My main teachers were Chiba shihan and Saito shihan. I have been training for forty plus years and teach at the makotokai dojo Marine Commando barracks in glasgow. I know of the Ellis school of aikido but have never trained there.I have spent many years cross training in judo karate and kendo with friends who are high grades in these arts hence my inclination to the martial aspects of aikido. At my dojo we have students who have trained in tai boxing. judo. ,karate'kendo and win chun so most of our practises are close to "anything goes." I have found it of more value to train outside of aikido. Training with 5th dan kendoka really improves your weapons training and gives you insights to principles of distancing.timing and decisive striking. With karateka you MUST unbalance them at the instant of musubi (contact) or you are instantly countered.All of my cross training has not been to "learn" these other arts but to learn from them how to make my aikido more effective. I am fortunate to count among my friends high grades in a number of martial arts who take great delight in showing me the effectiveness of their arts and who ,in kind, venture on to the mat to learn from aikidf most value has been the lifelong friendship and mutual respect for all martial arts that we have gained. Something saddly missing in some areas of the martial arts today. regards koyo makotokai.co.uk karateka Robert Weir attacking me with yoko geri.
I know it would be awful, but I have to admit that I would totally go to a Steven Segal concert. Or a David Carradine concert, if such a thing were available.
Dillon!!!! You have just frightened kensei away. Those two could become a tribute band for one of my favourites. The Egos. regards koyo
Nice post Koyo. I was mostly looking for the context in which the topic of stances was being discussed. I believe you did a good job giving me that context even though it appears that I was being lazy and did not read all the posts as maybe I could have and figured this out on my own... I noticed that from Jujutsu training that the legs tended to be more far apart (wider base) than in Aikido or Judo, but in such cases, the weight was distributed very even between the feet, it was not the case of one leg (except when kicking) had all the weight for more than a moment if at all. There are some footwork technique such as your mentioned in a previous post with crow-stepping and there are times in grappling when you hook your leg around something and you don't commit your mass behind it until you have the correct position (this prevents them from countering you during the transitions). In Kajukenbo, we do have something called a Tiger Stance and we also have the Cat Stance, and the Crane Stance. These are all examples of stances where one leg is supporting most of the weight. I'm thinking that these stances and maybe others have mostly to do with the orientation of hips and hip rotation rather than use in practical application. By spacing the feet apart a certain distance and position, the hip track will be aligned in the right orientation for the technique... in theory. Here is an example of tiger stance at the beginning of this technique: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyAb-a254x8"]Punch & Counter 10 AB RW110 - YouTube[/ame] It would be very difficult for me to actually move and come into this stance. But it does allow me to drop my weight and rotate my hips at the same time without having to rotate my upper torso. Not saying it is done exactly like in stance training, but it gives me the option of stepping in with my back leg and shooting between the legs of the opponent. Very hard style-based (direct) and quick. Not particularly good against someone a lot bigger than me.
Hi Rebel Absolutely nothing I would diagree with in your video clips. Like the constant mobility and use of atemi to set up throws.Recognised a good few techniques in there.Had a good hard training session tonight. Have a weapons seminar 11th of next month. Will be applying weapons principles to body techniques. Tonight we were looking at suki the openings offered by the attacker a few bumps but otherwise a good session. We are studying OYO WAZA just now these are techniques that "wash over" or cut directly through the attacker. Will post on this soon. Keep up the training. regards koyo
Thanks Koyo, sound like some good training. I went to seminar this last weekend, we did some limb destructions as well as same old hard training. I got to uke for one of the presenters. Sunday I had bruises all up and down my arms and my shoulders. Today all the bruises are gone except on big one on the inside of my right shoulder. Good times. I had a group of people working on me after each round of hits... kept the blood going and my limbs moving. I got so experience the healing aspects of martial arts from some real experts in the field. Just for clarification, the last group of videos I put up were done with the intention as showing how we do those techniques. I think it relates to this idea of stances really well because as we were filming, there were many times that if I had been in combat I would have done something different, maybe slightly different, maybe something completely different... I don't know. What I do know is that I found I had to force the technique. This was so that we could film the technique... but in reality my fighting mind was not completely free because I had become attached to the technique rather than allow the application to come intuitively. Stances are like techniques in that to learn them you become focused on them but to apply them real time you must not allow yourself to be attached to them, they need to be intuitive. I think it is actually better to teach simple footwork and movement and power from the hips than to teach fixed stances. However, the teaching of stances and footwork is necessary if we look at the cookie cutter approach to teaching. There is some basic framework from which people start their lessons, this allows in theory a way to teach the masses. It is the same in boxing where there are set footwork drills...it all comes down to principles of course. I guess I don't have any real point except that a few times I've banged up my knee on hard concrete when applying technique from any stance that drops the knee (e.g. tiger stance). This is because my feet were too far separated when I dropped down to one knee, allowing for my knee to hit the ground. If anyone is dropping there weight in such a way, your stance is not good. The stance should have the feet much closer together, this way when you drop a shin/knee, there is no way it will reach the ground, no matter how much pumped up in adrenaline you are or how much in the moment you are acting. Could it be that the learning of stances is not as bad as one thinks, the real issue is the learning of stances and things that are plan dangerous to use in a combat situation, in other words, the learning of things wrongly.
Hi rebel In aikido it is often said that we must move dynamically and cut directly through the attacker's intention to attack. This means we must avoid maai (distance from which we both can strike) Classic aikido use of ma (distance not a measurement) is to be just out of reach or too close. As far as multiple attacks are concerned I have found irrimi (entering behind) to be the most effective. In the photograph it is difficult to see but the initial right hook had been cut down and an entry to the rear escapes from the other attack/grapple. Derek was cut down with an ara (severe) irrimi nage using a kessa giri (diagonal cut) through the neck and shoulder. Do you use similar techniques? regards koyo
You bring up a topic that goes to the root of why many arts have stylistic differences, but yet all martial arts still share the same fighting principles. For instance, differences between the Kajukenbo flavor and Aikido flavor of techniques. In Kajukenbo, not all but a majority of technique comes under the premise that after initial contact, the opponent is moving away. The concept is that you are going to "catch", stun, and finish them while they move away before they can recover and counter. The techniques tend to resemble the boxing and kenpo karate roots of Kajukenbo. If instead of moving away, the opponent effectively stands their ground or has forward momentum, then the strikes will tend to be much shorter (otherwise they will be too easily jammed), and the techniques tend to resemble more the jujutsu and Judo roots of Kajukenbo, or Aikido as you demonstrated, taking the backside of the opponent. Here is a Kajukenbo version of kotegaeshi: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECHale4wMOw"]Punch & Counter 7A RW107 - YouTube[/ame] This one deals more with an opponent that has forward momentum. Here I could have attempted to enter to the rear of the opponent instead of the front, but nevertheless, it should resemble Aikido more than the previous video I posted.
Hi Rebel The kuzushi you used for the kote gaeshe is the one I would have used in the circumstance (uke would have been so stunned by the beating you gave him beforhand there would be no momentum left) If after the initial technique you had entered deaply to the rear and executed kote gaeshe that would have been similar to the "washing over" I was speaking of. Strange coincidence last prectice we were executing henks waza continuous techniques as you show. The only difference is after the first throw we allow uke to attempt to rise and throw him again. Sometimes we can execute three to four throws in a row.Example shiho nage maintain grip on wrist let him roll out and execute kote gaeshe release the technique and as he attempts to rise execute irrimi nage. Great training for ukemi (breakfalls) regards koyo
Hello to all Somethings i would like to share from class last night. Even though sensei can show me something five, six, seven times how come i can always miss things. Even after 5 years of practice. And secondly, body position. Last night we were practising tenchinage from shomen and yokemenuchi, i am being prepared for my green belt grading. The lesson, or as i perceived it, which in relation to my frist comment could be totally wrong. Was that you used your whole body for the technique, and literally stepped through using arms to lead the arm and head to unbalance. Another point, i can never get my head out of the way, when being nage, and i always end up with lumps on my head. :bang: Aiki
Hi Macker There is an instant in all aikido techniques if applied realistically (a strong attack no harmony) called ai uchi. This means that if you both strike you both get hit.This can happen in tenchi nage if tori attempts to move to the side to cut down the attacking arm. In fact tori should move forward initially as though directly inside the attack and at the precise moment uke has commited THEN tori angles his forward foot and drives his whole body through and to the side cutting the attack down and back. hope this helps regards koyo This is taisabai for tenchi nage. Note that my cutting hand is still defending my head/centreline.
After reading the thread "has it changed." I considered how aikido techniques have changed since I first began training. A major change has been on the preference for ura techniques. Where the aikidoka "waits" for an attack and blends with it to execute the technique. I have seen whole classes and even seminars given over to these techiques. While they are part of the aikido waza, one who depends on them becomes (in swordsman terminology) a "hesitator" giving over to the attacker the initiative. rarely if ever does the attacker maximise on this advantage by mounting powerful multiple attacks. The spirit of the aikidoka becomes negative.I have seen them become confused when a sudden powerful strike is mounted. The ability to seize the initiative and enter powerfully during or before an attack should be given prominance to build op the spirit of the aikidoka. I would go as far as to say that ura techniques should only be used when the attacker has seized the initiative. Even when we must make ura on the instant of kuzushi (unbalancing) we immediately return to omote.(direct techniques) your thoughts??? regards koyo Here ura has been used (for an instant) to counter Derek's shiho nage. The ura is instantly turned to omote to enter up the side to execute kote gaeshe.(henka waza) counter techique,
Isn't it true that to defeat Aikidoka, since Aikido is a purely defensive art, simply do not attack them and they will be unable to use Aikido. Seriously though, koyo, what you describe is not unique to Aikido. The training partner, whether uke or tori (or both as in Kaeshiwaza) is probably to blame as much as the teaching methods. Some training partners are effectively dead, they attack but like a robot and do not offer progressive resistance. I would say these partners are not challenging tori as they should be. A good training partner (e.g. uke) protects themselves with ukemi skills but also challenges tori with an appropriate level of resistance for the lesson. This resistance is progressive as the skill increases so does the level of resistance. At some levels training becomes almost like a game of chess (or duel) with each one countering the other (seizing the initiative). I also see a problem with how technique is applied. Any technique can be: 1) forced to work 2) made to work off a reaction in the opponent 3) made to work by tricking the opponent into giving the technique All three are related. Too many martial artists, IMHO, only try to utilize #2 method, invoking some reaction in the opponent to feed their technique without realizing that by "waiting" for the reaction they are "surrendering the initiative." Great fighters often employ all three methods, often forcing a technique that causes the reaction, that feeds the technique, AND while the opponent's mind is occupied with this technique, they are thereby tricked into leaving themselves open to something much worse.
But but !! If you don't attack us you become what is known in swordsmanship as a "hesitator" Wait...didn't I just post this. Hi Rebel As you say much of it is down to the attacker. If someone "attacks" in this manner we tend to bounce him a little (the first time) :Angel: .Am off to training will post later . Thanks for your input makes me think that many of the aikidoka who read these posts are "hesitators." Didn't I just post that (again) :bang:
Hi Koryu 101 Traditional aikido is based on sword principles and the first is that the instant you draw the sword you must fill yourself with the intention to strike. This is also a principle of aikido, not to wait and see what the attacker intends. Aikido is a dynamic art which cuts straight through the attacker's INTENTION to strike.( O Sensei Ueshiba) This major principle and others are beginning to be neglected in modern "aikido". regards koyo
