Control the center ?

The main point of many techniques is to control the center and the atack of the atacker. We use the movement of the oponent to control him. When the atacker is making a step of making a nig amplitude movement it's easy to get control of his center. What about very centered, hard and tenssed atacks ?
I don't anything other then simple block/irimi or a step to side and atemi.
Any ideas about it ?

The general idea is to not be there when the attack comes, however, there are moments when you must come inside to the opponent to throw them completely off center. You cannot always wait for the attack to come to you, sometimes you must go to it. At which point, why not do irimi nage? As for atemi, what is your objective? Are you applying it for the pain/shock effect or to knock out your opponent? Anyone else have perspective on this?

Adrian:

I have been an aikido practitioner for only a year, however, I did practice jujutsu almost two decades prior, so I am not sure if I am qualified to offer a suggestion, but I'll try.

Giovanni has the right idea of "not being there." Movement to avoid the initial attack prior to a counter would be my first choice.

He is also right (if I am interpreting him correctly) in the fact that sometimes you don't have that option.

All martial arts have solutions to the situation you described with Aikido being no exception. For example, if the attacker is running at you like a freight train (my interpretation of your description of "centered, hard, and tense"), aiki nage might be one of many good choices.

Your choices may be limited to your ethical beliefs. Again, as Giovanni questions, what are you trying to do with the atemi? I believe there are some people on this site who believe that the use of strikes(especially to create physical trauma) would violate the standards of the art. If you hold this belief, atemi may not be an option for you.

If would help if you could describe an example of the type of attack you're talking about. I feel I could be of more help.

With best regards,

Chris Raywood

First of all i don't see how you "should be not there" when there's an atack. Some people here dream of using Kotegaeshi in a real fight just like in the Dojo, well i don't. O'Sensei said "70% of a fight is atemi". I believe we use atemi to "distract" the oponent, and THEN make a throw or arm lock. If you can imagine a real fight, only if you can perfectly apply locks or throws, there's no way to stop someone without atemi, a strong one, maybe even damaging the oponent.

No about my first question. Let's say the atack is shomenuchi, you do sankyo or kotegaeshi. If the atack is centered, the arm highly stressed, there's no way you'll do much, maybe a short irimi to continue his movement, like a soft block, of course step off the line, and then do an atemi.

Noone atacks standing 3 steps away, and keeping his hand in your hand. The normal reaction is to pull the hand when it's grabed.

Control the centre but harry the flanks.

Think of it as a confluence of two triangles meeting. Nage represents the one and uke the other. The confluence (or nexus) is always nage's choice, and is is always found in his direct center (or should be). When uke attacks he stretches himself out into almost a straight line - right fist extended, right foot forward, left foot rear. This exposes both break points (front and rear) to a simple extension. Irimi techniques tend to move uke toward the rear break point. Tenkan to the front. The trick is to do what the other fellows suggest and move quickly - not allowing uke to recover and follow. If he does you have to accomodate the movement of the break points and now you're fightning - not doing Aikido.

When someone attacks you, they will find some middle ground of their own between delivering as much power as possible and maintaining as much balance and center as possible. One of the 'strategies' in Aikido is to encourage the attacker to choose a middle ground that leans as heavily as possible towards delivering power at the expense of balance. An uke who feels threatened our challenged is likely to opt for a safer attack with more balance. An uke who does not feel challenged, whose target is clear and open, who sees no obvious defense, no obvious 'fighting posture,' is more likely to opt for the delivery of power.

I had a teacher who said pretty often, "don't make your attacker any smarter than you have to."

Adrian, it's not so complicated when you really look at it. When I say "not being there" I'm talking about being on the outside of your opponent as opposed to being face-to-face with him/her.

As for the attack being stressed, my Sensei showed us once that you can only exert force in one direction, therefore, redirect it. And when it comes to atemi, one of its purposes is exactly that... to stun or distract.

Fist, I agree with Giovanni about the "not being there" stance. Particularly true when under a severe, strong attack. First thing is to get out of the way: move to the left, the right, backward, or anywhere you want but get out of the line (or center) of your opponent.

It may be clearer to say: keep your opponent in front of you without being in front of your opponent.

As for O'Sensei and the 70% atemi, I don't know if he said that before of after the war. Atemi were much more present in the aikido of the pre-war time. The idea was then to put your opponent out of combat (even killing him) with an atemi as soon as possible. It was totally different after the war... But that's another topic and there's already a numbers of threads about that on aikiweb.

Now, the shomen uchi. The idea isn't to make sankyo or kotae gaeshi. You do the technique most appropriate to the attack... There isn't one-fit-all attack technique... Some work better with strong attack, others just work better with less severe attacks... Attacked by a severe shomenuchi, I will favor a "let it pass you technique" like nikkyo ura, or some variation of irimi...

Now, about the grabs. An attacker try to grabs you. You don't want to be grabbed. Because you do something, your attacker choose to pull his hand because he feeled he cannot grabbed you. Your problem is solved: the attack has been countered and you haven't had to use any technique or atemi. That's quite good for me!!! Now, if an attacker really want to grab you and make a dedicated attack, there's no way he will be able to stop his attack and pull out his hand before you can apply a technique...

So, that's my 2 cents...

Thank you Giovanni for clarifying the phrase "not being there, and thank you Carl for elaborating on some of your thoughts once the attack was described, which I believe will help Adrian in answering her initial question.

With best regards,

Chris Raywood

IMHO, maintain your own center, take Uke's center (unbalance), and become the center pivot point of the waza.

Chris Raywood wrote: which I believe will help Adrian in answering her initial question. Chris Raywood

Hi Chris. Just for information, 'Adrian' is the male spelling of the name. 'Adrienne' is the female.

I can't speak for the original 'Adrian' poster, but we share the same name and I am most definitely male.

-(the other) Adrian

There is one little thing that I think should be mentioned. If doing Irimi Ikkyo you initially stay on the line of attack and deflect the attack with a slight movement. Practising this gives an excellent insight into 'FIRST CONTACT' in combat and redirection into the point of non balance. Big or small, that is how you deal with everyone in an ideal world, unless you are extremely skilled though (or your attacker is easy pickings), in real world ATEMI first, unbalance later!

Adrian Neagu (adrian) wrote: Some people here dream of using Kotegaeshi in a real fight just like in the Dojo, well i don't.

It works just fine.

Let's say the atack is shomenuchi, you do sankyo or kotegaeshi. If the atack is centered, the arm highly stressed, there's no way you'll do much...

Kotegaeshi works just fine.

..The normal reaction is to pull the hand when it's grabed.

Yes, but as you are not stuck to the ground you can move with it, yes? This is the 'sticky hands' feeling that tori needs to develop.

A stiffer uke means a shorter technique, no running around in circles. It means the timing has to be better. But - it also means the technique works better - and is much harder on uke (actually, he makes it hard for himself).

This really needs to be a part of everyone's training - to once give your sensei a really hard time. Then, when you get up from the ground, rubbing your wrists and sucking your bruised lip, you can carry on training with the knowledge that someday it really won't matter much how uke attacks - fast, slow, soft, hard, committed, feinting, aware or with their eyes shut. It all works just fine.

Train well,

Tim

the truth to the answer about the attacks is, use whatever works at that moment. There's a post about a sensei who was waiting for a knife attacker on a train to get to him. He was contemplating what would be the right approach. To his surprise the attacker confronted an old man who had him sit next to him and calmed the attacker down. If you train hard enough you get into a "fighting mode". Much as when you do Jiwaza. You do what the moment takes you into... be it Kotegaeshi or Iriminage... follow?

Adrian Smith wrote: Hi Chris. Just for information, 'Adrian' is the male spelling of the name. 'Adrienne' is the female. -(the other) Adrian

OT but a note since you raised it: in the USA most of the females I've met named Adrian were spelled Adrian. Only those born to French-born parents were not.

Giovanni Perez (aikidodragongio) wrote: There's a post about a sensei who was waiting for a knife attacker on a train to get to him. He was contemplating what would be the right approach. To his surprise the attacker confronted an old man who had him sit next to him and calmed the attacker down.

Can someone please for once cite a different story, preferably one not written by Terry Dobson and not involving a train ?

P.S. I like a different version of the quote from your signature, Giovanni.

It goes like this - "That which does not kill you, leaves you a drooling vegetable".

Janet Rosen wrote: OT but a note since you raised it: in the USA most of the females I've met named Adrian were spelled Adrian. Only those born to French-born parents were not.

OT again,

I'm originally from the UK, although I spent 21 years in Canada before moving to the US eight years ago. In both the UK and Canada 'Adrian' is exclusively male, from the Roman emperor 'Hadrian'. He's best known for building Hadrian's wall, a stone wall across the north of what is now England, to keep the Picts out of Roman territory.

-Adrian