attacks in aikido ?

May I ask what you find disturbing?

The "ART" of aikido isn't "defensive" per se, the philosophical aspects influance the student to adopt a defensive attitude to the application of the skills. The physical aspects can be offensive or defensive, whatever the student requires. This is a direct result of the weapons influance within the art. (the sword especially). I have several years working in Catagory A Prisions and I can assure anyone that "inviting" someone to attack is a risky business.

How do we define attack? As I said in my last post, I will determine a threat to me when the person in question cannot be reasoned with verbally, this decision may be made very quickly or, may be made over a period of time. Everything based on merit and situation however; waiting or inviting is a very dangerous position as it is entirely reactive.

I doubt your missing anything, we appreciate your dialogue and opinion on this matter, some of us just hold contra opinion.

Kind regards

Dave

 

Cheers mate... the cheque is in the post. </smug mode off> (lol)

Dave

 

I'm quite certain that at the last seminar in Ottawa ont., Saotome sensei taught at least two techniques initiated by nage, one being from shomen ate. I could be wrong though, certainly not the first time.
Is not the 5th kumi tachi as taught by Saotome initiated by the "victor"?

I really think this talk about "what aikido is or is not" does nothing but close minds and stagnates training. Aikido developed and changed as O sensei developed and changed, it should do the same for all serious students IMHO.

cheers,
bambeer

 

I couldn't disagree more.

One huge advantage this wonderful evil known as the internet gives us, is the ability to share and express our opinions and thoughts with people whom otherwise we might not physically meet. My "aikido" is far richer from having the opportunity to discuss with a fairly wide audience, both my opinions, and those of those people who wish to participate here and on other boards. Ok, there are times when we get a bit OTT (me included) but this is only because we are passionate. Discussion doen't stagnate or close minds, quite the opposite.

Kind regards

Dave

 

But isn't that the best offensive move? Getting your uke (or in "da street" you opponent) to attack you in the method or direction that you dictate? In that manner you have effectively controlled the fight from the very beginning, no matter who throws the first punch or kick.

 

Actually Mr. Humm thats exactly what I'm trying to say. I apologize if the way I tried to communicate it was not very clear.

I was actually referring to statements such as these:

I think telling people what is is not aikido (or at least thats what I felt this implied here) will stunt one's growth in the art in that instead of looking to what could be a variation, one is only looking to what is wrong.

Cheers,

bambeer

 

1) you do not know what additional influances one's opponent is under
2) you do not know if your opponent is armed (I always assume this)
3) Always ALWAYS assume your opponent is better than you
4) Never rely upon anticipated action

Some really top notch aikido full timers may be able to counter argue however, for the mere mortal training a few times a week attempting to control a potential conflict with anticipation is a very dangerous environment. Inviting an attack as I've stated before will very often yeild nasty surprises.

Do we know what skills the person in front of us has ? No. Do they know what skills we have ? Not likely. In a potential conflict this is the only factor which is truely equal. Waiting to find out is where the balance falls one way or the other. Just look at the Pizza parlour brawl recently on the net, who had the advantage ? The guy to took the fight to the other. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the situation which I don't condone, reactive is less advantageous than proactive action.

Dave

 

Bambeer, "Dave" will be ok.... Each time someone writes Mr. Humm I look for my father (lol)

Thanks for the clarification on your post

Dave

 

I dont know. Tomorrow is my first aikido training (I'm a TOTAL aikido noob ).
But, after practicing kickboxing for 5 years, it looks to me a little bit "silly" not to have offensive moves option.

 

Your quite right. I'm not sure whether they are nage/uke roles at all. Your right....It probably doesn't matter at all.

bambeer

 

Every technique, move, application you learn will have offensive and defensive applications, indeed when you know aikido well, you can alter intention (from defensive to offensive and visa versa) whenever you wish.

Technique has no label, use it as situation requires. I'm not the best person to discuss the philosophical aspects of the art because I don't follow 'orthodox' views however, these philosophical aspects which deeply accompany the art influance student's thinking on how the physical skills are applied.

Dave

 

All true, not arguing that. I too always assume that the other person may have a weapon or be under the influence of some type of chemical. However, would you agree that there are certain ways to control your opponent at the beginning? (not talking about the guy that comes at you from behind a wall or fence, but in a face to face confrontation) Such as: Presenting one side of your body versus the other? Keeping your hands at a certain level or distance to encourage an attack at another level or distance? Moving in one direction to get them moving in another? Keeping one hand or foot out of view, so that they are forced to think about what it is doing or hiding, therefore influencing how and where they attack? This is what I mean by "inviting" an attack. Of course, this is never a gaurantee that you will win, I never meant to imply that. Eventually we all come up against someone better or more detemined than ourselves. However, any advantage I can insert before the actual fight takes place, I will.

Just food for thought.

 

What you describe is body language which will be read quite instinctively by those who you present it to.

Yes one can determine what posture you take, where to position one's hands etc (and indeed I would be doing this too) however; to make such actions overt in hope they will invite a particular attack is an assumption which you cannot gaurantee to any sustainable level of confidence. The first rule of conflict is there are no rules. Thus one must expect the unexpected.

Taking the conflict to the opponent at a point where in the greater scheme of thing, he may least expect you to, has huge advantages. Ok, this might put you on the wrong side of the law and, may often be in conflict with the ideology of the founder but hey, I'd rather be in control and intact; but that's just me.

Dave

 

Got to agree with your last bit, on taking the conflict to the opponent.
Never said to make such actions overt, subtle movements are more effective in conveying the feeling or attitude I was describing. I think you and I are saying the same basic thing, but phrasing it differently.
There are ways of presenting body language that will be misread by your opponent too, this is what I am referring to. Not saying I have perfected this, but it is something that we have been training and working on rather extensively the past year or so. Fortunately, I have not had the opportunity to put it to use, yet. That almost changed 2 days ago. But as with everything, it's not something I'm going to go into a conflict looking to use. If it presents itself, I may do it. If it doesn't I won't. Can't see into the future, so I won't try.

 

Thank you, Kurohana, for eloquently explaining in my absence that which I meant when I wrote "inviting an attack."

I'll write more tomorrow, folks..too tired now. Dream well!

Blessings.. luv, Jessie

 

There is also this "SILLY" legend that tells, that "aikido is only good against untrained drunk punks". Why people believe in such "SILLY" legend .

I have carefully read O-sensei's interview. And he stated, that aikido is a VERY MUCH BUDO. It is an ultimate MA that can be used against anyone.
O-sensei trained in tens of styles of jujutsu (and they are very much martial). So, in fact, as I understand, aikido is a very successful derivative of many styles of jujutsu (I think that daito-ryu is one of them).

 

Its not the discipline which is capable... Its the person using it. Its the same with ANY martial art.

The skills themselves don't 'win' but the people who have the ability to use them effectively and to best advantage against someone else.

Dave

 

Not exactly. Its 50% the discipline and 50% the person.
(for example , you cannot win with sword someone in tank, right ? )

 

art or artist?

Here here Akira,

I'm not sure it's worth debating whether its 50/50 or 60/40 or whatever, but there is certainly an element of the art itself that determines it's applicability in various situations.

I'm also not sure it's worth arguing what Aikido is or isn't. The truest statement I've seen on this thread so far came from ladystar:

I don't agree with the sentiment, but the part in bold is key to remember during these conversations. What any one of us was taught is not the sum total of Aikido just our interpretation of our instructors' interpretations of what they were taught. So for any of us to make definitive statements about what Aikido is or is not is foolish.

I was taught that the strikes learned in our system are part of the system, not just training tools for our partners. If during the course of conflict an opening for atemi appears one should take it without worrying that it's no longer Aikido because you struck instead of throwing, restraining or pinning.

I have to admit however that sometimes during instruction I have been told, and have told others when I was instructing, to stop striking and do Aikido. But this was just shorthand for don't be lazy and take the easy way out of making a more advanced resolution, and only with a subset of students who show a tendancy to strike and consider the conflict concluded, without applying appropriate control or projection of nage (a problem I had in abundance when making the transition from TKD). It was just easier for my Sensei, and later for me, to say "OK you gonna do some Aikido now?" instead of launching into the lecture about lack of comfort and fear of failing with more advanced techniques, and proper finishing control. The issue was over-relying on one aspect of Aikido (as I was taught) instead of embracing all of it.

In any case, your Aikido is whatever you learned Aikido to be. And we would be well served to remember that when we speak we are talking about our personal Aikido, not all Aikido in the world.

Bear