Misconceptions about non-contact sparring.

[drop bear]

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]

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.

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

 

[drop bear]

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]

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]

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.

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

 

[ballen0351]

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.

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

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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?

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]

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.

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

 

[RTKDCMB]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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