Randori and the role of Uke

[chrismoses]

Something that I've been struggling with in my teaching and my training is the delicate role of uke, particularly in randori. By randori, I'm referring to multiple attackers all performing ryokatadori. What I find myself frequently running up against are attacks that lack any real intent. These attacks can be typified by "the undead" and "the unmovable." The "undead" is the attacker who rushes at you arms outstretched and limp, the "unmovable" by their tenacious grab and nearly straight arms. One is too easy to throw, the other is artificially hard. I say artificially, because while it is relatively easy to lock down and block the typical kokyu tenkan throw by extending your arms and moving into a horse stance at a good distance from nage, it is tactically ridiculous to do so. In my mind, there is no real need to perform Aiki techniques against one who is so generous in offering hyperextended elbows, dislocated knees or a bruised crotch. These attacks are similar in that they are trying to NOT DO something; as opposed to a real attack that is attempting do DO something. The latter attack is blocking the throw, but presents no intent to move or in any way injure nage. It is not a true attack, but a resistance to being thrown. The former is an attempt NOT to be thrown too hard. I can accept this one as almost a necessary phase. Before one knows how to attack properly and is unsure of ones ukemi, being cautious is only prudent. This needs however to be seen as a stage, and not an appropriate way for uke to attack in general. The latter brings up two issues which I notice more and more (probably due to my awareness of them, rather than an increased incidence). The first issue is a general lack of understanding in grappling, the second I will call "the strategy of benevolence" for lack of a better term.

With regard to grappling, I ask what technique as uke you personally envision when participating in randori? I wager that most people have no idea what they would do if nage failed to react. Some would probably say they were shoving nage (which in my opinion is a pretty boring attack) others might say “a throw.” But which one? I submit that it is much more difficult for a student to pick up how to effectively attack someone with ryokatadori than it is for them to eventually figure out how to strike yokomen. I believe the problem stems from the fact that modern (and specifically Western) Aikidoka typically do not come to Aikido with any Judo or Jujutsu background from which to draw. Ryokatadori differs from shomenuchi in that it is not an attack unto itself, it is the beginning of an attack. If nage does not know how to move from the initial contact inherent in ryokatadori into an effective throw (such as Judo’s Tai-Otoshi or O-Soto-Garai for example) then, as nage, how can we possibly learn to throw in an efficient and realistic manner? If you look at nearly all the pre-war uchideshi, you see general to extensive experience with Judo or another form of Jujutsu. I offer there are two solutions to this issue, and I am very curious to hear people’s responses to them. 1) Aikido can remove ryokatadori attacks entirely from the curriculum or 2) introduce throws using ryokatadori into the basic curriculum (the easiest would be modifying Tenchi-Nage or incorporating the aforementioned Tai-Otoshi and/or O-Soto-Garai).

The second and more general issue is what I called “the strategy of benevolence.” This is a concept that’s been rolling around in my head for a while and has been through more than a few malty-tasty-beverage conversations. It is how I describe when uke blocks or in some other way attempts to make the technique more difficult by banking on nage’s refusal to do them harm. Some examples to hopefully clarify this concept: in randori, charging nage in a direction that forces them to change your direction to keep you from hitting a wall or another uke, blocking out ikkyo by squeezing the armpit and lowering the elbow; thus exposing one’s face to strikes, exposing the arms and groin to injury in order to be harder to throw in randori, straightening the elbow in order to make nikkyo more difficult to apply correctly or simply ignoring clear and legitimate atemi. I know most people on this board can think of numerous counters to the counters, but they force nage to study something other than what was presented in the lesson, and I assert they are actively teaching Aikidoka that benevolence is undesirable. For an art that makes the lofty moral claims that most Aikido schools do, I consider this to be a terrible lesson. It puts nage in the position of deciding on being true to the technique and risking the injury of aite, or failing to perform the technique due to compassion. What a terrible choice to offer a training partner.

I’m sure many of you are sure these phenomenons are not present in your own dojo, but I have experienced these to some extent at numerous dojos. The “strategy of benevolence” was rampant at Aiki Expo ’02. I had several black belts stand bolt upright as I pressed my fingers into their eyes. One actually said, “that’s not the throw,” as I rolled my fingertips around on his eyelids! At that point, I lost any and all hope of learning anything from that partner. Anyway, I’ve found these concepts rolling around in my head more and more often these days and wanted to throw them out and see what some other folks thought. Thanks in advance for your input.

[chrismoses]

In paragraph two of my initial post I wrote, "If nage does not know how to move from the initial contact inherent in ryokatadori into an effective throw (such as Judo’s Tai-Otoshi or O-Soto-Garai for example) ..."

It should have read, "If *UKE* does not know how to move from the initial contact inherent in ryokatadori into an effective throw (such as Judo’s Tai-Otoshi or O-Soto-Garai for example)..."

Thanks.

[Julian Gerhart]

well Chris, you with your ever protruding knees and elbows are at least well on your way to curing me of being immovable. I think. Have you talked to sensei about the problem? If any solution is to be inserted into the mainline dojo ciriculum it would have to be orchestrated through her, right?

and how do you propose the problem be solved?

[John J. Montes]

My first question may seem quite obvious but anyway: in randori, why are uke only attacking with ryokatatori? This is probably the main source for the lack luster feeling to the attacks in general. Switching in various attacks spices things up and forces uke and nage to be aware...

2) I am a bit confused to your statement that Aikido:

"introduce throws using ryokatadori into the basic curriculum (the easiest would be modifying Tenchi-Nage or incorporating the aforementioned Tai-Otoshi and/or O-Soto-Garai)"

I know where I train that this already exists...additionally, uke attacks, BUT that does not mean that nage has to respond in that manner. Nage can face that attack in any manner he chooses - like thinking of it as tsuki in the jodan level...

3) I think the strategy of benelovence thing is something that may exist in your experience more than it does in other locations...I am sorry if you think I sound brutish but if uke resists a techinque when it is already on the way to being applied, he risks a major injury...likewise moving your body in such a way as to leave yourself open to a vicious atemi...I for one do not like getting whacked in the head for having bad ukemi...ukemi is as much a responsibility to nage as it is to myself...

and as for you experience at the 02 Expo, you were right and that person was wrong...plain and simple...providing that you weren't punking out of actually doing the technique...whatever it takes to break the commitment and then perform the technique...

just my 2 cents

[chrismoses]

"I know where I train that this already exists...additionally, uke attacks, BUT that does not mean that nage has to respond in that manner."
-JJM

Cool, I have never been to a mainline or related dojo that had specific techniques where NAGE grabs UKE ryokatadori and then throws them. What do you call the techniques? Are they based on Judo? What style do you practice?

[bruceb]

Alright ... let's cut to the heart of this question, when will the expectations of the practitioner meet the criteria of proficientcy of a master if people don't raise the bar of attacks as the practitioner gets better and better? Stop it, Chris. The fact that people attack lackluster is because you don't take control of the situation, there is no anger because you are doing lackluster techniques, and there is no fear because you are absorbed by others centers.

One must not become emotionally involved as someone lends their body to you to let you practice. The detachment of self, that causes safe yet effective practice, is the goal of all practitioners which allows for improvement yet keeps the practice within a margin of safety at the same time.

From the tone of the question, and the direction of the discussion, I would guess that the desire to be attacked, in a realistic manner that creates imbalance, is what you seek, but on the other hand, do you truly want to have your limits tested by someone who relaxes and causes all your efforts to be more difficult than easily taking the balance of a fully committed attacker? Yeah, it is more difficult to do randori with the lackluster attacker, but then again, not if your center where it needs to be, or you don't fall prey to the emtional triangle.

You do know about the tool of using the emotional triangle to overwhelm an attacker, or maintain your center, right? It is one of the prime tools to send signals both to your own body and to the mind/ body of an attacker that confuses their actions/ reactions so that your physical efforts seem enhanced, or their efforts are neutralized.

Why do you think there is such an effort to calm the emotions, stabilize the mind's attention to be centered, be aware of who and what is around you as you go through practice? It, the training, is a means of behavioral adjustment to the human conditon, which is the natural/learned responses of the human mind/ body.

The role of the lackluster uke will improve if you slow down your techniques so they are not always preparing to the lock, the throw, or the manipulation. Sometimes it takes a few minutes of practice before/ during / after class to get some students up to speed with a committed attack, maybe it is time to think about being an UNDERACHIEVER who is not concerned with becoming a master of Aikido, but simply practice and take notes on what it takes to move different people within the given practice technique? It sure would make going to class more fun, wouldn't it? After all, if practice can not be done with a joyful happy spirit, why do it?

Oh well .... just my opinion. Think about connecting to each attacker. I believe it is as much a disconnection of self, as it is a physical connection of bodys that can sense the intent or movement of an opponent. Being able to connect the moment you sense an attack, no matter how good or bad it is, is the key to defensive / offensive movement. Instead of working on the details of what you want to do .... work on the connection and what that information tells you what you should do.

I know it is somewhat vague, but then all discussions are merely advice given from words without actually seeing what is taking place, so the margin of error is quite wide in this advice. Anyway, work on connecting and using that information rather than predeterming what you think should be done, it should clear up any questions, or at least bring up questions your sensei can answer.

Good luck.

[chrismoses]

I'm not going to comment on this one, but if anyone who has trained with me felt like chiming in, feel free.

"Alright ... let's cut to the heart of this question, when will the expectations of the practitioner meet the criteria of proficientcy of a master if people don't raise the bar of attacks as the practitioner gets better and better? Stop it, Chris. The fact that people attack lackluster is because you don't take control of the situation, there is no anger because you are doing lackluster techniques, and there is no fear because you are absorbed by others centers."
-BB

[Ron Tisdale]

Hi Chris,

A) Put it in a balloon, and let it goooooo ......


B) I have seen both situations that you describe, in the dojo that I train in, and in other places.

Lax uke, no attack and stiff uke, no attack are the same thing really...no attack. One technique that Kondo Sensei used at his seminars is to ask someone to throw him, and to let them complete the throw. The two handed grab usually led to judo's koshinage, and ended with a two handed choke on the floor, using nage's lapels. If you teach your students to attack with this in mind as the end result, it should tighten up your randori considerably.

I think we should all be taught the attacks behind these grabs, whether they are one handed, two handed, grabs from behind or whatever. I think this is one of the strengths of styles like Yoseikan, which incorporate judo and or karate in their sylibus.

Some common refrains heard when this topic is brought up are that we shouldn't tell uke how to attack...uke is always right...etc. While this has merit, so does the problem that you bring up, and the solution you propose. I guess its a fine line.

By the way, once Kondo was sure someone was really attacking, I've never seen someone throw him with koshi...

Ron

[szczepan]

I think it can be very many goals in aikido “randori”. It is mainly training tool and could be used ie: to train a control of space around tori, to control and using in right way tori’s adrenaline, to reduce stress and prepare for pushing out limits of physical and mental capacities of tori, finally to develop spontaneous reaction against many different attacks by multiple opponents….etc
Each of these specific goals can be realised only by conscious work of attacker. That means, uke works along of some precise specification of instructor.
Example: if we want to develop certain rhythm of series of technique, the ukes will attack fast, but without resistance. If we want to develop variety of techniques, ukes will attack one after another, to let tori execute each technique properly.

In any situation, tori is free to apply any technique necessary to given attack. Static attack demands other response, stiff attack different response, strong dynamic attack – very different response. It is always TORI responsibility to execute a technique efficiently in safe way. Particularly it is true for an instructor – black belt. If it means that he can’t use atemi – well, he must be able to execute efficient technique WITHOUT atemi. No cheap excuses are accepted – after all, judo players throw ppl without atemi, aren’t they?

During seminar, often we can meet uke, that isn’t “drilled” as one may expect. It is very precious situation, and not to complain all around. Instead, it excellent occasion to work hard to close all openings in one owns technique.

[John J. Montes]

Hey Chris...this very hard to put into words so let me try once more...

as to your first question, I train in New York. Going back to the concept; I think I may have misled you...it isn't so much that in the middle of randori I reach out and grab uke with ryokatatori. The idea is more simply stated: that every attack in its essence is the same. That is every technique that you can think of can be applied with some degree of change to every attack. With this in mind, then we can see that ryokatatori can be thought of as tsuki, or shomen uchi (at mid-point of the downward swing) or any other attack. And therefore, all techniques apply.

Also, I guess depending how you want to look at it, ten chi nage could look like ryokatatori when executed in a dynamic fashion, as well as some koshi nage throws so your description/perception isn't wrong either.

[chrismoses]

A few clarifications and minor responses.

I think most dojos have techniques that RESPOND to the "attack" of ryokatadori. What I'm asserting however, is that without the knowlege of how to grab someone with ryokatadori and then throw them, ryokatadori is not really to be considered an attack. I'll offer the analogy of teaching someone how to chamber a punch or kick, but never teaching them how to deliver the strike. It is not an attack in itself, but a precursor to an attack.

While I'd agree generally that all attacks can be responded to with many of the different techniques of Aikido, I still find the specifics of those responses to be very different. If you take my assertion that without the intent to do more than simply grab in order for ryokatadori to truly be considered an attack, then if uke is unaware or unwilling to move in this way, there is no attack to defend against. Very few people in the history of the world have been mugged by a single person who would not take their hands off of their victim's shoulders. It's not threatening/ dangerous unless it leads to something else (an accomplice, a kick, a throw...)

As for using various attacks in randori, in many styles randori is a specific exercise involving the ryokatadori grab. In my experience, most schools refer to single or multiple attackers in an "anything goes" scenario as jyuwaza. I'm not really dealing with that practice, but randori as I've described it seems to be a fairly common exercise in nearly every Aikido dojo I've been to.

Thanks for the responses, keep 'em coming!

[szczepan]

Originally posted by chrismoses
If you take my assertion that without the intent to do more than simply grab in order for ryokatadori to truly be considered an attack, then if uke is unaware or unwilling to move in this way, there is no attack to defend against.

It is very surprising that you even consider the will of uke That means that your technique depends of attacker's will......hmhm.....I mean WOW!!!
In aikido theory you become one with attacker, so you are able to do whatever you like with him.
Before you reach such high level, still, it is always tori job to throw or control attacker. It is so simple. Uke is NEVER in fault
Otherwise you are completly helpless against more sophisticated attacks, like those with feints, or COORDINATED multiple attacks, where ie:two attackers immobilise you and the rest finish you cold dead.

[chrismoses]

So to follow your own logic szczepan, if as uke, I do nothing at all, how exactly is nage supposed to throw me without resorting to what most would consider Jujutsu? Would uke still be in the right? If you say, "No, he needs to attack," then we are in agreement. My assertion is that placing your hands on someone's shoulders is not an attack and therefore is the same thing as standing across the mat from you doing nothing. Please don't read into my posts that I don't know what to do with someone who is resisting as opposed to attacking. I have never asserted that, and I appologize if I implied it.

Of course the will of uke will affect how a technique is done, and I wholeheartedly reject the concept that uke is never wrong. Do you think that Shioda Sensei blamed O-Sensei for injuring the second uke at the Imperial demonstration? By his writings, it clearly sounds to me that he placed the blame on uke's half-hearted attack. It also sounds to me like Shioda Sensei was certainly taking uke's will into account when describing the situation. He did not say, "His aim was off." He described the attack as not sincere. Sincerity implies intent, which implies an inner will which entered into the event in question.

As an aside, if you become one with your attacker, who gets to decide what the outcome is? Why shouldn't uke get to impail you? After all, who are you to deny uke's desires?

[szczepan]

Originally posted by chrismoses
So to follow your own logic szczepan, if as uke, I do nothing at all, how exactly is nage supposed to throw me without resorting to what most would consider Jujutsu?

Chris, some stranger approach close to your child/wife/family placing his hands on her/his shoulders and you clearly feel it is dangerous situation. Was he attacking your family? How exactly your reaction is/was? Who did mistake? Attacker, or defender? Think about it.Meditate about it Deep In The Wood

See, we have different perception of safe ma-ai, and how to preserve it. Must be my fault, may be, because I do some weapons practice? Who knows....

I dont know about Founder or Shioda sensei, but me personally, I'm very comfortable to say - It is my fault that I can't throw attacker.

Definitely I have not right to say - "this is fault of attacker that I can't throw him" or "my uke's will decide that I can/can't do a technique".
After all, IF we practice MA, this is common sense

[chrismoses]

A threatening situation is NOT AN ATTACK. THIS IS EXACTLY MY POINT. I am not talking hypothetically, I am talking about mat time, a particular practice, not the ethics behind defending a loved one.

"See, we have different perception of safe ma-ai, and how to preserve it. Must be my fault, may be, because I do some weapons practice? Who knows...." szczepan

I am a licensed instuctor in Shinto Ryu Iai-Battojutsu, the sword style of the Hibino family, in addition, I currenly study knifework and previously was awarded the rank of Shoden-Ni in Seiki Ryu Kenjutsu and Jodo. I have taught Aiki-ken and Jo for several years. So you might say that I do some weapons...

You know what I hate? I hate when I offer what I consider to be a real and interesting topic for conversation, one that I've thought about a great deal and bounced around with a few people whose opinons I really respect and all I get from this board is patronizing crap.

"Think about it.Meditate about it Deep In The Wood" as if this were some tome of wisdom from the buddah. If you're trying to be cute, it didn't work. I'm asking a real question. If I wanted koans I'd order Chinese food and read my fortune.

"After all, IF we practice MA, this is common sense" Implying maybe what I'm doing isn't martial arts or I would get it. Oh, and by the way, cute smileys don't make up for insulting and partonizing comments. I still read them as insulting and patronizing.

"Stop it, Chris. The fact that people attack lackluster is because you don't take control of the situation, there is no anger because you are doing lackluster techniques, and there is no fear because you are absorbed by others centers."
You dare call my techniques lackluster when you've NEVER EVER SEEN ME TRAIN AND KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ME? Funny from a self proclaimed underacheiver you sure seem to know just about everything. Emotional triangle? Please, please, you're killing me. I am not an underacheiver, I approach my training in a very active manner. I want it all. I want all the good stuff and I'm willing to endure the hardships that come from dedicated training. I've gone out of my way to find good teachers who are pushing the art and themselves and somehow convince them to share some of what they know with me. I'm not really very interested in training with those who don't really want much from their art (whatever art it is).

So much for this thread. Every once in a while I forget why I'd given up on this part of the board. Thanks for the reminder. Too bad, I really was interested to hear what other people thought, maybe stir up a bit of real conversation about something that I feel is a real issue in the way modern Aikido is being taught, and that I haven't heard much talk about. Silly me.

Appologies to those of you who have contributed constructively to this thread, the above was not intended for you, and I hope it's obvoius who you are. Thank you for your honest and constructive replies. If anyone has anything to say about my initial premises, I'm still really interested to hear what you think.

Let's see if I get a yellow card for this one...