Definition of hard aikido
dii
(aikikai) and others hard (yoshinkan). I practice aikikai and my sensei does
say that he teaches a soft aikido. What is hard aikido then?
Gaidheal
si
"dii" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:c65jkk$4qm$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
DW
"dii" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:c65jkk$4qm$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
Here's how I tend to think of "hard" vs. "soft". I see the range of
applications as a spectrum of sorts.
At one of the spectrum you have something called "hard" Aikido. This style
is characterized by techniques that emphasize actual contact with uke. In a
"hard" style, uke is unbalanced and thrown through physical contact and
physical force, nage physically pushes or pulls uke applying (often hard)
physical force to his partner to execute the throw or technique. At the
other end of the spectrum, you have "soft" Aikido. This style is
characterized by techniques that emphasize unbalancing and throwing uke with
gestures of a technique (or non-contact atemi) that elicit a reaction in
uke's balance without actually making physical contact. In some "soft"
styles, uke is thrown without ever being touched by nage.
That of course is only one definition of "hard" vs. "soft" and completely
fails to address any of the merits or pitfalls of either style. Fortunately,
the truth is most dojos engage in techniques that are to be found somewhere
in the middle of the spectrum, applying ideas from both ends of the
spectrum. (Personally I tend to favor "hard" Aikido but appreciate the
theory behind "soft".)
DW
Mary K. Kuhner
There's a complicated range of styles, not just "hard" and "soft", and
a lot of people will deny that the terms even have meaning, but here's
what I think.
There's a particular throw from cross-hand grab which can be done two different
ways. Both start with leaping behind uke, stretching out the arm he's
holding and putting your free hand on the back of his head or neck. You
turn to the outside and uke goes round you.
Some styles then have you suddenly reverse direction and shove uke firmly
with the arm he's holding, across the throat or upper chest, to fling
him away. This is relatively "hard".
Other styles have you draw uke's arm down, then straight up, then down
again so that his feet get out from under him and he falls down. There's no
shove. The final downward movement doesn't touch uke at all except via
his grip on your arm; if you do the throw from shomenuchi instead it
doesn't even have that. This is relatively "soft".
There seems to be some correlation between how the throw is done and what
it's called; harder styles often call it 'iriminage' and softer ones
'kokyunage'. I doubt it's a completely reliable observation, though.
I'd consider a style hard if it did a lot of things in the spirit of the
first version. Full contact with uke, lots of shoving, lots of atemi,
hard falls. I'd consider it soft if it did a lot of things in the spirit of
the second version. Minimal contact, emphasis on unbalancing, few or
mostly stylized atemi, rolls and soft breakfalls.
Disclaimer: I train in Ki Society which is well over on the "soft" end
of the spectrum. My understanding of the "hard" end comes from a total
of about four weeks' study at other dojo, plus my instructors' comparison
and contrast sessions, which may be biased.
My instructors say that the advantage of the kokyunage form is that it
doesn't rely on strength. They don't mention what I see as
its disadvantage, which is that if you don't do it right it flatly
doesn't work. Everyone has to make their own call on this tradeoff.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
si
"Mary K. Kuhner" <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:c660q5$11j0$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
Your instructors analysis is flawed.
None of the techniques in Aikido should rely on strength. Hard or soft!
Thats not to say that you cannot add strenght if you wish...just that the
correct principles should be in place for the technique to work without it.
Adding strenght, power, speed to a technique is not a crime. Relying on it
to cover symptoms of a bad technique are though.
dii
"dii" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:c65jkk$4qm$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
Some interesting replies, some funny replies... ;)
Let me be honest, I practice Aikikai (supposedly soft) and Yoshinkan
(supposedly hard) Aikido. About 10 hours a week of Aikido. And the biggest
difference between the two that I note is the method of training. But I
don't think that has anything to do with hard and soft. I believe that is
just the instructors' teaching methods.
I must say that the idea of tecniques being done more with gestures, is more
prominent in the Aikikai than the Yoshinkan.
My Aikikai training focuses more on principles of Aikido, where my Yoshinkan
training seems to focus more on actual application of Aikido. In the end, it
amounts to very much the same thing except that I believe the Yoshinkan
akidoka may be slightly more prepared to use their training should life
require it of them. This, I believe, is not due to the differences between
soft and hard Aikido, but rather because of the differences between the
instructors' training methods.
Sean O.
not if you compare it to 'hard' martial arts, some styles of karate
maybe.)
What're called 'hard' styles are generally the ones modelled on what
Ueshiba M. was doing pre-war, taught by his earlier students (Shioda,
Tomiki, Saito, etc.) Its not hard in the sense that you meet force
with force, and it shouldn't rely on strength, but it is more linear
than later styles, theres less flowery turns and big circular stuff.
I'd say Aikikai has both types going on. Its a broad church and the
style varies a lot from shihan to shihan.
A 'soft' style instructor might to harder stuff on a hard day than a
hard style instructor does on a soft kind of a day.
Does that make any sense? :)
Sean
x
Boris Mason
news:c660q5$11j0$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
> There seems to be some correlation between how the throw is done and what
> it's called; harder styles often call it 'iriminage' and softer ones
> 'kokyunage'. I doubt it's a completely reliable observation, though.
>
These are actually two different techniques, not hard or soft version of
same technique
<snip>
> My instructors say that the advantage of the kokyunage form is that it
> doesn't rely on strength. They don't mention what I see as
> its disadvantage, which is that if you don't do it right it flatly
> doesn't work. Everyone has to make their own call on this tradeoff.
>
Also iriminage, what you label as hard style, does not rely on strength.
Even with iriminage there are different ways of performing it which may or
may not be catagorized as hard or soft....
The way you described, with tenkan, is the ura version. The omote version
will be perceived as much harder by a lot of people but is really the same
technique with different movement.
Cheers,
Boris.
DW
soft" not whether such distinctions were legitimate or not.......
I'll admit the distinctions are not always clearly defined since most dojos
practice somewhere between the extremes, incorporating elements of both in
different situations. Not to mention that and any given instructor may tend
toward hard or soft within any given style (as dii can attest).
But I wholeheartedly agree with Mary that what is generally meant by the
terms hard vs. soft is the use of physical contact and application of force
by nage as opposed to techniques performed as non-contact "gestures" with
each being used with the intention of unbalancing uke.
Take Iriminage as an example. At one extreme, uke's balance and momentum is
physically manipulated by nage via physical contact and the final throw
includes a transfer of physical force from nage to uke. At the other
extreme, uke moves and falls of his own volition (albeit in an attempt to
complete his grab or strike, then again in an attempt to avoid a well timed
atemi from nage.) Done correctly and performed with proper timing, neither
style relies on strength and both can be effective. However, you'll
generally find that over on the hard end of the spectrum, things tend to get
"harder" on uke. This is because at the hard end of things, nage reserves
the option to apply additional force to uke during his fall. Because nage
maintains physical contact with uke, he can load additional force above and
beyond uke's momentum or body weight as uke falls. Juxtapose this with
softer styles where this physical transfer of force is de-emphasized and
there is little or no physical contact as nage throws. Uke moves and falls
of his own volition to avoid the atemi. Thus the force applied to uke's
fall (if that's even a proper description) is limited by uke himself, and is
largely determined by the speed and commitment with which uke moves and
attacks. But once uke is unbalanced and falling no additional force other
than uke's own momentum and body weight can be transferred by nage. It's
the difference between merely falling down and being pushed down as you
fall............(it's also why you rarely see iriminage breakfalls when
performed as a "soft" technique but see them frequently when performed
"hard".)
In my experience it's quite clear that "hard" vs. "soft" exist as clearly
defined theories in an approach to Aikido, though as I've said before, most
dojos tend to train somewhere between the extreme poles incorporating
elements of both.
DW
Unknown
or soft depending on the instructor and our shihan certaily did not
pull his techniques.
Later I shifted to Yoshinkan style which I currently practice and,
remarkably, find it to be, in general, easier on my ageing bod. I
attribute this to the type of instruction; Our Aikai classes were
taught in the classical Aikikai manner - jump in at the deep end and
learn by osmosis. Fine except that you put up with a lot of bad
technique! Our Yoshinkan classes are far more anal-retentive in
terms of the mechanics of the technique and there seems to be a
greater emphasis on safety. Result? greater expertise in doing the
technique.
Having said all that, I appreciate the Aikikai background in our
freestyle practices.
Jay
"DW" <buj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> Take Iriminage as an example. At one extreme, uke's balance and momentum
is
> physically manipulated by nage via physical contact and the final throw
> includes a transfer of physical force from nage to uke. At the other
> extreme, uke moves and falls of his own volition (albeit in an attempt to
> complete his grab or strike, then again in an attempt to avoid a well
timed
> atemi from nage.) Done correctly and performed with proper timing,
neither
> style relies on strength and both can be effective.
Whilst I am inclined to agree somewhat to the above statement, the flip side
to the 'soft' approach is the price paid if not done, as stated,
'..correctly and performed with proper timing,...' - basically, without the
appropriate contact, nage can suffer as he/she falsely thinks their
technique is applied correctly and timely because uke will fall whether they
meet resistance or not. This leads to confusion in my opinion and thus can
reduce the martial effectiveness of Aikido. Furthermore, let us not forget
that in any self defense situation, physical contact or even better
described yet, physical scuffle is hardly avoidable; with this in mind
physical contact Aikido or 'hard' style Aikido if you prefer might favour
your chances in being more prepared for such scenario.
However, DW did go on to say that most Dojo's tend to practice halfway
within the soft and hard spectrum whereby is my firm belief that it is up to
the student to cultivate the amount of martial effectives he/she wants to
bring out of their Aikido.
J
DW
"Jay" <j...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:108264546...@dyke.uk.clara.net...
J,
Nice addendum. And when (not if) this thread spins off into a debate over
the merits of hard vs. soft, you'll find me squarely in your camp.
DW
si
I have to admit, I hate seeing the softer styles sometimes.
Wm Gardner
Yoshinkan styles (practice Yoshinkan myself), I believe this long
lasting hard vs. soft debate to be somewhat of an oversimplification. I
believe Aikido is only as hard or as soft as the Aikidoka who is
practicing. Soft or hard is really only determined by the Aikidoka'a
ability to blend with Uke and the Aikidoka's ability to perform a
technique with out "muscling" his/her way through it. This may seem
somewhat controversial but I have seen very hard Aikikai and very soft
Yoshinkai.
In my opinion, Yoshinkan gets this "hard" reputation indirectly from its
training method. Aikikai seems to focus more on smoothness and blending,
less on form (when compared to Yoshinkan). Yoshinkan focuses on a very
strict form that MUST be followed a particular way (slight exaggeration
to make a point) with the belief that the smoothness will develop with
experience. However, at the higher levels in Yoshinkan you can really
see this develop in to incredibly smooth, effortless techniques. This is
especially noticeable in the more senior sensei who have spend a
significant amount of time at the Yoshinkan Hombu dojo. Do the senior
Yoshinkan guys throw hard and far? Absolutely. Is it because of them
overpowering (out muscling) you? Absolutely not. Any one who doubts me
step on the mat with Robert Mustard Sensei sometime. When you get up you
will scratching your head as to how that gentle of a touch and slight
little movement dropped you so quickly.......
Osu!
Bill
--
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
-Theodore Roosevelt
"dii" <nos...@thank.you> wrote in message
news:c65jkk$4qm$1...@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net...
Sean O.
> In my opinion, Yoshinkan gets this "hard" reputation
> indirectly from its training method.
I definitely think you have something there.
Sean
x
Mary K. Kuhner
The sensei of a dojo where I was a guest described her school's
training method as "Get it working, then get it fluid" and mine
as "Get it fluid, then get it working." While this is of course
a caricature, I think there's a grain of truth in it. In that
case the destination could be quite similar even if the journey
isn't.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
si
are exactly different in the approach. One favours correctness of
technique, then movement. The other favours movement primarily, then goes
on to correct technique, once the movement is there.
I like being a mixture and able to do both. Its nice being able to break
down the movements so others can see and its nice having the speed and
fludity that comes from the second style.
Boy, am I brilliant or what!
"Mary K. Kuhner" <mkku...@kingman.gs.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:c6j5qs$142g$1...@nntp1.u.washington.edu...
DW
"si" <a...@a.com> wrote in message
news:%3ajc.173$QY...@newsfe3-win.server.ntli.net...
I think the distinctions you are making here do not really bear on "hard"
vs. "soft" so much as a general approach to training techniques that focuses
on "art" vs. "technical".
Again, I view the difference between hard and soft as one of full contact
vs. gesture, or the physical transfer of force from nage to uke as opposed
to uke unbalancing himself as a result of atemi.
Whether one focuses on the flowing art aspects first or instead works on the
technical accuracy first makes little difference on whether the overall
result is "hard" Aikido or "soft."
Neither the flowing "artful" approach or the punctuated "technical" approach
is necessarily "hard" or "soft". (Though one might care to venture that
dojos that lead with the flowing "art" tend toward a softer Aikido while the
punctuated "technical" camp tends toward a harder Aikido.)
si
I think you will be very hard pressed to find an example that goes against
the grain. It may not be the underlying difference or the cause but its a
big symptom and a symptom that you will find everywhere.
You could always say that the hard style is the harder style and the soft
style is the softer style, but that would get us nowhere. You have to
branchout from that thinking to answer the question and the first branch I
come to is the teaching methods. One is flowing from the start, the other
is static from the start.
Its may just be a symptom but I believe its more than that. Its this
fundamental diffence that leads to one style or the other (accounting for
the gray areas too).
DW
Actually, my original dojo was one that emphasized the "flowing" style but
I've yet to be thrown harder at any dojo than I was there. By that I mean
nage transferring force to me as I was being unbalanced then thrown. I'm
also rather familiar with some Iwama style instructors who tend to be
somewhat punctuated and technical in their approach and find them to throw
rather hard as well.
Conversely, I've attended other dojos that focus either on flowing or
technical aspects but their basic understanding of the relationship between
uke and nage and the resulting sabaki movement seemed to be based on
different assumptions. As a result they were rather soft if.
Thus I'm not at all convinced that "training method" as it relates to flow
or technicality necessarily results in hard or soft Aikido but have instead
found (in my experience) that the core philosophical approach to unbalancing
uke and the role of nage's use of force in the closing sabaki movements
makes all the difference.
DW
Mary K. Kuhner
>Juxtapose this with
>softer styles where this physical transfer of force is de-emphasized and
>there is little or no physical contact as nage throws. Uke moves and falls
>of his own volition to avoid the atemi. Thus the force applied to uke's
>fall (if that's even a proper description) is limited by uke himself, and is
>largely determined by the speed and commitment with which uke moves and
>attacks. But once uke is unbalanced and falling no additional force other
>than uke's own momentum and body weight can be transferred by nage. It's
>the difference between merely falling down and being pushed down as you
>fall............
>In my experience it's quite clear that "hard" vs. "soft" exist as clearly
>defined theories in an approach to Aikido, though as I've said before, most
>dojos tend to train somewhere between the extreme poles incorporating
>elements of both.
This fits my experience as well.
If I'm thrown in my home dojo's "soft" style, nage can't choose whether
or not to make the windows rattle but must work with whatever velocity
I give him. If he uses a "hard" style he can rattle the windows no matter
what I do.
We have one student who is inventive in finding a way to transfer a little
extra energy: if the throw as taught doesn't let him, he'll surreptitiously
find a shoulder or arm to push on. The rattling windows turn out to be a
useful teaching tool because they make this quite obvious: if uke attacks
at low speed and without strong commitment and the windows rattle anyway,
questions are asked....
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
si
He said that the training in Yoshinkan was very hard, an hours intense warm
up and very formal training on the mat too, no breaks, no rests, no few
second breathers all added up to a hard class. Plus many/all of the
techniques begin with atemi from nage too. Two steps, then attack, uke
blocks, nage does technique, return to starting position, into kamai, rinse,
repeat.
Then I wondered if the Tomiki aikido folk (ooohhh I said a swear word) do it
this way too? Now they must be considered a hard style as well, but do they
put them selves through all the formality and hour long warm up? Yes, they
really apply techniques, resist a lot and go about their aikido seriously,
but if they don't actually come away exhausted from their aikido sessions,
would you consider them hard or soft.
I personally would still consider them hard as its a very physical and
martial approach.
DW
Hah,
That's funny Mary. I'm beginning to think we need to install similar
windows where I train. LOL
DW
DW
"si" <a...@a.com> wrote in message news:eOhjc.499$fw5.36@newsfe1-win...
> Chatting to my sensei tonight about this....
>
> He said that the training in Yoshinkan was very hard, an hours intense
warm
> up and very formal training on the mat too, no breaks, no rests, no few
> second breathers all added up to a hard class.
I'm sure those classes were hard. Meaning "hard" as in "difficult" or
"physically and mentally taxing". But I'd proceed to ask if the Aikido
style itself is "hard" or merely the training system or regimine. (Though I
suspect it was.)
Plus many/all of the
> techniques begin with atemi from nage too. Two steps, then attack, uke
> blocks, nage does technique, return to starting position, into kamai,
rinse,
> repeat.
Yes, but what is the general theory or emphasis behind the final sabaki
movement? Is uke "thrown" by nage or does uke merely fall to avoid an
atemi?
>
> Then I wondered if the Tomiki aikido folk (ooohhh I said a swear word) do
it
> this way too? Now they must be considered a hard style as well, but do
they
> put them selves through all the formality and hour long warm up? Yes,
they
> really apply techniques, resist a lot and go about their aikido seriously,
> but if they don't actually come away exhausted from their aikido sessions,
> would you consider them hard or soft.
I've already explained (twice) what I consider hard or soft. For me, it
doesn't matter what "style" you train under or how formal your training
system is. It doesn't matter how strict the etiquette might be or what
patch you wear on your sleeve. It doesn't matter how long you warm up or
how fast you run around during practice time. It doesn't matter how
disciplined your approach is or how long Sensei makes you sit in
seiza...........any one of these things may be "hard" on the students but
the do not define "hard" Aikido (IMO).
If your Aikido is such that it emphasizes the transfer of force from nage to
uke during the sabaki movement, thereby making for a "harder" throw on uke,
I generally take your Aikido to be "hard". If on the other hand, your
Aikido tends toward unbalancing and throwing uke with a well timed atemi but
without contact, I generally consider your Aikido to be soft. Or to
paraphrase Mary's post.....if Nage rattles the windows I take it to be hard,
if Uke rattles the windows I take it to be soft.
As for Tomiki Style, several of my Sempai have trained under the Tomiki
system and I generally found their Aikido to be quite hard.
>
> I personally would still consider them hard as its a very physical and
> martial approach.
Agreed.
Hendric Stattmann
> Then I wondered if the Tomiki aikido folk (ooohhh I said a swear word) do
> it this way too? Now they must be considered a hard style as well, but do
> they put them selves through all the formality and hour long warm up?
> Yes, they really apply techniques, resist a lot and go about their aikido
> seriously, but if they don't actually come away exhausted from their
> aikido sessions, would you consider them hard or soft.
Shodokan Aikido ("Tomiki Aikido" should not be used, see [1]) is not
"softer" or "harder" than any other style. It depends on the Sensei, if he
insists more on the competition or on Kata. Also, the aims of the training
are adapted to the age and skill of the students. In Switzerland, we do
practice some Randori, but we mainly focus on Kata and similar exercises.
The techniques themselves are not more or less painful than the ones of
other styles.
With regards,
Hendric
[1] http://homepage2.nifty.com/shodokan/en/name.html
--
Hendric Stattmann, Lausanne, Switzerland. Registered Linux User #178879
The official Swiss Shodokan Aikido Homepage: http://www.shodokan.ch
Sean O.
> Then I wondered if the Tomiki aikido folk (ooohhh I said a swear word)
> do it this way too? Now they must be considered a hard style as well,
> but do they put them selves through all the formality and hour long
> warm up?
The average session probably isn't as demanding as the Yoshinkan session
you described, though like any style it depends who's training and for
what. A class full of old fogeys is never going to train as hard as a
class full of uni students in their 20's. Some of the training done in
the build up to competitions can be a pretty serious work out.
In terms of the style of the training, I think we have a lot in common
with the Yoshinkan folks. I get the impression that Tomiki and Shioda
had quite similar ideas about how to teach, the same emphasis on kihon
dosa, the same systematic aproach to technique.
> I personally would still consider them hard as its a very
> physical and martial approach.
Yep, I'd probably call Shodokan a 'hard' style too, though some
techniques and some kata can be pretty soft too. Theres much less
emphasis on 'flow' than in some Aikikai dojos, and you just about never
see the big circular tenkan stuff.
Sean
x
si
"Hendric Stattmann" <hendric....@hispeed.ch> wrote in message
news:3jv1m1...@desktop.localnet...
No, you misunderstand. When did I say that the techniques of hard aikido
are more painful? When? If English is not your first language then you
should be more careful about paying closer attention to what people write!
NOT WHAT YOU [THINK] THEY WROTE!!!
Have I ever said that hard aikido is more painful? NO!
I'll not make a big deal of it this time as its your first mistake. Make
sure its your last though...
Ryan
Yoshinkan, which is what I train in, is very strict on perfection of form
before the actual understanding of how the technique works.
It's the understanding of that "Form First" is what makes it the "Hard"
style.
From my understanding Aikikai works opposite of that, in which they teach
the understanding of the how the technique works and then they teach the
form to go with it.
So, it just relates to the order in which you get taught.
si
>
> "si" <a...@a.com> wrote in message news:eOhjc.499$fw5.36@newsfe1-win...
> > Chatting to my sensei tonight about this....
> >
> > He said that the training in Yoshinkan was very hard, an hours intense
> warm
> > up and very formal training on the mat too, no breaks, no rests, no few
> > second breathers all added up to a hard class.
>
> I'm sure those classes were hard. Meaning "hard" as in "difficult" or
> "physically and mentally taxing". But I'd proceed to ask if the Aikido
> style itself is "hard" or merely the training system or regimine. (Though
I
> suspect it was.)
>
>
> Plus many/all of the
> > techniques begin with atemi from nage too. Two steps, then attack, uke
> > blocks, nage does technique, return to starting position, into kamai,
> rinse,
> > repeat.
>
> Yes, but what is the general theory or emphasis behind the final sabaki
> movement? Is uke "thrown" by nage or does uke merely fall to avoid an
> atemi?
*
Thrown
*
Touche mon capitan!
Hendric Stattmann
> If English is not your first language then you
> should be more careful about paying closer attention to what people write!
> NOT WHAT YOU [THINK] THEY WROTE!!!
Hello anonymous,
I am very sorry, but English is only my sixth Language, after German,
French, Luxembourgish, Latin, Greek and Russian. I am very sorry that I
misunderstood you, but is this a reason to shout at me?
EOT.
Hendric
si
If you're foreign then GET USED TO IT WOULD BE MY ADVICE!!!
"Hendric Stattmann" <hendric....@hispeed.ch> wrote in message
news:l1c2m1-...@desktop.localnet...
Johan Lindquist
si was all like, "Dude,
> If you're foreign then GET USED TO IT WOULD BE MY ADVICE!!!
So there are assholes who practise aikido too. Who knew?
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
20:53:27 up 15 days, 1:26, 4 users, load average: 0.27, 0.15, 0.10
$ cat /dev/bollocks Registered Linux user #261729
aggregate leading-edge metrics
DW
>
> Touche mon capitan!
>
>
Whew!!! I'm just happy you're not berating my English skills. LOL
Carry on Simon.
DW
si
take a joke!!!
Typical filthy foreigner. No sense of humour and probably has sex with
donkeys and eats raw turnips!!!
Don't make me mention the war sonny because whatever country you are from
did something wrong and I have a very long list of what Johnny foreigner
should have done in the war that they did not!!!
Filthy foreign scum - no offence!
"Johan Lindquist" <sp...@smilfinken.net> wrote in message
news:5rm2m1-...@news.smilfinken.net...
si
Waaaaaaaaah, waaaaaaaaaaah, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
"DW" <buj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pbyjc.53007$aQ6.3952075@attbi_s51...
jabs
> Yes, because it the only language that Johnny foreigner understands!!!
>
> If you're foreign then GET USED TO IT WOULD BE MY ADVICE!!!
>
I'm not sure he would be considered a foreigner in his own country.
Johan Lindquist
si was all like, "Dude,
> Hey Johan (pronounce Joanne in my countyr - a true girls
> name)
Aaah-hahahah-hah. Hahah. Hah. *wipe*
> ...learn to take a joke!!!
Let's make a deal - I'll do so if you learn to be funny.
si
banana skin!
None of the sofistication of British witt and repartee!
...and none of the toilet humour either (the basis of our entire culture).
"Johan Lindquist" <sp...@smilfinken.net> wrote in message
news:i604m1-...@news.smilfinken.net...
si
Is that a word? It should be if its not!
"jabs" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:ZREjc.5464$g31...@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Johan Lindquist
si was all like, "Dude,
> None of the sofistication of British witt and repartee!
I agree, you have a ways to go if you want to reach that level.
si
Erm...nothing Joanne?
"Johan Lindquist" <sp...@smilfinken.net> wrote in message
news:0f94m1-...@news.smilfinken.net...
Johan Lindquist
si was all like, "Dude,
> And what exactly have you said recently that is funny?
I thought quoting you out of context was rather amusing, but I haven't
claimed to be funny to begin with, so I don't really have anything to
prove. If I really wanted to make fun of you at your expense, I'd be
dragging up all the misspellings and grammatical errors you've made
since complaining about someone else's lingustic skills.
Speling flames aren't all that much fun in the end tho.
> Erm...nothing Joanne?
At least I don't rehash old material, which was both rather lame and
somewhat puerile even on the first attempt.
But seriously, I think this is getting sufficiently off topic, so let
me just reiterate my initial point: you might want to try to be less
of an asshole and more understanding if you want to participate in an
international forum.
hth, hand.
si
Feel free. Of couse we'll have to assume that you are lying about them
until you do. Innocent until PROVEN guilty so I am!
And how about you want to be less of a cock end when talking to me or you
will fucking regret it you fucking cock?
If you ever decide to visit England then look me up fancy boy! I'm sure
that I'd like to look over a few finer points of this conversation with you
in person. Then again, like a typical foreigner, you'll just be all
keyboard and no action!
And I have to say that is the shittest signiture I have ever read. Then
again, most are there to try and let people convince themselves that they
are funny and are done by humourless cockwankers such as yourself!
Anyway, these forums are only ment for English and Americans (thats why they
are written in English). Go find yourself somewhere else as we don't want
you here with your fucking pessimistic analysis of humour. Patronising
twat!
"Johan Lindquist" <sp...@smilfinken.net> wrote in message
news:n275m1-...@news.smilfinken.net...
Johan Lindquist
si was all like, "Dude,
> Go ahead Joanne...list all my spelling errors.
[..]
> only ment for
That was right quick of you. Cheers.
However, if you feel like abusing me further while under the influence
of your impotent rage, feel free to take it to email (either of those
above will reach me) and I can try to help you find a way to better
control your emotions.
I won't be cluttering this group further with public responses to you,
and my apologies to anyone who still hasn't plonked me for taking
the troll bait in the first place. Your regular programming will now
continue.
Paul Maybury
"Ryan" <ry...@mondo-products.com> wrote in message
news:_wujc.23453$OU.4...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Hey there, Ryan.
I agree that our teaching style tends to make Yoshinkan Aikido harder.
That's where hajime training helps out - keep repeating the same
technique over and over, so that shite (nage) can't think about breaking
down the movements and learns to start flowing. I have been helping
instruct the junior belts, and it is difficult for them to make the
initial transition from static, step-by-step movements to one flowing
motion. But once they make that mental step their aikido becomes much
less 'hard'. (Of course, I don't have much choice - with my ruined left
wrist a hard block is just not possible, so I have learned to be much
softer.)
One other thing you have to remember is that Jardine Sensei is one of
the harder Yoshinkan instructors. His karate background may contribute
to that, who knows. That is not necessarily a bad thing, it just 'is'.
One benefit, of course, is that he can introduce some slightly more
realistic atemi to your practice. I really have to come out to some of
his jo classes!
Catch you 'round (and let me know when you are testing next).
--
tpm
(To reply, remove THESPAM)
si
> So anyway, it was like, 21:12 CEST Apr 28 2004, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> si was all like, "Dude,
>
> > Go ahead Joanne...list all my spelling errors.
>
> [..]
>
> > only ment for
>
> That was right quick of you. Cheers.
1 spelling mistake? Is that it? I thought you said ALL my spelling
mistakes (plural that is).
>
> However, if you feel like abusing me further while under the influence
> of your impotent rage, feel free to take it to email (either of those
> above will reach me) and I can try to help you find a way to better
> control your emotions.
>
> I won't be cluttering this group further with public responses to you,
> and my apologies to anyone who still hasn't plonked me for taking
> the troll bait in the first place. Your regular programming will now
> continue.
>
> --
> Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.
Why the fuck should I do what a cockend like you suggests. No, I have
nothing to hide so I'll do it in public. You scared I'll humilitate you?
Scared you'll learn the meaning of the word plural? Myabe I'll teach you
what the letter s does to a word.
John R. Macdonald
>Typical foreigner! Doesn't understand humour unless someone slips on a
>banana skin!
>
>None of the sofistication of British witt and repartee!
>
>...and none of the toilet humour either (the basis of our entire culture).
>
>
>
Nor the spelling ...
John
si
"John R. Macdonald" <scub...@remove.claranet.fr> wrote in message
news:rsh0905s3tks9n9ua...@4ax.com...
Well I wasn't sure if the sentence....
'Speling flames aren't all that much fun in the end tho.'
Was meant as a joke or not.
Considering the word 'spelling' and what I assume to be the word 'though'
are spelt wrong, I gave the limp-wristed, cocksucking maggot the benefit of
the doubt.
However, due to his obvious lack of wit, I'm not so sure anymore.
John R. Macdonald
Actually I was referring to your spelling (or lack of) :-)
"None of the sofistication of British witt and repartee!"
Two (2) mistakes in a simple nine word sentence ...
I suppose everyone has a bad day once in a while. :-)
John
si
I thought witt was an olde way to spell wit, but I could be wrong on that
score.
"John R. Macdonald" <scub...@remove.claranet.fr> wrote in message
news:5ml090d1aevrh9656...@4ax.com...
Ryan
"Paul Maybury" <tpma...@THESPAMrogers.com> wrote in message
news:JlWjc.309762$2oI1....@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
Hey Paul!
Actually, we have a Hajime class coming up tomorrow night. I wanna go, but
I'm kinda going to Canada's Wonderland tomorrow night.
I was working with a few of our newest white belts last night and really
noticing how they're not very fluid ( just like I was 4 years ago hehe ).
I'm actually liking Jardine Sensei's teaching a little better. And yes, his
atemi is quite strong. LoL *rubs bruised arm*
Come by the Dojo whenever you get a chance. I'm not ALWAYS out, but usually
twice a week.
I'll probably be testing for 1st Kyu at the end of this year or beginning of
next.
Later!