Not Again
Posted by: senseilou
Not Again - 04/14/04 02:17 AM
I want to get reaction to the way people feel about this situation. When fire-breathing dragons roamed the earth and I was studying Aikido we had a class one night and were working on Shomenuchi Ikkyo, My partner was about 6'4" tall and about 220, I am about 5'9" 180. The Sensei showed stopping the shomenuchi at the top of the ukes strike, then taking Ikkyo. In my case, I was giving away about 7" and about another 3" in arm length. If I were to stop this persons strike at the top of his attack, I would have needed a ladder. I adapted to the size only to be corrected by the Sensei. I explained I couldn't reach the arm, he demonstrated how to do it, and he did it, only thing was he was a bout 6'3". I learned that night that things had to be tailored to your own body size, and the way you move. I recently saw an old instructor of mine and we again talked about having to adapt technique, and his feeling was everything should be done, the way the Sensei showed, and not varied for your own use. The integrity of the technique was more important to him, than the funtion-ability of performing the technique.In many cases both can be achieved, but in many cases, factors come into play that prohibits your body from doing the exact same thing as your Sensei. I am not talking about changing the technique, but ADAPTING technique for oneself. What do you think?
I have to adapt many techniques because most of the people I train with are physically stronger than me.
I think a good sensei will help each student adapt techniques according to their height, build and strength. My husband for example is 6ft 4, a lot of things that work for him are impossible for me to execute on him without adjustment. He also has hands like shovels and I have tiny wrists so he can hold both my wrists with one hand. I obviously cannot do the same to him.
I am about to welcome a wheelchair user to our dojo. I intend teaching him to perform kata using the same hand and upper body movements as the able bodied, but adapting the bunkai to make it suitable for his seated position ( this will obviously be a case of trial and error, I have borrowed a wheelchair from the red cross to practice in myself). Obviously, many techniques will have to be adapted when I am teaching him.
In the same way that I would be doing him a dis-service if I did not help him adapt techniques, I think senseis that do not allow adaptations for body size and strength are doing their students a dis-sevice.
No offence intended to any old school instructors, this is just my opinion.
Sharon
Posted by: dazzler2
Re: Not Again - 04/14/04 06:19 AM
I think that trying to copy sensei and not adapting technique to suit ones shape and temperament is restrictive.
It takes the onus away from the student understanding the move and limits them to only being able to respond where the attack is exactly as they are used to.
I think of sensei more as coaches than icons of perfection. The instructors role is to help the student develop and this goes a lot further than saying 'copy me - I'm perfect'.
I know there are lots of things I do as an instructor where I'm not that good . Sometimes its a question of helping the students in the general direction. If some of the students then pass me in excellence then all well and good.
I also think this rationale lies behind a lot of the differences between aikido groups - all claim to have lineage to O'Sensei and to be doing his aikido. However even O'Sensei evolved so fixing your aikido around O'sensei at 45 and O'sensei at 85 will produce different forms. Who's to say whats correct?
My organisation were given a demonstration by some of the originals of UK aikido. They were extremely proud of the fact that they practiced in exactly the manner that they had been taught 40 or 50 years ago.
While I was impressed by their devotion and commitment to their original teacher I found it very sad that they had felt the need to stand still for so long.
I believe no one can reproduce exactly the movements of another so martial arts propagated by copying will ultimately degrade.
Where the moves are understood and adapted to become part of the aikidoka then it is possible for aikido to grow stronger.
A final point to consider is were the original disciples of aikido trained to teach?
I don't believe so and therefore all they knew as to do and be copied.
While AiKido in theory cannot change (man and ki harmonised) the methods of developing it can - We are a long way from perfect instructors.
D
Posted by: the504mikey
Re: Not Again - 04/14/04 10:52 AM
The techniques are meaningless without the priniciples the techniques come from. If your movement does not violate the principles, then *any* technique is valid. On the other hand, if you are compromising fundamental principles in your effort to copy a movement, then you are not doing aikido any more.
SenseiLou, your example was perfect-- if the geometry is not right, and you have to meet force on force or over-reach your balance to do a movement, that movement is no longer in accordance with aiki principles. These principles are what doing the techniques over and over is supposed to teach us-- but forcing a bad fit teaches us nothing. Worse, it moves us farther from our goal. It would have been much better for you to capture uke's hand later and redirect it (maybe tenkan as opposed to irimi) or even switch to shomenuchi shihonage and maintain practice that is consistent with the base principles.
Unfortunately we have a lot of parrots practicing and teaching aikido today-- they learned to copy the movements by looking and practicing, but they don't really understand the principles the techniques are based on other than perhaps intellectually. It's a very different thing to understand it in your bones rather than your brain. (At least I hope it will be when I eventually get there. [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG])
Posted by: Joe Jutsu
Re: Not Again - 04/14/04 11:45 AM
I'm about 6'2", and it's not uncommon for me to be working with people a whole foot shorter than me. Sometimes it feels ridiculous trying to work some techniques with this rather large height differential. I've encountered similar instances, working shihonage for example, where, in order to get under the arm I literally had to drop about to my knee, then so there was a down I would drop to my knee, only to be met with the comment "oh, we don't go to the knee in this style." I was thinking, yeah, duh?! How many years have I been here now again?? But it's even more ridiculous when these shorty's ( [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG] ) have to perform certain attacks, like rear chokes, which they just cannot do due height difference. During one class the instructor had me drop to my knees and try to work from there, which was difficult and interesting, but that just happened during one class out of many, many unfortunately.
Lou Sensei, out of curiosity how were you modifying shomenuchi ikkyo to your body type??
Joe
[This message has been edited by Joe Jutsu (edited 04-14-2004).]
Posted by: senseilou
Re: Not Again - 04/14/04 02:16 PM
Joe.....As suggested, I decided to let the shomen strike pass and caught it at the ukes off balance point-redirected his attack toward my center. I also gave him a "little shot"(atemi waza) to his center to fold him in the direction of the ikkyo. I always thought I did a great job of adapting however the Sensei didn't think so. Another point Joe....as you mention the problem with smaller people doing certain attacks, I feel alot of time is spent on nages job, but very little on ukes' job. I have all my students practice all attacks before they do technique. So I teach how a smaller person can choke a larger one by making the person their size. All chokes, are taught to be adapted to size, so my samller students will take out the leg in order to choke. This makes it a bit more difficult for uke, but on the other hand, a bit more true to life. Not stepping on toes, but I don't think Aikido practices the attacking side of the art enough, so many times techniques are given away.
Sharon, its a funny thing you mentioned this. My biggest lesson in adapting technique came from my female students especially my daughter.There is no way a woman can be expected to perform a technique like a man, they are built differently and are actually better technicians than men. they don't rely on strength when things don't work, rather work on technique instead. Most men will start to 'power' their techniques if something goes astray. Also the hip situation is different, and I stress to my females how to accentuate their hips in waza. When my daughter was small we had to adapt almost everything for her as she was small to begin with and everybody was bigger than her. Today thanks to years of adapting and working her technique against larger people, she now has the art of adaptation down. She focuses more and more on the technical aspects of technique and does what is needed to be done to get the job done. Working with girls and women can teach a Sensei alot about adapting technique to suit them.
Posted by: zbeth
Re: Not Again - 04/14/04 03:12 PM
(FYI, shomenuchi ikkyo irimi is actually deprecated in Kokikai Aikido for this (height-differential) reason (w/possible exception of suwari waza).)
I have the good fortune that our group emphasizes what works - "Find out for yourself: which is better" - then they call in the Heavy Weather ukes to "help" you check if you're using power instead of technique...
Weren't people over in another thread just complaining that aikido hadn't ought to evolve (like to include keri)?
SL, though our dojo seriously underlines the joys of competent ukemi, IMHO we still don't devote enough attention to it, no. (It's typical for Kokikai camps that say half of the females uke-ing in testing randori are from our dojo.)
WW, you have to adapt many _aikido techniques? Most of the ones I've enountered are already optimized for, well, I'd say low-to-mid 5'something"s and low-to-mid 100s pounds.
Posted by: the504mikey
Re: Not Again - 04/15/04 10:59 AM
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by zbeth:
Weren't people over in another thread just complaining that aikido hadn't ought to evolve (like to include keri)?
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure that adapting individual aikido techniques to account for relative differences in body type/size would be considered evolving aikido, while adding to the syllabus certainly could be. IMHO, aikido has always demanded that we adapt technique as required to remain in accordance with the principles.
[QUOTE]
"Find out for yourself: which is better" - then they call in the Heavy Weather ukes to "help" you check if you're using power instead of technique...
[/QUOTE]
That to me says it all. Do what you need to do, then test it... repeat, improve, repeat, improve. Adapt, but always test to make sure you haven't lost the point. I have come to feel that the standard aikido techniques are sign posts that point the way to understanding what aikido is, but they are not in and of themselves the whole of aikido.
If you do the techniques well, they will afford you the opportunity to experience aiki. Once we know what aiki feels like, though, I think our mission changes from recognizing it when we experience it in techniques to learning to establish it "free form". If you are violating the principles in your practice of the syllabus techniques, then they lose their value as signposts.
Making minor changes to the demonstrated technique is not evolving aikido, but rather remaining true to the spirit of it. Adding entirely new stuff is evolving (or maybe devolving, depending on your point of view) aikido and is a much more sensitive topic. To me, adapting and changing are different-- adapting is required and expected, changing is a much more difficult issue.
Where is the line between changing and adapting?
Edited to correct munged HTML tags
[This message has been edited by the504mikey (edited 04-15-2004).]
zbeth,
I do not practice Aikido, I was speaking in general terms. This type of thing comes up in most martial arts.
Sharon
Posted by: dazzler2
Re: Not Again - 04/16/04 04:47 AM
504Mikey.."I have come to feel that the standard aikido techniques are sign posts that point the way to understanding what aikido is, but they are not in and of themselves the whole of aikido."
Couldn't agree more...we go as far as to avoid the word technique as much as possible due to the implications that a technique is a fixed thing that has to be done in a specific manner.
We look at them as tools to develop aikido base but sign posts is good enough for me!
In translation for instance we'd look at ikkyo as first teaching and not first technique.
I think a great problem with aikido is people look at something like shomenuchi ikkyo and think they are looking at a fixed defence against a fixed attack.
If that were the case then what a waste of time...its probably the worst attack in the world! why learn a fixed defence against something you'll never see?
However ...as a vehicle for promoting irimi, tenkan ,maai , kokyu-ho, shisei, tai sabaki and everything else that Aikido engenders its right up there which is why ikkyo is absolutely central to our practice.
Glad to know you are singing from the same song sheet as us!
D
[This message has been edited by dazzler2 (edited 04-16-2004).]
Posted by: Joe Jutsu
Re: Not Again - 04/16/04 11:42 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zbeth:
Weren't people over in another thread just complaining that aikido hadn't ought to evolve (like to include keri)?
_____________________________________
WW, you have to adapt many _aikido techniques? Most of the ones I've enountered are already optimized for, well, I'd say low-to-mid 5'something"s and low-to-mid 100s pounds.[/QUOTE]
My point in the other thread was to see how many other people practice keri waza, because they are a part of our syllabus and I think they are fun techniques to work, and good ukemi training (balance, falling, committed attack). I was also thinking along the same lines as you zbeth in terms of most aikido techniques being optimal for short people, so I was also curious exactly how Lou had to adapt the technique.
Lou Sensei- I agree, I think that the attacking part of ukemi is often neglected, in my limited experience. I don't feel that I could compitently attack someone. Do you think that weapons work at all helps this? If I had the scratch, I'd be taking iaido now at the dojo, since it's being offered again. But due to my role as the poor college kid, the price of an iaito and a hakama are a bit too much... But who know, maybe I'll actually graduate one of these years then... I might have a chance too... naw, I'll probably be too poor paying back gov. loans [IMG]http://www.fightingarts.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif[/IMG] .
Joe
[This message has been edited by Joe Jutsu (edited 04-16-2004).]
Posted by: senseilou
Re: Not Again - 04/16/04 01:42 PM
Joe this may address your question as well.
"However ...as a vehicle for promoting irimi, tenkan ,maai , kokyu-ho, shisei, tai sabaki and everything else that Aikido engenders its right up there which is why ikkyo is absolutely central to our practice."
I understand this concept, but I question if this is the purpose of technique, to learn all these factors, components of technique if you will, where is the self-defense? I am not saying Aikido is not for self-defense, but question if you just use technique for a vehicle to learn other aspects what do you use for self-defense techniques? Do you have one way of doing technique for self-defense and one as a vehicle to learn concept?I guess it depends on what your training is for. I think that the messages have been mixed to an extent. Number 1 I think you blokes in the U. K. are more concept oriented than over here in the states. Here you may have a school that teaches technique for concept purposes, yet believes doing the technique the same way is for self-defense, which I may add is not going to work. Then again you may have a school here that doesn't know concept from corn flakes and could care less.
In my school we teach technique as a vehicle to learn concept and principles. HOWEVER....I point out to my students that these are training drills and not self defense techniques, done this way. I feel learning the concepts and principles of the techniques teaches you how to use it in a self-defense situation, but the practice method is separated from the self-defense technique. Set technique is a problem for us as well, as if you are thinking one technique, you are omitting another 25 or however many more you may have. That is why we teach technique basics, and learn the concepts, but apply them differently in self-defense application. Its form vs. function. In Karate training you learn basics, combinations then Kata. These all evolve into your own self defense techniques. Karate understands you can't block in practice, or in kata the way you would on the street(hand in chamber etc)so why not aply this concept to your other training. You learn technique as a basic, a vehicle to learn about the tecnique, what makes the technique what it is, but that form must turn into self-defense function(if thats the how you to chose to train)which is not the same as the practice method. So I see using technique for more than just one purpose.
In answer to you Joe, as you can see I see form vs. function. While doing Iai, or Kenjutsu while helping an area of your technique I believe is merely form, and not self defense oriented, unless you walk around with a sword on your belt. Once again you can apply sword technique but not the same way you do in practice. The best way to learn to attack is to practice attacking. A Japaneese Shihan told me that I had better learn some offense, not atemi waza in technique, but how to start a confrontation. I thought this crazy coming from an Aikido Master. He told me "what are you going to do when an intruder is in your home, wait for him to attack? You must have an attack mechanism that doesn't rely on someone doing something first" Having taken heed to this, we practice our attacks as much as our responses. We see all engagements in 3 segments. I believe that these exist in any art, no matter style or art you practice. That is
Action
Reaction
Counter-Action.
What separates styles and arts is how they react and conter-act. But all are predicated on some sort of action. So why should we only practice 2 segments of our training. Learning how to attack is essential in learning how to defend. It also helps see from vs. funtion
Posted by: scarryone
Re: Not Again - 04/16/04 04:04 PM
We also have always been encouraged, to adapted, and fit individual body types, even more so since we began sparing. We spent most of last year working on principals and taking what is there. Not being so concerned about techniques, but working entrances and control of uke, along with what to do with him, after control is gained. I really enjoy this type of training, “much more real world than grab my wrist”. With the atami incorporated into the entrance it seemed that many of the techniques that did not work very well in Classic Aikido did work with the new style. I guess that I began relying too much on the cheats and mussel because these last 2 months we have goon back to the basics, and I am really terrible. No posture, working off balance, feet spread apart hasn’t been on the centerline, at all. At 5’5’ 145lbs I do understand that some adaptation is required but if allowed to improvise too much the principals will suffer (well for me anyway cuz I am lazy). I have really had some bad classes these last couple of months and sensei has just been on my but, about form, body position, ECT. It has gotten to the point that I want to change arts because Aikido is too hard!! The point is it does not take long for good habits to be replaced by bad ones. As for quiting, I don’t think so!!
Posted by: Artentreri
Re: Not Again - 04/17/04 01:18 PM
I am new to studying Aikido myself, but I am constantly watching over my own Sensei. He is only 5' nothing, but the techniques he show are more then impressive, especially when he demonstrates against his 6' to 7' students. Being that I am very inexperienced to this topic, please be easy on me, but what my Sensei teaches is that the base of Aikido starts off with the center line of both Ukes and Kages body. All moves are designed to take your oppenents line away from them while maintaining your own. As he has shown many times in my classes, even with such height differences, with the right positioning, you should always be the dominating position, taking away from your oppenents. To him, this is the "proper way" of utilizing the art of Aikido.
Posted by: senseilou
Re: Not Again - 04/18/04 02:17 AM
Your Sensei is right and in a perfect world I am sure he could use this theory and make it work. I hate to tell you at a beginning level that all techniques will not work on all people. That is what the post was aiming at. If practice of an art is all the purpose of training that is one thing, but in a real funtional environment, this is not the case. In a real confrontation people are not going to attack in the same way, nor will their intent be the same. I just trained with a young man whose style was based on total domination, over excessive striking and kicking to the point the person would tire or be constantly on the defensive. If a style like this had someone 5' and was attacked by a 6'7" to 7' tall person he would have to ADAPT his techniques to work. Dojo practice is one thing, controlled and civil for the most part. Outside is not so much the case, and in an instance like this style I am talking about, lining up your centers will just invite you to get hit again.Its a lot more complicated outside the dojo, when its for real. That is why one must train for for form AND function. Not everything that looks so easy and works well in the dojo will work outside. Some will, some won't and some must be adapted for the situation. Also understand that a student taking ukemi for his Sensei dare not overwhelm the Sensei, its just not right and proper, but those on the street don't offer that respect and will attack with reckless abandon and this is not practiced in the dojo.
Posted by: Artentreri
Re: Not Again - 04/18/04 12:09 PM
Again Senseilou I mean you no disrespect, and I am VERY aware that the situations in the dojo compared to that of the street are very different. In fact if I was approached to a violent confrontation on the street by someone who was experienced or not in MA, I think my best technique would be crapping my pants.
I am enlightened only by what I read, and what I have learned (or see) at least in my class. I have read that the founder Morihei could smoothly neutralize any attack simply by being able to discern the direction of it. I'm not naive as to beleive that within the split second someone on the streets come after you, you are given the opportunity to do this, but what if someone trained based on this theory alone. Is it possible to train yourself in Aikido (or any other MA for that matter) on being able to anticipate your oppenents movements, at least the direction of his/her attacks. Again,I'm not trying to stray off from your original topic as to the fact that not all moves in Aikido are designed for everybody, but I do find it odd that Morihei himself was not that very tall either, but from the pictures I've seen, his movements, and size difference from those he taught were no different from the situations mentioned ealier on in this post.
I also don't mean to compare my Sensei by any means to the rest of the world, as I KNOW not everyone is going to be the " O-Sensei" , but I must admit, he is very knowlegable, and very impressive in his teachings. I also have a bit of a difficulty learning as well because I find his classes go by at a very fast pace, but again I must admit, after a few classes, my technique has deffinately improved.
Anyhow, I just want your input Senseilou, because I respect your view, as I have throughout reading the majority of your posts, you seem very knowlegeable, and I just want to be pointed in the right direction.
~Clay
Posted by: zbeth
Re: Not Again - 04/18/04 01:22 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by senseilou:
Also understand that a student taking ukemi for his Sensei dare not overwhelm the Sensei, its just not right and proper, but those on the street don't offer that respect...[/QUOTE]
This is one of the insights of Kokikai-ryu about aikido in its original form - this distinction is one reason Maruyama Sensei feels free to evolve and adapt aikido... Uh, IMHO...
It's always pretty clear - both in Maruyama Sensei's and my instructor's classes - that, for us, giving the instructor as hard a time as possible, within a certain framework (okay, that deserves comment), is expected/encouraged/required. My instructor is Sensei's #1 uke when Sensei's in the US, and he's talked about the mindset he maintains to keep Sensei using him - each attack, think "This time I'll get him" - each visit, better faster stronger. So I know I'm to try and cultivate this myself at home, and that's the feel of it at our dojo. The downside is we have kind of a resistey dojo, where IMHO lots of brown-belt-ish ukes cheat to avoid giving balance =/ (cheat i.e. they use their knowledge of what technique is coming and leave themselves wide open to almost anything else nage may care to improvise).
The other day we had a small class, our instructor was talking more than usual, and he said he wanted us to have each technique so bombproof we'd even be able to force any large unfocused untrained new student through at least a semblance of it - so, not rely 100% on the reactions the techniques are designed to take advantage of.
In our dojo (I don't know how prevalent this is), we are very much discouraged from saying "you didn't attack appropriately for this technique" =(
(One prefers strong, committed tsuki for kotegaeshi; for a jab, probably do something else. There's this technique vs yokomenuchi where nage ducks under the strike, goes around behind, and pulls uke over backwards - we have nikyu ukes who set up a strong forward stance specifically to resist getting pulled over backwards! Why on earth? Hello, nage is behind you - be a little curious?? So sometimes we pull uke back anyway, sometimes we push uke forward.)
This bugs me because I've spent a few years learning technique, and a few more years getting better at forcing it on resisting ukes - I'd like to spend some time now working on our more relaxed ideal - what do they say, do technique same as you would if uke weren't there, I heard somewhere?
This (relax!) is Maruyama Sensei's #1 critique of me, and it's frustrating I'm making progress on it slowly. But I'm grateful (grudgingly? nah, just moody lately) for the other kind of ad-hoc-every-time practice as well.
Anyway, maybe that's the other end of the spectrum?
Posted by: zbeth
Re: Not Again - 04/18/04 01:29 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe Jutsu:
My point in the other thread was to see how many other people practice keri waza [/QUOTE]
By the aikido-shouldn't-evolve contingent, I meant the people who were voting against keri in the curriculum. We practice vs keri too (mostly front snap kick and roundhouse; side once in a while). Keri is probably my biggest ukemi shortfall (wait, I don't mean falling trouble!), since I've got a couple nearly-broken toes that get reinjured pretty easily, so I'm a little, hmm, timid w/kicks w/most partners. I've sat out lots of testing at camp trying to gauge the timing of which round of ukes will be asked to kick, etc. (Used to try to avoid suwari-waza, too, for iffy knees - happier with that now.) So it's only finally this spring that I decided that's no good, kick is what I want to improve next.
So what does that say? It took me how many years to come up with that idea on my own. Maybe someone should have suggested? I think in our dojo we could use more ukemi advice, but at least the atmosphere is conducive.. such that a thoughtful handful eventually gravitates toward it on their own.. Now I'm back on the other subthread..
Posted by: zbeth
Re: Not Again - 04/18/04 01:41 PM
Temporarily back to shomenuchi ikkyo irimi -
If our instructor wants to show that/how one can do some technique (as-is or ad-hoc) against someone taller, he'll often get down in seiza and show hanmi-hantachi version to demonstrate...
Posted by: dazzler2
Re: Not Again - 04/19/04 06:26 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by senseilou:
"However ...as a vehicle for promoting irimi, tenkan ,maai , kokyu-ho, shisei, tai sabaki and everything else that Aikido engenders its right up there which is why ikkyo is absolutely central to our practice."
I understand this concept, but I question if this is the purpose of technique, to learn all these factors, components of technique if you will, where is the self-defense? I am not saying Aikido is not for self-defense, but question if you just use technique for a vehicle to learn other aspects what do you use for self-defense techniques? Do you have one way of doing technique for self-defense and one as a vehicle to learn concept?I guess it depends on what your training is for. I think that the messages have been mixed to an extent. Number 1 I think you blokes in the U. K. are more concept oriented than over here in the states. Here you may have a school that teaches technique for concept purposes, yet believes doing the technique the same way is for self-defense, which I may add is not going to work. Then again you may have a school here that doesn't know concept from corn flakes and could care less.
In my school we teach technique as a vehicle to learn concept and principles. HOWEVER....I point out to my students that these are training drills and not self defense techniques, done this way. I feel learning the concepts and principles of the techniques teaches you how to use it in a self-defense situation, but the practice method is separated from the self-defense technique. Set technique is a problem for us as well, as if you are thinking one technique, you are omitting another 25 or however many more you may have. That is why we teach technique basics, and learn the concepts, but apply them differently in self-defense application. Its form vs. function. In Karate training you learn basics, combinations then Kata. These all evolve into your own self defense techniques. Karate understands you can't block in practice, or in kata the way you would on the street(hand in chamber etc)so why not aply this concept to your other training. You learn technique as a basic, a vehicle to learn about the tecnique, what makes the technique what it is, but that form must turn into self-defense function(if thats the how you to chose to train)which is not the same as the practice method. So I see using technique for more than just one purpose.
[/QUOTE]
Lou, fair enough to question it. Looking at the bulk of aikido practice - wrist grabs gi grabs etc. its easy to see why technique orientated MA dismiss aikido as ineffective. I have been taught not to think of these things at practical techniques and therefore can use them to develop my base.
I am not really calling them techniques at all - not trying to be a slippery fish but you can attach any purpose to techniques you like - My purpose from these tools is to develop the bases - in particular irimi. So I can ignore their relative practical in-effectiveness and evade your question on purpose of techiques.
For me technique implies something that has to be done in a certain way - all I am concerned with aikido wise is that whatever move is made does not conflict with the aikido principles.
So to clarify: I cannot comment on the purpose of technique since this is not what I practice.
What do we use for self defence? Irimi or tenkan irimi. The form that it takes depends entirely on the circumstances. Just like in your own post the form will never be as in a perfect dojo situation. again like your own position - anyone who mistakes aikido forms for self defence is quickly corrected.
I cannot think of any aikido 'technique' I'd use out of the dojo in pure dojo form. Even those that come close would have multiple atemi added in.
I'd add that I can only speak for Ai-ki-do. Aiki jutsu may well use the techiques/tools differently.
Again - I represent only 1 Federation within the UK. Not everyone shares the views we have on Aikido. I'll leave it to the readers to decide if thats good or bad!
Cheers
D
[This message has been edited by dazzler2 (edited 04-19-2004).]
Posted by: dazzler2
Re: Not Again - 04/20/04 06:49 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by zbeth:
This is one of the insights of Kokikai-ryu about aikido in its original form - this distinction is one reason Maruyama Sensei feels free to evolve and adapt aikido... Uh, IMHO...
It's always pretty clear - both in Maruyama Sensei's and my instructor's classes - that, for us, giving the instructor as hard a time as possible, within a certain framework (okay, that deserves comment), is expected/encouraged/required. My instructor is Sensei's #1 uke when Sensei's in the US, and he's talked about the mindset he maintains to keep Sensei using him - each attack, think "This time I'll get him" - each visit, better faster stronger. So I know I'm to try and cultivate this myself at home, and that's the feel of it at our dojo. The downside is we have kind of a resistey dojo, where IMHO lots of brown-belt-ish ukes cheat to avoid giving balance =/ (cheat i.e. they use their knowledge of what technique is coming and leave themselves wide open to almost anything else nage may care to improvise).
The other day we had a small class, our instructor was talking more than usual, and he said he wanted us to have each technique so bombproof we'd even be able to force any large unfocused untrained new student through at least a semblance of it - so, not rely 100% on the reactions the techniques are designed to take advantage of.
In our dojo (I don't know how prevalent this is), we are very much discouraged from saying "you didn't attack appropriately for this technique" =(
(One prefers strong, committed tsuki for kotegaeshi; for a jab, probably do something else. There's this technique vs yokomenuchi where nage ducks under the strike, goes around behind, and pulls uke over backwards - we have nikyu ukes who set up a strong forward stance specifically to resist getting pulled over backwards! Why on earth? Hello, nage is behind you - be a little curious?? So sometimes we pull uke back anyway, sometimes we push uke forward.)
This bugs me because I've spent a few years learning technique, and a few more years getting better at forcing it on resisting ukes - I'd like to spend some time now working on our more relaxed ideal - what do they say, do technique same as you would if uke weren't there, I heard somewhere?
[/QUOTE]
Sounds like that is ushiro kiri otoshi zbeth.
Add in a hard double slap to the muscles on top of the shoulders prior to the drag back and they will soon forget about leaning forward.
What you are actually working on is irimi / tenkan. You enter, turn and step back and draw uke from his strong position into your centre where he becomes weak.
It also sounds as if you've been practicing kotai for a while. this is strong mechanical practice designed to instil correct form.
In Kotai uke would be solid - effectively inert. Be wary of mistaking resisting Tori/Nages efforts unduly. Remember you are working towards a level where you can blend with ukes force - if he pulls you push, if he pushes you pull kind of thing. This is the whole ying/yang concept coming into play.
If you work against this principle then while it may help with some things I dont think it is really Aikido (IMHO!). eg If uke is pushing and you are pushing back to force something then effectively you have yang v yang or positive v positive and a clash ensues. There is no blend and you are not using ukes force against him.
It also sounds as if you are looking to move into jutai...more flowing practice. Unlike Kotai which is more of a method of appreciating the mechanics this really starts to become Aikido. Here you will definitely need to blend with your parner eg If a punch is coming to your head (yang) then using tenkan to avoid it (ying) is much more useful than charging in to meet it.
Incidentally - Kotai, Jutai, Ki-tai and Ekitai which are the 4 levels of practice for aikido were covered in a previous thread initiated by SenseiLou. You may find it interesting and this may cheer Lou up as he's feeling a bit undervalued at the mo.
(Hope it wasn't anything I said! I have checked my posts in case!)
Cheers
D