"Full contact" sparring with rigid weapons

[Decker]

Hi all.

Stumbled upon this video in jap, apparently about a school/style of kenjutsu that features full contact sparring, unarmed techniques allowed, with a rigid weapon, without protection.

They later go on to demonstrate some techniques/drills with metal pipes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq1vIfum0uE

Anyone seen anything like this, or clarify what's going on?

Thanks much.

[tellner]

It's club-fighting with lightweight aluminum tubes. It borrows techniques and training methods from Japanese fencing, but you couldn't call it "Ken" do in any meaningful sense of the word.

The weapon itself is very poorly designed. The completely round shape reinforces bad habits by undermining edge-discipline.

The range is all kinds of wrong. In the clips at the beginning the fighters were way, way too close. That's because they aren't using swords or anything with enough authority to demand the respect that a blade would command. That's why I call it "club-fighting". If you're willing to accept a sword-cut to the head for a punch or kick you are not fighting with swords. You're not even fighting with very effective clubs.

[Sukerkin]

I am ever cautious when it comes to criticising anothers swordwork that has been put up on YouTube, particularly when I have no idea of their training or background. After all, I have no doubt that if I were to put any of my kata up there then there would be a storm tide of criticism.

However, I have just started watching that video clip and recognised the style being used in the opening - it's MJER. By the lights that I have been taught, then it starts with a not particularly well executed oroshi and so makuri. It degenerates pretty badly from there :D. For if you attack anyone 'full contact' with a bokken and know what you are doing, then they are going to the hospital or the morgue.

Of particular note is that the first word of the video voice-over is gendai. That's pretty much all you need to know if you're interested in the swordarts {need smiley for snobby-nose-in-the-air :o}.

I don't understand enough Japanese to give any realistic interpretation of what was being said but it looks like someone with training in iai has sensed a commercial opportunity for people to play fight pretty roughly and pay for the privelidge of thinking they're learning something about swordwork.

[Decker]

Wow, thanks for the insightful input, guys.



Of particular note is that the first word of the video voice-over is gendai. That's pretty much all you need to know if you're interested in the swordarts {need smiley for snobby-nose-in-the-air :o}.

Ah, if only the koryu martial arts could proliferate as much or as quickly as modern, trendy sport martial arts... Then again, what works still works, regardless of origin, no? :wink1:


For if you attack anyone 'full contact' with a bokken and know what you are doing, then they are going to the hospital or the morgue.


If you're willing to accept a sword-cut to the head for a punch or kick you are not fighting with swords. You're not even fighting with very effective clubs.

So my hunch that there was something really wrong with the picture was correct... Unless aluminium tubes hurt less than bokken owing to their lower density... :idunno:

Do you think sparring with padded weaponry like the type Actionflex makes is worse? (Probably a more common, derogatory term would be "boffers", yeah?)

[Sukerkin]

I don't think anyone would say that what they were up to in that video wouldn't be fun - it's just not swordfighting and if the participants in are being told that it is then that is where the problems start.

The best way to think of it is to switch to the analogy of paint-balling. Great fun, looks a bit like playing 'army' but has nothing to do with being able to shoot properly (unless you're re-enacting C18th musket fire :D).

On the technical side, I would guess that because the hollow 'tubes' are light and large bore, then the contact will be more stinging than crushing.

[Ken Morgan]

Sukerkin is quite correct, it starts as MJER and then veers all over the place.

I have no idea where they are going with it, perhaps it a bit of harmless fun? Wanting some non lethal contact without resorting to Kendo?

Someone already said that they are way too close, And they certainly are.

The ukenagashi practice at the end is quite common, we’ve done it in Niten and iai practice for years.

To each their own.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

......Of particular note is that the first word of the video voice-over is gendai. That's pretty much all you need to know if you're interested in the swordarts {need smiley for snobby-nose-in-the-air :o}.

I don't understand enough Japanese to give any realistic interpretation of what was being said but it looks like someone with training in iai has sensed a commercial opportunity for people to play fight pretty roughly and pay for the privelidge of thinking they're learning something about swordwork.

Forget about it being gendai, these people are training with the thought of taking a strike from a sword not a glancing slash and continuing to fight. This must be promotional video for the stunt doubles on Power Rangers. Tell me that's what it is. :idunno:

[Ken Morgan]

Forget about it being gendai, these people are training with the thought of taking a strike from a sword not a glancing slash and continuing to fight. This must be promotional video for the stunt doubles on Power Rangers. Tell me that's what it is. :idunno:


Nah-uh, there are no cute pink or yellow Power rangers practicing, so can’t be!!

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Nah-uh, there are no cute pink or yellow Power rangers practicing, so can’t be!!

Are you sure?

[Andrew Green]

Doing full contact, with head shots and no head protection is stupid, if those "weapons" had anything at all behind them they would all have pretty messed up faces, and broken fingers. A little more behind them and they'd have some serious head injuries.

Of course they don't seem to care about that much and just go in and forget that a hit would do serious damage and treat the hits for what they are with the pretend weapon.

This is what the koryu folks warn against when they say sparring is bad. It doesn't have to be bad, but it can, and they are proving that.

They'd be far better of wearing armor, using shiai and opening up the rules of Kendo a little too allow other targets and techniques.

[kegage]

While I find this video entertaining to watch, and I am not about to criticize them because I don’t know any more about what they are doing than what I am seeing in the video, the round pipes do give me pause. I have to agree with the edge discipline comment. That being said, with the proper head, body, and hand protection, sparring with a rigid a weapon that is designed to emulate the real weapon is not only possible, but is beneficial. I have been doing free sparring for years and, for me, there is nothing better than a free sparring combat situation to test and improve one’s technique.
Here is a video I came across that is an example of what I am talking about. It is not the type of sparring I do, but it does show what is possible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7nUFpznK7E (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7nUFpznK7E)

There are no videos of me sparring at this time (although I am going to try and change that), and I am hesitant to post a video of others engaging in the style of sparring I do, because, well frankly, I can’t find any out there that have a modicum of decent form and technique. I am sure they would be even more painful for you to watch than it is for me simply because I am used to seeing it.

Kevin

[Bruno@MT]

But no matter how much protection you use, the impact will remain the same.
And being hit on the fingers, arm neck or head with a steel bar can cause serious injury, even if there is no edge contact.

[Chris Parker]

While I find this video entertaining to watch, and I am not about to criticize them because I don’t know any more about what they are doing than what I am seeing in the video, the round pipes do give me pause. I have to agree with the edge discipline comment. That being said, with the proper head, body, and hand protection, sparring with a rigid a weapon that is designed to emulate the real weapon is not only possible, but is beneficial. I have been doing free sparring for years and, for me, there is nothing better than a free sparring combat situation to test and improve one’s technique.
Here is a video I came across that is an example of what I am talking about. It is not the type of sparring I do, but it does show what is possible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7nUFpznK7E (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7nUFpznK7E)

There are no videos of me sparring at this time (although I am going to try and change that), and I am hesitant to post a video of others engaging in the style of sparring I do, because, well frankly, I can’t find any out there that have a modicum of decent form and technique. I am sure they would be even more painful for you to watch than it is for me simply because I am used to seeing it.

Kevin

Oh, I'll happiliy criticise them... not for the sparring (although their methods do encourage bad habits, and takes them from the reality they think it brings them closer to...), as that's not where the real issues are.

It's the "swordsmanship" in the rest of the clip. The cuts are stilted and pulled, the grips are too tight, there is little in the way of tenouchi that I saw, movements are done for effect without the reason, they appear to be unable to move outside of their own heads, and they would not have much chance against an actual swordsman. That's just the beginning, though.

As for the "Toyama" clip, one thing to realise is that the people there are not actually Toyama Ryu practitioners, but people who came to a Toyama event to put on a demonstration. So it's still not Kenjutsu, gendai or koryu. They have been discussed here before, but the main things I noted last time are a prevalence of kendo-style hitting, rather than committed cuts, a lot of little "tapping" actions, and a few other things that made most of what they did rather ineffective, and again removed from the reality it was meant to get closer to. Unfortunately, that is the effect of "sparring" in sword arts.

If you are sparring in a sword art then you are actually removing it from reality. The reason is simple: If you are acting and moving realistically, then you are aiming for disabling or killing cuts every time. And if you do that, the way to ensure that that happens is to ensure that the reciever is stopped by the blows you strike, which means actually hitting in a way that achieves that result (which, if items like bokken are used means that a disabling cut, such as a cut to the inside of the wrists, won't be present, so a blade would be needed... I think we can see where that is going). If strikes are used that don't finish the encounter, or if finishing strikes don't actually finish the encounter (ie they are well struck, on target etc, but the opponent is not physically stopped, the way that a solid strike to the top of the head would, as control is being used) then the encounter will continue. That will lead to the employment of faster strikes as both try to get in first, not worrying about the fact that a mistake means death or dismemberment, which means less effective cuts, strikes instead of cuts, and so on.

So either it's fairly realistic, and people go to hospital, or it's not realistic, and that defeats the purpose of most people in engaging in such practices.

[Bruno@MT]

To expand a bit further on Chris' post: In one kata( I think it is Togakure ryu but I am not sure since I have not studied biken much yet) there is a form where one hits with the spine of the sword (the blunt part) in order to cleave a helmet and / or damage the skull and neck.

Ergo, a correct hit with even a blunted sword, even on armor, can be a killing or crippling blow. Ergo there is nothing realistic about the video clip, and realistic full contact sparring with rigid weapons is not done, anywhere. Because it would mean having a significant percentage of crippled and dead training partners.

[Langenschwert]

In my HEMA club, we do steel sparring quite a bit, but none of us thinks it's "real", and it's not full contact. You'll kill people doing that. You could call it "light contact". For us, it's an important way to pressure test some of the things we're working on and to improve our decision-making abilities under pressure. It's a necessary thing in reconstructed arts IMO. For us it's more along the lines of "OK, I'm going to try to get my Duplieren (a certain technique used in a hard bind) to work on this guy" or, "let's see if my counters close the line like they should". But that's not what the folks in the first vid are doing. More power to em, but I don't care much for it.

With regards to the second vid, I kind of like it. Some of those guys are decent. I wouldn't mind participating with my longsword... prize playing is an important part of the European tradition of swordsmanship. I'll cross swords in a friendly manner with anyone who isn't an idiot, newbie or psychopath for the purposes of mutual learning.

However, as fun as the second clip is, it ain't Koryu. It isn't traditional JSA at all.

It does, however look most enjoyable. Some of those guys seem pretty OK. And there's no harm in trying something new, as long as they're honest about what it is, what it isn't, and where it comes from.

Best regards,

-Mark

[kegage]

Oh, I'll happiliy criticise them... not for the sparring (although their methods do encourage bad habits, and takes them from the reality they think it brings them closer to...), as that's not where the real issues are.

It's the "swordsmanship" in the rest of the clip. The cuts are stilted and pulled, the grips are too tight, there is little in the way of tenouchi that I saw, movements are done for effect without the reason, they appear to be unable to move outside of their own heads, and they would not have much chance against an actual swordsman. That's just the beginning, though.

As for the "Toyama" clip, one thing to realise is that the people there are not actually Toyama Ryu practitioners, but people who came to a Toyama event to put on a demonstration. So it's still not Kenjutsu, gendai or koryu. They have been discussed here before, but the main things I noted last time are a prevalence of kendo-style hitting, rather than committed cuts, a lot of little "tapping" actions, and a few other things that made most of what they did rather ineffective, and again removed from the reality it was meant to get closer to. Unfortunately, that is the effect of "sparring" in sword arts.

If you are sparring in a sword art then you are actually removing it from reality. The reason is simple: If you are acting and moving realistically, then you are aiming for disabling or killing cuts every time. And if you do that, the way to ensure that that happens is to ensure that the reciever is stopped by the blows you strike, which means actually hitting in a way that achieves that result (which, if items like bokken are used means that a disabling cut, such as a cut to the inside of the wrists, won't be present, so a blade would be needed... I think we can see where that is going). If strikes are used that don't finish the encounter, or if finishing strikes don't actually finish the encounter (ie they are well struck, on target etc, but the opponent is not physically stopped, the way that a solid strike to the top of the head would, as control is being used) then the encounter will continue. That will lead to the employment of faster strikes as both try to get in first, not worrying about the fact that a mistake means death or dismemberment, which means less effective cuts, strikes instead of cuts, and so on.

So either it's fairly realistic, and people go to hospital, or it's not realistic, and that defeats the purpose of most people in engaging in such practices.

This is where we are going to disagree. While there are major philosophical, esoteric, mental and physical disciplinary and even ideological attributes in the martial arts, all martial arts, and especially a weapon arts is about combat. The whole reason why bokken and shinais were developed were so warriors could train and practice in a relatively realistic manner without actually killing each other (Something I think we all know.). It is possible to realistically train by doing combat. I know. I do it. The protective equipment needed has to be much more resilient than what is commonly used in most martial arts (even kendo) today, but it is possible.
In the quote above Chris mentions “kendo-style hitting, rather than committed cuts, a lot of little "tapping" actions, and a few other things that made most of what they did rather ineffective, and again removed from the reality it was meant to get closer to.” and the need of “using disabling or killing cuts every time.”, and he is absolutely correct on both points. The type of combat (I am going to stop using the word “sparring”( It does seem to leave the impression of light tapping style blows Chris was referring to.) I do is all about exactly what Chris is talking about full, committed, cuts to the head, body and extremities, and no one goes to the hospital. Bruising is, however, commonplace. Besides the armor, and the acurate design of the weapons, one of the keys to success is that the people who are training acknowledge when they receive a “good” cut (and small taps don’t count). The idea is to train in exactly the manner Chris described.

[kegage]

However, as fun as the second clip is, it ain't Koryu. It isn't traditional JSA at all.

These questions are not aimed at Langenschwert they are for everyone.
This bodes a question I have been curious about for a long time. At what point, in their far reaching history, did schools begin to phase out combat training as a part of their teachings? As an example, Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu was founded by Miyamoto Musashi who was in many people’s eyes a consummate warrior with a fighting reputation to match. I find it difficult to believe that in his, and the sensei that followed, teachings they did not engage in some form of combative training. When did the schools begin to exclude actually learning how to use the lessons learned through kata in combat?

Also, I see this type of statement a lot. Mostly in commentary on Youtube videos involving different school's and/or people's activities, demonstrations, or teaching. (Yes, I know, and have privately commented as such, on the total bogusness of many of the videos that are out there. I am referring to the ones that seem to be from trained people and sactioned schools.)
So, what determines what is and isn’t koryu and/or traditional JSA, and why aren’t the activities on the second video considered so? After all, it seems that they are at an established school and the activity appears to be sanction by such.


It does, however look most enjoyable. Some of those guys seem pretty OK. And there's no harm in trying something new, as long as they're honest about what it is, what it isn't, and where it comes from.

Best regards,

-Mark


Me too. Want do.

Kevin

[Ken Morgan]

Traditional JSA was never meant to train one for the battlefield, the koryu we have today came about from hundreds of years of peace and the pacification of the samurai.

Only 5% of casualties on a Japanese battlefield pre-1600 came from swords

Koryu is koryu simply because it has been around longer then anything else. Give Seitei another couple of hundred years, it’ll be considered koryu.

If you’re practicing the paired kata in any school, MJER, MSR or HNIR and you feel that it’s worth little to nothing in “real life”. Then you are either practicing incorrectly or not practicing hard enough.

[Sukerkin]

This bodes a question I have been curious about for a long time. At what point, in their far reaching history, did schools begin to phase out combat training as a part of their teachings? As an example, Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu was founded by Miyamoto Musashi who was in many people’s eyes a consummate warrior with a fighting reputation to match. I find it difficult to believe that in his, and the sensei that followed, teachings they did not engage in some form of combative training. When did the schools begin to exclude actually learning how to use the lessons learned through kata in combat?


Note: Bold mine



In a sense that is backwards, Kegage.

Kata are a series of techniques honed through the combat experience of others to greater enable the survival of those that follow after.

The combative training that formed the contents of the kata was, simply put, warfare.

A thing to remember is that, despite the high honour accorded the sword, most combat in war is carried out with other weapons. The katana is a 'side-arm', the equivalent of the more modern conception of the officers pistol. It is a fall-back weapon when all others have failed.

In the matter of Iai, however, a slightly different ethos arises, as Iai is the art of using the sword in self-defence or surprise attack in non-battlefield situations.

Historically, paired forms are 'scripted' because otherwise you lose more people in training than you need to. However, it is up to the student to provide the combative mindset to go along with the techniques and to excercise the control to stop blows short of the heads of their partner whilst not 'learning' to never do any differently. If you saw myself and one of of my fellow students performing the Tachiuchi forms you would hopefully see that the only reason what Uchidachi does not get his or her head caved in is because Shidachi chooses to apply tenuichi and stop the bokken just short.

That's about as combative as you can get in serious sword art training without killing each other :D.

[Bruno@MT]

Also, the thing that wasn't mentioned is that for people like Musashi, duelling was their form of sparring, and depending on the way the duel happened or was agreed to, it was to the death or not. Those who survived got to pass on their knowledge.

So in a way, the formalized patterns, teaching methods and kuden (oral transmissions and 'secrets') are the distilled learnings and teachings that made them succesful, generation after generation of student and master. At least that is how I feel about it.

Western society places a high emphasis on 'free' sparring, and it is a valid tool. But that does not mean that people who don't use that tool in favor of other methods are missing out or have inferior skills.

I think that is illustrated nicely in this clip here:
83Xq2p0E07o

[Chris Parker]

Hi kegage,


This is where we are going to disagree. While there are major philosophical, esoteric, mental and physical disciplinary and even ideological attributes in the martial arts, all martial arts, and especially a weapon arts is about combat. The whole reason why bokken and shinais were developed were so warriors could train and practice in a relatively realistic manner without actually killing each other (Something I think we all know.). It is possible to realistically train by doing combat. I know. I do it. The protective equipment needed has to be much more resilient than what is commonly used in most martial arts (even kendo) today, but it is possible.
In the quote above Chris mentions “kendo-style hitting, rather than committed cuts, a lot of little "tapping" actions, and a few other things that made most of what they did rather ineffective, and again removed from the reality it was meant to get closer to.” and the need of “using disabling or killing cuts every time.”, and he is absolutely correct on both points. The type of combat (I am going to stop using the word “sparring”( It does seem to leave the impression of light tapping style blows Chris was referring to.) I do is all about exactly what Chris is talking about full, committed, cuts to the head, body and extremities, and no one goes to the hospital. Bruising is, however, commonplace. Besides the armor, and the acurate design of the weapons, one of the keys to success is that the people who are training acknowledge when they receive a “good” cut (and small taps don’t count). The idea is to train in exactly the manner Chris described.

The problem occurs when people don't realise that they have recieved a realistically effective cut (again I'm going to go for a cut to the inside of the wrist here). It doesn't require a lot of strength to affect a powerful cut, to the point where most who would recieve it wouldn't recognise it as an effective action. In the heat of two people going at each other, such things (that would realistically be fight enders, or at least cause enough of an opening to finish the encounter), this small cut can be missed, leaving the end result unrealistic.

The other thing to realise is that, for Koryu systems, kata is combat. There is no difference, from the point of view of the approach and mindset required. The 16th Dai Shihan of the Sosuishi Ryu was quoted as saying that from the moment you bow in for kata practice, you and your opponent are warriors whose only job is to kill the other person. That is the mind set required for kata. Within systems such as Katori Shinto Ryu the kata are trained out of distance (by about half a step) in order to allow them to continue longer than would actually occur, but also allows them to increase the power and speed of the movements to a combat-realistic degree. There are other reasons specific to the Ryuha themselves, though.... The Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu teaches that once you are bowed in, you are in combat. The kata are trained in close, within actual combative distance and at speed and power. If you don't move, you get beaned pretty good and hard. With oak. Which, although not a sharp blade, is still not something I'd want.

The other thing to realise is that kata training, which realistically is as close to combat as you can get safely even with items such as bokken, is not the only training methodology of the various Ryu. Back to the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, there is a very high level form of training known as Aikuchi Roppo. Normally, this term would refer to a form of guardless dagger, but in the HNIR's case, it refers to a form of free-form training with fukuro shinai to test that the lessons and strategies of the Ryu's teachings have been properly internalised. Note, though, that this is not the form of all-in free-for-all "combat" that sparring is supposed to be, it is a Japanese "randori" free-form, where there is an attacker, and the defender, with their two swords, has completely free reign to respond as they will. At present, this training is only at a very high level in Japan, from what I understand.

If your group manages to take care of these issues (and honestly, from dealing with SCA guys in the past, I agree completely that they train hard, and are far more serious about what they do than most may realise, however they still had the issues I mentioned above), it would be great if you can get some footage of it up for myself (and others) to see. I'm getting rather intrigued....

[Langenschwert]

As has been established, sparring isn't a real fight, and can't be.

Here's a post by Matt Galas on the HEMA Alliance fora detailing some pertinent points:

http://www.hemaalliance.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=645

That knowledge that the opponent isn't actually TRYING to kill you makes a huge difference. Both sparring and kata can be useful, but remember that neither kata nor sparring are the real thing. They are tools that can be used to prepare you for it if done correctly.

For an example of what steel sparring can be, here's a clip the Fechtschule Gdansk showing their training regimen and tournament fighting. Very high-itensity stuff. Note the fluid disarms and transitions to grappling. Kind of Dog Brothers-like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7aXtzf7-Lk

Recent tournament:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qthCkt6Jolk&feature=player_embedded

They scare the crap out of me. :) Probably the best steel tourney fighters out there... certainly leagues ahead of anything else I've seen.

Best regards,

-Mark

[kegage]

Ken and Sukerkin:
Ok, I am going to admit that I am a historical Nipponophile, Japanophile (However you want to put it.). Not that I was trying to keep it a secret. Maybe I should have spoken up earlier, as I should have thought of it, when I was composing the question, that the Tokugawa Era would have a direct historical impact on how the schools would operate, but I didn’t think of it at the time.
I get the combat=lesson=kata scenario, it makes sense, and the nobody to fight so no reason train as if your going to have to fight. Also, I am a big fan (If you will) of the “Warring States Period”. In the historical group I am in that is my emphasis. So, I do understand the whole how many died from what weapons, and the emphasis of other weapons over the sword until later in history, and the development of Iai. I guess I kinda knew the reasons, but somehow got the idea there may have been some more esoteric reasons instead of pragmatic ones.

Ken wote: “Koryu is koryu simply because it has been around longer then anything else. Give Seitei another couple of hundred years, it’ll be considered koryu.”

That is probably very true. My main reason for asking the second question is that I have noticed a tendency for some martial artists to totally dismiss someone’s art or style as being inferior, “lousy”, or not even recognize it as martial art. I totally dismiss comments when they are about stuff like X-karate vs. X-karate. That’s like saying Baptist vs. Methodist. I get put out a little when I see vitriolic commentary about videos where people at a dojo are obviously trying something new and unfamiliar and are obviously unsure of them selves. Invariable the statement will be made that it is not koryu and/or JSA. Why not? If it is taking place at an established dojo, being done by recognized sensei and students (Even if it is being done badly. It takes time to start getting things right.) why would it not be considered valid. Is it just because it is out of the norm of traditional training methods? In some cases, I truly believe that those making the comments just have either serious superiority or inferiority issues, but that doesn’t account for most of the comments. The ones with those issues are usually the most vitriolic, and their criticisms contain the least amount of substance so they are easy to recognize.

Ken wrote: If you’re practicing the paired kata in any school, MJER, MSR or HNIR and you feel that it’s worth little to nothing in “real life”. Then you are either practicing incorrectly or not practicing hard enough.

Sukerkin wrote: Historically, paired forms are 'scripted' because otherwise you lose more people in training than you need to. However, it is up to the student to provide the combative mindset to go along with the techniques and to exercise the control to stop blows short of the heads of their partner whilst not 'learning' to never do any differently. If you saw myself and one of my fellow students performing the Tachiuchi forms you would hopefully see that the only reason what Uchidachi does not get his or her head caved in is because Shidachi chooses to apply tenuichi and stop the bokken just short.
That's about as combative as you can get in serious sword art training without killing each other.


I have absolute respect for any and all training methods unless they are intended to harm the student, or inflate the ego of the teacher (Here, let me beat the crap out of you so you can learn this technique, and I can show everyone how good I am.) I have seen both. Sometimes in one person, but I digress. I do understand the applications of kata, and how when properly done, at speed, can have the look, feel, and even the dangers of combat. I use unarmored; both single and paired, sword movement, cutting and offence/ defense drills and exercises in my training regimen that could be viewed, very rudimentarily, as similar to kata. While some of them are scripted, some are not. The idea behind the unscripted ones is to promote the student learning and developing their overall and combat perception skills, and their reaction timing and movement.

[chrispillertkd]

Also, the thing that wasn't mentioned is that for people like Musashi, duelling was their form of sparring, and depending on the way the duel happened or was agreed to, it was to the death or not. Those who survived got to pass on their knowledge.

So in a way, the formalized patterns, teaching methods and kuden (oral transmissions and 'secrets') are the distilled learnings and teachings that made them succesful, generation after generation of student and master. At least that is how I feel about it.

Western society places a high emphasis on 'free' sparring, and it is a valid tool. But that does not mean that people who don't use that tool in favor of other methods are missing out or have inferior skills.

I think that is illustrated nicely in this clip here:
83Xq2p0E07o

Hope no one minds the interruption but I just wanted to thank you for posting this video. Very cool and, I must admit, really increased my respect for iaido.

By the way, speaking as someone who doesn't practice a weapons based system, if they want to train full contact with a rigid weapon why not simply use fukuro shinai? (The shinai in the clip looked a bit like fukuro shinai, in fact, with the "bag" on the outside of the bamboo. Or was it just extra padding they added for the exercise?)

Pax,

Chris

[kegage]

Yes, a very good video. I particularly like how they expounded on the perception of the attack and the reaction.

ChristpillerTKD: In the combat training we do a shinai will break or come apart in short order. The armor too heavy for it to stand up. That is why we use rattan.

[kegage]

Chris: First I want express my deep appreciation for this post. In one go you have provided a perspective, information, and answered lingering questions about the Japanese sword arts community I have been trying to find out for many years. (I knew this was the right place) In the past I have inquired of both individual sword martial artist and, dojos, personally, via phone and e-mail, and I would get either no response, or they would act like it was some grand dojo super secret (I could tell you, but then either I have to kill you, or you have to commit suppuku.) Thanks again.



The problem occurs when people don't realise that they have recieved a realistically effective cut (again I'm going to go for a cut to the inside of the wrist here). It doesn't require a lot of strength to affect a powerful cut, to the point where most who would recieve it wouldn't recognise it as an effective action. In the heat of two people going at each other, such things (that would realistically be fight enders, or at least cause enough of an opening to finish the encounter), this small cut can be missed, leaving the end result unrealistic.

If you are referring to an impact type of cut, then yes that is included, taught and expected. If you are referring to a draw cut, that is a bit different. The armor we wear doesn’t facilitate well to draw cuts, and you are correct that in the heat and confusion of combat it can be difficult to tell the difference between a purposely executed draw cut and incidental contact. We do have observers watching the bouts, mostly for safety purposes, but they are occasionally called upon to comment on the success of an attack, if there is a question.
I have been investigating how we can expand the training we do in a manner that will allow us to train using both full and draw cuts, and thrusts, and possibly using modified Iaito that I am going to expound on more in my next post. Watch out Langenschwert, here I come. Don’t worry it won’t hurt.



The other thing to realise is that, for Koryu systems, kata is combat. There is no difference, from the point of view of the approach and mindset required. The 16th Dai Shihan of the Sosuishi Ryu was quoted as saying that from the moment you bow in for kata practice, you and your opponent are warriors whose only job is to kill the other person. That is the mind set required for kata. Within systems such as Katori Shinto Ryu the kata are trained out of distance (by about half a step) in order to allow them to continue longer than would actually occur, but also allows them to increase the power and speed of the movements to a combat-realistic degree. There are other reasons specific to the Ryuha themselves, though.... The Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu teaches that once you are bowed in, you are in combat. The kata are trained in close, within actual combative distance and at speed and power. If you don't move, you get beaned pretty good and hard. With oak. Which, although not a sharp blade, is still not something I'd want.

The other thing to realise is that kata training, which realistically is as close to combat as you can get safely even with items such as bokken, is not the only training methodology of the various Ryu. Back to the Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu, there is a very high level form of training known as Aikuchi Roppo. Normally, this term would refer to a form of guardless dagger, but in the HNIR's case, it refers to a form of free-form training with fukuro shinai to test that the lessons and strategies of the Ryu's teachings have been properly internalised. Note, though, that this is not the form of all-in free-for-all "combat" that sparring is supposed to be, it is a Japanese "randori" free-form, where there is an attacker, and the defender, with their two swords, has completely free reign to respond as they will. At present, this training is only at a very high level in Japan, from what I understand.

If your group manages to take care of these issues (and honestly, from dealing with SCA guys in the past, I agree completely that they train hard, and are far more serious about what they do than most may realise, however they still had the issues I mentioned above), it would be great if you can get some footage of it up for myself (and others) to see. I'm getting rather intrigued....

I am glad you are intrigued, and I appreciate your appreciation of those in the SCA. Now I have to live up to my own hype, and I want to try to do so. I am trying to arrange with some of the others to do a demonstration type of video. Nothing elaborate, just something simple that will give you an idea of what we are trying to do (and no loud and silly soundtrack!!!). However, it probably won’t be until next month before I will be able to get it done. Unfortunately, I am in the middle of handling a family medical crisis, and I not sure when that will be resolved. The other issue is that I really need to do some major aesthetic repair on my Do. It looks like it has the plague. I have nicknamed it “The Abomination”. That, also, is in the works. One of my students is going to help me take care of it. I really want to get started on my new Do maru. Oh, I digress again.

[kegage]

As has been established, sparring isn't a real fight, and can't be.

Here's a post by Matt Galas on the HEMA Alliance fora detailing some pertinent points:

http://www.hemaalliance.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=645

That knowledge that the opponent isn't actually TRYING to kill you makes a huge difference. Both sparring and kata can be useful, but remember that neither kata nor sparring are the real thing. They are tools that can be used to prepare you for it if done correctly.

This is an absolutely excellent article. In the SCA we have discussions and classes about this all the time.


For an example of what steel sparring can be, here's a clip the Fechtschule Gdansk showing their training regimen and tournament fighting. Very high-itensity stuff. Note the fluid disarms and transitions to grappling. Kind of Dog Brothers-like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7aXtzf7-Lk

Recent tournament:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qthCkt6Jolk&feature=player_embedded

They scare the crap out of me. :) Probably the best steel tourney fighters out there... certainly leagues ahead of anything else I've seen.

Best regards,

-Mark

Gee, this looks familiar. The SCA just recently (i.e.: a few years ago) started a new activity called “Cut and Thrust”. It looks a lot like this. The armor standards look about the same; however, I’m not sure we allow the grappling. The rules allow for “percussive strikes, draw-cuts, and thrusts. I know they are using weapons from daggers to pole-arms, but most people seem to be staying in the sword and small shield, case, sword and dagger, and long sword categories. I won’t claim it is as intense. So far, the bouts I have seen have not been.
This is what I was referring to in my post to Chris. I really, really want to do this, but course I want to do it Japanese and that is not a problem according to the rules. I also see great training potential in this.
I mention before the possibility of using an Iaito in this. As it stands right now, within the SCA scope of things, the use of an Iaito isn’t possible because of the weapon flexibility rules for thrusting. The only approved katana like weapon is a so-called katana that is made by Alchem. It is basically a European long sword with a curve put in the blade and a katana handle and tsuba as the hilt. Looks bad, feels bad, weight and balance are wrong. I am looking into the possibility of modifying an Iaito for our training purposes outside of the SCA, but I won’t do anything with it until I am absolutely positive it will be safe under normal use

[Chris Parker]

You may have problems with the Iaito idea, though. An iaito is typically made of a zinc/aluminium alloy, which is used specifically because it is too soft to take a true edge (the kissaki can still be pretty nasty, though....), and can't stand up to impact without being warped, bent, or outright ruined. So I'm not sure how well it will work with the way you describe things here.

Any questions, just ask. Ken and Sukerin, as well as Langenschwert are very experienced, and a wealth of knowledge and insight... if you know how to ask the right questions! One more aside for you, though. The bokken wasn't just developed to make training safer for the practitioners, a very real reason it was developed was to make training safer for the weapons themselves! By using a wooden replica, you didn't risk the cutting edge of a real sword, you didn't risk the blade getting bent or damaged, you didn't risk the tsuka snapping, or the mekugi breaking and the blade flying out... it was a single piece of wood, removing these possibilities, and ensuring that training could be intense, powerful, fast, constant, and go for hours. In terms of making it safer, here is one of my favourite clips of the Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu:

cQB5Lc1C_a8

The power and intesity of these blows are designed to kick off your adrenaline, under which stress you train the movements. And if you don't move, you get your bones broken. That's not making it that much safer, to be honest.

Oh, and under that type of adrenaline, even in kata practice, it's not unheard of, or even uncommon for the reciever to simply blank out and not remember the move they are meant to be making. Especially when the attacking partner is really trying to kill the poor trainee (as it should be). The way it works is that you are training to not need to "remember" the movements, or think about what they are, or what's coming up. You are training to have them an automatic responce, and that is achieved by training them under real stress and pressure (of a real attack). If you shut down under that stress and don't move, particularly at higher levels, you get hit. Hard. That's what kata training really is.

[Langenschwert]

Gee, this looks familiar. The SCA just recently (i.e.: a few years ago) started a new activity called “Cut and Thrust”. It looks a lot like this. The armor standards look about the same; however, I’m not sure we allow the grappling. The rules allow for “percussive strikes, draw-cuts, and thrusts. I know they are using weapons from daggers to pole-arms, but most people seem to be staying in the sword and small shield, case, sword and dagger, and long sword categories. I won’t claim it is as intense. So far, the bouts I have seen have not been.

I fully confess that while I am no slouch, those guys would trounce me soundly. I have no illusions on how well I'd do with SCA fencing either. I've done it once and it was and I gave as good as I got, but in general, under SCA rules, down I go.

Part of it is the role of protective equipment. What I train for is unarmoured duelling, by and large. SCA combat assumes the combatants are armoured not only actually, but conceptually... no matter the level of actual protection worn, the hits are counted to be against a more or less 12-13th Century level of protection for Heavy fighting, IIRC. Hand hits are not allowed/counted, and neither are hits below the knee. This makes the sword and shield combo more effective that it would be otherwise. Not saying it's a bad thing... it just is.

For us unarmoured duelling types, wearing too much armour distorts the footwork and balance, and really diminishes the "fear" of the blade when steel sparring. For the most part, I steel spar with a 16 gauge steel fencing helm and padded gloves and that's it. Sometimes I use hockey gloves which suck. One fences much more cautiously when you realize that one mistake can result in a broken finger. So for us the issue is control. We really are training NOT to hit the other guy too hard which is the inverse of what's required in a real fight. So I have a pell (wooden post) in my back yard that I whack the heck out of. It's sort of a pain that we have to train to do really fast hard strikes only to turn them into a friendly "tap" on impact when sparring.

The truth of the matter is, no training is really "like" combat. Heck, even a blunt steel sword, perfectly balanced does not behave the way a sharp sword does. Any training you do is an approximation of some of the factors of an encounter with sharp blades. In a real encounter, you're going to get tunnel vision, reduced hearing and may very well soil yourself. The latter of the three most people aren't too keen on replicating in the salle/dojo either.

So in short, do what your ryu tells you to do. They know the goals of the ryu better than you do. If you're doing free form sparring, just don't tell yourself "this is the real thing", because it isn't. It's fun, it's an excellent tool when used appropriately, but it's not the most realistic approximation of a lethal encounter. I don't know that anything is.

Best regards,

-Mark

[kegage]

Hey ya'll,
Sorry about that. Had to go away for a little while to handle some serious family medical stuff, but I am back now. I haven't really had a chance to read and digest the most recent posts. I will be doing that in the next couple of days, and I will probably have some responses. Of course.

Kevin

[kegage]

You may have problems with the Iaito idea, though. An iaito is typically made of a zinc/aluminium alloy, which is used specifically because it is too soft to take a true edge (the kissaki can still be pretty nasty, though....), and can't stand up to impact without being warped, bent, or outright ruined. So I'm not sure how well it will work with the way you describe things here.

Any questions, just ask. Ken and Sukerin, as well as Langenschwert are very experienced, and a wealth of knowledge and insight... if you know how to ask the right questions! One more aside for you, though. The bokken wasn't just developed to make training safer for the practitioners, a very real reason it was developed was to make training safer for the weapons themselves! By using a wooden replica, you didn't risk the cutting edge of a real sword, you didn't risk the blade getting bent or damaged, you didn't risk the tsuka snapping, or the mekugi breaking and the blade flying out... it was a single piece of wood, removing these possibilities, and ensuring that training could be intense, powerful, fast, constant, and go for hours. In terms of making it safer, here is one of my favourite clips of the Tenshinsho Den Katori Shinto Ryu:

Very true, and thanks for the word of caution. Right now the whole idea is in concept mode, and I wouldn't think of using it unless I was absolutely sure it was safe to do. However, regarding the use of iaito, that is no longer a consideration. Even though I found several steel iaito that looked like they would stand up to the abuse I also found a katana blade at Darkwood Armory that is designed for Cut and Thrust. It is a little lighter and longer than I would like, but otherwise it will do nicely.

Great clip. I enjoyed it very much.



The power and intesity of these blows are designed to kick off your adrenaline, under which stress you train the movements. And if you don't move, you get your bones broken. That's not making it that much safer, to be honest.

Oh, and under that type of adrenaline, even in kata practice, it's not unheard of, or even uncommon for the reciever to simply blank out and not remember the move they are meant to be making. Especially when the attacking partner is really trying to kill the poor trainee (as it should be). The way it works is that you are training to not need to "remember" the movements, or think about what they are, or what's coming up. You are training to have them an automatic responce, and that is achieved by training them under real stress and pressure (of a real attack). If you shut down under that stress and don't move, particularly at higher levels, you get hit. Hard. That's what kata training really is.

Correct. Been there, felt and done that. There are not many things I have done in martial arts that have been more satisfying than defeating an opponent and realizing that I didn't remember exactly how I did it because I acted instictively (from the Void if you will).
While we don't do kata in the same sense you do, we do have both individual and paired unarmored drills and exercises that are designed to teach and enhance the same skills as kata; movement, cutting technique, perception, reaction and muscle memory.

Kevin

[Langenschwert]

While we don't do kata in the same sense you do, we do have both individual and paired unarmored drills and exercises that are designed to teach and enhance the same skills as kata; movement, cutting technique, perception, reaction and muscle memory.

I'd like to see some. Traditional or not, a good drill is a good drill. :)

Best regards,

-Mark

[kegage]

I fully confess that while I am no slouch, those guys would trounce me soundly. I have no illusions on how well I'd do with SCA fencing either. I've done it once and it was and I gave as good as I got, but in general, under SCA rules, down I go.

Part of it is the role of protective equipment. What I train for is unarmoured duelling, by and large. SCA combat assumes the combatants are armoured not only actually, but conceptually... no matter the level of actual protection worn, the hits are counted to be against a more or less 12-13th Century level of protection for Heavy fighting, IIRC. Hand hits are not allowed/counted, and neither are hits below the knee. This makes the sword and shield combo more effective that it would be otherwise. Not saying it's a bad thing... it just is.

Not to be too picky, but in point of fact, the SCA Rapier and Cut and Thrust blow acknowledgement standards are head to toe and unarmored (i.e. street clothes).


For us unarmoured duelling types, wearing too much armour distorts the footwork and balance, and really diminishes the "fear" of the blade when steel sparring. For the most part, I steel spar with a 16 gauge steel fencing helm and padded gloves and that's it. Sometimes I use hockey gloves which suck. One fences much more cautiously when you realize that one mistake can result in a broken finger. So for us the issue is control. We really are training NOT to hit the other guy too hard which is the inverse of what's required in a real fight. So I have a pell (wooden post) in my back yard that I whack the heck out of. It's sort of a pain that we have to train to do really fast hard strikes only to turn them into a friendly "tap" on impact when sparring.

I agree hockey gloves are the pits, and they are slowly being outlawed. Since we now have better and more period protection commonly available. Yeah you have to wear a minimum armor for safety purposes, but it is pretty minimal.


The truth of the matter is, no training is really "like" combat. Heck, even a blunt steel sword, perfectly balanced does not behave the way a sharp sword does. Any training you do is an approximation of some of the factors of an encounter with sharp blades. In a real encounter, you're going to get tunnel vision, reduced hearing and may very well soil yourself. The latter of the three most people aren't too keen on replicating in the salle/dojo either.

You got that right. I haven't soiled myself yet, but I have been a victim of the other stuff.


So in short, do what your ryu tells you to do. They know the goals of the ryu better than you do. If you're doing free form sparring, just don't tell yourself "this is the real thing", because it isn't. It's fun, it's an excellent tool when used appropriately, but it's not the most realistic approximation of a lethal encounter. I don't know that anything is.

Best regards,

-Mark

I agree in principle. Unfortunately, I and the people I train with are the dojo. I have never met anyone in the SCA, or others I have trained with that believe for one second that what we do is close to real. If you are not afraid of severe injury, or death, then whatever you are doing is nowhere close to real. It may be realistic as a form of combat and have similar foibles in regards to good technique and form, but it ain't real.

Same to you,

Kevin