Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 34

Thread: Book: "Effortless Combat Throws", by Tim Cartmell

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA USA
    Posts
    2,570
    Likes (received)
    44

    Default Book: "Effortless Combat Throws", by Tim Cartmell

    [Post deleted by user]
    Last edited by Nathan Scott; 28th March 2014 at 18:36.
    Nathan Scott
    Nichigetsukai

    "Put strength into your practice, and avoid conceit. It is easy enough to understand a strategy and guard against it after the matter has already been settled, but the reason an opponent becomes defeated is because they didn't learn of it ahead of time. This is the nature of secret matters. That which is kept hidden is what we call the Flower."

    - Zeami Motokiyo, 1418 (Fūshikaden)

  2. #2
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Arrow

    See Tim Cartmell in action:

    http://homepage.mac.com/mancheta/imovie.html

    The principles and applications Tim teaches in this book and in other stuff he does is just good and solid Chinese internal arts principles. His throwing stuff is especially from Ba Gua and Taiji it seems, arts known for throwing and chin na respectively.

    Tim goes one better than most in that he tests his stuff in various levels of full contact training and competition, and he has overcome the prejudice many CMA and traditional jujutsu stylists have and embraced BJJ....he is a brown belt and division winning competitor in that art.

    Tim frequently mentions how the jujutsu principles embodied in the relaxation, flow and skilled body movement of BJJ are very much in line with Chinese internal arts principles.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Question

    I've looked at this book before and it is not bad at all for what it presents. However, as always (I find myself repeating my mantra)that the principles and techniques illustrated within that book are those common to jujutsu as well as some Chinese arts.

    "Hopefully, a lot of confusion, like what the difference in methodology between aikijujutsu and jujutsu is, will be answered."

    How does a book about Chinese throwing arts help to illustrate the difference between jujutsu and aikijujutsu methodologies? I find almost everyone of the principles mentioned to be jujutsu principles. Some of which are opposite (or at least in contrast) with Daito-ryu aiki principles. As such, the book might be useful for aikido and/or jujutsu, but not of much use for improving your aikijujutsu (imo).

    "My reason for introducing this book in the AJJ forum is that a great deal of the principles covered in this book are necessary for performing AJJ-type "aiki techniques"."

    That entirely depends on what you mean by AJJ-type "aiki techniques". If you simply mean "aikido-like" techniques like kotegaeshi, shihonage, iriminage, koshinage, sankyo/sankajo etc... then whatever. But if you mean Daito-ryu AJJ-like techniques then that's just not the case. Most experienced Daito-ryu practitioners still make distinctions between jujutsu and aiki techniques just as Sokaku Takeda taught.

    Having said that, borrowing or incorporating Don's principles relating to physics and physiology and the like, does not make something "ajj" or even aiki-like. Even Don's students have made distinctions between jujutsu and aiki - maybe not exactly along the same lines that I do, but the distinctions are there non-the-less.

    Nathan, with all due respect - my concern is that statements like the above only serve to perpetuate myths about aiki, and don't at all reflect orthodox or classical views of aikijujutsu by actual aikijujutsu instructors/practitioners. There are just too many people who will read a book like this, incorporate a few principles, techniques or ideas from it, and then say that they're teaching aikijujutsu. When what they're actually doing has nothing at all to do with authentic ajj (or the arts Tim Cartmell is teaching for that matter), and more often than not they're filled with pure crap, and the public is deceived into thinking that what they in turn are doing is "aiki" because that's what they call it.

    No disrespect to the author (Tim Cartmell) intended at all. I think he gave credit fairly enough to Don for his influence, and the title of his book accurately describes what it is all about. I imagine from what I've seen of the book - that his eclectic approach has served him well and that he's probably quite skilled. But recommend the book as useful for improving your throws in general, not as an adjunct or supplement that will help you understand aikijujutsu better, because it's not and it won't.

    If you want to understand aiki better, then study aiki with an aiki master, who's willing to teach what he knows, and then read one of their books.

    Just my opinion,

    Brently Keen

  4. #4
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    I'm not going to debate his art since I know nothing about it. The cover speaks volumes to me though. Wherein does that raised leg bent over reaping type technique speak to anyone about effortless throwing?
    If you need that type of gross body movement to take someones balance then It is not a jujutsu I would want to look at-much less anything I would consider advanced. It reminds of bad Aikido where the nage moves all over the freakin place just to move the other guys center. Maybe he didn't pick the cover and it's not representative of his art.


    I really don't care about anyone attaching their "Aiki" label to anything. Minimul motion and centered-to-center control speaks for itself what ever you want to call it.

    cheers
    Dan

  5. #5
    lemming Guest

    Default

    <B>From Dan Harden -
    I'm not going to debate his art since I know nothing about it. The cover speaks volumes to me though. Wherein does that raised leg bent over reaping type technique speak to anyone about effortless throwing?
    </B>

    I've got the book, and have read through it a couple of times. I don't think the cover fairly depicts the content, probably they just needed something a bit flashy.

    All that aside, 2 years training in aikido doesn't qualify me to have much of an opinion as to whether the content of the book is worthwhile or not. It looks good to me, but then I never tried it, and my throwing skills are deplorable. It would be great if someone with some background and ability were to pick the book up and spend a bit of time analyzing it, hint, hint...

    As to any aiki connection, I don't think the overall point of the book was to relate anything significant in that area, and most people reading it probably won't care so long as the concepts in the book are sound.

    There was another book, Chinese Fast Wrestling, which in my mind seems to have come out around the same time, and had what seemed to be some related material. I'd also be interested if anybody had qualified opinions on this book as well.

  6. #6
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Dan Harden
    I'm not going to debate his art since I know nothing about it. The cover speaks volumes to me though. Wherein does that raised leg bent over reaping type technique speak to anyone about effortless throwing?
    If you need that type of gross body movement to take someones balance then It is not a jujutsu I would want to look at-much less anything I would consider advanced. It reminds of bad Aikido where the nage moves all over the freakin place just to move the other guys center. Maybe he didn't pick the cover and it's not representative of his art.


    I really don't care about anyone attaching their "Aiki" label to anything. Minimul motion and centered-to-center control speaks for itself what ever you want to call it.

    cheers
    Dan
    I must admit you surprised me on this one, bud. Especially for someone with a judo background. Looks like an uchimata to me (also a popular throw in Chinese shuai jiao). Don't know about you, but I have been thrown with an uchimata that I barely felt...considering the lack of effort the guys put out and the lack of power I felt on taking the ride I would pretty much have called them effortless. Leg in the air or not.

    Good luck on that minimal motion stuff against someone who doesn't tank. I know, I know, maybe you do it in YOUR dojo. No else seems to be able to do it convincingly, though. I am making the rounds and trying to find someone who can convince me otherwise, and have so far been disappointed. Not sure when I'll be out east so you can show me how, though I still wanna visit.

    These people are skilled, mind you, but give them pressure, give them non-cooperation, adapt to their attempts to catch your center with their minimal motion locking of your joints (like people just seem to do naturally in the real world) and it all ends up looking like rough jujutsu,judo and/or sumo. Chinese styles, Japanese styles....looks like judo or sumo. Even push hands with full contact, when one man is vying to defeat the other, rather than a force-sensitivity experiment, is essentially sumo...at least thats what all the taiji stylists complain it ends up being.

    Might be good judo, might be good sumo, but that is what it is. Someone working against you just does that. If you are doing it differently, you are doing what no one else I have ever seen is capable of, arts and people with very good reputations.

    I really hope to see that some day.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,626
    Likes (received)
    143

    Cool

    Hey Kit,

    We don't tank. We don't use big, gross motor movements. Minimal motion when applied in the right places is plenty effective.

    What about making a machine's parts smaller and less gross in their movement, with the result of the machine becoming more efficient and powerful? Why wouldn't this also be applicable to martial arts principles and human "machines," the functioning of which follows and is subject to mechanical principles?
    Cady Goldfield

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    455
    Likes (received)
    9

    Default

    Originally posted by Cady Goldfield
    Hey Kit,

    We don't tank. We don't use big, gross motor movements. Minimal motion when applied in the right places is plenty effective.

    What about making a machine's parts smaller and less gross in their movement, with the result of the machine becoming more efficient and powerful? Why wouldn't this also be applicable to martial arts principles and human "machines," the functioning of which follows and is subject to mechanical principles?
    "Aiki is small"

    - One of my instructors .

    Best,

    Chris

  9. #9
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Talking

    Cady,

    So I've heard. That's why I want to see and feel your stuff next time I'm in your neck of the woods.

    No one else has convinced me so far, maybe you guys can.

  10. #10
    Dan Harden Guest

    Default

    Hey ya bud
    Sorry for a lenghty post but I can't seem to shorten it-you know me.

    Kit writes
    I must admit you surprised me on this one, bud. Especially for someone with a judo background.
    __________________________________

    me
    Judo is not fighting-never was-never will be. Agreeing to tangle and vie for position to throw against someone who knows all the throws is a physical game of chess. Hence there is an agreed sense of cooperation by the limits of allowable technique. It is one of the reasons it has degenerated into such muscle based pull-overs when they resist a throw. Now it is equal to any other form of sport competition. Low line Kicking striking, and feints that lead to set ups, chocking, and throwing- is fighting.
    And here's the thing-fighting a fighter who knows all of that is as artificial a response as practicing against half-assed attacks.
    This was the source of my comments to you about the level of attacks you face in your line of work. If Joe the average citizen gives you as much trouble as you and your fellow officers have repeatedly written about in these pages-imagine what they would offer you with serious training behind them combined with that much motivation.
    ___________________________________

    Kit writes
    Good luck on that minimal motion stuff against someone who doesn't tank. I know, I know, maybe you do it in YOUR dojo. No else seems to be able to do it convincingly, though.
    These people are skilled, mind you, but give them pressure, give them non-cooperation, adapt to their attempts to catch your center with their minimal motion locking of your joints (like people just seem to do naturally in the real world) and it all ends up looking like rough jujutsu,judo and/or sumo.


    me
    Where to begin........

    Joint locks; minimul motion or otherwise while fighting are stupid-dojo fair. Where in have you read where I advocated using them? I train them, I work them, I perfect what I can with them. They are a requirement to know here. But I am the fellow who has been rather forward and disdainful or their use and I have said repeatedly that I do not believe they are attainable against a commited attack-and whats more- most of them can be shaken off. (that's my polite version) Over beers I will tell you what I really think of most of this nonsense. Were you to come and fight don't expect to see even one. They are useful in "other" venues. For fighting another fighter I will concentrate on other things far more attainable. I am more interested in pragmatic real world intent to finish. With plenty of failure, humility and real world fustrations to the very same thing. We have discussed this in the past-do you think I was kidding? You can have the dojo fun, for practical combatives-away from the Aiki bunnies Hakama crowd -there are serious ways of using smaller motions to get close, bind, stop, or inhibit his body and then strike, go for the throat or throw and mount.
    I'll take your sarcasm about MY dojo in stride Kit. But I offer no panacea to the dilema of CQC-wherein did I ever clame to offer that? I seem to be the voice continually admonishing practical views in these very same pages.
    I'll offer you serious training with effective solutions to handling people. Anyone who offers 100% nonstoppable techniques is a fool.
    Lets see-am I not the same guy who encouraged you to seek your own solutions "outside" of these ridiculous arts?
    I think I am
    Did I not advise you as a friend that the solutions are in the principles-just dump the stupid attacks and you will discover Kits Ryu?
    I think I did
    I believe we reviewed the realistic notions of mindset to enter, and heightened and sustained agression that combined with adaquate training puts you just on this side of a brawl.
    Please don't place me in any line up of these other martial idiots who offer "shark attack" unstoppable mayhem jujutsu-I will disavow it at every turn.
    If you want to come train that would be lovely.
    _____________________________________

    Kit writes

    Might be good judo, might be good sumo, but that is what it is. Someone working against you just does that. If you are doing it differently, you are doing what no one else I have ever seen is capable of, arts and people with very good reputations.

    I really hope to see that some day. [/B][/QUOTE]

    I really have grown to be completely diinterested in these people with reputations. I have seen and felt many and I remain distinctly unimpressed. You may continue to travel far and wide but I think several of the fellows I grew up with would lay waste to the efforts of many of these "legends." The whole damn thing is embarassing.

    As for resistence having to lead to larger motions and muscle- there sweety-lies our most probable cause for dissagreement. I feel that the above can and should be accomplished with parsimony of technique, flash or fanfair. Training to go through them with the thought of weapons to finish (most of the time)and without using a lot of muscle is not even remotely unique. Its just that most people DO train that way.
    I will offer this and this only-I have never felt anyone who feels like I do up close- although I am quite sure they are out there. What I have seen and felt is tamer. But that view is limited by what I have seen and felt isn't it? I like what I have developed. But if you are looking for an art that is unbeatable you will be gravely dissapointed-that does not exist and everywhere you look you will simply set up a straw man and you will once agin be dissapointed.

    Again, (as I have written to you about this in the past) I urge you to define what you want and need for your line of work and concentrate on Kit ryu. You may eventually find what you need right at home.

    My response is probably to lengthy but it is a deep subject-too deep for this venue.

    cheers
    Dan
    Last edited by Dan Harden; 30th June 2002 at 16:28.

  11. #11
    Kit LeBlanc Guest

    Default

    Originally posted by Dan Harden

    me
    Where to begin........

    Joint locks; minimul motion or otherwise while fighting are stupid-dojo fair. Where in have you read where I advocated using them?
    Uhhhh, it sure sounds like it a couple posts up....


    Originally posted by Dan Harden


    I train them, I work them, I perfect what I can with them. They are a requirement to know here. But I am the fellow who has been rather forward and disdainful or their use and I have said repeatedly that I do not believe they are attainable against a commited attack-and whats more- most of them can be shaken off. (that's my polite version) Over beers I will tell you what I really think of most of this nonsense. Were you to come and fight don't expect to see even one. They are useful in "other" venues. For fighting another fighter I will concentrate on other things far more attainable. I am more interested in pragmatic real world intent to finish. With plenty of failure, humility and real world fustrations to the very same thing. We have discussed this in the past-do you think I was kidding? You can have the dojo fun, for practical combatives-away from the Aiki bunnies Hakama crowd -there are serious ways of using smaller motions to get close, bind, stop, or inhibit his body and then strike, go for the throat or throw and mount.
    I'll take your sarcasm about MY dojo in stride Kit. But I offer no panacea to the dilema of CQC-wherein did I ever clame to offer that? I seem to be the voice continually admonishing practical views in these very same pages.
    I'll offer you serious training with effective solutions to handling people. Anyone who offers 100% nonstoppable techniques is a fool.
    Lets see-am I not the same guy who encouraged you to seek your own solutions "outside" of these ridiculous arts?
    I think I am
    Did I not advise you as a friend that the solutions are in the principles-just dump the stupid attacks and you will discover Kits Ryu?
    I think I did
    I believe we reviewed the realistic notions of mindset to enter, and heightened and sustained agression that combined with adaquate training puts you just on this side of a brawl.
    Please don't place me in any line up of these other martial idiots who offer "shark attack" unstoppable mayhem jujutsu-I will disavow it at every turn.
    If you want to come train that would be lovely.
    _____________________________________

    Kit writes

    Might be good judo, might be good sumo, but that is what it is. Someone working against you just does that. If you are doing it differently, you are doing what no one else I have ever seen is capable of, arts and people with very good reputations.

    I really hope to see that some day.
    I really have grown to be completely diinterested in these people with reputations. I have seen and felt many and I remain distinctly unimpressed. You may continue to travel far and wide but I think several of the fellows I grew up with would lay waste to the efforts of many of these "legends." The whole damn thing is embarassing.

    As for resistence having to lead to larger motions and muscle- there sweety-lies our most probable cause for dissagreement. I feel that the above can and should be accomplished with parsimony of technique, flash or fanfair. Training to go through them with the thought of weapons to finish (most of the time)and without using a lot of muscle is not even remotely unique. Its just that most people DO train that way.
    I will offer this and this only-I have never felt anyone who feels like I do up close- although I am quite sure they are out there. What I have seen and felt is tamer. But that view is limited by what I have seen and felt isn't it? I like what I have developed. But if you are looking for an art that is unbeatable you will be gravely dissapointed-that does not exist and everywhere you look you will simply set up a straw man and you will once agin be dissapointed.

    Again, (as I have written to you about this in the past) I urge you to define what you want and need for your line of work and concentrate on Kit ryu. You may eventually find what you need right at home.

    My response is probably to lengthy but it is a deep subject-too deep for this venue.

    cheers
    Dan [/B][/QUOTE]


    No martial art in any dojo is fighting. Period. I no longer care to try to define what "is" and what "isn't" better suited for it with the bulk of people who have no frame of reference for "it." You do, from the history you have so far related, that is why I am interested in what you have to say.

    Your previous descriptions of the elements that go into the practice at your dojo, minus some of the over enthusiastic endorsements we saw in the aiki-wars, are also very intriguing.

    The sarcasm is meant more tongue in cheek, and to draw out your explanation. You generally give opinions that I agree with. But I am seeing more and more opinions on the Net that are not based on what is hard reality. Lately some of the opinions I have heard from people I have come to respect are not jibing with reality when I get to experience it first hand. So I am wondering exactly where you are coming from. I would like to see how you put this stuff to training for practical use....but I should say I don't expect to see anything different from what anyone else is doing, that really works, in *good* jujutsu, or judo, etc.

    Last, not sure I would be so dismissive of joe the average citizen. I think our definitions of that term are different in view of resistive arrest and officer assault situations. Even if they aren't, I have learned to have a lot more respect for psychoses, drug and alcohol influence, and weapons of opportunity than for any martial arts training.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    3,626
    Likes (received)
    143

    Default

    Kit wrote:
    "Dan wrote:
    Joint locks; minimul motion or otherwise while fighting are stupid-dojo fair. Where in have you read where I advocated using them?"


    Uhhhh, it sure sounds like it a couple posts up....


    If you're referring to my post, I misread what you'd written earlier. I was pointing to small, efficient movements in general, not joint locking, and particularly not jointlocking while fighting. The thread was about efficient throws, and I'm thinking about all the very small, minimal movements I've experienced from others in freestyle, in which very little effort was made to throw me or connect, lock up my body and choke me out. Joint locks and "grab my wrist"? As Dan so aptly has drummed into us, that's dojo practice fare to develop sensitivity and intuitive sense of vectors.

    And if you weren't referring to my post... nevermind.
    Cady Goldfield

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Long Beach, CA, USA
    Posts
    318
    Likes (received)
    1

    Default

    I have no comments on the book but I just wanted to throw in here (no pun intended) that I would agree with Cady and Dan in that I think it is important to draw a line between what is effective self defense and what are training exercises in sensitivity and basically "what I can get away with" -type techniques.
    That seldom comes up in these discussions.

    The latter is fine for showing off at seminars and such but not practical jujutsu/aikijujutsu.

    There are variations to many techniques that can fall into both categories.
    Take the sumi otoshi for instance: we have versions that (in a dojo setting) require almost no contact or cause the person to virtually throw themselves based on visual or tactile deception, minimal motion, or very light touch. But there are also versions that are designed to break the opponent’s arm and land him on his head with all of his body weight coming straight down on top of it.
    My teacher seldom if ever shows the latter forms at seminars because most people want to see the more esoteric techniques he has gotten a "reputation" for.

    There are various levels of each and I personally have found that having done some of the "what I can get away with" versions have helped to improve the more practical versions because you have to have it just right for it to work at all, even with no resistance. They have allowed me to see more direct and efficient lines of force that when applied in a more practical form make it come off cleaner and powerful while requiring less effort or strength.

    Some techniques are practiced because they can save your life, whereas some are practiced for the lessons that they teach.

    I think it is important to study both if you have them available to you, but you should know the difference between the two.
    Richard Elias
    Takamura-ha Shindo Yoshin ryu
    Yanagi Ryu

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Colo Spgs, CO USA
    Posts
    377
    Likes (received)
    2

    Default

    Wow, I'm sensing a group hug here in the imminent future - I'm agreeing with Dan and Cady, and yikes even Richard here!

    Among those whom I respect and like to train with "tanking" is not a regular practice even with minimal motion techniques jujutsu or aiki. Yet, in a sense aiki is a sort of induced tanking. If you want to get good, you've got to become sensitive of your openings and aware of potentials. To some extent uke will have to take a fall if he want's to avoid getting hurt. Other times when uke is a more senior student he will take the fall to show tori how the technique is supposed to work, it's like the instructor role in a sword kata. If the senior throws himself in order to teach the student - then it's beneficial to the student, it's beneficial for training. So just because someone falls doesn't mean the student's technique was real, but it may serve a purspose and still be effective for the teaching and training of the student. In the process the senior also learns much. So there's good tanking and bad. Bad tanking is when is when you take the fall when there is no reason to, when there's no application of technique, or intent. That is what the aiki bunnies and fairies do.

    Kit, I think perhaps you need to make a more realistic distinction between training and fighting. Perhaps the problem is rooted in the popular myth that we will always fight as we train/practice. Therefore the more "realistic" oriented arts/practitioners tend to engage in more "realistic" training methods (usually sparring, freefighting, resistive competition, etc...).

    The truth is that we train to be able to fight - We don't fight in training so that we can fight in the street. If you're fighting for training, then you're either going to eliminate yourself the first time you train with someone better than you, or you're going to run out of practice partners very quick (if you're very good), or your going to introduce rules/limits to your practice fighting. At any rate, you're not likely to make much progress beyond your present level, because you'll just do what you already know in order to win and/or survive the training.

    Just like Richard described, the various ways of doing sumi otoshi in Yanagi-ryu, in Daito-ryu it is very similar. There are basic jujutsu techniques, throws, strikes, chokes, locks, breaks, etc... Try like Dan said, to do those against a trained fighter - it gets a lot more difficult. But that's why those advanced aiki moves and combinations thereof were developed. They had to have some way of securing an advatage against other skilled samurai/fighters. During samurai era's every bujutsu school taught a dozen, or a hundred, or a thousand ways to strike, break, or otherwise incapacitate an opponent. Most were pretty common (since we're all dealing with the same human body's strengths and weaknesses). The advanced secret techniques of most koryu schools were usually subtle and often unorthodox ways of securing an advantage over another skilled opponent who would not easily fall for the more typical tactics.

    Aiki training in particular is aimed at developing particular skills to use against this type of fighter. If a basic jujutsu technique is going to do the trick, then that's all that's necessary. Aiki is not needed for such situations. Now if you're dealing with someone who is a skilled and sensitive enough fighter to counter your basic jujutsu, then some aiki will come in handy. If he's not sincerely trying to attack you, and is just playing defensively, then whatever - why bother?

    Here is a thread that addresses similar concerns about the only other aiki-like art that I've ever seen:

    http://russianmartialart.org/forum/p...opic.php?t=185

    The response to this fellow's question by James and other Systema practitioners is pretty much the same as my experience in Daito-ryu. One difference between Daito-ryu and Systema is that Ryabko and Vasiliev have very recent and extensive real world experience - using apparently the same sort of very relaxed, sometimes mimimal motion or even "no touch" types of techniques that Daito-ryu masters have been teaching and demonstrating for generations. Granted none of the present day Daito-ryu masters have the same extent of real world combat experience (AFAIK), the experience of Sokaku and his predecessors is at least two generations past, yet the skills and the principles and (to some degree) the methods are apparently quite similar if not shared. The training methodologies differ a little, but they also share many principles, and (imo) what the Russians are and have been doing validates much of what we Daito-ryu aiki guys have been saying for some time.

    That is the art is based on sound principles that work. Likewise it is also taught by principles. Training is "principle based" rather than "reality based" so that you can develop applicable skills and attributes to apply in real situations against either skilled or unskilled, armed, or unarmed, and/or even multiple opponents. By "reality" I mean those typically harder, competetive styles, NHB, MMA that square-off and use lots of resistance and sparring, and the like in order to engage in more "realistic" training - to be "as close as possible" to real fighting. I do not mean reality as in the quality of facing nature and facts the way they are and dealing with them practically (of course sound principles are more 'realistic', than contrived/controlled sparring and fighting events events like the octagon and such).

    Experienced as someone like Vasiliev is, he's also apparently teaching his students, who in turn (without the same level or amount of experience) are effectively teaching others by a principle based training method. They spar in slow motion - hardly realistic by today's standards, but what they're doing is also very amazing, not unlike aikijujutsu. If you want to learn, you "play the game" or "do the work" as they say. If you don't buy it (what they're doing) then there are plenty of guys who're willing show you how it works - and from what I've heard it really hurts.

    Still if their ego's aren't caught up in needing to prove it to you, then they'll likely let you come and go completely unimpressed, but none-the-wiser for the experience. If there's no hard feelings why hurt someone just to prove a point? In Daito-ryu this is more frequently the option chosen with an ignorant challenger, if they can't see or appreciate the value and effectiveness of what is being taught then why bother? Someone who is adept has already seen and had it proven that it works, and knows fairly well what they can and cannot do. Better to be a nice guy and let someone go away in ignorance than be an @ssh*le and cause a fight and hurt somebody. As Neil sometimes says, "Move along move along!"

    At any rate, the implication is to let us get back to training quietly, and let the instructor give his attention those sincere students who are coming to learn rather than show that they can stymie everyone else's attempts to do the same. By most accounts I think the more adept Daito-ryu instructors are perhaps better known for their manners and gentlemanly conduct anyway. As opposed to being known primarily for their fighting skills and ability. This is apparently true for masters Ryabko and Vasiliev as well, who apparently are quite frank about the spiritual qualities and characteristics needed to master systema as well. The ability is there, should they find themselves needing it, but there's no need to go around fighting just to prove it. Better to work on polishing your spirit, and keeping your ego in check (imo). People of that caliber regardless of nationality and the art practiced are usually able to make the stuff work on even the most sophisticated as well as dense skeptics - and if they walk away uninjured it has as much to do with their generosity as it does their skill level.

    By the way, I checked out the book again last night at Borders - the picture on the cover is fairly representative of the stuff inside. No aiki to be seen at all (imo). Tai Chi Chuan/Chin na, yes. Judo/Jujutsu/Aikido, yes. Shuai Chaio, yes. Aiki/Aikijujutsu, nope. In fact, I question the "effortlessness" of many of the techniques shown in the book - too many large and gross movements (imo). Large movements usually require more effort than small movements (especially against resisting opponents).

    While the principles listed and described may be sound, most of the techniques shown don't reflect very good posture - which is very basic to performing effortless throws of any kind. Poor posture always requires too much effort (imo).

    Brently Keen

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Atlanta - USA
    Posts
    712
    Likes (received)
    6

    Default

    So Kit, I have a question. Why didn’t you ask Don about this and see if he could back his stuff up? You had two days. If you are truly searching how are you going to get anywhere if you don’t ask the questions that are bothering you?
    Doug Walker
    Completely cut off both heads,
    Let a single sword stand against the cold sky!

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Mugai Ryu book revisited + history update
    By Seishin in forum Sword Arts
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24th January 2003, 00:08
  2. Book FAQ
    By John Lindsey in forum Passing the Guard
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 8th October 2002, 05:23
  3. Charles Nelson's Red Book
    By Phil Matthews in forum Close Quarter Combatives
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 21st August 2001, 20:34

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •