How important is contact sparring in MA?

[Hanzou]

Again, I'm going to disagree with you. Let me explain why, with respect :wavey:

Did the triangle choke work in this video? Apparently it did. Was it self defense? Hard to say from the video clip, however, let's assume it was. Rather than having a strong self defense application, it has an extremely poor self defense application. First, the guy was so focused on trying to get the choke applied that he was oblivious to his surroundings. Secondly, at no time was he trying to regain his feet as quickly as possible. Thirdly, if this individual had a weapon he would not have been hindered in using it. Fourthly, he was only able to apply this choke due to the good graces of the people surrounding him. If the other guy had a buddy willing to step in and kick in the head of the guy on the bottom it would have gone quite differently. A good ground defensive strategy does NOT employ staying on the ground and does NOT assume that it is a one-on-one fight. A good ground defense strategy utilizes a strategy of regaining the feet as quickly as possible, by whatever means is necessary.

First: Its pretty hard to be concerned about your surroundings when someone is punching you in the face.

Second: How do you know he wasn't trying to regain his feet? There is no easy way to reverse someone who is driving into you while you're on your back. Gravity and leverage in that situation are not on your side, especially if the person is larger than you. Which is why the guard exists, and is such a valuable position.

Third: While there was no weapon in this situation, the rape attempt in Dubai (which I also posted, yet you ignored) did have a weapon present. The choke was still applied effectively.

Fourth: There's plenty of cases where there are bystanders and no one interferes with two people going at it. However, for gits and shingles, let's say that in this situation people standing around started attacking him too; The guy was being punched in the face by a guy on top of him. If some people decided to stomp his head in on top of the guy bashing his face into the concrete, he'd be screwed. No method of self defense or martial art would be of much use in that situation. However, in the situation actually posted, you had a guy on his back defending himself from an attacker trying to cave his face in. In many cases you're screwed just from that alone.

No opinion on the woman in Dubai who was saved from an armed rapist thanks to a triangle choke?

 

[drop bear]

Except that under duress/stress you revert to your training (which includes the methodology). Haven't you researched into this yet? You really should if you haven't.

Meaning that sport fighting will be more effective. Because the sports method has been applied during sparring. It is going to be a lot harder to put your attacker in a redman suit first.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8tn1I07k0Bs


And it is not even a case of physicality. Applied sports method works. And that is a fact.
http://www.esnewsreporting.com/72-year-old-retired-boxer-beats-up-a-robber/

 

[Kong Soo Do]

First: Its pretty hard to be concerned about your surroundings when someone is punching you in the face.

Not if you've trained to be aware of your surroundings under adverse conditions. We train that way, and do it for real. That's good self defense training methodology. That's how you capitalize on available resources and opportunities. Those that do this for real, understand. Those that don't do this for real, don't understand.

Second: How do you know he wasn't trying to regain his feet? There is no easy way to reverse someone who is driving into you while you're on your back. Gravity and leverage in that situation are not on your side, especially if the person is larger than you. Which is why the guard exists, and is such a valuable position.

Because I watched the video. He wasn't aware of anything, nor trying to do anything except get the choke. And there are several ways to regain your feet when you aren't tied to an artificial rule set. Again, we train this way and do it for real.

Third: While there was no weapon in this situation, the rape attempt in Dubai (which I also posted, yet you ignored) did have a weapon present. The choke was still applied effectively.

Why would you assume I ignored you? There have been seven pages of information posted so far in this thread. Someone isn't ignoring you if they don't respond to each and every point for seven pages. Don't be obtuse. I've responded professionally and respectfully to you. If you can't do the same then state that you can't so I'll know it's pointless to talk with you and simply ignore you. As for the rape attempt, glad she's okay. Or should I say I'm glad she was lucky. If there were two attackers she wouldn't have been lucky using a sport technique in a self defense situation. A good self defense technique(s) anticipate multiple attackers and ways to deal with them. Not use sport techniques that limit your options and force you to rely on luck.

Fourth: There's plenty of cases where there are bystanders and no one interferes with two people going at it.

And there's plenty of cases where they do interfere to the detriment of the victim. Your way relies on luck and hope. My way relies on eliminating or mitigating potential problems.

No method of self defense or martial art would be of much use in that situation.

It is apparent then that your are not familiar with self defense (or martial arts that focus on self defense) if you hold that opinion. Once again, we train that way and utilize that training in real life. Not magic. Not flashy. And not infallible, but it beats luck and hope.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Meaning that sport fighting will be more effective. Because the sports method has been applied during sparring. It is going to be a lot harder to put your attacker in a redman suit first.

Your video has already been posted and comment on elsewhere. I pointed out the problems with it already so fill free to look it up.

nd it is not even a case of physicality. Applied sports method works. And that is a fact.

No, it is simply your opinion based upon your level of knowledge and perspective of training.

 

[K-man]

Meaning that sport fighting will be more effective. Because the sports method has been applied during sparring. It is going to be a lot harder to put your attacker in a redman suit first.

I have no doubt that someone good in the sporting context would be able to look after themselves on the street. What I can't understand is why reality based martial artists would be ineffective. This thread, like all the others Hanzou has twisted, has gone down the same burrow as the rest. Sad!

 

[Hanzou]

Not if you've trained to be aware of your surroundings under adverse conditions. We train that way, and do it for real. That's good self defense training methodology. That's how you capitalize on available resources and opportunities. Those that do this for real, understand. Those that don't do this for real, don't understand.

So you actually have someone lying on concrete or gravel while someone is punching them in the face with no padding or protection?

Because I watched the video. He wasn't aware of anything, nor trying to do anything except get the choke. And there are several ways to regain your feet when you aren't tied to an artificial rule set. Again, we train this way and do it for real.

Ever stop to consider that he attempted to get to his feet, failed, and then went for the choke?

And while there are several ways to regain your feet when someone's on top of you, that doesn't mean that those several methods are always going to work. Which is why its good to have an alternate route.

Why would you assume I ignored you? There have been seven pages of information posted so far in this thread. Someone isn't ignoring you if they don't respond to each and every point for seven pages. Don't be obtuse. I've responded professionally and respectfully to you. If you can't do the same then state that you can't so I'll know it's pointless to talk with you and simply ignore you.

Uh, the attempted rape was in the same post as the video you responded to.

As for the rape attempt, glad she's okay. Or should I say I'm glad she was lucky. If there were two attackers she wouldn't have been lucky using a sport technique in a self defense situation. A good self defense technique(s) anticipate multiple attackers and ways to deal with them. Not use sport techniques that limit your options and force you to rely on luck.

You mean limit her options to the point where she was proficient enough to subdue her attacker and survive?

It seems that the common theme with you is that someone is at a disadvantage if they're unarmed and facing someone with a weapon, or alone against multiple attackers. Considering that I have yet to see "self defense" guys beating down groups of people armed and unarmed, you'll excuse me if I doubt that people trained in that fashion are any more adept at those situations as anyone else.

And there's plenty of cases where they do interfere to the detriment of the victim. Your way relies on luck and hope. My way relies on eliminating or mitigating potential problems.

Both scenarios I posted had little to do with luck or hope. Both survived because of their skills that they gained from training in a sport.

It is apparent then that your are not familiar with self defense (or martial arts that focus on self defense) if you hold that opinion. Once again, we train that way and utilize that training in real life. Not magic. Not flashy. And not infallible, but it beats luck and hope.

Then you could post some examples of some self defense-based MAist defeating groups of armed assailants with their bare hands. A news report of video would suffice.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

This thread, like all the others Hanzou has twisted, has gone down the same burrow as the rest. Sad!

It's like they say, "You can lead an elephant to water...but you can't push one in". :boing2:

 

[Hanzou]

I have no doubt that someone good in the sporting context would be able to look after themselves on the street. What I can't understand is why reality based martial artists would be ineffective. This thread, like all the others Hanzou has twisted, has gone down the same burrow as the rest. Sad!

Who said that reality-based arts would be ineffective?

Kong Soo is the one saying that sport MAist are ineffective in self defense situations.

 

[Flying Crane]

Would you care to post some vids showing traditional stylists utilizing that level of head movement and evasiveness?

Do you believe that if you can't find it on Youtube, it doesn't exist in the world?

 

[Flying Crane]

If you spent your time and money in WC, Shotokan, Shaolin, or TSD and ended up fighting just like a boxer, you wasted your money. You should have just taken boxing.

That's funny stuff. Every time you say something about traditional martial arts, you show how little you understand about them.

Maybe you know something about MMA. I wouldn't be the one to judge, and I'm the first to say I know little about MMA. I have no interest in it, I don't pay it any attention. So maybe you know something about it, maybe you don't. I'll let others judge that.

But you know nothing about traditional martial arts.

 

[Hanzou]

Do you believe that if you can't find it on Youtube, it doesn't exist in the world?

I believe that if what you said earlier was true, evidence of it should be fairly easy to find.

That's funny stuff. Every time you say something about traditional martial arts, you show how little you understand about them.


Maybe you know something about MMA. I wouldn't be the one to judge, and I'm the first to say I know little about MMA. I have no interest in it, I don't pay it any attention. So maybe you know something about it, maybe you don't. I'll let others judge that.


But you know nothing about traditional martial arts.

I have a black belt in Shotokan, and I trained briefly in Tang Soo Do. I've also seen how WC exponents fight on numerous occasions.

It's fair to say that I know quite a bit about 3/4 the traditional styles you listed. None of them fight like that Armenian boxer.

Just saying.

 

[drop bear]

Do you believe that if you can't find it on Youtube, it doesn't exist in the world?

Is there some reason you couldn't find it?

 

[drop bear]

I have no doubt that someone good in the sporting context would be able to look after themselves on the street. What I can't understand is why reality based martial artists would be ineffective. This thread, like all the others Hanzou has twisted, has gone down the same burrow as the rest. Sad!

Well not just the sporting context. Kong so do is just rocking out these facts that are pretty much opinion from rbsders. And look opinion is fine but let's not pretend it is science or that there is no debate on the matter.

If rbsd want to hinge their argument that people fight as they train so therefore everybody has to do drills in a parking lot the argument falls apart.

If you had to fight exactly as you train you would have to do sport. Because sport is the only situation where in training two people compete who are equally matched and equally motivated until one person is incapacitated. Now not all the time with points and such. But more often than any other method.


You can defend yourself in the street with boxing gloves on if you were that sort of person. A boxer with gloves has enough hurt in their rule set to drop people.

Now of course you wouldn't if given a choice. But the argument is that you don't have one so I am just rolling with that at the moment.

Because given a choice the sports fighter could for example choose to kick the mugger in the head on the deck because he feared there may be a knife.

And if you have choice then sparring could benefit you by training the core skills regardless if all of sparring is applicable in a specific self defence. Because in that situation you would be able to choose what tactics you would employ.

 

[K-man]

Who said that reality-based arts would be ineffective?

Kong Soo is the one saying that sport MAist are ineffective in self defense situations.

Mmm! I don't think he said that at all. He did point out some failings that may have been the result of the video guy's sport based training.

I believe that if what you said earlier was true, evidence of it should be fairly easy to find.

I have a black belt in Shotokan, and I trained briefly in Tang Soo Do. I've also seen how WC exponents fight on numerous occasions.

It's fair to say that I know quite a bit about 3/4 the traditional styles you listed. None of them fight like that Armenian boxer.

Just saying.

I have a real issue with YouTube videos. I posted three videos earlier this week by people claiming to be expert in their field. All had basic flaws that were against the principles of their style. You delight in posting the worst videos you can find to demonstrate the failings of other styles. We have had armchair experts here before who regarded themselves as God's gift to our martial art community. Unfortunately they couldn't live up to their claims. Now you are here claiming that you are the greatest thing around, or at least I assume from your posts that you are at the top of the MMA tree, and in comparison all others are of lessor ability. You claim to know quite a bit about 3/4 of the traditional styles. Obviously Aikido and Okinawan Karate fall outside your area of expertise as you demonstrated total ignorance of the training we do. You have made similar disparaging comments about WC and when anyone tried to stand up to your criticism you bully them. Kong, FC and others try to point out that they have used their training on the street you ignore the facts and revert to claiming that their styles are ineffective compared to BJJ or MMA. For Heaven's sake, get a life. Debate techniques but don't dis the styles and the practitioners.

As to your BB in Shotokan. A sport based style and you did say you were very young when you were training in it. I doubt you experience in Shotokan is within a bull's roar of the Shotokan guys I know.

Just saying, now I've had enough of this thread. :wavey:

 

[K-man]

This was posted in the time I was posting the previous one so take this one as an exception.

Well not just the sporting context. Kong so do is just rocking out these facts that are pretty much opinion from rbsders. And look opinion is fine but let's not pretend it is science or that there is no debate on the matter.

If rbsd want to hinge their argument that people fight as they train so therefore everybody has to do drills in a parking lot the argument falls apart.

KSD is a cop on the streets. He is one of the few guys on this forum who has first hand experience against the worst guys in the community. I would take his word against what works on the streets above any sport fighter. I have been trained by high profile martial artists who have trained police and military. I have trained with police and ex military who have used their skills in high pressure situations. I have no doubt that the stuff I train is the real deal and I have no trouble in believing that the training of others is effective as well.

If you had to fight exactly as you train you would have to do sport. Because sport is the only situation where in training two people compete who are equally matched and equally motivated until one person is incapacitated. Now not all the time with points and such. But more often than any other method.

Not true. The real world does not match up equally matched and equally motivated persons. Military have their training, police have their training, then they go out into the real world. They don't test what they learn in the ring. I would suggest they fight as they have trained.

You can defend yourself in the street with boxing gloves on if you were that sort of person. A boxer with gloves has enough hurt in their rule set to drop people.

I have no doubt about that.

Because given a choice the sports fighter could for example choose to kick the mugger in the head on the deck because he feared there may be a knife.

And if you have choice then sparring could benefit you by training the core skills regardless if all of sparring is applicable in a specific self defence. Because in that situation you would be able to choose what tactics you would employ.

Under the definition of sparring outlined earlier in this thread almost all styles spar. That's why I didn't bother joining the debate sooner. Eventually it developed into the same old arguement as I felt it invariably would.
:asian:

 

[Hanzou]

Mmm! I don't think he said that at all. He did point out some failings that may have been the result of the video guy's sport based training.

The fact that you think the guy had some sort of failing is my point. The guy in the vid defeated his opponent and survived the assault. Where was the failing in his training?

Kong also attributed the success of those sport styles in SD situations as "luck", implying that if they had some sort of other training, it would be based more on skill and awareness. As if skill and awareness in self defense terms is an alien concept in Sport MA.

I have a real issue with YouTube videos. I posted three videos earlier this week by people claiming to be expert in their field. All had basic flaws that were against the principles of their style. You delight in posting the worst videos you can find to demonstrate the failings of other styles. We have had armchair experts here before who regarded themselves as God's gift to our martial art community. Unfortunately they couldn't live up to their claims. Now you are here claiming that you are the greatest thing around, or at least I assume from your posts that you are at the top of the MMA tree, and in comparison all others are of lessor ability.

Where did I imply or claim I was the greatest thing around? I merely desire objective evidence to go along with the conversation. In the case of this conversation; If you can provide objective evidence of a RBSD guy beating a bunch of armed attackers with his bare hands ala Steven Segal, I'll be a believer.

Also I don't even practice MMA. :lfao: I'm Bjj for life brother.

You claim to know quite a bit about 3/4 of the traditional styles. Obviously Aikido and Okinawan Karate fall outside your area of expertise as you demonstrated total ignorance of the training we do. You have made similar disparaging comments about WC and when anyone tried to stand up to your criticism you bully them. Kong, FC and others try to point out that they have used their training on the street you ignore the facts and revert to claiming that their styles are ineffective compared to BJJ or MMA. For Heaven's sake, get a life. Debate techniques but don't dis the styles and the practitioners.

When I said 3/4 of traditional styles, I was talking about the traditional styles FC mentioned in his post. Those styles were Shoto, WC, TSD, and Shaolin. I have experience with 3/4 of those styles.

As for disparaging WC, I was only disparaging anti-grappling, which is nonsense of the highest order.

As to your BB in Shotokan. A sport based style and you did say you were very young when you were training in it. I doubt you experience in Shotokan is within a bull's roar of the Shotokan guys I know.

I can agree with that. I did my best effort to flush my knowledge of Shotokan out of mind when I left that style years ago. I kept the kicks and hand techniques though, and that's about it.

 

[MJS]

This discussion sort of emerged in the other thread, but I thought it was pretty off topic there, and really deserved its own thread.

I'm a pretty firm believer in contact sparring; Sparring in which you actually hit or grapple with another person. I feel that the only way you can learn to hit or grapple with someone is to actually hit or grapple someone.

Does anyone feel that you can develop such skills without contact sparring, or no sparring at all?

I'm a firm believer in it as well. When I trained Kenpo, we sparred, but the contact, even at the Black Belt level, the strikes were limited to above the belt, nothing to the legs, and nothing to the head. IF that was allowed, it was very light contact. In the 3, going on 4 years that I've been doing Kyokushin, the contact is much harder, and while we don't punch to the face, kicks to the head are allowed, as are leg kicks. Sparring, while we don't do it every class, is high on the ladder, for lack of better words. Competing is important in the art. Of course, it is optional. My school is hosting a tournament next Saturday, and my teacher encourages everyone to go, even if they just do kata. There are tournaments in other states, ie: NY, Maine, etc, that he encourages us to go to. There was one recently in Costa Rica, that a few of our students went to.

Now, usually when we spar, the contact/intensity of the match, is pretty hard. While I do enjoy this, I personally feel that there should be times, when we focus more on a certain drill, technique, and slow the pace as well as the contact level down, just a bit. Again, nothing wrong with going out and banging hard, but you can't tell me that every boxer or guy that does BJJ or MMA, spars full out, every session. I'd imagine that going all out, all the time, would lead to injury. Furthermore, for me at least, when I want to work on something specific, I like to drill it slow, get the fine points, etc, and then gradually speed things up, and try it during sparring.

Just to add: When I'd do some grappling with some of my training partners, even that wouldn't be all out, each time. Again, sometimes specific things would be trained, ie: working an escape from a specific position, while the other guy is working to maintain that position. Sometimes it'd be a flow drill, transitioning from one position to the next, with the bottom guy working to escape. Other times, we'd be looking for a specific lock or choke. The list is really endless.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Fourth: There's plenty of cases where there are bystanders and no one interferes with two people going at it.

Which means absolutely nothing in any similar situation.

 

[RTKDCMB]

It's pretty arrogant to assume that you know more about striking than a professional boxer, and that said boxer is doing it "wrong".

I have been training in a primarily striking art for 27 years now, statistically speaking, I probably do know more about striking than most professional fighters.

Why the need to switch over to a boxer/MMA style? Isn't TKD good enough?

Because that was not the point of the exercise.

Rhee Taekwondo - Melbourne University Taekwondo Club

Well what would you like to see?

Something a little closer to you or your school specifically.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Kong Soo is the one saying that sport MAist are ineffective in self defense situations.

No, I'm saying that sport based training methodology is sub-optimal and detrimental to sound self-defense situations. And I've explained in detail, several times why I hold to that position. I, and others have linked to additional information to explain and support that position. Additionally, I have examined several of the YT videos posted in this and other threads and detailed why the sport training methodology is sub-optimal and detrimental.

So the bottom line and takeaway message is simply this; sport training methodology is sub-optimal and detrimental (insufficient) for the needs of real world altercations AND self defense training methodology is sup-optimal and detrimental (insufficient) for the needs of competition. In direct response to the OP, contact sparring is not needed in martial arts if the martial art (including defensive tactics, combative systems or RBCS) is focused or has the goal of self defense. Additionally, contact sparring in-and-of-itself is sub-optimal and detrimental for self defense for the reasons I've already detailed in this thread. Military, law enforcement, corrections and E.P. don't spar, they use scenario based training which allows for full contact in addition to the other necessary elements for solid self defense.