Sparring in Sword Arts

[Charles Mahan]

A quick note to the moderators. An awful lot of the posts on page one pertain to chanbara and not specificallly to this sparring thread. They areally ought to be moved back as they are relevant to that thread. The first 7 or 8 at least. In fact I would suggest that post 13 in the current incarnation of this thread is where we really got away from a discussion on Chanbara and onto a discussion of the merits of sparring.

BTW I would also like to protest whoever it was that snipped my links to various threads where Chanbara was discussed. If the justification for deleting links to threads on other forums is that it might pull readers away from this one, then it strikes me as poor form indeed. Are we to pretend that threads on other forums don't exist? Are we as forumites to ignore perfectly good resources when they are readily available?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Charles,
In this thread, I only see 1 post edited, the first one. I don't see any links removed from any of the posts though, unless they were in the lead post. If a link in that post got cut by accident, please feel free to repost. EDIT: I also checked the original thread, and see no missing links there.

As to links, specific links to other threads are almost always ok. General links to other sites usually are, depends on the nature. If the purpose is simply to push people away from here to there or are used to bash the other site, those links aren't allowed (as per policy).

If theres concerns over policy, please bring them to me directly by PM. Helps keep threads moving, and lets me know where to look, rather than it waiting until I find it or someone points me to it. Dankes.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

In regards to Chanbara or not. Or otherwise to spar or not regarding sword work. I think it is prudent to have a little sparring to complement your technique. To much and you get into a flailing match. To little and you may lose the ability to judge distance properly in real time. : ) I will say this though I have had the opportunity to move with some very qualified people who only trained kata or two man drills and generally two a man they were very effective when we did spar with or without armor. There definately seems to be more than one way to train. (imagine that) Just my take for what it is worth!

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com

 

[Bob Hubbard]

It depends on how you train. I've sparred in schools that limit the 'contact' point to chest only, for safety concerns. Hard to practice leg sweeps and head shots under those conditions. When their students sparred in a tourny I was at, they were woefully unprepared for the greater contact allowed.

The concern I think is that when dealing with a combat art, if you train to pull your shot, or 'safely distance' yourself, then you run the very real risk of doing the same in reality, which makes for a dangerous situation.

I got into an argument a while back with a kenpoist who insisted that every technique must be done to completion. After watching his technique, I said his secondary strikes wouldn't have landed. He said why not...I said "Because your first shot would have knocked me on my ***, so the rest would miss." While I'm sucking air, he's slapping himself. LOL!

Looking at the padded stick sparring.
Great for working on timing, coordination, conditioning and evasion. But, in the end, it's not "Combat", it's "Sport".

 

[Charles Mahan]

Bob. Go back and read post 9. It's pretty clear there are missing links. I found those links through searching the other forums. I had a lot of spare time when I posted them. I'm afraid I don't now. At any rate, I believe they were links on chanbara and not sparring, and as such they belong in the other thread.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Charles,
Post #9 in this thread wasn't edited. It would say so at the bottom if it had been.

Are these the links though?
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=578991&postcount=5

 

[Charles Mahan]

Those aren't the threads no. I suppose it just got lost somehow when the thread was split. Thanks for checking.

 

[pgsmith]

Some styles do still practice in armor. Yagyu Shingan Ryu I know still does, and I think Katori Shinto Ryu still may. However, other styles which matured during the Edo Jidai when large scale warfare basically didn't happen anymore are more geared towards a duelling atmosphere, and train under the understanding of an unarmored or at most lightly armored opponent.

Gotta correct a few fallacies that people are laboring under ...

Both Yagyu Shingan ryu and Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto ryu, among others, still retain armored training. However, it is only a small part of the entire curriculum. This is not due so much to the influence of the Tokugawa unification stopping large scale warfare. This is due mainly to the fact that the vast majority of sword work was expected to be done against an unarmored opponent. The sword was a sidearm only. It was only used in battles when everything else failed. Since it had only a small chance of being used in battle, only a small portion of training was devoted to this.

Our dojo is one of those that regularly engages in sparring using tsumeru techniques wherein the cut is pulled up short. This is only done with the most advanced practitioners, and it does lead to degeneration of technique. It's easy to see when watching it. I have personally used RSW type of sparring weapons, done sparring in kendo armor, and done Sports Chanbara. Each method of sparring is fun for its own reason, and each one requires a change in technique from what is supposed to be done. None of them can teach what is required as well as the kata, which leads me to my next point ...

There are many different "martial arts" with many different reasons for doing them, and many different things that can be learned. To learn to be a good boxer, you have to study boxing. To learn Olympic fencing, you study Olympic fencing, to learn how to be good at Sports Chanbara, you study Sports Chanbara. However, to learn how to effectively use the Japanese sword in the manner in which it was originally designed to be used, you will need to study a koryu sword art. Not because the koryu sword arts are necessarily better, but because they are the only ones which we know are effective. Since no one engages in sword duels anymore, anyone can say that their "new and improved" sword art is better. There is absolutely no way to know if that's true. The techniques and training methods of the koryu sword arts were developed and perfected hundreds of years ago when the people studying them were regularly using their swords. The koryu sword arts are the only schools that have been passed down through the generations, teacher to student, with the techniques, methods, and instructions intact. Because of this, we know that they are effective. The same can't be said of any other sword arts. Guesses can be made, and opinions put forth, but it's all opinion as these other sword arts have not been used in large numbers of life and death confrontations. Many Western Martial Arts enthusiasts would argue that there are several different training manuals from feudal Europe from when swords were used. This is true, but only the manuals remain, not the schools and the methods which were meant to go along with the manuals. Add to that the fact that most of the Japanese manuals from that time frame are deliberately obscure, or include outright falsification of some things in order to prevent rivals from learning too much about them, (I can't believe the Europeans were any different in that regard) and any certainty about how effective learning from these manuals is has fled. A common point between all of the koryu sword arts is the fact that they all train in the same manner, through kata. There are solo kata and paired kata. There are also a couple of other things that are done occassionally, such as the fukuro shinai in Yagyu Shinkage ryu. However, the main training method in all of the surviving koryu is kata. Since i seriously doubt that the folks that depended upon their training to preserve their lives would all embrace an inferior method, I have to conclude that kata is the most effective method of training.

In conclusion (finally!) all the different arts are fun, and they all have something to be gained from them. It all depends upon what you are trying to gain. If you wish to learn how to spar, then sparring is really the only way. Will this teach you how to effectively use the sword as it was originally intended? No, it will effectively teach you how to spar. Is this a bad thing? Not at all. As I said, it all depends upon what you wish to learn.

 

[howard]

Paul, excellent post. Thanks.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Paul, I definately enjoyed your post. Very nice.

Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com

 

[arnisador]

In the special "The Weapons That Made Britain," sword training is used that relies heavily on what we would term a kata (see here).

 

[kroh]

Wow, getting through this thread was like trying to swim through peanut butter. What always gets me is the passion shown by both sides about a discipline that has lost its place on the battlefield (or street as it were).

In much the same way that people no longer wear quick draw rigs and ten gallon hats when fighting with pistols, the same can be said about katana's and kimono's (sounds like a cool name for a rock band).

I have never been strictly a JSA practitioner (although I am continuously astounded by the grace, fluidity, and power exhibited by them), I have usually experienced it as a facet of my regular training. That being said, I totally agree that standard sparing for the JSA's is really not the best course to train these methods. Like Arnisador said earlier... If you are already cut, then you can't make the counterattack you see so often in "sparring" matches.

I can also see the point made by others that want to know how methods of old sword arts can train for the unexpected when everything is patterned. JSA, CSA, FMA-SA (Filipino Martial Art Sword Arts...I should have just wrote it out), they all use intensive drilling to hammer home the principles needed. There is nothing really unexpected if you train all the necssary skills required for the activity (SWORD FIGHT!). Any time you add sparring, you loose a lot of the principle by trading off for safety and the ability to whack (not cut) your opponent.

If there was a better way to train the combat efficiency than drills, wouldn't they be doing it... And if it took them (swordsman) this long to fix the problems (we need to add sparing)...why are we training and arguing about a method that was broken to begin with?

I think the "combative" sword arts are great as they teach timing and proper use of distance and footwork. I think sport fencing is great as it teaches targeting and intent. Both have merrits and both can be fun. We just have to remember where one activity ends and the other begins.

Regards,
Walt

 

[Makalakumu]

We just have to remember where one activity ends and the other begins.

I'm not so sure if it works like that. In fact, from what I've read thus far and from what I've experienced in other bladed arts that I've trained, the two may be two different beasts.

In the past, when I've sparred in lets say...judo...over a number of years, through repetition I started to develop a feel for what my uke was doing and what he was going to do. This was a very "hands on" feeling that made my technique better.

I never got that feeling with a training knife in my hands even though I've spent almost five years doing FMA. The reason why is simple. It. Doesn't. Cut. People were still reacting to various moves and counters but, in the end, people were not and could never in that situation, react how a human would naturally react from a given technique.

So, what did I get out of sparring with toy knives? I got to practice some technique, some footwork, and some instinctual responses. However, I'll tell you what my biggest lesson was...learning how fast a person could actually move with a knife and realizing how amazingly dangerous that situation would be with a live blade.

Hands down, THAT, was my biggest lesson.

So, what does this say to people who practice JSA and do not spar. I can't speak for them because I haven't trained in any koryu sword arts (although I'd really really like to). However, I can speak for myself...I think that you can learn all of the lessons I learned above with drills and without sparring. I think that you can get a better feel, even if it just intellectual, of what the human body would actually do if it were cut. Sparring with never EVER recreate that.

The bottom line is that there are no ways to go out and actually get an instinctual grasp on what it feels like and what it looks like to actually go out and cut someone. Thus, we are forced, through neccessity to trust the word of others who may have done this in a different time period.

IMHO, what koryu JSA has going for it is a highly documented link that goes back to those sources and preserves the actual techniques, drills and other methods that were used at the time. Who am I to question the fact that they don't spar? Maybe if I invented a sword art that used sparring and I went out and started killing people in duels I'd have some basis for argument. Obviously, that is impossible.

So, where does that leave me if my desire is go out and actually learn how to use a japanese sword in the fashion in which it was intended? It leaves me trusting the word of others who learned from a lineage of warriors who "been there done that." If they say sparring isn't neccessary, then it isn't.

I have no intellectual grounds with any sort of evidence that I could point so that I could disagree.

 

[jasonb]

Not sure about other arts, but Pekiti Tirsia is heavily focused on bladed weapons, including a short sword.

Training progression

training and free flow,sparring, etc with sticks

1. sticks
2. aluminum sword
3. live blade sword

In the end everything is done live blade with sword, forms, free flow/sparring, etc.

When I say sparing or free flow, what I mean is that we integrate all of our drills into a free flowing exchange, I don't know what you will do next and neither I you, but there is still a structure there. The means of sparing with the live blade is simply keeping a distance of several feet further out than how you would actually fight so that you do not hit the opponent and also having control over your weapon so that you do not hit them if they are not defending properly. Of course, we also don't want to make contact with the other sword either since it screws up the blade.

How else can you learn to sword fight if you do not use the real thing at speed in a free flow? How do you learn distance and timing?

Sometimes with sticks we do sparing with contact, using hockey gloves or fencing headgear. We don't advise using soft padded sticks or putting on all sorts of armor. Seems like it tends to make people sit there and beat on each other rather than out of the way, counter attack.

http://www.pt-go.com

 

[kroh]

Mr Gaje is the real deal, gentleman and no BS Trainer. I really enjoy the PTK ( and FMA ) training mentality all together. I think much of the debate in this thread comes from how sparing takes away from the actual mentality of the fight. You get whacked and you suffer a point... keep fighting.

in the end it is all moot as no one fights with swords anymore. Now machete, e-tool, or ASP is a different matter %-}

Regards,
Walt

 

[Sukerkin]

An interesting thread, gentlemen and some quite erudite posts to be found in it to :tup:.

I shall have to go through it again in a while to see if there was anything I missed in my quick skim through but I can't resist adding my own personal experiences right now (I know I shouldn't as a 'n00b' but the Typing Muse has seized control of my fingers ).

I'm a shodan in Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu Iaido and nearly all of our training is kata based, with extensive exploration of the bunkai behind the moves. I say nearly all because there is a kata set which involves a partner working with you to improve your technique. However, this is not 'sparring' because each persons role is strictly defined with the 'attacks' and 'counters' well known before blades ever cross (so to speak). Still, I'm glad that these days Health and Safety has seen to it that we perform them with bokken rather than shinken hew:.

The partner practice is useful because it allows you to train the only thing you cannot get from kata {well other than the general unpleasantness that would accompany sword combat :scared:}, that being that you have to adapt your distance and timing to a physically present (rather than imagined) individual without actually hitting them or being hit by them.
Because by the time you get to perform these partner kata you have already reached a certain level of competence in the use of the katana, the fact that you are controlling your sword not to hit them does not destroy your technique but adds a level of refinement to it i.e. you show that you have properly learned, via visualisation during kata, the ability to stop your sword where you wish rather than where it wishes, so to speak.

I cannot see, at present, how 'free sparring', of the semi-to-full-contact sort I used to do in the empty-handed art I used to practise, would add to the 'correct' execution of the techniques of MJER.

Sword arts are all about improving your control of the sword, at their core, after all, whereas sparring is about improvisation and making the best of the situation you have. In a JSA, if you've reached the stage where you're having to improvise a technique then, pretty much, you're already about to die :lol:.

Of course, this impression I've gained is only from the lowest level of 'acceptible' competence - I've a long, long, way to go yet and my views may well change (but I doubt I'll reach the conclusion that twenty-odd generations of true sword experts didn't know the best way to pass on technique).

Sumimasen if I've already stepped on someones toes (achieving that with my third post would not be something of which I'd be proud).

Mata na.

 

[arnisador]

I see a lot of sense in this post! Still, I think that some sparring is valuable for developing not only range, as you mention, but also timing and the ability to fake. You could use a bokken or shinai for this...but as you mention, bad habits could develop (or good ones fail to emerge) from too much of this.

 

[Swordlady]

Sword arts are all about improving your control of the sword, at their core, after all, whereas sparring is about improvisation and making the best of the situation you have. In a JSA, if you've reached the stage where you're having to improvise a technique then, pretty much, you're already about to die :lol:.

Excellent point!

 

[Sukerkin]

I'm grateful for the postive comments, Lady and Sir :rei:.

I like the quote from Charles Mahan you referenced in the linked thread, Arnisador. A succinct precis of the core of much of JSA technique and why 'sparring' per se would not necessarily improve the quality of technique in such an art.

That is not to say, of course, that working with a partner to help you visualise how a kata flows is not helpful.

I've just started to teach a little (I think Sensei has simply decided I'm the one with the biggest mouth so I might as well be put to work ) and I've already found that playing the role of 'target/aggressor' whilst guiding someone slowly through the correct movements enables them to much more quickly grasp the "Why's?" and the "How's?" of a kata.

That is particularly true of certain body movements in kata that make no sense unless you realise that what is happening is that you are avoiding a strike whilst carrying through one of your own. As I'm already becoming too fond of saying when in sempai-mode, "This is a game of inches" and having a physically present partner there can show you that why you twist your hip or move your hand in such a proscribed fashion is that there is an assumed sword stroke coming in that you are thus causing to miss you.

As I say, not really sparring as most would interpet it but a useful adjunct to demonstration and instruction nontheless.