222019 Bullies, 4194 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 21 to 30 of 35
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 123 4 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. glad2bhere is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    288

    Posted On:
    3/18/2007 5:14pm


     Style: Yon Mu Kwan Hapkido

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Not to pick nits, but technically, if the art is not related in some way to a tradition of the Aizu clan (of which the Takeda family is one branch), I don't know that I would use the prefix "aiki". reading the Later Donn Draeger, he relates that the concept of "aiki" originates with a philosophy posited by a Neo-Confucian scholar in the 18th century. Fact is that before that noone realy used the term and certainly not in the way that we have come to use it today. (I state it this way because there are continually some Japanese sword traditions who suggest that they used the term "aiki" many years before it came to be used for unarmed combat.)

    What that leaves us with is that
    a.) what we call today "Daito-Ryu Aiki-ju-jutsu" did not exist as a structured system before Takeda, Tokimuna and Kondo Sensei gave the curriculum structure in the last 20 years.

    b.) What we call today "Daito-Ryu Aiki-ju-jutsu" did not exist as an art before Takeda Sokaku named it as such, at the behest of YOSHIDA Kotaro in about 1919.

    c.) What we call today "Daito-Ryu Aiki-ju-jutsu" did not exist as an "aiki" tradition before the concept of "aiki" was formulated in the 1700-s.

    d.) What we call today "Daito-Ryu Aiki-ju-jutsu" did not exist as a traditional art or "koryu" since the original practice identified as "Daito-ryu" was a martial practice associated with the Aizu clan and lost for about 200 years between the 16th and 20th century. FWIW.

    Best Wishes,

    Bruce
    .
  2. Plasma is offline
    Plasma's Avatar

    Bullshido Admin

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,042

    Posted On:
    3/18/2007 6:33pm

    supporting memberforum leaderstaff
     Style: 柔術

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    If I was in Japan I would recommend you go to the Kodokan in Tokyo for Judo. If you are die hard for a Ko-ryu IMO there are better ones then Daito-ryu.
  3. lucky_8353 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    38

    Posted On:
    4/30/2007 4:01pm


     Style: Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I trained in Daito Ryu for two years in Numata-shi with the Renshinkan Dojo (after ten years of training DTR in the US). The training is NOT MMA or BJJ-esque at all. Daito Ryu as I was taught in Japan takes many years to make into an effective fighting base but once you really learn it and "get it", it's really awesome and unbelievably simple.

    There aren't that many koryu jujutsu systems around so I'm not sure which systems Ninjew would classify as "better than Daito Ryu". Since it has taken me 18+ years to learn about half of the Daito Ryu system, I believe very few persons can learn multiple systems to an extent to be able to comment on their completeness or "betterness".

    I agree with those that wrote to "try it" and if you like it, stick with it. Best of luck...

    Lucky
  4. WorldWarCheese is offline
    WorldWarCheese's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,121

    Posted On:
    5/01/2007 8:03am


     Style: Muay Thai n00b

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Not to be rude or anything, I'd just like to ask a few questions and make a couple of observations on my own.

    Quote Originally Posted by lucky_8353
    I trained in Daito Ryu for two years in Numata-shi with the Renshinkan Dojo (after ten years of training DTR in the US). The training is NOT MMA or BJJ-esque at all.
    This has nothing to do really with anything, but you must be a fair rank after all that time. Also, have you trained in BJJ to make that comparison? And even if you haven't what would the exact differences and similarities? All training, even from school to school in the same style, is different but what are the big differences here? Is it just the techniques learned or is it the training style as well?

    Daito Ryu as I was taught in Japan takes many years to make into an effective fighting base but once you really learn it and "get it", it's really awesome and unbelievably simple.
    If it's a very simplistic art, why does it take so long to pick up and be used effectively? Personally, one of the reasons I like Judo so much is that after about two weeks of good training, rookies are able to somewhat effectively use what they know in randori. If an art is COMPLICATED that's when people might assume it to take a number of years to use, not simple.

    There aren't that many koryu jujutsu systems around so I'm not sure which systems Ninjew would classify as "better than Daito Ryu".
    Well, if someone wants to learn a Koryu-esque art and is living in Japan where they can drop the "esque" and go right to the old stuff then Daito might not be the best to learn. I don't think he was implying that they made better fighters but then again, I'm not psychic.

    Since it has taken me 18+ years to learn about half of the Daito Ryu system, I believe very few persons can learn multiple systems to an extent to be able to comment on their completeness or "betterness".
    Well, honestly, I hope you're wrong about that. I like Judo and I like Kyokushin. I'll never become a world champion (especially with all the psycho trainin' regimens people do at places like Pedro's and Mayo Quanshi...) but I'm fairly certain given time and effort I can become pretty okay at them. Look at people who ARE/were International competitors like Yuki Nakai, Jacare Souza, Bruce Lee, etc all of them started in one MA (shoot fighting, BJJ, WC) and later picked up other arts from Judo to Wrestling and Boxing and apperently became pretty badassed at it. (I know there's better examples out there, but gosh dernit it's 9am gimme a break!)


    I agree with those that wrote to "try it" and if you like it, stick with it. Best of luck...
    Good.
  5. Fitz is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    875

    Posted On:
    5/01/2007 2:32pm


     Style: Judo, Tomiki Aikido, ??

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWarCheese
    If it's a very simplistic art, why does it take so long to pick up and be used effectively? Personally, one of the reasons I like Judo so much is that after about two weeks of good training, rookies are able to somewhat effectively use what they know in randori. If an art is COMPLICATED that's when people might assume it to take a number of years to use, not simple.
    Something can be simple and still not easy.

    Aiki methods such as those within Daito ryu are very simple. Minimal movement, minimal strength, essentially looking as if you have done nothing at all. Getting to a point where you can pull methods like that off can take a very long time.

    Watch some of the older Judo folks in your school. You notice that some of their most devastating techniques look remarkably simple to the point of looking as it they did almost nothing to get the throw while you're working a lot of muscle and sweat to get the same results.
  6. WorldWarCheese is offline
    WorldWarCheese's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,121

    Posted On:
    5/01/2007 7:54pm


     Style: Muay Thai n00b

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Fitz
    Something can be simple and still not easy.

    Aiki methods such as those within Daito ryu are very simple. Minimal movement, minimal strength, essentially looking as if you have done nothing at all. Getting to a point where you can pull methods like that off can take a very long time.

    Watch some of the older Judo folks in your school. You notice that some of their most devastating techniques look remarkably simple to the point of looking as it they did almost nothing to get the throw while you're working a lot of muscle and sweat to get the same results.
    Granted. I guess I mixed up taking years to apply and apply effectively. Granted our older senseis do make things look like nothing ever happened, but then again any whitebelt can learn the same tech for a bit and apply it, maybe not as effectively as the sensei, but with more strength and effort. It just seemed like my Hakkoryu class of "You're just learning the tech now, after you reach shodan you'll be able to apply it so if it looks like it's not working, it's because you haven't paid me for 6 years yet"
  7. lucky_8353 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    38

    Posted On:
    5/02/2007 9:04am


     Style: Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    To WorldWarCheese:

    No problem; I'm glad to answer questions.

    I've trained in BJJ on-and-off for about ten years. Too many differences and similarities to discuss in one day exist between koryu jujutsu and BJJ. Techniques and training regiments have been different in every dojo I've trained. What one has to look for to "learn" a martial art are underlying principles and strategies. I would argue principles of science and strategies (including evasiveness, mental harmony, and many others) are the ONLY thing in ALL martial styles.

    Fitz answered your second question for me. Simple is not easy, especially in jujutsu many simple things all have to be present to make the technique effective (balance, posture, angle of force, relaxation, timing and many others--all simple concepts but difficult to unify in technique).

    I don't think the international competitors you mentioned picked up an "art"; they picked up techniques and principles WITHIN the art. It's a huge difference. A koryu art curriculum can have over 1,000 techniques; each technique teaches a principle or several principles working together. Yes, one can become very good at a TECHNIQUE b/c of previous training, physical talent, and athleticism but that doesn't mean one understands the principles and certainly not the entire art. Certainly, Daito Ryu has techniques that are very, very simple and can be applied within a few minutes/hours after being learned to an unwilling, trained opponent (e.g. hadakajime aka rear naked choke) but I wouldn't call a person who has learned hadakajime someone who has picked up Daito Ryu. On the other hand, I can explain ALL the principles of a technique to a student and show them the same technique twenty-times and they still won't be able to do it. Maybe I'm a bad student and teacher but it's also possible that Daito Ryu is just really hard to learn...I like the second assumption better. :)
  8. WorldWarCheese is offline
    WorldWarCheese's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,121

    Posted On:
    5/02/2007 8:11pm


     Style: Muay Thai n00b

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lucky_8353
    I've trained in BJJ on-and-off for about ten years.
    Just checking.

    Too many differences and similarities to discuss in one day exist between koryu jujutsu and BJJ. Techniques and training regiments have been different in every dojo I've trained. What one has to look for to "learn" a martial art are underlying principles and strategies. I would argue principles of science and strategies (including evasiveness, mental harmony, and many others) are the ONLY thing in ALL martial styles.
    Umm... little confused here. Maybe I'm just reading it wrong, but yeah, I have no clue what this means.

    Fitz answered your second question for me. Simple is not easy, especially in jujutsu many simple things all have to be present to make the technique effective (balance, posture, angle of force, relaxation, timing and many others--all simple concepts but difficult to unify in technique).
    Gotcha

    I don't think the international competitors you mentioned picked up an "art"; they picked up techniques and principles WITHIN the art. It's a huge difference.
    Just so you know, I only chose those guys because you'd know them. I know plenty of people in multiple arts on the recreational level, including myself. And if an art isn't techniques and principles... what is it?

    A koryu art curriculum can have over 1,000 techniques;
    Tachi-waza, Judo has 67. However, even a good amount of these are counters to others or simply the same thing from another side. I got a Shodan in Hakkoryu Jujutsu, a baby of Daito and there was a lot of techs, yes, but a lot was just "Oh, it's that wrist bind, but with your thumb here" So having 1,000 things, unless you're including how to walk, tachi/ne waza, random weapons, and car maintenance then it seems a little far-fetched.

    each technique teaches a principle or several principles working together. Yes, one can become very good at a TECHNIQUE b/c of previous training, physical talent, and athleticism but that doesn't mean one understands the principles and certainly not the entire art.
    IMHO, one must understand the principle of a hip throw to be able to use O-goshi.

    Certainly, Daito Ryu has techniques that are very, very simple and can be applied within a few minutes/hours after being learned to an unwilling, trained opponent (e.g. hadakajime aka rear naked choke) but I wouldn't call a person who has learned hadakajime someone who has picked up Daito Ryu. On the other hand, I can explain ALL the principles of a technique to a student and show them the same technique twenty-times and they still won't be able to do it. Maybe I'm a bad student and teacher but it's also possible that Daito Ryu is just really hard to learn...I like the second assumption better. :)
    I think if someone knows a goodly amount of techniques with the attatched principles, they know the basis of the art. I mean, if you're asking someone to by a 10th Dan in any art before they move on, of course that'll never happen. Most people don't make 10th Dan PERIOD in their lifetimes. It sounds as if we don't start seriously training from the age of Still-In-Womb then we'll never have a chance to pick up multiple arts or ever "know" any single art.

    And also, Daito technically isn't a Koryu, last I heard. I understand it's trained pretty much like one but I always thought it was Gendai.
  9. lucky_8353 is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    38

    Posted On:
    5/03/2007 10:28am


     Style: Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Judo is gendai so it wouldn't have 1,000 techniques and not all koryu arts have 1,000 plus techniques. I was merely stating that learning the entire curriculum of an art MAY be time consuming based on the large number of techniques in some arts.

    Daito ryu a koryu? It's up for debate; conclusive evidence is lacking for either direction; it's been discussed on several jujutsu forums. I call it koryu but I do realize it's debatable.

    When I would practice randori, I would concentrate on doing one or two throws. My instructor would say to me when I would throw someone with an unintended throw, you did the WRONG THROW. I didn't do the THROW WRONG; I was taught that if you're standing and your opponent is flat on the mat, you did RIGHT. I didn't know ONE single principle when this would happen. In fact, I didn't start "principle" based training until about three years after my first dojo lesson. So, it is very possible to use o-goshi and NOT KNOW the principle.

    I think on the "picking up the art" we're writing the same thing differently or at least my definition of "picking" something up is more narrow than yours. You can pick up or experience the "essence" of an art in a short time. And the art's essence comes from the techniques and principles; however, I believe one cannot claim to "pick-up" an art by learning a few principles and techniques but again I think we are getting into semantics. Like I wrote, previous martial experience will allow some people to learn other arts but the subtleties (which I believe make an art "distinguishable" from other art) takes years to "learn". Simply written, knowing and learning "a goodly amount of techniques with the attached principles" of the art (to me) doesn't constitute "picking it up".

    Thanks for your reply. Good luck training..

    Lucky
  10. WorldWarCheese is offline
    WorldWarCheese's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    2,121

    Posted On:
    5/03/2007 12:10pm


     Style: Muay Thai n00b

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by lucky_8353
    Judo is gendai so it wouldn't have 1,000 techniques and not all koryu arts have 1,000 plus techniques. I was merely stating that learning the entire curriculum of an art MAY be time consuming based on the large number of techniques in some arts.
    Hakkoryu is based off of Daito Ryu and it doesn't have NEAR 1,000 techs.

    Daito ryu a koryu? It's up for debate; conclusive evidence is lacking for either direction; it's been discussed on several jujutsu forums. I call it koryu but I do realize it's debatable.
    I know, it really doesn't matter unless the guy wants Koryu or just some other random art, y'know?

    When I would practice randori, I would concentrate on doing one or two throws. My instructor would say to me when I would throw someone with an unintended throw, you did the WRONG THROW. I didn't do the THROW WRONG; I was taught that if you're standing and your opponent is flat on the mat, you did RIGHT. I didn't know ONE single principle when this would happen. In fact, I didn't start "principle" based training until about three years after my first dojo lesson. So, it is very possible to use o-goshi and NOT KNOW the principle.
    Wait... wha? What's your definition of principle... and why did it take your sensei so long to teach you one?

    I think on the "picking up the art" we're writing the same thing differently or at least my definition of "picking" something up is more narrow than yours. You can pick up or experience the "essence" of an art in a short time. And the art's essence comes from the techniques and principles; however, I believe one cannot claim to "pick-up" an art by learning a few principles and techniques but again I think we are getting into semantics. Like I wrote, previous martial experience will allow some people to learn other arts but the subtleties (which I believe make an art "distinguishable" from other art) takes years to "learn". Simply written, knowing and learning "a goodly amount of techniques with the attached principles" of the art (to me) doesn't constitute "picking it up".
    I think "picking up" = starting an art after already doing one and continuing your previous training. You're saying you need to focus all your energy on one or something negative is implied, while I feel by "picking up an art" while still doing another you will not have problems and be able to progress at the normal rate and nothing will be subtracted from either practice.


    Just because I'm a Star Wars geek and he showed up -->:chewy:
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 123 4 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.