How important is contact sparring in MA?

[Hong Kong Pooey]

And with all that said, observe a boxer taking down multiple attackers at once;

He's using the skills he learned in a sport, but those sport attributes could be easily translated into a self defense situation. Those attributes and skills were developed through consistent heavy sparring.

Hmmm, interesting post and interesting clip.

Seems a bit familiar though, like I've seen it before somewhere...

Oh wait, it was here:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/90-general-self-defense/115945-ground-fighting-3.html

And at the time I posted it you said this:

Originally Posted by Hong Kong Pooey
Yes you're at a disadvantage against multiple attackers, yet you're beloved youtube has many clips of one person overcoming the odds and getting the better of the situation against multiple opponents, and all the ones I've seen have done it by staying on their feet, or at least getting back up quickly if they do get taken down.

Is that not proof that some MAs or at least certain training CAN prepare you for multiple opponents?



Nope.

The example you showed for example was a boxer. Boxers never train for multiple opponents. The guy simply had the benefit of fighting in a cone where all of his opposition was coming from the front of him, so he could tag them as they came into range while he backed up. If he had opponents coming from all directions, that situation may have turned out quite different. Boxing doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, boxing teaches you how to fight so that you can knock people out with punches. If you know how to fight well, there's a good chance you can take more than one untrained moron down.

There's a big difference there, because there's a lot of martial arts out there that DON'T teach you how to fight period.​

Changed your mind?

 

[drop bear]

I was honestly taken back when I read your statement. Is this a serious question? Law enforcement and the military have known this for decades which is why the training is constructed the way it is. And it was learned the hard way. Going all the way back to Fairbairn, Sykes, Applegate and O'Neill (and even before them). I suggest, if you really don't understand things like stress related responses (flinch, fight or flight, OODA etc) that you have some research to do.

Start with the O.O.D.A loop.

Then the flinch response (Tony Blauer does a good job on this).

Then look at the ways L.E., Corrections, E.P. and the military train and more importantly, why they train that way.

Too bad you aren't local or I'd invite you over to show you Boatman edged weapon training and S.P.E.A.R. and explain why it was developed, why it's so effective and why they're some of the only systems with real world statistical documentation as to why they're so effective. And retained in long term memory (decades in the case of WWII combatives). And it all derived from how we respond under duress/stress and why we train the way we train. If you need any guidance let me know.
:wavey:

Edited to add: Oftheherd and I were posting at the same time. He's provided some links for you to look at, and thank you for posting them.

So it is not really a fact. That is why I asked. There is a difference between suggesting that good training effects results in a crisis and this idea that people revert to type.

I mean there is no actual study done regarding how much creativity or on the spot planning dissapears during a stressful situation.

So as an idea it has some merit but as a fact. No it really isn't.

What it is is a complicated method of switching between rational and instinctive response.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201109/how-can-we-make-better-decisions

 

[drop bear]

OK contact sparring is limited with padding and a safe environment. The reasoning behind this is three fold.

1. They are fighting back.

2. They can actually fight.

3. Crippling people in training needlessly is the opposite of what you are trying to achieve.

You cannot overcome these issues without removing some of the realism. It means if you add realism you remove one of these issues all of which are fundamental to learning.

Think of sparring as employing the scientific method. To see if an idea works against a resisting oponant in a fairly sterile environment.

Sparring also provides self defence exactly how it is trained. So should someone be so worked up through stress. Go to his car. Put on a pair of 16 ounce gloves and box according to Queensbury.there is still the ability to defend themselves and incapacitate an attacker.

Anything that the defender does on top of that is just cheddar.

If we apply the same idea to non contact. Then they are going to hit the other guy with no power or fail when the fight goes off script. You just do not gain that instinctive defend respond from anything but hard sparring. Except actual combat.

 

[Hanzou]

Hmmm, interesting post and interesting clip.

Seems a bit familiar though, like I've seen it before somewhere...

Oh wait, it was here:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/90-general-self-defense/115945-ground-fighting-3.html

And at the time I posted it you said this:

Originally Posted by Hong Kong Pooey
Yes you're at a disadvantage against multiple attackers, yet you're beloved youtube has many clips of one person overcoming the odds and getting the better of the situation against multiple opponents, and all the ones I've seen have done it by staying on their feet, or at least getting back up quickly if they do get taken down.

Is that not proof that some MAs or at least certain training CAN prepare you for multiple opponents?



Nope.

The example you showed for example was a boxer. Boxers never train for multiple opponents. The guy simply had the benefit of fighting in a cone where all of his opposition was coming from the front of him, so he could tag them as they came into range while he backed up. If he had opponents coming from all directions, that situation may have turned out quite different. Boxing doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, boxing teaches you how to fight so that you can knock people out with punches. If you know how to fight well, there's a good chance you can take more than one untrained moron down.

There's a big difference there, because there's a lot of martial arts out there that DON'T teach you how to fight period.​

Changed your mind?

At what point does the argument in the Ground fighting thread contradict the argument in this thread?

 

[oftheherd1]

OK contact sparring is limited with padding and a safe environment. The reasoning behind this is three fold.

1. They are fighting back.

2. They can actually fight.

3. Crippling people in training needlessly is the opposite of what you are trying to achieve.

You cannot overcome these issues without removing some of the realism. It means if you add realism you remove one of these issues all of which are fundamental to learning.

Think of sparring as employing the scientific method. To see if an idea works against a resisting oponant in a fairly sterile environment.

Sparring also provides self defence exactly how it is trained. So should someone be so worked up through stress. Go to his car. Put on a pair of 16 ounce gloves and box according to Queensbury.there is still the ability to defend themselves and incapacitate an attacker.

Anything that the defender does on top of that is just cheddar.

If we apply the same idea to non contact. Then they are going to hit the other guy with no power or fail when the fight goes off script. You just do not gain that instinctive defend respond from anything but hard sparring. Except actual combat.

I guess the best I can say is if you think what you say works for you, stay with it.

I do take exception to the bolded/underlined above. If you check what I said, the goal was not to hit your practice opponent at all, except in blocking. But there was no such thing as a kick or punch that wasn't done at full power, with as much control as we had. The difference was where the full power was delivered; outside the body or inside it. That was the purpose of learning control; it was a very important part of what we were expected to learn. Also, when we sparred, there was no script. Not even in one-step and three-step sparring. We blocked the requisite number of times, then counter-attacked as we wished from the counter-attacks we had been taught. Free sparring was just that.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Then they are going to hit the other guy with no power or fail when the fight goes off script.

That depends upon the quality of the sparring and the technique. There have been many people in my art that have only done non-contact sparring and were able to have plenty of power when they had to use it and mostly it was over very quickly.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

So it is not really a fact.

Actually yes, it is a fact. We've provided you sources of research. Whether or not you thoughtfully do that research is up to you. But again, it is a fact that high liability professionals have know literally for many decades and has a profound, positive effect on the way training has been upgraded. That is why we train the way we train.

 

[Buka]

Good thing there's more than one way to skin a cat......because we all be cat skinners here. Hopefully, we won't argue about what skinning tool to use, or what the hell to do with that damn hide. (A cool hat, maybe)

 

[Hanzou]

That depends upon the quality of the sparring and the technique. There have been many people in my art that have only done non-contact sparring and were able to have plenty of power when they had to use it and mostly it was over very quickly.

I find that hard to believe.

Unfortunately, there's no way to verify, so we'll have to take your word for it. When I run across people who spar like that, they behave exactly as Drop Bear has described.

 

[Buka]

I've always trained contact, always believed it was best, probably always will. BUT - I'm an old guy now. Anytime I forget something, like when you sometimes walk into a room and forget what the hell you were looking for.....you get that little uh oh feeling.

We never wore headgear until the 80's Even in boxing gyms there wasn't any headgear except for some of the pro fighters. Boy, do I wish I could turn the clock back.

 

[Hong Kong Pooey]

At what point does the argument in the Ground fighting thread contradict the argument in this thread?

It seemed to me that you were making the exact same point as I was in the ground fighting thread, no? Namely that his boxing training/skills enabled him to deal with multiple attackers on that occasion.

 

[drop bear]

Actually yes, it is a fact. We've provided you sources of research. Whether or not you thoughtfully do that research is up to you. But again, it is a fact that high liability professionals have know literally for many decades and has a profound, positive effect on the way training has been upgraded. That is why we train the way we train.

Or you say its a fact to validate the reason you train how you train. That is why the source wasn't a neuroscientist but an industry trainer. It seems self fulfilling.

It also seems conveniently overly simple.

And seriously Tony blauer? Mr cross fit defence?

 

[drop bear]

That depends upon the quality of the sparring and the technique. There have been many people in my art that have only done non-contact sparring and were able to have plenty of power when they had to use it and mostly it was over very quickly.

See that is only true that we are not robots and do not revert to training under stress. It would mean there is some sort of reasoning and adaptation on the fly going on there.

My actual issue with only non contact sparring is a little different. I think it puts your timing out which and enhances different aspects of fighting that may effect your performance should the fight not be over quickly.

 

[RTKDCMB]

I find that hard to believe.

If you had trained with any of them you wouldn't.

Unfortunately, there's no way to verify, so we'll have to take your word for it.

It is difficult to verify to others the effectiveness of an art that trains only for self defense as generally we tend to stay out of street fights whenever possible and don't keep paparazzi on hand when we do. So you will have to take my word for it just like I have to take yours and Drop Bear's word for anything you say about yourselves or your arts. If footage of one of o

When I run across people who spar like that, they behave exactly as Drop Bear has described.

We run in different circles.ur students or instructor, or me, defending ourselves in a real self defense situation turns up I will post it on here.

 

[RTKDCMB]

See that is only true that we are not robots and do not revert to training under stress. It would mean there is some sort of reasoning and adaptation on the fly going on there.

The last altercation I got into I was able to choose what actions to take, except for one wild punch to the ribs I through after which I immediately pulled myself up on.

My actual issue with only non contact sparring is a little different. I think it puts your timing out which and enhances different aspects of fighting that may effect your performance should the fight not be over quickly.

There is an element of guesswork that goes on with non-contact sparring as to the effects of your strikes, and theirs, but we feel that the advantages, such as not limiting your targets and saving injuries, outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Or you say its a fact to validate the reason you train how you train. That is why the source wasn't a neuroscientist but an industry trainer. It seems self fulfilling.

This is why it is so hard to take any of your posts serious. I don't know if your simply trolling or if you're actually that inexperienced?

It is quite obvious you haven't done any research into this. Otherwise you'd find that research scientists, in various fields, along with military researchers have all arrived at the same conclusion, 'under stress (combat) you don't rise to the occasion, you sink to the level of your training'. I could post a plethora of links, in addition to the ones already posted but I don't get the feeling you're really interested. If by chance you are interested, google is your friend. Perhaps start with Lt. Col. Grossman and then branch out into research papers from scientists in various fields that have conducted studies on blood pressure/rate, adrenaline, refined/gross motor skills etc while under duress/stress.

It also seems conveniently overly simple.

If you do the research, you'll discover that is precisely the point.

And seriously Tony blauer? Mr cross fit defence?

Don't know about crossfit, but he's been teaching combatives to military, law enforcement and corrections for decades.

 

[K-man]

Or you say its a fact to validate the reason you train how you train. That is why the source wasn't a neuroscientist but an industry trainer. It seems self fulfilling.

It also seems conveniently overly simple.

And seriously Tony blauer? Mr cross fit defence?

I'm right with Kong here. Tony Blauer is one of the top guys around and is one of the pioneers of modern reality based self defence training. I have known his training for years and would love to see what he does first hand.
:asian:

 

[Hanzou]

It seemed to me that you were making the exact same point as I was in the ground fighting thread, no? Namely that his boxing training/skills enabled him to deal with multiple attackers on that occasion.

Not so much his boxing skills, but the fact that boxing taught him how to be a fighter. I brought it up in this thread because I believe that martial athletes have the edge over martial artists because of their athletic ability and their contact sparring.

 

[geezer]

....I believe that martial athletes have the edge over martial artists because of their athletic ability and their contact sparring.

As a "martial artist" who is no athlete, and getting to the point in life where it is getting increasingly difficult just to stay in decent shape, I must say that Hanzou's comment above is just common sense.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I brought it up in this thread because I believe that martial athletes have the edge over martial artists because of their athletic ability and their contact sparring.

I disagree for two reasons. First, you need to define the venue in which they have an edge. Is it in a sporting competitions? If so, we've got an apples and oranges comparison. Is it in the street? I'll take someone with real world combatives experience over a TKD or BJJ gold medalist. Sparring makes a difference for sport, it makes no difference in real world altercations (and is detrimental) for the reasons I've listed above. Secondly, it depends on the school as to how conditioned the practitioner is and not the goal of the school. A martial artist is a person and a person can either be fit or unfit. It is a choice.