The sparring Thread.

[Kframe]

Ok here comes the can of worms. Having switched from mma to Bujinkan taijutsu one of the hardest things im having to accept is there is no sparring. They have randori but it isn't like sparring its a whole different animal.

I know that Chris parker and others will chime in and say that Sparring is not like self defense. I get that, but the thing is, especially with BBT were else are you going to get randomness. I have seen that, ya you can have pressure in the preset paired forms. In fact I have watched the black belts and out side of a few things they were throwing with speed and power and intent. The problem is, arts like mine and aikido and apparently most of the legit koryu don't spar.

So the question becomes outside of the obvious cardio and conditioning benefits, what else does sparring help with. I think the big thing is randomness. The ability to deal with unpredictable opponents. Also learning to take a hit and how really hitting someone feels.

So while I know that Chris parker has told me that you can have pressure in the kata(our paired kata), that pressure not matter how high, does not address randomness. Attacks are random.

I think part of the reason that MMA fighters do so well against most every style, and even on the street, is that they practice against randomness every day, from day one. Sure they may not have the most optimum skillset for street defense but its there inculcation to randomness that is one of their greatest strengths.

So the question I find my self struggling with, above all else is this. Those arts that teach techniques and no sparring, no randomness, how do you expect your students to be able to apply what they learn to a situation that is chalk full of random? How do you expect to be able to give and receive a hit if you don't know what being hit feels like? This question is the one I am struggling with the most. I honestly don't know how I can fix it with my own training but its a question that needs to be answered.

So Anti sparring people, chime in. I want your side of the story. I want a counter point.

Pro sparrers, whats your points?


I know that im going to have to address this as it is something that remains on my mind and cant be shaken..

Im reminded of this article..http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2...-skill-you-just-arent-as-good-as-you-thought/ and this one. http://www.fightscope.com/martial-arts/importance-of-sparring/

Basically, sparring while not a real self defense fight, is as close to a real fight as you can get. If you don't spar against a fully resisting opponent, not attacking you on a predetermined basis, how can you know that what your are learning or teaching works?

That is the internal struggle I am facing right now. I hope this sparks a good discussion.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Ok here comes the can of worms. Having switched from mma to Bujinkan taijutsu one of the hardest things im having to accept is there is no sparring. They have randori but it isn't like sparring its a whole different animal.

I know that Chris parker and others will chime in and say that Sparring is not like self defense. I get that, but the thing is, especially with BBT were else are you going to get randomness. I have seen that, ya you can have pressure in the preset paired forms. In fact I have watched the black belts and out side of a few things they were throwing with speed and power and intent. The problem is, arts like mine and aikido and apparently most of the legit koryu don't spar.

So the question becomes outside of the obvious cardio and conditioning benefits, what else does sparring help with. I think the big thing is randomness. The ability to deal with unpredictable opponents. Also learning to take a hit and how really hitting someone feels.

So while I know that Chris parker has told me that you can have pressure in the kata(our paired kata), that pressure not matter how high, does not address randomness. Attacks are random.

I think part of the reason that MMA fighters do so well against most every style, and even on the street, is that they practice against randomness every day, from day one. Sure they may not have the most optimum skillset for street defense but its there inculcation to randomness that is one of their greatest strengths.

So the question I find my self struggling with, above all else is this. Those arts that teach techniques and no sparring, no randomness, how do you expect your students to be able to apply what they learn to a situation that is chalk full of random? How do you expect to be able to give and receive a hit if you don't know what being hit feels like? This question is the one I am struggling with the most. I honestly don't know how I can fix it with my own training but its a question that needs to be answered.

So Anti sparring people, chime in. I want your side of the story. I want a counter point.

Pro sparrers, whats your points?


I know that im going to have to address this as it is something that remains on my mind and cant be shaken..

Im reminded of this article..http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2...-skill-you-just-arent-as-good-as-you-thought/ and this one. http://www.fightscope.com/martial-arts/importance-of-sparring/

Basically, sparring while not a real self defense fight, is as close to a real fight as you can get. If you don't spar against a fully resisting opponent, not attacking you on a predetermined basis, how can you know that what your are learning or teaching works?

That is the internal struggle I am facing right now. I hope this sparks a good discussion.

Um, have people try to resist your tech at various and random places. Randomness is only one of the many benefits of sparring, but the main focus of sparring is to work specific things against a resisting opponent; so, as long as that is happening on some level, you are OK.

 

[K-man]

There are different forms of sparring. Most people equate 'sparring' to what you see in the ring, just a lower intensity. If that is what you are training for then that form of sparring is fine. When I trained the Japanese form of karate I loved the sparring. When I look at our training now, that type of type of sparring has no place.

In the article quoted the author states; "The bottom line is sparring is probably the most important training exercise there is." That may be true if you are training for a particular type of scenario like the ring. If you are training for reality based scenarios you cannot spar the way you train so why would you spar in a way which for you is not realistic.

So look at the benefits from a non sport based system.

Sparring will help you develop a greater understand and application of the following skills:


Distance - How to control the distance between you and your partner.
Rhythm - How to break your opponents rhythm.
Timing - How to judge the timing of your opponent and know when to hit.
Combinations - How to land combinations whilst your partner moves forwards, backwards and tries to counter.
Footwork - How to move in, out and to the sides to strike or evade a punch.
Speed - You will learn how to use your speed to hit your opponent before they can block, as well as move quickly out the way of a strike.
Balance - You will learn to control your balance and center of gravity whilst in a fighting motion.
Reaction - You will improve your reaction times.
Focus - You will be forced to keep focus and concentrate on the fight without distractions. The second you switch off you will know about tit!
Cardiovascular - Your fitness levels will have to adapt and will improve.
Muscular endurance - Your endurance and stamina will have to adapt and will improve.
Conditioning - You will learn to get hit and fake that it doesn't hurt so you can carry on.

Doesn't that just describe normal training?

Then we have this little gem; "People don't like sparring because they aren't confident with their abilities and are worried about getting hurt. This is usually because they don't have a game plan. They don't have the knowledge and experience to keep a solid defense game whilst "holding their own" and attacking their sparring partner."

In a sporting context I could agree but in reality based systems it just doesn't make sense.

Training without sparring can still incorporate randomness and that randomness can include weapons and multiple attackers. You still get hit, you still develop fitness and stamina and you are developing all the skills described above. I don't see sparring or not sparring as the issue. If sparring is beneficial to your training go for it but to suggest it is essential for all arts is just not right.
:asian:

 

[Kframe]

K man you and I both train in a Kata centric art.(aikido for you). How in arts like ours, can you include randomness in a paired kata setting. By its very definition a paired kata can not have anything random. Random implies you didn't see it coming. IF you know its coming its not random, but variation. I hope that makes sense.

 

[Drose427]

I agree with K-man on this. You can get the randomness of a fight in the self defense aspect of your art without sparring. In my class, we spar full speed with lighter contact and rarely compete. I also dont remember ever being told that sparring was a good judge of self-defense. But since white belt I know I've been told sparring is where we can learn and practice things that pertain to self defense i.e. foot work, distance, reaction, and timing. But these things can be done without sparring just by simulating an attack or having a self defense program. Even in our one step sparring, we still get practice in position, reaction, distance, timing, and much more while having to avoid the punch or whatever technique our instructor tells us to use. I think of sparring as beneficial, but not a necessity.

 

[K-man]

K man you and I both train in a Kata centric art.(aikido for you). How in arts like ours, can you include randomness in a paired kata setting. By its very definition a paired kata can not have anything random. Random implies you didn't see it coming. IF you know its coming its not random, but variation. I hope that makes sense.

I'm a bit fortunate in training multiple arts. Aikido normally is training against a known attack but it doesn't have to be that way. At times in Aikido I will take the opportunity to start from the same sticky hands position that we use in our karate. You can use the same exercise in Krav and Systema with a little imagination. You can enter the sticky hands type training from any attack and you can use it to move to any appropriate technique at any time.

This is a long video, 29 minutes, that I just found. Don't necessarily watch the whole video but you can see what this guy is doing with WC techniques. Substitute your own and you have a fantastic training system that can be fast or slow, striking to body only, incorporating the feet, including the head and padding up and going full contact. We use it to move into all the locks, holds and takedowns as well. I also use it to simulate an injury where you can only use one hand to defend and respond or where you defend with one hand until you have a clear strike with the other.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zoaPM6jtvxA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=zoaPM6jtvxA

:asian:

 

[RTKDCMB]

Ok here comes the can of worms.

Big, giant, ugly ones.

 

[TKDTony2179]

You beat me to it. I will have to sleep on it and get back to you guys in depth on how I feel about the whole thing.

 

[geezer]

Ok here comes the can of worms.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_u9MGXhwr15w/TJQCSf5UdCI/AAAAAAAABzY/9AQ4fwq32LM/s1600/can-of-worms.jpg

The VT (WC) group I teach hasn't been doing contact free-sparring (guo sau). We do a lot of sparring-like exchanges but haven't opened it up, inviting other MA ists in to work with etc. Instead we do more controlled exchanges and drills designed to build proficiency in techniques and their application. For feel and "randomness" there is Chi-Sau.

On one hand, this approach works well to build solid skills in lower level students especially since a lot of WC techniques when first trained may seem to "go against the grain" so to speak and are quite unlike the typical way most of us tend to stand and punch. If you start sparring too soon, you will likely revert to those instincts rather than to apply the techniques we are training.


On the other hand, in my eskrima training, we do free it up. Not like like Dog Brothers mind you, but still with safety equipmant, "randomness" and resistance. And, we mutually agree on you hard to go at it. Some of the young guys train for mma competition and really go at it hard. At 58 I injure more easily and heal very slowly, so I go pretty light. It has still been a very valuable experience. So much so that I plan to get the more experienced members of my VT (WC) group sparring at least once a week too. I personally think they'll benefit from it ...and enjoy it too.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Big, giant, ugly ones.

My Dad is a ballroom dance teacher, and one of there biggest problems is to ask people to stop trying to dance while they are teaching them to dance. LOL

 

[RTKDCMB]

My Dad is a ballroom dance teacher, and one of there biggest problems is to ask people to stop trying to dance while they are teaching them to dance. LOL

That reminds me of when students perform techniques while at the same time I'm trying to teach them, by the time I turn around to see if it is done correctly it is already finished. Watch first, then do when I say to do.

 

[SteveNC]

I have had mixed feelings about sparring over the years. Traditional sparring doesn't translate well to self defense IMO but is obviously an important staple to competition and sport fighting. I believe "feel" and "contact" are extremely important but you have to find that fine line between all out and not enough. It is important to harness the ability to react effectively under stress but when you are trying to build a self protection mentality it can be difficult to simulate that on training partners. Pads and bags recover nicely, humans not so much.

 

[jks9199]

That reminds me of when students perform techniques while at the same time I'm trying to teach them, by the time I turn around to see if it is done correctly it is already finished. Watch first, then do when I say to do.

I've had to stop, and wait, and repeat until the student gets the point more than a few times. The other night, I was working with some students on a form, and they were having trouble with the footwork. So I gave the directions that I would tell them the steps, then give them a command to do them. So, of course, about half the class started doing things as I said them. So, we'd stop. Start over. Finally resorted to having them "read back" the directions to me...

My teacher taught us that the key to success is to LISTEN, and then to FOLLOW DIRECTIONS. For most people, the first part is hard enough... the second, almost impossible.

 

[SteveNC]

A do a LOT of 2 on 1, 3 on 1 and even groups of 5 or more on 1 and I believe it is an extremely effective means of introducing stress, chaos and random attack as mentioned before (especially with new people not used to contact). The goat in the middle has MMA gloves and the crashers are equipped with pads, shields and headgear. The trick is to go hard for 30 seconds max with escape as the goal.

For simulating one on one drilling I still like the quick 20 to 30 second burst with multiple people so I do line drills. You get a great core workout for a straight 2 minutes and this drill teaches you to fight and push your way through when you are tired and fatigued. I like stressful, realistic situations to be a part of everything I do

 

[Chris Parker]

Ok here comes the can of worms. Having switched from mma to Bujinkan taijutsu one of the hardest things im having to accept is there is no sparring. They have randori but it isn't like sparring its a whole different animal.

Hmm, can of worms, you say? Ha, yeah...

Let's start simply enough. What do you feel are the differences between "sparring" and "randori"? How are you defining each? I'll give my definitions as we go, but it really should be remembered that different systems (and, in cases, different dojo of the same system, especially when dealing with the Bujinkan) can use the same terminology incredibly differently... or completely interchangeably....

I know that Chris parker and others will chime in and say that Sparring is not like self defense.

Okay, here's where definitions are important. Sparring, as it is commonly used, is a training form which sees two people put against each other with similar (matched) skill sets, and the same goal. At it's most basic, core reality there, that's actually the opposite of self defence. There's a lot more, when you really look at it, but that's a good enough starting point.

I get that, but the thing is, especially with BBT were else are you going to get randomness.

Well, this is going to sound a little obvious, but.... by adding randomness. To add to that, you can add random response training in a number of ways, sparring is just one possibility. You might have a range of kata that all have the same attack... but you can apply any of the responses (without deciding which), or by trying to apply the response against a range of random attacks, or by looking at scenario training (different to kata), by putting other actions in the kata (such as countering the technique, or continuing an attack past the regular form, and more.

I have seen that, ya you can have pressure in the preset paired forms. In fact I have watched the black belts and out side of a few things they were throwing with speed and power and intent. The problem is, arts like mine and aikido and apparently most of the legit koryu don't spar.

Again, it comes down to definitions... but it also comes down to the purpose of the system and it's training methods. When dealing with Koryu, for instance, you're aiming to learn the methodology, principles, tactical and strategic application, and teachings of that particular Ryu.... in other words, you're not learning a generic skill (to be able to "fight"), you're learning a specific one (to know and have skill in the specific approach of that system), which might or might not even have any real desire or need to be applicable outside of it's own form. In Aikido, you're learning expressions of Aiki principles.

So the question becomes outside of the obvious cardio and conditioning benefits, what else does sparring help with. I think the big thing is randomness. The ability to deal with unpredictable opponents. Also learning to take a hit and how really hitting someone feels.

Hmm. Sure, it can definitely help with handling random action... of course, it's not that unpredictable. You'll have a pretty good idea of what you're going to face. When it comes to learning to take and give a hit, well, that can be done in scripted work as well... and sparring can be non- or semi-contact... which isn't the same thing, and doesn't give you the skills of giving or taking a hit, so it really does depend on what form of sparring you're talking about.

So while I know that Chris parker has told me that you can have pressure in the kata(our paired kata), that pressure not matter how high, does not address randomness. Attacks are random.

Sure... but attacks (in real life) aren't anything like what you face in sparring, either. The distancing, the preparation, the timing, the form, the set-up, the aim, and far more are wildly different.

I think part of the reason that MMA fighters do so well against most every style, and even on the street, is that they practice against randomness every day, from day one. Sure they may not have the most optimum skillset for street defense but its there inculcation to randomness that is one of their greatest strengths.

I'd disagree there, both in specifics and with the basic premise you're offering in the first place.

So the question I find my self struggling with, above all else is this. Those arts that teach techniques and no sparring, no randomness, how do you expect your students to be able to apply what they learn to a situation that is chalk full of random?

Firstly, I'd say you're making some rather false assumptions about how you actually get prepared for different things. The biggest issue to deal with isn't randomness at all, frankly. Secondly, you're looking at a false need, and ignoring the context of such arts. Thirdly, of course, sparring doesn't really offer you much more preparation for the "unexpected" than scripted training, when done properly... provided the scripted work is done realistically, it's going to provide realistic skills. And the reality is that sparring won't help with a sudden assault... but awareness training, knowledge of pre-fight indicators etc will, by allowing you to see something coming before it actually happens. Sparring can help with handling random actions once the fight has started... and, if we're dealing with a street predator attack, the fight starts and ends so quickly that that skill just doesn't get a look in.

How do you expect to be able to give and receive a hit if you don't know what being hit feels like?

Who says non-sparring arts don't have that? Come into my class, and you'll certainly know what it's like to hit and to be hit....

This question is the one I am struggling with the most. I honestly don't know how I can fix it with my own training but its a question that needs to be answered.

The first, and really, primary thing you need to do is to recognize that you're now training in a system with a very different set of priorities and a very different context. Assuming that it's dealing with the same thing as your previous training is to miss the point... and really, so long as you expect it to be the same, you're not going to get anywhere. You don't go to an Indian restaurant and expect a good pizza....

So Anti sparring people, chime in. I want your side of the story. I want a counter point.

Hopefully it'll come through in the rest of this post.

Pro sparrers, whats your points?

I'll leave that to them...

I know that im going to have to address this as it is something that remains on my mind and cant be shaken..

Yeah.... see above.

Im reminded of this article..http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2...-skill-you-just-arent-as-good-as-you-thought/

To deal with a few comments from the article....

Hmm, actually, I'm not sure where to start with this one. Half of it is "well, duh..." (such as the reality that people have a personal ceiling to their development), with most of the rest being some rather odd applications of logic and assumptions mixed with largely inaccurate truisms... I really can't say I agree with much of it, honestly, and would say that most doesn't really deal much with the benefit or not of sparring for self defence training at all (the few times it's mentioned, it's done to point out that it's "not a barometer of 'real' self defence skills").

To take it from the beginning, the title itself ("Facing A Harsh Reality: Sparring Measures Skill") is only true in a sense.... it measures skill, sure, but only skill in sparring. The whole idea of it showing you that you're not as fast, or strong as you thought you were (which is referred to as a "delusion" by the author) reads to me as a personal account, and is really little more than the author coming to terms with his own issues, rather than having anything to do with sparring itself. He also seemed to miss what he was being told, and why, instead reading into it something that wasn't there (what he classes as a delusion, which is more a delusion of his own). Sure, the other guy might have indeed been more skilled, rather than just having a "better day", but the denial of that fact wasn't anything to do with the feedback he was getting.

As far as there being a ceiling to the skill level of students, well, yeah, there is... but I really have no idea where he's getting his ideas on just how mislead karate practitioners are about their skills from. He seems convinced that everyone in a dojo feels that they're a combination of Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee, and that competition/sparring shows that they're really uncoordinated, slow, clumsy oafs.... I don't think that either of those descriptions are accurate, and again, feel that the author is potentially projecting his own issues quite a bit.

Next is "Teaching is not Doing", which bears almost no connection to the topic of the article at all.... while it's not really wrong, it's just out of place and irrelevant.

Ah, the next section... in which our author derides and moans about what he thinks are the common complaints against competition, essentially doing what he complains of others doing (just whining). He basically says "hey, if you don't like all the problems with competition, there's so many types, you should just go and do one you do like", which is like saying that if you don't like the rules in your families house, you should just go to someone else's where you can eat ice-cream all night long... Oh, and it's rare to get even the most fervent non-competition martial artists to say that there are no useful aspects... again, this reads as a projection, rather than any true reflection of reality.

"When in Rome".... oh, dear lord.... "yes, it's unrealistic (and therefore those who do not include it for that reason are correct), and yes, you do things that you'd never do for real (and therefore those who do not include it for that reason are correct), but we do things to win that false context (and therefore those who do not include it for that reason are correct), and if you do train in competition, then you're training in sport/competition, so, well, just do it, okay?". A complete non-argument based on saying that the critics are correct... really?

Finally, the conclusion simply restates the false assumptions, the lack of insight, and the inability to recognise just what sparring and competition actually tests. Not impressed with that one. Let's try the next...

and this one. http://www.fightscope.com/martial-arts/importance-of-sparring/

"Sparring is the closest we can get to a real fighting situation."

No, it's not.

"The bottom line is that sparring is probably the most important training exercise there is."

No, it's not.

"Sparring is as real as it gets. It's that simple."

No, it's not as real as it gets. And it's far from that simple. I think you can see where my opinion of this article is going....

"Sparring is the nearest thing to a real fight, without actually fighting."

No, it's not.

"People don't like sparring because they aren't confident in their abilities and are worried about being hurt."

Garbage. This is probably the most macho, egotistical, and least informed surmising of a motivation I've seen. "You don't spar, but I do, so I'm tough, and you're a scaredybaby".... yeah, right....

Hmm, not that fond of that one either.

Basically, sparring while not a real self defense fight, is as close to a real fight as you can get.

No, it really isn't. At all.

If you don't spar against a fully resisting opponent, not attacking you on a predetermined basis, how can you know that what your are learning or teaching works?

Again, that's a very false assumption. Realistically, knowing that something works in sparring only tells you that it works in sparring... nothing else. You really need to first off get a handle on what "works" means in each context.

That is the internal struggle I am facing right now. I hope this sparks a good discussion.

Same. And to that end, a question you might not have considered.... Why is "randomness" important when it comes to self defence training? And, by that, I mean... is it actually important in the first place?

 

[SteveNC]

Chris I agree that sparring is NOT the best way to train self defense. I like for my students to understand feel and get themselves used to contact but I have to instill in them that when an attack occurs the response (assuming they can't escape or de-escalate the situation) has to be dealt with swiftly and with the necessary force to get the job done so they CAN escape. It is my opinion that traditional sparring is part of the reason so many western MA schools do such a poor job of teaching self defense. They introduce sparring as a touch the gloves, bow to your partner and trade blows exercise. That isn't self defense training at all. Your goal in defending yourself (mental and awareness training aside) should be to hit first with deception and how ever many times needed to escape and that's it. Sparring just isn't the best way to achieve the simulation of that. Long post but good post and I agree!

 

[Kframe]

I was on E budo and found a old thread talking about old Koryu training. http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?47543-Free-practice-in-koryu-is-it-possible While im still trying to digest that whole thing, the gist I get is this. They did spar, just not quite like we do in modern arts. Apparently free sparring was something only few were doing after like 20 years of practice.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm This post also talks about old European arts used on battlefields. Here is the relevant excerpt.
"False. Modern research in historical European martial arts has revealed considerable evidence in Europe from the 12th to 17th centuries for several different forms of mock combat used as earnest self-defense training, battlefield rehearsal, ritual display, and sporting contest. From knightly tournaments to prize-playing contests to bouting a few veneys or assaults at arms and impromptu scrimmaging, the evidence for "free play" or "playing loose" as practice-fighting is substantial. This activity involved substantial contact, and not merely pulled blows or surface touches. Examination of the methods by which this kind of "sparring" was pursued (e.g., its equipment, its intent and purpose, its permissible techniques and safety considerations, and its risk of injury, etc.) is a main area of exploration in historical fencing studies. See: To Spar or Not to Spar."

So the question remains, how can you learn to fight with out fighting? Swing with out swimming? Sparring while not a real situation is as close as it gets. I have not yet seen any thing said here that is convincing. All I keep hearing is that sparring is not even close to real life. Yet if that is true why did so many old battlefield arts actually spar in some fashion?

Again the main issue I have is this. How can you expect to apply what your learn, to a random and or unexpected attack if you never practice against unexpected and or random attacks? It was said that sparring is not really random, that your matched based on skill and size and what not. That is true to a extent but that does not mean I will know what opening attack my opponent will throw, or what tactic he will use. I cant read his mind, he may attack with a kick or several, or a shoot or a anything. Only thing I know is that he can strike and grapple, I have no idea what is coming first next or last.

Just because Im good on pads and good with the tech sparring*partner drills in boxing that I did* does not mean ill be able to deal with a unpredictable and random attack.

One line from the e budo thread is interesting. "Indeed, and I think he's got it right from everything I've ever seen in my budo career, I've never seen anyone with kata only experience step onto a kendo floor and win his first match, I certainly have no illusions that I could take a moderately trained kendo kid, even if I was allowed any target at all. I twitch and he hits me, simple as that, and it has happened in the deep distant past. But I've also seen that those with kata and sparring experience are much more sophisticated in their practice, a different feel to their kendo. "


I think im still leaning towards adding some other element to my own training, I just cant deny the inarguable benefits to self defense that sparring brings. I don't see how you can deny the realities of training against a unpredictable opponent, throwing random and unpredictable attacks.

 

[K-man]

I think im still leaning towards adding some other element to my own training, I just cant deny the inarguable benefits to self defense that sparring brings. I don't see how you can deny the realities of training against a unpredictable opponent, throwing random and unpredictable attacks.

It depends on how you define 'sparring'. If sparring to you means the type of training required for MMA competition then I don't believe that is necessary unless you are preparing to compete in MMA. If you want to test your skills in a reality based setting there are many ways of providing that training.
:asian:

 

[MJS]

Ok here comes the can of worms. Having switched from mma to Bujinkan taijutsu one of the hardest things im having to accept is there is no sparring. They have randori but it isn't like sparring its a whole different animal.

I know that Chris parker and others will chime in and say that Sparring is not like self defense. I get that, but the thing is, especially with BBT were else are you going to get randomness. I have seen that, ya you can have pressure in the preset paired forms. In fact I have watched the black belts and out side of a few things they were throwing with speed and power and intent. The problem is, arts like mine and aikido and apparently most of the legit koryu don't spar.

So the question becomes outside of the obvious cardio and conditioning benefits, what else does sparring help with. I think the big thing is randomness. The ability to deal with unpredictable opponents. Also learning to take a hit and how really hitting someone feels.

So while I know that Chris parker has told me that you can have pressure in the kata(our paired kata), that pressure not matter how high, does not address randomness. Attacks are random.

I think part of the reason that MMA fighters do so well against most every style, and even on the street, is that they practice against randomness every day, from day one. Sure they may not have the most optimum skillset for street defense but its there inculcation to randomness that is one of their greatest strengths.

So the question I find my self struggling with, above all else is this. Those arts that teach techniques and no sparring, no randomness, how do you expect your students to be able to apply what they learn to a situation that is chalk full of random? How do you expect to be able to give and receive a hit if you don't know what being hit feels like? This question is the one I am struggling with the most. I honestly don't know how I can fix it with my own training but its a question that needs to be answered.

So Anti sparring people, chime in. I want your side of the story. I want a counter point.

Pro sparrers, whats your points?


I know that im going to have to address this as it is something that remains on my mind and cant be shaken..

Im reminded of this article..http://www.24fightingchickens.com/2...-skill-you-just-arent-as-good-as-you-thought/ and this one. http://www.fightscope.com/martial-arts/importance-of-sparring/

Basically, sparring while not a real self defense fight, is as close to a real fight as you can get. If you don't spar against a fully resisting opponent, not attacking you on a predetermined basis, how can you know that what your are learning or teaching works?

That is the internal struggle I am facing right now. I hope this sparks a good discussion.

In all of the arts that I've done or currently do, sparring is a part of it. IMO, I feel that its just one more part of the puzzle, as far as training goes. Sure, we can (and I have) do our SD techniques, in a non-static way, ensuring that it doesn't look like a sparring match, but for me, I like sparring. It's a faster pace, harder contact, and you get used to getting hit.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I don't have time right now to write a full essay on the subject. Having spent a bunch of years training in an art which did not use sparring (Bujinkan Taijutsu) and a bunch of years training in arts which do use sparring (Muay Thai & BJJ among others), these are a few of my thoughts:

Sparring is a vital part of training if you want to be able to fight effectively at a high level, regardless of the context. It teaches certain skills and attributes which no other training method really does.

That said, it is not the end all and be all. It has weaknesses and shortcomings, just like all training methods do, and it is important to recognize what they are so that you can make up for them in your other areas of training.

Sparring is not really a simulation of a self-defense situation. Certain types of sparring, if done correctly, can be a decent simulation of certain forms of fighting, which is something different.

Sparring comes in a variety of flavors. Different forms have different advantages. Some people practice sparring in a way which I consider to be downright detrimental to developing self-defense ability.

The point of sparring is learning, not winning. When students get hung up on winning rather than learning, then sparring can lose much of its benefit.