Sparring and TMA's

[MJS]

Ill start this rather general question with a disclaimer... I typically have no idea what I am talking about when it comes to any TMA. I have a rather basic idea of what most martial arts are about, but that's it.

I hear time and again about arts that don't do any sparring in their courses, or curriculum, or whatever you might call it. My question is: why not?

Is there a fundamental reason that a particular art would forbid sparring amongst students? To me, sparring seems like it should be one of the most important steps of training.

Step 1: Learn the technique
Step 2: Practice said technique at low speed against another student or on a practice dummy to get a feel for how it works
Step 3: Practice technique again at full speed in sparring to attempt to simulate the use of this technique in a realistic situation

This is how I was instructed when I dabbled in MMA and when I trained in US Army combatives.

Another question: Why is it frowned upon for a lower ranking student to ask a senior student to spar?

I can't remember exactly where I read this, but I have heard it from someone who has trained in martial arts for a long time. As a lower belt, you just don't invite a black belt to a sparring match. And not because you might get hurt, but because it is just against the rules. Why is that?


____________________________

"A man who has attained mastery of an art reveals it in his every action." - Anonymous

You'll hear mixed views on this. Some say it leads to or teaches bad habits. Some are fine with doing scenario training and training their empty hand techniques in a realistic fashion, in place of sparring. For me, I do both. I train an empty hand SD tech in the fashion that you listed. I also spar. Sometimes we just go right into it, other times we work on a specific tech, and then try to fit it into our sparring. Personally, I enjoy sparring, as it tends to force you to separate the fluff that you often see in the arts, from what's really going to work.

As for your 2nd question..I really have no idea. In some schools, lower belts, until they gain the experience, will always fight a more senior student, not necessarily a BB though.

 

[lklawson]

Just to offer a counter-point...

Learning to duel, with or without a weapon, contributes little to nothing to one's ability to be a soldier or one's ability to defend themselves.

Cyrano de Bergerac might disagree with you. Many Cyrano historians believe that the claim that he was assaulted by multiple assassins and fought them off using his Rapier is, in fact, the truth.

Arts that do not have sparring have other, actually older, methods of pressure testing techniques at speed. Methods that are actually more effective than sparring for preparing students for self defense in a non competitive environment.

Proving that those other methods are more effective will be a tough row to hoe.

Again, learning to duel, with or without a weapon, contributes little to nothing to one's ability to defend themselves outside of a tournament//duelling setting.

Going by your in-post definition of dueling to include boxing and similar "competitive" arts, I can attest that this isn't exactly so. There are countless examples of people who have trained in nothing except one of those "competitive" arts and have been quite successful in defending themselves outside of a tournament/duel. If you wish to take a position that a "competitive" art or a "dueling" art doesn't prepare one for self defense as well as a non-competitive art, then that's a different argument (and one that I might contest as well, depending on how it is described), but it is incontrovertible that these "competitive" and/or "dueling" arts have, in fact, adequately prepared countless exponents for self defense outside of their competition/dueling venue.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[ballen0351]

In throwing art, the slow speed training is not proper. You need to give your opponent a chance to have a complete body rotation in order to have safe landing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0JEN_8RiXg&feature=youtu.be.

I've learned all my throws at a slow speed first. Even not throwing at all just getting to the "tipping" point and stop set them down and start over. Slow and steady.

 

[Flying Crane]

I train pure RBSD and rarely spar. I have found that it is better to attack pads aggressively than to spar with a friendly gesture that I certainly wouldn't have in a real situation. For pressure testing I have found the concepts of Systema to be very effective by slowing down, focusing on feel and allowing natural movement and instincts to take over. I can turn the switch on when I need to so I limit the sparring.

this. yeah.

sparring in a friendly match mandates that certain safety issues be observed, so one partner doesn't end up in the hospital or the morgue every time you spar. Safety gear can help, but can also create problems of its own. That can fundamentally change how you do your techniques, and in my opinion it undermines the very skills and techniques that I am trying to develop.

Free sparring can help you become comfortable dealing with a chaotic situation where you are being attacked, and that is a valuable skill. But the more freeform the sparring, in my opinion the more it can lead to the breakdown of one's technique and the underlying principles. Everything gets sloppy in the middle of chaos.

A progressive approach, where you start more slowly and with more control, gradually building up to a more freeform and chaotic scenario is the better way to approach it, rather than just jumping straight into free sparring. That way you can keep the integrity of your techniques and gradually build more pressure into the scenario at a pace that you are able to keep up with and not let your techniques fall apart.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Just to offer a counter-point...

Cyrano de Bergerac might disagree with you. Many Cyrano historians believe that the claim that he was assaulted by multiple assassins and fought them off using his Rapier is, in fact, the truth.

Proving that those other methods are more effective will be a tough row to hoe.

While I have no interest in proving or disproving anything, Cyrano would not be my go to example for a counterpoint. In any case, I think you're missing my point, likely because of how I phrased it rather than any failing on your part.

Going by your in-post definition of dueling to include boxing and similar "competitive" arts,

Dueling, meaning one on one fight, armed or unarmed, fought to a predetermined outcome, be it death, points, or pin.

I can attest that this isn't exactly so. There are countless examples of people who have trained in nothing except one of those "competitive" arts and have been quite successful in defending themselves outside of a tournament/duel.

Just to clarify; I did not say that people who train for such a venue cannot defend themselves outside of it. In fact, I've made arguments against that thesis many times since I've been on this board.

My statement was in response to the OP's assessment that sparring is a realistic situation: Practice technique again at full speed in sparring to attempt to simulate the use of this technique in a realistic situation.

I was referring specifically to sparring. Learning to duel was probably a poor choice of words, but I was arguing against the idea that sparring is a "realistic situation."

Sparring is not a realistic situation unless you're likening it to a tournament or a one on one fight. Arts that have a competitive element frequently have a larger body of material that is not competition geared. Using TKD as an example, very little of what is taught in the art is allowed in competition, but that doesn't mean that the students aren't learning it or training it realistically; it simply isn't part of competition.

And of course, there are realistic elements in sparring; your opponent is trying to make their techniques work on you, is moving at speed, and you are trying to make your techniques work against him/her. So while you can pressure test techniques in sparring, and can do so realistically, sparring is not a realistic situation and is neither the only nor best method of pressure testing techniques.

If you wish to take a position that a "competitive" art or a "dueling" art doesn't prepare one for self defense as well as a non-competitive art, then that's a different argument (and one that I might contest as well, depending on how it is described), but it is incontrovertible that these "competitive" and/or "dueling" arts have, in fact, adequately prepared countless exponents for self defense outside of their competition/dueling venue.

One could also say that it is incontrovertable that these competitive and/or dueling arts have, in fact, inadequately prepared countless exponents for self defense outside of their competition/dueling venue. And in fact, many have. The internet is rife with such examples. However, my statements were not an assessment of any arts, competitive or no. They were addressing sparring specifically.

I won't make the competitive/non-competitive distinction or comparison, as many competitive arts have a large amount of non competitive material and teach more than just competition. Also, even in a specifically competitive art, such as boxing, the principles of timing, distance, reading your opponent, etc. are still there. These are not specific to any particular type of system. So what makes a system competitive or non competitive is not cut and dry.

But again, my point wasn't that boxers and competitive MA-ists can't defend themselve outside of their venue (I would and have argue against such a thesis). My point was that sparring is not a "realistic situation."

 

[Kframe]

Part of the problem as I see it. Is the arts that don't spar, some practitioners tend to never move beyond the demonstration phase of what ever techniques they are doing. They rarely have any pressure at all in any form.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Part of the problem as I see it. Is the arts that don't spar, some practitioners tend to never move beyond the demonstration phase of what ever techniques they are doing. They rarely have any pressure at all in any form.

It's a balance.

In arts that have sparring, some practitioners get caught up with scoring and do things that earn them the point, but which may not be advisable against an opponent who seeks to do you harm.

 

[Flying Crane]

Part of the problem as I see it. Is the arts that don't spar, some practitioners tend to never move beyond the demonstration phase of what ever techniques they are doing. They rarely have any pressure at all in any form.

yes, that's true. There are always those who don't train very hard or dilligently or realistically. I guess that's just part of the reality of the martial arts.

 

[K-man]

Part of the problem as I see it. Is the arts that don't spar, some practitioners tend to never move beyond the demonstration phase of what ever techniques they are doing. They rarely have any pressure at all in any form.

Perhaps you could be more specific. Which practitioners tend not to move beyond the demonstration phase, and how exactly do you know that for a fact?
:asian:

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I've learned all my throws at a slow speed first. Even not throwing at all just getting to the "tipping" point and stop set them down and start over. Slow and steady.

The SC (Chinese wrestling) doesn't use "slow speed" development for the following reasons:

- Most of the throwing are developed from your opponent punches at your head. If your opponent punches you at combat speed, you have to respond with combat speed.
- In SC, it's better to do it not too perfect in fast speed than to do in perfect in slow speed. To have courage to use your technique is important in the beginner training stage.
- Combat training is like "shirt catch on fire". There is no room for slow speed.
- The slow speed training is "bad habit" by itself. Either you can do your skill in combat speed or you can't, there is nothing in between.
- ...

What's the difference between a "scholar" and a "MAist"?

When a

- scholar takes a 10 questions test, he can start from Q1, Q2, ... If he has proble with Q5, he can skip it. After he had finished Q10, he can come back to Q5.
- knife stabs toward a MAist's chest, he has only 1/4 second to react. After 1/4 second, either he is dead or he is still alive, there is nothing in between.

The "speed" is not important for a scholar. For a MAist, the speed is extreamly important and should be addressed as early as possible in the training.

 

[Mauthos]

One thing I was always taught was to initially go at your own speed, what feels comfortable to you, whether this is at a relatively slow pace or a fast pace.

My instructor would always say to me, 'understand the technique and develop control. Speed and power will come.'

I have always agreed with this as in all my training I have noticed that once I have fully understood the concept of the technique I am throwing and can fully control it, my speed and power increase with this understanding. Sometimes this will only take a few minutes within a lesson, for example, when learning a new punch or it can take many sessions, such as, when learning a new complicated SD technique. Eventually, whatever happens, my speed and power develop and these new techniques become effective and ingrained within my muscle memory.

 

[lklawson]

While I have no interest in proving or disproving anything, Cyrano would not be my go to example for a counterpoint.

I use Cyrano because he is a famous example of a Rapier fencer who was assaulted by a vastly overwhelming force of assassins and, through skill of arms, (shockingly) fought them off.

In any case, I think you're missing my point, likely because of how I phrased it rather than any failing on your part.

Fair enough.

Just to clarify; I did not say that people who train for such a venue cannot defend themselves outside of it. In fact, I've made arguments against that thesis many times since I've been on this board.

My statement was in response to the OP's assessment that sparring is a realistic situation: Practice technique again at full speed in sparring to attempt to simulate the use of this technique in a realistic situation.

Fair enough, and again.

Arts that have a competitive element frequently have a larger body of material that is not competition geared.

Quite true.

One could also say that it is incontrovertable that these competitive and/or dueling arts have, in fact, inadequately prepared countless exponents for self defense outside of their competition/dueling venue. And in fact, many have. The internet is rife with such examples. However, my statements were not an assessment of any arts, competitive or no. They were addressing sparring specifically.

Well, that's a different debate and, I suspect, you already know what the counter typically is so I believe we can skip it.

So what makes a system competitive or non competitive is not cut and dry.

I agree.

But again, my point wasn't that boxers and competitive MA-ists can't defend themselve outside of their venue (I would and have argue against such a thesis). My point was that sparring is not a "realistic situation."

Fair enough. I would like to caveat that, honestly, sometimes sparing CAN BE a more-or-less "realistic" reflection of SOME self defense encounters. What percentage of them it is, is impossible to define and likely variable anyway, dependent upon a vast number of changing circumstances from time, place, local culture, and who-knows-what else. The corollary is, of course, sometimes it flat out ISN'T.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

It's a balance.

In arts that have sparring, some practitioners get caught up with scoring and do things that earn them the point, but which may not be advisable against an opponent who seeks to do you harm.

Frick'n strait up, man!

I've seen both.

I find it (slightly) easier to overlook when someone is failing to properly pressure test his techniques due to the fact that his school/art/whatever never goes beyond demo mode. I usually managed to just keep my mouth shut and smile.

But when I'm teaching Bowie (where I see the second problem most often), it drives me bananas when a student will rush in to get a "hit" in a manner that assures an immediate ripost. "Double Death" sucks and we're not using electronic scoring machines or anything. One of the things I love about the Bowie is how, historically speaking, it was a full-range weapon and tool. It was used for daily duty as a tool, as "self defense" against a range of weapons and opponents, as a backup weapon to less than 100% reliable firearms, and (yes) for dueling. We try to explore all of those ranges but, to be perfectly honest, "dueling" is really the most fun.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[lklawson]

The SC (Chinese wrestling) doesn't use "slow speed" development for the following reasons:

- Most of the throwing are developed from your opponent punches at your head. If your opponent punches you at combat speed, you have to respond with combat speed.
- In SC, it's better to do it not too perfect in fast speed than to do in perfect in slow speed. To have courage to use your technique is important in the beginner training stage.
- Combat training is like "shirt catch on fire". There is no room for slow speed.
- The slow speed training is "bad habit" by itself. Either you can do your skill in combat speed or you can't, there is nothing in between.
- ...

What's the difference between a "scholar" and a "MAist"?

When a

- scholar takes a 10 questions test, he can start from Q1, Q2, ... If he has proble with Q5, he can skip it. After he had finished Q10, he can come back to Q5.
- knife stabs toward a MAist's chest, he has only 1/4 second to react. After 1/4 second, either he is dead or he is still alive, there is nothing in between.

The "speed" is not important for a scholar. For a MAist, the speed is extreamly important and should be addressed as early as possible in the training.

Nah. ballen0351 is right on the mark. Few people learn techniques "full on" high speed from the get go very well. Most people learn best with a "start slow," find the right mechanics, and then progress to full speed.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I use Cyrano because he is a famous example of a Rapier fencer who was assaulted by a vastly overwhelming force of assassins and, through skill of arms, (shockingly) fought them off.

I don't disagree, but accounts of his exploits are not what I would call documented history and there are probably examples with better documentation.

Well, that's a different debate and, I suspect, you already know what the counter typically is so I believe we can skip it.

Absolutely. It is not a debate I'm interested in having; my point being that one can make a fairly strong case for either side.

Fair enough. I would like to caveat that, honestly, sometimes sparing CAN BE a more-or-less "realistic" reflection of SOME self defense encounters. What percentage of them it is, is impossible to define and likely variable anyway, dependent upon a vast number of changing circumstances from time, place, local culture, and who-knows-what else. The corollary is, of course, sometimes it flat out ISN'T.

I agree. I don't personally believe that complete realism can be achieved in the training hall, regardless of what method of training is being used.

However, the OP seemed to be coming from the perspective that without sparring, there is no realism in regards to pressure testing techniques, which simply is not true. Simply saying that you spar does not make one type of training more or less realistic than any other. You can have a free play element without really having sparring in the sense that you see in competitive arts.

 

[SENC-33]

The large majority of self defense confrontations are over within seconds. You should train that way......

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

The large majority of self defense confrontations are over within seconds. You should train that way......

You should, but not exclusively. There are other benfits to sparring outside of simply self defense. Regular sparring, aside from allowing one to train and pressure test in a free-form environment, is also good cardio and good for mental fortitude as well. And honestly, it's enjoyable.

 

[WaterGal]

Nah. ballen0351 is right on the mark. Few people learn techniques "full on" high speed from the get go very well. Most people learn best with a "start slow," find the right mechanics, and then progress to full speed.

Agreed. My experience is that students that try to immediately go full-speed before they really understand the mechanics often do the technique sloppy or wrong, and with grappling techniques are more likely to accidently injure their partner. I tell people to start out slowly (especially lower belts and especially with wrist locks) and work up to doing it faster as they get more comfortable with the technique.

 

[K-man]

You should, but not exclusively. There are other benfits to sparring outside of simply self defense. Regular sparring, aside from allowing one to train and pressure test in a free-form environment, is also good cardio and good for mental fortitude as well. And honestly, it's enjoyable.

We did some last night with one person against three. Going flat out, I reckon that 30 seconds was the most anyone could go before fatigue started to set in.

Agreed. My experience is that students that try to immediately go full-speed before they really understand the mechanics often do the technique sloppy or wrong, and with grappling techniques are more likely to accidently injure their partner. I tell people to start out slowly (especially lower belts and especially with wrist locks) and work up to doing it faster as they get more comfortable with the technique.

I doubt anyone could train wrist locks full speed without severely damaging their partner. You can train against resistance but you'll quickly run out of students if they go flat chat.

 

[WaterGal]

Going up to a black belt and 'inviting' him or her to spar could be viewed in the context of some kind of pecking order challenge.

I can see that. I think the issue is really with the attitude of the asker, more than the request itself.

Most of the junior students that ask to spar me ask because they want someone that will challenge them and offer feedback and suggestions. We have one little yellow-belt girl who asks to spar with me every time, because she's scared of sparring and feels safe with me. But then there are sometimes students who want to spar a black belt or teacher as some kind of ego thing - they act like "if I can beat that person then I'm better than all the other students". That's when it's rude.