FearlessFreep
Senior Master
In class today we were talking about sparring and how our school emphasizes self-defense/combat over sparring; and mostly because sparring, as it's practiced today, is not real similar to fighting. I sent him the following email
--
Bear with my insanity for a moment.
When I was in the Air Force, my dad, also in the Air Force said "All that 'peace is our profession' is just for the civilians; our job is to break stuff and kill people". Beyond the political issues of when and how to use force, that really *is* the mission of the military. (Elected civilian leaders decide why and when, military leaders and personnel...um..just do)
Take it as a given that Tae Kwon Do is a Martial Art. It's designed to inflict damage. Hopefully, we would only inflict damage as a last resort when the cost of not inflicting damage is too high.
All martial arts, as well as all sports, have ways of testing themselves to test the progrss and effectiveness of their training. I think the idea of 'sparring' has merit, the two main forms of sparring in TKD though, olympic sparring and point sparring, however, have rules for scoring that encourage strategies and motions that really do not translate well to true unarmed combat.
--
Point-sparring has the truth that it's about making the first scoring move; but it ends up encourage things like bops on the head. In a fight, I guess you do want to score first, but if that's to be the end then it has to be a debilitating blow, or the fghts going to last. Olympic-sparring recognizes the constant motion of a real fight, but the scoring and match setup encourages dancing and feints and sacrificial attacks (taking a hit to score a hit or more) that don't make sense in a real fight.
---
If we are starting from a basis of practicing self-defense in the air, like we do, and including self-defense as more-attack oriented strikes, like we did today and often do.
The first level of realism is introducing a live opponent. We do that in some motions, but not in a lot.
The second level of realism to increase the intensity. This can be done by increasing the speed of the strikes and the strength of the strikes. (To take it up to full speed/strength, you probably need to put on protective gear
This seems to be done naturally anyway when we practice as the level of intensity is dictated somewhat by the two participants
The third level of realism is to increase the dynamics. This can be done by allowing either the attacker, or the defender, or both, to vary their attacksl low punch, high punhc, choke, kick, whatever, on the attack, defender can chose method of defense. If the attacker is using a prescribed attack, the defender can know some options and has to react and execute. The attack is free to be dynamic in the attack, the the defender really has to defend himselve with quick reactions and strong execution.
Note: dynamics and intensity are independent. You can have dynamics but agree to go easy; you can have intensity but use preset moves, or you can go wild and do both.
At the end; what you have is two people facing each other, one about to attack, one about to defend..and a second or two later, it's done.
Now add some incentive Turn it into a competition
--------------------------
Rules:
1) Two opponents face each other; one is designated 'attacker' one is 'defender'.
2) Attacker initiates an attack, defender defends.
3) The 'round' is over when one person goes down to the ground.
4) Point given to the one still standing
5) Attacker and defender switch roles and do it again
6) Illegeal moves:
kicks to the knees
strikes behind the elbow
hands to the face
strikes to the throat
7) Legal moves:
Clinches, grabs, traps and takedowns
leg sweeps
kicks to thigh
knuckle punches, palm heel strikes, knife hand strikes
This would encourage more of the full range of TKD moves and options. Would encourage a more self-defense/combat style of attack and defense. No tapping the hogu; you score when the other guys butt goes down.
Notes:
An alternative rule could be to only allow scoring on defense, to encourage a self-defense emphasis. Like tennis or volleyball, you can only score when you serve. Here, you can score when you defend, you can only prevent an opponent score when you attack.
The list of legal and illegal moves is just some thoughts in trying to allow the maximum range of techniques with safety. Someone more versed in fighting and sparring than I could probably make a much better list.
Wanna make it really exciting? The attacker can, at their discretion, use a fake kife (or some other weapon) that will mark the opponent in some way. Thing is, if the defender successfully defends against a weapon, they get two points. (one possibilty is that if the attacker scores with a weapon, if you are allowing attackers to score then it's two points, if not, the the defender loses a point) You could expand that thought and allow the attacker to open with any sort of attack and if the scorers deem it to be something outside the realm of TKD, like a BJJ grab or shoot in or a choke, then you do the same rewards of a successful attack costs the defender more but a successful defense rewards the defender more. Anyway, the point is to allow for a 'sparring' style that goes from "TKD vs TKD" to "TKD defense against...whataver"
--------------------------
The whole point is that the idea of sparring in training to use techniques against a dynamic opponent is a good idea I think in itself. The current rules for most sparring however, encourages strategy and attack styles that are not very similar to the heart of the idea of training for self-defense/counter attack. I think if you look at what a fight is "someone attacks, someone defends, some stuff happens very fast and very quick, and it's over 'cause someone's on the ground", you can develop a dynamic and intense training approach based on getting as close to that as possible, safely.
Nothing I think will ever really go anywhere, but maybe some thoughts for directions in our training
----------------------------------------
Open for criticism
--
Bear with my insanity for a moment.
When I was in the Air Force, my dad, also in the Air Force said "All that 'peace is our profession' is just for the civilians; our job is to break stuff and kill people". Beyond the political issues of when and how to use force, that really *is* the mission of the military. (Elected civilian leaders decide why and when, military leaders and personnel...um..just do)
Take it as a given that Tae Kwon Do is a Martial Art. It's designed to inflict damage. Hopefully, we would only inflict damage as a last resort when the cost of not inflicting damage is too high.
All martial arts, as well as all sports, have ways of testing themselves to test the progrss and effectiveness of their training. I think the idea of 'sparring' has merit, the two main forms of sparring in TKD though, olympic sparring and point sparring, however, have rules for scoring that encourage strategies and motions that really do not translate well to true unarmed combat.
--
Point-sparring has the truth that it's about making the first scoring move; but it ends up encourage things like bops on the head. In a fight, I guess you do want to score first, but if that's to be the end then it has to be a debilitating blow, or the fghts going to last. Olympic-sparring recognizes the constant motion of a real fight, but the scoring and match setup encourages dancing and feints and sacrificial attacks (taking a hit to score a hit or more) that don't make sense in a real fight.
---
If we are starting from a basis of practicing self-defense in the air, like we do, and including self-defense as more-attack oriented strikes, like we did today and often do.
The first level of realism is introducing a live opponent. We do that in some motions, but not in a lot.
The second level of realism to increase the intensity. This can be done by increasing the speed of the strikes and the strength of the strikes. (To take it up to full speed/strength, you probably need to put on protective gear
This seems to be done naturally anyway when we practice as the level of intensity is dictated somewhat by the two participants The third level of realism is to increase the dynamics. This can be done by allowing either the attacker, or the defender, or both, to vary their attacksl low punch, high punhc, choke, kick, whatever, on the attack, defender can chose method of defense. If the attacker is using a prescribed attack, the defender can know some options and has to react and execute. The attack is free to be dynamic in the attack, the the defender really has to defend himselve with quick reactions and strong execution.
Note: dynamics and intensity are independent. You can have dynamics but agree to go easy; you can have intensity but use preset moves, or you can go wild and do both.
At the end; what you have is two people facing each other, one about to attack, one about to defend..and a second or two later, it's done.
Now add some incentive
Turn it into a competition --------------------------
Rules:
1) Two opponents face each other; one is designated 'attacker' one is 'defender'.
2) Attacker initiates an attack, defender defends.
3) The 'round' is over when one person goes down to the ground.
4) Point given to the one still standing
5) Attacker and defender switch roles and do it again
6) Illegeal moves:
kicks to the knees
strikes behind the elbow
hands to the face
strikes to the throat
7) Legal moves:
Clinches, grabs, traps and takedowns
leg sweeps
kicks to thigh
knuckle punches, palm heel strikes, knife hand strikes
This would encourage more of the full range of TKD moves and options. Would encourage a more self-defense/combat style of attack and defense. No tapping the hogu; you score when the other guys butt goes down.
Notes:
An alternative rule could be to only allow scoring on defense, to encourage a self-defense emphasis. Like tennis or volleyball, you can only score when you serve. Here, you can score when you defend, you can only prevent an opponent score when you attack.
The list of legal and illegal moves is just some thoughts in trying to allow the maximum range of techniques with safety. Someone more versed in fighting and sparring than I could probably make a much better list.
Wanna make it really exciting? The attacker can, at their discretion, use a fake kife (or some other weapon) that will mark the opponent in some way. Thing is, if the defender successfully defends against a weapon, they get two points. (one possibilty is that if the attacker scores with a weapon, if you are allowing attackers to score then it's two points, if not, the the defender loses a point) You could expand that thought and allow the attacker to open with any sort of attack and if the scorers deem it to be something outside the realm of TKD, like a BJJ grab or shoot in or a choke, then you do the same rewards of a successful attack costs the defender more but a successful defense rewards the defender more. Anyway, the point is to allow for a 'sparring' style that goes from "TKD vs TKD" to "TKD defense against...whataver"
--------------------------
The whole point is that the idea of sparring in training to use techniques against a dynamic opponent is a good idea I think in itself. The current rules for most sparring however, encourages strategy and attack styles that are not very similar to the heart of the idea of training for self-defense/counter attack. I think if you look at what a fight is "someone attacks, someone defends, some stuff happens very fast and very quick, and it's over 'cause someone's on the ground", you can develop a dynamic and intense training approach based on getting as close to that as possible, safely.
Nothing I think will ever really go anywhere, but maybe some thoughts for directions in our training
----------------------------------------
Open for criticism
