the importance of sparring as a method of training

[Walk the Torque]

I find it amusing that some are stating that sparring is counter productive for real life encounters. Sparring is not some separate entity that exists independent of the people that are doing it!

If you feel that sparring is not teaching you the best thing for real life, then just change what you are doing to get closer to what you imagine real life to be. In all likely hood it won't be anything like you think it will be anyway.

When I spar I have trained certain actions as I think might be useful in certain situations. For instance, If I am in a clinch, I will immediately go for the eyes to illicit a reaction in the head that allows me to take control. Nobody gets hurt but it adds a different flavour to the game.

Sparring is great because it gives you the freedom to work on many things like explosive attacks, evasion, grappling only, etc etc. Of course there are other ways to train, but there aren't that many that give you the range of components that provide necessary ingredients for "real encounters".

2C

[johnwang]

I find it amusing that some are stating that sparring is counter productive for real life encounters.

I find solo form training sometime is "counter productive" for real life encounters instead. There are so many kick in the form that you use your back leg kick as your 1st move. In real life you will expose your center line completely for your opponent's attack.

[JusticeZero]

If you feel that sparring is not teaching you the best thing for real life, then just change what you are doing to get closer to what you imagine real life to be.

And see, if that was the norm, I wouldn't mind sparring.

Instead, I see people presenting an attitude that sparring is the end-all of combat training and of utmost importance.

Alongside this, I see a lot of discussion of techniques, attributes, and the like where they are actually changing their expression of their martial art in ways which are pure and unapologetic adaptations to sport conditions, and utterly maladjusted to self defence.

Often I see it expressed that sparring rules CAN be changed to make it more real world applicable, but it is rare that I see any evidence of people actually DOING this outside of the pure RBST crowd.

As such, I consider standard sparring to be on the whole a disease and a hindrance to the martial arts community. It has potential which is rarely tapped, and it has glaring weaknesses which I rarely see addressed; it is uncommon in my experience for the proponents of sparring to do more than grudgingly acknowledge these weaknesses without making any changes to their practice to acknowledge the issues, if pressed on the point.

[Fubo]

As such, I consider standard sparring to be on the whole a disease and a hindrance to the martial arts community.

Can you define what "standard sparring" is?

[JusticeZero]

Basically, drills where two practitioners of an art face off and engage in controlled contact unrehearsed duelling, each attempting to in whatever manner dominate their opponent using their techniques in a context that resembles a fight. eg: Karate kumite for practice, boxing ring fighting for practice, wrestling practice, etc. These are fine if the sportive aspect is the final goal and the practitioners' goals are "I want to win in tournaments" rather than "I want to learn to fight". For COMBAT skill though, it's a net loser and criminally negligent to toss people in controlled-contact sport fights with wild sport adaptation and tell them that they are preparing for combat.

Real fighting skill requires "sparring" to be used for something more than just a 'test of skills' against one of your fellow students. This can take forms like:

• The sport aspect can be made sufficiently alien to fighting as to not create any preconceptions of "this is what a fight is". This is what my own art does; nobody has the slightest illusion that in a real fight, people will bust out with musical instruments to dictate a motorset, and then ignore any contact that the other person didn't walk into with some sort of acrobatics. They learn positioning, angling, and improvisation nonetheless, and then we can provide RBSD drills to fill it out. Needless to say, the words of sparring advocates almost universally is at odds with this viewpoint.
  
• Massive adjustment of rules and scenarios on a regular basis to transform the drills into RBSD scenarios. Another winner - but I don't see it done as a rule by anyone but the RBSD crowd, and then it's pretty much another kind of situation drill.
  
• Skill builders for limited technique subsets. For instance, "Only techniques and footwork done with at least part of your body above your waist on the floor allowed, because you guys need to work those more" is going to get groans from the class because those techniques take a lot of conditioning, they're strenuous to learn to do with any endurance, so people get lazy and don't work them unless forced to. Good - but still vulnerable to sport adaptation if you rely on them too much and too predictably. Still, this enters the realm of the first thing listed.

[TrainingDummy]

I spar with rules similar to MMA with protective gear against one group of friends (a MMA garage gym club), and against Walk The Torque without gear.

Against WTTorque, any touch near the eyes or groin is scored as a point. Medium contact shots to the body and light to the head, throws, china and limited ground fighting are allowed.

My garage gym does a lot of limited sparring such as boxing only, or grappling only to focus on specific ranges and tactics without too much to worry about. I've seen a massive increase in my rhythm, timing and fighting ability since undertaking this sort of training, because I can focus on a few variables at a time against a resistant opponent.

Then when I spar with WTTorque, I have to tighten up my defenses considerably since "dirty" fighting and all ranges are legal.

I personally dislike RBSD style attacker/defender drills since oftentimes the attacker uses wild, telegraphed movements. Sparring where all techniques are allowed, but pulled, allows one to explore strategies close to true self defense against a skilled opponent. It's not "the real thing", but it's a good drill.

I don't think sparring, with or without protection, with or without "deadly moves", is the end point of martial skill. They're just drills that give you some feedback and something to work on.

[CaliG]

Thanks for posting Tom. It's very nice post by Tim Cartmell. It actually reminded me of a blog I read today on Steve Morris's website in this response to a question about women's self-defense (posted down below).

I'd also add that in my own experience the skills you develop through sparring/grappling practice don't stick unless you keep it up. I did BJJ for a couple of years around 2000, then I sorted of "moved on" and when I returned to BJJ after getting a better understanding of leverage from CMA and it took another year of training before those old skills came back although intellectually I knew BJJ my body couldn't execute the techniques cleanly. So basically you never really "graduate" from sparring/grappling.

I would be interested to hear your views with regard to women & self defense. I still run short courses for women and have included (mostly from your DVDs) many more contact/grappling drills that includes the experience of trying to knock a guy out who is padded up.

--Kenneth Milling

There is a lot of criticism going around with regards to my continual references to MMA and criticisms of karate, etc. People say, why don’t I just get on and do what I do best? I wish that I could, but as long as karate and RBSD and their like continue to sell the easy option, they effectively make it impossible for me to make a living by calling it as it is. This is why I’ll continue to plug MMA and criticize anything that is not reality based.

Having the will to fight is important but having the will to train realistically and consistently is more important.

I’m telling you this because as a trainer, these are problems you’re probably going to encounter for yourself, if you haven’t encountered them already. People want an easy option. And there isn’t one.

For whatever you are going to do, you have to have a method which is based on MMA, but maybe without calling it MMA if it’s not for competition and you’re worried about the image: many people hear MMA and they’re thinking of guys with big muscles, ring girls, and loads of testosterone. I’ve got the same problem with my classes: people think I ‘do MMA’ as if it’s all pro fighters in my courses, when that’s not the case. The whole point of my method is that it’s applicable to anybody: men, women, kids, you name it. In the case of the latter, naturally you need to make some adaptations, but it’s the same method.

The reason I go on about MMA is because it’s the best reference for what goes on in an unarmed fight. You can go home and put your DVD in and watch it for real. There’s no guesswork, in that sense.

Remember, you always have to deal with the worst case scenario. One very likely worst-case scenario for a woman is ending up down on the ground being raped. That’s where the man’s going to try to put her, one way or the other. Those are the kind of scenarios you need to go through in the gym. Break them down and work them at high intensity.

This is where MMA is ideal. You can look at the film and it will deal with many of the scenarios, on the feet and on the ground, open and closed position, that are likely to come up. From a woman’s perspective, the guard position is crucial. Knowing how to use it to her advantage could change her situation from defensive to offensive, or allow her to escape or reverse the position. But you don’t work it in a self-defence context. It’s part of the whole picture of fighting. She has to become a fighter. Mindset, conditioning, all of it. She can’t expect to be some victim who turns into a victor. There’s no such thing as right and wrong/good and bad in a fight. Who knows how to fight, wins.

People tend to think, ‘I’m doing self-defence, and because I’m doing self-defence, right is on my side and therefore I will be victorious.’ That’s fucking bullshit. You’re kidding yourself.

Whether or not you go looking for it, a fight’s a fight. You’ve just got to watch the CCTV evidence to see that. The guys you see who are out there on the streets, many of them dangerously violent. You can’t deal with that with a few self-defence moves, and it’s misleading (I think criminal) to provide people with an expectation (i.e., ‘I’ll teach you self-defence’) and then apparently fulfil it through the lessons, when in fact it’s impossible to bestow that on somebody in ten easy lessons. Even if you can fight, you can’t teach somebody else to fight without putting them through the punishment.

The problem is, how do you put the person through the challenging, punishing, competitive situation without causing injury? That’s what my method does, and your only problem lies in creatively adapting it to the individuals you’ve got to deal with. That, and competing with the self-defence guru down the road who promises to give all the secret techniques.

You need to teach women exactly the same as you teach men. No compromise in what you’re teaching. The problems they have to deal with are the same. That’s why there’s no such thing as a beginner’s course. There’s no such thing as a progression within the lesson: this is how we begin, this is the middle, this is the end. When I’m teaching, I’m not spoonfeeding things. I’m not making it easy for you to take in the information. You either pick it up, or you don’t, and then you have to persist until you do pick it up. The main thing is, you’re in the water and you’re swimming—or trying to swim.

I teach in this intense way because you have to learn to pick up information and work under pressure. And you need to try out and test what you've picked up in a competitive fighting environment where you will be punished for your mistakes. So that the next time you pay more attention to what I’m saying and doing. You have to be training as though your life depends on it, because it very well might.

I also work in a way that is non-linear. It's not systemized. The reason for that is because I don't believe in perfect form or trying to get the concepts and principles across in a perfect way. I don't want to dwell on creating an ideal. I want the student to understand what he as an individual has got to do within a situation.

As a teacher, that takes a certain amount of skill. On my part, throughout the class, there’s a certain manipulation going on that the participants may or may not be aware of. I’m looking to bring something out of them, to realize their potential. I’m looking not to force them into a mold, but to get them to understand the concepts and principles and more importantly, to apply them, realistically. And to do it now, not in six months' time. Because that's the emergency mindset you need.

As a teacher, I know there’s no such thing as perfect form. I know there’s no such thing as a perfect training method. But I do know principles and concepts exist which are fundamental to fighting and training.

Different people pick up a principle different ways, so as a teacher I have to present that in different ways until the person gets it. And I can do that because I understand the principle inside-out myself. That’s the way my brain’s configured; I’m creative enough to be able to reach you wherever you are, no matter what level. I make no distinction between a beginner and an advanced student. My problem is reaching the person and getting the concepts and principles over in different ways. Each person is an individual.

I’ve never been able to be taught by rote, and I sure can’t teach by rote.

But most people can’t teach the way I do. That’s probably why the martial arts have become systemized: because the art of teaching combat (armed or unarmed) has been lost.

Many karate people will tell you that karate is ‘self-defence,’ and they have moves from their katas that they apply to what they believe would be a confrontational scenario. Many of these moves include pre-emptive strikes. But the thing is, if the pre-emptive strike doesn’t work, you’re definitely in a fight. And unless you know how to fight, then your self defence not only doesn’t work, but you’ve just ‘hit the bear on the nose’ and potentially got yourself in a worse situation. Now I’m not saying that pre-emptive strikes are useless—far from it—but they mustn’t be relied on.

It’s all part and parcel of the fight.

Any martial art must include the worst scenarios. You are potentially having the shit kicked out of you. How are you going to deal with it? Unless you’ve realistically addressed that within the gym, then when it happens for real, it’s too late. It’s over. You’re in hospital already.

Better to be punished in the gym, in a controlled environment, than on the street in an uncontrolled one. And that’s why, in the case where you describe padding a guy up and getting the woman to try to knock him out, it would make sense to also pad up the woman and let her take the hits. Learning how to take punishment is at least as important as learning how to give it. But when you do any of this stuff, there must be a goal that you’re trying to achieve within that scenario. Don’t just be dishing out and giving beatings all evening. You need to have missions.

So you might say that while he’s punching the shit out of her, her mission is to grab hold of him and knee him. For example. You know what I mean because you’ve got the DVDs.

You can apply my method to anything (knife, anything). And with the knife, because there is no DVD footage of real-life knife fights to draw on, your best bet for reference is the Filipino systems because they come out of a knife culture. Those methods wouldn’t be continually used if they weren’t being shown to be effective. So whatever knife work you’re doing, if it doesn’t resemble the Filipino systems, then it isn’t reflecting the experience of the real fight.

So: with the right method, you can rehearse in a relatively safe way. But the main thing is, if your scenarios are not including the worst possible situation, then you’re raising an expectation that we know, when we watch a fight, is unrealistic. Some of the fights I’ve had, I’ve come out looking worse than the guy I’d beat. But the only reason I came out of it and got to the other end was because I can take punishment. And I’m able to remain focused on what I need to achieve. As a martial artist, you will only get that if the training you are doing involvs you taking a supervised beating.

That’s what my method allows you to do.

You do have to find a way to factor in the man. I sometimes see feminist groups running self-defence courses where a woman’s teaching the class and all the other participants are women. But they’re unlikely to be attacked by other women. And it doesn’t matter what the experience of the teacher is, if men aren’t factored into the equation, using a punishing and competitive method, then again, I believe it’s criminal. Because it isn’t going to work.

There’s no short cut to this thing called fighting. And that’s what defending yourself is. Fighting.

Back in Earlham Street we had a woman called Lynn . She fought and trained with the men and she showered with them. The men were as indifferent to her as she was to them. And she gave as good as she got. But she was obviously one in a million. The rest of the women who came in were Barbie dolls; they took one look and made for the exit.

The problem is, the average woman is not going to be like Lynn . But you have a lot of media images that are telling women they can fight like Lynn , without going through the blood, sweat and tears. Around here, we call it the Buffy phenomenon. So how do you handle it?

Again: the best way is to do MMA-based training. True, even the best female MMA fighter is not going to beat the best male MMA fighter. But she’s got a better shot with MMA than with anything else out there. And she’ll get a realistic sense of her own strengths and weaknesses. She’s not fooling herself, and nobody’s fooling her. And if she’s well-trained, she’ll probably be able to beat a hell of a lot of men.

She’ll also be a martial artist, in a true sense, and not a make-believe sense. And that’s important. Through the fight training, she’ll develop a reality-based mindset, by which she can then know what’s bullshit and what isn’t if she persists in her martial art studies. In a street situation, she'll now have that killer instinct. She'll be resourceful in using anything in her environment that might help her survive the encounter.

There is always going to be the argument put forward by many martial artists that teaching something is better than teaching nothing at all. I would agree with this, if the ‘something’ is about teaching the person to fight back no matter who, or what the odds are, but when the ‘something’ is a lot of silly self-defence moves, then that’s criminal.

My own daughter, she’ll grow up with me. I know where she needs to be, and I’ll get her there. I’ll do everything I can to give her the reality without hurting her. As a trainer, you need to know where you’re going with this thing. What is the reality? How are you going to get each individual up to scratch to achieve it? It must be clear in your mind before you set out. No bullshit.

Because Rhiannon trusts me, I’ll be able to pass on to her in play and play fighting what she needs to know, and whatever exercises, drills, play or playfighting methods I devise for her (or the boys for that matter) will have specific purposes.

But the problem with trust is that too many people will trust anybody who calls themselves a teacher.

My method involves intense technical drilling, situational drilling, situational fighting, conditional fighting, and play fighting which as you know is very different from what anybody else does, whether in MMA or in RBSD. Because of the high intensity, trust is a key element. The practitioners need to get the experience without being hurt. And from a woman’s perspective, she needs to know that the instructor isn’t going to end up groping her. And that’s the beauty of my training method: it’s an instructional method that lets the practitioner jump into the pool on day one. It’s not touchy-feely like a lot of self-defense ('I come up behind you and grab you, swing your hips to the left,' you know what I mean) and she’s going to be making her own judgement calls through the missions and conditions I set as the trainer. So with my method, it’s not about trusting an instructor, it’s about trusting your training partners and the method you’re using.

So if you’re running these courses, you’ve got to make sure you stay out of the role of the wise guru. Don’t forget, like I’ve been repeating since the 1970s (and I see Harry Cook has picked it up and is using it) the function of the teacher is to create drills, situations, and scenarios that call for a needed response.. That’s the whole basis of my method. For the trainee, it’s not about ‘where do I put my foot’ or ‘how do I do this?’. It’s about being given clear objectives that reflect how the fight might break down. And then putting everything you’ve got (as an interval training set of repeating the same or different 30-second missions over a 30 min period or 6 times 5 mins rounds) into achieving those objectives.

The reality that you see in MMA has to be the reality that you’re training with. We know it works. RBSD and the traditions are unproven, beyond anecdotal evidence. And that’s what you need to convince your self-defence students, probably the women in particular: that there is no alternative. When they look at MMA, what are their eyes telling them is happening? They must believe only in this, and not in what they want to believe based on movies or the claims of some ‘master’ or guru.

This is the reality. Do you want some of it?

For the women you’re training, they have to buy into this reality, lock, stock and barrel. There is no other choice; the other methods don’t work, unless they’re reality-based—in which case they’re the same thing as MMA. If you can’t persuade your trainees of that, then there’s nothing else you can do. You can’t water it down. That’s an injustice. This reality of the fight cannot be compromised.

--Steve

http://www.morrisnoholdsbarred.co.uk/07 ... efence.htm

[johnwang]

The skills you develop through sparring/grappling practice don't stick unless you keep it up.

That's very true. Old Chinese saying said, "If you don't spar/wrestle for 3 days, your arms and legs are no longer be yours." When my teacher was in his prime, local SC guys got jealous and made a deal among each other that nobody would wrestle with my teacher. This way, my teacher's skill could be decreased after a period of time. Fortunately he had his 3 brothers include his own father were all his wrestling partners.

[GrahamB]

I'd also add that in my own experience the skills you develop through sparring/grappling practice don't stick unless you keep it up.

QFT

That's SO true. It's like polishing the silverware in your house. The moment you stop polishing you start to go dull again, until the next polish.

The more sparring you've done though I think you can kind of build up a kind of level of "background skill", so when you need to get back in the game quickly it takes you less time than it would otherwise, but you still get very rusty very quickly. It's kind of depressing!

[JusticeZero]

I realized today another reason I dislike sparring.

My art is primarily built around core-slung circular kicks with relaxed legs. Whenever someone suggests sparring, they want me to 'control' them, which means that I have to slow them down dramatically. Then, reacting and moving at full speed, they do thisandthatandthisandthat to respond to the kick drifting toward them, then declare themselves victorious and my skills null. I have very few techniques that I can snap out lightly; if I want to toss a fast technique, it's going to plow through unless I completely sabotage my technique to the point of unrecognisability. In which case, I'm still left holding a leg out with some effort of my own, which they can then do a bunch of techniques only possible because of the immobility of the leg to and declare themselves victorious.
So it doesn't seem like it does me much good at all, I mostly just get treated like a punching dummy and joke because of things I was told I needed to do in order to participate..

[johnwang]

The "control sparring" will build bad habit. It's better to put on gloves, head gear, and chest protection and go full force. But again since no matter how hard that your opponent punches at your chest (with chest protection), it won't hurt you, you may be too lazy to block a chest punch and that will also build bad habit.

If you wrestle with jacket on, you may build dependency on jacket. If you don't then you may not learn how to take advantage on your opponent if he has jack on.

[DeusTrismegistus]

I realized today another reason I dislike sparring.

My art is primarily built around core-slung circular kicks with relaxed legs. Whenever someone suggests sparring, they want me to 'control' them, which means that I have to slow them down dramatically. Then, reacting and moving at full speed, they do thisandthatandthisandthat to respond to the kick drifting toward them, then declare themselves victorious and my skills null. I have very few techniques that I can snap out lightly; if I want to toss a fast technique, it's going to plow through unless I completely sabotage my technique to the point of unrecognisability. In which case, I'm still left holding a leg out with some effort of my own, which they can then do a bunch of techniques only possible because of the immobility of the leg to and declare themselves victorious.
So it doesn't seem like it does me much good at all, I mostly just get treated like a punching dummy and joke because of things I was told I needed to do in order to participate..

Thats a common problem. However they are really the ones losing out. Its common for people when sparring slowly to see a punch or kick when it is halfway to them and they jerk away really quickly or they throw a very quick block. However they are just learning bad habits whereas you get to learn how to set things up better and deal with a faster moving person. Whatever you do needs to be something that will work at full speed. Its easy to delude yourself that you are some uber badass because you can catch a punch travelling at 0.2 mph and apply a wrist lock and throw when in reality your limp attempt at blocking would get you a fat lip.

[Fubo]

Cali G and Steve Morris make some excellent points.

One of the reasons I gravitated towards grappling based arts (though I still train striking as it's important), is because you can practice them with full force, 100% and full speed. I'm also relatively small, so I'd much rather get into a position where I can use leverage (whether throwing or ground work) and position myself up-close to the person where the power of his strikes are greatly decreased and easier to control, then slug it out with someone who has 100 pounds on me.

[Sprint]

You can apply my method to anything (knife, anything). And with the knife, because there is no DVD footage of real-life knife fights to draw on, your best bet for reference is the Filipino systems because they come out of a knife culture. Those methods wouldn’t be continually used if they weren’t being shown to be effective. So whatever knife work you’re doing, if it doesn’t resemble the Filipino systems, then it isn’t reflecting the experience of the real fight.

Marc Mac Young says:

"The FMA are predicated on one basic assumption, that you will be fighting a trained knifer. The problem with that assumption is that not everyone attacks the way that someone trained in the FMA will attack you. This is problematic because the counters of the FMA are designed to work against how people with FMA training will attack you. Against these kinds of attacks, the counters work great.
The bottom line is, in the Western culture, someone who is attacking you with a knife is attempting to murder you. They are not going to be hanging back cautiously in fear of your weapon and your fighting skill. Instead they will usually attempt to overwhelm you and quickly kill you by whatever means necessary. Such an attack is totally different than the well balanced and liquid attacks of the FMA. And that is totally different than how someone from Italy will attack you with a knife. And that is different than how someone from Venezuela is going to attack with a knife. And that is different than how someone from Brazil will attack you with a knife. And that is different than how someone from South Africa is going to attack you with a knife. And that is totally different than how someone from China will attack you with a knife. I know because I have traveled around the world and encountered knife fighting systems from all of those places. "

[GrahamB]

You can apply my method to anything (knife, anything). And with the knife, because there is no DVD footage of real-life knife fights to draw on, your best bet for reference is the Filipino systems because they come out of a knife culture. Those methods wouldn’t be continually used if they weren’t being shown to be effective. So whatever knife work you’re doing, if it doesn’t resemble the Filipino systems, then it isn’t reflecting the experience of the real fight.

Marc Mac Young says:

"The FMA are predicated on one basic assumption, that you will be fighting a trained knifer. The problem with that assumption is that not everyone attacks the way that someone trained in the FMA will attack you. This is problematic because the counters of the FMA are designed to work against how people with FMA training will attack you. Against these kinds of attacks, the counters work great.
The bottom line is, in the Western culture, someone who is attacking you with a knife is attempting to murder you. They are not going to be hanging back cautiously in fear of your weapon and your fighting skill. Instead they will usually attempt to overwhelm you and quickly kill you by whatever means necessary. Such an attack is totally different than the well balanced and liquid attacks of the FMA. And that is totally different than how someone from Italy will attack you with a knife. And that is different than how someone from Venezuela is going to attack with a knife. And that is different than how someone from Brazil will attack you with a knife. And that is different than how someone from South Africa is going to attack you with a knife. And that is totally different than how someone from China will attack you with a knife. I know because I have traveled around the world and encountered knife fighting systems from all of those places. "