Direction for Projecting Energy

I'm still training in aikido (with the aikikai) regularly, and I notice I sometimes stumble on a weirdly simple problem: as nage and uke, which direction should the energy go?

For example, nikkyo ura: I've been told it's supposed to go towards the centre (like a lot of other techniques), but is the energy supposed to go into the ground eventually? I can feel that some practitioners redirect a lot of that energy into my wrist or another joint, and I end up tapping out because of the pain. I'm pretty sure I'm doing the same thing to them. For years, I found maybe 2 people who can do nikkyo ura without any pain, but "swoops" me into the ground with it. Ideally, I want my nikkyo ura to work like that without any pain. Are they redirecting the energy to the ground? Is the energy technically spiraling downwards or straight to the ground? Unfortunately that was years ago when I experienced that and I'm not sensitive enough to know the energy directions so specifically.

Then there's the idea of "resistance". When there is resistance, I think I feel like the energy gets absorbed by uke, but sometimes once in a while it feels like it goes somewhere else. Is it gone to the ground? Is letting the excess energy go to the ground the safest way to take ukemi in general?

Any thoughts for training safer and where the energy goes, let me know! I'd like to learn more about this. Hopefully I am on to something.

It's about balance. You keep your balance as nage and uke loses his balance, then you have control of uke's body. Nage keeps balance by staying grounded and uke loses balance by being ungrounded. If you project energy to the the ground through uke's body you are rebalancing uke. Nage projects energy to ground outside of uke's body.

https://youtu.be/1v78ROpGvCs
https://youtu.be/tEvKaNHgm_k

Two good overhead views that may be helpful.
dps

Alright, I am gonna ask a few questions because [I think] I can relate this thread to another I posted on a little while back...

I think the OP was in regards to energy; I do not believe the vids David posted are energy work, but rather balance shifting.

Balance shifting is fine, but it's not directing energy. We have basic angles that can shift weight, but if I am putting force into my partner, its force work (i.e. physical). This presents a problem for aikido people because, supposedly, we are using our partner's "energy" against them. Eventually, you get to the question, "If I am just pushing my partner over, how is this different than judo?" In the beginning, you gotta learn some basics so we can use vids like what Guy sensei published to help give us some idea of what we are doing. As soon as we advance our education to an uke that is allowed to use gyroscopic stability (i.e. "resist"), we run into a problem because we now need to use more force to shift weight, AND we also have to move faster than our partner because the unbalancing needs to happen before uke regains her balance. We are now officially playing judo with a "push/pull" off-balancing strategy.

Anyone who has practiced for more than a few years should have the joint conditioning and know-how to defend a joint lock. It's a tough reality, but I think important to realize that after 5 or 10 years, most people should only be able to do standard waza on you because you let them. The OP is asking an important question here and detailed a unique feeling.

I am bringing up this point because [I think] it is a good example of aikido people providing instruction that is unclear in producing those traits that O Sensei (and other aiki giants) possessed. We know that our partner should be unbalanced the moment she touches nage - There are any number of quotes in this regard and something that is observable with someone who has aiki. So, adding to our problems from earlier, we also have this issue with an ultimate sensation that my partner should be off-balanced when she touches me.

Nage keeps balance by staying grounded and uke loses balance by being ungrounded.

So how does this happen? At the instant of contact, both things have to happen. We're talking about a vertical pattern here; one part ascending (separating from the ground/ungrounding), one part descending (connecting to the ground). Throw in a horizontal reference (ascending on the right and descending on the left)... It's almost like someone said something like that...

Energy should go everywhere. When you receive energy, it can't stay trapped inside you; your body, or your limbs, or your joints. So you tease the linear force apart into many directions; some down, some up, some left, some right, etc. so the incoming forces get split and pulled in too many directions to remain a force that can affect you.

So if we go back to nikyo... IF I have aiki... we know that when my nage touches me to start nikyo, I should have her unbalanced. Second, what force she puts into my wrist should be converted into energy work and I should disperse that energy in many directions (depending on who you talk to, there are differences of where). Third, at some point, her force into me gets pulled into a direction of advantage for me and now I have used her energy against her. Start slow - tai chi slow. Let your partner apply nikyo slowly, feeling the binding pressure and then using your muscles to pull the binding out of your wrist and into your forearm, then shoulder, then torso. You are literally learning how to move differently than you normally move, so it will take time. Eventually, your partner will feel a qualitative difference in her success in applying nikyo. You can actually do these exercises with all of the kansetsu waza.

I know, what about doing the waza... same rules... start slow. The instant you touch uke, she should be unbalanced. Not pushed over, not twisted; kuzushi. Take the force she is putting into her wrist to defend you from twisting it and bring it into you - take out the slack of her wrist by pulling it into many directions. In you.

If you don't have aiki, this won't work (because you won't have any actual "energy" to move). It's my belief that the kansetsu waza were intended to be energy puzzles for learning how to use aiki. If you are not there, you need to spend some time cultivating energy and the aiki body.

Both responses are excellent!

It is good to see that you are still around and still replying to my posts David! Your videos are a very useful reminder of remembering to take uke's balance. Martially, of course, I understand its importance since everything I do as nage is useless if I don't have uke's balance. That is the way my sensei teaches the aikido techniques, but it wasn't what I was looking for because at times I know some things didn't feel quite right; for example, "something" feels stuck at the wrist, elbow or shoulder during nikkyo, resulting in some pain (then tap out), even though the technique works quite well, which means I need to refine things further without the (in my opinion) unnecessary pain.

Jon, that is a very interesting interpretation. I will find ways to let the energy go "everywhere". I had different answers from different people over the years: - let the energy go to the ground, - let the energy spiral, - let the energy be rounded, and the weirdest answer - it doesn't matter where the energy goes. I sometimes seem to let the energy get into me like I absorbed just some of it and it feels uncomfortable. I will do my best to make sure the energy does not get trapped in me and redirect it more properly and more fully. Maybe I should try extending the energy away from myself at the end of a throw/technique and into uke or into the ground (or both?)?

Thanks for both of your detailed and different answers!
Also, merry Christmas if you are still reading this!

Why do feel that pain is unnecessary?

dps

David Skaggs wrote: Why do feel that pain is unnecessary? dps

Inflicting pain onto others is not necessary; I believe there are other ways to settle things. This is my own value and is what I will always stand by. People already bear enough burden from other things, whether or not we realize it, so why add pain as another burden to them?

Pain is already a signal that something within the body is wrong and we should respect our own bodies as well as those of our training partners.

Pain is part of Aikido for uke's conditioning. If uke does not want the pain uke should tap out before the pain.

Here is a link to a discussion about pain in Aikido.

http://www.aikiweb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10433

I have used sankyo to stop someone from punching me in the face. The pain was what stopped the attacker from continuing the fight.

dps

I am gonna split some hairs here, mostly because the OP is talking about energy work and not joint lock technique...

First, I do not believe pain is a requirement of expressing aiki. That is, I believe for the purpose of energy work, aiki can be expressed without intending pain; there is some responsibility for both partners to manage their bodies to minimize discomfort. Kansetsu waza as a jujutsu is designed to physically manipulate body parts for the purpose of creating discomfort as a tactic of control. But now things get murky because at some point we end up getting closer to poor jujutsu and farther from aikido. And if you think you kansetsu waza is up to par, just go roll with your neighborhood judo or BJJ club. Maybe you're in good shape, maybe not.

But we don't do jujutsu, so what makes our stuff different? Aiki, right? So how to you 'aiki" kansetsu waza? What if the manipulation that locks the body is not localized in a joint? What if you could manipulate your muscles and tissue around your joints to insulate and protect them? You could use your muscles and tissues to pull the stress out of a joint? Or, manipulate your partner's muscle and tissue to bind or immobilize a joint... Not pain compliance, but restriction of movement.

At some point, the idea of me "giving" you my arm to bend becomes a farce. In MMA and other sport fighting, you don't see much success from small joint manipulation because most competent fighters will defend their joints. The bigger joints can weaken under stress and you see success with arm bars, triangles, and shoulder locks once the defender is fatigues or fails to see a threat. But, that means you are fighting until you get to slip in a move. Not very "aikido", even if it is fight science 101.

Second, go with the weirdest answer. The best aiki people I work with really could care less what I do. You decide what to do with the energy in you body; whether that comes from your cultivation or as a gift from your partner, its your energy to manipulate. At some point you care where you put the energy because that is what designs technique. When someone puts excessive energy into you, you want time and space to remove that energy from your body. I have seen people take punches where you can see the exit force bruise because there is no time to disperse the energy. It's just physics, but it's freaky.

There are tons of stories from the old students describing ukemi for O Sensei as falling without control, being struck by lightning, instantaneously being put on the ground. In judo, they called this dashing. Daito Ryu students told similar stories about Sagawa Sensei. None of them said ,"O Sensei twisted my wrsist so hard I had to tap." This is important for me because it tells me the feelings the students remembered were not pain, but instant control.
The ground is the closest point of impact. As an hypotenuse of the right triangle of the ground and me, the closer my partner is to my feet the shorter the distance traveled to impact. Throwing someway "away" makes for more time and space for you partner to manage the energy in her body. Aikido ukemi is somewhat unique because most other fight systems don't deliberately provide for the opportunity to recover from an attack. Originally, I believe this was probably done as a safety mechanism to let nage express aiki in practice; now, it's become something of a stylized falling system.

Here's some videos:
Sunadomari Sensei talking about power, taking power from your partner and then expressing power in your movement.
https://youtu.be/2ZtDlo5gXhU

This is Chen Xiowang showing push hands. It's not quite our thing, but a good demonstration of power expressed horizontally into a partner
https://youtu.be/zFP63zj2hK4

In both videos, you can see horizontal expression of power giving partners time and space to recover. Now just imagine if you angle that power into the ground and don't give your partner time to recover...

Oh wait, here's a vid of Shioda sensei. You can see the vertical alignment of uke in many of sensei's throws; these throws are brutal - just a little more over vertical and these uke would be stacking their bodies onto their neck
https://youtu.be/SXoMyD50MG0

Aiki is useless without the body being in balance as all three of your videos show how one person maintains their balance and the other loses theirs.

dps

David Skaggs wrote: Aiki is useless without the body being in balance as all three of your videos show how one person maintains their balance and the other loses theirs. dps

I am not sure where to go with this...

Yes, aiki is useless in any number of situations. Somewhere along the way, aiki=superhuman powers. I don't know who made that up. I am pretty sure there are plenty of aikido people (who don't have aiki) who are plenty well balanced, and still can't last 30 seconds against a good judoka; probably less time in MMA.

Yes, I suppose if you have someone practicing martial arts who is not balanced, she will may have a more difficult time throwing someone who is more balanced. Of course, if you have someone who can't manage the basics of her body (like balance) there is also less chance she is gonna learn the body mechanics of aiki, anyway...

No, I don't agree that someone who has aiki can't apply it while unbalanced. In fact, I know plenty of people who can apply aiki while in a period of balance transition. That's the problem, though. "Unbalancing" is a temporary state as the body transitions from stability to stability. Most people walk in a constant state of unbalance. So what? Why can't you apply aiki? If you get thrown, you have to be able to apply aiki to perform reversals. What about sutemi waza? Balance is a just relative position of your body.

David Skaggs wrote: https://youtu.be/1v78ROpGvCs https://youtu.be/tEvKaNHgm_k dps

Those vids are great :-)

IMO there is no energy that leaves your body.

Aiki makes you naturally non resistant to their force and this creates kuzushi upon contact.

IMO there is no energy that leaves your body.

For those playing the home game that know what this means, yes. That's the idea, anyway - management, not loss.

But reaching back to my other thread posts about energy... if no one is even willing to define "aiki" or energy, I do not know how they will speak with any expertise about how to manipulate energy... that they can't explain.

Hi John, respectfully, I am still not sure what energy you are referring to. Can you enlighten me please?

Aiki in my understanding is a balance of forces that you maintain within yourself.
The result of this balance is your force is always tangential to your partner's.

If your partner has the intention to resist, they are subconsciously commanding their body to oppose your force, but they are never able to find the direction your force is coming from.

If you hold up a brick, there is no energy entering it. It's like two arrows pointing at each other.

Steven Wright wrote: Hi John, respectfully, I am still not sure what energy you are referring to. Can you enlighten me please? If you hold up a brick,... It's like two arrows pointing at each other.

So, if you'd just let fall down your hand , the brick would fall about 10 m straight down "like a brick" in one second - if ground didn't stop it. Bang….

Well, the energy to which I am referring is intent (forces in opposition) in this thread. Once we manipulate energy at a point of contact we start talking aiki. But for me, aiki is unified energy within my body, so the idea of learning to manipulate that energy is tangible. If this is not your perspective, then I think the idea is foreign.
Imagine a conveyer belt constantly manipulating its rubber tread. Now imagine placing a box anywhere on that tread. Does it matter on what point you placed the box? Did the box still travel on the conveyer belt? If you constantly move your body with intent, do you think it matters where your partner touches you to create a point of contact for aiki?

To talk a little more about your brick, I think there is a difference between things that can manage intent and things that can't. I think there is also a difference between balancing energy and manipulating energy. A brick cannot manage energy because it is inanimate. A brick can balance energy because the material can absorb an amount of force, after which the material fails. Placing a brick on your hand while you lift your hand is not putting energy into the brick. Now, if you squeeze the brick... your hand squeezing the brick may not put enough force into the brick to break it, but a hydraulic claw could, for example. So your example is really just a question of force - a brick may resist the energy of your hand squeezing it, but not the energy of a machine. What if the material of the brick was rubber instead of hardened clay material? This is balance, not manipulation. In a larger sense, its also the reason why I don't believe you can put aiki in weapons (i.e. I am putting aiki into the tip of my sword). Why not? Because the sword is not able to manipulate forces, so it cannot express aiki - you can express aiki through an object though because ultimately you are affecting another person at the end of the weapon.

What makes aiki wicked is that you manipulate the forces within you to prevent force (energy) from affecting your body. This also brings up a couple issues I am wrestling with concerning the idea that just standing with a balance of forces is not enough because:
1. Eventually you run up against someone who has better cultivation of energy/aiki and you have to do something with the energy that enters your body that you cannot divert
2. Eventually you want to actively direct energy, not passively divert it

There is a concept model for what you are talking about that involves a hollow ball on water. No matter how you touch the ball, it simply floats and rotates away from the force you try to put into it. On one hand, it's a good illustration of simply balancing force in you, but the glaring omission here is what happens when the ball wants to hit back? The ball can't hit back because Newton says so. So we eventually have to learn to manage our forces to be more than just balance (and often, actually just one side of real balance).

Your partner should have intent to ignore your manipulation because if she knows what she is doing she is moving her body independent of you. She should also know that she doesn't need to oppose your force to manipulate you.

Hope any of that helps.

Bernd Lehnen wrote: So, if you'd just let fall down your hand , the brick would fall about 10 m straight down "like a brick" in one second - if ground didn't stop it. Bang….

Shootfire. I was almost gonna use gravity in my response to show the brick was loaded with potential energy. I went another direction, though...

What? No pain?... The only time I took ukemi with the late Kawahara Yukio shihan, it was tsuki-kotegaeshi - smooth, where did he go? Holy crap that was a hard throw - harder than any judo throw I'd taken - well, except for Doug (Olympic Silver Medal Heavyweight) Rogers. When Kawahara sensei was teaching and an overly compliant uke dove to avoid owwies from nikyo, for example, the owwies would be applied to the point where uke could barely move his arm afterwards... Not broken, not dislocated, not sprained, but REALLY stretched.

His point was "Don't just go with the technique. Try not to fall - only fall because the technique makes you go so that nage can learn how to properly apply the technique, which they can't do if you jump like an aikibunny" (he didn't use those terms). The late Izumi Hiroaki was of a similar persuasion. So are (IIRC) Takase, Siameja, and Williamson, in NZ

Walter: I can see how my earlier reply about no pain can be interpreted as avoiding the pain all together by falling or rolling before the technique happens (i.e. "the overly compliant uke"). That's not my intent. In your example regarding tsuki-kotegaeshi, the way I see it is excessive energy or force being rotated in kotegashi on the wrist, so the body is reminding uke something is happening there. To "balance" that excessive energy or force, uke also has to rotate with it in the same direction.

Jon: Your two points sum up things I was thinking about really nicely:
1. Eventually you run up against someone who has better cultivation of energy/aiki and you have to do something with the energy that enters your body that you cannot divert
2. Eventually you want to actively direct energy, not passively divert it

And you also mentioned gravity. So, by that logic, should the excessive force (or energy? for a lack of a better term) be eventually directed towards the ground so it can be dissipated most safely?
Analogy: Kind of like how electric circuits are designed to have a "ground" to let all the excess charge go to the "Earth"?

Slightly different question and analogy, what if the excess charge went through the air instead of the ground? There would be arcing. Compared to the force (or energy) in aikido, we have uke doing flips in the air if the throw was directed upwards.

Using your brick example, the Earth's intent is to pull on the brick in your hand (through gravity). Your intent to hold the brick is resisting the Earth's pull on the brick. If you let go of your intent right away, the brick falls and goes BAM!, possibly damaging the brick and maybe your foot and maybe the hard ground. If you match your intent with that of the Earth by slowly lowering the brick towards the ground, there won't be nearly as much damage on anything.

Using your reasoning, I kind of feel like I answered my own question, for uke, actively go with the same intended direction as nage, and for nage, actively go with uke's intended direction? Does that make sense?

I am going to split some hairs here because there are competing theories and many of them are "kinda" right, depending on who you talk to...

should the excessive force (or energy? for a lack of a better term) be eventually directed towards the ground so it can be dissipated most safely?

There is a lot of support that says, power comes from ground and returns to ground. I don't like this thinking because it means you need the ground to make power. I think that we use the ground to make "more" power, but your body should be the primary source of power (energy). I think its more import to understand that you make energy (power) from opposition and the ground is a built-in opposition source (because of gravity). This perspective lets you orient yourself to pull against opposition regardless of your physical state. If you direct energy into the ground, it should return you you in exponent. From what I know, there are different IP training groups with competing ideas about this question. For me, if I put energy into the ground it should return to me and add energy to my movement. If I want to jump into the air, I push into the ground and the energy return into my muscles elevates me. Ever try to stop mid-jump? If you are doing it right, I think it is very difficult to "dissipate" energy once you express it.
I think also part of this question is "who" is directing energy into the ground. You? Your partner? Why? I know many people who stick their back leg into the ground and make a skeletal grounding system. But it's relatively slow, doesn't make power, and doesn't allow you to use the energy that comes into you because you divert it into the ground. It's not bad, but it can be more useful.

what if the excess charge went through the air instead of the ground?

It doesn't matter. I would say there is not "excess" energy - You use your power and it returns to you. Ideally, you should be able to direct energy where ever you want to direct it. From my personal experience, the limitation of energy manipulation is sometimes an indicator that you are moving wrong. I don't say this to be negative, we are only human. If you choose to move in a manner that only puts energy into the ground, this is going to limit your ability to manipulate energy.

As an observation about movement... We move in circular (spiral) motion because as a methodology, circular movement reduces the opportunity for your partner to find your vector and intersect with it. 3-dimensional movement (without telling your partner) is almost impossible to intercept as a matter of math. Anytime you give your partner a hint about your movement, your limit your movement, or you countermove, you are giving some clue as to where you will be in space and time - that is an opportunity for your partner to intercept you. This is part of the argument that I make against ever letting someone connect to your center as a practical means of fighting. If you match your intent with the Earth, you are telling your brick where you will be; if your brick knows about gravity, then it can intercept you. Aligning energy is just one way we can figure out where our partner is going to be so we can intercept them - that movement methodology works both ways...

In a larger sense, I think we need to examine the "take care of your partner" thing in aikido as it relates to energy work. I think this is why a lot of IP arts go slow. There is a difference between going slow and putting energy into your partner at a rate she can manage, and putting energy into your partner and then trying to stop it if its too much.

**Snark**
Honestly, I think some people get mileage out of moving too fast for their partner, then pretending they did something. This works great right up until you run into someone who can manage her body better than you. In aikido, we classically resolve this issue by calling the partner a meathead and working with someone else. Sometimes, if we are lucky, the instructor will see this exchange and reinforce to the class that managing your body is bad, and shame on you if you do it better than your partner. And we wonder why we never learn to manage forces in our body.
**End Snark**

Long, long time lurker, finally made an account a little while ago. Then I forgot the details of what I wanted to post about. It was something I found in the 1938 Budo book.

Jon, just wanted to mention I've enjoyed your posts recently. I like that you're not afraid to write more than a few words in an effort to explain what you are trying to get across.

Jon Reading wrote: So how does this happen? At the instant of contact, both things have to happen. We're talking about a vertical pattern here; one part ascending (separating from the ground/ungrounding), one part descending (connecting to the ground). Throw in a horizontal reference (ascending on the right and descending on the left)... It's almost like someone said something like that...

Obviously a well known quote. With all the talk for years of unifying energy within our own bodies, I've almost taken that too much to heart as I never thought of that quote as our energy decending and our partner's energy ascending. In your mind is it up and down within us, the down in us and up in them or both depending on the context? Like a lot of the old quotes which seem to have multiple meanings, I can see how it could be both.

Also one of the true confusions I've grappled with in many discussions about aiki is energy as force and energy as intent. You've mentioned both in your posts. I think it distills down to forces being managed and balanced by use of our intent. Also force thought of as force can illicit the wrong engaging of oppositional strength and so it's helpful to think of it not as force, but as energy - changes the response mindset and ability to stay inside our bodies. Also forces manipulated in motion (even if painfully slow) are an expression of energy (in the physics sense) so can be also called energy. Very interested if you've got a way of clarifying all that?

Also one of the true confusions I've grappled with in many discussions about aiki is energy as force and energy as intent. You've mentioned both in your posts. I think it distills down to forces being managed and balanced by use of our intent. Also force thought of as force can illicit the wrong engaging of oppositional strength and so it's helpful to think of it not as force, but as energy - changes the response mindset and ability to stay inside our bodies. Also forces manipulated in motion (even if painfully slow) are an expression of energy (in the physics sense) so can be also called energy. Very interested if you've got a way of clarifying all that?

Ugh. This is actually a tough thing to wrap your mind around. There are so many competing ideas about ki/chi/intent I think its easy to get mixed up (and I am not the best proof reader on my posts, so its entirely possible I also mixed my language at some point). First, The context for my comments is that intent/ki(aiki) is an energy element inside you that is a tangible thing you can manipulate. This perspective is an anchor concept. And keep in mind that this is how I think of my energy work, which is to say that I was hit in my head a lot when I was younger...

Some groups have started using the term intent to better describe the "thing" that we call ki, without the baggage of the energy balls or powers that can lift spacecraft out of swamps. Intent also describes the activity our brain is trying to accomplish - pre-movement signaling between your brain and your muscles. Your "intent" to move as a separate action from moving. For example, when I intend to use my arm, my brain sends signals into my muscles to get them all on the same page about what is supposed to happen in the next millisecond - I think about this transaction "energizing" my muscles, without firing them. In sports science, we call them visualization exercises. Intent is where everything happens, though. We can cultivate intent (i.e. make intent useable) and improve its ability to interact with our muscles. Intent always leads muscle movement and is predominately energy movement. Eventually, you "thinking" about movement with result in you body responding, but that takes a hot minute.

So what about force? Earlier I split hairs about ki and aiki (aiki requiring a point of contact around which to "do" something, ki is something my body naturally does). I think of force more closely to the science definition - I am using my intent to interact with an object, the nature of the interaction is force. For most of us, force is usually a physical trait because we are moving our body to interact with someone. It's a real way to see energy in action. But, I keep it simple and think of force as when I move. I work with 6 directions of oppositional forces. So, when do I consider my training to be force instead of intent? When my muscles move because of my intent. Draw a bow. we have two actions, one that loads the bow with potential energy, and one that releases the potential energy in to the arrow.

So in both cases, we have some bleed between energy work and physical movement. You also use one to train the other. I may move my body first to understand how I can think to move the muscles; then I may think to move my muscles while preventing them from moving. Worse, its pretty easy to confuse what you think you are doing with what you are actually doing. And even when you interact with someone, you are usually doing some combination of intent and force. Clear as mud.

I do have a couple of critical observations:
1. You manage forces within you, or you don't. Aikido is in love with a dependence on a partner and to that partner we ascribe components that otherwise should reside in you. As long as you need someone to be part of your energy equation, you will never have aiki in you. This is tough love, but just look at the number of ying/yang memes that feature two aikido people... This is a Matrix-movie style red pill/green pill decision. I manage my forces, my partner rises because I direct my energy underneath my partner and my partner is displaced - there are two things going on here, my unified forces in opposition in my body, and my body applying force.
2. Strength is a type of power (muscle power). The strength of my arm? The strength of my leg? The strength of my whole body? We typically use strength to describe the limitation of a muscle group. Maybe that group is small (like my arms), or larger (like my butt and legs), or all of my body. If you limit your thinking to a group, you limit your strength to that group.
3. "Doing" something to someone is killing aikido. The idea that I use force to affect someone is central to our modern aikido (so much so that we have developed a style of falling). I manage forces within myself and the affect on my partner is what we illustrate as "aiki". It is waaayyyy to easy to get trapped in a "throw you" mentality that dominates our paired training.

We kinda know intent is important, but we don't really know how to cultivate it, anymore. We use visualization exercises all the time in aikido, we just don't know why we persist in using them or how to transition the instruction style to a more practical style. I can't even count the number of times "lift your hand like you were drinking a beer," was used to describe how to lift my arm. WTF does that even mean? Most people don't know, but their instructors said it and it's a fun way to break the ice with students on the mat. And we all drink beer. It's a visualization exercise that is trying to emulate the intent your mind uses to raise your arm without all the feedback of someone holding onto your arm. It has nothing to do with beer, your grip on the beer, or even whether you drink beer with correct movement to begin with.

**More snark**
Something my football coach never said, "get your hands under your blocker's pads and push right into his chest."
Something aikido people say all the time, "grab my hand and push it into my stomach."
Something my football coach said all the time, "get your hands under his pads and drive your legs up and down until he is in the bleachers."
Something aikido people never say, "get your hand covering your partner's wrist and drive your legs until he is in the dressing room."
Intent, indeed.
**End more snark**

Thanks, I appreciate your reply. That helps clarify and lines up with other reading and training I've been exploring.

That bleed between energy work and physical movement both ways was one of many lightbulb moments for me in this stuff. I've read this from others as well, but with use of visualisation and other things, it's like we get stuck on what is supposed to be the basics and turn them into a lifetime of study. But if 'we' collectively don't know what's the next step or where to take it, what's supposed to be an important transition phase for development doesn't go anywhere else.

Loving your snarky observations. They're so true.

Hi Jon, I apologise for miss spelling your name earlier.

I believe the rising and sinking energy you refer to are the dual opposing spirals. I believe these occur within yourself. 'One rising on the right, one sinking on the left.'

I like your ball on water analogy, I imagine a ball attached to a stick with bearings.

I think what you are saying with it hitting back is it needs to 'enter' in the form of a spiral.

I suppose this is where intent is important. If you do this with your normal intent, you will use opposing, segmented power.

If your intent is to maintain aiki 1, 2 and 3 as Allen Beebe describes it, and 'ignore' your partner (the conveyor belt analogy) the result is non resistant.

Steven Wright wrote: Hi Jon, I apologise for miss spelling your name earlier. I believe the rising and sinking energy you refer to are the dual opposing spirals. I believe these occur within yourself. 'One rising on the right, one sinking on the left.' I like your ball on water analogy, I imagine a ball attached to a stick with bearings. I think what you are saying with it hitting back is it needs to 'enter' in the form of a spiral. I suppose this is where intent is important. If you do this with your normal intent, you will use opposing, segmented power. If your intent is to maintain aiki 1, 2 and 3 as Allen Beebe describes it, and 'ignore' your partner (the conveyor belt analogy) the result is non resistant.

The "ignoring you partner" thing is pretty tough, considering that includes reaction as much as action. Only slightly worse than the "do something to you" mentality is the "react to you" mentality. In their own ways, both concepts still capture your mind and provide an opportunity for your partner to catch you.

For me, focusing on cultivating intent in my movement is a way to make me the most important thing to think about. If someone is working out with me, great; if not, then its moving meditation. The training should be the same and illustrative that I am focused on my movement, not my partner's.

I have all thoughts of ideas about irimi I am noodling... remember, you don't have to use spiral energy to enter and affect your partner. It's arguably a better movement methodology because it's harder to intercept, but direct entering can be a successful movement. I think you could start a new thread defining irimi and you wouldn't find two matching ideas, let alone a concise explanation with which to instruct.