Aiki-taisos "soft" exercises vs "hard" styles

So would it be safe to assume regardless of which way sankyo gets applied, should an atemi be used? If/then we get sankyo applied, is it safe to assume that would be easier to take ones center because of the pain and atemi strike?

 

Yes, I meant taking the uke's center. As far as defeating Aikido's purpose, are all styles against the use of multiple atemi's? Let’s go into Shiho-Nage... do you believe this technique can be accomplished without an atemi? If so, please explain?

 

Sorry I should be more specific.... I meant Aikido only styles. As far as shiho-nage, this is a technique that can easily be reversed. One way simply is to bring your arm down to your side. But if you strike the person, this will cause him to not think straight and give you the ability to apply the technique. Its easy in the dojo to make this happen without atemi, but have your uke really apply pressure and see how the technique works.

 

The techniques should not be thought of as "what does it takes to get the technique to work", except when perfecting the technique itself in isolated training. It should be instead, in my opinion, the thought of "what works and how can I get from what works to executing the perfect technique."

I think of each technique building on basic concepts and on the failure of another technique. A failed Ikkyo might turn into a Sankyo, a failed Nikyo might turn into a Sankyo, etc. with the basic concepts of movement, using center, and controlling delivery systems. You take what is given to you and that is what you work with, you don't force a Sankyo if you are given Yonkyo.

The only technique that matters is the one the works.

It is taught often that atemi can be used to aid in a technique. For instance, if the uke is not giving you anything to work with, you can atemi to get them to react and use that reaction from them to fuel your technique.

Although this has merit, I think it leads to a waste of atemi. Atemi is reduced to just tricks of the trade like kicking the shin to get someone to loosen up so you can apply a wrist lock. These things have merit but are like a flea on a dog. One flea in the bigger picture does very little to the dog. In Budo, it can be said that even one strike can be lethal as it is delivered with strong conviction, power, speed, and accuracy. I don't think O'Sensei liked tricks, it was beneath honor and such, so atemi should probably not be reduced to tricks in Aikido, IMHO, they should be decisive.

Training in Aikido is in many ways a method designed to protect someone from attacks following the philosophy of Budo -- "One strike ends the fight."

Atemi therefore, is not to take the roll of a flea on a dog, used only to help out a technique. Atemi needs to be like the tens of thousands of fleas on a dog all working together.

Atemi should be taught as targets of opportunity, the many working together. For instance, if going under the arm to apply Sankyo, if you have the opportunity, you have elbow strikes you can throw as atemi, not one but several, one going under to the side, then one after turning around to the rear. They don't have to be fight ending power, but each one like a flea, working together until the many fleas are too much for uke. Flow is maintained. Whether you atemi or not, the flow stays the same!!!

The same goes for the question about Shihonage, can it be done without atemi. The answer is yes. The reason is that atemi or no atemi does not matter in the flow. There may be an opportunity to shorten the flow, hence no need for atemi. For instance, a downward (shomen or yokomen) knife strike attack from uke using his right hand... I enter to intercept the knife wielding arm, using my left arm to intercept near the wrist with the back of the forearm turning so that if I am cut, I take the cut on the back of my forearm. At the same time, my right arm intercepts uke's attack at the elbow (controlling the delivery system for the moment). From that position, enter in further with the right leg, and with right arm, reach up and grab uke's right forearm while sliding up the elbow to keep control of the delivery system... apply shihonage. This applies shihonage in about 1 second total, while controlling the delivery system the whole time, if you get it to work. The flow is so short that atemi has little opportunity to be used. If the flow was longer, then atemi could be used as part of that flow.

 

Nice response RebelWado..... Long ago, I used to train with very little atemi. And the techniques would flow fairly well. I since left that school and started training else where and realized the difference. The next school I went to, I couldn't apply anything. The students were much more rigid, giving you less and less. I quickly learned that atemi was the answer. Hopefully most people are aware of the different pain levels involved... If I strike you in the rib with an elbow, that is not as painful as being hit in the groin for example. You get different pain compliance with locks as well. A perfect example is nikyo... I have come from both schools of thought about atemi. And in my experience, without atemi, the technique has less chance of working. After so many years of training, it is no longer about technique as it is about principle. I've been in confrontations where I was attacked and before I attempted to apply a technique, I hit the person with an elbow up to the chin. Knocked him out and on his ass.... I was like.... "That's it!!, No technique..." And I am no expert in any style.... I train as often as I can like most people. I've just been fortunate to see alot of differenct schools and styles.

 

Without atemi techniques work perfectly fine. If students weren't moving for you perhaps you just weren't doing the technique correctly. Maybe your new school works to a higher standard than your old school.

So far as atemi is concerned the situation dictates what is required. Atemi alone isn't the deciding factor in what makes a technique work. A good understanding of timeing, distance and direction are far more important and have a much bigger impact on the outcome of the technique.

Oh and do you think you could possbily start using paragraphs aiki-jo. They make posts easier to read and less confusing.

 

I felt as though my techniques were great. They worked and I also gained a sense of self-confidence that I can pull these techniques off on anyone. When I started training at the new school, I realized I was sadly mistaken.

Can I pull a nikyo off from a same side wrist grab without an atemi? It would be very difficult to get that hand to turn over. Maybe I could, maybe I couldn't.

I agree with you on that there are several principles that are very important to make a technique work. But truth be told, most fights are very fast.... Sometimes there is no time for a technique. But there is always time for a quick strike...

 

Which is why training starts easy for beginners and gets harder and faster as students progress through the ranks. It's also why atemi is a technique in it's own right. It's there if you need it.

As for the nikkyo do you mean like a mirror image or oposite postures In either case it is very easily done and a very basic technique. You can even add atemi if you want to.

Edit
Teachniques also often work well with friends or people you're used to working with. It is a shock when one day they don't seem to work no matter how you approach them. In your case I'd say you unfortunately attended a bad school.

The teacher should have made sure you spent some time with a mix of students of different levels giving you the opertunity to gauge what was working and who was just falling down.

I often find working with higher grades than my self far more difficult than working with lower grades. Sometimes my techniques don't work and I can't pin or throw people. In these circumstances it's not the technique that is at fault. It's me. If the technique isn't applied correctly it shouldn't work.

 

I'm not sure what mirror image or oposite postures mean???

But I would disagree with you on nikyo being basic. It starts off basic, but can turn complicated. I've shown some students nikyo what feels like 100 times, and they still can't get it.

Anyway, I just wanted to note the importance of an atemi in Aikido training (In my opinion).

 

All techniques start out at a basic level and progress to a higher level. Wrist grabs from a front attack are the most basic techniques taught where I practice. Although attacks from behind or using combinations are more advanced.

A mirror image posture would be uke holding nages left wrist with their right hand. So it's as though you are looking into a mirror. An oposite posture would be uke holding nages right wrist with their right hand.

Looking out some notes the Japanese for a mirror image posture (left to right) is Katatetori. And oposite posture (right to right) is Katate Kosadori.

 

Nicely put aikiMac, I know many that would agree with you on principle.

Two points, however, one is the more literal translation of Aikido might actually be the "way of non-resistance" and the other is that not everything you train in or do in Aikido class is Aikido, some of it is more related to Budo.

In more philosophical terms, Aikido can be more the spiritual world and Budo more the manifest world. The goal is not to live only in one or the other world, but to be able to live in both worlds. I believe that Morihei Ueshiba wanted people to live in both worlds, calling the way of harmony, the way of love to be the true spirit of budo. If you translate budo, it means the way of war... so is the true spirit of war then love. Seems to be a contradiction, but I guess that is why you need to live in both the spiritual and the manifest worlds.

By the way, to live in both worlds means you see what is true from the manifest world AND you see what is true from the spiritual world. You cannot see what is true from both worlds at the same time because they contradict each other if you try to.

So from the spiritual world, saying that the eagerness to atemi is not love could be true, but from the manifest world, using atemi not to kill the other is love. Do I make sense? In the manifest world, if you strike but not to do lasting harm or kill, that can be a sign of love because you are striking out of need and not out of violence. For example, young children often will lash out at their parents, striking, but more out of frustration than hate. The child does not know how to express his or her feelings that they want physical contact. Hitting is a form of physical contact. Often the child just needs a good long hug to release that frustrated energy and feel loved. The child does not strike out of hate or want to kill, the child strikes because of internal conflicts that they don't know how to express what they really want.

If your Aikido techniques lack something, it is like you are that child and inside you, you don't know how to express yourself through the technique. For lack of any better way to say it, you need to lash out with atemi. Although atemi isn't what you really want, it is the only best way you can express yourself.

If you go about Aikido and your techniques never have atemi, maybe you are trying too hard to live only in that spiritual world, never looking at atemi as something of a way of expression, for lack of a better way to express yourself. You might then keep frustration inside of you, internal conflicts, contradictions between what you think is right and what you believe is right.

When I look at Aikido techniques, I see dozens of atemi and potential atemi in the flow. It is up to you to use them or not, I will not tell you what you should do, however, if I choose to take some of those atemi and strike without intent to do lasting damage, but to express myself then do not only judge that action from the spiritual world, judge it from the manifest world too.

If you do not see the atemi in Aikido, I say don't see it with your eyes, feel it. Take a step back, look at iriminage, see the contact to the ribs by tori, it can be with fist or with body, if you are too far to touch uke in the ribs with your body, then feel the atemi you can deliver to the ribs with fist or elbow. If you touch not with fist or body, then your entry will allow too much space and will be less effective. Now look at the last part of iriminage, do you see uke's head on your shoulder and the takedown. If uke's head is not on shoulder, do you see the forearm atemi or push you can use? If uke is further away, do you see the cross face or palm strike atemi you can use? If you do not have uke's head on your shoulder or contact with atemi or push, you will allow too much space and your techinique will be less effective.

Don't see the atemi, feel it whenever you have too much space between yourself and uke. The atemi bridges that gap, keeping the flow of the technique and that contact needed for grappling technique to work better.

Sorry this is so long, thanks for reading.

 

So far as falling back on atemi for every technique goes it's the same trap as assuming your techniques worked great because uke fell down or went flying across. When you fall back on atemi every single time you've become complacent. You're stuck in a hole you don't even want to climb out of because if you try something different it might not work. If you really want to advance in Aikido you have to leave the pacifier at home.

 

I see your point aikiworlfie, athough to fall back on atemi would be more like using it as a crutch than a pacifier

It is almost like the feeling someone might get if used to carrying a concealed weapon. With the weapon, you might feel more confident and strong. However, without the weapon, you might feel "naked" have more fear than if you never had carried the weapon in the first place.

So I agree that learning Aikido techniques without atemi is very helpful in both learning technique but also in dealing with your own internal conflicts, eliminating the use of atemi as a crutch.

What I don't agree with, is that atemi is always a crutch. O'Sensei had many years to develop techniques, it is not like he was the same throughout his life. Many compare Noma Dojo Techniques (1936) and Wakayama (1951) and say that Noma Dojo had more atemi, was a harder style. I don't agree that the use of atemi in Noma Dojo Techniques is using it as a crutch that he later removed. I look at both Noma Dojo and Wakayama and I see the essence of Aikido in both. With and without atemi I still see the essence of Aikido.

People need to discover these things on their own. Aikido isn't the technique and whether or not you use atemi, it is the essence behind it all. Techniques and variations of techniques are all just tools. Does your atemi flow with the technique or is it a destructive force of its own, that is the question I pose.

 

In the case of aiki-jo who has been posting questions about whether or not a teachnique would work without atemi, I think the atemi is being used as a crutch. And that is what my last post was refering to. He has gone from a dojo where his techniques worked to one where they suddenly didn't. And so far it seems the only way he can make a technique work to his satisfaction is to use atemi.

I think it would be more benificial for aiki-jo to experiment with his teachnique in the dojo some more and try something other than atemi. After all the dojo is there for students to practice, experiment and learn in safety. If it doesn't work that's fine. There's no harm done. He can try something else.

 

If a technique works on a fully committed uke without atemi, fine. I thoroughly agree with aikiwolfie's point about experimentation, although my own style has a great deal of atemi in it and hardly any techniques without.

To put the other side of the argument I have seen what I define as 'overly compliant' ukes changing direction, straightening up etc without knowing why.

Some techniques require atemi - the only way to examine this is in the safety of a dojo when uke and tori can unpick a series of moves and find out exactly WHY they need to move as they do.

Atemi is striking, not waving a hand about gracefully. It should make uke move through necessity, not custom and practice.