which is beter full contack sparing or no contact?

[Miles]

I think all types of contact lead to both negative and positive results.

Agreed. The proper technique for the proper target, the proper level of contact in the proper circumstances.

Full contact negates learning in that it puts you in a win lose situation and you are not so much improving but surviving.

I disagree that full contact negates learning-for example, I think it teaches the attacker what the reaction force of her techniques feels like. Along the same lines, it teaches the defender how to absorb a full contact shot. Both are improved by the experience. In the street, survival is winning.

I think the solution is to limit contact to a martial artist level of training. As they develop control and conditioning turn it up, by all means. White belts shouldn't be the meat your upperbelts practice having no control with. They are your schools bread and butter. I wouldn't spend them so cheaply.

Exactly-I think that one needs to teach/learn full contact progressively and there are times, even for experienced martial artists to practice both full and no contact. White belts are both the easiest and the hardest group to spar with-they have no control but they don't know they have no control. They leave themselves open and rarely follow-up. As such, they are probably the best example of who you will meet on the street (in my opinion). No one should be fodder for the upper ranked cannons....

Miles

 

[FearlessFreep]

I once joked with my teacher that I appreciated that he wold spar with me because I realized that it put him in a more dangerous position because as in-experienced as I was, I was more liable to do things with little control or things that were just plain stupid. So I guess I was good for practicing dealing with someone unskilled and random, but within the context of a olympic-rules match, he had to deal with the fact that I was much less skilled and therefore more likely to do something both stupid and dangerous

 

[TigerWoman]

Which is better, black or white? Full contact teaches you respect, what it feels like to get hit. No contact is good for learning how to respond and move, mostly for beginners. Each have its value. But full contact has risk of injury. No contact is insufficient training. We mostly do light-med contact so we have some bruises but nothing broken-torn, usually. TW

 

[Rick Wade]

Feeling is believing.

with full contact you get to see your opponents reaction.

V/R

Rick

 

[bobster_ice]

No contact or light contact.

 

[ashkin]

No contact helps with technique and accuracy, full contact is all about kicking someones ***, so I would say no-contact.

 

[Laborn]

Lol in my school, every friday we try new things, even tho we're hitting as hard as we can, it's the best way to find out WHAT works, for instance. i use to go to a school where there was no contact, we could never decide weather we hit one another or not. In full contact you KNOW you hit them, and you KNOW you got hit. Me personally i like fighting as hard as i can, trying new things while going hard, i can find out what works in a full contact situation.

 

[Laborn]

PLUS like i said, you fight as you train. If you train and are use to not hitting your opponent, will you remember in a rteal life situation to go as hard as possible? in full contact sparring, your already use to going as hard as you can, so it will be something familiar.

My school does tho no contact sparring at times, when we're in class we just play around with things. But for sparring we get out gear and go at it hehe.

 

[AdrenalineJunky]

One thing that nobody, that I saw, mentioned was the fact that a strike is useless if interrupted. Full-contact sparring teaches you, if nothing else, that when you do: A, your leaving: B open. If someone hits you in B, while you're doing A, then A will be ineffective. You do not learn that in light or medium-contact sparring, as it is still possible to get the shot off. Again, I'm talking Muay Thai; the ultimate purpose of which is to fight full-contact in the ring. . .so that might be the difference.

 

[Miles]

Yes, depending on the opponent's timing, you are either "interrupted" as AdrenalineJunky mentioned, or "countered." TKD teaches both-an example of "interruption" technique would be a push kick, an example of a counter would be open stance back kick to opponent's back leg round kick. Good point!

 

[Hwoarang_tkd26]

I as well feel that both should be trained in, but there is an appropriate time in a student's progression in which one of these should be used.
For instance, I feel that a beginer student should train with little or no contact, but with high emphasis on control, acuracy, and great technique.
Those three things right there are the most basic things that make the foundation of a great martial artist.

As this beginer student becomes more and more advanced, then he/she should be slowly introduced to full contact sparring, and with the right kind of training this student can generate more devastating power, speed, and can link techniques together to creat combinations.
Oposed to the student that has been trained in full contact ever since the begining of their training, they do understand what it is like to be knocked out and how to take a hit, but they seem to lack a certain cairity in their movements, and dont seem to generate as much power,speed, and acuracy due to the lack of training in the three things that I have stated above.

-Hwoarang_tkd26

 

[green meanie]

This coming from a non-TKD perspective but I'm more in favor of full-contact than non- or light-contact.