Sparring questions??

[Laughing Cow]

Hi all.

Here are a few questions about the sparring you do:

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.

Seeya.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Hi all.

Here are a few questions about the sparring you do:

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.

Seeya.

1. Now and then

2. I try to

3. Usually anything goes. Sometimes we limit it to only hands, or nothing above the shoulder.

4. If you are wearing boxing gloves, you tend to look like you are doing kickboxing.

5. No, he does the analysis at the end.

[Serpent]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Yep, as well as various other methods.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

I try to concentrate on making my sparring as reflective of my style as possible. I know that my styles techniques are awesome, so I work to perfect them. Sometimes, however, such as when boxed into a corner, the old HULK SMASH mentality kicks in and it looks nothing like my style! ;)

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Sometimes.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

The newer guys tend to look like kickboxers. More experienced guys spar with a greater control and deeper reflection of the style.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Of course not. Especially if it works! ;)

[SevenStar]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

yeah, sometimes

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

always

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

I usually pick a technique or two and try to use it during the seesion. If it works, great. If not, I try it until I get it. Of course, it won't be the only technique I use, but I do look for opportunities to use it.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

looks like kickboxing. I kickbox though, so it's cool.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

of course not. That's best left for AFTER the match.

[ComeToJesus]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Only with my friend, at my school great care is placed on technique.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

All the time.

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

If I am sparring someone of less skill maybe, gives me a chance to go back to some basics and work on them.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

The style that I train. We're the most authentic looking kung fu sparrers I've seen in my area.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

If he catches something major sure he'll tell you that you're doing it wrong and correct it. Also the person you're sparring might do the same.

[Starchaser107]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?
Yes Sometimes

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?
Yes

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?
Depends

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?
I've trained san shou, so i guess to an extent, but there are things about how we spar that kickboxers don't use.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?
yes

[Serpent]

Originally posted by SevenStar
4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

looks like kickboxing. I kickbox though, so it's cool.


LOL.

:D

[Water Dragon]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Currently we do a couple different free sparring drills.

Of course, we do traditional free wrestling. I want to throw you and you want to throw me. No striking or groundwork. I also practice an adapted form of Tai Chi push hands. We will follow the push hand format (yielding, sticking, following, leading, etc.)

But we add in the Shuai Chiao legs to complete our throws. The idea is to learn how to find the correct throwing opportunity in push hands and then learn how to apply the skill in free wrestling.

In a couple weeks, we are going to start sparring with striking. Muay Thai and Boxing. I'm not 100 % sure, but I think I read on the internet somewhere that both of those styles believe in free sparring as well.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

That's the whole point. Sparring is not a fight. Sparring is a tool that you use to develop your technique. It teaches you how to use a technique when the other guy is trying to prevent you from applying it. If all you want to do is fight, go find a local Toughman contest.

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Not per se. Free sparring should be mostly inrestricted, because if you see an opportunity, you should capitalize on it. Don't pass up an opportunity because you don't want to practice that throw today One of the "Big Ideas" in sparring is learning when it is appropriate to apply what technique. Merryprankster likes to call this "High Percentage Techniques" but I think it's more a matter of YOU learning when YOU are able to pull off which techniques and which you aren't. This is also the place you figure out which techniques are good for YOU to learn.

We do practice a lot of live throwing drills though. My goal may be to throw you with a hip throw. Your goal may be to stop my attack and counter with a head mopping throw. But those drills develop different attributes than free fighting.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

Get this question out of your head. Immediately. What does Kung Fu look like? I have no idea. I know what Shuai Chiao looks like in sparring, because I train it. I don't know what Hun Gar looks like in sparring because I have never seen it. What does a strong punch "look" like? What does a solid throw "look" like? Worry about how effective the techniquesare that you are learning. Don't worry what it looks like. Shuai Chiao is ugly as hell in free fighting, but it works!

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style

No

or use a tech from the style wrong?

Only if it was inefficient. Otherwise, it's basically trial and error.

[yenhoi]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Yes. Sometimes full contact with lots of pads, sometimes with little pads, sometimes in street clothing. Sometimes not full contact, but with various other limitations for various training methodology reasons I probably dont understand. We call it progressive sparring, and I think there is even 17 specific 'levels' or 'limitations' depending on who you talk to.


2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

How could I possibly not use my style's techniques during sparring? Of course I do, they are all mine. To actually defeat my opponent in various ways, I use my hands, feet, arms, legs, shoulders, hips, head, etc.


3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Often. We call it drilling.


4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

I dont train kick boxing.


5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

As far as sparring goes, the teacher doesnt interfere if thats what your suggesting. As for your actual question, huh?

:confused:

[Fred Sanford]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

I haven't done much sparring over the last few months. Mainly working drills, practicing techniques and doing forms. However I get to use my stuff on resisting opponents in the real world about once a month. My job has some perks:D.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

I lose sleep over this one, lol. if it works and I know what I'm trying to accomplish, I don't care what it looks like.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style

yea the same way someone will stop the fight in the street if someone does something unorthodox.

or use a tech from the style wrong?

if your usage of the tech works then it ain't wrong

[Vash]

1.)Free Spar?
Yep. No takedowns, strikes to the leg. Beat the hell out the groin, though ;) :D

2.) Usestyle-specific techniques?
Honestly, at my dojo, it's not really emphasized. :(

3.) Work those techs into sparring?
Not usually :(

4.) Appear to be kick-boxing or style?
Neither, actually. If something looks like kickboxing, it's probably ****ing kickboxing (I hope the word before kickboxing doesn't get edited out. Be ****ing tragic). What's taken the moniker kickboxing looks like really, really poor fighters fighting with poor technique. Lack of training, control, experience are all sadly evident in these "kickboxing" (I hate quotation marks) devolutions.
If something looks like one's style, and I'm just hazarding a guess that by style, it resembles the techniques contained within the forms, then yeah. Can't say this for any kung fu styles (as the two fights involving kung fu students I've seen were in the lower ranking point sparring matches I participated in) but . . . what? A martial art gives you the tools to whup the **** outta somebody. Doesn't matter if someone's Dragon-Clears-His-Path looked like a ****ing Dragon Clearing Himself a God-****ed Path or the Pivot-Step-Into-Wrist-Break looked like the ****ing guard position in Chinto. You get the tools. You use them. It's your style if you've trained in your ****ing style. You take what you can make work in the sit-chi-a-shun. Or something.

5.) Does teach stop the match, correct technique?
Not usually, unless a body hits the floor.

With all due respect to my sensei, and God knows I have the utmost respect, a lot of love, and a big-as-all-hell debt, for and to him, it seemed our stuff was slowly sliding down McDojo highway just before my black belt test. Now, when it came to the higher grades, those of us who've been ta hell an back with 'im, we sometimes get to the hardcore, this is what this technique could do to your granmama's spleen kinda stuff. But, with the lower ranks, we started doing Chanbara (can't even pronounce the ****ing name). Foam sword fighting. Got it started after seeing it at a ****ing tournament. Got the kids fired up (the only way we were keeping the doors to that small-ass house open). Then, got adults doing it. Not my bag. I'm a form, form, form, footwork, footwork, bagwork, bagwork kinda guy. Sparring is cool, but often times, as it's been said, **** devolves to, well, ****.

Don't know what shape our school's in right now. I go up there occasionally to hang out with my girlfriend while her nephew's in class. Don't recogize half those kids. Don't really pay attention to the class workout, though.

Another month, time to become a badass again.

~Peace~

[rubthebuddha]

1. yes
2. yes
3. i focus on one or two things that i sucked at last time i sparred andwork mainly on those, but it's still open season
4. it looks like wing tsun when i'm not sucking
5. no. he'll say something like "keep your head back" or "keep your elbows in," but stoppage only happens when someone's about to go through the drywall, someone has a obvious, conclusive position over their opponent, someone's hurt, etc.

sisok i think would rather we figure out what works and what doesn't with our hands, feet and face. if our hands and feet don't figure it out, the face will.

and no technique from a style is really all that wrong. application may be (not gonna use my hands to block a kick to my shin, because that'll leave my head and other bits way the **** open). if i'm sparring and mainly focusing on wing tsun with my opponent, and i can sneak a roundhouse or spinning backfist in, all the better. i expect the same from my partners -- if i'm leaving an opening, take it. press me and make me work for it.

[SevenStar]

Actually, when I kickbox, it looks like bagua! :eek:

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Water Dragon

[i]3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Not per se. Free sparring should be mostly inrestricted, because if you see an opportunity, you should capitalize on it. Don't pass up an opportunity because you don't want to practice that throw today One of the "Big Ideas" in sparring is learning when it is appropriate to apply what technique. Merryprankster likes to call this "High Percentage Techniques" but I think it's more a matter of YOU learning when YOU are able to pull off which techniques and which you aren't. This is also the place you figure out which techniques are good for YOU to learn.


It should be irrestricted, but by going into it with a goal of using specific techniques, you're getting yourself in the habit of being able to recognize the opening for applying a specific technique or principle. Also, it will make you more versatile. I stopped using the kimura during grappling, because about 95% of my taps come from some form of kimura or americana. It's very high percentage for me, but I needed to be able to be just as effective with other techniques also.

Say I want to work on my uchi mata (ho ti). I will use whatever technique I have the opportunity to use, but I am specifically looking for a way to set up my uchi mata.

[mysteri]

i think everyone here can attest to what works for them(hopefully) so i'll shed some light on some jow ga "sparrin"...

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

"free" sparrin, not much in the beginner or intermediate levels as this helps very little to develop a strong foundation. anything goes? no, its a trainin drill. however, we do drill the obvious maimin techniques apart from free sparrin.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

yes and no. generally, we don't believe "jow ga" vs "jow ga" is very productive b/c we're already familiar w/ the style and how to defend against it, so its more fruitless than anything. rather, we have a "jow ga" guy then a "dummy" guy(usually kickboxer, karate, tkd impressionist). and rather than free spar, we try to focus on specific techniques or concepts to develop(includin footwork and other attributes). so in that sense, YES! all the time...(i honestly don't see why people have such a hard time doin this, its jus like trainin boxin, if u have a qualified teacher w/ experience to show u properly and u must develop it like anything else-then again jow ga is really combat intensive).

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

(see above)

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

is it "beauty" in motion? hardly. is it effective and to the point, of course.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

generally no, usually sifu's too busy sittin on the sidelines w/ popcorn and soda laughin in amusement :) but when i train w/ other sihings, OOHHH yeah! they're on ya like white on rice! only b/c they know what u r and r not sposta be workin on for the session. so they try to help develop the specified techniques as opposed to allowin u to delude urself out of progressin further w/ the focus of that session.

good questions man, though some may not be relavent, i got the gist that people should be constantly assessin their trainin and their progress. i agree w/ the way someone said on here earlier that people should take sparrin in stride and not all @ one time. i guarantee u(here goes my example again) that if u tried this experiment, ur results would be this: if u had 2 groups of 5 people and allowed each group to train for 6 months in a prescribed manner. group A simply free spars from scratch and learns through trial and error(includin whatever is practiced in class). and u have group B train certain drills and small attributes to solidify their foundation, u give them a few basic techniques and let them work those repeatedly for 6 months(in a certain trainin process) after those 6 months, u can pit the 2 groups against eachother. i can guarantee u that even though group A may be able to use a few techniques and may know a lot more through trial and error, group B through a pre-defined, consistent, simple method(which included periodic "free" sparrin" w/ drills) will spank them by AT LEAST 4 out of 5 matches, that ONE bein if one of the guys had some previous trainin and experience.

point-u must assess how u train and ur learnin(growth) curve. everyone is responsible for their own in the end and can blame noone else if given the tools to succeed but they do not. ask questions, learn different methods, but take responsibility for ur own development.(okay, i'm tired, sorry so long :) )

[scotty1]

We only start sparring in our class once you've got some skill, and conditioning. I think this is because most everyone in the class has been doing the internals for a bit and are a fair bit stronger, skilled and better conditioned than me. Which leads me to believe it must be quite hard sparring too.

It's also quite annoying though, that there's no sparring for me at the moment, although there are plenty of two man drills to be going on with. And I don't think it'll be long before I'm allowed to start playing.

Sorry, just felt the need to share.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Hi all.

Here are a few questions about the sparring you do:

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.

Seeya.

1. Yes.

2. Yes unless the technique is nasty and then I just do my forms.

3. Sometimes I will limit myself to only a set of techniques from a form. Sometimes I will only kick of punch or defend/evade. Sometimes I will focus on a target (i.e. the solor plexus) and try to hit that area with every technique. Just depends on my mood and waht I feel I need to work on.

4. Sometime it does, but I try to incoperate certain aspects from my stlye into my sparring. I really try to keep a good center line awareness when I fight and my guard tends to reflect that.

5. No. They will provide a running comentary of "that didn't work." or "You didn't see that one coming." They will critique youafterwards as to what techniques you may want to try based upon your strengths, body mechanics, etc., but they will not stop you unless someone got hurt.

[apoweyn]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Not literally "anything goes." But my sparring has gotten more and more permissive over the years. Started in taekwondo, which was mostly high kicks in sparring (though punches were permitted, if not emphasized).

After that, it was eskrima. The hand-to-hand got more freestyle, though there was still not much contact involved. Low kicks, light elbow strikes, more handwork, and the occassional sweep were all keenly encouraged (though still not taught well enough to make them really useful).

Then, things got eclectic. The contact level increased. Takedowns (albeit inexpert takedowns) were allowed. (I was in college by then, and training with whomever was available, making our own rules.)

Now, I'm trying to learn more about grappling, so that I can incorporate that as well. So is my sparring completely freestyle? No. But it's getting more free as I go along.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

Taekwondo and kickboxing, certainly. Eskrima mano mano, not so much. But I'm beginning to train that more, so I can incorporate workable guntings (limb attacks) and the like. I'd also like to incorporate padded weapons into empty-hand sparring, so that a knife could suddenly come into play.

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Sometimes I work sparring drills, yeah. Concentrate on offense, on defense, on the jab, whatever.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

One and the same really. But, once again, let's make it clear that kung fu stylists who aren't managing to "look like their style" also don't look like kickboxing. Not to anyone with significant kickboxing experience, anyway. They just look... basic. World of difference.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Don't really have a sifu at the moment. More like training partners. But no, no coach, sifu, etc. has stopped us to correct us in mid session. That's a highly irritating practice. Success or failure in sparring doesn't happen from moment to moment or move to move. It happens in the bigger picture. The course of a sparring match (session, whatever). I don't want to be stopped just because I got tagged with a good jab cross. That breaks the flow of my potential recovery and counter. And I need to learn to do both things. Take the hits, roll with them, regain my composure, and take the fight back to the other guy. Breaking the rhythm of a match is a bad idea, in my opinion.


Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.

Yeah, I think I know where this is headed. But let's see.


Stuart B.

[Merryprankster]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Yes

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

What the hell does this question mean? It's free-sparring.

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

Depends on who I'm with. If you want to get the most out of sparring you have to pick what you do. If I'm working with somebody's who's ass I can kick, I work on something I'm not very good at. If I'm working with somebody who's about my level, I open up my arsenal. If I'm working with somebody who's better than me, I open up my arsenal, but am forced to respond to what they are doing and identify my weaknesses.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

Wrong Question. But thanks for playing our game!

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

What the hell does "not using a technique in the style" mean? Am I the only person perplexed by this? If I'm doing something wrong, I might get told how to fix it in transit, but instruction is for later. I'm busy. I would get ****ED if I kept getting interrupted while I'm trying to spar.

[apoweyn]

What the hell does "not using a technique in the style" mean? Am I the only person perplexed by this?

Nope. I'm perplexed by it. I understand the question. I just can't believe what an issue it is.


Stuart B.

[Ming Yue]

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?
yes

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

If you mean do I incorporate techniques from the style I study into my free sparring, then yea, I try to. sometimes I wind up doing a disservice to the style or myself in the process. ;)

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

If we're free sparring, then no, no particular techs. We will do controlled sparring with a specific technique or two in mind occasionally in class though.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

couldn't tell you. I have old TKD sparring habits and am picking up some new stuff too. I spar to my advantage using what I got.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Generally only if it's ineffective or way out there. If I do something unusual, and it works, he may comment and make adjustments or tell me to use what I know. If I do something really useless or that leaves me in a bad position he definitely lets me know. :D

[yenhoi]

Nope. I'm perplexed by it. I understand the question. I just can't believe what an issue it is.

I dont even understand the question.

Too young and too unenlightened.

:mad:

[MasterKiller]

What he's saying is, would you use something like a Tiger Claw during sparring if your style does not use Tiger Claw technqiues. In which case, I would ask how you came upon a technique if it was not taught to you by your instructor. If you haven't been shown something correctly, what are your chances of using it correctly?

What the hell does this question mean? It's free-sparringJust because it's free sparring, that doesn't mean you go in waving your arms and legs around like an untrained fool. You should be practicing your style's techniques when you spar....otherwise, why practice them at all?

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
What he's saying is, would you use something like a Tiger Claw during sparring if your style does not use Tiger Claw technqiues. In which case, I would ask how you came upon a technique if it was not taught to you by your instructor. If you haven't been shown something correctly, what are your chances of using it correctly?

I think he's saying the opposite. (Laughing Cow, feel free to correct one or both of us.) He's not asking about using techniques from outside your style. He's asking about being able to use techniques in sparring from inside your style.

Question being, if I'm a taiji stylist who spars (as opposed to solely pushing hands), can I reliably pull off the single whip in sparring.

As for being able to use the tiger claw without explicitly being taught it... What's involved in a tiger claw? Because it seems to me that with enough experience, a person can extrapolate. Can I use my fingers to scratch, claw, and pinch without explicitly being taught to do so? Yeah. Will it, stylistically, be up to tiger claw snuff? Likely not.


Stuart B.

[MasterKiller]

I was referring to "not using a technique in the style"?

I took that to mean do you use techniques outside your styles catalog, but either way, you should be able to apply what your taught; otherwise, it's just masturbation.

Tiger claw was just an example for the sake of argument. But even so, have you ever tried to use one while sparring? It's not something that can be done effectively without some proper conditioning and guidance. Fingers break pretty easy. You just don't throw them like a punch or scratch madly at someone's eyes. There are specific targets for different tiger claw techniques.

[Shaolin-Do]

Im not about scratches... Im more about brutally maiming. I prefer to throw one to the ground and step on their testicles before scratching.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by MasterKiller

Tiger claw was just an example for the sake of argument. But even so, have you ever tried to use one while sparring? It's not something that can be done effectively without some proper conditioning and guidance. Fingers break pretty easy. You just don't throw them like a punch or scratch madly at someone's eyes. There are specific targets for different tiger claw techniques.

:confused: They do, but the focus of a tiger claw is primarily the heel and the palm to strike and then the "claw" to rip, scratch or grab. Your fingers should be pulled back out of the way for the inital impact.

[MasterKiller]

Im not about scratches... Im more about brutally maiming. I prefer to throw one to the ground and step on their testicles before scratchingTiger Claw technqiues are used to rip tendons and muscles from the bone. You hit a muscle, grab, twist, and pull. That's hardly scratching.

They do, but the focus of a tiger claw is primarily the heel and the palm to strike and then the "claw" to rip, scratch or grab. Your fingers should be pulled back out of the way for the inital impact.True. Ap brought up scratching. I was just playing advocate here. That being said, some tiger techniques are used to rake the eyes, in which case, the fingers are extended. Also, some tiger punches are peformed sorta like a Leopard's paw, the area of impact being the finger area between the first and second knuckle (where as a Leapord paw makes contact with the second knuckle).

[Shaolin-Do]

As far as specialized hits go, Id much prefer a pheonix eye fist, or leapord fist. Leopard punches are tough... :)


Hi all.

Here are a few questions about the sparring you do:

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.


1. Sometimes.
2. Of course.
3. Lately we have been choosing a few techniques to work on, and when we can use that technique at least 90% of the time or so, move on to get down another.
4. Looks like shaolin-do and kickboxing and shuai chiao.(any kicks and punches will look like kickboxing, no?) :D
5. No. That would drive me nuts.

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Just because it's free sparring, that doesn't mean you go in waving your arms and legs around like an untrained fool. You should be practicing your style's techniques when you spar....otherwise, why practice them at all?

I disagree with this. Sparring isn't simply learning how to apply a techinque, it's an excercize designed to develope a whole range of attributes. When you spar, you deal with conditioning (both to give and recieve full-power and near full-power blows), adrenaline dump, and cardio. You learn to feel the difference between a delivering shot with power and a shot without under a stress. You develop tactics and familiarize yourself with methods of entry, defence, ranges, etc.

Sparring is so much more than just learning to throw a punch with the proper form. This is why I'm a big fan of learning to spar early, even with imperfect technique. The technique you can always corrected and refined by your instructor afterwords, but if you don't learn how to get in and attack without being stopped by a teep or fold up when ever going full power, you're not going to do much with your perfect punch.

[Merryprankster]

If I'm sparring where all types of attacks within reason are allowed and my opponent hits me with a spinning back kick with good power but that's not on the menu at my school what's the problem? It's free sparring. He's being exposed to some new stuff, I'm being exposed to some new stuff. What's the issue? What does "Not in my style" mean at this point? You're just fighting with what you've learned, whatever that may be. I'm not going to abandon my wrestling takedowns and body control in free-sparring unless I do so intentionally to work on something else.

But you have to learn to deal with that as well, don't you? "Not in my style...." Funny concept.

[MasterKiller]

I disagree with this. Sparring isn't simply learning how to apply a techinque, it's an excercize designed to develope a whole range of attributes. When you spar, you deal with conditioning (both to give and recieve full-power and near full-power blows), adrenaline dump, and cardio. You learn to feel the difference between a delivering shot with power and a shot without under a stress. You develop tactics and familiarize yourself with methods of entry, defence, ranges, etc. All of this can and should be done while you practice your style's techniques. No one comes out the gate with a full curriculum. Part of learning the basics is learning how to use them during sparring. Once you advance to more difficult and specialized manuevers, you should be trying to apply those during sparring. Sparring is part of the learning process, not the culmination of it.

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
All of this can and should be done while you practice your style's techniques. No one comes out the gate with a full curriculum. Part of learning the basics is learning how to use them during sparring. Once you advance to more difficult and specialized manuevers, you should be trying to apply those during sparring. Sparring is part of the learning process, not the culmination of it.

I agree that sparring is definitely part of the learning process, but I disagree that teachnique is the desired goal. The technique will come along and refine itself, if you're working with a good teacher AND sparring regularly. I fail to see how having picture perfect technique is a prerequisite for sparring, that's all.

[MasterKiller]

MP,

I know your point, and I agree with it. Tunnel vision is a dangerous concept in the martial arts.

But if you are going to class to learn grappling, it does little good to ignore the groundwork and focus on throwing tornado kicks all night long during practice.

When you are learning to fight a particular way, you should be trying to apply those methods you are being taught. Otherwise, what's the point of learning them?

Why take kung fu if you want to fight like a boxer?


fail to see how having picture perfect technique is a prerequisite for sparring, that's all. Correct does not mean picture-perfect. There is a correct way to kick in order to generate the most power....who cares what it looks like. "Style" really has nothing to do with how something looks....it has to do with an accepted curriculum of techniques. If you think the only difference between White Crane and Black Tiger is the poses, then you have a shallow understanding of CMA.

[Merryprankster]

Ah, well, that's different. If I'm told to box/kickbox the other guy to improve my striking, without being allowed to grapple, then we're clearly sparring--even free-sparring, but not really FREE-sparring, if you catch my meaning.

And that's fine. I see nothing wrong with that. Fair enough. I think we're in agreement here!

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Correct does not mean picture-perfect. There is a correct way to kick in order to generate the most power....who cares what it looks like. "Style" really has nothing to do with how something looks....it has to do with an accepted curriculum of techniques.

I think we're just arguing over minor differences in training methodology at this point rather than some fundamental rift between us. ;)

That said, I believe that if you use incorrect technique in sparring against a skilled adversary, you're quick to realize how it's ineffective. Case in point-- if I go in to use a hip throw and I don't use my legs, I can feel how I don't have enough power for the throw. Sparring allows me to realize this feeling so I know what to practice on my own. I can't imagine learning technique without sparring, nor can I imagine "perfecting" a move without it failing in sparring several times before I figure out how best to perform the technique as it suits my body.

This is shaping up to be an interesting discussion.

[yenhoi]

But not even all Black Tiger schools teach the same exact thing, not all Crane schools teach the same exact thing. Yes the teacher should teach you and yes he should correct you when hes teaching you stuff, but what does that have to do with names? The teacher teaches, not the banners, and the students learn, not the uniforms and tshirts with fancy logos and neat slogans.

:eek:

[Shaolin-Do]

Forms are good to learn the technique, and the proper stance, ect. of it, but sparring does the same. Sparring just further refines a given technique to the point of being able to apply consistently against a resisting opponent. I feel that some forms work should be done before sparring, to give a student at least vague feeling of technique before trying to spar. (sending a student to spar without first showing some techniques is asking for them to windmill the arms)
Forms are just an easy way to show techniques.

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by yenhoi
But not even all Black Tiger schools teach the same exact thing, not all Crane schools teach the same exact thing. Yes the teacher should teach you and yes he should correct you when hes teaching you stuff, but what does that have to do with names? The teacher teaches, not the banners, and the students learn, not the uniforms and tshirts with fancy logos and neat slogans.

:eek:

No, but the Black Tiger schools should at least share some common denominators their teachings. The philosophy in applying a Tiger technique should be universal even if the teacher, his methods, and the forms themselves differ.

[MasterKiller]

But not even all Black Tiger schools teach the same exact thing, not all Crane schools teach the same exact thing. :rolleyes: Here we go again. Even though techniques can vary from school to school, the general philosophy is the same. A pure Tibetan White Crane teacher does not teach his students to use a Black Tiger Claw anymore than a pure BJJ teacher shows his students tornado kicks.

The catalog of techniques from which you are taught is what you have to work with. If you aren't taught something, you aren't going to know to use it. And since a style is system of techniques which have been grouped together, that's what you have to work with. A fighter uses techniques, right? I mean, you agree on that point, surely?

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by Shaolin-Do

Forms are just an easy way to show techniques.

I agree, but some people would argue that drills and heavy bag work do the same thing.

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by Judge Pen


I agree, but some people would argue that drills and heavy bag work do the same thing.

I would argue that shadowboxing and combinations ARE forms, albeit smaller, sometimes changing ones.

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
:rolleyes: Here we go again. Even though techniques can vary from school to school, the general philosophy is the same. A pure Tibetan White Crane teacher does not teach his students to use a Black Tiger Claw anymore than a pure BJJ teacher shows his students tornado kicks.

See, this is where I'm lost. Maybe it's because I come from a background that never explicitly put an emphasis on prinicples, but what ARE the principles of some styles and how do they differ from others?

I'm not trying to troll, but I don't really understand this point at all.

[MasterKiller]

See, this is where I'm lost. Maybe it's because I come from a background that never explicitly put an emphasis on prinicples, but what ARE the principles of some styles and how do they differ from others? Well, if BJJ emphasizes techniques to control the opponent in close range in order to neutralize them on the ground, and Long Fist emphasizes keeping the opponent out of range by throwing kicks and punches at full length, you have two obvious different methods of fighting--i.e. Styles.

It's about philosophy and focus, not cosmetic application.

My point above was to stress that if you are not shown a technique, you cannot use it. Since a style is a classification of techniques for you to use, that is what you have to work with. Obviously, your fighting is going to reflect the parameters of techniques you have been shown.

But to get more specific within CMA....

A flower (hua) boxer is taught to throw people a lot, and the techniques of the style focus on getting close and using leverage to toss people around. Now, because of this focus, Hua techniques are stream-lined towards this goal. Sure, there is kicking and punching, but even those things are used to close the gap and throw the opponent.

Now, a Cha Boxer, is taught a lot of simultaneous punching/kicking techniques, used to keep the opponent at arms reach (like above). These techniques would not be as useful to a Hua fighter because the combat philosophy is different.

A Hua fighter and Cha Fighter both learn to kick and punch, but their philosophies in fighting (throwing vs staying out of reach) dictate which techniques they focus their time and energy on.

A western boxer has little use for leg sweeps. So, they are not taught that technique and therefore sweeps are not part of that style of fighting.

[yenhoi]

A fighter uses techniques, right? I mean, you agree on that point, surely?

Actually no. Combatants 'use' their body. Im not -trying- to be a ****, but its true. Techniques are just names on paper and are convient ways to refer to a group of similar motions and intents and energys.

What is there? ::

Technique on paper..
Technique vs pads..
Technique vs pads, w/footwork??...
Technique while shadowboxing...
Technique while sparring..
Technique in "applications."

Are they all the same technique?

:eek:

[MasterKiller]

Whatever....I think I'll go outside and sit under a brown thing, with bark, and limbs, and green sprouty things that block sunlight.

In the real world, we call that a tree.

I'm sure you would argue there is no such thing as a T-R-E-E, but abstract rationalizing does little good if one falls on your h-e-a-d.

[yenhoi]

How does calling it a tree help you move out of the way?

:D

[fa_jing]

Hi all.

Here are a few questions about the sparring you do:

1.) Do you do free-sparring (anything goes)?

Yes, we go full power with no protection and all targets and techniques allowed, so long as they come from our style.

2.) Do you use your styles techniques during sparring?

Exclusively. Why just the other day I was sparring in my Yi Gee Kim Young Ma stance, and I missed a bracing step. My center of gravity floated to a full centimeter away from my Bubbling Springs point in the feet, so of course I fell right over. Making an adjustment on the fly would be an insult to my style's ancestors.

3.) Do you work a few techs per sparring session?

I try to fight right out of a form, usually I try to complete the whole form from beginning to end on my opponent.

4.) Does your sparring look like kick-boxing or the style you train?

When I do things right, it looks just like the style I train. Sometimes I slip up though, and revert to a low grade style resembling that of a crude martial artist such as Ernesto Hoost. I really hate it when that happens and Sifu usually has me sit in a horse stance for 3 hours as punishment.

5.) Does your Sifu stop and correct you when you use a tech not in the style or use a tech from the style wrong?

Again, just the other day, I shifted on the balls of my feet, rather than the heels. My teacher, who has an expert eye immediately threw me out of the school since I was practicing a forbidden movement from another Wing Chun lineage. I had to perform the tea ceremony until my knees were sore, in order to be accepted again into the walls of our kwoon.

Why, I am asking this questions should be easy to spot, if not I will tell you later.

I assume you're just curious, to see if our free sparring is as cool as yours.

I hope it was as good for you as it was for me :D

Seeya. [/QUOTE]

[Laughing Cow]

Hmmm.

This has turned into an interesting discussion.

MK you and me think along similar lines, 2 or 3 other posters also got what I am talking about.

I have been recently going to a few schools in the neighbourhood and checked theirsparring out.
For the most part what I saw was more like "fight-club" than well structured and well-executed sparring.

It appears then someone over here sez we free-spar or we do 100%-sparring they mean ANYTHING goes haymakers, ground-grappling the works. Once the protection is on anything goes but what seems to be lost the most is the ability to use their style.
Objective being to BEAT the opponent and WIN the fight, no emphasis on good techniques, principles or anything.

One TJQ school I went to I could NOT see the difference between their Tui Shou and their San Shou, never mind that the students relied too much on force vs force and similar to execute a technique. Moves were slow, jerky and full of muscle power.

Sparring is a tool like forms, drills and so on, unfortunately I think many people misunderstand sparring to mean anything goes fighting, or it's time to get rid of frustrations, etc.

The reason why I asked if you use techs NOT included in your system is because a LOT of people these days cross-train.

IMO, if you study style X than your sparring in the school should only use techs from style X unless you study multiple arts under the same sifu.

As one poster said you need to re-evaluate your training continously to see if it still meets your goals(which might change over time).

Example:
Does my sparring help me develop and refine the style I am stuyding or do I want sparring to test if I can be a bad tough guy.

I see a lot of guys advocating sparring, but why are they doing it to better themselves or to feed their ego that they beat another guy.

In short I see the same misunderstandings that Tui Shou gets iin some TJQ circles applied to sparring.

Just some thoughts to spark further discussion and flames. ;)

(steps out of the room till the smoke has cleared)

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Hmmm.
It appears then someone over here sez we free-spar or we do 100%-sparring they mean ANYTHING goes haymakers, ground-grappling the works. Once the protection is on anything goes but what seems to be lost the most is the ability to use their style.
Objective being to BEAT the opponent and WIN the fight, no emphasis on good techniques, principles or anything.

One TJQ school I went to I could NOT see the difference between their Tui Shou and their San Shou, never mind that the students relied too much on force vs force and similar to execute a technique. Moves were slow, jerky and full of muscle power.


I think you're missing the point about what good sparring looks like. Good sparring can be riddled with mistakes, provided the people sparring learn from those mistakes and correct them in the next session.

When I spar with Water Dragon, I don't look like a Shuai Chiao guy-- I miss throws, I get set up, I'm off-balance, et cetera. But what I'm feeling from the encounter is more important. When I do a sloppy Inner Leg Hook, I can feel where my structure was lacking, which lead to me getting countered. When I take a stealing step from too far out and I get thrown, I learn the proper range to make that movement in. I learn tactics when my entrances fail.

In short, it's not how I look during the sparring, it's what I gain from it. With the knowledge I've gained from sparring, I know what to go back and work on. If I had perfect technique, I wouldn't need to do this. If I had perfect tactical sense, I wouldn't need to get thrown around like a ragdoll. If my cardio was in ring shape, I wouldn't get tired and sloppy. However, by sparring, I can improve all those areas together.

Using sparring to refine my combat and ring senses is an advanced form of sparring. But there's no reason why you shouldn't spar at the beginning of your training with these points in mind.

Ugh I hate typos

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Well, if BJJ emphasizes techniques to control the opponent in close range in order to neutralize them on the ground, and Long Fist emphasizes keeping the opponent out of range by throwing kicks and punches at full length, you have two obvious different methods of fighting--i.e. Styles.
But to get more specific within CMA....

A flower (hua) boxer is taught to throw people a lot, and the techniques of the style focus on getting close and using leverage to toss people around. Now, because of this focus, Hua techniques are stream-lined towards this goal. Sure, there is kicking and punching, but even those things are used to close the gap and throw the opponent.

Now, a Cha Boxer, is taught a lot of simultaneous punching/kicking techniques, used to keep the opponent at arms reach (like above). These techniques would not be as useful to a Hua fighter because the combat philosophy is different.

A Hua fighter and Cha Fighter both learn to kick and punch, but their philosophies in fighting (throwing vs staying out of reach) dictate which techniques they focus their time and energy on.

A western boxer has little use for leg sweeps. So, they are not taught that technique and therefore sweeps are not part of that style of fighting.

So, if I'm reading you right, MK, styles consist of two contrasting areas-- technique and tactics. Since techniques can vary in appearence and even be improvised, I'm assuming that the primary goal of styles is to fight in a given tactical range, right?

Given this, why do we have people fighting in different ranges with different tactics in each style? Why does a boxer like Roberto Duran fight from the inside, while a Thomas Hearns fights from the outside? These two share a common style, western boxing? Or how is Wing Chun different than Southern Mantis? They're both into fighting in close, right?

The only real concrete difference between styles I seem to find is training methodology-- but even this is highly variable between individual fighters. So, I guess my second question, (if I've understood stylistic philosophies, :D) is why is style so important if it's such a nebulous and ever changing concept even among fighters in the same lineage or "style"?

I'm honestly curious here. I just don't think I'm getting something.

[Laughing Cow]

CA.

A beginner to a style will look sloppy during sparring, but a student that has studied for 5+yrs should look like the style he has studied.

If a 8yr student can't fight using his style and it being apparent than he wasted 8yrs of training, IMHO.

Apart from that I agree with you, that sparring is the final refinement tool in the MA training, that's where it all comes together.

And at times you will need to go back to other tools like form-work, drills and similar to corect and re-test in sparring.

Said that I believe that you can start to spar too soon, you first need to get your basics down well.

IMO, the teachers that run a good sparring session are few, like with any other aspect of MA training.

[MasterKiller]

Given this, why do we have people fighting in different ranges with different tactics in each style? Because no two people have the same ability or physical attributes. A complete style may teach 25 hand techniques, but you may only be able to use 10 of them effectively, when a classmate with the same experience prefers to use the other 15.

This is where individual 'flavor' comes into play. Just because you fight using the techniques and strategies of your given system doesn't mean you will parrot each other when you fight. A good style takes a fighter's physical attributes and proficiencies into consideration. That's why there are 100s of Chin Na techniques for arm-bars, but my Chin Na Sifu says "Learn 5 techniques thoroughly and you will beat someone who knows 50 techniques well."

His point is that it doesn't matter which of those 5 I prefer to use, and which 5 my classmate prefers to use, only that we concentrate on those and master them.


Since techniques can vary in appearence and even be improvised, I'm assuming that the primary goal of styles is to fight in a given tactical range, right?Not really. There are many factors. Black Tiger is very aggressive and attack-oriented; White Crane is defense-oriented.

Tactical range is important, but there are lots of Long Fist styles that prefer to fight in the same range, but they subscribe to a different catalog of preferred techniques and targets.

[Water Dragon]

Originally posted by CrippledAvenger

When I spar with Water Dragon, I don't look like a Shuai Chiao guy-- I miss throws, I get set up, I'm off-balance, et cetera. But what I'm feeling from the encounter is more important. When I do a sloppy Inner Leg Hook, I can feel where my structure was lacking, which lead to me getting countered. When I take a stealing step from too far out and I get thrown, I learn the proper range to make that movement in. I learn tactics when my entrances fail.


Correct. Once you discern where you are lacking, you know what you need to fix. Next you go back into your exercises. Your forms, your stance work, conditioning exercises. You have a reason to train them now.

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
CA.

A beginner to a style will look sloppy during sparring, but a student that has studied for 5+yrs should look like the style he has studied.

If a 8yr student can't fight using his style and it being apparent than he wasted 8yrs of training, IMHO.

Apart from that I agree with you, that sparring is the final refinement tool in the MA training, that's where it all comes together.

I think part of the problem is that CMAs tend to over-mysticize sparring. It's either heathen and verbotten, or a mark of achievement (as in: Wow, I just put in 3 years of dues and now I can SPAR!). It's just a tool, granted a fundamentally important one, but not a magical one.

If the 5 and 8 year students are looking sloppy during sparring, I would have a few questions:

1) When did they begin sparring? The earlier you begin sparring, the better in my book. Sure you'll muscle through technique, but if your sparring is set up to be in the least bit challenging, you should begin to see the obvious limits of that approach real quick.

2) Where was their teacher in teaching them how to spar and use sparring to their utmost? Like any other tool, you have to learn how to use sparring to get the most out of it.

3) What are the teacher's and the student's expectations of sparring? Sparring isn't a death match, but it's not point sparring either. Nor will it look like a Shaw Bros. movie-- you have to take it for what it is to get the most out of it.

[Laughing Cow]

CrippledAvenger.

I think we are in agreement except for a few small details, which might be style specific.

But I agree with those questions that you posted.

We do Tui Shou before we get started on sparring, but here the opinions are also divided as to when students should use this training method.

The last kwoon I studied got students involved quickly, my current one which is more traditional tends to take some time before a student starts.
At the current kwoon it also takes longer to learn forms. ;)

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by MasterKiller

Not really. There are many factors. Black Tiger is very aggressive and attack-oriented; White Crane is defense-oriented.

Tactical range is important, but there are lots of Long Fist styles that prefer to fight in the same range, but they subscribe to a different catalog of preferred techniques and targets.

Hey MK, I don't have time to address your whole post at the moment, but I thought this part was too good to pass up.

All of these examples you are showing me are of different tactics. Choice of targets? Tactical decision. Combat mindset? Yup, that's tactical too. Maybe not a range issue in the puriest sense of the word, but let's also keep in mind that certain targets are only available at certain ranges. This is what I mean by "Tactical range" . It's the area you're most comfortable fighting the way you know how. So, if this is what truly separates similar-looking styles, it stands to reason that this is the fundamental dividing line between styles.

This is why I find it perplexing that people always point to techniques to differentiate styles. Why care about it if it's not the fundamental essence of the style, but more personal preference? Wouldn't you be more likely to see someone using your style's tactics and ranges in a fight than fine motor skills?

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by Water Dragon


Correct. Once you discern where you are lacking, you know what you need to fix. Next you go back into your exercises. Your forms, your stance work, conditioning exercises. You have a reason to train them now.

I had a reason before.

It was "don't get thrown on your head". :D

[Vash]

What the **** is a martial art for?!?!

[Laughing Cow]

Vash.

Do you REALLY want me to answer that one for you?

Maybe we need to do so for the non-tcma guys. :D

Let me know if your cup is empty to receive the SHOCKING truth.
:D

[Vash]

Yes, please fill my cup. Oh, wait . . . I'm non-cma, I ain't got no cup . . . it's a ****ing bottle :D

It has been thus far my understanding that a martial art was a system of keeping your ass (and other important parts of one's anatomy) intact. Like I said before, if I use a Dragon-Clears-a-****ing-Path that looks like a spinning ****ing crecent kick, or a shuffle punch to the throat, it don't matter if it's in my style. If it ain't, and it worked in that instance, then the style is so much ****.

[Laughing Cow]

I see MA training twofold:

1.) Improving my current abilities, by showing me how to move more efficient, breath better, etc.

2.) Prepared me mentally & physically as much as possible for the real thing.

This is done via different training methods:
meditation, forms, drills, sparring, etc.

Nothing I do during the MA training will come close to the real thing, all it can do is teach , correct and improve.
Too many factors in the real thing you can't gather for everything during your training.

MA training won't make you into a fighter nor give you things that you haven't got from the word go.

Problem too many people see MA training as the silver bullet for SD and think that their MA training will keep them alive and unharmed during a confrontation.
Like any other training in life it is simply there to prepare you for the real thing, no person fresh out of law or medical school will be 100% prepared for what their profession will ask of them either..

There are certainly great benefits to be gotten from MA-training, but I think that SD is the least of them.

Seeya.

[joedoe]

As a karate-ka I would have thought you would understand the whole thing about not using techniques outside of the style. After all, in karate tournaments you can only score a point in sparring if you use a karate technique and you kiai at the same time. Or has this rule changed?
:D

[Vash]

Laughing Cow:

Actually, that's exactly what I think. I got into martial arts because . . . well, I don't know why. Hell, I honestly can't say why I do martial arts, other than it feels right to, and wrong not to do it. But, in my training, I have certain goals: I want to ENJOY it and I want to be able to USE it. I've been in ONE altercation since I started Isshinryu. One day at my job as a K-Mart *****, I was pushing carts in the rain. Had 27 on a line. The last 14 decided to go after a dude's truck. I caught them before they did, but got sandwiched 'tween the two. Dude gets out, obviously drunk. Says some stuff, takes a swing. I use a two-hand circular parry (which is not in the original Isshinryu curriculum). Dude slips, gets up, says something, leaves. Was that a part of the schools curriculum? Yep, but not the style as a whole.

What was I talking about? Oh, yes. I'm not trying to perfect Isshinryu. I'm doing martial arts. I love my style, but I don't want to be limited to it. But, that statement leads to the question of whether a system or style can limit one and still be a style.

Oh, well. 6 Billion People = 6 Billion and One Different Opinions on One Subject. Kew? :cool:

Joedoe:

Tournaments? I give a ****. I suck mucho-ass at tournaments. Hell, I sucked at track. Performance anxiety. I ran a 4:49 mile by myself over hills and through curves, but on a flat as all hell track, I ran a ****ing 6:18 as a career best. So, to sum up: none of my goals in martial arts includes being good at tournaments. ESPECIALLY after seeing those hellacious musical forms. Like the Scrubbing Bubbles meets The Matrix.

Actually, there was one tournament I loved: it was a little inter-dojo thing. Ishsinryu and Gojuryu. It was absolutely awesome. Won 1st in sparring, empty-hand kata, weapons kata, 3rd (with my then-girlfriend) in two-man kata. That was cool. More of the -do as to my preferred -jutsu, but wtf.

The hell was I talking about?

[Vash]

Here's what I was trying to say:

I am in martial arts for a variety of reasons. Indeed, I study a style that has a set curriculum of techniques and fighting theories, but I will extrapolate and expound on these as I see fit. After all, I'm a ****ING MARTIAL ARTIST, not a MARTIAL XEROX MACHINE.

Not that staying 100% in style is bad. Just not me.

[scotty1]

I have also recently visited a taiji class in my area. They were using muscle power too!

So I said to them, "what the he!l are you doing using your muscles to move?"

To which they said "what the he!l do you expect us to use?"

I did not think such an impertinent question was worthy of an answer, so I simply tut-tutted and walked away on my jelly and noodle legs.

;)

[MasterKiller]

This is why I find it perplexing that people always point to techniques to differentiate styles. Why care about it if it's not the fundamental essence of the style, but more personal preference? Wouldn't you be more likely to see someone using your style's tactics and ranges in a fight than fine motor skills? Well, because some techniques are closely tied to the findamental essence of a style. If your primary weapon is the Tiger Claw, everything you do is going to center around using that technique. White Crane fighters use the Crane's Beak. Eagle Claw fighters use the Eagle's Claw. In each style, blocking is different, striking is different, and for all intents and purposes, the techniques are different because of that.

Some styles don't have specialized 'claw' techniques, per se, but focus on other aspects. In my school, we throw a shltload of elbow techniques standing up, in the clinch, and on the ground. I would say that 35% of my striking training is done with the elbows as a primary weapon. Drive an hour down the road to Rich Mooney's school, and you won't see his Tiger-Crane students using elbows like we do.

Maybe you can argue that the difference in technique is a secondary result of their strategy differences. But since technique is the most obvious difference apparent, at least on the surface level, that is how we tell one style from another.

Not that staying 100% in style is bad. Just not meIf someone only studies one style with one teacher, how can they not stay within their style? Unless you are making shlt up, the only techniques you will be exposed to are the one's your teacher showed you. I think we take for granted the amount of information available today that lets us sample other styles. 10 or 20 years ago, if your teacher didn't show you a technique, you would not have been exposed to it until someone hit you with it. Therefore, you had no choice but to 'stay within your style.'

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Vash.

Do you REALLY want me to answer that one for you?

Maybe we need to do so for the non-tcma guys. :D

Let me know if your cup is empty to receive the SHOCKING truth.
:D

Pretentious arsery. The other white meat.

:)

[apoweyn]

Laughing Cow,


Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Hmmm.

This has turned into an interesting discussion.

MK you and me think along similar lines, 2 or 3 other posters also got what I am talking about.

Some of us get what you're talking about just fine. We just disagree.


I have been recently going to a few schools in the neighbourhood and checked theirsparring out.
For the most part what I saw was more like "fight-club" than well structured and well-executed sparring.

I know I've been harping on this lately. But do you have footage of you sparring? Maybe I've lost my perspective. But I honestly don't know what I should expect structured and well-executed sparring to look like. Somewhere between rehearsed drill and blatant arseup, from what I can gather.

It seems very easy to point at sparring and say why it's wrong. But those same people seem to have an almost impossible time pointing at sparring and saying "that's what I'm on about." Surely, there are visible examples we can look at. Because if there aren't, then it seems to me that we're talking about a purely theoretical situation. Sparring should this, it should that.

But nobody can show me where it does this and it does that.


It appears then someone over here sez we free-spar or we do 100%-sparring they mean ANYTHING goes haymakers, ground-grappling the works. Once the protection is on anything goes but what seems to be lost the most is the ability to use their style.

I say again: Two different approaches. With two different objectives. 1) Perform the style effectively or 2) defeat the opponent effectively.

Both are valid interpretations of the point of martial arts. Though one seems to offend your sensibilities.


Objective being to BEAT the opponent and WIN the fight, no emphasis on good techniques, principles or anything.

If you're able to defeat a trained opponent with it, isn't it a good technique? A sound principle?

What, exactly, are you looking for?

Yes, there's sloppy technique in sparring. And yes that's a problem. But, again, without being able to see a GOOD example of what you're advocating, it's difficult to conceptualize a sparring session in which the fighters resemble the forms. Or is that not what you're advocating?


One TJQ school I went to I could NOT see the difference between their Tui Shou and their San Shou, never mind that the students relied too much on force vs force and similar to execute a technique. Moves were slow, jerky and full of muscle power.

Please, please, please get a camera and post footage. Contrary to what you might think, I would desperately love to see genuine kung fu effectively used in sparring. I honestly would.


Sparring is a tool like forms, drills and so on, unfortunately I think many people misunderstand sparring to mean anything goes fighting, or it's time to get rid of frustrations, etc.

That's NOT a misunderstanding. It's a different use of the tool. Anything goes fighting is a logical extension of training. Not the only extension. But a logical one. Giving you the opportunity to experience and deal with mental and emotional duress, constantly changing tactics, and yes brute force (which, while potentially aesthetically offensive, goes a long way).


The reason why I asked if you use techs NOT included in your system is because a LOT of people these days cross-train.

IMO, if you study style X than your sparring in the school should only use techs from style X unless you study multiple arts under the same sifu.

As an opinion, that's cool. I disagree. If I'm sparring in a school, I'll honour the rules of their school. I don't go to a taekwondo school and start kicking people in the thighs. Because, regardless of my personal feelings, they have their way. And I'm in their house. I don't go over to people's houses and put my feet on the coffee table either.

But if I went to a school that did allow low kicks, but emphasized snapping them from the knee, I'm still going to throw mine thai style. In my experience, seeing something in action doesn't generally offend people. It makes them want to learn about it. And that's a good thing.


As one poster said you need to re-evaluate your training continously to see if it still meets your goals(which might change over time).

Example:
Does my sparring help me develop and refine the style I am stuyding or do I want sparring to test if I can be a bad tough guy.

I see a lot of guys advocating sparring, but why are they doing it to better themselves or to feed their ego that they beat another guy.

Here's that bias of yours again. Freesparring doesn't result in feeding the ego. Quite the opposite actually. Even the best among us get beaten from time to time. Someone is always better, especially when more tactics are available.

I sparred a guy recently who, stylistically, didn't have my experience or savvy. He pummeled me. Horribly. Because he had the attributes and he had the intent.

One of the nicest guys I've ever met. There wasn't a person in that place who didn't KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt that this guy had kicked my arse. But was he c0cky about it? Nah. He was friendly. Told me I'd scared him with my kicks (which I seriously doubt). And thanked me profusely for my help.

Is that the ego monster you refer to? Because that's the type of character I've consistently encountered.

Besides, adhering to style leaves just as much room for ego gratification. Perhaps more. Because there's suddenly an additional gauge for the ego. There's more than just "do you win." Because nobody wins forever. There's the additional "are you good at the style." And that is something that persists, whether you win matches or not. People can garner all sorts of accolades for their skill in a style without putting it to the test. Belts, titles, the admiration of students. You can't tell me that doesn't appeal to the ego just a little. That it's all for bettering yourself.


In short I see the same misunderstandings that Tui Shou gets iin some TJQ circles applied to sparring.

Just some thoughts to spark further discussion and flames. ;)

Over to you then.


Stuart B.

[scotty1]

*clap clap clap*

Bravo

[MasterKiller]

But if I went to a school that did allow low kicks, but emphasized snapping them from the knee, I'm still going to throw mine thai style. If you were going to a school to learn their style, and you continued to use your kicks in class, you are wasting your time and the instructors. If you have learned both ways, like Thai kicks better, and use them sparring, that's a different story. You were taught two techniques by two different instructors, and you have chosen the best one for you.

At the same time, a western boxer who continually uses low leg sweeps is no longer a western boxer. He has modified the style in which he was taught, and it has become something else.

Most of you guys who don't like the style classifications are coming from a background of two, three, or even more schools in which you studied. You have created amalgamations for your personal benefit. You may study BJJ the most, but adding Muay Thai to that means you are no longer a pure BJJ fighter. Even adding Muay Thai kicks to your TKD means you are not a pure TKD fighter. Does it mean you aren't effective? Hell no. It just means you aren't fighting like instructor A taught you, or like instructor B taught you. You have mixed the training, which may or may not work, depending on you. Now, if instructor A is teaching you to use both BJJ and Muay Thai at the same time, then he isn't teaching either art, by definition, he is teaching something else (we'll call it MMA).

I have been with the same school since day 1. Now, I have two different Sifus, mind you (one teaches me in-depth Chin Na and ground work on a private basis), but the two training regiments do not conflict. I don't have one guy teaching me Kick A, and another teaching Kick B. So, my only option is to learn Kick A, practice Kick A, and use Kick A. Therefore, when I kick someone, it looks like I was taught and reflects the style in which I train.

Effectiveness has more to do with personal ability than choice of technique, just as I said earlier. If I learn 5 Chin Na moves completely and thoroughly enough to use them at will, I will defeat most people who learn 50 techniques so-so. Of course, individual ability can only compensate so much for POOR technique (regardless of style). That's why finding a good instructor is crucial.

[apoweyn]

If you were going to a school to learn their style, and you continued to use your kicks in class, you are wasting your time and the instructors. If you have learned both ways, like Thai kicks better, and use them sparring, that's a different story. You were taught two techniques by two different instructors, and you have chosen the best one for you.

Only assuming that the only valuable asset of their school is their low kick. If I go there to learn something from them, but not everything from them, then it's hardly a waste of either of our time. Besides, I'll practice the low kick as they teach it, see what I think of it, and then make an informed decision. That's also not a waste of time.

But when it comes to freesparring, I'm going to use what I'm going to use, within the agreed-upon rules.

Now generally, since very few things I've seen qualitatively suck, I end up using both types of low kick (for example). Both have merit under the right circumstances and for the right purpose. So I've learned something. They've taught something. And generally, everyone's happy.


Stuart B.

[MasterKiller]

Only assuming that the only valuable asset of their school is their low kick. If I go there to learn something from them, but not everything from them, then it's hardly a waste of either of our time. Besides, I'll practice the low kick as they teach it, see what I think of it, and then make an informed decision. That's also not a waste of time. It's a waste of time if you don't give the training a chance. The reason most people don't fight like Kung Fu is because they don't accept the training. At some point, you have to give in and actually try to use what you are being taught.

If you do Kung Fu forms 10 hours a week, but still fight like a Muay Thai fighter when you spar, you are wasting those 10 hours. You could spend them better doing Muay Thai drills. Of course, that's only if your taking KF for fighting. Some people train for health reasons, etc, but rarely will those types of people become serious fighters anyway.

[TonyM.]

That was the best explanation I've read in a long time MK.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
It's a waste of time if you don't give the training a chance. The reason most people don't fight like Kung Fu is because they don't accept the training. At some point, you have to give in and actually try to use what you are being taught.

If you do Kung Fu forms 10 hours a week, but still fight like a Muay Thai fighter when you spar, you are wasting those 10 hours. You could spend them better doing Muay Thai drills. Of course, that's only if your taking KF for fighting. Some people train for health reasons, etc, but rarely will those types of people become serious fighters anyway.

MasterKiller,

I agree with you wholeheartedly. If my objective is to fight in a certain style, then I absolutely have to give the training a chance. And even when I'm learning at a different school, I'm still going to give the training a chance. After all, I still want to understand a technique before dismissing or accepting it. Right?

So yes, you should definitely try to use what you're being taught. But to my mind, it's also okay to use what you're not being taught in that place provided it doesn't conflict with their sparring rules. My first loyalty isn't to a particular style. It's to my own line of inquiry.

You and I differ in viewpoint mostly because we differ in approach. And that's fine. I don't have a problem with your choices and priorities. I do have a problem with any insinuation that one person is doing things right and another doesn't "get it."


Stuart B.

[Vash]

apoweyn:

You said everything I felt, except you said it better, more coherently, and with a hell of a lot less swearing. Bravo, indeed.


By staying in style or not staying in style, here is what I mean (if I do much more clarification, my ass is going to be transparent. Maybe I should just think before I speak?): Adherence to the guidelines of a particular style is good. But, adherence to the Dogma of a style, allowing for no interpretation of or variation on techniques, is bad juju.

Now, what are we arguing about? We are each preaching to a choir from a completely different religion. We aren't going to change a body's view(s) on this. We will give some extremely delicious food for thought, though. Like someone said earlier (or maybe it was in a sig), we all walk different paths. Just cause someone's on a different road doesn't mean they're lost.

Mother****er.

[MasterKiller]

So yes, you should definitely try to use what you're being taught. But to my mind, it's also okay to use what you're not being taught in that place provided it doesn't conflict with their sparring rules. My first loyalty isn't to a particular style. It's to my own line of inquiry. Sure it's OK. But it's also either directly or indirectly leading to an amalgam of styles. If it works for you, then it works. And there is nothing wrong with it as long as you can use what you learn.

But I think this approach is why some people have a hard time understanding what makes style A different than style B. The more you blend things together, the harder it gets to distinguish the individual flavors.

Adherence to the guidelines of a particular style is good. But, adherence to the Dogma of a style, allowing for no interpretation of or variation on techniques, is bad juju.I've never said otherwise; and, in fact, I was trying to make this point when I was talking about an individual's ability to display 'flavors' of a given style.

[fa_jing]

Well, my more genuine answer is that you should be using what you train in class (if applicable), otherwise you are wasting time training that. My junior was like that, he would train the wing chun drills, but it would all go out the window when he sparred. OTOH his (our) JKD did show in the sparring, as well as his football skills. But even his fighting is changing due to osmosis or something, the wing chun (the large part) of classwork is seeping into his personal fighting style. My sifu wouldn't stop us unless someone was hurt, but he constantly yelled out coaching advice (when not sparring us himself.) Mostly on the line of, keep your hands up, go lighter, directions to break, relax Keith, etc.

However, we were certainly never admonished for using something "outside of the style" - unless it violated our basic fighting principles, like taking a full step forward on a rear-hand punch. we might get a "don't do that."

We were instructed to choose for ourselves 1-2 techniques per round, and try to train them to be effective by looking for opportunities to employ these. Sometimes we followed this advice. When we did, it was very helpful. However, most of the time we lost track of this directive as we became lost in the moment.

Sifu had an important piece of advice - you should be able to vary the intensity level of your sparring from 1 to 10.

Thank heavens I'm a JKD guy. That means I get to practice TMA to my hearts content, while never being limited by stylistic boundaries. ;)

[Judge Pen]

It's nice just to be able to sit back and read MK and AP's posts. You get a good, well-reasoned opinon from both persepctives.

I am a MA "mut" in most regards. My earliest training was essentially TKD and my primary study is, of course SD, with some periods of bjj, isshin-ryu, chuan fa, and aikido thrown in to boot. I primarily see my SD influence in fighting and I have difficulty applying, say aikido, when I square off and spar. However, if someone comes up behind and grabs me then the aikdio influence kicks in. Same thing if someone sweeps or throws me: the work I had in bjj kicks in too. Now I wouldn't last against an experienced ground fighter, and I would never intentionally take a fight to the ground, but its nice to have a background just in case.

I guess my rambling point is that most people need to try other styles to find what works for them in different situations. When you train with a teacher of style A try to apply what you learn in style A. I don't think it makes it difficult to distinguish the different flavors as long as you have made an honest attempt to learn the subtleties of each style before you combine them into whtever works for you.

[apoweyn]

MasterKiller,


Sure it's OK. But it's also either directly or indirectly leading to an amalgam of styles. If it works for you, then it works. And there is nothing wrong with it as long as you can use what you learn.

But I think this approach is why some people have a hard time understanding what makes style A different than style B. The more you blend things together, the harder it gets to distinguish the individual flavors.

Quite right. More to the point, I blend things together because I don't want to distinguish between individual flavours.

I have much love for martial arts of all sorts. And I can definitely see the appeal of throwing yourself, heart and soul, into the practice of one of them. But for my own practice, I prefer less distinction between styles.


Stuart B.

[Laughing Cow]

Apoweyn.

I have studied a few styles in the the time that I learned MA.
Some got mixed up and overall my results were not that satisfactory.

I really like my current style and have decided to make it my main and only style from now on.
So, yes, I ditched many years of study and had to unlearn a lot.

Since I decided to concentrate on my current style alone I have found more joy and better results from it.

Maybe it is because I found a very good Sifu or a style that really fits me, but I and many other students I speak to have come to the same conclussion.

Cheers.

[norther practitioner]

I primarily see my SD influence in fighting
With so many styles represented there, what is the biggest influence from the SD curriculmn to your sparring?

[Laughing Cow]

Apoweyn & others.

If I see a guy that sez I study Chen TJQ than he should look like he has done Chen TJQ and shouldn't show other influences.

Note, I am not talking about if the fighting ability is good or not.

Some people simply want fighting ability but than they shouldn't claim be doing style X or Y orZ.

If you mix and match and amalgate than you left styles behind and are simply doing what suits you.

For me there is a difference between a person studying an art to fight and a stylist. I am a stylist in short I want to become as good as possible at my style.

Maybe it will affect my fighting ability and maybe it won't. ;)
OTOH, the more I concentrate on my style the more I find in it.

I also believe that you can't master a style unless you fully concentrate on it.

Cheers.

[Vash]

Understand where you're coming from. I'm almost the same way (except for how I'm of a totally different opinion).

I've been doing Isshinryu for about 3 years, take away 6 months for injuries. I've not yet really scratched the surface of the style.
I just don't want to not learn and apply stuff from outside the curriculum.

[rogue]

If I see a guy that sez I study Chen TJQ than he should look like he has done Chen TJQ and shouldn't show other influences. Even if he's studied another art Chuckling Bovine? I agree that a Chen stylists should be able to see the Chen style in the fighter but if the guy has other skills then he should use them. I've found that when sparring a fellow TKDinker that a little Isshinryu inside game is unexpected, a little bit of push hands in the clinch is fun too. I study certain styles of karate but if I learn something that isn't karate, such as the tiny little bit of Yang Tai Chi that I picked up, I'm going to use it.


I just don't want to not learn and apply stuff from outside the curriculum. Vash, maybe because Tatsuo Shimabuku was the same way? A large part Shorin, a good part Goju, and mix in some ideas from God knows where and we have Isshinryu. Sensei was a good role model in how to merge styles and ideas and create something coherant.

[omarthefish]

Boy, skipping the middle pages was a good idea. I thought for sure sonner or later it was going to come down to talking about if you fight the way you train.

My training has been pretty eclectic, so I'm not sure. Currently I'm doing Muay Thai and so I get to bang around every class. When I first started at the gym there was some minor *****ing about me "doing kung-fu" and some minor criticism that "that's not how we do it here", but fortunately none of it was coming from the teacher. As long as it didn't violate any of his MT principles it was all good. These style boundries are fuzzy things to me anyways. Mt 'principles'?

-keep your hands up (duh!)
-no fighting southpaw unless you're left handed (I can deal with that)
-always counter attack everything (still no conflict with my gong-fu background)
-keep your feet moving. Don't put rest weight on your front leg (if you do, it will get kicked)

It's not like there's anything he's taught me that my gong-fu teachers would have objected to either. Good gong-fu is good gong-fu. But at the same time, I definately brought lot's of gong-fu technique to the ring. I have a reputation for being extremely agile. I'm told I 'move well' and a classmate last night commented on what a moving target I was compared to most people. Well, that's the bagua coming through. Another night, after feeling my opponents defense was a little too solid I mixed things up a bit and at the side lines someone joked, "What was that!?! Drunken style?". No, I never did drunken but I definately stole some drunken foot work from Fu-Hok and was advancing in a very Hung Gar way. It worked and I backed my partner into a corner. Forearm senitivity from that stuff has helped me et up some wonderfull punching openings too.

I guess my point is that although technically, everything I do is Muat Thai, I'm borrowing HEAVILY from my gong-fu stuff. Nobody notices or cares. They just say I have a very 'unorthodox style'. I've absorbed a lot of odds and ends and fight in my own style. Hey! I guess I'm doing JKD and didn't even know it!

[David Jamieson]

Hey! I guess I'm doing JKD and didn't even know it!

*in my best jimmy stewart voice*
"why omar, gosh, that's what it's all about isn't it"? :D

cheers

[Judge Pen]

Originally posted by norther practitioner

With so many styles represented there, what is the biggest influence from the SD curriculmn to your sparring?

Fair question. I'm heavy on hand techniqes which is probably because I'm working on our Hsing-I primarily right now. The blocking techniques that I use come out of a few forms, mainly Black Tiger and Tiger-Crane. Our most basic forms, short forms, teach several sweep/kick combinations that a use often. Finally I'm trying to employ more evasiveness through Pa Kua. Up until black you primarily learn tiger, crane/various birds, and short forms. Several people I fight either tend to use primarily tiger or crane.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Apoweyn.

I have studied a few styles in the the time that I learned MA.
Some got mixed up and overall my results were not that satisfactory.

I really like my current style and have decided to make it my main and only style from now on.
So, yes, I ditched many years of study and had to unlearn a lot.

Since I decided to concentrate on my current style alone I have found more joy and better results from it.

Maybe it is because I found a very good Sifu or a style that really fits me, but I and many other students I speak to have come to the same conclussion.

Cheers.

Laughing Cow,

No arguing with that. If you're more satisfied with one approach than another, that basically legitimates itself, as far as I'm concerned.

My conclusion has been different. Sort of. One of my closest friends and sparring partners has stuck with basically one style (though he does have some exposure to boxing and judo) and has been similarly pleased. I can even recognize the appeal of that.

But I went the other way. And I've been thoroughly satisfied with that too.

I'm not even sure that reflects a difference in learning styles or whatever. I think that people are adaptive enough that whatever choice either of us had ultimately made (or will ultimately make), we'd end up satisfied.


Stuart B.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Apoweyn & others.

If I see a guy that sez I study Chen TJQ than he should look like he has done Chen TJQ and shouldn't show other influences

Note, I am not talking about if the fighting ability is good or not.

Some people simply want fighting ability but than they shouldn't claim be doing style X or Y orZ.

Would you do me a huge favour and stop saying "simply" as if learning to effectively fight other trained fighters were a bit like walking out to the mailbox for the paper.

You want to do right by your style. And I respect that. But the alternatives aren't simpler. They aren't easier. And they aren't morally bankrupt. Our future conversations would be a lot more productive if you could please bear that in mind.

As for claiming that you're doing style X when you've got influences from style Y in there, I don't really see the big fuss. People have a base. A frame of reference through which other influences get filtered. I don't personally think it's necessary to list all of those influences every time.

Grandmaster Canete (Doce Pares eskrima) says he does eskrido and pangamot. He doesn't feel obliged to then explain that he also has experience with karate, boxing, blah, blah, blah. Asked to go into detail about his background, he will. But he doesn't feel the need to qualify it every time. His base is eskrima. It's the framework through which his experiences in boxing, karate, judo, etc. are filtered.

That approach makes sense to me.


If you mix and match and amalgate than you left styles behind and are simply doing what suits you.

There's that "simply" again. Yeah, it's dead easy. I hardly even work at it anymore.


For me there is a difference between a person studying an art to fight and a stylist. I am a stylist in short I want to become as good as possible at my style.

I think that's a perfectly valid choice. In fact, I think I made that distinction myself in our earlier discussions.


Maybe it will affect my fighting ability and maybe it won't. ;)
OTOH, the more I concentrate on my style the more I find in it.

That's absolutely true. But then, the more you concentrate on combining two things, the more you find in that too. It's the nature of careful consideration. Not the specific mode of learning.


I also believe that you can't master a style unless you fully concentrate on it.

Can you master a style even if you do fully concentrate on it? What does that mean?


Stuart B.