Realistic Training !!

[Seattletcj]

Randori, from wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randori)
It is not black and white.

Randori (乱取&#12426 is a term used in Japanese martial arts to describe free-style practice or sparring, sometimes with multiple attackers. The term literally means "chaos taking" or "grasping freedom," implying a freedom from the structured practice of kata.
The exact meaning of randori depends on the martial art it is used in. In judo and Shodokan Aikido, it most often refers to one-on-one sparring where partners attempt to resist and counter each other's techniques. In other styles of aikido, in particular Aikikai, it refers to a form of practice in which a designated aikidoka defends against multiple attackers in quick succession without knowing how they will attack or in what order. This form of randori is not sparring, and the attackers are not allowed to resist or attempt to counter the defender's techniques. It must be noted that the term is used only by Aikikai dojos outside Japan. In Japan, this form of practice is called Taninzu-gake(多人数掛&#12369 which literally means multiple attackers.
Although in karate usually the word kumite is used for sparring, in some schools they also use the term randori for the "mock-combat" in which both karatekas move very fast, attempting and parrying acts of extreme violence with all four limbs (including knees, elbows, etc.) and yet never making other than the lightest contact. Total control of the body is necessary and therefore usually only the senior grades can practice randori. In these schools, the distinction between randori and kumite is that in randori the action is not interrupted when a successful technique is applied.
Randori may be contrasted with kata, as two potentially complementary types of training.

 

[DWeidman]

There are some points on where they are very stark and in contrast.

Really? Seriously -- when both the defition for Sparring uses the word Randori to explain what it is... and when Randori uses the word "sparring" to explain what it is... the definitions *seem to imply* a rather grey area here. I am sure you would LIKE to see them as entirely different animals. Just as I would like you to see them as the same animal. However -- the only point worth recognizing here is that neither of us holds a black and white answer to the question. Feel free to hold your breath and stomp around all you like... it isn't clear. Period.

Here is the Wikipedia definition for you:

Sparring is a form of training common to many martial arts. Although the precise form varies, it is relatively free-form fighting, with enough rules, customs, or agreements to make injuries unlikely. By extension, argumentative debate is sometimes called "verbal sparring".
The physical nature of sparring naturally varies with the nature of the skills it is intended to develop; sparring in a striking art such as Savate will normally begin with the players at opposite corners of a ring and will be stopped if they clinch. Sparring in a grappling art such as judo might begin with the partners holding one another and end if they separate.
The organization of sparring matches also varies. If the participants know each other well and are friendly, it may be sufficient for them to simply play, without rules, referee, or timer. If the sparring is between strangers, or there is some emotional tension, or the sparring is being evaluated, it may be appropriate to introduce formal rules and have an experienced martial artist supervise the match.
Sparring is normally distinct from fights in competition. The goal of sparring is normally the education of the participants, while a competitive fight seeks to determine a winner.
The educational role of sparring is a matter of some debate. In any sparring match, precautions of some sort must be taken to protect the participants. These may include wearing protective gear, declaring certain techniques and targets off-limits, playing slowly or at a fixed speed, forbidding certain kinds of trickery, or one of many other possibilities. These precautions have the potential to change the nature of the skill that is being learned. For example, if one were to always spar with heavily padded gloves, one might come to rely on techniques that risk breaking bones in one's hand. Most schools recognize this problem but value sparring nonetheless because it forces the student to improvise, to think under pressure, and to keep their emotions under control.
Sparring has different names and different forms in various schools. Some schools prefer not to call it sparring, as they feel it differs in kind from what is normally called sparring.

• In Chinese martial arts, sparring is usually trained at first as individual applications, eventually combined as freestyle training of long, medium and short range techniques. See chin na, pushing hands.
• In Japanese martial arts, a sparring-like activity is usually called randori. In judo, this is essentially one-on-one sparring; in some forms of aikido it is a formalized form of sparring where one aikidoka defends against many attackers.
• In Korean martial arts, (Taekwondo), sparring is called Kyorugi by the WTF or Matsoki by the ITF. In the World Taekwondo Federation, the majority of the attacks executed are kicking techniques. Whereas the ITF will encourage the use of both hands and feet and is closer to realistic combat. The ITF generally do not spar with headguards or Taekwon-Do Hogus.
• In Karate, sparring is called kumite.
• Taekwondo Sparring Champions
• In Capoeira, the closest analogue to sparring is playing in the roda.
• In Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu sparring is commonly called rolling

Enjoy.

-Daniel

 

[saru1968]

RT: So to clarify because you have now said that adding anything to your training is CHANGING your training, if you had a student that loved his BBT, but After 3 years of study decided that he was to keep training his BBT as normal but once a week he wanted to take a BJJ class so that he can have really awesome stand up skills (BBT) and really sound ground skills (BJJ) you would ask him to leave?

Simple answer: Yes or No?

I won't bother with replying to the rest as its be hashed out so much I've lost interest..but i will say its not so much the physical aspects that seperate Randori and sparring but the mindset..sorry can't explain it any better.

Seperate classes are seperate classes but if the student decided to bring a conflicting training methodlogy into a BBT lesson, then they would stop.
If they want to learn BJJ then they can go to a BJJ class, Judo go to a Judo class. But at BBT class we do BBT.

Its pretty straightforward, if i'm teaching then the students are there to learn and learn the way i am taught if not the door is always open.

 

[Rubber Tanto]

I won't bother with replying to the rest as its be hashed out so much I've lost interest..but i will say its not so much the physical aspects that seperate Randori and sparring but the mindset..sorry can't explain it any better.

Don't bother. Saying the the difference between what you label sparring and what you label randori is what each person is thinking when they a training with it leaves it impossible to have a coherant debate with you on the subject matter. We'll just agree to disagree and it would be best for all.

Seperate classes are seperate classes but if the student decided to bring a conflicting training methodlogy into a BBT lesson, then they would stop.
If they want to learn BJJ then they can go to a BJJ class, Judo go to a Judo class. But at BBT class we do BBT.

Isn't that what I stated was the situation in the hypothetical? Way to go answering with the original question. Hence why I asked for a yes or no answer.

Its pretty straightforward...

So straighfoward in fact, that you didn't give a straightforward answer. But I'm guessing it was in fact "Yes"

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

Do many of you believe that what they learned before and the way they trained before plays no part in what type of martial artists they are today? This is not a jibe, this is a serious question.

http://www.winjutsu.com/source/hatsumi.html#kihon

RT: The bold area is a poor statement. You are trying to imply to those reading that members of the bujinkan who enjoy training randori (noted in bold so that you do not once again confuse it with sparring) are lazy martial artists that cannot be "bothered" to train correctly.

For what it's worth, I believe that is at least partially true. A lot of people simply do find kata to be boring and uninteresting, at least in comparison.

A stupid comment if ever I heard one as adding (noted in bold so that you do not once again confuse the word with "changing") additional elements to your training is actually harder work, and in my opinion, just another example of a practitioners pursuit for martial excellence.

Look. Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu is not my art or your art or any one of our respective teachers's art. It is the art of Masaaki Hatsumi. If you want to practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, it's the knowledge he's shared that's relevant in the pursuit of knowledge of his art. The bulk of that knowledge can be found in Japan.

 

[Rubber Tanto]

[/color]Look. Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu is not my art or your art or any one of our respective teachers's art. It is the art of Masaaki Hatsumi. If you want to practice Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu, it's the knowledge he's shared that's relevant in the pursuit of knowledge of his art. The bulk of that knowledge can be found in Japan.

And no one is disputing that knowledge. And no one is disputing that the source of it stems from japan. I have a problem with this frame of mind and am quite aware that Hatsumi-Sensei owns this art.

But then again, I am also aware that Hatsuim says this art is an evolving art. and that each person make his taijutsu his own. I am also aware that people that have gone to him and spoken of adding elements to their training have been told that each makes their taijutsu their own. So this is probably why I find your above quoted argument lacking of substance.

Oh well. As I have said, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I can live with that. As my sensei said when I discussed all this with him. I will find two kinds of people in the BJK. Those that train with randori and those that don't. People on each side will always think their way to be the more logical training method. It is the natural order of things.
People could post in this thread until it reaches page 1,000,000 and still each will believe what they want. Nothing will change.

So thanks for the debate anyway, guys.
I have learned a little more about all of you because of it.
Cheers,
Nick

 

[Grey Eyed Bandit]

But then again, I am also aware that Hatsuim says this art is an evolving art. and that each person make his taijutsu his own.

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Dojo/8290/modernninpo.htm
RTFM

 

[Don Roley]

Really? Seriously -- when both the defition for Sparring uses the word Randori to explain what it is... and when Randori uses the word "sparring" to explain what it is... the definitions *seem to imply* a rather grey area here. I am sure you would LIKE to see them as entirely different animals. Just as I would like you to see them as the same animal. However -- the only point worth recognizing here is that neither of us holds a black and white answer to the question. Feel free to hold your breath and stomp around all you like... it isn't clear. Period.

Could you tone down the heat? We can discuss this like adults, can't we?

And according to what I have experienced, Randori is a Japanese word that means that there is no set ending of the actions like in kata. Sparring is an English word and for years I went to tournaments where the sparring division was always two guys of about the same ability trying to win over the other.

So sparring is randori, but not all randori is sparring.

And it is the competive aspect of trying to win over someone else that some of us do not like. A lot of people have chimed in about how we really can't challenge ourselves unless we go against someone who is there with the intent to defeat us and uses any means to do so. That is sports sparring as I have experienced it. I do not like it and I have not seen the Japanese do anything like that at any level of training in my many years in Japan.

But having one guy, or multiple guys, with weapons or maybe having weapons is another matter. I find it amazing that the title of this thread is 'realistic training' and started out by complaining about the punches we use in the Bujinkan. But of course, from there is got into a discussion of why we should look to the UFC and such for what to train like and against.

I myself would not call having one guy try to attack another with a rubber knife a form of sparring. I sparred for many years in another art and they never had something like that in that part of training. I find the whole idea that two guys are there to fight a foriegn one to me. If I get into a violent situation, it will not be because I was getting ready for a fight. So any type of training that starts out with the assumption that I am there to defeat the other guy by using violence is not realistic from the start. I may be attacked and I train with that in mind. But I try to avoid violence right up to the point where the other guy throws the first blow and that is not what you see happening in sparring like the UFC- but you do see it with Peyton Quinn and randorit practice in the Bujinkan Japan sometimes.

 

[Don Roley]

But then again, I am also aware that Hatsuim says this art is an evolving art. and that each person make his taijutsu his own.

Have you ever heard the term Shu Ha Ri? Do a google search if you have not. And then realize that the end goal is indeed to make the art your own (ri) and not just copy your teacher. But to get there you have to go through Shu and Ha. And when you teach others you teach them the Shu portion if you are using your teacher's name or that of his art.

 

[Rubber Tanto]

Have you ever heard the term Shu Ha Ri? Do a google search if you have not. And then realize that the end goal is indeed to make the art your own (ri) and not just copy your teacher. But to get there you have to go through Shu and Ha. And when you teach others you teach them the Shu portion if you are using your teacher's name or that of his art.

No I haven't heard of the term. I'll look into it.
Thanks

 

[Rubber Tanto]

http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Dojo/8290/modernninpo.htm

Thanks for that link.
Is the guy that wrote that article (Sven-Eric Bogsäter) this guy:

http://www.budogruppen.nu/dojoopening1.shtml

and is that guy throwing that punch a shodan or higher? I wonder if he is a student of Sven-Eric Bogsäter?

 

[saru1968]

Thanks for the conversation everyone but after recieving neg rep
'Pure ignorance...I can't believe it!'

For my opinion on the different 'mindsets' on sparring & Randori.

Not really worth continuing.

cheers

Gaz.

 

[Seattletcj]

Could you tone down the heat? We can discuss this like adults, can't we?

LOL, like in the "soke Hatsumi clips" thread ?

And it is the competive aspect of trying to win over someone else that some of us do not like.

Something about competition that seems to be the issue. hmmmm.
I recently heard that some parents here in the U.S are trying to make it so that there are no more scores in childrens sports. You know, everyone is a winner. Even the losers get trophies etc.

A lot of people have chimed in about how we really can't challenge ourselves unless we go against someone who is there with the intent to defeat us and uses any means to do so. That is sports sparring as I have experienced it.

Almost sounds like real life too. Uh oh.

But of course, from there is got into a discussion of why we should look to the UFC and such for what to train like and against.

...strawman.

 

[shesulsa]

Admin Note:

Thread locked pending Admin review.

G Ketchmark / shesulsa
MT Assistant Administrator