I think I am over graded!

[Gronk]

Hi everyone, I'm new here, but from what I can tell there are quite a few students of Aikido here so I figured/hoped this would be a good place to get some opinions. I actually have a bunch of questions but will attack them one at a time

Firstly I have been training for a little over 3.5 years now and not long ago graded to 1st kyu, which brings me to my first conern as per the title : I think I am over graded! I just don't think that 3.5 years is long enough to be this high (6th kyu being the lowest in our school). I mean I can apply for shodan in 9months time and I just don't think I have the understanding that should be necessary for this level. I mean I can do the techniques on the cirriculum ok, but surely there should be more required of us than a simple display of rote learning?!?

Plus of all the gradings I have been to in our school I have only seen one person fail because just flat out didn't know his stuff... poor execusion seems to be ok though.

So basically is 4.5-5 years long enough to expect to reach shodan or is it too quick? Plus should we be doing more than simply copying techniques?

Thanks.

 

[shihonage]

In my school I've seen people take from 2 to apparently 11 years to make shodan. I've been doing it for 6 years now and I'm 2nd kyu. It all depends on the person, their natural ability to learn, and the amount of time they can spend on Aikido per week.

In our school, there's a huge gap in requirements between 1st kyu and shodan. We're required to visit at least one summer camp and 11 blackbelt seminars, in addition to training in randori (4 attackers drill) and jo-kata sequence before testing for shodan.

Also, even 1st kyu testers are required to show a demonstration in jiyu-waza - which is a spontaneous application of Aikido technique, hardly "simply copying techniques". This alone separates the 1st kyu test from all the kyu tests below it.

Also, I believe that at its core Aikido technique is not simple, and its not the same thing as copying "kata". Everytime you apply the same technique, even to the same person, something is a little different. WIth a different person, that difference grows. There's "aliveness" in every Aikido technique - if you do it by repeating instead of adapting, it will not work.
Hence, the goal is to learn "aliveness".

In general I think Aikido training method allows a lot of leeway for its practitioners to develop poor and inapplicable technique, and in fact graduate to shodan with little martial knowledge. There are guaranteed to be quite a few of those people in every Aikido school. I think you have enough awareness in you not to be one of them. Thats because you ask questions.

I also think it is mandatory for all Aikido practitioners to have at least a glancing familiarity with real life violence. Things happen in real life literally 10 times faster than practiced in the dojo most of the time (even if you think you're being realtime), and they're a lot more fierce and ugly. You must thoroughly understand the driving principles behind the techniques and their intended, fully applicable purpose instead of repeating them blindly.

Personally I think that a person who graduates shodan should be fully capable of handling an aggressive sober attacker around their size who is intent on taking your head off. As a shodan you should graduate from techniques to principles, and in real life have the ability to create your own technique spontaneously depending on what the attacker gives you.
You should be able to limit the opponent's range of responses and keep yourself safe.

The type of shodan that can get clocked by your typical aggressive 16 year old teenager but patronizes people who try to train with sincere physics is the type that should have his black belt revoked.

P.S. Also I notice differences in yudansha having a deeper understanding of technique. They're not just repeating the same technique as they did at 6th kyu. For example when you grab their wrist and they do a katate tori kokyunage omote, you find yourself thrown on your ass even if you let go of their wrist. Or during another technique, you find yourself WANTING to hold on to them instinctively instead of letting go. They have more refined ways of maintaining connection to the uke and making the technique less breakable.

Anyway this was a big rant, hope I didn't ruffle anyone's feathers too much. This is just my personal opinion.

 

[Gronk]

Hey thanks for the response, I think you make some very good points. Now that u made me sit and think a little, we do practice jiyu-waza, as well as bokken/jo suburi and kata. For our shodan we have to know the 20 jo suburi, 7 bokken, the 13 and 31 jo kata, possibly a bokken kata as well. We also do jiyu-waza in the grading as well as some weapon taking... basic weapon taking though!

The thing that got me thinking about all this was that I also study at a jujitsu school, although it's very aiki based. However the level of understanding required to grade at this school is far deeper than the aikido school. At the aikido school I'm considered a high grade as there is only 1 shodan there at this point, but at the jujitsu I'm middle road at best... ok I have been studying jj for 18months less, but it's more to do with the level of understanding and principles. Could this simply be a difference in the skill levels of my senseis (can you pluralise a japanese word? hehe)?

Your point about realism got me thinking too. If anything we have recently taken a step back to less realistic attacks! Surely as some of us grade higher in the school we would want MORE realism! By realism I mean we only face 3 types of strikes, shomen-uchi, tsuki and yokomen-uchi, and ALL from stepping strikes, i.e. uke steps through with the same foot as the hand that strikes. Now from what I find, basically everyone who punches or strikes "on the street" will not step through but twist at the hips. Now while I'm sure the techniques will still work, the change in stance will effect the mechanics of whatever throw/response tori makes, not to mention the timing differences.

Does any other school ignore this sort of attack too? Personally I would like a total beginner to walk in off the street and on their first night have them strike at some higher grades, to show them how "real" people hit. I think most of my school, myself included, would struggle!

It seems impossible to say anything about aikido without making it long! hehe

 

[shihonage]

Let me quote an article by George S. Ledyard Sensei which sums up my feelings about "realism" in Aikido very well. In addition, I feel when we practice with honest Aikido attacks, it becomes easier to understand how to deal with less stylized, more "real life" attacks. The mechanics remain true, but we may need to think of some shortcuts and tricks. Also, in real life, I feel that atemi is a must. You can't irimi with a fully aware opponent if you didn't distract their focus for those 0.25 seconds that you need. I visited briefly a Judo school and sparred with amateur boxers, it is an experience that I feel, is sorely needed for yudansha. Otherwise they end up being these "old lady" yudansha. Skillless passivists instead of skillful pacifists.

Practice of so-called "non-traditional" attacks is quite useful and has a necessary place in the practice of Aikido as a viable martial art. But that isn't the main thrust of the critics of Aikido attacks, of whom I am one. My problem is that in many dojos I see, there are NO attacks.

I was at a seminar in which visiting Ikeda Sensei called up a shodan to take ukemi. This young man was directed to do munetsuki but Ikeda Sensei didn't move when the attack was made. Six inches from his chest the young man's tsuki suddenly deflected off into space. Ikeda Sensei directed him to really hit but after five attempts, the young man was still unable to get himself to make contact.

This is a massive failure of training. This man has gotten up to Yudansha Rank and can't do a tsuki. Having this person for a partner is not just useless but actually counter productive for one's training. Repetitive parctice of technique from attacks which are energetically false imprints a whole range of associations which are wrong and will prove disastrous when a real committed attack is made.

One doesn't need to get into non-traditional attacks to find out where the problem in Aikido attacks lies. Stick with Shomenuchi, Yokomenuchi, and Munetsuki. I consistently visit dojos in which mid-level yudansha routinely deliver strikes to each other in training which one would find vaguely annoying at worst if one were struck. I have watched Randoris on Yudansha tests in which several ukes did their level best not to strike the nage but rather held their arms out for the necessary time to allow the nage to do the technique of his choice. There was no need for nage to develop proper timing and spacing as the ukes fascilitated everything for him.

If Aikido is to have any real value other than as a dance form then things need to be seen and practiced for what they are. A shomenuchi is a knife edge strike to the front of the head. Whether you do it off the front foot, off the back foot, as an extension outwards (like the Shingu folks) or as a powerful vertical downwards strike (like the ASU folks) doesn't matter. What matters is that it is a strike and that the uke is attempting to strike the nage. If nage is too junior to handle a full out attack then the attck is adjusted to make it safe. But if he makes a mistake it should still hit him; it just doesn't hit hard enough to injure. When you get to yudansha level you should be seeing committed and powerful attacks. If nage makes mistake he should get hit.

Attacks in many dojos are completely lacking in intention. You can casually move off the line of attack and the uke will dutifully strike the spot where used to be standing. No matter how slowly you make your entry somehow the uke never hits you. You attain O-sensei level of ability to move around without anyone ever hitting you (as long as the attackers are from your own dojo where this type of detrimental practice is condoned). I consistentlly encounter people at seminars who are shocked to find that they can't actually do the irimi movement they thought they could. Repeatedly my hand stiops touching their heads no matter how they try to escape. Their problem isn't that I am somehow so much faster than anyone else they train with... it's that I have a clear intention to strike when I strike. They'd been cruising along in their dojos thinking that they could actually do that irimi nage and then they find out it was all a dream.

Once again I was at a nidan test in which the person testing looked fairly competent but was not, in my opinion, being challenged in any way by the ukes who were all from his own dojo. At one point Saotome Sensei called fr a new uke and a student from outside that person's dojo stepped in. His first yokomen strike went right through this fellow's attempted deflection and bopped him upside the head. To his credit he was able to make the adjustment and handled the next few committed attacks. But you could see the shock on his face when that first "real" strike came in. It made it painfully obvious to everyone present who cared to look that none of the previous ukes were actually trying to do a strike.

I think that people need to make an attack be what it is. It is a strike and the person doing it needs to think of it that way. He should be trained to have the strongest intention to hit that safety allows. This starts with the teacher. If the teacher accepts unreal attacks from his ukes than the whole basis for training at the dojo is undermined. My teachers, Ikeda Sensei and Saotome Sensei absolutely expected you to do your level best to nail them. On those very rare occasions when one of us would succeed you'd get a smile and a "very good". We trained with each other the same way. In my early yudansha days I got hit as many times as I succeeded on my entries. But as frustrating as that was sometimes, when I pulled one off I KNEW I had pulled one off. I didnt have to wonder if my partner had given it to me.

In many dojos there is so little intention in the attacks that when someone who can really attack does so, the students can not stand in front of it and keep their centers. You can feel their energy field collapse as you start to move forward with the strike. If you can't hold your mind steady when the attack is delivered, then no amount of training, no amount of technical acquisition, no amount of detailed understanding of how a technique works will make any difference. If your Mind goes into retreat at the instant of the attack, everything else is over before you even make physical contact. It doesn't matter that you know hundreds of techniques. They are simply hundreds of techniques which you can't do.

This is the fundamental issue with Aikido training today. You take care of this issue and adding some practice once in a while using non-traditional attacks is just a detail in the development of the students skills as martial artists.

 

[shihonage]

Surely as some of us grade higher in the school we would want MORE realism!

Yes ! I forgot to comment on that. When I watch Aikiexpo tapes they make me depressed. When I show them to someone I know, they laugh.

Why ? Because a sight of an old guy squeaking and rotating a stick around is funny. Because seeing an old "Sensei" having two compliant students run up to him and grab his wrists and then he grunts and throws them is also funny. Because seeing some other "Sensei" have a compliant guy run in circles around him slowly while he poetically rotates in some sort of kokyu nage is also funny. And all of the above is embarassing.

Wrist grabbing is a beginner exercise which is very helpful in learning to feel the balance and connection, but when you're 6th dan, and demonstrating Aikido, I don't want to see these stupid parlor tricks with your own students ! I want to see roundhouses, straight punches, kicks, I want to see energy, speed and danger ! Yes, demonstrations should be flashy and dangerous ! They don't happen everyday and doing things like its everyday dojo training during a demo just isn't right !

In fact I think that the high ranked guys during demos should be REQUIRED to use students from different dojos, not just their own. And thats the LEAST of the changes that need to be done.

 

[TDWoj]

That was an interesting article, shihonage. Thanks for posting it.

The writer makes a good point about the "intention" of attack by uke. One of the instructors at my dojo, whose classes I rarely attend because they're on Fridays, taught a class - a whole class - on striking with intention. He made an interesting point, which was this: how much "intention" goes into uke's strike depends a great deal on how good uke's ukemi is. Someone with good ukemi can afford to strike with intention; someone (like me, for instance) whose ukemi isn't as good, cannot strike as forcefully.

The reason, of course, is that nage can only defend at the speed at which he is attacked. If uke strikes fast, nage has to move fast - and instinctively know which technique to use against the strike - to neutralise uke, and then uke will instinctively respond with the correct ukemi. That way, no one gets hurt.

Someone like me, however, whose ukemi is still pretty shaky (those darn forward rolls are still giving me trouble!), perforce has to strike with less intention because ukemi for me is still not instinctive, and I am still having to think before I roll (well, forward rolls, anyway. Backward ukemi - particularly ushiro yoko kaiten - I've got pretty much nailed).

However, I've learned to strike with as much intention as my ukemi can handle, and I've still managed to land a few blows on a nage who was napping. And those uke working with me are teaching me to react faster as nage, otherwise I'll get clocked (got a good one in the eye one time, not bad enough to get a black eye, but it taught to me to step smartly out of the way next time, or else).

At the nidan test in October (Yamada Sensei, judging), the two testing from my dojo had ukes from other dojos for both their one-on-one and randori demonstrations, and those ukes meant business. In one case, there was an exception made, since the person testing for nidan was 67 years old and had a history of two heart attacks and asthma, so instead of running his test all one go, he did parts of his test between the others who testing. The ukes held back a little, but not much.

Gronk, you didn't say if you had attended any or many seminars. If you haven't, I would recommend that you do. It gives you an opportunity to work with students from other dojos, and it helps to work with people who have been taught by different teachers. Also, does your instructor go to seminars? When my instructor returns from a seminar, she incorporates the variations in techniques she learns.

There have been two seminars here this year with instructors who learned aikido directly from O Sensei. One was Yamada, the other, I believe, was Kawahara. In the summer, there was an aikido camp (1 week) in BC with the grandson of O Sensei as one of the instructors.

I would recommend you try to attend at least one seminar per year with an instructor who was a student of O Sensei's. You might have to travel a bit, but it's well worth the expense. Sometimes the students of the host dojo will offer their homes to stay in, so you can at least avoid the expense of a hotel.

Nine months between 1st kyu and shodan seems a bit short, though. In my dojo, you need 300 practice days between 1st kyu and shodan, making that nearly 11 months if practicing 7 days per week (not likely), or 18 months if practicing 4 days per week.

Obviously, if the instructor says you're ready, then you take the test. There's no rule that says you HAVE to take your shodan test only nine months after your 1st kyu. If your instructor is a good one, he/she will tell you if you're ready or not.

 

[Aikilove]

shihonage,
Not everyone train aikido for the same reason as you do...

/J

 

[shihonage]

Aikilove, Aikido is a martial art. Spiritual development in a martial art comes from honest practice of technique as it was designed. It comes from being sincere with your partner in both attacks and words.

On the other hand when you deliver attacks which do not connect or fall for your partner just to be nice, you're not helping anyone spiritually develop. Your partner has false self-confidence about his nonexistent skill, and you're afraid to be honest with them in order to help them develop. You're helping foster a lie. You can't drop "martial" out of "martial art" and claim you're practicing the same thing as O Sensei taught.

I hope you see where I'm coming from. When O Sensei was sick and was giving a demonstration for the emperor, a student decided to go easy on him and give an insincere attack. He broke the student's arm.

A true pacifist is a person who can choose to do damage, but at the last minute, doesn't. In order to do "loving protection", you must not only love, but protect. Aikido was meant to produce pacifists, persons able to protect and do damage if necessary, but trying to avoid it at all costs. Not passivists, people who are unable to do anything except claim to be pacifists.

TDWoj, a sincere attack does not have to be fast all the time. I find that Aikido slow-motion mode of training is very very useful, as long as both partners simulate the same physics that would take place in realtime encounter.

For instance, during slow motion tsuki, the uke can't curve his punch. Yeah he CAN but in the realtime speed he wouldn't be able to. So he shouldn't cheat in slow motion. Also uke should not recover his balance so fast, because in realtime, he wouldn't be able to.

So, if a slow motion training starts with a slow, but sincere attack by uke (which is meant to connect, but doesn't track things too unrealistically well) it can be both safe and useful.
What irks me is people who deliver attacks which are both SLOW and have completely zero intent behind them. Its as if they're aiming to gently caress the hair on my forehead or perhaps not even touch it. This develops false distancing and false energy patterns.

 

[TDWoj]

TDWoj, a sincere attack does not have to be fast all the time. I find that Aikido slow-motion mode of training is very very useful, as long as both partners simulate the same physics that would take place in realtime encounter.

For instance, during slow motion tsuki, the uke can't curve his punch. Yeah he CAN but in the realtime speed he wouldn't be able to. So he shouldn't cheat in slow motion. Also uke should not recover his balance so fast, because in realtime, he wouldn't be able to.

So, if a slow motion training starts with a slow, but sincere attack by uke (which is meant to connect, but doesn't track things too unrealistically well) it can be both safe and useful.
What irks me is people who deliver attacks which are both SLOW and have completely zero intent behind them. Its as if they're aiming to gently caress the hair on my forehead or perhaps not even touch it. This develops false distancing and false energy patterns.

The point I was making, though, was what the instructor was trying to teach us - that an attack with intention depends on how well you can take ukemi. It isn't so much the speed as the delivery, and what follows after the delivery.

I got a comment once in class, that I "punch like a girl". After the class on attacks, I wasn't punching like a girl any more - but I have to be careful, because if I attack with intention at any speed, you can bet my partner isn't going to be gentle with the neutralisation. So, until my ukemi is better, I have to pull my attacks, or risk serious injury.

What I have a problem with in class is convincing my partner to put enough distance between us when I am attacking. For some reason, they think because I'm short, I have to be right in their face to complete the strike. Every time I back up to make more space, they step in closer, and what ends up happening is that the technique isn't executed correctly - or else I accidentally hit them (it's happened a few times, which makes me nervous) because they're too close to me to effectively deflect the punch.

 

[Aikilove]

shihonage
Yes, Aikido is budo, but we all have different goals towards our training in aikido. Most people are fine with training and polishing the basics for the rest of their lives. They would in fact call this the goal of aikido. I agree that attacks must be 100% sincere (not 100% speed). If you look at most students of the founder, they teach nothing but basics (no fast jabs, kicks or roundhouses). It doesn't mean that we shouldn't, but one has to be careful stating the quality of someone aikido, based on how realistic it looks at a demo. Try one of your kicks at same person and you might be in for a surprice.

/J

 

[shihonage]

shihonage
Yes, Aikido is budo, but we all have different goals towards our training in aikido. Most people are fine with training and polishing the basics for the rest of their lives. They would in fact call this the goal of aikido. I agree that attacks must be 100% sincere (not 100% speed). If you look at most students of the founder, they teach nothing but basics (no fast jabs, kicks or roundhouses). It doesn't mean that we shouldn't, but one has to be careful stating the quality of someone aikido, based on how realistic it looks at a demo. Try one of your kicks at same person and you might be in for a surprice.
/J

In other words, you agree with my main point(which is the same as Mr. Ledyard makes - we should focus on stylized Aikido attacks mainly, but do them PROPERLY), and misread my other point. I'm not saying that we have to routinely train with jabs in the dojo. Given the nature of Aikido, that is dangerous and will cause unnecessary injuries.

However, there damn well better be no wrist grabs in a DEMO, unless the Shihan in question can perform techniques in a way where uke can't let go of the wrist since the moment they made contact. Some techniques can work this way, others can't. And, it has to be realtime.

And the Aikido stylized attacks have to be realtime too. The slowness won't fly here. This is a demo, it is a rare occurrence where Aikido must be shown "as it is". No training aids, no slow motion stuff, no overly compliant ukes, just the solid attack and solid technique.
And yes during a demo I'd like to see roundhouses and other "real" attacks, at least for a brief moment in time. That tells us that this practitioner has in fact internalized the energy patterns taught by Aikido's stylized training method and is able to adapt it to the kind of attacks one might actually see outside the dojo.

My understanding of "reality" of techniques does not mean encouraging everyone on the demo to fight with broken beer bottles. But I do desire to see realistic attack energy and realtime technique - you know, the kind of technique where you can't stop it. This can be manifested through practically anything - shomen uchi irimi nage, anything. As long as its done honestly and with enthusiasm.

 

[shihonage]

Every time I back up to make more space, they step in closer, and what ends up happening is that the technique isn't executed correctly - or else I accidentally hit them (it's happened a few times, which makes me nervous) because they're too close to me to effectively deflect the punch.

This sounds like something that your Sensei should notice and correct. Also if your partners are yudansha they should be able to prevent you from hitting them no matter how close they are.

 

[Aikilove]

So where do you draw the line then?
Apparently the founder himself said that you can't show aikido, since it would be over after the first encounter (someone dead or incapacitated!).

For some (even high graded) stylized attack (although 100% serious) is aikido. And that is what they show. They might even feel that aikido is defined by its basics. And therefore it's the basics you should show, for everyone to see, compare and relate to.

I'm not saying that I agree 100% with this, but that I understand how they think.

How do you do a demo only with "real attacks"? Should it be real for someone not trained in punching and kicking? Real for some NHB exponent?

/J

 

[jhogan]

Hi everyone, I'm new here, but from what I can tell there are quite a few students of Aikido here so I figured/hoped this would be a good place to get some opinions. I actually have a bunch of questions but will attack them one at a time

Firstly I have been training for a little over 3.5 years now and not long ago graded to 1st kyu, which brings me to my first conern as per the title : I think I am over graded! I just don't think that 3.5 years is long enough to be this high (6th kyu being the lowest in our school). I mean I can apply for shodan in 9months time and I just don't think I have the understanding that should be necessary for this level. I mean I can do the techniques on the cirriculum ok, but surely there should be more required of us than a simple display of rote learning?!?

Plus of all the gradings I have been to in our school I have only seen one person fail because just flat out didn't know his stuff... poor execusion seems to be ok though.

So basically is 4.5-5 years long enough to expect to reach shodan or is it too quick? Plus should we be doing more than simply copying techniques?

Thanks.

Where I studied, you need 3 yrs & a certain number of hrs prior to shodan.

HOWEVER, Hombu Dojo - headquarters of Aikido - only requires 300 days ! (Less than one yr!)....

(see attached):
http://www.aikikai.or.jp/eng/gradingsystem.htm

 

[TDWoj]

Where I studied, you need 3 yrs & a certain number of hrs prior to shodan.

HOWEVER, Hombu Dojo - headquarters of Aikido - only requires 300 days ! (Less than one yr!)....

(see attached):
http://www.aikikai.or.jp/eng/gradingsystem.htm

Less than one year (after you reach 1st kyu, to clarify for those reading that don't know the structure of testing) if you train every day. I don't know of anyone other than uchi deshi who would be likely to do that.

Reaching Shodan just means you've reached the status of "beginner". (Actually, according to O Sensei, you practice for 10 years, THEN you become a beginner). You'll notice that every dan level after that, the number of days required increases exponentially.

 

[tenshinaikidoka]

4 years seems about average for a shodan, as long as the student is going consistantly to class, and the Sensei feels that he/she is ready. After all, why put a time limit on a lifetime of training! Shodan is just a "beginner" anyway.

 

[shihonage]

So where do you draw the line then?
Apparently the founder himself said that you can't show aikido, since it would be over after the first encounter (someone dead or incapacitated!).

For some (even high graded) stylized attack (although 100% serious) is aikido. And that is what they show. They might even feel that aikido is defined by its basics. And therefore it's the basics you should show, for everyone to see, compare and relate to.

I'm not saying that I agree 100% with this, but that I understand how they think.

How do you do a demo only with "real attacks"? Should it be real for someone not trained in punching and kicking? Real for some NHB exponent?

/J

It appears you're intent on finding verbal confrontation with me instead of actually reading and comprehending what I said. Making my position sound a lot more simple and a lot more extreme than it actually is in order to create something to disagree with is called the "strawman method of arguing". Please examine your reasons for doing that.

For some (even high graded) stylized attack (although 100% serious) is aikido

And so it is ! Too bad on AikiExpo footage I see about 0% of those "serious" attacks. They all do shomen uchi like they're correcting each other's hair and then some of the more "poetic" nages blend with that deadly hair caressing attack with iriminage by rotating the uke around them a lot, or rather, relying on uke's ability to run around them while being able to recover his balance at any moment, yet not doing so because "it wouldnt look pretty". You get a crappy attack, you got a crappy technique.

 

[Aikilove]

"You get crappy attack, you got crappy technique."
I agree. The question is what a good attack is?
I guess I would disagree with you if you say that Hitohiro Saito, Patricia Hendrics or Christian Tissier would ever alow their uke to not attack 100% on a demo. And I have the DVD myself. I also talked with Patricia not so long ago about the demo. She said that they rehersed their demo before because she felt it was quite dangerous (live knife and katana, lots of counters, strong fast attacks). Ask her if she think they are holding back.

I agree that there were some of the more flowy stuff there too, but even so...

/J

 

[shihonage]

Christian Tissier rocks, the one old Patricia Hendricks demo I saw (set to music) was pretty ok, and I don't remember Mr. Saito's demos. I just remember the general impression I got from the Aiki Expo tapes (I had both 2002 and 2003 editions) and the laughter of every non-Aikidoka whom I showed them to. If not laughter, then condescencion - "Yeah, I get it... its like... its poetry and stuff".

People only really get convinced of Aikido's martial aspect when they see Seagal's "Path Beyond Thought" tape. And you know what, everything Seagal does is Aikikai Aikido. He doesn't have his own style, he only has his own dojo. His style is Aikikai.

 

[Gronk]

Wow thanks guys, there is HEAPS digest in there! Someone asked me if Ihave beento any seminars and I haven't. My jujitsu school goes to one every year though, maybe I should try that one just for the sake of new partners.

As for talking about attacks/ing I was not so much worried about the speed they come in as I know different paced attacks have different uses and that's cool. I was talking about physically unrealistic, insofar as I don't believe someone "on the street" would do a stepping punch as opposed to a reverse punch (i.e. they don't step through with the same leg as hand that is punching). We cover 3 angles of attack all from the same range... no close stuff, no reverse, no uppercuts, elbows, kicks etc. I understand aikido is based on sword movements, but is it based soley on sword style attacks???

Oh and one more quick question: What do you do when your sensei "reinvents" techniques, or changes them to something you believe to be fundamentally incorrect?

 

[shihonage]

I was talking about physically unrealistic, insofar as I don't believe someone "on the street" would do a stepping punch as opposed to a reverse punch (i.e. they don't step through with the same leg as hand that is punching). We cover 3 angles of attack all from the same range... no close stuff, no reverse, no uppercuts, elbows, kicks etc. I understand aikido is based on sword movements, but is it based soley on sword style attacks???

There are two distances - the distance where the opponent has to take a step forward before he attacks, and the distance where he's close to you and all he has to do is quickly strike you with his arm.

Aikido does not formally teach how to deal with the second type of attack (the hand-faster-than-the-eye range), but its all aligned with Aikido's principles of redirection. We all have a flinch response. One needs to become aware of their flinch response and come up with ways to continue it into Aikido principles.

Seagal uses one hand to protect and cut down. Watch his demonstration videos closely. Haruo Matsuoka, his lead student, teaches the same thing. This approach is definitely meant for fast attacks. There's no time to move your torso. The opponent isnt moving his ! He's just doing a really quick close-range attack which warrants a very quick response/redirection with relaxed arms... THEN you start to put your center into it.

Thats how I see it, anyway. Aikido technique is meant to be set up on an unpredictable opponent by making him more predictable. A part of that is limiting your openings and part is limiting the opponent in his options. Throwing a few quick jabs at his openings can buy you the time to close distance and irimi.

I also find that with a person outside the dojo, the weirdest techniques can come into play. Jujinage can work if you managed to intercept and redirect one punch, then another, and you slid your grip down toward the person's wrists right after each interception (this took out the slack and prevents them from withdrawing their arms). Then you turn, crossing their arms, and slam their head into a wall

Oh and one more quick question: What do you do when your sensei "reinvents" techniques, or changes them to something you believe to be fundamentally incorrect?

This is highly possible in Aikido dojos, because due to the cooperative nature of training each Sensei can set up their own little laws of reality, which can be severely misaligned with common sense or reality in general.

However, I also know that all good instructors try and evolve. They never stop. Its difficult to determine if the instructor is just being vain and stupid, or if he has a point. At some points I thought I didn't understand the point of doing things in certain ways, but later I understood it.

It always helps to just come up and ask - why this way and not that way ? Aikido shouldn't be a cult where everyone is shaking in their boots and won't question their training.