Aikido exploration...

[Jenna]

Because that video is outright silly, and really shouldn't be taken seriously. It's no different than the tape of Masaaki Hatsumi doing laughable ground work and people (mainly his disciples) believing that it is effective.

Also the hate being thrown towards Aikido isn't always ill-informed. In many cases the hate is well deserved.

yes true, and but hate is unproductive and largely reflective of the hater

 

[Hanzou]

yes true, and but hate is unproductive and largely reflective of the hater

Only if that hate is ill-informed. As I said earlier, there is plenty of Aikido hate that comes from informed sources, and is well-deserved.

 

[Buka]

I'm sceptical of demonstrations like, "push on my finger."

Not to be nit picky and correct you, Steve, but it's "pull my finger" when letting one rip.

 

[Jenna]

Only if that hate is ill-informed. As I said earlier, there is plenty of Aikido hate that comes from informed sources, and is well-deserved.

There is not one problem anywhere ever that have been solved by hate.

 

[Hanzou]

There is not one problem anywhere ever that have been solved by hate.

Perhaps "hate" is too strong a word in this context. I believe that "criticism" is a better word choice.

Here's a fairly good video that I found:

I don't like his conclusion, but everything leading up to that point is pretty spot on. His points about Ueshiba possibly envisioning Aikido to be a capstone for a master martial artist instead of a stand alone style is something that I've theorized for quite some time.

 

[drop bear]

There is not one problem anywhere ever that have been solved by hate.

I hated my old job. So I got a better one.

Problem solved.

 

[Jenna]

I hated my old job. So I got a better one.

Problem solved.

exactly.. the act of hating itself did nothing to ameliorate your dislike of your work function.. hating your job make you miserable or angry depending on your sensibilities.. what you did.. you change your situation so you do not have to hate.. some thing more productive.. yet I would guess there exist social site where people who hate their job would pop online tweet out futile muttering and hating rather than do what you did.. anyway.. now you are fixed up.. you can spot me twenty?

 

[Jenna]

Perhaps "hate" is too strong a word in this context. I believe that "criticism" is a better word choice.

Here's a fairly good video that I found:

I don't like his conclusion, but everything leading up to that point is pretty spot on. His points about Ueshiba possibly envisioning Aikido to be a capstone for a master martial artist instead of a stand alone style is something that I've theorized for quite some time.

Not disagreeing with you or any thing and but you might expect a designer of any art to be some what ego centric or demonstrate a level of hubris.. else they probably not even think of dreaming up new arts in the first place.. a certain self aggrandisement could be evident in all of these creators I would suggest.. so he view his art as some thing unique special mystical (other designed arts have other imagined qualities) etc

 

[Hanzou]

Not disagreeing with you or any thing and but you might expect a designer of any art to be some what ego centric or demonstrate a level of hubris.. else they probably not even think of dreaming up new arts in the first place.. a certain self aggrandisement could be evident in all of these creators I would suggest.. so he view his art as some thing unique special mystical (other designed arts have other imagined qualities) etc

While I certainly agree that creators of MA systems have a bit of an ego creating their styles, my point is that Ueshiba probably never intended his style to be taught to amateur or beginning martial artists. If that's the case, then you have generations of Aikidoka misinterpreting the system.

Also, an advanced grappler would fill many of the shortcomings of the art.

 

[JP3]

yes true, and but hate is unproductive and largely reflective of the hater

I'd opine that it's really not hate at all, but actually simple scorn and derision. And, sometimes... in some places, in some times and locations and by some people, well-deserving.

And, sometimes not.

 

[drop bear]

exactly.. the act of hating itself did nothing to ameliorate your dislike of your work function.. hating your job make you miserable or angry depending on your sensibilities.. what you did.. you change your situation so you do not have to hate.. some thing more productive.. yet I would guess there exist social site where people who hate their job would pop online tweet out futile muttering and hating rather than do what you did.. anyway.. now you are fixed up.. you can spot me twenty?

Action needs emotional content.

 

[Spinedoc]

While I certainly agree that creators of MA systems have a bit of an ego creating their styles, my point is that Ueshiba probably never intended his style to be taught to amateur or beginning martial artists. If that's the case, then you have generations of Aikidoka misinterpreting the system.

Also, an advanced grappler would fill many of the shortcomings of the art.

Hanzou, you also have to understand, Ueshiba was not about fighting....Aikido is NOT about fighting...which is what so many people still keep missing. Almost every Aikido practitioner I know says that they don't care about at all about the argument of whether or not Aikido is effective or not, because they don't ever plan on fighting. Aikido is different for different people. For me, it's about relaxation, stress relief, flexibility, and connecting with other peaceful, like minded people. That's all I care about. I've studied other arts, if I am ever forced to fight, whatever I do will end up probably being a combination of my military training, other martial arts, and maybe a little Aikido. But I don't care about fighting.

Not saying that other martial artists don't have different goals....but I go to Aikido Seminars all over the US, and have trained with all kinds of Aikido practitioners, both high ranking, and not high ranking...and I cannot recall a single person...ever, ever saying that they were training Aikido to be a better fighter. Not once. Just keep that in mind...

 

[drop bear]

Hanzou, you also have to understand, Ueshiba was not about fighting....Aikido is NOT about fighting...which is what so many people still keep missing. Almost every Aikido practitioner I know says that they don't care about at all about the argument of whether or not Aikido is effective or not, because they don't ever plan on fighting. Aikido is different for different people. For me, it's about relaxation, stress relief, flexibility, and connecting with other peaceful, like minded people. That's all I care about. I've studied other arts, if I am ever forced to fight, whatever I do will end up probably being a combination of my military training, other martial arts, and maybe a little Aikido. But I don't care about fighting.

Not saying that other martial artists don't have different goals....but I go to Aikido Seminars all over the US, and have trained with all kinds of Aikido practitioners, both high ranking, and not high ranking...and I cannot recall a single person...ever, ever saying that they were training Aikido to be a better fighter. Not once. Just keep that in mind...

It is this weird rationalisation generally. So someone may say it is not about fighting but then generally add something about how it really is but they are too enlightened to consider it important.

So you may claim you are not about fighting. But then if I mention that your wrist locks are weak because your set ups are basically silly and your expectations of what you can actually achieve in real time is unrealistic. And that is because my system is about fighting. And we test that stuff.

The excuses come out.

I didn't even get that from Capoeira. And they are to a point about fighting.

 

[hoshin1600]

Perhaps "hate" is too strong a word in this context. I believe that "criticism" is a better word choice.

Here's a fairly good video that I found:

I don't like his conclusion, but everything leading up to that point is pretty spot on. His points about Ueshiba possibly envisioning Aikido to be a capstone for a master martial artist instead of a stand alone style is something that I've theorized for quite some time.

i agree with spinedoc. i will extrapolate on it with my own beliefs about aikido. these are my own ideas and i know many will judge it as incorrect or heresy. the video posted about the failings of aikido shows a common belief that aikido is a horrible martial art. but that is judging a fish on how well it can climb a tree. in my opinion aikido is not like any other martial art. the commentator points out failure in aikido because it does not have competition or resisting opponents. my response is that aikido is perfect as it is, for what it is. other arts like karate and BJJ are substitutes for actual combat. i will focus on BJJ. BJJ is a competitive form of grappling. the training is with resistant partners and holds the belief that their training for full contact UFC fights is as close as you can get to actual combat without breaking the law. so in a sense BJJ is a substitute for actual combat. aikido in contrast, the way the founder taught was not about fighting at all. Yes Ueshiba was a martial artist but his art was not a fighting art it was an art of harmonizing with another human being with body movement. i would say its very much like a martial dance. Ueshiba saw his art as a form of mystic experience. He said that the movements are an expression of the universe. aikido is not a substitute it is what it is. the movements do not aim to be anything other than what they are. the same could be said of Zen style archery. the art is the stylistic draw, breath and release of the arrow. you cannot complain that Zen archery sucks because there are no cams on the bow, they dont wear camo and they dont know how to set up a tree stand. its not meant to. no one is going into the wood to hunt for deer with a Yumi and Ya. the beauty is in the simplicity of Draw, breath, release. nothing more.
however this is where the comparison ends because Kyudo practitioners have no illusions of hunting or of fighting with their bows. while many aikido practitioners mistakenly think they are training for a street fight or that aikido can be used for self defense. this is not a failure on the part of Ueshiba or his art. it is a failure on the part of students for misunderstanding the founders intentions. it is possible that under the pressure of other arts making claims of self defense effectiveness that teachers of Aikido began making those same claims. i would say aikido is not street effective and was never ment to be so. However the predecessor of aikido that being Daito Ryu, it could be argued was of a more combative aim. so from a Daito ryu perspective these earlier techniques may have been effective during their time and place in history. any modern street effectiveness seen in aikido is merely a carry over of Daito ryu into Aikido.
Ueshiba was a religious man that believed in the mystical. his art was an expression of this. i think he would laugh at the concept of aikido as street effective and say no no no you totally misunderstood everything i ever said.
to quote...
"Aikido is not a technique to fight with or defeat and enemy. it is a way to reconcile the world and make human beings one family"

 

[Steve]

i agree with spinedoc. i will extrapolate on it with my own beliefs about aikido. these are my own ideas and i know many will judge it as incorrect or heresy. the video posted about the failings of aikido shows a common belief that aikido is a horrible martial art. but that is judging a fish on how well it can climb a tree. in my opinion aikido is not like any other martial art. the commentator points out failure in aikido because it does not have competition or resisting opponents. my response is that aikido is perfect as it is, for what it is. other arts like karate and BJJ are substitutes for actual combat. i will focus on BJJ. BJJ is a competitive form of grappling. the training is with resistant partners and holds the belief that their training for full contact UFC fights is as close as you can get to actual combat without breaking the law. so in a sense BJJ is a substitute for actual combat. aikido in contrast, the way the founder taught was not about fighting at all. Yes Ueshiba was a martial artist but his art was not a fighting art it was an art of harmonizing with another human being with body movement. i would say its very much like a martial dance. Ueshiba saw his art as a form of mystic experience. He said that the movements are an expression of the universe. aikido is not a substitute it is what it is. the movements do not aim to be anything other than what they are. the same could be said of Zen style archery. the art is the stylistic draw, breath and release of the arrow. you cannot complain that Zen archery sucks because there are no cams on the bow, they dont wear camo and they dont know how to set up a tree stand. its not meant to. no one is going into the wood to hunt for deer with a Yumi and Ya. the beauty is in the simplicity of Draw, breath, release. nothing more.
however this is where the comparison ends because Kyudo practitioners have no illusions of hunting or of fighting with their bows. while many aikido practitioners mistakenly think they are training for a street fight or that aikido can be used for self defense. this is not a failure on the part of Ueshiba or his art. it is a failure on the part of students for misunderstanding the founders intentions. it is possible that under the pressure of other arts making claims of self defense effectiveness that teachers of Aikido began making those same claims. i would say aikido is not street effective and was never ment to be so. However the predecessor of aikido that being Daito Ryu, it could be argued was of a more combative aim. so from a Daito ryu perspective these earlier techniques may have been effective during their time and place in history. any modern street effectiveness seen in aikido is merely a carry over of Daito ryu into Aikido.
Ueshiba was a religious man that believed in the mystical. his art was an expression of this. i think he would laugh at the concept of aikido as street effective and say no no no you totally misunderstood everything i ever said.

In zen archery, does an arrow leave a bow and travel to a target?

 

[hoshin1600]

In zen archery, does an arrow leave a bow and travel to a target?

the arrow flys. but the target is not the target. the aim is not the target, the aim is the harmony within. the bail of hay on the other end is only to stop the flight. makes it easier to find and retrieve the arrow. in many kyudo practice halls the hay bail is only a few feet from the archer.

 

[drop bear]

Hanzou, you also have to understand, Ueshiba was not about fighting....Aikido is NOT about fighting...which is what so many people still keep missing. Almost every Aikido practitioner I know says that they don't care about at all about the argument of whether or not Aikido is effective or not, because they don't ever plan on fighting. Aikido is different for different people. For me, it's about relaxation, stress relief, flexibility, and connecting with other peaceful, like minded people. That's all I care about. I've studied other arts, if I am ever forced to fight, whatever I do will end up probably being a combination of my military training, other martial arts, and maybe a little Aikido. But I don't care about fighting.

Not saying that other martial artists don't have different goals....but I go to Aikido Seminars all over the US, and have trained with all kinds of Aikido practitioners, both high ranking, and not high ranking...and I cannot recall a single person...ever, ever saying that they were training Aikido to be a better fighter. Not once. Just keep that in mind...

Wait a sec. The video this thread is based on.

What message is that putting out?

 

[Jenna]

While I certainly agree that creators of MA systems have a bit of an ego creating their styles, my point is that Ueshiba probably never intended his style to be taught to amateur or beginning martial artists. If that's the case, then you have generations of Aikidoka misinterpreting the system.

Also, an advanced grappler would fill many of the shortcomings of the art.

Your first point, generation of Aikidoka misinterpreting.. yes.. I know this to be true. Though I do not know how you mean it exactly, and but for me is not a matter of technical ability or inability rather a misapplication.. like a utilisation in a manner of trying to win; trying to beat a person.. with that mind set Aikido is ineffective.. why? Because it is doing a job is not designed to do.. that job is better designed for edged blade, claw hammer or a gun depending upon your own proclivities.. so maybe you can disagree with me agreeing with you and but I agree with you disagreeing with me

And your second point.. is your interpretation of shortcomings I would take up.. if I apply my own Aikido philosophy to your art, I could -were I of the mind to - see "shortcoming" because you have sought to control your opponent by application of greater torquing leverage or strike power than he can bear.. and but I am not of that mind to see that as shortcoming just because it is not what I would do.. and so for me your art is your art.. I like that you do what I do not do.. that is good with me.. Conversely.. you look at my art and see is full of holes by your definition of effective.. and so naturally you are a helpful sort and you genuinely want to help.. that is it yes? You have seen ineffective Aikido or maybe experience it first hand.. yes me too.. all over.. I am not the advocate for all of Aikido and because is just tickling games.. Anyway I cannot, nor do I wish to prove any thing.. just giving you my 2c.. me I have not come up shorthanded when it come to fighting for keeps.. I like to fight and not dick around when I fight.. I cannot nor would I speak for any body else who do what look like Aikido.. is just my opinion..

 

[jobo]

i agree with spinedoc. i will extrapolate on it with my own beliefs about aikido. these are my own ideas and i know many will judge it as incorrect or heresy. the video posted about the failings of aikido shows a common belief that aikido is a horrible martial art. but that is judging a fish on how well it can climb a tree. in my opinion aikido is not like any other martial art. the commentator points out failure in aikido because it does not have competition or resisting opponents. my response is that aikido is perfect as it is, for what it is. other arts like karate and BJJ are substitutes for actual combat. i will focus on BJJ. BJJ is a competitive form of grappling. the training is with resistant partners and holds the belief that their training for full contact UFC fights is as close as you can get to actual combat without breaking the law. so in a sense BJJ is a substitute for actual combat. aikido in contrast, the way the founder taught was not about fighting at all. Yes Ueshiba was a martial artist but his art was not a fighting art it was an art of harmonizing with another human being with body movement. i would say its very much like a martial dance. Ueshiba saw his art as a form of mystic experience. He said that the movements are an expression of the universe. aikido is not a substitute it is what it is. the movements do not aim to be anything other than what they are. the same could be said of Zen style archery. the art is the stylistic draw, breath and release of the arrow. you cannot complain that Zen archery sucks because there are no cams on the bow, they dont wear camo and they dont know how to set up a tree stand. its not meant to. no one is going into the wood to hunt for deer with a Yumi and Ya. the beauty is in the simplicity of Draw, breath, release. nothing more.
however this is where the comparison ends because Kyudo practitioners have no illusions of hunting or of fighting with their bows. while many aikido practitioners mistakenly think they are training for a street fight or that aikido can be used for self defense. this is not a failure on the part of Ueshiba or his art. it is a failure on the part of students for misunderstanding the founders intentions. it is possible that under the pressure of other arts making claims of self defense effectiveness that teachers of Aikido began making those same claims. i would say aikido is not street effective and was never ment to be so. However the predecessor of aikido that being Daito Ryu, it could be argued was of a more combative aim. so from a Daito ryu perspective these earlier techniques may have been effective during their time and place in history. any modern street effectiveness seen in aikido is merely a carry over of Daito ryu into Aikido.
Ueshiba was a religious man that believed in the mystical. his art was an expression of this. i think he would laugh at the concept of aikido as street effective and say no no no you totally misunderstood everything i ever said.
to quote...
"Aikido is not a technique to fight with or defeat and enemy. it is a way to reconcile the world and make human beings one family"

i agree with spinedoc. i will extrapolate on it with my own beliefs about aikido. these are my own ideas and i know many will judge it as incorrect or heresy. the video posted about the failings of aikido shows a common belief that aikido is a horrible martial art. but that is judging a fish on how well it can climb a tree. in my opinion aikido is not like any other martial art. the commentator points out failure in aikido because it does not have competition or resisting opponents. my response is that aikido is perfect as it is, for what it is. other arts like karate and BJJ are substitutes for actual combat. i will focus on BJJ. BJJ is a competitive form of grappling. the training is with resistant partners and holds the belief that their training for full contact UFC fights is as close as you can get to actual combat without breaking the law. so in a sense BJJ is a substitute for actual combat. aikido in contrast, the way the founder taught was not about fighting at all. Yes Ueshiba was a martial artist but his art was not a fighting art it was an art of harmonizing with another human being with body movement. i would say its very much like a martial dance. Ueshiba saw his art as a form of mystic experience. He said that the movements are an expression of the universe. aikido is not a substitute it is what it is. the movements do not aim to be anything other than what they are. the same could be said of Zen style archery. the art is the stylistic draw, breath and release of the arrow. you cannot complain that Zen archery sucks because there are no cams on the bow, they dont wear camo and they dont know how to set up a tree stand. its not meant to. no one is going into the wood to hunt for deer with a Yumi and Ya. the beauty is in the simplicity of Draw, breath, release. nothing more.
however this is where the comparison ends because Kyudo practitioners have no illusions of hunting or of fighting with their bows. while many aikido practitioners mistakenly think they are training for a street fight or that aikido can be used for self defense. this is not a failure on the part of Ueshiba or his art. it is a failure on the part of students for misunderstanding the founders intentions. it is possible that under the pressure of other arts making claims of self defense effectiveness that teachers of Aikido began making those same claims. i would say aikido is not street effective and was never ment to be so. However the predecessor of aikido that being Daito Ryu, it could be argued was of a more combative aim. so from a Daito ryu perspective these earlier techniques may have been effective during their time and place in history. any modern street effectiveness seen in aikido is merely a carry over of Daito ryu into Aikido.
Ueshiba was a religious man that believed in the mystical. his art was an expression of this. i think he would laugh at the concept of aikido as street effective and say no no no you totally misunderstood everything i ever said.
to quote...
"Aikido is not a technique to fight with or defeat and enemy. it is a way to reconcile the world and make human beings one family"

but this is just the same old hackneyed , doesn't work on the street argument that gets thrown at all tma, well yes they do, its all dependent on who your are up against, not that it happens on the street. If you are up against a bigger strong adversary, them all styles will struggle, a style that is focussed on speed and using the movement of the other guy as a weapon for your use, will struggle less

 

[JP3]

Action needs emotional content.

Maybe, maybe not.

"We are the Borg." comes to mind.