OK you can't say sparring is detrimental if you are pro kata. not for the sake of realism.

[Daniel Sullivan]

You just can't. Sorry does my head in. If you need realism in training. Need to be in the area you are going to fight have access to every tool you could conceivably use because otherwise you will not be able to fight.

Then kata does not fit that module.

So I am sure you can give the value of kata based on its own merits but let's see you give the value of kata based on these merits.

Sparring isn't a necessary part of self defense training. Beyond that, it is detrimental BECAUSE we revert to our training under duress. Unless sparring allows the person the opportunity to de-escalate, escape, evade, use a weapon, improvise a weapon, use the terrain etc. Does sparring usually contain these and other real world elements (lighting, environment, multiple attackers, starting from a position of disadvantage)? No. Does scenario based training contain these elements? Yes.



Do you spar with the possibility that other attackers will join the fight?
Do you spar with the possibility that the attacker(s) will have a weapon?
Do you spar with the ability to use a weapon, conventional or improvised?
Do you have the opportunity to de-escalate the situation so the sparring section doesn't even happen?
Do you have the opportunity to escape or evade the situation prior to or during the sparring session?
Do you spar only in a well lit, open space?
Do you spar with a specific rule set that both of you have agreed to abide by?
Do you spar only on a dry surface?
Do you spar only indoors?
Do you spar on stairs, in an elevator, inside a car, in the parking lot between two cars, on a slippery surface that slopes?
Do you spar to a conclusion i.e. you have escaped the situation or the opponent is no longer able to continue the attack?
Do you spar starting at a position of disadvantage i.e your opponent is standing over you or behind you?

Wait that is the arguments against sparring specifically quoted. I am suggesting they are the same arguments against kata. I could have changed the quotes to make that a bit more understandable.

Kata vs. sparring. Why not have both? Or what if both? And how do you define "kata?"

The topic of one vs. the other has been discussed so many times on MT (and probably everywhere else by now), and the positions of people are so ingrained that if you're in more than one discussion on the topic, you could practically just copy and paste your response from the first thread and dispense with coming up with new ones.

I've seen a LOT of people bash both sparring and kata, and often for almost the exact same reasons. Each side states emphatically, "well we do that too," cites all of the luminaries of their art and how they defeated many opponents as a result of their sparring or kata training, and with each citation comes the proverbial, "and that's why (insert training method) works/is better/is better than yours."

The truth is that unless you're in a real fight, you're not in a real fight. Everything you do is going to stop short in some way for the sake of safety (blinding your partners in order to practice realistic eye gouges is frowned upon).

I've trained in arts that use kata with no sparring, I've trained in arts that use sparring, but no kata, and I've trained in arts that use both, though depending on how you define kata and sparring, chances are that most arts, if not all arts, use both in some form or another.

There are different types of kata, and different ways of teaching with kata depending on the art; some use the solo kata by themselves, training in a broader range of techniques separately and with a partner. Others use the solo kata, and then break down the kata and train with a partner on the hidden techniques. Other arts have kata that are partnered and may train the kata by themselves, using separate drills to train in resistance, while others will do that to teach the moves, and then perform the kata with resistance.

Sparring is the same way; some sparring is exclusively for sport and preparation for competition. Some sparring is scenario based, and some sparring is realistic, but performed strictly in the confines of the studio and in whatever uniform the students normally wear.

I'm going to agree with you in the thesis statement you make: "You can't say sparring is detrimental if you are pro kata. not for the sake of realism," as both have their limitations; how well each works is really a matter of how the art is taught as a whole rather than a matter of kata vs. sparring.

I have never trained in a school that calls itself reality based or scenario based. But whatever I did train in worked well enough that when I've had to use it "on the street," it worked and I went home. That doesn't mean that scenario based and reality based training is inferior or unnecessary; it simply means that those schools utilize a different teaching pedagogy than the ones where I trained.

And that's really what it comes down to; teaching pedagogy. That, and the philosophy of the art (every art has one, even if it's as rudimentary as kill or be killed). Different methods are better suited to some arts than to others, and better suited to some people than to others.

You can comb the web and find videos of any style beating any style, and variation of any style beating any other variation of that same style. Quoting from the Ip Man movie, "It's not the style; it's you." That, and your instructor.

 

[K-man]

Karate is a very broad art. It is unfortunate that most karate dojos simply skim the surface.

OMG! Something I can agree with 100%.
:s391:

 

[K-man]

When I started karate for example, I had some idea of what was going on. When I started Bjj, I was on a completely different planet.

Well, I'm glad we at least agree on something.

Mate, you are still on that other planet but at last you are starting to make sense! :s81:

 

[K-man]

Except I did explain why its also necessary for SD, you simply missed it.

Again, if I'm doing a movement constantly in practice under significant pressure, I'm more capable of doing that same movement in a SD situation where I am again under significant pressure.

If I'm doing a pre-arranged form, without significant pressure, I am less capable of doing that same movement in a SD situation where I am under significant pressure.

As stated before, if we have two Bjj black belts, and one did his techniques flawlessly against a dummy, and another did his techniques flawlessly against a variety of living, breathing, resisting opponents while rolling, who would you believe to be the superior Bjj black belt?

Kata, pre-arranged drills, and one step sparring isn't much different than doing techniques on a dummy.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Hanzou, there have been dozens of posts trying to point out to you the difference between kata (kihon) and bunkai (application of kata). Bunkai is nothing like doing techniques on a dummy. Bunkai is tested on a non compliant partner. Kata is nothing to do with fighting in its kihon form. Pre-arranged drills and one step sparring have their place, perhaps not in your training and certainly not in mine but that doesn't invalidate them as training tools for those who do use them.

Get a life!

As to the two BJJ blackbelts, what you guys do with dummies is up to you.

 

[MJS]

The kata is prearranged but the bunkai isn't. It is what we call predictive response. Because it involves holding, the response of the attacker can be predicted. For example, if I am controlling your left arm and I strike say backfist to your head with my right, you either get hit or you protect with your right arm. If my strike is effective end of scenario. If you block then I switch control to your right arm and hit you with the left. We can train bunkai with anybody because uke's response is just what anyone would do. It is not choreographed. Bunkai doesn't work in the boxing/sparring situation because you can't control the response, another reason why Hanzou will never find recognisable aspects of kata in his sparring videos. We used to have pre-arranged drills but honesty, they were pretty useless and I took them out of the syllabus.
:asian:

Sure, I'd imagine that the counters, things that you can do, etc, are pretty much endless.

 

[MJS]

I was actually going to do that thread arguing against the idea you need to thrash the hell out of the uke in demonstration. Beating on a guy just standing there proves nothing and so many people seem to feel they have to do it.

I've never done that during a demo of a tech. Of course, after the tech is done slow, I would usually have them pick up the pace a bit, you know, putting a bit more realism into it, but even still, I never beat the hell out of my partner.

 

[K-man]

Sure, I'd imagine that the counters, things that you can do, etc, are pretty much endless.

What I teach to all my guys, Karate and Krav, is to use what they have in their grasp. So they will respond to an attack hopefully in a reflex way, as I do not teach blocks as I have explained before. The object is to engage and finish the altercation as soon as possible. In Krav it will often be from the 360 defence in one way or the other, in karate from 'sticky hands' and maybe into bunkai. Once you have control the options are like a smorgasbord.
:asian:

 

[drop bear]

I've never done that during a demo of a tech. Of course, after the tech is done slow, I would usually have them pick up the pace a bit, you know, putting a bit more realism into it, but even still, I never beat the hell out of my partner.

I have seen it happen a bit. Security training it happens a lot.

"Here let me get you in this gooseneck"
"OK"
"Now let the other guy get you in a gooseneck"
"Fine"
"Now try to escape" GRIND.....
"Ow Ow. I can't and that really hurts"
"Well this shows how effective these locks are"

 

[drop bear]

Since my last (only) post in this thread I've been out in the deep woods on an SEP Gathering. Just got back and have been catching up on emails and various posts. I have not read all the pages of this thread and I'm unlikely to do so, however, I'll touch on a few things starting with Drop Bear's respnse. To begin with, DB you're either very confused or very dishonest. As in my last post to you, I suggested that if YOU wanted to gain a better understanding of kata then you should start a thread and seek others input. So which is it, are you confused or dishonest?



Which are two things from a previous thread separated by multiple pages and not linked in anyway in that thread. You're linking two things that were in different conversations.



Why would it?

A kata contains principles on combat. One can have a periphreal understanding of the individual movements or a more in-depth understanding. As I always like to use as an example, the opening movements of Pinan Shodan can be viewed as a block (and a rather inefficent block) or it can be viewed as a shoulder lock (and a rather effective one). Further, the shoulder lock demonstrates and effective principle of locking that can be succesful standing or in the prone position and even from a grapple. This provides quite a bit of training and drilling and use on just ONE movement from the kata. In fact, one could train several sessions to several months on just this one movement and the techniques that flow from it.

Does it succed or fail when subject to the list I posted in the sparring thread? Is this a serious question? No, it really isn't but I'll point out the obvious to you anyway. Using the above shoulder lock again as the example, can you use it indoors and out? Yes. Can you use it in full light or dim light? Yes. Can you use it when defending against multiple opponents? Yes. Can it be used in a scenario based drill? All day long. Shall I go on down the list?

Kata is meant to be broken down into bunkai. Bunkai can be drilled individually by rote or in live action scenario based drills. Kata is not utilized by every art as a training methodology. It is however used in many arts as an effective training methodology. Kata can be nothing more than a pre-arranged dance learned to get to the next colored belt (i.e. a class filler) or it can be an indepth tool of study containing a multitude of real world effective principles that can be used in a violent altercation.

So it is now principles of combat and elements that can be used. And not something you will revert to under stress. Causing some sort of robotic response.

Sorry but that agument needs to get tuned up a bit before it becomes your anti sport super weapon.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Again, I said the difference maker is the fact that we have rolling/sparring where we get to test the techniques we learn under significant pressure and resistance against other skilled grapplers.

In free sparring against someone of comparable skill and experience and going flat out you get to test your attack and defense against resistance under significant pressure, so again no fundamental difference other than the level of contact (it is generally a lot safer to get choked out and submitted than it is to get punched in the head and kicked in the groin repeatedly).

Thus when we grapple someone who isn't a skilled grappler, this happens;

The only thing that video shows is that there is a huge difference between a beginner who is self taught and a high level practitioner of an art. That is how it should be. I can guarantee you if a beginner who was self taught in their back yard walked in off the street and I sparred with them flat out they wouldn't stand a chance either.

 

[K-man]

So it is now principles of combat and elements that can be used. And not something you will revert to under stress. Causing some sort of robotic response.

Sorry but that agument needs to get tuned up a bit before it becomes your anti sport super weapon.

Whether you revert to it under stress depends on your training. If someone says they know twenty five kata you can be pretty sure they probably don't know even one in a way that it could be used in a fight. Goju Ryu have twelve kata. I reckon I would be able to use two if the opportunity arose in a fight. Remember, the masters of years ago spent years learning just one kata and may have learned two or three in their lifetime.

I don't see kata (or the bunkai) in sport any time soon.
:asian:

 

[drop bear]

Whether you revert to it under stress depends on your training. If someone says they know twenty five kata you can be pretty sure they probably don't know even one in a way that it could be used in a fight. Goju Ryu have twelve kata. I reckon I would be able to use two if the opportunity arose in a fight. Remember, the masters of years ago spent years learning just one kata and may have learned two or three in their lifetime.

I don't see kata (or the bunkai) in sport any time soon.
:asian:

Wait we are comparing it to that guy who took a gun off a dude and then handed it back or Someone who spars on a mat but cannot figure out what to do if he is in between two cars. Robotic. That is not someone who can take a concept out of kata and then apply it.

Yeah that guy what was his name again?

I don't feel people are inherently that stupid under stress as a general rule.

 

[K-man]

Wait we are comparing it to that guy who took a gun off a dude and then handed it back or Someone who spars on a mat but cannot figure out what to do if he is in between two cars. Robotic. That is not someone who can take a concept out of kata and then apply it.

Yeah that guy what was his name again?

I don't feel people are inherently that stupid under stress as a general rule.

Maybe I am stupid. Exactly what are you trying to say here? It is making no sense to me at all.
:asian:

 

[Kong Soo Do]

So it is now principles of combat and elements that can be used. And not something you will revert to under stress. Causing some sort of robotic response.

Sorry but that agument needs to get tuned up a bit before it becomes your anti sport super weapon.

Couple of things:

First, you haven't answered my question yet; are you confused or simply dishonest?

Secondly, perhaps it is your poor grammar and continual use of the fragmentary sentence, but I don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

[MJS]

So it is now principles of combat and elements that can be used. And not something you will revert to under stress. Causing some sort of robotic response.

Sorry but that agument needs to get tuned up a bit before it becomes your anti sport super weapon.

I know you're addressing this to someone else, but I'll comment anyways. First, I'll start by saying that I'm not anti sport. I've said a million times, that there is NO ultimate art, despite what some people think. You show me the ultimate, end all be all art, and I'll train there in a hearbeat!! But, we all should know, that there is no best art. We can all learn from everything. I've learned things from MMA, BJJ, JKD, etc, and I've added them to my own training. It's not something I teach.

I came from a Kenpo background. There are numerous techs. in that art. IMHO, the techs are comprised of nothing but your basics, ie: punches, kicks, blocks, etc, put together in a specific fashion, to address a certain attack. NOTHING is set in stone with those techs though. If we're initially defending against a right hand lapel grab, and suddenly the guy changes up the attack, and adds in a punch, we need to be able to adapt, and adjust on the fly, to deal with the change. Much like kata, the SD techs, are nothing more than preset moves...that's it! BUT....nothing says that those moves have to be done verbatim, and anyone that does is full of it! This is why I used to harp on my students, the importance of the basics. The techs are nothing more than ideas, just like a mount escape in BJJ. There're quite a few, but they're not set in stone. I doubt you're going to find a BJJ gym that says you've got to do this escape move by move, like a robot, each and every time, whether you're just practicing or in a competition. Things change, and the BJJ guy is going to adapt, just like the stand up fighter.

So yes, if you train correctly...that being the key word...those principles, concepts, ideas, etc, and drill the **** out of them, then yes, you will revert back to them, under stress. No, I may not use the step by step move by move tech that we trained in class, but you can bet I'm going to use parts of them. It's rare that you'll see anyone, even under stress, when things are changing all the time, use something verbatim. The BJJ guy going for an arm lock...well, unless the guy on the bottom is an idiot, he's not going to let it happen...so he's going to move, fight it, whatever, and the other guy is going to have to adjust accordingly.

IMO, kata, much like the empty hand techs, are nothing more than moves (basics) put together in a certain fashion. Just like a boxer, training a jab, cross, hook on the pads. It's a preset combo, but nothing says he's got to throw those punches in that exact order. Maybe he'll throw a cross and then a hook...who knows. No, you're not going to fight like you would in a kata. That's crazy thinking..lol. But as I said...if you train right, you just might pull off a certain move, IF it feels right at that moment.

 

[drop bear]

Couple of things:

First, you haven't answered my question yet; are you confused or simply dishonest?

Secondly, perhaps it is your poor grammar and continual use of the fragmentary sentence, but I don't have a clue what you're talking about.

OK your question is a really weird one so I decided to let you off the hook with it. But if you want an explanation of why your question is silly. You have fabricated two outcomes based on your own bias expecting me to have to choose one. I don't really have to choose either or answer your question at all.

False dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Relying on things like a false dilemma is dishonest by the way. Relying on being a grammar Nazi is also dishonest.

But in simple terms I am still arguing your logic still is not sound regarding sparring kata and self defence. Either we are robots under stress and cannot apply kata or we are not and can apply kata. And either we are robots under stress and cannot apply sparring or we are not and can apply sparring.

But to direct the idea that we are robots when we spar and not when we do kata is a case of you just making stuff up.

 

[MJS]

Whether you revert to it under stress depends on your training. If someone says they know twenty five kata you can be pretty sure they probably don't know even one in a way that it could be used in a fight. Goju Ryu have twelve kata. I reckon I would be able to use two if the opportunity arose in a fight. Remember, the masters of years ago spent years learning just one kata and may have learned two or three in their lifetime.

I don't see kata (or the bunkai) in sport any time soon.
:asian:

Couldn't agree more with this!!! I used to laugh when I'd teach someone a new technique, tell them to work on it, and I'd be back. I'd come back a few minutes later, and they'd tell me that "They've got it, and they're ready to learn another!" Well, needless to say, 9 times out of 10, they didn't 'get it' and I was still able to find things for them to fix. Sorry, but IMHO, i doesn't matter if you know 3 techs or 30...if you suck at all of them, then learning yet 1 more, isn't going to help you much. LOL.

 

[drop bear]

I know you're addressing this to someone else, but I'll comment anyways. First, I'll start by saying that I'm not anti sport. I've said a million times, that there is NO ultimate art, despite what some people think. You show me the ultimate, end all be all art, and I'll train there in a hearbeat!! But, we all should know, that there is no best art. We can all learn from everything. I've learned things from MMA, BJJ, JKD, etc, and I've added them to my own training. It's not something I teach.

I came from a Kenpo background. There are numerous techs. in that art. IMHO, the techs are comprised of nothing but your basics, ie: punches, kicks, blocks, etc, put together in a specific fashion, to address a certain attack. NOTHING is set in stone with those techs though. If we're initially defending against a right hand lapel grab, and suddenly the guy changes up the attack, and adds in a punch, we need to be able to adapt, and adjust on the fly, to deal with the change. Much like kata, the SD techs, are nothing more than preset moves...that's it! BUT....nothing says that those moves have to be done verbatim, and anyone that does is full of it! This is why I used to harp on my students, the importance of the basics. The techs are nothing more than ideas, just like a mount escape in BJJ. There're quite a few, but they're not set in stone. I doubt you're going to find a BJJ gym that says you've got to do this escape move by move, like a robot, each and every time, whether you're just practicing or in a competition. Things change, and the BJJ guy is going to adapt, just like the stand up fighter.

So yes, if you train correctly...that being the key word...those principles, concepts, ideas, etc, and drill the **** out of them, then yes, you will revert back to them, under stress. No, I may not use the step by step move by move tech that we trained in class, but you can bet I'm going to use parts of them. It's rare that you'll see anyone, even under stress, when things are changing all the time, use something verbatim. The BJJ guy going for an arm lock...well, unless the guy on the bottom is an idiot, he's not going to let it happen...so he's going to move, fight it, whatever, and the other guy is going to have to adjust accordingly.

IMO, kata, much like the empty hand techs, are nothing more than moves (basics) put together in a certain fashion. Just like a boxer, training a jab, cross, hook on the pads. It's a preset combo, but nothing says he's got to throw those punches in that exact order. Maybe he'll throw a cross and then a hook...who knows. No, you're not going to fight like you would in a kata. That's crazy thinking..lol. But as I said...if you train right, you just might pull off a certain move, IF it feels right at that moment.

We are missing a premis that is part of my OP.

In a fight you will revert to your training due to stress. The example made was that cop. Who trained a gun disarm and handed back the gun. Then disarmed a guy on the street gave the guy the gun back and was shot.

This shows that if you train in a method that is unrealistic like in a gym or dojo you will be hampered by the change in environment tactics and so on and that will count against you in a real confrontation.

This is why sparring does not prepare you for the street and is actually detremental. That you have to train in the environment you will fight and in the manner you will fight.

Kata on the other hand is different because we like it better?

 

[MJS]

We are missing a premis that is part of my OP.

OK...I'll have to go back and re-read it.

In a fight you will revert to your training due to stress. The example made was that cop. Who trained a gun disarm and handed back the gun. Then disarmed a guy on the street gave the guy the gun back and was shot.

Agreed. That is why when we train weapon disarms, after we gain control, and the tech is done, we don't hand it back. Fortunately, many of the people I train with, are from a LE background, so they don't make those mistakes, as they've learned from the examples that you gave.

This shows that if you train in a method that is unrealistic like in a gym or dojo you will be hampered by the change in environment tactics and so on and that will count against you in a real confrontation.

OK, so where are you supposed to train then? Sorry, but for me, it's not a matter of whether it's a BJJ/MMA gym, or a dojo. It's up to the individual and what they want to get out of their training. Is it possible, that the techs that you'd learn in a traditional dojo, are outdated, impractical, etc.? Sure. So, it's then up to the student to either leave that art, or seek out additional training. I've said countless times, that the ground defenses in Kenpo suck. Yes, I said it. I'm not a Kenpo nutrider. Sure, maybe my teacher didn't know certain things, maybe this, maybe that. Sorry, we can't all be privy to the best of the best. BUT...given what I said, I sought out training from people who did BJJ, to help my ground game. I'm not interested in learning 50 different escapes, locks, chokes, or even testing for rank or competing. I'm interested in learning some basic defense, drilling the **** out of it, and if I find myself on the ground, I might stand a better chance, compared to if I didn't have that training at all. Against a solid MMA/BJJ guy, sure, I'd get stomped anyways, but that goes for anything.

This is why sparring does not prepare you for the street and is actually detremental. That you have to train in the environment you will fight and in the manner you will fight.

Wait...I thought you were for sparring? Sparring, like anything, IMO, has it's pros and cons. I enjoy it, but I don't rely on that as my sole learning tool for effective street SD.

Kata on the other hand is different because we like it better?

LOL...like I said...I do kata, because it's in all the arts I do. I never said I was a kata fanatic. I also never said it was useless either.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

OK...I'll have to go back and re-read it.

...
Wait...I thought you were for sparring? Sparring, like anything, IMO, has it's pros and cons. I enjoy it, but I don't rely on that as my sole learning tool for effective street SD.

I think you're missing the context of drop bear's original complaint. I'll quote myself from earlier in this thread, since I think many people responding have missed the explanation:

While I don't agree with the confrontational way drop bear phrased this post, I do understand where he's coming from. I'll put it in the context of the thread it spun off of and hopefully be less confrontational about it:

Kong Soo Do claimed that sparring is a suboptimal training tool for self-defense because it does not include a host of real world considerations: de-escalation, escape & evasion, environmental factors, improvised weapons, etc, etc, etc.

Kong Soo Do claimed that kata is an effective training tool for self-defense.

Drop bear notes that kata does not include any of those real world considerations (de-escalation, escape & evasion, environmental factors, improvised weapons, etc, etc, etc.) that Kong dinged sparring for not having. Drop bear notes a certain inconsistency - how can you say training method A is not good because it lacks certain qualities but say training method B is good despite lacking those same qualities?

Drop bear may be (as several people in this thread have commented) completely ignorant of kata and its uses, but he doesn't have to know much about kata to question the inconsistency of the claims.

To take it out of the realm of martial arts - if I tell you that a Toyota Prius is a poor vehicle for getting around because it can't fly or go on water and in the next breath tell you that a bicycle is a great vehicle for getting around, you might be confused as to what I am thinking.

Now, I'm not any kind of kata expert, but I would guess the defenders of kata would say that kata does not need all those considerations (de-escalation, environmental factors, et al) to be useful for self-defense because it has a different purpose than scenario training and is just focused on conveying certain specific skills and knowledge. You can train kata to gain that knowledge and skillset, and then use scenario training to address other issues relevant to self-defense.

This, by the way, is the exact same argument I used in that other thread to argue for the value of sparring in self-defense training (see my 12:03 pm post). Sparring doesn't necessarily have to include all those additional factors that you can find in scenario training because it is more narrowly focused on training certain specific skills and attributes in more depth. I think Kong ended up agreeing with me on that after I explained my point multiple times in different ways.

BTW - I think we can have more productive conversations here if we can break the habit of treating everybody who disagrees with us as willfully ignorant.

If drop bear doesn't object, I'll reiterate my interpretation of what he was getting at. I can see how his point could be missed by anyone who wasn't following the other thread in its entirety.

I don't believe this thread was intended as a diss on kata in any way.

It's fine to practice kata for whatever benefits you feel it brings for self-defense.

It's fine to practice sparring for whatever benefits you feel it brings for self-defense.

It's fine to prefer kata to sparring because you value the specific benefits of the one over the other. (I might disagree with you, but there's nothing logically inconsistent about your position.)

It's seemingly contradictory to say "sparring is not good for self-defense training because it lacks elements A, B, C, D & E, but kata is just fine for self-defense training even though it lacks elements A, B, C, D & E." This is the exact claim that Kong made in the other thread, and it is this claim which drop bear is responding to.

Because I have a lot of respect for Kong, I'm racking my brain to come up with an explanation for how this position can not be self-contradictory. The best I've been able to come up with is something like this: "The positive values of sparring for self-defense training are (1, 2, 3). These values would be greatly enhanced by including A, B, C, D & E, which would transform it into scenario training. Therefore, sparring is a suboptimal self-defense training tool, at least compared to scenario training. In contrast, the positive values of kata for self-defense training are (4, 5, 6). These particular values are not enhanced by including A, B, C, D & E because (insert explanation here). Therefore kata is valuable as a training method with purposes distinct from scenario training while sparring is better replaced by scenario training."

Kong would have to fill in details 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and *insert explanation here*, but this would be a non-self-contradictory argument that would be consistent with his statements in the other thread. I'll be interested to see if he's willing to fill in those details or offer some other non-inconsistent argument.

Without this context it gets confusing to understand what drop bear is getting at.