sparring

[Brian R. VanCise]

Most self defense systems have some form of sparring within them. It can be used as a part of training that is designed to benefit the practitioner by getting them used to real time and contact! In the Takamatsuden arts I personally believe you can have some forms of sparring and should. I would agree with Chris though that you will find it hard to spar unless in a limited manner only using Takamatsuden technique. Hence why when you see off shoots or sparring within the Takamatsuden arts you will see them incorporate techniques more commonly found with heavy sparring or rolling arts like Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Boxing, Brazilian Jiujitsu, etc. Why? Because when working in the sparring context those systems skill sets work very, very well! I would also agree with Chris that the Takamatsuden systems totally being geared towards a self preservation method with the idea of quick limited engagement do not necessarily parlay into a great sparring mentality and or technical execution with that goal in mind. Having said the above though I think anyone who studies within the Takamatsuden arts should spar and incorporate what is useful there. Yet, you have to have the understanding that sparring is not the same as fighting for your life on the street or in a war zone. Yet, sparring can make you mentally and physically tough and has it's place as an effective training tool!

 

[Haikuguy]

Chris, sorry, but after all this I still don't understand what's wrong with sparring in ninjutsu...

So you don't spar, we spar.
Isn't it all good?


Different approaches and different interpretations by different people- what's wrong with that?

 

[Aiki Lee]

Chris pretty much sumed up any coherent point I could have made but I'll try to word it differently in case its just not coming across in an understandable way. I'm going to break up what you said by numbers and adress each one individually as I see it.

1. The correct execution of ninjutsu tactics and strategies will result in injuries or death. That's what it's meant for.
Before I came to Akban (late 90'), they were sparring quite hard, and many students and veterans were injured regularly.


2. As someone who comes from a military background and working in security in ridiculously dangerous places in Israel I can say that very few things can prepare you for a life threatening situation, but one of those few things is getting as close as you can to realistic sparring without injuring yourself or others.

3. And regarding the sparring in the background of the video, I don't really think it represents anything in particular- some veterans are sparring while using the belt of their Gi, or using the walls of the dojo etc, there is a lot you don't see in that video...

Sparring against multiple opponents is done regularly in Akban but you don't see that in this video also....

1. While techniques can be dangerous when applied the strategies and principles are not necessarily the techniques themselves but the "how, why, and when" you apply those techniques. After all, proper execution of any martial arts technique can result in serious injury if the practitioner wills it. With control, application of the arts can be done in a live but safe fashion. In regards to injury, no one should be injured during training and when people are being careless they should be told to slow down and work more on form than speed, which is what your teacher did if I am understanding you correctly.

2. I think you and I may have the same agendas. Realistic pressure testing is essential to anyone who is seriously interested in learning how to apply their art in a real combat or self-defense scenario. However, I believe pressure testing and randori are not the same as sparring which I equate more with a sport context in which the goal is not to move in and take control of the situation as soon as possible but rather more of a game in which partners exchange techniques without any particular commitment to come and do harm to the other person.


This is where I feel the difference lies. In randori (or pressure testing) one or both parties must have the intent of doing real harm to the other, but still be in control to not actually go through with it at the last minute. That means when I walk tup to my partner I must have the intent of wanting to squeeze the life out of him when I choke him, or knock him flat on his *** when I hit him. Likewise my partner must have the intent of "I must do what must be done to escape (or take control of) this situation". In sparring no such idea seems to be present and is replaced with the thought of "I'm going to hit you, you're going to hit me and eventually we stop." There is no sense of urgency in sparring as there is in pressure testing and the scenario based training Chris is advocating.

3. So the reason the sparring doesn't look right is really a combination of the first two responses I had. The tactics of ninjutsu do not appear to be present, and there is no sense of urgency (live or die). When it comes to the tactics there didn't appear to be much angular movement, changing of timing or rythym, set ups for techniques, or realistic feinting or misdirection of the opponent's attention. People may be having fun, but they are not exploring the concepts of the kata they are shown in a realistic setting.

What i would recommend is when having opponents train to pressure test, I would suggest starting with a specified uke and tori just like a kata starts, but uke's attacks are random and continuous. Tori's goal should be to put on a technique (say oni kudaki) while uke bull rushes them, swings punches at them, kicks at them, or does whatever. This will show studnets why it is important to set up their techniques with strategy and why the specific angling in the kata needs to be accounted for during the pressure testing. Uke's job should not be to thwart tori's technique but to apply realistic attacking energy. After this has been done for numerous techniques then both training partners can can practice in a randori situation where there is no specified uke and tori and whoever gets the technique , gets it and they counter each other when possible but don't go over board and risk serious injury.

 

[Indagator]

One point regarding the "shooting in class" comment, there. You could compare shooting at the range to sparring, and I would agree. However I would then go on to compare scenario training or proper randori to tactical training with simunition marking rounds (which I have done, as well as put in many hours at the range).

In the case of the shooting example, does that now make slightly more sense, the Takamatsu-den side of this argument, if I utilise your own metaphor and extend it's principle like that?

Hope so - only trying to help!

 

[Chris Parker]

Most self defense systems have some form of sparring within them. It can be used as a part of training that is designed to benefit the practitioner by getting them used to real time and contact!

Actually, most self defence systems (such as RBSD groups) don't use sparring at all. They use scenario-based free-response drills, but not sparring (although, confusingly, some use the term "sparring" as it's easier to give people the idea....) The difference between the two (sparring and scenario-based free-response training) will be covered in a little bit.

In the Takamatsuden arts I personally believe you can have some forms of sparring and should. I would agree with Chris though that you will find it hard to spar unless in a limited manner only using Takamatsuden technique.

Actually, I don't think limiting is really the issue, it's a matter of what you're actually testing.

Hence why when you see off shoots or sparring within the Takamatsuden arts you will see them incorporate techniques more commonly found with heavy sparring or rolling arts like Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do, Karate, Boxing, Brazilian Jiujitsu, etc. Why? Because when working in the sparring context those systems skill sets work very, very well!

Honestly, I think that when you see such things, it means that the practitioners themselves either don't understand their own system, or don't have faith in it. As a result, they go to what they see as being successful in sparring, which is a TKD/kickboxing approach for standing, and BJJ for ground. More on this later...

I would also agree with Chris that the Takamatsuden systems totally being geared towards a self preservation method with the idea of quick limited engagement do not necessarily parlay into a great sparring mentality and or technical execution with that goal in mind.

Yep. That's the thing, really, the training methods have to be congruent with the ideas of the art itself.

Having said the above though I think anyone who studies within the Takamatsuden arts should spar and incorporate what is useful there. Yet, you have to have the understanding that sparring is not the same as fighting for your life on the street or in a war zone. Yet, sparring can make you mentally and physically tough and has it's place as an effective training tool!

Oh, sparring absolutely has benefits, but the form needs to compliment the rest of the training. When it is done congruently, it's great, and I highly recommend it. It's when it isn't that there are issues. Speaking of that....

Chris, sorry, but after all this I still don't understand what's wrong with sparring in ninjutsu...

So you don't spar, we spar.
Isn't it all good?


Different approaches and different interpretations by different people- what's wrong with that?

I'll see if I can state it one more time then. The big clue was in my last post where I discussed how martial training actually works (programming your unconscious response).

To be effective, training has to be congruent. There is no two ways around that. If you have two incongruent methods, the only way to get them to work is to abandon one, or change them both to make them fit with each other. And that just isn't possible when the two methods are diametrically opposed.

The issue isn't that you're sparring, it's the way you do it. There are forms of free-form training (which some may label as "sparring") that can absolutely be used to train the Takamatsuden arts, but the way you're doing it just doesn't work. You may get good at the sparring approach you use, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the Ninjutsu skills or if you're any good at that. And you may be fantastic at the Ninjutsu skills and techniques, but not so good at the sparring, and feel that you're not able to "fight" properly, when you haven't even tested anything you're actually good at.

When I'm talking about sparring here, I'm referring to two people squaring off, and trying to outclass/outperform each other. Both are trying to press forward with offense, and handle incoming attacks with defense. It is a contest, even when it's claimed not to be ("The only competition is with yourself... There are no winners..."), due to the structure of the testing method. And, as such, it is not really representative of reality at all.

Real encounters have an aggressor (or a number of them), and a defender. There is often no preparation time, or very little, the attacks are unfamiliar (as opposed to being similar to what you yourself are responding with), and the encounters tend to be fairly quick, rather than drawn out exchanges. As a result, if you're after a realistic way of testing your skills and abilities, look to methods that mimic that as closely as possible. Sparring just doesn't do it.

Reality Based Self Defense uses scenario-based response training, and that's really the way to go. Scenario based training is exactly as it sounds... you set up a scenario, where there is an attacker and a defender. To begin with, the attacks are nominated, but by the end, it becomes completely free form. The defender has an aim to accomplish, rather than just "fight", which might be to subdue, to escape, to prevent a takedown, or anything similar. This way skills are genuinely tested, rather than just "fighting".

The "just fight" approach leads to tactics of staying 'in' the fight, when the tactics of the art tell you to escape. The "just fight" approach leads to an unrealistic expectation of combat, with the reality of attack and defense compromised simply by being aware that you're in a fight already. That changes the effect of the attack, whether or not the attacker is also prepared, or ready to defend themselves, and so on.

Put it another way, sparring is highly unrealistic for anything other than preparation for sporting systems and their competitive environment. Scenario based training gives all the benefits of sparring, but none of the drawbacks.

As said, training needs to be congruent, without that, it's just exercise and wasting time. And that's the biggest problem with the sparring clips that I've seen, and as have been put forth from the Akban organisation. The reason that TKD, kickboxing, karate etc have their sparring methods is that it is congruent with their art. In TKD sparring, you see TKD kicks, postural concepts, distancing, power source, and so on. In BJJ rolling, you see BJJ postural concepts, tactics, techniques, and so on. In Akban Ninjutsu sparring, you see kickboxing/TKD/Karate, Judo, and BJJ, but no Ninjutsu. That's the biggest problem. You're sparring as a way of testing your art, but not actually testing your art in any way whatsoever. Sparring itself isn't the problem, but sparring without using your art in order to show how you can use your art is just pointless.

I really don't know any way to say it clearer than that, honestly.

 

[Cyriacus]

Hi.

Actually, most self defence systems (such as RBSD groups) don't use sparring at all. They use scenario-based free-response drills, but not sparring (although, confusingly, some use the term "sparring" as it's easier to give people the idea....) The difference between the two (sparring and scenario-based free-response training) will be covered in a little bit.

And both, if used in conjunction, can be as beneficial, so long as they are both done properly.

Actually, I don't think limiting is really the issue, it's a matter of what you're actually testing.

And so stems the issue of Focus.

Honestly, I think that when you see such things, it means that the practitioners themselves either don't understand their own system, or don't have faith in it. As a result, they go to what they see as being successful in sparring, which is a TKD/kickboxing approach for standing, and BJJ for ground. More on this later...

Tis the Focus and the Faith. They assume that theyre not learning what they should literally think, and instead replace it with preconceived notions theyve developed.

Yep. That's the thing, really, the training methods have to be congruent with the ideas of the art itself.

*nods*

Oh, sparring absolutely has benefits, but the form needs to compliment the rest of the training. When it is done congruently, it's great, and I highly recommend it. It's when it isn't that there are issues. Speaking of that....

And this is where I start to come in. Sparring has come to mean something a bit disambiguous of its definition and idealogy. It must be a test of Skill as a Practitioner of Your System. Sparring is not Fighting, even if it can come damn close to it sometimes.

I'll see if I can state it one more time then. The big clue was in my last post where I discussed how martial training actually works (programming your unconscious response).

*Nods*

To be effective, training has to be congruent. There is no two ways around that. If you have two incongruent methods, the only way to get them to work is to abandon one, or change them both to make them fit with each other. And that just isn't possible when the two methods are diametrically opposed.

This can also lead into self deception, causing bad habits. Such as, thinking that something works in Sparring, and will therefore work in Fighting, when the Sparring Idealogy is flawed to begin with, causing a void which You are filling in, which would not otherwise exist.

The issue isn't that you're sparring, it's the way you do it. There are forms of free-form training (which some may label as "sparring") that can absolutely be used to train the Takamatsuden arts, but the way you're doing it just doesn't work. You may get good at the sparring approach you use, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the Ninjutsu skills or if you're any good at that. And you may be fantastic at the Ninjutsu skills and techniques, but not so good at the sparring, and feel that you're not able to "fight" properly, when you haven't even tested anything you're actually good at.

And this is where Im replying primarily. Sparring is not Fighting. Sparring is controlled exchanges of applications. It can benefit Fighting, but it is not fighting. It can be very close to fighting, but it is still, not fighting. The problem that arises, is that if someone continuously loses in Sparring without realising this, it can diminish their confidence in both their System, and themselves. And that is dangerous.

When I'm talking about sparring here, I'm referring to two people squaring off, and trying to outclass/outperform each other. Both are trying to press forward with offense, and handle incoming attacks with defense. It is a contest, even when it's claimed not to be ("The only competition is with yourself... There are no winners..."), due to the structure of the testing method. And, as such, it is not really representative of reality at all.

Aye. It is representative of only one small aspect, and even then, it is but an element of it. Sparring is subjective, and if it is taken out of its relevant subject context, it becomes skewed, and unusual.

Real encounters have an aggressor (or a number of them), and a defender. There is often no preparation time, or very little, the attacks are unfamiliar (as opposed to being similar to what you yourself are responding with), and the encounters tend to be fairly quick, rather than drawn out exchanges. As a result, if you're after a realistic way of testing your skills and abilities, look to methods that mimic that as closely as possible. Sparring just doesn't do it.

Aye again. Sparring can help Your Mindset, and Your Movement, and probably Positioning, and so forth, but as Im saying in support, Sparring aint Fighting.

Reality Based Self Defense uses scenario-based response training, and that's really the way to go. Scenario based training is exactly as it sounds... you set up a scenario, where there is an attacker and a defender. To begin with, the attacks are nominated, but by the end, it becomes completely free form. The defender has an aim to accomplish, rather than just "fight", which might be to subdue, to escape, to prevent a takedown, or anything similar. This way skills are genuinely tested, rather than just "fighting".

Technically, that is Fighting, in its proper context. Much like how Sparring is such a vague term.

The "just fight" approach leads to tactics of staying 'in' the fight, when the tactics of the art tell you to escape. The "just fight" approach leads to an unrealistic expectation of combat, with the reality of attack and defense compromised simply by being aware that you're in a fight already. That changes the effect of the attack, whether or not the attacker is also prepared, or ready to defend themselves, and so on.

Which cannot be simulated in Sparring.

Put it another way, sparring is highly unrealistic for anything other than preparation for sporting systems and their competitive environment. Scenario based training gives all the benefits of sparring, but none of the drawbacks.

Again, Ill say that it can benefit Your Mindset, but it is not representative of Your Actions and Responses, so much as various less pertinent elements.

As said, training needs to be congruent, without that, it's just exercise and wasting time. And that's the biggest problem with the sparring clips that I've seen, and as have been put forth from the Akban organisation. The reason that TKD, kickboxing, karate etc have their sparring methods is that it is congruent with their art. In TKD sparring, you see TKD kicks, postural concepts, distancing, power source, and so on. In BJJ rolling, you see BJJ postural concepts, tactics, techniques, and so on. In Akban Ninjutsu sparring, you see kickboxing/TKD/Karate, Judo, and BJJ, but no Ninjutsu. That's the biggest problem. You're sparring as a way of testing your art, but not actually testing your art in any way whatsoever. Sparring itself isn't the problem, but sparring without using your art in order to show how you can use your art is just pointless.

Optionally, Misinterpriting or 'adding' to Your Art is a bigger problem. The real question should be, that when they Spar, where the hell are they getting all their non-Ninjutsu from? Where did it come from, and what gave them the idea and mindset that it was the right thing to do? If they were freely choosing to use different approaches, that wouldnt be as bad. The fact that when theyre put in that situation and immediately dump their proper System, I cant help but be on the same boat as You are. Which is the second reason Im replying.

I really don't know any way to say it clearer than that, honestly.

You cant. Im voicing agreement to put forward My Views on the matter, albeit the Issue seems pretty clear. They are Sparring, but it is not Ninjutsu as it should be being applied. Its Sparring with a Ninjutsu Label.

Just My Contribution.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Hi Chris,

Most of the RBSD guy's I have personally worked with have sparring in their curriculum in some form as well as scenario training. Both used in conjunction together are very effective!

 

[Aiki Lee]

I think Chris pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Brian when you refer to sparring are you thinking about the term the way Chris and I were using the term or do you use to refer to more of a stress test with specified aggressor defender situations?

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

[SUP]Okay long post dumped. How frustrating!!!

I believe that limited sparring such as scenario training is very important! It is also important to have some sparring within a curriculum.
I do believe like Chris that the empty hand skill sets within the Takamatsuden arts do not lend themselves well to sparring. They are more
conducive to ambush and reactive style counter attacks. However, having said that does not mean that you should not spar. You see I am
a strong believer in cross training even if it is just so you understand how another system works to have a chance to defend against it. You see
no amount of Taijutsu training in the Takamatsuden arts will give you a feel for dealing with a resisting Brazilian Jiujitsu exponent or a Muay
Thai specialist, etc. It does not mean you will be ineffective as the Takamatsuden arts are effective in a self defense situation at what they do
just that every practitioner needs that experience. If we look at the Human Weapon episode we experienced watching Doug Wilson actually
dismantle his opponent while he kept his Fukuro Shinai in his hands. He only had a major issue when he decided to go empty handed. We also
observed Bruce Appleby (whom I have met and is a really nice person) be out athleticed and lose closely by a much superior athlete who was a former pro football
player. Now Doug and Bruce I imagine rarely if ever had participated in sparring in that fashion much like their opponents. Yet one won and one of
them lost. Doug other than the empty handed part looked great and won. Bruce lost but it was close. Sparring helps ensure that not
only due practitioners have strong mental will but that the system also maintains some athleticism amongst its practitioners. I imagine that if they
had recruited some of the even more athletic practitioners that I know the results would have been better. Why is this important? The future
of a system I feel is carried on better when the practitioners at the top are athletic, have strong mental will and an understanding in the "real
time" application of their system. Unfortunately, to many people in systems that do not spar have no idea of application in "real time" against
a resisting opponent! This creates a situation where people can theorize but that theory is never tested. It also creates a situation where
people can dismiss some thing because the technique did not look sharp when anyone who has sparred, fought in real life or been in a
combative situation will tell you that rarely if ever will the technique in such a situatioin be perfect. I woiuld not advocate mass scale sparring
in the Takamatsuden arts but instead at least some. Hope that helps![/SUP]

 

[Cryozombie]

Real encounters have an aggressor (or a number of them), and a defender. There is often no preparation time, or very little, the attacks are unfamiliar (as opposed to being similar to what you yourself are responding with), and the encounters tend to be fairly quick, rather than drawn out exchanges. As a result, if you're after a realistic way of testing your skills and abilities, look to methods that mimic that as closely as possible. Sparring just doesn't do it.

Reality Based Self Defense uses scenario-based response training, and that's really the way to go. Scenario based training is exactly as it sounds... you set up a scenario, where there is an attacker and a defender. To begin with, the attacks are nominated, but by the end, it becomes completely free form. The defender has an aim to accomplish, rather than just "fight", which might be to subdue, to escape, to prevent a takedown, or anything similar. This way skills are genuinely tested, rather than just "fighting".

This sounds pretty much exactly how we structure our Randori.

 

[Haikuguy]

Here are another few seconds of akban's randori to ponder about

[video=youtube_share;GsbG-XUCGps]http://youtu.be/GsbG-XUCGps[/video]

 

[Aiki Lee]

There's not that much randori in this clip, and the camera changes to fast for me to determine if it is what I would call sparring or actual randori. For the most part once the testing of techniques begins towards the end of the clip I see peopl "defending" against edged weapon attacks, but not taking control with the possible exception of the guy at 3:25. I'd say the rest looked more like sparring because the defenders were swatting at the arms and hands of the attacker without moving in to take control. If the drill was to practice counter striking thats fine, but I honestly don't see enough of the randori to give you much of an opinion on it.

Brian,

If I understand you correctly, I think that what you are reffering to as sparring is what I would refer to as "true" randori. During what I call tru randori, there is no designated uke or tori and both students have the goal to subdue the other. The difference between this and sparring to me is that during this kind of randori the students have about 4 seconds to "win" the fight. Anything longer is immediately stopped as we find that it is going longer because people's egos are preventing them from accepting a "loss" (as if there could be such a thing in a learning situation), or the studnets do not know how to properly apply the principles to take control in the correct amount of time. This type of training we reserve for only our most experienced and trustworthy students now. Each student must know when he or she has been "beaten" and accept it and learn from it and try again. With such a low time limit there is no stagnation of energy or intention between training partners. So while your sparring concept might be slightly different as long as there is a goal or objective I feel it can be beneficial no matter what you call it as long as it isn't just a 2 minute game of tag.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Contact that is unpredictable is important in training. Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you is important. You do not need to do it all the time but you need some of it!

 

[Indagator]

Contact that is unpredictable is important in training. Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you is important. You do not need to do it all the time but you need some of it!

Well said.

 

[MJS]

Contact that is unpredictable is important in training. Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you is important. You do not need to do it all the time but you need some of it!

QFT! My thoughts exactly!

 

[Chris Parker]

[SUP]Okay long post dumped. How frustrating!!!

This has happened to you a couple of times, yeah? The new software should keep a copy, so you should be able to recover such posts. Don't know how, though, haven't tried it myself...

[/SUP]

[SUP]I believe that limited sparring such as scenario training is very important! It is also important to have some sparring within a curriculum.

If you're referring to scenario (free-response) training as "sparring", cool, and agreed. In fact, a number of the Ryu have that as a major part of their training methodology, although I'm not sure how well known such aspects are in the Bujinkan by and large (I'm sure there are a number who do know about it, but it seems like many either ignore it, are unaware of it, or try to put "regular" sparring and the like in as a stop-gap measure).

[/SUP]

[SUP]I do believe like Chris that the empty hand skill sets within the Takamatsuden arts do not lend themselves well to sparring. They are more conducive to ambush and reactive style counter attacks.

No, that's not quite what I meant. I'll see if I can explain in a little more detail later in this post.

[/SUP]

[SUP]However, having said that does not mean that you should not spar.

First, we really need to agree on a definition of "sparring". The one that I, and others, have been going with is the "two people face each other, and try to outperform each other. Both attack and defend, and are aware of their opponent trying to attack and defend". In that regard, yeah, I'd say, for us, you shouldn't spar. If you mean more of a scenario based training, where there is an attacker and a defender, a specific aim perhaps (such as escape, or subdue, or disarm, or whatever), which is basically an unscripted form of training, then yes, that should be a part of the training.[/SUP]

[SUP]You see I am a strong believer in cross training even if it is just so you understand how another system works to have a chance to defend against it. You see no amount of Taijutsu training in the Takamatsuden arts will give you a feel for dealing with a resisting Brazilian Jiujitsu exponent or a Muay Thai specialist, etc. It does not mean you will be ineffective as the Takamatsuden arts are effective in a self defense situation at what they do just that every practitioner needs that experience.

Ah, I'm not such a fan, really. I see it as people not understanding their own art well enough in the first place when it is used to "fill gaps" in their system. And the argument of "well, just in case we come up against such a trained person" is, to me, so highly unrealistic as to have no credence. Firstly, you can't possibly train in every system out there, so there's always going to be gaps in what you're experienced with. Second, serious martial practitioners tend to not be who you'd ever face in a real assault, so it's wasted effort unless you're planning on meeting them in their competitive environment... but we'll see the issues with that in a moment. So I'm not really agreeing that "every practitioner needs that experience". Additionally, training in a classical martial art shouldn't be about self defence... if it is, you have seriously misjudged the art you're studying. The Takamatsuden arts (meaning the Ryu-ha themselves) are really in no way suited to a self defence situation, so to describe them as being effective in that regard isn't really accurate either. Now, before you misinterpret that, the skills of the various Ryu can certainly be effective, the principles are definitely applicable, and the tactics are as good as they ever were... but a modern self defence situation is far from what they are designed for.

[/SUP]

[SUP]If we look at the Human Weapon episode we experienced watching Doug Wilson actually dismantle his opponent while he kept his Fukuro Shinai in his hands. He only had a major issue when he decided to go empty handed. We also observed Bruce Appleby (whom I have met and is a really nice person) be out athleticed and lose closely by a much superior athlete who was a former pro football player.

Hmm, if we're going to bring this up again, let's be frank about it. Doug acquitted himself far better than Bruce did (despite the grief he got for being swept... really, I don't mind him being swept, but there's enough in the Shinden Fudo Ryu and Takagi Yoshin Ryu that deal specifically with sacrifice throws to perform when that happens that I'm disappointed in his lack of follow up!). Doug's bo work was his best, his sword was, really, better than Bruce's, which had huge amounts of issues. And it was nothing to do with Bill being a "better athlete", it was to do with Bruce not applying any real tactics, having very poor distancing (he was way too close the entire time), and a complete lack of targeting and angling (footwork). Doug was getting a little over-excited and overcutting from time to time, but he really did do much better. Oh, but I'm not sure what Bruce being a "nice" person has to do with anything, really... if anything, it works against him in this realm!

[/SUP]

[SUP]Now Doug and Bruce I imagine rarely if ever had participated in sparring in that fashion much like their opponents. Yet one won and one of them lost. Doug other than the empty handed part looked great and won. Bruce lost but it was close.

I don't know that sparring was actually the answer, though. And I really don't think a 13th Dan losing "close" against a guy who had never done any swordwork before that week is really anywhere close to being acceptable, but that's me. Personally, I think the biggest issue was that they met their opponents in an environment they weren't knowledgable about... but I also think that it's not an environment that was cared about either. I did find it interesting that weapons were chosen, given the structure and assumptions of weapon training, but again, that's me. I think it was set up in a way that was never going to be a glowing representation of the art, which is a pity. But I don't think the producers of the show realised that, so I'm not laying blame anywhere.

[/SUP]

[SUP]Sparring helps ensure that not only due practitioners have strong mental will but that the system also maintains some athleticism amongst its practitioners.

Ah, now here we agree completely. I, however, don't feel that such things require sparring (in the one-on-one competitive format described earlier) is needed for such benefits, and that the downside outweighs the benefits that can be achieved in other ways.

[/SUP]

[SUP]I imagine that if they had recruited some of the even more athletic practitioners that I know the results would have been better.

Honestly, I doubt it. I do think that if they chose more junior ranks, less experienced practitioners, it would have been a better move (on the part of the Bujinkan membership present).

[/SUP]

[SUP]Why is this important? The future of a system I feel is carried on better when the practitioners at the top are athletic, have strong mental will and an understanding in the "real time" application of their system. Unfortunately, to many people in systems that do not spar have no idea of application in "real time" against a resisting opponent! This creates a situation where people can theorize but that theory is never tested.

Ah, but Brian, you're projecting your value system onto the art. Athleticism isn't necessarily required, nor even that their is an ability to apply the system in 'real time' when dealing with a traditional art. So for continuation of the system, honestly, no. If the system is based on competitive usage, sure. If it's designed with self defence, or modern conflict in mind, then that needs to be addressed properly and realistically... but, and here's the kicker, that doesn't mean that any form of athleticism is required there either. Nor is any ability to employ the methods in a long, drawn out "sparring" format. It really just comes down to recognising what an art is created for, what it's suited for, and going with that, rather than what many seem to do, which is decide what they want an art to do for them (what skills and abilities they want it to give them), and try to insist that that's what it does.

[/SUP]

[SUP]It also creates a situation where people can dismiss some thing because the technique did not look sharp when anyone who has sparred, fought in real life or been in a combative situation will tell you that rarely if ever will the technique in such a situatioin be perfect. I woiuld not advocate mass scale sparring in the Takamatsuden arts but instead at least some. Hope that helps![/SUP]

Hmm. Again, I don't think that requires sparring in the form being discussed here, but simply proper, appropriate training devices and methods, which can, and should, include free-response methods, including dealing with failure (of technique). Sparring will honestly just reinforce bad concepts.

Here are another few seconds of akban's randori to ponder about

[video=youtube_share;GsbG-XUCGps]http://youtu.be/GsbG-XUCGps[/video]

Hi Oded, I'm not going to comment on the Kunai aspects here, just on the tanto sparring you linked the clip for, and in that regard, I'll be blunt and say I saw more of the same: unrealistic, but fun. I will say that there was more of a ninjutsu footwork and movement being employed here, so it was more congruent, which just makes me wonder more why it can appear here, but not in the unarmed sparring?

Contact that is unpredictable is important in training. Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you is important. You do not need to do it all the time but you need some of it!

I know that Indagator and MJS have agreed with this comment, thanked you for it etc, but honestly, it's not true. Unpredictable (random) training is highly beneficial, certainly, and is recommended. However, the issue is with the idea of training against resistance. Frankly, it's unrealistic.

If you are attacked, your attacker will not resist. Mainly because they won't be concerned (looking for) your counter attacks, they'll just be wanting/trying to attack you. They don't actually actively defend anything, they don't actively resist anything, they just attack. What they will do, though, if you start defending or counterattacking, is react. This is incredibly different to the way someone who is trying to outperform you "resists" your actions. In sparring, both opponents are simultaneously trying to attack (score) and defend (stop the opponent scoring). This means that they are more "aware" of your attempts to "score" on them, and are looking for you to do so, having a range of actions designed to counter such attempts. But when it all comes down to it, this is completely removed from the reality of an attack.

The simple fact is that a real, committed attacker won't resist. They won't really give any thought to defence. They'll just be concerned with attack. If your goal is to look at defending against an assault, don't spar. It's nothing like a real assault, and therefore of no real benefit to that end.

 

[Haikuguy]

Contact that is unpredictable is important in training. Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you is important. You do not need to do it all the time but you need some of it!

Totally agree.
"contact that's unpredictable" = sparring, and not just performing Katas, in an open system (a system which involves strikes, wrestling, small joint manipulation, pressure points and all other things that are ilegal in UFC...)
"Dealing with someone who is full on resisting you" (and the sparring that I've just described) takes a great deal of practice and guidance to do safely.

The idea is to keep your sparring partner safe.


And does "full on resisting" means taking someone's eye out? pulling a hidden blade and using it? a gun and using it? pushing someone down the stairs?
And if not, why not? I mean, if someone will try to hurt my family, I will definitely "full on resist"....

The biggest difference between randori and tatakai http://<a href=http://www.akban.org/pyramid_en/pyramid-conclusions.php> Tatakai</a>is THE INTENT TO HARM.



You take that intent out of the equation, you get some good people and with some good professional guidance and you can practice just about anything.

 

[Haikuguy]

The simple fact is that a real, committed attacker won't resist. They won't really give any thought to defence. They'll just be concerned with attack. If your goal is to look at defending against an assault, don't spar. It's nothing like a real assault, and therefore of no real benefit to that end.

Hi Chris

I respectfully disagree.



For example, this is one of the places I worked in security while studying in the university in Jerusalem-

I left 2 years before this incident happened (this footage was just recently released to the public) -
[video=youtube_share;Kqr4AnMw454]http://youtu.be/Kqr4AnMw454[/video]

A real, committed attacker will do all kind of things.

"If your goal is to look at defending against an assault, don't spar"- I think it all depends on the sparring.

Isn't it like saying- if your goal is to work in security, don't learn how to actively attack and pursue?
Just learn how to shoot from behind a table in indoor gun ranges?

Whenever I wrote about gun ranges of course I was talking about tactical shooting.

This guy's training in tactical shooting (and Paintball too, by the way, was part of training in that job) helped him eliminate the terrorist eventually.


Speaking of Paintball, (let's try to say that paintball is the "sparring of the tactical shooting world"...), notice that the people who have experience and have been under fire are always more careful and cautious when it comes to handling themselves in a paintball game.




hmm, so let me phrase this analogy...it might be a good one:


Akban's sparring to Ninjutsu is like paintball to tactical shooting, only with less protective gear.

 

[Indagator]

Lol did you just say simunition=paintball? Or did I read between the lines there...?

In regards to Mr Parker mentioning the thanks I gave to Mr VanCise on that post earlier, just to clarify:

I was more considering things in terms of it is good to experience training where things do not always go according to plan, or flow the way one's preconceived notions may have anticipated as this encourages (imho) a subtle development of flow in the moment and reactionary response - well, I shoud say it can do if done well :lol:

 

[pgsmith]

Akban's sparring to Ninjutsu is like paintball to tactical shooting, only with less protective gear.

Based upon what has been displayed in the youtube videos of their sparring, I have to disagree. I would say rather that it could be, if it were done well. I don't think that the sparring that is shown in any of their videos would be beneficial for much of anything. Of course, that's just an opinion.