Kotegaishi weakness?

Daren Sims wrote: To me you are twisting my words to suggest a slight to your high ranking friends. Never my intention.

Darin - I only pointed it out that there are are a number of experienced people whose views of Aikido are distinctly broader.

Basically what Larry said in his last post.

By the way Darin - I like the way you express yourself and am a bit remiss that I didn't say welcome to the forums right off.

Its always a joy to debate differences of opinion with someone of experience.

Just to clarify a little more with respect to Kotegaishi since my latter comments were on pain in general.

The key to Kotegaishi is the kuzushi which precedes it. The inclusion of pain in the execution of the technique or any other does not negate it as an Aikido technique.

Larry Camejo wrote: Of course this is based on the assumption that you can identify a mish mash when it is placed before you by someone who has been training for a much longer period of time.

Larry, I think this is more of an assumption! Don't jump to the defence of whoever you think I'm attacking unless I have actually attacked them! (I'm working round to that...)

However I have seen some things passed off as aikido that for me were most definitely not and which come much closer to the phrase I am now famous for ...'a mish mash'.

I'll add that length of training is no guarantee of knowledge either but thats a side issue for now. (although my techical base comes from Pierre Chassang who has trained since 1952 so thats long enough for me!..).

Heres what I wrote originally

Daren Sims wrote: Point 2....Force uke down? Using pain compliance / threat of a wrist break? I don't think agree one bit. If you take ukes hand away from his centre using tai sabaki, tenkan, tora fume movement or whatever floats your boat and at the same time remain centred yourself behind the point of contact you will achieve a dominant position without the primitive requirements you suggest. Sure pain and bone breaking are effective...but call them by their correct name...jujitsu. This is not Aikido.

My point is that the balance taking is primary to kotagaeshi. Force and pain compliance alone are not aikido.

I am happy with this - It is a free country (well it is where I am) so everyone is entitled to their opinion of this.

Daren Sims wrote: If a purist is someone who feels strongly about a mish mash of ju jitsu, fighting and whatever being passed off as Aikido then, yep I'm a purist.

Again - this is not a specific attack on anyone. More of a response to being termed a purist as if it implies narrow mindset. Again I stand by this statement. I have been very fortunate in the training I have received to be able to discern what is and what is not good aiki to a reasonably high level. Pain compliance alone does not qualify as aiki.

No matter how much pain there is...if the kamae is incorrect, shisei is out of balance, maai is wrong, if there is no irimi or if any of the bases is disproportionately represented then it is either not good aiki or not aikido at all.

at the end of the day you can put someone on their rear with a gun...it may well be effective but for me it is not aikido.

PeterR - thank you. I welcome healthy debate and hope to learn from the experience.

I agree that the presence of pain does not invalidate a form as aikido. If this were so it wouldn't be the joy that it is. as long as it remains secondary to the balance taking.

I have been taught that aikido is to bring yin and yang together to release ki. This can take infinite forms.

So despite my strong assertation regarding pain v balance taking I hope I am open minded and recognise fully there are many ways to skin a cat...or uke!

Respectfully

D

Daren Sims wrote: Larry, I think this is more of an assumption! Don't jump to the defence of whoever you think I'm attacking unless I have actually attacked them! (I'm working round to that...)

Hi Daren,

I think you assume much to think that I am jumping to defend anyone or anything. My concept of "What is Aikido" is a continuously evolving thing. I don't think even its founder would have defined it as the same thing all the time. As a manifestation of Yin/Yang interaction it is by nature infinite in expression while always exhibiting certain core principles. Of course many don't even agree on what these core principles may be, but it still does not mean that one who has not walked in their shoes can define what they do or not do as Aikido. Just my opinion.

As you said it is a free country and I am expressing my opinions as anyone else. If you feel attacked I am sorry as that is not the case, I'm merely seeking answers and challenging things that seem to have openings.

Daren Sims wrote: However I have seen some things passed off as aikido that for me were most definitely not and which come much closer to the phrase I am now famous for ...'a mish mash'.

So have I, and I agree that there are mish mash so-called systems out there that are called a lot of different names, including Aikido and it's paiful to look at. I guess I try not to be too judgmental since the one thing I've realised is that I don't know everything.

Daren Sims wrote: I'll add that length of training is no guarantee of knowledge either but thats a side issue for now. (although my techical base comes from Pierre Chassang who has trained since 1952 so thats long enough for me!..).

I agree with that. As someone's signature here says - "Perfect practice makes perfect". In this light one can train for one year or a century in incorrect methods, it does not change the fact that they are practicing bs.

Daren Sims wrote: My point is that the balance taking is primary to kotagaeshi. Force and pain compliance alone are not aikido.

Now this is far more precise as compared to your inital statement. Makes perfect sense now.

Daren Sims wrote: Again - this is not a specific attack on anyone. More of a response to being termed a purist as if it implies narrow mindset. Again I stand by this statement. I have been very fortunate in the training I have received to be able to discern what is and what is not good aiki to a reasonably high level. Pain compliance alone does not qualify as aiki.

Personally I have not met any purists in anything who don't have their heads buried very very far up their own a$$, but when someone can experience the breadth of what is out there and maintain their purism not because of cloistered myopia, but as a result of truly having seen the myriad of expressions and knowing what they do to be true, then this is the person I deem a true and respectable purist. Of course since martial arts like Aikido come out from other martial arts and in fact are a combination of concepts from these styles and other things, how do we distill what is pure? Is the dojo who practice 80% bokken and jo less pure than the one who practices 60% meditation and suwari waza?

Daren Sims wrote: No matter how much pain there is...if the kamae is incorrect, shisei is out of balance, maai is wrong, if there is no irimi or if any of the bases is disproportionately represented then it is either not good aiki or not aikido at all.

Well I agree it may not be good "Aikido" (the budo). Being good "Aiki" (the budo concept) is another thing entirely, the latter being a concept that has been applied outside of "Aikido" for centuries before its creation. One may be able to apply Aiki without irimi for example, it depends greatly on the dynamics of the particular situation.

Back to kotegaeshi and kuzushi - I've encountered schools where the kotegaeshi starts with the normal forward kuzushi bringing Uke off balance forward to one side, and the twist is done taking the arm back towards the shoulder of Uke and past it to effect the throw, so his hand goes back in the direction from which his body just came, along the same line. Seagal did this in his "Aikido demo" at the beginning of Nico. Imo when one brings the wrist back towards and in line with the shoulder of Uke he infact negates the effect of the kuzushi that takes Uke off balance while moving forward. During the interval when the wrist is taken back towards Uke's shoulder and body Tori actually restores Uke's posture after having broken it a split second earlier. At this point Uke can effectively negate the technique by tai sabaki or muscular tension.

What do you folks think? The way we do it is to constantly move our body in the direction of the kuzushi while twisting the wrist, so the effect of the wrist twist on Uke's body is maintained but Uke is not restored to balance in the midst of it by Tori.

Just some thoughts.
LC

Hi Larry

An excellent response. I shall take great care in future to avoid suggesting any assumptions on your part with or without my tongue fimly in cheek.

Larry Camejo wrote: Back to kotegaeshi and kuzushi - I've encountered schools where the kotegaeshi starts with the normal forward kuzushi bringing Uke off balance forward to one side, and the twist is done taking the arm back towards the shoulder of Uke and past it to effect the throw, so his hand goes back in the direction from which his body just came, along the same line. Seagal did this in his "Aikido demo" at the beginning of Nico. Imo when one brings the wrist back towards and in line with the shoulder of Uke he infact negates the effect of the kuzushi that takes Uke off balance while moving forward. During the interval when the wrist is taken back towards Uke's shoulder and body Tori actually restores Uke's posture after having broken it a split second earlier. At this point Uke can effectively negate the technique by tai sabaki or muscular tension. What do you folks think? The way we do it is to constantly move our body in the direction of the kuzushi while twisting the wrist, so the effect of the wrist twist on Uke's body is maintained but Uke is not restored to balance in the midst of it by Tori. Just some thoughts. LC

I've also encountered issues where kotagaeshi is too linear and thus restores ukes balance.

Our methodology to cover this is to draw the wrist away from ukes centred position towards toris centre, drawing it down to the side, as we turn back to uke (assuming ura technique) we keep the wrist outside of ukes centre line and continue our spiral back to an imaginary third point behind uke rather than 'in line with the shoulder'.

We also keep the level of the kotagaehi at chudan/gaedan level to reduce risk of returning uke to upright posture.

For those that think in terms of spiralling energy the wrist/hand follows a spiral down and out of ukes centre then spirals up again before spiralling back down to the third point.

By using the spiral the control of balance is maintained and the opportunity for uke to lock up against a straight movement is reduced.

I think this is similar to your final suggestion?

Thanks again for reply.

Respectfully

D

Larry Camejo wrote: Back to kotegaeshi and kuzushi - I've encountered schools where the kotegaeshi starts with the normal forward kuzushi bringing Uke off balance forward to one side, and the twist is done taking the arm back towards the shoulder of Uke and past it to effect the throw, so his hand goes back in the direction from which his body just came, along the same line. Seagal did this in his "Aikido demo" at the beginning of Nico. Imo when one brings the wrist back towards and in line with the shoulder of Uke he infact negates the effect of the kuzushi that takes Uke off balance while moving forward. During the interval when the wrist is taken back towards Uke's shoulder and body Tori actually restores Uke's posture after having broken it a split second earlier. At this point Uke can effectively negate the technique by tai sabaki or muscular tension. What do you folks think? The way we do it is to constantly move our body in the direction of the kuzushi while twisting the wrist, so the effect of the wrist twist on Uke's body is maintained but Uke is not restored to balance in the midst of it by Tori.

I don't know about the film example you give but
any technique form where that is allowed to happen is a mistake.
Koichi Tohei Sensei has been very clear about that.

like you, that is a very clear expectation in our practice.

Discussions like this help define one's own technique, and to understand others. Of course, it is wise to listen to those of many years experience, but at the end of the day you need to sort your own techniques out and rationalise them in your own mind. Your instructor can help, of course, but more often than not, one instructor has one way whereas another instructor has another - and often people clash or disagree in argument, yet sometimes both can be valid principles. Personally, I have trained in quite a few dojos and have seen variations on many techniques that some would claim are ' the only way to do it.' As I said, the only way for solution is to sort it out and rationalise it in your own mind and then put it into practice. If you only 'do' and never 'think' you will not advance far.

Jun Akiyama wrote: Is there an esoteric definition of "slack" that you use? -- Jun

That was taught to me as "Yurumi" took a while but I eventually worked out it ment "slack" or roughly the give that you get in the skin before the connection for a waza physically is fully effective and/or apparent.

Oren Bregman wrote: Hi all, I was wondering.. if you attempt a Kotegaishi on an uke that has locked his wrist, is there a way to loosen his wrist and still use this technique? Thanx Oren

One of my instructors, Tony Graziano Sensei (4th Dan), explained an interesting point relating to Kotegaeshi. If you picture Uke's "Ikkyo Curve" in your mind (the curved line between Uke's two outer shoulder points running across Uke's back), then picture that line extending out from the shoulders. As you apply your Kotegaeshi, turn the hand and move it on that line. It's unbelievable how much more effective Uke's compliance will be. It works especially well on a highly resistant Uke!

Shane Marcum wrote: One of my instructors, Tony Graziano Sensei (4th Dan), explained an interesting point relating to Kotegaeshi. If you picture Uke's "Ikkyo Curve" in your mind (the curved line between Uke's two outer shoulder points running across Uke's back), then picture that line extending out from the shoulders. As you apply your Kotegaeshi, turn the hand and move it on that line. It's unbelievable how much more effective Uke's compliance will be. It works especially well on a highly resistant Uke!

Or, another way, don't focus on the hand, focus on SHIKAKU (http://www.aikiweb.com/language/vocab.html). Positioning is far more critical than torqueing.

You can all write about "what to do" and what "not to do" theoretically, but in fact, if in this example the attack (gote gaeshi) has been stoped (via force/whatever from he uke/real person) than:

If you're stronger, you'll apply more pressure to the wrist.
If you're smarter you will break his balance.
If you're in unknown situation/afraid, kick him in the nuts (exit attack usually used in krav maga and probably others and have been found most effective in real life situations)