The sparring Thread.

[MJS]

I was on E budo and found a old thread talking about old Koryu training. http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?47543-Free-practice-in-koryu-is-it-possible While im still trying to digest that whole thing, the gist I get is this. They did spar, just not quite like we do in modern arts. Apparently free sparring was something only few were doing after like 20 years of practice.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm This post also talks about old European arts used on battlefields. Here is the relevant excerpt.
"False. Modern research in historical European martial arts has revealed considerable evidence in Europe from the 12th to 17th centuries for several different forms of mock combat used as earnest self-defense training, battlefield rehearsal, ritual display, and sporting contest. From knightly tournaments to prize-playing contests to bouting a few veneys or assaults at arms and impromptu scrimmaging, the evidence for "free play" or "playing loose" as practice-fighting is substantial. This activity involved substantial contact, and not merely pulled blows or surface touches. Examination of the methods by which this kind of "sparring" was pursued (e.g., its equipment, its intent and purpose, its permissible techniques and safety considerations, and its risk of injury, etc.) is a main area of exploration in historical fencing studies. See: To Spar or Not to Spar."

So the question remains, how can you learn to fight with out fighting? Swing with out swimming? Sparring while not a real situation is as close as it gets. I have not yet seen any thing said here that is convincing. All I keep hearing is that sparring is not even close to real life. Yet if that is true why did so many old battlefield arts actually spar in some fashion?

Again the main issue I have is this. How can you expect to apply what your learn, to a random and or unexpected attack if you never practice against unexpected and or random attacks? It was said that sparring is not really random, that your matched based on skill and size and what not. That is true to a extent but that does not mean I will know what opening attack my opponent will throw, or what tactic he will use. I cant read his mind, he may attack with a kick or several, or a shoot or a anything. Only thing I know is that he can strike and grapple, I have no idea what is coming first next or last.

Just because Im good on pads and good with the tech sparring*partner drills in boxing that I did* does not mean ill be able to deal with a unpredictable and random attack.

One line from the e budo thread is interesting. "Indeed, and I think he's got it right from everything I've ever seen in my budo career, I've never seen anyone with kata only experience step onto a kendo floor and win his first match, I certainly have no illusions that I could take a moderately trained kendo kid, even if I was allowed any target at all. I twitch and he hits me, simple as that, and it has happened in the deep distant past. But I've also seen that those with kata and sparring experience are much more sophisticated in their practice, a different feel to their kendo. "


I think im still leaning towards adding some other element to my own training, I just cant deny the inarguable benefits to self defense that sparring brings. I don't see how you can deny the realities of training against a unpredictable opponent, throwing random and unpredictable attacks.

I still stand by what I've said in my other post in this thread, as well as others through out the forum. It's one part of the puzzle but it's an important piece. No, it's not like real life, but does that mean it shouldn't be done? OTOH, I've seen some sparring sessions that are closer than what is normally seen as sparring. One of my old Kenpo instructors and I used to have some pretty hard, intense sparring sessions. It was more MMAish, but rough nonetheless. The sparring that I do in my Kyokushin dojo is pretty hard core. There are valuable things to be gained from it.

Of course, keep in mind, working SD and doing sparring, are, IMO, 2 separate things. Sure, I've used ideas from my SD techs, during sparring, but no, I never pulled off a full tech while sparring.

If it's something that you feel is important, if it's something you like to do, then do it.

 

[MJS]

I don't have time right now to write a full essay on the subject. Having spent a bunch of years training in an art which did not use sparring (Bujinkan Taijutsu) and a bunch of years training in arts which do use sparring (Muay Thai & BJJ among others), these are a few of my thoughts:

Sparring is a vital part of training if you want to be able to fight effectively at a high level, regardless of the context. It teaches certain skills and attributes which no other training method really does.

That said, it is not the end all and be all. It has weaknesses and shortcomings, just like all training methods do, and it is important to recognize what they are so that you can make up for them in your other areas of training.

Sparring is not really a simulation of a self-defense situation. Certain types of sparring, if done correctly, can be a decent simulation of certain forms of fighting, which is something different.

Sparring comes in a variety of flavors. Different forms have different advantages. Some people practice sparring in a way which I consider to be downright detrimental to developing self-defense ability.

The point of sparring is learning, not winning. When students get hung up on winning rather than learning, then sparring can lose much of its benefit.

I agree with everything said here, especially the underlined part!!!

 

[skribs]

Hapkido is a purely self defense art, and we still have sparring in my hapkido class. Basically, one person plays the attacker and the other the defender, and the attacker uses a random attack the defender has to reverse. They then switch places. It sounds like what you're talking about with introducing randomness.

I think that there are three sides to learning defense; there's learning the basic techniques (usually practiced against the air or a bag), which teach you how to use the techniques. There's the self defense techniques practiced very light contact or no contact (certain techniques I specify "be very careful" to my partner in class, I'll let you guess what area is targeted there). And then there's sparring, where you learn how to deal with a real person, even if half of the techniques you *would* use in self defense are banned. Personally, these are all important, and I like that we do all 3 in my school.

 

[Kframe]

For me sparring was the proving ground of the basics. Every art has basics. Punch's blocks movement ect. Sparring was a fantastic way to train them against a random fully resisting opponent. I also enjoyed it because it allowed me a good way to practice my experiments with grafting basic karate style deflections on to my mma training. I loved pulling them out during sparring. I attribute my success with using them to my instructor and the way he drilled them. Learn the movement, then get ready cause he going to hit you repeatedly and you got to use them. The defense drills were fast and hard and fun. I found my self using them in sparring instinctively very quickly.

Victory in sparring, defined as a day I did well or didn't out right get my *** kicked, made me feel awesome. I have such confidence issues and how ever fleeting it felt good to win some times.. Though it never lasted, I just wish that feeling of I don't suck would have lasted.

The point of all this is, that people who spar do better in a confrontation then people who don't. Here is a video of a Taijutsu practioner facing a TCMA. Its obvious who has aliveness in there training.

Why would I post that? Because, it highlights, that had he had just a little bit of sparring experience he would have faired much better. About the only thing he was able to do that whole fight was assume Jumonji no kamae and back peddle to a decision loss and a few random haymakers.


I keep coming back to sparring because of its obvious benefits of dealing with randomness. Attacks are random, you need to be able to deal with the unknown. Yes I know about what skill set my sparring partner has I have no idea what is coming in what order. Its that element of the unknown that gets hammered(literally) into you.

There is another just as important thing. That is the adrenalin dump. Yes it is not as large as a self defense situation, it does begin to show you the effects of it. I remember it took me a few sessions to get used to the adrenalin dump. Then when I had my real life near fight, ya a real adrenalin dump hit but I was able to function through it. I don't see how you can get that kind of thing with out sparring. NO matter how hard you do your partner kata you wont get a adrenalin dump response.

If you are saying that use scenario sparring/ drills for aliveness and randomness training then that is exactly what I want. So far I have not seen it done, and apparently many don't.

It just makes me wonder, how many of these non competing arts students, skill sets would be so much better if they had some kind of random resistance added to there training.

Paired kata can be great for a good many things but random is not one of them. They are preset techniques for a reason, that by definition precludes their being anything random in them. If their was random in them they wouldn't be preset techniques.

So, in the end, for me the answer is simple. When my situation permits it, im going to seek out a side training venue that will allow me a more free mode of sparring.. Not now of course, as I my life only permits one martial art while I am doing personal training for my weight loss body restructuring dream.(I wanna go from morbidly obese to ripped and cut)

 

[K-man]

For me sparring was the proving ground of the basics. Every art has basics. Punch's blocks movement ect. Sparring was a fantastic way to train them against a random fully resisting opponent. I also enjoyed it because it allowed me a good way to practice my experiments with grafting basic karate style deflections on to my mma training. I loved pulling them out during sparring. I attribute my success with using them to my instructor and the way he drilled them. Learn the movement, then get ready cause he going to hit you repeatedly and you got to use them. The defense drills were fast and hard and fun. I found my self using them in sparring instinctively very quickly.

Victory in sparring, defined as a day I did well or didn't out right get my *** kicked, made me feel awesome. I have such confidence issues and how ever fleeting it felt good to win some times.. Though it never lasted, I just wish that feeling of I don't suck would have lasted.

The point of all this is, that people who spar do better in a confrontation then people who don't. Here is a video of a Taijutsu practioner facing a TCMA. Its obvious who has aliveness in there training.

Why would I post that? Because, it highlights, that had he had just a little bit of sparring experience he would have faired much better. About the only thing he was able to do that whole fight was assume Jumonji no kamae and back peddle to a decision loss and a few random haymakers.

I keep coming back to sparring because of its obvious benefits of dealing with randomness. Attacks are random, you need to be able to deal with the unknown. Yes I know about what skill set my sparring partner has I have no idea what is coming in what order. Its that element of the unknown that gets hammered(literally) into you.

If you're into sport that type of sparring is fine. If you are looking for self defence I feel it is totally counter productive. You can put on protective gear and have a much better workout than that type of sparring gives without compromising the principles you are training. You'll still get random attacks, you'll hit and get hit and, depending on the intensity, still get the adrenalin.
:asian:

 

[RTKDCMB]

Victory in sparring, defined as a day I did well or didn't out right get my *** kicked, made me feel awesome. I have such confidence issues and how ever fleeting it felt good to win some times.

Sometimes having the mindset of always trying to "win" in a self defence situation people forget how to survive one.

The point of all this is, that people who spar do better in a confrontation then people who don't. Here is a video of a Taijutsu practioner facing a TCMA. Its obvious who has aliveness in there training.

Why would I post that? Because, it highlights, that had he had just a little bit of sparring experience he would have faired much better. About the only thing he was able to do that whole fight was assume Jumonji no kamae and back peddle to a decision loss and a few random haymakers.

That could simply be a matter of who has more relative experience or has been training longer.

It just makes me wonder, how many of these non competing arts students, skill sets would be so much better if they had some kind of random resistance added to there training.

I'm curious as to why you think non-competitive arts don't have any kind of random resistance in them?

 

[Chris Parker]

A few clarifications to begin with....

Chris I agree that sparring is NOT the best way to train self defense. I like for my students to understand feel and get themselves used to contact but I have to instill in them that when an attack occurs the response (assuming they can't escape or de-escalate the situation) has to be dealt with swiftly and with the necessary force to get the job done so they CAN escape.

Okay. There can be some semantic arguments based on exactly what you're meaning, but nothing to get too far into here.

It is my opinion that traditional sparring is part of the reason so many western MA schools do such a poor job of teaching self defense. They introduce sparring as a touch the gloves, bow to your partner and trade blows exercise.

How is that different to non-Western martial arts schools? And who says that such forms of sparring are anything to do with self defence? The idea that "it's a martial art, it's fighting (in a form), therefore it must be about self defence" leads to many, many issues, contextually, tactically, strategically, mechanically, historically, and more....

That isn't self defense training at all.

No, it's not... and it doesn't sound like it's pretending to be. If a particular school tells you it is, it's more likely that the teacher there doesn't get the distinction, rather than there being an actual issue with the training methodology itself.

Your goal in defending yourself (mental and awareness training aside) should be to hit first with deception and how ever many times needed to escape and that's it.

No, it really shouldn't. That might be part of your tactical response (physically), if it comes to that, but even then, it's not the only, or even primary approach that should be looked for.

Sparring just isn't the best way to achieve the simulation of that.

So sparring, instilling an approach of hit first, hit hard, be aggressive, push forward isn't the best way to achieve a simulation of what you're thinking is important, namely that you should hit first, hit hard, be aggressive, and keep pushing forward (until you can escape)? Hmm...

Long post but good post and I agree!

Ha, that wasn't long.... trust me on that.

I was on E budo and found a old thread talking about old Koryu training. http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?47543-Free-practice-in-koryu-is-it-possible While im still trying to digest that whole thing, the gist I get is this. They did spar, just not quite like we do in modern arts. Apparently free sparring was something only few were doing after like 20 years of practice.

I remember that thread... some good content, some, well, other stuff...

Look, there's a few things to look at here. Firstly, the discussion there is Koryu, and the context of Koryu is (and was) quite removed from modern self defence, so you really are looking in the wrong area. Next, it really depended on which Koryu you were talking about... it's stated quite emphatically that Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu has no free-training methods at all... nor does Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu... but Owari-Kan Ryu does, as do a number of branches of Itto Ryu, and quite a number of Jujutsu Ryu-ha.

Overall, though, it's so far removed from the context you're talking about, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm This post also talks about old European arts used on battlefields. Here is the relevant excerpt.
"False. Modern research in historical European martial arts has revealed considerable evidence in Europe from the 12th to 17th centuries for several different forms of mock combat used as earnest self-defense training, battlefield rehearsal, ritual display, and sporting contest. From knightly tournaments to prize-playing contests to bouting a few veneys or assaults at arms and impromptu scrimmaging, the evidence for "free play" or "playing loose" as practice-fighting is substantial. This activity involved substantial contact, and not merely pulled blows or surface touches. Examination of the methods by which this kind of "sparring" was pursued (e.g., its equipment, its intent and purpose, its permissible techniques and safety considerations, and its risk of injury, etc.) is a main area of exploration in historical fencing studies. See: To Spar or Not to Spar."

Again, this is so far removed from the context you're talking about that I'd leave it alone completely. You might as well as how English Long-bow Archers developed their drawing strength because you want to get a pistol.

So the question remains, how can you learn to fight with out fighting? Swing with out swimming? Sparring while not a real situation is as close as it gets. I have not yet seen any thing said here that is convincing. All I keep hearing is that sparring is not even close to real life. Yet if that is true why did so many old battlefield arts actually spar in some fashion?

Okay. This whole line of "swim without swimming" is false, you realise... not only is it an apple/orange comparison, it's historically disprovable (German physicist Theodor Kaluza, whose work is now used as part of the basis for String Theory, is said to have taught himself to swim from reading a book, successfully achieving it his first foray into the water). But, to the point, learning "how to fight" isn't actually that applicable to self defence (when all's said and done), nor is it something that requires sparring or even testing of any form. What it requires is the learning and practice of physical combative methods, tactics, and strategies. Sparring is simply one way of practicing one form of application in one type of context. That's it.

When it comes to the idea of sparring not being like real life, you've put this thread in the Self Defence section... so I'm looking at everything in that light. We'll cover more in a moment, but for now, it's important to realize that sparring is very close to real life, if your real life application is to apply it in tournaments and competitions. If your version of real life is a self defence situation or encounter, then no, it's (in many ways) the exact opposite.

Again the main issue I have is this. How can you expect to apply what your learn, to a random and or unexpected attack if you never practice against unexpected and or random attacks? It was said that sparring is not really random, that your matched based on skill and size and what not. That is true to a extent but that does not mean I will know what opening attack my opponent will throw, or what tactic he will use. I cant read his mind, he may attack with a kick or several, or a shoot or a anything. Only thing I know is that he can strike and grapple, I have no idea what is coming first next or last.

I actually asked you quite a pertinent question in this regard, namely why randomness is important (or, really, if it is at all) in your training, if you're looking at self defence. Frankly, the answer is that it's not important at all.

Sparring isn't really random. It's an attempt to apply and defend against unannounced techniques, but that's it. Sparring isn't dealing with the unexpected. It's an attempt to apply and defend against unannounced techniques. If it was really random, or unexpected, then you'd be dealing with attacks from behind, against people you didn't think were involved (or even part of the class), weapons would make sudden appearances, attackers would try to get close without you realizing they're going to attack, and more. Sparring, on the other hand, sets you up against a known opponent, with a known (restricted) skill set, in front of you, from a distance where you can see them coming, with both of you fully aware that there's going to be an engagement. That's not random or unexpected...

When it comes to the idea of not being able to read the opponents mind, and not knowing what they're going to come in with first, that's really not an issue... and, again, bears little resemblance to an actual assault/attack. That said, you can, if not read their minds, dictate to them what they're going to come in with... which is a big part of what kata impart.

Mind you, as you're trying to expect a traditional (classical) Japanese approach to martial arts to be the answers to a completely different cultural, societal, and combative context and application, perhaps something from your new art might provide some clues. There's a phrase in the Bujinkan arts (which is said to have come from Gyokko Ryu, being a saying of Hakuunsai Tozawa's) which is "Banpen Fugyo", or "many changes, no surprises". While this has many different meanings and subtleties, something that is pertinent here is that you should always keep your awareness up to the point that you don't get caught out by anything. In other words, no matter what happens, you'll be able to see it coming. The first stage to this is building an education as to what you need to be aware of... and how to manage things like distance (between yourself and potential attackers), and so on. Once you get that down, it's far harder for an attacker to get close enough to launch an attack... which will stop most. If something does come in, then you'll be in a position where you can see it before it gets too late (most assaults are done from very close range, and are a sudden single hit or barrage... which is nothing like the ranged combinations and attacks in sparring). Additionally, by training responses against a range of attacks (which are found in the kata training), the application of a response should be automatic.

When it comes down to it, in order to deal with unexpected attacks and random violence, the reality is that you need to work on awareness (to avoid being caught) rather than anything that sparring deals with. A random sequence of techniques (found in sparring) is very different to a random assault, and shouldn't be confused.

Just because Im good on pads and good with the tech sparring*partner drills in boxing that I did* does not mean ill be able to deal with a unpredictable and random attack.

You first need to understand just what a random attack is... it's nothing like sparring.

One line from the e budo thread is interesting. "Indeed, and I think he's got it right from everything I've ever seen in my budo career, I've never seen anyone with kata only experience step onto a kendo floor and win his first match, I certainly have no illusions that I could take a moderately trained kendo kid, even if I was allowed any target at all. I twitch and he hits me, simple as that, and it has happened in the deep distant past. But I've also seen that those with kata and sparring experience are much more sophisticated in their practice, a different feel to their kendo. "

Sure... and if I was entering a match fight (such as MMA, Kendo, or anything similar) sparring would be excellent preparation. But this thread is in the Self Defence section... and that has little to nothing to do with fighting, especially match fighting. And, again, the context of Kim Taylors comments are important...

I think im still leaning towards adding some other element to my own training, I just cant deny the inarguable benefits to self defense that sparring brings. I don't see how you can deny the realities of training against a unpredictable opponent, throwing random and unpredictable attacks.

There are certainly benefits, but you need to understand what they are. The context that sparring is best suited for is match fighting... and it's certainly fantastic for that... but as soon as you're looking at something different (such as self defence, as we are here), then the benefits definitely become arguable... and there is a huge disconnect in what you're calling reality.

In all of the arts that I've done or currently do, sparring is a part of it. IMO, I feel that its just one more part of the puzzle, as far as training goes. Sure, we can (and I have) do our SD techniques, in a non-static way, ensuring that it doesn't look like a sparring match, but for me, I like sparring. It's a faster pace, harder contact, and you get used to getting hit.

To be fair, Mike, "faster pace, harder contact, and you get used to getting hit"... none of that has anything to do with sparring. It may well have been that that was where those elements shone through in the schools you train/ed in, but methodologies such as the ones I use are full pace, full impact (depending on the curriculum... we don't go full contact with weapons, for example, although the attacks are still going to be, if they hit...), and you can definitely get used to getting hit!

I don't have time right now to write a full essay on the subject. Having spent a bunch of years training in an art which did not use sparring (Bujinkan Taijutsu) and a bunch of years training in arts which do use sparring (Muay Thai & BJJ among others), these are a few of my thoughts:

Sparring is a vital part of training if you want to be able to fight effectively at a high level, regardless of the context. It teaches certain skills and attributes which no other training method really does.

Large numbers of older arts would disagree with that idea, for the record...

That said, it is not the end all and be all. It has weaknesses and shortcomings, just like all training methods do, and it is important to recognize what they are so that you can make up for them in your other areas of training.

Fairly agreed... but I'd add that it's also important to realise exactly what the methodology promotes, and what it doesn't to recognise whether or not it's even a good addition in and of itself.

Sparring is not really a simulation of a self-defense situation. Certain types of sparring, if done correctly, can be a decent simulation of certain forms of fighting, which is something different.

Completely agreed.

Sparring comes in a variety of flavors. Different forms have different advantages. Some people practice sparring in a way which I consider to be downright detrimental to developing self-defense ability.

And again, agreed.

The point of sparring is learning, not winning. When students get hung up on winning rather than learning, then sparring can lose much of its benefit.

I don't know that it's actually learning that's the aim... I'd say it's more in line with development, in application of lessons.

I still stand by what I've said in my other post in this thread, as well as others through out the forum. It's one part of the puzzle but it's an important piece. No, it's not like real life, but does that mean it shouldn't be done? OTOH, I've seen some sparring sessions that are closer than what is normally seen as sparring. One of my old Kenpo instructors and I used to have some pretty hard, intense sparring sessions. It was more MMAish, but rough nonetheless. The sparring that I do in my Kyokushin dojo is pretty hard core. There are valuable things to be gained from it.

In some cases, yes, it means it shouldn't be done. The most important thing is to have a clear understanding of what the realities of sparring are in the first place... what it's going to lead you towards, and how, and whether or not that fits with your goals and aims (or the arts goals and aims, which might actually take precedence over your own).

Of course, keep in mind, working SD and doing sparring, are, IMO, 2 separate things. Sure, I've used ideas from my SD techs, during sparring, but no, I never pulled off a full tech while sparring.

There's a reason for that, of course...

If it's something that you feel is important, if it's something you like to do, then do it.

Sure... unless there are very good reasons the system doesn't do it. Which is why you need to be clear about what it is in the first place... saying "if it's something you like to do, then do it", while ostensibly good, well meaning advice, can lead to a range of real issues, such as (in this case) counter-manning the methods of the actual art/system that is trying to be learnt (or, in more extreme cases, it's the argument we hear when someone makes up their own sword "techniques", saying "hey, I just want to do it, and there's no-one around me!").

For me sparring was the proving ground of the basics. Every art has basics. Punch's blocks movement ect. Sparring was a fantastic way to train them against a random fully resisting opponent.

It's not random, and resistance is actually unrealistic. Real attacks/assaults don't really feature resistance in any major way, particularly not in any way resembling sparring/competitive training. Additionally, when talking about the art you've now started, all of that is built into the kata....

I also enjoyed it because it allowed me a good way to practice my experiments with grafting basic karate style deflections on to my mma training. I loved pulling them out during sparring. I attribute my success with using them to my instructor and the way he drilled them. Learn the movement, then get ready cause he going to hit you repeatedly and you got to use them. The defense drills were fast and hard and fun. I found my self using them in sparring instinctively very quickly.

Here's the problem. Sparring is a way to develop/emphasise personal application, it's really a way for you to do things that you think work for you... and, as such, it's fairly random in the way it develops skill. The idea of experimenting and trying things out (in this approach) typically means that you're ignoring what the actual system says you should do, in favour of your own preferences and ideas... regardless of whether or not you have any (or enough) experience to be able to tell if what the system is suggesting is valid or not... or if your idea is better, worse, or suicidal. The drills you're talking about are more in line with kata training... and, when you followed what they showed, you had success. Especially in arts like your new one, ignore what you think should be correct, and listen to the arts lessons... simply accept for a short time that whatever you've done before is different, and has no bearing on what you're doing now. Stop trying to treat them the same way, and you'll find that there's less confusion.

Victory in sparring, defined as a day I did well or didn't out right get my *** kicked, made me feel awesome. I have such confidence issues and how ever fleeting it felt good to win some times.. Though it never lasted, I just wish that feeling of I don't suck would have lasted.

Hmm, okay....

The point of all this is, that people who spar do better in a confrontation then people who don't. Here is a video of a Taijutsu practioner facing a TCMA. Its obvious who has aliveness in there training.

Why would I post that? Because, it highlights, that had he had just a little bit of sparring experience he would have faired much better. About the only thing he was able to do that whole fight was assume Jumonji no kamae and back peddle to a decision loss and a few random haymakers.

Other than a few half-hearted kamae, there was nothing Taijutsu in any of that clip. None of the movement, striking, kicking etc was from our approaches, so I'd hardly take it as an example of Taijutsu versus anything. In fact, neither of them looked to be doing anything that they were trained in... both resorted to a form of karate/kickboxing, with the CMA guy doing a few fancier kicks (but that was about it). What it showed me was that, when put in a sporting situation, both immediately went to what they unconsciously believe is "powerful" in that context... which is what they see in MMA, kickboxing etc... regardless of what they've actually done. In other words, it was like they've both done years of tenpin bowling, then end up on a badminton court trying to play volleyball (because that's what the court looks like to them). But we're going to start dealing with conscious versus unconscious beliefs, and so on, which can get a little intense pretty quickly there...

I keep coming back to sparring because of its obvious benefits of dealing with randomness.

Obvious? Nah... What you have there are assumed benefits for an assumed context, neither of which are actually realistic when it comes to self defence.

Attacks are random, you need to be able to deal with the unknown.

Actually, no. Violence can be in the form of random assaults, but that's not the same as a random sequence of attacks. Dealing with that form of "random" or "unknown" is not dealt with in sparring.

Yes I know about what skill set my sparring partner has I have no idea what is coming in what order.

Realistically, it's not important. Self defence is not about trading blows.

Its that element of the unknown that gets hammered(literally) into you.

My guys (as well as the students in our other schools in other states, from my Chief Instructor on down) know to keep their awareness up at all times... and to not let us get too close to them. That's the result of actually preparing them for genuinely random and unknown attacks.... not sparring.

There is another just as important thing. That is the adrenalin dump. Yes it is not as large as a self defense situation, it does begin to show you the effects of it. I remember it took me a few sessions to get used to the adrenalin dump. Then when I had my real life near fight, ya a real adrenalin dump hit but I was able to function through it.

The adrenaline experienced in sparring/competition is a slow-release form. There's a build up (preparatory) release, as you know that you're going to be engaging in a match fight or sparring drill, and the effects are greatly reduced (as you've missed the spike that is felt). A real assault, on the other hand, might have some pre-fight surge (with yelling, pushing, shoving etc), but it's going to hit in a sudden, large burst. There isn't the build-up, or evening out that sparring/match fighting gives you, and, as a result, it's not really much of a preparation for handling adrenaline in a real assault. There are, however, a range of training methods that specifically induce such an adrenal dump, and they are very good preparation. Not sparring, though.

I don't see how you can get that kind of thing with out sparring. NO matter how hard you do your partner kata you wont get a adrenalin dump response.

You really should train with me, then... believe me, you'll get an adrenal dump training paired kata with me.

If you are saying that use scenario sparring/ drills for aliveness and randomness training then that is exactly what I want. So far I have not seen it done, and apparently many don't.

In the Bujinkan? Depends on the instructor. For the record, though, Takagi Yoshin Ryu specifically includes it, Kukishinden Ryu gets very random in it's attacks in the later parts of it's scroll (with attacks simply listed as "The opponent strikes freely"), and there are other free-responce training methods in other ryu-ha and sections within the schools. From there, you can look at various techniques that have a similarity, and use those to create a more free-form approach. As an example, this week I am teaching a kata called Hyo Fu, which has 5 formal variations. This weeks forms involve the opponent grabbing you in order to attempt a throw, which is stopped by you applying a choke. The opponent then relieves the choke by lifting one of your arms, which provides you an opening to change your grip and throw with a sacrifice throw. One of the forms has them moving your left arm, the other has them moving your right... so, after drilling each of the versions, we began to do some more "free-responce" methods.... the opponent would catch as before, and you would apply your choke. Then, the attacker could escape to the right or left, and the defender would simply respond depending on which way the attacker moved. The idea was to move without thinking or hesitating, as that would alter the timing, and remove the success of the techniques. In this drill, the defender didn't know which way they would need to apply their defence until it happened. From there, you can add more and more "unscripted" aspects (what happens if they move before the choke is on? How about if they get in to apply a throw? What about a strike?), similar to Mike's comments earlier. There's still an attacker and a defender, but it's now far more what you're thinking is necessary. And all of this is in the Bujinkan approach.

It just makes me wonder, how many of these non competing arts students, skill sets would be so much better if they had some kind of random resistance added to there training.

As RTKDCMB asked, what makes you think it's not there already?

Paired kata can be great for a good many things but random is not one of them. They are preset techniques for a reason, that by definition precludes their being anything random in them. If their was random in them they wouldn't be preset techniques.

To be frank, that's what is referred to in the e-budo thread as the beginners/intermediate understanding of kata.... there's plenty random in them, when you get to it...

So, in the end, for me the answer is simple. When my situation permits it, im going to seek out a side training venue that will allow me a more free mode of sparring.. Not now of course, as I my life only permits one martial art while I am doing personal training for my weight loss body restructuring dream.(I wanna go from morbidly obese to ripped and cut)

So, with, what, a couple weeks training, and only a few short lessons at that, you've decided you know better than the art itself as to how to teach and impart the skills it's got to offer, as well as why it does or doesn't do things it's way, so you're going to go and do something that could easily counter-man what you're being taught? Hmm... okay....

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sparring is a vital part of training if you want to be able to fight effectively at a high level, regardless of the context. It teaches certain skills and attributes which no other training method really does.

Large numbers of older arts would disagree with that idea, for the record...

Yep, I'm aware of the disagreement.

I should correct myself, though. There is another training method which can work to develop all the skills and attributes that sparring does. That method would be - actual fighting. It's entirely possible to develop some fundamental skills through non-sparring methods, then go out and get in a bunch of fights. If you survive the fights and can apply the lessons from your experiences then you could become a dangerous fighter without ever sparring. It's not a path I would personally care to take, but it can work.

this thread is in the Self Defence section... and that has little to nothing to do with fighting

As I mentioned in this thread, there is some overlap in the Venn Diagram of fighting and self-defense. In the context of martial arts discussion, most people tend to be referring to that overlap area when they mention "self-defense." Of course, you are correct that the overlap is a relatively small area.

 

[KydeX]

I've been training in Kyokusinkai Karate for many years in my youth, doing full contact sparring and competition. I now train in the Bujinkan, which I also have been doing for some years now. I believe all the sparring would enable me to defend myself, but not to the same degree as i feel I can with the skills I have aquired through the Bujinkan. Like Chris always point out, it's different focusing and tactics. Not trying to imply that Bujinkan is a self defense art, but it doesn't have a competition focus. "anything goes", and you will recognize that in the tactics they employ.

I would say to the OP that its too early in your training to say if it works or not. You don't have the basics in yet, and you haven't practiced enough henka/variations to be able to act instinctively to different attacks yet, but you will with training.

If I were to attend another full contact match again, I would surely get beaten up. However, out on the streets, I feel it might end differently. If I were to go up against one of my former friends from the Kyukushinkai it would not be random attacks to me. It would be rather predictable.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk

 

[MJS]

To be fair, Mike, "faster pace, harder contact, and you get used to getting hit"... none of that has anything to do with sparring. It may well have been that that was where those elements shone through in the schools you train/ed in, but methodologies such as the ones I use are full pace, full impact (depending on the curriculum... we don't go full contact with weapons, for example, although the attacks are still going to be, if they hit...), and you can definitely get used to getting hit!

Be that as it may, the fact is, many places do not train the empty hand SD like it should be, thus my comment. Sure, you can train SD in a fashion that is akin to sparring, of course, as I've said in the past, with the provision that it doesnt turn into a sparring match.

In some cases, yes, it means it shouldn't be done. The most important thing is to have a clear understanding of what the realities of sparring are in the first place... what it's going to lead you towards, and how, and whether or not that fits with your goals and aims (or the arts goals and aims, which might actually take precedence over your own).

If someone chooses not to do it, then that's fine. I feel, as I said, that it has some value, though it's not the only thing that should be trained. I still feel it has value.

There's a reason for that, of course...

Of course.

Sure... unless there are very good reasons the system doesn't do it. Which is why you need to be clear about what it is in the first place... saying "if it's something you like to do, then do it", while ostensibly good, well meaning advice, can lead to a range of real issues, such as (in this case) counter-manning the methods of the actual art/system that is trying to be learnt (or, in more extreme cases, it's the argument we hear when someone makes up their own sword "techniques", saying "hey, I just want to do it, and there's no-one around me!").

I would say more often than not, the majority of the arts out there, incorporate sparring. If someone feels that it's that important, that its beneficial, that they're going to gain something out of it, and it's not done in the art they choose, then they either accept that the art doesnt do it, or opt to train in an art that does.

 

[K-man]

I would say more often than not, the majority of the arts out there, incorporate sparring. If someone feels that it's that important, that its beneficial, that they're going to gain something out of it, and it's not done in the art they choose, then they either accept that the art doesnt do it, or opt to train in an art that does.

I don't think that's the issue. Most martial arts incorporate sparring without doubt. Most people training a martial art expect there to be sparring. Most martial arts also have a competitive element and whatever sparring is done in a martial art reflects the competition that you are training to compete in.

I think this is seen in Kframe's posts. How can you know where you are at if you don't spar? When you have trained an MA that spars and you change to a system that doesn't spar I think most times you can accept it, especially if the instructor can explain why there is no sparring. Where it gets harder is where someone from a system that spars looks at a system that doesn't and immediately assumes that the system that doesn't spar is inferior or lacking. What is harder still is the concept that sparring, as most people think of sparring, can be counter productive. What ever physical testing method a style employs is specific for that style. If it employs the type of sparring people expect, well and good. If it doesn't, fine. That's the way it is.

Many discussions distil down to the question, "in a fight, would System A beat System B"? Hence competition and MMA. But when that 'fight' comes down to a fight like we watched in the earlier post ( http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=visioCFH7II&desktop_uri=/watch?v=visioCFH7II ) where neither side is using anything recognisable from their training, it shows the irrelevance of competitive sparring between people whose systems are not designed for competition.
:asian)

 

[Kframe]

Chris parker, you may be correct that with my few weeks of training I am likely jumping to a conclusion. Ill try and state it as bluntly as possible. Im scared.. Im scared that im doing something that every time I go I find my self having a ball and enjoying my self immensely and that in then end, when the hammer drops it will be for nothing because of no sparring. I enjoy what im doing, I just have no way of knowing what is were and how good im doing or not doing if I don't have someone randomly trying to attack me and take my block off like happens in sparring. Sparring for me was were I learned what I knew, and what I needed to work on. I don't have that now and I lack a point of reference.

Fear that im doing something so great and enjoyable and that in the end it amounted to larping because of not sparring. I have no way of testing what I know, what I don't know and what im ok with, short of getting into a fight at a bar and I don't go to bars. Christ today I got out of class and I was on such a high, so damned happy and excited. Not only did I nail the back roll again on the 3rd attempt, i actually nailed the other side of the back roll on my second attempt. Then we did URA and i was struggling with it a bit. He put a blind fold on me, turned off the lights and i was forced to feel through it. It clicked.

I have been on a high ever since it ended so damn happy. The fear comes in, as stated above, that in the end, i wont be able to apply it when the hammer drops because i didn't spar. With out sparring i have no point of reference of my skills. Maybe you can provide it? Or a method of gauging were my skills are?

Its not just my life.. I cant just run away when the hammer drops. I wont abandon those behind me. My wife and daughter and autistic son. Retreat with them in tow is not going to be a option. Trust me, if im between harm and my family its going to be everything my wife can do to contain my special needs son and my daughter. Retreat wont be a very viable option. I will die for my family and ill take every last one of them with me if i have to. Of course ill be bringing my friends Smith and Wesson with me and his 6 110grain Friends.

That is how serious i take my training friend. If you were serious about training with you for a day or so some day ill take you up on that offer if im ever Down under.

So what is it about scenario drilling that is superior for self defense then traditional sparring? I have never done it so I don't understand. How is it different and why is it better for this application?

 

[Chris Parker]

Yep, I'm aware of the disagreement.

I should correct myself, though. There is another training method which can work to develop all the skills and attributes that sparring does. That method would be - actual fighting. It's entirely possible to develop some fundamental skills through non-sparring methods, then go out and get in a bunch of fights. If you survive the fights and can apply the lessons from your experiences then you could become a dangerous fighter without ever sparring. It's not a path I would personally care to take, but it can work.

Hmm... no, actually, that's not what I was talking about. I'm referring to systems that specifically, overtly state that sparring and the like are to be avoided, with such methods being no part of the training methodology at all. Many Koryu systems, particularly weaponry ones, are like that. The reasoning is that the aim is to instill the approach that the system is teaching, and by adding such an uncontrolled element, the methods get distorted and inaccurate. One person might be able to do something well, but if others try it, the skills might not be transferable. This is what I meant when I said that sparring is far more random in developing specific skills than other methods. Schools such as Katori Shinto Ryu have relied on kata training pretty well exclusively, and actually have rules against engaging in fighting... but at the same time a trained practitioner should be able to cut down any opponent with a single strike... so their training methodology is geared towards application... and this has been the standard for some 5 and a half centuries now. By the same token, they're far from alone. In fact, thinking about it, sparring is a rarity for combative systems.... there might be some free-form training in one form or another, but not sparring... as sparring is really the domain of match fighting and competition.

As I mentioned in this thread, there is some overlap in the Venn Diagram of fighting and self-defense. In the context of martial arts discussion, most people tend to be referring to that overlap area when they mention "self-defense." Of course, you are correct that the overlap is a relatively small area.

I don't know that many are referring to only the small overlap... it seems to me more that people make the false association of "martial arts = fighting, fighting = violence, violence = street assault, street assault = self defence,

∴ martial arts = self defence ∵ fighting = self defence. Honestly, this misunderstanding is something I think is the bigger issue... even if a situation does get to a physical level, "fighting" (both people engaging aiming to defeat each other) is one of the rarest of all possible forms. In short, it starts with awareness (not fighting), then you get to avoidance (not fighting), physical de-escalation (body language, presenting a hard target, not fighting), verbal de-escalation (not fighting), pre-emptive striking (to provide an escape, not fighting), to defensive responses (which is where the "fighting" starts), to handling legal and psychological repercussions (not fighting again), and so on.​

Be that as it may, the fact is, many places do not train the empty hand SD like it should be, thus my comment. Sure, you can train SD in a fashion that is akin to sparring, of course, as I've said in the past, with the provision that it doesnt turn into a sparring match.

Hey Mike,

Hmm.... no, that's not really what I was getting at. My point was more that the benefits you listed as being found in sparring, with the implication that you couldn't get them without it, were found just as easily in other training methods, including technique drills (it's where you get it in traditional systems, for instance). Additionally, the list aren't necessarily there in sparring itself... only in a particular forms or particular forms of sparring. It's not anything to do with training in scenario training or other methods akin to sparring.

If someone chooses not to do it, then that's fine. I feel, as I said, that it has some value, though it's not the only thing that should be trained. I still feel it has value.

Except if the system itself has very good reasons to avoid sparring, such as sparring methodologies encouraging or requiring tactics and techniques that are not only different, but diametrically opposed to what the system is teaching. What it comes down to is that sparring has value provided it matches (fits) with what you're doing... for everything that I do, for instance, sparring has almost no value whatsoever (while it is very rarely used in my classes, it's never used for any form of reality), so we really don't use it (except in very rare cases, as mentioned).

I would say more often than not, the majority of the arts out there, incorporate sparring. If someone feels that it's that important, that its beneficial, that they're going to gain something out of it, and it's not done in the art they choose, then they either accept that the art doesnt do it, or opt to train in an art that does.

I don't know that I'd say it's the majority... there's certainly quite a lot of arts that use it in some form, and it might well be the majority of modern systems (and almost all competitive ones), but that's not quite the majority of all systems of course...

With your last sentence there (either accept that the art doesn't use it, or find a different art), yeah, I'd be with you there. Trying to insist that something be present just because you expect it, and don't understand the actual reasons for it's inclusion or lack simply doesn't work.

I don't think that's the issue. Most martial arts incorporate sparring without doubt. Most people training a martial art expect there to be sparring. Most martial arts also have a competitive element and whatever sparring is done in a martial art reflects the competition that you are training to compete in.

Competitive arts need sparring. It's essential to what they do. Other arts don't, as it's not only not necessary, it can genuinely be detrimental. Of course, this is just me agreeing with you, and adding a bit as to why it's seen so much, and why it's expected today (to a fair degree).

Chris parker, you may be correct that with my few weeks of training I am likely jumping to a conclusion.

It's not that you're jumping to a conclusion, it's that you're still at the point of just learning the very basic mechanical aspects... you're simply not up to having anything there that you can test yet, so it's hardly surprising that you haven't seen much in the way of testing methods. I'll say this once more.... this ain't MMA/Kempo, or anything you've done before. You have no real experience or skill in it yet (simply due to being so new to it)... so I suggest some patience until you're at a point where testing might be appropriate. But you still need to come to grips with the context, as you're way out still (in this post).

Ill try and state it as bluntly as possible. Im scared.. Im scared that im doing something that every time I go I find my self having a ball and enjoying my self immensely and that in then end, when the hammer drops it will be for nothing because of no sparring.

Then I'll be blunt as well. Sparring proves nothing. All it does is give a sense of confidence (in cases, false confidence) by using a false analogue and different context. Being able to do things in sparring really means nothing other than you did it once in sparring. There are plenty of anecdotes of sparring methods simply not preparing anyone for "when the hammer drops", no matter what they thought at the time.

I enjoy what im doing, I just have no way of knowing what is were and how good im doing or not doing if I don't have someone randomly trying to attack me and take my block off like happens in sparring.

Which still wouldn't tell you anything about what you were doing, or how well. I know that won't make sense to you, but it simply won't. And the simple fact of the matter is that, when training the techniques (once you have the basic mechanical skill down), your partner should absolutely be trying to take your head off. Believe me, if you're doing it properly, you'll know if what you were doing worked or not.

Sparring for me was were I learned what I knew, and what I needed to work on. I don't have that now and I lack a point of reference.

Your first frame of reference now is your instructor. Then it'll move to self criticism and appraisal. This will then go hand in hand with keeping your training and practice "honest" (and you'll know if you are or not).

Fear that im doing something so great and enjoyable and that in the end it amounted to larping because of not sparring.

Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine... the usage of the term "larping" is inaccurate, and is most commonly applied by people who don't understand a non-sparring training methodology... but the term refers to living out a fantasy life (quite simply, it means "Live Action Role Playing", and refers to people who act out a particular role, such as a Knight of a Court in the SCA)... just because a training methodology is different (in this case, not sparring) doesn't mean that there is anything like larping going on. Larping, in this instance, would be you adopting a Japanese (or Japanese-sounding) name, the dress and manner of a particular social class, and interacting with others who are similarly acting out such roles. It would be you actually pretending to be a "ninja" or "samurai"... and this has no real resemblance to training in a martial art school. Additionally, groups such as the SCA do spar... so the lack of it could be seen as moving it away from such terminology.

But, again, sparring or not is not what makes something of value (in training). Honesty in training is.

I have no way of testing what I know, what I don't know and what im ok with, short of getting into a fight at a bar and I don't go to bars.

You're right, you don't have any way of testing it yet. You also don't have anything to test. Relax, learn, listen to your instructor, and have a bit of patience. You need to develop a lot more before you get anywhere close to testing anything.

Christ today I got out of class and I was on such a high, so damned happy and excited. Not only did I nail the back roll again on the 3rd attempt, i actually nailed the other side of the back roll on my second attempt. Then we did URA and i was struggling with it a bit. He put a blind fold on me, turned off the lights and i was forced to feel through it. It clicked.

Good for you. All rather irrelevant, though, if I'm being blunt. You did a couple of things well today... now you need to be able to do them consistently. Then you'll be needing to apply them consistently against higher pressure. And that's where the testing will begin. Ideally, every time you train (after you have the basic mechanics down) it should be under enough pressure to qualify as a testing method.

I have been on a high ever since it ended so damn happy. The fear comes in, as stated above, that in the end, i wont be able to apply it when the hammer drops because i didn't spar.

Forget about that. It doesn't mean anything, and is just you trying to compare your new system with your past experience. And, in this case, it just doesn't work.

With out sparring i have no point of reference of my skills. Maybe you can provide it? Or a method of gauging were my skills are?

You do have a point of reference... you've given it yourself a few sentences ago. You know when you've done a rear roll properly or not. You know the feeling when an Ura Gyaku just "clicks". That's the start... then you add more and more pressure.

Its not just my life.. I cant just run away when the hammer drops. I wont abandon those behind me. My wife and daughter and autistic son. Retreat with them in tow is not going to be a option. Trust me, if im between harm and my family its going to be everything my wife can do to contain my special needs son and my daughter. Retreat wont be a very viable option. I will die for my family and ill take every last one of them with me if i have to. Of course ill be bringing my friends Smith and Wesson with me and his 6 110grain Friends.

Hmm, yeah, I get that attitude (we teach Partner Protection and similar topics for just that situation/occasion). Sparring isn't going to do anything for them, though, especially if it means you leave them to go and engage the "attacker"... which can leave them open to other attackers, or have them run off in a panic, or anything. Sparring is going to give you the opposite of what you need there.

That is how serious i take my training friend. If you were serious about training with you for a day or so some day ill take you up on that offer if im ever Down under.

Oh, I get how serious you are. The problem is that you're looking at the wrong thing, and (because you're taking it so seriously) not letting go of an idea that simply doesn't have a place. And yeah, should you find yourself down here, you'd be more than welcome.

So what is it about scenario drilling that is superior for self defense then traditional sparring? I have never done it so I don't understand. How is it different and why is it better for this application?

Scenario drilling is designed to be a direct analogue of various self defence situations (scenarios). It is meticulously crafted to be as close to reality as possible. It addresses all the realities of a real encounter (from the distancing, the likely attacks, the numbers you might face, weapons, psychology, de-escalation, tactical approaches, strategies, and far, far more), and commonly is done with a specific, particular aim in mind, rather than the more random "try to apply your techniques" that sparring engenders.

 

[SteveNC]

Scenario drilling as Chris mentioned above is the Alpha and Omega of self defense PERIOD, not only from a physical standpoint but educationally as well. Direct sparring is nothing more than fighting and fighting IS NOT self defense. From a tactical standpoint you want to apply the proper force to get the job done and leave and that is difficult to accomplish on a training partner fighting back. Pads and bags are for technique and confidence training. Partners are for feel and movement drilling

 

[K-man]

Scenario drilling as Chris mentioned above is the Alpha and Omega of self defense PERIOD, not only from a physical standpoint but educationally as well. Direct sparring is nothing more than fighting and fighting IS NOT self defense. From a tactical standpoint you want to apply the proper force to get the job done and leave and that is difficult to accomplish on a training partner fighting back. Pads and bags are for technique and confidence training. Partners are for feel and movement drilling

Good post Steve. Now we are on the same page.

 

[MJS]

I don't think that's the issue. Most martial arts incorporate sparring without doubt. Most people training a martial art expect there to be sparring. Most martial arts also have a competitive element and whatever sparring is done in a martial art reflects the competition that you are training to compete in.

I think this is seen in Kframe's posts. How can you know where you are at if you don't spar? When you have trained an MA that spars and you change to a system that doesn't spar I think most times you can accept it, especially if the instructor can explain why there is no sparring. Where it gets harder is where someone from a system that spars looks at a system that doesn't and immediately assumes that the system that doesn't spar is inferior or lacking. What is harder still is the concept that sparring, as most people think of sparring, can be counter productive. What ever physical testing method a style employs is specific for that style. If it employs the type of sparring people expect, well and good. If it doesn't, fine. That's the way it is.

Many discussions distil down to the question, "in a fight, would System A beat System B"? Hence competition and MMA. But when that 'fight' comes down to a fight like we watched in the earlier post ( http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=visioCFH7II&desktop_uri=/watch?v=visioCFH7II ) where neither side is using anything recognisable from their training, it shows the irrelevance of competitive sparring between people whose systems are not designed for competition.
:asian)

Points taken. IMO, anyone that trains in an art that has competition, isn't or shouldn't be required to compete. While I and others, do feel that it's a good venue to 'test' yourself, I have other ways to do that. In the 2+yrs that I've been training Kyokushin, I've only fought once in a tournament. Had to pass last year because of a prior engagement, but I would like to do at least 1 more tournament. But for me, it's not something I have to do. I'm more interested in learning the art.

I also get the impression that some think that I'm very pro sparring. Not the case at all. I feel it's good to do, but as I've said, it's only 1 part of the puzzle. As long as the person training is doing something to test themselves, and their material, that is all that matters, IMO.

 

[K-man]

Points taken. IMO, anyone that trains in an art that has competition, isn't or shouldn't be required to compete. While I and others, do feel that it's a good venue to 'test' yourself, I have other ways to do that. In the 2+yrs that I've been training Kyokushin, I've only fought once in a tournament. Had to pass last year because of a prior engagement, but I would like to do at least 1 more tournament. But for me, it's not something I have to do. I'm more interested in learning the art.

I also get the impression that some think that I'm very pro sparring. Not the case at all. I feel it's good to do, but as I've said, it's only 1 part of the puzzle. As long as the person training is doing something to test themselves, and their material, that is all that matters, IMO.

Your quite right. When I trained Japanese Goju my last tournament was when I was 58. That actually looks quite young from where I'm looking now. I enjoyed it and I enjoyed the sparring that we used to do. With the style of Goju I teach now, that type of sparring goes against so much of our training you just don't do it. Mind you, what we do now can be punishing. The young guy practising an uppercut missed the mitt and took my jaw. Mmm! Who needs to spar?

 

[jks9199]

Its not just my life.. I cant just run away when the hammer drops. I wont abandon those behind me. My wife and daughter and autistic son. Retreat with them in tow is not going to be a option. Trust me, if im between harm and my family its going to be everything my wife can do to contain my special needs son and my daughter. Retreat wont be a very viable option. I will die for my family and ill take every last one of them with me if i have to. Of course ill be bringing my friends Smith and Wesson with me and his 6 110grain Friends.

That is how serious i take my training friend. If you were serious about training with you for a day or so some day ill take you up on that offer if im ever Down under.

Stop right there. The absolute best, safest, and smartest thing you can do if your family is with you is AVOID THE DAMN SITUATION. Period. The odds of you and your family being assaulted when together are pretty damn low, unless you go out of your way to put yourself in places that it's likely to happen. If it does happen, they need to know how to respond and get away while you run interference. Honestly, if something does happen while you're with them -- the chances are pretty good it'll be a resource predator, counting on them to deter your resistance. You know what? He's probably right, because I know that, despite my training (personal and professional), if I'm out with my son or family, and someone wants my wallet -- I'm giving it to them, unless I think that they're going to attack anyway. Because that's the safest way to resolve that situation.

As to the gun... If you're going to carry for self defense, get proper training. That means spending time and money in combat oriented classes, not simple marksmanship. And buy yourself a Blue Gun or Red Gun or similar non-firing replica, and (with your instructor's permission!) begin to integrate it into your "unarmed" training, at least occasionally. You need to develop the habits of retention and transitions.

So what is it about scenario drilling that is superior for self defense then traditional sparring? I have never done it so I don't understand. How is it different and why is it better for this application?

Scenario training makes an attempt to replicate real situations. It's active rehearsal for what you want to do in a real situation. Just like your kata training in BBT, at first, a scenario should be easily resolved. As you practice, the complexity of the scenario should advance. Because I can show the transition more simply, I'm going to use room clearing practice for LE as an example. The first time you run through, you probably don't have anyone hide. No weird angles, no locked doors... Just go in, move through, and be done. After the first time or two, you start throwing monkey wrenches in. Maybe a role player who doesn't open the door and come out. Or who hides behind the sofa. In time, you might escalate to using some sort of marking cartridge or other simulation, and have role players actually trying to take you out. At the end of the day, you should be able to go through a scenario that would have "beaten" you when you started with confidence.

Proper scenario training is HARD work. Way too many people claim to do scenario training, but are really just doing a fantasy "what if" game. "OK, so you're in a bar, and you see a guy roughing up his date... Billy, there, he's the guy... What are you gonna do?" type stuff. Usually that encourage being a superhero and intervening when the best answer is probably call the cops and alert the management. Or someone does a totally unrealistic knife attack as a robbery, and then stands there while the defender does an stupidly complicated disarm and attack. Do it right, and scenario training should be a really close simulation of situations in the way that they are likely to happen. The best scenario would be in an actual location -- so if you want to do barroom scenarios, you should ideally be in a barroom, with music, dim lighting, and the works (except actually drinking!). Situations to create there would range from a Monkey Dance with another customer, to being present during a robbery.

 

[jks9199]

By the way -- before you can do scenario training, you need to develop an appropriate tool set, or you'll engrave bad responses powerfully into your reaction set. In the room clearing example, you have to have the basics of moving around with guns and partners, entering, forcing doors, and so on before you can practice it. For martial arts training, that's the line drills and kata (solo or partnered) practice.

Sparring really reinforces some very dangerous habits for protecting yourself. One of the worst is the idea of what a "win" consists of. (What's the goal of self defense versus the goal of a sparring match? A self defense "win" for a sparring match is simple: don't get in the ring!) Another is the practice of re-engaging after an exchange... There are more, left as an exercise for the student to discover.

 

[MJS]

Hey Mike,

Hmm.... no, that's not really what I was getting at. My point was more that the benefits you listed as being found in sparring, with the implication that you couldn't get them without it, were found just as easily in other training methods, including technique drills (it's where you get it in traditional systems, for instance). Additionally, the list aren't necessarily there in sparring itself... only in a particular forms or particular forms of sparring. It's not anything to do with training in scenario training or other methods akin to sparring.

How do you train your techniques Chris? I know you work scenarios, as do I. I assume that your partner is really trying to hit you. I assume that things are spontaneous, so you react to whatever is happening? ie: the guy grabs you, and as you're dealing with that, he then tries to punch, etc, or things of that nature? I gave an idea of what I did in class one day, where I picked a technique, had them go through it, and then slowly do something else, so as to break the pattern of the 1 attack, stand like a statue, while the other guy defends, mentality. They'd have to deal with the lapel grab, then whatever else the other guy did, be it a punch, adding in his other hand now making it a 2 hand grab, pulling, pushing, etc. This can easily turn into sparring, if it's not watched closely.

Except if the system itself has very good reasons to avoid sparring, such as sparring methodologies encouraging or requiring tactics and techniques that are not only different, but diametrically opposed to what the system is teaching. What it comes down to is that sparring has value provided it matches (fits) with what you're doing... for everything that I do, for instance, sparring has almost no value whatsoever (while it is very rarely used in my classes, it's never used for any form of reality), so we really don't use it (except in very rare cases, as mentioned).

Then it's simple...if the art doesn't benefit from it, then don't do it. Easy right! I just get the impression that you think that any art that includes sparring, isn't as good as one that doesn't. No offense to you but that's the impression I get, and of course, I might be wrong. My teacher sparred in class and fought in many tournaments back in the day, although now he no longer does. Despite that, I'm confident that he's more than capable of defending himself and would not be hindered in any way, because of his past sparring.

I don't know that I'd say it's the majority... there's certainly quite a lot of arts that use it in some form, and it might well be the majority of modern systems (and almost all competitive ones), but that's not quite the majority of all systems of course...

With your last sentence there (either accept that the art doesn't use it, or find a different art), yeah, I'd be with you there. Trying to insist that something be present just because you expect it, and don't understand the actual reasons for it's inclusion or lack simply doesn't work.