# Misconceptions about non-contact sparring.



## RTKDCMB (Apr 18, 2014)

I thought I would do my part and try to dispel some misconceptions some people have about non-contact sparring.

*Misconception #1* - _Non-contact means there is no physical contact at all._

This is simply not true, in sparring people are in constant motion, you aim for the person but the person is constantly blocking, dodging and deflecting and will thus not be there to receive the contact. When a strike or kick comes at you and you choose to block it has to physically blocked. You also occasionally jam kicks to get in close and every now and then you can make contact with a kick or a strike in a controlled manner without injuring your sparring partner. 

*Misconception #2* - _Punches and kicks are pulled_. 

Also not true, during correct non-contact sparring all techniques are fully extended and controlled with power. You just focus your strike just short of the vital areas. The difference between contact and non-contact sparring is only distance, if you punch to the jaw and stop the punch 1 or 2cm in front and your opponent then they are fine, but step in slightly closer instead and your opponent  is injured. When black belts are sparring with each other the distance between the strike and the target gets quite close but when adults are sparring children, black belts are sparring junior belts or when beginners are sparring with each other the space between them is increased for added safety. Non-contact sparring where the practitioners pull strikes does not allow the technique to be applied properly; it is easier to adjust your distance than it is to adjust your technique.

*Misconception #3*- _If you only train non-contact you won't be able to deal with pain or take a hit._ 

Also not true, being able to withstand a blow is a result of conditioning both mental and physical as well as the state of mind. In full contact competitions, when a fighter gets kicked in the groin, they usually have to stop sparring or take a rest period. Outside in the street if you get kicked in the groin or poked in the eye you have to keep going no matter what or you will get hurt or killed, you don't get a 5 minute rest period. I have seen others get punched in the head accidentally without slowing them down  and once a young lady going for her junior black belt broke her ankle half way through and still went on to spar the black belts a few minutes later. So if you are doing non-contact sparring and get accidentally hit you can still keep going - you just have to think about it as a free massage and toughening exercise.  There sometimes is a tendency to freeze when hit but in all my years of experience I have not seen any evidence to suggest that this reaction is any more prevalent with non-contact sparring than with full contact sparring, at least not in the art I study. The hit either hurts enough to make you react or it doesnt, there is no special freezing reaction for non-contact sparring that does not exist for full contact sparring.

*Misconception #4*  _With full contact you can condition yourself to take a hit._

This true, but only to a certain extent. Full contact fighters (MMA fighters for example) do toughen themselves up quite a bit and can sometimes seem almost invulnerable but they still get knocked down/out with one good shot. They condition their bodies to be able to take hits but only in certain areas but how do you condition yourself to take a hit to the groin, the throat or the knee?  You cant, not without damaging something. I once saw a UFC fight where the fighter were getting hit often in the head and body but when one of the fighters was hit in the solar plexus the fight ended immediately. While it is true that with full contact sparring you can learn to handle getting hit more than you would if you only did non-contact sparring it does not mean that it is the only way. 

*Misconception #5*  _We dont train full contact because it would be too dangerous._

This is either true or false, depending on what you mean when you say it. Some instructors from some schools would say this in order to brag and prop themselves up. Any art, whether it be a purely self defence art or a sport, will be too dangerous for full contact sparring if they use their full range of techniques. A full power front kick to the groin, side kick to the side of the knee or knife hand chop to the throat would certainly not be safe, thats why martial arts competitions have rules.
 In order to do full contact sparring and make it safe you have to sacrifice something  either you have to limit your targets (i.e. no punching to the head, striking to the neck, groin kicks), or you have to use protective equipment. Limiting your targets can make your art less effective for self defence because you often have to train yourself out of the instincts you need. Instead of kicking to the groin you kick to the inner thigh (less effective) and when you accidentally kick to the groin you are reluctant to kick low in case you get disqualified. Training in this manner can give you a false sense of security as you may sometimes intentionally take hits in order to get one in yourself. In self defence you cant afford to get hit even once (many people have died from a single punch when they hit their head on the ground). Wearing protective gear can also give you a false sense of security  getting hit bone on bone is a far cry from getting hit with a glove on your protective gear. Martial artists who only spar with protective gear sometimes get hit in those spots and believe that that they can take a hit there. Its not the same, getting hit bone on bone hurts a lot more and has a higher shock value.   

Some martial arts only do non-contact sparring because they refuse to modify their techniques to make them safe for full contact sparring. They choose to use the techniques the way they would in self defence but with the distance modified to make it safe instead of the other 2 methods. They want to remain in top, uninjured, condition at all times so that when they are attacked they can have the best chance to defend themselves at any time. I dont know about anyone else but I joined a martial art so that people WOULDNT punch me in the head. What is the point of learning self defence if you just get beaten up in class? Also when a full contact fighter gets hurt in the ring or the cage and then gets attacked on their way home then how can they defend themselves properly?  

*Misconception #6*  I_f you only train non-contact then you will instinctively not make contact in a real fight_

This is usually stated by full contact martial artists, sometimes you will hear that if you train non-contact then you are* training to miss*. This is simply not true, you use focus mitts, kicking shields and punching bags to practice making contact with your techniques. In contact sparring you do this on an opponent (which is probably more dynamic than just on the pads) and you have to learn correct distancing. When you spar non-contact you still have to learn correct distancing, it just has a slight translational (mathematical term) spatial arrangement. There have been a few instances where instructors and students from my, non-contact, style have gotten, through no fault of their own, into physical altercations and were able to dispatch their attacker(s) with no problems connecting with strikes. On 2 separate occasions our black belts (1 male, 1 female) were attacked by 5 people and not only did they defeat them all but they did so very quickly. So their instincts that they learned through non-contact sparring served them very well.

*Misconception #7*  _Non-contact martial artists do not do any conditioning_

The conditioning usually done by the non-contact martial artists is centered on the forearms and hands. The wrists are conditioned by never using gloves or hand wraps when doing pad work and lots of pushups. The fists are conditioned by knuckle pushups on wooden floors and occasionally concrete and bitumen. There are jumping knuckle pushups and twisting knuckle pushups and walking on your knuckles in pushup position on the wooden floor is also good. Punching hard but flexible objects is good too. Breaking boards (no spacers) and tiles is also a great way to condition the fists. The forearms are conditioned through blocking and certain forearm toughening exercises with a partner or hitting yourself with a hard flexible object, such as a piece of doweling, on the shins and forearms to deaden the nerves.

The body is conditioned by strengthening the muscles; many different types of sit-ups are not only good for strengthening the stomach area but it also helps to support the back. Holding the bridge position is good for strengthening the core. Learning to tense the body at the right time can help you to absorb some blows to the body (this is one of the reasons for the kihap). When performing a strike or kick the whole body is tensed at the moment of impact, not just the arm or leg. Getting hit accidentally in sparring or hurting yourself during breaking techniques can provide additional conditioning
Although the level of conditioning in a non-contact martial art will never approach that of a full contact style (except for fist and forearm conditioning) there are many things a non-contact martial artist can do to condition themselves for the rigors of self defence.

*Misconception #8*  _Full contact martial arts are the only way to learn how to hit targets well_

Hitting the target is all about accuracy, precision, timing, speed and power  this comes from technique and practice. My schools philosophy, which I share, rates the importance of the qualities required for a successful strike, kick or block as:
1  Technique  This is something that is sadly lacking in many schools nowadays, both with contact sports and non-contact martial arts even at the higher levels. I have seen 3[SUP]rd[/SUP], 4[SUP]th[/SUP] and 5[SUP]th[/SUP] dans on YouTube with very poor technique, no power or snap in their strikes. I once trained with a child who was a certified black belt who was barely at yellow belt standard. He was a good student who did very well in class and picked things up quickly though. Many of the combat arts who only do *alive training*, who criticize the static training techniques and patterns often have poor technique and often resort to wild swings and do not look where they punch. It is better to only have to hit an attacker once than to have to hit them 20 times (I once saw a UFC bout where one guy hit the other guy over 200 times and still required a judges decision to win).

2  Accuracy and precision is next in importance, it is no good having the best technique in the world if you cannot hit the target. Due to the lack of static exercises in some of the combat sports the accuracy and precision is often limited. When you have the option to win on points, referee stoppage or judges decision you can afford to take your time a bit. You can study your opponent, develop a strategy and pick at them. For self defence you have to be deadly accurate because you may only get one chance to finish the attacker. You have to size up your attacker instantly as well as watch out for his friends. Being accurate and precise does not help as much if your technique is no good.
3  Speed and power  After developing technique, accuracy and precision then you can develop speed and power, without good technique this is a lot more difficult. If you can hit your target every time with good technique then that will not do you any good if you do not have good speed and power.

One advantage of full contact sparring is that you have instant feedback on whether your kick or strike has the desired effect; with non-contact sparring it is a bit more theoretical. When you do a kick in a full contact it is often stopped before it is fully extended and this can lead to improper distancing. For sidekicks and back kicks if your leg is not straight at the end then you will get some recoil and some of the power will not be transferred to your target. Sometimes when hitting the target students often lean into the strike too much; this happens to non-contact martial artists during pad work but rarely during sparring. Often when full contact fighters go to hit the target and miss they just about fall over. So with non-contact sparring you learn better balance and distancing, so long as you do not make any significant errors.

*Conclusions*  _Advantages and disadvantages of non-contact sparring- __may not be a complete list_

The disadvantages of non-contact sparring; 



Lower level of body conditioning and toughening.
More difficult to gain confidence in your effectiveness.
More difficult to adjust your strikes according to your opponents reaction to getting hit (i.e.  Kick makes contact to floating ribs doubles over opponents body and changes orientation of chest and head).

The advantages of non-contact sparring; 



No need for protective gear.
No need to ban techniques or limit targets.
Lower incidence of injury therefore safer for children and families.
Allows for better balance and distancing (if done properly).
Adults and children can spar together.
Higher degree of control.

The only way to really know how effective a martial art is and what will work in a real life situation is to go out and get in to real fights on a daily basis and to use your skills to actually try to hurt other people. However, unless someone invents the Holodeck (ala Star Trek), this is highly immoral and logistically impossible as you would soon run out of students. There are 2 basic ways martial arts try to approximate real life situations in their sparring; contact sparring and non-contact sparring. All martial arts that use sparring are compromise between these 2 extremes in order to learn and to remain safe. Contact martial arts choose to keep the contact elements but need to  either limit the techniques that can be used, the targets that can be struck or use protective equipment. Non-contact martial arts choose to keep all of the techniques and, not limit the targets but take out most of the contact elements. Many school, choose to train non-contact because they believe that the benefits of non-contact sparring outweigh its shortcomings. 

There are more contact martial arts around than non-contact martial arts and some of the less enlightened full contact fighters and martial artists seem to think, and have in fact stated, that non-contact sparring is useless. People often dismiss what they do not understand so I hope I have been able to shed some light on the subject of non-contact sparring and its application for self defence. I have never trained in competition sparring or full contact martial arts/combat sports so there is an element of bias involved, as there is with anyones point of view so always remember that there are 3 sides to every story, YOURS, MINE AND THE TRUTH.


----------



## seasoned (Apr 19, 2014)

Excellent post.........


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 19, 2014)

Yeah, enjoyed reading this. Nice one RTKDCMB :yoda:


----------



## tshadowchaser (Apr 19, 2014)

I must say that the opening post said what needs to be said very well


----------



## Lone Wolf (Apr 19, 2014)

Agreed great post, definitely should be "stickied" somewhere.Nice breakdown and really well laid out


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 19, 2014)

> *Misconception #2* - _Punches and kicks are pulled_.
> 
> Also not true, during correct non-contact sparring all techniques are fully extended and controlled with power. You just focus your strike just short of the vital areas. The difference between contact and non-contact sparring is only distance, if you punch to the jaw and stop the punch 1 or 2cm in front and your opponent then they are fine, but step in slightly closer instead and your opponent  is injured. When black belts are sparring with each other the distance between the strike and the target gets quite close but when adults are sparring children, black belts are sparring junior belts or when beginners are sparring with each other the space between them is increased for added safety. Non-contact sparring where the practitioners pull strikes does not allow the technique to be applied properly; it is easier to adjust your distance than it is to adjust your technique.



I'm afraid I have to disagree pretty strongly with your second point.  Changing the distance _is_ changing the technique and it's changing it much more drastically than just pulling the punch would.


I actually enjoy doing light/minimal contact sparring with partners who are accustomed to full-contact fighting/sparring.  They understand the correct distance.  There's no question about whether a given strike "would" have connected or how cleanly and powerfully it would have done so, because the timing, distancing, and angling is all there.


Fully extending your strikes from out of range changes all that.  It changes the attacks.  It changes the available counters.  It changes the timing.  It changes the angles. There are lots of techniques and tactics which are impossible to do in any meaningful way when you are striking from out of reach.

There's a decent argument to be made that controlling distance is the single most important factor in a fight. By getting accustomed to always working at the wrong distance, you are not doing yourself any favors.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm afraid I have to disagree pretty strongly with your second point.  Changing the distance _is_ changing the technique and it's changing it much more drastically than just pulling the punch would.
> 
> 
> I actually enjoy doing light/minimal contact sparring with partners who are accustomed to full-contact fighting/sparring.  They understand the correct distance.  There's no question about whether a given strike "would" have connected or how cleanly and powerfully it would have done so, because the timing, distancing, and angling is all there.
> ...




Other things like (yes I know I am a bad role player) but I can just walk through semi contact hits and drive straight punches in the pocket with impunity. I suddenly have a chin of iron. No fear of getting nailed and extra cardio that comes with not throwing as hard.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Other things like (yes I know I am a bad role player) but* I can just walk through semi contact hits and drive straight punches in the pocket with impunity. I suddenly have a chin of iron*.



Well that wouldn't be non-contact sparing then would it


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Well that wouldn't be non-contact sparing then would it




Well if I throw non contact hits we could both stand there like rockem sockem robots.


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jgpsR579Zy4


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if I throw non contact hits we could both stand there like rocks sockem robots.



did you even read the 1st post?


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> did you even read the 1st post?



Yes........


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

Am I the only person who wacks people in the head to get them to keep their guard up?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Apr 19, 2014)

When I studied TKD, that was the rule; non-contact sparring except in blocking.  We constantly worked on being able to bring our strikes and kicks closer to our opponent without actual contact.  We punched or kicked as we were taught, simply making our strike point away from the partner.  For learning how to strike we had punching bags and other things.  We would sometimes punch walls or wood on our own at home or wherever.  You always had it in the back of your mind where your were and that in sparring, you were doing different that you would in a real fight.  

I know that sounds difficult for those who haven't done it, but that's the way it was done in my experience, as late as the 60s.  We students just always assumed it had always been done that way before, didn't question it, and learned it that way.

Thanks for the post RTKDCMB.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 19, 2014)

From personal experience, I can say that it is very difficult to go from non contact or pulling to full contact. 

Like Tony said, it changes the angles, distance, etc. 

For example, if you throw a round kick and get full extension, even if you touch your partner, your kicking knee is in the wrong position to get penetration. I've seen lots of students try (myself included) and very few can turn it on and off (though quite a few believe they can).

Hitting pads is excellent, but pads don't move the same as a person. 

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk


----------



## K-man (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.


I'm not sure that you read the OP. If you did it is obvious you did not understand it.



drop bear said:


> Well if I throw non contact hits we could both stand there like rockem sockem robots.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jgpsR579Zy4


That's not what non-contact sparring is about but I do agree with you, the video is total crap.



ballen0351 said:


> did you even read the 1st post?



Real answer "no".



drop bear said:


> Yes........



Really? 



drop bear said:


> Am I the only person who wacks people in the head to get them to keep their guard up?


No, I do it all the time, but it doesn't have to be a hard strike. I use open hand to make the point.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2014)

K-man said:


> I'm not sure that you read the OP. If you did it is obvious you did not understand it.
> 
> 
> That's not what non-contact sparring is about but I do agree with you, the video is total crap.
> ...



I read and understood the op. I don't agree it. But I did understand it.

Trying to pretend I didn't will not fool anyone. Especially if it is your constant fall back when you don't actually have an argument.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.



Its been done, its called defending yourself from real attackers in the street.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 19, 2014)

Jaeimseu said:


> From personal experience, I can say that it is very difficult to go from non contact or pulling to full contact.
> 
> Like Tony said, it changes the angles, distance, etc.
> 
> ...



Here is a video of one of our instructors from interstate doing a 100 man Kumite against multiple different styles with contact using their rules and target areas.






He doesn't seem to be having any more or less trouble connecting than any of the others he is sparring.

The turning (round) kick should always have the knee slightly bent otherwise the ball of the foot is comes in at the wrong angle, that does not change when you are kicking a solid object.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if I throw non contact hits we could both stand there like rockem sockem robots.
> 
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jgpsR579Zy4




The sparring in that video is terrible. The sparring I am referring to is more like the sparring in this video of one of our most recent demonstrations.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 19, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Here is a video of one of our instructors from interstate doing a 100 man Kumite against multiple different styles with contact using their rules and target areas.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What are their rules? He (and they) don't seem to be hitting full contact. Maybe he's tired in the video (it was round 90 that I saw). I'm not questioning a person's ability to make any contact. I'm saying it's not as simple as flipping a switch for most people. 

Regarding the round kick, it doesn't matter if you're kicking ball of the foot or instep, the kicking knee still needs to aim past the target to get full contact.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 19, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Am I the only person who wacks people in the head to get them to keep their guard up?



When I was grading for my brown belt I was sparring an instructor and I dropped my guard for a moment and he struck me in the face with a back fist and gave me a fat lip.He could have hit me a lot harder if he had wanted to but I got the message and did not drop my guard after that.

I guess all those MMA fighters I've seen who have their guard down and get whacked in the head just aren't getting the message.


----------



## K-man (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> I read and understood the op. I don't agree it. But I did understand it.
> 
> Trying to pretend I didn't will not fool anyone. Especially if it is your constant fall back when you don't actually have an argument.


In case you didn't understand the OP it was about non-contact sparring. That doesn't happen a lot in MMA I suspect. So whether you agree or not is not the point. 



drop bear said:


> Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.


If you read and understood the OP why would you make such a smart **** comment about testing it in a full contact fight? If the people training non-contact wanted to fight full contact surely they would train Kyokushin, MMA or any one of the other sports available that train that way. You are told post after post that not all martial artists are training for the ring. What part of that don't you understand? In fact most of us are not training to fight at all. Fighting for most of us is the last option, not the Holy Grail that you perceive. So non-contact sparring may well be a viable option for some people if not most people. Personally non-contact sparring is not my cup of tea either but I will discuss that in another post and my reasons are totally different to yours.

So I'm not pretending that you didn't read the OP. If you read it you obviously have a problem with comprehension. Either way your suggestion about testing was wrong and disrespectful. The OP made a number of points regarding misconceptions about non-contact sparring, eight in fact. You are free to agree or disagree, but for heaven's sake leave your MMA Superman cape somewhere else and discuss what was posted on its merits. We all know how talented you are in the ring and on the street so you don't have to rabbit on about how everyone needs to fight full contact to be credible. 
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 20, 2014)

Jaeimseu said:


> What are their rules? He (and they) don't seem to be hitting full contact. Maybe he's tired in the video (it was round 90 that I saw). I'm not questioning a person's ability to make any contact. I'm saying it's not as simple as flipping a switch for most people.
> 
> Regarding the round kick, it doesn't matter if you're kicking ball of the foot or instep, the kicking knee still needs to aim past the target to get full contact.
> 
> Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk



If you look on the ActiveRed website it will tell you but basically if he is facing a boxer then there is no kicking or hitting below the belt and if he is facing a WTF guy then there is no leg kicks or punching to the face etc. It is not an official Kumite because it is not scored and he is not trying to defeat his opponents. It is for charity so they are not going all out as he has to last 100 rounds and needs to recycle opponents, although the boxer did knock the wind out of him in round 23. I think it was 90 second rounds with a 30 second rest period between and a 5 minute break after round 50. Here's another link:

Active Red :: Kumite recap Pt2


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Other things like (yes I know I am a bad role player) but I can just walk through semi contact hits and drive straight punches in the pocket with impunity.



And if you suddenly decided to do that when sparring one of our black belts then they would quickly change tactics and knock you out instead. A few times in the past when a student would get overzealous and continuously make contact with their sparring partners my instructor used to say to the student that if he wants full contact he can spar with him (meaning no protective gear or forbidden targets) and so far noone has been stupid enough to take him up on it.



drop bear said:


> I suddenly have a chin of iron.



Yes you would, when defending against yourself against 3 opponents in the 'street' once you knock one out you only have to defend against 2 but when you are non-contact sparring 3 opponents you can not eliminate one of them to make it easier, you have to continue to deal with all 3 and in that respect that actually makes it harder.




drop bear said:


> No fear of getting nailed and extra cardio that comes with not throwing as hard.



We occasionally have students who come from other martial arts that do full contact and have 'no fear of getting nailed' but once they spar one of our black belts or instructors they soon change their tune once they start seeing hands and feet coming at their unprotected face, believe me the fear will be there. Contact or no contact you 'throw' just as hard.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

K-man said:


> In case you didn't understand the OP it was about non-contact sparring. That doesn't happen a lot in MMA I suspect. So whether you agree or not is not the point.
> 
> If you read and understood the OP why would you make such a smart **** comment about testing it in a full contact fight? If the people training non-contact wanted to fight full contact surely they would train Kyokushin, MMA or any one of the other sports available that train that way. You are told post after post that not all martial artists are training for the ring. What part of that don't you understand? In fact most of us are not training to fight at all. Fighting for most of us is the last option, not the Holy Grail that you perceive. So non-contact sparring may well be a viable option for some people if not most people. Personally non-contact sparring is not my cup of tea either but I will discuss that in another post and my reasons are totally different to yours.
> 
> ...



Because then you would know if there was a difference or not. We can natter on all day but that is the deciding factor. Op,s post was saying no contact produces similar results. Fair enough. Go find out.

I could tell you the differences technically I tried, And people got sensitive. 

Now when I say go out and test it you get sensitive.

Lucky I am not so sensitive. Or I would be offended by your insult posting.

Now go back and read the original post. Where it is a comparison on contact training and why there is really no difference.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> And if you suddenly decided to do that when sparring one of our black belts then they would quickly change tactics and knock you out instead. A few times in the past when a student would get overzealous and continuously make contact with their sparring partners my instructor used to say to the student that if he wants full contact he can spar with him (meaning no protective gear or forbidden targets) and so far noone has been stupid enough to take him up on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Missing the point. Getting hit changes the tactics.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Missing the point. Getting hit changes the tactics.



Not all training needs to be done full contact with the intent to injure your partner in order to be effective.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> Not all training needs to be done full contact with the intent to injure your partner in order to be effective.



Still changes the tactics though. 

Like a tendency to sit in the pocket and trade. And less need for good cardio.


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:
			
		

> Still changes the tactics though.
> 
> Like a tendency to sit in the pocket and trade. And less need for good cardio.​



Sorry if I am being a bit thick here, but would not cardio be separate anyway?


----------



## K-man (Apr 20, 2014)

Can I first say, I think you have done a great job with this post. I did try to rep you for it but the system was not in the same frame of mind. 





RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #1* - _Non-contact means there is no physical contact at all._


Non-contact can be a bit of a misnomer. Unless you are fighting a couple of metres apart, which seems a little pointless, contact is always a possibility and sometimes that contact can be quite hard. That is not evidence of lack of control but purely an unforeseen movement that suddenly puts the target in range of the strike, a point that was made in #2. We used to do a lot of limited contact sparring ant twice I copped broken ribs.




RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #2* - _Punches and kicks are pulled_.



Like *Tony Dismukes*, I'm not a great fan of utilising strikes that finish an inch or so from the target. Strikes that do that smack of training from a fixed stance. That way you certainly can judge the distance knowing that your punch will stop exactly one arms-length from your shoulder. I don't teach striking that way. I teach to strike through the target from an informal stance as in karate's Moto Dachi or fighting stance. 

Many people look at karate punches as being like the ones in this video ...
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R1PZbInSsyc

Unfortunately you also see advanced karate people doing the same thing and you see it in non-contact sparring. My 'smell test' is this. Would you punch like this in a pub brawl? If your answer is _yes_ then I can't  help you. If the answer is _no_, then I would ask why are you still training that way?

Here's some video of Bas Rutten fighting. Bas' background is Kyokoshin. There is no fixed stance and his punches and kicks strike through. These are real full on punches and kicks and I doubt you could stop any of them short in a non-contact sparring situation.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uiGQIh-6Kdo



RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #3*- _If you only train non-contact you won't be able to deal with pain or take a hit._



I have come away from training many times bruised and sore. There are as many conditioning methods as there are days in the year, and probably even more. To think you have to spar full contact to develop tolerance to pain and being hit is totally wrong.



RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #4*  _With full contact you can condition yourself to take a hit._



See above.



RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #5*  _We dont train full contact because it would be too dangerous._



I actually agree with the misconception. But that is the training I conduct. It is targeting places that if struck with full power would be likely to severely injure or worse, and I don't want to water down my training just so people can spar. I prefer them to train with light contact and good control in the way that they would fight in a real situation. If you train a sport based style then your training will be different because in sport you are not utilising those techniques.

So I agree totally with the OP saying "In order to do full contact sparring and make it safe you have to sacrifice something  either you have to limit your targets (i.e. no punching to the head, striking to the neck, groin kicks), or you have to use protective equipment. Limiting your targets can make your art less effective for self defence because you often have to train yourself out of the instincts you need."

But having said that there are many MAs that are not designed for sparring. Some of them like Aikido could be quite destructive if used full on. And then there are others that you might just shake your head when they make the statement.

And I just love this bit ...

"I dont know about anyone else but I joined a martial art so that people WOULDNT punch me in the head. What is the point of learning self defence if you just get beaten up in class?" 

I would suggest that this describes 95% of martial artists.



RTKDCMB said:


> *
> Misconception #6*  I_f you only train non-contact then you will instinctively not make contact in a real fight_



I agree that this is a myth, however if you are going to train with non-contact sparring I believe you need to ensure that there is other training in place that gives you a real feel for in your face fighting. Probably the biggest issue in a real fight is the adrenalin rush, not the lack of full contact sparring.



RTKDCMB said:


> *Misconception #7*  _Non-contact martial artists do not do any conditioning_



Same as #3 and #4 above. 



RTKDCMB said:


> *
> Misconception #8*  _Full contact martial arts are the only way to learn how to hit targets well_



Certainly full contact martial arts are ONE way of learning to hit targets well. But I must confess I am not a fan of static drills and 'air' punches. Technique is important but I believe the technique which we teach to beginners, kihon, is totally different to the technique we should be using as we gain more experience. 

I do question the need for speed and power. As we get older we begin to slow and we do lose our strength. I believe that as we get older we can be just as effective by using our mind and experience to make up for power and speed. 


_"One advantage of full contact sparring is that you have instant feedback on whether your kick or strike has the desired effect; with non-contact sparring it is a bit more theoretical." 
_
And here is an arguement for either side. Full contact does mean you get a real response but it is the response of a trained and seasoned fighter. I would argue that a theoretical response may well be more realistic. That plus in full contact you are avoiding certain targets. With the theoretical approach you can arguably react in the way a person might react to a strike to the back of the neck or a knee to the lower abdomen. This is the principle behind a lot of our Krav training.







RTKDCMB said:


> The only way to really know how effective a martial art is and what will work in a real life situation is to go out and get in to real fights on a daily basis and to use your skills to actually try to hurt other people. However, unless someone invents the Holodeck (ala Star Trek), this is highly immoral and logistically impossible as you would soon run out of students.



Back in the 70's I had mates that did just that. Most were involved in security at that time and were keen to test their skills. These days the laws are such that if you did that sort of thing you would get an enforced holiday with full board and lodging. The reality is, thankfully, that unless we are in law enforcement or security, very few of us will ever have to test our skills to the max in real life. I am more than happy to just train with people who do regularly use their skills and rely on their judgement as to whether my skills are sufficient for my needs.



RTKDCMB said:


> There are more contact martial arts around than non-contact martial arts and some of the less enlightened full contact fighters and martial artists seem to think, and have in fact stated, that non-contact sparring is useless. People often dismiss what they do not understand so I hope I have been able to shed some light on the subject of non-contact sparring and its application for self defence. I have never trained in competition sparring or full contact martial arts/combat sports so there is an element of bias involved, as there is with anyones point of view so always remember that there are 3 sides to every story, YOURS, MINE AND THE TRUTH.


I have trained for competition, not full contact, and we no longer spar in the conventional sense. I would reintroduce sparring tomorrow if I thought it would be more effective training than what we presently do, so in the main YOURS and MINE are much the same. Is it the TRUTH? Who knows?
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Sorry if I am being a bit thick here, but would not cardio be separate anyway?



It is harder to train at contact. More stress. And everything is thrown with more effort. You get tired quicker and that changes things.

Remember that kick that misses and the fighter almost falls over? That sort of kick sucks energy from you.

People win contact fights on good cardio.


----------



## K-man (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Because then you would know if there was a difference or not. We can natter on all day but that is the deciding factor. Op,s post was saying no contact produces similar results. Fair enough. Go find out.



The OP's post was an opinion. You are entitled to your opinion same as the rest of us here. If you want to put up your opinion, fine, go for it. But please, argue the case on its merit, not from an MMA perspective.



drop bear said:


> I could tell you the differences technically I tried, And people got sensitive.



There was nothing technical about your response. You said you were a poor role player 



> Other things like (yes I know I am a bad role player) but I can just walk through semi contact hits and drive straight punches in the pocket with impunity. I suddenly have a chin of iron. No fear of getting nailed and extra cardio that comes with not throwing as hard.


and you preferred to just hit people and you claimed that the best way to test the effectiveness of non-contact sparring was full contact sparring.



> Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.



Technical difference? Maybe a few glib one liners but nothing of substance.



drop bear said:


> Now when I say go out and test it you get sensitive.
> 
> Lucky I am not so sensitive. Or I would be offended by your insult posting.



Oh dear! Me sensitive? My insult posting? Really? Mate I have been so patient with your posts you wouldn't believe. And I didn't neg rep any of them. 



drop bear said:


> Now go back and read the original post. Where it is a comparison on contact training and why there is really no difference.


I spent over an hour working on my response. Perhaps you would like to do likewise.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> It is harder to train at contact.



In some ways.



drop bear said:


> More stress.



Depends on how much stress is applied, certainly more stress on the parts of your body getting hit.



drop bear said:


> And everything is thrown with more effort.



Just because you are not hitting each other full on does not mean that you are not throwing things with as much effort, it just has a different focus. Unless I am sparring beginners or children I put 100% effort into everything I do in class.



drop bear said:


> You get tired quicker and that changes things.



Getting tired always changes things but I would not say that the level of contact has anything to do with how tired you get. You get more tired when you put in more effort and/or you are not utilizing the effort efficiently, forgetting to breath for example.



drop bear said:


> Remember that kick that misses and the fighter almost falls over? That sort of kick sucks energy from you.



It does suck, yes, but fortunately that does not happen to me very often because, through non-contact sparring, I I always throw my kicks so that no matter whether I hit or miss I still have my balance, I might fall over once every couple of years or so but that's life.



drop bear said:


> People win contact fights on good cardio.



That is not in dispute but not everything is about 'winning'.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> In some ways.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Contact strikes are inherently different normally. Which is why the overbalance and also why it is a harder exercise. If you really wail on someone it is very easy to gas out. It is a factor to consider.

Even full contact there is a management between hard and really hard shots.

You really need that chin of iron to stand and trade which is why most fighters don't.

Guys like mark hunt do exactly that but then they are built for it.

When it gets to full contact it really is about winning. Nobody wants to get bashed.

Found it.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dapfW9AkfsQ

This is a really hard way to win a fight.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

K-man said:


> The OP's post was an opinion. You are entitled to your opinion same as the rest of us here. If you want to put up your opinion, fine, go for it. But please, argue the case on its merit, not from an MMA perspective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Look seriously anytime you want to argue the actual subject go for it.


----------



## K-man (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Look seriously anytime you want to argue the actual subject go for it.


So you didn't see my response?


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> It is harder to train at contact. More stress. And everything is thrown with more effort. You get tired quicker and that changes things.
> 
> Remember that kick that misses and the fighter almost falls over? That sort of kick sucks energy from you.
> 
> People win contact fights on good cardio.



Right now I get what you mean. You missed out "full" (I presume) and that threw me a lil bit. From what I have seen of MMA, I can't help but feel that a certain amount of recklessness is there. Okay there are some greats, but that would apply across a lot of disciplines. I really do see you're point about cardio, but why throw a kick that is going to miss. That just implies that the kick is a guess move of sorts, and that would be reckless. The one thing I would cite as a disagreement, is the stress element. One you get stressed, you do not breath. Thus you are relying on brute strength and raw power. Hence the energy drain. Economy of movement also applies to economy of the mind. Once you have to start thinking, you are not reacting. Just my own opinion.


----------



## Steve (Apr 20, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> Not all training needs to be done full contact with the intent to injure your partner in order to be effective.



Not all implies that some does.  Or said another way,  "not all" is different from "none."  

Mixed martial artists spar at all levels of contact from shadow boxing with air to full contact.

If I understand drop bear's point, I believe he's suggesting that some full contact sparring is preferable to no full contact sparring.  If so, I agree.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve (Apr 20, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Right now I get what you mean. You missed out "full" (I presume) and that threw me a lil bit. From what I have seen of MMA, I can't help but feel that a certain amount of recklessness is there. Okay there are some greats, but that would apply across a lot of disciplines. I really do see you're point about cardio, but why throw a kick that is going to miss. That just implies that the kick is a guess move of sorts, and that would be reckless. The one thing I would cite as a disagreement, is the stress element. One you get stressed, you do not breath. Thus you are relying on brute strength and raw power. Hence the energy drain. Economy of movement also applies to economy of the mind. Once you have to start thinking, you are not reacting. Just my own opinion.



This is very true about breathing and stress.  I've seen very experienced black belts in other styles do this very thing when they step into the bjj gym.  Another great endorsement for at least periodically sparring with greeter intensity and more contact.  

The presumption I'm seeing here from some is that you train without contact, acknowledge the adverse effect that stress has on breathing and understand that in these situations that technique goes out the window.  But then also seem to believe that you are immune to it. I don't get that, guys.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 20, 2014)

Steve said:


> Not all implies that some does.  Or said another way,  "not all" is different from "none."
> 
> Mixed martial artists spar at all levels of contact from shadow boxing with air to full contact.
> 
> ...


Nobody spars "full contact"  full contact would lead to injuries or death.  The only time anyone uses full contact is in a life or death fight


----------



## jks9199 (Apr 20, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Because then you would know if there was a difference or not. We can natter on all day but that is the deciding factor. Op,s post was saying no contact produces similar results. Fair enough. Go find out.
> 
> I could tell you the differences technically I tried, And people got sensitive.
> 
> ...



I'm starting to wonder if there's not some sort of comprehension barrier.  The whole point of the post was NON-CONTACT sparring, and it's benefits and role in training.  Of course you can wade right through a barrage of non-contact shots...  I bet you can walk through a paper wall on stage for a play, too, even if it's portraying a prison wall.

It's clear that you believe greatly in heavy contact sparring.  That's great.  It's definitely got a place in training, and I encourage people to do it some.  But it's not the only or even the best form of training.  There's no single best; there's only best for particular purposes.  Non-contact sparring encourages participants to develop a certain skill set; a lot of that's covered in the first post.  Sparring in general is great practice for dueling, and it's certainly fun.  Slow exercises like Rory Miller's One-Step drill or half speed sparring allow you to develop other things, and has a place in training.  But you're running a one-note line of "if it's not in the ring, if it's not full contact sparring, it's not _real_."  It's like your trying to say that the only thing that really matters in heavy metal music is massive guitar solos.  But, really, all the other parts -- bass, drums, keyboards, vocals, even stage performance -- are vital elements.

I don't know where the communication failure is happening -- and it can be from either side! -- but it sure seems to be happening. 

Do you really suggest that a fighter going into a pro or even semi-pro fight is going full contact right up to fight day?  I doubt it -- because the last thing any fighter I know at the pro or semi-pro levels wants is a rep for signing fights, then having to pull out from training injuries at the last minute.  Most mix heavy sparring and lighter sparring through their ramp up to the fight, backing off the heavy stuff in the last few weeks before the fight.  

But this is really starting to derail the topic -- just like talking about full contact in a non-contact setting is a derailleur.


----------



## K-man (Apr 20, 2014)

Steve said:


> This is very true about breathing and stress.  I've seen very experienced black belts in other styles do this very thing when they step into the bjj gym.  Another great endorsement for at least periodically sparring with greeter intensity and more contact.
> 
> The presumption I'm seeing here from some is that you train without contact, acknowledge the adverse effect that stress has on breathing and understand that in these situations that technique goes out the window.  But then also seem to believe that you are immune to it. I don't get that, guys.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


The breathing is one thing I stress in training. So many guys actually hold their breath when they are concentrating on other things.

It is probably a topic in itself but to me 'sparring' is what people normally associate with sparring in TKD matches, Karate point kumite or the stand up part of MMA. That is, moving in and out of space, sometimes attacking, sometimes covering. It can range from pretty much full power with protective gear to total no touch like I experienced in a karate school that I won't name here. I don't do any of that in my karate. We do contact sparring in Krav so I'm not saying it doesn't have a place in MA training and for those thinking of participating in competition it is essential.

The point I want to make here is that we don't avoid heavy contact in our training. We just do it in a different way. In the same way that MMA includes grappling in 'sparring' we do train to engage and take down, but it is over in seconds, not a protracted 'give and take' situation. Some of it involves light striking, sometimes it is simulated striking depending on the target but it does start from a committed attack. What some aren't getting is that there are many different methods of training and hopefully, at the end of the day they all take us to roughly the same place.
:asian:

BTW, I love your WC quote. Very appropriate.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

jks9199 said:


> I'm starting to wonder if there's not some sort of comprehension barrier.  The whole point of the post was NON-CONTACT sparring, and it's benefits and role in training.  Of course you can wade right through a barrage of non-contact shots...  I bet you can walk through a paper wall on stage for a play, too, even if it's portraying a prison wall.
> 
> It's clear that you believe greatly in heavy contact sparring.  That's great.  It's definitely got a place in training, and I encourage people to do it some.  But it's not the only or even the best form of training.  There's no single best; there's only best for particular purposes.  Non-contact sparring encourages participants to develop a certain skill set; a lot of that's covered in the first post.  Sparring in general is great practice for dueling, and it's certainly fun.  Slow exercises like Rory Miller's One-Step drill or half speed sparring allow you to develop other things, and has a place in training.  But you're running a one-note line of "if it's not in the ring, if it's not full contact sparring, it's not _real_."  It's like your trying to say that the only thing that really matters in heavy metal music is massive guitar solos.  But, really, all the other parts -- bass, drums, keyboards, vocals, even stage performance -- are vital elements.
> 
> ...




OP is making the comparison. So am I.

If this was a thread on tactics for non contact and I started saying full contact.

That would be the derail.

And you taper up to full contact to about a week or so  and then stop sparring all together. I don't think you could easily go back to semi or no contact at that point as the fighter is a bit intense at that stage.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Right now I get what you mean. You missed out "full" (I presume) and that threw me a lil bit. From what I have seen of MMA, I can't help but feel that a certain amount of recklessness is there. Okay there are some greats, but that would apply across a lot of disciplines. I really do see you're point about cardio, but why throw a kick that is going to miss. That just implies that the kick is a guess move of sorts, and that would be reckless. The one thing I would cite as a disagreement, is the stress element. One you get stressed, you do not breath. Thus you are relying on brute strength and raw power. Hence the energy drain. Economy of movement also applies to economy of the mind. Once you have to start thinking, you are not reacting. Just my own opinion.




The miss kick is the Thai style kick that if it misses you have to spin out from.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8G4gsTD1hfk

OP I believe is comparing it to the sort of kick that you re chamber. Which you would have to throw in non contact.



Throwing hard bombs is exhausting.

You can limit stress. But it is very hard to remove completely. And is also exhausting. This is a cornermans first job is to get the fighter breathing again.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 20, 2014)

Steve said:


> Not all implies that some does.  Or said another way,  "not all" is different from "none."
> 
> Mixed martial artists spar at all levels of contact from shadow boxing with air to full contact.
> 
> ...



If that's his point, I'd agree. But what he posts suggests that he feels all sparring needs to be full contact. And if that we're his point, all he needed to do was agree with the statement I made: not all training needs to be full contact. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 20, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> If that's his point, I'd agree. But what he posts suggests that he feels all sparring needs to be full contact. And if that we're his point, all he needed to do was agree with the statement I made: not all training needs to be full contact.
> 
> 
> Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.



You are correct not all training needs to be full contact.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 21, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You are correct not all training needs to be full contact.



Ahh, Progress.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 21, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Getting hit changes the tactics.



Yes, it means that your tactic was not working as well as it should and you need to defend better.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 21, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The miss kick is the Thai style kick that if it misses you have to spin out from.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8G4gsTD1hfk



From the comment you made about the kick that misses I thought you were  referring to a kick that was aimed at a target and suddenly the target  was not there and the kicker overbalanced and fell over. The kick in the  above video is another story. I personally would not like to use such a  kick. There is a saying that "you should never turn your back on an  opponent", which is gennerally good advice. However if you must do a  spinning movement (back fist, back kick etc) then you have to turn your  back and you should minimize the time you are facing away from your  opponent. Now you might do a spinning technique if your opponent moves  to the side at your back, blocks your kick in such a way that makes you  turn or to produce more power (a back kick is much more powerful than a  side kick for example) and there are always risks associated with  spinning. I would not use that kick in self defence or sparring because because I would have my back to my opponent needlessly, I would not be turning my back for any of the reasons I just mentioned, there is not much point to spinning after my kick is completed. If someone threw a kick like that then they would be vulnerable to a direct kick to the groin when their back is turned.



drop bear said:


> OP I believe is comparing it to the sort of kick that you re chamber. Which you would have to throw in non contact.



There are many reasons for re-chambering the kick and none of those I can think of has anything to do with the level of contact. You re-chamber so you can kick again without putting your foot down, so your opponent can not grab your leg, to step backwards more easily, so you can follow up with hand techniques etc.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 21, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You really need that chin of iron to stand and trade which is why most fighters don't.



I have seen fighters in full contact matches stand and trade all the time. Just because you are sparring non-contact does not mean you can stand and trade. We sometimes use a drill called toe to toe hand sparring where both training partners are standing with their front foot close to each other and are not allowed to move the front foot and even that is not about trading. You try to get your strikes though your partners defenses and block theirs from getting through. The Don Frye video has a lot of trading.




drop bear said:


> Found it.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dapfW9AkfsQ
> 
> This is a really hard way to win a fight.



The only thing that is missing are the ice skates.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 22, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if I throw non contact hits we could both stand there like rockem sockem robots.
> 
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jgpsR579Zy4



If you thought that was bad you should see them performing their patterns, devoid of any power.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 22, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> I have seen fighters in full contact matches stand and trade all the time. Just because you are sparring non-contact does not mean you can stand and trade. We sometimes use a drill called toe to toe hand sparring where both training partners are standing with their front foot close to each other and are not allowed to move the front foot and even that is not about trading. You try to get your strikes though your partners defenses and block theirs from getting through. The Don Frye video has a lot of trading.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You have to be a certain kind of fighter to stand and trade. Some can some can't. You can't really teach it.

The only way to realise that is to get hit.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 22, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> If you thought that was bad you should see them performing their patterns, devoid of any power.



First one I could find. The point is they eat shot after shot completely unaffected. While they get on with the business of working out their next attract.

You can't actually do that unless you have a head like a brick.

They are both fighting like they have iron chins. Which is a really good way to risk getting knocked out.


----------



## wingchun100 (Apr 22, 2014)

It's cool to read an article like this from someone who favors non-contact, or can at least see the benefit of it. In my wing chun school we don't spar (there are too many new students who don't even have the hang of chi sao yet), but every now and then we will run through self-defense scenarios where we stop short of going full-contact. I've had other people insult me for practicing that way...not just the non-contact part of course, but also using the "you never know what will happen on the street" argument. A well thought out post like this presents a great argument for why we shouldn't knock our classmates' teeth out every night.


----------



## Buka (Apr 22, 2014)

A great OP. Great comments, too.





It's  all good, really, at least to me. I think once someone has a few years  under their belt they'll have a better understanding of what each might  be able to do for their training. I don't really see a down side - other  than specifics which are obvious - it probably wouldn't be prudent to  train non contact to prepare for a boxing match. But, then, it probably  wouldn't be prudent to train in boxing for a sport Karate competition. 






I  trained exclusively non contact from 1970 to 1975. When we made contact  to the face, the match was stopped and you had to do a set of pushups  as punishment. In 1975, a group of us had been promoted to black belt a  few months earlier and started competing in that division. Contact was  allowed to the face so we started training that way. Been that way ever since. I  competed for several decades. Fought in hundreds of tournaments around  the country and some overseas. Had a lot of success, won a lot, lost a  lot, won a dozen grand championships or so. I fought guys who trained  specifically in non contact, I've fought guys who train contact. I have  been injured, hurt and absolutely smoked by both on an equal basis. I'd  like to be  able to say otherwise, but I can't. 

Am I a better fighter because I trained with contact? I honestly don't know, but I don't think so. I think I'd be the same fighter either way. But there's no way to tell.


Random thoughts -




If a guy is sparring and throwing everything  really, really hard - he's going to gas out in 90 seconds. We'll be  waiting. Smiling. That's called fun in the Dojo.


Getting punched in the face sucks, always  has always will, but it happens in Martial Arts. "Getting used to it"  might be a common rally cry for the young fight crowd, but they don't  know ***** from tuna fish. (and yes, we old guys were the same way when  we were young) You deal with it, you don't want to _get used to it_. If you do get used to it, you might want to reconsider your choice of sport. (seriously)

For me....I still train contact. With beginners I use kid gloves,  with intermediate students I'm careful - not of them, but of me getting  hurt. Sometimes they're worse than white belts. With black belts and  other old dogs, we just train and have fun. How much or how hard we hit  each other varies with the players and the particular mood we're all in  that day. 


I'll tell you one thing I've noticed between the  "non contact" guys and the "contact" guys. The non contact guys tend to  have a better reverse punch. I'm not sure why. I hate getting hit with a  reverse punch. Them suckers hurt.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 22, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Easy to test as well. Do a full contact fight and see how you go.


How bout this? Both fighters don't spar full contact, one doesn't even spar. Oddly enough, looks like they didn't have any cardio or conditioning issues.
Johny Hendricks vs. Robbie Lawler: How Safe Sparring May Change Contact Sports | Bleacher Report


----------



## drop bear (Apr 22, 2014)

kempodisciple said:


> How bout this? Both fighters don't spar full contact, one doesn't even spar. Oddly enough, looks like they didn't have any cardio or conditioning issues.
> Johny Hendricks vs. Robbie Lawler: How Safe Sparring May Change Contact Sports | Bleacher Report




Look if that was a trend and not the exception.

Machida drinks his own pee.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 22, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Look if that was a trend and not the exception.


I didn't say it was a trend, all I did was show you two top class fighters who don't practice "full-contact" sparring, and my personal knowledge of kickboxers who are relatively successful and train the same way, but whether or not its a trend i've no idea. I'm assuming you have information to support the idea that it's just an exception?



> Machida drinks his own pee.


And that is related to his fighting ability how? That might be an apt comparison if I was making an argument about hair color or something that clearly isn't related, but how one practices is much more related to their fighting ability then what they do with their piss.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Apr 22, 2014)

K-man said:


> Many people look at karate punches as being like the ones in this video ...
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R1PZbInSsyc
> 
> *Unfortunately you also see advanced karate people doing the same thing and you see it in non-contact sparring.* My 'smell test' is this. Would you punch like this in a pub brawl? If your answer is _yes_ then I can't  help you. If the answer is _no_, then I would ask why are you still training that way?



You see advanced karate people doing punching like that video shows during sparring? I've never seen that and I've been in Taekwon-Do for 28 years. Have you seen it at tournaments? In class sparring? I haven't seen it in either of those settings. Our sparring tends to be non-contact at white belt level and then progresses to semi-contact around 8th gup. I have never even seen 10 gups punch like that in sparring.

The punching that was shown in the video seems to be simply to demonstrate the proper body mechanics for a punch under ideal conditions (which sparring would certainly not qualify as). It's certainly not meant to be used as an example of how to punch during a sparring match. 

Pax,

Chris


----------



## drop bear (Apr 22, 2014)

kempodisciple said:


> I didn't say it was a trend, all I did was show you two top class fighters who don't practice "full-contact" sparring, and my personal knowledge of kickboxers who are relatively successful and train the same way, but whether or not its a trend i've no idea. I'm assuming you have information to support the idea that it's just an exception?
> 
> 
> And that is related to his fighting ability how? That might be an apt comparison if I was making an argument about hair color or something that clearly isn't related, but how one practices is much more related to their fighting ability then what they do with their piss.




Two fighters is not a trend. Combined with my personal knowledge of fighters who don't train that way. Correlation does not imply causation.

Machida drinks his own pee for the health benefits might work for him. Probably not going to try it myself unless it becomes a trend.

But of course this means op would be fine to jump in a full contact match training non contact?

Then he should do it and test his theory. And yours..



The peecdri


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 22, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Two fighters is not a trend. Combined with my personal knowledge of fighters who don't train that way. Correlation does not imply causation.


And?


> Machida drinks his own pee for the health benefits might work for him. Probably not going to try it myself unless it becomes a trend.


irrelevant


> But of course this means op would be fine to jump in a full contact match training non contact?
> 
> Then he should do it and test his theory. And yours..


Why should he do it?  I don't spar full contact I don't actually spar at all in the sense you claim.  BUT Ive for darn sure used my skills in real life against real bad guys really trying to hurt me and I didn't have a ref, cut man, time limits, weight classes, predetermined time and place, time to stretch and train, doc check ups prior to and after, a nice fence to keep others from jumping in, ect ect ect and guess what Im still here.  So again your point is irrelevent


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 22, 2014)

drop bear said:


> But of course this means op would be fine to jump in a full contact match training non contact?
> 
> Then he should do it and test his theory. And yours..



This theory has passed many tests in the only arena that means a damn to us - real life attacks from people in the street wishing to do serious harm to our students and instructors, not in a safe controlled environment of a sporting competition. I did hear about one of our former black belts who went to a full contact school, did one back kick on a kicking shield, knocked the holder on his butt and was told not to come back because he was "too dangerous". 



drop bear said:


> Machida drinks his own pee for the health benefits might work for him.  Probably not going to try it myself unless it becomes a trend.



So you might drink pee if it becomes a trend? That says a lot.


----------



## K-man (Apr 22, 2014)

chrispillertkd said:


> You see advanced karate people doing punching like that video shows during sparring? I've never seen that and I've been in Taekwon-Do for 28 years. Have you seen it at tournaments? In class sparring? I haven't seen it in either of those settings. Our sparring tends to be non-contact at white belt level and then progresses to semi-contact around 8th gup. I have never even seen 10 gups punch like that in sparring.
> 
> The punching that was shown in the video seems to be simply to demonstrate the proper body mechanics for a punch under ideal conditions (which sparring would certainly not qualify as). It's certainly not meant to be used as an example of how to punch during a sparring match.
> 
> ...



Then why do you teach something that you wouldn't use in a fight? Then you get into a sparring match and do this.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NKOvNjDVLA

Is it any wonder that MMA people call BS on this type of fighting?

You see, I would argue that you might teach a punch as in the video to illustrate some of the technical aspects but that it has very little to do with bio mechanics. If this was the best way of punching under ideal conditions why don't boxers punch that way? Practitioners need to ask what is the purpose of the kihon and not blindly assume that what is shown in basic training is what is the best way to utilise a technique in a fight.

As for TKD, I haven't watched a lot and what I have seen had very little punching anyway. For example in this clip there is hardly a punch thrown. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ADxy-4OVLoY

Here is a clip demonstrating how to punch in TKD. I ask you, would a boxer punch anything like that?

Then you take it into a match. 
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8fXqKVyPzyM

Not a punch to be seen from the TKD guy and he doesn't protect his head at all. Obviously there was a rule saying no head shots or the guy wouldn't have lasted 15 seconds. But the karate guy is not throwing 'karate' punches.

Now we get to Lyota Machida. He has a karate background (Shotokan) which is renowned for its deep stances. 
Look at this fight and see if you see a typical 'karate punch' from a typical 'karate stance'. It isn't going to happen.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zpRcJ8rCDAA

Why not if the structure and form of the kihon is so good?

Of course the answer is that there is a huge difference between kihon and advanced forms of fighting and many schools don't ever progress beyond the kihon. And that too is easy to explain. I don't want this to sound as if I'm blowing wind up *DB*'s backside but they are never tested beyond there own environment and their own rules. That is still not to say they couldn't use their training for self defence, just that I believe it could be more effective.

But to bring this back into the context of the OP. If most of these guys that I have shown were tested full contact they would fail dismally because I believe their performance demonstrates their training is not good. That is not to say that they need to spar full contact, just that their training is not realistic. Evidence that you can be effective without sparring is demonstrated by Robbie Lawler who, as *kempodisciple* posted, doesn't spar contact at all in training for his fights.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7D_crm7JW8k

There doesn't seem to be much lacking in his training.
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You have to be a certain kind of fighter to stand and trade. Some can some can't. You can't really teach it.
> 
> The only way to realise that is to get hit.



I would never teach someone to stand and trade like that, it would be very counterproductive for self defence. I would rather teach someone how to not get hit.


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You have to be a certain kind of fighter to stand and trade. Some can some can't. You can't really teach it.
> 
> The only way to realise that is to get hit.



I concur. Knowing your pain threshold translates both ways. That is why I like a full contact sparring sesh,you measure the input and output. You take a hit, whatever. It does take a certain mind set though.


----------



## K-man (Apr 23, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> I concur. Knowing your pain threshold translates both ways. That is why I like a full contact sparring sesh,you measure the input and output. You take a hit, whatever. It does take a certain mind set though.


Why do you need to spar to take a hit? 
:asian:


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 23, 2014)

K-man said:


> Why do you need to spar to take a hit?
> :asian:



What need? Just like sparring.

EDIT> Not clear. No, don't need to spar to take a hit. It is partly the environment I grew up in and also have taken a lot of hits that did not bother me.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Apr 23, 2014)

K-man said:


> Then why do you teach something that you wouldn't use in a fight? Then you get into a sparring match and do this.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NKOvNjDVLA



The fighters in that clip were throwing punches from their guard position, not from their hips. Additionally, they were constantly in motion, not in a static position in a stance that fully faced their opponent. That doesn't qualify as doing "the same thing" as the first video, which is what you said before and was the comment to which I replied. 

The basic mechanics of the punch, however, is the same as it is in the first video. It's not a question of teaching something you wouldn't use in a fight. The first video was simply a teaching tool for people to understand and practice basic body mechanics. You might think it's not as efficient as some other teaching method but you're free to teach however you want at your school. 



> Is it any wonder that MMA people call BS on this type of fighting?



It's been my experience that there's very little _some_ MMA proponents wont "call BS" on. I'm not really concerned with that. They do great at what they do and karate folks do great at what they do.



> You see, I would argue that you might teach a punch as in the video to illustrate some of the technical aspects but that it has very little to do with bio mechanics. If this was the best way of punching under ideal conditions why don't boxers punch that way? Practitioners need to ask what is the purpose of the kihon and not blindly assume that what is shown in basic training is what is the best way to utilise a technique in a fight.



I don't know why boxers don't do it. But then, I don't know why everybody doesn't learn how to kick exactly like Taekwon-Doin do. Or rather, I do It' because people come up with a system that works for them and their students. If you think boxing is the best for punching, including being able to seamlessly be integrated with the rest of the techniques and the general body mechanics of your system then by all means adopt its methods. 

I agree with you about the nature of basics. If you don't know what their purpose is it will be a problem. But that purpose will vary depending on the style in question. You shouldn't judge one style by the underlying philosophies of another style, IMO.  



> As for TKD, I haven't watched a lot and what I have seen had very little punching anyway. For example in this clip there is hardly a punch thrown. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ADxy-4OVLoY



I have very little to say about that style since it isn't, IMO, Taekwon-Do. It's a sport that uses the name Taekwondo and is heavily regulated by the World Taekwondo Federation. It's quite unlike the Taekwon-Do developed by Gen. Choi and promulgated by the ITF. The clip that you posted, however, is _not_ an example of a martial art, not really. It's an example of a combative sporting event played under very specific rules developed to promote kicking techniques not the use of punches (seriously, this is a major topic of debate in the TKD section of this and pretty much every MA BBS on the internet). I am not a fan at all of the WTF and their rules but it does get people to get very adept at kicking. If you've never been kicked by a high level WTF fighter I suggest you give it a try sometime. It's not what I would call fun.



> Here is a clip demonstrating how to punch in TKD. I ask you, would a boxer punch anything like that?



No clip demonstrating how to punch in Taekwon-Do here.



> Then you take it into a match.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8fXqKVyPzyM
> 
> Not a punch to be seen from the TKD guy and he doesn't protect his head at all. Obviously there was a rule saying no head shots or the guy wouldn't have lasted 15 seconds. But the karate guy is not throwing 'karate' punches.



That's a great example of a WTF fighter being stupid enough to fight what appears to be a kyokushin (or one of its derivatives) guy under kyokushin rules If you're going to do that the best thing to do would be to spend an adequate amount of time practicing under those rules so you know what's coming and how to deal with it. Undr WTF rules, for example, you can't grab someone, But that's very common in kyokushin fighting. The WTF guy didn't know how to counter that at all, let alone use that tactic himself for an advantage. D

Do you really think the kyokushin fighter would do any better under WTF rule? 

The karate fighter sure looked like he was using kyokushin style punches to me. He wasn't chambering at his hip from a full facing position, of course, but we really already covered that topic.



> Now we get to Lyota Machida. He has a karate background (Shotokan) which is renowned for its deep stances.
> Look at this fight and see if you see a typical 'karate punch' from a typical 'karate stance'. It isn't going to happen.
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zpRcJ8rCDAA
> 
> ...



So then why are we having this discussion if you seem to, if not agree with me in substance, at least acknowledge there is a difference between doing basics and fighting? If you think you have a better way of doing things more power to you. Get to doing them and start posting videos of yourself and your students so people here can see your system and how it stack up to what they do. 



> But to bring this back into the context of the OP. If most of these guys that I have shown were tested full contact they would fail dismally because I believe their performance demonstrates their training is not good.



 I don't know what their training is like or whether it's good or not good because I have never seen them train. Nor do I know what the goal of their training is. I can say that I have been largely unimpressed with a lot of what I saw in the videos you linked to in your last post. But then, that might have been by design on your part  



> That is not to say that they need to spar full contact, just that their training is not realistic. Evidence that you can be effective without sparring is demonstrated by Robbie Lawler who, as *kempodisciple* posted, doesn't spar contact at all in training for his fights.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7D_crm7JW8k
> 
> ...



Yes, which is, I think, the main point that the OP was making.

But let's keep in mind that being "effective" is going to depend on the rues under which you fight as much as your training methods (which will be geared towards those rules). Mr.  Lawler does great under MMA rules, I'm sure. If he fought a WTF match I don't know how he would fare. It would depend on too many variables to address in a single post here. Note, I didn't say he would do poorly, I said I didn't know how he would do. But like the video you posted of the WTF fighter going against the kyokushin fighter and obviously not hving any experience fighting under those rules, a lot of it would depend on how much time he put in familiarizing himself with them. As a professional fighter I imagine Mr. Lawler would be savvy enough to spend some time doing so The WTF fighter seen above was obviously not one of the WTF elites (they're usually busy training for events like the WTF WC's and the Olympics, not fighting matches against a karate fighter, though).

Pax,

Chris


----------



## MJS (Apr 23, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> I thought I would do my part and try to dispel some misconceptions some people have about non-contact sparring.
> 
> *Misconception #1* - _Non-contact means there is no physical contact at all._
> 
> ...



Nice thread!  I know I'm a bit late to the party, but I'll toss in my thoughts.   Personally, I think that both have their place, and both are important.  I feel that too much or too little of each could have negative effects.  When I trained in Kenpo, we had both no and light to moderate contact.  When I left Kenpo and joined the Kyokushin dojo I currently train at, it was quite an eye opener.  Less padding ( we wear those cloth hand and shin pads during sparring) and the contact is much harder than I ever did in any of the Kenpo schools I was a part of.  

When we spar now, it's heavy contact.  More than once, after a sparring session, I've woken up the next morning, feeling like I got hit by a truck. LOL.  Personally, I wish that we would do some lighter contact, so as to allow everyone to work on specific things.  Oh sure, we do drills that do allow us the opportunity to do that, but I also feel that we should do some lighter sparring, so we can test the drill in a more 'live' environment.  On the flip side, I feel that being able to take a hard shot is important.  In the event you found yourself in a confrontation outside of the dojo, that guy isn't going to be pulling any punches.  If you're not used to or have never taken a hard shot in the dojo, you're going to be in for a rude awakening.  

So, as I said, I feel that both have their pros and cons.  It's nice having some lighter sessions, where you're still getting a good workout, still making some light contact, but at the same time, giving your body a break from the hard beating.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 23, 2014)

kempodisciple said:


> How bout this? Both fighters don't spar full contact, one doesn't even spar. Oddly enough, looks like they didn't have any cardio or conditioning issues.
> Johny Hendricks vs. Robbie Lawler: How Safe Sparring May Change Contact Sports | Bleacher Report



I'm very interested in how Hendricks and Lawler are approaching their training.  I think it's much smarter than the old Militech gym's approach of knocking people out during routine training.

That said, both Hendricks and Lawler have done plenty of full-contact sparring and fighting in the past.  They have that experience to draw on, which means they already understand correct distancing, how to relax under full contact pressure, how an opponent's body reacts to contact, and what it's like to receive and deliver a barrage of full-contact blows. I don't think someone who had never sparred or fought with contact would have that success.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 23, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Sorry if I am being a bit thick here, but would not cardio be separate anyway?



Sparring full-contact takes a lot more energy than light or no contact.  It takes more energy to hit a solid object. It drains more energy when you get hit hard. It takes more energy when you clinch and/or push against an opponent. That's not even including the fatigue that comes from the stress of worrying about getting hit. Fighters who are accustomed to full-contact can get used to it and learn to relax, but it still burns more cardio than punching air.

BTW - "full contact" is a bit of a misnomer in most cases.  The fighters at the Militech gym notoriously d_id s_par truly full-contact - meaning their sparring sessions were like actual fights and participants frequently got knocked out. I'm not convinced they were doping themselves any favors with that approach.  What most boxers/kickboxers/MMA fighters do could better be described as "hard" or "solid" contact. They strike with correct distancing and body mechanics to deliver a solid jolt, but they don't put that extra oomph in an attempt to give their sparring partners a concussion.


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 23, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Sparring full-contact takes a lot more energy than light or no contact.  It takes more energy to hit a solid object. It drains more energy when you get hit hard. It takes more energy when you clinch and/or push against an opponent. That's not even including the fatigue that comes from the stress of worrying about getting hit. Fighters who are accustomed to full-contact can get used to it and learn to relax, but it still burns more cardio than punching air.
> 
> BTW - "full contact" is a bit of a misnomer in most cases.  The fighters at the Militech gym notoriously d_id s_par truly full-contact - meaning their sparring sessions were like actual fights and participants frequently got knocked out. I'm not convinced they were doping themselves any favors with that approach.  What most boxers/kickboxers/MMA fighters do could better be described as "hard" or "solid" contact. They strike with correct distancing and body mechanics to deliver a solid jolt, but they don't put that extra oomph in an attempt to give their sparring partners a concussion.



Yeah. I must have been thinking about a situation that I thought must have been similar. I have random thoughts on most things. One of my thoughts was harking back to the day's, or to be precise - years, when a mate and myself would train together. He played Rugby at school and I had the boxing, so we would just have a bit of fun. We would not intentionally try to hurt each other, but we did not hold back. Mainly body shots, but we both hit the floor and thought nothing of it. It did have cross purpose for both us. Probably would be termed numbnuts behavior rather than full contact, but see you're point on that.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Sparring full-contact takes a lot more energy than light or no contact.  It takes more energy to hit a solid object. It drains more energy when you get hit hard. It takes more energy when you clinch and/or push against an opponent. That's not even including the fatigue that comes from the stress of worrying about getting hit. Fighters who are accustomed to full-contact can get used to it and learn to relax, but it still burns more cardio than punching air.
> .



While I won't deny having a good cardio is important none of what you describes even compares to a real life self defense.  I stood still and shot someone one and ws breathing like I just sprinted a mile.  Ive been in real fights that lasted 30 seconds and felt like I was fighting for an hour.  So again you don't need to spar hard to build up this endurance because it doesn't really translate.  It can be built in many traditional ways.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> And?
> 
> irrelevant
> 
> Why should he do it?  I don't spar full contact I don't actually spar at all in the sense you claim.  BUT Ive for darn sure used my skills in real life against real bad guys really trying to hurt me and I didn't have a ref, cut man, time limits, weight classes, predetermined time and place, time to stretch and train, doc check ups prior to and after, a nice fence to keep others from jumping in, ect ect ect and guess what Im still here.  So again your point is irrelevent




Well if we wanted to throw irrelevant around your unproven personal anecdotes kind of fit as well. 

But I am sure you are awesome.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> While I won't deny having a good cardio is important none of what you describes even compares to a real life self defense.  I stood still and shot someone one and ws breathing like I just sprinted a mile.  Ive been in real fights that lasted 30 seconds and felt like I was fighting for an hour.  So again you don't need to spar hard to build up this endurance because it doesn't really translate.  It can be built in many traditional ways.




It is something you can readily test. You can no contact spar and then full contact spar and see which one makes you more tired. Mma sparring by the way takes more cardio than striking.

Peoples opportunity to just go out and life and death someone is limited.

The added cardio is about the other guy pushing the pace. Say you did sprints which you could also do. At some point you could collapse and nobody is punching you in the face.

To train someone for a fight we would throw a fresh guy at the fighter each minute just to mimic the extra push needed to compete in front of people.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> This theory has passed many tests in the only arena that means a damn to us - real life attacks from people in the street wishing to do serious harm to our students and instructors, not in a safe controlled environment of a sporting competition. I did hear about one of our former black belts who went to a full contact school, did one back kick on a kicking shield, knocked the holder on his butt and was told not to come back because he was "too dangerous".
> 
> 
> 
> So you might drink pee if it becomes a trend? That says a lot.




The arena of stories.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> It is something you can readily test. You can no contact spar and then full contact spar and see which one makes you more tired. Mma sparring by the way takes more cardio than striking.
> 
> Peoples opportunity to just go out and life and death someone is limited.
> 
> ...


Except I don't train to fight in a ring.  So repeated fighting of fresh guys means nothing to me.  I have no desire to ever fight in a ring.  I train to fight to save my life should the need arise.   No amount of sparing will ever prepare you for the total adrenaline dump you get in a real live fight with a real live bad guy trying to kill you.  So you want to train for sport fighting that way is probably very helpful.  It just doesn't carry over to real life.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if we wanted to throw irrelevant around your unproven personal anecdotes kind of fit as well.
> 
> But I am sure you are awesome.



Your welcome to come read all the police reports anytime you want it's all public record.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Mma sparring by the way takes more cardio than striking.



By the way MMA sparing has strikes.  Perhaps you mean BJJ which I agree is a hell of a workout


----------



## K-man (Apr 23, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> That said, both Hendricks and Lawler have done plenty of full-contact sparring and fighting in the past.  They have that experience to draw on, which means they already understand correct distancing, how to relax under full contact pressure, how an opponent's body reacts to contact, and what it's like to receive and deliver a barrage of full-contact blows. I don't think someone who had never sparred or fought with contact would have that success.


I think you are making a good point here. Once you have learned how to make distance and how to engage it does stay with you. Whether you ever get to relax under that sort of pressure is debatable as your always going to be hyped up.

In the end though, in a SD situation, which for most of us is a pretty rare occassion unless we are stupid, we aren't going to be attacked by a trained fighter. We are not training to take on a trained fighter and most trained fighters, particularly those at a higher level, aren't going around attacking people.
:asian:


----------



## K-man (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if we wanted to throw irrelevant around your unproven personal anecdotes kind of fit as well.
> 
> But I am sure you are awesome.


You are becoming offensive again. I'm sure *Ballen* can speak for himself but what is this BS you are throwing around that his personal experience is irrelevant. What *Ballen*  and the other LEOs have is experience you and I will never have. Take a step back. Not everything has to be on YouTube. If you can't understand what is being written without seeing it in action it is a problem of comprehension. If *Ballen*, or any of the other LEOs started to post material that was not real or unlikely, it would be challenged immediately by a peer. You and I are not their peers. They are on the street risking their lives day after day. They walk the walk, unlike us who train for fun because we want to. I have had top police and military trainers teach me at various times. To me, their first hand experience is like gold. You don't listen, you don't learn ... simple.
:asian:


----------



## Steve (Apr 23, 2014)

kempodisciple said:


> How bout this? Both fighters don't spar full contact, one doesn't even spar. Oddly enough, looks like they didn't have any cardio or conditioning issues.
> Johny Hendricks vs. Robbie Lawler: How Safe Sparring May Change Contact Sports | Bleacher Report



Guys, I think that the larger point is missed, though.  Anyone who is fighting in an mma match is getting hit, working out the timing and technique under pressure and at full speed and power.  

Is it sparring?  Well, not really, but if you're a professional mma fighter, regardless of how often you fight at this level of intensity, it is not accurate to say that they never do so.  The stakes are much higher in a professional mma ring, but the tangible benefits of sparring remain the same. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve (Apr 23, 2014)

K-man said:


> You are becoming offensive again. I'm sure *Ballen* can speak for himself but what is this BS you are throwing around that his personal experience is irrelevant. What *Ballen*  and the other LEOs have is experience you and I will never have. Take a step back. Not everything has to be on YouTube. If you can't understand what is being written without seeing it in action it is a problem of comprehension. If *Ballen*, or any of the other LEOs started to post material that was not real or unlikely, it would be challenged immediately by a peer. You and I are not their peers. They are on the street risking their lives day after day. They walk the walk, unlike us who train for fun because we want to. I have had top police and military trainers teach me at various times. To me, their first hand experience is like gold. You don't listen, you don't learn ... simple.
> :asian:



I'm going to remember this the next time someone calls me out for suggesting that experience is immaterial to credibility as an expert.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## K-man (Apr 23, 2014)

Steve said:


> I'm going to remember this the next time someone calls me out for suggesting that experience is immaterial to credibility as an expert.


Yes. But remember you have to have credibility before you can stand on it.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

Steve said:


> I'm going to remember this the next time someone calls me out for suggesting that experience is immaterial to credibility as an expert.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


And you would still be wrong :btg:


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

K-man said:


> You are becoming offensive again. I'm sure *Ballen* can speak for himself but what is this BS you are throwing around that his personal experience is irrelevant. What *Ballen*  and the other LEOs have is experience you and I will never have. Take a step back. Not everything has to be on YouTube. If you can't understand what is being written without seeing it in action it is a problem of comprehension. If *Ballen*, or any of the other LEOs started to post material that was not real or unlikely, it would be challenged immediately by a peer. You and I are not their peers. They are on the street risking their lives day after day. They walk the walk, unlike us who train for fun because we want to. I have had top police and military trainers teach me at various times. To me, their first hand experience is like gold. You don't listen, you don't learn ... simple.
> :asian:



And that is the rub I am just supposed to believe people.  Or I am being offensive.

Look you can believe if you want. I will test OK?


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> By the way MMA sparing has strikes.  Perhaps you mean BJJ which I agree is a hell of a workout


Striking and wrestling combined is tough.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Striking and wrestling combined is tough.


Actually, pure grappling is a hell of a lot more of a workout to me than grappling and striking...with the striking you can break off and keep distance to rest. No purpose in breaking off in pure grappling.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Except I don't train to fight in a ring.  So repeated fighting of fresh guys means nothing to me.  I have no desire to ever fight in a ring.  I train to fight to save my life should the need arise.   No amount of sparing will ever prepare you for the total adrenaline dump you get in a real live fight with a real live bad guy trying to kill you.  So you want to train for sport fighting that way is probably very helpful.  It just doesn't carry over to real life.




Except it does in the hundreds of street fights I can't prove I have been been in but that you can't question.

Regardless if you are talking about non contact and full contact. You can easily do both and see which one is harder.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> And that is the rub I am just supposed to believe people.  Or I am being offensive.
> 
> Look you can believe if you want. I will test OK?



So come test.  Everytime I put my hands on someone it has to be documented. Feel free to stop by all our reports are available to the public at my department.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Except it does in the hundreds of street fights I can't prove I have been been in but that you can't question.
> 
> Regardless if you are talking about non contact and full contact. You can easily do both and see which one is harder.


The issue isn't that one requires more energy than the others, I agree with you that full contact requires more energy than noncontact, but that's unimportant. When all your adrenaline comes, its going to drain you either way, since it'll just use all that energy at once.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Except it does in the hundreds of street fights I can't prove I have been been in but that you can't question.
> 
> Regardless if you are talking about non contact and full contact. You can easily do both and see which one is harder.


It doesn't matter which one is harder.  What's harder for you might not be harder for me and and what's easy for you may be hard for me.  No training no matter how tough you make it will ever compare to real life the adrenaline release and fight or flight response kicks in.  There is nothing in a controlled training environment that can match it.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> It doesn't matter which one is harder.  What's harder for you might not be harder for me and and what's easy for you may be hard for me.  No training no matter how tough you make it will ever compare to real life the adrenaline release and fight or flight response kicks in.  There is nothing in a controlled training environment that can match it.



A full contact fight is pretty close. But it depends what you are used to. When I did a heap of fights at work I did not adrenal dump as much. Because there is less lead up. I suffered really badly a week before.

The last street fight I got into I was pretty calm. But it varies. Straight after eating a decent injury. I was nervous as hell for a while.

A friend of mine suffered really badly in a very casual boxing match he did. To the point he was shaking and outright couldn't function. Now the thing is he street fights no problem. He also was fine on his first fight that was more serious.

Now yes I am using anecdotes but not to the point I am beating you around the head with a "I have black belt I am right. Don't question"


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

kempodisciple said:


> The issue isn't that one requires more energy than the others, I agree with you that full contact requires more energy than noncontact, but that's unimportant. When all your adrenaline comes, its going to drain you either way, since it'll just use all that energy at once.




Only sort of. Adrenaline is not very consistent.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> So come test.  Everytime I put my hands on someone it has to be documented. Feel free to stop by all our reports are available to the public at my department.




Halfway across the world?


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Halfway across the world?



If your that interested.  I'll buy you a crab cake when you get here we have the best


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> A full contact fight is pretty close. But it depends what you are used to. When I did a heap of fights at work I did not adrenal dump as much. Because there is less lead up. I suffered really badly a week before.
> 
> The last street fight I got into I was pretty calm. But it varies. Straight after eating a decent injury. I was nervous as hell for a while.
> 
> ...


OK kid whatever you say.......


----------



## K-man (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> And that is the rub I am just supposed to believe people.  Or I am being offensive.
> 
> Look you can believe if you want. I will test OK?


Pretty much yes. If someone says something credible I will believe them at face value the same way I believed you when you first came to MT. But time generally sorts the wheat from the chaff. Questioning to expand an issue is a very reasonable thing to do but if you question from the point of view that the person is wrong, then that can turn ugly. And, since you asked, yes, a number of people are finding your posts offensive.

We can all make up our minds and believe what we want, but this is the internet. You can't 'test' anything. Continuing to demand evidence that doesn't exist is not reasonable.



drop bear said:


> Except it does in the hundreds of street fights I can't prove I have been been in but that you can't question.
> 
> Regardless if you are talking about non contact and full contact. You can easily do both and see which one is harder.



I wonder if you are equating you job in security as 'hundreds of street fights'. If you have genuinely been in 'hundreds' of street fights I would seriously question your character and your intelligence. I would also question why you were frequenting areas where street fights are likely to occur and what transpired to get you involved in those fights. 



drop bear said:


> A full contact fight is pretty close. But it depends what you are used to. When I did a heap of fights at work I did not adrenal dump as much. Because there is less lead up. I suffered really badly a week before.
> 
> The last street fight I got into I was pretty calm. But it varies. Straight after eating a decent injury. I was nervous as hell for a while.
> 
> ...



I think it is a given that many people around here have a black belt. It sounds a bit like 'penis envy'. When you write of things like your friend's response to a fight I am more than happy to accept that. When you talk of 'hundreds' of street fights where you have beaten up on heaps of black belts, that's when my BS meter goes off the scale.



drop bear said:


> Halfway across the world?


And that is why we have to take people's word for things, especially when what is being claimed makes perfect sense.
Questioning for the sake of questioning is trolling.
:asian:


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Well if we wanted to throw irrelevant around your unproven personal anecdotes kind of fit as well.



You mean like everything you have said on this forum so far?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Halfway across the world?



There's always the internet, makes the world a lot smaller.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The arena of stories.



True stories.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

drop bear said:


> And that is the rub I am just supposed to believe people.
> 
> Look you can believe if you want. I will test OK?



Belief goes both ways, you can either believe someone is telling the truth as they see it or you can believe they are lying. If you believe everyone is lying all of the time then no amount of 'proof' will satisfy you.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 23, 2014)

Folks, it's starting to get a little testy in here. Can we dial it back a notch, before someone has to break out the Great Glowing Staff of Admin and whack people upside their virtual heads?


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 23, 2014)

Two good points have been made, 1) that full contact sparring requires more cardio than non-contact sparring and 2) getting hit gives you a good idea of what your pain threshold is. I don't think that either of those are in dispute. The cardio issue is relative one, it depends more upon the level of intensity of the movements than it does on the level of contact, but the level of contact is certainly an issue. Cardio needs to be improved in either case. Grappling and 'rolling' is always contact so it is not really a fair comparison to non-contact sparring. The kind of sparring I do in my training is geared towards self defence and in a self defence situation the aim is to resolve it quickly so cardio is not such a big issue, except in circumstances that require me to run, you do not need to be an extreme athlete to kick someone in the groin. Being fit is better than not being fit. 

As for the pain threshold issue, the way around that is to ensure that you have good defenses and to make sure that if you have to hit your attacker that you should only have to hit them once. One of the points I made at the start in;

*Misconception #4*  - "how do you condition yourself to take a hit to the groin, the throat or the knee?  You cant, not without damaging something".

*Misconception #5*  - "wearing protective gear can also give you a false sense of security   getting hit bone on bone is a far cry from getting hit with a glove on  your protective gear. Martial artists who only spar with protective gear  sometimes get hit in those spots and believe that that they can take a  hit there. Its not the same, getting hit bone on bone hurts a lot more  and has a higher shock value."


----------



## drop bear (Apr 23, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Two good points have been made, 1) that full contact sparring requires more cardio than non-contact sparring and 2) getting hit gives you a good idea of what your pain threshold is. I don't think that either of those are in dispute. The cardio issue is relative one, it depends more upon the level of intensity of the movements than it does on the level of contact, but the level of contact is certainly an issue. Cardio needs to be improved in either case. Grappling and 'rolling' is always contact so it is not really a fair comparison to non-contact sparring. The kind of sparring I do in my training is geared towards self defence and in a self defence situation the aim is to resolve it quickly so cardio is not such a big issue, except in circumstances that require me to run, you do not need to be an extreme athlete to kick someone in the groin. Being fit is better than not being fit.
> 
> As for the pain threshold issue, the way around that is to ensure that you have good defenses and to make sure that if you have to hit your attacker that you should only have to hit them once. One of the points I made at the start in;
> 
> ...



Doesn't work.

I can't condition the groin so therefore all contact training serves no purpose?

Same idea with the pads.

You are showing the limits of contact training. Which is fine but then you are using that to link no contact as an alternative.

Non contact does not solve those issues.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Doesn't work.
> 
> I can't condition the groin so therefore all contact training serves no purpose?
> 
> Same idea with the pads.



You have a real talent for missing the point.



drop bear said:


> Non contact does not solve those issues.



Neither does full contact, which was the whole point.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Doesn't work.
> 
> I can't condition the groin so therefore all contact training serves no purpose?



Apparently you can condition the groin:vu:


----------



## MJS (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> To train someone for a fight we would throw a fresh guy at the fighter each minute just to mimic the extra push needed to compete in front of people.



We do this a lot at my dojo, usually either when a tournament is coming up or a belt test.  We also do this on testing day as well.  My last test, I had to fight 4 times, each lasting 1min-1 1/2min.  New people each time, and I only got a short rest in between each fight.


----------



## MJS (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> And that is the rub I am just supposed to believe people.  Or I am being offensive.
> 
> Look you can believe if you want. I will test OK?



Please, please tell me you're not falling back on the 'if its not on video, it didn't happen' crap line that gets used repeatedly.


----------



## Steve (Apr 24, 2014)

I don't know, guys.  I see both sides here, but don't agree with either side completely.  I think that it ultimately depends upon what your goal is.  Why are you training in martial arts?  If it's just to get a decent workout, then Tae Bo is just fine.  Nothing wrong with it.

But, as your goals change, I think we can all agree that the intensity of the training must also change.  If you want to be a professional fighter, then you will need to train for that, which will include a full range of contact from shadow boxing to light sparring to some amount of hard sparring.  Whether it's full contact or not, at some point you are stepping into the ring and are executing techniques at full speed and full power against a (hopefully) skilled, resisting opponent. 

If your goal is self defense, you will at some point need to train the skills.  I get the need for safety equipment and such, but at some point, you just need to have a go and see what happens.  Take the training wheels off and experiment.  Sparring, regardless of the level of contact, is the lab where you try things out, and it's vital.  

Ultimately, regardless of your final intent with your training, you have to take training as close as you can in training, and I don't think that can be done for any martial art if there is never any contact at any point.


----------



## Wo Fat (Apr 24, 2014)

Before I draw the wrong conclusion ... is it the original poster's contention that if combat sports practitioners (UFC, Strikeforce, Bellator, etc.) trained only non-contact, their performance would be equal to or better than their performance that included full-contact in their training?


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

Steve said:


> I don't know, guys.  I see both sides here, but don't agree with either side completely.  I think that it ultimately depends upon what your goal is.  Why are you training in martial arts?  If it's just to get a decent workout, then Tae Bo is just fine.  Nothing wrong with it.


I think your correct about the Goal.  Your goals set the type of training you need to do.


> But, as your goals change, I think we can all agree that the intensity of the training must also change.  If you want to be a professional fighter, then you will need to train for that, which will include a full range of contact from shadow boxing to light sparring to some amount of hard sparring.  Whether it's full contact or not, at some point you are stepping into the ring and are executing techniques at full speed and full power against a (hopefully) skilled, resisting opponent.


I agree if your goal is to be a professional fighter then like all sports you need to practice on the field or in the ring


> If your goal is self defense, you will at some point need to train the skills.  I get the need for safety equipment and such, but at some point, you just need to have a go and see what happens.  Take the training wheels off and experiment.  Sparring, regardless of the level of contact, is the lab where you try things out, and it's vital.


I disagree here.  You don't need "have a go"  Non-contact isn't training with training wheels.  Its training.  I don't spar full contact but I have used my skills on the street.  I don't compete in Judo and don't do full speed randori in class but Ive used Judo at work.  Its not that I don't like sparing or full speed randori its that I cant afford to get injured in training so in this case the benefits of going full speed or full power are too low to risk it. Esp when my methods of training work fine without it.  



> Ultimately, regardless of your final intent with your training, you have to take training as close as you can in training, and I don't think that can be done for any martial art if there is never any contact at any point.


Well no martial artist is training Full contact regardless of what they say.  You train full contact your going to run out of training partners due to injury very quickly.  Also if full contact was the best way then why do we train new people slow and methodical.  If that's the best way to learn something then its also the best way to retain it.  Repetition is the key.  How do I learn to draw my weapon fast and smooth out of a lvl3 holster?  By doing it over and over and over.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 24, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Apparently you can condition the groin:vu:



Not really because the Gladiator is actually kicking his buttocks.  This is a trick and can be taught relatively quickly.  You cannot condition yourself to take a shot to your testicles but you can be sure that they kick your ***!


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 24, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Apparently you can condition the groin:vu:



First of all...ow. There are exceptions to every rule. I think you would be hard pressed to find a second person stupid enough to allow themselves to get kicked in the groin for the 1000's of times it would take to get that kind of conditioning, even if it was real. But if anyone wants to try it, be my guest.


----------



## Transk53 (Apr 24, 2014)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Not really because the Gladiator is actually kicking his buttocks.  This is a trick and can be taught relatively quickly.  You cannot condition yourself to take a shot to your testicles but you can be sure that they kick your ***!



Guess he maybe now a Eunuch lol


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 24, 2014)

Wo Fat said:


> Before I draw the wrong conclusion ... is it the original poster's contention that if combat sports practitioners (UFC, Strikeforce, Bellator, etc.) trained only non-contact, their performance would be equal to or better than their performance that included full-contact in their training?



No because they have to train in the manner in which they compete, they test their art in the arena for which it was designed, the mat or the cage and the training method works well for them that purpose. The art I study is designed for self defence and it can only be properly tested in a self defence situation when it arises, and the training works well for that purpose. My main point is that if I trained full contact then there would be many things I simply could not do safely, even with protective gear. Sparring/training non-contact (and that's not to say we never hit each other) allows me to do those things and still have training partners the next day.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> First of all...ow. There are exceptions to every rule. I think you would be hard pressed to find a second person stupid enough to allow themselves to get kicked in the groin for the 1000's of times it would take to get that kind of conditioning, even if it was real. But if anyone wants to try it, be my guest.



I just thought it was funny


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 24, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> I just thought it was funny



He certainly won't be substance Peeing for a while.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 24, 2014)

MJS said:


> We do this a lot at my dojo, usually either when a tournament is coming up or a belt test.  We also do this on testing day as well.  My last test, I had to fight 4 times, each lasting 1min-1 1/2min.  New people each time, and I only got a short rest in between each fight.



Yeah even helping the guys was tough we were all blowing hard at the end.

We have a kyokashin guy train with us. And they do 20 50 and 100 round fights. I think a minute or a minute thirty. That would be hard work.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 24, 2014)

MJS said:


> Please, please tell me you're not falling back on the 'if its not on video, it didn't happen' crap line that gets used repeatedly.



Yeah I just like to watch people try to dodge. It entertains me.

Otherwise I get this line. We train ABC's and it works perfectly fine for 1234. And there is nothing that makes that link. I am just expected to believeeople.

I could do the same but if you think this is a flame war then you have seen nothing. Both of us standing there defending a training method based on nothing but our egos would get nowhere.

So I ask for proof.

I know I won't get any that is why I ask.

But the level of upset surprises me.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Yeah I just like to watch people try to dodge. It entertains me.
> 
> Otherwise I get this line. We train ABC's and it works perfectly fine for 1234. And there is nothing that makes that link. I am just expected to believeeople.
> 
> ...



Like I said the proof is there.  Come read all the reports you want.  Where is your proof.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 24, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> You have a real talent for missing the point.
> 
> 
> 
> Neither does full contact, which was the whole point.



Yeah but even if full contact conditioned 1 body part. That is 1 more than non contact. 

The big training gap from realistic sparring to fight is elbows. Where you either have to seriously pad up or throw super light. So it is a point where you work around it.

But there is nobody I know who would say bin contact completely because you can't train elbows realistically


----------



## drop bear (Apr 24, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Like I said the proof is there.  Come read all the reports you want.  Where is your proof.




How dare you ask I am like totally offended you don't believe me.

Mine is in an office in Australia that you can not reasonably come see.

So I don't really have any.

This is why I try my best to fall back on YouTube. That you can reasonably see.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> How dare you ask I am like totally offended you don't believe me.
> 
> Mine is in an office in Australia that you can not reasonably come see.
> 
> ...



So YouTube is your proof yet you have posted nothing of YOU on YouTube just other folks doing stuff.   Got it.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> How dare you ask I am like totally offended you don't believe me.
> 
> Mine is in an office in Australia that you can not reasonably come see.
> 
> ...



So the only correct way to train is your way?  Who are you again?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Apr 24, 2014)

drop bear said:


> I could do the same but if you think this is a flame war then you have seen nothing.


Actually that's exactly what this has been turned into, IMHO


----------



## K-man (Apr 24, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> First of all...ow. There are exceptions to every rule. I think you would be hard pressed to find a second person stupid enough to allow themselves to get kicked in the groin for the 1000's of times it would take to get that kind of conditioning, even if it was real. But if anyone wants to try it, be my guest.


I guess this would be one of the rare instances where you could be eligible for a Darwin Award and still survive!
:asian:


----------



## Wo Fat (Apr 24, 2014)

_Before I draw the wrong conclusion ... is it the original poster's contention that if combat sports practitioners (UFC, Strikeforce, Bellator, etc.) trained only non-contact, their performance would be equal to or better than their performance that included full-contact in their training?
_


RTKDCMB said:


> No because they have to train in the manner in which they compete, they test their art in the arena for which it was designed, the mat or the cage and the training method works well for them that purpose. *The art I study is designed for self defence and it can only be properly tested in a self defence situation when it arises, and the training works well for that purpose.* My main point is that if I trained full contact then there would be many things I simply could not do safely, even with protective gear. Sparring/training non-contact (and that's not to say we never hit each other) allows me to do those things and still have training partners the next day.


In other words, combat sport fighters train full-contact because the outcome necessitates it. Now, I agree that they're bound by rules; no eye or groin strikes. But limb incapacitation is within the rules. Knockouts are within the rules. In fact, they're necessary to defeat the (usually similarly trained) opponent. 

What we know is that a self defense situation--eyes and groin notwithstanding--will rely on the same kind of incapacitation.

So if combat sport requires the same kind of preparation necessary to ultimately incapacitate, and the objective in a self defense situation is to ultimately incapacitate (or flee) then what is it about your art that does not allow for the same or similar full-contact training to ultimately incapacitate?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Apr 25, 2014)

Wo Fat said:


> _Before I draw the wrong conclusion ... is it the original poster's contention that if combat sports practitioners (UFC, Strikeforce, Bellator, etc.) trained only non-contact, their performance would be equal to or better than their performance that included full-contact in their training?
> _
> 
> In other words, combat sport fighters train full-contact because the outcome necessitates it. Now, I agree that they're bound by rules; no eye or groin strikes. But limb incapacitation is within the rules. Knockouts are within the rules. In fact, they're necessary to defeat the (usually similarly trained) opponent.
> ...



Because the accumulation of damage fromend  repeated concussions and connective tissue injuries are not worth it. Certainly not for the non-pro-fighter crowd, and questionably so for the pros. 

There are many good reasons to spar hard. And we do increase the level of contact as people advance through the program. But I'm not interested in knocking out my friends. I'd prefer to spar with them again tomorrow. Not send them a Get Well card. 

No contact. Light/medium/heavy contact. Yes. 
Do my best to injure them?
No. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> How dare you ask I am like totally offended you don't believe me.
> 
> Mine is in an office in Australia that you can not reasonably come see.
> 
> ...



They have these things called video cameras that you could use to film yourself and post on YouTube to show us your proof.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> So I ask for proof.
> 
> I know I won't get any that is why I ask.



So tell us what kind proof would you be satisfied with seeing.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

Wo Fat said:


> In other words, combat sport fighters train full-contact because the outcome necessitates it. Now, I agree that they're bound by rules; no eye or groin strikes. But limb incapacitation is within the rules. Knockouts are within the rules. In fact, they're necessary to defeat the (usually similarly trained) opponent.
> 
> What we know is that a self defense situation--eyes and groin notwithstanding--will rely on the same kind of incapacitation.



To a certain extent yes. In a sporting environment the object of, an arm bar for example, is to make the opponent tap out and win you the bout, for self defence the object is either to force compliance, in which case sport and self defence are similar, or to break the arm so that your attacker can not use it to attack you with, then it is different from sport where breaking your opponents arm is generally frowned upon. 



Wo Fat said:


> So if combat sport requires the same kind of preparation necessary to ultimately incapacitate, and the objective in a self defense situation is to ultimately incapacitate (or flee) then what is it about your art that does not allow for the same or similar full-contact training to ultimately incapacitate?



Good question. Often when full contact combat sport martial artists talk about the traditional self defence orientated martial arts they usually only mention groin strikes and eye gouges like they are the only differences, it is much more than that. Some examples; side kick to the side of the knee to break the leg, elbow strike the jaw where the object is usually to break the jaw not just go for a knockout, spear-finger thrust or knife hand strike to the throat, knife hand strike to the base of the skull or the back or side of the neck, upset punch to the kidney, downward elbow to the back of the head, double palm strike to the ears etc. Most of these you will not find in a sporting competition for very good reason but I can do all of these during non-contact sparring.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 25, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> So YouTube is your proof yet you have posted nothing of YOU on YouTube just other folks doing stuff.   Got it.




Not about me. That is what I am trying to say. You don't listen to me because I am cool. I am not cool I am just a nobody like everybody else.

Maybe this is simpler. How can I see if something you tell me that works actually does? How do I test any technique any idea you come up with?

How do you test it?

Do you expect a persons first test of a technique or theory to be a life or death street fight.

So on topic.non contact sparring has all of these misconceptions. Now the logic may be sound or it may be flawed. We could go back and forth all day.

Under what method is the system OP is suggesting validated? How could OP or myself validate it?

It just seems like I am expected to take massive leaps of faith.

So one point missed for full contact is I can go to my coach and say you are full of bs let's jump in a cage and really shake this idea about. Without risking it on a random street punk.

If I am wrong I don't pay for it by getting killed or crippled. If he is wrong he does not pay the same.

And that way neither of us have to be anybody. My bouncing career does not apply his fight record does not apply. Just what works works.

There are times where you cannot or should not do this. But if you can I think you should.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 25, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> To a certain extent yes. In a sporting environment the object of, an arm bar for example, is to make the opponent tap out and win you the bout, for self defence the object is either to force compliance, in which case sport and self defence are similar, or to break the arm so that your attacker can not use it to attack you with, then it is different from sport where breaking your opponents arm is generally frowned upon.
> 
> 
> 
> Good question. Often when full contact combat sport martial artists talk about the traditional self defence orientated martial arts they usually only mention groin strikes and eye gouges like they are the only differences, it is much more than that. Some examples; side kick to the side of the knee to break the leg, elbow strike the jaw where the object is usually to break the jaw not just go for a knockout, spear-finger thrust or knife hand strike to the throat, knife hand strike to the base of the skull or the back or side of the neck, upset punch to the kidney, downward elbow to the back of the head, double palm strike to the ears etc. Most of these you will not find in a sporting competition for very good reason but I can do all of these during non-contact sparring.



The techniques you mention here aren't used in a sport context, but I'm not sure you're going to be able to claim self-defense if you do some of that stuff, either.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

Jaeimseu said:


> The techniques you mention here aren't used in a sport context, but I'm not sure you're going to be able to claim self-defense if you do some of that stuff, either.
> 
> Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk



That would depend upon the circumstances, the level of danger to me and the amount of force I used for each individual strike in each case.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> How can I see if something you tell me that works actually does? How do I test any technique any idea you come up with?


For starters I didn't come up with anything.  Im learning a style that's been around since before I was born so its been tested over and over and over again long before I ever learned it so I know it works because it has worked over and over again


> How do you test it?


Hopefully you never need to


> Do you expect a persons first test of a technique or theory to be a life or death street fight.


I can practice things in a class room I don't need to "test" anything.  I can look at a technique or theory and using what I know about violence, my body style, my condition, my injuries, the places I frequent and placed Id be more likely to use that technique I can tell if something just wont work.  For example Ive had 2 ruptured disks in my back for over a decade.  I suffer from back pain and in my left leg don't have the same range of motion as my right.  So I cant do very high kicks with my left so I dont train that.
I also don't train in a style that's overly complicated I try to use the K.I.S.S. (keep it simple stupid) method for self defense.  


> So on topic.non contact sparring has all of these misconceptions. Now the logic may be sound or it may be flawed. We could go back and forth all day.
> 
> Under what method is the system OP is suggesting validated? How could OP or myself validate it?


I don't know what method or system the OP is using that's irrelevant.  You can learn any system with out full contact.  How do you validate it?  I have no idea how YOU validate it.  I use common sense and history to validate it.  


> It just seems like I am expected to take massive leaps of faith.


Why if I learn how to punch someone why does it matter if I punch my training partner in the face as hard as I can in a controlled environment? It doesn't translate to real life.
So it really doesn't matter how hard I hit people in training.  Take shooting for example.  Law enforcement train in a controlled range and normally shoot well to very well.  Yet when they get into real world shootings accuracy is terrible.  The last Officer Involved Shooting I went to was a few months ago.  The officer is a SWAT trained and always gets perfect scores on the range yet in this shooting from 8 feet away he fired 5 shots missed one all together, one in the leg, stomach, shoulder, and face.  No very accurate because you cant train for the stress no matter how "hard" you train its still training.


> So one point missed for full contact is I can go to my coach and say you are full of bs let's jump in a cage and really shake this idea about. Without risking it on a random street punk.


And so can I but I don't need to get a concussion to do it 


> If I am wrong I don't pay for it by getting killed or crippled. If he is wrong he does not pay the same.


Then your not going full speed and power so your argument is invalid


> And that way neither of us have to be anybody. My bouncing career does not apply his fight record does not apply. Just what works works.


Which is fine and I can figure out what works without beating up my training partners. You also only figure out what works in training and not in real life


> There are times where you cannot or should not do this. But if you can I think you should.


I never said you shouldn't I said you don't need to.  You can learn just as effectively if not better without it.


----------



## MJS (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Yeah even helping the guys was tough we were all blowing hard at the end.
> 
> We have a kyokashin guy train with us. And they do 20 50 and 100 round fights. I think a minute or a minute thirty. That would be hard work.



Yeah, those 100 man fights are no joke!  One of the guys who tested for black, had to do 10 fights, that were about a minute thirty.  Needless to say, he was pretty spent after that.  But he completed it!


----------



## MJS (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Yeah I just like to watch people try to dodge. It entertains me.
> 
> Otherwise I get this line. We train ABC's and it works perfectly fine for 1234. And there is nothing that makes that link. I am just expected to believeeople.
> 
> ...



I understand and can relate.  I personally, just don't like to rely on or use YT, and the proving ground, the Bible, the final word, etc, on what works/what doesn't work.  People survive encounters all the time, none of which are filmed.  I mean, I could film myself doing a defense against a punch.  I could have 10 different people or all shapes and sizes, punch me.  It may work all of the time, it may work some of the time, it may work none of the time.  If it worked 5 out of 10 times, does that mean that the tech sucks?  I could grab 10 other people and it might work all the time.  The variables, IMO, are too wide.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

MJS said:


> I understand and can relate.  I personally, just don't like to rely on or use YT, and the proving ground, the Bible, the final word, etc, on what works/what doesn't work.  People survive encounters all the time, none of which are filmed.  I mean, I could film myself doing a defense against a punch.  I could have 10 different people or all shapes and sizes, punch me.  It may work all of the time, it may work some of the time, it may work none of the time.  If it worked 5 out of 10 times, does that mean that the tech sucks?  I could grab 10 other people and it might work all the time.  The variables, IMO, are too wide.


You can also edit or keep doing retakes until you get what you want to see


----------



## MJS (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Not about me. That is what I am trying to say. You don't listen to me because I am cool. I am not cool I am just a nobody like everybody else.
> 
> Maybe this is simpler. How can I see if something you tell me that works actually does? How do I test any technique any idea you come up with?
> 
> ...



The point we're all trying to make is...Ballen, who is a LEO, who has probably had more confrontations than the average person, due to his line of work, is saying that badguy did A, Ballen did Y, and it worked.  You deny everything he says.  So, if you're going to deny that, say it won't work, it'd be nice to film yourself and show what you think is the better option.


----------



## MJS (Apr 25, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> You can also edit or keep doing retakes until you get what you want to see



Exactly!  Another reason why I hate to see YT as the last word on what works or not.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Maybe this is simpler. How can I see if something you tell me that works actually does? How do I test any technique any idea you come up with?
> 
> How do you test it?



I and others have tired to explain it to you. You learn it in class and practice it slowly at first with a semi compliant partner, try it out in sparring or with a partner giving some resistance and then it is there if you need it.



drop bear said:


> Do you expect a persons first test of a technique or theory to be a life or death street fight.



Do you expect the first test of a competition technique or theory to be in a competition?



drop bear said:


> So on topic.non contact sparring has all of these misconceptions. Now the logic may be sound or it may be flawed. We could go back and forth all day.
> 
> Under what method is the system OP is suggesting validated? How could OP or myself validate it?



It is validated by being taught by people who know what they are talking about, by instructors who have had 35+ years of experience and by anyone who has used the art successfully to defend themselves, you can't just look at it for 5 minutes and expect to know if anything is valid or not



drop bear said:


> It just seems like I am expected to take massive leaps of faith.



You don't need to take a huge leap of faith, just listen to people who know more than you about the subject being discussed.



drop bear said:


> So one point missed for full contact is I can go to my coach and say you are full of bs let's jump in a cage and really shake this idea about. Without risking it on a random street punk.
> 
> If I am wrong I don't pay for it by getting killed or crippled. If he is wrong he does not pay the same.
> 
> ...



The main problem is that you do not listen to anyone, every time someone  tries to give you any kind of proof yo do not believe them. People on  this forum have a lot of experience in the arts they study and you will  not believe a word they say. If a doctor tells you that you are mortally allergic to peanuts do you go and try to prove if it is true or not by eating a jar of peanut butter or do listen to what the doctor is telling you and stay away from peanuts? You ask for proof that a self defence art  works for self defence by testing it in the cage when that is not a  accurate test. You ask for proof but provide none of your own other than  random YouTube videos.

Oh and one final point, you do not *test *a technique, theory or strategy in a self defence situation, you *apply *it.


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> To a certain extent yes. In a sporting environment the object of, an arm bar for example, is to make the opponent tap out and win you the bout, for self defence the object is either to force compliance, in which case sport and self defence are similar, or to break the arm so that your attacker can not use it to attack you with, then it is different from sport where breaking your opponents arm is generally frowned upon.


But the timing and execution of the technique under pressure in order to get to the point where you can break the joint are the same.  The only difference between a tap and a blown joint is a half inch or so, in most cases.  Anyone who doesn't think an armbar is a joint finisher should look at the second Tate/Rousey fight.



> Good question. Often when full contact combat sport martial artists talk about the traditional self defence orientated martial arts they usually only mention groin strikes and eye gouges like they are the only differences, it is much more than that. Some examples; side kick to the side of the knee to break the leg, elbow strike the jaw where the object is usually to break the jaw not just go for a knockout, spear-finger thrust or knife hand strike to the throat, knife hand strike to the base of the skull or the back or side of the neck, upset punch to the kidney, downward elbow to the back of the head, double palm strike to the ears etc. Most of these you will not find in a sporting competition for very good reason but I can do all of these during non-contact sparring.


Strikes to the side of the knee are not illegal, nor are blows to the jaw.  But the point remains that the skills development is the same.  If nothing else, self defense is a skillset that incorporates many of the same skills used in combat sports.  So, logically, if the sport athletes train to execute the skills successfully, it's because the training methods work.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> , it's because the training methods work.



I haven't seen anyone say they don't work.  We are just saying its not the ONLY way


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2014)

Another thing that I think is being overlooked here is that the testing must at some point be done by you and me.  As in, not someone else.  I know this seems obvious, but, it's not.  There is a difference between saying, "This technique is sound," and "I can execute this technique."  Those are not equivalent statements.

One has to do with the integrity of the system, and the other has to do with the integrity of the training methods.  Pointing to techniques and saying that so and so can do them, and my teacher does them and Bruce Lee does them and I can point to a handful (or dozens or hundreds) of people who have successfully transferred these skills from comprehension to application... doesn't mean that you can do them.  

This is where, I think, the brains of a combat sport guy starts to go haywire, and where questions about testing come into play.  I can GUARANTEE you that if you come into a BJJ school and train for 2 years (3 to 4 times every week), you WILL become proficient in the fundamentals.  The techniques may or may not be the best for self defense.  That's debatable.  But the training methods are indisputable.  If you (as in you, not someone), train for 2 years, you will become proficient.  This is regardless of current fitness level, size, shape or athletic ability.  Some will learn faster, some will get better, but everyone learns.

If you're in a style where you can only point to someone else as evidence that you can do something, you're on much less firm ground.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Another thing that I think is being overlooked here is that the testing must at some point be done by you and me.  As in, not someone else.  I know this seems obvious, but, it's not.  There is a difference between saying, "This technique is sound," and "I can execute this technique."  Those are not equivalent statements.
> 
> One has to do with the integrity of the system, and the other has to do with the integrity of the training methods.  Pointing to techniques and saying that so and so can do them, and my teacher does them and Bruce Lee does them and I can point to a handful (or dozens or hundreds) of people who have successfully transferred these skills from comprehension to application... doesn't mean that you can do them.
> 
> ...



Why do you think BJJ is the only style that can train people in 2 years?  If its a sound style with proven training methods what difference does it make what style it is?


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Oh and one final point, you do not *test *a technique, theory or strategy in a self defence situation, you *apply *it.


Here's the next question then.  How many of your techniques have you applied?  For most people, in a self defense context, the answer is zero.


----------



## Steve (Apr 25, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Why do you think BJJ is the only style that can train people in 2 years?


I don't.





> If its a sound style with proven training methods what difference does it make what style it is?


It doesn't.  

Read again.  Slowly.  You'll figure it out if you care to.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Another thing that I think is being overlooked here is that the testing must at some point be done by you and me.  As in, not someone else.  I know this seems obvious, but, it's not.  There is a difference between saying, "This technique is sound," and "I can execute this technique."  Those are not equivalent statements.
> 
> One has to do with the integrity of the system, and the other has to do with the integrity of the training methods.  Pointing to techniques and saying that so and so can do them, and my teacher does them and Bruce Lee does them and I can point to a handful (or dozens or hundreds) of people who have successfully transferred these skills from comprehension to application... doesn't mean that you can do them.
> 
> ...



That's basically what I see in every class, everyone is different and has different abilities, just because someone else can do something doesn't meant that I can and vice versa. Being able to say the technique is sound is a good start.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Here's the next question then.  How many of your techniques have you applied?  For most people, in a self defense context, the answer is zero.



Low section block, reverse punch, front snap kick, uppercut from one knee kneeling position, front thrust kick from my back (up kick), low turning kick, knee strike. All about 20 years ago.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 25, 2014)

*Resistance training and pressure testing is crucial to martial development*.  Combat sports and many martial systems utilize full contact, submission grappling, technique training, etc.  I am a huge proponent of pressure testing your training via full contact sparring, submission grappling, Scenario Training, etc.  In my background I did a lot of point sparring as a youngster even competing and being first in my division at a state level as an adult, competed regionally and also placed 5th in the First NBL Super Grands way back in the day.  During that same time frame I also kickboxed (the mma of the day) and was an amature champion at one point. I have also used my training in work related situations that involved violence.   I said all of the previous to give you an idea of my background.  In the system that I teach *Instinctive Response Training* when we pressure test it is full contact.  Whether with padded sticks (where I start everyone), rattan sticks and Filipino Body Armor, rattan sticks and fencing masks or full contact empty hand and submission grappling. (with hand strikes, elbows, knees kicks, etc.)  We also  pressure test via submission grappling only, Scenario Based Training (where full contact is also involved), etc.  The above of course does not mean we do not spend most of our time technique training.  Just that when we pressure test it is full contact even if we do not do it every training session.  Which brings us back to non-contact training.  *Even though my background as a young man was extensive in non-contact sparring or point sparring I am not a fan of it*.  I have seen to many point sparring people who had issues transitioning to full contact. (does not mean that some cannot as some certainly can)  The one really good thing from point sparring is the explosiveness that the athletes develop.  However, this can be easily developed through various drills.  
*
Now if you point spar I am not saying what you are doing is bad* just that in my opinion it is not the best training methodology.  However it is a training methodology that can work.   Yet I think there are better alternatives in the long run.  Nor am I saying that you can't point spar most of the time and go full contact some of the time. (this has worked for quite a few)  Each individual will find *what works for them* and there are some systems that simply do not spar at all and I know several individuals who practice them who have successfully defended themselves in a violent situation.  Bottom line there is more than one way to get good in the Martial Sciences.  Several paths can lead a practitioner to their desired goal.  That is the question what is your goal?  If it is mma then you need to train mma to be successful in it.  Also to understand that mma is a sport that can be used for self-defense but.... that is not it's goal and self-defense is a different beast than stepping into a cage.  If it is for self-defense then that also needs to be your primary focus yet that does not mean you shouldn't have contact in your training and or pressure testing of some sort.  Drop bear has found his path in MMA good for him.  The rest of us have or are finding our way.  Good for us.  *We can disagree on techniques, sparring, etc. but in the end we are all trying to get better and achieve a goal in the Martial Sciences!*


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> I don't.It doesn't.
> 
> Read again.  Slowly.  You'll figure it out if you care to.



I read it thanks.   When you make the claim that BJJ anyone can be taught in 2 years your implying that isn't true for other styles.  Otherwise why single out BJJ.  Goju can be taught regardless of size shape conditions as well so can many other styles.


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Here's the next question then.  How many of your techniques have you applied?  For most people, in a self defense context, the answer is zero.



Not only that most people never will.


----------



## K-man (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Another thing that I think is being overlooked here is that the testing must at some point be done by you and me.  As in, not someone else.  I know this seems obvious, but, it's not.  There is a difference between saying, "This technique is sound," and "I can execute this technique."  Those are not equivalent statements.


It really does depend on the technique you are describing. In Krav for example a lot of the drills involve elbows (point of elbow) to the ribs, face or side of head. These are generally followed by multiple forearm strikes to the back of the head and neck. I really don't need to test those. I know that if those shots get through they will be devastating. What I do need to test is my ability to get into position to execute the technique. That is why I asked Brian if his sparring was continuous. In my training once you are in position to deliver those strikes you stop. It is no different to you applying an armbar and having your partner tap. You don't need to break his arm to prove the technique. I don't need to cave in my partner's face to show an elbow to the face is effective.



Steve said:


> One has to do with the integrity of the system, and the other has to do with the integrity of the training methods.  Pointing to techniques and saying that so and so can do them, and my teacher does them and Bruce Lee does them and I can point to a handful (or dozens or hundreds) of people who have successfully transferred these skills from comprehension to application... doesn't mean that you can do them.


 I think this applies to complex techniques. Most SD techniques are simple. Almost all involve gross motor skill. I'm pretty sure it was Bruce Lee who said something along the lines of; "The long fight scenes are for the movies. In reality a fight is over in seconds but the people watching don't want that". What you see Bruce Lee doing in films is not what Bruce Lee was teaching his students.

I do agree with you about the techniques that I can do seamlessly but students struggle with. Rather than say they are *likely* to fail under pressure, I would say they would almost *certainly* fail. Until they are drilled to become second nature you won't even think to use them. By that I mean in the stress situation you don't plan ahead what you are going to do. You react instinctively to the situation you find yourself in. That is different to grappling where you may have time to think.





Steve said:


> This is where, I think, the brains of a combat sport guy starts to go haywire, and where questions about testing come into play.  I can GUARANTEE you that if you come into a BJJ school and train for 2 years (3 to 4 times every week), you WILL become proficient in the fundamentals.  The techniques may or may not be the best for self defense.  That's debatable.  But the training methods are indisputable.  If you (as in you, not someone), train for 2 years, you will become proficient.  This is regardless of current fitness level, size, shape or athletic ability.  Some will learn faster, some will get better, but everyone learns.


If you train Krav with me for half that time I will give the same guarantee. My guarantee will also be that the techniques will be 100% suitable for self defence.



Steve said:


> If you're in a style where you can only point to someone else as evidence that you can do something, you're on much less firm ground.


To a point I agree because until you are in that situation you don't know how you will react when someone might be really trying to kill or maim you. But that works for all systems because none test to that level, not even the military. That is when scenario training comes into its own.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Apr 25, 2014)

MJS said:


> The point we're all trying to make is...Ballen, who is a LEO, who has probably had more confrontations than the average person, due to his line of work, is saying that badguy did A, Ballen did Y, and it worked.  You deny everything he says.  So, if you're going to deny that, say it won't work, it'd be nice to film yourself and show what you think is the better option.





No he has never said that.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 25, 2014)

MJS said:


> I understand and can relate.  I personally, just don't like to rely on or use YT, and the proving ground, the Bible, the final word, etc, on what works/what doesn't work.  People survive encounters all the time, none of which are filmed.  I mean, I could film myself doing a defense against a punch.  I could have 10 different people or all shapes and sizes, punch me.  It may work all of the time, it may work some of the time, it may work none of the time.  If it worked 5 out of 10 times, does that mean that the tech sucks?  I could grab 10 other people and it might work all the time.  The variables, IMO, are too wide.



Not as the final word. But as a matter of degrees. So I say defence against punch. Worth sort of meh. I show defence against punch slightly better. Show resisted. Better. Show comp better. show fight better. Look for consistency.

Gives an idea of what may work. Short cutting from say to proof with nothing in between does not make sense.  And that seems to be what I get.  

So I could show that punch defence in a full contact fight between reputable fighters. Show it consistently but for some reason if someone says street. It is not applicable. Doesn't show street. Just says it. Might show a compliant drill and say street. Or tell me that they are a super street kill merchant. And say street. 

I get. "A friend of a friend put someone in a lock in the street and the guy tapped. At which point he let go and got totally killed" now this is a common urban myth that goes around in circles untill people believe it. I would ask for proof of something like that.

I get adrenalin in a real fight makes people do ABCD. Sports do not have that. It is only life or death fights that create that response. So you must train whatever or in a fight for our cannot function. Now none of us are adrenaline experts and the worst person to be able to oblectivly talk about mind altering effects of chemicals is the guy experiencing the mind altering effects. So I would ask for proof on that.

I get in a street fight the greatest danger is going to the ground because a crowd of people are waiting to kick the crap out of you. Do we really know how likely that is? I could say anecdotally. But that would be my best guess not an absolute.

I use the term high low percentage to cover the variables. I use what works for me in testing for consistency. I try to apply that and then form the logic as to why something works. This black white works does not work is not my idea of posting opinion.

You have to understand I can't even pop into these gyms and spar. Because they don't. They don't feel the need. So any test seems to have dissapeared.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 25, 2014)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Resistance training and pressure testing is crucial to martial development*.  Combat sports and many martial systems utilize full contact, submission grappling, technique training, etc.  I am a huge proponent of pressure testing your training via full contact sparring, submission grappling, Scenario Training, etc.  In my background I did a lot of point sparring as a youngster even competing and being first in my division at a state level as an adult, competed regionally and also placed 5th in the First NBL Super Grands way back in the day.  During that same time frame I also kickboxed (the mma of the day) and was an amature champion at one point. I have also used my training in work related situations that involved violence.   I said all of the previous to give you an idea of my background.  In the system that I teach *Instinctive Response Training* when we pressure test it is full contact.  Whether with padded sticks (where I start everyone), rattan sticks and Filipino Body Armor, rattan sticks and fencing masks or full contact empty hand and submission grappling. (with hand strikes, elbows, knees kicks, etc.)  We also  pressure test via submission grappling only, Scenario Based Training (where full contact is also involved), etc.  The above of course does not mean we do not spend most of our time technique training.  Just that when we pressure test it is full contact even if we do not do it every training session.  Which brings us back to non-contact training.  *Even though my background as a young man was extensive in non-contact sparring or point sparring I am not a fan of it*.  I have seen to many point sparring people who had issues transitioning to full contact. (does not mean that some cannot as some certainly can)  The one really good thing from point sparring is the explosiveness that the athletes develop.  However, this can be easily developed through various drills.
> *
> Now if you point spar I am not saying what you are doing is bad* just that in my opinion it is not the best training methodology.  However it is a training methodology that can work.   Yet I think there are better alternatives in the long run.  Nor am I saying that you can't point spar most of the time and go full contact some of the time. (this has worked for quite a few)  Each individual will find *what works for them* and there are some systems that simply do not spar at all and I know several individuals who practice them who have successfully defended themselves in a violent situation.  Bottom line there is more than one way to get good in the Martial Sciences.  Several paths can lead a practitioner to their desired goal.  That is the question what is your goal?  If it is mma then you need to train mma to be successful in it.  Also to understand that mma is a sport that can be used for self-defense but.... that is not it's goal and self-defense is a different beast than stepping into a cage.  If it is for self-defense then that also needs to be your primary focus yet that does not mean you shouldn't have contact in your training and or pressure testing of some sort.  Drop bear has found his path in MMA good for him.  The rest of us have or are finding our way.  Good for us.  *We can disagree on techniques, sparring, etc. but in the end we are all trying to get better and achieve a goal in the Martial Sciences!*




I got routinely freaking smashed moving from semi and no contact to contact by guys I should have been technically better than. I got smashed moving from the slower pace of jap jits. Judo and a very small amount of bjj. To mma. By guys I was technically better than.

I struggled for a long time until I changed my more evolved techniques to counter bastard resistance.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 25, 2014)

Steve said:


> Another thing that I think is being overlooked here is that the testing must at some point be done by you and me.  As in, not someone else.  I know this seems obvious, but, it's not.  There is a difference between saying, "This technique is sound," and "I can execute this technique."  Those are not equivalent statements.
> 
> One has to do with the integrity of the system, and the other has to do with the integrity of the training methods.  Pointing to techniques and saying that so and so can do them, and my teacher does them and Bruce Lee does them and I can point to a handful (or dozens or hundreds) of people who have successfully transferred these skills from comprehension to application... doesn't mean that you can do them.
> 
> ...




You also have a quantifiable level of proficiency.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> I got routinely freaking smashed moving from semi and no contact to contact by guys I should have been technically better than. I got smashed moving from the slower pace of jap jits. Judo and a very small amount of bjj. To mma. By guys I was technically better than.
> 
> I struggled for a long time until I changed my more evolved techniques to counter bastard resistance.



I know a number of people who like you were as you put it "smashed" as they transitioned as well.  Some were never able to cope with it.  I know a few others who moved flawlessly back and forth.  They did not have a problem and they are probably the exception not the norm!  Like you I believe in pressure testing and making sure that you can utilize your skill sets but I also acknowledge that it is not the only way to become effective in the Martial Sciences.  Yet it is a piece of the puzzle that works for me!


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> No he has never said that.



Sure I did. You asked how I "test" my techniques.  I said I don't need to test them. They you said  I wont know they work.  I said I know they work because Ive done it people that came before me have done it and people Ive trained with have done it.  Then you demand proof. I invite you to come look and you cry its too far.  Look I don't care if you believe me or not.  The techniques you learn are very similar to what I learn so if it works for you then it will for most people.  I don't learn or teach complicated multi-move fine motor skilled techniques. The best defense is simple straight forward and easy.  I teach if your In a position where you need to defend yourself you need to attack swiftly, forcefully, and with violence of action.  I have no need or desire to "test" it.  Its been tested over and over again long before I learned it.  I drill it over an over and over until it becomes a reflex or trained reaction.  I don't care what any one else does.  If you have so little faith in your style and teachers you feel the need to go "test" it then so be it.
I also call in to question anyone claiming they train in full contact.  I have only ever hit someone "full contact" once.  I broke my hand and he's now blind in his left eye had 5 surgeries to rebuild his eye socket and filed a suit against me and the city for 6 million dollars which was dropped after he was sent to prison for 25 years.  I hit people from time to time at work but almost never "full contact."  So I doubt your going full contact because you would run out of training partners. You may be going hard but your not going full contact.  

Im also not saying training extremely hard is bad or wrong Im saying its just not the only way


----------



## K-man (Apr 26, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Im also not saying training extremely hard is bad or wrong Im saying its just not the only way


Perhaps if I reposted this bit it might be reinforced! After all, it is exactly what most of us have been saying.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 26, 2014)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> *Resistance training and pressure testing is crucial to martial development*.  Combat sports and many martial systems utilize full contact, submission grappling, technique training, etc.  I am a huge proponent of pressure testing your training via full contact sparring, submission grappling, Scenario Training, etc.  In my background I did a lot of point sparring as a youngster even competing and being first in my division at a state level as an adult, competed regionally and also placed 5th in the First NBL Super Grands way back in the day.  During that same time frame I also kickboxed (the mma of the day) and was an amature champion at one point. I have also used my training in work related situations that involved violence.   I said all of the previous to give you an idea of my background.  In the system that I teach *Instinctive Response Training* when we pressure test it is full contact.  Whether with padded sticks (where I start everyone), rattan sticks and Filipino Body Armor, rattan sticks and fencing masks or full contact empty hand and submission grappling. (with hand strikes, elbows, knees kicks, etc.)  We also  pressure test via submission grappling only, Scenario Based Training (where full contact is also involved), etc.  The above of course does not mean we do not spend most of our time technique training.  Just that when we pressure test it is full contact even if we do not do it every training session.



Pressure testing and resistance training is an important part of any self defence training but that doesn't necessarily require full contact sparring/fighting. Sometimes when we teach self defence techniques against holds, the holder first holds firm and doesn't resist too much until the defender gets the technique right and then they apply the hold with full force while the defender apples the release. Some self defence techniques can not be practiced with full force without risking possibly serious injury to the holder. To people sparring with a similar amount of size and experience going at it full speed, even though they are not constantly hitting each other, certainly aren't being compliant with each other. Grading for black belt requires many rounds of continuous sparring against the black belts and instructors and involves plenty of pressure. The continuous sparring at the grading is either single opponents or 2 on one or both, one after the other with no rest in between and no protective gear of any kind. If the candidate is hit or kicked (even in the groin)  the have to keep going unless it puts them out of action, and even then once they recover sufficiently the sparring will often continue. When the adults are grading we will sometimes hit them in a controlled manner on purpose (I once knocked someone out with either a spinning heel kick or hooking kick, I can't remember which, that just clipped him (thankfully I saw it was going to hit him and I slowed the kick down a little bit at the last second). One time one of the people who were going for their black belt got hit a few times, including a kick to the groin, and there were these two adult ladies who were watching who, after seeing this, actually quit training because they though it was too brutal. So just because the sparring is predominantly non-contact it does not mean there is no pressure being applied.



Brian R. VanCise said:


> Which brings us back to non-contact training.  *Even though my background as a young man was extensive in non-contact sparring or point sparring I am not a fan of it*.  I have seen to many point sparring people who had issues transitioning to full contact. (does not mean that some cannot as some certainly can)  The one really good thing from point sparring is the explosiveness that the athletes develop.  However, this can be easily developed through various drills.
> 
> * Now if you point spar I am not saying what you are doing is bad* just that in my opinion it is not the best training methodology.  However it is a training methodology that can work.   Yet I think there are better alternatives in the long run.  Nor am I saying that you can't point spar most of the time and go full contact some of the time. (this has worked for quite a few)  Each individual will find *what works for them* and there are some systems that simply do not spar at all and I know several individuals who practice them who have successfully defended themselves in a violent situation.  Bottom line there is more than one way to get good in the Martial Sciences.  Several paths can lead a practitioner to their desired goal.  That is the question what is your goal?  If it is mma then you need to train mma to be successful in it.  Also to understand that mma is a sport that can be used for self-defense but.... that is not it's goal and self-defense is a different beast than stepping into a cage.  If it is for self-defense then that also needs to be your primary focus yet that does not mean you shouldn't have contact in your training and or pressure testing of some sort.  Drop bear has found his path in MMA good for him.  The rest of us have or are finding our way.  Good for us.  *We can disagree on techniques, sparring, etc. but in the end we are all trying to get better and achieve a goal in the Martial Sciences!*



At this point I would like to point out that the system of sparring that is used in the style I study is not point sparring as there is no point to point sparring for self defence (I was wondering how many times I could use the word 'point' in one sentence).


----------



## ballen0351 (Apr 26, 2014)

I think your point about point sparing and non point sparing was on point and I agree with your point and this point in the topic......boom for the win


----------



## MJS (Apr 26, 2014)

drop bear said:


> No he has never said that.



He never said what?  He has said that his training has served him well on the job.  You are the one denying that.


----------



## MJS (Apr 26, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Not as the final word. But as a matter of degrees. So I say defence against punch. Worth sort of meh. I show defence against punch slightly better. Show resisted. Better. Show comp better. show fight better. Look for consistency.
> 
> Gives an idea of what may work. Short cutting from say to proof with nothing in between does not make sense.  And that seems to be what I get.
> 
> ...



I think I understand what you're trying to say here, and while I agree with parts, I disagree with others.  I'm sorry, but just because someone shows a YT clip of them doing a certain lock or choke, does not mean that it's a high percentage move or that it'll work 100% of the time.  Why?  Well, it's simple...who is it high percentage for?  Just because a Gracie might be able to pull something off, doesn't mean that I or even you, will have the same success.  The fact is, is that we all have to develop our own things that work well for us.  I don't care if my teacher says that it works or his teachers...if it works for THEM, great!  But I want to be sure it will work for ME, and I"M the one doing it.  

Dude, the sparring or not sparring pro/con, has been beat like a dead horse ten times over.  Every art I've done, does sparring, therefore, I will always lean towards being an advocate of it.  Chris Parker, a member of this forum, isn't too fond of it. And that's fine.  I've interacted with Chris on the forum and via PM.  I don't hate the guy or think he's a joke because his views of sparring differ from mine.  

In the end, YT is not a reliable source of what works/doesn't work.  If you want to think so, go right ahead.  Fact is, many people have come out of confrontations, with success, so apparently they're doing something right.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 26, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> So I doubt your going full contact because you would run out of training partners. You may be going hard but your not going full contact.
> 
> Im also not saying training extremely hard is bad or wrong Im saying its just not the only way



*We are in total agreement that going at it hard is not the only way.*  I would not advocate anyone to train hard, spar, go full contact all of the time.  Actually probably only a very small percentage of the time.

If you are talking about full contact until severe knockout, death or dismemberment then no that is not what we are doing nor do I personally know anyone training that way. I would also mention that there is a big difference between any training and fighting for your life.  There is no way to 100% accurately replicate the later.  I cannot speak for others but in IRT when I say we pressure test and that sparring is full contact it actually is in that we are not pulling, stopping short with any blows.  Whether it is with padded sticks, rattan, empty hand, etc.  We are making contact to in effect stop the other person during that sparring session if we can but at least to hit them as hard as we can.  We always have a person monitoring and stopping it if one person needs to stop or gets compromised and they break the match whenever they feel it is right or to put other practitioners out there.  *That is one safety net that is very important*.  We are also not trying to severely injure the other person so when they are compromised ie. injured, flash knockout, etc. we are backing off or an instructor is stopping it no different than if we are submission grappling and someone taps.  We might also only be working on certain things ie. striking the hands only or striking period and not grappling.  We always where full face headgear to protect the nose and give some degree of safety plus a few other pads depending on what type of sparring we are doing.  The headgear and nose protection is really important as trust me broken noses will happen otherwise. (I have extensive experience in this area both in the giving and receiving)  In regards to injuries with the headgear on there are rarely any injuries.  The worst ding we had recently in Las Vegas was when a practitioner took a rattan stick strike right on his shin and another one that was a flash knockout and he recovered so quickly we did not even know it.  The shin swelled up big time but he was okay otherwise and limped around for a couple of weeks.  We also do not spar *all the time* and this is really important.  If you did it every class, every day you would as you mentioned quickly have a lot of injuries and have a lack of training partners.  *You can padded stick spar regularly, submission grapple regularly but full contact rattan stick with fencing masks or empty hand sparring needs to happen once in awhile and not all the time*.  I also never throw anyone right into full contact rattan sparring, full contact empty hand sparring or submission grappling until they have really good skills.  No one get's thrown to the wolves.  Depending on the person that could be six months to a year and a half or more.  Age also comes into effect as well as experience.  Some times there are diminishing returns at a certain point especially with age.  Someone's profession could interfere as well.  I had a surgeon training with us and his livelihood is his hands so we worked around that.  *I believe in variety and balance in training plus finding the right balance for every unique individual*.  

Now here are a couple of IRT Full Contact Filipino Body Armor Sparring video clips:  Note these are from an old analog camera and not HD!
















Here is some padded stick sparring and empty hand sparring at the end:






Some submission grappling:  Note these two know each others game really well so there is no submission until right at the end just a lot of movement.  I would also note that together these two have 20 mma match wins and one of them was undefeated and stepped into the ring a few times just to test himself and the other became an amature Michigan champioin in mma.






Here is some IRT Marking Knife training for variety:






Here is a survive the shank drill which by just watching it you should realize you do not want to go against a person with a knife. (3 IRT guys and 1 TKD guy at an Intensive)








In all of these videos when guy's are trying to strike they are actually trying to strike and not trying to pull up short of striking ie. non contact.  There is no pulling anything unless someone is injured.

If you are interested in more IRT videos you will find them here: 
IRTYoutube




*Now if we talk specifically about injuries* the worst injuries I have seen in the last fifteen years came during scenario training.  The potential for a blind side or strange angles is some thing you have to watch out for during scenario training and caution practitioners during Pre-Scenario work up.  After all at the end of the day people want to go home not injured!  That does not mean that scenario training is bad just that you need to make sure everyone is on the same page with what you are trying to accomplish.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 30, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> You can also edit or keep doing retakes until you get what you want to see



Plus people do not generally put their failures on YouTube.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Apr 30, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Plus people do not generally put their failures on YouTube.



Amused bystanders often do, however.


----------



## K-man (Apr 30, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Plus people do not generally put their failures on YouTube.


Mmm! Not quite sure about that ... unless of course they don't recognise their failures as failures, and that is a real concern.
:asian:


----------



## drop bear (Apr 30, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> Plus people do not generally put their failures on YouTube.



They are not always failures.

Have a look who put this video out.


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XdyDS4UICZ4


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 30, 2014)

drop bear said:


> They are not always failures.
> 
> Have a look who put this video out.
> 
> ...



I see your point but it was not quite what I was getting at. I was actually referring to when someone wants to prove their martial art's techniques or philosophies works in the 'street' then they will only show videos of them being successful and not when it isn't. Or they will only show videos of an art they are trying to discredit being unsuccessful, or poorly skilled/inexperienced practitioners of that art against high level practitioners in theirs.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 30, 2014)

RTKDCMB said:


> I see your point but it was not quite what I was getting at. I was actually referring to when someone wants to prove their martial art's techniques or philosophies works in the 'street' then they will only show videos of them being successful and not when it isn't. Or they will only show videos of an art they are trying to discredit being unsuccessful, or poorly skilled/inexperienced practitioners of that art against high level practitioners in theirs.



But both sides have access to the internet.

Supporting an argument is not essentially flawed because you are supporting one side.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Apr 30, 2014)

drop bear said:


> But both sides have access to the internet.



Yes but usually only one side has an agenda.



drop bear said:


> Supporting an argument is not *essentially *flawed because you are supporting one side.



If you mean not *necessarily *flawed, then we are in agreement.


----------

