3 persons sparring

[Buka]

We used to do a lot of variations of sparring. The student feedback over the years was positive, most said it helped them a great deal. Said it was enjoyable, too.

We did sport sparring (points) kickboxing, boxing, standup into grappling, we did what we called the subtraction game, we sparred under a strobe light (really trippy, difficult to judge distance, difficult to quickly identify a blitz.) We sparred under a black light - one student in a black gi, one in a white. Black gi had a ball, white gi usually got smoked. We played bull in the ring.

It was all good, lot of fun, too.

 

[Holmejr]

Good idea!

Danny Inosanto used to do this in the last 70’s early 80’s. We would do 1 on 2, 2 on 2…4 on 4. He would set it up with something like “these 4 are trying to leave and these 4 are going to stop them”. There would be no back hitting, although you could grab someone from the back, but not around the throat/head.
At our school now we gang up on each other randomly with weapons (stick, practice blades) and open hand. But we don’t formally spar. They are more like surprise attacks.

 

[GojuTommy]

What separates this from all 3 people attacking whomever they like?
If A is fighting B, and C is fighting both A and B..
Why would A not fight C as well?
Why would B not fight C?
At that point, A is fighting B and C, B is fighting A and C, and C is fighting A and B. So just call it a free for all.

If A is fighting B and C attacks B what purpose would there be for A to attack C?

This sort of drill would be a self defense style drill, and the 3rd person represents another attacker/Good Samaritan.
Ideally I’d prefer if A then disengaged from B and called the police and EMS at that point.

 

[GojuTommy]

What I don't like about it is the possibility you could be training bad habits, such as turning your back to a potential threat. I think this is inevitable if the third person is allowed to attack both people.

On the other hand If you designated which of the two, is at risk of being attacked by the third person, that person could keep that in mind during the whole spraring session. And work to fight, but maneuver to keep that person in his peripheral view. That's an extremely realistic thing to happen in a realistic threat environment. I think starting out you wouldn't even need the third person to attack, but just to be a potential threat. The potential threat they have to work to keep aware of.

Everyone is always a potential threat though…so do you just slide around back to the wall every where you go?

 

[Jared Traveler]

Everyone is always a potential threat though…so do you just slide around back to the wall every where you go?

You think your buddy is going to attack you if you are in a fight with someone else? I hope not.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If A is fighting B and C attacks B what purpose would there be for A to attack C?

This sort of drill would be a self defense style drill, and the 3rd person represents another attacker/Good Samaritan.
Ideally I’d prefer if A then disengaged from B and called the police and EMS at that point.

That was based on his original statement/my (mis)interpretation of it, which I've since redacted. My thought was that C was attacking both A and B at pretty much the same time, at which point A would have to defend himself against C as well (and so would B). Now that I understand it better, I changed my stance.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

You think your buddy is going to attack you if you are in a fight with someone else? I hope not.

But a random bystander might. Depending on who looked to be in the wrong/needs defending to them.

 

[Jared Traveler]

But a random bystander might. Depending on who looked to be in the wrong/needs defending to them.

That is certainly possible. Of course a real fight isn't likely to resemble a sparring match in the first place. Typically there is a skill disparity, which as a trained martial artists hopefully that is you.

But regardless of all of that, are we simulating any type of reality, having two guys prioritize not turning their back to potential threat? In other words is an attacker going to prioritize that while he's attacking you? I truly doubt it in a real event. By the nature of the fact that he's attacking you, he's confident and focused on attacking you. So by both of you dancing around trying not to turn your back to a possible threat, I question if this resembles any version of reality of what would happen by an aggressive person? I don't think it does.

What can be very realistic, is having an aggressive personal attack you, but you having to also deal with the fact that there's potential third party threat.

Not saying anybody's wrong for doing this drill, I'm just saying I would only run it with students, if the third party was only allowed to attack one person.

 

[MadMartigan]

I like the concept, but see the point about both trying to keep from turning their back to the same third party (C). A potential fix for this issue could be having them not know who the third party is:

Have A and B spar each other with several other bystanders (students) surrounding them at a distance.
Within the spectators is C who has been assigned to attack 1 of them (but C's identity is unknown to A or B).
Perhaps C can be waiting for an opportune moment to choose when or who to attack.

This could simulate the realism of not knowing who or where the danger may come from, but help them stay alert for it (rather than getting tunnel vision).

 

[GojuTommy]

You think your buddy is going to attack you if you are in a fight with someone else? I hope not.

It’s always a possibility. A small one sure but always possible.

My point being that saying something like “this teaches you to turn your back on a potential threat” is stupid because you have a known active threat in front of you to worry about and if there’s other people around during the fight, particularly people you are not close to, they are all potential threats, so good luck fighting the active threats effectively without turning your back to a potential threat.

People say some absolutely stupid things in regards to self defense, and this was one of those things.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

What can be very realistic, is having an aggressive personal attack you, but you having to also deal with the fact that there's potential third party threat.

That's basically what it is though. Both people are fighting, and aware of the possibility of a third party threat. The other option (also mentioned in here) would be to have it where there's a group of people around you and any could join at any point. Kind of like no-mind drills in the middle of a sparring match.

 

[Jared Traveler]

It’s always a possibility. A small one sure but always possible.

My point being that saying something like “this teaches you to turn your back on a potential threat” is stupid because you have a known active threat in front of you to worry about and if there’s other people around during the fight, particularly people you are not close to, they are all potential threats, so good luck fighting the active threats effectively without turning your back to a potential threat.

People say some absolutely stupid things in regards to self defense, and this was one of those things.

This was the whole point of the drill, it was to treat the third person as a potential threat. Or is the goal to feel what it's like to get sucker punched from behind? Winning and Tactical positioning can be realistically and often easily accomplished. It's called footwork.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not sure about this. 3 person sparring would have to be designed to work on a specific skill set. I'm not sure if I would here's why. My school tried this out before I attended it and the 3rd person who jumped in would often get "clocked" hit hard in the face. While the 3rd person is trying to get the jump on one of the fighters, the fighters are also looking to get the jump on the 3rd person trying to jump into the fight.

If I'm sparring against someone and I feel that the 3rd person is about to turn on me, then I may actually position myself to hit the 3rd person before they can hit me. For safety issues, I assume there would be some limitation on how the 3rd person can enter the fight. This is the punch that Jow Ga uses when someone is behind us. If the 3rd person isn't ready or expecting this, then it's going to land hard.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not sure about this. 3 person sparring would have to be designed to work on a specific skill set. I'm not sure if I would here's why. My school tried this out before I attended it and the 3rd person who jumped in would often get "clocked" hit hard in the face. While the 3rd person is trying to get the jump on one of the fighters, the fighters are also looking to get the jump on the 3rd person trying to jump into the fight.

If I'm sparring against someone and I feel that the 3rd person is about to turn on me, then I may actually position myself to hit the 3rd person before they can hit me. For safety issues, I assume there would be some limitation on how the 3rd person can enter the fight. This is the punch that Jow Ga uses when someone is behind us. If the 3rd person isn't ready or expecting this, then it's going to land hard.

Maybe 4 is a better option where each fighter gets a "buddy" that stands on the side. The goal could be that the sparring partners have to spar against each other and one of the options is that they can position their opponent to where his team make can sneak in an attack. The attack can be a simple kick but not a full on attack. If the fighter goes to the ground then it's whoever is closer to the fight that gets to jump in.

I would probably rotate the extra fighters by giving them a color. Red vs Blue. When the coach says switch the 2 extra will switch colors, Red becomes blue. Blue becomes red. Now the two fighters have to quick reposition themselves within a certain time limit.

The problem with multi-attacker scenarios is that it becomes dangerous even at 30% strength because there's so much opportunity to be blindsided.

 

[Xue Sheng]

2 persons spar. The 3rd person moves around and can attack any person that he likes.

What's your opinion about this kind of sparring training?

We use to train this way back in my jiujutsu days, our goal was to get all 3 on one side of you to better control the situation and keep the attacks only coming from one direction

 

[drop bear]

3 guys is more manageable. I mean you could have 20 guys. But then you need 20 guys.

With 3 you just rotate one in each round.

Bare in mind if you know random 3 is going for you, or for either one of you. You can cheat and keep pushing your sparring partner at him.

Then you are also learning a bit of ring craft and how to control space.

We do a version of this where I spar and encroach on my coaches space and he belts me.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Then you are also learning a bit of ring craft and how to control space.

This is the point I was trying to get at. Both people need to learn how to control space. And if you've got both trying to get the same space, it becomes a challenge better than one person having motivation to get the space, and the other person having less motivation.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This is the point I was trying to get at. Both people need to learn how to control space. And if you've got both trying to get the same space, it becomes a challenge better than one person having motivation to get the space, and the other person having less motivation.

I can see this working if this is the focus of the drill. To me this is more valuable than thinking that you have to beat up 2 people. This is most likely what went wrong when my school did it.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I can see this working if this is the focus of the drill. To me this is more valuable than thinking that you have to beat up 2 people. This is most likely what went wrong when my school did it.

I would never go into a fight or drill thinking I have to beat up 2 people. Whether in practice or reality, if there's more than one opponent, especially if they seem competent, my goal is escape.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I would never go into a fight or drill thinking I have to beat up 2 people. Whether in practice or reality, if there's more than one opponent, especially if they seem competent, my goal is escape.

In reality sometimes people can get the jump on you..

Sometimes there's no escape

Sometimes escape is not an option. One day my wife and I were walking in our neighborhood and a car rode up on us in a strange way. I told my wife that if they get out and come to us, then run home and call the police while I stay there and fight it out. I can out run my wife but in that situation I wouldn't. Thankfully the car was just the neighbors teens. I'm not sure if they were aware of what they did or if they were trying to scare us. I just knew from past neighborhoods I've lived and worked in, that it's not normal to ride up on people like that.

In the past my wife has been stalked by someone in the car. I didn't know how many people would jump out the car or if they would have guns. I just knew I couldn't run. Escape wasn't an option at least not before my wife was safe. 1, 2, or 5. Whoever jumped out of the car I knew it would be me by myself until my wife could get help.

If two people were attacking one of your family members. Would sit back and watch, pull out your phone and video tape, stand on the side and try to talk them out of it. I don't know what your physical abilities are now, but my abilities are still decent, so I know I would still be willing to get into it with multiple attackers. If it's just then may yes or maybe know. It just depends if I get caught off guard, by myself, or have to protect someone.