the importance of sparring as a method of training

[Daniel]

And no-one has tried to hit you during the year since?


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[mixjourneyman]

And no-one has tried to hit you during the year since?


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

As we used to say: I am rubber, you are glue. Whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

[Daniel]

Sticks and stones can hurt my pony, but words will never break it.


D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[RobP2]

Does it have to? The question really isn't how closely does sparring mimic a violent encounter but does sparring develop skills and abilities that will be useful if not vital in a violent encounter. Of course a person training for solely self defense may want to use more scenario type sparring events that do mimic the type of likely encounters than a squaring off deal with rounds.

The question then is what are those useful skills and abilities? The prime failing IME frommartial artists is the unability to deal with the explosiveness of even your average Saturday night brawler - partly, I think, because we are conditioned mentally by the arts we practice to be either "the good guy" who will wait for the bad guy to go first, or the sportist who applies ring craft outside the ring. Either can be effective, depending on circumstances, but I have to say by and large I've never seen martial arts guys do well in that type of encounter. It's all well and good and useful having tactile sensitivity, posture, great form, smooth movement, etc etc but if it all goes down the swannee the minute someone bellows C*NT!!! in your face then it ain't worth diddly. It's what you see in those clips of people who lose it when sparring going into "playground" mode.

[Fubo]

+1 what Tim Cartmell said.

[Brady]

If I couldn't spar, then I'd feel as if I lost a part of my soul. I love the solo work and fixed partner exercise but nothing beats an intense sparring session. I'm not too concerned anymore with martial efficacy. But still, if you don't like sparring, why the hell are you doing martial arts? Its the most fun thing in the world.

[Chris McKinley]

I hope I'm not the only to see it, but what we really have here are several valid but complementary points, meaning they are somewhat contradictory to each other but exist in a balanced optimum. Such is often the case when we have two or more factors that are essential but insufficient.

Yes, Tim Cartmell sets forth a very compelling argument that some kind of repeatable training that allows for incremental contextualization of the skill sets is absolutely required. It has nothing at all to do with what's "in" a style, since styles do not exist other than as abstract labels for sets of physical behaviors. It has everything to do with what you yourself, as an individual practitioner, can use functionally, and it's axiomatic that one cannot use a skill functionally under duress without practicing that very skill under duress.

It's also true that some sparring approaches over-emphasize certain tactics and entirely ignore others, creating the so-called bad habits referred to in previous posts. However, where the logic can often fall apart is in then concluding that sparring as an entire training modality is to blame and should be avoided or abandoned. What's necessary is to instead restructure the sparring as needed to reflect more of the realities of a real assault. IOW, the boundaries between partner drills, sparring, and scenario training aren't permanent nor made of steel...they can be flexed or even obliterated on occasion if the training needs call for it.

The problem with accepting a premise like the one Tim outlined is that often, and definitely in Tim's case, the argument is so convincing that it's tempting to accept it and simply stop thinking objectively and critically at that point. The danger there is that guys who use a regular regimen of this kind of training, which is fairly comprehensive and inarguably results-producing, develop a blindness in their thinking to the deficiencies of this approach. They forget that there is absolutely no consideration whatsoever of the role of ingress/egress awareness, communications, conventional weapons presentation/use/retention, counter-weapons tactics, protection of charges, environmental weapons/obstacles, multiple opponent strategy/tactics, etc. These deficiencies, and yes that's definitely what they are, are why you will not find top-level MMA fighters being hired to train Special Operations personnel in the military or special teams personnel in law enforcement. While such fighters have plenty to bring to the table in terms of unarmed combatives, they are grossly unqualified for the other requirements of the training.

Likewise, it should be mentioned, for almost all TMA instructors as well, since they are also very rarely tapped for such instruction. They, too, may have varying degrees of ability to instruct realistic material for an unarmed tactical context, but are completely unprepared for many other requirements in most cases.

Still, even for those trained for such specialized activities, regular practice of both their armed and unarmed tactical skill sets against resistive opponents is vital to maintaining the highest state of tactical readiness. What we have, then, is a case of full-contact sparring against fully-resistive opponents in a real-time unchoreographed context being essential, but not sufficient.

[GrahamB]

Again, it's a good idea to remember what your art is for. Sparring will help me actually be able to apply my CLF in a live situation against a resisting opponent. In fact, there's no way doing all the pretty forms in the wold would ever help me apply it freely if I don't work it in sparring. It's a simple truth. BUT It won't help me with special ops, firearms or weapons retention. But equally, that's not what CLF is for.

[JusticeZero]

What I generally find is that sparring is helpful up to the moment when people say or believe that it is a simulation of a fight and thus of utmost importance; then it turns counterproductive. Fully agree with what Chris says here, though, for me, I want my students to come home safe and sound. Sparring is fun; it is NOT a fight simulation.

If you want to spar for the sake of sparring, go right ahead.

If you want to spar as a training tool, say "This is a training tool, it helps X and Y and has problems Z P Q. It's a part of a balanced diet of training exercises."

Don't say "Sparring is awesome, it's just like real fighting, other training techniques don't compare to it's awesomeness!" because you'll be lying to yourself and seriously damaging your skills.

[Mut]

Sparring is fun; it is NOT a fight simulation.

yup.... personally I love to spar, it trains many attributes that assist with learning for the threat of reality. A large part of what it assists with is the fun factor... it keeps me training and enjoying my training, far more than form or even more scenario based stuff.

BUT the scenario based stuff is what I believe is essential, certainly in the first 6 months to a year of training. After that scenario based stuff is still good, but has less grasp than sparring.

For us the first year is purely about fighting and getting home, then we start to delve into skill and how to utilise our skills against other skilled opponent. This sort of training is always punctuated with returns to the down and dirty of scenario training and of the recieving of intent (i.e: I like to have occassions where a scenario starts with litterally the words "you CUNT I'm gunna kill you for that" given with all the venoim and hatred that can be mustered. This is a real good thing to use with new students who have XP from other systems.... it always confuses them and lets them get (simulated) beaten to within an inch of thier life.

[johnwang]

The skill that you can use in sparring is your true skill. The skill that you can't use in sparring is the skill that you think you have but you truly don't have it yet.

[Daniel]

The skill that you can use in sparring is your true skill. The skill that you can't use in sparring is the skill that you think you have but you truly don't have it yet.

D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[DeusTrismegistus]

Does it have to? The question really isn't how closely does sparring mimic a violent encounter but does sparring develop skills and abilities that will be useful if not vital in a violent encounter. Of course a person training for solely self defense may want to use more scenario type sparring events that do mimic the type of likely encounters than a squaring off deal with rounds.

The question then is what are those useful skills and abilities? The prime failing IME frommartial artists is the unability to deal with the explosiveness of even your average Saturday night brawler - partly, I think, because we are conditioned mentally by the arts we practice to be either "the good guy" who will wait for the bad guy to go first, or the sportist who applies ring craft outside the ring. Either can be effective, depending on circumstances, but I have to say by and large I've never seen martial arts guys do well in that type of encounter. It's all well and good and useful having tactile sensitivity, posture, great form, smooth movement, etc etc but if it all goes down the swannee the minute someone bellows C*NT!!! in your face then it ain't worth diddly. It's what you see in those clips of people who lose it when sparring going into "playground" mode.

I would tend to agree that sparring tends to not teach how to deal with an explosive opponent well. I think in MMA Brock Lesnars explosiveness is his primary asset as even in that venue it is extreme. I know from experience when I started I would try to rush my teacher and hurt him and although I was tiny I learned that my explosiveness can be used against me. I think this happens to some people when they train with a skilled teacher, however if everyone learns that doing it is not the safest way to go about your business, then no one will learn how to deal with it.

[nianfong]

your sparring experience varies depending on who you spar with. simple as that. so you spar with as many types of people/styles as you can.

my xingyi training started with sparring in our 2nd class, when he gave us boxing gloves and boxing helmets and had us go at it. After that, it was sparring at the end of every class. no matter what.

[johnwang]

Should you spar with someone who is better, or lower level than you? This may be a very interest discussion subject. Someone is

- better can bring you up to higher level but he can also destroy your confidence, and you will never have chance to develop new skill.
- lower level can help you to develop new skill, build up your confidence, but it may also build up you false confidence.

6 months before your tournament, you may want to train with someone who is better than you so you can taste defeat and adjust your training program. 6 days before your tournament you may want to train with someone who is lower level than you because you will need all the confidence that you can get.