Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Need a HKD BB to go with your TKD BB?
#21
(10-02-2015, 10:53 PM)sidekick Wrote: I found the following on a forum dealing with Steven Segal and what style of Aikido he does, very interesting post.

"As I said in another post, Seagal Sensei's aikido was developed through many teachers(Ishisaka, Tohei, Abe, Isoyama) but the guy he spent many hours training with and of course the guy he resembles the most is Isoyama Sensei. This comes directly from Seagal Sensei's mouth from his original forum on his web page AND it comes directly from a guy whom has studied under Isoyama Sensei since around 1958 when Isoyama Sensei left Iwama and became the head instructor in the Japanese Air Self Defense Forces at Chitose Air Base. Isoyama's aikido is DIRECTLY from Ueshiba Sensei. He and Saito Sensei were two very rare people that learned ALL of their aikido directly from the founder. Isoyama's aikido emphasizes kicks and strikes as well as very sharp movements. Very much like Seagal Sensei. Hmm, wonder why?"

Now that last sentance makes a lot of sense to me and it follows what I do and taught, but it also opens up a question of "how many different styles of Aikido are there and what are the major differences". Now I will confess that to my way of thinking, any style or system that takes years to learn and become street proficient with is wasting valuable time. If one is into just into the journey aspect and not worried about or needing the self defense equation, then the longer the better. From my perspective, a style or disipline should be able to offer their students a modicum of practical self defense techniques, that can be used, within the first 3 months of instructions.
One of my training partners trained in Japan under Abe Sensei for a number of years then moved to the U.S. where he was training with Seagal. Although Seagal has his own organisation he is still graded by Aikikai.

If you want to use Aikido as a means of defending yourself, don't be holding your breath. I reckon it was six years before I felt confident in Aikido and that's with a significant martial art background. In the school I attend I don't think there is anyone that is learning Aikido for self defence. As I have stated many times, I started learning Aikido to better understand my karate. Practical techniques in 3 months, switch to Krav.
Reply
#22
K-man, as you pointed out, you already had a deep background before your Aikido training began, so the journey is / was your goal and I applaud you on your dedication to such a long journey.

Now here is a question dealing with what different styles of Aikido are there. From my understanding, the Japannese police force in Toyko are trained in Aikido, but is it the same style you currently study? Since they have a different need for practical self defense, could their training be expidited in some way or is it a totally different style? You also stated that your Aikido training offered you a better understanding of your karate, could you elaborate on that. Appreciate your responses.
Reply
#23
Obviously Aikido has its origins in Jujutsu via its Daito Ryu origin. This in turn possibly/probably originally developed from the Chinese martial arts. Over centuries people have taken different paths to arrive at where we are today. Some things are discarded, some things modified and that is the same with Aikido. I'll get to the differences in Aikido later.

Aikido takes a lot of stick from other martial artists, particularly those who are in the 'wham, bam ... thank you Mam' MMA scene. So why is it that these guys seem to be able to make techniques work and Aikido and Hapkido guys can't? To my mind there are several reasons. For a start, competition organises the competitors by weight and gender. The real world doesn't. Competitors use only a small number of the locks and holds (and they are generally the ones that are most physical), good training teaches all the techniques and,of course, competition allows a heavy strike before a technique is applied, something that you do see in the real world but not in a normal training environment.

Ueshiba was obviously an amazing martial artist. He was awarded his licence to teach Daito Ryu and that is a particularly nasty martial art. Being a small guy he would have needed to have his techniques honed to perfection and be hard and fast. What he did next was really radical. He threw most of his training away and developed a handful of techniques into what we now know as Aikido. But he did more than that. As the best Chinese martial artists and the best Japanese swordsman had done, he developed the concept of Ki. As a result his Aikido became softer and softer and more effective as well.

Like all martial art masters, Ueshiba had his core group of students who eventually went their own way. The main ones would be Gozo Shioda (Yoshinkan), Morihiro Saito and Kisshomaru Ueshiba (Aikikai) and Koichi Tohei (Shin Shin Toitsu). Each of these guys trained at different times and as a result their style was influenced by the way they trained. To me Tohei was the greatest of them all and I believe his Aikido was possibly better than the original. The problem here was, Tohei was the master of utilising Ki, the same as Ueshiba. That is why he was the only 10th dan. He should have been Ueshiba's successor but deferred to Ueshiba's son, Kisshomaru. He was the chief instructor but was told not to teach Ki. Why? I can only surmise that the others didn't have the same ability. Now we have the situation where everyone talks about Ki but only a handful really understand it.

So let's look at the Tokyo police. I'm not sure how much of the total Aikido syllabus they are taught. I teach 'Aikido' to my Karate guys and to my Krav guys. I teach karate principles and I teach basic effective Aikido techniques and I would be pretty sure that is what the Tokyo police are doing. Occasionally I get the opportunity to take the Aikido class when my instructor is away. I am up front in telling the guys my technical ability sucks and that all I am going to teach is how to get their techniques to work for them. Yoshinkan Aikido was from the earlier part of Aikido's development. It is harder and faster than the later development. That is the style adapted by Shioda for police training. If you look at the psychology of policing, once a person is in police custody any resistance is largely token. It looks good and gives the bad guy a bit of 'feel good' but if he went all out to resist the police would use even greater force. So yes, it has good techniques that are valuable and can be used for cuffing and restraint, but it is secondary to other hardware if all else fails.

I'll expand on my style of Aikido when I get some more time.
Reply
#24
(10-03-2015, 02:20 PM)sidekick Wrote:  You also stated that your Aikido training offered you a better understanding of your karate, could you elaborate on that. 

When I started out in karate I knew absolutely nothing about it or its origins. I learned what I was taught and practised diligently. I thought Goju was the greatest thing around, my instructor was part of the Australian Karate team, his instructor was the coach and the other team members were all Goju. What could be better? Then, about 15 years ago, I came across some video of George Dillman talking about kata bunkai and the way kata were actually fighting systems. When I started looking further I came across the work of Iain Abernethy and Geoff Thompson from the UK. I realised that my understanding of karate, despite years of diligent training was limited to the 'schoolboy karate' practised by most people world wide. 

Karate guys take offence when I call their art 'schoolboy karate' but it reflects the fact that when karate was introduced to the schools and universities in Japan, it was for health and physical fitness. It was a totally different animal to the original one in Okinawa. An American Karateka, David Oddy, nailed it when he called many highly ranked 'experts' advanced beginners. That described my training perfectly.

Another thing I recognised was that the formal Japanese karate styles (as distinct from Okinawan) were very much sport oriented and really weren't reality based. 

The issue now was, I had identified the problem and I couldn't ignore it. I was teaching my students the same things I had been taught and I didn't know who in Australia to turn to expand my understanding. I looked at guys like Kevin O'Hagen and other combative so guys. I started looking at top Baghua and Wing Chun guys on video realising that as karate's origins lay in China I might get some understanding there. I looked at Kyusho, read about Tegumi and came across 'Ki'. I understood the concept of 'hard' Ki but 'soft' Ki was something else. My son introduced me to an Aikido teacher who could do amazing things without using physical strength. 

'Goju', as in Goju karate, means 'hard' and 'soft'. I understood the 'hard'. Could the skills this guy had be the 'soft'? I started training with him just on nine years ago. A few years later I went to Okinawa and had the privilege to meet a guy called Tetsuhiro Hokama, a 10th dan Goju practitioner who confirmed my understanding.

Now I am still a rusted on Karateka but with skills complemented by my Aikido training.
Reply
#25
(09-22-2015, 03:40 PM)Conrad Wrote: The Taekwondo I was taught always incorporated a fair amount of locks and bars.
...
Later I was told (by a 5th Dan WTF Taekwondo practitioner) that what I had learned "was not Taekwondo."  By then I was a black belt, had done more research about the history of martial arts in general and my own lineage in particular, had joined IKSDA, and therefore had more understanding of some of the dynamics.  So I just politely nodded.  From his perspective, he made sense.

(09-23-2015, 11:36 AM)Kong Soo Do Wrote: ...

Is it Taekwondo with locks and throws or is it Hapkido?  Is it Hapkido or is in Jiu Jutsu?  Or is it Karate with properly applied bunkai?  Or is it White Craine Gong Fu? 

...

I have mentioned several times on another board, that I once taught a 4th Dan TKD and his wife.  Several times when I would teach a technique, he would get a pensive look in his eye, and then comment that he recognized the movement of that technique from TKD.  It had made no sense in the kata he had been taught, and when questioning the move, was told it was part of the "art" of TKD.

Probably not as strange as it might sound when one considers the nearness of both TKD's and HKD's lineages from Japanese arts.
Reply
#26
(10-26-2015, 01:25 PM)oftheherd1 Wrote: [quote pid='390' dateline='1442936441']
I have mentioned several times on another board, that I once taught a 4th Dan TKD and his wife.  Several times when I would teach a technique, he would get a pensive look in his eye, and then comment that he recognized the movement of that technique from TKD.  It had made no sense in the kata he had been taught, and when questioning the move, was told it was part of the "art" of TKD.

Probably not as strange as it might sound when one considers the nearness of both TKD's and HKD's lineages from Japanese arts.

[/quote]

Very satisfying when the light bulb goes off for someone.  And hopefully they'll continue it along to others.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)