Erroneous Aikido, The Amazing Story of..

[Xue Sheng]

I do not train aikido and I am basing this on my background in Taiji Tuishou so I could be way off the mark, but it would seem to me that a person learning to be a good uke would be equally advantageous in a real world application as it would be to be good at Aikido. If you are not movable it is as likely to throw the other guy off and give you the advantage IMO.

However there would also be a disadvantage to being to rooted which I would think if one learns to be a good uke they would figure that out as well. And of course learning how not to be afraid of the fall, or attack, in the dojo would also be advantageous outside when you are in harms way.

IMO you are just cheating yourself and your training partner if you help them execute the technique by jumping or making it easy

 

[amir]

So far, this is a fruitful discussion, so let us continue to discuss:

for your point # 1. I do not agree, the important factor you have omitted here is speed. When beginning in the art, each technique should be completed at a very slow rate that sinuous tension can be felt before it is moved upon by both uke and tori. Again, nothing should be forced, yet nobody moves unless their physiology makes them move. To do otherwise is to learn nothing, neither as uke nor tori. When practitioners become more adept, those reflexes become the more efficient and necessarily quicker thus the technique is completed at a rate more akin to real life. The situation you describe is more likely to occur if partners are either a. mismatched in their level of proficiency or b. forcing the technique as described above.. in either case yes, granted damage may very well be sustained so I agree with you on that part.

I may misunderstand your meaning by "nothing should be forced", if Uke has to be moved, is he not forced to move?
Except from that, our experiences here with beginners may defer (must admit, many years have passed since I start, so I rely more on seeing others):
- At least here, too often beginners try to force techniques, using force or speed instead of correct movement.
- I have seen more then one beginner tapping continuously while hanging in an impossible position, yet, unable to sense where should he move to reduce the pressure on him, I have even seen some move in the wrong direction and almost dislocating something.
- In Judo, only locks that create significant pain before damage are allowed. Many Aikido locks are disallowed because they do not belong in this category.
- From my own experience and that of the other veterans here, some locks cause minor yet cumulative damage if one waits for them to really hurt.
- I still remember several cases of practicing with some beginner who insisted they can withstand the technique. In the end, I did something similar to your suggestion and each of them did not show up a few lessons/weeks later because they were hurt and in pain.

for your point #2 I do not quite follow this logic forgive me.. I am referring specifically to practice of singular technique wherein it is important that neither partner [and that includes tori] move until they ARE moved. However if you are referring to randori type practice then yes standing static would be foolish, that is a given yes.

About Tori:
To my understanding of Aikido, to stay in place would be wrong for Tori. In almost all cases of Uke actions, Tori should move, to create Kuzushi, to prevent Uke from following a grab with a strike or striking again
About Uke:
One learns Aikido while he is Uke too (otherwise 50% of our training time would have been wasted). I will continue about this below.
If the Uke learns to stay static in a disadvantageous situation, he will act the same way in real situations.
For example, in basic variations of Shiho-Nage and irimi-nage, Tori unbalnces Uke downwards, I expect Uke to resist this and try to restablize himself, and not to stay static with his head down, waiting for Tori to knee his face and elbow his head.
Uke should be active, in a realistic manner aimed to maintain his attack and well being. Even if only one attack is practiced, Uke reaction to Tori should be realistic and reflect his desire to be in position for a second attack.

… [I would not use your word soft, rather, receptive or even absorbing] ...

Soft is the common best translation of the Japanese concept. It does not mean weak, it means a combination of sensitive, feeling, responsive, etc.
Soft is the counter of stiff.
One memorable memory of mine is practicing with a Japanese Katori Shinto Ryu teacher and doing Randori with him (in a Korindo settings). He was very soft, but you could feel his muscles continuously working and flowing, just like a tiger.
I dislike the term absorb, since to me it connects to getting hit and absorbing it, while my training teaches not to get hit.

for your point #4 well I think it depends here on what kind of training one does in one's Aikido and which kind of benefit is sought. Yes, for uke to be for uke to be this way is best for their learning, granted.

I am assuming the aim of learning is martial, otherwise – you can do anything. When one is Uke one is also learning. A martial artist who is not soft, who continuously uses force against technique, is doomed to fail. The same is true in any M.A.
If one is looking for effective Aikido, one must be soft. One of the times to learn to be soft, is while being Uke. When you are Uke you are not only giving your partner opportunity to train, you are also learning – how to react.

Yet this is not a situation which has a parallel in reality where the opponent will resist you with 100% effort. In which case, if you do not MAKE him move, he will not move, you may end up on your back and lest you are adept at your BJJ too then that is not so good. So if you are practicing pure technique in a dojo void then yes receptive or absorbing uke.. else [and I know not many aikidoka practice real life situations - we were removed for doing this] and but for real life, hard, unreceptive, uncompliant, non-absorbing uke is requisite.

Here we partially disagree, especially when looking at this from the martial prospective:
- I agree with "uncompliant", once one is not talking of beginners still learning their moves or intentionally leading someone to correct some point.
- One (and not beginners) can and should do some isolated practice against 100% force resistance. It is good to develop correct techniques, moving from the center, etc. This type of training should be done in progressive manner, to make Sure Uke is within his limits of responding well.
- In a real life fight, if you get the attacker to 100% resistance against your technique, then great – take advantage of his new direction of force to throw him with another technique. That is Tori being soft, feeling Uke and responding to it, not insisting rather flowing.
- I have heard more then one Judo teacher explain that anyone who tries to resist, be hard etc, is the easiest "prey". Same is true in Aikido.
You do know the stories of the Oak tree and the grass, or the how to sense a sword fight as it starts (if you fell him strongly, kill him and get home. if you feel him lightly, be ready for a difficult fight, if you can not feel him – give in or make your peace with …)?

So yes and no here.. depends on what you are trying to get from your training [or which role you are acting].

I am talking from the martial approach, as my teachers taught me in Korindo Aikido, which is considered a very practical style (though I doubt how many of those who copied that statement has ever seen any one actually doing Korindo).
Most of the practice time, Tori has to be soft to succeed, and Uke has to be soft, to learn to be better.

I'd like to follow Jenna's example and respond to each point. 1. I agree to a point, but I dobn't think it's really an issue. When first learning the technique is put on slowly to avoid damage, at this point uke shouldn't move until tori moves him. When you get better and the attacks come faster, Tori is moving sooner so uke's attack doesn't stop, so his balance is compromised and he has to move to maintain the impetus of the attack and he walks into the lock.

If this is the intention, I kind of agree, with the exceptions I wrote above.

2. Not moving unless you have to doesn't mean that you stand there and wait until you're hit until you move, it means moving to blend with or avoid an attack. It means moving when it's appropriate to do so, not too late, but not too soon either.

I agree, but that should apply to both Tori and Uke.

3. This is only an issue if you start from a static position, and you don't unbalance uke so he has to move to maintain structural integrity.

Again, mostly agree, just add moving away from disadvantageous situations to the specific case of structural integrity.

4 & 5. I agree with most of this, but I think it works the other way. What happens to uke is a direct response to what tori does. If tori gives uke something to fight against, then uke will resist and the technique will be ineffective. On the other hand, if tori remains soft and uke can't find anything to resist, nothing to fight against, he is sucked into the technique because of his own momentum and to his detriment.

Here you describe the ideal. I am talking of the learning process.
I still remember the very few Randori-s in which I was close to that ideal, in those, too often the first to be felt by the other, immediately found himself so trapped in technique he just simply dropped (We did not need to follow things through with force, I am talking of randori/sparing of two sandans, each knowing the other's techniques work. We learned much more about sensitivity and timing without the resistance). I have also seen what happens if after shuch a randori I happen to work with a beginner – until I get back to my senses he can learn nothing since I counter anything he does and throw him away effortlessly, and this may answer Jenna about the martial aspect – soft means much faster (moving in response to intent not to end of action), soft means stronger (the whole body generates force).

Hope this is of interest
Amir

 

[amir]

IMO you are just cheating yourself and your training partner if you help them execute the technique by jumping or making it easy

To some point, Uke should help tori to execute the technique, but only in accordance to Tori and Uke levels.Keeping Tori challenged to do the technique the best he can.

If Tori is a beginner and Uke is experienced, Uke may have to lead Tori in his moves to do a correct technique (did it, and it is damn hard for Uke and a most teaching experience).
If Tori is more experienced, Uke should do his best to behave naturally, yet react to the power Tori is using. Uke should also not get Tori to put Uke at risk.

Uke should remember that scaling down is of both speed and force, not only one of them.
Uke should also not resist in such a way that changes the basic situation. I have seen more then one Uke who resisted so strongly to some technique that he practically invited a dozen others, instead of the one Sensei showed (luckily I am senior enough to respond in the Aikido way in such situations and not expected to force my way :uhyeah


Some people here seem to forget that it is easier to evade a technique through a loop-hole then to use all your force to resist. I could not resist a much stronger beginner (once he learns the basic mechanics), but normally I can find a dozen openings to evade and counter.
Force resistance is the lowest level of resisting. We aim higher.

Amir

 

[amir]

Hi

There is one thing I though about, the part that uke learns how to move compared to what tori does.

This is normal human behavior...nobody wants to stand in harms way. But isn't this making uke move in a way that non-uke's would move? And isn't it going to create a stylistisk way of moving that isn't rooted in "reality".

/Yari

You need a good teacher, so you will learn how to receive correctly.
Ukemy is not just falling, it is receiving the technique, at high level, you should use your softness to counter.

As you get to high levels, you should know to move in different ways, according to the level your partner should feel. It is not easy to be Uke.

We only learn if we get about 75% of successes, similar to one not getting much stronger by pushing a wall. If you wish to learn, you need a consistent experience, letting you learn from your mistakes, and succeed if you did correctly.
There is no point to my fully resisting a student in his first 5yrs, my superior experience and knowledge will let me find too many opportunities for him to learn to block them all at once, his successes will be opportunistic and related to my failings, not to his doing. (been there, done that, and got my Sensei to teach me to be better, the hard way)
A good Uke adjusts the level of practice to Tori, so tori will have to strain himself, but will mostly succeed. Tori should not learn more then 1-2 new pointers on any technique at a single lesson (and no more then 5-6 in the lesson), otherwise he will be overwhelmed and be unable to digest it all during his rest in order to get better the next lesson.

Amir

 

[tempus]

There are times I do have Uke tap before pain gets there. One student was so fleixable his joints could bend flat. You can try to give pain, but nothing. Fast forward a few years and belt levels. Guest black belt comes in applies a lock on the guy and he does not tap and then pop went the shoulder because he was waiting for pain while the visiting person did not know how flexible the guy was.

There is a young girl now in class who is just as flexible. I am telling her to tap early so as not to get hurt. As she moves up in levels I want her to counter strike. If I am defending myself and apply a wrist lock that does nothing I should be moving into another technique or striking. Not standing there. Who klnows, my luck I will get attacked about a eveil ex-cirque du soleil person.

On another note, depending on the belt level, I counterstrike as Uke. If I go to tear your head off and you miss the technique, you should be immediatly striking, to create energy and slow down the attacker, or going into another technique. Low level belts I do not do that, but correct and attack again. My reasoning is to make sure the person just does not stand there. You need to do something.

Does anyone find issues with people wanting to strike? I think punching drills should be part of any aikido school since a good punch makes for a realistic Uke.

 

[Yari]

....I think punching drills should be part of any aikido school since a good punch makes for a realistic Uke.

Yes, anything to emphesize reality, and make sure that you practice accordanly to what you might experience, is for me a good idea.

/Yari

 

[theletch1]

Yes, anything to emphesize reality, and make sure that you practice accordanly to what you might experience, is for me a good idea.

/Yari

Excellent idea. Static, karate style punches aren't going to be the norm in a self defense scenario. We will often work the big roundhouse punches and backhands that you see in the bar scene as well as the shoot that too many yahoos see in the MMA world and decide is a good idea to try in a fight.

 

[tempus]

I have some boxing experince, thanks Dad, that I tend to use on higher belts. The issue is a lot of people let me get in close to throw a boxing style punch. Boxing style I mean planted with hips twwisting and along wth the punching foot so it is a short straight or hook. Either they blend the wrong way, which is okay as long as you get in and jam my punch before it goes to full power, or they get tagged because the blend has to be very quick. Sometimes we will pratice the close punches and play with quick blocks and parries.

Some have caught on and kick me when I get in close and then follow up with technique. Just glad I wear a cup.

-Gary

 

[Telfer]

Hope that is all clear to you?? Say if it is unclear, yes?

And but the techniques themselves in no way rely upon strength rather they utilise principles of impulse and momentum to redirect the motion of the opponent.

Yes, you could certainly redirect *A LOT* of momentum in such a way that the assailant is floored. This happens even when someone is running and trips on a pebble.

I did this myself endlessly when I was kid playing King of the Hill. I took Judo from the age of 10-17 and would stand on top of a snow hill and have the other hurl kids hurl themselves at me and I would flip them down the other side with a different technique each time.

Nobody got hurt and it had nothing to do with real fighting, because in a real fight almost nobody is stupid enough to GIVE you that much momentum.

Its a matter of degree. A retracting punch doesnt contain enough momentum to put anyone down. The kinetic energy required to do this has to come from somewhere, and if its not from the assailant then it has to come from the Aikidoka.

In Judo we arrange arms and legs so that we use our large muscle groups against the opponent's small muscle groups...but even this still requires *adding* kinetic energy. It still pays to be physically strong.

I am not sure that retraction of strikes is common practice in any MA?

Retraction of strikes is common to all striking arts including western boxing, karate, kung-fu, Muay Thai, etc.

The only time you see fists freezing in midair is in Movies and Wushu demos.

 

[theletch1]

Motion is motion is motion. Whether the strike is coming at your head, from an angle OR going away from you on the retraction there is motion and energy. Parry the punch and follow the retraction back in. As that energy returns to the striker go with it and maximize it. Because a punch is being retracted doesn't mean it can't be used. Also, don't make the mistake of believeing that an aikido-ka doesn't know how to strike. Any aikido-ka worth his/her salt has either studied a striking art perviously or has studied strikes in depth in order to better defend against them.

 

[theletch1]

BTW, Telfer.... you have exactly 4 posts on this site as of this posting and ALL of them are in the aikido section... and all of them show a somewhat disdainful outlook on aikido and none in your listed primary art/style of MMA. Be aware that the rules that you agreed to abide by when you opened your account here forbid style bashing. If you are willing to have open discussions on the art and are truly interested in what aikido has to offer then welcome. If, however, your only objective is to stir the pot, as it were, then perhaps a quick re-read of the rules would be in order.

 

[Telfer]

Whether the strike is coming at your head, from an angle OR going away from you on the retraction there is motion and energy. Parry the punch and follow the retraction back in. As that energy returns to the striker go with it and maximize it.

Thats a good point about following a retraction, assuming its slow enough to follow.

The real question however is the AMOUNT of kinetic energy it contains and whether it is enough to put the opponent down by redirecting it.

If the whole body is throw at you, then yes there is enough energy to work with. But a standard jab...no.

 

[Telfer]

all of them show a somewhat disdainful outlook on aikido and none in your listed primary art/style of MMA. Be aware that the rules that you agreed to abide by when you opened your account here forbid style bashing.

The only reason I'm here is because there are strict rules, and I genuinely want to find out what the response is to a critique based on fundamental physics.

Usually when people say you should have a more 'open' attitude to any art...it means they want you to let your brains fall out.

I hope thats not the case here.

 

[K-man]

No, this is not an issue. Anyone trying to grab a fast strike is making a stupid mistake. If one chooses to relate to the strike and not avoid it altogether, the strike should be intercepted/controlled/diverted and only then one may be able to catch the hand or arm.
If I were to connect to the striking hand you would find retraction is not as easy as it normally is, and you would already be unbalanced. You could still retract the hand, but as you do this, I would get closer to you and continue the retraction itself to some other technique, against that arm or against the head or body that might have been opened during the retraction.
Again, non of the above is unique to Aikido, I have seen high level Karateka teach exactly the same things and concepts.

When we train against karate type strikes, often the arm is left extended. This is of course totally unrealistic but offers the opportunity to train 'muscle memory'. Then we say, "ok, now retract after the punch". The problem here is that the punch thrown is most often like the punches thrown in karate tournaments. These are very fast but equally unrealistic. Trying to catch one is a little like trying to catch smoke. They never reach their intended target, nor were they ever intended to reach the target. However, if the punch is fast, and delivered with intent, the story is quite different. If uke punches with the intent of actually hitting, then tori needs to either move off the line or move uke's arm of the line. In either event the attack is not stopped. The split second it takes 'til uke reacts and retracts his fist is enough to give tori the time to capture the arm, or move in to deliver another technique.
As amir said, this is not unique to Aikido. We experience the same frustration in karate training. Another reason for avoiding the tournament scene!

 

[Xue Sheng]

Thats a good point about following a retraction, assuming its slow enough to follow.

The real question however is the AMOUNT of kinetic energy it contains and whether it is enough to put the opponent down by redirecting it.

If the whole body is throw at you, then yes there is enough energy to work with. But a standard jab...no.

The response would be different from any MA perspective. You would not respond to a jab the same way as you would if someone was throwing their body weight at you

 

[Telfer]

You would not respond to a jab the same way as you would if someone was throwing their body weight at you

Ok, how do you respond to a quick retracting jab?

 

[K-man]

I think the use of force in any Aikido technique is bad practice. If someone is forcing at all, then something within their execution of the tech needs to be looked at. Can be anything from the ground up: their stance / balance to front and rear, their starting position before engagement, the mechanics of their drive from the core, the contact points for the technique and the application of torque..

There are many factors that determine why an aikidoka would force something, though there is absolutely an inherent problem if they are. It is not to be condoned nor excused and but rather corrected!

Using force to cover a mistake is one of those things that happens.. that is fair enough.. And but better to stop the technique midway and address the issues rather than continuing with it. Nothing is gained by that. Two obvious reasons to eliminate use of force.. First, in the dojo, forcing can result in ligament and tendon damage either in you or your partner. And but secondly, if your opponent in a real-life situation knows the first thing of Aikido or simple dynamics then your forcing may be a direct cause of your own defeat.

This is one of the hardest lessons to learn, especially if you do possess more than the average strength. We find during, the technique, that we come up against resistance so we do what is natural and add some extra force to the technique. Against a weaker opponent we may get away with this but the truth is, the technique failed and against a stronger opponent it will fail every time.
As Jenna said, at this stage we must stop and look for the problem. Although the answer is simple it took me several years to get my mind around this concept. "You can't win in aikido by using strength!" You have to use 'soft'. (BTW, soft does not mean weak!!) When we encounter resistance, we need to pause and absorb their strength, then continue, sometimes in a different direction. The principle is simple. Our ego prevents us from accepting it.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Ok, how do you respond to a quick retracting jab?

retracting, why am I responding to it retracting.

And can I assume from this post that you feel a response to a jab and a response to someone throwing their body weight at you should be the same?

And I am not going to get into typed demos

 

[Telfer]

retracting, why am I responding to it retracting.

I didnt mean ONLY retracting. I mean a quick jab striking me in the jaw and then retracting.

 

[Telfer]

can I assume from this post that you feel a response to a jab and a response to someone throwing their body weight at you should be the same?

I would not respond the same way no.