# On Cross-training and "Making Stuff Work" (with clips)



## noname (Sep 25, 2018)

I know that there are a range of opinions on the idea of cross-training. Most people I meet in person seem to be in favor of it. Personally, I think that my time in other arts has been quite productive. I think it's useful to expose oneself to many different styles/masters. Perhaps others feel differently.

Given that there isn't really a defined structure for pressure-testing the techniques we study in the Bujinkan, I tend to go outside the art in order to do so. Here's a clip of me sparring with the instructor at a HEMA group in Portland (until I moved away quite recently, I'd been training with them for a bit over a year):






I'm interested to hear what people have to say about the clip specifically and about cross-training in general. Comments, concerns, anecdotes. I'd also love to see clips of other people pressure-testing themselves outside their home turf (whether that home turf is X-kan or some other ninjutsu organization).

Thanks, and enjoy!


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 25, 2018)

Nice work. Which one is you?

I personally feel the X-kans would benefit greatly from more pressure testing and cross training.


----------



## noname (Sep 25, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Nice work. Which one is you?
> 
> I personally feel the X-kans would benefit greatly from more pressure testing and cross training.



Thanks!

Haha, woops. I forgot to mention I'm the one in blue pants. The instructor is in all black. He's also sporting some patches with his group's emblem.

I completely agree with your sentiment. 

I think weapons work is perhaps the venue most suited to exploring what we are pursuing. The kamae, the sabaki, many things make so much more "sense" (to me, at least) when contextualized by sharp pointy things and armor.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 26, 2018)

I think pressure testing is a necessary element, and including testing with people outside your own art is important, unless you're only training for competition within the art. Even light sparring with someone from another art often shows significant gaps in both offense and defense.


----------



## dunc (Sep 27, 2018)

There are many who'd disagree with me, but I feel that we all have to find the best balance of regular x-kan training with cross training & pressure testing for our personal objectives

For example cross training in other styles teaches you the strengths of those styles, but you have to appreciate that you're operating in their context. If your objective differs from the other style then it you may have to work hard to remain somewhat sub-optimal for their context whilst learning to deal with their strengths

Pressure testing does not equal free sparring. It's entirely possible to pressure test x-kan techniques and get the obvious benefits of this without getting into free sparring, rules, protective gear etc (which can detract from the objectives of many folk who train in the x-kans)


----------



## dvcochran (Sep 27, 2018)

noname said:


> I know that there are a range of opinions on the idea of cross-training. Most people I meet in person seem to be in favor of it. Personally, I think that my time in other arts has been quite productive. I think it's useful to expose oneself to many different styles/masters. Perhaps others feel differently.
> 
> Given that there isn't really a defined structure for pressure-testing the techniques we study in the Bujinkan, I tend to go outside the art in order to do so. Here's a clip of me sparring with the instructor at a HEMA group in Portland (until I moved away quite recently, I'd been training with them for a bit over a year):
> 
> ...


I think cross training is a great idea and is very effective. I have never trained in a long sword but there is no way I would "spar" like that without something protecting my thighs like the one person has. Kali uses mostly slicing so your open thighs would be a ripe target. Question, why can't you just stab with such a long weapon? I am sure I am missing something. Good video.


----------



## O'Malley (Sep 28, 2018)

Nice clip. 

Were you trying to pressure test principles you learned in Bujinkan Taijutsu?

If not, have you ever done so? Why (not)?


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

dunc said:


> There are many who'd disagree with me, but I feel that we all have to find the best balance of regular x-kan training with cross training & pressure testing for our personal objectives
> 
> For example cross training in other styles teaches you the strengths of those styles, but you have to appreciate that you're operating in their context. If your objective differs from the other style then it you may have to work hard to remain somewhat sub-optimal for their context whilst learning to deal with their strengths
> 
> Pressure testing does not equal free sparring. It's entirely possible to pressure test x-kan techniques and get the obvious benefits of this without getting into free sparring, rules, protective gear etc (which can detract from the objectives of many folk who train in the x-kans)



I agree that there are implicit disparities that enter in to the equation when one ventures in to foreign territory. I think one of the most important components in making such an experience a positive one is the teacher. The teacher sets the tone for the training hall. Some are quite strict and abhor deviations from their prescribed formulations (whether those formulations are kata, sparring rulesets, etc.). I feel I have been blessed throughout my martial path with teachers that allowed me to explore with relative freedom.

I would say that sparring is perhaps the most useful form of pressure testing. There are methods to pressure test without sparring, but I would contend that some of the most important components of a fight - like kyojitsu tenkan - cannot be accurately tested except within a sparring environment.


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

dvcochran said:


> I think cross training is a great idea and is very effective. I have never trained in a long sword but there is no way I would "spar" like that without something protecting my thighs like the one person has. Kali uses mostly slicing so your open thighs would be a ripe target. Question, why can't you just stab with such a long weapon? I am sure I am missing something. Good video.



Hahaha, yes tell me about it. Many nights I've come home with bruises on my thighs. I leave them relatively unprotected in class training in order to incentivize my defense. Thighs are nice and big and meaty, so they can take a lashing without causing much real damage. The teacher in the clip likes to talk about "succulent leg meat". He certainly got a piece of it during that session.

Yes, one can most certainly stab with the longsword. I think I try for one near the beginning of the clip, and I land one near the middle of the clip. I would in fact say that the longsword is more of a thruster than the katana is. The katana cuts better, for sure.


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

O'Malley said:


> Nice clip.
> 
> Were you trying to pressure test principles you learned in Bujinkan Taijutsu?
> 
> If not, have you ever done so? Why (not)?



Thanks!

With regards to that specific clip, I don't think that I had in my mind the intention to try movements and/or techniques from the 9 schools. It was more just a free-form experience.

In other instances, I have had in my mind that specific intention. Like these two, where I'm thinking of ichimonji, kuji kiri, tsuki, switching hands freely, etc:


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

This one shows nitou (two swords):






Personally, I really like that one.


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

These three show modern katana vs longsword:
















I will say this: modern katana vs longsword is quite difficult. My opponent is new to the applied use of weapons in general, hence why I'm able to close with some grace in certain instances. It is quite another story to close on an experienced practitioner. Not impossible. Just that much harder.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 29, 2018)

dunc said:


> There are many who'd disagree with me, but I feel that we all have to find the best balance of regular x-kan training with cross training & pressure testing for our personal objectives
> 
> For example cross training in other styles teaches you the strengths of those styles, but you have to appreciate that you're operating in their context. If your objective differs from the other style then it you may have to work hard to remain somewhat sub-optimal for their context whilst learning to deal with their strengths
> 
> Pressure testing does not equal free sparring. It's entirely possible to pressure test x-kan techniques and get the obvious benefits of this without getting into free sparring, rules, protective gear etc (which can detract from the objectives of many folk who train in the x-kans)




Yeah not really. 
If you do multiple rule sets it just means you are forced to focus on different aspects of your system.

I mean if you only sparred boxing and became good at punching it is going to help everything else. Not hinder it.

Even if you wanted to get better judo chops. And never threw them in boxing sparring. Boxing would still help you develop the sort of timing and movement that would make your chops more effective.


----------



## dunc (Sep 29, 2018)

I’m not with you 100%
My point is if your objective is something different from say “being the best boxer”, then the approach you take will be suboptimal from a pure boxer
It’s great training to go do boxing, but you should probably keep your objective in mind when you do that

For example in my BJJ training I consciously narrow my game to fit with my more SD oriented objective. This naturally excludes certain options for me in the BJJ context and is somewhat sub-optimal as a result


----------



## dunc (Sep 29, 2018)

noname said:


> I would say that sparring is perhaps the most useful form of pressure testing. There are methods to pressure test without sparring, but I would contend that some of the most important components of a fight - like kyojitsu tenkan - cannot be accurately tested except within a sparring environment.



Personally I’m a big fan of specific sparring which is different to free sparring (both helpful tools). Specific sparring can allow you to pressure test even quite dangerous techniques I think


----------



## noname (Sep 29, 2018)

dunc said:


> Personally I’m a big fan of specific sparring which is different to free sparring (both helpful tools). Specific sparring can allow you to pressure test even quite dangerous techniques I think



I think that it is to such methods ("specific sparring") that I was referring when I said that the Bujinkan does not have structured pressure testing. In other arts, like BJJ for example, one has pairs and sequences of reciprocal technical application (example: I mount, so you bridge, and therefore I XYZ, etc. etc.). This kind of thing is missing from the Bujinkan curriculum.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 29, 2018)

dunc said:


> I’m not with you 100%
> My point is if your objective is something different from say “being the best boxer”, then the approach you take will be suboptimal from a pure boxer
> It’s great training to go do boxing, but you should probably keep your objective in mind when you do that
> 
> For example in my BJJ training I consciously narrow my game to fit with my more SD oriented objective. This naturally excludes certain options for me in the BJJ context and is somewhat sub-optimal as a result



You would think that. And MMA is a good example. Because to be a top level MMAer throwing the gi on and rolling bjj should be sub optimal.

But there are timing and technical aspects you will miss if you don't.

So instead of learning half the system that applies the successful guys generally learn the whole system.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 29, 2018)

dunc said:


> Personally I’m a big fan of specific sparring which is different to free sparring (both helpful tools). Specific sparring can allow you to pressure test even quite dangerous techniques I think



Depends how you spar. I go for wrist locks I do grinds I do striking in bjj rolls. I just don't hit them at a level where I am going to hurt someone.

And this is if I am sparring within the rules as well. I don't tee off on a guy who is all bound up or turned around.

I am there to make the other guy better.


----------



## dunc (Sep 30, 2018)

Hi
Maybe we’re talking cross purposes 
In my view and experience:
1. Specific sparring can be used to almost fully pressure test even the most dangerous techniques. So it’s entirely possible to incorporate this into Xkan training. Probably we agree on this?
2. Cross training is good (probably we agree), but the difference in rule sets and objectives can require a bit of navigation (I think we don’t agree on this?)
3. Trying out your techniques (for your objectives) on experienced folk from other styles is good as long as it’s done in a constructive, safe way (probably we agree?)


----------



## pdg (Sep 30, 2018)

dunc said:


> Specific sparring can be used to almost fully pressure test even the most dangerous techniques



What do you mean by "specific sparring"?

Prearranged drills?


----------



## dunc (Sep 30, 2018)

Hi 
No it’s sparring a particular situation and / or technique
Eg you start in the mount and have to do your best to escape while the person on top tries to maintain the mount
Or you practice standing closed guard passes while your opponent tries to submit you
Etc


----------



## drop bear (Sep 30, 2018)

dunc said:


> Hi
> Maybe we’re talking cross purposes
> In my view and experience:
> 1. Specific sparring can be used to almost fully pressure test even the most dangerous techniques. So it’s entirely possible to incorporate this into Xkan training. Probably we agree on this?
> ...



Sparring is specific sparring.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Sep 30, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is specific sparring.


Could you expound on that, DB?


----------



## dunc (Oct 1, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is specific sparring.



Sure, but I’m making the distinction between free sparring and specific sparring


----------



## drop bear (Oct 1, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Could you expound on that, DB?



Sparring is always a refined version of fighting.

You are still creating a situation in free sparring.

And free sparring and situational sparring are complimentry.

The idea is I do a drill. Say double leg. He stands there I get the technique right.

He tries to defend I get the timing and nuances right.

Free sparring I learn how to put that together on an open playing field.

Now if I do the first two and then just bang away in sparring I am not training as efficiently as I could be. But quite often my success is better when I am doing something I know rather than something I am still grasping the concept of.

So I am still doing that situational drill. I am just adding more elements to it.

Which goes back to my point about why mma guys will put on a gi and roll.


----------



## drop bear (Oct 1, 2018)

dunc said:


> Sure, but I’m making the distinction between free sparring and specific sparring



Yeah and it is a detrimental distinction.


----------



## noname (Oct 1, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Sparring is always a refined version of fighting.
> 
> You are still creating a situation in free sparring.
> 
> ...



Free sparring and limited sparring are not equivalent, even though they are both restricted forms of fighting. Weapons work highlights the distinction, IMHO. A match where I'm only trying to thrust - and my opponent is only trying to defend against such - is going to be very different than a match where my attacks are not so limited. 

Engage in such limited sparring long enough and one ends up distorting the lens through which one judges victory. It was by way of such protracted limitation that classical swordplay morphed in to modern fencing (which are two very different beasts, despite that one is simply a more limited form of the other).


----------



## noname (Oct 1, 2018)

The distinction between free sparring and limited sparring is useful, if for no other reason than that they are both distinct and useful. Limited sparring will let you work on the details. Free sparring lets you work on the big picture.

And neither alone is superior to both together.


----------



## dunc (Oct 1, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Yeah and it is a detrimental distinction.



Can you elaborate a bit?
I appreciate that everything can be looked at on a continuum, but they are suitably differentiated to warrant a distinction I think
The are certainly used to achieve different things in training


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Oct 1, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Yeah and it is a detrimental distinction.


I don't think the distinction is necessarily detrimental. It could be applied detrimentally, but could also just be used to clarify two different (but overlapping) approaches. I don't use one of the terms, but when I have "free sparring", that's generally time to use the best stuff - what we already know works. That's a different approach - and the discussion is worth discussion - from sparring to see what we can manage with other tools in our bag.


----------

