What is the difference between Akido, and Chin Na?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Can anyone tell me specifically? So much looks so similar. There are a few key things that scream Akido, but nothing that I see to separate Chin Na from it.

[xcakid]

Aikido has a little Tai Chi incorporated in it by way of transferring momentum/energy or redirection of.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Tai Chi comes from Tai Tzu & Hong Quan, so all that is in Chin Na too..especially when you realize that Taiji is a lot of Chin Na.

[The Willow Sword]

as one who has had training in aikido i would say the difference is style and philosophy. During Ueshiba Morihei's early travels in Manchuria he most likely learned bagua forms an chin na from the people he traveled with. He was already skilled in Aiki-jitsu and kendo was a Soldier. he created aikido well after those brutal times and it became an excersise in movement and harmony of oneself through life. most people Bash aikido because the actual fighting ability of most aikido practitioners is not that great. it takes years to master the techniques and even then Aikido STILL does nothing but choreographed routines that in my opinion lead to nowhere. I learned to fall and to recieve and bind an attack so that i could have a chance of countering with something more aggressive. as for chin na, those techniques are what i feel to be the Base and fundamentals of aikido as well as aikido being a japanese version of Bagua(in a sense) both are circular in nature and both rely on grappling and manipulating the joints and take downs with emphasis on hyper extending those joints to the point of tearing ligaments right off the bone.

i feel that aikido is a beautiful expression but as a really good way of defending oneself? well it can help but should not souley be relied upon.

Peace,TWS

[HOKPAIWES]

Sometimes when we are drilling something and a student points out,- "hey, this is just like what I learned in such and such style". Our sifu always has the same reply, he nods his head and says,- " thats because good fighting is good fighting".

Earlier this year there was a pit fight at a local bar, very ruff and bloody game there. One of the fighters won his match with a stone cold K.O., he used what we in crane world call clear and fist hook. The fighter has never stepped foot in or probably never even heard of a TWC classroom, yet there he is using one of our signature favorites.

Good fighting is good fighting.

[B-Rad]

The chin na I learned had more resistance training and more chin na specific strength training rather than just relying on what you have already. Most of the akido I've seen seems to be entirely based on using your own opponents strength again him. You'll never just flat out overpower someone (at least from what I've seen... never taken a class myself).

[B-Rad]

I suppose akido is one way of practicing chin na. My teacher wouldn't say it's not "chin na" just because it's from another country. It's just a Chinese word for a type of application.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I think there are fundamental usage differences, I just don't know what they are.

[Christopher M]

Oh, I know this one! They're different martial arts!

More accurately, one is a japanese martial art, and one is a category of techniques in the chinese martial arts.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Gee, THAT narrows it down to somthing visibly identifiable!!

I wonder why i couldn't figure THAT out for myself!! :rolleyes:

[Christopher M]

I know! I was quite surprised too! (But I didn't want to say anything; you know, for appearance's sake.)

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

LOL!!!




--------------------------------------------> Sell March 08 Cocoa

[Bruce W Sims]

This may not make any sense to most folks but the difference is actually quite simple.

Aikido, somewhat like Korean YU SOOL is based on Newtonian Physics, including manipulation of velocity, angle/vectors, mass, power, timing and so forth.

CHNI NA, like Korean HAPKIYUSOOL is based on impacting the neuro-muscular system.

Now here is where the problem comes in and the clarity goes out the window. Each of the arts I have mentioned is not exclusive to the other arts meaning each art has aspects of the other arts involved. This is why the minute you make a gneral statement about, say, Aikido, someone is bound to make a comment like "but we do that other stuff, too!"

So what it comes down to is a matter of emphasis and also where one grabs the art in its development. Early Ueyshiba Aikido and Early Choi Hapkido are pretty nasty stuff and based almost exclusively on Physics. In time Ueyshiba became very "cosmic" in his teaching and suddenly Aikido became a "love fest". Hapkido has likewise loosened-up quite a bit to make it a greater commercial success. CHIN NA has not lost its edge, but I imagine its just a matter of time. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Mr Punch]

Only one of them exists.

[Mr Punch]

Aikido has a little Tai Chi incorporated in it by way of transferring momentum/energy or redirection of.Nope. They do both work on 'transferring momentum/energy or redirection of', but that doesn't mean that aikido 'incorporates' tai chi: they have proven different origins and different ways of 'transferring momentum/energy or redirection of'.

Incidentally, boxing could be described as 'transferring momentum/energy or redirection of': if I punch you in the face I am transferring my momentum/energy into your face; if I parry your jab I am 'redirection of'!

[TenTigers]

Chris nailed it..chin-na is not a style, it is a catagory of technique. Plain and simple, it is seizing and twisting, but has sub-catagories such as sealing the breath, and vital point striking. So Aikido has Chin-na,Hapkido has chin-na,jiu-jutsu has chin-na, and wrestling has chin-na. Your Mom grabbed your wrist and squeezed it hard saying,"NO!" making you drop it,when you picked up something that you shouldn't, that was chin-na. Translate it into English and you don't have to try to figure it out. You will realise how ridiculous this conversation is:
"What's the difference between Aikido and siezing and twisting?"
Now, of course you might want to delve deeper and ask, "What is the difference between Aikido's locking techniques and TWC's locking techniques?"or, Shuai Jiao's, or Hapkido's,etc., and down the list.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

What is the difference between Akido, and Long Fist, Taiji, Eagle claw and Bagua Chin Na?

[Mr Punch]

During Ueshiba Morihei's early travels in Manchuria he most likely learned bagua forms an chin na from the people he traveled with. Where DOES this crap come from? I hear this unsubstantiated and completely unfounded nonsense in a lot of places. WTF makes you think in your wildest imaginings, thata Chinese MA master (notoriously cagey about teaching to foreigners even now) would accept a member of a foreign invading, occupying and notoriously brutal enemy army into their little teaching circles?


I learned to fall and to recieve and bind an attack so that i could have a chance of countering with something more aggressive. I think you learned crap aiki. That's not a personal attack - there's a lot of it about.

As far as aggression is concerned: every aiki move starts with a strike, and many of them incorporate strikes on the way to further disrupt the body structure and balance of the opponent. The whole ideal of handling someone without damaging them is supposed to be the highest level and is widely recognised as just that: an ideal.

And although the wrsit grab and other unrealistic grabs are slated in aiki, they should only be practiced until the student has grasped the basic movements. My sensei always said, "If you can lock them great, but if they let go, just hit them!" In the old days, if soemone grabbed your sword hand, your sword hand would initiate the lock but the ulitmate aim was to cut through your opponent: the locks rarely came off - they were mostly releases so you could strike into your opponent and get the kuzushi (or get the kuzushi in the process of the release).

as for chin na, those techniques are what i feel to be the Base and fundamentals of aikido as well as aikido being a japanese version of Bagua(in a sense) both are circular in nature and both rely on grappling and manipulating the joints and take downs with emphasis on hyper extending those joints to the point of tearing ligaments right off the bone. Utter bollocks.

1) Chin-na, as just stated by Ten Tigers and others is not form one source and there are very different chin-na across very different arts.
2) NO chin-na is part of the base/fundamentals of aikido, which along with its sister art jujutsu is the most provenly original Japanese art with references going back to the 6th century with the single exception of sumai.
3) Aikido is not the Japanese version of bagua, or any other Chinese martial art in historical terms.
3) The little chin-na I've been shown in wing chun is very very straight - the delivery is the abject opposite of aikido. Sure if your art is more circular there will be more similarities. But even then: a lot of tai chi is circular but a lot is also direct.

[Mr Punch]

This may not make any sense to most folks but the difference is actually quite simple.Translation: I made this up, and you might not agree, but if you don't that's because there is something deficient in you. :p


Aikido, somewhat like Korean YU SOOL is based on Newtonian Physics, including manipulation of velocity, angle/vectors, mass, power, timing and so forth. This is a specious comment. All MA are based on Newtonian physics. Unless you're watching 'The Matrix'! :D

Philosophically, it doesn't have anything to do with physics: Ueshiba was a martial artist in the literal sense of the word (i.e. a soldier who supposedly used his arts in battle - certainly his yari/juukendo upon which all of aikido's core body movement is based, and possibly his kenjutsu, upon which most of aikido's techniques are based) and then more into metaphysics than he ever was into physics.

The physics is purely your interpretation, as is the 'impacting the neuro-muscular system'.

[Mr Punch]

What is the difference between Akido, and Long Fist, Taiji, Eagle claw and Bagua Chin Na?There's no such thing as 'akido'.

[TenTigers]

to answer my own question, when you get down to it, you will probably not find a difference in the actual locking. Perhaps the delivering of the strikes before and after,the method of combining it with other locks, and the flow, and the footwork, but a wrist,(or any other joint) will twist one way, and the other, up and down, etc. Bend it past its range of motion, or bend it against its natural motion, and there you have it. Probably the main difference will be the type of pajamas one wears when practicing.:rolleyes:

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

So, what are the stylistic differences?

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

What techniques are in Akido that are not seen in Chinese Chin Na?

Of the techniques that are the same, what is the difference in usage?

[Mr Punch]

So, what are the stylistic differences?

I wear a dressing gown. It's nice. Thick dark green towelling.

[SanHeChuan]

I would suggest going to an aikido school and finding out for your self. No answer we give will be as meaningful. All the Aikido schools I ever went to were hands on day one.

[Mr Punch]

What techniques are in Akido that are not seen in Chinese Chin Na?What is this 'akido' of which you keep speaking? FFS it's spelt 'aikido'. That's with a ****ing I

I've never seen kaiten-nage in any Chinese MA, but it might be there.

Nor irimi-nage as such, but breaking it down into its component moves and you may come across elements of it in chin-na, or more likely shoe chow (OK, you've got me on the spelling there! :D ).

Outside sumi-otoshi is another one I've never seen.

The only lock or manipulation ( as opposed to throw) I've never seen in CMA is yonkyou.

But then, I'm no expert on shuiuiuiui chiao or chin-na, so I wouldn't know.

[The Willow Sword]

Where DOES this crap come from? I hear this unsubstantiated and completely unfounded nonsense in a lot of places. WTF makes you think in your wildest imaginings, thata Chinese MA master (notoriously cagey about teaching to foreigners even now) would accept a member of a foreign invading, occupying and notoriously brutal enemy army into their little teaching circles?

Hey Moron, try reading some books about Ueshiba Morehai, i have a few. I was just specualting about the learning of bagua and such, maybe he didnt maybe he did,who knows, but you cant deny the similarity in movement and structure to aikido and bagua, i have done both styles and see the difference and also recognize the similarities. As to the last portion of your dumba$$ comments, reread the first sentence i wrote.


I think you learned crap aiki. That's not a personal attack - there's a lot of it about

See thats the issue with you Mr Dunce, you are trying to do something that you obviously do not have a lot of skill with, THINKING. I learned my Aikido in the 80's from Good teachers here in Texas, Joseph Birdsong Being one of them, Mark Cartwright being another, dont know of these People? LIke i care.

Utter bollocks.(your reply to my statement about my opinions on Aikido and Chin na and bagua.

What does Chin-Na Mean dipsh!t? It essentially means "Seize and Control". So what does Aikido do? or AikiJuitsu? SEIZE AND CONTROL. The styles are different because of the practitioners or Masters teaching it out. but the techniques are Universal and apply to the SAME ANATOMY of the Human Body. Or maybe there is a difference in anatomy between japanese and Chinese that i am not aware of where this would not come into play:rolleyes:

Bagua is circular in nature,by its very essence and fundamentals it is. So is AIKIDO, the main difference is that Aikido doesnt stop the motion to strike with force. I recognize the structural differences of Both Systems but also see the Glaring similarity to them both, which is why my experienced opinion allows me to say, AIKIDO is a Japanese version of Bagua(in a sense). I didnt say it was an exact duplicate you dimwit.
You want to get into a flame war over this id be happy to oblige, Mr Dunce, and JFY your non personal attacks to me are as transparant as you are regarding how much you actually KNOW about Aikido. I am offering up opinions and some experience here. YOU are starting sh!t, and i dont take sh!t from anyone.

Hey and if really want to split hairs here, you do Aikijutsu right? Well that really isnt the same as Aikido now is it? Oh but it is Similar right?:rolleyes:

TWS

[Mr Punch]

You got Tourette's or something?

It's kind of a badge of honour to get such a heated, childish and abusive comeback from a renowned forum ass like you Swordy.

This is me :), not addressing any of what you may like to pass off as points.

[Bruce W Sims]

You got Tourette's or something?

It's kind of a badge of honour to get such a heated, childish and abusive comeback from a renowned forum ass like you Swordy.

This is me :), not addressing any of what you may like to pass off as points.


Translation: I made this up, and you might not agree, but if you don't that's because there is something deficient in you.

Not sure where all the anger is coming from. As far as I can tell we are having an decent discussion. A mildly self-deprecating comment is considered appropriate in those cases where written communications with strangers include declarative
statements. In this fashion one represents himself as peer rather than an authority and the "Hwa" of the exchange is preserved.

As far as my sources, I find that most people tend to stop discussing things if the exchanges get a little too intellectual. Certainly I can provide citations, if thats what you would like. All you need to do is ask, 'kay? The inter-relationships between and among the arts under discussion are pretty well-known and have been examined quite a bit on HAPKIDO FORUM and E-BUDO.

As far as the comment about Newtonian Physics, I was thinking you might want to examine some of the many articles available regarding what has come to be known as "pain-compliance". Just a thought.

Hope this helps.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[Mr Punch]

Not sure where all the anger is coming from. Er, the Willow Sword, I think! I'm being flippant if anything, but I haven't offered you any anger.

Look at your first statement: you say something is simple yet it may be beyond others' understanding... Do you not realise how pompous that makes you seem? Well worthy of some flippancy I feel!


In this fashion one represents himself as peer rather than an authority and the "Hwa" of the exchange is preserved. Again, I posit that you are presenting yourself as an authority.

Is that 'hwa' Chinese btw? It's no standard Japanese transliteration of 和 that I'm aware of, if that's what you're talking about. And why don't you just use the word 'harmony' which is a reasonably direct translation, no? More attempts to confuse and present yourself as an authority perhaps (NB: more flippancy, still no anger! :D )? :p


As far as my sources, I find that most people tend to stop discussing things if the exchanges get a little too intellectual. Certainly I can provide citations, if thats what you would like. All you need to do is ask, 'kay? The inter-relationships between and among the arts under discussion are pretty well-known and have been examined quite a bit on HAPKIDO FORUM and E-BUDO. E-budo is a reasonable board but one whose members have a tendency to over-theorize and over-analyze... Some people may mistake plain speakers with those incapable of having an intellectual conversation. Some people may get bored of theoreticians but appreciate plain English.


As far as the comment about Newtonian Physics, I was thinking you might want to examine some of the many articles available regarding what has come to be known as "pain-compliance". Just a thought. Sure, sounds good, could you direct me to a couple please?

For now I'm inclined to go with your statement that there are too many overlapping areas between arts... so that in fact any simplified division between 'Newtonian' arts and 'Neuro-muscular' arts are facetious at best, and time-wasting speciousness at worst. I'm more than willing to look at anything you point me to, and maybe (!) even change my mind! :)


Hope this helps.

Best Wishes,

Bruce
Thank you for your time sir, and best wishes to you too.

[Shaolindynasty]

WTF makes you think in your wildest imaginings, thata Chinese MA master (notoriously cagey about teaching to foreigners even now) would accept a member of a foreign invading, occupying and notoriously brutal enemy army into their little teaching circles?


This is a really good point. I know a guy who is korean and he said he had trouble getting served at restraunts in the mainland last year because they thought he was japanese. I always found the Aikido/ bagua connection to be suspect. I also find the Shorinji kempo story to be equally unlikely. There is an excellent article by David Peterson on the subject of MA history. It mostly covers Ving Tsun but I think it's relevant here. I'll find the link and post it.

http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/peterson/altwc.php

[Mr Punch]

This is a really good point. I know a guy who is korean and he said he had trouble getting served at restraunts in the mainland last year because they thought he was japanese. That's a bit of a different point but in the same vein. Perhaps more relevant is that there is a longtime student and sifu of a famous wing chun teacher over here (in Tokyo) who trains in secrecy with a private circle of students, even backing down to another wing chun teacher who challenged his authenticity, because said famous Chinese sifu told him that he didn't want it known by anyone that he'd agreed to teach the Japanese.


I also find the Shorinji kempo story to be equally unlikely. I don't in that case. Don't forget there are two shorinji arts over here. One is Japanese and the founder never claimed it to be anything other than his own creation and that he thought the name sounded cool (now a long enough lineage in it's own right) and then there's Okinawan Shorinji, which is fairly documented to be old and from Chinese origins. Don't forget also that Okinawa was a separate kingdom with helluva lot of trade with China, and a shared animosity to Imperial Japan.

[lkfmdc]

attention, attention, class is now in session.....

1. Some who claims to do "chin na" is right up there with someone who claims to practice "kicking" or "punching" or "blocking".... I can't think of a single exception in something like 30 years in this of someone who claimed they did "Chin Na" who was not shaddy in at least some degree

2. The idea the the founder of aikido learned anything at all of use or effectively in the SHORT PERIOD OF TIME he spent in China, as part of an occupying force, is so absurd as to not even merit dicussion.

The supposed links between Bagua and Aikido have been dreamed up by idealists (I'm being nice) who can't get past the obvious; ie that since human beings only have 2 arms, 2 legs and joints that all work in the same way it is inevitable they are going to find similar techniques even if they never cross paths

3. RELATED to #2, the stuff that people associate with Bagua (or any other internal martial art) are features of POST WAR AIKIDO

Read about pre war vs post war if you can find a good source

4. All this being said, Aikido is pretty much LARP'ing at it's finest. Last year in black belt magazine there was an interview with the direct inheritor of Daito Ryu Aiki Jujitsu.... his honestly and directness was astounding, he was up front about how the grandmaster taught people incorrectly ON PURPOSE, taught made up crap to most and kept the real system among a very close circle of which Ueyshiba was NOT part.

Add to this Aikido's post war "reorganization" into a spirtitual pursuit, and the cult connection, and you have a wonderful fantasy but not much of a martial art

WOW, Aikido and Chin Na ARE similar! :rolleyes:

[Shaolindynasty]

From what I've read about Doshin So, the founder of the Shornji kempo I was reffering to, he traveled china during WW2 and learned from several different chinese masters. I think given the attitude of the mainland chinese ,my friends experience as an example, I find it unlikely to have happened.

note: this doesn't reflect the systems effectiveness for todays practitioners. Also i wasn't there so I can't really say if it happened or not. It's just my opinon.

[TenTigers]

Doshin-so said himself that after visitingthe Shaolin Temple, and seeing the frescoes of the monks practicing, he was so inspired by that and the legends that he created Shorinji Kempo. Never once did he mention ever actually training in Chinese Martial Arts. Shorinji Kempo is basically a jiujutsu style combined with their own version of zen called Kongo zen, which is an accepted religion in Japan.
If you look at the end fight scene in the movie,"Shaolin Temple," it is obvious which stuntmen are from wu-shu and which were from Shorinji Kempo.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TuLTizxFFMM
pre-arranged "sparring"

[sanjuro_ronin]

The chinese don't even teach other chinese the "real" kung fu, much less a Japanese.

Aikido is aiki-jutsu, a highly ridgid and over stylized version of aiki-jutsu.
Are there similarities?
Of course, two arms, tow hands, etc, etc...

Shorinji kempo rocks, one need only see "the killing machine" with Sonny Chiba !!
:D

[The Willow Sword]

The idea the the founder of aikido learned anything at all of use or effectively in the SHORT PERIOD OF TIME he spent in China, as part of an occupying force, is so absurd as to not even merit dicussion

Well then lets discuss since you in your high and mighty wisdom and authority deem it unworthy of discussion, i will challenge that inflated view of yourself right off the bat.

I am speculating based on what i have experienced in my training and what i have read. We will never really know what Ueshiba Morehai took away from his time in Mongolia and Manchuria. Maybe he learned some things. i like to think that MAYBE he did, sure it was in a short period of time but since he was already a skilled Warrior and soldier i would think that those with whom he travelled with in that time would have shared combat tactics(is that a SAFE Assumption for you all?) or am i being too idealistic??:rolleyes:

Here is an Excerpt from one of the books i own that tells of his journey i am referring to. NOTE: this is retold by his SON Kisshomaru Ueshiba: Book titled BUDO Teachings of the founder of Aikido with introduction by Kisshomaru Ueshiba.

"in 1924 Morihei was to emabrk on a journey that would be crucial to his spiritual development. on February 13th he secretly left Ayabe with Onisaburo bound for manchuria and Mongolia,in search of a holy land where they could establish a new world government based on religious precepts. On the 15th,they arrived in Mukden, where they met with Lu Chang K'uei,a famous Manchurian Warlord. Together with Lu, they led the Northwest Autonomous Army(Also Known as the Mongolian Independance army) in to the interior of the country At this time Morihei was given the chinese name "Wang Shou Kao". However their expedition was ill fated: they were victims of a plot concocted by another Warlord,Chang Tso Lin, and when they reached Baian Dalai on June 20th,they found the chinese troops waiting to arrest them. Morihei,Onisaburo and four others were sentenced to Death. Fortunately just before they were due to be executed, a memeber of the Japanese consular staff intervened and secured their release and a safe return to Japan."

This excerpt basically describes his short journey to china where he spent several months, definately enough time to learn a few things and add to his repotoire(its just a speculation but there it is)


The supposed links between Bagua and Aikido have been dreamed up by idealists (I'm being nice) who can't get past the obvious

and what OBVIOUS might that be? Oh that one is japanese and the other is chinese and they have different methods of movement? or that Bagua incorporates more striking and kicking whereas Aikido imploys none, well almost none?:rolleyes:
Look i am not blind to the differences i have studied both systems for christ sake, but i CAN see the similarities with respect to the seize and control methods of Bagua as well as Aikido, aikijutsu etc. IN form they look different, in application of techniques how can you NOT see the similarities? Im not saying that aikido has its roots founded in bagua, i am stating that there are similarities which gives rise to questions about it.

All this being said, Aikido is pretty much LARP'ing at it's finest. Last year in black belt magazine there was an interview with the direct inheritor of Daito Ryu Aiki Jujitsu.... his honestly and directness was astounding, he was up front about how the grandmaster taught people incorrectly ON PURPOSE, taught made up crap to most and kept the real system among a very close circle of which Ueyshiba was NOT part.


I would contend that this very statement is BS at its core.
Ueshiba first trained in tokyo in the early 1900's in Jujutsu and Kenjutsu(school unknown) He then enlisted in the Army at Osaka when the Russo-japanese war broke out and he served his time. he Then attended Masakatsu Nakai's Dojo in Sakai where he learned the Goto school of Yagyu ryu jujutsu. Morihei THEN trained under Kiyoichi Takagi and learned the Kodokan Style of Judo. Ueshiba also studied with a renown master of Daito ryu jujutsu, Sokaku Takeda and gained his certificate in daito ryo jujutsu. He also attained his certificate from the goto school. Sometime shortly thereafter he started his OWN dojo and named it the Ueshiba academy 1920's.


Peace,TWS

[lkfmdc]

oh no, challenged by Shaolin-Do all over again.... :rolleyes:




We will never really know what Ueshiba Morehai took away from his time in Mongolia and Manchuria.



1. learn to use the quote function, so we MIGHT take you at least a little seriously...

2. What did he take away? Judging upon documents of Japanese behavior during the occupation, he probably stole some artwork, a few valuable hides and left with what might be considered a record as a war criminal

That aside......

You got to love the KF board, one minute they insist you need years of dedication to learn CMA correctly, then they insist you can pick up something in a few months :rolleyes:





Maybe he learned some things. i like to think that MAYBE he did,



well, as long as you'd like to believe it, it MUST be true :eek:





Here is an Excerpt from one of the books i own that tells of his journey i am referring to. NOTE: this is retold by his SON Kisshomaru Ueshiba: Book titled BUDO Teachings of the founder of Aikido with introduction by Kisshomaru Ueshiba.



Well, if it was in a book, it must be true! I mean, published by an academic institution it must have gone through peer review and fact checking.... or maybe it was, like 99% of martial arts books, just published :rolleyes:




whereas Aikido imploys none, well almost none?:rolleyes:



your complete and total lack of any significant research into this is showing :rolleyes:

Look into PRE WAR as opposed to post war....





I would contend that this very statement is BS at its core.



you can get your underwear into an oragami knot for all I care, it's still true whether you like it or not

Have you even read the interview RE Sokaku Takeda?

Do you know he had to PAY for every technique he learned?

THis is TOO funny

[Jeong]

What techniques are in Akido that are not seen in Chinese Chin Na?

Of the techniques that are the same, what is the difference in usage?

Chin na and Aikido are of course arts with many variations and methods of practice, so take my thoughts here only as representative of the Chin Na that *I* practice and the Aikido that I've seen.

Seems to me like Aikido has a gentler intent to it. The idea is *not* to hurt your opponent. The result of this is that the circles used for redirection are quite large and the whole body moves a lot. The techniques are big motions. Chin na on the other hand it's about sparing your opponent, it's about taking control and subduing them. The techniques might utilize the same principles, and of course often do, but they've been streamlined to make them quicker to get into. The circles are smaller and faster, designed to get as quickly as possible to the point; the lock.

Additionally I've never really seen Aikido practice snapping energy into the lock. Aikido from what I've seen enforces a lock for the purpose of either tossing them away or making them give up. Chin na on the other hand (no pun intended) practices for the intent of using the technique for maximum effectiveness. This includes using the same type of energy we use for a strike; the consequence here is that we rip & tear the ligaments, disabling the person entirely.

The last difference I can think of right now is that Chin na is integrated into other kung fu skills often. In other words the idea is not to just use a lock, but use it to subdue the opponent temporarily while you strike at vital points and end the conflict. You mix punching & kicking with grappling.

[Bruce W Sims]

Er, the Willow Sword, I think! I'm being flippant if anything, but I haven't offered you any anger.

Look at your first statement: you say something is simple yet it may be beyond others' understanding... Do you not realise how pompous that makes you seem? Well worthy of some flippancy I feel!

Again, I posit that you are presenting yourself as an authority.

Is that 'hwa' Chinese btw? It's no standard Japanese transliteration of 和 that I'm aware of, if that's what you're talking about. And why don't you just use the word 'harmony' which is a reasonably direct translation, no? More attempts to confuse and present yourself as an authority perhaps (NB: more flippancy, still no anger! :D )? :p

E-budo is a reasonable board but one whose members have a tendency to over-theorize and over-analyze... Some people may mistake plain speakers with those incapable of having an intellectual conversation. Some people may get bored of theoreticians but appreciate plain English.

Sure, sounds good, could you direct me to a couple please?

For now I'm inclined to go with your statement that there are too many overlapping areas between arts... so that in fact any simplified division between 'Newtonian' arts and 'Neuro-muscular' arts are facetious at best, and time-wasting speciousness at worst. I'm more than willing to look at anything you point me to, and maybe (!) even change my mind! :)


Thank you for your time sir, and best wishes to you too.

Maybe, its better if we just tie this off. I want to hear what you are saying with a "positive internal voice" but I still hear anger and unless I miss my guess this exchange is not going to turn-out well.

As far as your questions you are certainly entitled to information.

1.) The reference to something being simple stands on its own. Comparisons in and among the arts under discussion can be found all over the INTERNET. However, just because there are a lot of comparisons and just because the comparisons are simple does not mean they are easily understood. Expressing concepts in terms of one another and in terms of opposing views is practically an art-form in itself. As the example of "hwa" demonstrates conveniently.

2.) Within the context of Korean culture the "Hwa" of a community carries a variety of nuances. Certainly "harmony" is one such interpretation. However, so are "balance", "quiessence" and "order". The purpose of KMA is to re-establish the "Hwa", or, as is characterized in modern parlance "stop the fight". Since the Koreans are arguably "more Confucian that the Confucians" the interpretation for "Hwa" along the lines of "order" may be most accurate. For myself I tend to represent it as "the quiet which proceeds from order", but that's just me. As always, YMMV.

3.) It has never served me well to represent myself as an "authority". Thirty years, four books, two degrees and BB in two arts and I still find that my friends don't require it of me and my antagonists are no closer to regarding it in me. Whats a guy to do, right? :)

4.) Lastly, there are the resources. If it were me wanting to approach this target I would start on the Aikido side.

I would begin with a sound overview: AIKIDO and the Dynamic Sphere Ratti and Westbrook

I would then augment this with either Saito's fine 6 volume set or settle for Shioda's Dynamic Aikido. Having done this is where things will get fun.

Go to Stanley Pranin's DAITO-RYU Aikijujutsu for its interviews with the historic figures of the Aiki arts and then grab a copy of DAITO-RYU Aikijujutsu- Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo by KONDO Katsuyuki.

OK--- up to this point you have established a decent education in what Aikido is about.

Now, for a comparitive study begin, once again with the general writing. I suggest
starting with Chow's KUNG FU (See: Chap 5) and moving to Practical CHIN NA by ZHAO Da Yuan and finishing with either of YANG Jwing-mings fine books Analysis of Shaolin Chin Na or/and Comprehensive Applications of Shaolin Chin Na

Lastly, for the inter-relationship among YU SOOL, HAPKIYUSOOL and HAPKISOOL you may want to consider HAPKIDO by KIMM He-young. But if your interest is in only furthering your studies within the parameters of this discussion then I would avail myself of Omiya's The Hidden Roots of Aikido. Not a little controversial, it is probably one of the best treatments of the progression from ju-jutsu to aiki-jujutsu to aiki-jutsu around.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

[sanjuro_ronin]

Seems to me like Aikido has a gentler intent to it. The idea is *not* to hurt your opponent.

Judo is a "gentle art" too....

[The Willow Sword]

Well, if it was in a book, it must be true! I mean, published by an academic institution it must have gone through peer review and fact checking.... or maybe it was, like 99% of martial arts books, just published


well gee uhh i jinda like to think that a book written by his OWN SON would be pretty accurate. But i guess i am being too idealistic then right?:rolleyes:

oh and about the "being challenged by Sd all over again" comment. Newsflash, i havent been a part of them for years now and do not share their view on things.

i will use the QUOTE function whenever i feel like it. for now i am using the BOLD function to post your statements. maybe i do this because i really do not deem your statements QUOTE worthy;)

TWS

[lkfmdc]

i kinda like to think that a book written by his OWN SON would be pretty accurate.



or blantantly biased... :rolleyes:

I'm gonna take it, from the fact you didn't adress the issues, that you don't have much to say in regards to the rest :rolleyes:

[sanjuro_ronin]

I have seen good aikido,but mostly bad aikido, by bad I mean impractical.

Aikido is not a "beginner art" in my view, but is great for someone coming in as a BB in judo for example.

I think that Aikido can very easily be made practical, like most MA that are not, but it does take quite a commitment on the part of those doing so, Aikido can be very har don the body when done realistically.

[lkfmdc]

I think that Aikido can very easily be made practical



EVERYTHING can be made practical, just practice it with "liveness" in realistic conditions with resisting partners.... the rub is that when you do a lot of the distinctly "aikido" looking stuff will disappear, it will start looking like wrestling and Judo....

Last time we had an Aikido thread, I mention how in post war Japan an American photographer with no training had said that Aikido looked ridiculous in front of Ueyshiba and his senior student, the senior student tried to fight the American. He couldn't pull off any of the standard aikido moves and ended up jumping on the American's back and choking him

[sanjuro_ronin]

EVERYTHING can be made practical, just practice it with "liveness" in realistic conditions with resisting partners.... the rub is that when you do a lot of the distinctly "aikido" looking stuff will disappear, it will start looking like wrestling and Judo....

Last time we had an Aikido thread, I mention how in post war Japan an American photographer with no training had said that Aikido looked ridiculous in front of Ueyshiba and his senior student, the senior student tried to fight the American. He couldn't pull off any of the standard aikido moves and ended up jumping on the American's back and choking him

You obviously don't recognize the advanced Aikido Move which translates to "oh crap that didn't work, let's revert to judo".

[lkfmdc]

You obviously don't recognize the advanced Aikido Move which translates to "oh crap that didn't work, let's revert to judo".

it must be related to the CMA move "oh crap that didn't work, let's revert to san da (kickboxing)"

[sanjuro_ronin]

it must be related to the CMA move "oh crap that didn't work, let's revert to san da (kickboxing)"

Ah, so you learned under GM ****youintroublenow also I see.

[lkfmdc]

Ah, so you learned under GM ****youintroublenow also I see.

I studied under master Hu FengDung and Sam DimGoy first

[sanjuro_ronin]

On a serious note, I had one bouncer with me that was Aikido, Yoshinkan and he handled himself quite well, so I went to his Dojo and after about 6 months was told that I would be happier somewhere else or with private lessons, as I was more interested in "fighting and not Budo".
The private lessons were great though, very rough and tumble.

[The Willow Sword]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4_3TdHBAvA (Aikido)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutQkUk6J2U (Chin-na applications)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx3dCLKKR_M (More Chin na)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr5vQm_i09I (Bagua)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de0mKPySj8o (Bagua Apps first 15 seconds is what i am wanting you to look at)



now as to whether or not any of you deem these examples worthy of comparison i could care less. What i am trying to show with my points are the similarities and the basic common denominators of all these vids.

This is all i am going to post for now. I feel like i have made my points clear in all my posts on this thread. Hope this Helps RD's Alias

Peace,TWS

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4_3TdHBAvA (Aikido)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutQkUk6J2U (Chin-na applications)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx3dCLKKR_M (More Chin na)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr5vQm_i09I (Bagua)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de0mKPySj8o (Bagua Apps first 15 seconds is what i am wanting you to look at)



now as to whether or not any of you deem these examples worthy of comparison i could care less. What i am trying to show with my points are the similarities and the basic common denominators of all these vids.

This is all i am going to post for now. I feel like i have my my points clear in all my posts on this thread. Hope this Helps RD's Alias

Peace,TWS

I think that circular systems will always look alot alike, simple because the body can only move a certain way.
Not sure if you can equate that in any other way in this case.

[ToraDojoNJ]

These videos are a result of an ongoing exchange between myself and some members of the kung fu community, who have been open minded enough to allow for such exchanges.

The techniques are from Shinriryu Goshinjutsu, although the terms and some of the explanations are in Cantonese or at least my best attempt to pronounce them:D.
In order for the kung fu students to better understand the principals. I tried present the material in a way that would show respect for kung fu while showing them joint locking concepts from a Japanese based art.

Any mistakes in pronunciation or interpretation of kung fu techniques is solely my responsibility, I did make an effort to understand kung fu as best I could with an
outsiders perspective.

www.youtube.com/user/ToraDojoNJ

[Mr Punch]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4_3TdHBAvA (Aikido)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutQkUk6J2U (Chin-na applications)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx3dCLKKR_M (More Chin na)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr5vQm_i09I (Bagua)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de0mKPySj8o (Bagua Apps first 15 seconds is what i am wanting you to look at)



now as to whether or not any of you deem these examples worthy of comparison i could care less. What i am trying to show with my points are the similarities and the basic common denominators of all these vids.

This is all i am going to post for now. I feel like i have made my points clear in all my posts on this thread. Hope this Helps RD's Alias

Peace,TWSThere's some similar-looking stuff. Except that I never realized there was anything even less unrealistic in locking applications than aikido. You've opened my eyes. Again, Ueshiba did not do any Chinese arts.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4_3TdHBAvA (Aikido)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZutQkUk6J2U (Chin-na applications)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nx3dCLKKR_M (More Chin na)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr5vQm_i09I (Bagua)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=de0mKPySj8o (Bagua Apps first 15 seconds is what i am wanting you to look at)



now as to whether or not any of you deem these examples worthy of comparison i could care less. What i am trying to show with my points are the similarities and the basic common denominators of all these vids.

This is all i am going to post for now. I feel like i have made my points clear in all my posts on this thread. Hope this Helps RD's Alias

Peace,TWS

Reply]
From what I can see, the Akido seems to be really wide, and grandiose. The Chin Na seems to be done closer in and controlls the arm and shoulder more. Thta is my poor attempt to explain the differences I am seeing anyway.

Comments anyone?

[Mr Punch]

Reply]
From what I can see, the Akido seems to be really wide, and grandiose. The Chin Na seems to be done closer in and controlls the arm and shoulder more. Thta is my poor attempt to explain the differences I am seeing anyway.

Comments anyone?This is true for the most part, but people who practice more realistic aiki learn big and train small, same as CMA.

[Sekabin]

In my limited exposure to Aikido here in Japan (including Mr Punch), I can attest to the fact that most videos around are large circle fun to look at impressive twirly throws and falls, but Aiki when done on you in small circles hurts like b*ggery. It's certainly *not* about trying to not hurt your opponent.

[Shaolin Wookie]

I think the primary difference between the two is the style of pants they wear.

[ToraDojoNJ]

I think the primary difference between the two is the style of pants they wear.

LOL, yeah my wife still calls the hakama a dress. Thanks for calling them pants :eek:

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

One thing I am seeing is that Chin Na seems to like to use the locks to seize, controll and restrain. Akido seems to want to throw with them.

[ToraDojoNJ]

One thing I am seeing is that Chin Na seems to like to use the locks to seize, controll and restrain. Akido seems to want to throw with them.

I agree partially with this, there are osae (pinning/controlling) movements in Aikido. Ikkyo, Nikkyo and Sankyo are three examples of osae waza (pinning/controlling techniques) there are of course more but these are just three examples. Actually these techniques are simply translated as first control, second control and third control, which imply that they are part of a series of controls. Nage waza (throwing techniques) can originate from these controls.

Not all Aikido movements result in a throw, but in demos that's what you will see since pinning and restraining someone isn't that exciting as a demo.

As for Qinna/Kam Na, the techniques are not art art unto themselves but part of a fighting system, most kung fu styles have four ranges of combat Dit (kick), Da (hit/punch), Shuai (throw) and Na (hold). The aim of Qinna/Kam Na seems to be the deal with an attack that is close quarter in nature to begin with while Aikido as art deals with all the ranges. That's to say Qinna/Kam Na is part of a kung fu stylist whole approach.

The comparison of Aikido and Qinna/Kam Na is an interesting one, I like these sorts of comparisions since they help in bridging understanding between CMA and JMA. :D

[specialed]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7wK2_6kScY :confused:

hey tora, have you ever tried any of this stuff against a person who's not cooperating with you? the big guy in that video could have destroyed you at any time throughout that whole clip.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

I am aware that Chin Na is not a stand alone art, but exists as a component of the Chinese arts.


However, you can work *Just* the Chin NA aspect during training, and in that context it has it's own individual stylistic identity. When I see it, and compare it to Akido, it is different, but I can't quite place how.

Now that I ma looking closer, it seems to be a strategic difference, more then a technical one. They seem to share similar technology, and tools, but one seems geared primarily to throw the opponent, and the other to restrain and control which can lead to crippling joint breakage if so desired. Akido seems that it can be rolled out if one follows the energy of the technique. Infact form my experiences (small ones), it seems the more spectacular *Throws* of Akido are the actuall opponent doing it to himself to prevent injury.

Also, Akido seems to favor wrist and elbow manipulations, where as Chin Na seems to want to lock everything in the entire chain, like shoulder and back as well.

[ToraDojoNJ]

I am aware that Chin Na is not a stand alone art, but exists as a component of the Chinese arts.


However, you can work *Just* the Chin NA aspect during training, and in that context it has it's own individual stylistic identity. When I see it, and compare it to Akido, it is different, but I can't quite place how.

Now that I ma looking closer, it seems to be a strategic difference, more then a technical one. They seem to share similar technology, and tools, but one seems geared primarily to throw the opponent, and the other to restrain and control which can lead to crippling joint breakage if so desired. Akido seems that it can be rolled out if one follows the energy of the technique. Infact form my experiences (small ones), it seems the more spectacular *Throws* of Akido are the actuall opponent doing it to himself to prevent injury.

Also, Akido seems to favor wrist and elbow manipulations, where as Chin Na seems to want to lock everything in the entire chain, like shoulder and back as well.

I agree there is the tendency in Aikido to favor wrist and elbow manipulations.
Of course, you can isolate any aspect of your training and develop it.
Maybe the difference is as much cultural as it is technical?

[ToraDojoNJ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7wK2_6kScY :confused:

hey tora, have you ever tried any of this stuff against a person who's not cooperating with you? the big guy in that video could have destroyed you at any time throughout that whole clip.

OF COURSE, it ain't ballet its fighting:D
And if I got resistance, do you think I would expect the technique to *magically* work?
The answer is simple, if he resists hit him HARD! Then move along to the original technique or something else based on how he responses to being hit. Sometimes Qinna/Kam Na isn't the answer...sometimes you just have to knuckle up and hit the person...repeatedly!;)

Again, these techniques are but an aspect of complete fighting. I ain't Harry Potter, I can't make this stuff work magically...he switches up I switch up:D

Thanks...Now that I see the video again **** he's big! Great guy though!

[ToraDojoNJ]

Infact form my experiences (small ones), it seems the more spectacular *Throws* of Akido are the actuall opponent doing it to himself to prevent injury..

Yeah, the reality is that in actual application there won't be a beautiful, high flying throw just the muffled sound of a joint finding its breaking point followed in turn by the not so muffled sounds of someone scream because of it. :p :eek:

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Maybe the difference is as much cultural as it is technical?

Reply]
I am thinking it's not cultural, but strategical. same or similar tools, different methodology for use.

I had a Kung Fu friend who was in the military years ago. He taught me some of his locks and such. I was convinced what he was teaching me was not Kung Fu, but infact Akido. I later learned that the techniques he was teaching me were not from his Kung Fu, but random stuff he picked up in the military.

After pointing that out, he had to concede that the person he learned them from in the military was a Japanese Kendo player.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Yeah, the reality is that in actual application there won't be a beautiful, high flying throw just the muffled sound of a joint finding its breaking point followed in turn by the not so muffled sounds of someone scream because of it.


Reply]
LOL!!! :D

[ToraDojoNJ]

Maybe the difference is as much cultural as it is technical?

Reply]
I am thinking it's not cultural, but strategical. same or similar tools, different methodology for use.

I had a Kung Fu friend who was in the military years ago. He taught me some of his locks and such. I was convinced what he was teaching me was not Kung Fu, but infact Akido. I later learned that the techniques he was teaching me were not from his Kung Fu, but random stuff he picked up in the military.

After pointing that out, he had to concede that the person he learned them from in the military was a Japanese Kendo player.

Only so many ways the human body can move before it all starts to look the same.
Ball up your fist and punch someone in the face, then call it whatever you want....while I call a doctor for the poor sap! LOL!

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

Only so many ways the human body can move before it all starts to look the same.
Ball up your fist and punch someone in the face, then call it whatever you want....while I call a doctor for the poor sap! LOL!

Reply]
You are missing my point, it DIDN'T look the same. It looked very different.

Even though he was telling me it was Kung Fu, in reality it was some sort of Akido his Kendo friend knew. I could SEE it by the way he moved, and what he was doing. It was *Different* than the Kung Fu I knew.

When I pressed him on it, I found out I was right.

[ToraDojoNJ]

oh ok, i understand [now]...hehe.
:D

[NJM]

Only so many ways the human body can move before it all starts to look the same.
Ball up your fist and punch someone in the face, then call it whatever you want....while I call a doctor for the poor sap! LOL!

Reply]
You are missing my point, it DIDN'T look the same. It looked very different.

Even though he was telling me it was Kung Fu, in reality it was some sort of Akido his Kendo friend knew. I could SEE it by the way he moved, and what he was doing. It was *Different* than the Kung Fu I knew.

When I pressed him on it, I found out I was right.

Well, you've seen the videos of supercompliant impossible techniques in Aikido. You've seen it in Chin Na too, but here's the difference:

You don't see those impossible techniques at tournaments where Chin Na is utilized; you do in Aikido tournaments.

BTW, who was it that said Aikido focused more on throwing? Why? Because they do it in videos?

[specialed]

Well, you've seen the videos of supercompliant impossible techniques in Aikido. You've seen it in Chin Na too, but here's the difference:

You don't see those impossible techniques at tournaments where Chin Na is utilized; you do in Aikido tournaments.

BTW, who was it that said Aikido focused more on throwing? Why? Because they do it in videos?

what tournaments allow chin na?

[Lucas]

what tournaments allow chin na?

MMA..........

[Mr Punch]

Some nice posts Tora. I don't agree with everything you're saying but interesting anyway.
I agree partially with this, there are osae (pinning/controlling) movements in Aikido. Ikkyo, Nikkyo and Sankyo are three examples of osae waza (pinning/controlling techniques) there are of course more but these are just three examples. Actually these techniques are simply translated as first control, second control and third control, which imply that they are part of a series of controls. Nage waza (throwing techniques) can originate from these controls.

Not all Aikido movements result in a throw, but in demos that's what you will see since pinning and restraining someone isn't that exciting as a demo.
Actually your translation is off, as is the subsequent interpretation. Ikkyou etc means not 'first/second control' but 'first/second principle'. It's a fundamental part of the lack of realism in most modern aikido that these techs are taught as techs, and especially as osae waza OR nagewaza separately. They are principles and that's all. People forget this and teach the technical aspect of the move as the objective: 'Here we are trying to pin him to the floor,' 'Here we are trying to throw him,' instead of teaching as a principle.

As such all osaewaza are nagewaza and vice versa. The objective is not to pin or to throw, but to stop your attacker! This is done by kuzushi at the point of musubi. Anything else is icing.

In effect, 9/10 of aiki techs in real life do not throw the attacker and do not break anything. And there is certainly only rarely effective pain compliance, usually when there is an LEO or six involved and there are otehr reasons to comply! What happens really in aiki is that you break the person's grip, break their balance and get a good opening to punch them repeatedly in the face, before if you like, throwing them at the end! Certainly most aiki throws to be effective need the punching element as part of the set-up.


Infact form my experiences (small ones), it seems the more spectacular *Throws* of Akido are the actuall opponent doing it to himself to prevent injury.In some cases yes. Which is why if the tech is done properly (adhering to the underlying principles) it is impossible to breakfall from many of the techs safely. Iriminage (entering body throw) is done gently by brushing the hip into the opponent's hip to knock him off balance while projecting the upper half of his body in a large motion to allow the breakfall, whereas at greater intensity it's a serious hip slam and the throw goes straight down. His balance is not then broken in some far projection, rather the idea is to concertina down his spine. This is why a lot of aiki looks rehearsed: you need a high level uke to breakfall from this to read what's happening. You can't do that tech on a newb.

Even when I practiced full-contact sparring in my MMA class, a lot of the time I slackened up on a tech because I was afraid for my opponent. Sometimes this unfortunately enabled them to escape, and sometimes I could hash something out of it. Of course, a lot of the time my aiki didn't work at all at full speed and intensity - the more 'historical' techs (and therefore useless!)! :D



Akido seems that it can be rolled out if one follows the energy of the technique. So again, this is not really correct. In modern touchy feely aikido the meaning of aikido is changed from its origin. This was Kisshomaru Ueshiba's paraphrasing of his father Morihei's later crazier ramblings. The original idea of aikido was that 'aiki' ("balance/equal energy") was to be broken through kuzushi. This does not allow you to 'follow the energy of the technique' - the technique is designed to break pieces off you in the quickest way! The later idea is that 'aiki' ("balance of energy/spirit") was to be achieved through harmonizing with your attacker. In that case you can roll out of the tech. If I'm attacked I don't want to harmonize with my attacker! Believe me - I've tried this in the street and got ****ed for it! My attacker wants to harm me - if I harmonize with him I may as well just punch myself and save him the job! :D


Also, Akido seems to favor wrist and elbow manipulations, where as Chin Na seems to want to lock everything in the entire chain, like shoulder and back as well.Noooooooo! The main principle of aiki is to take the opponent's centre, through kuzushi. I'll try and find a vid later to show you what I mean, but if I do a wrist 'control'/'lock' I still want to cut it through your centre of balance so that you have to fall over or your wrist breaks.


I agree there is the tendency in Aikido to favor wrist and elbow manipulations.Again, this is through misinterpretation of the principles IMO.


Maybe the difference is as much cultural as it is technical?LOL, yes: modern touchy feely crystal-licking yoghurt weaving culture, vs the culture whereby if I'm attacked my primary objective is to destroy the attacker ASAP.

[ToraDojoNJ]

Mr. Punch,

Good points, thanks for the clarification on the translation but ikkyo, nikkyo and the like are indeed thought as specific techniques that convey those principles. There are in fact many applications to ikkyo, so I agree and understand your point.

YES, good (CORRECT) aiki is to create an opening. The breaks and throws happen if you choose to follow through and make them happen, so again I agree with your assessment.

Just as a point of clarification, I don't believe that the end-result is the wrist or elbow control. Those are merely start points or points of contact for the greater control which is the attackers center or torso. Look at any of my youtube video and you will hear me make that point many times. So in that we are in agreement.

THANK YOU for posting, its these sorts of points that and thoughts that SALVAGE these forums. For that I am grateful that you posted.

[shaolinboxer]

As a long time practitioner of CMA, and a public supporter of Aikido, I invite anyone who is interested in trying aikido to come visit us and try a class free of charge any monday night:

www.shinbudokai.org

It is one dojo where CMA is respected and practiced by many members at some point in their martial wanderings.

-Lyle