Do you think sparring is essential to learning how to defend yourself?

[Chris Parker]

what is a better way to develope pain tolerance and expose the student to contact OTHER than sparring?

Yes, free-response scenario training. That can be full impact (if you want it to be), full pace (if you want it to be), realistic attacks (far more than in sparring), contains realistic tactics for self defence (far, far more than sparring does), and has everything you want from sparring without the issues.

Seriously, sparring is far from the only way to achieve such things, and it is also far from the best way to do so either. There is nothing in scenario training that says there is less impact, less pain tolerance, or anything of the like. To imply such tells me that you don't know what scenario training is versus sparring... which is fine, because that's 90+% of martial artists, I'd say.

And, believe it or not, you need water to learn how to swim.

Sure. But if self defense is analogous to swimming, is sparring analogous to water?

No, it's not. It's a common simile applied, but it's also quite a false one. More realistically, is self defence is analogous to swimming, then sparring is a bath, or a paddling pool. A body of water you can immerse yourself in, but not really the same in some very key ways. Tournament fighting being analogous to swimming, though, that's a different story... in that case, sparring is more like swimming laps.

 

[seasoned]

Trips to Okinawa showed younger Okinawans sparring while the older Okinawans didn't, as they used kata and serious drills.

I, on the other hand, feel that sparring is "one more tool" for distancing and moving around an opponent while getting your techniques off under pressure.

Your normal street situation will involve sucker punches, blind attacks from behind, and multiple people. So, under these conditions, it would be hard to duplicate.

In a street altercation you need the will to survive, and the ability to withstand pain, while at the same time doing "what ever" it takes to win.

In a controlled sparring setting, there is stopping and restarting matches, which can pollute you thinking and cause you to freeze up and lose focus.

If I could give one tip of advice, it would be to train with a serious mind set, no matter what you are training on. Your partner is not your friend, and if you train under an unrealistic mind set, it is very detrimental to your overall goal.

 

[yak sao]

Sparring, as has already been stated several times, is a tool for learning, but not the only tool.
Your sparring needs to mimic a fight as closely as possible. In a fighting situation, you need to shut down your attacker; you aren't going to dance around him and exchange blows...if this is how you spar, then this is going to be how you fight.
Here is an anecdote I wrote about a while ago:

Back when I was teaching Shaolin Kung Fu, I had a student, Raymond, a brown belt, get into a fight over a traffic incident. He told me this guy gets out of the car, a full head taller and 50 pounds heavier than him. Not only that, but the guy knew Tae Kwon Do. So this angry individual charges into Raymond full steam ahead, hands and feet flying. Raymond responds like he had countless times in class, by counterpunching and moving around the guy picking his shots. Well this guy hits Raymond square in the head, spinning him around and down onto the ground. It was there, as he shook the stars from his vision, that he had the realization that his opponent was fighting, but he was sparring! With renewed determination, Raymond exploded up from the ground, catching his opponent under the chin with an uppercut, knocking him back. Without letting up, Raymond drove him back with a flurry of punches, until the guy ran to his car and sped away. It wasn’t pretty, but it was effective. And that is the difference between fighting and sparring.


This was early on in my teaching "career", and his story was a wakeup call to me. Our training approach changed. We used to be very heavy on sparring in those days. We went to more street oriented two man drills after that.
It wasn't to many years later that I started training Wing Tsun, and found they had the exact approach to fighting that I was trying to reinvent.

 

[Buka]

Reading the original post, I have to remind myself of the word "essential". I'm going to rethink my whole thought process on this. I don't have any actual experience of self defense without sparring as one of the components. So, I realize I just don't know if sparring is essential or not. I know it is in boxing and wrestling, but I'm not sure if they're technically "martial" arts or not. I know it is in BJJ, but I'm just not sure if it is in stand up striking arts, or maybe just in some of them.

Maybe I don't know as much as I think I do. I'm going to think on this for a couple years.

 

[mukashimantis]

My opinion is that, yes, sparring is important. Unless you get into frequent figts, it is a good way to practice timing, distance, stances, blocking, etc.

 

[Chris Parker]

Reading the original post, I have to remind myself of the word "essential". I'm going to rethink my whole thought process on this. I don't have any actual experience of self defense without sparring as one of the components. So, I realize I just don't know if sparring is essential or not. I know it is in boxing and wrestling, but I'm not sure if they're technically "martial" arts or not. I know it is in BJJ, but I'm just not sure if it is in stand up striking arts, or maybe just in some of them.

Maybe I don't know as much as I think I do. I'm going to think on this for a couple years.

My take on it is that training should be geared towards the primary usage (in the main), and when you look at boxing, wrestling, BJJ (as examples you chose), the primary usage is for competitive performance against similarly trained individuals. BJJ players compete against other BJJ players, boxers box other boxers in the ring, wrestlers wrestle other wrestlers... and, as such, sparring (rolling etc) is perfectly suited to their training methodologies, to the point where I would consider it essential in those training systems. Now, that isn't to say that none of those systems are good for self defence, that they can't be used for it, or anything of the kind, just that the reason sparring is there is due to it's primary usage, not for self defence. The big catch is that it's commonly assumed that martial art = self defence, so systems that use training devices for other purposes are thought to be, or imagined as being, for self defence. Which is often simply not the case, and only presented as such due to the lack of actual knowledge of what is and what is not self defence, frankly.

 

[Bill Shaw]

IMHO... There’s some really good replies here so far, some I have to agree with. A few points though, maybe not so much… But my opinion, alone, doesn’t make me right. So I hope my two cents worth sparks maybe a different viewpoint deemed worthy of your consideration.

Isolated technique practice can be extremely effective against hold & grab attacks. I mean you’re already there, in position, ready to go. As long as your opponent doesn’t respond unexpectedly (the potential of which can be the strength or weakness of a technique) you should be good to go! That is, if he goes down as expected. Remember, if all you do is get him to let go, the fight is still on. But now you are no longer in position – which WAS your advantage.

Another way to look at it: If "Herman", the non athletic, never been in a fight, 98 lb guy from accounting, "snaps" & starts swinging at you... your isolated technique practice will probably suffice - as long as your timing and distance is correct. But if "Jake" the scarred up, bulked out, bar fighting guy from the loading dock comes after you - it's a different story, my friend.

Sparring regularly, especially the "anything goes" type, teaches you things that I doubt you could acquire any other way. And those things I would not want to be without, in a real fight, against a capable opponent. Sparring develops things like: timing, distance, reading posture, telegraphs, fakes & faints, requires speed & mobility, and develops unrehearsed reaction response to any moves thrown at you - even things you've never seen 'em before.

If principle based “creativity” is part of your training, it's not uncommon at all to instantaneously create & execute a move at full speed (without missing a fraction of time), that you never saw before… Not only is it a complete surprise to your opponent, it’s actually a shock to you the fist few time it happens. However, this skill must be actively and purposely cultivated. I won’t just show up if it hasn’t been developed beforehand.

It's interesting that it's usually those that don't spar that think you don't need it, while most that do spar are convinced of it's necessity. There could be a hint here….

THE OTHER SIDE: Of course one can also acquire MANY bad habits (if they aren't corrected) from sparring. A lot of it has to do with how you are taught, and the quality of your training partners. I could probably could fill a book with this kind of stuff. Oh, Wait! I already did.. ;-)

Anyway, I hope that any readers with this question, discover the correct answers that fit the unique person they are. The other posters here have made some good points for you to consider what is right for you.

Bill Shaw :asian:

 

[jasonbrinn]

No. Sparring IMO is not essential and actually does much more harm than good for any kind of training, especially self defense. To me saying sparring is essential and adds value to self defense skills is like saying nerf gun wars makes you better with firearms.

 

[Twin Fist]

the most polite thing i can think of to say to you is "you are either joking, stoned, or know NOTHING about martial arts"

 

[jasonbrinn]

Not joking.
HATE drugs.
Up for debate.

 

[Blindside]

No. Sparring IMO is not essential and actually does much more harm than good for any kind of training, especially self defense. To me saying sparring is essential and adds value to self defense skills is like saying nerf gun wars makes you better with firearms.

Because you brought up firearms, you are essentially suggesting that simunitions training and the various force on force simulators out there have no added benefit to the skills associated with the operations of firearms and the execution of martial techniques under pressure?

 

[jasonbrinn]

No. I said nerf. If sparring was fighting with pads then my opinion might be different overall - still I feel in both disciplines "better" training is found in the fundamentals and repetition of them alone.

 

[Cyriacus]

No. I said nerf. If sparring was fighting with pads then my opinion might be different overall - still I feel in both disciplines "better" training is found in the fundamentals and repetition of them alone.

And You dont believe that aiming those Fundamentals at a resisting Opponent is going to benefit You in any way?
And what about when no Pads or Gear are involved?
And what of the fact that Sparring is representing an Aspect of Fighting, and not Fighting as a whole?

 

[Blindside]

No. I said nerf. If sparring was fighting with pads then my opinion might be different overall - still I feel in both disciplines "better" training is found in the fundamentals and repetition of them alone.

So force on force training with firearms (such as simunitions or something similar) is functionally similar enough to "real life" that it isn't considered to be the equivelant of sparring or are you making a different argument?

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

the most polite thing i can think of to say to you is "you are either joking, stoned, or know NOTHING about martial arts"

He wouldn't be the first to voice such an opinion, and others who definitely do know a lot about martial arts have voiced similar opinions. Not saying that I agree or disagree; I made my statement in this thread earlier, but there is merit to both perspectives.

There was a video that I saw some time go where a gent who was incredibly fit and looked like VanDamme back in the Bloodsport days went up against an iai sensei who was well over sixty. Both were equiped with shinai. The younger gent had weapons training as well as whatever his karate training was. The old man did nothing but iai and of course, in iai, there is no sparring.

Each attack attempted by the younger man was thwarted by the old man simply not being there and having his sword at the younger man's vitals. And there was contact, no pads. You don't practice iai with a shinai. You don't spar in iai. But somehow, the old guy made what would have been fatal cuts every single time and the younger man couldn't get anything even resembling a solid shot in.

While I do believe that sparring is useful and helpful (read my earlier post), I do not consider it essential.

 

[Cyriacus]

He wouldn't be the first to voice such an opinion, and others who definitely do know a lot about martial arts have voiced similar opinions. Not saying that I agree or disagree; I made my statement in this thread earlier, but there is merit to both perspectives.

There was a video that I saw some time go where a gent who was incredibly fit and looked like VanDamme back in the Bloodsport days went up against an iai sensei who was well over sixty. Both were equiped with shinai. The younger gent had weapons training as well as whatever his karate training was. The old man did nothing but iai and of course, in iai, there is no sparring.

Each attack attempted by the younger man was thwarted by the old man simply not being there and having his sword at the younger man's vitals. And there was contact, no pads. You don't practice iai with a shinai. You don't spar in iai. But somehow, the old guy made what would have been fatal cuts every single time and the younger man couldn't get anything even resembling a solid shot in.

While I do believe that sparring is useful and helpful (read my earlier post), I do not consider it essential.

Id call that the difference between Fighting, and Self Defense/Combative Logic. In one instance, You are "Fighting". In the other, You are "Engaging", if that makes sense.

 

[jasonbrinn]

@Cyriacus
And You dont believe that aiming those Fundamentals at a resisting Opponent is going to benefit You in any way? As a personal opinion I feel that any benefits that come from such a process are not worth the costs and time.

And what about when no Pads or Gear are involved? If there are rules and expectations of safety then I don't see that much difference personally. Fighting is fighting - any attempt at fighting without doing such is NOT fighting IMO.

And what of the fact that Sparring is representing an Aspect of Fighting, and not Fighting as a whole? I personally see that as an individual view and not a fact at all. I don't spar and yet I fight.


@Blindside

I feel that simunitions (or something similar) is better than sparring for many reasons, however, still not as good as training fundamentals without the simulations.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

So force on force training with firearms (such as simunitions or something similar) is functionally similar enough to "real life" that it isn't considered to be the equivelant of sparring or are you making a different argument?

This is where a lot of misunderstandings arise; what is sparring? I do not consider force on force training simulations to be sparring or any near equivalent thereof. And the OP was pretty clear about what sparring was in the context of the post.

Sparring in the context of the OP, and in the context of what many of the respondants are saying, is two people placed against each other for the purpose of trading blows for a limited amount of time and within a rule context, written, spoken, or unspoken.

Anyone who claims that they do 'anything goes' sparring mean that their sparring involves a higher level of contact and a greater range of techniques being used against a greater range of targets, but it is never really anything goes; if you gouge out your training partner's eye or bite off his ear, you can bet that you'll be in jail and the school may find out that those comprehensive waivers weren't quite as water tight as they had thought.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Id call that the difference between Fighting, and Self Defense/Combative Logic. In one instance, You are "Fighting". In the other, You are "Engaging", if that makes sense.

By fighting, do you mean 'fighting' as in a ring or against a rival in some kind of schoolyard or pecking order type of thing?

 

[MJS]

Well, welcome back to the forum Jason.

Anyways....Chris makes some good points. During some of my Kenpo classes, I've picked a technique, had the students practice it, with no resistance, no pressure, etc. Once they did that, I'd gradually have the attacker add in resistance, pressure, add in additional strikes, basically anything to throw off the defender. This, IMO, is what Chris is describing. Of course, as much contact, resistance, realism, etc, can be added as necessary.

However, this type of training, IMHO, can easily turn into the typical sparring that we see. It'll be the same type of back and forth exchange that we see in sparring.

As for whether or not its important...yeah, of course there has to be rules. I've already seen some posts talking about that, but without some sort of safety in place, people will get hurt or worse. No, its also a no brainer that we'll never replicate 'the real deal' 100%, however, military and leo as well as fire depts, all do simulated training. Its the mindset that makes a big difference.

As I said in another thread in which sparring was the topic, I just don't see, for the life of me, how ANYONE can train, without having contact in their training.