no ideas what they say but I want to say something about the post topic.
Sometime when we approach to unscrew a rusty bolt we always have our own ideas how to to do it. And its not always the best way.
Grow up in Island we have our own way when we do stuff.eg If a kids do something bad we punished them then explain why he have been punished.
Its the same with Aikido. A lot of people think they know about techniques but the way they demonstrate is very poor. I watch the video . my first observation was : yes the way he demonstrate it he will end up with a black eyes.
Aiki is like water that flow nothing hindered it . Its flow with power and peace, and that power can be destruction .
Technique is like a instruction book that you use for the ki to flow. If there is no technique no understanding.
Thankyou.::

Henele Veikune wrote: Hi, ---- Grow up in Island we have our own way when we do stuff. --- Its flow with power and peace, and that power can be destruction . Thankyou.::

Makes me think of lava.
Construction by destruction…

Best,
Bernd