I'm asking because the few schools around me that teach this style seem to have a hard time attracting and keeping students as opposed to the 'traditional' styles of Aikido. I got interested in Tomiki over 'traditional' styles primarily because I liked the randori aspect of it, among other things.
i take tomiki aikido also and i like Tomiki's outview on things also,which you will have to address a real life situation more with randori,im not saying any other aikido is wrong but i like it. most schools dont think it is traditional because this aspect but tomiki didnt expect to make his own style he just wanted to try to improve it. o sensei said that you should address old styles and recloth them improve them to nowaday,so why couldnt you do it with aikido?i believe in o sensei's teachings and tomiki's thoughts so tomiki just put them into one so that just my opinion though.
The randori aspect might be why the schools around you have trouble keeping students. I've seen alot of people come and go from my class because it turned out to be a bit rougher than they thought or because my teacher is fairly strict. I think alot of people take up Aikido because they want to be involved in martial arts for what ever reason but also don't want the lumps and bruises. I think they think because Aikido is often quoted as being "a soft art" they will get an easy ride.
I train in Lau Gar Kung Fu and not Aikido, in fact I'm not very familiar with it at all. The only style have seen is in fact Tomiki at last weekends Heriot Watt cross training event, but I've got to say I was very impressed by both the instructor & his students abilities and it seemed a very useful art to practice for those who have spent the time learning it. I personally found it quite difficult to pick up but I don't think this would be unique to the Tomiki style. If I was to train in Aikido I think I would prefer it to be Tomiki specifically for the Randori aspect. Just a humble CMA practitioners opinion.
I have a question on somthing i witnessed in a tomiki class, When i was in oz i say a class a friend was doing and there was a knife section which is my concern. The same section was then covered in a grading. Basiclly there was a knife attack (say chudan tski) and tori ended up holding the empty hand and proceeded to apply a tech on the empty hand leaving the knife hand hanging around free as a bird. So my obvious question is what is that all about? I m sure there must be a convincing reason so can someone please help i find it hard to understand but would love to know more please.
The technique I think you're talking about appears in the 3rd dan syllabus. The person with the knife is approaching with the knife drawn back and the free hand to the front. Not sure why someone would want the most dangerous hand to the rear but anyway... As they are so kindly giving you an arm without a weapon, why not take it. You are moving away from the arm with the knife, so if quick you should be OK. The initiation from uke is very much like a policeman shoving someone in the chest for that short sharp shock when controlling a 'baying mob'. Its kind of hard to explain much more without being able to physically demonstrate. Hope this sheds some light on this for you.
Martin, I think the unarmed hand (that just sounds weird ) forward is intended to remove any obstacles, ie hands, so that the knife hand can strike straight to the body. Also if its the one you showed me, its probably so you can keep the other guy off you while you draw the knife. Col
Tomiki/Shodokan can be more physically demanding than other forms of Aikido. It is all very well jumping around the tatami being chased by 2 or 3 over-zealous uke who can be flipped over with as little as a wrist flick. You won't get anywhere in Shodokan with such techniques because in this form of randori no-one has any intentions of over-commiting, over-balancing, standing their like an idiot waiting for you to do something....or any other such weakness. In that sense it is very much like Judo or Kendo - there is kata practice but it is a seperate thing from randori. In some Aikido schools randori is merely speeded up kata practice. That is not randori. 'Finding Order in Chaos' Tai-no-henko, as an example, is all very well but it is a slow almost lazy excercise done in your own time, and this fault is endemic in much of Aikido. The blending exercises in Tomiki require (or develop) more fitness, a natural moving balance and allow us to learn about our own body movements and how they relate to the people around us. This is not a comparitve statement about technical differences, merely a diiferent approach. Comparing the Iwama and Shodokan forms of kaiten-nage merely allows us to see that both vertical and horizontal spirals can be applicable in the same way. Vive la difference! As to knife techniques...I rarely see a realistic one. Knives are employed to dominate, to hypnotise, to slash, cut and stab. No-one thrusts with a knife. Tomiki had to develop a form of randori that was suitable to the demands of Waseda University, so the knife forms were developed in regard to that.
BY DEXTER--Tai-no-henko, as an example, is all very well but it is a slow almost lazy excercise done in your own time, and this fault is endemic in much of Aikido. Eh, that has got to be the worst example of dirscribing taino henko. You clearly have no idea what it truly is about this is the one exercise that O.sensei taught every day, infact it was so important to the founder that he wrote that "daily training must beging with taino henko and morortdori kokyu ho, gradually build up the powewr of the grip to make tori stronger/powerful" I dont think anyone is in any postion to say anything against osenseis technique As for slow- WHAT? Do you remember anything about what you done in a traditonal dojo? Taino henko is as fast as you are attacked
Firstly...stop talking to me like that please. Address me like an adult, which is the same respect you are given by others, coz you seem to be doing it all the time now. (No offense, sorry about that) 2ndly tai-no-henko: I was not talking about the technique per se, I was talking about the lack of proper pressure training in most 'traditional dojos' that are around today. Your uke may well vary the speed of his initial motion but everything else is predictable. That is not intended to say that tai-no-henko is bad, nor that ryus that practice it (in whatever way) are bad. It is only given as an example of my opinion. That is to say that the technique (and application of it) are led by Uke, not by Tori, because Uke decides speed/resistance/intent/power. That in itself is workable, but if you agree with my main point that the majority of training is done without pressuring Nage because 95% of attacks are done by memorized repetition.
http://www.aikidoaus.com.au/dojo/docs/tainohenko.htm Although.. TnH was only given by me as an example of kata.
Oops, drifting away from the thread topic here. I'm impressed we haven't had the 'randori (competitive) is evil' or 'tomiki was disowned by Ueshiba' lines yet. Still time I suppose.... P.S. Dexter & Aikiscotsman - you're exchanges are one of the best things about MAP at the moment. If I didn't know you both I might be worried Keep it civil you two now.
Civility is my next to middle name. And Steff is a good guy in real life, he feels strongly on his views and is entitled to. His excellent bokken work opened my eyes many times.
Yes. It is called the 'basis' for all ura techniques I think. However that oversimplifies it. (And the learning of it) Repositioning in such a way is as much a mental act as a physical one sometimes. I have not yet seen an ura technique that goes away from nage's centre...but that is another thread drift.
I know that position as the tenkan version of "kokyu-ho." It is a basic exercise in my dojo. Here basic means "you cannot possibly ever learn aikido except that you first learn this exercise."
