Nihon Goshin Aikido

Posted by: Painbringer

Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/09/03 10:54 AM

I wish more people could be exsposed to this style of Aikido, It is a harder more combative style that uses kicks and hand strikes, this style does not work off the beleif of not injuring your attacker, basically it's not your mothers Aikido anymore!!!!
Posted by: JohnL

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/09/03 11:46 AM

I looked at the videos on a Nihon Goshin Aikido site.

Sorry, they loked like pretty standard Aikido demo's.

Complex movements against compliant attackers who attacked in the most pathetic manner imaginable.

I can't imagine why anyone should be exposed to it.

I agree that it's not my mothers Aikido.
Maybe my Grandma's [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

JohnL
Posted by: Joe Jutsu

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/09/03 02:29 PM

Ahh, suckered into yet another one of "these" discussions.

I think when Ueshiba Sensei founded aikido, he developed a system derived from daito ryu aikijujutsu that could be practiced vigorously and without "pulling" the techniques, as would be necessary when practicing many older-style techniques that involve breaking the joint. This is purely my hypothesis, but I bet in older days different jujutsu schools were able to actually practice these bonebreaking techniques. They would have prisoners and the like to practice on, and most definitely not themselves. It is my understanding that samurai would test the effectiveness of armor and weapons against prisoners. So in the old days, they wouldn't have to "pull" the techniques, because they weren't practicing against each other. You couldn't really do that in a dojo these days, there'd be no students left after one day of practice. However, it would be one's own folly to think that aikido techniques can't be used to break a joint, or that an aikidoka can't strike. Though maybe many aikidoka do not have effective striking skills, this is a product of poor training methodology, and not the art. But I don't believe strong atemi skills to be necessary, I'll get to that in a bit.

So here's another instance of aikido getting shit slung at it, by an outsider, observing the "weak attacks" and complex movements to be ineffective. When attending an iaijutsu demonstration about a month back, the sensei made a point of relating how samurai schools would hide their techniques within the kata, and broke down a two-person bokken kata, showing what the "outsider" sees, and what the practitioner would actually do in a combat situation. It was really cool to see, and quite informative. Dare I suggest it?? Could this be true in aikido as well, or is it unique among Japanese arts in that it has no secrets? This question has me reexaming aikido from the ground up, and has been yeilding some interesting results.

I also take issue with the statement, "this is not your mother's aikido," in reference to certain styles which the Painbringer evidently deems ineffective. O'Sensei was hardly a feeble old lady, and styles based off of his teachings when he was in his later years of his life are far from ineffective. Which of the shihans did he ask to introduce Aikido to the western world again?? I can say that I am not at that point in my training where I can be sure what I am doing is 110% combat effective (I've always wanted to make the stupid 110% cliche, thanks for indulging me), but who, in any art, can make such a claim. Dojo versions of throws teach balance, principle, and discipline-it's easier to teach one to shorten up a technique than to lengthen it, IMHO. In my club we have made a consorted effort to up the intensity, resistance, etc. and I will admit it can be quite frustrating at times. I'm still very new to the art in a relative sense, and realise how many aikidoka practice their art is pretty flawed, but then again, how is that different from most arts (point sparring anyone??)

Anyway, if anyone is actually interested in aikido, genuinely interested, I challenge you to go check it out. Hopefully you will be lucky enough to have a good dojo in your area. If not, well, too bad, maybe your situation will change some day. A good friend of mine, ex-Navy, and a bouncer at a big KC club, had similar criticism of aikido as those that are offered in this thread and on this website. I finally got him into practice, and, being a big guy and experienced in martial arts, at his request we didn't really "hold back." After having the wind knocked out of him multiple times and eating the tatami (not literarly) at least as often he's coming back, and loving it. He's a strong guy, and is helping us all improve by his presence.

The moral of the story, I guess, is don't flop as an uke. You're doing no one a favor, and it invites this sort of nonsensical criticism of aikido. I don't really care to change the mind of those who already have their minds made up about aikido, especially when they haven't been on the mat, but misinformation may keep those away from aikido who aikido would be a great benefit to. It certainly isn't for everyone, nor would I want it to be, but most of the criticisms that I've read are pretty much BS if aikido is being practiced as I believe it should be.
Anyway, enough with my rant.

Joe
Posted by: dazzler

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/10/03 04:50 AM

Same old rubbish...just a different thread.

People slagging Aikido off because it doesn't contain obvious punches and kicks for their limited imagination.

Same old generalisation and complete misunderstanding of the purpose of Aikido forms.

A harder style of aikido? WTF ! There is Aikido ....and there is not. all aikido can be practiced hard, soft, flowing, solid whatever. Just depends on what you are trying to learn.

No it is not fighting ...does it aspire to be fighting? Dont criticise aikido for not being what it does not aspire to be.

This is a little boring ....Look through previous threads and this is old ground...Aikido 'techniques' are not techniques ...they are tools to develop a martial base.

If you don't appreciate this then fine, continue to brawl but you will find this loses its attraction after 20 years on the mat...If you survive 50 years as my instructors have you may start to appreciate that there is a little more to MA than crushing all before you.

I accept the argument that if you wish to fight then practice by fighting...but the reverse applies...If all you have is the ability to lash out then that is how you go through life. Fighting everyone everytime you feel threatened.

Regards

D
Posted by: csinca

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/11/03 07:48 PM

I've noticed that all arts go through a similar challenge: aikido is soft and invalid in the street, TKD has the point sparring cross to bear and of course everyone knows that the Gracies are just commercializing BJJ and turning it into a sport....

I've seen good and bad (from my personally perspective) aikido, TKD, kung fu and BJJ. Believe it or not, I think different people might study the same art for different reasons.

Well, time to go to class

Chris
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/12/03 08:36 PM

Well, I don't know WHAT objection ANYBODY could have to NGA! This is an Aikido WITH kicks and punches. Just study ANY of its websites and the fabulous literature it's given us (books: "Escape" and "Black Belt Course") NOTHING deranged or pacifist about it but correctly DEFENSIVE.
Posted by: senseilou

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/13/03 12:07 AM

I bet you guys thought I was dead. Truth is, Senseilou almost was practicing at the big dojo in the sky, but I think I was too damn stubborn to go, beside they don't like the way I train up there, so I was reoiled, given a tune up and allowed to stay down here and torment you guys. Anyway, its good to be among the conscience again. Now that I have enough strength to argue, I really don't want to, but, this thread I think actually sums up the problem with Martial Arts. Karate-ka think Aiki is soft, Aiki- thinks Karate is burtal, Jujutus is better than Aiki-Jujutsu and Krav Magra is better than anything, except Muay Tai which with the exception of Jeet Kune Do is the best. truth is, if an Aikidoka wants to kick, let him, and if he feels its Aiki, so what? Point sparring is worthless and kata even more so, than don't go to tournaments, or do kata. Kata makes one a better fighter, then do kata, and sparring is fun, then do it. I think Martial Artists as a whole are too judgemental and concerned with what other people say and do. If one crticizes Aikido for not having kata, that means his style is better cause he has a kata, yet his kata stinks. So is it better to have no kata, or have shitty kata? I think we need to concentrate on our own art, refining what we do, and making ourselves better, than tearing apart how others train. If someone likes to kick or not kick, it really doesn't matter as long as that person enjoys what he does, and can do it well. There's more to training than just how one does technique, so maybe we need to be a bit more tolerant.
Posted by: Joe Jutsu

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/13/03 12:10 PM

Sensei Lou-

I'm sorry to hear that you had a close call--Hopefully you are better and back on the matt shortly. As I mentioned in another post, my sensei had a close call recently too. But he's better, and anyway, my best thoughts and wishes are with you. And you made some really good points in your post (as per usual).

Last night I finally viewed a tape that my aikido club has had for awhile titled "Dynamic Aikido Combat vol I." It was from Nihon Goshin Aikido, taught by McEwan Sensei or something like that. I must say I thought it was pretty cool. The sensei moved very quickly, and they sort of focused on "non traditional attacks," but they really aren't all that different than shomen, yokumen, munatski, etc. The style was very different than what I do, but still cool, and it's given me some good ideas and variations of techniques that I had not seen or heard of. Cool tape if you guys get the chance to check it out. I think it's selling point was something like: "Most realistic gun takeaways ever caught on tape.--kung fu magazine."

Joe
Posted by: Painbringer

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/15/03 09:39 AM

I think it's selling point was something like: "Most realistic gun takeaways ever caught on tape.--kung fu magazine."

Joe[/QUOTE]

Sensei MacEwen is my Sensei's teacher, He is in Middletown Ny. If you ever get a chance to watch him do Aikido don't miss it he's something to see. My Sensei (Sensei Phelps)just went to Washington to do a seminar on handgun disarming, He sells tapes with all NGA handgun disarms on it $20 I can hook you up if your interested!!!!!
Posted by: ralphrom

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/15/03 04:06 PM

Hi Joe,
My name is Ralph and I am a student at GoldenGate University. I have read several of your posting and it seems that you are very knowledgable about the martial arts. I have been given an assignment to do a paper on the differences between karate and Aikido. I hope that you can give me a summary or tell me a little about the differences between these two. I thought that instead of trying to read about it, I could get it directly from someone who is on the inide of this sport and its paradigms.
Thanks
Ralph
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe Jutsu:
Ahh, suckered into yet another one of "these" discussions.

I think when Ueshiba Sensei founded aikido, he developed a system derived from daito ryu aikijujutsu that could be practiced vigorously and without "pulling" the techniques, as would be necessary when practicing many older-style techniques that involve breaking the joint. This is purely my hypothesis, but I bet in older days different jujutsu schools were able to actually practice these bonebreaking techniques. They would have prisoners and the like to practice on, and most definitely not themselves. It is my understanding that samurai would test the effectiveness of armor and weapons against prisoners. So in the old days, they wouldn't have to "pull" the techniques, because they weren't practicing against each other. You couldn't really do that in a dojo these days, there'd be no students left after one day of practice. However, it would be one's own folly to think that aikido techniques can't be used to break a joint, or that an aikidoka can't strike. Though maybe many aikidoka do not have effective striking skills, this is a product of poor training methodology, and not the art. But I don't believe strong atemi skills to be necessary, I'll get to that in a bit.

So here's another instance of aikido getting shit slung at it, by an outsider, observing the "weak attacks" and complex movements to be ineffective. When attending an iaijutsu demonstration about a month back, the sensei made a point of relating how samurai schools would hide their techniques within the kata, and broke down a two-person bokken kata, showing what the "outsider" sees, and what the practitioner would actually do in a combat situation. It was really cool to see, and quite informative. Dare I suggest it?? Could this be true in aikido as well, or is it unique among Japanese arts in that it has no secrets? This question has me reexaming aikido from the ground up, and has been yeilding some interesting results.

I also take issue with the statement, "this is not your mother's aikido," in reference to certain styles which the Painbringer evidently deems ineffective. O'Sensei was hardly a feeble old lady, and styles based off of his teachings when he was in his later years of his life are far from ineffective. Which of the shihans did he ask to introduce Aikido to the western world again?? I can say that I am not at that point in my training where I can be sure what I am doing is 110% combat effective (I've always wanted to make the stupid 110% cliche, thanks for indulging me), but who, in any art, can make such a claim. Dojo versions of throws teach balance, principle, and discipline-it's easier to teach one to shorten up a technique than to lengthen it, IMHO. In my club we have made a consorted effort to up the intensity, resistance, etc. and I will admit it can be quite frustrating at times. I'm still very new to the art in a relative sense, and realise how many aikidoka practice their art is pretty flawed, but then again, how is that different from most arts (point sparring anyone??)

Anyway, if anyone is actually interested in aikido, genuinely interested, I challenge you to go check it out. Hopefully you will be lucky enough to have a good dojo in your area. If not, well, too bad, maybe your situation will change some day. A good friend of mine, ex-Navy, and a bouncer at a big KC club, had similar criticism of aikido as those that are offered in this thread and on this website. I finally got him into practice, and, being a big guy and experienced in martial arts, at his request we didn't really "hold back." After having the wind knocked out of him multiple times and eating the tatami (not literarly) at least as often he's coming back, and loving it. He's a strong guy, and is helping us all improve by his presence.

The moral of the story, I guess, is don't flop as an uke. You're doing no one a favor, and it invites this sort of nonsensical criticism of aikido. I don't really care to change the mind of those who already have their minds made up about aikido, especially when they haven't been on the mat, but misinformation may keep those away from aikido who aikido would be a great benefit to. It certainly isn't for everyone, nor would I want it to be, but most of the criticisms that I've read are pretty much BS if aikido is being practiced as I believe it should be.
Anyway, enough with my rant.

Joe
[/QUOTE]
Posted by: ralphrom

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/15/03 04:08 PM

Hi Joe,
My name is Ralph and I am a student at GoldenGate University. I have read several of your posting and it seems that you are very knowledgable about the martial arts. I have been given an assignment to do a paper on the differences between karate and Aikido. I hope that you can give me a summary or tell me a little about the differences between these two. I thought that instead of trying to read about it, I could get it directly from someone who is on the inide of this sport and its paradigms.
Thanks
Ralph
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe Jutsu:
Ahh, suckered into yet another one of "these" discussions.

I think when Ueshiba Sensei founded aikido, he developed a system derived from daito ryu aikijujutsu that could be practiced vigorously and without "pulling" the techniques, as would be necessary when practicing many older-style techniques that involve breaking the joint. This is purely my hypothesis, but I bet in older days different jujutsu schools were able to actually practice these bonebreaking techniques. They would have prisoners and the like to practice on, and most definitely not themselves. It is my understanding that samurai would test the effectiveness of armor and weapons against prisoners. So in the old days, they wouldn't have to "pull" the techniques, because they weren't practicing against each other. You couldn't really do that in a dojo these days, there'd be no students left after one day of practice. However, it would be one's own folly to think that aikido techniques can't be used to break a joint, or that an aikidoka can't strike. Though maybe many aikidoka do not have effective striking skills, this is a product of poor training methodology, and not the art. But I don't believe strong atemi skills to be necessary, I'll get to that in a bit.

So here's another instance of aikido getting shit slung at it, by an outsider, observing the "weak attacks" and complex movements to be ineffective. When attending an iaijutsu demonstration about a month back, the sensei made a point of relating how samurai schools would hide their techniques within the kata, and broke down a two-person bokken kata, showing what the "outsider" sees, and what the practitioner would actually do in a combat situation. It was really cool to see, and quite informative. Dare I suggest it?? Could this be true in aikido as well, or is it unique among Japanese arts in that it has no secrets? This question has me reexaming aikido from the ground up, and has been yeilding some interesting results.

I also take issue with the statement, "this is not your mother's aikido," in reference to certain styles which the Painbringer evidently deems ineffective. O'Sensei was hardly a feeble old lady, and styles based off of his teachings when he was in his later years of his life are far from ineffective. Which of the shihans did he ask to introduce Aikido to the western world again?? I can say that I am not at that point in my training where I can be sure what I am doing is 110% combat effective (I've always wanted to make the stupid 110% cliche, thanks for indulging me), but who, in any art, can make such a claim. Dojo versions of throws teach balance, principle, and discipline-it's easier to teach one to shorten up a technique than to lengthen it, IMHO. In my club we have made a consorted effort to up the intensity, resistance, etc. and I will admit it can be quite frustrating at times. I'm still very new to the art in a relative sense, and realise how many aikidoka practice their art is pretty flawed, but then again, how is that different from most arts (point sparring anyone??)

Anyway, if anyone is actually interested in aikido, genuinely interested, I challenge you to go check it out. Hopefully you will be lucky enough to have a good dojo in your area. If not, well, too bad, maybe your situation will change some day. A good friend of mine, ex-Navy, and a bouncer at a big KC club, had similar criticism of aikido as those that are offered in this thread and on this website. I finally got him into practice, and, being a big guy and experienced in martial arts, at his request we didn't really "hold back." After having the wind knocked out of him multiple times and eating the tatami (not literarly) at least as often he's coming back, and loving it. He's a strong guy, and is helping us all improve by his presence.

The moral of the story, I guess, is don't flop as an uke. You're doing no one a favor, and it invites this sort of nonsensical criticism of aikido. I don't really care to change the mind of those who already have their minds made up about aikido, especially when they haven't been on the mat, but misinformation may keep those away from aikido who aikido would be a great benefit to. It certainly isn't for everyone, nor would I want it to be, but most of the criticisms that I've read are pretty much BS if aikido is being practiced as I believe it should be.
Anyway, enough with my rant.

Joe
[/QUOTE]
Posted by: the504mikey

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/16/03 11:26 AM

Ralph,

You may want to seek out a book called "Aikido and the Dynamic Sphere" by Adele Westbrook and Oscar Ratti. The early material in that book is about the ethics of self defense, and explains the philosophy of aikido and how it differs from primarily striking based arts like karate. I don't think I have ever come across a more clearly written explanation.
Posted by: Joe Jutsu

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/16/03 12:15 PM

Ralph-

I agree, check out Aikido and and the Dynamic Sphere for a good basic understanding of Aikido. I'd also recommend to go to an aikido club and ask them directly, hopefully your university has one. Thanks for your compliment that I seem to know much about the martial arts. But if you want to get to the horses mouth, so to speak, of someone who has practiced both aikido, karate, as well as many other arts, I refer you to Sensei Lou who also posts here. (not to imply that you are a horse sensei [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG] ). He has been studying the arts MUCH longer than me, or most anyone I know for that matter, and could give you a better perspective than me. For aikido info, i also recommend www.aikiweb.com and www.aikidojournal.com . Both have sections with terminology, I believe, and a wealth of information on both the physical and spiritual aspects of our art. And aikidoka(aikido practitioners) don't refer to aikido as a sport, in fact it is supposed to be inherently noncompetitive. Just a heads up, there are some touchy people out there and you never know who might be insulted by such a minor point.

By the way, what class are you taking that you get to compare karate and aikido? I wish they offered that at my university! [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG]

Good luck with the project,

Joe
Posted by: Painbringer

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/16/03 06:55 PM

I just watched some of the Mpegs on the Aikiweb site, I hate to say it but I can see where people get the idea that Aikido attacks are weak, before people start getting mad at me let me say that I also study Aikido, I just hope that people don't think that all Aikido attacks are like this, the Uke's were not even attacking they were running up to him and letting him grab them!!!!!! TRAIN SOFT, FIGHT SOFT, FALL HARD
Posted by: senseilou

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/17/03 12:13 AM

This will probably lead to another feud, but here goes. I am not saying all Aikidoka attack softly, as its an individual thing, but I am not sure that they attack for real, but I think there is a good reason. In a Karate dojo, you practice your basics over and over and over. In some cases across the room 100's of times. You are constantly working on kicking and punching, then putting together combinations, then techniques. Aikido on the other hand doesn't practice stiking or kicking on a repeatative basis. Most Aiki schools don't practice punching at all unless they are associated with Karate schools or include Karate in their curriculum. So when you watch a Karate-ka attack, he has practiced the attack part of the equation. Aikidoka,if they practice striking is usually the atemi waza within the technique. So this is why Aikidoka attacks seem soft or not as real as other arts, simply, they don't practice the attacking side of the equation. I find this really odd in light that Aikido is based on Kenjutsu, and if one practices the Kumitachi's they are 2 people sword techniques, which requires the uke to attack with the sword. Why don't they attack the same way without it?
Posted by: JohnL

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/17/03 10:30 AM

Hi senseilou:

I agree with you.

I've also found that with some Jui-jitsu schools I've studied at as well. Even though they claim to do striking, throwing and grappling, they tend to have an emphasis depending on what the instructors strong suit is.

I trained at one where the emphasis was on throwing/grappling (the instructor was a high level judo competitor as well as teaching jui-jutsu) and their punching and kicking skills while included were only really taught from the perspective of how to defend against them, and were rudimentary at best.

In karate, as you say, we practice striking all the time. That's why we get good at it.

What I also find though, is that when karateka try and teach throwing and grappling, they invariably do a poor job. I train with Judoka's for that. They're better.

JohnL
Posted by: Joe Jutsu

Re: Nihon Goshin Aikido - 12/17/03 02:20 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by senseilou:
This will probably lead to another feud, but here goes. I am not saying all Aikidoka attack softly, as its an individual thing, but I am not sure that they attack for real, but I think there is a good reason. In a Karate dojo, you practice your basics over and over and over. In some cases across the room 100's of times. You are constantly working on kicking and punching, then putting together combinations, then techniques. Aikido on the other hand doesn't practice stiking or kicking on a repeatative basis. Most Aiki schools don't practice punching at all unless they are associated with Karate schools or include Karate in their curriculum. So when you watch a Karate-ka attack, he has practiced the attack part of the equation. Aikidoka,if they practice striking is usually the atemi waza within the technique. So this is why Aikidoka attacks seem soft or not as real as other arts, simply, they don't practice the attacking side of the equation. I find this really odd in light that Aikido is based on Kenjutsu, and if one practices the Kumitachi's they are 2 people sword techniques, which requires the uke to attack with the sword. Why don't they attack the same way without it?[/QUOTE]

There's actually an article sort of about this on aikiweb, by George Leynard Sensei I believe. He writes that the main problem involving attacks in aikido is not the fact that the attacks are traditional and stylized, but the fact that there are no attacks period in alot of the dojo's that he's been to. I'm sure that there is alot of variety even within a particular dojo when it comes to this, I know that there is in mine.

Joe