I am not going down the road of naming and shaming schools, just my opinion from what I felt and was asked to do on the Mat. I would love to be proven wrong and someone tell me about a KI school that does not expect so much co operation and does not rely on Uke giving his balance up with the click of a finger. I remember reading a story years ago saying that when Tohei Sensei travelled around and saw what had become of his organisation he went ballistic, saying that was not what he was teaching and that type of training could only be truly understood from years of hard solid basics just like what he had to go through. I think many people have decided to leave the levels of training below KI out of their system and move straight to no touch throws and Uke giving up his balance rather than having it taken and controlled by tori/nage by constantly studying the 3 main principles of Aikido; HANMI, AWASE AND KOKYU
Even the aikido which is very effective needs supplementation with a striking art at the very least. The techniques which are really high percentage even in good aikido are actually small. The rest of it is about learning principles. Watch a video of Gozo Shioda and you'll see him using the more complicated techniques like to showcase principles but when it come to randori it's more about direct aggression, timing, distance, and a limited number of techniques using the body mechanics built through the other techniques. For me Shioda is the model of good aikido and for my money I think he actually surpassed Ueshiba in terms or practicality, skill, and developing a system to train people.
I hate what if questions. Mostly because I personally don't have a clue what I'd do in a fight. I work on instinct in that situation as does everybody. Unless of course they've been conditioned to roboticly produce response A to attack B. Which just doesn't seem like a practical way of training to me. What school of Ki Aikido do you train with? What grade is the teacher? He sounds quite inexperienced and naive. A teacher should know better than to adopt formulaic dojo training based technique in a real scenario.
The 'what if' questions were pretty broad, not picking on little things. If wasn't so much "how do we respond to this attack?" because if not trained properly, training like that can be pretty dangerous. It was more "what if someone REALLY attacks you?" and isn't compliant... just to see if he was more realistic. The head sensei of our dojo is 2nd Dan and the next highest is 1st Dan. I'm not going to call out any names but we are located on the Eastern US.
Well is it a genuine Ki Society dojo or some other organisation? Not all "Ki Aikido" schools are part of the Ki Society. In fact there are probably more independent Ki Aikido orgs than there are traditional clubs. EDIT: Even the "what if someone really attacks" question is hard to answer. Other than not playing nice any more there's not a whole lot you can predict in my opinion other than assuming a weapon will be involved and the attacker will likely have mates.
I feel it would be better if your "what if" questions were more specific. The thing about realism in training is that it is ultimately based on real-world experience and situations. "Real world" being a catch all phrase for the development of practical application. Meaning that your application should be developed with the goal that it is practical for you in real situations you are likely to encounter. In other words, so you are best prepared. When you give broad questions about "what if you are attacked" then particular skill sets don't end up to be as important as experience and fighting spirit. Much as koyo used to say in regards to what he felt was the most important for real world encounters... "the ability to go from zero to 100% in an instant." An issue is, how do you know if it is practical, unless you use it in real world? One alternative is to set up in training to be as close to real world as possible, or in other words, simulate real world. This would be scenario based training used much in RBSD and other venues of training as well for self-defense. Another way is to add progressive resistance to training (some call this alive training). This ends up to be more like sparring and can also be very useful in developing practical application. There are some disadvantages to each of the above training methods. Scenario based training requires someone with adequate knowledge and experience in real world to keep the training useful. At first, this type of training is a big eye opener for many... a wake up call. But as the training progresses, so must the knowledge and experience to keep things improving and fresh. Progressive resistance training is a must, IMHO, but has the disadvantage that someone without a good foundation in fundamentals might end up promoting and bringing into their muscle memory the use of bad habits. These bad habits may go unnoticed without a trained/experienced eye to catch them and then force the unlearning of these bad habits. It is sort of the two steps forward, one step back with improvement complimented with the need to unlearn bad habits developed from training. Strong grasp of good fundamentals is one of the best ways to avoid bad habits. With all this said, if your training is missing BOTH progressive resistance training (alive training) and scenario based training, you are not going to be learning how to fight. You don't have to get to black belt to figure this out. You, however, can do something about it. You can attempt to use progressive resistance in your training. Bring your training partners just a little outside their comfort zone progressively AND ask them to do the same for you. You can also ask specific questions, such as what if someone grabs be from behind and another attacker pulls out a knife from in front of me and work through this type of scenario. If you want realism, two very common scenarios to practice. Have someone slap you on the side of the head (simulate a sucker punch) then come at you with pushes and slaps as you defend yourself and cover vitals. Another is the build up where someone yells at you and threatens you with a training knife or stick, then attacks you. Add in some protective gear and multiple attackers and you got yourself some good training, IMHO.
It is a part of the Ki Society and the question itself wasn't too broad or too specific. I basically wanted them to answer how to defend against someone who didn't throw telegraphed attacks (I believe I used a boxer and his jab as an example) and I just wanted to get an idea of how they would handle that. I obviously wasn't impressed. I have come to realize I have to do a lot of this on my own with some people I trust but I probably won't ask anyone from our dojo to train more intensively with me until I'm more comfortable with that. I honestly feel that if I ask for a little more 'realism', they'll feel insulted.
I hear you there. Even with the best intentions, asking for things to be done a certain way can come off as "telling someone what to do" and taken as you either being disrespectful or extremely needy. You often have to come from the top down on these things. Seems like the instructor (2nd degree black belt) is open to experimenting some. I bet you he is holding back some so as not trying hurt you. You can work on your ukemi skills, not only to protect yourself, but to steal the technique (feel how it works). Come in with an open mind to try to feel how a technique works so you can steal it. Once he knows you are trying to steal the techniques from him, he might give you his best stuff... and then if it still doesn't work, well that is good feedback for him to help him improve too. I think as long as it is clear you don't have malicious intent and that you are there for learning AND there to help others learn too, the training will naturally start to come alive.
I sure hope so. I'd like to but I feel like they'd feel disrespected or they'd take it out of context. The conversation would probably lead to the discussion of a 'lack of realism' but then again, I haven't tried it yet. Speaking of intensity though, I was referred to as a delicate, beautiful flower in class today so Nage would go even softer. I hope the next dude who decides to attacks me reacts like a beautiful flower would, so that all is safe and gentle. But seriously, I don't understand how such a mentality could keep a person alive in an extremely dangerous situation. As much as I want to say "what if that flower has thorns?", it'd probably be regarded as a childish question because of my lack of experience, and I understand that. I also understand that nature is as equally savage as it is beautiful. For every cooling breeze and beautiful ocean view, there's an animal gouging another animal to death or a storm tearing homes apart. It's this denial of such things that discourages me taking this martial art too serious. No one will attack as soft as we do. You will not detour a predator with a smile and heart-warming attitude. No one will 'give' you their energy so that you can lock/throw them. I want so bad to bring these things up and if anything, I'd love for them to have a reasonable answer and put me in my place but in the context of MARTIAL arts, I don't see that happening. Done ranting. Other than venting, I hope some of these posts will serve as a guide to those that believe such ideas (practiced in Ki Aikido but more specifically, our region of KA. I don't know anything about other styles of Aikido so I won't speak of them).
Sometimes softening the technique really, REALLY makes sure the practitioner gets the nuances down. I don't use flower analogies, but do say "go 20% for this round" when everybody seems to be getting a bit *ahem* "enthusiastic" shall we say Now of course I also crank it to 100 when it feels right, but rarely with beginners or low level students. Do the seniors go harder by what you have seen? It may simply just be a waiting game
Well my way of asking was just to attack harder. Generally speaking in my experience any grade above green belt (3rd kyu) was fair game. I also used to go practice with the highest graded black belts in the class and then insinuate they were getting old and slow. Which was guaranteed to "motivate" them into teaching me a lesson. I don't want to encourage bad habits or behaviour. I just don't see the need to discuss it if you're training with a higher grade. Just attack harder. Something you have to understand about Ki Aikido is it's focus isn't entirely on martial arts. A very large part of it is about self improvement. Enhacing your confidence. That sort of thing. Something else you should understand is that Ki Aikido approaches Aikido from the point of view of sorting out the mind first. If you're not happy in your training, find something else. Bad feeling poisons the mind And your state of mind is reflected in the state of your body.
They higher ranks do tend to go harder but not in a way that would make a technique more effective. You'll be rolling further or possibly be slammed but still not enough to apply it to SD. If we took away compliance and encouraged more realistic attacks, I'd have more faith in it but when he tells me I'm not attacking right because I didn't start 15 feet back, go slow, and make it known that I'm going to attack sloppily, I can't take the training seriously (physical training, at least). Yes, and I do take it for the self-culivating aspects but it's just when we do discuss the Martial aspects, although it does go with our style's mentality, it won't save your life in an all out assault. And I'll take advantage of your advice. Thanks!
Like other Martial Arts, the Aikido has its share of schools that teach watered down derivatives. There are schools that teach "Aikido" with no beauty or effectiveness at all! Here is what my club believes: The Aikido exists to bring more possibilities to your Martial Arts The Aikido by default teaches a system derived from Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu, but you can take say Karate and apply the Aikido to it. It then becomes Aiki-Karate. Aikido is a martial arts path not exactly a martial art. Jutsu is the technique and Do is the way. Hope this helps.
Since Iwama's been brought up - I'd point out that Morihiro Saito had a healthy amount of respect for Koichi Tohei. That doesn't mean that any particular school is good (or bad), however. There are quite a few things that Koichi Tohei got right, IMO, and others that I disagree with - but that's pretty much the same whoever we're discussing. I had great fun training in Iwama, but I don't know that I'd characterize it as better for self defense (as in MMA type self defense) than other styles - like anything else, it has its strengths and weaknesses. So...stylistic considerations aside, I'd mostly decide what I want to train in based on what I want out the training, and what the individual instructor is willing or able to supply. Best, Chris Aikido Sangenkai
Before I forget, Wayne Muramoto wrote a nice blog post on a related topic: http://classicbudoka.wordpress.com/2012/08/14/70-reality-based-martial-arts-not-so-reality-based/ Best, Chris Aikido Sangenkai
Thats my point, Tohei was Saitos Sempai but that was when Tohei was practising Budo still with O sensie. What I said was I refuse to belive that the KI Aikido is Tohei's legacy, I refuse to believe that he taught that that as basic Aikido. After all the reason he got so good was through years of Kihon just like Osensei said. I still think Tohei expected studenst to have lots of hard Kihon training to understand awase and Ki training was supplementary, but i dont know. All I know is there is nothing Martial in giving your Balance up when you attack or falling down unless you have no choice. Of course Iwama Aikdio is no better a self defence system than MMA or other fighting systems. But it is MARTIAL compared to Ki Aikido
In general, I'd agree that Iwama folks think more martially than Ki Society folks - although a large part of that is that the rhetoric tends to select that kind of person. Whether the system itself is more martial or not is harder to say. Over a wide range of practitioners I run into just as many Iwama folks with problems (not always the same problems) as I do in any other methodology. IME, anyway. Best, Chris Aikido Sangenkai
