Calling all historians

[StudentCarl]

There's an interesting assumption at work here that the past was different from the present--I think that deserves a little closer look.

The development of competitive sparring spurred evolution in equipment, rules and techniques. Pros and cons of those aside, they have made it easier for more people to participate MORE SAFELY.

Take away those differences and I doubt many of you would be different from masters of the past: I think you would require a high level of skill, control, and toughness before letting your students spar, and then you would have to have some strict rules to minimize injuries. How many of you have your students spar without gear? Put yourself in their shoes.

I'd be interested to know about early training other than forms. Bagwork, some form of paddles or pads? I wonder what else early masters used to refine speed and technique.

 

[Sukerkin]

Not to start sparring vs forms or anything. But calling sparring "playing" is kind of offensive to those who train very seriously. The sparring I do is not a game at all, it is preparing me for real life scenario. Sparring to me is the best way to find out if you can perform a technique without someone giving you everything you need in order to do the technique. I would never call our kata "dancing," nor would I call our sparring sessions "just playing." There's some techniques I know I could of never been able to do in a real life scenario without actually performing them against a live opponent.

Assuming that this was spawned by my comments, I think that perhaps my point wan't quite clear. Let me try one more time.

Sparring, no matter how 'hard' you go at it, is not preperation for fighting. It is preparation for sparring (hence, "play fighting"). It can never be anything else with the best will in the world.

I sparred back in the days when it was termed 'full contact' and the height of protective gear was some footballers shin pads and even then there were rules that meant that, whilst the acknowledged lessons of distance, timing and reading were there to be picked up, it wasn't really a preperation for the 'real thing'. Though very much still better than nothing; certainly for those of us who don't get into fights all that regularly (for example I learned to cope with getting my glasses knocked off by sparring, something that it would be hard to come to terms with just by kata alone).

As to kata, without visualisation and emotional involvement in the imaginary scene, then it is formalised physical moves without the accompanyment of music. It is the most commonly heard self-criticism in our school - it is not denigrating of the form, just of the lack of appropriate engagement with intent in that particular instance i.e. the kata can 'tick' all the technical boxes but still lack that focus on the 'ghost' opponents that makes all the difference.

 

[jks9199]

Not to start sparring vs forms or anything. But calling sparring "playing" is kind of offensive to those who train very seriously. The sparring I do is not a game at all, it is preparing me for real life scenario. Sparring to me is the best way to find out if you can perform a technique without someone giving you everything you need in order to do the technique. I would never call our kata "dancing," nor would I call our sparring sessions "just playing." There's some techniques I know I could of never been able to do in a real life scenario without actually performing them against a live opponent.

There are different types of sparring. In TKD, for example, you have point sparring, Olympic sparring (both sports oriented, both quite different!), the various step sparring exercises, and more. Each serves different purposes -- and drawing too many conclusions from one alone is dangerous...

There are also different ways to pressure test your art. Free sparring is only one, and a pretty specific one at that. I've seen great ring fighters fall apart in scenario training, for example.

 

[Tanaka]

Assuming that this was spawned by my comments, I think that perhaps my point wan't quite clear. Let me try one more time.

Sparring, no matter how 'hard' you go at it, is not preperation for fighting. It is preparation for sparring (hence, "play fighting"). It can never be anything else with the best will in the world.

I sparred back in the days when it was termed 'full contact' and the height of protective gear was some footballers shin pads and even then there were rules that meant that, whilst the acknowledged lessons of distance, timing and reading were there to be picked up, it wasn't really a preperation for the 'real thing'. Though very much still better than nothing; certainly for those of us who don't get into fights all that regularly (for example I learned to cope with getting my glasses knocked off by sparring, something that it would be hard to come to terms with just by kata alone).

As to kata, without visualisation and emotional involvement in the imaginary scene, then it is formalised physical moves without the accompanyment of music. It is the most commonly heard self-criticism in our school - it is not denigrating of the form, just of the lack of appropriate engagement with intent in that particular instance i.e. the kata can 'tick' all the technical boxes but still lack that focus on the 'ghost' opponents that makes all the difference.

I don't spar to prepare me for sparring. I spar to prepare me for going against a live opponent.(which helps me for real life scenario)
Sparring is just one of many things included to prepare me for using my techniques in a real life encounter. Sparring isn't inclusive to just ring fighting or sport fighters.

I cannot train myself for every scenario. I have to rely on my training to help guide me to the right decisions for that. But for me, sparring is a great way to see how I do against someone who isn't giving me what I want. Win or Lose doesn't matter(well I won't lie, because I do love to win sparring sessions). It's the learning from sparring that counts to me.


As for this "Sparring, no matter how 'hard' you go at it, is not preperation for fighting. It is preparation for sparring"

I see where you're coming from, but I would like to point out the flaw I see.
Let's forget about martial arts, and let's just look at the concept. When you spar, you're being conditioned and things are being ingrained. Now let's say this person who does this on a daily basis gets put in a scenario or "struggle" with someone who has never fought a day in their life? (This is something that can occur in real life)
The mentality and physical technique/conditioning will help the chances of the one who has sparred. Versus someone who has not experienced any of this type of struggle at all.

But I will agree it really depends on the type of sparring. For instance if you spar to fight only those in your weight class. Then if you fight someone without experience, who is outside of your weight range, your experience might be counter-productive in this situation.

In the end sparring helps one prepare to fight. But where I see you being correct is about the simulation. Sparring is not the real scenario, so it should not be treated as such(not a replacement for the real thing). That's why I say it is a tool for preparing. It takes more than sparring to become a proficient martial artist.

To make things simple: Everything I train for related to martial arts helps to prepare me

 

[Chris Parker]

Hey Granfire,

You got me there, but it is also a part of the problem.
It used to be straight forward TKD:
learn how to walk
learn your forms
learn to spar

now we are dealing with an ever changing program:
learn sticks
maybe swords (went away)
learn grappling

now it's forms (another doozie there, but that's another story) and maybe if you feel like it, we spar. I do believe there are a set of contact drills, so you can train TKD in a 'safe environment'
So much for fighting your way out of the mean streets of Philly...
I might want to add that the organization never went for more than light/medium contact.

In my TKD days, it was basically techniques (various strikes, kicks, etc)being drilled repeatedly, some work on forms (little to no explaination to the lessons in them... it was really that you needed to know the sequence of movements in order to achieve your next grade, but then I was young, and maybe that was more focused on for the elder members of the school. Mind you, we all trained together, and I never saw it. Hmm.), then sparring. Occasionally there was some "self defence" focus for a night, and we might do some breaking as well. I think in three years we used a short stick (about two feet) once.

Interesting if that's not the way all/most TKD dojangs operate, or if there's been more of a move away from these elements. To me, they epitomise what TKD is about (technique/basics, forms, sparring, and breaking).

I was really talking about sparring in class. There are only a few tournaments every year on the calendar, I think 3 ATM, the rules are not that much different from class sparring.

The big issue with thinking that sparring, whether class sparring, tournament, or other, is the same as self defence training, or real fighting, is that it is actually quite removed from the reality of the way you would apply things. This is what Sukerin was getting at by describing sparring as "play fighting" even at it's best. Yes, sparring has a huge number of benefits, but realistic training for self defence is not one of them. There are multiple reasons for this, including, but not limited to the type of opponent you are facing, the circumstances/environment you are sparring in, the rules (explicit, such as no eye-gouging, or groin kicks, and implicit, such as grappling being excluded from what you will face, as may be weapons and groups), the distancing, and so on. What sparring is good for preparation for is more sparring-type activities, such as tournaments, or simply more sparring. And sparring itself has huge numbers of benefits, sharpening targeting skills, timing, fitness, endurance, angling, preparing for chaotic situations, and more. But the type of fighting it prepares you for, truly, is sparring.

Yes, forms are a collection of moves that - used on another person with full force as you should perform it in the form - would maim or kill your partner. But you have to make the connection and translate that to your students.

Absolutely! As I said above, this was sadly lacking in my TKD experience. I feel that the emphasis was on sparring, as that was mistaken for application, rather than on understanding the movements on the forms themselves. Traditional Japanese systems have to have understanding of the movements because, in a lot of cases, that's all they have to train with!

You can make a program out of never touching another student. I think Tai Chi has shown that, you can incorporate the moves into a high intensity workout, Billy Banks made a lot of money with that, but what do you have when you don't spar.

I mean, eventually they will be handing the Black Belt to those folks who opted out...what message does that give to them.

Er, Tae Bo do you mean? Tai Chi is wonderful, but I haven't heard it described as a "high intensity workout...." Really, I don't think Tae Bo should be part of this discussion, after all, it's removed from martial arts almost completely. All Billy did was use some martial arts-related movements as part of an aerobics program, same as Zumba using Latin dance moves as part of an aerobics program. It's not Latin dance, and Tae Bo has as much relation there.

In terms of a martial art that doesn't spar, I'm going to link a blog post from Steve Delaney (Saitama Steve here) on the role of Uke in Koryu forms, specifically Kenjutsu and Jujutsu. These systems use no sparring at all (by and large.... I do know of one or two Koryu that do use a form, but they really are the rarities), and you may get some understanding of how we get realistic results without sparring. As I said, it's not essential for learning to fight, although I do feel it's essential for TKD to be TKD. Here's the blog post:

http://seirenkanuk.wordpress.com/the-duty-of-the-uke-in-kata-geiko/

 

[Bruno@MT]

In terms of a martial art that doesn't spar, I'm going to link a blog post from Steve Delaney (Saitama Steve here) on the role of Uke in Koryu forms, specifically Kenjutsu and Jujutsu. These systems use no sparring at all (by and large.... I do know of one or two Koryu that do use a form, but they really are the rarities), and you may get some understanding of how we get realistic results without sparring. As I said, it's not essential for learning to fight, although I do feel it's essential for TKD to be TKD. Here's the blog post:

http://seirenkanuk.wordpress.com/the-duty-of-the-uke-in-kata-geiko/

IIRC, in Kashima Shinto ryu, students sometimes practise their forms with fukuro shinai. If they see an opening because the other guy made a mistake, they are allowed to break the kata and strike. Sparring however is not allowed, and I suppose that only senior students have this freedom, to prevent it from degenerating into sparring.

 

[Chris Parker]

IIRC, in Kashima Shinto ryu, students sometimes practise their forms with fukuro shinai. If they see an opening because the other guy made a mistake, they are allowed to break the kata and strike. Sparring however is not allowed, and I suppose that only senior students have this freedom, to prevent it from degenerating into sparring.

Kashima Shinryu, to be precise. The Hyoho Niten Ichi Ryu also includes, at a higher level, a practice they refer to as Aikuchi Roppo. Normally, Aikuchi refers to a short dagger without a guard, but in this instance it is a training device employed within the Ryu. It is a form of free form training with fukuro shinai, allowing you to express the arts principles and approaches without kata.

 

[granfire]

Hey Granfire,



In my TKD days, it was basically techniques (various strikes, kicks, etc)being drilled repeatedly, some work on forms (little to no explaination to the lessons in them... it was really that you needed to know the sequence of movements in order to achieve your next grade, but then I was young, and maybe that was more focused on for the elder members of the school. Mind you, we all trained together, and I never saw it. Hmm.), then sparring. Occasionally there was some "self defence" focus for a night, and we might do some breaking as well. I think in three years we used a short stick (about two feet) once.

Interesting if that's not the way all/most TKD dojangs operate, or if there's been more of a move away from these elements. To me, they epitomise what TKD is about (technique/basics, forms, sparring, and breaking).

but you sparred, right?

The big issue with thinking that sparring, whether class sparring, tournament, or other, is the same as self defence training, or real fighting, is that it is actually quite removed from the reality of the way you would apply things. This is what Sukerin was getting at by describing sparring as "play fighting" even at it's best. Yes, sparring has a huge number of benefits, but realistic training for self defence is not one of them. There are multiple reasons for this, including, but not limited to the type of opponent you are facing, the circumstances/environment you are sparring in, the rules (explicit, such as no eye-gouging, or groin kicks, and implicit, such as grappling being excluded from what you will face, as may be weapons and groups), the distancing, and so on. What sparring is good for preparation for is more sparring-type activities, such as tournaments, or simply more sparring. And sparring itself has huge numbers of benefits, sharpening targeting skills, timing, fitness, endurance, angling, preparing for chaotic situations, and more. But the type of fighting it prepares you for, truly, is sparring.

it's yet another tool in the box. Very valuable for some students, all benefit from it. I think the most important lesson learned from it for a real fight is to not be surprised when you get hit a bit harder, especially invaluable IMHO for the timid student, the one likely to decline the opportunity.

Er, Tae Bo do you mean? Tai Chi is wonderful, but I haven't heard it described as a "high intensity workout...." Really, I don't think Tae Bo should be part of this discussion, after all, it's removed from martial arts almost completely. All Billy did was use some martial arts-related movements as part of an aerobics program, same as Zumba using Latin dance moves as part of an aerobics program. It's not Latin dance, and Tae Bo has as much relation there.

Exactly. (I do believe Tai Chi does very well qualify as high intensity workout in terms of Kata alone. Tried it once, never thought my legs could hurt that bad, and I was not even out of shape)

But you really illustrated my point. Giving something a fancy name and doing it in a Gi does not make it a martial art.

There have always been way to include aerobic workouts into the class, with moves or just generally...now there is this 'next big thing' fancy name, new gear....(I really have to go look at it and see for myself, but the last couple of years ha d me scratch my head, this will have me rip my hair out)

In terms of a martial art that doesn't spar, I'm going to link a blog post from Steve Delaney (Saitama Steve here) on the role of Uke in Koryu forms, specifically Kenjutsu and Jujutsu. These systems use no sparring at all (by and large.... I do know of one or two Koryu that do use a form, but they really are the rarities), and you may get some understanding of how we get realistic results without sparring. As I said, it's not essential for learning to fight, although I do feel it's essential for TKD to be TKD. Here's the blog post:

http://seirenkanuk.wordpress.com/the-duty-of-the-uke-in-kata-geiko/

Thank you.

I think I went a bit broad on the MA/sparring thing (but then again this is the TKD forum )

 

[Chris Parker]

but you sparred, right?

Absolutely. My background includes a number of sparring systems, including Tani-ha Shito Ryu Shukokai Karate, and Rhee Tae Kwon Do, so I definately sparred. As I said, I don't think TKD is TKD without sparring as part of it's teaching and training methodologies. But that's how I see it, at least.

it's yet another tool in the box. Very valuable for some students, all benefit from it. I think the most important lesson learned from it for a real fight is to not be surprised when you get hit a bit harder, especially invaluable IMHO for the timid student, the one likely to decline the opportunity.

Yep, certainly another very valid reason for sparring. It really comes down to the reasons it's being used, and I feel it is necessary for arts such as TKD (although not for other arts).

Exactly. (I do believe Tai Chi does very well qualify as high intensity workout in terms of Kata alone. Tried it once, never thought my legs could hurt that bad, and I was not even out of shape)

But you really illustrated my point. Giving something a fancy name and doing it in a Gi does not make it a martial art.

There have always been way to include aerobic workouts into the class, with moves or just generally...now there is this 'next big thing' fancy name, new gear....(I really have to go look at it and see for myself, but the last couple of years ha d me scratch my head, this will have me rip my hair out)

Completely agreed.

Thank you.

I think I went a bit broad on the MA/sparring thing (but then again this is the TKD forum )

Yeah, I know.... hope I didn't go too far with the alternate systems.

 

[Cirdan]

Exactly. (I do believe Tai Chi does very well qualify as high intensity workout in terms of Kata alone. Tried it once, never thought my legs could hurt that bad, and I was not even out of shape)

But you really illustrated my point. Giving something a fancy name and doing it in a Gi does not make it a martial art.

So.. Tai Chi isn`t a martial art?

 

[Chris Parker]

To be fair, as Granfire was quoting my comments on Tae Bo, I think that is what he was refering to when he wrote about just adding a gi doesn't make something a martial art, not Tai Chi.

 

[Cirdan]

To be fair, as Granfire was quoting my comments on Tae Bo, I think that is what he was refering to when he wrote about just adding a gi doesn't make something a martial art, not Tai Chi.

Maybe, the original post about Tai Chi and Tae Bo was kinda hard to follow. Just wondering what he meant. Billy does not do his thing in a gi does he?

"High intensity" and Tai Chi seems kind of contradicory. Also, would pushing hands qualify as sparring?

 

[Chris Parker]

I've seen Billy demonstrate in a gi, but most often it's gym gear (tank top, shorts, maybe MMA-style gloves for that "martial art" flavour). Personally I wouldn't class Tai Chi as an "intense" workout, I tend to think of those things as more high-impact aerobics, lots of movement and actions, a good sweat worked up. Tai Chi can be hard on certain muscle groups (like the legs), due to the control required over them as you slowly move, so you can certainly feel the results over the next day or more, I just think there's differences of definitions here.

 

[Manny]

it's sparring need it inside the dojo/dojang? yes. It's sparring estrictly imperative inside the dojo/dojang? NO.

For me it's more importante the full understanding of the techs and basics inside every martial art and also the kata/poomsae. If one's not do this how can we think we can sparr in a good way?

Aikido, for example, it has no sparring, only tori and uke drills that are practiced over and over till one's get muscle memory and because of this we can't say a good aikidoka can't defend him/her self on a bad situation.

Sparring inside the dojang is a game, even inside a tournament it's a game, where the best wins, a match, a medal or a trophy, sparring it's a controled thing inside a place like the dojo/dojang.

I wasn't ever a competitor, I went to maybe no more than 10 tournaments in my entire TKD life as a competitor, I am not an Aaron Cook and Steven or Mark Lopez, never was and never will, but I think I have a set of tools that I can use in a confrontation.

Real fighting is not for points.

It's desireable we do sparring inside the dojo, cause we need to learn how to take a blow, and also we need to learn how to deliver a blow too, but sparring should not be seen like the most important thing inside dojo/dojang.

Manny

 

[dancingalone]

Aikido, for example, it has no sparring, only tori and uke drills that are practiced over and over till one's get muscle memory and because of this we can't say a good aikidoka can't defend him/her self on a bad situation.

On the contrary, this is one of the most frequent criticisms of aikido both from those within and without the art. We aikidoka become very good at the rote forms, but it's fair to say that there is little uncooperative practice at the average dojo.

I myself favor training aikido with a great deal more resistance and realistic attacks. In my personal experience, the average aikidoka simply doesn't practice enough against someone who can strike or kick at a competent level. They just work off a slow, unrealistic attack, and while the counter would indeed be functional if they managed to pull it off in RL, it's a big step up to make it work against someone trying to take your head off.

Sparring is a drill versus a resisting, attacking opponent in TKD. While it is not fighting per se, I would go so far to say as it is vital for building precision under adversity. I would be very suspicious of any TKD dojang that makes sparring optional, and I would definitely seek to discover what other methods they substitute to develop the same desirable qualities that sparring does. I'm not saying it can't be done as I am familiar with a number of other martial arts that do not spar; however, I do believe sparring is key component inside TKD, so he who takes it out had better have really good alternatives for it.

 

[WC_lun]

I honestly cannot think of another training tool that gives the skills that sparring with resisting opponents gives. Those skills I am referring to are the ability to change range and timing while flowing rapidly from one thing to another while under duress. I get there are drills that can train the change part, but not the unpredictable nature of fighting which requires flowing from one technique to the next, all while trying to avoid letting a resisting oponent do what they want to do.

 

[Disco]

"I honestly cannot think of another training tool that gives the skills that sparring with resisting opponents gives."

The skills you elude to are limited, because in sparring, as has been stated numerous times, you are governed by set parameters/rules. If I cannot invoke the full range of available techniques, then in essence I've/you've become a one armed/one legged fighter (for lack of a better term). In practicing this aspect, one becomes ingrained (also stipulated prior), with limited technical offerings. While, depending upon the individual, one may have just enough of a tool box to make things work, but the majority of non-athletic folks will be greatly hampered if this is what they focus on. True self defense is not a fight, it's dispatching your attacker as quickly as possibly and by whatever means/techniques available.

 

[jthomas1600]

There's a couple threads going right now that seem to be following similar lines with people tending to fall in one camp or the other.

As I read this thread I find myself in agreement with those saying that sparring is indeed an important element in preparing for self defense as it develops your timing, ability to judge and control distance, ability to take a hit and keep coming, etc. I was in enough fights when I was younger to realize it's a lot harder to pull off in real time what you can do at home on a heavy bag. What I found made it hard was putting myself in the right position and creating the opening. Certainly sparring helps with that?

Some of the more traditional SD practitioners here seem to be saying that some of the SD techniques are too dangerous to practice at full speed/full force against a classmate. That there's a need to practice techniques that are designed not to score points but to instantly incapacitate an opponent. That line of thinking makes complete sense to me too.

So in the end, it seems to me a person would be doing themselves a favor by training in both styles at least a little. If you mostly train like your getting ready for a sparring tournament add a little old school hardcore SD training once or twice a month and if you train mostly SD add a little sparring.

At least that's going to be my game plan.

 

[dancingalone]

Some of the more traditional SD practitioners

Well, there's the rub. I tend to believe traditional TKD has always used sparring within the curriculum. I define traditional TKD as the kwan period and that's as far as I care to take the time machine back without delving into Korean gong fu and such. If we jump forward to the early ITF days, now that General Choi had unified most of the kwans under his direction, I believe they sparred too, although certainly Mr. Weiss can jump in and correct me if I am wrong.

So just where does this stance that traditional TKD does not spar come from? The Japanese karate link? Well, we know that the students of Gichin Funakoshi definitely liked jiyu kumite and they promulgated it to great extent after he became less active.

Where then?

 

[WC_lun]

I understand there are some techniques that you can't use on your class mates. However, if you do not practice with a resisting opponent, with some sense of danger, you won't be able to land those as well as the less lethal techniques. I absolutley agree that sparring only as training is a bad idea, and thinking that sparring is the same thing as a fight is also a mistake. Not sparring at all because you can't use your more lethal techniques makes little sense to me. If you want to be able to use your martial skills in a SD atmosphere, you MUST be able to act through adrenal rush, nervousness, stress, shock, perhaps suprise, and getting hit or grabbed. In my opinion, I know of no other way except sparring to train that.

Schools that teach martial arts without at least some sparring and occasionally that with heavily resisting opponents is not teaching quality self defense, but rather self-defense theory. While the school might be perfectly good for people who are there for other reasons, such as physical fitness or sports, it is not the best place for a person really wanting to learn self defense methods.