Are we as Aikidoka looked down on by other MAs?

[drDalek]

I just want a general opinion, do you think that as an Aikido practicioner, other martial artists from other schools look down on you?

I recently heard from a friend that someone at some social gathering heard about me doing Aikido and being a Jujitsu guy (one of the Japanese Ryu's, not Brasilian) went on a tirade of how much tougher and harder Jujitsu is and how Aikido is not for self defence and so on and so forth.

I did not take it personally though, I dont know the state of intoxification everyone present was in, I dont know what brought about such an angry responce and I am pretty sure that with the level of aliveness that we practice that I am getting the "real thing".

However, do you feel that your friends or aquintances from other MAs, look down on you or feel that you are "soft" or "fruity"?

[Martial Sloth]

Hey Wynand..sorry not quite on the topic, but where is your dojo?? I'm in the JHB area and have only found a few..will be very interested to find out :) Thanks

[drDalek]

Wow, another South African here? I am in Cape Town so I try and check out a good cross section of the dojos available to me down here. http://www.puk.ac.za/aikido/dojos.html lists most of the SA dojos under the AFSA banner.

[PRehse]

On a contrary note - I once had an Aikido person comment after watching one of my classes that we were doing jujutsu not Aikido (surprise to me). There is a whole spectrum of Aikido out there, everything from your friend being totally right to not knowing his head from his *ss. The same thing can be said about a lot of jujutsu which after all Aikido is just a form of. It's real easy to apply painful technique to someone who gives you his arm and to be blunt - the ones who proclaim against Aikido the loudest are often from this school.

My answer to these people is that they just haven't seen enough Aikido. If I like the person I invite them to the dojo.


Originally posted by drDalek
I just want a general opinion, do you think that as an Aikido practicioner, other martial artists from other schools look down on you?

I recently heard from a friend that someone at some social gathering heard about me doing Aikido and being a Jujitsu guy (one of the Japanese Ryu's, not Brasilian) went on a tirade of how much tougher and harder Jujitsu is and how Aikido is not for self defence and so on and so forth.

I did not take it personally though, I dont know the state of intoxification everyone present was in, I dont know what brought about such an angry responce and I am pretty sure that with the level of aliveness that we practice that I am getting the "real thing".

However, do you feel that your friends or aquintances from other MAs, look down on you or feel that you are "soft" or "fruity"?

[Amir]

My art is the Best" syndrome is very common, and appears to be quite natural to the Human nature, through oat the cultures.

I believe the case you described, is more in common with that syndrome, then any specific M.A. they were talking about. He would probably have found something bad to say even had you been learning another style of Jujitsu besides his own, or his style in a different school. Some people build their self esteem on diminishing the image of those around them, this concept is very common in our western society (look at marketing and Elections propaganda for an obvious example).

Luckily, a large portion of the M.A. practitioners community grow up of this concept after a dozen or two of practicing years.


Amir

[Bradenn]

Tell the Japanese Jujutsu guy to ask a Brazilian JJ guy what he thinks of the Japanese Jujutsu.

He'll probably get the same answer as what he himself said about Aikido.

[Peter H.]

I frequently get a kind of scoffing attitude from people who have studied other martial arts. They are usually yellow to green belts in a style like Karate or TKD, and it usually starts right after they ask me if there is sparring or competition, and I tell them no.
I always invite them to try a few classes to see for themselves, or at least watch one class. But few actually try it. They're loss.

We've had some other interesting Aikido doesn't work moments. Aguy dressed like Billy Jack came in and threw some punches at Sensei, prefaced with, "What if someone did this!" Sensei was not amused, and after being dropped three times, Bill Jack gave up.

We also had a cop come in with a brand new gi and a book on BJJ and start running an unscheduled class in the gym, which he tried to run partialy during our class time, until I informed him that the gym pays us to teach there. He went the next day and demanded that the gym pay him to teach and dump the Aikido program (which had been in place for 16 years at that point), because "Aikido doesn't work". That lasted until he was asked to produce proof he was qualified to teach a martial art, which was the first question the gym manager asked him. He said he didn't have any, and has yet to return to the gym. It's been about a year now.

[ChrisHein]

when i was teaching in fresno, a guy came in and said he wanted to try a class, so of coarse we let him try a free class, after i had finished demonstrating, I had the class pair up, I looked at him, and he was fighting with one of my students, I went over and told him that it was a cooperative practice, and that he needn't do that. He said ok, and asked me to show him how it worked, we were doing sankyo, and he tryed to resist me, after about 2 mins of me tieing him up in all kinds of funny positions, he agreed that it worked, and that he would cooperate. About a week later, one of my fellow udansha went to try a juijutsu class(japanese) at a local school, He told me that there was a black belt in there who said aikido sucked, and that the local school was no good, exsept for one of the teachers, they had fought and he had put him in alot of pain, low and behold, it was the very same guy who had been in to see my class, funny thing is i dont remember fighting this guy:), and i don 't think this guy did anouther class ! People like to make themselves feel good, they like to make up all kinds of stuff to help themselves feel better. I used to rag on TKD all the time, then i met some guys who did TKD, and they were alright,then I realized what a bigget I am!

[Dark_Samurai]

I train in a chinese style. Almost everyone in my style (even if they disagree with the concepts and philosophy) have great respect for japanese martial arts, ESPECIALLY AIKIDO. So from the chinese point of view, aikido is not looked down, but looked as a very respectful and practical martial art.

[Audrey Hoo]

onagashimas.

I have had experiences of people who both greatly respected aikido and of those who greatly looked down on it.

For those who respected it -- some from the most unsuspecting folk who don't do aikido. Someone even said to me that, that's what 'yoda' and all the jedi knights in star wars was modelled towards -- O'sensei and aikidokas... which I took as a compliment! :)

I did some cross training once ;P to a korean martial art, [won't say which one in particular.] But I left after my first grading. One thing that I didn't like was the fact that the coach kept puttin down aikido simply cos he knew I trained in aikido, and he would say "what do you think, this isn't aikido!" in reference to how he perceived aikido was very "soft".

Although, the irony of that was, during his training I hardly broke a sweat, he never allowed the girls to pair with the guys or with the senior belts, and he never allowed us to fully lock/kick/punch a person. Compared to aikido training, his traing was a breezeeee... :)Aikido on the other hand was FULL ON. For e.g, I just got back with three fresh new yonkyo bruises to show off.

Another friend who trained in unarmed combat mentioned that he doesn't care for how beautiful a technique looked unlike aikido, he was trained to just put the person down asap regardless of what it took. I'm not sure if that was a put down or not.

In any case, personally I'm not too affected by what others say. So long as I know why I'm doing aikido!

cheers. Audrey

[PRehse]

By the way - let's not forget some of the attitudes expressed by Aikido practioners for other arts.

There is some real hlier than thou tripe floating around.

Amir is correct to point out My art is the Best" syndrome is very common, and appears to be quite natural to the Human nature, through out the cultures.

[rupert]

Here in Korea, Aikido is slowly gaining a name for itself but I have come across the standard Hapkido opinion that Aikido is easy many times, including that it is not self defence because it doesn't have kicks etc etc etc. I have managed to change the minds of a few...

Rupert Atkinson

[Bradenn]

Hi again

Hope no-one minds me posting as I am not an Aikidoka. I have always been fascinated by it though and have a lot of respect for it as well as Ueshiba-sensei.

I think that people who criticise the fighting ability of Aikido do actually have a point. Before you get mad, let me say that this point is true of lots of arts, my own (Ninjutsu) is no exception.

Quite simply, I think that the techniques of a martial art can be wonderful, but the way in which one trains is all-important. I'm sure that in his prime, Ueshiba-sensei would destroy the sport fighters that are so admired these days. I believe that in his lifetime he fought many challenge matches and demonstrated Aikido's potential to handle any attack.

It is all there for the taking, BUT how many people these days train the way Ueshiba-sensei did? Are you prepared to lift logs all day, join the army, fight in wars with bayonets, douse yourself with ice water daily, train until you drop etc etc. I believe that all these things he did in his lifetime made him what he was. I may be wrong, but I remember hearing that originally Aikido had a lot of atemi in it and that Ueshiba's dojo was called Hell Dojo for its hard training.

The same thing can be said for many martial arts. Takamatsu-sensei (Bujinkan Ninjutsu forefather) was a remarkable and lethal man but that does not mean that all Ninjutsu students today are good. He did some incredibly harsh training in his lifetime.

A Russian Spetsnaz trainer Col. Ryabko says the following: "This is one of the problems with all martial arts: a fighting style will begin with someone who is a very good fighter, but as he teaches his students less brutally than he was trained, the real effectiveness of the style begins to be diluted. As his own students teach the next generation of students it becomes even more diluted until that, which is left, is a "nice" martial art, but a far less effective fighting system."

Anyway, that's my $0.02. If you feel it is not appropriate in this forum please feel free to PM me. ANY art can be as effective as you want to make it.

Respectfully,

[Amir]

Brendan does have a point - the way one trains , and the aims one is setting to himself does matter.

In Aikido and several other M.A. there is an higher concentration of people who consider S.D. a low priority, hence their training is different, and if they believe they maintain the same level of S.D. capabilities, then I beg to differ.
But this is only a group whiten the Aikido Community, and I wouldn't assume everybody is training this way or extrapolate from their capabilities to those of others.

Amir

[TyroneTurner]

Originally posted by Bradenn
It is all there for the taking, BUT how many people these days train the way Ueshiba-sensei did? Are you prepared to lift logs all day, join the army, fight in wars with bayonets, douse yourself with ice water daily, train until you drop etc etc. I believe that all these things he did in his lifetime made him what he was. I may be wrong, but I remember hearing that originally Aikido had a lot of atemi in it and that Ueshiba's dojo was called Hell Dojo for its hard training...

...A Russian Spetsnaz trainer Col. Ryabko says the following: "This is one of the problems with all martial arts: a fighting style will begin with someone who is a very good fighter, but as he teaches his students less brutally than he was trained, the real effectiveness of the style begins to be diluted. As his own students teach the next generation of students it becomes even more diluted until that, which is left, is a "nice" martial art, but a far less effective fighting system."

I agree 100% with what you said. People forget that when they see a smiling picture of O-Sensei that he was quite a scrapper in his youth. He did a lot of what Coach Sonnon (www.Rmax.tv) would call 'hard work' so he knew what was effective. Once he became incredibly effective, he developed ways to become more efficient (what Coach Sonnon calls 'soft work').

If we want to be like O-Sensei, we must walk the path that he walked that led him to Aikido. It was a path of hard physical training and an unquenchable thirst to achieve martial excellence.

[PRehse]

Originally posted by TyroneTurner
I agree 100% with what you said.
Same here. And the hard training, in Aikido, can still be found. You just have to know where to look and have the desire to go after it.

[Peter H.]

You always get out what you put in. Anyone who doesn't seriously try can go to any martial arts school and come out with nothing. Anyone who works hard and practices with serious intent will come out ahead no matter what martial art they try.

I think people tend to forget that it is more the individual, less the art.

BTW Peter, we talked about Tomiki's Aikido before, and your experience came up much different than mine. Do you have any recommendation for good schools in Texas area under the Shodokan/Tomiki banner?

[PRehse]

Originally posted by Peter H. BTW Peter, we talked about Tomiki's Aikido before, and your experience came up much different than mine. Do you have any recommendation for good schools in Texas area under the Shodokan/Tomiki banner?

A search of http://www.tomiki.org gave only

Aikido of West Houston
Sensei John Ivey
Houston, TX
IveyFrames@aol.com
Tel: 713-302-1803


I don't know him but it might be a place to start. Did not quite understand your post, did you mean you tried Tomiki Aikido before and found it wanting?

[Peter H.]

We had a quick debate over the pro's/con's of Tomiki v. Aikikai during the summer. And my experince at a Tomiki school in San Antonio and with practitioners in San Angelo seemed a far cry from yours. I'm interested in trying again, as I'm going to have a few weeks off for christmas here soon.

[ChrisHein]

hey is there any way i can still read that thread(tomiki vs aikiki) It sounds very interesting to me.

[Jack B]

The Tomiki group in San Angelo was formerly part of the Fugakukai organization, but are now independent.

Texas is home to a lot of Tomiki style dojos. The Fugakukai directory is here (http://www.kegkeg.com). You are kind of out in the hinterland; if you get the chance to go to Houston I would recommend you visit the Fugakukai hombu dojo. The annual Xmas Clinic is the last weekend of December.

p.s. the web site seems to be down right now. email em if you need info.

[Jack B]

that should be email "me"

[Bruce Mitchell]

I have an obseravtion and I am curious what others think,
In almost any bookstore with a martial arts section you can find more books on aikido than almost any other single martial art.

I have also noticed (and been guilty of in the past) that aikidoka spend an inordinate amount of time justifying their aikido practice and it's focus (whatever that may be).

Aikido as a whole makes a lot of unqualified claims. I am not saying that they are untrue, but they are unprovable (short of starting a fight) and they set aikidoka up for critisism.

Many aikidoka seem to suffer from some latent inferiority complex. Example; I recently met an aikido bloke and when I told him that I studied naginata, he went on at great length about how aikido has weapons training and implied that he was therefore qualified to discuss ALL aspects of weapons training. I have seen this many, many times.

As someone who now trains excusively in weapons arts, I do not presume that I understand other weapons systems.

Another example, I can't tell you how many times I heard aikidopes talk down about the Gracie's since the UFC's first came out. Specifically making comments about how aikido prepares you for mulitple attacks vs. the Gracie system that ties you up on the ground.

I am not saying that either side of the arguement is correct, but that the aikidoka were immediately looking to elevate their practice by pointing out the shortcomings of others. I think it would often be much better for the aikido community to acknowledge the success of others and move on.

So, in closing I would say that the aikido community has brought a lot of focus on itself by its barrage of rhetoric. Just my 2 cents.

[Peter H.]

Chris, it wasn't a specific Tomiki v. Aikikai thread. A person who was looking for Aikido wandered about the different substyles, as I had been involved in both, I mention what I saw as differences between the two. The other Peter differed with me on some of my opinions and observations of Tomiki, and he having far more experience in it, I bowed to his superior knowledge.

Bruce, I think you see more books on Aikido than any other for three reasons. One, O-Sensei was alive until fairly recently and had a very exciting life. So there are many people still around who have worked with him and can directly pass on his teaching and stories. You can't do that with someone like Boddhidarma or the many founders of Okinawan Te. Two, no offense to other styles or individuals, but having been around the block in martial arts over the past 13 years experiencing different schools and styles, your average Aikido practitioner tends to be a little older and better educated than the average Karate or TKD student. I'm a prime example, I am the youngest blackbelt and instructor in my organization, at the age of 26. I can't pick a single other school I've ever been to that the youngest black belt would be as old as that. Anyway, as such, they read and write more. Third, there is a market for it. Otherwise publishers would not want to print them.

I think we end up spending so much time defending our practice because it is hard to demonstrate. In Karate, I could demonstrate proficiency with a breaking demo, in Kung-Fu, I could preform a traditional form, in TKD I could demonstrate a high kick. In Aikido, well, I guess I could breath for you, or show you the oh so impresive way I stretch my wrists before practice. But your right, unless some one comes for a class and tries it, or watches very intently, the only way to really demo it is by preforming it on another.

[ChrisHein]

bruce,

Let me be the first Aikidoka(for you anyways) to say that other martial arts are awesome! If Aikidoka are so good at multuple attackers, put them in with two brazilian Jui jutsu players! I'm not uneaque, look at peter H's back ground, actually look at almost any of the aikido guys who post heres back ground, they are usually pretty diverse, Like peter says most aikidoka are a bit older, that gives them lots of time to get around the block. I personally train in bjj, along with several other things, and i still think Aikido rocks the balls off an elifant. However like you I really agree(as most people will tell you) that aikido has it's short commings! there hasn't been anouther O-sensei yet, give us time, it's only been 33 years!

[Bruce Mitchell]

Thank you for the replies Chris and Peter,
I agree with both of you. I guess that I am just wondering if the fact that Aikidoka tend to interested in discussing topics related to their art, that they may unintentionally open the door for criticism.

I would agree that an eighteen year old martial artist will most likely have a different, possibly less intelectual, approach to their training.

I can't say whether or not having fewer dan grades that are younger is a positive sign, but I agree that it creates a different atmosphere.

In many ways I think the Aikido community as a whole benefits from the volume (and much of the content) of discussion that takes place. I would also say though, that most people who practice Aikido are a little to willing to tell you what Aikido IS.

I also see that Aikidoka tend to personalize their practice in a way that many other arts do not. Aikidoka talk about "So-and so's Aikido" being a certian way. Or they will say "my Aikido is...". At times a bit presumptious.

Lastly I would venture that Aikidoka also frequently refer to Aikido as "true" martial arts, and speak of qualities and quote maxims that really are historically inaccurate, or exist only in chambara. While there is some merit to saying that (most) Aikido has maintained a more martial focus by keeping dangerous techniques, and eschewing competition, this rhetoric is often used as a form of posturing, rather than a basis for discussion.

So I am not making a judgement, rather suggesting that the above mentioned trends tend to invite negativity from more conservative sections of teh martial arts world. What are your thoughts here?

[John Lindsey]

I was once invited to attend an aikido seminar here in Houston. I think the instructor's name was Toyata sensei from Chicago? Anyhow, I was very impressed with his technique. BUT, I was training with some of his higher dans and it was a wide difference in skill. I remember training with a high ranked aikidoka and having to run circles around her trying to grab her hand. The technique never seemed to work on me, but her movement was good.

In the end, I left was a good feeling about aikido as a martial art.

[stevemcgee99]

AFAIK, the uke is meant to "commit" to their technique, in order to support the nage's practice. If you were providing a grabbing attack, don't stop til you get it, don't let go, and get in the nage's face!
With this in mind, keeping the wrist jus out of reach, but available enough to try for, will totally pull uke out of their center. I think that was the point.

"My aikido". I've heard "my" applied to alot of things lately, whereas maybe 10 years ago nobody spoke in those terms? Even "my McDonald's". Is this a Me Generation thing? Remember the Beatles "I, Me, Mine"? Well, I think this phenomena is a symptom of the incredibly self-centered nature of americans. What seperates my aikido from your aikido (really, Aikido) is when I think about it.

[Dan Harden]

With this in mind, keeping the wrist jus out of reach, but available enough to try for, will totally pull uke out of their center. I think that was the point.

*********************
Huh?

Why would I compromise MY center just to reach your hand? If you pulled it out of reach why would that lead me to.......anywhere but standing where I began from. Or standing right next to you trying to set a choke while head butting you.......With my center intact!
I would suspect that there is little if anything this lady could do to me to get me off my center without a tremendous effort on her part. And since I train to remain centered specifically against antagonistic force including head buts,leg sweeps and all manner of mayhem. Just what are we talking about? Some leading kata "open the door he pushes against" training? How about slamming the door in his face?
Committed "grabbing" should involve a multiplicity of movement to choke, leg bind, and generate a kill. Grabbing a hand is one of the dumbest moves you could make. There is far too much articulation in the leading joints. Much better if they try to grab you. Stalling and controlling the hand if it held a gun is more a point-and even then there are so many other factors involved that the "grab" becomes just a piece of the puzzle.

I would offer you nothing to begin with that you could not take-that's...er....called martial arts.

Dan

[Dan Harden]

I was just going to add that every martial art I have ever seen taught how to retain balance under stress. Including Aikido.
So any teaching mechanism that lets an adept lean, reach, or do anything else that compromises their center should be considered a false martial teaching.
As far as attacking goes I learned how to walk or slide in while maintaining a centered attacking frame. Seems simple enough to me.

I would add to that; excessive turning or compromising of ones own postural relationship to the attacking frame is a waste of good motion. Only a complete imbecile, drunk, some housewife or otherwise "non-threat" would fight anyone the way you see it done in some Dojo. And even if they occur here and there you sure as hell don't train that way. They are just "gifts."

The only thing I have ever seen that has a leading extension isn't a martial art. Its dancing

I am looking forward to the new influx of teachers who are going to clean up some of these martial weaknesses in Aikido.

cheers
Dan

[Dan Harden]

I agree 100% with what you said. People forget that when they see a smiling picture of O-Sensei that he was quite a scrapper in his youth. He did a lot of what Coach Sonnon (www.Rmax.tv) would call 'hard work' so he knew what was effective. Once he became incredibly effective, he developed ways to become more efficient (what Coach Sonnon calls 'soft work').

If we want to be like O-Sensei, we must walk the path that he walked that led him to Aikido. It was a path of hard physical training and an unquenchable thirst to achieve martial excellence.


__________________
Tyrone Turner
Queens, NY

***********************

What he did was 23 years of Daito ryu under Takeda Sokaku, something like a year of Judo under a 17 year old shodan, he "watched" Kashima Shin ryu and had his kid Kiisomaru learn it. He came up with a scroll about training in Yagyu Shingan that was denied by the Soke of the school.
Ueshiba stamped and sealed the enrollment book of Takeda for decades. Everything else he got, he got from him.
You may review them yourself. It in his own hand writing.

When he opened his first Dojo what did he teach?
Daito ryu
When he awarded rank to people as late as in 1937 what did he award rank in?
Daito ryu
You may review the scrolls in his own hand writing that were exact copies of the Daito ryu Hiden mokuroku.
All of his early students? Every....single....one reported that they were studying?
Daito ryu
They offered Stanley to review their certificates in
Daito ryu


Gradually he opened up the circles, included the much debated tenkaning motions, removal of atemi, and the shortening of the techniques. and in gneral made the techniques less martial then they were. If you want to call that "more efficient" as you did above, and think it is a refinement over Daito ryu I know dozens of men who will argue with you vehemently.

But here's the thing. The Aikido that you know was not taught by him. The modern syllabus was developed by Tohie and Kissomaru in the 1950's and 60's.
All of this has been researched and credited with dozens of interviews of all of Ueshibas early students and has been meticulously cooborated with paperwork that these- his very own students- supplied to Stan Pranin. Most of this was in direct oposition to what the Aikiki had been saying for years.
The Doshu admitted it and corrected it in several interviews.

Aikidoka still refuse to believe it here and there. But as the years go by they are increasingly looked upon as just ignorant of the facts. Any view that Ueshiba studied a multiplciity of arts that came together to form Aikido is uninformed, ignorant or just plain fantasy.

You want to travel his path?
Go find a Daito ryu Dojo
Go find Omoto
The Aikido of today is Kissomaru's path
It at least explains why Aikido looks so much like Kissomaru and so little like the Founder.


cheers
Dan

[Jack B]

Dan, you're so infuriating when you're right! :p

K.Tohei and K.Ueshiba were not the only ones who created curricula from what M.Ueshiba taught. There are also Tomiki and Mochizuki and Shioda. The first two have obvious judo or judo/karate influence. The latter's Aikido looked a lot like Morihei's but his curriculum is designed for police.

[ChrisHein]

Hmm, I think that people say "my" aikido, simply because it is there aikido, it all used to be O-Sensei's aikido, but he's dead now, and Aikido has changed so much in the years seance that there arnt all that many things that keep the practice uniform. Lots of people have there own interpitiation of aikido, and there not right or wrong it's just differn't. my aikido, his aikido, there aikido, whats the differance.

Dan,
You gotta remember that aikido isn't designed to fight with(by fight i mean the inharent form of struggling that happens when two people equally skilled, or equally motivated enter into physical conflict), it's not a sport art, it's not designed to be pitted against trained fighters who are protecting their centers. Aikido is designed to defend yourself when your drunken uncle lunges at you, or some pissed off high school kid wants to steal your wifes purse, it's not for comandos in the feild, when they have lost there gun fighting the evils of some apocoliptic army. I've had drunken friends flinging themselves at me many times during some idiotic acohol induced rant, and let me tell you their center was the last thing on their mind!

[Amir]

Chris :


"aikido isn't designed to fight with(by fight I mean the inharent form of struggling that happens when two people equally skilled, or equally motivated enter into physical conflict), it's not a sport art, it's not designed to be pitted against trained fighters who are protecting their centers. Aikido is designed to defend yourself when your drunken uncle lunges at you, or some pissed off high school kid wants to steal your wifes purse, it's not for comandos in the feild, when they have lost there gun fighting the evils of some apocoliptic army."


I totally disagree with you, I believe Aikido was developed for fighting against any threat, provided the Aikidoka is skilled enough (few are, but this is true to lots of other arts too).

It's true, Aikido is using the going out of the center of the opponent,as one of it's strategies. But this is not the only strategy. Besides, a minor loss of the "center" is sufficient. At the beginning a wide out-of balance response is necessary for learning, but later on, a very minor one is sufficient. As Dan wrote, he is learning not to compromise his center, but this means people do have this tendency, and certain situations will encourage and enhance this behavior, a good Aikidoka will use the latter to his advantage. Hence, the better the attacker and the less he risks his center line, the better the Aikidoka has to be to react to more sublime losses (while he is using this strategy and does not use another).

And, when I see people running in circles around someone just to grab his wrists I do find it odd at best. I was taught wrist grabs are more means of learning then the threat one should train to face. Depending on your way of training you could learn either a technique in a relatively controlled and repeatable situation, or distancing and timing in less threatening/dangerous training situations, when practiced in another, more dynamic approach. And neither of these approaches isn't supposed to replace practicing technique Vs a striking opponent.


Amir

P.S.
I could not be considered to represent Aikido in general since I am training Korindo Aikido. It is not part of Ueshiba Aikido. The way I am learning is different by origin, and appears to resemble styles of Aiki-Jutsu in it's views.

[ErikH]

Originally posted by TyroneTurner
If we want to be like O-Sensei, we must walk the path that he walked that led him to Aikido. It was a path of hard physical training and an unquenchable thirst to achieve martial excellence.

No doubt, but what also made Ueshiba, and why we have so many books on Aikido in my opinion, was because Ueshiba was the guy who seemingly talked about spiritual loving harmony and seemingly had the ability to back it up. Ueshiba's path was not spent solely learning how to thump people. He also spent time with a fellow by the name of Deguchi and I suppose if we really want to follow in his path then we should probably get into nature spirits and things of that ilk as well.

[ChrisHein]

amir,
have you ever got in a ring and fought some one? one good nhb match should clear your head of any dilutions you have of useing aikido in a fight. Fights inharently involve struggle, aikido is the antistruggle. None of the techniques or the theory are set up for struggle. Aikido isn't the only thing there is, go do some western wrestling, then try and aikido them see how far you get! Aikido works; for what it's designed for.

[Peter H.]

Amir,
A wrist grab is a very real attack, and deserves as much practice against as a punch or kick. If you've ever spent any significant time in a major air port, you've probably seen someone try to snatch a suitcase out of a poor travelers hand. Grabbing the handle of a suitcase is just about the same as being grabbed by the wrist.

The case of Ernesto Miranda is also a good defense for training against wrist grabs, as it was reportedly how he drug is victim, if I remember correctly.

[Bruce Mitchell]

In light of the topic of this thread, it is interesting to see that the members of the Aikido community cannot agree on what aikido is about. To my mind this is a very valid point of criticism from outsiders.

I know this sort of thing goes on in other martial arts, but is it to this extent? Arts like Kendo, Iaido, and Judo all seem to have a greater degree of standardization, which may limit the kind of debates happening here.

It would almost seem that Aikido is looked down on by Aikidoka more than by anyone on the outside.

I would also like to put forth an opinion here. Morihei Ueshiba named his son as his successor. Kisshomaru in turned named his son, Moriteru as his successor. The Ueshiba family has the sole right to determine what is and isn't Aikido. Period. No Aikido teacher, no matter how skilled, or how many years spent with the Founder has this right. If they want to take aikido in a different direction then the has been taken by the Ueshiba family, they should call their art something else, as many of the prewar students did.

[Peter H.]

I call Bull on the standardization of other arts, no offense. One of the reasons why I have so many medium ranked color belts in different arts is I was a military brat and moved a lot between 1990 and 1998. Everytime I did so, I would find a school that taught a style I already ranked in, and tried to just continue on.

None of my ranks even got accepted, even if the two schools were under the same parent organization (WMSK, WTF, ITF, AKBBA, so on). Reason given was always that the curriculm was differnt. Since I couldn't carry on with my current rank, so I tried a new art.

It was actually a little amusing being a white belt at a TKD school who could smash bricks and roofing tiles while most of the black belts couldn't.

[ChrisHein]

damn bruce, for a guy who dosent do aikido you're sure on the ball! I think he's right, the real truth is that aikikai hombu dojo is the official and only(O-sensei approved) organization, only problem is that many of O-senseis students are still around and they think they know best, It will all be sorted out in about 100 years, eather aikido will dissapear alltogether or one group will gain power. eather way it's all politics. I frankly could give a crap if we all started calling it poopkido, if it's the stuff i've come to know and love i'll do it anyhow.

[Amir]

To ChrisHein

No I have never been in a ring, NHB has hardly reached here (I don't even know of a wrestling team here), but I wouldn't consider it relevant. I don't feel the drive to fight in such a competition, nor have the time for it.

However, if it is S.D. we are talking about: some of my Dojo members have already had to use Aikido for their own S.D. and most of them have found it to be sufficient for the results they needed, some did have exaggerated expectations (beating several physically superior opponents after about 3 years of amateur practice) .

Further, we have several people who have learnt other M.A. before Aikido, my sensei himself does Karate and Judo too. And none seems to think Aikido should be less effective then any other M.A.in a real fight. In Randori training, I (and other students) often ask such students to use these other arts in attacking, and while I can't claim I can evade any attack and will succeed in any case (some of them are better in Karate then I am in Aikido). I do not see any limitation to it.

I also train a little in TKD, as an addition to my Aikido, in a place that teaches S.D. through TKD as well as the sports aspect. And I must say, I don't feel Aikido is less efficient for S.D. then TKD. Not if one trains properly.

I have looked in many Japanese Ju-Jutsu styles videos, the techniques look very similar, sometimes with harder blocks, that's all. When I was in Japan I even succeeded to get a lesson in one of these Ju-Jutsu Ryu - Dojo, and while their pinning to the ground were harsher and more developed then those I have learned, the Korindo Aikido version of the same throw to the ground felt stronger and with more harmful potential then the one they applied (when their practitioners used it on me).

I don't see the "anti-struggle" you find in Aikido, we learn to respond to threatening situations and the philosophy is coming from between the lines. Perhaps it is the difference in styles (as I have mentioned, Korindo Aikido is in fact a separate art) or in teachers or maybe in our cultures (Maybe Israelis are normally more aggressive ? The stress of living here lately is sufficient to turn any person :( ) ?

Therefore I do not think Aikido is not less suitable for real attacks, even by other trained people, then any other M.A.

Amir

[Amir]

To peter

Of course a wrist grab can also be the attack in some situations, but I think is the least aggressive type of attack (unless someone has some Bio-agent\toxin as you imply in the case of Ernesto Miranda, but then, if he missed the wrist I doubt he would have objected to touching some other place on the victim's body), and defending only against such attacks will leave you unready for other types of attacks.

However, I wanted to stress that while learning to defend against wrist grabs, one is in fact learning much more, if only he is training appropriately. I personally believe this way also grants a more practical idea of defending against an assailant trying for a wrist grab.

Amir

[Amir]

To Bruce

I happen to know many other M.A. do have similar "self definition" problems, often between being a combative sport or a S.D. style or self development. A short list would include TKD,Judo, Karate, Kung Fu Vs Wu-Shu (S.D. or combative sport or performance or self-development).

Aikido is not different, this new age were all M.A. are much less useful for S.D. then a gun, and no longer have common Martial usage (even Special forces rarely practice Hand to hand these days, they have more important things to do with weapons).

Personally, the style I learn (Korindo Aikido) is separate and is not part of the Ueshiba Aikido, we do not even consider Ueshiba as a significant person in our style's history. And therefore I would like to one of my styles founder sentences, he said : "every man and his own M.A." and given this assumption, it is obvious each of us also has a different conception of the M.A. (be it aikido or any other)


Amir

[INFINOO]

Bruce Mitchell: Rights are taken never given. Aikido will change and move forward, like it or not. The art of Aikido is now bigger than than one man and one family.

Cris Hein: What does stepping in a ring prove? In a fight anything goes. Unlike fighting in the ring, there are no "rules" in a real fight. Its amazing how many holds/tech are not allowed in no holds barred(finger breaking,eye gouging ect). Not to mention weight division, lack of weapons, no multibal oppenents or the element of surprise :eek:..OO

By the way, I have been wrestling for 25 years.

Peter H. I agree about a wrist grab being a real attack/counter attack. Especially put in the context of a knife/gun/stick in the hand. Or in weapon retention of said knife/gun/stick.

Regards

Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

[Jack B]

The wrist grab is viable for practice because it allows you to work on a technique from a situation of maximum disadvantage. The leverage advantage is for the attacker that way. If the grab is on the arm of shoulder, closer to tori's center, it is easier to deal with because tori has more power.

Grabs indicate any connection. I can grab your wrist and do the same techniques, as far as angle and movement, with just some small adjustments. In fact the technique is usually more secure. Grabs also train blocks and interception of the striking arm.

[Peter H.]

Played bad guy at a seminar for cops a while back. We taught them to do Nikyu while grinding the gun against the nerves in the wrist, the same ones you apply pressure to with Yonkyu. It's an odd sensation to still feel the grinding sensation three days later.

[Ron Tisdale]

Originally posted by Bruce Mitchell
In light of the topic of this thread, it is interesting to see that the members of the Aikido community cannot agree on what aikido is about. To my mind this is a very valid point of criticism from outsiders.

I know this sort of thing goes on in other martial arts, but is it to this extent? Arts like Kendo, Iaido, and Judo all seem to have a greater degree of standardization, which may limit the kind of debates happening here.

I think that there are a number of reasons for the lack of standardization in aikido:

Different students of Ueshiba (even within the aikikai) seem to stress different things from their time spent training with him. Thus within one organization you have multiple technical "versions" and even multiple philosphical "versions" of aikido.

Ueshiba Sensei taught many ways of doing the technical syllibus at the same time, and at different times during his teaching carrer. And most people really couldn't understand what the heck he was talking about, which left Ueshiba's words open to much interpretation.

The fact is, there are many ways to make any physical technique "work". Especially once someone's balance is taken. So you will have many different ways of doing things.

Aikido is often taught by people of relatively low rank (even under third Dan, sometimes even under shodan).


It would almost seem that Aikido is looked down on by Aikidoka more than by anyone on the outside.

I think this is totally appropriate. Who else could be better suited to point out aikido's flaws or contradictions than the people who practise it? Who would have more intimate knowledge?


I would also like to put forth an opinion here. Morihei Ueshiba named his son as his successor. Kisshomaru in turned named his son, Moriteru as his successor. The Ueshiba family has the sole right to determine what is and isn't Aikido. Period. No Aikido teacher, no matter how skilled, or how many years spent with the Founder has this right. If they want to take aikido in a different direction then the has been taken by the Ueshiba family, they should call their art something else, as many of the prewar students did.

Well, the family you hold so highly would disagree with you there, as would the aikikai. The fact is that the family and the aikikai recognize the other forms of aikido (Yoseikan Budo, Yoshinkan, Shodokan, etc.), even inviting the leaders of these "styles" to the all japan aikido demonstration in may every year. The "de facto head" of the yoshinkan was there the year I attended. At the head table. Most of the pre-war students still attach the name aikido to what they do in one form or another. Shioda Sensei had Ueshiba Sensei's permission to start his own school. So your reasoning seems to be flawed in several areas.

As to the question of intellectual defensiveness, I've seen it as well as participated in it. Oh well. Mea culpa. I'm slowly outgrowing it. I will say that one of the main reasons for my earlier defensiveness was the lack of good information out there amoung other martial artists...in spite of the published information out there on aikido. I still remember and see now misinformation spread by people not really in a position to know. Unfortunately, aikidoka are not immune to this problem, either. Unless I am carefull, neither am I.

I must say also, that there are even people that I train with who sometimes display things I don't agree with (arrogance about "our style" relative to others, arrogance about aikido in relation to other arts, hell, just plain arrogance). I try to gently point them to a different viewpoint. One of my teachers simply says..."well, they've never been hit, so they don't really understand". And since it would be bad ettiquite for me to hit them, I think we just have to wait for them to grow up. With the occational nudge in the "right direction". :)

Ron (in my case, they just hit me) Tisdale

[Jack B]

Teachers in Japan always seem to get along better than their overseas disciples.

[NathanielG1]

It seems to me that "iakido" is becoming more and more of a generic term like "jujitsu." As far as I can tell, the main difference between most jujitsu styles and aikido styles is that aikido tends to use more "redirection in a sphere" strategies.

As with how various jujitsu styles can vary significantly from one another, it seems that aikido is branching out enough where in the future, the styles may not have any more in common than the fact that they place greater emphasis on utilizing "redirection in a sphere" strategies than typical jujitsu styles. Technically, aikido seems potentially every bit as capable for self-defence as jujitsu, it just depends how it is taught.

I make these comments from my own experience watching different aikido styles practice (Tomiki, Aikiki, Ki Society, and Seikikan). Some styles I have seen look very much like jujitsu, and I was impressed with the apparent self-defence application of the techniques. Other styles have that I have had the opportunity to see were not nearly as impressive (sometimes not at all).

Anyway, thats my 2-cents.

Nathaniel Gullion

[Bruce Mitchell]

I just wanted to post again to carify my statement about the Ueshiba family and Aikido. I did not mean to imply that teahers remove the name aikido entirelly from their art if they seek to change it, rather that they add a qualifier or modify the name to differentiat it from what the Ueshiba family is now teaching.

I am fully aware that the Aikikai recognizes other styles of Aikido. The other forms of Aikido that Mr.Tisdale mentioned have all, however, doen two things. 1. they have modified the name of their art to reflect it's differences and it's roots. 2. The teachers who founded these branch arts were given permission to do so.

So I stand by my original statement. O'Sensei may have been vague or unclear in what he said and taught, but he was completely clear in whom he choose as his successor.

I look at it this way, I can use microsoft excel to do just about anything I want with it, but the technology belongs to micorsoft. If I want to reproduce it, modify it and market it, then I need to change the name.

Both the current and past Doshu have published books and even instructional videos. If you have questions about what Aikido is, look at these. Again these men were chosen by the founder to head his art, no one else, no matter how talented was designated by Morihei Ueshiba. To me that is the defining arguement.

Lastly, I agree with Mr. Tisdale that Aikidoka are the best qualified to criticize their art, my point was merely that they are often the harshest critics. Great responses from everyone. Thank you!

[Bradenn]

Originally posted by Jack B
Teachers in Japan always seem to get along better than their overseas disciples.

Similarly, I am sure Moses, Jesus and Mohammed would have gotten along better than their modern-day followers.

[stevemcgee99]

well, isn't it the point to "pull them out of center (as far as "leading" the uke by keeping one's wrist just out of reach)?

If not, at least that's the only explanation I can see. And, if the uke doesn't "commit", there would be no wrist grabbing. Because it IS stupid.

I think Dan's points are pretty right on. I think that working with jo and bokken might've taught me more, but it never happened much at the local dojo. And, not everyone had the same goal there, so it really wasn't ok to push everyone too hard.

Well, any thoughts about this from experienced aikidoka?

[Ron Tisdale]

I think that this is a difficult area (the whole wrist grabbing, how hard do you work in terms of attacks, how much cooperation, etc.). It's hard because

1) Dan is correct in that a lot of what is called aikido is now the product of Tohei and K. Ueshiba and others as much or more as it is what M. Ueshiba practised/taught himself

2) Each person has their own level that they seek. And I do not imply anything negative in the use of the word "level"...just that some people like one type of effort and result, others might like something somewhat different.

I think its best to seek a full time school that approximates the level you are most comfortable with. And to supplement that level with cross training within the art at other places. That way you are at least familiar with what is going on on a larger scale.

The difficulty then becomes how do you integrate what you learn at these different levels. A personal example:

I have spent some time in sustained training in a style that is very different in terms of certain mechanics from my base (yoshinkan). The use of the hips, how much cooperation, the role of uke, all of these things are somewhat different than what I am used to. Some of the things this other group does fit very well with what I do, some of these things do not. Too much time spent on the intergration can interfere with my progress in my "base" style. So I have to make choices.

I can't imagine trying to make these choices, or to accomplish the intergration with less experience in my base (I may not have enough experience to be successful as it is). It would be too confusing to do in a serious way. And what is appropriate in one environment (overly sharp, powerfull movement and kiai, for instance) might not be preferred or appropriate in a different environment. Even the role of uke can be a problem here. There are some things you just don't learn well (IMHO) if all of uke's time is spent resisting a throw just to "make" shite "really" do a throw. Work spent on the shite / uke relationship and connection is valuable IMO (leading the attack, wrist grabs, etc.). Even the large circle, very flowing, very cooperative training yields certain benefits.

Ron (hope this isn't too confusing) Tisdale

[Jack B]

If an attacker is well centered and doesn't give up his center, you have to take it by attacking. Aikido is really one of the most aggressive martial arts, almost as agressive as Iai.

[ChrisHein]

if someone isn't giveing up his center, why would you take it? if he's not giveing up his center he's not atttacking, or attacking in away that is easily avodid, so why not go home and eat a taco.

[PRehse]

Hi Chris;

Listen to Jack Chris.

Aikido is not all go no sen (reactive). In fact some would say that sen no sen (siezing the initiative) or its higher cousin sen sen no sen are the ultimate expressions of Aikido.

Attacking is mental more so than physical. You may be squared off against Bubba who has expressed every intention of taking that taco and whatever else you may have. An opening presents itself which allows you a greater chance to survive than waiting for his attack (Bubba is big and eats garlic). There is no conflict between this an Aikido philosophy as you don't have aggressive intent. All you are doing is not restricting your options in dealing with the threat.



Originally posted by ChrisHein
if someone isn't giveing up his center, why would you take it? if he's not giveing up his center he's not atttacking, or attacking in away that is easily avodid, so why not go home and eat a taco.

[Peter H.]

What I believe Chris is saying is why deal with someone who isn't truely committed to attacking. Some one who is just fooling around to get a reaction out of you so they can avoid seeming the aggressor, or someone who is trying to look tough without actually getting into a fight.

I work part time night security at a mall to supplement my income, and I used to get garabge like this fairly frequently from the local gang members. I've made it clear to them that I won't play thier games, but if they do decide to actually attack, I will deal with it quickly and decisively. It took two weeks before they realized not to fool with me, and not to screw around when I'm near by. Some of my collegues have been working here for months longer, and the ones who take the bait are constantly baited, those who show anger are pushed, those who don't back up their threats are laughed at. They treat the cops who work weekends in the mall the same way.

While sen no sen may be a high form of Aikido, I believe that never having to deal with who has the initiative is an even higher form.

[PRehse]

Originally posted by Peter H.
While sen no sen may be a high form of Aikido, I believe that never having to deal with who has the initiative is an even higher form.
Hi Peter;

Sen sen no sen can be described as reading intent. If there is no aggressive intent no problem.

Both Chris and Jack were using the word attacker so I assumed that we were past the point of mall posturing.

One of the great advantages of Aikido is the measured response. My point, and poosibly Jack's, is that in Aikido you are not limited to reactive techniques.

[Ron Tisdale]

And one of the greatest illusions you can suffer under is that someone has to "give up their balance" to attack you. I know and train with people whose balance you will have to take. And if you don't, they will beat you like a red headed step child. All without losing their balance.

Some people believe and teach that just by attacking you magically lose your balance. I think of all the mythologies spread by aikido, that one is one of the scariest.

Ron (It just ain't necessarily so, and I've got the bruises to prove it) Tisdale

[Peter H.]

Agreed on both points with ypu Peter and Ron.

What I balk at is using Aikido Offensively. It doesn't fit with my concept, or my school's concept of Aikido.

I agree that a good attack will not necessarily result in loss of center, but an attack will require the center to be brought closer to you. I'm still not going to go get it, unless I absolutely have to.

[Jack B]

I agree with Chris and Peter H, don't let yourself get drawn offsides. Practice a lot and you'll know the difference between posturing and attack. Maai is a giveaway -- a real attack HAS to close maai. Also there are obviously situations (protecting your family, police apprehensions) in which you must use Aikido offensively.

Attacking, even a well-centered attack, gives an opportunity to take off-balance. I know some VERY good okinawan karate types, and they will walk up to you and rupture your internal organs while maintaining low and solid centers. Fortunately these are nice guys, but they are dangerous. You can't fight people on their own terms.

The attack begins before you are struck. There is a mental kuzushi at the instant that the attacker consciously decides to attack (attack is volitional; defense can be made automatic). This ~0.5 sec is when you can attack the attack before it is launched (sen sen no sen), but after the attacker has committed to the process.

Great discussion, all. Thanks and happy solstice! Ho ho ho!

[Dan Harden]

It has been my experience that most martial artists are inept. The worst ones I ever met were in Aikido. I am most certainly not saying Aikido is inept, just that its particular brand of cooperative play seems to attract and then foster some real wiener “gentle people” types who are essentially devoid of any understanding of sustained aggression. Just listening to their descriptions of attacks and attacking tells me everything I need to know about “where they’re at” in their level of skill. Leading extension has no place in any discussion of conflict. Any attempt at validating it expresses and solidifies ignorance. It is for fools. Make no mistake, there are men in the art who know the difference between play and fighting quite well. Unfortunately there are many others who do not. When I see what is frequently taught as martial arts these days I consider it a really sad sort of joke on people.
One of the hardest lessons you will ever learn is going up against someone who knows how to kill you. I don’t mean some dojo jockey- I mean someone who has spent a deal of time on the wrong side of life who has found his way back and then got into the “martial” arts. The difference these men express- the preparedness- both mental and physical is frequently palpable. Everyone can yak till their hearts desire –till you been there its just that-talk. There is a fundamental truth to fighting -with weapons or without…….. If you haven’t-you can’t. You will have your head handed to you by anyone who has done it a lot. The rest? Everyone has an opinion or a plan-till they been hit.
The core of the martial arts was never to show, never to discuss, never to reveal. Then whenever possible to discover, to watch, to wire frame motion, to seek weaknesses. In short to seek out how to win and destroy.
These are the ugly truths that gave us our masters. There is a wide gulf between violent men restrained and refined by the martial arts, and martial artists restrained by the martial arts.
Being honest with ourselves is the first step toward learning.

Dan

[David Russell]

I think Dan just answered your question. :)

David Russell

[David Russell]

Hi Ron,

I disagree with your statement on offbalance. The human body is always off balance. If you stand still and notice, your body is constantly adjusting, when you take a step, you're off balance 90 degrees to the line between your ankles and also down the line of your ankels. I think that your off balances are very small and hard to take advantage of, but they are there.

If an Aikido person will keep mai, move every time the attacker does and be patient, then he cannot be attacked successfully, he is never in range of attack...
In order to attack, the attacker will have to over commit to the attack and leave himself in a poor position.

I've done this drill with some high ranking karate people, the most common response is a grin, followed by a step back and a bow. They were not going to attack and break the principles of their art.

Had I not moved with them or had I stepped forward to attack them, (breaking the principles of my art) they would have had opportunity to take my head off. (They had incredible hand and foot speed).

Fortunately, the hands and feet are attached to a body and the human body cannot move from a standing stop much more than a gravity drop speed of 3.3 feet per second.


David Russell

[TyroneTurner]

Originally posted by Dan Harden
It has been my experience that most martial artists are inept. The worst ones I ever met were in Aikido. I am most certainly not saying Aikido is inept, just that its particular brand of cooperative play seems to attract and then foster some real wiener “gentle people” types who are essentially devoid of any understanding of sustained aggression. Just listening to their descriptions of attacks and attacking tells me everything I need to know about “where they’re at” in their level of skill. Leading extension has no place in any discussion of conflict. Any attempt at validating it expresses and solidifies ignorance. It is for fools. Make no mistake, there are men in the art who know the difference between play and fighting quite well. Unfortunately there are many others who do not. When I see what is frequently taught as martial arts these days I consider it a really sad sort of joke on people.
One of the hardest lessons you will ever learn is going up against someone who knows how to kill you. I don’t mean some dojo jockey- I mean someone who has spent a deal of time on the wrong side of life who has found his way back and then got into the “martial” arts. The difference these men express- the preparedness- both mental and physical is frequently palpable. Everyone can yak till their hearts desire –till you been there its just that-talk. There is a fundamental truth to fighting -with weapons or without…….. If you haven’t-you can’t. You will have your head handed to you by anyone who has done it a lot. The rest? Everyone has an opinion or a plan-till they been hit.
The core of the martial arts was never to show, never to discuss, never to reveal. Then whenever possible to discover, to watch, to wire frame motion, to seek weaknesses. In short to seek out how to win and destroy.
These are the ugly truths that gave us our masters. There is a wide gulf between violent men restrained and refined by the martial arts, and martial artists restrained by the martial arts.
Being honest with ourselves is the first step toward learning.

Dan

Bless you for speaking the truth.

[Ron Tisdale]

Originally posted by David Russell
Hi Ron,

I disagree with your statement on offbalance. The human body is always off balance.
David Russell

Diagreement noted and welcome. Perhaps we'll have a chance to share in person sometime. Without that, I think it'll be hard to convince either one of us.

That said, I agree that someone must close maai in order to strike. What I don't agree with is shite moving straight backward to maintain maai. Or that uke's movement forward ***causes them to give up control of their center*** (specifically worded to avoid the off-balance disagreement). It just isn't so. I've seen way too many people who don't do this. Its easy to find them (any good judo or boxing school usually has a bunch). Add to this the fact that almost any engagement takes place in a limited amount of space. Sooner or later, someone really interested in stalking you down, can. Unless you have enough of an offense to hold them off, or are very capable when it comes to entering in on their space, or taking their center in some other way (and there are some other ways). In the clean attacks and pristine environment of the dojo, these methods are fairly demonstrable. In the rough and tumble of the "real world", there are no rules, or guarantees either.

Ron Tisdale

[DCPan]

Hi Dan,

What do you mean by leading extension?

Thanks!

[Phil Farmer]

I read, with some interest the discussion of kazushi or unbalancing and it is an important discussion. I also read, with some amuzement, Dan's view of aikido. I would agree that many aikidoka and dojo I have worked out in or with have poor attack skills and are practicing the side of aikido that resembles tai chi more than a powerhouse martial art. I would not lump all aikido styles together. My own style (Yoseikan), yoshinkan, iwama and others are very proficient at attacks and at realistic randori. In Yoseikan, for example, we teach shotokan skills and our international federation teaches other karate styles and boxing. When we do a randori, the attacks are real, I have the bruises from my own teacher to show that punches are not pulled. Our international federation has competitions that utilize full body armor and then go for all out attacks of punches, kicks, throws, pins. The purpose of the armor, to make sure one can go all out with the least amount of danger. I have heard these arguments before, that aikido is an unrealistic art that cant handle a street fighter or a person who is really out to kill you. A person who is inept at any art is going to get hurt and a person who is adept at any art will survive.

Some have made a good point, kazushi begins when we wake up in the morning. Finding our balance each day is good budo. Not being in those situations that could lead to conflict or stopping conflict before it begins, that is good budo. Any person who is moving can be potentially unbalance. A person standing still can be also but it takes much more energy to do so. It is the difference between judo and having someone punch at you. A person moving is easier to unbalance and the unbalancing can usually be accomplished by simply extending their energy in the direction they were already moving. This is a good discussion, not to be thrown off by being redirected to someone else's view of "reality". Besides, reality is over-rated.

Phil Farmer

[Ron Tisdale]

Nice post Dr. Farmer,

But I don't think that Dan was saying:


that aikido is an unrealistic art that cant handle a street fighter or a person who is really out to kill you.

In fact, he went out of his way to say that there are some in aikido who are quite good.


I am most certainly not saying Aikido is inept, just that its particular brand of cooperative play seems to attract and then foster some real wiener “gentle people” types who are essentially devoid of any understanding of sustained aggression.

I am not suggesting that aikido is not an excellent art either. I'm just stating the fact that inspite of the best that is out there, there are also people teaching things that in my view are way over the top (the attacking mindset being physically unbalanced). And I, like Dan, have some concerns about the cooperative nature of the training, as it relates to the mindset it can foster, as well as the high potential for abuse.

I have observed in myself certain attitudes and tendencies which, although already present before my training, seem sometimes somewhat enhanced without carefull self monitoring. A certain passive aggressiveness, for one. There is also the ease with which one can take advantage of the cooperative training to build yourself up. In most other types of practise, you'd get your head handed to you (possibly in most yoseikan dojo, and in many aikido dojo as well...but the exceptions seem to be remarkably wide spread). As Mr. T would say, "I pitty the fool who would try that crap in Chiba Sensei's dojo"...but the problem has been spoken of often enough and by enough people where it deserves at least a cursory examination.

I think that the cooperative model yields great benefits as well when properly monitored...what are some of the restrictions and guidelines that others put in place to enhance the benefits, and minimize the risks? Dr. Farmer has mentioned some of what Yoseikan does...can you provide more examples?

Ron Tisdale

[Dan Harden]

Thank you Ron

Lets not forget I also said this

*****************************
Make no mistake, there are men in the art who know the difference between play and fighting quite well. Unfortunately there are many others who do not.
*****************************

Mr. Farmer
What you do, and what others do may be different things. To be clear, what a minority does VS the majority is more the point. It is the majority that defines an art.
Aikido is having a harder time these days maintaining and defending its peace-love-dove, and "hey we're a violent and deadly budo" dichotomy with any resemblance of credibility. Many within its own ranks are crying "foul" to its lofty goals since its fails to deliver in many aspects relating to good sound fighting principles. I simply left. I think most of what we have seen and felt from the arts leading dans is almost laughingly inept to any real challenge. I have watched it degrade before my eyes when I did "randori" in a true fighting style. I have never met a man who could use "recognizable and "clean" aikido technique against me. They simply fall apart.
I do not say that about Goju, Judo, jujutsu, or Daito ryu. Just Aikido. And I believe its changing.
If you are interested in a full(er) discussion that's fine. My response was well thought out and mores the point- can be readily demonstrated. I have done so in the past. And you may find literally hundreds of Aikido teachers and students who are increasingly agreeing, admitting and openly writing of such weaknesses.
I know of a few who know the difference quite well, and can handle themselves-I also know of many who are hopelessly inept in the worst way-they think they are able.
Your mileage may vary....mine does

I am hopeful that we are seeing a new Aikido that finally defines itself. This "I'm a Budo", "one strike kills", coupled with "We embrace our violent foes and lead them to self-awareness without hurting them" is the worst sort of lie to perpetrate on prospective students. It is patently obvious to most experienced Budoka that the bulk of Aikido that we have been watching and experiencing for years is sh!t. The only difference now from fifteen years ago is that many IN Aikido are finally owning up to it, finding they have brothers and sisters who agree wholeheartedly and are interested in changing it
Hopefuly with the new martial interest out there today it will shed itself from the new age, gentle people, ganola crowd that would piss themselves in the face of any real challenge. They are an embarassment to anything related to Budo and should be summarily thrown out to go practice with the Reiki group while smelling candles and chanting in the Japanses language.

In closing I will remind you that your brothers in the art have been writing comments like mine in both the major magazines for years. Aikido Today got so sick of it that they published an editirial saying they would not publish these types of letters any more. THey also said they were hoping that Aikido would shed itslef of its martial aspects and become something more-I guess by burying its head in the sand to its weaknesses.
Thats the left coast granola view
Aikido journal on the other hand embraced this cirtique fully and challenged the Aikido community to answer its detractors from within its own ranks.
Go to the Aikido Journal web site you will find much excellent critique from dozens of the arts leading teachers from all over the world.

All this is of course dependant on your views of what Budo is supposed to be about.

Cheers
Dan

[Phil Farmer]

One of the problems I have had when visiting other aikido dojo is that they were totally unprepared to defend against realistic attacks, to cope with any degree of violence directed at them (even when totally controlled) and to do anything remotely associated with reality to respond to the attack. I fully agree that most of what is done,nowadays, in the name of aikido belongs in a temple not a dojo.

I guess my style, being one of the pre-WW II styles, is much more "violent" (the word other aikidoka use in relation to our techniques) than the current ones. I wanted to say that "pure" aikido techniques can be very effective but therein lies the problem, aikido techniques are not pure, they derived primarily from daito ryu jiujitsu and it can be a very powerful art. I fully agree that the state of aikido, in general, has gone way overboard toward soft techniques. One only has to watch the videos of the Aiki Expo of 2002 to see that the bulk of what is being done is falling down for one's sensei. You're right, Dan, I would tend to think that falling down when an attacker on the street confronts you is going to get you hurt even more.

The old jiujutsu techniques that Kano developed into judo were toned down to avoid injury. There is some truth, not to the one strike one knockout idea, but to the idea that one technique can end the conflict. As noted on the thread about unbalancing, it is amazingly easy to make a powerful opponent look foolish and a quick kotegaishi can easily snap a wrist. I did not mean to start an argument, I was just reacting to the implications that most aikido is ineffective. I think I still have to go with the idea that aikido is a gentle art only in the mind of the practitioner applying the techniques. How much pain to inflict lies in the hands of a good practitioner.

Phil Farmer

I

[PRehse]

At the moment a rather intense young man from Ulster is training at the dojo. Really not sure why he is in Japan but basically his premis is exactly what Dan was talking about.

....essentially devoid of any understanding of sustained aggression
I find myself in the uncomfortable position of wanting to disagree with him but knowing he's right. Well not about the inability to comprehend but the ability to deal with.

When I was in Uni I competed in full contact Japanese boxing. I got pretty good at not folding under sustained attack and giving a little back. BUT ... I knew then I was probably not going to die and I know now it would take more than a little training to get back in the same required mind set. It is clear to me that learning to fight requires stepping out of any dojo of any style and not stopping.

As I pointed out to my dojo mate. The required mind set he has cultivated is not something I need or even find desirable. But - and I am pretty sure this is what Dan means - I don't go around posturing either.

The mind set I do cultivate in the dojo will hopefully allow me to deal with most of what I encounter. There are things in my life that have happened that tell me I will keep my head under intense pressure. Funny though - the worst of these I didn't train for. It just happened.

[Dan Harden]

I am actually offering that all of us- you, me, we- merely be honest with ourselves and our goals that's all. It doesn't need to be intense all the time. Most are not looking for that anyway. But let it be what it is.
Most people do not have the experience and skill sets to make a clear disctinction or even be able to tell you what it is that would make a difference in a physical encounter. Funny that the skill sets to actually win most encounters are the skills to size up, avoid, and or confront and mentally distract and control someone from the onset. Rarely- if ever- is that taught.
Secondly the uncanny confidence and flat-affect response to stress comes from experience in bad places. Even then its not a constant. I have seen young men maintain composure with a gun pointed at them and walk away (with no prior experience at all) and others who simply fell apart under stress. It is always a question of you, knowing you and how you respond.
As for training, heck I don't train as intensly as I used to but the lessons from my youth and from the arts I do and have been up against have carried forward and are made valid in the venue of my choosing. The paring and parsing of technique, a personal view of what is flat out bullsh!t regardless of the source, what is quintessentialy relevant(which may be surprising to some) and then the dissemination of a personal art that is satisfactory to me. I don't want or need to accept challenges, knock people out, concuss them or break them anymore. I know what works and can work that out with small groups. The key is the knowing, and then knowing what to choose to accentuate and develop. It is that aspect that makes or breaks an artist. That is why many look to an ART for the answers and come up short. The answers are really in individual teachers and wat they have "seen" and fostered in themselves and their expression of any ART. It is still the individual, not the art, that works.
Anyway I understand it sounds a bit harsh, but it nevertheless is still a balanced view that simply calls for self-evaluation and challenge.
cheers
Dan

[PRehse]

One more point to add - I was stewing over this during lunch.

I actually find as a whole Aikidoists are balanced in their view of what they do and why they do it. Try training with some of the sport TKD kids for a time.

A lot of this is due to the fact that many of us have burnt out our testosterone driven fantasies before we came to the art. If you are worried about what some young kid with less than five years of anything has to say than that is probably a greater problem than anything they have to say.

[stevemcgee99]

Yes, Dan, I agree. The teacher is the art as far as the "eye of the beholder" can see. For me the difficulty lies in finding the right teacher with such inexperienced eyes.

[ChrisHein]

Funny thing about aikido,
It seems to be a modern martial art. By that I mean that, I don' t live in a time that it is likely I am going to meet a trained samurai warrior on the street, who wants to cut off my head because I touched him. Most of the people who want to attack me are going to be drunken acquaintances, or people who are mentally disabled, or kids who are dumb. So I don't think it's a dilution to go into a dojo and train for some one who is going to lunge at me, or through wild flinging blows. And I think most of the training I get in today’s school will prepare me for what is in my world (normal pissed off people) just fine. Yes it is likely that if I ever face some ex-nam, special forces commando death squad master, I will die at his hands, It dose mean that I don' t think I am deluding myself with what I may have to deal with, in my opinion the illusion is that I will ever have to face that death squad master (some times when I want to pretend that I am a bad ass, I must admit, yeah, I do picture my self shihonageing a ninja). Now this dose not mean that I don’t' think I should train as seriously as possible, I just think it mean it's better to train for what is going to happen (my pissed of kid brother) and not as important to train for what I fantasize could happen (death squad, super awesome, bad guy hit team) and it's silly for me (A young guy livening in relatively safe civilization) To pretend that I need to do 3 tours of nam to be a martial artist.

[rupert]

The original question was "Are we as Aikidoka looked down on by other MAs?" and reading through the posts it looks like a resounding "Yes", not only by other arts but by ourselves. The real answer to the question then, is what is to be done about it?

For me, I have travelled far and wide, sought out many teachers, and practised several aiki arts, and various other styles. The thing is, I always return to Aikido as I believe it has something other arts do not. I have added to it in many ways for myself - I have a strong-ish punch, a strong low kick, a solid hip throw, subtle evasions, hard blocks (yes) and soft parries, and so on, and even though I don't often show them in my Aikido, they exist within and find ways to express themselves. A most useful asset is probably that simple Blo*dy mindedness one gets from Judo - wanting to down the guy no matter what. Detracts a bit from the love-thy-neighbour clap trap often heard - just have to try to do it without grunting, keeping a straight, calm 'Aikido' face.

Rupert Atkinson

[RunDuck&Hide]

I think that, and I'm talking with only 2 months experience, we are looked down on. One of my so-called friends even laughed at me when he found out that I have started Aikido.


Peace.

[Etch]

Hi All,

Sorry to ressurect such an old thread, but I wasn't around when this conversation was taking place originally (well, I was around, but not here). I was wondering if, in the last two years, any of you who had originally taken part in this discussion have undergone any changes in your views, or in what ways your views may have evolved through more training?

As my training continues, and I contemplate what it is I am doing when I am training, I am beginning to suspect that the questions of practicality, efficacy, "street credibility", and "realism" of aikido are trivial, and the "answers" are illusory. Even the gross techniques that we practice when we practice the budo are secondary to what we are really doing. I am beginning to suspect that the true aim of practicing the budo is to sharpen the mind and quiet the spirit to a point where at all times, whether sitting quietly or when under moments of great stress, you can see reality clearly and be completely in the moment. I suspect that a person who achieves that kind of spirit and resolve does not need external positive affirmation, and probably does not preoccupy themselves with self defense, even though they could probably handle themselves quite handily if ever forced to.

In short, I believe that it is the spirit, or mind if you prefer, that we are training when we practice budo, and that the techniques of the body are simply our vehicle to accomplish this training.

At least, that's what I am feeling at this point in my training.

Best Regards,
Bernard "Etch" Echiverri

[davidgibb]

Originally posted by RunDuck&Hide
I think that, and I'm talking with only 2 months experience, we are looked down on. One of my so-called friends even laughed at me when he found out that I have started Aikido.


Peace.
I have around 3 and a half months and i agree, john were you there at the dojo when my friend came along to watch, well he was telling my friend who is his cousion that he watched it and it was really boring and looked stuipid and such, and she has 2 years of TKD on her, so i guess its really depending on the person, the first class i watched took my breath away just by how graceful it looked, then chase came with 4 years of TKD , he was telling me him and his friend was sparing and his friend used aikido and then chase lost all respect for TKD, thats why he came to the dojo, so i guess it just depends on the persons opionin on the art. sorry for the spelling, tired as heck.

[Etch]

Originally posted by davidgibb
I have around 3 and a half months and i agree, john were you there at the dojo when my friend came along to watch, well he was telling my friend who is his cousion that he watched it and it was really boring and looked stuipid and such, and she has 2 years of TKD on her, so i guess its really depending on the person, the first class i watched took my breath away just by how graceful it looked, then chase came with 4 years of TKD , he was telling me him and his friend was sparing and his friend used aikido and then chase lost all respect for TKD, thats why he came to the dojo, so i guess it just depends on the persons opionin on the art. sorry for the spelling, tired as heck.

Hi David,

It's unfortunate, but some people have to feel what is happening to really "get" it. I remember one guy who came in to practice for a while at my first dojo had several years of karate training under his belt. I happened to be his first training partner on the mat, we were practicing hanmi handachi, and when he attacked with a fast shomenuchi and I did a sokumen iriminage throw, he didn't get up at first, just laid there with this shocked expression on his face. I asked him if he was okay, and he just laughed and said "how did you do that? I've never been thrown like that before!?" I laughed too and said, "man, I don't know, I've only been doing this for three months, but it's cool huh?" Although he had come in skeptical, he was hooked after that.

Best Regards,
Bernard "Etch" Echiverri

[davidgibb]

lol i love in aikido the effect of the throws, you see the throws and its like WTF HOW DID HE DO THAT?!!?!?!

[rodgerd]

Originally posted by RunDuck&Hide
I think that, and I'm talking with only 2 months experience, we are looked down on. One of my so-called friends even laughed at me when he found out that I have started Aikido.

That's funny; I'm 31. When I was in my early teens, quite a few people in New Zealand my age were taking up Aikido as a kind of "ultimate" Japanese martial art.

[Brian Owens]

Many people who have watched an Aikido class and left disappointed didn't know what they were seeing, and weren't willing or able to give it a chance.

I recall one karate student who came to watch a class at my dojo. Rather than waiting until after class to ask sensei a question he just blurted out, "That guy wasn't thrown; he jumped!"

Without missing a beat sensei yelled back, "Yeah, otherwise his arm would have been ripped off!"

:D

[aikihazen]

Since we measure our Aikido by how effective it is against other Martial Arts and having studied Martial Arts long before I came to Aikido I usually find most folks looking up at me. :) That being said, I do agree with the original post about how some factions of Aikido are moving away from it's Martial roots and towards some kind of yoga practice with a partner. The only confusion that comes with this is both the perception that outsiders have and how an Aikidoka represents himself/herself. I find most of the time that most of my peers used to laugh about Aikido until the got on the mat and did kumite or sparred. That is encouraged by our Sensei's. Another good tip is not to believe your own press unless it's backed up with relevent experiance. We had a Sensei here in So-Cal tell his students they were invincible with "his" Aikido until one of his Senior Sandan's died in a street fight with a punk kid.It wasn't much a of fight either, a few punches and the Sandan was knocked to the pavement and cracked his head open. The Sensei "retired" soon after and moved out of the country. It is up to you to make Aikido respectible. If folks have a low opinion of Aikido that is thier problem but if you only talk the talk without walking the walk can you blame them???. I know I have to push myself to get better and lucky for me my Sensei welcomes that. What about you?

William Hazen

[Oniyama]

Are we as Aikidoka looked down on by other MAs?
I think in some regards, yes. However, I think that is more about the individuals doing Aikido than Aikido itself. I have had two very fortunate opportunities to attend seminars with Kato sensei. I was thoroughly impressed by him and his technique. What he did made perfect sense. His movement was very effective. Sadly, most of the
students there did not seem to train with the same movement. There was definitely something missing.

My primary art is Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu but I also study Aikido and sometimes Judo and Sumo. My personal opinion is that what many people want to do with Aikido is actually very advanced; that is to keep yourself from harm and at the same time not harm the attacker. I think this is both laudable but also some what lofty. My opinion is that it takes much greater training time to be able to meet that goal.

In the interim between beginner and proficient practitioner is substantial and those students in that period are vulnerable. What adds to that vulnerability is that students are generally only taught to deal with Aikido styled attacks and, in some school work only with overly cooperative uke. Once taken out of that Aikido dojo, many students are not equipped to deal with other approaches. While the problem is certainly not limited to Aikido, it is certainly much more apparent there. I think this is why other some other martial artists may look down on Aikido.

[Jason Llamas]

I think Mr. Hidalgo put it as concisely as possible,more or less summing it up just right.I think we all have to improve our Aikido apart from the natural progression of time.Hence improving Aikido itself.

[chrismoses]

Originally posted by Brian Owens

I recall one karate student who came to watch a class at my dojo. Rather than waiting until after class to ask sensei a question he just blurted out, "That guy wasn't thrown; he jumped!"

Without missing a beat sensei yelled back, "Yeah, otherwise his arm would have been ripped off!"

:D

There's the real rub. In many ways Aikido only works within the context of Aikido. Are you studying an art that can actually be used effectively and not hurt someone untrained in Aikido? Not the way most people do it. Aikido makes the claim that it's teahing how to prevent injury, but always seems to back up its effectiveness by, "well, if you didn't go with it, you'd get hurt..." Most people only know how to to techniques such that they would either work (but cause injury) or wouldn't do anything to anyone who wasn't willing to simply fall down. That goes against the *claims* of many practitioners, but that's how I see it. If we're learning techniques that are simply there to cause immediate injury, there are faster and easier methods.