Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Non-Aikido Martial Traditions

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-11-2013, 11:28 AM   #51
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo
Location: Williamsville, NY
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 931
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

I hear you, Kevin, I'm that last person to advocate dogmatically approaching anything from the belief system perspective (it's one of the things incredibly wrong with so many martial arts practices that I've observed) EXCEPT when you see a desired skillset and the person charged with teaching you gives you specifics on how to acquire it. Then it's burn, burn, burn and train, train, train and if you don't get it it's because of 1 of 2 things 1) You weren't really taught how to get it (due to instructor lack of knowledge or a flaw in the approach to transmission) 2) You lack the ability to get it. Either of these things shouldn't take THAT long to suss out - but if someone reasonably says that you need at minimal a baseline of 6 months of focusing on building a foundational skill, that's not a bad spot to be able to self-identify "Do I have what it takes to dedicate this practice". If someone then tells you that practicing this thing alongside some other thing is not usually going to yield good results, but you do it anyway, then don't get the results you were after, whose fault is that? See what I mean?

I mean go to any martial arts seminar and you'll see people there just to keep doing what they've always done, regardless of what's being shown in the seminar. Not sure where this lens comes in of translating what's being presented into what's been preferred, but man is it ever on display. The ones with smart marketing angles just nod and smile and make people feel good about what they're doing while challenging that side of them that makes them work for approval, acceptance and maybe some tangible gain of physical work/benefit.

The ones that aren't willing to compromise while being explicitly upfront about the work required and the risk of failure - well that appeal is probably only going to be for the ones that are after the skill and don't care as much about joining/belonging/ feeling good .. maybe.

To your point about functional skills balancing against set parameters - Kevin, I don't disagree and it's a logical approach. From what I know about your dabbling with IS you haven't really had the inclination or opportunity to just focus on it for a sustained specific chunk of time (potentially putting some other things on hold). Given your stated purposes for training and the demands place on you by service, career, family, etc. - I'd be surprised if it was something you wanted to develop to any degree of depth as I don't know that the benefits would outweigh the cost. Yanno? (not trying to make this about you at all, but I don't think your perspective is all that unique and it's worth having that more common perspective be something transparent as a choosing mechanism for others to benchmark when deciding what to invest their time in)

Anyways, words words words, blah blah blah
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 01:01 PM   #52
oisin bourke
 
oisin bourke's Avatar
Dojo: Muden Juku, Ireland
Location: Kilkenny
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 313
Ireland
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Bernd Lehnen wrote: View Post
Looks as if DR people might be doomed to have a very long way to go.

Best ,
Bernd
People on this thread going on about Daito Ryu don't know what they're talking about. Why don't you all decide on another art to give half-formed opinions about?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 01:34 PM   #53
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Oisin Bourke wrote: View Post
People on this thread going on about Daito Ryu don't know what they're talking about. Why don't you all decide on another art to give half-formed opinions about?
Or, perhaps more of those who have experience in one or more of the various branches and scions of that art could provide an informed opinion, as some have.

How can there be learning and understanding, if there is only reticence?

Last edited by Cady Goldfield : 12-11-2013 at 01:38 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 02:34 PM   #54
oisin bourke
 
oisin bourke's Avatar
Dojo: Muden Juku, Ireland
Location: Kilkenny
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 313
Ireland
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Cady Goldfield wrote: View Post
Or, perhaps more of those who have experience in one or more of the various branches and scions of that art could provide an informed opinion, as some have.

How can there be learning and understanding, if there is only reticence?
Reticence as in not divulging one's training history?

Anyway, you probably can guess my answer: If people want to have an informed opinion, they should sign up with a DR group and train to an appropriate level. People are free to voice their opinions on the internet of course, but they should be clear when they are giving advice on subjects they half understand.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 02:58 PM   #55
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo
Location: Williamsville, NY
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 931
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Oisin, I will say that generally I agree, regarding speaking with authority about an entire martial arts system, there should be some degree of experience and expertise.

That being said, speaking regarding what is observed. In this case, a video was posted regarding someone presumed to be doing basic DR Aiki. I looked at it and said it looks like jujutsu with jin/kokyu. Do you have a comment on the persons on the video or what was being shown?
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 05:09 PM   #56
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Good stuff above Budd and I don't disagree with any of it! thanks!

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 05:15 PM   #57
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Oisin Bourke wrote: View Post
People on this thread going on about Daito Ryu don't know what they're talking about. Why don't you all decide on another art to give half-formed opinions about?
would this be sort of like taking a trip to Scotland and trying a couple of different Scotches and then offering your judgement what is a good Scotch and what isn't? I'd say you might have a better understanding of what you like, but may not be able to discuss Scotch as a whole, or really offer an opinion of any real value as it relates the overall quality various Scotches or even be able to discern a good one from a excellent one.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 08:53 PM   #58
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Oisin Bourke wrote: View Post
Reticence as in not divulging one's training history?

Anyway, you probably can guess my answer: If people want to have an informed opinion, they should sign up with a DR group and train to an appropriate level. People are free to voice their opinions on the internet of course, but they should be clear when they are giving advice on subjects they half understand.
Where is advice about DR being given on this thread, and where was anyone asked for their training history?

The reason this thread was posted, was that some aikijujutsu videos have recently been uploaded onto YouTube that are among the few to show some measure of aiki, with kuzushi, being applied in a manner other than the ritualistic form in the more commonly seen AJJ videos (mainly from Japan) online. Since, in the past, there have been many requests to see videos of aiki/IP, I posted two clips that give at least some sense of how they "look" in application. That's really all there was to it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 09:01 PM   #59
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
would this be sort of like taking a trip to Scotland and trying a couple of different Scotches and then offering your judgement what is a good Scotch and what isn't? I'd say you might have a better understanding of what you like, but may not be able to discuss Scotch as a whole, or really offer an opinion of any real value as it relates the overall quality various Scotches or even be able to discern a good one from a excellent one.
I'd say that after a couple of belts of good Scotch, one's confidence in his opinions probably gets a lot stronger...

Someone might work for a distillery for a decade or more, then start his own distillery and practice making single malt Scotch for four or five years, decide he needs some exposure to other forms of whiskey and so goes to work for another distillery, for several years or more, that uses the same fundamental methodology to make a somewhat different whisky... equally good, but different.

After that, I'd think he has had enough experience to have an informed opinion and make some informed comparisons about Scotch, whiskey in general, and the whiskey distilling process.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2013, 09:58 PM   #60
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Budd Yuhasz wrote: View Post
Oisin, I will say that generally I agree, regarding speaking with authority about an entire martial arts system, there should be some degree of experience and expertise.

That being said, speaking regarding what is observed. In this case, a video was posted regarding someone presumed to be doing basic DR Aiki. I looked at it and said it looks like jujutsu with jin/kokyu. Do you have a comment on the persons on the video or what was being shown?
The person in the video claims to have been a student of Tanemura Katsumi, a student of Yoshida Kotaro.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 01:20 AM   #61
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Cady Goldfield wrote: View Post
I'd say that after a couple of belts of good Scotch, one's confidence in his opinions probably gets a lot stronger...

Someone might work for a distillery for a decade or more, then start his own distillery and practice making single malt Scotch for four or five years, decide he needs some exposure to other forms of whiskey and so goes to work for another distillery, for several years or more, that uses the same fundamental methodology to make a somewhat different whisky... equally good, but different.

After that, I'd think he has had enough experience to have an informed opinion and make some informed comparisons about Scotch, whiskey in general, and the whiskey distilling process.
Agreed, and want to be clear I am not directing this at you or insinuating on any one on the thread. Just using an analogy.

However, I key thing that is missing is comparative criteria. Scotch makers and drinkers have agreed and test of quality etc.

In Martial arts, this is not the case. We don't necessarily have this type of thing. So, a better analogy would be to have someone making Scotch on his own for 20 years, never bothers to take it any where to expose it to criticism and judgement. AND he has managed to get some training from a few highly regarded Scotch makers and he buys the finest ingredients, yet somehow he can't quite put them together the right way. A few people drink it and think it is good, but they really have no clue about what else is out there in the world. They don't bother to execute any critical analysis of the Scotch.....but then go on internet forums and say that they have found the best scotch maker in the world....but he only produces it in small amounts, will only share it with a few people he selects, on the rare occasion a dissenter slips through the cracks, they side step this guy and he gets no more Scotch...that of which he really doesn't care anyway cause it sucks.

Meanwhile, the rest of the Scotch making world ignores this Scotch maker and his minions as they really could careless as he has no impact on their world, and they all believe his Scotch sucks anyway.

But the few drinkers that like it will say....but he uses the finest ingredients...same as everyone else, and he has trained with the best Scotch makers...it has to be good!

And then we go back into the do loop about arguing about "under what criteria does this constitute fine Scotch?"

I suppose if you like it, it doesn't really matter does it?

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 01:13 PM   #62
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 614
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Cady Goldfield wrote: View Post
Or, perhaps more of those who have experience in one or more of the various branches and scions of that art could provide an informed opinion, as some have.

How can there be learning and understanding, if there is only reticence?
Perhaps. It's possible.

That said, it's also possible that most of the people who have experience in/with one or more of the various branches and scions of that art, whether their experience was positive or negative, agreed at the outset of their engagement with them not to publicly disclose proprietary matters relating to those schools and they see no broader benefit -- as well as probable downsides -- in doing so.

Just a thought, ymmv.

FL

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 05:17 PM   #63
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

I get your point, Kevin.
Thanks for the detailed explanation.

Fred,
That's the obvious point, of course.

Though, this being an aikido discussion board, Daito-ryu being the parent art of aikido, and DR aiki being what made Ueshiba great... a natural curiosity about and interest in one's ancestry, beyond just the history, for some folks, is to be expected and is understandable. And seeing what Ueshiba could do with aiki has piqued interest in the methods themselves.

That some of the modern-day DR schools are not interested in engaging in discussions about their art is perhaps unfortunate, but also to be expected. But, as it happens, some of the contemporary senior exponents are talking about it, and some have even shared some surprisingly revealing and frank insights in interviews with Stanley Pranin. So, the resources for understanding are already out there and accessible, as are other sources for learning the internal skills themselves -- not proprietary to just one art, though specific exercises created by a school or individual for developing the skills certainly can be should be respected as such and not discussed by students of that individual or school.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 09:28 PM   #64
hughrbeyer
Dojo: Shobu Aikido of Boston
Location: Peterborough, NH
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 653
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Kevin -- I'd love to hear more from you about how you go about getting "martially appropriate" feedback on new techniques. You say you're confident you can do this well--what does that look like? From where I sit, it seems like a hard problem. If you're too "realistic" then how do you measure the performance of a technique which you are not yet an expert at when you're forced back to habitual movement patterns just to survive? If you're too cooperative, how do you know if the feedback is real? (Scare quotes around "realistic" because, of course, it means "realistic within the context of an artificial situation in which both of you would really rather not maim anybody.")

When it comes to addressing failure, I don't know that you're giving enough credit to the IS approach. I know that both my teachers (one of whom is the Prince of Darkness himself) have emphasized recovering from a compromised position without a reset, and have talked about staying ahead in the OODA loop (though not using that term).

As to the question of how much build up time you need, I think you can in fact start to incorporate IS skills into normal training fairly quickly. I'm not operating anywhere near your level but in my own practice I started to see the impact fairly quickly. When a training partner said, "As soon as I touch you I'm off balance. How do you do that?" I was stunned--I had no idea I was having that effect.

On the other hand, people I trust very much say the opposite. So I may be running full tilt down a dead end. And there's no question you have to be willing to fail--if your attempt to use IS fails, you have to be willing to fail rather than resort to muscle or ju-jistsu to make it work. Otherwise, you're reinforcing the behavior you're trying to eliminate.

Evolution doesn't prove God doesn't exist, any more than hammers prove carpenters don't exist.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2013, 10:43 PM   #65
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Hugh,

I'll try and answer it as brief as I can. It may take a few post to communicate and clarify some of my points as some of this of course is non-verbal in nature.

The first thing I think is to change your mindset about training and isolation of techniques and concepts. Now you can take this to an extreme and totally do that if all you really care about is fighting well. For example I had a golf pro once a few years ago that was concerned about getting jumped at a golf seminar he was going to go to by a boyfriend of a girl he met somewhere along the way. He had no martial experience, I had three weeks to work with him and through about 40 hours of training we were able to significantly improve his ability to fight.

He didn't practice "wax on wax off" over and over, but narrowed our parameters down to those that he would most likely encounter, assessed where he was in the raw with what he already had for raw skills, and went from there. One extreme would have been to simply have a guy come up and jump on him and start beating the crap out of him until he "figured it out" that is, the equivalent of throwing him in a pool to teach him how to swim. The other extreme would have been to discuss theory and done a very technical focused approach. The equivalent of sitting on the side of the pool, watching others swim and practicing his swimming on the cement until he could do the strokes etc EXACTLY right (wax on wax off).

Somewhere in between is necessary. I'd equate swimming to learn how to swim "alive training", and training on the edge of the pool, "dead training" to make two overly simplistic terms to save digits.

So, to teach him quickly, we took an alive approach. However, you still need to balance safety and inculcating proper responses and instilling good habits. So, you have to slow things down somewhat to discuss the important parts.

In his situation, it was easy to teach in 3 weeks as we had a particular goal, a focus, and fairly narrow parameters. He wasn't there to master a whole art, learn techniques, or earn a belt...but simply to improve his understanding and spontaneous responses to what might happen to him in the near future. So yes, you can have success in 3 weeks. I think this is a different way of thinking about success in training.

BTW the book the Talent Code is a very good read on this subject and how you produce Talent and rapid results. I did this kinda thing two years before I found this book, and then found that the book did a wonderful job of explaining things I was already doing, and is done by many others.

The hard part here is to describe the actual transition from teaching technique to providing appropriate feedback. the best I can describe this is, you teach a little, then you fight a little. It is really the same concept as learning to swim. You start in the shallow end, practice some strokes and then you have to go swim and fail. Same with riding a bike. The endstate is very clear. You want to ride a bike. You balance training wheels and someone supporting you with actually riding. Your gonna fail when you let go. and fail alot. In both these examples you actually DO the thing you are learning to DO at some point.

I don't remember giving my kid lessons on how to turn the crank through a wax on wax off mentality.

I think another simplistic analogy would be teaching someone to ride a bike using the IS paradigm that is adopted by so many in Martial Arts. that is, to factor out failure. Imagine having him stand there for hours learning how to shift his weight and imagine being on the bike to simulate pedaling etc. The hope would be in a couple of years of this training to put him on the bike and he would ride the first time and never have to fall once he finally went live.

Sounds ridiculous but that is how many tend to approach training in Martial Arts.

Back to bike riding...I found the Germans do this the right way without training wheels. They buy their kids a little wooden push bike about the time they start walking and then the kid simply gets on the bike and begins to understand and inculcate the skills. This is an example of a model based on systematic and gradual escalation of skills acquired through failure and mistakes. It is an implicit training method versus and explicit or cognitive training method. In the US we culturally wait a little longer, then we must put on training wheels, and make them learn faster, the mistakes are more costly since the safety net is less and we have more tears...etc.etc...but in the end they learn to ride.

So, you have to first change your mind set.

I think the IS training is great. It works to some degree, but I don't seem to take the same approach which limits me to simply using IS. It has not proven to me to be a good approach/paradiigm to learning how to be more martially effective.

Quote:
On the other hand, people I trust very much say the opposite. So I may be running full tilt down a dead end. And there's no question you have to be willing to fail--if your attempt to use IS fails, you have to be willing to fail rather than resort to muscle or ju-jistsu to make it work. Otherwise, you're reinforcing the behavior you're trying to eliminate.
When you say "make it work" I'd have to understand "under what conditions". I have no clue how you define success or failure. I think that makes all the difference in the world. If you are learning to ride a bike or swim, you don't really hear the conversations too much about only swimming using IS and not muscle...you swim. Now, as you enter higher levels of competition, sure you are gonna find people that are looking for an edge to be more efficient and more competitive...they will isolate things out and maybe train more specifically.

But, before they do that...they have learned simply to swim or ride a bike without thought to how they actually do that. I'd say the same should be true with any endeavor, you must train under alive conditions.

I know this is more complicated than swimming or biking in Martial arts as we have to limit ourselves more as safety must be factored in. but you also do this in swimming, you don't learn in the english channel!

It's not about failing in IS, its about failing in fighting first and then developing efficiencies to be successful. It is all based on the feedback mechanisms you have set up for yourself. Its about finding a methodology and training model that has inculcated the concept of aliveness in every training session and provide you rapid success and feedback.

Sorry to be so long winded and I probably have not answered your question exactly with respect to performance of specific techniques. You can't say ignore all techniques and just fight, but you also can't say don't fight until you've mastered all techniques. We can spend more time on that later if you want.

I really recommend reading the Talent Code and see how that might apply to your training.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 04:59 AM   #66
Lee Salzman
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 405
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
The hard part here is to describe the actual transition from teaching technique to providing appropriate feedback. the best I can describe this is, you teach a little, then you fight a little. It is really the same concept as learning to swim. You start in the shallow end, practice some strokes and then you have to go swim and fail. Same with riding a bike. The endstate is very clear. You want to ride a bike. You balance training wheels and someone supporting you with actually riding. Your gonna fail when you let go. and fail alot. In both these examples you actually DO the thing you are learning to DO at some point.

I don't remember giving my kid lessons on how to turn the crank through a wax on wax off mentality.

I think another simplistic analogy would be teaching someone to ride a bike using the IS paradigm that is adopted by so many in Martial Arts. that is, to factor out failure. Imagine having him stand there for hours learning how to shift his weight and imagine being on the bike to simulate pedaling etc. The hope would be in a couple of years of this training to put him on the bike and he would ride the first time and never have to fall once he finally went live.

Sounds ridiculous but that is how many tend to approach training in Martial Arts.

Back to bike riding...I found the Germans do this the right way without training wheels. They buy their kids a little wooden push bike about the time they start walking and then the kid simply gets on the bike and begins to understand and inculcate the skills. This is an example of a model based on systematic and gradual escalation of skills acquired through failure and mistakes. It is an implicit training method versus and explicit or cognitive training method. In the US we culturally wait a little longer, then we must put on training wheels, and make them learn faster, the mistakes are more costly since the safety net is less and we have more tears...etc.etc...but in the end they learn to ride.

So, you have to first change your mind set.

I think the IS training is great. It works to some degree, but I don't seem to take the same approach which limits me to simply using IS. It has not proven to me to be a good approach/paradiigm to learning how to be more martially effective.
This analogy falls completely flat for IS. IS is a different animal. Why? For the simple reason that it is replacing something we, by default, as a consequence of modern life if nothing else, and as a consequence of being taught wrong from the beginning... we all move horribly, utterly, depressingly, humiliatingly wrong. So half the problem of IS work is to get rid of all of these unconscious things, and then the other half to replace them with a better, conscious way of moving first. If we could all magically learn to move in the IS way from the beginning, then this model would apply. Sadly, we don't.

In many cases, with young athletes targeted for competitive levels, we don't hesitate to get them extremely young, in the single digit age category, and start training their movement to not be dysfunctional from the get-go for that chosen sport discipline, but somehow for MA we just put on blinders and expect people to magically have underlying movement foundations with no significant time spent training in it. That is bunk.

And to compound it further, even when we train IS, we spend most of the rest of the day un-conditioning the good and re-conditioning the bad habits with all the stuff we normally do, making it even harder. One response to that is to throw up your hands in defeat, let the bad way of moving stay, and just teach someone to know how to be violent and deal with violence with what they've already got, however dysfunctional. Fine, but it doesn't float my boat. I think many of us are looking for something different than that, though, because we have the luxury of exploring the alternative.

We don't take babies straight out of the cradle and expect them to jog half-marathons. We let them at least learn to crawl and walk first. Likewise, we shouldn't necessarily expect people to learn how to fight before they've learned how to move in a generalist way first. Some exposure to it at the start sure helps to keep focused, but after an introduction, I don't see much point. Been there, done that.

If you can go through the majority of your life moving in an IS way, completely unscripted/automated, then it's not much of a leap to start applying this in MA. But the reverse, to learn MA based on a foundation of bad movement, and then rewrite it to be with IS movement, not just every single bad movement habit you had before MA, well, that's really really difficult.

Then you put aiki skills above that IS foundation. IMO, the aiki skills have almost zero real-life application outside of a martial context that I can discern after wrapping my head around them for some years. They are so specific to moving people that it may well be completely worthless to understand or use them unless you're just a complete martial nerd who is really interested in being able to do it (as I am). But, if you have no IS foundation, the aiki skills are likewise completely worthless fluff. So, for me, the IS is already just a means to an end, to learn aiki. I've already learned how to box, how to wrestle, basic weapon sparring with/without armor/gear, etc. and realistically, it doesn't warrant spending much time on those anymore until my foundations are in order because all I can do is condition in more garbage that I need to simultaneously unlearn to do it right.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 08:47 AM   #67
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

After typing my post this morning, I went to the gym to work out with my guys. There were three young guys over on the mat grappling very hard. They went at it for a while, worked up a good sweat, but I don't think much learning was really being accomplished. Meanwhile, I was over working with my guys on processes, movement, balance...all the things you need to do to do things more efficient and correctly....then we grappled hard for 20 minutes, but it was not a free for all like the other guys over there rolling around. It was done in specific ways to reinforce specific things they need to master to get better.

So, I just want to point out the all "ALIVE" training is not necessarily GOOD training.

also wanted to comment, that I am not against IS training at all. If it is accomplishing what you want it to do, then that is good. One thing I realized as I drove in to work is some of what Lee comments on above, most of us are experienced and have developed skillsets in other areas. So, I would support and can see how isolating IS training for many is the right way to go.

My comments are directed at fighting and developing proper and efficient responses to doing that stating that I think this process is done incorrectly a lot in MA, and I believe there are better ways to train to accomplish this, if that is what you want to do.

I just wanted to clarify that I support those that study IS methods. I have too in the past and plan to do the same in the future. I just believe that unless you have developed correct methods for feedback for fighting, then whatever you learn will not really help you be better martially since you will essentially be conditioning yourself in a matter that could provide a false platform.

Not to pick on Cady at all, but when I see the videos she provided and I see the assumptions and conclusions being drawn that somehow this will directly translate to fighting, it raises my eyebrows because I see nothing remotely martial about that context. Has nothing to do with the amount of power or transmission of force etc being demonstrated. I also don't believe that was her intent for showing the videos after she has more than clarified her position!

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 09:27 AM   #68
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Lee,

Quote:
This analogy falls completely flat for IS. IS is a different animal. Why? For the simple reason that it is replacing something we, by default, as a consequence of modern life if nothing else, and as a consequence of being taught wrong from the beginning... we all move horribly, utterly, depressingly, humiliatingly wrong. So half the problem of IS work is to get rid of all of these unconscious things, and then the other half to replace them with a better, conscious way of moving first. If we could all magically learn to move in the IS way from the beginning, then this model would apply. Sadly, we don't.
I agree and I think there are very good methodologies out there for doing this. I do much in my practice methods to try and communicate and instill good while doing away with the bad. I don't agree that you cannot combine this with good, solid, martial training that builds the ability to effectively fight. I think it can be done in parallel.

Feldenkrais and Alexander Technique are also built on this assumption and represent two very successful methodologies or premise that we are born, then we begin to do some things the wrong way, and cannot escape our paradigms and habits. These two systems based on that premise would also be seen as being helpful to building correct movement, posture, and responses.

However, while that may be the case, their is also a specificity to events and stress, and reprogramming the exact movements you will do as you will do them for real. For example, a concert violin player will go to AT for therapy to undo bad habits, but they will have to integrate this back into their concert playing under the same stress and conditions they will perform under or they will not be able to do that. Why would this be any different from martial arts? SO I'd support an IS approach for Martial Arts, however, it also needs to be integrated back into "train as you fight".

I don't really see how IS is a different animal, other than the methodologies you use to train things you want to encourage/discourage. It may be different than the way you have trained in the past, but I don't think that leads to the conclusion that it is a "different animal". I suppose I'd have to ask, different from what, and different in what way?

Quote:
In many cases, with young athletes targeted for competitive levels, we don't hesitate to get them extremely young, in the single digit age category, and start training their movement to not be dysfunctional from the get-go for that chosen sport discipline, but somehow for MA we just put on blinders and expect people to magically have underlying movement foundations with no significant time spent training in it. That is bunk.
I agree, I think maybe we are saying the same thing? MY bike analogy I think is the same isn't it? you put a toddler on a wooden push bike and he operates it with certain parameters/conditioned established by the bike and he begins to learn how to balance. I think the problem is again, criteria, measures, and feedback. Martial Arts do a terrible job at this. Dojos opened up and a open minded public stepped in and was willing to abandon all forms of critical thought and analysis towards the endstates and did what they were told to do! crazy stuff. With basketball, you have a clear set of measures and it becomes apparent fast through feedback processes what works and what doesn't.

My premise is that if we do the same for MA, then the methodologies would evolve to correct ones without as much worry about intent. I believe that you'd see IS type methodologies be integrated into the training. I think maybe now, that for the experienced MAers out there, that they maybe needed to take a time out and relearn in a different way....maybe that was necessary for you.

My point is, I don't believe it is necessary for all. Pick the correct feedback, measures, and methods...and it will fall in place, and has in many disciplines.

Quote:
And to compound it further, even when we train IS, we spend most of the rest of the day un-conditioning the good and re-conditioning the bad habits with all the stuff we normally do, making it even harder. One response to that is to throw up your hands in defeat, let the bad way of moving stay, and just teach someone to know how to be violent and deal with violence with what they've already got, however dysfunctional. Fine, but it doesn't float my boat. I think many of us are looking for something different than that, though, because we have the luxury of exploring the alternative
Lee not really sure what is going on in this paragraph. It seems that you have a particular way that you want to deal with fighting. Or maybe it is simply semantical differences concerning how we view violence. I am not sure that you can meet physical violence with anything other then physical violence. I don't subscribe ethics or morality to actions I'd take in a violent encounter. I respond with what I have to respond with. Hopefully, I have enough skill to use only what is necessary, but I Personally think that this may be where I part ways with many in the IS or Aikido paradigms/philosophies.

Fighting is fighting. You fight with what you have and what you can do. I think if you are not willing to bring 100 percent of yourself into a fight, or are only willing to fight if certain things are present then you are not really willing to go the distance, or can't. I think if you are learning to fight, you train under the conditions that you will encounter in a fight. You train primarily to win and to recover dominance if you are losing. I have students that have no clue about IS, they suck at it and will for many years, but they are improving in their ability to fight and as they are going, they are learning to move more correctly as they go. I don't buy that by doing this they are reinforcing bad habits, in fact bad habits don't get them success.

Now the guys I discussed in the other post where training, well, I didn't see where they are making progress simply by fighting, there does have to be some methodical approach.

So, it concerns me when I hear people say "i'm looking for something different than that?" I don't really know what that means. Could we be saying the same thing? or does "something different than that." mean that you want to achieve a level of proficiency that allows you to fight a random 20 year old at 50 and do it in such a way that it doesn't matter what position or advantage he has, you maintain structure and can control him, move him and do it rather effortlessly.

If so, I do this on a regular basis, yet I will also tell you I can't do one damn IS exercise proficiently.

So is it the endstate I laid out above, or does it go beyond that to some level of "something" that I have yet to really figure out what that means.

I still have a lot to learn and I learn a lot from the self identified IS practitioners. so, again, please, please don't think I am disparaging the methods or what they do. I am simply trying to understand integration into martial arts and end states. I think many of them are confused.

Personally, I think given certain parameters I have an understanding of IS. In fact I know I do. However, in others I do not. As I am a grappler/Jiu Jitsu guy, I understand it in that context and under those conditions okay...I can always improve mind you. However, in the standard ways that IS skills are typically taught, I am a fish out of water.

My point is that context and conditions of training count for a lot I believe. That is why I believe that you can learn IS as an isolated practice all you want. learn to walk, learn to do all the Jo tricks and all that stuff very well....yet when you are stress loaded under fighting conditions you have never experienced, that training will most likely go out the window if you have not trained in that manner.

Now I do believe that there is a degree of transferability of that training. I had a Parkour and movement specialist show up with no Jiu Jitsu experience once. While he did not know jiu jitus...when I told him to do certain things in positions, he got it immediately, where my white belts that had been training for a few months could never get it for a long while.

So, yes, I could see why guys like you that have lots of experience would step back and reset in the manner that you are doing.

Quote:
We don't take babies straight out of the cradle and expect them to jog half-marathons. We let them at least learn to crawl and walk first. Likewise, we shouldn't necessarily expect people to learn how to fight before they've learned how to move in a generalist way first. Some exposure to it at the start sure helps to keep focused, but after an introduction, I don't see much point. Been there, done that.
I think maybe our experiences are different. I agree on crawling and walking first. I think you can do this a lot faster than we are doing it in MA. I have done it with people before. Again, it is highly dependent on how you view success. Maybe for you it is different as you have a different objective. But for fighting, nope not true, you can do this pretty darn quickly. Of course, some people are naturally more gifted than others. I don't subscribe to the "learn bad habits" by making mistakes paradigm. I subscribe to the opposite theory. Make more mistakes faster in a highly accountable feedback environment that is controlled and you will learn very rapidly. It doesn't take 5 10 or 20 years. of course, skill is progressive so that isn't entirely true either!

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts, and I think maybe a lot of what we are saying is semantics Lee, but still makes for a good discussion.

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 09:38 AM   #69
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Hey Kevin,
What is relevant to me is the aiki/IP body in a martial (i.e.punching, striking, locking, choking, etc.) context. I'm not concerned with the efficacy of specific jujutsu techniques or whether they are "practical" in today's world for professionals who use combatives. IP and aiki can be applied to -any- martial or self-defense system in which human bodies are in direct connection and conflict, whether traditional or contemporary.

That the guy is showing how he connects and moves another body, instantaneously on-contact, using internal rather than conventional drivers, is the point. In the context in which he was presenting it, you can observe the effects on uke's breath, body alignment, and (in)ability to continue any kind of free movement or attack. It's a different means of kuzushi than that powered by conventional "external" drivers.

How would such skills not be relevant to modern-day hand-to-hand combat? Or the hard grappling you and your guys did today?

Training for IP/aiki and training to fight are -- as has often been noted -- two separate disciplines. If the two disciplines are conditioned-in in increments and combined in increments, we can observe the changes in the impact and effects the internal body method has on fighting at each stage of development. It is really fascinating both to witness and to experience for oneself.

With all due respect, Kevin (and I really mean that), I think you need more exposure to someone with good internal-power and fighting skills to see how the two tie together in a very practical way. If a certain someone does a seminar in your neck of the woods...

Last edited by Cady Goldfield : 12-13-2013 at 09:41 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 10:50 AM   #70
Alfonso
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 346
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb_CC3GE18M shows a teacher working out with students in a cooperative but not scripted way. Chen Zi Qiang has been training IS since age 3, I don't think any of us will ever approach his level of conditioning; notice how non-superhuman it all looks like; and at the same time notice his body usage. The players are all doing the same thing. Don't confuse this with fighting please.

Alfonso Adriasola
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 11:17 AM   #71
Budd
 
Budd's Avatar
Dojo: Taikyoku Budo
Location: Williamsville, NY
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 931
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

I like this one, too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF8zJzmhO2c

Again, not to be confused with fighting . . .
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 11:21 AM   #72
Cady Goldfield
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 888
United_States
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Nice find, Alfonso.
Note how hard (impossible, actually, for these young guys!) it is to throw or lock him, and that he can easily reverse the students' attempted locks and take apart their structure. He also "listens" to his opponents' intent (which can be felt through even one point of contact to the body, even a forearm) and can detect the slightest opening, which he then fills so quickly it's like a vacuum sucked him into position.

These are all manifestations of the internal process he is constantly generating in those matches.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 11:40 AM   #73
Alfonso
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 346
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Budd Yuhasz wrote: View Post
I like this one, too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HF8zJzmhO2c

Again, not to be confused with fighting . . .
This one illustrates what im trying to say too; I think when reading about IS skills it is easy to imagine something super hero like. But the descriptions are not wrong when you think about it. I feel the same is true of the criptic language associated with traditions who teach this. When you gain a bit of experience you realize the language is hard to beat as verbal descriptions go. Its a head scratcher really.

Alfonso Adriasola
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 12:38 PM   #74
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Cady Goldfield wrote: View Post
Hey Kevin,
What is relevant to me is the aiki/IP body in a martial (i.e.punching, striking, locking, choking, etc.) context. I'm not concerned with the efficacy of specific jujutsu techniques or whether they are "practical" in today's world for professionals who use combatives. IP and aiki can be applied to -any- martial or self-defense system in which human bodies are in direct connection and conflict, whether traditional or contemporary.

That the guy is showing how he connects and moves another body, instantaneously on-contact, using internal rather than conventional drivers, is the point. In the context in which he was presenting it, you can observe the effects on uke's breath, body alignment, and (in)ability to continue any kind of free movement or attack. It's a different means of kuzushi than that powered by conventional "external" drivers.

How would such skills not be relevant to modern-day hand-to-hand combat? Or the hard grappling you and your guys did today?

Training for IP/aiki and training to fight are -- as has often been noted -- two separate disciplines. If the two disciplines are conditioned-in in increments and combined in increments, we can observe the changes in the impact and effects the internal body method has on fighting at each stage of development. It is really fascinating both to witness and to experience for oneself.

With all due respect, Kevin (and I really mean that), I think you need more exposure to someone with good internal-power and fighting skills to see how the two tie together in a very practical way. If a certain someone does a seminar in your neck of the woods...
I was supposed to meet with that certain someone this year and he couldn't make it due to family issues. I have been trying! I've been hoping that he could show me how things work in the conditions and parameters I subscribe too.

How would such skills NOT be relevant? I am not arguing that they are not...if they are developed in such a way that allows them to be used under those conditions. That's been my point all along.

For example, doing the Jo trick and other aiki skills test are fine...just fine. However those things/skills are executed under very tight parameters and controls. (restrictive environment)....if you change the conditions, then what? that is what I am concerned with. How well do you fight in a given set of conditions?

So yes, I agree with you that maybe I need to be exposed to the right people. I am always open to that and that certain someone has basically said the same thing...so hence my wanting to get with him. It will happen in the next two years for sure as I move back to the US for sure!

Quote:
Training for IP/aiki and training to fight are -- as has often been noted -- two separate disciplines. If the two disciplines are conditioned-in in increments and combined in increments, we can observe the changes in the impact and effects the internal body method has on fighting at each stage of development. It is really fascinating both to witness and to experience for oneself.
This is where I probably disagree...I think they can and should be trained in an integrated approach. Albeit, I also recognize that isolation of training techniques are necessary to reinforce training.

However, for me, why would you study with someone that can't demonstrate how to transition that methodology to the conditions and criteria you ultimately need to meet? That has been my on going issue with this topic. That is, integration.

I am looking for that certain someone that can show how to do that. My adopted training strategy is open enough to incorporate anything that proves to leads to where I am going!

Lets cut to the core of the matter. We've been having this discussion for almost 10 years now when certain people I think around 2004 and 2005 came on here and started discussing IS/IT training methods.

So where are we now? how are those folks doing? and how has it been integrated into various training regimes martially?

Recognizing that, of course, we have different people with different objectives in training. I think this would be a more positive and constructive conversation to have instead of heading off into the land of validating and invalidating IS/IT training.

I mean after close to 8 to 10 years of training, we should be able to definitively say where folks are in the process and how it has improved whatever they do and how it has informed/changed how they train. I am really curious about transference and integration. I mean, doing Jo tricks and AIki test are one thing, but we need to transcend this and put it to use at some point.

It is a shame that so many of the folks that are advocates are no longer posting here on aikiweb for various reasons.

I am asking because I am genuinely curious and want to see where everyone is. Me personally, I have sideline the training methods as a primary mode of training for a number of reasons. one, lack of good instruction and partners with interest. Two, I could not figure out how to justify spending my time doing this as it came at the expense of other things I was doing martially. I think those are the two main reasons.

However, I did find through my exposure that I was able to incorporate some of the concepts in what I do, and some of the concepts were already present in my training, we just needed to recognize it and work to enhance those things.

thanks for your patience on this Topic Cady!

  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2013, 12:55 PM   #75
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: Aikijujutsu

Quote:
Alfonso Adriasola wrote: View Post
This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gb_CC3GE18M shows a teacher working out with students in a cooperative but not scripted way. Chen Zi Qiang has been training IS since age 3, I don't think any of us will ever approach his level of conditioning; notice how non-superhuman it all looks like; and at the same time notice his body usage. The players are all doing the same thing. Don't confuse this with fighting please.
Thanks for the video. this is much more impressive to me, and I agree that it is cooperative in a non scripted way and it approaches closer to where we need to be martially.

However (you knew it was coming ) As impressive as he is and he is impressive...his uke suck IMO, only the guy at 5 minutes to me shows any degree of skill really and he begins to have a hard time with him. It begins to look more like grappling and less like push hands, but they still are playing with in the boundaries of push hands...albeit pushing the boundaries, but there is STILL a lack of dynamic adaptability that is necessary to approach that needed to be considers uncooperative practice. (but you did say it is cooperative).

Also, it is still essentially a duel in my opinion. A duel that operates from a position of parity within a fairly narrow set of parameters.

This has nothing to do with this guys skills though as I am sure he is proficient at what he does. I'd like to see him against someone that decided not to play by the rules of push hands. It be interesting to see how he adapts and what happens to his structure and choices. My guess is it becomes less stylistic and he would have to default to things like clinching as he reached various points of failure when more parameters are entered. I'd be interesting to see how he works in a clinch and how what he is doing differs from what good grapplers are doing.

  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Aikido of Northern VA Seminars - Doran-sensei in Northern Virginia, March 2015



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Correlation of Aikido and Daito-Ryu Waza John Driscoll Columns 28 08-04-2013 06:01 PM
Kenjutsu, Iaijutsu, Aikijujutsu classes relocated-Boston Samurai Arts Walter Wong Events Listings: Non-Aikido Martial Traditions 0 08-02-2007 06:08 AM
Aikijujutsu kicks butt Roy General 11 06-16-2005 12:15 PM
Yanagi Ryu Aikijujutsu ronin_10562 Seminars 0 06-27-2002 12:57 PM
Daito-ryu Aikijujutsu Martin72 Training 1 06-27-2002 11:24 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:31 PM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate