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 > General

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 04-05-2004, 11:04 AM   #51
aikidocapecod
Dojo: Shobu Aikido Cape Cod
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 152
United_States
Offline
Let's talk about outside the aikido world...

I know this has happened to many...if not most people here....

You are walking down a city street.....big tall building beside you. As you come to the end of a building, somebody walking on a converging side street, also along the building walks right in front of you. She/he could not have seen you, and you could not have seen her/him.

There is a sidestepping piroutte(sp) and you both lose balance trying to avoid the other. I know that in some cases one or both have met the sidewalk.

Is this not a "no touch" throw? Or in this case a "no touch" fall?

The original question asked was to explain a "no touch" throw. While some may not believe in the existance of such a thing, that does not make those who do believe in the possibility of "no touch" throws wrong.

"No touch" throws do not require a compliant Uke. They do not require a Nage with 30 years of experience. At times a "no touch" throw may happen quite by accident. At other times the attempt to cause a "no touch" throw may result in an unintentional smack to the head.

(That is NOT a no touch throw!!! :-)

But....they do exist in and outside of the world of Aikido.

And watch out next time rounding the corner of a tall building!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:44 AM   #52
Hanna B
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 647
Sweden
Offline
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 11:52 AM   #53
aikidocapecod
Dojo: Shobu Aikido Cape Cod
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 152
United_States
Offline
On the contrary Hanna, I think you are quite correct. If Uke has her/his mind someplace else instead of a commited attack, then Uke will provide very little partnership in practice.

Sure, Nage can use a little muscle to get Uke moving and thereby get the desired results, Uke on the mat....if that is Nage's only goal.

So, getting back to the point of this thread, What is a "no touch" throw....and taking your view into consideration, if Uke is not commited to an honest attack, a "no touch" throw is not possible.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 12:44 PM   #54
John Boswell
 
John Boswell's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Midland
Location: Midland, Texas
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 597
United_States
Offline
One important topic keeps coming up and that is the subject of Committed Attack.

I've only been to one seminar in my life, due to location and money, but I know enough to know that as Uke, when you throw a punch in aikido... you need to follow through with it for the nage to execute his/her technique.

At this seminar, I saw a nidan test in which there was a 1st kyu uke throwing a punch (munitski) and stopping his attack right at the place of supposed "impact". In doing this, uke came to a complete halt and locked down. This guy is ONE STEP from being black belt! What the hell kind of attack is that?

It's not one, that's what it is.

So, for those of you out there that do not believe in this "no touch" throw thing, can you really tell me that your uke is giving a commited attack or are they going through the motions?

It isn't something mystical at all. It isn't hard to believe either, if you just think about it. HELL! Mr. Miagi from Karate Kid did the same basic thing at the end of the movie when he got outta the way of the punch from the other sensei... letting him punch the car windows instead? Committed Attack. If you get one, you can do all kinds of stuff.

It's not unreal to expect someone seriously throwing a punch to end up throwing themselves instead. It happens in boxing all the time, it can happen anywhere.

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 01:35 PM   #55
cbrf4zr2
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 114
Offline
Quote:
John Boswell wrote:
At this seminar, I saw a nidan test in which there was a 1st kyu uke throwing a punch (munitski) and stopping his attack right at the place of supposed "impact". In doing this, uke came to a complete halt and locked down. This guy is ONE STEP from being black belt! What the hell kind of attack is that?
John -

Not sure how you are instructed to throw punches, but the way I've been taught to throw them, munetsuki should not finish with you still moving forward. Uke may have needed to be closer in order to punch through the target, but at the end of munetsuki you are locked down. You should not (at least in my style) have so much forward extension that you are tippy. If the 1st kyu was in fact "locked down" then either A) the intial ma ai was completly botched OR B) the nidan was behind in his technique. Because, you will be off balance at some point during an attack as uke. This is the point at which the technique being performed is to be executed. Of course, that point will vary in size due to rank, and due to athleticism and body style.

In fact, in our organization we do Ki tests at the end of the suburi at for 6th Kyu to make sure that uke is "locked down" as the attack culminates.

Last edited by cbrf4zr2 : 04-05-2004 at 01:41 PM.

************************
...then again, that's just me.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 03:11 PM   #56
Doka
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 169
Offline
Quote:
Edward Frederick (cbrf4zr2) wrote:
John -

Not sure how you are instructed to throw punches, but the way I've been taught to throw them, munetsuki should not finish with you still moving forward. Uke may have needed to be closer in order to punch through the target, but at the end of munetsuki you are locked down. You should not (at least in my style) have so much forward extension that you are tippy. If the 1st kyu was in fact "locked down" then either A) the intial ma ai was completly botched OR B) the nidan was behind in his technique. Because, you will be off balance at some point during an attack as uke. This is the point at which the technique being performed is to be executed. Of course, that point will vary in size due to rank, and due to athleticism and body style.
I think the essence of this is that you need your timing and position to be right to allow you to extend the attack (in Ni technique), extending and leading your Uke. Even if the technique is focused on the point of impact (like in some style of Gung Fu), if your timing and positioning are good you can extend and throw your Uke.

As for no touch throws, I am the unbeliever! Why, because I believe that if you do not touch someone you don't throw them.

If a ball is flying towards me and I move out of the way so it misses me, have I thrown it behind me?

If a bullet is fired out me, but I have moved out of it's line, have I thrown it too?

If me Uke attacks me and I am not there, have I thrown my Uke?

I say no to the above. This is because I see a throw as a physical action. In the above examples I have caused them to happen by not being there. A throw is something that you couse to happen by being there.

Osu!

To Mark Balogh

9 Years is not very long in martial arts. You have been talking to people with over 20 years in martial arts, none of which would (or have) tell you that you are wrong and they are right, because there is not just one way! Aikido, like other martial arts, does not have just one path. Things will work in one environment (or dojo) and fail in another. It is amazing what you can do when your Uke knows what they are supposed to do!

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 03:16 PM   #57
MaryKaye
Dojo: Seattle Ki Society
Location: Seattle
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 522
Offline
(I'd suggest not responding to trolls.)

I think there are at least two distinct kinds of throws under discussion, and separating them might make things clearer. This is a beginner's stab at doing so and I welcome correction from more experienced people.

We do a jo-nage where uke reaches for the jo, trying to get hold of it--he finally suceeds just as it is whipped over his head and down behind him so that he must fall. If uke is making a genuine effort to catch the jo this can work as a no-touch throw. Uke falls because he kept reaching for the jo an instant too long and lost his balance due to its unexpected movements. I think the throws people have been describing where nage is "just not there anymore" are like this one.

At the seminar a week ago we did several different no-touch throws (or rather, the yudansha did them and people of my rank mostly failed to do them). These seemed to be of a quite different kind where nage moves toward uke very suddenly and assertively and uke falls due to flinching or reacting movements. I noticed that the falls were unusually hard. You could easily see the difference between a successful use of the throw and a compliant uke falling anyway, because our normal falls are a lot softer--we don't slam into the mat like that.

The thing both kinds have in common is requiring a strongly committed attack. If you are just sort-of following the jo around you'll never fall. If you think you're going to grab it and do something clever with it (as in a practice where the instructor is encouraging us to reverse him if we can) then you're committed enough to go down.

In Chinn sensei's seminar he spent a lot of time trying to get a strongly committed attack, which he defined as one which would make nage want to move. He showed this with kata tori, the shoulder grab, which was strange since there's not a harmful blow involved. I can say from experience that when Chinn sensei comes at you to grab you, there is a strong tendency to back up. We junior people were not nearly as consistent in being able to do this, which is part of why we couldn't make the no-touch throws work. (And when my seniors came at me with full commitment I was the one flinching....)

Anyway, I'd say these are two different animals. They both require "leading uke's mind" but so does everything else we do; and the mechanics of why uke falls are quite different.

Mary Kaye
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 03:35 PM   #58
Doka
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 169
Offline
Like I said, I don't buy this "No touch throw" thing. It is mostly Uke reacting how is expected. To reiterate, my view is:

"A throw is something that you couse to happen by being there."

To qualify that - if you enter towards someone striking and they fall over trying to avoid your strike, that is not a throw! They simply fell over avoiding your strike!

Anyway, what the hell does it matter what you call it? As long as you are not telling me you can throw someone with your magic "Ki" power! (apart from Peter who can even levitate! )


Last edited by Doka : 04-05-2004 at 03:38 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2004, 03:46 PM   #59
Doka
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 169
Offline
Quote:
Mark Dobro (Doka) wrote:
in Ni technique
LOL!

I did it myself! I know that some will be saying "NI technique?"

This is where the energy of the attack is forwards, like a push, towards Sh'te/Tori/Nage (how many names? Anyone know of more? ), as opposed to Ichi technique, where the energy is backwards, like a pull, away from Sh'te/Tori/Nage (see what I mean? )!

And I have practiced in numerous schools of Aikido! D'oh!
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:14 AM   #60
Mark Balogh
Dojo: Mushinkan Dojo, Guildford
Location: Surrey, UK
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
England
Offline
I just can't believe what I am hearing on this forum, it's like a childs playground.

1) In my first e-mail I commented that my level is such that I don't consider myself anything but a serious student of Aikido.

2) I offered what I consider a very important point on the subject. NO ONE HAS COMMENTED ON MY POINT. Is it because no one understands it? Then several of you try to ridicule me.

3) My attitude is deliberate. Everyone on here thinks they know what a Ghost technique is. From my training, what has been taught to me and my experience NO ONE HAS TOUCHED ON HOW TO DO IT (bar again the only person on here who seems to have any idea, Mr. Murray). If you realise you don't know, you can start to figure out HOW TO.

4) I wish I had never posted and kept the conversation between myself and other instructors (close friends) in my association which was happening on e-mail prior to this threads creation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:30 AM   #61
Chris Birke
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 258
Offline
It's ok Mark, some day you'll show them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:38 AM   #62
Mark Balogh
Dojo: Mushinkan Dojo, Guildford
Location: Surrey, UK
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
England
Offline
Quote:
Chris Birke wrote:
It's ok Mark, some day you'll show them.
Give me 5-10 years of working on it and I hope to be able to do just that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:41 AM   #63
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,319
Japan
Offline
Quote:
Mark Balogh wrote:
3) My attitude is deliberate. Everyone on here thinks they know what a Ghost technique is. From my training, what has been taught to me and my experience NO ONE HAS TOUCHED ON HOW TO DO IT (bar again the only person on here who seems to have any idea, Mr. Murray). If you realise you don't know, you can start to figure out HOW TO.
The thing is several of us know exactly what you are talking about - we just don't agree. We are not less experienced, less capable, less skilled or particularily dense.
Quote:
4) I wish I had never posted and kept the conversation between myself and other instructors (close friends) in my association which was happening on e-mail prior to this threads creation.
Here's the rub. I have never seen no touch techniques performed outside of the parameters I laid down (timing) where uke was not pre-trained to believe its possible. In other words part of the same organization, or close friend, or or. If you limit your conversation to the above your beliefs will never be challenged. And really if you don't like being challenged you shouldn't hang out red flags to the bull.

Mu.

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 03:52 AM   #64
Mark Balogh
Dojo: Mushinkan Dojo, Guildford
Location: Surrey, UK
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
England
Offline
Quote:
Mary Kuhner (MaryKaye) wrote:
Anyway, I'd say these are two different animals. They both require "leading uke's mind" but so does everything else we do; and the mechanics of why uke falls are quite different.

Mary Kaye
Finally, more sense.
Quote:
Peter Rehse (PeterR) wrote:
The thing is several of us know exactly what you are talking about - we just don't agree.
The concept I am talking about I have recieved from 2 different Sensei, one 80 year old japanese student of O'sensei and my current teacher. O'sensei and Tohei can be seen doing it on video. So how do they do it then Peter? It isn't fake. I think I have the majority of the answer but you disagree....So how?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:17 AM   #65
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,319
Japan
Offline
Uke was cooperative - plain and simple.

Fake is not the word I would use - preconditioned is. Yes even with Ueshiba M. or Tohei K.

A simple question - could the same technique be done against a martial artist outside of a selected group - could it be done to me?

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:23 AM   #66
Hanna B
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 647
Sweden
Offline
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:29 AM   #67
Hanna B
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 647
Sweden
Offline
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:29 AM   #68
Col.Clink
Dojo: Waiuku Ki Society
Location: New Zealand
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 68
Offline
Quote:
Hanna Björk (Hanna B) wrote:
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.
I disagree Hanna, I think you are quite correct.

Being committed is one thing, having intent behind it, is the other, which you don't hear alot about. Sure I can commit to attack someone, but my level of intent to hurt them, will determine the response.

If a person is commited to an attack, (that means full force), and their intention is to strike a specific point with that force and hurt you (maybe more so), then if your timing is correct, and you have lead them to believe you are going to move a specific way and don't, (see Larry's post re: buildings) i think it is possible to move/throw/make them fall, using nothing but their own ENERGY and whatever INTENT you planted in THEIR head to cause unbalance, ie. no touch.

Not saying that's how it works, just how I think it might work

No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!

or am I being silly now?

cheers

"Excess leads to the path of Wisdom"
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:29 AM   #69
Col.Clink
Dojo: Waiuku Ki Society
Location: New Zealand
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 68
Offline
Quote:
Hanna Björk (Hanna B) wrote:
I find that lots of techniques are dependent on a committed attack... most stuff is difficult to perform on an uke who has no intent in what he is doing. But of course, I am wrong againg. Silly me.
I disagree Hanna, I think you are quite correct.

Being committed is one thing, having intent behind it, is the other, which you don't hear alot about. Sure I can commit to attack someone, but my level of intent to hurt them, will determine the response.

If a person is commited to an attack, (that means full force), and their intention is to strike a specific point with that force and hurt you (maybe more so), then if your timing is correct, and you have lead them to believe you are going to move a specific way and don't, (see Larry's post re: buildings) i think it is possible to move/throw/make them fall, using nothing but their own ENERGY and whatever INTENT you planted in THEIR head to cause unbalance, ie. no touch.

Not saying that's how it works, just how I think it might work

No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!

or am I being silly now?

cheers

"Excess leads to the path of Wisdom"
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:29 AM   #70
Hanna B
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 647
Sweden
Offline
A more precise question is: could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Maybe the discussion would be helped if you defined what you mean by "cooperating". I assume you do not mean "faking".
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:29 AM   #71
Hanna B
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 647
Sweden
Offline
Peter: a more precise version of your question. Could it be done on you, if you are completely unaware of what tori is going to do? I.e. not preconditioned in any direction.

Maybe the discussion would be helped if you defined what you mean by "cooperating". I assume you do not mean "faking".
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 04:58 AM   #72
PeterR
 
PeterR's Avatar
Dojo: Shodokan Honbu (Osaka)
Location: Himeji, Japan
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,319
Japan
Offline
Quote:
Robert H.G Burrell (Col.Clink) wrote:
No touch in the dojo, I believe works similar, only uke knows if he don't move, he's gonna cop it, so uke moves!!
Just to be clear. I stated quite early on that the threat of pain and injury can lead to no touch throws both inside and outside the dojo - timing is all important but the threat must be there. Mark's contention is that its not necessary but a matter of leading. I disagree.

Peter Rehse Shodokan Aikido
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 05:03 AM   #73
Mark Balogh
Dojo: Mushinkan Dojo, Guildford
Location: Surrey, UK
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 106
England
Offline
Quote:
Peter Rehse (PeterR) wrote:
Uke was cooperative - plain and simple.

Fake is not the word I would use - preconditioned is. Yes even with Ueshiba M. or Tohei K.

A simple question - could the same technique be done against a martial artist outside of a selected group - could it be done to me?
Peter, I am not aiming this at you as a person, but honestly, I find your views I unbelievable. We are talking about O'SENSEI HERE!!! His feats are well documented and his abilities almost magical because of highly developed and refined skill. He trained extremely hard, he had vision, he had compassion.

Don't you think that there is a little more to it than what you say? I am just at a loss, maybe I have been lucky to have some excellent tuition filtered down to me through the Aikikai (in fact, I'm sure I am) but I am just lost for words.

Today I will try and help you, but I am leaving this thread now, I can see it is not a place for me, or what I have been taught.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 09:13 AM   #74
Chris Birke
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 258
Offline
*sigh* If only these conversations took place in person, preferably in a bar; the AiKiPub. Things would be so much better...

*wipes tear from his eye*
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2004, 10:15 AM   #75
Goetz Taubert
Location: Germany
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 40
Offline
So again, just to add another aspect of no touch throw, barely adressed in this thread:

Click on the chapter Taiki and wait for the picture to load up.

You ain't seen nothing yet ....
  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

AikiWeb Sponsored Links - Place your Aikido link here for only $10!



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
No Touch Throws pezalinski Techniques 237 04-14-2011 10:17 AM
aikido throws kienergy1234 Training 22 02-20-2006 06:27 PM
hip throws Paula Lydon Training 40 02-20-2006 05:41 PM
Reading throws kensparrow Techniques 15 08-25-2003 10:12 AM
touch response Paula Lydon Training 9 06-06-2003 05:34 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:50 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2018 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2018 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