Aikido hate

[Spinedoc]

Aiki, at least in my mind, has less to do with techniques than most assume. I remember hearing a story of O'Sensei after he left Takeda and before he was really teaching Aikido. He was apparently challenged by a reputable swordsman and O'Sensei simply drew a sword and faced down the attacker. They stood for close to an hour. No attack, no counter. O'Sensei simply stood in perfect stance and presented not a single opening to the swordsman. After an hour, the swordsman sheathed his sword, bowed, said that he apologized and left.

Now, I am not sure if this is a true story, or merely myth, but I heard a Shihan once telling this story, and saying that this was the essence of Aiki.

O'Sensei himself once said “Aiki is a means of achieving harmony with another person so that you can make them do what you want.”

Takeda Sokaku said that Aiki was “the ability to defeat an enemy with a single glance.”

It gets blurry, because Aiki means in Japanese, a fusion or meeting of energy. It is related to Kiai, or focus of the spirit and they actually blend together somewhat...in typical Japanese fashion.

 

[Flying Crane]

In what way does anything you just posted further the discussion? Honestly (since we're being honest) it seems like you're just being very snarky. I honestly believe if you took a few minutes to read my posts without deciding ahead of time you don't agree, you'd feel pretty foolish, as I've said several times I'm not interested in imposing anything on you. And I've explained it several times, as well.

Saying I am over and over doesn't change the words I've actually written. This is bizarre. Truly.

Edit: Okay. I'm trying to understand. Please tell me what you think Ilve identified that I think works for me, that I'm trying to impose on you? What is that? I don't see it. I just see all of the times I've literally said to you that you're free to establish your own standards, and more power to you.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

As I said before, I am not being snarky. I am being honest.

Perhaps if you reread your own posts, you might understand why my honesty has taken on a level of bluntness. If you can't see what it is about your own posts that might cause someone like me to be a bit blunt with you, then I doubt I can make it more clear for you.

All the best to you.

 

[Steve]

As I said before, I am not being snarky. I am being honest.

Perhaps if you reread your own posts, you might understand why my honesty has taken on a level of bluntness. If you can't see what it is about your own posts that might cause someone like me to be a bit blunt with you, then I doubt I can make it more clear for you.

All the best to you.

What do you think I've identified that works for me, that I'm trying to impose on you?

Look, I appreciate feedback. I get that you want to be the good guy, and you're welcome to it. But I truly don't know what the heck you're talking about. You think you're being honest, but this isn't honest feedback. Honest feedback would be where you actually provide some examples. There is a record that you can easily go back and reference. If you could quote for me where you think I'm suggesting you should do what I do, or that I think what you're doing is bad or wrong or anything like that, it would really help. It's all here.

In fact, I went back, as you suggest, and reread every one of my posts in this thread. What I found was that I repeatedly emphasized that I am not suggesting anyone do anything they don't enjoy. To the contrary, I said:

I agree with you mostly, particularly about what is interesting and enjoyable..

Let's be clear. If you're having fun and enjoying yourself, knock yourself out. I would never (here or in person) presume to rain on your parade.

I would happily agree with you that any training method that includes some way to measure efficacy is effective. Without any way to measure success, how can you know if training is successful?

I'm willing to take your word that your training is effective, even if you don't have any way to know, but that's mostly because I don't have a real stake in whether it fails or not. You do. Doesn't mean is actually IS effective. To be clear, I'm talking about self identifying some measurable criteria for success and then exceeding it.

And that's fine, if you don't feel it's necessary. However, absent any form of measurement, you just can't evaluate whether your training is effective. And we're back to faith... which, again, is also fine, if you know that's where you're at. You can't say to someone, "I know my training is effective" unless you are prepared to explain what you mean by "effective" and how you're measuring your training against it.

Look, I hope it's clear. I'm not suggesting you must know whether your training is effective or not. I'm very specifically saying that "effective" is a subjective term that must be defined in some way. If you're going to use it, be prepared to define it.

if you think I am trying to apply a universal standard, I'm doing a poor job of explaining. I'm not trying to apply any standards to you or your training.

This isn't about me imposing standards on you. As I said earlier, knock yourself out, provided you're happy.

And lest you misunderstand again, it's not a big deal, except that we are having a conversation about arts like aikido being effective in self defense (among other things).

I snipped out most of the repeated points about measurable standards. I tried to explain that point a few times, but I'm pretty sure now that you get it.

Once again, I invite you to tell me where you think I'm imposing my beliefs on you, because I see many examples where I have said exactly the opposite.

 

[drop bear]

Er... what? No. Aiki is not present in all martial arts... that's the whole sentence. It's not just the same thing under a

Yes it is. Every martial art uses those fundimentals.

 

[drop bear]

An honest assessment of what? And how is it honest? I'm genuinely curious as to how you would answer that.

They are actually trying to stab you you are actually trying to stop them.

That provides a reasonable base for feedback.

 

[drop bear]

Yeah, that definition is as vague to me as the term itself (undefined).

Your thought above ("aiki is experienced when a technique is performed exactly right and at exactly the right time, so that it is effortless") I think highlights what I haven't communicated well, Steve. That feeling of effortlessness from a great technique isn't quite aiki. There's some similarities, and sometimes you'll feel that effortlessness because of aiki, but I can also get that feeling just by excellent use of timing and leverage, which isn't aiki, by my definition.

For me (and I keep stressing that, because I believe - don't know, just believe - that my definition differs from what you'd likely get from someone in Ueshiba's art), aiki is mostly expressed by (nearly) all of the functional energy/momentum in a technique coming from the "attacker". So, even within a given technique (let's use a standing Arm Bar), there are both aiki and non-aiki variations. Executed properly, both can feel effortless, especially if I catch my opponent "in the void" (that point where they are between bases and easily disrupted). The aiki version of the technique will blend into their movement, either redirecting it or accelerating it into an overextension (actually, mostly the same thing). The non-aiki version doesn't blend with their movement, but interrupts it and redirects their weight through leverage. To muddy things up, these aren't necessarily far apart, and I can execute the technique at several points along a continuum between the two.

There. Sort out that muddiness, Steve!

ok there is a sweep that catches the foot as it is about to land and drags it forwards.It creates the equivilent of slipping on a banana peel.

That would be aiki.

 

[Paul_D]

You can't develop any true MA skill if you only train when your opponent cooperates

If I punch you in the throat any subsequant throw or joint lock won't require your cooperation I can assure you.

 

[drop bear]

If I punch you in the throat any subsequant throw or joint lock won't require your cooperation I can assure you.

So you are advising the best method of learning joint locks is good striking?

 

[Paul_D]

So you are advising the best method of learning joint locks is good striking?

No.

 

[Steve]

If I punch you in the throat any subsequant throw or joint lock won't require your cooperation I can assure you.

That is a really good line. I literally laughed out loud. I initially marked it as funny, but I didn't want you to get the wrong impression. It's true and also very witty.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

ok there is a sweep that catches the foot as it is about to land and drags it forwards.It creates the equivilent of slipping on a banana peel.

That would be aiki.

If they are still moving their center, yes, that would fit with my definition of aiki.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So you are advising the best method of learning joint locks is good striking?

Or something else to control their structure and/or movement.

 

[drop bear]

If they are still moving their center, yes, that would fit with my definition of aiki.

Yeah. Ok. The thing I think that is going to get people when looking for aiki in other martial arts is that those elements of aiki are disguised within pressure.

You can apply both at the same time. Or one or the other. This will be much more common if both fighters know what they are doing.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. Ok. The thing I think that is going to get people when looking for aiki in other martial arts is that those elements of aiki are disguised within pressure.

You can apply both at the same time. Or one or the other. This will be much more common if both fighters know what they are doing.

A patient fighter won't commit his weight often in ways that open up for aiki techniques. Fighters in competition tend to be more patient. The opportunities still come up, but waiting for them would be suicide in a competition, IMO.

 

[oftheherd1]

Much of a muchness. Most people get stabbed in that sort of training Even experts. (it is just that hard to stop a knife with intent) So you either do it and constantly eat crow. Or make the situation unrealistic so you win.

Personally i like the akido method there because it at least gives an honest assessment

As I said, there isn't a lot of room for error in knife defense. But it isn't roll over and try to die quickly either. Properly learned and continuously practiced, there are knife defenses that are very effective. From your post, it is obvious you are doing what so many do; focusing on the knife rather than what is holding the knife. That is your best chance to survive; look for what is holding the knife and defend that, not just defend the knife.

Consider also that the attacker with the knife is probably not expecting, therefore not able to effectively defend against, a useful counter to his attack. And when you see those who have trained themselves in use of a knife, present a series of attacks one after the other (looks so awesome), if you stop the first, the rest never will happen.

From conversations with Gerry and others, I would probably modify that to read: aiki is experienced when a technique is performed exactly right and at exactly the right time using the energy of the opponent, so that it is effortless.

Practitioners of aiki-centric arts, how do you feel about that definition?

It is interesting to read all the attempts to explain aiki. I need to show another aspect, since I have no concept of what aiki is. I studied two Korean martial arts, TKD, and Hapkido. I am belted in Hapkido. We talk about ki, gi, qi, whatever. I think it is something like aiki, which isn't surprising, especially in Hapkido. As Chris Parker pointed out before, Hapkido is closely related to Aikido, having the same ultimate parentage.

In TKD, under Jhoon Goo Rhee, we were taught to use that inner energy, or gi, to use all aspects of our art. To step, balance, connect to the ground, punch, kick, and defend with speed and correctness. I learned that to an extent.

In the Hapkido I studied, I didn't even think of learning or using gi, until I one day realized I had achieved some part of it. So, that meditation, practicing of single and multiple kicks, along with refinement of technique, suddenly paid of when I didn't even realize there was a debt. I found that gi allowed me to move faster and with more precision. It allowed me to focus power. I wasn't as good as I have seen others use it, but to recognize I even had some useful amount of it was awesome.

I believe it is something anyone can acquire if they believe in it. I also believe that it has a faith aspect to it. I don't believe it requires faith in a religious sense to be acquired, although I suspect it may help.

That's a part of how I see it, YMMV, and that doesn't mean it is wrong.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That's a part of how I see it, YMMV, and that doesn't mean it is wrong.

Sure it does. Anyone who disagrees with me is demonstrably wrong.

 

[oftheherd1]

Sure it does. Anyone who disagrees with me is demonstrably wrong.

But, but, I wasn't demonstrating.

 

[Flying Crane]

What do you think I've identified that works for me, that I'm trying to impose on you?

Look, I appreciate feedback. I get that you want to be the good guy, and you're welcome to it. But I truly don't know what the heck you're talking about. You think you're being honest, but this isn't honest feedback. Honest feedback would be where you actually provide some examples. There is a record that you can easily go back and reference. If you could quote for me where you think I'm suggesting you should do what I do, or that I think what you're doing is bad or wrong or anything like that, it would really help. It's all here.

In fact, I went back, as you suggest, and reread every one of my posts in this thread. What I found was that I repeatedly emphasized that I am not suggesting anyone do anything they don't enjoy. To the contrary, I said:









I snipped out most of the repeated points about measurable standards. I tried to explain that point a few times, but I'm pretty sure now that you get it.

Once again, I invite you to tell me where you think I'm imposing my beliefs on you, because I see many examples where I have said exactly the opposite.

You are correct in that you are unable to actually impose anything on anyone here.

The message contained in your posts is that people who don't train the way you train, cannot possibly be doing something with functional value. And I am certain that you are aware that this is your message.

And so I don't see any need to discuss it in circles any further. You are free to believe what you wish and train as you will. It matters not to me.

 

[ImagineClouds]

Hello everyone,
Why does Aikido get so much hate? I realize that BJJ and MMA are very mainstream at the moment, and some of those guys are the biggest Aikido haters out there. No offense. It all boils down to: Did any of the MMA fighters do aikido?" Some people go as far as calling it ********, ineffective, a waste of time, etc. Really? I visited the local Aikido school, and I loved the atmosphere. I'd like to know what your opinion of this art is. I believe most (if not all) arts can be applied in certain scenarios. I have to admit that I am not one of those people that dream of killing/dismantling others. That's the last thing I want to to.

Thank you in advance.

Hi
I'm an aikidoka, though i do it for just 2 years now, i think the problem is that we learn thinks static like not in motion, in the beginning!. so people usually say it is not realistic it can get you killed. not true we learn like this cause once you get your uki (the attacker) out of balance what do you do? well we learn from this perspective. later on we put motion in the attacks and once your uki is out of balance you strike with the techniques. furthermore once you are in motion and you attack your blackbelt master you automaticly jump because if you don't and he does a particular technique, like kotegaeshi for example you brake break your wrist, so you jump moments before he uses his technique creating a "non realistic" scéne. and most people don't understand this.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hi
I'm an aikidoka, though i do it for just 2 years now, i think the problem is that we learn thinks static like not in motion, in the beginning!. so people usually say it is not realistic it can get you killed. not true we learn like this cause once you get your uki (the attacker) out of balance what do you do? well we learn from this perspective. later on we put motion in the attacks and once your uki is out of balance you strike with the techniques. furthermore once you are in motion and you attack your blackbelt master you automaticly jump because if you don't and he does a particular technique, like kotegaeshi for example you brake break your wrist, so you jump moments before he uses his technique creating a "non realistic" scéne. and most people don't understand this.

Hey, nice to see a new face. Drop by the Meet & Greet section and introduce yourself and give us your background, so we can all say hi!