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

[drop bear]

I didn't post a video of our training for you, and I have posted no videos of our training ever. I suggested you did some research for yourself if you want to understand where I am coming from. We train against full resistance constantly, we hit to the body with close to full power constantly, we train fast or slow when appropriate but we do not train drills and we do not spar in the conventional sense. We are not into competition and our techniques are not suited to competition. We have no choreographed moves, our partners responses are totally unscripted.

Your comment on being tested in competition is unrealistic. We have another thread on that so I'm not going down that rabbit hole here. We are RB and that is not suited to competition. I have no desire to compete in the ring, I did enough competing in earlier times. It is nothing like what we train now and it would be impossible to take just a portion of it to prove it in competition.
:asian:

You have been jumping down the throat of the street sport debate since post one. I don't do reality training I do honest training. I don't make esoteric claims about what should work. I make actual provable claims.

That the method I employ works in fully resisted competition. Yours doesn't. That the method I employ works in sparring. You don't engage in it.

So what can you say with any real certainty that your method works under any conditions. Remembering that if it is anecdotal I am pulling that bs flag you like using.
.
Without videos of your training how can anybody know. Every video has been a drill that you have shown so far. So if you have a method that is provable by resistance then please show it.

Or if you have some other way of proving your method go with that. But as I said about anecdotes you opened the door on that.

I am sorry but unscripted? Like when you react to a shot you don't get hit with but pretend to so your partner knows what it is like to hit someone.

And so people know what mma sparring looks like. ( not my gym of course)
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I5DAr1uvJ1c

 

[Kong Soo Do]

I don't do reality training I do honest training.

So reality based training is...dishonest training?

I don't make esoteric claims about what should work. I make actual provable claims.

Okay, what are your provable claims? How many real-world altercations have you been in (armed and unarmed) against violent, resisting felons?

That the method I employ works in fully resisted competition.

That's great. Doesn't mean it will work outside of competition where the attacker isn't bound by the same rule set or the artificially created environment of a competition. As mentioned, many of the best competitors in the world have realized (thankfully) that what they do doesn't translate well to the 'street'. As I mentioned, Royce Gracie is one of them. The fact that you continually bring up competition demonstrates that your not really on the same sheet of music as those of us explaining reality based and scenario based training.

So what can you say with any real certainty that your method works under any conditions.

Well, been using it successfully for 23 years now against violent felons (not counting military service prior to that). About a thousand document uses-of-force including five deadly force incidents. Plus the data base we keep on our students real world altercations. And the fact that every major/minor agency of which I'm aware uses scenario based training. I'd say that's a pretty good start.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

And so people know what mma sparring looks like. ( not my gym of course)
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I5DAr1uvJ1c

Okay, I don't want to sound mean here, but from the point of real world self defense training this video presentation is complete garbage. Here's a small list of why;

• Artificially created training environment i.e. everything is padded, dry, level, well lit with plenty of room to dance around.
• They are trying to take each other to the ground. I can't stress how stupid that is in a real fight unless you enjoy getting stomped on by other assailants/don't mind injuring yourself on stuff like concrete/don't mind getting stabbed by that edged weapon you should have assumed the attacker had/like to limit your mobility etc.
• They are going to a point...stopping...and then resetting to start their dance all over again. I've never seen a real fight happen that way. It should be going to a definitive conclusion each and every time. If you're not going to a definitive conclusion EACH and EVERY time your training is detrimental to your health based on thousands of documented uses-of-force. That's one of the major reasons LEO training has changed since I began decades ago.
• Their wearing some nice loose fitting clothing and I'll bet their all warmed up and stretched out prior to beginning their dance.
• When one of them needs to readjust their safety gear the other is nice enough to stop and let them make their adjustments. That courtesy doesn't happen in a real fight.

Look, I'm not really trying to bust your balls here (nor is anyone else). But you really....really...REALLY need to listen to what we're trying to explain to you. This video is fantastic for sport competition and I'm sure these guys are in fine shape. The training however will get you hurt or killed in the type of situations I've described unless you're really lucky. And I don't train for luck. The average realworld altercation lasts 7 seconds with injury usually occurring in the first 3 seconds. That is how you need to train for the real world. Not dancing around on mats. How you train is how you will react under duress. That is a plain, documented state of fact. Training for the wrong venue is detrimental. I really don't know of any other way to put it.

 

[jks9199]

I have seen it and done it. I think this idea I haven't done the real combat scenario training is a bit misleading.

Sparring teaches a different set of skills to combat scenarios. As I said we drill as well. But to understand random movement dealing with contact and problem solving you need to spar.

Mc map is moving back in that direction. The police here are employing mma fighters to help with their combat systems. Seal team 6 was looking to employ boxing instructors.

Sparring is coming back into fashion with these organisations that put themselves in harms way.

The Gracie's are doing combat scenarios and sparring combined.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HncwGDTNsxo

That's not scenario training. Why'd they decide to arrest him? Why'd they immediately launch into hands on? No commands, no shoes... That was exactly what I described: "here, go arrest this guy." No scripting, no real planning other than the hidden knife... no striking, no escalation of force... Honestly, if I was evaluating them in some sort of training exercise, I'd fail them. We'd restart, and work until it's right. (There's a hint there about scenario training.)

I get the ppct stuff forced on me during security guard training. And there is a lot of oponants to it among the people who actually have to put themselves in danger using it.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ7mjc_aweE

First -- he hasn't done PPCT himself, nor has he really researched it. (There are a few threads here on MT about it, as I recall.) He can't even be bothered to learn who created it or why... Kind of damages his credibility. I'm not a fan of PPCT either -- but I admit that my opinion is largely ignorant and based on incomplete exposure to it. Pressure points have a place and do work in the DT arsenal. They're not a tool for active assailants however, unless you start talking about things like the point of the jaw for right hook...

Perhaps we need to define sparring... and scenario training. Perhaps you'd like to start by reviewing this post upthread

 

[drop bear]

That's not scenario training. Why'd they decide to arrest him? Why'd they immediately launch into hands on? No commands, no shoes... That was exactly what I described: "here, go arrest this guy." No scripting, no real planning other than the hidden knife... no striking, no escalation of force... Honestly, if I was evaluating them in some sort of training exercise, I'd fail them. We'd restart, and work until it's right. (There's a hint there about scenario training.)


First -- he hasn't done PPCT himself, nor has he really researched it. (There are a few threads here on MT about it, as I recall.) He can't even be bothered to learn who created it or why... Kind of damages his credibility. I'm not a fan of PPCT either -- but I admit that my opinion is largely ignorant and based on incomplete exposure to it. Pressure points have a place and do work in the DT arsenal. They're not a tool for active assailants however, unless you start talking about things like the point of the jaw for right hook...

Perhaps we need to define sparring... and scenario training. Perhaps you'd like to start by reviewing this post upthread

I have done the ppct and it suffers from two major issues

It doesn't work if the guy is fighting back

It is taught by people who have a weeks worth of training. And seems to be trapped in the 70s

And then is used as this ideal solution to violence." I don't understand why you had to punch kick choke the guy. Ppct is scientifically proven to defeat any attacker without hurting them"

I am not sure has you would really do a scenario right. You would need a lot of experience in actual incidents to do the job right. Otherwise it devolves into fantasy pretty quickly. When I did scenarios it was the same. I knew I was never going to talk the guy out. So why bother.

If you have got a better example post a vid.

I don't think shoes make a difference.I have never been bothered one way or another. De escalation is tricky. I do it but have never figured out a system for it. I have done the security guard versions and again pretty unrealistic.

The dog brothers comment?

Situational stuff and sparring teach different skills. Sparring allows for the application of core technique and to get that right. Combat scenarios allow for application to a specific environment. If you don't have the core skills the combat scenario's don't work.

Same as if I made people spar without giving them the core skills of fighting first.

I am pretty dead set against compliant drills or combat scenarios. Especially done at speed or with contact. I will take that one step further if you are helping the guy by pretending their shots are doing damage when they are not. I think it does something bad to your brain. And is the start of how these no touch knockout styles work.

 

[drop bear]

Okay, I don't want to sound mean here, but from the point of real world self defense training this video presentation is complete garbage. Here's a small list of why;

• Artificially created training environment i.e. everything is padded, dry, level, well lit with plenty of room to dance around.
• They are trying to take each other to the ground. I can't stress how stupid that is in a real fight unless you enjoy getting stomped on by other assailants/don't mind injuring yourself on stuff like concrete/don't mind getting stabbed by that edged weapon you should have assumed the attacker had/like to limit your mobility etc.
• They are going to a point...stopping...and then resetting to start their dance all over again. I've never seen a real fight happen that way. It should be going to a definitive conclusion each and every time. If you're not going to a definitive conclusion EACH and EVERY time your training is detrimental to your health based on thousands of documented uses-of-force. That's one of the major reasons LEO training has changed since I began decades ago.
• Their wearing some nice loose fitting clothing and I'll bet their all warmed up and stretched out prior to beginning their dance.
• When one of them needs to readjust their safety gear the other is nice enough to stop and let them make their adjustments. That courtesy doesn't happen in a real fight.

Look, I'm not really trying to bust your balls here (nor is anyone else). But you really....really...REALLY need to listen to what we're trying to explain to you. This video is fantastic for sport competition and I'm sure these guys are in fine shape. The training however will get you hurt or killed in the type of situations I've described unless you're really lucky. And I don't train for luck. The average realworld altercation lasts 7 seconds with injury usually occurring in the first 3 seconds. That is how you need to train for the real world. Not dancing around on mats. How you train is how you will react under duress. That is a plain, documented state of fact. Training for the wrong venue is detrimental. I really don't know of any other way to put it.

OK so padding safety gear and warming up and courtesy between partners is now a bad thing in reality training? You would hate K man he uses a full suit.

You are using dogma to justify yourself. fights last for 7 seconds. going to the ground is bad. And so on. You are limiting your training with too many rules. Just learn to move around with a resisting oponant and then you will be flexible enough to deal with a situation that might fall outside your ideas about fighting.

And be nice to your training partner I don't think a little courtesy in the gym will get you killed in the street. And more people will want to train with you.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Your not understanding what is being said to you. Let's take a look at your post;

OK so padding safety gear and warming up and courtesy between partners is now a bad thing in reality training? You would hate K man he uses a full suit.

Padding is occasionally okay, but not necessary in every training session. You'd hate PCR or Systema training; you use a real knife/M16/AK47/shield. The rifles are unloaded of course, but the knives are real. Not done in every session, but it is in some just like WWII Combatives training. Why? Because real life attackers don't use rubber knives.

Warming up is okay, but not all the time. Good to go in cold from time to time. Why? Because a real life attacker won't allow you to warm up and stretch out prior to attack.

Courtesy is okay prior to and after the scenario. But not during. This is the time to train. Why? Because a real life attacker isn't going to allow you to catch your breath/tie your shoe/adjust you cup.

We occasionally use full suits as well depending on the scenario. Most of the time there is NO gear at all.

You are using dogma to justify yourself.

No, I'm using real life experience as well as real world statistical data compiled by L.E. agencies around the world. This is my area of expertise, I humbly would suggest you benefit from it.

...going to the ground is bad.

In a controlled environment such as what you train in or in a competition it is fine. In the real world is will get you hurt or killed unless you're very lucky. That's a fact. For all the reasons I've already detailed earlier in the thread. The ONLY time a LEO wants to go to the ground is once the situation is under control and the threat has ceased. Unless he's a rookie or hasn't received good training.

You are limiting your training with too many rules.

I am? What rules are limiting me? Did you actually look at the video link you posted. Those boys are the ones abiding by an artificial rule set. And you've erroneously translated that as actual self defense training when it is the polar opposite.

Just learn to move around with a resisting oponant and then you will be flexible enough to deal with a situation that might fall outside your ideas about fighting.

My last time fighting a violent, resisting felon high on spice was last week. How about you? Serious question and not a slap. I truly don't think you understand the level of violence that some people are actually capable of. You are looking at the real world through a narrow lens. And to be very clear, I'm not trying to be tough on you or 'call you out'. But I am, as a courtesy, trying to educate you on some things that you are in grave error on. For YOUR benefit as well as those you may have to protect.

 

[jks9199]

I have done the ppct and it suffers from two major issues

It doesn't work if the guy is fighting back

It is taught by people who have a weeks worth of training. And seems to be trapped in the 70s

And then is used as this ideal solution to violence." I don't understand why you had to punch kick choke the guy. Ppct is scientifically proven to defeat any attacker without hurting them"

As I said -- I've got problems with PPCT, as well -- but I've also communicated with actual instructors of it, and have a decent idea of why it's set up the way it is. (It was designed around being legally defensible... which raises all sort of issues.)

I am not sure has you would really do a scenario right. You would need a lot of experience in actual incidents to do the job right. Otherwise it devolves into fantasy pretty quickly. When I did scenarios it was the same. I knew I was never going to talk the guy out. So why bother.

Then they weren't done properly -- or you've been exposed to a very narrow slice of it. When you design a scenario, you have a lesson or performance goal in mind. Some are quite broad (handle an encounter with a street tough) and others are very specific (go in, and put this guy in that cell...). The script and options then are built to support that goal, and allow the student to work the scenario to success. A scenario may be a direct rehearsal of a planned encounter or activity, too -- like a SWAT unit practicing an entry. Done right, scenario training is as close as you can to actually dealing with the situation in question under somewhat laboratory conditions. Depending on the skill of the instructors and the training level of the students, there may be several possible outcomes -- with varying degrees of success. Doing it RIGHT is very hard work. Doing scenario training half-assed is easy.

But -- scenario training won't do much at all to help you prepare for sparring or competitions.

If you have got a better example post a vid.

I don't think shoes make a difference.I have never been bothered one way or another. De escalation is tricky. I do it but have never figured out a system for it. I have done the security guard versions and again pretty unrealistic.

Shoes were a simple observation. The first thing I do when I evaluate a potential DT program is look at what they wear to teach and demo. If they aren't using a full gun belt, appropriate uniforms, etc. to show it, I have to wonder whether they've actually considered the realities of what cops wear to work. Body armor changes how you move, gun belts and boots can limit your movements...

Situational stuff and sparring teach different skills. Sparring allows for the application of core technique and to get that right. Combat scenarios allow for application to a specific environment. If you don't have the core skills the combat scenario's don't work.

Same as if I made people spar without giving them the core skills of fighting first.

I am pretty dead set against compliant drills or combat scenarios. Especially done at speed or with contact. I will take that one step further if you are helping the guy by pretending their shots are doing damage when they are not. I think it does something bad to your brain. And is the start of how these no touch knockout styles work.

You've got a valid point here. It's what a lot of us have been saying: sparring is training for a particular environment. But it's not preparation for street self defense. At least not by itself.

I asked you to define sparring; you've haven't done that. Here's one definition of sparring: a method of practicing the learned techniques under the pressure of an opponent. And here's one for scenario training: a method of simulating real events to allow students to practice responding to them. (Wow, just hit me... Sparring is really scenario based training for a competition or duel...)

Both have a place in training, depending on your goals. One of the big advantages of sparring is that it's fun -- and we learn best when we play. But that's also a disadvantage; it's fun, so we do it to the exclusion of less fun stuff. How many times have you seen folks "rock and roll" who haven't really learned the basic techniques, and aren't practicing anything they've learned when they're under pressure? They're often tough scrappers -- but unskilled. Scenario training allows you to simulate the actual events -- but make mistakes and fix them. Done right, it's a really powerful tool for learning to actually apply skills. That's why pilots, the military, NASA, and lots of others use it. But -- it's easy to do wrong. One of the most common errors is the instructor who builds unwinnable scenarios to prove how good they are... which can teach exactly the wrong lesson ("I knew I was never gonna talk the guy out. So why bother.")

OK... one more thing I want to call your attention to. You said

De escalation is tricky. I do it but have never figured out a system for it. I have done the security guard versions and again pretty unrealistic.

If you're doing it, and it's working -- start taking a step back and figuring out why. It'll make you more effective, and more capable, so that you do things consciously rather than unconsciously. At that point, you'll be able to do it by design, instead of luck.

 

[jks9199]

OK so padding safety gear and warming up and courtesy between partners is now a bad thing in reality training? You would hate K man he uses a full suit.

You are using dogma to justify yourself. fights last for 7 seconds. going to the ground is bad. And so on. You are limiting your training with too many rules. Just learn to move around with a resisting oponant and then you will be flexible enough to deal with a situation that might fall outside your ideas about fighting.

And be nice to your training partner I don't think a little courtesy in the gym will get you killed in the street. And more people will want to train with you.

Actually, being nice to your training partner can hurt them. You teach them to drop their guard, and let their adversary move in. And then there was an incident that really happened... There was a cop who loved practicing gun disarms. He practiced them all the time; he'd have a training partner point a practice weapon at him, and quick as a blink, he'd disarm the guy, then hand the practice gun back to do it again. One day, a crook approaches him, and brandishes a gun at him. Our guy was in heaven... and, quick as a blink, disarmed the crook. THEN HANDED THE GUN BACK just like he'd practiced. The only saving grace of that is that he did it again, the crook was apparently so shocked that he handed it back that he didn't shoot him.

 

[wingchun100]

Probably. you spar with Intent but not ego. To test your partner not to destroy him. But it has to be tough to reach better gains.

At least someone knows what I meant. If there is no resistance then there are no gains. An opponent in a street fight isn't about to do what you think they will. You need to train with that element of unpredictability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[drop bear]

So reality based training is...dishonest training?



Okay, what are your provable claims? How many real-world altercations have you been in (armed and unarmed) against violent, resisting felons?



That's great. Doesn't mean it will work outside of competition where the attacker isn't bound by the same rule set or the artificially created environment of a competition. As mentioned, many of the best competitors in the world have realized (thankfully) that what they do doesn't translate well to the 'street'. As I mentioned, Royce Gracie is one of them. The fact that you continually bring up competition demonstrates that your not really on the same sheet of music as those of us explaining reality based and scenario based training.



Well, been using it successfully for 23 years now against violent felons (not counting military service prior to that). About a thousand document uses-of-force including five deadly force incidents. Plus the data base we keep on our students real world altercations. And the fact that every major/minor agency of which I'm aware uses scenario based training. I'd say that's a pretty good start.

Oh sorry I am going to have to call bs on all of that due to at this stage it is all anecdotal.

By the same rules everybody else is calling bs on mine.

Irritating isn't it.

Your system does not even work in an artificial environment with rules. You will just have to provide evidence of these documented street fights. I am not bashing rsbd that is just the reality.

Royce Gracie spars as part of his training. If he extends his sort trading to encompas self defence aspects I applaud that. I have no issue with scenario training so long as it is based on a core of honest training of basics.

And that only comes with resisted training like sparring.

 

[drop bear]

At least someone knows what I meant. If there is no resistance then there are no gains. An opponent in a street fight isn't about to do what you think they will. You need to train with that element of unpredictability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah it seems fighting back is the one element not covered.

Just a quick poll.

I don't think throwing money at someone is covered in the wing chun syllabus. Would you for any reason be unable to do so to defend yourself?

Would you get yelled at by your instructor if you did?

 

[drop bear]

Actually, being nice to your training partner can hurt them. You teach them to drop their guard, and let their adversary move in. And then there was an incident that really happened... There was a cop who loved practicing gun disarms. He practiced them all the time; he'd have a training partner point a practice weapon at him, and quick as a blink, he'd disarm the guy, then hand the practice gun back to do it again. One day, a crook approaches him, and brandishes a gun at him. Our guy was in heaven... and, quick as a blink, disarmed the crook. THEN HANDED THE GUN BACK just like he'd practiced. The only saving grace of that is that he did it again, the crook was apparently so shocked that he handed it back that he didn't shoot him.

Good more anecdotes. Happened to a friend of a friend? You are basing your training on that?

It is an urban myth.

 

[drop bear]

As I said -- I've got problems with PPCT, as well -- but I've also communicated with actual instructors of it, and have a decent idea of why it's set up the way it is. (It was designed around being legally defensible... which raises all sort of issues.)


Then they weren't done properly -- or you've been exposed to a very narrow slice of it. When you design a scenario, you have a lesson or performance goal in mind. Some are quite broad (handle an encounter with a street tough) and others are very specific (go in, and put this guy in that cell...). The script and options then are built to support that goal, and allow the student to work the scenario to success. A scenario may be a direct rehearsal of a planned encounter or activity, too -- like a SWAT unit practicing an entry. Done right, scenario training is as close as you can to actually dealing with the situation in question under somewhat laboratory conditions. Depending on the skill of the instructors and the training level of the students, there may be several possible outcomes -- with varying degrees of success. Doing it RIGHT is very hard work. Doing scenario training half-assed is easy.

But -- scenario training won't do much at all to help you prepare for sparring or competitions.


Shoes were a simple observation. The first thing I do when I evaluate a potential DT program is look at what they wear to teach and demo. If they aren't using a full gun belt, appropriate uniforms, etc. to show it, I have to wonder whether they've actually considered the realities of what cops wear to work. Body armor changes how you move, gun belts and boots can limit your movements...



You've got a valid point here. It's what a lot of us have been saying: sparring is training for a particular environment. But it's not preparation for street self defense. At least not by itself.

I asked you to define sparring; you've haven't done that. Here's one definition of sparring: a method of practicing the learned techniques under the pressure of an opponent. And here's one for scenario training: a method of simulating real events to allow students to practice responding to them. (Wow, just hit me... Sparring is really scenario based training for a competition or duel...)

Both have a place in training, depending on your goals. One of the big advantages of sparring is that it's fun -- and we learn best when we play. But that's also a disadvantage; it's fun, so we do it to the exclusion of less fun stuff. How many times have you seen folks "rock and roll" who haven't really learned the basic techniques, and aren't practicing anything they've learned when they're under pressure? They're often tough scrappers -- but unskilled. Scenario training allows you to simulate the actual events -- but make mistakes and fix them. Done right, it's a really powerful tool for learning to actually apply skills. That's why pilots, the military, NASA, and lots of others use it. But -- it's easy to do wrong. One of the most common errors is the instructor who builds unwinnable scenarios to prove how good they are... which can teach exactly the wrong lesson ("I knew I was never gonna talk the guy out. So why bother.")

OK... one more thing I want to call your attention to. You said
If you're doing it, and it's working -- start taking a step back and figuring out why. It'll make you more effective, and more capable, so that you do things consciously rather than unconsciously. At that point, you'll be able to do it by design, instead of luck.

Well the ppct instructor did train for a whole week. (18 days I think) so probably not that much time on doing things well.

I did help run them in a fist suit. But that was a self defence one. Which has different goals. Basically you de escalate until I throw an then bang on with me throwing half hearted attacks.

My definition of sparring is a fully resisted exersize that has an open playing field. Meaning It allows both people to test random attacks and defences. Rather than a drill that while still can be resisted but covered a limited section of that. Or a pre arranged attack.

Both need to be covered to be well rounded.

Sparring can range from fun to very not fun. It has been used as a punishment for extreme duchebaggery.

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

I believe the back story on that was a guy who wanted to go hard on people with less skill learning why it is better to be courteous to your partner.

You will also notice that it did not go to the ground. Just to show people don't have to if they don't want to.

(I know you didn't argue that )

I would suggest rock and roll is a pretty important factor in defending yourself. Especially when you do not have a pre arranged ending. And that ending is up to you.

 

[K-man]

You have been jumping down the throat of the street sport debate since post one. I don't do reality training I do honest training. I don't make esoteric claims about what should work. I make actual provable claims.

We have debated street vs sport endlessly on this forum. You will find post after post bagging RBSD systems but you won't find a single post of mine bagging sport based training. But it is offensive to state that your training is honest implying the rest is not when you admit you don't do RB training. I don't have any problem in agreeing MMA training works well in the ring and it is likely to be very effective in most street scenarios. I would claim that my training would fail dismally in the ring with MMA rules but would be more effective on the street.

That the method I employ works in fully resisted competition. Yours doesn't. That the method I employ works in sparring. You don't engage in it.

Our training is often against full resistance. Yours is full resistance competition. You spar in a manner that suits your competition. I used to spar in a similar manner but now I don't because it is contrary to the type of training we now do. You have a problem with my training, that you have never seen and I don't have a problem either way.

So what can you say with any real certainty that your method works under any conditions. Remembering that if it is anecdotal I am pulling that bs flag you like using.

my system is not anecdotal. I am there first hand.

Without videos of your training how can anybody know. Every video has been a drill that you have shown so far. So if you have a method that is provable by resistance then please show it.

Or if you have some other way of proving your method go with that. But as I said about anecdotes you opened the door on that.

Mate, I don't need to prove anything to anyone. You want to see what we do first hand, you are welcome to train with us any time you are in Melbourne.

I am sorry but unscripted? Like when you react to a shot you don't get hit with but pretend to so your partner knows what it is like to hit someone.

And so people know what mma sparring looks like. ( not my gym of course)
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I5DAr1uvJ1c

And this is the way we used to spar. Does it prove something?
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NKOvNjDVLA

I am pretty dead set against compliant drills or combat scenarios. Especially done at speed or with contact. I will take that one step further if you are helping the guy by pretending their shots are doing damage when they are not. I think it does something bad to your brain. And is the start of how these no touch knockout styles work.

No touch knockout has nothing to do with our training. To even consider what we do to be like that shows you haven't a clue what we do. No touch KOs have as much relevance to my training as it does to yours ... that is none.

OK so padding safety gear and warming up and courtesy between partners is now a bad thing in reality training? You would hate K man he uses a full suit.

If you are going to quote me, please be accurate. I don't use a red suit. My comment refers to the only way you can train full contact full power and for the record I don't like red man for a number of reasons.

Decent padding and short rounds you should be able to manage it. Without too much injury. I used to do reality based stuff with ten second rounds that was helpful.

Sorry, without a red man suit that is just not possible.

Now, I'm do for a couple of hours of ineffective training.

 

[Flying Crane]

jeezus ****ing krist folks, all this back-and-forth. And everyone is talking in the extremes: "the way WE train is the ONLY way that works, and if you don't train OUR way, then you'll just get killed on the streets..." I'm sorry, but that's the BS right there, no matter which side of the argument you are on.

there are lots of ways to train, that will help one develop effective and useful skills. Sparring, if done appropriately, if recognized as simply one tool in the toolbox of training, can be part of an effective training methodology. But it's not the only effective method and it's certainly not imperative that one use sparring.

competitive athletes who spar a lot can certainly take care of themselves on the street. To say otherwise is nonsense.

likewise, those who train in a non-competitive way and do not spar or spar very little, can also develop skills to take care of themselves on the street. To say otherwise is nonsense.

This debate devolves (as always) into everyone arguing the merits of their own favorite method. OK, you like it and you feel it works for you and gives you the skills you need? Great, keep doing it. And sharing your thoughts and ideas and insights with folks here is great. But this "only my way works and your way will get you killed" attitude is nonsense, plain and simple. That goes for all sides of this debate.

 

[K-man]

jeezus ****ing krist folks, all this back-and-forth. And everyone is talking in the extremes: "the way WE train is the ONLY way that works, and if you don't train OUR way, then you'll just get killed on the streets..." I'm sorry, but that's the BS right there, no matter which side of the argument you are on.

there are lots of ways to train, that will help one develop effective and useful skills. Sparring, if done appropriately, if recognized as simply one tool in the toolbox of training, can be part of an effective training methodology. But it's not the only effective method and it's certainly not imperative that one use sparring.

competitive athletes who spar a lot can certainly take care of themselves on the street. To say otherwise is nonsense.

likewise, those who train in a non-competitive way and do not spar or spar very little, can also develop skills to take care of themselves on the street. To say otherwise is nonsense.

This debate devolves (as always) into everyone arguing the merits of their own favorite method. OK, you like it and you feel it works for you and gives you the skills you need? Great, keep doing it. And sharing your thoughts and ideas and insights with folks here is great. But this "only my way works and your way will get you killed" attitude is nonsense, plain and simple. That goes for all sides of this debate.

Michael, I'm not sure that it is two extremes. I have absolutely no problem accepting that training MMA is effective for the ring and the street and I am not thinking that anyone else here has voiced otherwise. I just get thoroughly peed off when some one bags every other persons training including mine. I haven't seen anyone from a traditional style say their training was the only 'honest' training. We have lots of MMA guys on the forum who constantly put up great posts which are not only educational but can get you to look at something from another angle. But every so often we get the 'my way or the highway folks' who can polarise the forum. What should we do? Just ignore them?

The thread was basically, do you need to spar to be effective in RBSD or street fighting. The answer is, there are many ways to prepare yourself for that scenario. Some systems use sparring and some don't. The ones that don't spar use other types of training to replace the sparring. It depends on the focus of your training but common sense should say that a system that trains solely for the street type situation might be more effective on the street than on designed for competition. But in reality both styles of training on the street against an untrained or poorly trained aggressor should prevail.
:asian:

 

[Kong Soo Do]

Oh sorry I am going to have to call bs on all of that due to at this stage it is all anecdotal.

By the same rules everybody else is calling bs on mine.

Irritating isn't it.

I don't think you understand the definition of anecdotal.

Definition of ANECDOTAL

1
a : of, relating to, or consisting of anecdotes <an anecdotal biography>
b : anecdotic 2 <my anecdotal uncle>

2
: based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>

3
: of, relating to, or being the depiction of a scene suggesting a story <anecdotal details>

This doesn't apply to the information I (and others) have detailed to you in this thread. It can be researched and verified from thousands of L.E. agencies world wide. It would appear that your becoming rather defensive which indicates a closed mind and an unwillingness to learn from those that 'do' what you profess to 'train' for. That doesn't put you down in any way to listen and learn, but you have to check your ego partner. No one is calling you an idiot despite the fact that your trying to argue that a sport methodology is better for the 'street' than what we do....and many of us actually have real world altercations on a rather unfortunately regular basis. Do you understand the conflict here? Someone (you) that doesn't 'do' is telling us that 'do' that our way of doing it is inferior to your sport method. And then you provide a video link to some rather bad MMA as support. I've listed for you in great detail why what you've offered is not only inferior training, but detrimental to solid SD training. And we've taken the time to discuss this with you and you're still not getting it. For example;

Your system does not even work in an artificial environment with rules.

This is comparing apples and oranges. What I do would work just fine in your artificial environment, but since I would not subscribe to an artificially created rule set I would be DQ'd after about the first 5 seconds. Whereas if you tried to pull of some of the stuff in your video link against the people I have to regularly fight...well, lets just say I don't like your chances very much.

And your very statement shows the contradiction that your using to bolster your argument; basing the effectiveness of RBSD or scenario based training by how it would work in an ARTIFICIAL ENVIRONMENT WITH RULES. Do you understand the contradiction? Did you actually read my summary of the MMA link you provided and why it was pure garbage from the perspective of RBSD and scenario based training? Seriously, did you actually thoughtfully read it with the mindset of understanding?

You will just have to provide evidence of these documented street fights.

You bet. Next time you find yourself in my neck of the woods I'll personally drive you down to records and you can peruse my file at your leisure. It is public record and is several inches thick so bring a lunch. In fact, I'll buy you lunch. How's that sound?

Royce Gracie spars as part of his training. If he extends his sort trading to encompas self defence aspects I applaud that.

You continue to bring up Royce as an example. Not a good idea. You don't know him, I do. And I've explained that what he offers as training was a flavor-of-the-month situation that was quickly exposed as not only being sub-standard for SD but detrimental. That is why he had to dramatically alter the training....and NO sparring. And finally even that died off and he no longer teaches at the Regional Training Center which encompasses a fairly large part of the state. People that do continue to teach there are Tony Blauer, Ken Good, Sonny P., Peter Boatman (up until he passed away), Tony Lambria etc. I've taken all these courses and became an instructor in all of them (also in my file). And there is NO sparring. Lots of reality based drills and scenarios all of which are taken to a conclusion. Which is one of the things your video lacks (among a great many other things).

I have no issue with scenario training so long as it is based on a core of honest training of basics.

And why would you think our basic core of scenario based and/or RBSD training isn't designed directly for what we actually do? You're just not making sense.

And that only comes with resisted training like sparring.

Let me correct this for you: And that only comes with resisted training. Sparring isn't sufficient to qualify for true resistance and can't be compared with scenario based training. Again, looking at the video link you provided, that isn't real resistance. They're dancing around. Their pausing to pull up their pads. Their laughing and smiling during some to this 'training'. There is not verbal judo or any type of verbalization that is MANDATORY during a street assualt, no escape & evasion, no improvised weapons, no realistic terrain, no multiple attackers, no ambush etc. I've already detailed all the reasons it is garbage training for the purposes of SD based training.

Peace.

 

[drop bear]

I don't think you understand the definition of anecdotal.

Definition of ANECDOTAL

1
a : of, relating to, or consisting of anecdotes <an anecdotal biography>
b : anecdotic 2 <my anecdotal uncle>

2
: based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>

3
: of, relating to, or being the depiction of a scene suggesting a story <anecdotal details>

This doesn't apply to the information I (and others) have detailed to you in this thread. It can be researched and verified from thousands of L.E. agencies world wide. It would appear that your becoming rather defensive which indicates a closed mind and an unwillingness to learn from those that 'do' what you profess to 'train' for. That doesn't put you down in any way to listen and learn, but you have to check your ego partner. No one is calling you an idiot despite the fact that your trying to argue that a sport methodology is better for the 'street' than what we do....and many of us actually have real world altercations on a rather unfortunately regular basis. Do you understand the conflict here? Someone (you) that doesn't 'do' is telling us that 'do' that our way of doing it is inferior to your sport method. And then you provide a video link to some rather bad MMA as support. I've listed for you in great detail why what you've offered is not only inferior training, but detrimental to solid SD training. And we've taken the time to discuss this with you and you're still not getting it. For example;



This is comparing apples and oranges. What I do would work just fine in your artificial environment, but since I would not subscribe to an artificially created rule set I would be DQ'd after about the first 5 seconds. Whereas if you tried to pull of some of the stuff in your video link against the people I have to regularly fight...well, lets just say I don't like your chances very much.

And your very statement shows the contradiction that your using to bolster your argument; basing the effectiveness of RBSD or scenario based training by how it would work in an ARTIFICIAL ENVIRONMENT WITH RULES. Do you understand the contradiction? Did you actually read my summary of the MMA link you provided and why it was pure garbage from the perspective of RBSD and scenario based training? Seriously, did you actually thoughtfully read it with the mindset of understanding?



You bet. Next time you find yourself in my neck of the woods I'll personally drive you down to records and you can peruse my file at your leisure. It is public record and is several inches thick so bring a lunch. In fact, I'll buy you lunch. How's that sound?



You continue to bring up Royce as an example. Not a good idea. You don't know him, I do. And I've explained that what he offers as training was a flavor-of-the-month situation that was quickly exposed as not only being sub-standard for SD but detrimental. That is why he had to dramatically alter the training....and NO sparring. And finally even that died off and he no longer teaches at the Regional Training Center which encompasses a fairly large part of the state. People that do continue to teach there are Tony Blauer, Ken Good, Sonny P., Peter Boatman (up until he passed away), Tony Lambria etc. I've taken all these courses and became an instructor in all of them (also in my file). And there is NO sparring. Lots of reality based drills and scenarios all of which are taken to a conclusion. Which is one of the things your video lacks (among a great many other things).


And why would you think our basic core of scenario based and/or RBSD training isn't designed directly for what we actually do? You're just not making sense.



Let me correct this for you: And that only comes with resisted training. Sparring isn't sufficient to qualify for true resistance and can't be compared with scenario based training. Again, looking at the video link you provided, that isn't real resistance. They're dancing around. Their pausing to pull up their pads. Their laughing and smiling during some to this 'training'. There is not verbal judo or any type of verbalization that is MANDATORY during a street assualt, no escape & evasion, no improvised weapons, no realistic terrain, no multiple attackers, no ambush etc. I've already detailed all the reasons it is garbage training for the purposes of SD based training.

Peace.

So you are trying to basically say mma is inferior to rsbd. And you wonder why I disagree.

Garbage training seriously?

 

[Kong Soo Do]

So you are trying to basically say mma is inferior to rsbd. And you wonder why I disagree.

Garbage training seriously?

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.