Aikido.. The reality?

[JowGaWolf]

you could argue that it cannot exist because no thing that exists outside of our imagination can be huge and tiny at the same time.

Depends on your perspective. To an ant a human would be huge. To a Blue whale that same human would be tiny. That would satisfy being huge and tiny at the same time.

Ok. So then I assume you must know that to move something from an educated guess(hypothesis) to a working theory requires rigorous, repeatable testing, and the resultant theory must be falsifiable to qualify as knowledge, correct?

Yeah but nothing in that says you have to be the one to do the repeated testing. If other's have done it before you then there's no need for you to do it in order to declare it to be true.

For example, there's no need to burn yourself multiple times with fire in order to know that fire can burn you. You don't even have to see evidence of this. If others in the past tell of stories of what fire does then you can choose to believe that without evidence of it. With this you don't have to do repeatable testing because others have already been burned long ago. Which is how the stories came about. The only thing that you need is a reliable source and your willingness to believe it.

I always like stuff like this because I've seen it occur many times. Especially in the field of medicine where traditional medicines do a better job and has fewer side effects than modern medicine. Just like modern medicine you just have to have a good source for information.

Science Finally Shows What Grandma Knew All Along​

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Learning any sort of nuance related to fighting involves competitive drills. We are talking timing, balance being able to read or predict the other guys movements. Any of that esoteric feels stuff. The other guy just falling over is where you learn enough technique to be able to start training.

There’s a layer of body principles to aiki (not feel or timing) that I don’t know a way to develop without compliant drills. Once you own it, you can tune it and improve application with competitive drills, but it’s a long time before it gets to that point.

 

[JowGaWolf]

There’s a layer of body principles to aiki (not feel or timing) that I don’t know a way to develop without compliant drills. Once you own it, you can tune it and improve application with competitive drills, but it’s a long time before it gets to that point.

The reason I like this because you are someone who train Aikido explaining something you understand to someone who doesn't train it and won't understand unless he trains it.

Sort of like my "light bulb moments" Where certain concepts are foreign and unrealistic at first. Then one day I get some clarity and it all makes sense. Then when I try to explain it to someone else, it's the most difficult thing to do. I eventually say to the student. Just keep training. It will come to you. Then when they finally get it, I know because it's not what they say it's how they say it and how they say is often the same impression I got when I first understood.

It's like explaining the taste of chocolate. If someone asks "What does chocolate tastes like." Other than sweet or bitter. What do you say? Lots of stuff tastes sweet and bitter, but it doesn't taste like chocolate.

 

[Steve]

Depends on your perspective. To an ant a human would be huge. To a Blue whale that same human would be tiny. That would satisfy being huge and tiny at the same time.

this is the problem. You read quickly, looking to respond, and as a result you missed some really important details. I defined tiny and also defined huge. You can go back if you like and very easily see it for yourself.

If folks would slow down just a little, and READ what other people take the time to write, there would be a lot less drama around here. i think all the arguments on this forum are really just folks explaining the same things over and over for this very reason.

 

[Steve]

There’s a layer of body principles to aiki (not feel or timing) that I don’t know a way to develop without compliant drills. Once you own it, you can tune it and improve application with competitive drills, but it’s a long time before it gets to that point.

Cool. Can you share an example of someone who has applied aiki? What does that look like?

 

[JowGaWolf]

this is the problem. You read quickly, looking to respond, and as a result you missed some really important details. I defined tiny and also defined huge. You can go back if you like and very easily see it for yourself.

If folks would slow down just a little, and READ what other people take the time to write, there would be a lot less drama around here. i think all the arguments on this forum are really just folks explaining the same things over and over for this very reason.

I didn't miss it. You defined measurements. I didn't not disagree nor comment about the measurements you stated. I commented about Tiny and Huge because those are not measurements.

Your words.
"At its simplest and most obvious, if something were alleged to be 1 mile tall and simultaneously 1 foot tall, you could argue that it cannot exist because no thing that exists outside of our imagination can be huge and tiny at the same time."

That statement in bold is not the same thing as something that is 1 foot tall and that same thing being 1 mile tall at the same time. Tiny and Huge are size comparisons and not measurements. Whether you did it on purpose or not, you picked 1 think that is true and applied an assumption to another and spoke of it as it was the same. They are not.


You also did the same when speaking of a theistic god. That a theistic god cannot be "omnipotent", "omniscient", and "omnibenevolent" "while senseless and inecessary pain and suffering exist."

Again, words that depend on one's perspective on how to see the world. Sort of like how some see forest fires as being bad and a biologist will tell you the good of them. In reality forest fires are only seen as bad when human life is in the mix and when material things are destroyed. Otherwise people see it as a natural course of nature, which biologist would agree that it is good. A biologist would probably say that it keeps forests from being over crowded and returns nutrients back to the soil. It allows for new growth and helps sterilize and limit the spread of any plant disease that may be in the area.

The same can be said about death and disease. It sucks, but it's true. 5.61 million deaths have occurred because of Covid. That doesn't include the 9.5 million or so cancer deaths a year, nor does it include accidents, war, other illnesses, murder, and suicides that check out each year. It all sounds bad. But it makes room for new growth. It helps to manage population size and helps to prevent over crowding. It helps to ensue that resources are not over used. If we were buried in the ground without chemicals then our bodies would return nutrients back into the earth.

No one dying sounds good until you run out of space and run out of resources and run out of patience. For me personally, I'm ok with limited life span for humans especially since not all humans care about other humans. All of this and nature just runs in harmony in many ways that man nor scientist has yet to completely understand.

So your perspective on what's considered benevolent, senseless, and unnecessary pain and suffering is just that, your perspective. One which other do not have. Then there's there's the limitation of a human.

Humans are not Omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. So what makes you think a human would have the ability to know what would qualify as such when a human has never possess any of it.

This is the limitations of science. Science is limited by human understanding. Beliefs, Emotions, and imaginations do not have such limits. Science must make sense. Beliefs, Emotions, and imaginations do not. Yet people still try to place such limitations on them. Science is reliable to the extent of our knowledge. It explains a lot of things, but not everything.

 

[drop bear]

There’s a layer of body principles to aiki (not feel or timing) that I don’t know a way to develop without compliant drills. Once you own it, you can tune it and improve application with competitive drills, but it’s a long time before it gets to that point.

Yeah. But you basically have this ability that is developed in this special way that nobody can demonstrate. (Or the demonstration is obviously hinky.)

Rokus did not have some unique power in any of his resisted matches. He was just really bad at all aspects of fighting.

There are like 3 guys who we can pull out and say they can probably use Aikido effectively. Basically all of those guys are big. Or have trained in other disciplines. I don't think any of those guys have claimed some secret ability.

Where for example we might be able to make the argument that say a circus performer may not be a game changer in combat sports but say has some interesting unique abilities developedin a uniqueway. So they might be super flexible or something. But that could be demonstrated.

 

[JowGaWolf]

@Gerry Seymour
I think I understand a little more about the flow of Aikido. Not saying that I have a complete understanding of it, but I think I may have a better understanding than what I had previously. You can tell me if I'm off or not. I'm hoping to land in the same universe with this observation.

I came across this video tonight and it's one of the few videos that I felt that I'm seeing enough to give it a try. I tried @7:33. I first tested on my son without telling him what I was doing and then I had him do the same to me, so I can experience it.

My first attempt it felt like I was forcing it and then I remember all of that talk about blending and flowing so I gave that a try and it was more effective.

The best way that I can describe it is that it was like emptiness but I wasn't the one falling into it. There is resistance but because I'm moving with it, I don't get the same feeling of trying to move or redirect it. I also notice that when my son was trying to apply it (I told him to go with the direction of my push) it felt like falling and that made me want to hold on and not let go. It's that same concept about using the brain's desire to maintain balance. If you can make the body feel as if it's falling it will abandon all other thoughts and actions and focus on regaining balance. My son had a good giggle because he was like WTF. I could see it on his face lol. I didn't try to apply a lot of strength too it as I'm always cautious about this stuff.

Things that I noticed.
1. I was able to use my strength to "force things" to go my way. I could tell when I was using muscle and when I was going with the flow.

2. I could feel my elbows lock up. Especially since they are sore from the heavy bags.

3. The weaker someone is in comparison to the person holding the arms, the more that person has to be able to flow with the movement.

4. using too much muscle gives the person a hand rail to hold themselves up and maintain balance making it less effective.

It seems that the key for that one technique is to keep your opponent in emptiness. I can also see how that would be beneficial if you could do that in a fight. Basically, constantly falling into emptiness will keep the person from trying to fight back. Instead it would get them super focused on retaining balance.

It's like stumbling down the steps. When we loose our footing on the steps and loose our balance, we don't let go of the hand rail. We seek to grab it with force and to support it. But when I tried the technique in the video it was like that support was always being removed.

This is the best I can explain it. I took what I know in Tai Chi and kind of used it to help me with the blending effort that you or someone else spoke of.

 

[Steve]

You defined measurements.

I’m glad you went back and saw it on the second run. You should have just stopped here.

Just to be more clear, the entire point is that we can agree on meaning of words, even subjective ones. I defined what I meant by tiny and huge. You made a choice to ignore what I meant and instead muddy the waters.

and now I’m wasting my time explaining something to you because I can’t really tell if you are being intentionally argumentative for no real purpose, or unintentionally obtuse.

 

[JowGaWolf]

In the video it doesn't work on the MMA . I'm thinking it doesn't work on him because he starts the grab in the position that he would finish in. This means his grip is adjusted to the end position not to the beginning position. When I was doing it, it felt as if there was something going on with my hand and my son's thumb, as if I was locking the thumb with the movement. I didn't try to explore it deeply.

I also tried this on my wife who is shorter to me and has smaller hands and an interesting thing happened. Instead of her trying maintain the grip she let her grip relax and I had no resistance to work with. So it appears that the escape for this would be somewhere along those lines of relaxing. If I hold on too tight then it gives the resistance that is needed. If I relax my hand then the person applying the technique would be the one in emptiness. I can see how something like this would be esoteric.

By the way this move is similar to a Jow ga technique where we bring our hands into a praying position. The difference is that in Jow Ga this escapes a wrist grab.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I defined what I meant by tiny and huge.

You defined 1 foot and 1 mile. Which is not the same as Tiny and Huge. Again like I stated. I never commented about the 1 foot and 1 mile comment. I only commented about the Tiny and Huge.

You made a choice to ignore what I meant and instead muddy the waters.

1 foot is always 1 foot. 1 mile is always one mile. Is Tiny always 1 foot? is Huge always 1 mile? I did not muddy the waters. If you want to make a point then stick with measurements.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I tried @7:33.

This is why the "reverse wrist grip" is superior than the "forward wrist grip". You have to think 1 step ahead. What will you do if your opponent tries to break your grip?

When your opponent uses

- "forward wrist grip", if you break his grip by turning against his thumb, your hand will end up on top of his hand.
- "reverse wrist grip", if you break his grip by turning against his thumb, your hand will end up below his hand.

The on top hand always has advantage (such as just punch on your opponent's face).

Forward wrist grip:

Reverse wrist grip:

Even if your opponent may break your wrist grip, since your hand is on top, you can easily control his elbow joint.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This is why the "reverse wrist grip" is superior than the "forward wrist grip". You have to think 1 step ahead. What will you do if your opponent tries to break your grip?

When your opponent uses

- "forward wrist grip", if you break his grip by turning against his thumb, your hand will end up on top of his hand.
- "reverse wrist grip", if you break his grip by turning against his thumb, your hand will end up below his hand.

The on top hand always has advantage (such as just punch on your opponent's face).

Forward wrist grip:

Reverse wrist grip:

Even if your opponent may break your wrist grip, since your hand is on top, you can easily control his elbow joint.

Good point

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Personally, thinking that you have what you need to succeed is a limiting mindset. I would think even a very skilled BJJ'er or wrestler would realize that they need to develop additional skills to succeed. The traditional MAists in MMA who are successful all embrace this simple truth.

Agreed.

This is something you and I have talked about at length in the past. I don't think you can develop aiki principles at all without applying skills. AND, I think if you want to experience aiki, you should roll with an elite grappler. They develop what you're talking about, but it comes with hard work, and doing it less perfectly thousands of times.

So, let me start by clarifying that how I define "aiki" is probably not correct by the original definition - others here more familiar with the original use of the term, please be kind.

So, to me, "aiki" has two parts to it. One is the part you're talking about here - it's timing and feel. The timing can only be started in cooperative drills (where all skills are started - a partner feeds an input without any real intent, so you can get the motion and the beginning of the timing), but can't really advance reliably without some intent being added, which is easiest to do by the partner actually trying to do whatever the "feed" is (actually tries to shove you back, do a single-leg, punch you in the gut, or whatever). The "feel" part develops best in my experience with a long path of varying "feed" drills that lead to that same point - where there's real intent from the partner. Without that last step, you're learning to feel for something without knowing what leads to it.

There's a second component in my definition of "aiki", and it might be the only part that was originally in the term (though what I've seen from other sources really confuses these two, suggesting both might be part of the original term...dunno). And this part is a specific use of body mechanics. These, you probably won't find randomly developed by an elite grappler, because there are other ways to accomplish what we use aiki mechanics for. I've looked for these mechanics in BJJ videos, for instance, and only see glimpses of them. BJJ (and Judo) use different mechanics in these places. And I don't know a way to develop these without a long path of cooperative drills. They simply take a long time to develop beyond the beginner stage, so they can be used non-cooperatively.

Of course, once they get beyond the beginner stage, they become usable in a non-cooperative environment. Unfortunately, a lot of Aikido eschews any form of non-cooperation. This appears to be a philosophical stance, rather than one based in any practical principal of skill development.

Toward the beginning of a learning curve, you should be making huge leaps. At the beginning of any new activity, everything you learn has a profound effect on your overall performance. If you graph performance in anything, the early stages are where you should see the most dramatic leaps in ability.

In most things, this is true. I don't see this in that second part of aiki development. Most students will work for quite a while before they start to grok what this body mechanic is. I've gotten better at explaining parts of it to students, but I've still never seen a student - mine or anyone else's - start to understand it within their first year. So it's a plodding path until they have a foundation to understand it. Once they reach that first point of acquisition, that's when the curve suddenly steepens. But maybe that's saying the same thing. Maybe all that other work is just what it takes to get them to the starting point on those principles, so that is the actual starting point. I know many instructors won't even approach those principles early in training, and wait until there's a foundation to place it on.

So, I think you missed my point. If it's a 5 year journey to application in any human endeavor, there is something amiss. Or more directly, if it takes you 5 years to realize a "2% improvement from where you were before that)" it's not bias that's the issue. It's an honest assessment of real value added.

No, we definitely agree that marginal gain is not worthwhile. In particular in the early stages where the learning curve is steepest. If you see marginal gain at the beginning, you will at some point see progress stall completely, because something is most definitely up.

I think I wasn't clear. I'm not saying the entirety of the learning is useless to that point. So, for instance with my students, long before they are able to apply the aiki principles (and, thus, the aiki version of a technique), they have the fundamental grappling principles. So they are able to do a seoi nage, and later learn to do it "properly" with aiki principles. Early on, they learn effective grip-fighting, and later learn to do it "properly" with aiki principles. And here, when I say "properly", I mean by aiki standards - the non-aiki version is fully functional (it's usually pretty close to what you'd see in Judo, for instance).

Students often comment that when I do some of the throws and control movements, it looks like I'm using a lot less effort than they are. And they are correct. Part of that, of course, is just better fundamentals (you can see this in how much effort is expended in a BJJ guard pass, comparing a blue belt to a black belt, for instance). Another part of it is that I'm using those aiki body mechanics, which mean less muscular effort in many of the techniques.

But that addition of aiki to them isn't a huge advantage. And it takes a long time to get to that. If I was starting from scratch and wanted to learn to compete in NAGA competitions, I don't need the extra training load of aiki. I'd actually get to "competitive" without it.

[
[/QUOTE]

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Exactly. Prove God does Not exist.

Prove a ruby teapot out in space does NOT exist.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

The reason I like this because you are someone who train Aikido explaining something you understand to someone who doesn't train it and won't understand unless he trains it.

Sort of like my "light bulb moments" Where certain concepts are foreign and unrealistic at first. Then one day I get some clarity and it all makes sense. Then when I try to explain it to someone else, it's the most difficult thing to do. I eventually say to the student. Just keep training. It will come to you. Then when they finally get it, I know because it's not what they say it's how they say it and how they say is often the same impression I got when I first understood.

It's like explaining the taste of chocolate. If someone asks "What does chocolate tastes like." Other than sweet or bitter. What do you say? Lots of stuff tastes sweet and bitter, but it doesn't taste like chocolate.

Just a reminder to all reading this - I train/teach in the body of arts classified as Aikido (my primary art is Nihon Goshin Aikido), which is different from the specific art named Aikido (a specific branch from Daito-ryu, previously known by various names). So it's probably more correct to say I train aiki, just for clarity.

And I get frustrated with my inability to describe the full range of aiki principles. I've tried on multiple occasions to codify them, and have always ended up with either a small set of principles that had a lot of gaps, or a too-long list with lots of overlaps. I feel like if I could put the principles into concise wording, I'd be able to communicate better in discussions like this.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Cool. Can you share an example of someone who has applied aiki? What does that look like?

All the video examples I can find that show those principles are from compliant drills. And some of them have been posted on these forums in the past. But without understanding the principles, they don't show what you want me to show you. Which bugs me. On the mats, I could show a couple of things that would shortcut this discussion, because you'd be able to feel the effect of the mechanics. It's subtle - so much so that it's hard to see, but it's farily easy to feel in specific uses. Feeling that is one of the fundamental parts of learning the principles. We all learned to recognize them as uke well before we were able to perform them reliably.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. But you basically have this ability that is developed in this special way that nobody can demonstrate. (Or the demonstration is obviously hinky.)

[/QUOTE]
The problem in seeing them is that they are visually really subtle, and where you can see them, you can't really see the effect they have. And trying to replicate the look doesn't result in getting the same effect.

Rokus did not have some unique power in any of his resisted matches. He was just really bad at all aspects of fighting.

[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I haven't seen much video of him doing Aikido, so I don't have an opinion on whether he uses the principles I'm talking about. What I do know is that I saw him doing a lot of grabbing to try to get a technique, rather than controlling the situation until he could use the grappling principles (both aiki and not) he should have been learning. He lacked the tactics and strategy for fighting, so we never got to see more. And that's where compliant training has its biggest weakness, IMO.

There are like 3 guys who we can pull out and say they can probably use Aikido effectively. Basically all of those guys are big. Or have trained in other disciplines. I don't think any of those guys have claimed some secret ability.

[/QUOTE]
For anything, bigger guys will have the advantage in application, so this shouldn't surprise us. And there's not some secret ability to it. Aiki is just a different set of mechanics that can be applied. Nothing magic about it.

Where for example we might be able to make the argument that say a circus performer may not be a game changer in combat sports but say has some interesting unique abilities developedin a uniqueway. So they might be super flexible or something. But that could be demonstrated.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

@Gerry Seymour
I think I understand a little more about the flow of Aikido. Not saying that I have a complete understanding of it, but I think I may have a better understanding than what I had previously. You can tell me if I'm off or not. I'm hoping to land in the same universe with this observation.

I came across this video tonight and it's one of the few videos that I felt that I'm seeing enough to give it a try. I tried @7:33. I first tested on my son without telling him what I was doing and then I had him do the same to me, so I can experience it.

My first attempt it felt like I was forcing it and then I remember all of that talk about blending and flowing so I gave that a try and it was more effective.

The best way that I can describe it is that it was like emptiness but I wasn't the one falling into it. There is resistance but because I'm moving with it, I don't get the same feeling of trying to move or redirect it. I also notice that when my son was trying to apply it (I told him to go with the direction of my push) it felt like falling and that made me want to hold on and not let go. It's that same concept about using the brain's desire to maintain balance. If you can make the body feel as if it's falling it will abandon all other thoughts and actions and focus on regaining balance. My son had a good giggle because he was like WTF. I could see it on his face lol. I didn't try to apply a lot of strength too it as I'm always cautious about this stuff.

Things that I noticed.
1. I was able to use my strength to "force things" to go my way. I could tell when I was using muscle and when I was going with the flow.

2. I could feel my elbows lock up. Especially since they are sore from the heavy bags.

3. The weaker someone is in comparison to the person holding the arms, the more that person has to be able to flow with the movement.

4. using too much muscle gives the person a hand rail to hold themselves up and maintain balance making it less effective.

It seems that the key for that one technique is to keep your opponent in emptiness. I can also see how that would be beneficial if you could do that in a fight. Basically, constantly falling into emptiness will keep the person from trying to fight back. Instead it would get them super focused on retaining balance.

It's like stumbling down the steps. When we loose our footing on the steps and loose our balance, we don't let go of the hand rail. We seek to grab it with force and to support it. But when I tried the technique in the video it was like that support was always being removed.

This is the best I can explain it. I took what I know in Tai Chi and kind of used it to help me with the blending effort that you or someone else spoke of.

This is one side of aiki, and yes, what you describe is the "feel" we're looking for. If there's any resistance within the technique, ideally we'll change direction or technique to go where there isn't any (there are situations, of course, where we practically may choose to add force, instead).

Your 4th point is one that a lot of students struggle with. Within many of the techniques, there are points where your own structure - if rigid - provides structure to uke. I think we jointly become a bit of a flying buttress. There are even points where just moving a foot out of the way (without significant shift of the upper body) removes that last bit of structure that lets them resist.

To be clear, these principles are likely to be seen in a lot of grappling. They're simply more the focus in aiki arts - I think because they make the aiki body principles more available and effective. And because it's cool to work on. I've always enjoyed the feeling - from both sides - of a really good, flowing technique where uke loses control without feeling controlled. And that last part is an important tactic, because when you don't feel where you're controlled, it's harder to figure out what to resist against.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

In the video it doesn't work on the MMA . I'm thinking it doesn't work on him because he starts the grab in the position that he would finish in. This means his grip is adjusted to the end position not to the beginning position. When I was doing it, it felt as if there was something going on with my hand and my son's thumb, as if I was locking the thumb with the movement. I didn't try to explore it deeply.

View attachment 28008

I also tried this on my wife who is shorter to me and has smaller hands and an interesting thing happened. Instead of her trying maintain the grip she let her grip relax and I had no resistance to work with. So it appears that the escape for this would be somewhere along those lines of relaxing. If I hold on too tight then it gives the resistance that is needed. If I relax my hand then the person applying the technique would be the one in emptiness. I can see how something like this would be esoteric.

By the way this move is similar to a Jow ga technique where we bring our hands into a praying position. The difference is that in Jow Ga this escapes a wrist grab.

So, a couple of points. First, it actually worked on the guy in the yellow shirt (the grip was diffused, which is the primary goal)- it just didn't turn into a fall. And, yes, that's partly because he started with a bent grip, so his arm structure was different - can't lead the arm into the desired structure if it doesn't start from a point that allows the conjunctive locking. But if you take away the structure of the grip (so it is no longer useful) and/or are able to affect posture, then the technique had a useful effect from a grappling perspective, even if it dosesn't end with the desired throw. In fact, the same movement can be used simply as a grip escape, as part of grip-fighting (similar to the Jow Ga application you mentioned).

And, yes, relaxing is one way to escape a lot of this. That also applies in other grappling. I've seen some excellent video of folks trying to do something to well-trained BJJers, who relaxed at the right point and took away the leverage needed at that critical moment. Watch a blue belt rolling with a black belt, and you'll see a lot of the blue's initial probing (and actual attempts) is foiled simply by the black belt being too relaxed for that. And I think subtler moves are especially susceptible to this. And of course, anything that requires someone holding on is foiled if they let go - those techniques are intended for when someone is trying to own an arm, for instance, and will hold on long enough to make the transition.