The aikido thing

[Flying Crane]

Here is an idea: aikido, like any martial art, can be different things to different people. Some people like it, others do not. If it is not to your taste, then do something else. There are plenty of other things to choose from.

I wonder how many people who think they have the answers to how to fix aikido, actually have any significant experience with it. And YouTube does not count.

 

[drop bear]

Here is an idea: aikido, like any martial art, can be different things to different people. Some people like it, others do not. If it is not to your taste, then do something else. There are plenty of other things to choose from.

I wonder how many people who think they have the answers to how to fix aikido, actually have any significant experience with it. And YouTube does not count.

That is why I never listen to a paramedic on the subject of Reiki.

 

[Hanzou]

I'm going to guess you stopped believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when they stopped working good for you. I will do the same if ki ever stops working for me. So far it hasn't.

One of the things I have yet to see anybody do is actually comment on what it appears Aikido does, at least as I see it. The Aikido I have seen does not intend to hurt opponents. An opponent may indeed be hurt, but that is normally not the intent. Aikido will diligently keep throwing an opponent around, or use some other technique, until the opponent gets tired or too many bumps, and leaves.

Of course I have never studied Aikido nor have I seen every style of Aikido so I may be wrong.

What it appears to do is show someone effortlessly throw multiple attackers with little to no effort involved.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that. The issue is that people want you to be able to demonstrate that incredible ability outside of demonstrations and you just can't do it. That's when people start calling BS.

 

[Steve]

I'm going to guess you stopped believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy when they stopped working good for you. I will do the same if ki ever stops working for me. So far it hasn't.

what? This is a pretty silly argument to make. It is literally an attempt to legitimize superstition .

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I always have trouble with these kinds of threads because of looking at what aikido SHOULD be and has in its curriculum versus HOW aikido is trained and taught. Ueshiba was a legitimate martial artist and fighter who had other martial artists join him and his method. At one point, Ueshiba's dojo was called the "Hell Dojo" for the tough training that ocurred there.

Fast forward and the focus of the art became self-improvement and a way to create peace (according to Ueshiba's own words). When that focus started to happen, the type of realistic training also went by the wayside in many cases.

Ueshiba's original art had LOTS of striking (atemi) in it to vulnerable spots. If you look at his book, "Budo" you will see the pictures and he is striking the temple etc. with a middle knuckle fist. He even had the quote (% may be slightly off), but he said Aikido is 75% atemi. Far cry from what we see today.

I recall the quote being 70%. Same-same.

But yes, this is the issue. Some defend Aikido as being what it was, rather than what Ueshiba moved it to. I took the point of the OP as, "What would take Aikido back to its roots as a fighting art?".

 

[Gerry Seymour]

there no dennying sporty cars confuse womens qi meter, but unfortunately only till you marry them and decided you don't need a sporty car any more and trade it in for a low chi practcle family car and then suddenly they see you in your chiless glory and immediately start putting out feelers for a male more endowed with ki (or with a sport car, which ever comes first ,)

Man, another time I wish I could "like" and "funny" the same post.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Sorry, just some additional thoughts.

One thing that is highly emphasized in Aikido (at least from my experience) is the idea of de-escalation and avoiding the conflict in the first place (not saying others don't btw). By understanding your "center" in practical terms. What does it take to make me mad? What does a person have to do for me to really feel threatened/scared/angry? How do I put that into place to remain calm to de-escalate a situation instead of feeding into it?

Agreed. I think - and this is entirely supposition - this was part of Ueshiba's change in attitude. It seems he went from "be able to end it fast" to "be the kind of person they can't start a fight with".

 

[Gerry Seymour]

IMO, there are some weakness in the Aikido system.

1. Over emphasize on the wrist control - If you control your opponent wrist, not only his elbow joint is still free, the distance between you and him is too far. It gives your opponent too much space to counter you.

2. The lacking of leg skill - If you just block your opponent's leg, he can step over. If you scoop, sweep, hook, lift, ... your opponent's leg, it will be much harder for him to escape.

3. The lacking of "give before take" - You can't always wait for your opponent to attack you. You have to train how to attack your opponent too. You need to train how to step in, set up, and ...

4. ...

Just some thoughts...

1. Proper wrist control locks the elbow (a principle I learned as "conjunctive locking") and even the shoulder. And that control can happen at any distance from arm's length to near-clinch.
2. Yes.
3. This is a weakness in the approach, and probably in the choice of techniques. Adding the striking back in would be enough to give back the first-response option.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

1. If you use both hands to control your opponent's wrist, your opponent's other hand is still free.

2. Leg skill is different from footwork. Leg skill is to use your leg to deal with your opponent's leg.

I'd agree on the legwork issue, from what I've seen. I've not seen even basic sweeps used in Aikido, though I'd expect them to be there. They may exist in some of the branches I don't see as often.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

havnt we beat this horse enough.
the issue as i see it is that Ueshiba changed over time. his final product , he called Aikido. but like many asian things the art is only a medium for something else that is more cerebral. in this case the art of Aikido is a medium that Ueshiba used to express his philosophy. much like the writer Ann Rand used the medium of novels and writing to express her philosphy. Aikido was only supposed to be the medium for the philosophy but as more and more learned the art (as far as i can tell) what is missing is the philosophy part because students today dont care about some old guy rambling on about religion and the oneness of the universe. but you cant separate the two sides and expect the technique to fit and work well for your new philosophy of self defense and the MMA mind set of pressure testing. the two just do not go well together. so while it may seem to be a contradiction that Ueshiba is supposed to be a true martial artist but his art kinda fails are fighting its not a contradiction. he was a martial arts who used the medium for a different purpose and his purpose was to redefine a nation that was set on war and destruction. dont forget all this was happening in a war time Japan. the country was war crazy and Ueshiba didnt agree with this so he used martial arts (which was being used as a propaganda by the Government) to show an art of NON CONTENTION. which by design was anti pressure testing and anti fighting. so if it dosent hold up to someones standard of effective fighting ....yeah that was the point.

I think the issue is that some (not sure what proportion) of practitioners - including some instructors - still see it as a defensive fighting art. I think that's what the OP is talking about.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

every art has an underlying philosophy that everything else is built upon.
i say:
philosophy gives rise to an inner narrative.
the narrative of what a martial art should look like conditions the methodology and training within the art.

if you separate the philosophy from the technique you are essentially tearing out the soul of the art and playing Dr. Fankenstein. we know that never works out well. many have taken out the soul and replaced it with their own views , then they wonder why the results are sub par.

I like the first half of this. I'm not sure I agree with the last half. Many arts show a different philosophy in different groups - much of that is the interpretation and approach of the CI. Approaching an art with a drastically different philosophy should change the art, but it need not be a change for the worse.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Here is an idea: aikido, like any martial art, can be different things to different people. Some people like it, others do not. If it is not to your taste, then do something else. There are plenty of other things to choose from.

I wonder how many people who think they have the answers to how to fix aikido, actually have any significant experience with it. And YouTube does not count.

I think it's a thought experiment, if nothing else. It's an interesting discussion, even if folks never plan to do anything with it.

 

[FriedRice]

Here is an idea: aikido, like any martial art, can be different things to different people. Some people like it, others do not. If it is not to your taste, then do something else. There are plenty of other things to choose from.

I wonder how many people who think they have the answers to how to fix aikido, actually have any significant experience with it. And YouTube does not count.

Why doesn't Youtube count? Because someone has the balls to put themselves on video and express their thoughts...risking their reputation, business, future business(es) and name + actually demonstrating their skills to prove their point vs. you saying otherwise, on a lesser credible medium which is through a post on a lesser known forum of its type + anonymity and no video demo, etc?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

your new philosophy of self defense and the MMA mind set of pressure testing. the two just do not go well together.

According to the

- Tao philosophy, if you promote someone, you will make others unhappy. This philosophy does not encourage competition.
- Christian philosophy, I'm the only true God, all other Gods are fake. This philosophy does not encourage equality.
- Buddhism philosophy, If you own nothing, you will have nothing to lose. This philosophy does not encourage possession.
- Aikido/Taiji philosophy, You always wait for your opponent's attack. This philosophy does not encourage "give before take".

If you apply Aikido/Taiji philosophy through your life, you just stay home and wait for your girlfriend to knock on your door, you will never be able to find any girlfriend.

Philosophy can be wrong too.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Christian philosophy, I'm the only true God, all other Gods are fake. This philosophy does not encourage equality.

Perhaps in the context of your discussion these characterizations make sense but the way you describe the philosophy of Christianity is incorrect. The philosophy of Christianity as it pertains to other religions is the idea of having 'one God' as opposed to a 'pantheon' of Gods AND the idea that one should 'turn the other cheek' when facing transgression.

There are perhaps sects in Christianity that vehemently believe that all other Gods are fake but this is not a concept that is widely accepted by Christians. Not to turn your discussion to religion but essentially the concept you outlined for Christian philosophy was not a widely held belief.

 

[drop bear]

Perhaps in the context of your discussion these characterizations make sense but the way you describe the philosophy of Christianity is incorrect. The philosophy of Christianity as it pertains to other religions is the idea of having 'one God' as opposed to a 'pantheon' of Gods AND the idea that one should 'turn the other cheek' when facing transgression.

There are perhaps sects in Christianity that vehemently believe that all other Gods are fake but this is not a concept that is widely accepted by Christians. Not to turn your discussion to religion but essentially the concept you outlined for Christian philosophy was not a widely held belief.

It is in the ten commandments.

 

[Yokozuna514]

It is in the ten commandments.

Yes I know. The Ten Commandments are in the Old Testament.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Why doesn't Youtube count? Because someone has the balls to put themselves on video and express their thoughts...risking their reputation, business, future business(es) and name + actually demonstrating their skills to prove their point vs. you saying otherwise, on a lesser credible medium which is through a post on a lesser known forum of its type + anonymity and no video demo, etc?

Not even close to his comment. You’re trolling again.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

According to the

- Tao philosophy, if you promote someone, you will make others unhappy. This philosophy does not encourage competition.
- Christian philosophy, I'm the only true God, all other Gods are fake. This philosophy does not encourage equality.
- Buddhism philosophy, If you own nothing, you will have nothing to lose. This philosophy does not encourage possession.
- Aikido/Taiji philosophy, You always wait for your opponent's attack. This philosophy does not encourage "give before take".

If you apply Aikido/Taiji philosophy through your life, you just stay home and wait for your girlfriend to knock on your door, you will never be able to find any girlfriend.

Philosophy can be wrong too.

That’s a fairly shallow interpretation of the aiki philosophy.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

That’s a fairly shallow interpretation of the aiki philosophy.

Should MA always have to be mixed with philosophy?

Today, how many people still associate MA with "侠 (Xia) - Help the weak to defeat the strong"?