Aikido.. The reality?

[isshinryuronin]

You are talking about the Taiji system 13 postures.

1. Peng (ward-off)
2. Lu (roll-back)
3. Chi (press)
4. An (push)
5. Tsai (pull-down)
6. Lieh (split)
7. Chou (elbow strike)
8. Kao (shoulder strike)
9. Chin (advance)
10. Tui (retreat)
11. Ku (look left)
12. Pan (look right)
13. Ting (center)

Thanks for the clarification. The last five were termed the "5 steps" in my source. Those, plus the 8 principles = 13, as you noted. How is this relevant to an Okinawan stylist? One of the oldest, and widespread, kata is "Seisan" (of Chinese origin, though much changed as it made the rounds across Okinawa) which is said to refer to the number 13. One theory has it that a root form of Seisan kata embodied these 13 elements, and thus the name. An interesting story.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Thanks for the clarification. The last five were termed the "5 steps" in my source. Those, plus the 8 principles = 13, as you noted. How is this relevant to an Okinawan stylist? One of the oldest, and widespread, kata is "Seisan" (of Chinese origin, though much changed as it made the rounds across Okinawa) which is said to refer to the number 13. One theory has it that a root form of Seisan kata embodied these 13 elements, and thus the name. An interesting story.

The concern that I have is the last 5 principles:

1. Chin (advance)
2. Tui (retreat)
3. Ku (look left)
4. Pan (look right)
5. Ting (center)

It's just common sense, You move forward, move backward, look at your left, look at your right, remain center. It's pretty much like you go to church and the preacher tells you that you should love your parents, and you should not steal.

Believe it or not, I have seen one workshop that a Taiji instructor just teach how to be "center".

IMO, the last 5 principles are too abstract to have any combat value.

 

[drop bear]

Do we have any Aikido clip that 2 persons wrestle against each other?

There is some aikijitsu out there and some obviously rehearsed boxer vs stuff.

Oh. And when people say "yeah man we do sparring at our club" this is what you envisaged right?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

There is some aikijitsu out there and some obviously rehearsed boxer vs stuff.

Oh. And when people say "yeah man we do sparring at our club" this is what you envisaged right?

So to apply force in one direction, when your opponent resists, you reverse your force, and apply your force in the opposite direction is commonly used in the Aikido system.

But you don't always need to use aiki to apply this strategy.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Anyone familiar with this guy or with what he's doing?

 

[isshinryuronin]

The concern that I have is the last 5 principles:

1. Chin (advance)
2. Tui (retreat)
3. Ku (look left)
4. Pan (look right)
5. Ting (center)

It's just common sense, You move forward, move backward, look at your left, look at your right, remain center. It's pretty much like you go to church and the preacher tells you that you should love your parents, and you should not steal.

Believe it or not, I have seen one workshop that a Taiji instructor just teach how to be "center".

IMO, the last 5 principles are too abstract to have any combat value.

Instead of "look" left and right, think of step left and right, sidestepping the opponent and working angles (I learned these as the 5 steps.) This interpretation makes more sense, especially in terms of fighting. But I agree, it's just common sense to us, but maybe was a more novel idea hundreds of years ago.

As for "centering," I read it as focusing in on your dan tien, the center of your body and source of qi. And/or perhaps rooting your stance into the ground as you draw in towards your center, similar to the Sam Chien (Sanchin) form. This is another of the oldest katas and considered by many to be the most fundamental. Or we can see it as controlling the center, a very important and useful concept in combat.

Whatever those old masters meant, we can spin these things in a way relevant to us, look at them from different angles, and use them as starting points to analyze our art, or to at least remind us of concepts that we can actually use.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Whatever those old masters meant, we can spin these things in a way relevant to us, look at them from different angles, and use them as starting points to analyze our art, or to at least remind us of concepts that we can actually use.

Both Chinese wrestling and Aikido are throwing art.

Chinese wrestling uses the following principles. What principles does the Aikido system use?

撕(Si) - Tearing
崩(Beng) - Cracking
捅(Tong) - Striking push
褪(tun) - Hand pushing
肘(Zhou) - Elbow pressing
蓋(Gai) - Covering hands
攞(Lou)- Pulling hands
搖(Yao) - Body-shaking hands
捯(Dao) - Reverse arm-holding
抖(Dou) – Shaking
分(Fen) - Separate hands
掖(Ye) - Hand tucking
引(Yin) - Arm guiding
捧(Peng) - Arm raising
架(Jia) - Elbow Locking
圈(Quan) – Under hook
抄(Chao) - Over hook
抹(Mo) – Wiping
偏(Pian) – Head circling
夾(Jia) – Clamping head
摘(Zai) – Helmet removing
摀(Wu) – Face covering
速(Su) – Forehead push
墬(Zhui) - Sticking drop
撈 (Lao) – Leg seize
環(Huan) – Neck surrounding
托(Tuo) – Chin pushing
封(Feng) – Throat/waist blocking
撒(Sa) – Casting
飄(Piao) - Floating hand

Here is 飄(Piao) - Floating hand.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Will you consider this throw to be more aiki like?

Not in that execution. The body structure doesn't fit. There appears to be a lot of "shove" in that, where the power is coming from an arm, not the body. And he's off-balance (I think) at the midpoint. That latter part seems intentional, but doesn't fit with my concept of aiki.

Of course, that doesn't mean there's necessarily anything wrong with it. Just doesn't fit the term.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Anyone familiar with this guy or with what he's doing?

I don't know, but that boxer (if boxer he was) wasn't using any power at all, so the Aikidoka was just standing and taking the punches. Hard to tell if he'd be able to do anything against someone delivering punches with power, but his lack of respect for the light punches suggests he hasn't spent much time working against power.

 

[drop bear]

So to apply force in one direction, when your opponent resists, you reverse your force, and apply your force in the opposite direction is commonly used in the Aikido system.

But you don't always need to use aiki to apply this strategy.

Yeah. I don't know if aiki is just good timing or magic.

 

[Deleted member 39746]

There is some aikijitsu out there and some obviously rehearsed boxer vs stuff.

Oh. And when people say "yeah man we do sparring at our club" this is what you envisaged right?

To be fair for that point, it looks like they took out the full speed and reistance part of the paired kata. If i recall my Japanese martial arts history right, they did paired kata at full speed to practise with. (and if the person had a training weapon there is some incentive to get it right so you dont get your head cracked open) I havent looked into it as far to know, (if)
there is the beggning stage of it, then they ramp it up to full speed. I dont know if they would do the person attacks you without you knowing what in the kata part.

But thats not really sparring as far as i know, no one would call that sparring, sparing is free fighting. Everyone considers sparring free fighting, they may make some safety arrangements or lay down some rules to train a specfic area, but if it becomes too scripted its not really sparring anymore.

Oh i also forgot about step sparring, which is a sort of inbetween free sparring and kata. (no idea how Japanese martial arts would do that one or if its a karate thing TKD took, i only did TKD)


This may have been a rpeated point because i by far have not read any reply here.

 

[jobo]

Not at all. There is no requirement for me to believe something without evidence. That isn't duchey. That is critical thinking.

It is actually duchey not to provide evidence and instead rely on emotional attacks.

Here is how the burden of proof works and why it is fundamental to understanding how things work.

there a sliding scale on what burden, the burden of proof imposes, dependent on context,

in science it's on s
sigma significance, that to what number in a million is there a possibility you may be incorrect, sigma 5 being the usual level of proof

to beyond reasonable doubt, as used in criminal cases, which is far to frequently wrong to be judged as reliable and very inconveniently requires a jury of your peers to esablish

to the balance of probabilities, which mostly depends on people making an informed decision to believe your version of events or not

to the general way of believing what people tell you untill they turn out to be a fibber as it doesnt really matter much at all where they went for their holidays

you cant really insist on either of the first two in social interactions, unless you are actually disputing a scientific fact or have a jury handy(and number three is difficult as it requires you to be impartial , which you clearly are not and is a good way to loose friends) unless you playing silly games, they are generally impossible standards to meet and the person, in this case you, knows that. so proof will always be lacking, so they are always correct, there is indeed no proof, to that impossible standard

 

[drop bear]

there a sliding scale on what burden, the burden of proof imposes, dependent on context,

in science it's on s
sigma significance, that to what number in a million is there a possibility you may be incorrect, sigma 5 being the usual level of proof

to beyond reasonable doubt, as used in criminal cases, which is far to frequently wrong to be judged as reliable and very inconveniently requires a jury of your peers to esablish

to the balance of probabilities, which mostly depends on people making an informed decision to believe your version of events or not

to the general way of believing what people tell you untill they turn out to be a fibber as it doesnt really matter much at all where they went for their holidays

you cant really insist on either of the first two in social interactions, unless you are actually disputing a scientific fact or have a jury handy(and number three is difficult as it requires you to be impartial , which you clearly are not and is a good way to loose friends) unless you playing silly games, they are generally impossible standards to meet and the person, in this case you, knows that. so proof will always be lacking, so they are always correct, there is indeed no proof, to that impossible standard

Until it is a consistent standard of an organisation charging money for a service they claim to provide.

I am pretty sure then I can expect something other than marketing.

 

[drop bear]

To be fair for that point, it looks like they took out the full speed and reistance part of the paired kata. If i recall my Japanese martial arts history right, they did paired kata at full speed to practise with. (and if the person had a training weapon there is some incentive to get it right so you dont get your head cracked open) I havent looked into it as far to know, (if)
there is the beggning stage of it, then they ramp it up to full speed. I dont know if they would do the person attacks you without you knowing what in the kata part.

But thats not really sparring as far as i know, no one would call that sparring, sparing is free fighting. Everyone considers sparring free fighting, they may make some safety arrangements or lay down some rules to train a specfic area, but if it becomes too scripted its not really sparring anymore.

Oh i also forgot about step sparring, which is a sort of inbetween free sparring and kata. (no idea how Japanese martial arts would do that one or if its a karate thing TKD took, i only did TKD)


This may have been a rpeated point because i by far have not read any reply here.

The point is sparring or resistance gets used a bit to try and convey a meaning that may not necessarily be true.

They are cat fishing.

 

[jobo]

Until it is a consistent standard of an organisation charging money for a service they claim to provide.

I am pretty sure then I can expect something other than marketing.

that unfortunely most of them, ma or otherwise, marketing and reality seldom match, in my exsperiance

you could of course take them to court for false representation, which would then put the onus on them to supply proof to a legal standard, the fact that this doesnt seem to happen all that often perhaps means the express claims are being met, it's the implied ones that are commonly the issue, in the service industry generally

in the mean time you can carry on building strawmen and demanding proof that's impossible to suppy on an internet forum

 

[drop bear]

that unfortunely most of them, ma or otherwise, marketing and reality seldom match, in my exsperiance

you could of course take them to court for false representation, which would then put the onus on them to supply proof to a legal standard, the fact that this doesnt seem to happen all that often perhaps means the express claims are being met, it's the implied ones that are commonly the issue, in the service industry generally

in the mean time you can carry on building strawmen and demanding proof that's impossible to suppy on an internet forum

I know right. If only Aikido wasn't invisible to cameras then they wouldn't get picked on so much.

 

[BrendanF]

that unfortunely most of them, ma or otherwise, marketing and reality seldom match, in my exsperiance

you could of course take them to court for false representation, which would then put the onus on them to supply proof to a legal standard

lol. Don't give up the day job mate.

 

[jobo]

I know right. If only Aikido wasn't invisible to cameras then they wouldn't get picked on so much.

I wouldnt know, my life has significantly more reward and balance than would allow me to devote much into ploughing through you tube vids to find out. added to which I'm really not that interested in doing so, I'd find it a bind if someone was paying me

absence of evidence is not however evidence of absence,

as discussed the burden of proof is your yours, to support statements you make, not on me to prove you wrong

 

[drop bear]

I wouldnt know, my life has significantly more reward and balance than would allow me to devote much into ploughing through you tube vids to find out. added to which I'm really not that interested in doing so, I'd find it a bind if someone was paying me

absence of evidence is not however evidence of absence,

as discussed the burden of proof is your yours, to support statements you make, not on me to prove you wrong

Time and effort is the major factor here.


The thing is from a practical stand point the absence of evidence is evidence of absence is a pretty good rule of thumb when looking at martial arts.

Because nobody should be forced to buy in, and especially buy in for years. To find out if the martial art does what it claims.

We do sparring but you just can't see it. Is the practical equivalent of we don't do sparring. Ok they might. But why waste time finding out?

 

[jobo]

Time and effort is the major factor here.


The thing is from a practical stand point the absence of evidence is evidence of absence is a pretty good rule of thumb when looking at martial arts.

Because nobody should be forced to buy in, and especially buy in for years. To find out if the martial art does what it claims.

We do sparring but you just can't see it. Is the practical equivalent of we don't do sparring. Ok they might. But why waste time finding out?

nobody is forced to buy into anything