Big circles, little circles.

[Dave Humm]

I was wondering if my fellow aikidoists would share their thoughts on this..

(I comment generally)

In our training we may work with big circular movements that 'fit' the circumstances of a 'traditional' training method within the dojo, this environment being with us throughout our training from kyu to dan. Therefore, I think it would be fair to say training in this fashion is a 'norm' for quite a large portion of the Aikido community (I also base that on first hand observations over 16 odd years of practice)

One might describe this as a "flowing" and or "open" form of movement.

What I'd like to know is how people see their aikido in relation to a more 'martial' form. Is the open big circular movement what they consider to be their martial aspect of the discipline or, does one look to scale down the dynamics of their movement thus, be far more direct (one might say "martial") in application ? And if so... Is there a distinction between 'training' and actually 'doing' ?

I come from a mainstream Aikikai background where, I feel very fortunate to have been exposed to both methods of training.. 'hard and soft' might be a good analogy to use however; I have experienced aikido from other sources that don't close the circular movements they use at any time. Whilst utilising those traditional training methods in the dojo, for example; shomen, yokomen, ai-hanmi etc etc movement in this way, very much fits the founder's latter part of his life's ideology for aikido where, it is less martial in intent however; do we feel through our training we have clear distinction between the martial aspect of Aiki (perhaps more akin to the earlier jutsu side) or, are we more focused on the less martial idealistic 'practice' which O-Sensei advocated post WWII ?

I hold slightly conflicting opinion on Aikido which isn't particularly martial. (Tomiki Ryu a side)

In one hand I consider Aikido to be, first and foremost a martial art, furthermore, I do not classify it as "Self defence". I feel the practice of Aikido needs to be focused on tradition without loosing practical application.

On the other hand.. I appreciate that aikidoists may not specifically study aikido for its martial application thus, may not focus their training as such.

Some times this bakes my noodle :)

Look forward to reading your comments and thoughts.

[DexterTCN]

Well there is a whole encyclopaedia's worth here I am sure.

I will add a comment about the chaotic practice of Shodokan randori:- because of the lightning fast attacks and resistance to applications - small circle movements tend to leave uke crumpled in a heap, whereas large circle forms (as such) tend to finish with flowing breakfalls or stretched out pins.

Obviously small circles are more common in such conditions because the attacker is trying to fill in any spaces where you could blend. On the 'positive' side (I put that in quotes because I don't really see it as a negative,) this allows superior (imo) development of timing and rhythm because these are what the uke is not giving you - so you must learn them through failure. And of course it comes to the stage where every movement is an opporchancity to blend...so controlling ma-ai suddenly becomes important.

All this and everything else is involved in large/small circular (cough spiral) movements...imo. Situations not styles.

[Dave Humm]

Cheers for that Dex..

I do agree that large circular (as you say spiral) movements are entirely applicable in certain circumstances in Aikido, I'm not completely convinced however, that we are given a clear distinction between what we do on the mat, when we train and, an understanding of a "martial" application where one could not expect to get the (even limited) amount of co-operation from our opponent. I would go so far as to say that, I've often got an impression from *some, that what their doing (big turns, large circles and spirals etc) is the be all and end all of their application.

In my experiences of restraining prisoners, I'd be very surprised to see this form of movement ever work on some one other than a co-operative partner.

[timmeh!]

Looking at it from a standpoint of 2 years Shodokan/Tomiki experience, i.e. not much - a simple answer presents itself to my wee pea brain. O'Sensei as a young man was more martial (small circles) - due to experiences in his life and his religious proclivities as he got older molded his art to his personality as time moved on, i.e. more qi based, flowing and bigger circles - or to look at it another way, more artistic.
It's like anything really, the better you get at something the more your body memory kicks in, which in turn frees you up to add in extra flair and be more body aware i.e. what your breath and mind is doing etc.

I'll not continue down the path of the practicalities of which form of Aikido is best in practice with a fully resistant opponent as that particular can of worms has probably been opened before. But then again.... ;)

So Dave, would you say the restraints you've used in the past have been more Shodokan (tomiki)/Yoshinkan based i.e. small circle?

[DexterTCN]

Dave absolutely. (btw you've done 10 years more than me)

But isn't it just (partly) the difference between mat and real life?

By that I mean 2 things:-

Real life people don't attack with shomen-uchi, so 'adapting' to real attacks (or resistance) means the creation of waza is comes in smaller movement because realistically most aikido training attacks are BIG allowing BIG things;

Real life people don't have any decent balance etc anyway, so applications in such circumstances are going to be smaller (circle) because ukemi as such is not an option...merely gravity.

By these I do not mean to imply that it is easy to apply waza in these situations..I am sure you would agree the opposite is probably true up to a point. Merely that once you are passed the 'opening' and are in a position to apply.

Having said that...ask 100 people and get 100 answers on this one :D

[philipsmith]

I was told once that you train with big movements so that you develop you hip/body movement because that's where your power is generated.
As time goes by you should learn to develop that same power with small or even very small circles.

Hope that helps.

[Dave Humm]

timmeh
"So Dave, would you say the restraints you've used in the past have been more Shodokan (tomiki)/Yoshinkan based i.e. small circle?"

I dunno mate purely because I've never studied either of those forms of aikido. What I will say however, my application was 1000 fold more martial in application than i'd ever consider appropriate for the mat on an uke.

Dexter
"Real life people don't attack with shomen-uchi, so 'adapting' to real attacks (or resistance) means the creation of waza is comes in smaller movement because realistically most aikido training attacks are BIG allowing BIG things;"

Dex.. thats my point mate.. how many students really acknowledge this through their training and understand the vast difference between co-operative practice and martial application ?


philipsmith
"I was told once that you train with big movements so that you develop you hip/body movement because that's where your power is generated.
As time goes by you should learn to develop that same power with small or even very small circles."

I think I've heard you say that on the mat Phil, I can't disagree with the principle however, I have a *problem with with the latter, where students don't "do" their aikido in a martial sense.

*see my first post for my thoughts

Quoting your father for a moment "Martial mind" I think this sums up what I see as missing in some areas of aikido, Aikido is practiced as an ideolistic subject based upon the founder's concepts post WWII and perhaps not, as a 'discipline' which ultimately involves direct physical contact where intent is martial in orientation.

[aikiMac]

Big movements are a learning tool. Easier to see what your teacher is doing when he makes a big circle. For the same reason my teachers often lift up the legs of their hakama so I can see their feet.

Aside from that, I don’t think there is a universal answer to the question, “Big or small?” You might as well ask me if a punch is better than a kick. I think it depends on the situation. My thinking is that sometimes, for tactical reasons, a big movement would best diffuse my attacker’s energy, but sometimes a small movement would be better.

What do I care either way? Just do what is appropriate for the energy given to you and the circumstances that you are in.

[Dave Humm]

Just do what is appropriate for the energy given to you and the circumstances that you are in.Naturally I agree 100% however what *if* an aikidoist doesn't know any different only ever uses "big" aikido and, never scales down the dimensions of the circular/spiral movements that would be far more appropriate when the speed or intent of an 'attack' is greater than appropriate for larger movement.


My specific point is this... Have some schools lost the "martial art" plot a little ?


I look at aikido this way, when the founder was a young man his aiki was very martial, as his life progressed his aiki became less martial and more a "way" (do) of training in aiki.


Unfortunately we as contemporary students don't have the benefit of having experienced the circumstances and times that shaped aikido as we know it today. Thus, I genuinely feel there is a community of aikidoists who aren’t being taught a martial art, yes they are learning aikido but is it martial in application ?

Aikido is somewhat of a paradox. It is born from Koryu tradition but in our lifetime(s) it is taught with peace, love and harmony as a back bone to its foundation.


Now, please don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not questioning the ethics behind the integration of these concepts in to what is a physical budo however, I am concerned when, what should be a martial discipline, is applied with those concepts at the *forefront*


Frankly I've seen some absolute crap taught in the name of aikido, one supposed instructor from West Yorkshire instructing his students to physically say "thank you" (during) each and every time one executed a technique, when I enquired as to the reason for this, I was told "Aikido is a polite art"


FFS !


Polite my arse, I'm going to give absolutely no quarter to whom ever creates a situation where I deem it appropriate to apply aiki technique. <shakes head in disbelief>


Getting back to my point, Aikido is a martial discipline, as such that involves (by definition of "martial") a degree of physical sometimes aggressive interaction (controlled of course) which should be trained for in a realistic (there I've gone and said that word lol) fashion.


I recall the very first time I took a class of Chiba Sensei.. Prior to that I thought I'd got a grasp upon the handle known as aikido. How wrong could I have been !


Chiba Sensei was all over his uke, his aikido was both graceful to watch (and sometimes not) yet it was probably the most martial I've seen ever, it left me with a lasting impression as you can probably tell.


Whilst I'm not suggesting we should all be clones of Chiba sensei, if there was a greater emphasis on being martial, I think we'd have a far better 'martial' art.


Thanks for your replies BTW :)

[aikiMac]

My specific point is this... Have some schools lost the "martial art" plot a little ?
Yes.

[Virtuous]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Humm
My specific point is this... Have some schools lost the "martial art" plot a little ?


Yes.


I couldnt agree more with you both.

[Dave Humm]

Funny because I was only talking about this very subject yesterday with a student who stated he thought (in general) most 3rd/4th generation instructors today, are only teaching the aikido of the founder akin to his later part of his life and not, specifically a martial form of aiki.

Quite astute really

The issue becomes more evident if you have the opportunity to train with instructors who, were students of the founder when he was more martial in orientation, their teachings reflect that approach. Unfortunately, those valuable people are becoming less and less. I'll be kandid and say, in the not too distant future we'll have a situation where we are learning aikido from sources which have never had any direct contact with the Ueshiba family (regardless of style)

Although this is possible now, at least somewhere down the chain there is a link that connects to a respective hombu and eventually back to the source however, I do shudder at the thought of loosing all traces of the martial aspects of aikido... Then IMHO it just becomes a form of dance.

Personaly I feel as time marches on, we need to ensure we are retaining the martial part of our martial art otherwise time to hang up the hakama and do somthing else. - But that's just me of course. :)

[aikiMac]

Personaly I feel as time marches on, we need to ensure we are retaining the martial part of our martial art otherwise time to hang up the hakama and do somthing else. - But that's just me of course. :)
Yep, that's just you. Well, maybe not just you. But it's not something that bothers me. I say, if you want to fight other people then take up boxing or JJ or escrima or wing chun or whatever, but don't take up aikido. That's not what aikido is for. Aikido is for fighting yourself, not for fighting other people. And, may I add, that is it's greatest strength, and what makes it more useful than other martial arts.

[aikiscotsman]

THe one thing i would add here about circles is that yes certain traning will decide on the size of the circle or the level of trainig, but true Aikido in its highest form or Takemusu Aiki is no longer a circle but sharp line that pierces stright through your opponent ie 'morotadori kokyu nage kino nagare' is such a small movement because it appears to be a straight attack.

[kiaiki]

I have only one guide - check out the lineage of your sensei and see when he/his sensei was training with O Sensei, Shioda, Chiba etc. It seems that some of our UK clubs use the 'ki' argument to claim some kind of superiority for softer and slower styles that may bear no resemblance to O Sensei in old age. Good news for the rest of us, there's ki employed in the harder styles too! It's just the case that small circles used at high speed need a uke to respond at high speed or suffer injury. It all requires a decent level of fitness. Perhaps this is why some (unfit?) instructors prefer large circles, no atemi and no weapons training (certainly no freestyle live tanto etc). When they do this they cheat their students out of much of what Aikido is all about, including aspects of their beloved 'ki development'. As a form of spiritual development, all styles of Aikido are equally capable of this if taught by an instructor well versed in O Sensei's teachings. As a martial art, some are woefully inadequate. I admit I've seen a 'full on' tanto attack dealt with very well by a softer 'ki aikido' sensei, but only once, in response to a single attack. I've seen it at Shudokan (Yoshinkan) classes every week, against repeated and sustained attacks with a live tanto (sorry to those of you who prefer a rubber sausage).

[DexterTCN]

I... attacks with a live tanto (sorry to those of you who prefer a rubber sausage).

It's nothing to do with sausages.

It's to do with having legal insurance so your club can operate in a building and be recognised by an authority and not have to pay 3 thousand pounds a month in extras and be open to millions of pounds in lawsuits. Sausages are in the mind of the complacent. You think you could avoid a sausage? I know some 5th kyus that would rapidly educate you :)

[Dave Humm]

Yep, that's just you. Well, maybe not just you. But it's not something that bothers me. I say, if you want to fight other people then take up boxing or JJ or escrima or wing chun or whatever, but don't take up aikido. That's not what aikido is for. Aikido is for fighting yourself, not for fighting other people. And, may I add, that is it's greatest strength, and what makes it more useful than other martial arts.So what your intimating then... above all else.. Aikido irrespective of many factors isn't a martial art ? ...."if you want to fight other people then take up boxing or JJ or escrima or wing chun or whatever, but don't take up aikido"


This thread isn't and never has been about picking fights, or any other connotation of premeditated intent, it's a discussion concentrating on *If* we are loosing the martial aspect of our discipline, nothing more.


I've today returned from two days at the UKA annual summer school, Sugiwara Sensei being the guest instructor from Hombu Dojo. I didn't see any aspect of his aikido (or any of the Shidoin's for that matter) that indicated that "AIKIDO" was an internal struggle, actually most of what was being taught was 'applied aikido' Martial first and foremost.


As I stated in one of my earlier posts, I really don't have a problem with students (and that includes me to some degree) who wish to study a tradition and are less interested in the practicalities of their actions, if these people are honest with themselves and don’t purport this study as being a fighting art.. Fine however, and getting back to the thrust of my first post, I am seeing aikido being practiced that, push comes to shove, isn't worth the effort of the student.

[Dave Humm]

It's nothing to do with sausages.

It's to do with having legal insurance so your club can operate in a building and be recognised by an authority and not have to pay 3 thousand pounds a month in extras and be open to millions of pounds in lawsuits. Sausages are in the mind of the complacent. You think you could avoid a sausage? I know some 5th kyus that would rapidly educate you :)
Agreed..
Anyone (aikidoists) using live edged weapons dull or sharp are operating outside of their insurance policy. Assuming it's BAB insurance issued through Perkin Slade. However, even insurances issued through other agencies don't cover the use of 'edged' weapons without some hefty additional premium.
As a student of Iaido I cannot practice with a sword of *any* description within the realms of an insurance policy without first joining the BKA and... If I'm seen to be using a sword within an aikido class neither of my insurance policies are valid.

[kiaiki]

Oh dear, another can of worms. I have also practised Iaido, with an edged weapon, under Musashi UK, Muso Jidiken Eishen Ryu, some years ago. I believe they still do, as cutting straw bales (tamo shagiri?) is part of the learning process and curriculum. The BKA teach Kendo, so naturally their focus is different from pure Iai - presumably this is why their insurance precludes live blades. As for Aikido, Shudokan uses UKMAF for insurance. (The founder of Shudokan was afounder member of BAB, but there was the usual political splintering.) Edged weapons are introduced gradually - wooden tanto first, then steel, then 'live' steel tanto for Dan gradings. No need for personal insults about the rubber sausage - Shudokan dan grades evade a live tanto wielded by other Dan grades in fully committed and random attacks, so please don't insult them by assuming a 5th Kyu could strike them. Although I agree that the weapon's construction is irrelevant to the technique, live blades do focus the mind wonderfully. No need for ink pens to test strikes - blood would soon expose poor training and technique. Please don't atack me personally with this rubbish - join a Shudokan class and learn. Then criticise. There are clubs in the UK, Malaysia, Poland, Germany, Australia etc.. If that's no good, look for Yoshinkan - a similar style.

[kiaiki]

Cant' believe what I just picked up from reading the posting again!!- Using a sword within an Aikido class is surely THE way to show the roots of all aikido - O Sensei used one all the time to show technique, I'm told. Ok, a bokken may do, but ......AAARGH!! If anyone disagrees with the need to employ a katana then that's their privilege, but I can't see how anyone can claim to train in Aikido without exposure to the traditional weapons against which some of the techniques were designed to operate.

If any instructor feels vulnerable to prosecution then get students to sign an agreement that when live blades are used they recognise that they are uninsured and at risk and agree to those risks. This should surely take care of accidental injury. I'm sure some solicitor somewhere can advise the BAB on the wording for this. Cant' believe what I've read, but then I suppose in an age when a teacher can't take kids on a country walk without risk assessments etc etc I can't say I'm totally surprised. As for the dojo, again I would imagine a waiver should take care of it. Can't be sure as we had our own dojo. Don't the BAB offer ANY legal templates to their members?! Of course, I am not legally trained and offer the above as opinion, not advice, and claim no special expertise in such matters, so don't sue me, pretty please, if you use a live tanto and cut someone!!! That would be your decision......hum!

[Dave Humm]

Cant' believe what I just picked up from reading the posting again!!- Using a sword within an Aikido class is surely THE way to show the roots of all aikido - O Sensei used one all the time to show technique, I'm told. Ok, a bokken may do, but ......AAARGH!! If anyone disagrees with the need to employ a katana then that's their privilege, but I can't see how anyone can claim to train in Aikido without exposure to the traditional weapons against which some of the techniques were designed to operate.

If any instructor feels vulnerable to prosecution then get students to sign an agreement that when live blades are used they recognise that they are uninsured and at risk and agree to those risks. This should surely take care of accidental injury. I'm sure some solicitor somewhere can advise the BAB on the wording for this. Cant' believe what I've read, but then I suppose in an age when a teacher can't take kids on a country walk without risk assessments etc etc I can't say I'm totally surprised. As for the dojo, again I would imagine a waiver should take care of it. Can't be sure as we had our own dojo. Don't the BAB offer ANY legal templates to their members?!Let me clarify something for you..

1) Aikido as far as INSURANCE is concerned isn't a live edged martial art.
If you want to use live blades you need ADDITIONAL insurance

2) The BKA ISN'T just a Kendo association (despite what the name suggest) within the BKA (which is the governing body within the UK for both Kendo and Iai...) They incorporate Kendo, Iaido, Kydo.
The BKA does NOT preclude the use of live edged weapons within their insurance policies.. In fact it's quite the opposite.

3) Regardless of what O-Sensei may or may not have done during his life to propergate Aikido, we on the other hand are governed by a set of insurance laws and by-laws that protect us against litigation.

4) Getting any student to sign a "waiver" is as useless as the paper it's written on. if that student dies or is seriously injured, their relatives can seek litigation on thier behalf and, attempt to persue a claim of negligent behaviour on the part of the instructor.. Waviers within UK law are useless. Thats why we have insurance.

5) You wrote
"but I can't see how anyone can claim to train in Aikido without exposure to the traditional weapons against which some of the techniques were designed to operate."
This is nothing but plain ignorance. Aikido is a Sword INFLUANCED discipline. It does not cover the actual use of a Japanese sword. Yes you will see many Aikidoists including myself operate quite effectively with a katana, but that's either because we've trained specifically in seperate sword discipline or, their grasp of AIKIKEN is such that their transition to the actual sword is minimal.

I've said this before several times.. Aikido is NOT as sword art. It is an heavily sword (amongst other weapons) Influanced system.

[kiaiki]

I agree with some of the above, Dave, (except your insult about my own ignorance!) but please let's not get into who is the 'governing body' for what. The BKA has Japanese masters and has a strong UK following. However, it's not the recognised governing body for all other organisations teaching Iai. The Eikoku Roshukai, even though they may use BKA insurance, were quite independent and took authority from Iwata in Japan. The focus is quite different. (Am I out of date, as I don't currently practice Iai?) For your information, O Sensei trained extensively in Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, which uses the katana with great frequency in illustrating the ORIGIN of unarmed techniques. Try to catch a UK demo of Daito Ryu by Okabayashi Sensei and see what I mean - both he and his Uke use live katana. Yoshinkan and Shudokan styles have forms, almost like katas ,which are done empty handed AND with a sword. Too complex to explain in a short posting, but just take it from me that a katana has an active role in styles which you may not have encountered. Incidentally, at no point did I state that Aikido was a sword art, but that we still use the katana in demonstrating the roots of techniques and, in Shudokan, occasionally as a weapon in Uke's hand against which Tori defends.

[Dave Humm]

You entirely misunderstand my point.

See Sport England
http://www.sportengland.org/recognition_of_activities#governing

See the list for Kendo

The BKA is the officially recognised body for the governing of Kendo within the UK, incorporating Iaido and Kyudo.

As such they are the primary source of insurance for the practice of thise disciplines. I'm not suggesting they are the sole organisation for the teaching of Iaido or Kendo because they can be sourced elsewhere.

[kiaiki]

This website seems to put edits back further up the list of posings, so i've put this one in again. I agree with some of the above, Dave, (except your insult about my own ignorance!) but please let's not get into who is the 'governing body' for what. The BKA has Japanese masters and has a strong UK following. However, it's not the recognised governing body for all other organisations teaching Iai. The Eikoku Roshukai, even though they may use BKA insurance, were quite independent and took authority from Iwata in Japan. The focus is quite different. (Am I out of date, as I don't currently practice Iai?) For your information, O Sensei trained extensively in Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu, which uses the katana with great frequency in illustrating the ORIGIN of unarmed techniques. Try to catch a UK demo of Daito Ryu by Okabayashi Sensei and see what I mean - both he and his Uke use live katana. Yoshinkan and Shudokan styles have forms, almost like katas ,which are done empty handed AND with a sword. Too complex to explain in a short posting, but just take it from me that a katana has an active role in styles which you may not have encountered. Incidentally, at no point did I state that Aikido was a sword art, but that we still use the katana in demonstrating the roots of techniques and, in Shudokan, occasionally as a weapon in Uke's hand against which Tori defends. Of course, I would recommend any Aikido instructor to get some training in Iaido or some basic tanto, wakazashi and katana techniques or they would make a very poor trainer of uke's.

[Virtuous]

This thread got slightly derailed.

As for the big circle/small circle. I use both. If the attacker is offering alot of energy Ill start cultivating it by using a large circle and once I have it under control the technique spirals into a smaller circle. The only other time we use large circles is with lower kyus.

[Matt_Bernius]

Yep, that's just you. Well, maybe not just you. But it's not something that bothers me. I say, if you want to fight other people then take up boxing or JJ or escrima or wing chun or whatever, but don't take up aikido. That's not what aikido is for. Aikido is for fighting yourself, not for fighting other people. And, may I add, that is it's greatest strength, and what makes it more useful than other martial arts.
Umm.. ok Aikido outsider joining the party:

Aiki. I have a real issue with calling an Aikido a martial art if the above is true. Martial arts are meant for self defense and fighting. If the specific goal of Aikido has become personal development, then it's transformed to something else. And that something else is not a martial art. And the diea of teaching self defense as part of a cirrculumn should be removed as well. Otherwise students are being given a dangerous set of beliefs in their own ability that might fail them at a time when they can't aford it. It's better to not know anything than think you know something.

Exculding the idea that Aikido isn't geared for self defense or fighting, is it possible to change training methodology (or introduce methods) to allow for small, practical circle practice against street techniques? For example could more realistic attacks and defenses be used if both the uki and the defender are moving at slower speed, but remaining in time. Example, the attacker throws street cross and retracts it unless the defender does something to suspend the technique. Thoughts?

- Matt

[Virtuous]

Example, the attacker throws street cross and retracts it unless the defender does something to suspend the technique. Thoughts?


Man, why is it every one assumes the only target you have is the attacking appendage? I mean is it not that obvious?

As for aikido being martial or not... I've practiced Aikijujutsu, Aikijutsu, and, Aikido. To be honest there really isnt much that seperates the three. Mostly it is philosophy and modifications to techniques to accomodate them. It would be hard to argue that daito-ryu isnt martial, and we all know aikido has strong roots in daito-ryu. I mean honestly, it isnt that difficult to go from one mind set to another depending on the application. The nuances the differintiate do from jutsu/jujutsu are not that difficult to adapt to. I honestly believe they should be both. Can you still call it Aikido? I guess it depends on your definition but if any school claims 'self defense' then they most certainly should spend a sufficient amount of time teaching both martial and non martial applications. Ah I get so confused talking about this grey area of aiki.

My personal philosophy is, after you've been training long enough you will have a great understand of the body, its physical limitations, balance manipulation, and other useful things. When you get to this point you can throw the confines of 'this technique' versus 'that technique' out of the window since you can dynamically apply the principals. With that knowledge you can also control the severity of what ever it is you are applying.

[Dave Humm]

Ok... Thanks to the continued replies fellas :)

So I pose my question again with another aspect attached

Do we feel that some schools have lost the "martial" plot a little ?

One answer was "Yes" and I have to agree with it, reading some of the additional replies indicates a similar feeling so, how could we counter act that ?

My thoughts on the matter are quite varied, come controversial. I'll keep off the controversial ones purely because I think it's fair to say I've expressed most of them here before.

From an instructor's point of view I'm enthusiastic about maintaining the traditional facets of Aikido, I am at heart a traditionalist who believes in dojo discipline, etiquette and 'old school' methods of training (most of which can be described as forms)

That said, IMHO students should also be fully taught how to punch effectively, strike with their hands (in various ways) employ their elbows and be conditioned to being punched/struck at with some degree of actual intent.

Problem 1:
Most if not all (purely) contemporary aikido Sensei have no comprehension of effective atemi waza unless their Sensei was either 1st generation IE Abbe/Chiba/Shibarta Sensei for example (to name just three) Unless of course they undertake some form of additional training which includes those skills.

Problem 2:
As a member of an organisation teaching Aikikai I never once received formal instruction in atemi waza other than that of learning how to make the traditional attacks of Shomen uchi, Yokomen uchi etc. And this was never applied on a punch bag to learn what it would feel like, and how to develop those skills effectively. I'm sure that may be the case for many other students regardless of style.

Problem 3:
To my knowledge, physical atemi waza isn't tested in grading syllabus thus another reason why it probably gets neglected.

Opinion based on experience:
As a former prison officer I can say with some conviction (pardon the pun) that it is highly unlikely in a one on one situation; one could get away without having to actually hit one's opponent in some form or another, before an immobilisation could be effectively applied. No I'm not suggesting Aikido techniques must reply upon atemi first however, I have a considerable amount of experience in restraining resisting individuals, and unless I was very lucky to be exactly in the right place at the right time, I was forced to make a controlled strike which would provide me with the opportunity to effect a restraint.

Obviously everything is relative to a given set of unique circumstances however, although I do consider Aikido to be effective, it does lack in practical atemi skills.

[Matt_Bernius]

Man, why is it every one assumes the only target you have is the attacking appendage? I mean is it not that obvious?

Fair point. I was wrinitng as a neophyte and outside observer. I do realize that you don't have to simply work against the attacking appendage. However, in my exposure to Aikido that is typically what the demonstrator did.

Forgive my ignorance, does the large vs. small circle issue come heavily into play when not working with a specific appendage? And is it possible to slow down the randori, while keeping the intent and response realistic in order to practice small circle defenses?

Opinion based on experience:
As a former prison officer I can say with some conviction (pardon the pun) that it is highly unlikely in a one on one situation; one could get away without having to actually hit one's opponent in some form or another, before an immobilisation could be effectively applied. No I'm not suggesting Aikido techniques must reply upon atemi first however, I have a considerable amount of experience in restraining resisting individuals, and unless I was very lucky to be exactly in the right place at the right time, I was forced to make a controlled strike which would provide me with the opportunity to effect a restraint.Again it seems that things come back to the issue of controlling strikes. Any practical manipulation that I've been taught has always been set up by controlled stiking. I have a hard time believing that step can be skipped in most cases (though there are exceptions like casting).

- Matt

[kiaiki]

Absulutely right. Didn't O Sensei say at some point that Aikido was 80% atemi? many wrist locks etc were designed to be applied AFTER a damned good atemi strike (whether a feint or actual contact) and I have to laugh when I see some aikidoka tacking a beginner who doesn't 'know' that he is supposed to be compliant. Yes, we are all compliant as uke's but let's not forget that originally this stuff was meant to work against a strong and committed attack. Pain and/or surprise is required before many of our techniques may be applied to the rigid wrist of an angry man holding a weapon, for example. Big circular hand gestures may be good form, but I have seen many 'traditional aikido' classes where this is the closest they get to atemi and yet tell students that it is practical as self defence (?). I thought we had some pretty good atemi skills in (hard style) Shudokan, and compared to most aikidoka I think we probably had, but apart from those with other MA (karate etc) experience, when it came to joint training a few years ago with other arts such as shorinji kenpo, karate, etc, we were pretty crap in making a good solid punch or kick with the correct timing, distance and balance.

[Virtuous]

and I have to laugh when I see some aikidoka tacking a beginner who doesn't 'know' that he is supposed to be compliant. Yes, we are all compliant as uke's but let's not forget that originally this stuff was meant to work against a strong and committed attack.

I find this very funny as well, even when I do it. You do have to remember that I can make the technique work, but 1 of at least 2 things has to happen;
a. I pound the stew out of you and you dont have the presence of mind to squirm out of the technique OR
b. I take enough of your balance to make the technique work as intended which usually yields a howling uke.

You could also do the technique faster but the other 2 option would yield a greater benifit for the tori.

Either of these arent very desirable in the dojo :D

As for small circle/ big circle for a non attacking appendage, or static appendage. I find small circle works better for static throws, they are quicker and easier to control. This is of course after taking kazushi or applying some pain. Without either of these you might as well not do anything.

[Dave Humm]

Absulutely right. Didn't O Sensei say at some point that Aikido was 80% atemi? The actual quote was 90% but I know where your coming from.

[DexterTCN]

Just goes to show you.

I didn't even know that the Japanese used the percentage system.

[Dave Humm]

I find this very funny as well, even when I do it. You do have to remember that I can make the technique work, but 1 of at least 2 things has to happen;
a. I pound the stew out of you and you dont have the presence of mind to squirm out of the technique OR
b. I take enough of your balance to make the technique work as intended which usually yields a howling uke.

You could also do the technique faster but the other 2 option would yield a greater benifit for the tori.

Either of these arent very desirable in the dojo :D

As for small circle/ big circle for a non attacking appendage, or static appendage. I find small circle works better for static throws, they are quicker and easier to control. This is of course after taking kazushi or applying some pain. Without either of these you might as well not do anything.
Complience is a necessary evil of aikido, the problem is, knowing when NOT to be complient.

Going back again to my first post... I was refering to the size of circular/sprial movement purely because, large circles and big circular movements are only *part* of aikido. remembering from my earlier post, I mentioned that I was seeing student who knew nothing but this kind of movement and expected it to fit in a situation of practicality which, through my personal experiences isn't the case. A basic premiss of Aikido is, the faster the attack the less one has to move to take effect of the kinetic energy being delivered, the slower the attack the more one has to move to make the most of the energy.

[Dave Humm]

Just goes to show you.

I didn't even know that the Japanese used the percentage system.LOL :)

[aikiMac]

[color=black]So what your intimating then... above all else.. Aikido irrespective of many factors isn't a martial art ?
Of course it's a martial art. I'm only intimating what you also said: "... I really don't have a problem with students (and that includes me to some degree) who wish to study a tradition and are less interested in the practicalities of their actions, if these people are honest with themselves and don’t purport this study as being a fighting art."

I agree with your statement.

I sincerely believe that non-fighting-art aikido can be made to work in a fist-fight. But very truly, the moment that I start to believe that I will be getting into fist-fights, I will stop going to the aikido dojo and return to the JJ or muay thai gym, or some such place. That's because aikido is not the "best tool for the job." I consider aikido a martial art, but not a fighting art, and I like it that way. I very much like that aikido is not a fighting art.

[timmeh!]

Complience is a necessary evil of aikido, the problem is, knowing when NOT to be complient.


I think when the technique is almost fully on is the time to be compliant or a squeek pops out of your uke due to a tense limb.

Just as an aside - with the utmost respect Dave it's compliAnt, COMPLIANT !!!!!!!!!!!! - being the age I am it was the last week of corporal punishment and Hitlers evil Uncle was the English teacher - your spelling of compliAnt was the word that caused the pain.... (don't even mention 'separate'). Is there deep seated resentment/anxiety there - possibly, have I let it go, created closure? - aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhh..... ;)
(If you think I'm bad go and spell 'akido' at Freeform - not pretty)

That's because aikido is not the "best tool for the job." I consider aikido a martial art, but not a fighting art, and I like it that way. I very much like that aikido is not a fighting art.

What kind of response is that! I only get a half hour lunch break, I agree, yet disagree, yet can't decide?!.... I could have just let it go as your opinion, but I've sat here trying to come up with an answer/reply... my keyboard is awash and sticky with blood and brains.

The only thing left is the 'traditional' - 'non traditional' argument to rear it's ugly head and I may just go pop.

...the spirit of Basil Faulty is hovering over me today - apologies

[MartialArtsSnob]

Another non-Akido (sorry timmeh, I couldn't resist) martial artist here. I studied Karate for about 10 years or so before coming across Aikido (out of frustration with the local Karate teachers abilities (or lack thereof). What I found was startling. I thought that it was totally silly the way I was being taught to comply, I also thought that the techniques were useless. Then I had an "Aha!” it occurred to me that Aikido was being taught to me from the perspective of principals. This is very different form the approach that I was exposed to. The principals of blending and circular motion were not new to me but in my training thus far I was NEVER able to successfully use them. In a very short time of training in Aikido I was able to see how to use these principals. However, I was still of the opinion that these guys simply could not fight, and for the most part I was right. It took a while to realize that being able to fight was not their intent, embodying these principals was. I did however notice that the guys that were there who studied another art as well were very, very good fighters, much better than people who did one or the other. I then moved on to Tai Chi. The similarities between Tai Chi and Aikido are many, including being taught from principles. I have now come full circle and again study Karate, with what I gained from Aikido is that I can now see much deeper into my karate. In fact, the circles are there too; they are just quite a bit smaller. Taking the circles from big to small is essential to being able to apply them in full speed, full contact sparring. In the end I would have to say that trying to fight with Aikido training alone will take a long, long time, maybe 20 years or so. Figuring out how to fight with karate (and understand the principals on which it was created) will take a long, long time, maybe 20 years or so. I think that studying Aikido as a martial art is probably not the best idea. If you are a lifelong martial artist, NOT studying Aikido as a martial art is probably not the best idea!

[Dave Humm]

I think when the technique is almost fully on is the time to be compliant or a squeek pops out of your uke due to a tense limb.

Just as an aside - with the utmost respect Dave it's compliAnt, COMPLIANT
Jezus man I'll fek off back to school an redo my CSE in English FFS.

[timmeh!]

Jezus man I'll fek off back to school an redo my CSE in English FFS.

You must be old mate, CSEs went out years ago :D

...apologies again, the pedantic, pontificating, hypocritical 'Moley' character who sits opposite me almost got small circled today... psychologists call it 'transference' - I'm blending with it as we speak ;) (pass me big stick)

MartialArtsSnob, your walking a veeeery thiiiiin line- beware, coo on the edge...

<<shouts>>FREEFORM!

[KickChick]

Jezus man I'll fek off back to school an redo my CSE in English FFS.


If you can teach me how to "bake noodles" , I'll offer to tutor you in Spelling :D

Oh Freeform where are you???

Hope that Basil Faulty is no longer in your vicinity timmeh!! :D ;)

Although I took only a few Akido classes .. I'm finding this thread pretyy intresting ;)

[MartialArtsSnob]

MartialArtsSnob, your walking a veeeery thiiiiin line- beware, coo on the edge...

<<shouts>>FREEFORM!

I call them like I see them, besides no martial art has all the answers. I have a great appreciation for Aikido, but saying that you can fight with Aikido after just a few years of study is as bad as saying that a few years of karate will teach you how to grapple. :rolleyes:

[timmeh!]

Hope that Basil Faulty is no longer in your vicinity timmeh!! :D ;)

Although I took only a few Akido classes .. I'm finding this thread pretyy intresting ;)

I'm letting "pretyy" go Kick chick........ ;) Freeform has been informed of 'the other' misspelling....

Moley's gone home - and after thrashing my PC to within an inch of its life with a ring binder I'm feeling very much better thanks! :D

After AikiMac battered my head earlier on and Martialartsnob' comments:
("I have a great appreciation for Aikido, but saying that you can fight with Aikido after just a few years of study is as bad as saying that a few years of karate will teach you how to grapple.")
My own thinking is that I agree with Martialartsnob and AikiMac in so far as I do Aikido so as not to fight, I can see the areas where it's weak, especially without more than at least 5 years+ experience, but that is also it's allure. I've done my fair share of striking arts and know enough to get myself out of trouble, the lure of Aikido was/is that if someone is so unbalanced as to want to attack me I have the capacity to immobilise and restrain without causing too much injury.
The young Machismo's talking about on 'the street' fail to take into account that one punch, kick or whatever, can paralyse or kill - it might be the strike that kills, but it's more likely the concrete the attacker hits his head off as he falls. I'm sure Mr Humm has met a few of those guys in his old line of work.
I'm 6'5'', played rugby form the age of 5 to 18 and am well aware of the damage I can cause another person, which is the other magical lure of Aikido (Shodokan is all I know), Tintin is our Sensei - about 5'6" (and three quarters ;)....), there's another girl there I can pick up with one arm, but on the mat they can both take my balance and throw me round like a rag doll - to me that kind of skill is very appealing and I want to learn more of it.

Martialartsnob, I also agree with and that's why as soon as Freeform hurries up and comes back to Edinburgh I'll be taking his submission fighting class as that's an area I feel I have very little knowledge.

Tim

[DexterTCN]

I'm letting "pretyy" go Kick chick........ ;) Freeform has been informed of 'the other' misspelling....

mis-spelling


Moley's gone home - and after thrashing my PC to within an inch of it's life with a ring binder I'm feeling very much better thanks! :D
its


I'll go away now :)

[timmeh!]

mis-spelling


its


I'll go away now :)

Due to paranoia about spelling... 'misspelling' was checked against the micrasift spillchucker...

Don't know what your saying about the 'its' :confused: :p

This from the guy that shakes the ketchup when the top's off (I'll never stop laughing at that). Blended that day, eh? :p

[Dave Humm]

I'm sure Mr Humm has met a few of those guys in his old line of work.
No need for formalities Tim, just call me Dave.

The fact remains that regardless of what martial system one studies, a student will not be equipped with adequate skills to effectively fight without several years of dedicated training. Yes I do agree there are many systems which lend themselves to a faster way of developing "street" effective skills however, let me ask another question, and please be honest with yourselves...

How many here (Aikidoists) actually study aikido so they can walk confident in public knowing their equipped with an effective method of 'fighting' ? Or in other words, they've learned aikido so they can fight ?


I have in all my years of study only met (less than) a handful of students who actively wanted to use aiki technique because they felt threatened in life.
Putting aside the social issues of violence that we all know exist, actual physical assault (which is random) is relatively uncommon. Let’s forget alcohol, domestic and antagonised related incidents, how many times do we walk down the street to witness a fight ? In my 38 years, I've seen this twice. I have lived in the East end of London to Scotland and in between.
I often read comments relating to fighting and *if aikido is truly able to deal with physical conflict. I say it's down to the individual to study hard, understand the difference in training and "doing" and be prepared to accept the responsibilities in law for their actions.

Tim is exactly right in his quoted words above, but the harsh reality is that whilst I am still here to tell my 'war' stories I have sustained injuries (some of which quite serious) resulting from dealing with people who have nothing to loose through their actions (no rules that bound their actions). Unfortunately I am of the opinion that a large portion of the aikido community has a glazed sugar coated opinion of their aikido which, they feel will protect them when the time comes. They may be right, after all it all comes down to raw ability and luck on the day however, rest assured injuries will occur regardless.

This brings me back neatly to the point of this thread, if aikido (in general) is being taught as a passive system it wont work in a non passive situation, it won't matter how much the student relates their study to O-Sensei's later ideology of "harmony" or "love" if they have absolutely no experience of practicality the truth is going to hurt. Literally !

[kiaiki]

Big Circles hurt, Little Circles hurt - but quicker.

When in agony from a cracking good technique and your Sensei tells you that the first 10 years are the worst - don't believe him. Pain to Brain is just as quick - you just learn to take it better. The first 20 years are the worst.....? Keep going long enough and you realise the whole shebang is one big circle, eh?

[MartialArtsSnob]

Um......yeah, what kiaiki said..........I think......

[kiaiki]

Techniques are circles, spirals and spheres (Westbrook and Ratti: Aikido & The Dynamic Sphere is brilliant). Life's the same - to Buddhists anyway. I could explain it better but I'd need to be sober..;)

[MartialArtsSnob]

AAhhh I see, I hope you are in a different time zone as It is a bit early to start drinking from where I sit.

I agree, from DNA to the galaxy and everything in between, its all circles, spirals and spheres. Now pass the bottle!

[kiaiki]

Yup - it's nearly 8pm here in the UK. Of course alcohol and aikido never mix. Following a very exhausting training session, I once was asked to take a (anonymous) VERY high ranking Japanese sensei to the pub and was told he was a strict Buddhist and teetotaller. What did he order? Beer and whisky chaser of course! Personally, I try to drink, think and train on different evenings, but sometimes...

[Virtuous]

How many here (Aikidoists) actually study aikido so they can walk confident in public knowing their equipped with an effective method of 'fighting' ? Or in other words, they've learned aikido so they can fight ?

I myself am an aikijustu'ist so I am not sure my senitments count but here they are. Do I feel more confident in handling a physical confrontation since I started training? You can bet your bum I do. Did I explicitly start training for this very reason? No, but I would be lieing if I said it wasnt a factor. Do I look for opprotunities to test my abilities in a real world environment? Hell no, it still hurts.

My instructor once told me what really seperates good martial artist from bad martial artist in regards to a street fight, is the ability to deal with large amounts of pain and maintain your mental presence. Because odds are you're the one who is going to get struck first and it is probably going to be a big surprise, not to mention very painful.

[aikiMac]

Aikimac: "That's because aikido is not the "best tool for the job." I consider aikido a martial art, but not a fighting art, and I like it that way. I very much like that aikido is not a fighting art."

What kind of response is that! ... The only thing left is the 'traditional' - 'non traditional' argument to rear it's ugly head and I may just go pop.

I’m not saying anything about traditional vs. non-traditional. (But I am fond of traditional martial arts.) If I want to fight someone, the ol’ jab-cross-hook combination is hard to beat. Simple is good. I ought to start working the bags again. Maybe practice my knee kicks again, but keep it simple. A few punching combos, a few kicks, and strong arms is as good as you’ll get.

That’s not the sort of material you get in an aikido dojo, because aikido is not about fighting someone else. Yes, aikido can work “on the street.” I sincerely believe that it can work. But my belief is that if your goal is to fight someone else, then you’d be much, much happier learning boxing combos in a boxing gym than learning 18 different kokyu-nages in an aikido dojo.

[kiaiki]

Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu? That is a battlefield martial art. Your instructor is right. Pain and damage are different. In the UK, the best path in a fight would be to:
1. Minimise but accept and ignore your own pain as far as possible
2. Minimise your own damage (injury)
3. Minimise damage to your attacker
4. Optimise the pain inflicted on your attacker - enough to stop an attack, no more.

[Virtuous]

Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu? That is a battlefield martial art.
Close, its Dai Yoshin Ryu Aikijutsu. Unfortunatly there is no Daito Ryu available here and Dai Yoshin Ryu is VERY similiar. The origins, or lack there of, of Dai Yoshin is subject to skepticisim. So skeptical in fact I am pretty reluctant to talk about it. However, its principals and techniques are very close to daito ryu (which would be my first choice) so Ill take what I can get.

Now you want to talk tradition, daito ryu is where its at. None of that new age aikido stuff..... :rolleyes: Im only pushing your buttons yall :D

[Dave Humm]

I'd like to add, (given something I've just read in another thread) I'm not suggesting that aiki"do" is or isn't an all singing all dancing martial art.

I fully understand and empathise with the ideology of "modern" aikido, however, there does seem to be the (wrong IMHO) attitude amongst some that aiki"do" isn't a combative system just because the founder altered his philosophical outlook following the second world war. The actual differences between Aikijutsu and Aikido are finite, one might actually put this down to the ideology on the student.. To hurt or not as the case may be.

The exact same can be said of Muso Shinden Ryu Iaido (another of my disciplines) the way of the katana is to kill. After all that IS the purpose of the blade however, I don't cut anything other than air when I practice but... I could *IF* I choose to. The sword doesn't kill or mame... The person does. Aikido techniques don't break joints or immobilise.. People do (Granted with the skills taught to them known as aikido)

When we work with an attitude of co-operation all the time, it is natural that our bodies and minds will become conditioned in this way. That is human nature. My analogy of "Big Circles" is a way of describing this form of training.

As stated earlier in this thread, big circular movements help develop the foundations of our technique, this is because they are open, easy to see and easier to practice when other bits and bobs are being learned however, the student should always be looking to reduce the dynamics of one's movements thus, the technique becomes quicker to execute. Everything however is relative to the speed and commitment of the attack. However, as I've said before, big (slower) movements which are ultimately more circular by nature don't work effectively against attacks which have linear intent and have some degree of effort behind them, it's basic physics.. (unless of course you uke is being compliAnt)

[Virtuous]

The actual differences between Aikijutsu and Aikido are finite, one might actually put this down to the ideology on the student.. To hurt or not as the case may be.

I could not agree more, a tend to group do/jutsu/and jujutsu together now as aiki. In the jutsu training Ive noticed alot more emphasis on atemi, economy of motion, and we play a little rougher but that goes along the lines of the "im going to hurt you" mentality. I wholey agree with your sentiments.

[timmeh!]

When we work with an attitude of co-operation all the time, it is natural that our bodies and minds will become conditioned in this way. That is human nature. My analogy of "Big Circles" is a way of describing this form of training.


This has no doubt been said before, but it's just occurred to me...
Aikido could be viewed metaphorically from the point of view of being in a whirlwind or whirlpool. when starting Aikido and going through the kyu grades your movements move in larger circles until your body gets used to and also battles with the ebb and flow of the current. With time and effort your naturally drawn in, you start to 'feel' the eddys, flows and currents, you stop battling against them. A certain amount of relaxation due to body memory starts appearing, smaller circles make more sense. Towards the centre things speed up and time slows down as you've been there many times before, until, I suppose, Aikido nirvana appears, you're in the centre watching the circles move around you with virtually no effort on your part.

Off to grow my hair and purchase a flowery VW van ;)


(unless of course you uke is being compliAnt)

:D

[MartialArtsSnob]

What is the term that Aikido uses for this idea? Isn't it the name of a island that is protected form the storms because it is surrounded by natural barriers? It was many years agos so it is a bit foggy......Shikoku or somthing?

[Dave Humm]

As a conclusion to this thread, I'd like to thank everyone who contributed their thoughts and opinions.. Greatly appreciated.

Regards