Mod edit: this was split off from this thread, which remains a sticky. ------------------------- Aikido involves a lot of balance and flow principles, i have benn studying Aikido for about half a year now, aikido is all about entering your enemy's stike and then taking him down using his energy in a circular mothion, it's really cool!
What Articfox describes: Awase, the blending with and opponent's movement Kuzushi, the breaking of an opponent's balance Waza, the application of technique For techniques to work (and this statement relates to ALL techniques) the aforementioned applications must be in place and in the order in which they are presented. If not, what one has is a battle of strength in an attempt to 'muscle in' technique on a person. Resistance to technique can only be possible when there is something to resist against, posture has a great deal to do with a person's ability to resist. If a person is in the process of loosing their balance or has already lost it, they cannot effectively resist. Providing technique is applied in the short time available - whilst a person has lost their natural posture (thus their balance) aikido will work with little physical effort. Awase, Kuzushi, Waza, Looking at the these aspects a little closer: Awase and kuzushi can in many instances appear to the eye to occur instantaneously they are however, separate but very closely connected aspects. In blending with an opponent, the aikidoist has several movements at his/her disposal – Otherwise known as taisabaki (posture management); Mae ashi irimi – Front (leg) foot advancing forward Ushiro ashi irimi – Back (leg) foot advancing forward Tenkan – To turn in response to a connection with an opponent Tai no henko – To blend and turn Kaiten – A posture typical of having an opposite hand and foot alignment Ayumi-ashi - Performed with a stepping motion Tsugi Ashi - Forward Sliding Step In addition there are four key positions relative to ones opponent. Omote - in front of (working along the front of the opponent) Ura - on the flanks of (but not directly behind) Tenshin - aprox 45% relative to your opponents front Ushiro - to be directly behind The principle of breaking a person’s balance is pretty simple, as humans we only have two feet upon which we stand on, whenever loss of balance occurs we attempt to compensate, aikido teaches its students where weaknesses exist and how to exploit them. Within the aikido repertoire there are some fundamental techniques which teach the core principles of all other techniques. Ai hanmi katate dori ikkyo ude osae and Ai hanmi katate dori shiho nage are the two primary techniques however, sumi otoshi captures the essence of (and ease of teaching) posture breaking. Additionally, but not entirely exclusively; Aikido is an ideology of life. A primary tennant of the discipline, a legacy left by the founder, indeed one of his wishes is the "Unification of man" within this ideology, there lies a deep philosophy, alot of which IMHO is misunderstood however, the principle is fairly easy to comprehend. "Conflict resolution without violence" Putting it into practice is by far the hard part and requires a life long study. Regards
Excellent post Dave. I would translate Awase = blending = footwork = positioning Kuzushi = breaking posture = the set up of technique (so the technique can work) but I thought that Waza = technique or the categorization of techniques (a way to categorizing similar techniques so that you can practice them). I have been referring to the finishing or application of technique as kake. Am I misunderstanding something?
Nope, your not wrong mate, Awase, kuzushi and waza all generally happen together, especially when we talk of someone experienced however, they are three individual components, all of which can be executed by themselves however, in doing so one does not perform aikido technically correct. Indeed some might suggest that awase and kuzushi are part of the technique however, I would argue that until such time waza is applied (whatever that may be) all one is doing is "setting up" as such I do not consider awase and kuzushi as (directly) part of a technique. Many techniques have "finishes" all of the kansetsu for example, there are as we know applications such as shiho nage, sumi otoshi, kote gaeshi which can be 'thrown' and then pinned by way of a finish. Regards
Effectiveness depends on what the goal is.... It is primarily joint-locks and Shoulder rolls, but has a far different flavor than JJ. Whereas JJ is ground-focused, AKD seems to be mostly stand-up. Also, it is culturally very different from JJ, as it has a strongly pacifist element. Google for "Wiki aikido" to read the aikido wikipedia entry.
When I was taking aikido, it seemed like the best way to describe it is like... some guy is running at you, you step to the side, which puts him off balance, and then easily take him to the ground. That's what it seemed like to me. Looks so simple and elegant, but it takes some work to perfect. BTW, the first thing you're gonna learn is how to roll and how to fall.
Eh ? Regardless of the "goal", effectiveness depends solely on one factor.... How good you are at making it happen over one's opponent. Nothing else. Eh ? (again) Aikido is a vast system including Taiso, Buki, (three weapons armed and unarmed), Jyu waza, and there more nage waza than there are "joint-locks" Entirely wrong. Aikido does not contain "pacifist elements" at all. A far more accurate description would be to say that the ideology of the FOUNDER contained pacifist elements which have been infused into the philosophy ASSOCIATED with the art however, it is very important to remember that one does not have to subscribe to either the whole or part notion of this philosophy to study the art. Indeed it is agreed there is no single definitive when describing the philosophy of the art. Aikido is no different to many Japanese martial arts which have (otherwise) superficial philosophies associated with them. If one looks at the 20 precepts of Gichin Funakoshi - Founder of Shotokan Karatedo, you'll see remarkable similarities, indeed the Dojo kun associated with Shotokan Karate details a set of principles by which students should essentially live their lives. Regards
NOTHING ELSE!!!!! Wow, thanks for informing me that your wisdom is the final word. Having been thus enlightened, I'll make sure I hold no other opinion, and remain closed to information to the contrary. You obviously have the knowledge and understanding to do his question far better justice than my own well-intentioned attempt. Why not share it in a form palatable and accessible to the OP, instead of patronizingly asking him to google a whole bunch of esoteric terms?
Hold on what the heck was wrong with what Dave Humm posted? You made a statement about the art he is obviously very knowledgeable about and he corrected you. Sorry but if you don't like being told your wrong don't bloody post ! Also the response to Google is exactly the right one! If there is a genuine interest in an art then you should be willing to do some leg work yourself and not expect be spoon fed! A simple search of both Google and MAP would of addressed the questions raised in the original post.
Forgive me but, put two people in a room, lock the door and tell them to "tough in out" what will form the basis for the effectiveness of either of their technique, essentially (all things being equal) who will win ? - The better person on the day... it’s as simple at that. I've said this many times.. It isn't an art which is (or not) effective but the person's ability to use his skills. I assume from your username you have some connection to the Military ? I too have a number of years serving in the British Armed Forces thus, if my assumption is correct; you and I should both appreciate that a modern day rifle with all the technology used to make it the most deadly accurate weapon is wasted unless the person squeezing the trigger understands how to apply the marksmanship principles involved in placing the nose end of the round he fires on it's intended point of aim. Ergo it's not the rifle which is accurate but the user. Yes there are additional factors but ultimately the rifle doesn't fire its self, it requires a human to make it function. Read the thread. Post 7 Additionally, I don't have the time or the unlimited capacity available through search indexes such as google to present the information requested, isn't that what the net is intended for ? Isn't it fun to research and find out for one's self (once given a snippet of direction) ? Perhaps the journey of "self discovery" no longer exists with people anymore and with everything else in this *instant* "I want it the fast way" world, people may have lost the capacity to even comprehend the very nature of Aikido (of which I am NOT an expert) which is not an *instant* "I want it quick" discipline to learn. I meant ho offence by the content of my reply to your post but I am merely a straight talker, I say (or type) what's on my mind, and I teach aikido in the same way. Aikido is a martial discipline, too many people mince about with it, get wrapped up in the (sometimes) unnecessary baggage which comes with it and, the "Martial mind" becomes clouded with very often misunderstood information, most of which is rubbish. To know and understand aikido requires a student to train for a long time; aspects of the founder’s ideology and philosophy naturally merge with that hard training. Hope that clarifies. Regards
Well, Aikido does confuse me, many blab on about how Aikido is not about attacking but redirecting the attackers energy, and that there is no directly attacking move from the aikidoist. Then I see them throwing their palms into another guys face before he can make a move. but i do not doubt its proficiency one bit - the founder is a proper legend!
Well... "Blab on" is a pretty good descriptive If one looks at the origins of almost all aikido technique you will see direct connections with the use of the sword, spear (and short staff) and the knife, indeed using these weapons as part of a technical application doesn't require an actual strike as the weapon will almost exclusively kill or seriously injure one's opponent. Controversially I will state that many schools of aikido (I only speak of the UK because this is where I live) speak and talk of Buki waza and the connection to taiso however, ultimately their path is lost in a lot of mumbo-jumbo, conversely, it may look and sound like aikido but the origin, the purpose for the technique is ultimately missing. If one wishes to look, it isn't hard to see that for every connection with an opponent, be it in the very first seconds of contact or through the dynamics of the ensuing technique there exist opportunities for good atemi. However; those opportunities need to be pointed out and trained for. People confuse martial practice and ideology to the point of extreme. This is where confusion occurs in respect of Aikido and what it is all about. Regards
IMHO, Aikido is not a spectator sport. It cannot be explained well to the outside observer. After you have read some, show up, suit up, and get on the mat and expereince it at the hands of a compenetent instructor. IMHO, usually the ones who "bash" are the ones who didn't train long enough or hard enough under a competent instructor. If you are "interested", go train.
I accept some will just not take to the art however, I had a student join me here in Grimsby, he actually up-sticks and moved to the town so that he could study orthodox aikido, the aikido he'd tried before just was, according to him, "a load of rubbish" This comes from a student with little experience of the art directly but he had the sense/ability to recognise what he was being taught just didn't cut the mustard. If he hadn't of had the fortutude to keep looking for another dojo, his opinion of "...its a load of rubbish" may well of extended to "Aikido" in general and not specifically to the school (which would have been more the accurate description) Unfortunately the poorer quality stuff which exists often gets the otherwise remaining a bad rep. Regards
