How bad does not sparring effect you in a real street fight situation ?

[Kong Soo Do]

Let me tackle this conversation from another angle. First, I'm not trying to bust your balls, attack you, flame you or say your training sucks.

Now let's discuss sparring directly. For a controlled competition it is the bomb. It provides you with a resisting opponent within the confines of the rule set of the competition. Thus for this environment it is a sound training methodology.

For self-defense it is not an optimal training methodology. I've detailed many reasons why already and can touch on any of those if you would like clarification or further discussion on them. Now, that doesn't mean sparring totally sucks for self-defense, only that it is less than optimal. Sparring as noted above puts you against a resisting opponent so that is a good thing. But so does scenario based training in more realistic real world environments. So what I'm saying is that while sparring maybe covers the first wrung of the ladder (which is sufficient for the sport environment), scenario based training takes everything good about sparring and fills in the areas where it lacks thus taking you to the top of the ladder for this specific environment.

Thus in a scenario session, you have a resisting attacker....or multiple attackers. You have different stimuli that aren't normally covered in a sparring session. You have options such as verbalization, escape & evasion, improvised weapons etc that aren't normally covered in a sparring session. And it takes you from beginning to a conclusion in a fluid manner which definitely is not covered in a sparring session. And there are documented reasons why this is of the utmost importance. Some have been touched on already and I can provide a plethora of additional real world data that we have learned from if you would like.

 

[drop bear]

No, that is not what I'm saying at all. They both have a specific goal. As such, they each have a specific training methodology. That specific methodology lacks, severely, if it is used for the goal for which it is not intended.

In other words, sport training is great for sport and is sub-standard for self defense. And vise-versa. There is no superior or inferior, just different methodology for the goal.

The link you provided is not indicative of good MMA training, even for sport. So yes, I would say it is a poor example of the training necessary for competition. And for self defense training, it would be hard to get much worse than what they were doing in that video. I've detailed the reasons why already a couple of times.



Doesn't mean MMA sucks. But the training methodology is sub-standard for the topic covered in this thread. If this was a sport sparring thread it would be different, though as I stated, in a pure sport context that video just wasn't a good example.

And this is where you get rage posted at you may as well be comparing mma to salsa dancing. Good for a bit of fun but crap in a fight.

Which would be fine if it wasn't wrong.

There is a lot of videos out there of sports fighters doing fine in self defence. I have used sports fighting fine for self defence. So have plenty of other sports fighters The principles are basically sound.

I have done rsbd. And sports fighting. I am speaking from experience in both. For yourself when you see belator or top team and then say their mma is no good? I am going to start to doubt a bit.

You reasonings are debatable. You really don't have to angry grind every sparring session. It is not a drill to get your angry grind on it is to cement you basic techniques against a resisting oponant.

What you see there is professionalism in training. That is their job that is all they do.

I have still not seen a counter video of how it should be done. Just a lot of people getting upset when I expect them to justify their opinions.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

If this was a sport sparring thread it would be different.

Perhaps we're all barking up the wrong tree. We're discussing and/or debating the merits of sparring in self defence.

Here is the OP:

%-}

Which leaves us with only the title of the thread: "How bad does not sparring effect you in a real street fight situation?"

So how we answer is partly dependent upon how you interpret a "real street fight situation."

Secondly, the question was how, if you are in a "real street fight situation" are you affected if you do not spar?

Thirdly, I'd like to remind everyone that some of the responses are starting to fall outside of the forum rules.

 

[drop bear]

Let me tackle this conversation from another angle. First, I'm not trying to bust your balls, attack you, flame you or say your training sucks.

Now let's discuss sparring directly. For a controlled competition it is the bomb. It provides you with a resisting opponent within the confines of the rule set of the competition. Thus for this environment it is a sound training methodology.

For self-defense it is not an optimal training methodology. I've detailed many reasons why already and can touch on any of those if you would like clarification or further discussion on them. Now, that doesn't mean sparring totally sucks for self-defense, only that it is less than optimal. Sparring as noted above puts you against a resisting opponent so that is a good thing. But so does scenario based training in more realistic real world environments. So what I'm saying is that while sparring maybe covers the first wrung of the ladder (which is sufficient for the sport environment), scenario based training takes everything good about sparring and fills in the areas where it lacks thus taking you to the top of the ladder for this specific environment.

Thus in a scenario session, you have a resisting attacker....or multiple attackers. You have different stimuli that aren't normally covered in a sparring session. You have options such as verbalization, escape & evasion, improvised weapons etc that aren't normally covered in a sparring session. And it takes you from beginning to a conclusion in a fluid manner which definitely is not covered in a sparring session. And there are documented reasons why this is of the utmost importance. Some have been touched on already and I can provide a plethora of additional real world data that we have learned from if you would like.

Sparring teaches basic fundamentals the same fundamentals that will win competitions will win fights.

Without the ability to master that basic process of having techniques work when someone is fighting back. You cannot gain as much value from scenarios.

This is my point about honesty. A scenario is also a made up environment designed to teach or test. But as you control the environment you need to be sure that it is not being influenced by wrong preconceptions. Sparring brings back that honesty.

This is my problem with compliant drills. And doubley so with this predictive drill idea.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

And this is where you get rage posted at you may as well be comparing mma to salsa dancing. Good for a bit of fun but crap in a fight.

These are your words and not mine.

There is a lot of videos out there of sports fighters doing fine in self defence.

And we have them getting their clock cleaned as well. Not to mention those that have been killed. I'm sure you're aware of these incidents as well?

I have still not seen a counter video of how it should be done. Just a lot of people getting upset when I expect them to justify their opinions.

Look up any of the systems I've previously detailed. And though I can't speak for others, I'm not upset at all.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Sparring teaches basic fundamentals the same fundamentals that will win competitions will win fights.

Maybe, but not necessarily. Sparring doesn't cover the totality of a SD situation.

Without the ability to master that basic process of having techniques work when someone is fighting back.

I'm not sure why you're assuming that basic training hasn't already occurred?

This is my point about honesty. A scenario is also a made up environment designed to teach or test. But as you control the environment you need to be sure that it is not being influenced by wrong preconceptions. Sparring brings back that honesty.

I don't understand what you're saying here, could you please clarify?

This is my problem with compliant drills. And doubley so with this predictive drill idea.

Where are you getting the idea that scenario based/RBSD training is compliant drills? They have attacker(s), various stimuli, various environments, various terrain, various problem solving and more duress that you can shake a stick at. I've never seen a compliant scenario unless it is a 'no-shoot' type scenario which needs to be tossed in from time to time in order to be able to correctly address a situation with the proper amount (or no amount) of force.

 

[MJS]

I am not a fan of scenario training. I believe it promotes the attacker to start reacting badly. They start to train their flinch reaction in a way that assists the other guy. As opposed to actively trying to spoil the technique and make their partner look bad.

I have found it is much easier to deal with a person that has scenario trained than a person that has not trained at all. And I think it is due to a person who has not trained does not recognize my technique will work.

I do train drills. I do not train them to where I tea off on a guy who is just standing there.

An example arakan.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2rBj1d4_kgk

See how they are flinching and collapsing when it is an action that is detrimental to self defence.

Many martial artists do this, as well as military and LEO. However, as JKS said, it needs to be done correctly. Done right, it is a very beneficial tool.

 

[drop bear]

These are your words and not mine.



And we have them getting their clock cleaned as well. Not to mention those that have been killed. I'm sure you're aware of these incidents as well?



Look up any of the systems I've previously detailed. And though I can't speak for others, I'm not upset at all.

Sports fighting is not good for self defence is a terrible misconception. Fighting is dangerous sports fighters loose fights. But they are the bulk of the fighters you see winning fights on YouTube.

Just find the video for me please. I will get blamed for it not being the really real combat scenario.

 

[drop bear]

Many martial artists do this, as well as military and LEO. However, as JKS said, it needs to be done correctly. Done right, it is a very beneficial tool.

The unresisted I throw one punch leave my arm out so my instructor can do a thousand finishing moves scenario.
Eg.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tGAE99qawps

Yes we do drills as well. We have a monster one for fight training.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Attention all members:

While discussion and debate are fundamental to MartialTalk, when tempers start to rise and things start to become vitriolic, nothing positive can result.
That being said, please remember that MartialTalk is, as it says in the logo, "friendly". So let us all try to keep things friendly and polite, and avoid the nastiness.

Thank you,
Mark A. Cochran
Dirty Dog
MT Senior Moderator

 

[MJS]

I have used a fist suit and honestly they are over rated.

Your biggest issue would be your face otherwise I have gone full contact knees and elbows with no more than gloves mouth guard box shinguards and elbow pads. Sometimes we train I. Boxing head gear near fights to avoid cuts. People of course fight knees and elbows full contact.

If you were desperate to make eye gouges a part of training a mate of mine sparred Kudo. Now there headgear is full face. And getting smashed in the face is not so bad. According to him.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cIs1MS64Fe0

I did hocks system for four years. Up to you as to whether you think that is valid or not.

I understand the idea. I don't think it works very well. It moves from resisted training to compliant training to assisted training with people who have never received crippling shots trying to imagine what it is like to received crippling shots.

Which seems to be flinching and collapsing.

Nice clip! Some of the people in my Kyokushin dojo use the full face head gear even though we're not punching to the face. During my private lessons with one of my old Kenpo teachers, we used full face gear and fought pretty much MMA style.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

So how we answer is partly dependent upon how you interpret a "real street fight situation."

Very true. Some think of a bar fight. Others a shoving match. And still others a mugging or multiple assailant type of attack.

For me, I draw upon personal experience which usually entails a drunk or someone high on crack, meth or spice. Spice is the worse as these people don't know what planet their on, have super human strength and just don't have the sense to feel pain like a normal person does. Edged weapons are a very real possibility or at the least improvised weapons.

 

[drop bear]

Nice clip! Some of the people in my Kyokushin dojo use the full face head gear even though we're not punching to the face. During my private lessons with one of my old Kenpo teachers, we used full face gear and fought pretty much MMA style.

My coach did a seminar of it. It is very kyokushin judo sort of.

 

[drop bear]

Maybe, but not necessarily. Sparring doesn't cover the totality of a SD situation.



I'm not sure why you're assuming that basic training hasn't already occurred?


I don't understand what you're saying here, could you please clarify?


Where are you getting the idea that scenario based/RBSD training is compliant drills? They have attacker(s), various stimuli, various environments, various terrain, various problem solving and more duress that you can shake a stick at. I've never seen a compliant scenario unless it is a 'no-shoot' type scenario which needs to be tossed in from time to time in order to be able to correctly address a situation with the proper amount (or no amount) of force.

Last bit first from the nobody posting a video of what they are on about.

Now you will not have basic technique until it can be applied to someone who doesent want it applied to them. This is the only way a technique becomes yours.

Then you can honestly say it work for you to the level it works for you.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

For you SD guys, how will you develop your "hip throw (mother of all throws)"?

In

- "sport" approach, you 1st "develop" in your partner training, you then "test" in your "sport"?
- "SD" approach, you may "develop" it in your SD situation, but how do you "test" it?

 

[MJS]

IMO, we need a little of everything, not just one thing, if we want to be complete. If our goal is SD, to feel comfortable dealing with weapons, multi man attacks, grappling, getting hit hard and being able to take the hit and recover, we need to focus on all of those areas. One thing isn't a fix all...it's a combination of everything.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

IMO, we need a little of everything, not just one thing, if we want to be complete. If our goal is SD, to feel comfortable dealing with weapons, multi man attacks, grappling, getting hit hard and being able to take the hit and recover, we need to focus on all of those areas. One thing isn't a fix all...it's a combination of everything.

Good way to put it. Let me see if I can approach the topic from another perspective. I'll use Drop Bear's video as a point of reference. And let me start by saying to DB, I'm not busting on your video. It is as a point of reference to expound my point(s).

Okay, sparring as demonstrated in the video or in general. What are the good points? Well to begin, we have a training tool that allows you to use the basic skills that you have learned. That could include striking, kicking, grappling, locks and/or a combination of those things. So that is a good thing. Next, it allows you to use it against an opponent that is resisting your attempts to control the situation (for whatever the desired result). So that is also a good thing.

So sparring does have a couple of things going for it. Can we all agree on this point?

Now, here are, in my professional opinion, where sparring (as presented in the video and in general) is less than optimal for the purpose of self-defense and other methods are superior (for this specific purpose). To be clear, that should not be taken as a slap in the head for sparring. But if we're to have a frank, open conversation on the topic we need to look at the good as well as the bad (or ugly).

Using the video as a point of reference:

• They are in a controlled environment. Can we all agree that you are not likely to get attacked inside of a school as opposed to other venues? Can we all agree that you and your attacker aren't likely to be wearing safety equipment? Can we all agree that your attacker may not be standing in front of you in a starting position and waiting for you to also get into a starting position? Can we all agree that an attacker may not be abiding by the same rule set that you are using? Can we all agree that the terrain is likely not going to include a dry, level, flat, padded surface (and padded walls) in a well lit venue?
• There is no opportunity or attempt at verbalization i.e. opportunity to de-escalate the situation before it begins. Now not every situation will provide that luxury, but some will. And it needs to be addressed and trained for accordingly. Any fight that can be avoided is a fight that was won. Otherwise no one wins and everyone loses.
• The video demonstrates normal sparring i.e. you stand here and he stands there and you start boxing and dancing and looking for an opening. They go to a point, stop and then reset. This is fine for competition, but is not reflective of how a real fight progresses. There is no reset, break, tap out or time out.
• No opportunity is utilized to escape the situation or place a barrier between you and the attacker.
• No attempt is made to draw attention to the attack as it is happening. Attracting the attention of bystanders or the public in general is good for you and bad for the attacker(s) that don't want to be identified.
• The video demonstrates attempts to go for a submission. While that may be fine to calm down your drunk uncle at the family BBQ because you're trying not to hurt him, attempts to purposefully go the to ground in an actual attack is fool-hardy at best and detrimental to your life at the worst. In a real world altercation you NEED to assume weapons are present and multiple assailants are present until the attack is over. The video does not address either real world consideration at all.
• While the training demonstrated may suffice for an untrained attacker, I honestly don't like your chances against a determined (trained or not) attacker(s) who may be armed and/or under the influence of a drug.
• The video does not address taking the situation to a specific conclusion. This is paramount! As detailed by JKS, under duress you WILL react as you train. As I've said before many times, you will NOT rise to the occasion...you WILL sink to the level of your training. In short, how you train is how you will react under extreme duress. That can be a good or bad thing.
• The video does not address self defense applicable laws and legal uses-of-force. It is only you stand there, I'll stand here and let's start duking it out and then we'll stop, reset and do it again. That isn't real life.

Scenario based training addresses all of the real world concerns detailed above in ADDITION to the things sparring addresses i.e. full contact with and from a resisting attacker. So where sparring has a limited use for SD, scenario based training takes all that sparring offers and takes it up several notches to an entirely different level. Sparring is not the tool to address these other consideration. Thus whereas one needs to spar for competition, one does not need to spar for SD as their are other tools that incorporate what sparring has to offer and adds elements that sparring (as presented in the offered video link and in general) doesn't include.

 

[drop bear]

Good way to put it. Let me see if I can approach the topic from another perspective. I'll use Drop Bear's video as a point of reference. And let me start by saying to DB, I'm not busting on your video. It is as a point of reference to expound my point(s).

Okay, sparring as demonstrated in the video or in general. What are the good points? Well to begin, we have a training tool that allows you to use the basic skills that you have learned. That could include striking, kicking, grappling, locks and/or a combination of those things. So that is a good thing. Next, it allows you to use it against an opponent that is resisting your attempts to control the situation (for whatever the desired result). So that is also a good thing.

So sparring does have a couple of things going for it. Can we all agree on this point?

Now, here are, in my professional opinion, where sparring (as presented in the video and in general) is less than optimal for the purpose of self-defense and other methods are superior (for this specific purpose). To be clear, that should not be taken as a slap in the head for sparring. But if we're to have a frank, open conversation on the topic we need to look at the good as well as the bad (or ugly).

Using the video as a point of reference:

• They are in a controlled environment. Can we all agree that you are not likely to get attacked inside of a school as opposed to other venues? Can we all agree that you and your attacker aren't likely to be wearing safety equipment? Can we all agree that your attacker may not be standing in front of you in a starting position and waiting for you to also get into a starting position? Can we all agree that an attacker may not be abiding by the same rule set that you are using? Can we all agree that the terrain is likely not going to include a dry, level, flat, padded surface (and padded walls) in a well lit venue?
• There is no opportunity or attempt at verbalization i.e. opportunity to de-escalate the situation before it begins. Now not every situation will provide that luxury, but some will. And it needs to be addressed and trained for accordingly. Any fight that can be avoided is a fight that was won. Otherwise no one wins and everyone loses.
• The video demonstrates normal sparring i.e. you stand here and he stands there and you start boxing and dancing and looking for an opening. They go to a point, stop and then reset. This is fine for competition, but is not reflective of how a real fight progresses. There is no reset, break, tap out or time out.
• No opportunity is utilized to escape the situation or place a barrier between you and the attacker.
• No attempt is made to draw attention to the attack as it is happening. Attracting the attention of bystanders or the public in general is good for you and bad for the attacker(s) that don't want to be identified.
• The video demonstrates attempts to go for a submission. While that may be fine to calm down your drunk uncle at the family BBQ because you're trying not to hurt him, attempts to purposefully go the to ground in an actual attack is fool-hardy at best and detrimental to your life at the worst. In a real world altercation you NEED to assume weapons are present and multiple assailants are present until the attack is over. The video does not address either real world consideration at all.
• While the training demonstrated may suffice for an untrained attacker, I honestly don't like your chances against a determined (trained or not) attacker(s) who may be armed and/or under the influence of a drug.
• The video does not address taking the situation to a specific conclusion. This is paramount! As detailed by JKS, under duress you WILL react as you train. As I've said before many times, you will NOT rise to the occasion...you WILL sink to the level of your training. In short, how you train is how you will react under extreme duress. That can be a good or bad thing.
• The video does not address self defense applicable laws and legal uses-of-force. It is only you stand there, I'll stand here and let's start duking it out and then we'll stop, reset and do it again. That isn't real life.

Scenario based training addresses all of the real world concerns detailed above in ADDITION to the things sparring addresses i.e. full contact with and from a resisting attacker. So where sparring has a limited use for SD, scenario based training takes all that sparring offers and takes it up several notches to an entirely different level. Sparring is not the tool to address these other consideration. Thus whereas one needs to spar for competition, one does not need to spar for SD as their are other tools that incorporate what sparring has to offer and adds elements that sparring (as presented in the offered video link and in general) doesn't include.

Then you would put up a video of scenario training so we could critique it wouldn't you.

Because as far as I can see you have 3 choices.

Contact but in a controlled environment. Which is the same as sparring.

No contact but in any environment you want but it is not realistic.

Compliant which is compliant.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Contact but in a controlled environment. Which is the same as sparring.

That really depends upon how you are defining sparring.

 

[Kframe]

Drop bear, you keep mentioning that sparring teaches the fundamental basics. Im sorry but you are wrong, and who ever taught you is wrong. You should have ALREADY learned those basics, out side of sparring. Sparring is not the place to learn a technique correctly. It is were you go to learn when to apply it appropriately. That is my issue and part of why i quit MMA. They spend not nearly enough time not sparring and doing the boring #### like pad work and partner drills. Especially the partner drills. I gained more from them then i did in any other thing.

Hence why on sherdog you constantly get threads about the piss poor state of striking in mma. They just don't spend enough time on the basics, out side of sparring. Oh and for proof all i have to do is watch any mma fight in the last 10 years and all i see out side of a few people is craptacular striking and standup.. It is essentially BJJ with some striking for the flavor and a potential payday.

Your nonsense about mma guys constantly dominating on the street is far fetched. I guess someone forgot to tell Miquel Falco and his friend. One of which was a UFC Fighter, the other a Professional boxer. Before you jump in and say it was 5 on 2 let me clue you in. The first exchange, was in a small space, in a door way, with only 2 aggressors making it 2v2. The others were not engaged at that point. Our MMA hero, the man with the single greatest fighting style and training methodology in your opinion violated the number one rule in a mma fight right off the god Darned batt. Which is KEEP YOUR HANDS UP. At no point in that exchange, did he ever assume a fighting stance, or even have his hands up En guard. They were by his sides the whole time, and all of his strikes you see, were all haymakers. Yep that was Dang nice performance by a top teir fighter using the supposed best training methodology. Not to mention his Pro boxer friend whose career is over because of his idiot friend.

Your the type of sherdog poster i cant stand, if it isn't the mma holy trinity, then its crap and needs to die. This attitude of your art sucks and you suck or doing it is ridiculous, especially at a time when martial artists of all flavors need to be coming together in support of each other not fighting each other. Wanna know why?

The state and federal authorities don't have a problem with TMA and its competitions. It does however have a major problem with yours and is constantly trying to ban it. MMA needs to unite with TMA and both stand together to keep a entire style from being banned. Which it is in some places. MMA's continual arrogance and egotistical BS will be its eventually down fall. You guys need to take your chips off your shoulders, and pull you heads out of the sand and unite with other arts instead of constantly bashing them and tearing them down.