PDA

View Full Version : VERY BAD NEWS FOR AIKIKAI PEOPLE



Yamantaka
12th January 2001, 17:00
I just got this message from PETER GOLDSBURY, Chairman of the International Aikido Federation(Aikikai) :
"Hello, everybody. Thanks for all the feedback and the questions.
As you might have gathered, I am especially interested in the aspect of competition in aikido because the IAF has already begun to receive the kind of outside pressure which eventually led to judo becoming a western-style sport. This is one reason why contributors like Yamantaka have, in my opinion, rightly said that aikido really has no business being in the World Games. But let that pass. However, a new thread has recently opened about competition in aikido and I am looking forward to seeing what the members of this forum have to say."

That was my answer to Mr. Goldsbury :
"YAMANTAKA : Hello, Goldsbury Sama!
I'm glad you finally opened the box on Aikido participation in the World Games. I've always felt that this was the beginning of competition in Aikido, as it has been for other martial arts, as Taekwondo.
So, the problem now is : Aikido is being pressed to create competitions and to become a big money making international sport, as judo. Why not?
A month ago, I made a poll in my List (Aikido in portuguese Language)asking if aikido should or shouldn't have competition. The results were very interesting.

YES, BECAUSE IT WOULD HELP AIKIDO'S GROWTH........... 5,56%
NO, BECAUSE COMPETITION WOULD BE AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF HARMONY..........38,89%
NO, BECAUSE O-SENSEI FORBADE IT....27,78%
NO, BECAUSE ALL ARTS THAT COMPETE (Judo, Karate, Taekwondo)WEAKEN.........27,78%

As you see, almost 67,0% rejected competition, not because "O-Sensei forbade it" or "because competitive sport was considered negative", but because, in their opinion, competition was absolutely contrary to Aikido's essence. Another curious thing, is that those which approve do not consider competition as an important thing on itself but just as a means to aikido's growth. The rejection was almost absolute (more than 90%!).
To include competition in Aikido will be to uproot it completely from its sources (peace, harmony, cooperation, martial spirit). Even Tomiki style practitioners are cautious to minimize competition ("not so very important", "a small part of Aikido") and its effects(need to defeat the other, jealousy, aggressiveness)on participants.
Also, no one can deny the bad consequences of competition on martial arts. Judo has abandoned all its martial arts aspects and became a mere sport; Karate and Taekwondo have become weak and also abandoned their martial aspects. We should point out, also, that sports judo, karate and Taekwondo, having lost public continuously, are always trying to develop new things to get their public back to the stadiums. Taekwondo was the most fantastic case of all. After stripping their art to the core to gain access to the Olympics, their first participation was a fiasco. Small public and bad press reports.
If we believe Aikido to be a martial art; if we think it helps to develop saner and better people; if we love the complexity and richness of our art; we should not allow it to become a mere sport, simpler, weaker, without roots. Aikido today attracts youngsters, women and men of all ages. If Aikido becomes a sport, it will attract only teenagers(competitive age). We saw that happen in judo, karate and Taekwondo. Our teachers will be heavily involved in competition training and won't have time to teach anything else(as it has happened in judo, karate and Taekwondo). Even Tomiki style was unable to make the transition (I participate in many discussions with Tomiki friends and in Tomiki lists, and they admited many problems with competition).
AIKIDO IS NOT SPORT. TO INCLUDE COMPETITION IN IT, WILL BE A GRAVE DISSERVICE TO THE ART.
IMHO
Yamantaka

#########################################################
If anyone wishes to manifest personally his opinion, he may write to the :
INTERNATIONAL AIKIDO FEDERATION
c/o Peter Goldsbury - Chairman
http://www.aikido-international.org/
In my humble opinion, we have the duty to fight against this possibility.
Feeling very bad
Yamantaka

Daniel Pokorny
12th January 2001, 19:41
YAMANTAKA,

Your quote:

"In my humble opinion, we have the duty to fight against this possibility."

Reflects the same stance anti- "sport Judo" people took as well. It came about anyway. Please, take a breath and realize that what other people do in their training does not affect what you are doing in yours.

Personally, I agree that Aikido is not for sport and it would sadden me deeply to think someone would even consider it a "World Game", but this is only my view and opinion. We can only control the Aikido we have internalized....... it's up to others to control theirs......

Regards,

Dan P. - Mongo

Yamantaka
12th January 2001, 23:31
Originally posted by Daniel Pokorny
YAMANTAKA,

Please, take a breath and realize that what other people do in their training does not affect what you are doing in yours.
We can only control the Aikido we have internalized....... it's up to others to control theirs......
Regards,
Dan P. - Mongo

YAMANTAKA : Know something, my friend...You have some reason. Perhaps I should refrain my emotions...

Hayate
21st January 2001, 23:14
Hello everyone...

i practise aikido 3 1/5 years now,and i have never felt so bad than the time i read the article about aikido becoming a sport!!!
We must never let this happen,i mean..what are these people thinking?Where are the ideals and teachings of O-Sensei???
Why has it always to be money...why do we let it control us,why do let our weaknesses be our guides to our lives???
I am curious what has Hombu-Dojo to say about it and the Doshu?
We have seen what happened to other Martial Arts that became sports,well NO WAY NOT AGAIN !!!i don't want to be around and see this humiliation,degeneration....
I love Japanese culture and Martial Arts, and Aikido has become my way of living,we must prevent this from happening,we like aikido as it is,PURE,as it was handed over from Morihei Ueshiba,and IT WILL STAY THAT WAY!!!
Some people are waiting to make a fortune out of this conspiracy,but we will not allow it....

AIKIDO IS THE WAY OF PEACE-HARMONY-LOVE
HELP US KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!

MarkF
22nd January 2001, 10:48
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA


Judo has abandoned all its martial arts aspects and became a mere sport

I think this statement is unfair, and unfair to all who have benefitted through sports. Someone said that you should make your own aikido your own, so to fight against this possiblity, is to go against the very nature of Aikido, something you say is different than other martial arts, and that it is an art of stopping a fight before it happens. By fighting against this, the very phrase immediately puts aikido into the muck and mire of politicking and money.

Aikido is much more popular in the United States right now, than judo, simply because of the infighting all ready seen in disagreements between organizations.

If it is going to happen, you must allow it to burn itself out. If you really think this is something with which you must make war, I don't think the priniciples of Kano Jigoro or even Ueshiba Morihei have sunk in. Instead, when pushed, you will push back.

Read what people such as Dave Lowry and Ellis Amdur have to say about judo, and you will see, throughout this war-torn, politiczed sport of judo, exists those who participate in the contest aspects and have in no way fought against it. It is your own, each and every one. If Sensei Ueshiba M. is right, there is no need to fight anything. It would be as putting out the sun.

Bottom line: even those who have not done judo for many years, when it comes down to it, the judo comes out. Well, isn't that what is really important?

Originally posted by Daniel Pokorny


Reflects the same stance anti- "sport Judo" people took as well. It came about anyway. Please, take a breath and realize that what other people do in their training does not affect what you are doing in yours

Fighting judo as a contest has taught no one anything, if the above is not the very soul of aikido, and even if the contest enters your small part of the world, atom bombs couldn't stop it. If you were to be truely honest cconcerning aikido contests, you would all drop whatever color belt you wear, and never again seek another grade.

Judo was not the first martial art to have randori no kata, and not the first to have tournaments. Koryu has had challenge match tournaments, with a huge upswing in this area of the bugei, after 1868, but it happened on a regular basis before this particular year, with ryu challenging ryu, teams challenging other teams. This is not the end of the world. Judo, as in shodokan ryu aikido, had contests from almost the beginning and as sports were meant to teach, frienship, comradeship, lessons about life (isn't life a contest?), team work, and by helping those who need it to get it. The basis for sport, at least as far as Japanese culture, was to intermingle with others, perhaps not your equal on the mat, but as ukemi does, makes it harmless fun, and makes being uke, most of the lesson.

Perhaps you haven't been watching so closely, but what was to come out of these huge aikido events you've seen since the beginning. Wouldn't mutual respect be better than calling judo a failure, and condemn aikido to this same fate?

Judo was also forced to bring the randori to the forefront because it would have been banned if the allies had seen the judo schools as tools to teach a martial art. The amusing part of this, was that the US had a big part in teaching its martial abilities, and was, for a time, the H2H school (the Kodokan) of the allies. There is some for all, but how many Olympic or international competitiors do you think there are? Is money the thing which keeps it going? When was the last time you've been to a judo dojo in which the owners actually made money on judo as an investment? Only the big organizations are able to do that, and as I see it, the aikido organizations are huge considering the time it has been around. To make this money, it must be stolen, but this is funny because big organizations willingly give it, and smaller ones give it to the bigger ones.

The way I see it, you have two choices, join it and make it what it ought to be, or let it push you, and you will only push back, doing the very thing your elders and your passed teachers had taught never to do: fight.

I think this may be taken and is, and will end up spilling over to what is unimportant. Daniel said it, but I don't worry about judo. It does what it wants while I do what I want, and that is to play/teach judo. Don't take these as choices, take it as part of the learning process. Otherwise, all the complaining will drive those from it who may have benefitted.

Judo a mere sport? Hardly. Just look at how it has managed to upset an entire world of martial arts.:)

Mark

Yamantaka
22nd January 2001, 11:31
Originally posted by MarkF

I think this statement is unfair, and unfair to all who have benefitted through sports.

YAMANTAKA : Point taken in.


If it is going to happen, you must allow it to burn itself out. Instead, when pushed, you will push back.

YAMANTAKA : Agreed.

Originally posted by Daniel Pokorny

[quote]Reflects the same stance anti- "sport Judo" people took as well. It came about anyway. Please, take a breath and realize that what other people do in their training does not affect what you are doing in yours

YAMANTAKA : I have already agreed with Pokorny San.

If you were to be truely honest cconcerning aikido contests, you would all drop whatever color belt you wear, and never again seek another grade.

YAMANTAKA : In our group, we do just that.

Judo, as in shodokan ryu aikido, had contests from almost the beginning and as sports were meant to teach, frienship, comradeship, lessons about life (isn't life a contest?), team work, and by helping those who need it to get it. The basis for sport, at least as far as Japanese culture, was to intermingle with others, perhaps not your equal on the mat, but as ukemi does, makes it harmless fun, and makes being uke, most of the lesson.

YAMANTAKA : I think we respectfully disagree, if we are talking about competitive sports.

Wouldn't mutual respect be better than calling judo a failure, and condemn aikido to this same fate?

YAMANTAKA : That wasn't really my initial intention and I agree, as I did before with Pokorny San, that Mark San is right and that I didn't make my point correctly. Forgive me, Mark San!

The way I see it, you have two choices, join it and make it what it ought to be, or let it push you, and you will only push back...

YAMANTAKA : I couldn't say it better! Thank you for your input, Mark San!

Judo a mere sport? Hardly. Just look at how it has managed to upset an entire world of martial arts.:)
Mark

YAMANTAKA : Touché! I'll try to blend and change in others the things I feel are not very good.
Best regards

Yamantaka
22nd January 2001, 20:03
Dear Mark,

I guess Donn Draeger (himself a judoka who lived long in Japan and trained at the kodokan) gives a better argument about competition than I did.
http://judoinfo.com/draeger.htm

I agree with him on many points.

Best regards (and more control, I hope, on my emotions...)
Ubaldo.

22nd January 2001, 22:37
Hello,

I am not an aikidoka by defination because I don't practice or have been doing it as long as others. I don't see competetion in Aikido all that bad really! There has to be some value to Aikido going sport? What would be wrong with have both competetion and Traditional Aikido?

TDK and Aikido are my two masters. Understanding the competetion of TDK and the tradition of Aikido opens me to both sides of the issue.

Looking at competetion, Aikido makes the art stronger and weaker, just not weaker. A big concern under many folks breath in the aikido dojo is not putting aikido waza to the test we needed. Aikido is just not pure philosophy. A big fear too for many Aikido in and out of the dojo is competetion. Going out on a limb, folks who join Aikido don't want or like to fight. Unlike others that join a dojang are ok with fighting.

Being attracted to Aikido and TDK I get a strong spiritual/peaceful foundation that tempers the fierce combative nature of TDK. A yin and yang kind of thing. From my experinence then, I don't think Aikido would be harmed by having a competetion side to part of the art. Change is a difficult beast. Aikido becoming competetive is a complex issue in deed.

Hayate
23rd January 2001, 00:45
I must disagree with you guyz,

diverting from the Way is not an option.
The problem lies not on how each one of us practises,the problem is that if someone will follow a competative path he will drag along with him a certain number of people and mislead them,and because some of them have never come in touch with Aikido in its pure form, they will never know what it is like.
Let's take me for example,Aikido is my first Martial Art,in the beginning i was excited seeing all the breakfalls ,techniques,atemis...etc,only after i had practised for 2 years,did i start to realise the true meaning of Aikido through practise and reading.
What i am trying to say is, that i would never had been able to see the true meaning of Aikido(and all other M.A)if i had been misled by a teacher of e.g Sport-Aikido... My opinion is that, because of the nature of Aikido it will fail becoming a sport,and i am glad about it, because it will not have the same end as Judo and Taekwondo.
Well it is up to everyone what Way to follow,but as a future Sempai i am obliged to stick to the path and teachings of Morihei Ueshiba.
I don't believe that i sound "morgue" or "conservative",but messing with the ideals and teachings, only will lead to degeneration and destruction.

Sincerely...

Jerry Johnson
23rd January 2001, 05:30
I whole heatedly get your point. I understand in some capacity your battle cry. Please don't take this as an insult rather a point coming from a non-Aikido person. I read some where that according to the founder of Aikido his biggest complaint was with all his students that no one followed him. Many say the true ideals and teaching died with the founder. Even the founder didn't follow the ideals of his teacher either.

I personally have trouble, of what I have witnessed in Aikido, how would you make Aikido into a sport? I thinking along the lines of who do you make yoga a sport.

I don't do Aikido. I am interested in it like all martial arts because of it being a Japanese martial art. So, please understand my comments are as sobering as Al Pachino at the Golden Globes. As poignant as Liz Taylor reading the teleprompter. And as insightful as Robert Dowing Jr.'s promise to say clean.

O.K. am movie buff too. So what else do you do when it is below -0? I already have enough kids.

yamatodamashii
23rd January 2001, 05:55
Now, as far as actually PRACTICING aikido... I start next month, at a new school in my area. I haven't trained in it, yet, myself.
My question is, as I understand the nature of "aiki"... you must BLEND with your opponent's energy (ai-ki). Since this very concept negates the idea of ATTACKING, how can you have competition and still call it "aikido"?

MarkF
23rd January 2001, 08:53
Ubaldo,
I wasn't attempting to tell you were wrong, and since you noted I repeated myself and others, I apologize for that.

First, it doesn't have to be a sport, only sportING in the simplest of terms. Kano didn't believe in judo, the sport, he just didn't think judo a game, thus his belief that judo not be a part of the Olympic games, but that contest could bring harmony to a world which was otherwise busy playing war games.

Contests are not inherently wrong IMO, it is the way in which they come off. That it is being discussed reminds me of the descriptions I've heard, and the demonstrations I've seen, of large, and sometimes boring, "get togethers." A contest isn't out of sight, and the bigger it gets, this is where it is headed. I think it was Stan Pranin who commented about this at a large seminar he went to.

I would instead think of how it is going to come off. Judo was forced into a role, but aikido has seen the results. Since some contests all ready do exist, perhaps a good model, without the infighting and politics, not to mention money, can be the goal. I always liked Tomiki's shiai, and if you read what Kano really thought was the purpose, then it may have been different. Kano was just a figure head at the Kodokan by the 1930s, and when committees and politics are in the same room, watch for falling rocks!:)

Anyway, I thought you may want an opinion from someone who has been there. While most of the people twenty or more years older than I am, said that judo wasn't the same after the war, and I know judo isn't the same since I competed either. Things were simple, the wa was excellent, and I never saw (until the eighties, anyway), anyone dismissed for flagrant and violent rule infractions (that was when I retired from competition).

It does happen today, and that is why I use it as a model, so aikido, no matter whether contest oriented or not, can keep its nose clean, for lack of a better term. Besides, as was noted before, how much of a sport could aikido be? Contests, sure, but I don't think it is worrisome. Some must be vigilent.

Mark

BTW: I love boxing, and judo is in the same category, a combative sporting event. Some behind the scenes in boxing are scumbags, and I know of a national director of a judo program who payed a lot for his teaching license. If it manages to stay away from that, I think there is room for both (I have no problem with your problems with competitive sport, btw). If you had gone to the Lousiana judo happenings which are still going on (see seminar forum), you would see a kata championship, and certainly nothing is wrong with good kata. No koka in kata contests.;)

Yamantaka
23rd January 2001, 13:20
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MarkF
[B]Ubaldo,
I wasn't attempting to tell you were wrong, and since you noted I repeated myself and others, I apologize for that.

YAMANTAKA : No need for that, in your case, my friend!

First, it doesn't have to be a sport, only sportING in the simplest of terms. Kano didn't believe in judo, the sport, he just didn't think judo a game, thus his belief that judo not be a part of the Olympic games, but that contest could bring harmony to a world which was otherwise busy playing war games.

YAMANTAKA : in my sincerest opinion, that was one point at which Kano Jigoro Sensei was seriously innocent...



I would instead think of how it is going to come off. Judo was forced into a role, but aikido has seen the results. Since some contests all ready do exist, perhaps a good model, without the infighting and politics, not to mention money, can be the goal. I always liked Tomiki's shiai, and if you read what Kano really thought was the purpose, then it may have been different. Kano was just a figure head at the Kodokan by the 1930s, and when committees and politics are in the same room, watch for falling rocks!:)

YAMANTAKA : When sports competition and politics take over (and they always do...), it is not just Kano Sensei. The same thing happened with Funakoshi Sensei and with Ueshiba Sensei(in the last case, not beause of competition, but because of an organization, the Aikikai, at which Ueshiba Sensei was really a figure head also).


Anyway, I thought you may want an opinion from someone who has been there. While most of the people twenty or more years older than I am, said that judo wasn't the same after the war, and I know judo isn't the same since I competed either. Things were simple, the wa was excellent, and I never saw (until the eighties, anyway), anyone dismissed for flagrant and violent rule infractions (that was when I retired from competition).

YAMANTAKA : Exactly what I mean. It always come to that...

It does happen today, and that is why I use it as a model, so aikido, no matter whether contest oriented or not, can keep its nose clean, for lack of a better term. Besides, as was noted before, how much of a sport could aikido be? Contests, sure, but I don't think it is worrisome. Some must be vigilent.

YAMANTAKA : When you create a Frankenstein Monster, how easy it is to control him? Wasn't that Dr. Frankenstein mistake and the ones that followed him? If we presume competition is bad in itself, it's not a question of controlling it, it's a question of avoiding it.


Mark

BTW: I love boxing, and judo is in the same category, a combative sporting event. Some behind the scenes in boxing are scumbags, and I know of a national director of a judo program who payed a lot for his teaching license. If it manages to stay away from that, I think there is room for both (I have no problem with your problems with competitive sport, btw). If you had gone to the Lousiana judo happenings which are still going on (see seminar forum), you would see a kata championship, and certainly nothing is wrong with good kata. No koka in kata contests.;)

YAMANTAKA : It does not matter, Mark San. In a kata contest, you have competition, rules, judges, one wins, another loses. That's the problem : COMPETITION, not just "combat competition". It's still competition.
IMHO
Your sincere friend
Yamantaka

Daniel Pokorny
23rd January 2001, 14:53
Originally posted by MarkF

Fighting judo as a contest has taught no one anything, if the above is not the very soul of aikido, and even if the contest enters your small part of the world, atom bombs couldn't stop it. If you were to be truely honest cconcerning aikido contests, you would all drop whatever color belt you wear, and never again seek another grade.
[/B]

Mark,

I don't know if dropping ones belt and not ever testing again could be considered the best way of protesting against contests. I really don't care for the ranking system much myself and I don't put a lot of stock in it either. I'm much more interested in what can be done "on the mat" if you will.

But I also see the important aspects of obtaining rank and "the wearing of belts" as well. Remember, your "tests" are also a means of feedback for the instructors to grade THEIR efforts in teaching. This is very important. You are but a reflection of their work and efforts. Also, your "belt color" may not mean as much to you as it does the beginner looking for someone with some experience to help with a particular technique or perhaps some other issues.

I'm not real sure just when or how this happens, but at some point in the training at our dojo (Shindai Aikikai), it becomes less about your growth in technique (that progresses with time and practice anyway) and more about your growth as a person. We start by giving back that which we were fortunate enough to receive. I have witnessed this here over and over again and to me, this is the side of Martial Arts training I value the most, regardless of style or rank.

These things are way to important to me to lose in making a statement over something that I can't control the out come of anyway. We all have a choice to either participate in "sport MA" or not. I simply choose not to. What others do is up to them.....

Regards,

Dan P. - Mongo

23rd January 2001, 17:30
What I hear is fear.

I respect how passionate many of you are about your Aikido. That goes without saying. Admiration abound, I would like to throw somethings out there to chew on from my view point. My thoughts may be hard to shallow, and I don't expect anyone to. It is a difficult time for Aikidoka.

First
I love Japanese culture and Martial Arts, and Aikido has become my way of living,we must prevent this from
happening,we like aikido as it is,PURE,as it was handed over from Morihei Ueshiba,and IT WILL STAY THAT
WAY!!!
Some people are waiting to make a fortune out of this conspiracy,but we will not allow it....

I am not Japanese but I think Aikido is a martial art for the modern times. Ueshiba to my understanding was not a samurai like his teacher Takeda. So right there is a change. Others say Ueshiba also mix other arts into Aikido again another change. We all know Ueshiba philosophical impact on these arts that is the spirit of Aikido. Being told by many in Aikido pure exists in the individual's heart. Competition will not change that, what I bet will happen is you will have, over-time, a traditional movement and a competitive movement. Aikido is dynamic thus changing. Going into competition is the next way of things to be. I believe it is the Grandson of Ueshiba who is making this change? If I am correct there is nothing anyone can do but to accept or brake-off. But this change will happen this generation or next. It follows the path of society. As society changes and each generation so does the art. Just as Kendo came into being, just as Aikido came into being. I am sorry to have to say this based on such passionate and heart-felt words but we can't fight change, just prolong it.


Second
My question is, as I understand the nature of "aiki"... you must BLEND with your opponent's energy (ai-ki). Since this very concept negates the idea of ATTACKING, how can you have competition and still call it "aikido"?

From what I have learned from both arts that often an attack is defense and defense is an attack. Blending is movement, a dynamic sphere, you are not stagnate or linear in movement. Which all can be applied to a real life situation which is competitive. Competition may also provide for better technique and execution. A way to hone and refine skills and work out bugs. If you take this attitude training with you in your training with your dojo mates or outside your dojo you are competeting. Your energy doesn't differenciate from competetive or non-competetive situation. You do. You utilize your energy and control it depending on the situation. Being defensive is a concept of non-aggression. Non-aggression I understand it as challenging and picking fights in a belligerent or macho manner. Not the aggression enegry used to protect oneself. I remember reading in some Aikido book that Aikido is a martial art; hard and difficult training, I figure to do so you have to be aggressive. Being a martial art wouldn't that include an attitude of competitiveness in someway. So is defense really a misunderstood concept? Be it yourself or against other people the goal is to defeat another. With that spirit you have to be balanced. Both aggressive and defensive equally.



That's the problem : COMPETITION, not just "combat competition". It's still competition.
IMHO

We I train in both Aikido and TDK I have a competitive attitude. At first I didn't with Aikido, but then I seen one of Ueshiba's films in the 60's throwing someone. I noticed his eyes fierce as a wild fire. The intensity was so intimidating it changed my view on how I practice. Funny, I was watching on PBS ( yes I am member ) a program about Jazz. A piano play of Benny Goodman's way recall his experience with the "ray" and how it effected him and others in Goodman's band. Then a still picture of Goodman was shown displaying the "ray" it was as fierce as Ueshiba's "ray." You can't be a martial artist without competition.

Martial arts is about competition. Self competition, dojo practice, in a match, or in the street it is all the same competition. What many feel will happen or fear the most won't happen. There will all ways be a place for the traditionalist who prefer not to go to a tournament and compete. This is only a way to test yourself to compete against others. To what intensity and involvement is up to the individual. I say give it a chance. No one to this point said confidently competition in Aikido will fail. What I hear is that it will succeed and that concerns everyone.

IMHO.

[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-23-2001 at 11:44 AM]

BC
23rd January 2001, 18:08
I think some people are overlooking the fact that aikido is participating in the World Games as a DEMONSTRATION EVENT ONLY! See the below link:

http://www.wg2001.or.jp/engimg/ea31320.htm

Frankly, I don't see a problem in participating in the World Games as a demonstration event only. From what I have heard, Doshu has reiterated his opposition to creating any competition in aikido. Hasn't there always been pressure in various degrees on the Aikikai to create some competition? If so, why is this such a surprise now? Personally, I'm not going to get my dogi in a bunch over this. IMHO.

Daniel Pokorny
23rd January 2001, 20:51
Originally posted by DeshiJack
What I hear is fear.

You can't be a martial artist without competition.

[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-23-2001 at 11:44 AM]

DeshiJack,

Please forgive the butchered quote here but I would like to address this particular point of view. You have made very valid points in much of your post however, I believe people that "compete" in Martial Arts tend to focus primarly on the various physical manifestations of the principles derived from the particular art they practice.

The reality however, is that the physical techniques themselves are only a part of the entire art. If you think about this it becomes rather obvious. If you are actually trying to "compete" in the art of Aikido, then each participant would ALSO have to demonstrate a higher level of compassion for their attacker than the other participants. This may prove much more difficult to demonstrate than say, iriminage, don't you think? There are many more positive aspects to Aikido than just the physical techniques.

While working with my sensei I have discovered that once internalized, Aikido becomes a way of conflict resolution that spans far beyond the physical aspects of the art. The physical aspecets are then viewed as just a small part of a larger picture.

Competing in just the physical aspects of ANY art is only demonstrating a particular level of physical proficiency and does not encompass the art as a whole. This is the short fall of competing in ANY martial art. Basically, you strip the art down to it's physical layer and still try to "label" it as the whole art? I don't think so......

If competition in the physical techniques of the arts are all you are interested in then I'll let you in on a little secret, you're missing the point.......

Regards,

Daniel Pokorny - Mongo

Hayate
24th January 2001, 02:08
Indeed O-Sensei had mastered kendo judo and jujutsu and then he created aikido based on the spiritual teachings of the Omoto-Kyu religion,the main point here is that Aikido was an entirely original M.A.
If i would like to learn Jujutsu, i would go to a Jujutsu dojo or if i would like to learn daito-ryu...i would go to the appropriate dojo.But NO i wanted to learn Aikido so thats what i did,Ueshiba did not change any other M.A he created one of his own based upon other M.A.
Aikido will not be the same anymore if it becomes a sport,it will not be Aikido,it will be something else but not AI-KI-DO.

P.S I would like to repeat that:"O-Sensei never changed any Martial Art!!"

Yamantaka
24th January 2001, 15:25
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BC
[B]I think some people are overlooking the fact that aikido is participating in the World Games as a DEMONSTRATION EVENT ONLY! See the below link:
http://www.wg2001.or.jp/engimg/ea31320.htm
Frankly, I don't see a problem in participating in the World Games as a demonstration event only.

YAMANTAKA : If you re-read some posts on this thread and others, you'll see that Peter Goldsbury has stated that there have been pressures on the IAF, in order to admit competitions and that the Doshu has no direct interference in that. Also, Mr. Goldsbury has asked for opinions on the introduction of competition in Aikido and we have been discussing that. As you see, no surprise and no "gettin our dogi in a bunch over that"...

24th January 2001, 17:15
Hello to all,

Clearly, everyone has written with great passion and strong conviction well deserving of respect. One can't but admire such emotion facing change. Criticizing those Aikido for not wanting competition is ignorant and hypocritical, I would not want to do it. The reasons for resisting change are strong. I understand the dilemma. I understand the complexity of this issue.

In today's Aikido outside Japan, Aikidoka focus more on the spiritual side and less on the martial side. Allowing competition in a positive and intelligently harmonious manner could balance out today's Aikido. An Aikido that has drifted more toward one hemisphere. Or the interpretation of the second pillar if you like. As I mentioned before, and is worth repeating, I think change to a degree will be good.
In support of my claim I mentioned that Ueshiba was a fierce and serious budoka of great skill. who was equally in depth a religious man in the continuum of his life. It is evident as he got older both physical and spiritual hemispheres where refined and flourished. In the early part of his life he stressed more publicly the martial. In his latter life, like as all, spiritual beliefs became as important. Ueshiba in his latter years, like many of us, allowed the spiritual to catch up and balance out his life. We were lucky to see it publicly. Neither hemisphere was neglected in Ueshiba's life, and thus demonstrating internalized balance at the age of maturity.


I believe Ueshiba was a warrior with merciful heart. I doubt if he would take anyone's life, like his Daito ryu instructor did. This is a difference that I am stressing competition in today's world is not a life or death match. Ueshiba was not a life or death budoka like Takeda. Ueshiba's personality wasn't completely different as both men had fierce temperaments, maintained the philosophy of martial arts. But there major difference was religion which effect Ueshiba perspective on fighting to the death. Granted, I am aware of the other differences between the two though the compassionate and merciful spiritual beliefs of Ueshiba is the most relevant. I am not saying Ueshiba wasn't a fierce budoka, he clearly was, thus, Aikido is budo. Let stress the "do" of budo. The "do" clearly of Ueshiba was the Omoto flavor. This is what I feel make Aikido different, or by some original.

In a nutshell, for the larger picture perspective, competition as defined in Japan 100 years is not inline with what it means today. To take the spirit of Aikido as I am being taught is to apply the physical aspects of Aikido such as harmony, blending, flowing, and balance applying them to life situations and challenges like the one being faced now. This is Aikido at it's highest form.

Competition is a new arena that could polish both the physical and spiritual components of any Aikidoka. It could be a great training ground for polishing waza and the heart. I would hope any serious Aikidoka would approach this matter with balance. Utilizing their highest form of Aikido to meet this challenge of competetion. All I am saying is give it a chance as it may be beneficial. There is no shame in saying it didn't work.



[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-24-2001 at 11:18 AM]

BC
24th January 2001, 20:23
Yamatanka:

I realize that it is just a topic for discussion, it was just that after reading some people's posts, it appeared to me that many of them were reading this as an issue that has suddenly arisen. Maybe my interpretation was incorrect, based on the seemingly strong and passionate responses. No criticism of anyone was intended. I personally am opposed to competition, but my position is that since I'm not in a position to influence the IAF in this regards, I'm not going to worry about it too extensively, since the leadership of our dojo has aligned themselves with Doshu in this regard. My greatest concern about aikido of late has just been trying to get my clumsy body to work with my lumbering brain to get the techniques correct. IMHO. Regards.

Yamantaka
24th January 2001, 21:46
Dear Jack,

With all due respect, there are so many things that you do not understand, that I find difficult to begin to explain them, in such a medium. Perhaps if we meet face to face, it would be easier. Anyway, I will try to place some definitions :
a) It definitely is not a case of "emotion facing change" or of writing with "great passion and strong conviction"...
Some may be that way, others not. There is no dilemma.Change isn't inevitable and there is not "just one way". We propose no such dicotomy. Things may happen or they don't. We take position according to our good sense and analysis.
I do not think that Aikido in the West and Aikido in the East are very much different or turned to one hemisphere. I believe it's more concerned with how we understand the art.

Originally posted by DeshiJack
Hello to all,

Clearly, everyone has written with great passion and strong conviction well deserving of respect. One can't but admire such emotion facing change. Criticizing those Aikido for not wanting competition is ignorant and hypocritical, I would not want to do it. The reasons for resisting change are strong. I understand the dilemma. I understand the complexity of this issue. Also when you say change "to a degree", it sounds funny. Half-virgin? Semi-Honest? Just a bit of larceny? Either you are in favor of something or you aren't. If competition is positive, we shouldn't propose it "to a degree" but wholeheartedly.
I think the point is : it's impossible to compete in a positive, intelligent and harmonious way. That's a dream. Competition is to do battle, to try to win, to feel good with the defeat of our adversary, to triumph over others, to strike the air with our fists and cry our victory scream while our adversary grovels, defeated, on the ground. Everything else is hipocrisy. As you see, not much harmony, wisdom or positiveness.
Furthermore, non-competitiveness is not exclusive to Aikido. Many other japanese, Korean and Chinese arts, do not choose competition as something desirable.
Without passion, many have explained the disadvantages of competition and the reasons it is prejudicial to a martial arts. I won't repeat them again. Karate, Judo, Kendo, Taekwondo, and other sports, are no longer BUDO(Martial Ways) but COMPETITIVE COMBATIVE SPORTS. To pretend they are one and the same is not just a misconception, it confounds the discussion. If a martial art turns into a sport, it is no longer a martial art. And in the case of Aikido, the majority of Aikikai practitioners train in the way perfected by O-Sensei after the war, that is, the absolutely different martial art, geared to cooperation and harmony between nage and uke. To do competition, would be to deviate significantly from the art we practice. Not simply a change : a brutal differentiation.
I tried to clarify some of my points. I may be wrong in some of those points but that's how I see them now. Hope you read these with tolerance and open-mindedness.
Best regards
Yamantaka


In today's Aikido outside Japan, Aikidoka focus more on the spiritual side and less on the martial side. Allowing competition in a positive and intelligently harmonious manner could balance out today's Aikido. An Aikido that has drifted more toward one hemisphere. Or the interpretation of the second pillar if you like. As I mentioned before, and is worth repeating, I think change to a degree will be good.
In support of my claim I mentioned that Ueshiba was a fierce and serious budoka of great skill. who was equally in depth a religious man in the continuum of his life. It is evident as he got older both physical and spiritual hemispheres where refined and flourished. In the early part of his life he stressed more publicly the martial. In his latter life, like as all, spiritual beliefs became as important. Ueshiba in his latter years, like many of us, allowed the spiritual to catch up and balance out his life. We were lucky to see it publicly. Neither hemisphere was neglected in Ueshiba's life, and thus demonstrating internalized balance at the age of maturity.


I believe Ueshiba was a warrior with merciful heart. I doubt if he would take anyone's life, like his Daito ryu instructor did. This is a difference that I am stressing competition in today's world is not a life or death match. Ueshiba was not a life or death budoka like Takeda. Ueshiba's personality wasn't completely different as both men had fierce temperaments, maintained the philosophy of martial arts. But there major difference was religion which effect Ueshiba perspective on fighting to the death. Granted, I am aware of the other differences between the two though the compassionate and merciful spiritual beliefs of Ueshiba is the most relevant. I am not saying Ueshiba wasn't a fierce budoka, he clearly was, thus, Aikido is budo. Let stress the "do" of budo. The "do" clearly of Ueshiba was the Omoto flavor. This is what I feel make Aikido different, or by some original.

In a nutshell, for the larger picture perspective, competition as defined in Japan 100 years is not inline with what it means today. To take the spirit of Aikido as I am being taught is to apply the physical aspects of Aikido such as harmony, blending, flowing, and balance applying them to life situations and challenges like the one being faced now. This is Aikido at it's highest form.

Competition is a new arena that could polish both the physical and spiritual components of any Aikidoka. It could be a great training ground for polishing waza and the heart. I would hope any serious Aikidoka would approach this matter with balance. Utilizing their highest form of Aikido to meet this challenge of competetion. All I am saying is give it a chance as it may be beneficial. There is no shame in saying it didn't work.



[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-24-2001 at 11:18 AM]

Yamantaka
24th January 2001, 21:46
Dear Jack,

With all due respect, there are so many things that you do not understand, that I find difficult to begin to explain them, in such a medium. Perhaps if we meet face to face, it would be easier. Anyway, I will try to place some definitions :
It definitely is not a case of "emotion facing change" or of writing with "great passion and strong conviction"...
Some may be that way, others not. There is no dilemma.Change isn't inevitable and there is not "just one way". We propose no such dicotomy. Things may happen or they don't. We take position according to our good sense and analysis.
I do not think that Aikido in the West and Aikido in the East are very much different or turned to one hemisphere. I believe it's more concerned with how we understand the art.
Also when you say change "to a degree", it sounds funny. Half-virgin? Semi-Honest? Just a bit of larceny? Either you are in favor of something or you aren't. If competition is positive, we shouldn't propose it "to a degree" but wholeheartedly.
I think the point is : it's impossible to compete in a positive, intelligent and harmonious way. That's a dream. Competition is to do battle, to try to win, to feel good with the defeat of our adversary, to triumph over others, to strike the air with our fists and cry our victory scream while our adversary grovels, defeated, on the ground. Everything else is hipocrisy. As you see, not much harmony, wisdom or positiveness.
Furthermore, non-competitiveness is not exclusive to Aikido. Many other japanese, Korean and Chinese arts, do not choose competition as something desirable.
Without passion, many have explained the disadvantages of competition and the reasons it is prejudicial to a martial art. I won't repeat them again. Karate, Judo, Kendo, Taekwondo, and other sports, are no longer BUDO(Martial Ways) but COMPETITIVE COMBATIVE SPORTS. To pretend they are one and the same is not just a misconception, it confounds the discussion. If a martial art turns into a sport, it is no longer a martial art. And in the case of Aikido, the majority of Aikikai practitioners train in the way perfected by O-Sensei after the war, that is, the absolutely different martial art, geared to cooperation and harmony between nage and uke. To do competition, would be to deviate significantly from the art we practice. Not simply a change : a brutal differentiation.
I tried to clarify some of my points. I may be wrong in some of those points but that's how I see them now. Hope you read these with tolerance and open-mindedness.
Best regards
Yamantaka

dainippon99
24th January 2001, 23:08
i have to say that ubaldo claiming that karate and judo are no budo but "competitive compbat sport" is quite surprising. It seems that many, many japanese masters would disagree. I hardly think any of the aiki-lackeys (myself included) on this board are in any position to make a definate statement about arts that were conceived, practiced, and improved before we were even concious of a foreign land outside our front yard. IMHO

Joseph Svinth
25th January 2001, 07:44
"Today, judo is not a martial art but a sport. The International Judo Federation (IJF) in 1981 at Maastricht, Netherlands, declared that judo should not be a martial art. Judo is like wrestling and boxing. It is a sport recognized by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) as an Olympic sport."

-- Eiichi "Karl" Koiwai, M.D., 7-dan, president of the U.S. Judo Federation from 1968-1976; chairman of the U.S. Olympic Judo Committee from 1969-1973; and current chairman of the sports medicine and promotion committees for U.S. Judo, Inc.

By this definition, Japanese karate is still not entirely a combative sport because the Koreans showed up with $5 million instead of the $3 million the Japanese offered, and as a result TKD made it into the Olympics instead of karate. For the Koreans, it was a sound investment, too, as the inclusion of TKD significantly inflated South Korea's medal count at the 2000 Olympics.

Be that as it may, competition has been built into Japanese collegiate karate since the mid-1930s, so to find budo in the the pre-1868 sense, probably one would do best to look at some of the kata-intensive Ryukyuan Shorin systems. Even there, however, someone interested in trophies probably shouldn't do those older Shorin kata at tournaments, as made-up kata accompanied by songs such as "Kung-fu Fighting" tend to win more trophies than do really nice naihanchi.

[Edited by Joseph Svinth on 01-25-2001 at 01:56 AM]

Yamantaka
25th January 2001, 09:26
Originally posted by dainippon99
i have to say that ubaldo claiming that karate and judo are no budo but "competitive compbat sport" is quite surprising. It seems that many, many japanese masters would disagree. I hardly think any of the aiki-lackeys (myself included) on this board are in any position to make a definate statement about arts that were conceived, practiced, and improved before we were even concious of a foreign land outside our front yard. IMHO

YAMANTAKA : Hello, Bobby!
S***! Joe Svinth beat me to it again. :))
No kidding, Joe's answer in this thread was exactly what I was going to say. I have nothing to add to it.
Best regards

MarkF
25th January 2001, 13:44
Life is a contest, and so are the arts; music, painting, writing, etc. Competition in life wouldn't be necessary if human beings would accept mediocrity as the only goal, but human beings are, well, human. The best of musicians play in the symphonies of the world. Mediocre musicians also have the same teachers.

In Ubaldo's defense, he was, in part, referring too, to Donn Draeger's description of judo. From his earlier post: http://judoinfo.com/draeger.htm .

I think his post and Deshijack's posts went together like two sides of the same coin, actually.

I just don't think life is possible without competition unless you imagine a life as a Brave New World, a good description of non-competitiveness. Read the piece of the Draeger article. The competition doesn't stop when the body does, the type of competition changes. Even when competing with one's self, it still is competition. Bottom line, competition isn't in one form only, as is seen in the higher ranks of the elders of any combative training, room must be made for everyone.

Mark

25th January 2001, 16:41
I have been debating a respond. I understand this is a very highly emotional issue for some rooted in the fear of losing something they love. I understand that, but what I don't understand is accusations of ignorance. I am not a threat. I am offering my ideas based on my experience. I am not God. I doubt if my ideas will change anything. I am offering my words and thoughts in peace. I am not interested in war. It is my intention to continue exploring this new element in Aikido. And at the sametime putting our highly charged emotions aside.

Hayate has a point by saying "Aikido will not be the same anymore if it becomes a sport,it will not be Aikido,it will be something else but not AI-KI-DO." In a Japanese mind set I guess this is true. Having Aikido add sport competition does changes the art's phenotype. People joining Aikido may focus solely on sport achievements and not get what Aikido is about. If this is true, what I see this has already happened and let me refer to my point about balance. Maybe people need a little competition to match the spiritual hemisphere.

If a competition element is put in place, I don't think it will mirror what some are negatively implying. People always think the worse and it usually is never as bad as they feared. I am sure there will be foundations and guidelines dictating competition that are inline with Aikido philosophy. Secondly, I doubt everyone will be forced to do competition nor effected by it. Some dojo's may choose not to focus on competitions, hence stay pure as Hayate put it. Finally, What is "Bu" and what is "DO?" Ken-do got much resistance from the old kenjutsu guard when it was first introduced. Isn't Kendo a Budo? It does have competitions. I am not aware of the ills of competition mentioned by others. I don't think Kendo is junk nor that it isn't Budo. Kendo gets a lot of respect.

Hatake said, "P.S I would like to repeat that:"O-Sensei never changed any Martial Art!!"

To address this, in may line of thinking and in relation to what I said about Kendo, Ueshiba did changed Daito ryu from jujustu to "do." Daito ryu was like the old Kenjutsu. Aikido is like Kendo. In that, a following generation changed the philosophy, thus approach to the originating martial art. Bigger picture, the change from Bujustu to Budo. And what a difference between Bujustu and Budo.


I think the real challenge is, if competition becomes an element, would be by all of us Aikidoka to make the change acceptable. The challenge is in design and handling of competition to be effective within the scope of Aikido. Aikidoka have the ultimate control to make competition whatever they want it to be. What I think most people fear is the lack of confidence in that competition will be uncontrollable. That it get out of hand, and destroy the total dynamic of Aikido. The fear Aikido will be reduce to dance songs and trophy hunters. It will strip all the essence out of Aikido that makes it enjoyable. I agree there is a risk of that. I think the risk is a stones throw to the moon. Many Budo have successfully made the change . I hope the same for Aikido.

Good luck to all.

Yamantaka
25th January 2001, 18:05
Originally posted by DeshiJack
I have been debating a respond. I understand this is a very highly emotional issue for some rooted in the fear of losing something they love. I understand that, but what I don't understand is accusations of ignorance.

YAMANTAKA : I was really afraid of that. You see, English is not my first language and I was in a hurry when I wrote that e-mail. After I read it, I felt you might misunderstand me. Please, forgive me. What I intended to say was : "There are so many things you DID NOT UNDERSTAND IN MY POSTS" and DEFINITELY not accusing you of ignorance. Sorry for that. Apart from that, I hope you will see that my post was not written in anger.

If a competition element is put in place, I don't think it will mirror what some are negatively implying. People always think the worse and it usually is never as bad as they feared. I am sure there will be foundations and guidelines dictating competition that are inline with Aikido philosophy. Secondly, I doubt everyone will be forced to do competition nor effected by it. Some dojo's may choose not to focus on competitions, hence stay pure as Hayate put it.

YAMANTAKA : It's not a question of "resisting change". It's a question of discussing a topic, based on what we know and what has happened to other arts. All other arts had foundations and guidelines on competition but it had not prevented bad things to happen. Of course, no one will be forced to compete but that's not the point. See judo, for instance : The IJF, the Kodokan and all organizations are concerned with competing. If anyone tries to find a teacher to teach him other aspects of judo, he won't find them, because they are almost nihil. Mark San cited one, ONE in the whole wide world! Conclusion : to hold competitions is a true way to force everyone to compete. Those who won't, have the only option of quitting!

Finally, What is "Bu" and what is "DO?" Ken-do got much resistance from the old kenjutsu guard when it was first introduced. Isn't Kendo a Budo? It does have competitions. I am not aware of the ills of competition mentioned by others. I don't think Kendo is junk nor that it isn't Budo. Kendo gets a lot of respect.

YAMANTAKA : Sorry, but Kendo isn't a Budo, Judo isn't a Budo and Karate isn't a Budo. They're COMPETITIVE COMBATIVE SPORTS (See the previous e-mail from Joe Svinth). And Kenjutsu continues to be taught as a martial art, in spite of Kendo. But if the Aikikai decides to hold competitions, everybody will have to agree or to found a different organization apart from Hombu to continue practicing Aikido as a Budo. Do you see that ?

[Bigger picture, the change from Bujustu to Budo. And what a difference between Bujustu and Budo.[/i]

YAMANTAKA : That wasn't directed to me, but to Hayate, but I would like to stress one point : there really isn't so much differente between bujutsu and budo, since the Edo Period. Both hadn't real aplication in combat and were more directed to self-improvement, no matter what bujutsuka and budoka said. One way or the other, we all do Budo(Martial Ways).

Aikidoka have the ultimate control to make competition whatever they want it to be. What I think most people fear is the lack of confidence in that competition will be uncontrollable. That it get out of hand, and destroy the total dynamic of Aikido. The fear Aikido will be reduce to dance songs and trophy hunters. It will strip all the essence out of Aikido that makes it enjoyable. I agree there is a risk of that. I think the risk is a stones throw to the moon. Many Budo have successfully made the change . I hope the same for Aikido.

YAMANTAKA : As I tried to say before on this thread, there are some things that you didn't understand. The problem is : we have a martial art based on cooperation and harmony. That's impossible with competition (one must win, one must lose; we must have rules, which is basically opposed to a martial art process; we must train for competition with disregard to all other things, since we won't have time...) and those are fundamental characteristics of competition, BASIC TO IT. There's no way you can control it and make it the way you want it to be. I, personally, believe that NO BUDO have successfully made the change (Judo has now fewer techniques trained for competition and the philosophical and cultural level of its athletes is very low, since those things do not get points in competition; Karate has favored speed against power, forgot how to kiai and also reduced its techniques; and Taekwondo (yes, I know, it's not a budo, since it's korean in origin) is perhaps the worst of them all, becoming a weak art, in spite of its entry in the Olympics. This last fact doesn't mean Taekwondo has improved but that the Koreans gave 5 million dollars to the IOC to gain that entry, ahead of Karate...
The problem is : we're discussing something that is interesting to us all. We have our positions and points and we defend them. That doesn't mean we should get upset and I hope you forgive for the misunderstanding. I never had the intention to accuse you of ignorant. It was a wrong use of words by someone who isn't native to this language(english). Sorry and let's continue with this valid discussion.

Good luck to all.

YAMANTAKA : And to you, Jack !

Yamantaka
25th January 2001, 19:06
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MarkF
[B]Life is a contest, and so are the arts; music, painting, writing, etc. Competition in life wouldn't be necessary if human beings would accept mediocrity as the only goal, but human beings are, well, human. The best of musicians play in the symphonies of the world. Mediocre musicians also have the same teachers.

YAMANTAKA : I've pointed before that this position seems inclined to bad Darwinianism (survival of the fittest, life is a contest...). Darwin also emphasized cooperation as another major force of evolution, as opposed to competition. Man is quite an example : the thing that made him progress was cooperation. Else how would they be able to kill woolly mammoths or giant cave bears? And further, competition against others is the lowest form of competition. Competition against himself (as in the case of a scientist doing research) might be acceptable but we must not forget that to label everyone that did not compete as mediocres is overstepping the mark. People are different and react in different ways. Each one excels at something, not necessarily at the SAME things.

In Ubaldo's defense, he was, in part, referring too, to Donn Draeger's description of judo. From his earlier post: http://judoinfo.com/draeger.htm .

YAMANTAKA : Well, let's state the points in Draeger's article I agree with :
"...Modern-day Judo is even less within the Budo sphere than was Kano's beloved Kodokan Judo".
"It's patent that no Budo can house a sport form and still be a budo form. Modern-day Judo, WITH ITS CONCENTRATIONS ON SPORTING ASPECTS OF JUDO, thus fails to qualify at this earliest juncture from the requirements of Budo forms".
"For one thing, the Judo training system, as is in vogue in our modern-day society, is in reality a cruel system, insofar as it is wanton to recognize the inexorable decline of a judoist's physical and mental powers as the judoist descends the chronological ladder, as each of us inevitably must".
"Statistics show that top-level judo champions expire prior to age 30...others which do not actually compete against opponents...(kusari-gama and kyudo)...operate at ma-ai of 20 feet or more and the best in these especialities are the oldsters" (about the way old people are mistreated in competitive sports).
"Kano accepted the reality of two types of judo, one an entity in complete accord with nature(classical Judo) and the other, substantially opposed to it(competitive Judo). Kano defined these two types as Judo in a "high" sense (Jodan Judo) and Judo in a "low" sense (Godan Judo)...He also cautioned that the later type (competitive judo) is more entertaining, because it is less precise, plain to the mediocre mind as more of a "game" and contains, therefore, less valuable disciplines. While its technical implications are very similar to those adopted for the "high" Judo, THE END POINT OF A "LOW" JUDO IS A SHORT ROAD TO ALMOST NOWHERE".
"Judo training...must always lay stress on the "harmonious development of the body muscles"...Over-specialization in any area of Judo endeavor cannot achieve this body developmental balance. In essence, this means regulated, balance participation in Randori, Kata and Shiai." (NOTE : In this, I feel Kano Sensei was innocent. And today Kata is almost abandoned, except for a few, trained just for some competitions and for black belt exams. Also they are poorly perforned, since there are a diminishing number of good kata teachers).
"Those who aspire to be proficient in Judo must strive to avoid unnecessary fatigue of body and mind..." (NOTE : Today's preparation for competition leads to pushing the body and the mind to its ultimate limits. Athletes became so stressed that burst out in tears when they win or lose. The Olympic concept of faster, higher and more powerful, leads to over-training, with many times dangerous results. )
"A "survival-of-the-fittest" type of training was always opposed by him (KANO) with great vigor, in that it violates the principal of Judo : the maximum efficient use of the energies.Rather, he advocated the NATURAL, GRADUATED STUDY AND PRACTICE OF JUDO". (NOTE : Competition makes that impossible).
"The sacrifice of quality for quantity, that is, lowering the standards to the whims of the public so that more can come in judo, was never his method... The student had to come to judo, as it was, not Judo to be warped, bent, and weakened, and then taken to the student".

I think his post and Deshijack's posts went together like two sides of the same coin, actually.

YAMANTAKA : I really don't think so.

I just don't think life is possible without competition unless you imagine a life as a Brave New World, a good description of non-competitiveness. Read the piece of the Draeger article. The competition doesn't stop when the body does, the type of competition changes. Even when competing with one's self, it still is competition. Bottom line, competition isn't in one form only, as is seen in the higher ranks of the elders of any combative training, room must be made for everyone.

YAMANTAKA : I guess everybody reads what he wants to see. That's not my reading of the text. And I would like to conclude with a quote from the book "Political Sociology of Sports" by JEAN-MARIE BROHM :
"Sports today are structured as an ideological organ of the State, intent on political domination, cultural oppression and pedagogical mistification. Modern version of the roman arena, it has the function of "opium of the people"; social amusement; ideological alienation; and the production of an enormous conservative mythology. A strategy of mass manipulation; anesthetization of spirits; cult of xenophoby and chauvinism; incitation to suicide through extreme performance; ideology of risk for risk and violence for violence, sports are an institution legitimated and that legitimes the war of everybody against everybody".
I would just add that sports are not used just by the state but by the whole of our society.
IMHO
Your friend
Yamantaka

25th January 2001, 21:28
YAMANTAKA,

I didn't know English was a second language for you. I understand there may also have been misunderstanding on my part.

[quote] YAMANTAKA The problem is : we have a martial art based on cooperation
and harmony. That's impossible with competition (one must win, one must lose; we
must have rules, which is basically opposed to a martial art process; we must train
for competition with disregard to all other things, since we won't have time...) and
those are fundamental characteristics of competition, BASIC TO IT. There's no way
you can control it and make it the way you want it to be. [/qoute]


In a concise thought, sport competition is harmony, it is cooperation. Sport competition is not combat; life or death battle. In sports there is sportsmanship, sports is not a street fight. People cooperate, and are in harmony with one another. Granted some people have attitude problems an therefore lack the understanding of sport. Wining is a state of mind. Some people place a heavier emphasis on it then others. Winning or losing is a personal attitude how that is taken is up to that person when in a sport. But in combat winning is living to see another day, regardless of attitude. That fact is in sport people are not out to kill each other that is harmony and cooperation.

NOw many complain that with some Aikidoka harmony and cooperation is interpreted as "flying/tanking." Many say this leads to poor technique and is the cancer to Aikido. The attitude to "cooperate and harmonize" is not about pretending to be thrown, nor resisting at all costs, but in otherworlds, to have mutual cooperation and respect. To have an attitude of mutual benefit ( I dare say in the lines of sportsmenship ). Arrogantly, and cruelly, beating the holy stuffing out of other to show your the big man on campus. And showing no concern for safety or welfare of others is not being cooperative nor harmonious as I was taught. Nor a sportsmen like conduct. I hope you can see the similaritys of Aikido as being in line and making the transition to sport. A transition that is harmonious with sportsmenship and the philosophy of Aikido and not with combat.

YAMANTAKA,
If I have misunderstood you. Please feel free to make me aware of this. I will be glad also to read any corrections or misunderstandings you have to offer
.

dainippon99
26th January 2001, 04:11
Ubaldo, my freind!
You know what i like about you, man? you sure stand by your convictions. alot of people would have dropped out of the rat race at this point. cheers. let me clarify though. are you saying that you feel aikido is the last true budo? i myself, who practices shodokan, am not in favor of competition any longer. i can see its benefits, but have to agree that it is contrary to my personal feelings on aikido. i will not limit any of my students (when i become a sensei that is) from competing, but i will made known my feelings on it to them.I truly feel that shodokan aikido is real aikido, and it will always be near and dear to me. But i feel that competition just doesnt fit in my idea of budo. i love the system i train, mainly because its so close to aikijujutsu. and at this point in my aiki career, im interested in the martial aspect. I dont intend on competing again, but do intend on going to tournaments to see freinds and go to some awesome seminars. but i do feel that aikido has to retain a non-competition orientation.

a little about face after some introspection on my part, but im young. it's still legal for me!

dainippon99
26th January 2001, 04:14
another question, to you all.
do you think that someone who practices competition aikido can practice true budo. i personally do, and feel that i am.
what do you think?

Yamantaka
26th January 2001, 09:30
Originally posted by DeshiJack
YAMANTAKA,

I didn't know English was a second language for you. I understand there may also have been misunderstanding on my part.

YAMANTAKA : It's all right, my friend!

[quote] YAMANTAKA The problem is : we have a martial art based on cooperation
and harmony. That's impossible with competition (one must win, one must lose; we
must have rules, which is basically opposed to a martial art process; we must train
for competition with disregard to all other things, since we won't have time...) and
those are fundamental characteristics of competition, BASIC TO IT. There's no way
you can control it and make it the way you want it to be. [/qoute]


In a concise thought, sport competition is harmony, it is cooperation. Sport competition is not combat; life or death battle. In sports there is sportsmanship, sports is not a street fight. People cooperate, and are in harmony with one another. Granted some people have attitude problems an therefore lack the understanding of sport. Wining is a state of mind. Some people place a heavier emphasis on it then others. Winning or losing is a personal attitude how that is taken is up to that person when in a sport. But in combat winning is living to see another day, regardless of attitude. That fact is in sport people are not out to kill each other that is harmony and cooperation.

YAMANTAKA : As you see, reading your mail and my quote, we agree to diverge...:))

NOw many complain that with some Aikidoka harmony and cooperation is interpreted as "flying/tanking." Many say this leads to poor technique and is the cancer to Aikido. The attitude to "cooperate and harmonize" is not about pretending to be thrown, nor resisting at all costs, but in otherworlds, to have mutual cooperation and respect.

YAMANTAKA : This happens but not in all dojo.

To have an attitude of mutual benefit ( I dare say in the lines of sportsmenship ). Arrogantly, and cruelly, beating the holy stuffing out of other to show your the big man on campus. And showing no concern for safety or welfare of others is not being cooperative nor harmonious as I was taught. Nor a sportsmen like conduct. I hope you can see the similaritys of Aikido as being in line and making the transition to sport. A transition that is harmonious with sportsmenship and the philosophy of Aikido and not with combat.

YAMANTAKA : As I said before and exposed my views, I find that impossible.

YAMANTAKA,
If I have misunderstood you. Please feel free to make me aware of this. I will be glad also to read any corrections or misunderstandings you have to offer
.

YAMANTAKA : Don't worry. I just love that thread. Sometimes we just have to clear things a bit but no harm done.
Best regards
P.S. By the way, I've just saw that you made me a compliment. When you say that "you didn't know english wasn't my first language", you're implying that my written english is good. Thank you, my friend!


[Edited by YAMANTAKA on 01-26-2001 at 03:34 AM]

Yamantaka
26th January 2001, 09:43
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dainippon99
[B]Dai Nippon,

I feel really red-faced with your words...Most of time, people think I'm being just dumb-headed and insistent but that's not so. I believe that you start a thread and you have convictions, you should stand by them and hold your place. You shouldn't be mean or diselegant but you shouldn't also desist easily, unless you're convinced you are wrong. Thanks for your understanding, much more important coming, as it does, from a Tomiki practitioner.
You see, some of my friends in Tomiki took exception with this thread, thinking I was attacking them personally (I wasn't).
And as to your question if a budo can have sports competition and still be a budo, I'll quote from Donn Draeger, Rokudan of Judo and master of many arts :
""...Modern-day Judo is even less within the Budo sphere than was Kano's beloved Kodokan Judo".
"It's patent that no Budo can house a sport form and still be a budo form. Modern-day Judo, WITH ITS CONCENTRATIONS ON SPORTING ASPECTS OF JUDO, thus fails to qualify at this earliest juncture from the requirements of Budo forms".

Thank you again and best regards from
Yamantaka

Yamantaka
26th January 2001, 09:45
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dainippon99
[B]Dai Nippon,

I feel really red-faced with your words...Most of time, people think I'm being just dumb-headed and insistent but that's not so. I believe that you start a thread and you have convictions, you should stand by them and hold your place. You shouldn't be mean or diselegant but you shouldn't also desist easily, unless you're convinced you are wrong. Thanks for your understanding, much more important coming, as it does, from a Tomiki practitioner.
You see, some of my friends in Tomiki took exception with this thread, thinking I was attacking them personally (I wasn't).
And as to your question if a budo can have sports competition and still be a budo, I'll quote from Donn Draeger, Rokudan of Judo and master of many arts :
""...Modern-day Judo is even less within the Budo sphere than was Kano's beloved Kodokan Judo".
"It's patent that no Budo can house a sport form and still be a budo form. Modern-day Judo, WITH ITS CONCENTRATIONS ON SPORTING ASPECTS OF JUDO, thus fails to qualify at this earliest juncture from the requirements of Budo forms".

Thank you again and best regards from
Yamantaka

P.S. Is Aikido the last true Budo? I don't think so. But it sure is one of them.

26th January 2001, 17:18
Just a few comments and questions about the last few threads.

Concerning the Dreager quote on Judo, could we replace the word Judo with all the Aikido of today? If not, why?

What is the defination of Budo?

Why is Aikido a Budo and not Karate, Judo, Kendo, etc. as mentioned by Yamantaka.

Sport has tournaments, safety gears, and rules of engagement. I can't see any difference in aikido when there is randori other then a tournament format. No one says in sports one has to jump up and down and yell shaking fists "victory" and get awarded a piece of plastic. While the loser slumps into a deep depression. Sports don't have to be so narrow and they are not.

Aikido, by nature in it's difference from Daito ryu (parent art) is more of a gentle art. Being a gentle art, it lends itself to being safe. The goal is of the art is not to harm or kill unlike it's parent art, other martial arts and martial arts on the whole. Aikido's unique goal via controlled and altered combative skill is to is convince an attacker that further attacks are futile. The attacker is to surrender his intent to attack after realizing any attacks can't gain an advantage. The attacker is to realize the defender is superior and will surrender losing the conflict unharmed. This is the main philosophy and drive of Aikido it is deeply rooted the core tenets


Aikido's unique philosophy in martial arts initiates it's own rules of engagement. In both practice and demonstration you have an offensive and a defense by which both enter a mock combat ( to prepare the individual both mentally and physically for an actual conflict) with dictated rules of engagement. For example, offense must attack first and the defense responds to the attack. The defense never initiates an offensive move. The defender must not resist an attack by the offense. The defender must be defensive and receive the attack. The defender in doing so may not harm the offense, but rather control and guide (or direct) them to the ground in form of a fall. This signal is a sign of defeat to the attacker. It also is a clear indication the defender has overcame the attack and defeated the attackers intent to attack again. The conflict is over and participants resets to practice or demonstrate again.

Aikido as combative that doesn't compete in public tournaments nor awards trophies or awards. It is unique in it's hybrid philosophy of martial and Omoto religious tenets. Is not unique in that is contains many elements that define sports. Though it may be argued whether it or isn't a sport, Aikido clearly is evolved like many sports from martial roots and beginnings appeasing or providing an alternative of man's nature to engage in combat.

I think too many who think sports and competition in Aikido imagine combative competitive sports like football, hockey, or rugby. Many don't think of Aikido as a combative or even competitive. But it is. Aikido isn't like tennis, which is not a combative. Aikido is a combative.



[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-26-2001 at 12:23 PM]

26th January 2001, 17:52
many will disagree that Aikido is a sport. I am noticing that Aikido is very much closer to a sport then most realize. All that is lacking in Aikido from being a full blown art is the public venue. Aikido doesn't have open public tournaments where trophies are won. If there are open tournaments in Aikido I see no reason why there should be trophies. I see no reason why it doesn't have to be set up to be a combatitive like football or hockey.

Bring the element of competetion into Aikido will change it. I agree. But not as drasitically or monumentally. Aikido is more inline with kendo as I said before. Both arts came from a jutsu. Both arts are not about life and death matches. Both are not arts of war.

Thank you

szczepan
26th January 2001, 22:48
Originally posted by DeshiJack

Aikido's unique philosophy in martial arts initiates it's own rules of engagement. In both practice and demonstration you have an offensive and a defense by which both enter a mock combat ( to prepare the individual both mentally and physically for an actual conflict) with dictated rules of engagement. For example, offense must attack first and the defense responds to the attack. The defense never initiates an offensive move. The defender must not resist an attack by the offense. The defender must be defensive and receive the attack. The defender in doing so may not harm the offense, but rather control and guide (or direct) them to the ground in form of a fall. This signal is a sign of defeat to the attacker. It also is a clear indication the defender has overcame the attack and defeated the attackers intent to attack again. The conflict is over and participants resets to practice or demonstrate again.

[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-26-2001 at 12:23 PM]

I don't know if/how long you practice aikido, but from your post it seems to me like your knowlegde is rather from books/video or you must be quite beginner.

there are no rules in aikido only spontanous application of techniques.Don't misunderstand pedagogical approach setting behaviors in a dojo with normal application aikido techniques.

There is no defender/attacker dualism - only as presented to beginners for educational reasons.

develop your eyes better - look at top shihans to see principles.Don't limit yourself to phisical side - try to study their internal behaviors.

Fall is kind of techniques which can lead to escape/counter/preserving phisical integrity and not any " sign of defeat to the attacker" and it's only possible cos tori create an opening for uke.

there is no conflict at all - tori's control(mentally and phisically) is preserved from the beginning of technique.

...etc....etc.....

dainippon99
26th January 2001, 23:17
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA

[B]Dai Nippon,

I feel really red-faced with your words

what do you mean, red faced? :smilejapa

27th January 2001, 04:57
Hello Szczepan Janczuk,

You bring to light precisely what was aiming at. What I was attempt to show in an elementary fashion who Aikido can be perceived as a sport or sport like activity. To the outside world, despite how Aikidoka perceive, the average Joe sees Aikido in terms of defense and attack. Even some Aikidoka perceive it in this manner. The duality concept of no offensive and no defense functions in Aikido, but that is also can apply to most combative sports. But, the concept of no duality is communicated in the same "zen koanish" language in other sports. By boiling this down to a Dick and Jane level make it much easier to see the similarity in a fundamental way.

I had mentioned before in a previous post there is no duality between mind and body. That the mind follows the body and the body follows the mind. Technique affects the mind and the mind affects the body. I mentioned this was the highest form of Aikido.

Being thrown or Ukemi/ being on the ground universally is a sign of defeat when your put there by someone else. School yard fights are a good example. Judo and BJJ both have techniques for ground fighting as other martial arts. Aikido doesn't have techniques. The point of this is to show how Aikido can move into the field of a gentlemen’s sport.

Aikido can have a sport division where the tori is judged based on execution and choice of technique count much like in gymnastic or skating. This is the point I am driving at when I said "design is up to Aikidoka." I was implying that it didn't have to be a NHB, but instead a contest within the perimeters of Aikido. For instance, image the contest as a public demonstration with the focus on all the Aikidoka must performing at their best level. No mistakes. No sloppy waza. Keep in mind this is an academic example.

With any change a new path is taken, I am aware that any change like proposed would have an effect on Aikido. This is the reason I said previously sport Aikido could be a division of Aikido. Now granted I don’t make those decisions. I am not a part of the powers that be. So all this is only academic. Therefore,
I was hoping someone would bring up how I thought sport Aikido would be done? I underestimated the emotional grip and passion that many Aikidoka have for Aikido.

Yamantaka
27th January 2001, 10:19
Originally posted by dainippon99

Originally posted by YAMANTAKA

[B]Dai Nippon,

I feel really red-faced with your words

what do you mean, red faced? :smilejapa

YAMANTAKA : Abashed...:((

Yamantaka
27th January 2001, 11:28
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DeshiJack
[B]Just a few comments and questions about the last few threads.
Concerning the Dreager quote on Judo, could we replace the word Judo with all the Aikido of today? If not, why?

YAMANTAKA : Sorry, I didn't understand your question. Could you rephrase it?

What is the defination of Budo?
Why is Aikido a Budo and not Karate, Judo, Kendo, etc. as mentioned by Yamantaka.

YAMANTAKA : I explained all those points in my previous post. Since you didn't discuss them, I suppose you didn't read them. Anyway, you'll have them explained at :
http://www.furyu.com/onlinearticles/Defs1.html
http://koryu.com/library/dskoss8.html
http://koryu.com/library/dskoss6.html
http://koryu.com/library/mskoss1.html
Beginning from the Edo Period, Budo and Bujutsu(Martial Ways and Martial Arts) become intermingled. Japanese people do not make a very big difference between them. Grand Masters of Bujutsu, such as the Headmaster of Yagyu Shinkage Ryu, sometimes call their art as BUDO. Both (Budo and Bujutsu) are really martial ways (BUDO), since none of them train for everyday application in war.
In this sense, Aikido is a Budo and Karate, Judo, Kendo, are COMBATIVE COMPETITIVE SPORTS, a thing which is recognized among many others by the International Judo Federation and by many japanese masters(Read my previous posts and the post by Joseph Svinth).


Sport has tournaments, safety gears, and rules of engagement. I can't see any difference in aikido when there is randori other then a tournament format. No one says in sports one has to jump up and down and yell shaking fists "victory" and get awarded a piece of plastic. While the loser slumps into a deep depression. Sports don't have to be so narrow and they are not.

YAMANTAKA : I don't know your environment and what television you do watch. The only thing I can say is : i watch, through my satellite dish, television from all over the world; I watch many competition matches; and I talk with many competitive practitioners of Judo, Karate, Kendo, Taekwondo, Hapkido and Aikido(Tomiki and AS styles). What I witness all the time(there are a few exceptions, of course) is machismo and obsession at winning. And, YES, the up and down jumping and yelling (Quite, quite, common...)

Aikido, by nature in it's difference from Daito ryu (parent art) is more of a gentle art. Being a gentle art, it lends itself to being safe.

YAMANTAKA : Believe me, if you trained with Chiba Sensei, Tamura Sensei in his prime, Hiroshi Isoyama Sensei or Welf Quade Sensei, from Germany, you wouldn't call Aikido "a gentle art"

The goal is of the art is not to harm or kill unlike it's parent art, other martial arts and martial arts on the whole. Aikido's unique goal via controlled and altered combative skill is to is convince an attacker that further attacks are futile. The attacker is to surrender his intent to attack after realizing any attacks can't gain an advantage. The attacker is to realize the defender is superior and will surrender losing the conflict unharmed. This is the main philosophy and drive of Aikido it is deeply rooted the core tenets
Aikido's unique philosophy in martial arts initiates it's own rules of engagement. In both practice and demonstration you have an offensive and a defense by which both enter a mock combat ( to prepare the individual both mentally and physically for an actual conflict) with dictated rules of engagement. For example, offense must attack first and the defense responds to the attack. The defense never initiates an offensive move. The defender must not resist an attack by the offense. The defender must be defensive and receive the attack. The defender in doing so may not harm the offense, but rather control and guide (or direct) them to the ground in form of a fall. This signal is a sign of defeat to the attacker. It also is a clear indication the defender has overcame the attack and defeated the attackers intent to attack again. The conflict is over and participants resets to practice or demonstrate again.

YAMANTAKA : Believe me again : That doesn't happen in all dojo and isn't a characteristic of all teachers.

Aikido as combative that doesn't compete in public tournaments nor awards trophies or awards.

YAMANTAKA : Some styles do, as Tomiki and AS. The results have been complex and after 40 years m/l are still under observation and not much practiced.

Though it may be argued whether it or isn't a sport,

YAMANTAKA : Thank you for admitting that.

I think too many who think sports and competition in Aikido imagine combative competitive sports like football, hockey, or rugby. Many don't think of Aikido as a combative or even competitive. But it is. Aikido isn't like tennis, which is not a combative. Aikido is a combative.

YAMANTAKA : Let me point out that I have made my opinion clear in my previous posts. My critique of competition is not restricted to combatives but involves all forms of competition, including kata. Whatever involves competition, judges, winners and losers and will to defeat, are in my opinion intrinsically bad. And we have discussed also Darwinism. Man is not competitive : Our society is. Darwin stressed the equal importance of competition and cooperation. Our capitalistic society has always stressed competition (Survival of the fittest) as the only way, when it isn't. Without cooperation, feeble man wouldn't have survived the mammoth and cave bear times.
Best regards
Yamantaka





[Edited by YAMANTAKA on 01-27-2001 at 05:30 AM]

Yamantaka
27th January 2001, 11:36
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dainippon99
[B]i myself, who practices shodokan, am not in favor of competition any longer. i can see its benefits, but have to agree that it is contrary to my personal feelings on aikido. i will not limit any of my students (when i become a sensei that is) from competing, but i will made known my feelings on it to them.

YAMANTAKA : Bobby San,
Could you explain your position to us? why competition is contrary to your pesonal feelings? Why don't you favor them anymore ?
Best regards

28th January 2001, 00:06
Yamantaka,

I am sorry if you didn't understand my correctly. I will rephrase.

1. What is the defination of Budo by how the Japanese define it, how they, in general use, in their culture and speech; connotation and denotation, and every day usage of the term. This is what I was getting at. At this point further answering of this would be restraining. There is no need to argue this point in other words, I just wanted others input.


2. Your mention of Darwin is eyebrow raising. Evolution is a key to my suggestion throughout this academic discussion.

a. Aikido in general naturally changes and adapts to the current society ( of competition as you put it) and evolves a new legs; sport. Aikido evolved from Daito ryu and other bujutsu into a budo art. Just as Japan evolved from warring states to a modern Nation; from swords to plowshares. Aikido's next step could be sport. This is just a suggestion in this academic discussion. Please read my posts.

b. I hope this discussion will also evolve. Until then there is no reason for me to continue a discussion that seems to be used as a personal vehicle for some that is something beyond a simple discussion to explore possibilities.

Those against competetion shouldn't compete,e.g. arguementation. Those who make a sport of things should be in favor of sport. Isn't this the true way?

[Edited by DeshiJack on 01-27-2001 at 06:13 PM]

MarkF
28th January 2001, 02:43
Ubaldo,
I cannot argue your convictions. No one can. This is your "snapshot" of aikido today, so don't lose it. Hold on to it, even if you feel some are not worthy of the club, as the club is usually for the minority anyway.

Someone said this to me something like that recently, so I don't worry so much anymore.

No one has really said it, but it has been implied time and time again. Kano said randori/shiai was intended for everyone's welfare, not just the one with the hand raised.

"Mutual Welfare."

Joe quoted three sports organization concerning sports. Were they going to say anything but that?

But there is a point to all this. Competition has been around since before 1868, before the 1830s when the word was first used. Competition has been in kyujutsu before there was kyudo. I see this argument simply as an argument over the same -do Vs -jutsu argument, only this time it is budo raising its head to be heard, not bujutsu.

Both judo and aikido were practiced to preserve life, not take it. If the simple definition of budo is the way of the warrior, then neither is budo. Budo, bugei, whatever you wish to call them are no more. Instead we "pretend" to do it, some with imaginary people in front of them, and some with a bad example of one, or makiwara, so just what are they doing?

Most of the quotes here come from Koryu.com, but this isn't sacrosanct law, it is opinion. I can even paraphrase a quote from Diane Skoss, who, while in the midst of a bar room brawl a while ago, in the koryu threads, was reminded of the competition which took place in kyujutsu, and before this sanctified year of 1868. She said (Please excuse me Diane, if I muddle your words some)"OK, actually then, koryu would be where "competition" is not the goal. (my quotes, not hers)."

But modern judo IS a sport and I have no problem with that at all. The problem is that, when taken and stripped of everything sporting, what is it? What is it about the physicality of the thing which sets so many off in this direction? I'm asking because I'd like to know. Judo has been called everything in the book, and more (I can't post what some call it, nor can I post what some think of aikido), but most of those who play judo, accept it, and don't really argue those good points which aikido "players" could do now that a good example of what is bad when budo does become a sport has been experienced, debated, put off the map by some of the more respectable people who play judo even though it is "only" a sport.

Ubaldo, I said your argument and that of Jack's were "two sides of the same coin." You don't accept that, and that is fine, but that is what it really is. You gave a great account of why not, and he gave a damn good one of why so. Heads or tails. Different, but the same. It is aikido being discussed, isn't it?

Well, sport or not, I do what I do my way and no other. I don't mirror my teachers, nor have I made any significant difference in it (one hopes, but generally that is it). So, as Donn Draeger said, judo "is outside the sphere of budo." Fine. So what is aikido? Certainly, it isn't budo, it can't be, not if the descriptions given over and over again are correct. It isn't "Way of the Warrior." Warriors did, or do, what aikidoka abhor almost as much as they do sports, kill. Oh, and they did practice before being put in this distinct group; killers.

I once said in that same thread where I probably misinterpreted Ms. Skoss' words that "Practicing koryu isn't protecting something which is dying, it is all ready dead."

Doesn't everyone, even tomorrow in the superbowl, at least pretend to kill? If so, then budo is dead, and sports are all that is left. Do I play a concerto with an orchestra the way the composer of that concerto wanted it to be played, or do I play it as the live director next to me wants it? Should I accept another's interpretations of John Lennon's "Steel and Glass" or do I accept only his (you cannot accept anyone else's version of this song because it was something personal about another member of a band he once founded). So do you perform the "killer concerto," or the one which originally "killed," by the original?

I pretend on the mat, doing something which could very well kill, but I am pretty confident that it won't. So does most everyone here. After all, you do want to be the best you can be, don't you? Who is going to inform you of this when it happens? A symbolic act of victory over the enemy, politely done, is not budo or sports. Then what is it?

Mark

MarkF
28th January 2001, 02:45
BTW: Ubaldo, believe it or not, I am on your side. I used to go to the well at every opportunity, but I've grown weary of the chase.;)

Jeff Cook
28th January 2001, 03:14
In support of Mark, I would like to put this idea forth.

Budo, bujutsu, sport applications and combat are virtually identical on an elemental level if you own and adhere to this one precept: Think not of winning, but of not losing!

If you apply this rule, how does it support or change your arguments?

Jeff Cook
Wabujitsu

dainippon99
28th January 2001, 07:29
sorry for being a bit slow on the response, ubaldo.

I was thinking (as i beleive we all should) on the direction of aikido, IMPO. i have been to competition, and seen the looks on the faces of people who didnt finish first. I saw people yelling at the ones in randori shiai, telling them to win win win. Apart from being quite obnoxious, i have to say that it didnt add to the overall friendly and fun atmosphere. I was also thinking about the art i practice. I find it very stimulating because of its extreme closeness to aikijujutsu (tomiki-ryu is aikijujutsu,in my opinion, because tomiki sensei never studied "aikido"). Its techniques are fast and hard, very martial. but the competition aspect as always kinda ate at me. but i decided not to reject it until i tried it. so i competed in kata. got second. that made me feel good, i have to admit. and i didnt see anything in competition that really irked me. but, you know, i think that my aikido training has made me more sensitive to instincts. and i always kinda felt, well... bad about it. you know what i mean. when you know that something is out of place. that feeling you get when you do something you know is gonna dissapoint your father. i just recently recognised what it was that was making me feel that way. So i dont plan on competing again. dont beleive in it anymore. people can do what they feel is necessary, but i wont have that feeling i had while i was waiting for the reslults again.

I beleive aikdio has to remain a non competitive art.
To quote o-sensei, "True budo is within yourself to find."

I'm trying.

MarkF
28th January 2001, 20:49
Hi, Jeff,
A point well made. I found training to win sets you up to lose. If you train to do your best instead, winning feels good, and you may just do that about half the time.

I think of it as training for a chess match. Don't play to win, play to stay even. If your opponent isn't expecting this, it just may set him up, but if not, you are prepared not to win in the end. Participation is key, not winning or losing.

Tough to teach, though. Kano said this basically from the beginning. By the 1930s some were saying "this is not my judo." Well, possibly the new movement back to tradition will take hold. It can happen.;)

Mark

BTW: Jeff, it is a hard sell, but thanks for your support.

Yamantaka
28th January 2001, 23:52
Originally posted by MarkF
Hi, Jeff,
A point well made. I found training to win sets you up to lose. If you train to do your best instead, winning feels good, and you may just do that about half the time.

I think of it as training for a chess match. Don't play to win, play to stay even. If your opponent isn't expecting this, it just may set him up, but if not, you are prepared not to win in the end. Participation is key, not winning or losing.

Tough to teach, though. Kano said this basically from the beginning. By the 1930s some were saying "this is not my judo." Well, possibly the new movement back to tradition will take hold. It can happen.;)

Mark

BTW: Jeff, it is a hard sell, but thanks for your support.


YAMANTAKA : Interval for resting...And wait for the 37th round...
Mark, my friend, you need not remember me that you are on my side : I know that! Even if some people does not understand it, this is a healthy discussion, without any real competition :))
Some points :
a) if you read again my posts, I said before that Budo are "martial WAYS", not arts, techniques or training. The main purpose of Budo is self-improvement not proficiency in war of fights. Since the Edo Period, neither Bujutsu, nor Budo, were concerned with fighting but with the study of an ART, intent on perfecting the individual. So we have no problem with "killing", as you supposed and we are still against competition;
b) Kano Sensei was wrong. He imagined competition (not Randori)as a temporary process to atract inteligent young people to the REAL judo. The process escaped his control and very soon competition was the only important thing. And please don't say it isn't. Kata is poorly performed and all training is concentrated in Shiai. Nagewaza is almost forgotten (to the point that some judoka look after BJJ (a derived art) to learn it again. Why? because almost no one in Judo knows how to do it!The ART of Judo has almost completely dissapeared; and
c) please, do not propose participation in Shiai "half-heartedly". You know, better than myself, the extreme pressure to compete. No one admits entering in a competition not completely intent and anxious to win. That's impossible! When you enter in a competition, you enter to win, your coach trains you to win, your parents, your friends wish you to win and the public wants to see real dispute, not a friends' gathering...That's the truth, let's not lie to ourselves.
I can't answer for Meik and Diane (two respected friends) but I don't think (as you yourself admited) that you really understand them. This discussion easily gets emotional and miss the points. I do believe that, when a martial way introduces sport competition in its curriculum, it will be no longer a martial way (Budo); I do believe that competition, since its beginnings as in the Roman Coliseum was used as an instrument of domination (Panem et Circensis, you know...); and the judo I love is not modern olympic judo but Mifune's Judo (very similar to Aikido).
I do not like competition and I don't think it's progress, advancement or anything like that. I do not say Aikido is better than judo because it doesn't have competition. I say they are two different things, both deserving respect. My son and his students crosstrain in judo and many judoka friends crosstrain in Aikido. I believe we both have profit. The initial discussion was : must Aikido have competition? It's a pity that much of this thread wasn't about that topic and debating what people said (pro and against) but went straight sometime to an emotional combat. Let's try to discuss arguments, not emotions.
A last point : congratulations on your great capacity for elegant discussion. I have much to learn with you.
Always your friend
Yamantaka

Yamantaka
28th January 2001, 23:55
Dear Bobby,

Thank you for a very sincere and interesting testimony from a former competitor.
Best regards
Yamantaka


Originally posted by dainippon99
sorry for being a bit slow on the response, ubaldo.

I was thinking (as i beleive we all should) on the direction of aikido, IMPO. i have been to competition, and seen the looks on the faces of people who didnt finish first. I saw people yelling at the ones in randori shiai, telling them to win win win. Apart from being quite obnoxious, i have to say that it didnt add to the overall friendly and fun atmosphere. I was also thinking about the art i practice. I find it very stimulating because of its extreme closeness to aikijujutsu (tomiki-ryu is aikijujutsu,in my opinion, because tomiki sensei never studied "aikido"). Its techniques are fast and hard, very martial. but the competition aspect as always kinda ate at me. but i decided not to reject it until i tried it. so i competed in kata. got second. that made me feel good, i have to admit. and i didnt see anything in competition that really irked me. but, you know, i think that my aikido training has made me more sensitive to instincts. and i always kinda felt, well... bad about it. you know what i mean. when you know that something is out of place. that feeling you get when you do something you know is gonna dissapoint your father. i just recently recognised what it was that was making me feel that way. So i dont plan on competing again. dont beleive in it anymore. people can do what they feel is necessary, but i wont have that feeling i had while i was waiting for the reslults again.

I beleive aikdio has to remain a non competitive art.
To quote o-sensei, "True budo is within yourself to find."

I'm trying.

Yamantaka
29th January 2001, 00:08
[QUOTE]Originally posted by DeshiJack
[B]Yamantaka,
I am sorry if you didn't understand my correctly. I will rephrase.
1. What is the defination of Budo by how the Japanese define it, how they, in general use, in their culture and speech; connotation and denotation, and every day usage of the term. This is what I was getting at. At this point further answering of this would be restraining. There is no need to argue this point in other words, I just wanted others input.

YAMANTAKA : Sorry, I was talking about japanese's definition of Budo; its general use, in their culture and speech; connotation and denotation, and every day usage of the term. But since you don't want me to write anymore, I'll respect your wish.

2. Your mention of Darwin is eyebrow raising. Evolution is a key to my suggestion throughout this academic discussion.

YAMANTAKA : Well, I can't say no more, since you don't want to hear and you didn't explain if you agree or disagree with my points on Darwinism, nor how evolution is a key to your reasoning.

a. Aikido in general naturally changes and adapts to the current society ( of competition as you put it) and evolves a new legs; sport. Aikido evolved from Daito ryu and other bujutsu into a budo art. Just as Japan evolved from warring states to a modern Nation; from swords to plowshares. Aikido's next step could be sport.

YAMANTAKA : Or not...

This is just a suggestion in this academic discussion. Please read my posts.

YAMANTAKA : I have read them with attention and I have tried to answer them all. And answering your arguments, not just presenting my own.

b. I hope this discussion will also evolve. Until then there is no reason for me to continue a discussion that seems to be used as a personal vehicle for some that is something beyond a simple discussion to explore possibilities.

YAMANTAKA : Sorry that you interpret our discussion in that way.

Best regards

Jerry Johnson
29th January 2001, 02:54
OOP! Wrong forum. Sorry.

[Edited by Jerry Johnson on 01-28-2001 at 10:19 PM]

MarkF
29th January 2001, 11:10
HI, Ubaldo,
Thank you for your comments. You are most eloquent especially when discussing one's convictions. I certainly have no problems here.

You know how I feel about modern Olympic competition, especially where judo is concerned and I'm not defending it. I brought up a question concerning what aikido really is for the simple reason that it was said to be considered for competitive purposes.

I didn't misunderstand Ms. Skoss. She also said it in email as well, but that wasn't the purpose of the paraphrase. I just believe sporting competition can be separated from competition itself.

Well, we differ over a translation and that I certainly won't argue.

This is your thread, and if you wish to keep it dead on square as the title of your post, I cannot say much else. I simply do not have enough aikido experience to do so. My experience in shodokan aikido was brief, but I loved doing it. I also say that both, when stripped down to their foundations, are, basically the same thing, and I also presented an argument as to what it is.

BTW: I studied music with the same intentions, and I also won and lost there, as well.

Again, thank you for your kind words, but I will step back from this thread.

Mark

yamatodamashii
29th January 2001, 12:51
Originally posted by YAMANTAKA
[ a. Aikido in general naturally changes and adapts to the current society ( of competition as you put it) and evolves a new legs; sport. Aikido evolved from Daito ryu and other bujutsu into a budo art. Just as Japan evolved from warring states to a modern Nation; from swords to plowshares. Aikido's next step could be sport.


But Daito ryu did NOT evolve into aikido; Daito ryu continues on it's course (evolving in it's own way). Aikido is separate art, with it's own techniques and philosophies; if these philosophies change, then it should no longer be cosidered aikido, any more than cubist paintings can be considered realist.

Daniel Pokorny
29th January 2001, 13:35
There were sport activities created like Football, Baseball, Basketball (all of which I've enjoyed) etc.... with the intention of competition in mind. This can be a very healthy thing. However, we must also consider the "goal" of the mental and physical training when we are to compete against others that also participate in these activities. The goal of your training in sport is really, to become proficient enough to "defeat" those that you compete with. This goal is applied to both team sports or individual competitions. You are training to become the "best" in that sport, always gauging yourself against the others.

I have yet to meet any serious Aikido practitioners that are training to be anything but "their own" best, which is a vastly different kind of training. This is perhaps where the competitive person may see some illusion of alignment however, it is just that, an illusion. There is no competition with another in Aikido, only various ways of survival.

Regards,
Dan P. - Mongo

Yamantaka
29th January 2001, 21:07
Originally posted by yamatodamashii

But Daito ryu did NOT evolve into aikido; Daito ryu continues on it's course (evolving in it's own way). Aikido is separate art, with it's own techniques and philosophies; if these philosophies change, then it should no longer be cosidered aikido, any more than cubist paintings can be considered realist.

YAMANTAKA : Well, I completely agree with you, Jason San but...that quote wasn't mine!
One thing we must observe : this thread got more than 1.500 views and more than 56 replies. At least it catered to the interests of many people, don't you think so?
Best regards and good keiko

Yamantaka
29th January 2001, 21:11
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MarkF
[B]HI, Ubaldo,
Thank you for your comments. You are most eloquent especially when discussing one's convictions. I certainly have no problems here.
You know how I feel about modern Olympic competition, especially where judo is concerned and I'm not defending it. I brought up a question concerning what aikido really is for the simple reason that it was said to be considered for competitive purposes.
I didn't misunderstand Ms. Skoss. She also said it in email as well, but that wasn't the purpose of the paraphrase. I just believe sporting competition can be separated from competition itself.
Well, we differ over a translation and that I certainly won't argue.
This is your thread, and if you wish to keep it dead on square as the title of your post, I cannot say much else. I simply do not have enough aikido experience to do so. My experience in shodokan aikido was brief, but I loved doing it. I also say that both, when stripped down to their foundations, are, basically the same thing, and I also presented an argument as to what it is.
BTW: I studied music with the same intentions, and I also won and lost there, as well.
Again, thank you for your kind words, but I will step back from this thread.
Mark

YAMANTAKA : Shall we call it quits? Of course, my friend! We fought the good fight and neither beat the other. I think we both won. That's good.
Until our next one :))
Ubaldo.

P Goldsbury
22nd April 2001, 07:34
It is a long time since anyone added to this thread, but since my name was mentioned by Ubaldo Alcantara in his first post and since I have recently joined this discussion forum, I think I should make some kind of comment.

I think Ubaldo quoted me from Stanley Pranin's 'Aikido Journal' forum, where the thread received a large number of posts. I think there the posts are still contiinuing.

In my position in the IAF there is very little chance to discuss all the issues involved and so I found the arguments very illuminating.

The pressure on the IAF to admit some form of competitve demonstrations has come from the sports federations of which the IAF is a member. I think they would very much like to include aikido demonstrations in the tele-digests sponsored by the large companies (and this would also be a source of income).

However, and I hope this reassures Ubaldo, I have consistently answered that the IAF will not change its position simply to court popularity and that we will not engage in competitive demonsrations of any kind.

Thus, the aikido demonstrations in Akita will be traditional. Groups from various nations will demonstrate a repertoire of techniques, followed by high-ranking shihans and finally by Doshu. It will be like the annual All-Japan demonstration in May, except much shorter.

Then we will all go and have a party and meet each other as friends.

I hope this information is of value.

Best wishes to all,

Peter Goldsbury
(IAF Chairman)

George Ledyard
22nd April 2001, 15:53
Originally posted by yamatodamashii
Now, as far as actually PRACTICING aikido... I start next month, at a new school in my area. I haven't trained in it, yet, myself.
My question is, as I understand the nature of "aiki"... you must BLEND with your opponent's energy (ai-ki). Since this very concept negates the idea of ATTACKING, how can you have competition and still call it "aikido"?

Although this is only tangential to the issue of competition I would like to clear up a common misconception that appears over and over in discussions about Aikido.

Whereas Aikido is about blending or joining there are two ways that can come about. Many people seem to be under the misconception that an Aikido practitioner stands and waits for an attack so he can blend with it. That conception of the art is entirely too passive. In Aikido you don't wait for an attack but rather initiate. This may consist of moving into the maai that causes your opponent to launch his attack or it may be that you launch the attack yourself and then use the energy of his response to set up a technique.

In any case you can certainly initiate yourself. Then there is the issue of blending itself. Most people think of this as blending with the energy given you by the attacker. The opposite side of this is not given the attention it deserves by many Aikidoka which is what you do if the attacker cuts his energy and resists. At the point where the attacker is not going to supply the energy for the throw the defender must do so. Blending then becomes a matter of drawingf power from the earth through your own structire and joining it with the attacker's structure without conflicting with their strength.

Styles that put emphasis on martial application tend to work more on this part of the practice by using static training exercises to build strength and base. So then you have the choice to use the attacker's energy against him or use your own energy to take his center; whichever is appropriate.

The real reason to not have Aikido competition is that there is no safe way in which to do it. O-Sensei didn't oppose competition because it wasn't unharmonious per se. That's a kind of New Age add-on by later generations of Aikido folks. O-Sensei actually had a number of competitions in his career as did his students when they were speading Aikido.

The main reason O-Sensei stopped doing real challenges was that it was too easy to seriously injure someone. The techniques we do are dangerous and at the heart are based on atemi. To compete the atemi would be taken out. At that point too much emphasis would have to be placed on strength in technique. Dangerous locks would have to be removed for safety and soon you would have an art that is destroyed from a martial point of view.

TIM BURTON
22nd April 2001, 18:02
George,
Quote,
“That conception of the art is entirely too passive. In Aikido you don't wait for an attack but rather initiate. This may consist of moving into the mai-ai that causes your opponent to launch his attack or it may be that you launch the attack yourself and then use the energy of his response to set up a technique.
In any case you can certainly initiate yourself”.

I must agree whole heartedly with you on this point, here is an exercise I posted on another thread whilst trying to convey this principle.

Quote,
“An exercise I teach to my students is one that explores Ma-ai, in order that they can experience it at work. Thus forming a basic understanding of the principle of ma-ai quickly.
First allocate an area two tatami square and only allow Toshu and Tanto to move around its edge. Tanto can thrust at any time, but Toshu will soon clearly see that Tanto will try to close the distance between them to a “comfortable” one before attempting an attack. Many times Tanto will inadvertently invade the area of the square or cut its corners whilst trying to shorten the ma-ai before they thrust. It does not take long before Toshu recognises the attacking ma-ai unique to this particular partner. Toshu can then use this new knowledge to react to attacks a fraction of a second before they are generated because they recognise the sign of Tanto moving into their comfortable attack position, just before the thrust is made.
Later, additions to this exercise can be added, such as getting Toshu to cause/illicit an attack from Tanto by reducing the ma-ai themselves, thus dictating when Tanto will attack without Tanto realising this is occurring.
Tanto can also benefit by changing the exercise in order to encourage their thrusts to be made over a greater distance than normal in order to monopolise on the ma-ai of Toshu’s comfort zone. Attacking from outside this has the effect of stunning Toshu as they struggle mentally for a split second to comprehend that an attack has been made without invading their safe zone first”.

Budo00
24th April 2001, 14:25
I can't even imagine what aikido would look/be like if made competitive? I am not really an aikidoka but I have had some training in it and my perceptions of it are that it is an art of centering one's self.

I guess it would look kind of like Steven Segal movies if you were to compete to "win."

If it becomes competitive, I think this will be a step backwards for the evolution of a highly spiritual art. I don't think you could call it aikido any longer, as the very name "aikido" does not imply sport or competition.

I am sure that if we continue to see these sorts of bastardizations of styles, it will not be long before you see catholic nuns wrestling in the WWF, Buddhist monks holding 'death matches' and ballet dancers wearing black belts and arm wrestling each other to ‘test their skills’


Dean Nelson

PRehse
24th April 2001, 16:08
Bobby wrote

<<
tomiki-ryu is aikijujutsu,in my opinion, because tomiki sensei never studied "aikido"
>>

Strange statement - so in 1960 what was he teaching at Aikikai Honbu.


Dean wrote:
<<
If it becomes competitive, I think this will be a step backwards for the evolution of a highly spiritual art. I don't think you could call it aikido any longer, as the very name "aikido" does not imply sport or competition.

I am sure that if we continue to see these sorts of bastardizations of styles, it will not be long before you see catholic nuns wrestling in the WWF, Buddhist monks holding 'death matches' and ballet dancers wearing black belts and arm wrestling each other to ‘test their skills’
>>


As Ubaldo mentioned this debate revolves around the direction the Aikikai should take yet because Tomiki's Aikido has gone down this path it is made mention of. Some point out the benefits, some detract. However, considering Tomiki's history with Ueshiba I would be very careful calling his style a bastardization. I suggest Dean that you do a little bit of reading before you go off on colourful tangents.

Budo00
24th April 2001, 18:15
Originally posted by PRehse

As Ubaldo mentioned this debate revolves around the direction the Aikikai should take yet because Tomiki's Aikido has gone down this path it is made mention of. Some point out the benefits, some detract. However, considering Tomiki's history with Ueshiba I would be very careful calling his style a bastardization. I suggest Dean that you do a little bit of reading before you go off on colourful tangents.

When did I say any thing about Tomiki's history or make mention of "his style?" I was not commenting on any particular style of aikido. I am speaking hypothetically about some thing that hasn't even happened.

The "colourful tangents" were meant to be funny. I am just commenting on how Americanized and money oriented all arts and religions have become. {Do I really need to explain that?}

I am not an aikido practitioner. Yes, I do need to do more reading about the subject but you didn't re-read my post properly.

Are you just looking to attack some one or help a non aikido person learn something about the art/style? I am always open to learning some thing new.


Dean Nelson
self ordained expert on all needless subjects
You can visit my site at: http://www.geocities.com/hellbows_411

Yamantaka
24th April 2001, 21:11
Originally posted by PRehse


As Ubaldo mentioned this debate revolves around the direction the Aikikai should take yet because Tomiki's Aikido has gone down this path it is made mention of. Some point out the benefits, some detract. However, considering Tomiki's history with Ueshiba I would be very careful calling his style a bastardization. I suggest Dean that you do a little bit of reading before you go off on colourful tangents.

YAMANTAKA : You're right, Peter! By the way, the original title of this thread was exactly "VERY BAD NEWS FOR AIKIKAI PEOPLE" and involved discussion of a possible introduction of competition in Aikikai Aikido.
As you also said, due to its nature (competition) there was some talk about Shodokan (Tomiki Aikido) but never in disrespect.
I believe that everything is subject to discussion, including competition in Aikikai, Tomiki Aikido competition and Tomiki Sensei's ideas about competition. But never in anger...
Best

Nathan Scott
24th April 2001, 22:59
Hello,

I'm coming into this discussion a bit late, but fwiw - I feel very strongly that structured competition (sport) is the worse thing you could do to aikido, and would literally destroy the art.

Competition is the exact opposite of what we need. We don't need the techniques to get watered down more, and we don't need any more politics and power struggles. We need to be researching how to make aikido effective again in accord with the founders vision.

What will happen to aikido if we join in competition?

The answer is clear. One simply needs to look at kendo, judo and many types of karate to see what will happen given a little time. These arts mostly incorporated competition in order to get around the ban on martial arts practice that followed WWII. The damage is irreversable now, and aikido does not need to follow suit as these arts did. Kano sensei of judo had not intended for his art to turn into what it has, and senior members of judo, kendo and karate (and other arts that compete) are now grumbling between themselves about how they have lost the essence of their art.

Does aikido really need to grow that much more, or that much faster? I don't think so. It looks to me like there is plenty of interest. If we want to make aikido more appealing to prospective students, it seems to me that the best thing we could do is to drop all the BS politics and spend more time and energy training harder in the kihon and application of waza. That is what the founder did, and that is what will raise the reputation of the art and "impress" others. Not trophies.

It is easy to say "do your own thing and don't worry about it - don't let it affect you", but I feel that is incorrect, with all due respect. That is the same as those that never vote or concern themselves with local/global issues, thinking that someone else will take care of it. Eventually, major changes will affect you, no matter how small your dojo is, and by that time it will be too late to try to reverse the wheels. If you care about the integrity and vision of aikido and want to be heard, be heard now.

Hey, there are plenty of arts that compete out there. Nothing is stopping anyone from following that road, or crosstraining in those arts.

Why does EVERY art have to compete????

dainippon99
25th April 2001, 00:34
Peter said : "strange, what was he teaching at the Hombu in 1960" (or something to that effect). my answer would be: not tomiki aikido. he might have taught aikido for the aikikai, but he never studied aikikai aikido. he studied aikijujutsu and later aikibudo before he left for manchuria to teach there.

Karl Kuhn
25th April 2001, 06:41
Mr. Scott,

I understand that you and many others have concerns, many of them just, about competition and aikido. I have no idea what the Aikikai is considering, or if they are considering anything, but there is "competative" aikido and it's good and true thing.

It seems that a lot of people are more willing to project their fears of the worst-case-possible-scenarios of what competition "may" mean than they are willing to look at the existing model. I study the existing model, Shodokan/Tomiki Aikido, and I am quite confident that it will not "destroy the art. " In fact, quite the opposite, thank you.

Prof. Tomiki designed the exploration of kata and randori as the core of the educational model. The randori competitions are simply an expression of that educational mode that are shared amongst practitioners at seminars/festivals. The lessons under review in randori are very important and not available in the study of kata/waza with a compliant uke. It has been an important part of my aikido experience and I feel that the proper understanding and application of randori training can do nothing but add to the value and richness of anyone's aikido.

The techniques have not been "watered down". The kihon waza or junanahon no kata is an amazing distillation of aikido principles that have been specifically designed for randori shiai. It is by no means the only kata or series of waza in the syllabus but it sure makes for interesting international events ;^)

You mention your concern for paths that kendo and judo have taken and while valid are not yet an issue for Aikido Kyogi. I think those lessons, both good and bad, are there for people to learn by and I hope they will. There is already evidence of Shodokan Honbu is attempting to mitigate the "individual" victory with the introduction of team events that mix kata and randori for a combined team score. I think that the mistakes of the commercialization of other arts or not applicable and are an example of how people project fears onto something they do not want to look at in ernest. I hope that you do not misunderstand my intention here, I am as concerned as anyone about the goofy glory hound vibe as anyone, I just see no evidence of it in Aikido Kyogi.

Cheers,
Karl

Karl Kuhn
25th April 2001, 06:43
I just re-read my post and it seems a bit rude in parts. I apologize if it comes off that way, it certainly was not my intent. It's late and should have waited before posting, oh well.

Karl

PRehse
25th April 2001, 15:21
Does this assume a magical transition of the art with the name change in 1942 and where does this place any of the pre-war greats and their styles? It is my understanding that most of the post-WWII development of Aikikai and the direction it took were due to Ueshiba K. and Tohei. Iwamma ryu definitely hold the view that what they do more closely reflects the intent of Ueshiba M.

At least now you qualify your statement by saying Aikikai Aikido and I do agree that Shodokan, Yoshinkan and the Aikido of Mochizuki are quite different from what the Aikido of Aikikai Honbu developed into. In the first post you said Aikido and my premise is that each of the founders of the pre-WWII styles considered what they did to be Aikido and from my view they were in a pretty strong position to know.

Maybe I am a bit jumpy and I apologize if this was not your intent but I did read the initial statement as only Aikikai Aikido is real Aikido. Under the huge umbrella of Aikikai there are styles and practitioners that are as hard as anything found in the pre-WWII stuff. For example I attended a seminar with Chiba and for me it was like coming home.




Originally posted by dainippon99
Peter said : "strange, what was he teaching at the Hombu in 1960" (or something to that effect). my answer would be: not tomiki aikido. he might have taught aikido for the aikikai, but he never studied aikikai aikido. he studied aikijujutsu and later aikibudo before he left for manchuria to teach there.

Dennis Hooker
25th April 2001, 17:19
Let us suppose that M. Ueshiba Sensei did continue to grow and develop his art throughout his life. Lets suppose also that those fine students that left for one reason or another over the years to start their own traditions represented what Ueshiba Sensei had accomplished up to that point, plus their own special contributions and abilities. Could we not then suppose that the Aikido at the end of his life was more complete, and those last students represented the culmination of his studies and teachings? They represent all that went before. Aikido is not a sub branch of anther jujitsu school. It has as it’s foundation certain principles adopted from other schools. Just as those schools adopted them from others. It has no technique unique to it’s self. That is because all the techniques are interchangeable. It the definition of Aiki that is different. What was once delivered with passion was now tempered with compassion. One has but to read Ueshiba to see that he redefined Aiki and made it stick. He redefined war as love and could back it up. I’m not sure I understand all the complexities that involves even after 40 years or so, but I know it is unlike anything else I study or have studied.

Den
26th April 2001, 20:42
I have to disagree with Mr. Kuhn and express support for what Sensei Scott has written. If students want to do competition, let them go to a Tomiki school, we don't need this in the Aikikai.

Aikikai Aikido is about studying a martial art at a highly evolved and highly civilized level. Competitive sports are about something else, and those of us associated with the Aikikai don't need the loss of focus. I hope our art has and will continue to evolve. I admire the work of Chiba, Nishio and Saotome Senseis as they have expanded and enhanced Aikido. Nevertheless the direction they have been going in is not toward sport and not toward competition.

I'm curious that the International Federation is even discussing this. It yet again offers insight into why Yamada Sensei took the USAF out of the International.
-Anthony

PRehse
26th April 2001, 21:24
Originally posted by Den
I have to disagree with Mr. Kuhn and express support for what Sensei Scott has written. If students want to do competition, let them go to a Tomiki school, we don't need this in the Aikikai.


All Karl has done is explain what competition means in the Tomiki sense and to point out that the fears that are voiced are not necessarily justified. I don't think he ever suggested that the Aikikai should go down that path - just that the path is not so dark and some would like to believe.



Aikikai Aikido is about studying a martial art at a highly evolved and highly civilized level. Competitive sports are about something else ....


This is what gets Karl and my own hackles up and is responsible for our constant jumping in. The implication is that somehow the practitioners of Shodokan are less evolved and less civilized. This is the sort of egotistical attitude that in a word stinks. Both Karl and myself have travelled in both worlds (Aikikai and Shodokan) and neither of us would never think of making such a statement.

szczepan
26th April 2001, 21:29
Originally posted by Dennis Hooker
Let us suppose that M. Ueshiba Sensei did continue to grow and develop his art throughout his life. Lets suppose also that those fine students that left for one reason or another over the years to start their own traditions represented what Ueshiba Sensei had accomplished up to that point, plus their own special contributions and abilities. Could we not then suppose that the Aikido at the end of his life was more complete, and those last students represented the culmination of his studies and teachings? They represent all that went before.

Every sport instructor who trains his students correctly knows, that student can't burn stages of developpement. In many cases, his role is to hold back over enthusiast student who want tp progress faster and faster.

Aikido developement is very similar. Student who never experienced or jumped over certain stages of developpement can't represent a point in developement of his master, only his own developement , coz he never experienced the same steges as his master.
I think also it is mistake to think that if you see more sophisticated techniques, automaticly you aikido become more sophisticated.If one get very tired(or scared), all this very elaborated mechanism will fail, and then you will need to back it up with much more primary skills. Student who jumped over basic steges will not have any primary mechanism to help him out. So he has no choice if he want to develop strong basics he'd have to do kind of come back to earlier stages of trainig - and this is not efficient teaching.
That`s why I'm not sure about this culmination stuff.

regardZ

Den
26th April 2001, 23:55
Peter,
My intension wasn't to get your hackles up, nor to attack Karl and certainly not to imply that Shodokan is or isn't about something. This is why I specifically and simply said sport is about something different. I would not presume to define what Shodokan is about, I'm not a student or a practitioner. I have nothing against Shotokan and I would never attempt to define another art, not Tomiki Aikido, not Daito-ryu Aikijutsu.

What I can say is that they are different from the art I study, and in turn try to express what I believe my art to be about. With Aikikai Aikido this is difficult, aspects of it are a martial art, but at the same time it is often like an intense meditation to me. The adjectives I use are not meant to imply anything about other arts, be they self-defense arts or sport arts.

At the same time I agree with Sensei Scott's basic statement, the Aikikai world is complicated enough without adding this to the debate. I'm sure there are people who feel there should be sport competition within the Aikikai system. To those people I respectfully suggest that Professor Tomiki has already created this art.

Respectfully,
Anthony

PRehse
27th April 2001, 00:24
Anthony;

Thanks for that. It really was not just your post but the view keeps coming again and again often with little attempt to understand what others from within the system are saying.

You know us Aikido thugs are really very sensitive. :cry:

By the way competition works within the Shodokan system because from its inception the relationship between kata and randori have been very well defined, not to mention the dojo culture. It would be very difficult to introduce competitive randori at this point to the Aikikai considering the degree of variation under the umbrella. Embu might be easier but even here there are far too many chiefs. Maybe because I see the near impossiblity that I see the discussion as another version of Tomiki bashing. Gee there goes that sensitivity again.

Nathan Scott
27th April 2001, 01:07
Hello,

I'm actually well aware of the major branches, including Tomiki style.

My comments against competition are in regards to the big picture - the future of aikido. Many groups tend to have these idealistic high hopes of how they could use competition to enhance interest and participation in their art.

In the short term, these elements are often found. But it is the long term that we need to be weary of. These are some things to consider:

1) once competition is introduced - even on a trial basis, a precedence is set that says "the founder/headmaster thought it was an acceptable idea at one time, but it didn't work". It leaves the door open permanently to future seniors and generations for selling the idea again.

2) short term may (or may not) produce positive results, but human nature has shown repeatedly that the desire to focus on the sportive competitive aspects will grow almost exponentially. Those in charge will feel compelled to give in to pressure from those wanting to compete, and will offer more shiai practice and taikai's to keep them happy. If you go to the vast majority of Kendo & Naginata clubs, you'll find that most people there care very little about kata. They are (mostly) there to compete.

3) competitions bring in (alot) of money to the group providing them. Lets be real: money corrupts EVERYTHING eventually if tempted enough. Once the money is there, the organization/federation will become more stable and successful. You will not convince anyone in a position of influence to disband competition at this point.

4) political tension will go through the roof. This is unavoidable, because there will be those that will judge in their favor, or complain against those that don't in order to win. Those that would not normally act this way will begin to act this way in response to being confronted.

How do you judge good technique? You might say that the person was thrown down, so it is a point (or half point). I may say that the opponent was not locked into their center, and that the throw was produced through localized torquing only (wrist twist). I wouldn't personally acknowledge such technique, but whether it locked into the center or not would be a matter of opinion based on the observation of the judges. Judging is an imperfect science by definition.

**

There is a whole martial culture that is involved in budo specifically for validation through trophies. You can read about it all day in Black Belt magazine, and in every instructor bio. These people tend to flock to arts with good reputations and encourage competing and trophies in this style as well. That would make them the first one to win first prize in this "acknowledged effective system". When that gets watered down, the glory of winning trophies is diminished and they look around for other arts to win trophies in. Are they concerned with whats best for the art?

I've actually thought, discussed and researched this subject pretty extensively in relation to my responsibilities in an organization I'm involved in. I can site numerous examples of what I'm talking about from numerous styles. I've watched these arts change just in the last 20 years I've been involved.

If you are interested in this subject, please consider asking around and doing some research of your own before writing off my comments.

I respect the Tomiki style, and am happy that competition has not gotten out of hand yet. Kyokushinkai karate is another example of an art that has limited competition and has retained most of it's martial integrity so far.

But Kano sensei and many others all had high hopes when they introduced competition into their art. The history of what happens when you introduce competition into budo has been documented clearly.

I would encourage those that feel competition would not "destroy" aikido eventually if introduced through the mainline to offer insight into what the aikikai would do that all the other groups did not think of or could not do.


Let us suppose that M. Ueshiba Sensei did continue to grow and develop his art throughout his life. Lets suppose also that those fine students that left for one reason or another over the years to start their own traditions represented what Ueshiba Sensei had accomplished up to that point, plus their own special contributions and abilities. Could we not then suppose that the Aikido at the end of his life was more complete, and those last students represented the culmination of his studies and teachings?

I think it is safe to say that Ueshiba M. sensei continued to evolve in all aspects until his death. However, his training history, methods and background is different than pretty much everyone else who is learning in aikido. It has been said that none of his students seemed to pick up the core of what Ueshiba S. was really doing, and I happen to agree with that (not to say there aren't some very proficient people teaching aikido out there).

If you look at all the great martial artists, they all trained very very hard, and very seriously - often under harsh conditions. You can't skip over all this and just study the movements that Ueshiba S. was doing in the end of his life. There are no short cuts to hard training. The movements may look identical, but the difference will be found in effectiveness.

No offense intended toward anyone. Good discussion,

P Goldsbury
27th April 2001, 04:46
Originally posted by Den
I have to disagree with Mr. Kuhn and express support for what Sensei Scott has written. If students want to do competition, let them go to a Tomiki school, we don't need this in the Aikikai.

Aikikai Aikido is about studying a martial art at a highly evolved and highly civilized level. Competitive sports are about something else, and those of us associated with the Aikikai don't need the loss of focus. I hope our art has and will continue to evolve. I admire the work of Chiba, Nishio and Saotome Senseis as they have expanded and enhanced Aikido. Nevertheless the direction they have been going in is not toward sport and not toward competition.

I'm curious that the International Federation is even discussing this. It yet again offers insight into why Yamada Sensei took the USAF out of the International.
-Anthony

I think you have not understood me quite correctly and your remarks are rather tendentious. I have been approached by outside bodies concerning the holding of competitive aikido demonstrations. It is not a topic of discussion within the IAF and I do not believe it is connected with why the USAF left the federation.

I myself see no harm whatever in competition as a topic for discussion in this and other forums and I have found the views of some members very illuminating and instructive, including the views of those who practise Shodokan aikido.

Yours sincerely,

P A Goldsbury

Karl Kuhn
27th April 2001, 04:46
Just to be clear here:

"There is a whole martial culture that is involved in budo specifically for validation through trophies. You can read about it all day in Black Belt magazine, and in every instructor bio....."

That is not the culture of Shodkan Aikido and aikido randori/embu kata events. I am sure you can understand our discomfort at being even causually associated with the above.

Karl

Karl Kuhn
27th April 2001, 06:16
"I have to disagree with Mr. Kuhn and express support for what Sensei Scott has written. If students want to do competition, let them go to a Tomiki school, we don't need this in the Aikikai. "

Again to be clear, I never advocated the introduction of "competition" into the Aikikai. I was simple attempting to remind people that there is "competition" (randori/embu kata) in aikido an we do just fine, thank you very much. But, as I believe Peter mentioned the core syllabuses and culture allow this. And I should mention, many, many years of work and study by gifted budoka.

"Aikikai Aikido is about studying a martial art at a highly evolved and highly civilized level. Competitive sports are about something else...."
Not that I consider what I do "competitive sport", though it is in part I suppose, but, oh......................never mind.

Karl

MarkF
27th April 2001, 10:07
OK, I'll give it a shot. If aikido is such a "highly evolved" bugei then what is koryu? An antique which should pull itself together, hold "invitationals" which have gone on for centuries, or dojo storming which in itself is competition in which most all surviving koryu did and why jujutsu schools are so similar. The only reason people take pot shots at judo is because of its date of founding, 1882, IE, the "official" year of the founding of gendai martial arts.

So in actuality, competition is probably older than the ryu-ha themselves which lead to a kind of maniacal and secretive protection of basics and technique which make koryu something different from each other.

A discussion over whether aikido itself has a competitive spirit or not really goes to the heart of aikido itself, and whether it is a MA or a new age perspective on life in the modern world. With all the new aikido schools popping up (such as aikikai, ki society, and the separate but equal political organizations), what is it which makes it anything different from other bugei? Or is it budo, bujutsu, etc.?

Aikido is not competitive in the newest sense of the word but has the same political hacks as any other, and to deny it, is to deny aikido itself.
*****

So putting all that stuff aside, what is it specifcally about aikido which has its students believing this "fact" that aikido is somehow above all else, and what is the supposed evolvement today beyond Ueshiba Morihei's difficulty in explaining exactly what he himself meant?

So it is non-competitive. Than what is competition which separates aikido from every other MA in the world?

If it is so different, then I would love to know, as most who practice any system of taijutsu have been asking for at least the last twenty years or so.

Mark

MarkF
27th April 2001, 10:14
Oh, I did forget to quote Karl Kuhn:


Originally posted by Karl Kuhn
Not that I consider what I do "competitive sport", though it is in part I suppose, but, oh......................never mind.



He pretty much sums up my feelings as well, as I did bow out of this discussion once, so please feel free to ignore my post above.:D

Mark

TIM BURTON
27th April 2001, 17:57
Competitive Aikido can be denounced, but it does supply an element that is missing from classical Aikido and that is uncooperation. Shodokan is not in my opinion unrefined, but instead more refined, as Tomiki has pared the techniques down into ones that work in the majority of situations whether instigated by the attacker or defender. The lessons learnt by engaging an uncooperative or unpredictable opponent are invaluable in transforming one’s personal Aikido into a workable strategy. When this strategy is applied to the classical techniques then an insight develops on how to make the technique being studied effective in practice. This becomes the case if the attack is a committed one (Go no Sen) or if we ourselves have to initiate the action (Sen no Sen).
Rules do inhibit any martial art and I agree no sporting system will be “the answer”, but please reflect on the rules you already impose on your own Aikido training in the dojo. I am sure you do not kick to the groin, some of you probably do not even kick. No storming in and taking to the ground, no gouging, biting, spitting etc. We are already bound by a set of rules that affects our Aikido in a practical sense.
Shodokan Aikido follows a path that allows one to experience to a greater degree the effect our Aikido would have if used in a live situation.
In part spirituality comes from the confidence in ones ability. If one is no longer troubled by the worry of defeat, then the calmness that descends allows one to concentrate on a higher level of concepts uninterrupted by the anxiety of failure. Aikido practised in a competitive manner can allow those demons to be faced sooner rather than later.

Den
27th April 2001, 20:04
Mark and Tim,
You both still refer to something I specifically didn't state, infer or imply. Thankfully Karl did understand.

Mark,
You ask "If aikido is such a "highly evolved" bugei then what is koryu?" I would ask that question of a Daito ryu practitioner. They might respond that it is also highly evolved, or they might respond that it is highly evolved as a combat art or a self-defense art. I don't know the answer to your question, but my comments did not imply that koryu arts or sports arts are less evolved than Aikido. Rather I specifically wrote that they are different, they are about something else, and I believe these arts were developed for different purposes.

Tim,
Again I did not say that Shotokan is unrefined. A practitioner may say that it is highly refined, and is highly refined as a sport art. I don't think that you or I can fairly say that one art is more or less refined. We can say that it is refined in a specific direction or for a specific purpose. This is where the differences in our arts lay. You have dne a disservice to the discussion by stating that Tomiki Aikido is "more refined." I believe several Shihan would disagree with you.

My point, and I cannot speak for Scott Sensei, but I believe he is also saying, Tomiki Aikido does the job of offering sport practice for Aikido. The Aikikai should focus on its own purpose and strength, which I believe lay elsewhere.

Finally to Mr. Goldbury, I may have misinterpreted the initial question. My intent in refering the the International is not to stifle discussion, rather I've quite enjoyed this entire discussion thread. Nevertheless I feel strongly that competition is not a direction the Aikikai should pursue.

-Anthony

Nathan Scott
27th April 2001, 20:04
That is not the culture of Shodkan Aikido and aikido randori/embu kata events. I am sure you can understand our discomfort at being even causually associated with the above.

It was not my intention to associate Tomiki/Shodokan aikido in with the comments I was making. I had earlier indicated that, from what little I've seen of Tomiki aikido, they seem to have maintained the integrity of the art so far, much like Kyokushin karate. I really haven't seen much though, to be honest. Your concern is understood.


Competitive Aikido can be denounced, but it does supply an element that is missing from classical Aikido and that is uncooperation.

This is a fact. Methods of what I call "passive resistance" and "active resistance" are critical methods of testing/practice. As is correct, committed attacks by uke.

There are in fact good aspects to structured/sport competition. I simply have found that the negative elements that develop vastly outweigh the positive.

Also, the majority of benefits you would gain from structured competing could be gained from performing public demonstrations and/or inter-organizational demonstrations.

Aikido already has freestyle (with practical limitations, as noted. This is a factor for any martial art.), and methods like cooperative/passive resistance/active resistance can all be incorporated into regular practice. This is an area I've been working on in my own methods, and can even be seen in the aikido of Matsuoka Haruo sensei and Steven Seagal (via the "black belt" tests). At Matsuoka sensei's dojo, even in kyu testing the uke would be instructed to push shite away and make them try again if there was any gap or weakness in the technique.

Anyway, "competition" by definition is not a necessarily a bad thing, and is what makes people excel. Competition with your co-workers, instructors and seniors in the dojo and even competition with yourself to press beyond your own perceived limitations (my favorite). Jiyuwaza is a kind of competition.

It is the STRUCTURED competition (rules, point limitations, "cheating methods" to work around the rules for points, etc) that I consider harmful, and that is what we're talking about here.

Regards,

Yamantaka
28th April 2001, 02:33
Hello, All!

I guess Peter R. has pointed out correctly the main problem here. Some people are over-aggressive and changes an educated discussion into a free-for-all. And, consequently, some competitive fellows got over-sensitive.
I'm sure I have an obligation to be educated with my friends, even if they have different opinions. I'm free to question everyone (Kano Sensei, Tomiki Sensei, and even Ueshiba Kaiso); to have restrictions against competitions(and to explain why); and to believe that martial arts and competitive sports are different things. But never forgetting that we must keep our respect for our friends.
This thread began questioning the possible inclusion of competition in Aikikai Aikido. There is no need to promote bashing against any other style. If we do that, our competitive friends will have reason to get over-sensitive... :shot:
Best

TIM BURTON
28th April 2001, 09:29
Hi,
No offence was meant to any person or their art. I was actually commenting on the point that, the“competitive testing” of ones Aikido is advantageous as one is faced with an uncooperative partner. This type of testing can be done behind closed doors, it does not have to be in the public arena.
Anyway I have really enjoyed this thread, thanks to you all.

:toast:

MarkF
28th April 2001, 11:00
If it becomes competitive, I think this will be a step backwards for the evolution of a highly spiritual art. I don't think you could call it aikido any longer, as the very name "aikido" does not imply sport or competition.


Mr. Deen, I was not really responding to anything in your posts, but rather the idea in the above post. I didn't include the name of the poster because this is something which has a true, thick quality to it, and is as common amongst aikidoists as shiai is to judoists. It just doesn't hold water.

And as one of the "competitive types" where the blame falls for this thread going off topic, that is blatant BS. It is the quote above which tickles my knickers. People assume many things about those who have stayed with the art of choice because of competition, but no one has ever asked why, even though you can find the reasons littered throughout this and many other bulletin boards.

Frankly, I am ashamed of one of the posters here for the highly insulting and purposeful manner in which this is turning into a flame thread.

A little advice. No one knows precisely why anyone does or does not compete, and what the true motives are for doing so. It is so much assumptive reasoning, and why some believe aikido to be on some higher plane. It isn't, and never was. There have been plenty of O-sensei, some obviously deserve it and we all know those who probably don't.

So to bow out of this thing yet again, aikido is no more spiritual than Ray Charles, and no higher plain exists for aikido, nor does it have some higher morality. It just is. No more.

The next time someone wants to lump all "competitors" in the same stew had better think before speaking. My goals I'm sure were different than Tim's and his different from Stephen's, and so on and so on. That is the one thing where your argument against competition falls apart. Remember the lesson of not finding the correct martial art, but the correct teacher? No? Well, it's a damn good one.

What reason is there for someone to make all these assumptions about something truly hated as much as something which has "been" since man locked his knees?

Jo Ford
28th April 2001, 17:19
I agree with Jack Smith about how "Aikido is dynamic thus changing. Going into competition is the next way of things to be."

Firstly, as we no longer live in a 'martial' society the importance on the martial aspect of Aikido is decreasing, although is still important as far as self-defence is concerned. Aikido as a sport is therefore a natural shift in emphasis from practising Aikido to use in a martial situation (fighting for your life) to a sports situation (fighting for fun).

Personally I cannot see how Aikido as a sport can be anything but beneficial provided there are safeguards ie. rules that reward good Aikido and penalise bad 'strength' Aikido.

In response to Jason Diederich, in order to enable Aikido to work in a competitive sphere a soft tanto is used by one competitor (called 'tanto') who has 1 1/2 minutes to try to strike the other competitor (called 'toshu') in a specified way (a straight strike from the hip ie. not a punch to the v-area of the gi). This promotes avoidance of the tanto by toshu, an essential skill in aikido, which can then be transferred to other such striking attacks. The basis of competition is therefore if you cannot avoid an attack you cannot do aikido because you have been hit!

Once toshu has avoided the tanto they can then move in using uchi-kome (another essential skill for aikido) and try 'balance-breakers' and actual techniques. It is here that the most abuse happens in competition as many people simply resist techniques using strength, when in order to improve their own aikido they should be using movement to avoid the technique. In any event, however, the point is that your aikido should be good enough to be able to put technique on people who are resisting using strength as this is what the large majority of people do. If your technique does not work it is not good enough.

Competition is therefore a learning tool to improve your own aikido. If you cannot get techniques to work you know that these techniques need more practice, and even if you don't get any techniques to work if you have managed to avoid the tanto you havn't been hit (or therefore hurt in the real world). Tomiki saw that in the real world people are unpredictable and react in unpredictable ways. Competition is therefore used as the safest way we can practice aikido with this unpredictability.

In order for competitive aikido to work, however, it has to be realised that it is a sport and aikidoka have to be 'sportsmen/women' and follow the rules and the spirit of the sport, which is to improve your aikido not necessarily to win.

I have practised Shodokan Aikido for four and a half years and enjoy competition immensely. I think it helps you realise your strengths and weaknesses and also motivates you to train hard and be fit. The skills you learn when competing (primarily probably speed) can then be directly transferred into kata and each bounce off and help each other. There is also a certain humility in competition as you realise how hard it is to make Aikido work for you and how much better you need to be!

Promoting aikido as a competitive sport will also encourage more people, especially young people, to try aikido as aikido competitions are great fun.

As a postscript the Aikido World Championships are in Osaka this October (25-28) and will be on Japanese national television if anyone is able to receive it. This will give a better idea than I can describe here about what competition is really about.

Den
29th April 2001, 02:35
Mark,
Hope you don't mind me usine your first name, please call me Anthony (Mr. Deen makes me feel my age). Thanks for the reply, I didn't see that previous post, and I do think your view point is quite well thought out.

To Jo Ford,
""Going into competition is the next way of things to be." Firstly, as we no longer live in a 'martial' society the importance on the martial aspect of Aikido is decreasing, although is still important as far as self-defence is concerned. Aikido as a sport is therefore a natural shift in emphasis from practising Aikido to use in a martial situation (fighting for your life) to a sports situation (fighting for fun)."

I think its difficult to speculate on one future for Aikido. Aikido has at least three present states - martial art (Aikikai and others), sport art (Shotokan), koryu martial art (Daito ryu). All of these variations have practical, philosophical and other applications (health, fitness et al) that enrich the continuing evolution of each. Let's celebrate the differences rather than assume one is the appropriate evolutionary end point.

Also, some of us still live in a world where martial arts are required, there are several threads on this forum which relate people having to use Aikido to protect themselves. Let's not discount the substantial self-defense requirements of the art yet!

Great thread!

-Anthony

Karl Kuhn
29th April 2001, 02:55
Let's also make sure that we do not divide things up into little categories unnecessarily. There is a great deal more to the Shodokan system than randori/embu kata events, what you would call sport, and "martial" fits there as well as anywhere else in aikido. Thanks.

Also, kind of nit-picky but , it is Shodokan with a d.

Cheers,
Karl

Jo Ford
29th April 2001, 08:38
Point taken, Anthony!

MarkF
29th April 2001, 10:43
Hey, Anthony,
At least you have a reasonably pronouncable surname. Most have to copy/paste mine in when they want to get on their high-horse as I did.;)

Here is a reasonable quote and something which has not yet happened in the judo world, and something aikidoists can jump on and test the water. Judo was forced to admit early on to being simply a sport for political and survival reasons, and why the Kodokan became the H2H school for the allied occupation forces after the end of WWII:


Originally posted by Jo Ford
Personally I cannot see how Aikido as a sport can be anything but beneficial provided there are safeguards ie. rules that reward good Aikido and penalise bad 'strength' Aikido.



This may be looked upon as basic and simple, but I wish we had the opportunity and an example to pick apart. This could really be a good way to finely tune the use of aikido in a today's modern combative arts. I do think, Hower, that tanto shiai has these all ready built in. Otherwise, I wish it had been burnt into my memory and I had not been so young and foolish as to use what strength I had at twelve, thirteen years old.

It is something to consider especially when those of the aikikai with many years in aikido complain of the same injuries and the hope of not taking so much hard ukemi after a certain age.

Mark

PS: Anthony, I should have paragraphed a little in the previous post. I had no intention of passing any blame or to infer it was anyone in particular I had in mind.

MarkF
29th April 2001, 10:46
BTW: I forgot one important message.

Jo,
Welcome to E-budo!

Mark

PRehse
29th April 2001, 16:25
Ditto on that - please remember that Kenji Tomiki was one of the pre-war students of Ueshiba. Like Yoshinkan the style is harder and more direct than Aikikai and some say more martial. I say this only in that I too don't like categories.



Originally posted by Karl Kuhn
Let's also make sure that we do not divide things up into little categories unnecessarily. There is a great deal more to the Shodokan system than randori/embu kata events, what you would call sport, and "martial" fits there as well as anywhere else in aikido. Thanks.

Cheers,
Karl

Jo Ford
30th April 2001, 10:46
I agree with the comments made by Peter Rehse and Karl Kuhn not to forget that Shodokan Aikido also has a strong martial element.

I guess I just get a bit carried away with the sport side of it and think this is an area that is not pushed enough. At the level that I am at the sport has more realistic goals for me as I am still skeptical that I would be able to make aikido work for me in a more 'martial' situation whereas with the sport there are always referrees to protect you! I hope that I will be able to concentrate on the other aspects of aikido when my technical ability improves a bit more and I mature more as an aikidoka.

Thanks for pulling me up on that point though Peter and Karl.

PRehse
30th April 2001, 14:26
Originally posted by Jo Ford
At the level that I am at the sport has more realistic goals for me as I am still skeptical that I would be able to make aikido work for me in a more 'martial' situation whereas with the sport there are always referrees to protect you! I hope that I will be able to concentrate on the other aspects of aikido when my technical ability improves a bit more and I mature more as an aikidoka.


Excellent point - for me the sport was very much minor to the technical side but the question of martial also bothered me quite a bit in my second year at Honbu. The place to work on that is the kata, especially the dai-san but also the Junanahon. It takes a small shift in mind from just learning the moves to instilling a martial feel but it will make all the difference to how your kata looks. Watch someone like Michael McCavish do the Koryu Dai san - what you see is not flash (no extra moves there) but really effective looking Aikido which I have no doubt would translate into really effectve action.

Nathan Scott
30th April 2001, 20:30
Hi,

I think this topic goes beyond competition as it is used in Tomiki aikido. Some if not most of us are discussing the concept of competition in mainline aikido, as opposed to aikido as it is implemented so far in the Tomiki line.

I only bring this up because it may not be necessary to be on the defensive on every comment, as I don't think anyone here is purposely trying to put down the entire branch of Tomiki aikido.


Firstly, as we no longer live in a 'martial' society the importance on the martial aspect of Aikido is decreasing, although is still important as far as self-defence is concerned.

I would not agree with this. Aikido is classified as a "martial art", and needs to maintain it's effectiveness or else be classified as something else. As pointed out, there are cival self defense applications as well as military and police applications that are still relevant in these modern times.

It is one thing to compete in something that was created to be a competitive sport, and another thing to convert a martial art into a competitive sport. If you took an NFL football team, gave them M-16s and pitted them in battle (as infantry) against a professional military team, they would get blasted. Some elements of football would apply to combat, but not enough to overcome a group that has trained in and maintained their "effetiveness".

Sports are not evil, and competition is not evil. In my opinion, the problem is with turning a budo into something else. It is not necessary.

BTW, as far as I'm concerned this discussion has nothing to do with aikido being better or "above" those arts that compete. I feel the same way about Judo.

Regards,

Jo Ford
1st May 2001, 20:40
Please can I make it clear that I am not saying aikido is no longer a martial art, but that as society (Western and Eastern) has changed, so the art must develop (although clearly maintain its historical links).

According to historical accounts of Oeshiba and his students it was perfectly permissible to use aikido in fights and hurt other people, and this can be seen as their version of sport. With other martial arts also I think this happened and people were often killed (certainly in samuri times) in such contests. Looking at the western world and for example fencing, this was also the case.

However, and I'm sure it is clear to everyone, this is not acceptable now and so an alternative forum in which to 'test' your aikido safely has been found, in a modern competitive bout.

I hope I am not getting too controversial but I feel a modern and realistic viewpoint has to be taken. It is romantic and fanciful to pretend aikido still has the connotations it had at its inception. I see aikido as a practical means of self-defence, and an enjoyable sport together with the discipline of its budo origins. I think I'll stop here as I don't know enough to argue the point further!