Intent and purpose in training

What's the purpose of your drill? How about your Kata? Patrick, at the venerable Mokuren Dojo blog, always seems to have something in every post which can apply to all of us. This post, "Gripe about Tomiki jo" is no exception. Patrick asks this key question:

Or do you do kata in order to get better at some underlying principle (ju oraiki or ran or whatever)?  Are kata a vehicle or are they an end goal?

Guest Interview with Danny Da Costa - Founder of Shinjido (video)

This is a guest post by Bob Patterson, of Striking Thoughts fame, a long-time friend of TDA, as well as almost the entire martial arts blogging community, and someone for whom I have much respect. What I like about Bob’s perspective is that he’s one of the most humble and open of any out there. Striking Thoughts is written from the viewpoint of a beginner at all times; Bob shares his observations about his current training, how it fits with his past accomplishments and skills, and isn’t afraid to admit when he gets his butt kicked by a newbie, or as to how he adapts to what he calls middle age. Most sites, like this one, have to choose between being a training diary and specific purpose informational site. Bob has successfully done both. He’s well known for his weekly Martial Arts News, and the scathing commentary on Steven Seagal, criticism of Chuck Norris’ politics, and for sharing why a basic technique is so good, which is refreshing. This is not to minimize his accomplishments, since he’s got what many of us have: experience. His time as a correctional officer (that’s prison/jail guard for us civilians) gave him a chance to face down and de-escalate, as well as physically contain some bad guys that would give the rest of us nightmares. So with all due respect, I’d suggest you check out his site, and learn from him. Anyway, Bob proposed a first for this guest post, which hasn’t been done before on TDA Training. Without further ado, the interview. – Nathan

---

The Interview with Danny Da Costa of Shinjido

Very interesting Guest Post tomorrow

Bob from Striking Thoughts has graced us with his insight in an interview of someone who’s the founder of his own martial art.

I think you will find it interesting. Can you guess who the interview subject is?

Look for it after 1600 hours on Wednesday, May 11 (US, Eastern time). Don’t miss it.

Thoughts on Tueller (guest post by Patrick Parker)

This, the second in the series on the “21-foot rule” is written by Patrick Parker, of the venerable Mokuren Dojo blog. Patrick and I have enjoyed several years of banter, debate, and sincere mutual admiration since he started writing online, and I’ve grown to look forward to anytime he expresses an opinion, even if I don’t understand it. Sensei Pat runs a Judo and Aikido school in Mississippi, while, in Clark Kent fashion, appearing to the lay person as a physical therapist and PhD with some kids, living a normal life in the suburbs with a long honey-do list. Several times a week, ,however, in the evenings, the suit comes off, the gi and black belt goes on, and he transforms into a 6th-dan in aikido and 5th-dan in judo, both of which outrank and scare me. To preempt any threats or just looks of intimidation for not allowing him to play, I invited him to share his insights from his own context.

Cross-posted here at his site.

I'm not a law enforcement officer.  I don't even play one on TV.  In fact, I didn't even stay at the Holiday Inn Express last night.  But Nathan at TDA Training did ask me to contribute some ideas to a week-long discussion of the famous Tueller Drill.  Check out the video at Nathan's blog, and while you're at it, check out this gruesome example of the 21-foot rule played out in this police reel.

I enjoyed TGace's post about the flaws within the Tueller experiment and I appreciate his assertion that Tueller's results did not validate any sort of claim about the superiority of any particular weapon (a knife) over any other particular weapon (a gun).  I intended to write this post on the idea that what Tueller does demonstrate most effectively is that a gun is not a magical talisman that automatically assures victory - but Paul at Tactical Arnis beat me to that point.  Kudos to both of y'all for excellent, informative articles.

In my opinion, one of the take-away lessons from Tueller (perhaps unintended by the original author) is that a knife in the hand of a person with the right mindset is the most versatile, effective, gruesome, demoralizing weapon invented in the last several thousand years.  Sure, the handgun is (I suppose) the centerpiece of police force projection, but again, the handgun is not a magic talisman.  This point is effectively demonstrated by Tueller.

Also, Tueller's results were intended for police consumption.  Using it to justify anything in the civilian self-defense context is a stretch - particularly because of the simple fact that most civilians will not have access to a handgun most of the time.  But Tueller does illustrate an important point that is one of the centerpieces of our aikido system.  That is...

You can never afford to underestimate the potential of your opponent.

Or, put another way, you have to treat every single training encounter as if your opponent is the most dangerous bad guy imaginable, armed with the most awful tactical advantage imaginable. Or, in shorter form, "You can never tell who you're standing beside."  To us, that means we try to assume that all opponents are armed with a knife.  You have to design your practices around the assumption that your opponent has the potential to kill you if they have the ability to touch you.  That's pretty stringent, and it leads to practices like stab-twice randori, starting already stabbed, and progressive chaos.

As we have done knife randori like this over the years, we have come up with a few pretty reliable pieces of information. First, all of aikido (and probably most all of self-defense) is based on a couple of techniques that we call shomenate (A.K.A. the palm jab to the chin) and aigamaeate (A.K.A. iriminage, a palm jab to the chin done from outside the opponent's arm). The tactical idea behind both of these techniques is the same:

• get out of the way at least a little bit.
• get at least a little bit of control of the weapon arm
• crash into the opponent's center with your whole bodyweight, spearing into his head violently with a stiff-armed palm, locking his neck, and throwing him away.
• disengage and run away immediately.

All of our randori over the years has verified this basic idea - if you go into a knife encounter with any plan but the above, You're likely to get killed.  But the above plan saves you a remarkable percentage of the time. 

It turns out that all the other stuff in aikido - all the stuff you think of as aikido - the cool wristlocks and the airy breath throws - those are just backup plans.  This basic plan enumerated above makes up easily 80% of aikido, and all the cool stuff fills in around the edges.

And you know what's cool?  Tactical guru, Dave Spaulding agrees with me!

So, in summary of this somewhat rambling, stream of consciousness...

• Tueller is an interesting experiment that has implications primarily for police, but that us civilians can also learn from.
• A gun is not a magic talisman that assures victory - particularly if you allow you opponent within a few paces of you.
• A gun is a powerful and useful weapon, but IMO, a knife is demonstrably more versatile at close range.
• You can never afford to underestimate your opponent's potential. You must take this idea into every single training encounter.
• You need some variety and speed and resistance in your knife defense practice - not just the slow zombie attack over and over again.
• You have to have a fundamental tactical plan that makes up the vast majority of your system that is simple, easy to remember, works under pressure, and involves evasion, automatic control, and immediately-disabling atemiwaza (strikes)

[photo courtesy of Jesse Millan]

____________________

Patrick Parker

www.mokurendojo.com

Blogs You Should Read: Martial Arts Spectrum and The Dragons Orb

During my self-imposed hiatus, I missed the connections I had with some great writing and resources in the martial arts blogging community. I’m determined to help my readers by posting links to great sites, and to help my fellow instructors and martial arts bloggers by public appreciation and recognition of their work.
Two such sites are Martial Arts Spectrum and The Dragon’s Orb.


Martial Arts Spectrum is a relatively new blog (started in January of this year), but is off to a great start. I’ve been burned before by featuring and linking new sites, but have a feeling that this one will be with us for a long time. Author Craig Willits runs a school in Fredericksburg, Virginia that features formal instruction in ATA Taekwondo, with an adult program that includes techniques from TKD, Krav Maga, vee arnis jitsu, and defensive tactics. A nice mix.

Mr. Willits writing interests me because his focus is on the practical or self-defense aspects of technique and tactics, while not ignoring the strategies necessary to employ them. He is also not afraid to express his opinions in a blunt manner, and, more importantly, give the reasons for those thoughts.

Some good recent examples of MAS posts are:

Kata Evolution: A Video Comparison
Refractions 3/28/2011: Sumo, McGruff, and Daniel-San – a great weekly collection of links. I hope he adds labels so that we can review or reference past posts that way.
Taekwondo for Self Defense
The Jumping Jack Brain Scramble

Check out Martial Arts Spectrum whenever you can, and look for his latest post the sidebar under “What I Read” for a link.


Another recent discovery is The Dragon’s Orb, written by the mysterious Sensei Strange, whose moniker should give you an idea of the flavor of the content: irreverent, fun, but insightful. Strange’s self description is “Martial Magi. Exploring the path through exploration, introspection, a deep love of people and sense of awe.” Love it! I have to admit that I didn’t really discover this site, it was actually there all along, and I saw it linked several times on Pat Parker’s Mokuren Dojo site, and had to check it out.

From what I can see, there is a heavy emphasis on Aikido content and much is filtered through that context, though

I am only beginning to explore The Dragon’s Orb, but to give you an idea of why you should do the same, here are a few posts to whet your appetite:

Training Montage a post which immediate gave me pangs of envy ‘cause I don’t have a montage myself, and as Strange says, “What you don't have a montage? ...And you call yourself a martial artist. Sheesh.”
Interesting Ashi Waza – Sapu contrasting the footwork of a silat instructor’s ideas with ashi waza.
The Definitive Shomen Ate which does what Sensei Strange seems to do best, expound on concepts and ideas using words and video exposition.

A heavy and satisfying dose of instruction is what you’ll get with every post at The Dragon’s Orb. So head over and check it out, or look on the sidebar under “What I Read” for a link to the latest post.
____
Like this post? Subscribe to our feed or by email and you won’t miss a thing.
Please interact with us at our TDA Training Facebook page!

All original material is copyright of their respective authors.
All rights reserved. Permission must be obtained before use. Copyright 2011

Savage Baptist Joins the Debate on Escape

Mokuren Dojo's post, The aiki gift that keeps on giving, prompted a response post at Colin's Traditional Taekwondo Techniques blog, Aikido Philosophy, Taekwondo Technique ... Is it possible???, as well as mine, Escape as a Strategy in Self-Defense. I'd start in that order to get the full flavor.

I just read Savage Baptist's response to the series of posts at No Blog of Significance.

One of my favorite blogospheric acquaintances, Dr. Patrick Parker, wrote a thoughtful post on how closely some aikido techniques actually match the art's professed ideals. The ensuing discussion, which has spread over three or four blogs at this point, seems to center around the difference between fighting and self-defense, and which techniques and strategies constitute what.

With that, I think he hit the proverbial nail on it's flat head. It's about the difference between fighting, a voluntary engagement of two or more in violence, and self-defense, which is involuntary by one of said parties.

His thoughts on my post:

Nathan, at TDATraining, wrote:

Most of us don't have the time, in a realistic attack, which is likely an ambush of some sort. If I could have escaped, I would have done so. If a situation makes me uncomfortable, I should get out - it's my moral obligation to avoid violence. If, on the other hand, I haven't left, then I didn't expect the attack in the first place.

This provoked several thoughts on my part (Smell smoke? That's probably it...).
Maybe it's just me, but in all my life, I've been in--oh, probably less than ten "confrontations" (I have a hard time thinking of some of them as "fights")--and only one of those involved an ambush. All of them were years ago. I'd say maybe it's just the neighborhoods I've lived in, but most of them haven't exactly been upper-crust, know what I mean? I mean, people do get involved in fights there. Just not me. Why? Who knows?
As an aside, I must also note that I've never had to deal with a complex attack or a skilled attacker. There are times I wonder where the bogeymen that some people write about actually live. All I've ever met are the sucker-punch artists, and not too many of those.
Most of the time, I could smell trouble coming, so to speak. I knew something was going to happen...

I'd agree with that, especially the last statement. If you know something's going to happen, get out, if you can. I'm not so ashamed to admit that, in my younger years, I didn't run either. In fact, if a fight was going to happen, I didn't mind being there at all. That was a choice. Savage Baptist goes on to relate that most of the situations he didn't leave, but could have.

It seems like we're all on the same page, more or less. My post was really related to the fact that 1) I agree with Pat's idea of practicing the evasive technique: no counter, no blend, no grab or throw. Just get into position to escape. I think that was his point (as I saw it). The ideal of nonviolence is just that, an ideal. Where I was heading with my response was that for self-protection, that ideal isn't always the best choice. Indeed, "Immediate engagement can be your best defense - evasion and escape only work if you can outrun or otherwise escape your attacker - if you can't, you could be toast."

Your thoughts?

Escape as a Strategy in Self-Defense

Pat at Mokuren Dojo has a post (The aiki gift that keeps on giving) which made me think, a lot. And I don't usually like that, but I chose to respond here as opposed to in his comments (which you should read, to get the whole picture). The point of his post, to me, is two-fold:

1. Develop the skill of evasion as a technique because it will give you more options, make you more slippery as a defender, and give you the option of escape if you choose to take it. Therefore, "Try it for a month and see what it does for your aikido..." A great idea. Anytime you try to develop a new skill, isolate it, then fit it into the rest of your skills naturally.
2. Open your mind to the idea of escape first, as many of the techniques which are your first choice in Aikido are actually counter to the ideals of the art, as espoused by the founder. As Pat puts it:
   "Aikido guys like to claim the moral high ground by talking about peace and not fighting with the enemy and etc... We drone things (often in a spacey voice) like, “get offline... No, don't oppose force... avoid... evade... don't fight with the attacker... Blend...”"

I appreciate and agree with the first point (again, as I see it), but the second, to me, is an ideal which is not easily met. I actually object to it (too strong a word?) for the following reasons:

• Immediate engagement can be your best defense - evasion and escape only work if you can outrun or otherwise escape your attacker - if you can't, you could be toast.
• If you have no idea what kind of weapon the attacker may have, counterattacking can be the best way to prevent it from being brought to bear. For me, hitting quick and escaping fast can prevent a ranged weapon from entering the picture.
• Most of us don't have the time, in a realistic attack, which is likely an ambush of some sort. If I could have escaped, I would have done so. If a situation makes me uncomfortable, I should get out - it's my moral obligation to avoid violence. If, on the other hand, I haven't left, then I didn't expect the attack in the first place. I subscribe to the "stop-hit now, ask questions later" school of preemption.
• Too strong a response? Not likely. If someone is deranged or aggressive enough to attack little old me, a peace-loving, non-threatening, nice guy, then he must be really dangerous.

Keep in mind that this only fits with my personal philosophy of self-protection, and may not apply to anyone else. I agree with the sentiment of escape. But when it comes to the evade part, once it's on, it's on.

Please read the post on Mokuren Dojo, then Aikido Philosophy, Taekwondo Technique ... Is it possible??? at Colin's Traditional Taekwondo.

Have a great day, and stay out of trouble!

Flashlight Defensive Tactics

Those of you who've trained in Filipino martial arts (FMA) may recognize some of the techniques. Ditto for you traditional Ju-Jitsu or Aikido folks. Interesting material. LEOs should also note that their ASP training comes directly from FMA.

Flashlight as DT weapon

Any observations you'd like to share?

Guest post: An aikidoka on the boxing jab

[Nathan- Today's guest post is by the estimable Patrick Parker of Mokuren Dojo, and is a response to our post, How does Aikido deal with the jab? Mr. Parker is a long-time judo & aikido teacher, and exercise physiologist based out of Mississippi]

So, how do you deal with the boxer’s jab in aikido? I think you first have to think about what boxing and aikido are. Boxing is a sport in which the competitors are both trying to win, either by throwing more punches or by throwing better punches (for KO or TKO). Aikido is, among other things, a self-defense art in which the goal is to disengage from the fight as safely and efficiently as possible while remaining relatively uninjured. Boxing is about dominating the other competitor, aikido is about not engaging in a fight with him.

.

Much of the boxer’s arsenal would be negated without the ring and the rules that prevent disengaging and fleeing (two great aikido strategies). Many of the aikidoka’s tools would be rendered useless if he were required to stand and fight toe-to-toe. You beat the boxer the same way you beat the aikidoka – by making them play your game by your rules and not playing their game by their rules.

With that said, here are some more specific ideas about beating the jab. None are foolproof but each one, with some practice, can give the aikidoka some hope…

• Don’t let the boxer stand toe-to-toe with you. If you do, he will always get a snappy jab in, which will stun you and set you for a more powerful cross or hook. Anytime he steps to within touching distance, evade back outside touching distance. Don't ever stop moving long enough to try to get a technnique - he will always beat you to the punch (as it were) with a jab.
• Keep your hands up between your face and his. Anytime you get stuck inside touching distance, clinch (or at least cover his hands) until you can disengage and get back out safely.
• If you get stuck inside, throw your own straight lead jab (i.e. shomenate – palm to the chin/face). Instead of using the face jab to set up a rear cross or hook, the aikidoka uses it to disorient and distract the opponent long enough to get back outside touching distance. (It also might stun them long enough for a technique.)
• All the cool-looking techniques in aikido are pretty much what-ifs that solve particular problems that you can get into when you are trying to stay outside touching distance but fail. The techniques of aikido don’t work especially well against a smart boxer unless the aikidoka is at least trying to disengage back outside touching distance.

Because of the way the two systems work, the jab is generally a more useful tool for boxers against boxers than for boxers against aikidoka. In the boxing contest, the opponent has to stay engaged in order to have a chance to get their own hit in. The aikidoka doesn’t care about getting his own technique in – just about getting his own butt to safety, so he can disengage and avoid the jab. The difference in the objectives and assumptions and strategies between the two styles gives the aikido some hope for beating the snappy jab.

.

Want to read a great interview on this same subject? Check out this interview with Karl Geis.

[Nathan - You may respond to Pat here via comment, or contact him at Mokuren Dojo]

How does Aikido deal with the jab?

Let's rephrase that: How does the art of Aikido deal with an uncommitted attack of the snappy, balanced flavor? Or, how do you throw, lock, or break a weapon (arm) that isn't there?

I remember experimenting with this during my several years training in Canton Wing Chun. A group of us were training on Pak Sao (an open hand block/parry with the palm) in the basement of our Sifu [instructor], and someone asked, "How would we adapt to deal with a quick boxer?" We huddled up, and started experimenting and discussing, as we usually did. Since I had some (OK, extensive) boxing and kickboxing experience, I served as the sacrificial lamb and did the jabbing. We quickly learned that our traditional techniques had trouble with redirecting an attacking limb that was quickly retracted. Try as we might, the quick, pumping jab was difficult, if not impossible to trap, parry, or drive through.

Months later, one of my si-hing (seniors) came over to train with me, and we went full-contact sparring, pitting his superior WC against my Muay Thai. It was a great day for learning new things! I learned that the high kick is not a good tactic versus a very good WC stylist - it actually hurt my well-conditioned shins when he blocked the kicks. His offense was something I could reasonably handle, but only because I had the WC training, but what was most effective was my jab. The plain, old jab!

Aikido and Judo training also gave me that perspective. I was practicing knife sparring (tanto randori) with a kid no older than twelve, and I was able to handle everything. Except. Except when he "didn't attack me right" and just poked at me with a balanced, uncommitted (his weight was still back and approximately 50-50) stabbing attack. He pumped it, and all of my fancy counters went out the window. And I got stabbed. A lot.

So this isn't focused on the art of Aikido at all, but on anyone who studies a similar style. Chime in via comments - or email (tdatraining at g mail dot com), and let me know if you don't want me to publish your feedback.

Clash - the Nature of Combat

Pat commented to yesterday's post (Boxing Combinations Revisited) by shamelessly plugging his post (Boxing and Aikido), which was inspired by an older post here at TDA, The Three Cs of Sparring: Offense and Defense - repost. Confused? As I reread my own post, then Pat's, I reflected on the nature of fighting, and all combat, as being composed of:

1. Approach: Closing with the enemy (getting into range), whether with artillery, rifles, pistols, impact weapons, blades, or hands and feet. This is the point at which a risk is taken. Who moves first? Is it where you think? Who has the advantage of surprise, high ground (reach), longer range weapon, or speed?
2. The clash of bodies, transfer of energy via weapon or fist, with damage done, energy expended, then...
3. Clearing the engagement, meaning moving back out of range or danger. Clearing properly means you break off the fight when it's advantageous to you, and are not exposed to more danger.

In other words, all conflict is composed of a series of clashes, and he who wins is he who gets in and out safely. It may take different means, but the ends should be the same - stay alive!

Pat properly compares the strikes and movement of boxing with the footwork, techniques, and tactics of Aikido not by contrasting them, but by noting the similarities of the strategies involved.

Look at your fighting or combat system in the same way. How can I get close, damage without absorbing damage, then get back out safely? Adapt your ideas to winning.

Finally, look at how avoiding conflict is the best way to overcome it.

Technorati Tags: Conflict,conflict resolution,nonviolence

Today's Quote: Patrick Parker brings the beef!

My post, Is Aikido Effective for Self-Defense was a response to Patrick Parker's Mokuren Dojo post (A helpful handful – Aikido for self-defense) about the Aikido techniques he considers universally effective for self defense. In said post, he dropped this gem, "I can honestly say that of the martial arts I have experienced, aikido appears to me to be the best self defense there is." That means a lot to me, as Pat is black belt ranked in several styles and an experienced instructor who's been around the block (sorry Pat!). In my post and comments to him, I requested elaboration on why he considers Aikido the best. Without hesitation, he responded:

With My kung fu is more powerful than yours!, then No, MY kung fu is better than your puny technique!, and I'm betting there'll be more. This is worth reading, then re-reading:

Superiority, equality, or inferiority

What is self-defense? Defense of the self. Not necessarily offence against some other. Sure, sometimes there are people that “need killing,” but that is not self-defense. For example, if you know a given martial art so well, have trained it so long and so rigorously that you know, absolutely KNOW that you are completely superior to some particular enemy, is it self-defense to destroy that enemy? If you know that you absolutely outclass them then it’s not self-defense – it is retribution or punishment or murder or something like that.

It is only self-defense when you are immediately afraid for your life or well-being.

When are you most reasonably afraid? When you’re surprised in the dark on uncertain footing and outclassed and out-gunned and the enemy knows what is going on and is younger and stronger and faster and bigger and better at what he is doing than you. You are most afraid in a situation of weakness and inferiority and lack of knowledge.

Karate, etc… is generally built from an assumption of superiority. All other things being equal, the karateka will use superior technique or training or strength or speed or leverage, etc.. .to prevail.

Pat summarizes his views:

... aikido is based on an initial assumption of inferiority or weakness or slowness. We invest in that weakness and slowness by avoiding the necessary use of strength and speed to make things work. As we invest in that state of weakness, we try to figure out how to work it to our salvation. Thus, aikido, by its definition and its nature, is all about self-defense. Aikido is THE art of self defense. Karate, and even sport judo, are not even about self defense in this sense because they predominantly operate from equality or superiority.

That is, indeed, a different way of looking at things, which reflects well on Pat as a martial artist, instructor, but more as a human being. What do you think? Comments welcomed here, or over at Mokuren Dojo.

Technorati Tags: martial art,karate

Is Aikido Effective for Self-Defense

In a word, yes. As always, it depends on the type of training provided, and the attitude, determination, and aptitude of the student, but Aikido addresses many aspects of "street" self-defense, while neglecting some others. Pat at Mokuren Dojo posts A helpful handful – Aikido for self-defense:

Over the past 23 or so years I have studied taekwando, karate, judo, aikido, hapkido, and jujitsu and I can honestly say that of the martial arts I have experienced, aikido appears to me to be the best self defense there is [Emphasis mine- Nathan]. The following are a handful of aspects of aikido that I think make it particularly suitable for self-protection purposes.

• Ukemi – the art of falling safely – particularly the simple side fall and the forward roll. Proper reflexive falling skills will likely save you from many more hazards during your lifetime than any other martial arts technique or skill. Check here for a collection of good articles on proper falling.

• Evasion and the aiki brush-off – the ability to efficiently get out of the way of an incoming force and push the opponent off of you or push yourself off of the opponent. This is the fundamental skill in aikido, practiced in every class as the foundation of every technique. To read more about the aiki brush-off, check out this article.

There's more, much more to this post than meets the eye. In his usual understated way, Pat gives hints and glimpses of what may take you decades to learn in a manner that suggests it's obvious - and to him it may, indeed, be. The post also covers striking, groundwork, and something he calls calibrating the "hyperactive reflexes."

To elaborate on what I said above about Aikido neglecting other aspects of self defense, read my post Its not what's there, it's what's missing for my thoughts - Aikido, like many other systems can form the foundation of an effective style, but has weaknesses in it's strengths.

Please click over to Mokuren for more. I will ask Pat in the comments why he'd characterize it as the "best there is" for him.

Aikido And The Dynamic Sphere

New and used available on Amazon.com

Dojo Rat here again, Gotta get this post in tonight because of an early business meeting tomorrow.
I am a nut for cool grappling and joint-locking techniques. I wrestled in high school all through the '70's, and if Brazilian Jujitsu was avalable during that time, I would have been way into it.
Now I'm an old guy, and I prefer stand-up fighting techniques, including Small-Circle Jujitsu as taught by Wally and Leon Jay and their subsequent instructors. I trained for two years in Aikido with Sensei Charles McCarty who studied under Saito Sensei instructors. What I learned during that time was the dynamics of movement, and how introducing movement to a joint-locking technique can greatly improve how the technique works.
With that said, I would like to suggest that anyone interested in grappling and joint-locks should have this book for reference. The authors, Westbrook and Ratti have created THE DEFINITIVE book on how and why Aikido techniques can improve standing grappling skills and classical pins. The essence of this book is in how the entry to the opponent occurs. Once the bridge is made, continual motion, circles within circles occur. This book has simple illustrations, which are much easier to interpet than photographs. It has a clear categorization of techniques and makes it easy to understand how to handle the entry/bridge, followed by a projection, throw or submission. This book is a must read for stand-up grappling, and is the absolute best book on Aikido I have in my collection. Check it out, "Aikido And The Dynamic Sphere".
Coming up: A pair of the nastiest joint-locking books I've ever read...

Seagal conducting shodan test

This looks like a good test. I like the level of intensity in it, especially the three-on-one.

Ukemi variants

Check out this Mokuren Dojo post, Falling leaves ukemi with some interesting video. As Patrick says in the post, "This guy has seriously GOOD body coordination." Couldn't agree more!

How to Roll

I love this! These guys teach the correct technique to forward roll (mae ukemi) with a sense of humor. I learned a lot, and I think you may too. Watch!



From the Team Ukemi site:
Team Ukemi™ was founded by Richard Maier, Fredrik Christiansson and Erik Dalin. It was originally created to be a small group of Bujinkan practitioners who had a deep desire to excel in the art of taihenjutsu. Since then Team Ukemi™ has grown and widened.
The main focus of the training is breakfalls, acrobatics, martial art trickz and parkour. The goal is to master the motion of your own body in every direction.

Seagal Demonstration - video

This is a an AikidoJournal.com video of a 1993 Steven Seagal performance at the 1993 All-Japan Aikido Demonstration.

Not as good as Sam, but he got the job done...

Aikido History 1946-1956

I just read Aikido in the Postwar Years: 1946-1956 on FightingArts.com, and would recommend it to anyone who has more than a passing interest in Aikido. An excerpt:

Since only a relatively small percentage of aikido practitioners have more than a vague acquaintance with the origins of the art, there are a number of common misconceptions about how aikido attained its current status as one of Japan's modern budo. The most glaring misunderstanding is the idea that the founder, Morihei Ueshiba, was the driving force behind the postwar spread of aikido. This is far from true. Rather, his role can more accurately be described as inspirational in terms of his impact on early practitioners. In reality, it is the technical and pedagogicial approaches of other key figures such as Koichi Tohei and Kisshomaru Ueshiba --the founder's son-- within the Aikikai, and Gozo Shioda of Yoshinkan Aikido (an early student of aikido), that became the de facto standards. Even today, the training methods adopted by the majority of aikido organizations and independent schools can be traced back to these figures.

In this article I will attempt to describe the first challenging years of aikido in postwar Japan, the principal figures whose thinking and actions shaped the early development of the art, and the confluence of circumstances that allowed aikido to gain momentum in Japan and flourish internationally.

Read the rest.

New Link - Aikido Online

A very comprehensive Aikido site. Check it out.