PDA

View Full Version : IS IT AIKIDO?



Yamantaka
24th November 2000, 23:12
Hello, All!

I friend of mine, an Aikido Nidan, was talking about koshi waza techniques in Aikido, specifically those demonstrated by Hiroshi Ikeda Sensei in his video "KOSHI". Her question was : koshi waza techniques, extremely similar to judo throws may be considered Aikido or are they judo throws "included" in Aikido? I have my own opinion but I would like to know what do you think.
Best
Yamantaka

Mike Collins
25th November 2000, 01:05
I think that virtually no technique is "not Aikido". It can be done in a way that is not Aikido, but Osensei said that Aikido comes from and encompasses all of the martial arts that came before. We shouldn't throw out the older knowledge, only filter it through or educate it from the Aikido perspective.

Judo is Judo, Judo has a pretty definite curriculum of techniques. Aikido is an art that trains in principles, rather than techniques. Ikkyo teaches a principle, Shiho Nage teaches a principle, Irimi Nage teaches a principle. I think that no serious Aikidoka ever sets his/her mind on one way of doing any technique, only on learning and teaching particular principles from one particular technique.

Osensei wasn't interested in teaching a particular method of fighting, probably because there is in reality not one method of fighting that works in all situations. Osensei was interested in getting people to be appropriate in each situation, by applying whatever principle was appropriate.

In learning appropriateness, people begin to appreciate all of the many facets of what he perceived to be the divine.

That is my best guess anyway.

Yamantaka
26th November 2000, 07:24
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mike Collins
[B]
"A)I think that virtually no technique is "not Aikido".
B)Aikido is an art that trains in principles, rather than techniques."

YAMANTAKA : Thank you very much for your answer, Mike!
Anyone would like to comment?

RDeppe
27th November 2000, 03:32
Sure it's aikido. Judo didn't invent koshi waza-- they're everywhere (certainly in aikijujits). Also, note that the way they are pacticed is very diferent. Practicing hip throws in a judo class feels (& looks) very different from most aikido classes.

Yamantaka
28th November 2000, 12:56
Originally posted by RDeppe
Sure it's aikido. Judo didn't invent koshi waza-- they're everywhere (certainly in aikijujits). Also, note that the way they are pacticed is very diferent. Practicing hip throws in a judo class feels (& looks) very different from most aikido classes.

YAMANTAKA : How different ? I've seen Shihan doing koshi the "Ueshiba" way (open legs) and others(generally taller men) doing it judo-way. They both present their techniques as Aikido koshi. Also we must remember that judo koshi have been influenced by competition. To see what a judo koshi throw is, you should look at the Kyuzo Mifune tape (Masters of the Kodokan series, from Budostore). A fantastic judo, very aikido-like!
Best

Arashi
28th November 2000, 13:56
Hi Ubaldo.

Kyuzo Mifune and O-Sensei apart (after all they are the "god of Judo" and "the god of Aikido", it is really unfair to compare us to them), and coming back to us mere mortals, i believe the main difference in the way it feels like is not so much in the way you place your koshi, be it perpendicularly (uh, is that the correct word in english?) to uke or in the same direction. The difference is in kuzushi. Judoka are generaly more aware of Happo-no-kuzushi than Aikidoka (we do it exactly like Jodoka do without knowing it or even being taught about it, it is essentially what shiho nage is all about) and when they enter in koshi-waza they unballance uke almost every time to the front first, doing it in Aikido (in BOTH ways of doing the technique) we first unballance uke to the rear (using Atemi, i mean) and when we enter we pull him/her making he/she shift the weight to the front subtly. I believe that is what makes the difference for the way UKE feels the koshi waza in Aikido and in Judo. Both can be soft and/or strong and in fact they are a little different. For the tori/nage/shite the prefference of different Shihan is mostly because of their boddies as you noted. I learned to do it in the way you call "Ueshiba way" (Saito Sensei would not agree with you calling it like this, you know) but Kawai Sensei (my teacher) is not a tall man. Saito Sensei on the other hand does it with open legs and placing the koshi in the same direction of uke's and he is a tall man (for a Japanese i mean, not for an American, i think). Perhaps some Judoka could give us some more imput on this. Mark, are you there?
Ganbatte.

Toni Rodrigues

George Ledyard
28th November 2000, 14:42
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA
Hello, All!

I friend of mine, an Aikido Nidan, was talking about koshi waza techniques in Aikido, specifically those demonstrated by Hiroshi Ikeda Sensei in his video "KOSHI". Her question was : koshi waza techniques, extremely similar to judo throws may be considered Aikido or are they judo throws "included" in Aikido? I have my own opinion but I would like to know what do you think.
Best
Yamantaka
Basically there are four "confrontational ranges" ie. kicking, punching, trapping, and grappling. Mainstream Aikido is not particularly known to focus on any of these accpet punching range (which is also grabbing range). Some people extend their practice to include kick defense. Others work on technique that is executed from closer range. Koshinage are merely those techniques that are most appropriate for grappling range (although in Aikido we also execute koshis from the other ranges as well). The idea that they are "not Aikido" somehow is one I do not understand. It fits right in with the folks who think atemi are not Aikido. What makes it Aikido is the context into which the techniques are contained not the particular techniques themselves.

I once had a conversation with Richard Heckler Sensei about the fact that both of us were at the time working on paired knife technique. He commented that he thought it was amusing that many people felt that paired knife work wasn't Aikido and was somehow distasteful yet they were happy enough to do sword work which they viewed as somehow "traditional". The idea that the two were the same except for maai of the weapon didn't seem to occur to them.

Saotome Sensei didn't make artificial borders around his Aikido. Anything might be contained within the art depending on the circumstance. Since he maintained that Aikido is virtually infinite in nature there really isn't anything that can't be contained within.

Daniel Pokorny
28th November 2000, 15:05
For me, I found that the major difference can be "felt" while being uke. In the Aikido koshi(at least the way I am being taught)uke is simply put into such a position where there is really no other option but to "fall" over nage's hips. Of course, nage helps uke's efforts by rolling the hips while uke "falls"........

While being "uke" (loose term here, no flames please)in Judo, the feeling is more of being thrown to the ground after being unbalanced. (btw...they also like to choke you out once they get you down there so they don't have to throw you again! HA!)

Anyway, when either is being done correctly, it's quite effective and requires little effort on nages part. (at least it appears that way from the ground view!).

Is it Aikido though? For me, I don't try to label every technique I use or practice as part of one "style" or another. This is because there are always too many variables in techniques.

I believe Judo, Aikido and other "styles" share many principles and techniques such as "Koshi". I do not believe any of them "own" any particular technique. They are just practiced and executed a little different.

2 cents.

Dan P. - Mongo

Gil Gillespie
28th November 2000, 15:53
Hi Dan

I like the way your horizons are broadening. All styles, all waza, it all comes together. No matter how beautiful or entrancing the river, the estuary where it becomes One with the Sea is where life teems! Kinda like Doc Jones Sensei's old adage: "There's a common web of sanity that unites all the martial arts!"

Yamantaka
28th November 2000, 21:57
Thank you all for your excellent answers, specially to our esteemed Ledyard Sama.
Domo Arigato

[Edited by YAMANTAKA on 11-28-2000 at 04:04 PM]

Yamantaka
28th November 2000, 22:03
Hello, Arashi!

Thanks for your excellent answer. I think Ledyard Sama's e-mail also was very much my own point of view.
There's a small revolution going on in the Aikido in portuguese language list. People are trying to crucify my son. What I find funny is that the discussion is all emotion, no dialogue. And people do not read each other posts ("I think I know what you're talking about, you creep! Now my opinion is..."). Fantastic!
Best regards
Yamantaka

Yamantaka
29th November 2000, 09:35
[QUOTE]"The idea that they are "not Aikido" somehow is one I do not understand. It fits right in with the folks who think atemi are not Aikido. What makes it Aikido is the context into which the techniques are contained not the particular techniques themselves."


YAMANTAKA : Ledyard Sama, have patience with me. About Koshi : I've been observing some old videos of O-Sensei and it seems he always did koshi nage with open legs. I believe that was because he was very short and it was easier for him. When his taller disciples began to try to do it HIS way, they couldn't. So they began to do it the judo way.
What do you think about that? Have you a different opinion?
Best regards

MarkF
30th November 2000, 10:20
There is really little difference between the two; aikido and judo, and if it is in the specifics, then it is the intent of the waza, but more importantly, the intent of uke. The difference I see are in the semantics, mainly. Intent is the same, but why you throw uke to the floor as opposed to helping uke make that decision for you mainly would be situational, if there is a difference at all.

In uki goshi (floating hip throw), the technique is done very much the same way as explained above, that uke is not "thrown" to the floor, but uke's intent is read that he comes straight at you, tori breaks kuzushi to the front, float's uke and he is dropped off to the side.

In O-goshi (large hip throw), kuzushi is in the same direction, foreward, but here uke is allowed to continue foreward, so you lower your center, step in deeply, turning, bringing uke down to the left foot (assuming a right side attack), and with a gentle upward lift upward, uke is continued forward, but is redirected to the left front corner, falling in front of you. By stepping in the correct distance, and then back even deeper with the other foot (left), uke should barely touch tori and is thrown in the one throwing direction in the gokyo no waza of "throwing him where you are."


But not all koshiwaza appear to be hip throws. For example, out of the guard defense, one may grab the opponent, and appear to lift and slam him back onto the floor (dakiage). Actually, it is done with the same lift as in o-goshi, but instead, the center must be dropped at the very same time as the opponent is grabbed, lifting with the hips to the front and up in a thrust motion, and removing your center, uke falls back, with his own weight doing the damage. This has been segregated to "kata only" and not to be practiced in randori. The lift with the hips is to the front, obviously.

I hope this helps a little.

Mark

Yamantaka
30th November 2000, 10:34
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MarkF
[B]I hope this helps a little.
Mark


YAMANTAKA : It helped a lot, Mark San! Thank you!

rossl42
14th December 2000, 06:39
Sorry I'm a bit late to this discussion but at present I have only occasional access to the internet. Mark provided a lot of detail on various koshiwaza, but I hope this is a useful addition. I would differentiate between various koshiwaza (such as ogoshi, tsurikomigoshi, ukigoshi and koshigaeshi) as the direction of forces applied is quite different.

In most of the aikido schools I have seen, the emphasis is on koshigaeshi - it seems to be "the" hip technique taught. I will assume that this is the technique primarily referred to in the original question.

My understanding of this technique is that the defender must enter deeply through the attacker's centre-line. HIs (her) feet are therefore at a right angle to a line drawn between the attacker's feet. The feet are space widely apart and the defender is in an "open horse stance," drawing the attacker over his pelvic girdle. If the attacker has entered deeply enough and has sufficient extension on the attacker's arm, the attacker will be "double-weighted", unbalanced directly forward and "roll" over the defender's hips.

Sometimes the defender has insufficient extension and / or has not entered sufficiently deeply and is in a position where he is simply supporting (carrying) the attacker. In this case he can draw his "back" leg up to the other, thereby shifting the effective pivot point under the attacker's centre.

In performing ogoshi the defender's feet are positioned parallel to and between those of the attacker. The feet are together to maximise upwards drive as the legs straighten. I hope this doesn't just muddy the issue for you.

MarkF
14th December 2000, 11:44
Sounds fine to me, Ross. Not all koshiwaza even look like koshiwaza. When doing uki-goshi, kuzushi may be similar, but with this one, a twisting motion is used, allowing uke to fall in front or to the side.

Tsurikomigoshi is similar in that uke is "loaded" like o-goshi, but the hips, or the hara, is lowered even further. Sode tsurikomigoshi makes this even more apparent, or necessary.

Mark

George Ledyard
14th December 2000, 12:47
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA
[QUOTE]"The idea that they are "not Aikido" somehow is one I do not understand. It fits right in with the folks who think atemi are not Aikido. What makes it Aikido is the context into which the techniques are contained not the particular techniques themselves."


YAMANTAKA : Ledyard Sama, have patience with me. About Koshi : I've been observing some old videos of O-Sensei and it seems he always did koshi nage with open legs. I believe that was because he was very short and it was easier for him. When his taller disciples began to try to do it HIS way, they couldn't. So they began to do it the judo way.
What do you think about that? Have you a different opinion?
Best regards

I think the reason for the variations has to do with the backgrounds the deshi had before they came to Aikido. The majority of the deshi had judo backgrounds before they were accepted as Aikido deshi. Both Ikeda Sensei and Saotome Sensei had rank in judo before they started Aikido.

If someone learned his grappling technique from an earlier non-sport version you were apt to see slightly different variation that depended less on movement and could be executed with full combat regalia. Anyway, what makes it Aikido or not is nmore the interaction between the uke and nage, not the execution of the technique. Ikeda Sensei is a former judo man but I can guess that he never once executed a koshinage in a judo match that looks like the ones he does on his film. In judo you are dealing with a contracted and resistant opponent who wishes not to be thrown. That is difficult to do precisely because you aren't allowed to do the atemi which you would use in an Aikido application. If you could utilize atemi in judo the opponent would have to defend huis openings quite differently and that would change things.

szczepan
14th December 2000, 16:12
Originally posted by rossl42
The feet are together to maximise upwards drive as the legs straighten. I hope this doesn't just muddy the issue for you.

that's ok, and wide legs make koshinage slower(particularly important in ji waza with multiple attack) and not allow to create "empty space" or "a hole" where attacker falls.Also changing distans(if attacker suddenly provide heavy resistance) is much more difficult.

regardz

MarkF
15th December 2000, 08:46
George,
allowing all atemi (some is used, but it comes under a different description) would turn randori, or shiai, into a free for all, with many injuries, or would necessitate the wearing of protection. The closest I've seen in this regard is the ko shiki no kata, and this is a major one from the kito ryu school, originally done in armor.

There are just not that many koshiwaza which are used in shiai, except for harai goshi, uchi mata (OK, this is not a koshiwaza according to the Kodokan, but many say it is), and hanegoshi. Those spoken of here, IE, o goshi, uki goshi, are basic techiques practiced, but most would not put themselves in that position.

To allow atemi would control shiai even more than they are today, as butting with the head, strikes anywhere, would still be banned. As randori is now, the main purpose is achieved. Practice for the more practical aspects and anyone can join in.

But judo and aikido, when searching out such things as weapons training, or perhaps defense against the sword is alive and well, just being categorized a little differently.

If, in your dojo, you practice attack drills, those who have a background in judo or koryu jujutsu, find this all comes to the rescue if all else fails, and even if it hasn't, these waza are made for attack.

I do agree, basically, with your post, though.

Mark

Yamantaka
15th December 2000, 10:25
[QUOTE]Originally posted by George Ledyard
I think the reason for the variations has to do with the backgrounds the deshi had before they came to Aikido. The majority of the deshi had judo backgrounds before they were accepted as Aikido deshi. Both Ikeda Sensei and Saotome Sensei had rank in judo before they started Aikido.
Anyway, what makes it Aikido or not is nmore the interaction between the uke and nage, not the execution of the technique.

YAMANTAKA : thank you very much, Ledyard Sama, for your excellent explanation.
Best regards and Merry Christmas

Aikieagle
18th December 2000, 07:48
Please excuse me if this sound abrassive, but how can one style claim "ownership" of a technique?? True, Judo is famous for this throw, but Judo technically didnt "invent" the throw. Martial Art historians would tell you that Japanese arts owe their foundation from Chinese martial arts, and Chinese Martial Arts owe their foundation from Indian Combat, etc., etc. the trace goes on and on. What if there is someone out there in the jungle who has never heard of martial arts that is doing the hip throw on his own?
I think that the lesson that O-sensei and even people such as Bruce Lee were trying to tell us is that we shouldn't create boundaries in our ways of thinking. And to narrow our thinking of hip throws being a "Judo" or "Japanese Martial Art" thing would defeat our training of freeing the mind's boundaries. When I see a technique being performed i do not think, "This is Aikido method" or "This is Judo method". All i see is a movement. Even in my Aikido class, if there is an attack that catches you in a manner that is not Aikido you can't give up! All you can think is what is the best way to deal with this, whether that is a strike, kick, throw, pin, whatever. just react! Let this divine feeling enter your body and move in accordance with it, or as westerners say "go with the flow".
O-sensei was always changing attacks and techniques, and it kept the students on their toes. I remember a story of O-sensei taking his uchi-deshi to the woods and blind folding himself and asked his students to strike him with live blades! isnt that incredible?! Who here gets that kind of training?
Anyways, to make a long story short, at the beginning everything seems the same in martial arts to a beginner; then when you have some exposure you see a difference in Martial Arts; then finally once you are experienced you return to thinking that it is all the same. You treat a karateka the same as an aikidoka or a wu shu practicioner, it doesnt matter. As long as we have two legs and two arms there will only be one way of fighting.
"Under the skys, under the heavens, we are but one family. It just happens that we are different" - Bruce Lee
Thank you,

Cesar Aguirre

Chuck Clark
18th December 2000, 16:34
Good Post. Whatever works is aiki...how we treat each other determines whether it is aikido.

Safe Holidays.

MarkF
20th December 2000, 08:36
Chuck is right. But sometimes, for the sake of discussion, the subject needs to be identified with as short a description as possible, so you get judo koshi, aikido koshi, etc.

There's no harm in a short description in a discussion.

We aren't describing apples and oranges, but apples and other apples.

Mark