As I noted, we train using swords due to principles of fencing, which are applicable to hand to hand combat in defense against attacks using hands, feet, pool sticks, or whatever...
I have no problem with 'applied' learning...applying knowledge of one thing to another in order for preparation.
My disagreement is focused training in unrealistic things and branding it 'reality' training.
I've conversed with Jay before, so I hope it's not violent agreement, lol.
There is the actual reality, and the perceptual reality. We know what could have, and we have a perception of what might happen. We have to bring those into line as close as we can to streamline the training of someone wanting to learn K-Sys (or any 'reality' based combatives styles, IMHO). If they are trained to react in a way that is dangerous to them, the teacher is screwing them. When one trains a certain way all of the time, there is the trap they will expect an enemy outside of that training to fight using that training. If someone defend against high spinning kicks all day, and uses them, there is a propensity to expect that to work in 'reality'. Hell, it's one of their main 'sparring; weapons. THat is why I tell people to go out in the parking lot between two cars, or go in the bathroom of the school and 'spar'. That's reality.
Objectively, when one measures the nature of the changing scenario, one would, IMHO, realize that a high spinning kick is probably not going to be a method to use in a 'real' fight. I've been hit with a spinning kick IN A GYM, but have never seen one successfully pulled off outside of a gym because the conditions are rarely favorable.
Reality is reality. It's also what is statistically most likely for you to encounter in a street fight. If you truly believe you will be attacked by a katana wiedling fruitcake in NY, then train for it, if that is your reality. Out of 250 million people in the USA, and 1 person being attacked by a katana every six months, stastically there is little chance of it happening. I'm not gonna specifically train for it.
Therefore, in my mind, you either train with said weapon to: a) preserve tradition; b) use the lessons used in applied knowledge toward another pursuit (against a pipe, crowbar, pool stick, etc).
Of course, there are other means to train so...like, using a crowbar, pipe, or whatever. That's the K-Sys way. Let me put out my point of view about this. Your mind is much quicker to associate such weapons with specific trained defensive measures...if you have worked against a pipe, crowbar, knife, whatever, you will be less apt to be in 'shock' when they appear. Nevermind the general movement patterns of employing an attack ( a low stab is the same as a low punch, etc). It's the very APPEARANCE of a weapon that changes everything. That's why one should use some form of live knife pretty quickly in training. Not enough to kill you, but enough to feel it, so the respect is there. Training with dummy knives for long periods does nothing to keep the student honest...they will get sloppy. It's my job not to train 'cool' looking students with dummy knives, but someone who can survive a knife attack with as least damage as possible, no matter how 'sloppy' it looks.
If you must take the lessons of the sword, which generally require different measures than a crowbar (a crowbar will injure or break a bone, not cut your arm in half like a sword), the methods used against a katana, if you really want to apply training, are not as similar as using a real baseball bat. The injury they do to the body is different, as such, the measures you will use to defend are different. The principles are there (angles, deflection, footwork), but the mechanical means combined with the mindset in doing so, are different.
When I want to train methods against a sword, I use a sword for the prupose of training. When I want to teach the methods of defense against a baseball bat, I use a baseball bat. The science of fencing does give certain insight into the sciences of energy management, angles and deflection, footwork, etc., but they must be put into context.
Though there are some ways, it is difficult to train someone to address a club physically the same way you teach them to address a sword. So, you must work with both, and lean in each direction precariously. Lean toward the sword for specific reasons (teaching your methods) but lean toward the weapon (baseball bat) for the physical training (for K-Sys, it's Theory + Movement = Application). While you are giving some methods which are useful, you are not giving ALL of the methods that are useful because you are talking about two different weapons. Similar ancestor, but different weapon.
I'm not gonna say, "you can't train someone to defend against a crowbar using a sword, that's stupid...!" What I will say is if you never bring the crowbar in, it's not complete training. They will never be conditioned to the impact, and methods of using the crobar, and will be slow and sloppy to address the attack of the crowbar, because they have to spend time in the street bleeding to draw coorelations that should have been drawn in training with someone not wanting them dead.
So, you have to train with both...If we look at the FBI Crime Statistics, and the places we live in, we are much more likely to face some things than others. For me, teaching combatives, I am a much more effective teacher if I use a baseball bat or a spray-painted knife (so there is no gleam and you don't see it) than using the Lord of the Rings collector sword (though it does look cool as hell). I do my students an unjustice if I don't train them for the reality of what they will face: mass attacks, shanks, small caliber firearms, sucker punches, etc.
The sword for heritage and basic principles, the crowbar for the physicality and realistic application.
In our System in Russia, there is a saying, "Against a crowbar, there is no 'defense', only levers to use.' You have to apply the principles to the weapon you will face, or you'll be using sword blocks against a crowbar (or vice versa) and take damage you shouldn't be taking. Therefore, you must train with both and learn how to apply principles.
Truly, as well-rounded martial artists and 'warriors' (if I may use that term) we have a duty to learn to utilize all classes of weapons (ancient and modern) and blend them with the art we study. As teachers, we must know the difference between the two and prepare our students accordingly.
It seems we're all in agreement here, I'm just longwinded agreeing!
M