Is it possible to "train" for something that you never actually do?

[Zero]

I'd have to agree, it's amazing what stress levels and mental pressure will do on a physical level, particularly when you have not been previously expossed to that. When I first started competition I was very, very fit on a cardiovascular level and in good physical/muscular condition. It amazed me how quickly I gassed out though when fighting "less fit" but much more fight experienced opponents. Sure the base fitness did help me a lot but it did not compare to "fight" fitness and mental fitness. Again, when I started MMA, my initial fight was "ok this guy is trying to punch me, now there is a kick, hell, now he is trying to do a take-down!" You get used to that as well. Then you have competent RBSD or the like and it is "ok, this guy is high and is focused on stabbing me or gorging out my eye without concern for his own well-being". When you are faced with a concerted, relentless attack, suddenly you are gasing out in 30 seconds, not 3 minutes. It is amazing the impact of mental stress on your physical state and it is amazing the difference of exertion involved in fighting off an individual soley concerned with doing you injury compared to five three minute rounds in the ring, during which opponents disengage, feint, regain composure, re-group and are separated by the umpire.

 

[Tgace]

Hmm. I'd disagree with everything there except the quote. Sparring or competition doesn't show you what it's like to face someone with "bad intent", as that's not the aim. The aim is to win the competition, or to practice sparring. The intention is completely different. I'd also say that while it can certainly help a lot with endurance, the form of "gassing" in a real encounter is rather different to a sparring match, for a large range of reasons. So, no, that's not really good preparation for anything other than more of the same.

When I was boxing (for a short time) it was amazing how after years of "martial arts"...thinking you can throw a punch...you discover that REALLY trying to land a power blow on a guy whos trying to land one on you is a whole different world from point sparring, limited contact sparring or "control" sparring. It's the closest you are going to get to the "real thing" without being in the real thing in terms of someone actually trying to put you down. Not something I wanted to do all of the time (KO's at my age? No thanks....) but it's an eyeopener.

Many MA'ists like to believe sport has no "real world" value but most MA have never been (intentionally) KO'ed or KO'ed someone else. Theres value in actually taking and receiving full contact shots in a sporting environemnt and seeing how you react to someone actually trying to put your lights out. At lest as much value as there is in practicing "killing" moves against a non-resisting opponent.

 

[MJS]

We still have threads that distinguish between "sports" and "self defense." Whether the sub-topic is TKD or MMA or whatever, it's common to hear something along the lines of this: "Why don't you/they understand that we don't train for sport. We train to deal with multiple attackers with weapons for self defense."

The specific verbiage changes, but the message is consistent. Sport people train for sport. Other people train for other things.

My question is simply this. Can you train for something you never do? Or more accurately, can one actually become expert in something he or she has never actually done?

Can we train for something? Sure. Will be we an expert at it? Probably not, but I'd say that'd depend on how often we actually put those skills into play. The average citizen can take a Red Cross First Aid/CPR course. What do those last on average...a 1 day, 8hr course, maybe 2 days? The odds of that person, while those skills are very important, may fail to recall something or freeze up, if they had to actually use it, whereas if you worked as a Doctor, an EMT, Firefighter, Paramedic, Nurse, etc., the odds of you putting those skills into play, are alot higher, IMHO.

As for the sport/non sport debate..lol..I don't think that'll ever die. Alot of sport guys have come from a TMA background. Chuck Liddell is Kempo/Kaju, Machida (sp) comes from a TMA background. I'd like to think that even if its something that they normally don't train, that they'd still be able or capable of defending themselves if someone pulled a knife on them.

 

[MJS]

When I was boxing (for a short time) it was amazing how after years of "martial arts"...thinking you can throw a punch...you discover that REALLY trying to land a power blow on a guy whos trying to land one on you is a whole different world from point sparring, limited contact sparring or "control" sparring. It's the closest you are going to get to the "real thing" without being in the real thing in terms of someone actually trying to put you down. Not something I wanted to do all of the time (KO's at my age? No thanks....) but it's an eyeopener.

Many MA'ists like to believe sport has no "real world" value but most MA have never been (intentionally) KO'ed or KO'ed someone else. Theres value in actually taking and receiving full contact shots in a sporting environemnt and seeing how you react to someone actually trying to put your lights out. At lest as much value as there is in practicing "killing" moves against a non-resisting opponent.

Funny you should say that. After years of training Kenpo, when I made my switch to Kyokushin, I felt the same way. OH sure, I'm in good shape, 20+yrs in Kenpo, yet I couldn't make it thru my first Kyokushin class. I had adjustments made, for the better, to my blocks, punches and kicks. Sparring...LOL..yes, quite a shock when you were so used to sparring guys in my old school that barely tapped you, yet the Kyokushin guys were throwing hard shots to the body and the legs.

Almost 2 yrs later, and I see some drastic improvements in what I can do now, compared to before.

 

[harlan]

I like this analogy - of comparing martial arts training to a fire alarm drill.

When I hired on at the nuke plant, I trained regularly to do things I hoped I'd never get to do, and never did. Later, I trained people to do those things, and hoped they'd never get to them, and they never did. Could they do them? Sure, they could have, If needed....Cops train regularly to do things they hope they never do, and some never do-others, in fact, do wind up doing those things, and pretty well......at Los Alamos, I regularly practiced and trained to do things I hoped I'd never have to do. On the other hand, can one be called an "expert" in arming a nuclear weapon if they've never actually armed an deployed one? Yes. I've also managed to get through a variety of armed assaults over the years-notably, I'd never actually stabbed anyone with a pen, until I did, but I'd trained to do so.......saved my life, I think....as for the rest of it, can competition training prepare one for self-defense? Yes, on a variety of levels-the competitive trainer is more likely to get hit, or hit the ground, and having experienced that shock and worked through it might serve them well. Likewise, actually hitting someone who is trying to actually hit them. On the other hand, such training might serve someone badly, dependent upon the situation. For myself, while not exactly "sport" training, with my primary training being in karate, judo and boxing, back in the time when I was mugged-or in "fights"-that training served me pretty well most of the time-in fact, my usual advice to someone seeking self defense training for their kids is to get them into judo and boxing.....

 

[Steve]

When I was boxing (for a short time) it was amazing how after years of "martial arts"...thinking you can throw a punch...you discover that REALLY trying to land a power blow on a guy whos trying to land one on you is a whole different world from point sparring, limited contact sparring or "control" sparring. It's the closest you are going to get to the "real thing" without being in the real thing in terms of someone actually trying to put you down. Not something I wanted to do all of the time (KO's at my age? No thanks....) but it's an eyeopener.

Many MA'ists like to believe sport has no "real world" value but most MA have never been (intentionally) KO'ed or KO'ed someone else. Theres value in actually taking and receiving full contact shots in a sporting environemnt and seeing how you react to someone actually trying to put your lights out. At lest as much value as there is in practicing "killing" moves against a non-resisting opponent.

This actually gets to one of the key questions I have.

In boxing, you train to box. The punching is trained to be executed at full power in a ring against an opponent. You are training for that and you practice it. Over and over. You aren't training to street fight.

BUT,here's the million dollar question. Is any school REALLY teaching self defense, if the students never defend themselves? If you're training to sword fight, but never actually sword fight, then are you training to fight with a sword?

Could the skills translate? Sure. In the same way that a proficient boxer or MMAist can defend him or herself effectively using the skills learned in the gym, a kenpoist or whatever might also have skills that translate. But there is a transition. Isn't there? Training in wing chun isn't the same as fighting with wing chun. Training in Iaido isn't the same as fighting with a sword.

 

[harlan]

That is what supplementary stuff is for. Weapons training without contact is only half of the syllabus.

But there is a transition. Isn't there? Training in wing chun isn't the same as fighting with wing chun. Training in Iaido isn't the same as fighting with a sword.

 

[Steve]

Can we train for something? Sure. Will be we an expert at it? Probably not, but I'd say that'd depend on how often we actually put those skills into play. The average citizen can take a Red Cross First Aid/CPR course. What do those last on average...a 1 day, 8hr course, maybe 2 days? The odds of that person, while those skills are very important, may fail to recall something or freeze up, if they had to actually use it, whereas if you worked as a Doctor, an EMT, Firefighter, Paramedic, Nurse, etc., the odds of you putting those skills into play, are alot higher, IMHO.

As for the sport/non sport debate..lol..I don't think that'll ever die. Alot of sport guys have come from a TMA background. Chuck Liddell is Kempo/Kaju, Machida (sp) comes from a TMA background. I'd like to think that even if its something that they normally don't train, that they'd still be able or capable of defending themselves if someone pulled a knife on them.

I don't know if I posted this or not, but the next question would be how removed from concrete expertise one can be and still be confident that they are learning practical skills.

Put it like this. Let's say you're a veteran cop. You've been at it for 20 years. Are you an expert in every aspect of law enforcement? Likely not, according to Tgace. But, you're credible. You've been there, and the skills you will teach (hard skills like firing a weapon or soft skills like critical thinking/decision making/conflict management) will be skills you've mastered through application. The students you teach are learning practical skills, but are now 1 generation away from application. They never use the skills in "real life," but continue to practice, and they teach students, who are now 2 generations away from application. And so on.

In martial arts, there are some students learning "self defense" who are 3, 4, 5 or more generations away from skills taught by someone who has enough real world application of the skills to be considered an "expert." Does this matter?

 

[Steve]

That is what supplementary stuff is for. Weapons training without contact is only half of the syllabus.

What's the difference between weapons training with contact and training for a sport? Aren't there still rules when you spar, however hard, in a school?

Wouldn't the stakes of an actual sword fight make a huge difference?

 

[Tgace]

This actually gets to one of the key questions I have.

In boxing, you train to box. The punching is trained to be executed at full power in a ring against an opponent. You are training for that and you practice it. Over and over. You aren't training to street fight.

BUT,here's the million dollar question. Is any school REALLY teaching self defense, if the students never defend themselves? If you're training to sword fight, but never actually sword fight, then are you training to fight with a sword?

Could the skills translate? Sure. In the same way that a proficient boxer or MMAist can defend him or herself effectively using the skills learned in the gym, a kenpoist or whatever might also have skills that translate. But there is a transition. Isn't there? Training in wing chun isn't the same as fighting with wing chun. Training in Iaido isn't the same as fighting with a sword.

You seem to be implying that I think boxing is better for self defense...therefore study boxing. All I'm saying is that boxers\MMA really hit people, take punches, and are used to fighting while taking real blows. I think that's a valuable defensive trait those guys pick up in their arts. To be honest...id take a fit, conditioned boxer with me into a bar fight call over a MA who only point sparred anyday.

Sure any MA can impart valuable skills...but not all skills are equally useful IMO. No offense intended to our Iado practiconers, but boxing is much closer to fighting than Iado is to a real sword fight. All MA'ists could benefit from a trip to a boxing ring for even just a month or two to put the experience under their belts...don't have to do it forever, but trying it may change the way you see\train your primary art.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[harlan]

Steve...what is your experience with (albeit, archaic) 'weapons' study?

What's the difference between weapons training with contact and training for a sport? Aren't there still rules when you spar, however hard, in a school?

Wouldn't the stakes of an actual sword fight make a huge difference?

 

[Zero]

Sure any MA can impart valuable skills...but not all skills are equally useful IMO. No offense intended to our Iado practiconers, but boxing is much closer to fighting than Iado is to a real sword fight. All MA'ists could benefit from a trip to a boxing ring for even just a month or two to put the experience under their belts...don't have to do it forever, but trying it may change the way you see\train your primary art.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

Generally I would agree with wanting to be with a conditioned, fight experienced boxer over a point fighter if it came to a bar brawl but it needs to be remembdered that many MAs do train hard and fight full contact in tournament - kyokoshin (I hate no punching to head but that topic has been done before), muay thai, some kickboxing styles and events are all as full contact as a boxing event - and now days obviously MMA/UFC etc. I would probably prefer to have a Pride fighter in my corner such as Fedor over most heavy weight boxing champs if it came to a bar brawl or lawless/ruleless fight in the street.

Other than that, I agree that having experienced full contact must to some extent better prepare you for a street fight or SD, than not having done so (from my own personal experience I would say so hands down)...although that said, way back in the day in a SD / potential street fight I was involved in (I was cornered and about to get jumped by four guys as I had ran across the street and accidently knocked over one of their kid-brothers on the curb and unfortunately hurt him) when I was a teenager and only had TKD training/really just point fighting (and judo as a kid) to draw on, I ended up lashing out a combo of punches and felled three of them without even knowing what I had done, it just went bam, bam, bam. However, this was not life or death (although could have been I guess if I ended on the ground and they put in a stomping) and maybe their intent was not actually there but they had managed to corner me and I felt I was about to get a hammering. We never really did much on boxing combos or training in my TKD club. So who really knows what you draw on when it comes down to the line...

 

[jasonbrinn]

I don't know if I posted this or not, but the next question would be how removed from concrete expertise one can be and still be confident that they are learning practical skills.

Put it like this. Let's say you're a veteran cop. You've been at it for 20 years. Are you an expert in every aspect of law enforcement? Likely not, according to Tgace. But, you're credible. You've been there, and the skills you will teach (hard skills like firing a weapon or soft skills like critical thinking/decision making/conflict management) will be skills you've mastered through application. The students you teach are learning practical skills, but are now 1 generation away from application. They never use the skills in "real life," but continue to practice, and they teach students, who are now 2 generations away from application. And so on.

In martial arts, there are some students learning "self defense" who are 3, 4, 5 or more generations away from skills taught by someone who has enough real world application of the skills to be considered an "expert." Does this matter?

It only matters as much as the elements involved change. Most self defense systems teach concepts and techniques based on human anatomy and hopefully basic physics principles and these things will remain relevant until either of those change or some other factor becomes so prevalent as to make them change.

However, I believe this is an interesting fact within your line of questions. How do we as martial artists become aware of changing factors without regularly pressure testing our concepts and techniques? I feel that there is not any honest way to keep training relevant without persistent testing and retesting in the environment or situations we hope to find the material useful. If you want to know whether your boxing works you should box a little every now and then

"Let what works be the judge for what's right" Bruce Lee.

Jason Brinn

 

[Steve]

You seem to be implying that I think boxing is better for self defense...therefore study boxing.

Didn't mean to imply anything, and in fact, I was trying to articulate the opposite point, which is that boxers don't train to street fight. They train specifically to box against boxers.

All I'm saying is that boxers\MMA really hit people, take punches, and are used to fighting while taking real blows. I think that's a valuable defensive trait those guys pick up in their arts. To be honest...id take a fit, conditioned boxer with me into a bar fight call over a MA who only point sparred anyday.

Exactly. We're saying the same thing, I think.

 

[Drasken]

You seem to be implying that I think boxing is better for self defense...therefore study boxing. All I'm saying is that boxers\MMA really hit people, take punches, and are used to fighting while taking real blows. I think that's a valuable defensive trait those guys pick up in their arts. To be honest...id take a fit, conditioned boxer with me into a bar fight call over a MA who only point sparred anyday.

Sure any MA can impart valuable skills...but not all skills are equally useful IMO. No offense intended to our Iado practiconers, but boxing is much closer to fighting than Iado is to a real sword fight. All MA'ists could benefit from a trip to a boxing ring for even just a month or two to put the experience under their belts...don't have to do it forever, but trying it may change the way you see\train your primary art.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

I agree that in GENERAL an MMA fighter or Boxer is generally more prepared due to how they train and fight in the ring. However keep in mind that many actual traditional martial arts schools actually do full contact sparring. In fact the Aikido dojo I went to did full contact sparring. But I believe that to be a rarity in Aikido, but the full contact was imphasized due to our sensei being an old marine.

I have always said it has more to do with training than style. Being primarily from a Krav Maga background, I can't see honest self defense training without full contact sparring being a part of it.

My point is, that assuming that a traditional martial artist does no full contact stuff is not entirely accurate. Especially with the trend in martial arts now, with the popularity of MMA, many schools are teaching in a more realistic manner.

 

[Steve]

Steve...what is your experience with (albeit, archaic) 'weapons' study?

I would say about none. I've had some experience, but nothing beyond beginner level stuff. Why do you ask?

 

[Steve]

I agree that in GENERAL an MMA fighter or Boxer is generally more prepared due to how they train and fight in the ring. However keep in mind that many actual traditional martial arts schools actually do full contact sparring. In fact the Aikido dojo I went to did full contact sparring. But I believe that to be a rarity in Aikido, but the full contact was imphasized due to our sensei being an old marine.

I have always said it has more to do with training than style. Being primarily from a Krav Maga background, I can't see honest self defense training without full contact sparring being a part of it.

My point is, that assuming that a traditional martial artist does no full contact stuff is not entirely accurate. Especially with the trend in martial arts now, with the popularity of MMA, many schools are teaching in a more realistic manner.

What if you approach it from the other side? MMA is a sport, and training in MMA teaches the participants the skills needed to compete in MMA. And people who train in MMA, even if they aren't fighting in the cage, are participating in the sport of MMA. They grapple, they clinch, they strike. They do the drills, spar and perform the full range of sport. There are varying levels of intensity, but training in MMA results in getting better at MMA. It's not self defense training, although it would certainly teach some valuable skills. It's MMA.

And you can replace MMA with anything. The guitar is a musical instrument. I may not ever be a professional musician, but if I practice the guitar and play songs with the guitar and apply myself to learning the art of the guitar, I will get better at playing the guitar. Will the skills translate to playing the tenor banjo? Not all, but some. The connection isn't direct, but it's there. The tenor banjo can be tuned like a guitar, minus two strings. So, I will need to learn some new chords, but the transition will be a lot smoother. But I'm not learning to play the Tenor Banjo. I'm learning to play the guitar. They're not the same.

So, then, what am I doing when I learn Krav Maga? Am I not learning the skills which will make me better at Krav Maga? Could those skills translate to self defense? Sure. But am I learning self defense? No. I'm learning Krav Maga. It's a subtle, but important distinction, IMO.

 

[harlan]

Thanks...especially for not biting my head off! (I realized after posting that my question could be taken negatively.)

As I read through the thread, I am personally inclined to keep seperate the question of empty-hand vs. weapon training. Even that seems like such a large field...as I personally keep koryu and more plebian arts mentally seperate and might consider the question/s you are framing can't be answered in the same way (as with empty-hand). Just thinking here...I mean....does one really mean to ask if sword arts need to be trained to an 'expert' level using the same criteria as karate?

I would say about none. I've had some experience, but nothing beyond beginner level stuff. Why do you ask?

 

[Steve]

Thanks...especially for not biting my head off! (I realized after posting that my question could be taken negatively.)

As I read through the thread, I am personally inclined to keep seperate the question of empty-hand vs. weapon training. Even that seems like such a large field...as I personally keep koryu and more plebian arts mentally seperate and might consider the question/s you are framing can't be answered in the same way (as with empty-hand). Just thinking here...I mean....does one really mean to ask if sword arts need to be trained to an 'expert' level using the same criteria as karate?

I don't take any of this stuff personally and, although I'm not perfect, I try to presume good intent.

As to your questions, this is what I'm interested in discussing. My personal belief is that there is no functional difference in the way human beings develop expertise in anything. While there are practical considerations, such as aptitude, complexity of the skillset, time, immersion, related/transferable expertise and the quality of the instruction/curriculum, the way the human brain processes new information and the way that the human body acquires facility with new skills is the same.

So, in other words, learning a sword art will be different in many ways to learning a non-weapon art, but the way that a person learns is the same. At least, that's my belief.

 

[James Kovacich]

but the way that a person learns is the same. At least, that's my belief.

Are you suggesting that the training method does not matter?


Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2