Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Really, have all the "IP" people on Aikiweb read this?
Is this really what all the commotion is about? All the name calling, and silly feuds are about?

This is a very normal thing Mike is talking about, why does anyone think they need to go to one of only a few "vetted" people to get this stuff? What Mike wrote here is great, a very good explanation of a lot of what is going on in internal. Very similar to how my Chinese internal teacher would have outlined them (My teacher who was insulted many times). This is mostly how I would describe these things, why are all these crazy ideas flying around? This stuff is normal!

Quote:

Secondly, notice how I move around trying to illustrate the body's intrinsic ability to maintain that balance-path/ground-path if I'll just let it. The body is a frame, but it's a flexible frame as long as you're using jin rather than rigid "structure" to handle the incoming force.

Here Mike is talking about structure. And how he uses "balance-path/ground-path" (alignment). He is not saying that you don't need the ground, or that your structure is not important. This is normal, any good football coach will teach you these things- he won't use these words, but he will say the same things.

Quote:

In the post about [1.] Jin as Balance, Body as Flexible Frame I was basically talking about what the makeup of jin is: it's a force skill based on an intrinsic ability of the body to juggle forces even while the body is moving and it's a force skill that draws its power from the ground (or sometimes the weight, in the case of down-power). The question of jin and force vectors gets confused when we begin to look at 2 humans interacting with their forces.

Here again, Mike is talking about flexible frame, or what I would call structure. And how you are using the ground, or weight to make force... He is also talking about the ability to dynamically align the structure of the body using the bodies natural ability to juggle forces.

How is this different than anything your wrestling coach would have told you? Why does anyone think that are there only like 8 guys who know how to do this. I mean really this is totally normal athletics here! Why would anyone need to be "vetted" to be sure they know this stuff? This is normal!

Quote:

In order to most efficiently use the body connection(s) for strength, the body logically should function as a complete unit when doing tasks. The logical control unit for whole-body usage is the middle of the body and that's why there's so much emphasis on the dantien/tanden/hara as the focal point (and why shoulder usage would hinder whole-body control).

Every martial art I have studied has told about this, from Kendo to BJJ, this is not anything special. It's normal!

Quote:

The general idea is to connect the body so that a movement of the dantien is connected to the hands (or feet, legs, elbows, head, etc.) via the Jin/intention and the suit/qi. The dantien draws its power from the solidity of the ground or the central weight of the body ("ground or gravity"; the Qi of the Earth). A person who has practiced and developed this skill (over a long time) can spot very quickly whether or how much some other practitioner has developed the same skill; the skill (and percentage of skill level) can be felt in another person, as well.

good athletics.

Really this just goes on and on. All of what Mike is writing about is very normal! It's also very good! That's why athletes use these same principles. Good sports people know these things.

After reading this, it seems silly. Everyone is so worked up, worried about selling themselves at their next seminar, that they have ramped up these simple, great ideas. They have made them out to be some kind of thing that only special people know; that's just not true.

Look if Mike Sigman is going to talk to you plain and simple like this, I would go do his seminars. This is a great outline of how the body should be used during athletic pursuits (yes, Aikido is an athletic pursuit, you are an athlete, congratulations). I would go to anyone who simply outlines these things. I would not go to anyone trying to trick you, telling you that they are the only person who knows these things, or you've got to go see this fellow because they know he has the "goods" it's just not true. If someone says something like "with this special power, no one can defeat me" or strength doesn't matter, leave go to a simple person outlining normal athletic activity, like Mike outlined here.

Please stop this silly action, let's just accept that we are all, at least a little, interested in learning to use our bodies correctly, and that is called athletics, and lot's of people know about that. Let's stop fighting, and pretending we are super special. Let's just enjoy the training!

Or as Mike says in his own words!- Did you guys read this!?

Quote:

One of the confusing things I used to run into was the number of statements about things that were done in a Chinese martial-art; the impression was "these are the things done uniquely in this art". It took a while to realize that almost all of the "things that we do in this art" are also pretty commonly the things that are done in all the other arts, although with occasional variations and permutations. Looking into some of the written lore that is sparingly available in Japanese martial-arts, it's pretty clear that the same basic principles are also found in those arts, again with variations, permutations, and different levels of completeness.

Well... maybe what Sigman says and does are not unique but very very normal in CMA or sports training. However, I like his universal theory and exercises too. With that tools it becomes easier to understand what famous XXX senseis do. I strongly recommend him but at the same time I don't want my dojo mates know about his stuffs.

Chris, the words are not what matter in the end. The words are not what make these people special. Most of these words you could probably find in your average questionable Matt Furey product. What matters here is the degree to which these skills have been burned into the body and the methods used to do that.

While most of these concepts exist in our idea of modern athletics, they are a bit schizophrenic and all over the map in their development, and basically lacking. There are people out there with skills along other axes than simple athleticism - they don't replace athleticism, they augment it - and they are developed to unusual degrees through methodology that we might ordinarily dismiss or not immediately recognize the potential of without specific in-the-flesh exemplars. You know who these people are by now, no need to belabor that - they all have varying degrees of worthwhile things, so don't either make the mistake of judging any one based on the other either. Go seek them out and feel them before you dismiss things based on mere false cognates in skill development terminology.

You will not find the answers you think you found by any amount of reading words on a screen. Some things are ultimately transmitted non-verbally by feel in the end, despite what the words imply, they are not exhaustive descriptions of what is going on and can only vaguely point the way.

I hold Ikeda sensei as the gold standard for being able to use and apply IS in an Aikido framework - I have NEVER felt any other Aikido teacher with the skill set he has and definitely no Aikido student.

If it was normal, everyone would be able to do it. They can't. Why not? It's not normal that's why.

You seem to have a real issue trying to meet any of these people, I'm assuming you've at least made the effort to train with the one Aikido teacher that everyone seems to agree has the goods?

What Chris Hein is trying to tell you is that this IP/aiki stuff is "normal". It's athletic training. And that:

Quote:

Chris Hein wrote:

After reading this, it seems silly. Everyone is so worked up, worried about selling themselves at their next seminar, that they have ramped up these simple, great ideas. They have made them out to be some kind of thing that only special people know; that's just not true.

Let's review then.

David Orange who trained with Mochizuki
Bill Gleason, who trained with Saotome and Yamaguchi
Marc Abrams who trained with Imaizumi and Ushiro
Chris Li who trained with too many to list but includes top Aikido shihan
Allen Beebe who trained with Shirata
George Ledyard who trained with Saotome and many others
Howard Popkin (who isn't nearly as fat as an iceberg ) from Daito ryu who trained with Okamoto (student of Kodo Horikawa) can be added to the list.
Richard Stevens was the most recent and publicly posted his thoughts here on Aikiweb. But, there were others who preceded him.

So, you have top people in aikido who trained with top Japanese shihan and then went and experienced what this IP/aiki stuff was all about. These people are training IP/aiki. None called it "normal" nor did they equate it to good athletic training.

Chris Hein (who trained with which Japanese shihan and which IP/aiki people?) has said it's "normal" and good athletic training. And that all these other people are wrong.

Let's recap that.

Abrams, Beebe, Gleason, Ledyard, Li, Popkin, Orange (hundreds of years of training history with exceptional Aikido shihan) all state IP/aiki is different and are training it -- VS -- Chris Hein who states they don't know what they're talking about and are wrong as it's all just normal athletic training.

That's just the above named people. How about all the other aikido people (numbering in the hundreds) who are training IP/aiki now?

i knew it! that's sigman dude was a fake! i shouldn't have listen to him. i shouldn't let him did the zero inch palm strike that launched me some distance. i knew that big bugger sneaked under me while i wasn't looking and stood there smirking while i squatted all the way to the floor in order to uproot him. that's it! i am going back to do aerobic kickboxing with them ladies in leotard. at least this way, i have good views and learned how to kick ass at the same time.

Yes, it does have all the 'earmarks' of a good troll - If it is not a troll, and all this stuff is so simple and found in all athletics, then why is it not seen more? - Now that Chris realizes how simple it all is, maybe we will see some evidence of a connected body in his videos from now on - unfortunately, none of his previous videos showed any clue that indicated a connected body in any of the movements.

I can understand and respect your point of view. Been there. And frankly, yeah, it is all physics. It is all explainable as I don't believe in magic. I can't explain it very well myself, but I've learned a couple things, developed a few minor skills, and find my universe expanding a bit. All this because I got on the mat with a couple of these guys and found that they could do stuff I couldn't even remotely do or deal with in return.

So maybe it is the same stuff you think it is and you're the guy who we should all be training with. I honestly wouldn't dismiss it as a possibility, but, well, I've heard it quite a few times only to see people baffled, confused, flustered, etc. The choice for them has always been to either re-calibrate their ideas or to walk out.

I've seen both.

Unlike some I don't see it as the end-all. I see a vastly larger picture. But larger picture and all I see this stuff as integral and critical. Not that it isn't there otherwise in some respects in some places, but the quality of it varies tremendously. And more importantly the question for me is whether those who can do some of it can transmit it to their students, cause that's what's gonna matter to me.

But sure, it's all explainable because, again, I don't believe in magic. I just don't have a good enough model yet myself to do it. And each guy doing their things seem to have varied nuances to their models even when they use similar words. Which results in variations. But again... None of that means there's nothing there. Or nothing extra.

Chris, you have adopted a position of "convince me why I don't know, convince *me* why I'm wrong.". That's never going to happen and frankly it is foolish to think otherwise. So I'm not going to argue.

In my case years ago I went to some seminars with a local tai chi guy. That left a mark. I come from a lineage that broke off from Ki Society and we focused very strongly on his ki tests. That left a mark. I've subsequently gotten on to the mat with guys like Dan, Toby, Mike and a few others. And played some with students of Angier, Ark, and others. There are some serious ranges of abilities out there, some that seem "magical" to me that aren't just the conventional, fluffy, hand-wavy crap that I hate.

But I've seen this post posted by others many times before. So I doubt it will matter much.

I try very hard not to pre-judge those things I've not felt in person. I go to seminars as a result. I've been to many seminars and classes with highly respect folk only to walk out saying "Meh, not for me.". With those other guys I try to go back whenever I can.

So here's to hoping Howard Popkin makes it out to the left coast one of these days...

Chris, you do what you think is right and I agree quite a bit with many things you've written. Kindred spirit in many ways. Just not on this one.

I hold Ikeda sensei as the gold standard for being able to use and apply IS in an Aikido framework - I have NEVER felt any other Aikido teacher with the skill set he has and definitely no Aikido student.

Hi John,

Just out of interest, have you ever grabbed Kanetsuka Sensei? In my opinion he and Ikeda Sensei are doing basically the same thing (though Ikeda does actually explain what he is doing in ways that most of us can understand...).

Yes, it does have all the 'earmarks' of a good troll - If it is not a troll, and all this stuff is so simple and found in all athletics, then why is it not seen more? - Now that Chris realizes how simple it all is, maybe we will see some evidence of a connected body in his videos from now on - unfortunately, none of his previous videos showed any clue that indicated a connected body in any of the movements.

Greg

Well, this isn't the first time. He came to the same conclusion a year or more ago on another IP forum after going in with the same assumptions that he was already doing it and it's just normal athletics. I don't see why people want to work so hard to convince anyone and everyone of what they already believe. Some say why, I say why bother?

Have you trained with Mike? You seem fairly sure of what he's trying to communicate.

I've trained with Mike, and I'm...less sure that he would agree with the characterization that you're making (although only he could say for sure).

I'm not sure why you want people who have experienced something to agree that what they believe they've experienced is different than what they say it is - even though you haven't yourself had that same experience.

Well, this isn't the first time. He came to the same conclusion a year or more ago on another IP forum after going in with the same assumptions that he was already doing it and it's just normal athletics. I don't see why people want to work so hard to convince anyone and everyone of what they already believe. Some say why, I say why bother?

I am with you on that - Of course there are some similarities between external training and internal training, but they are two distinct things with two different approaches to things. If someone asks questions just to shoot down the answers because of a preconceived conclusion without any real hands on evidence, comes across as trying to stir the pot just for the sake of stirring the pot - a waste of time to me.

When I first started training with an Internal Chinese Martial artist, lot's of the things he would show, seemed pretty amazing, then he would show me how to do it. And a few weeks later, I could do it, not as well mind you, but I could do it. He also took the time to explain to me what was going on in the larger athletic fields, showing me that the kinds of things he was showing were being used all over the place.

If you went to play football with a pro team, the things they would do would blow you away, you would feel like they were not even human. They are "just athletes" but because of the skill difference they seem amazing. However you can learn to do all the same things they can, at your level, by simply training in football.

To me there seems to be an underlying idea that if you learn "IP" you're going to have a mysterious power that almost no one else has. Now I'm sure some of this is my own projections, because this was me for awhile. The universally useful things you learn in "IP" are found in many athletic approaches. When I see things like, only so-and-so has "IP". It sounds silly to me. If we use the word "athletic ability" in place of "IP" we can see how silly that sounds- ONLY so-and-so has athletic ability. We can clearly see that doesn't make sense.

Now saying something like only some people are good at tennis, that makes sense, and we all know it to be true. Only some people are good at doing "Jin demonstration" this to is correct as well. Skill specific things will certainly favor some and not others. People who train skills will be better at them then others. If you want to learn how to fight, you should train with people who are skilled at fighting, training with people who don't fight, even if they have great athletic ability won't give you more fighting skill. If you want to improve your athletic ability (body skills), you could train with lot's of different people, no one person has all the ability.

If you want to learn "jin demonstration" I agree you should go to a specialist, so for example, Mike here is a specialist in jin demonstration, if you're into that, you should probably check him out. But you have to understand that being good an jin demonstration is not going to make you a better tennis player. If you want to play tennis, the people who have that best figured out, are already doing it, go see them. Same with fighting, my CMA teacher is now the head coach for a professional MMA team, he is not doing that because he's good at demonstrating jin, he's doing that because he learned about MMA.

Chris,
I do not think you are trolling here - I think you have brought forward some points that deserve serious consideration.
It would be interesting to see a response by Mike.

One thing that I would like to point out is that the word jin as such does not just refer to skill or power in the martial arts. Someone who is cutting trees as a trade may require a jin from this that is specific for his trade. So a sailor would have a jin as a result of sailing, a swordsmith as a result of forging metal, and so on. A sailor might be just as strong as a swordsmith, but still would not have the jin to make a sword.

Hey Tom,
Thanks, I'm not trolling, I'm trying to get to the bottom of this stuff. I wish that were more apparent.

I think the way you are using Jin there is a good example of what I was talking about with specific abilities, unique to the sport. Like tennis players, having specific skills for tennis, or tennis jin.

So maybe my explanation of "jin demonstration" was a bad one. Maybe I should say "IP demonstrations", I don't know how to phrase it, but the idea that there is an ability to demonstrate these kinds of things. It's like with the CXW video, I agree he's got some real ability showing his stuff there, but that won't make him a better tennis player, and the skills that are universal to his training, and would help him with tennis, are sills that the tennis players are already aware of, and have good methods for practicing.

Just out of interest, have you ever grabbed Kanetsuka Sensei? In my opinion he and Ikeda Sensei are doing basically the same thing (though Ikeda does actually explain what he is doing in ways that most of us can understand...).

Alex

Well, I did practice with Kanetsuka sensei. He used be known for his hard, even rough style of Aikido. It changed after his illness - the form of the technique did not change dramatically, it still looked like Yoshinkan Aikido, but his techniques felt different. I have never experienced Ikeda's Aikido - for me it felt more like Tamura sensei's Aikido.

if you have never experienced it, how do you kow what it felt like? or was that a typo?

I have never met Ikeda and therefore have no personal experience with Ikeda.

I did train in the dojo of Kanetsuka sensei in London and have felt his techniques. I cannot compare it with Ikeda - however, at the time I also practiced under Tamura sensei and Kanetsuka's Aikido felt similar as to Tamura's Aikido.