traditional training and sparring

[travelsbyknight]

I consider traditional training to be learning how not to be tense, how to flow, how to get good body positioning so that low stances can be used correctly, trapping so that you are not just lobbing out punches, breath control to maximize striking power and for health.


I've never seen any of the above used during sparring. So why spar?

I know the first paragraph seems kind of vague but I'm in a rush. So if you want elaborations then let me know.

[joedoe]

I guess because it is a fair approximation of what a real fight is like and it is a good way to test your skills. All the other attributes you train are of no use if you cannot use them in a fight situation.

[travelsbyknight]

there are some people I know who spar without trying to learn the things I listed in the origional post. I'd be more worried about them not being able to fight than someone who doesn't spar.

[Vash]

If you are given the opportunity to train your forms/sets/kata applications in a free-form environment at a lower intensity than a regular sparring session, then are allowed to step it up to the point of real sparring, then you'll probably be able to apply your training in the sparring.

That is the second longest sentence I've ever written.

[David Jamieson]

sparring is progressive in traditional as opposed to "get the hell in there" as in modern training. :D

in traditional, you go slow and at the level you can handle. as you progress, you will reach the "get the hell in there level" but it is not thrust upon you with the immediacy that we find in many non-trad places.

sometimes this is interpreted as p.ussy by moderns, but, the injuries are considerably less and the skill grows just as well.


Now, having said that, the modern method works too, but it does discourage a lot of people because of the injuries. All you can hope for is that your coach is responsible and feels responsible for you and won't stick you in there with a psycho. For the most part this is the case. :D

eiter way, if there ain't no sparring, you ain't learning no "martial" art, you is just learning a ritualistic dance pattern and frankly, you can get better training at juliard for that. :D

[Vash]

As much as I hate to say it, KL has taken the correct and paid it's tuition to Clown College.

[SiuHung]

Originally posted by joedoe
I guess because it is a fair approximation of what a real fight is like and it is a good way to test your skills. All the other attributes you train are of no use if you cannot use them in a fight situation.

Nope, No, No have to disagree...
Sparring is nothing like a real fight. Sparring is a training tool, much like a free form drill. It's very important to spar because it brings into play a combination of strategy, tactics, conditioning, timing, and skill under some degree of pressure. But it doesn't come near to the element of physical danger, adrenaline, fear, and raw survival instinct of a fight. Fights happen for a variety of reasons, but rarely are they a situation of two squared off combatants who agree to fight. More likely a fight is a situation where one or more combatants attack another with intent to truly harm them, most often with unskilled technique and brutal adrenaline laced power.
Mike

[travelsbyknight]

Sparring develops bad habits and causes people to forget about what their system/style is really supposed to be about.

[David Jamieson]

I disagree travelsbynight.

Sanda within your style teaches you how to use your style specifically. Sanda is sparring in kungfu and when the progressive approach is used, it is an extremely useful tool.

How could learning to use your martial art develop bad habits?

Kungfu is taught as a martial art first after all and though it does have transformative and healthful effects after longterm practice, it is Martial first.

If one was to only want to do the healthful and transformative aspects, then perhaps they should adapt all their stuff into qigong and present it as such.

cheers

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by travelsbyknight
Sparring develops bad habits and causes people to forget about what their system/style is really supposed to be about. Quite the opposite. Sparring lets you weed out the b.s. techniques that you cannot use in a "real time" application against a resisting opponent.

[Mika]

KF is at it again....:D

No, it's not like that. I do not know what TBK is thinking, but I can agree with him, just as I can agree with everyone else here so far.

It's just that I think TBK is referring to something other than using a cross-stance in a fight or anything like that. I could be mistaken about what he means, but that's at least what I mean. So, in that respect KF is right, San Da does weed out some of the moves that do not work in a ring. But then again, a street fight is not the same as a ring fight. But that's OT at this point.

Every style has its own features and flavors which to the untrained eye may or may not seem different from one another. To the trained eye, they definitely are different. But that's only if they actually are different. That's what I am talking about (and maybe TBK, too). Many a San Da fighter fight San Da -like, not representing the flavor of their style. Many of them fight in much the same way. Sure, you could say that that is because those are the techniques that work. Okay, maybe, maybe...But it could also be because of the fact they weren't taught to fight according to their system (or that they never learned it despite having been taught).

Example: in Choy Lee Fut, the double backfist combo is used a lot (tip for you guys fighting a CLF fighter...;) ). Some styles prefer going in on the outside, some styles go in in the middle.
Now, these characteristics are NOT inclusive to one style only. A lot depends on the size of the fighters and so many other things, too. And anyone can use them, of course. But a lot of times you cannot tell which style a given fighter represents. I have heard chinese Masters sigh at tournaments ("That is not XYZ style fighting) even if the fighter is doing OK.

This is not a comment on what should or should not be, just an observation.

Cheers :)

Mika

[David Jamieson]

I don't agree with that either knife fighter :-)

techniques that one person does not understand does not make them B.S or unusable.

With time and practice, one ca learn how to use all teh fighting techniques from in tehir style against resisting opponents.

With one or two exceptions of course, for example eye gouges, neck breaking techniques and others cannot fully be trained in a courteous atmosphere. You have to find other ways to train those forces and the techs that drive them.

The whoel point of "sparring" is the you want to recycle your partners so you can continue to learn. If yuou keep breaking people, you won't be able to fully learn and they definitely won't be able to learn :D

anyway, food for thought
cheers

[SiuHung]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
The whoel point of "sparring" is the you want to recycle your partners so you can continue to learn. If yuou keep breaking people, you won't be able to fully learn and they definitely won't be able to learn :D



Good point Kung Lek, but man do I find your avatar strangely disturbing...
Mike

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SiuHung


Nope, No, No have to disagree...
Sparring is nothing like a real fight. Sparring is a training tool, much like a free form drill. It's very important to spar because it brings into play a combination of strategy, tactics, conditioning, timing, and skill under some degree of pressure. But it doesn't come near to the element of physical danger, adrenaline, fear, and raw survival instinct of a fight. Fights happen for a variety of reasons, but rarely are they a situation of two squared off combatants who agree to fight. More likely a fight is a situation where one or more combatants attack another with intent to truly harm them, most often with unskilled technique and brutal adrenaline laced power.
Mike


Sparring is not a fight, but it's the clsoest you will safely come to one. hard contact sparring teaches you several lessons that will indeed carry over into a real fight.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Kung Lek

sometimes this is interpreted as p.ussy by moderns, but, the injuries are considerably less and the skill grows just as well.


Now, having said that, the modern method works too, but it does discourage a lot of people because of the injuries.

IME, injuries aren't THAT frequent. Not frequent enough that anyone I know has been turned off from training.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by SiuHung


Nope, No, No have to disagree...
Sparring is nothing like a real fight. Sparring is a training tool, much like a free form drill. It's very important to spar because it brings into play a combination of strategy, tactics, conditioning, timing, and skill under some degree of pressure. But it doesn't come near to the element of physical danger, adrenaline, fear, and raw survival instinct of a fight. Fights happen for a variety of reasons, but rarely are they a situation of two squared off combatants who agree to fight. More likely a fight is a situation where one or more combatants attack another with intent to truly harm them, most often with unskilled technique and brutal adrenaline laced power.
Mike

And that is why I said it is an approximation of a real fight. It introduces elements of a real fight situation while reducing the dangers. Obviously, the only way to experience a real fight is to get into one, but that is unrealistic for training purposes.

[travelsbyknight]

I think the fighting aspect of kung fu was meant to be learned by getting into real fights and then seeing what your strengths and weaknesses were. Also, when you learned new things you were supposed to test them on your own by fighting.

You can't test anything by sparring with gear. Footwork maybe.

[David Jamieson]

well, the kungfu school i went to we didn't really use gear. Just a cup and a mouthguard.

at lower levels, the sparring was much more metered , like karate point fighting, but at advanced levels it was pretty full blast, have courtesy.

putting on gloves and head gear takes it up one notch further I think, but then hammering at each other as opposed to sparring is not teh purpose. I think a lot of people miss the boat on that.

But a lei tai match was were one would test his skills traditionally with teh kungfu. I don't think there are any barehands lei tai matches anymore.

[Ou Ji]

Here's my take on sparring and fighting.

Real fights range anwhere from one hit, to grappling (stand up and ground), to boxing, and everything in between. To say that sparring isn't like real fighting is not exactly corrrect. Some fights are like sparring but not all fights. Sparring helps but the fear of serious injury, and the 'illegal' techniques used to inflict injury, aren't there. It all changes when someone is really trying to hurt you by any means.

I'm all for minimal protective equipment. The common arguement for padding is that you can go full blast and learn how to hit fast and hard. Most people train for only one speed, all ahead full. The drawback is that you get a false sense of blocking/taking a hit. In a real fight the shock of a hard strike will throw you off. On the other hand no protective equipment will cause you to hold back too much when attacking.


Remember yin/yang and balance you're training. Full gear for attack training and light (or no) gear for defensive training. Getting hit tends to make you block/evade a little quicker next time.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
techniques that one person does not understand does not make them B.S or unusable.Some techniques are b.s. for a variety of reasons. Some techniques will always be low percentage moves for almost everyone, but are taught as part of a system, anyway. Others will be low percentage for only some people, while others will be too advanced for a particular person to be using at a certain stage in his development. If techniques cannot be used in sparring the same as, or close to, the way they are taught in the system, then one of these things usually applies.


Originally posted by travelsbyknight
You can't test anything by sparring with gear. Footwork maybe. Putting on gear lets you test under pressure without sending each other to the hospital. How can you expect to pull your techniques off under the pressure of a real fight- where your adrenaline dump causes you to lose between 30 to 70% of your learned motor skills- when you can't even pull them off in sparring? I don't think anybody is under the impression that sparring is real fighting. It is just a laboratory for testing out your techniques, strategies, tactics, etc.

[David Jamieson]

kf-

techniques you can't use in sparring doesn't render them "useless", it just means they are not suitable for that type of interplay.

for instance, a cutting punch designed to rake and break an esophagus. THis tech can't be used for obvious reasons.

In kungfu, there are a lot of techniques that you cannot fully practice with opponents and can only practice in form or on inanimates.

THe same as any other killing apps. like when training with a blade or bludgeoning weapon et al.

Now granted, there are some techniques in forms that even the teachers of those forms don't get in some schools.

Anyway, just because you can't use it in sparring doesn't mean you can't use it and doesn't mean it is not worth keeping in the toolbox. Who knows when you'll need to break that neck quietly :D

cheers

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
for instance, a cutting punch designed to rake and break an esophagus.

Who knows when you'll need to break that neck quietly Jesus... you are even more deluded than I thought you were.

[SifuAbel]

As per the issue of certain strikes and techniques not being used in sparring because of risk.

First, striking. Punching to the throat or any other place is just that, a punch. A punch that is "fitted" to a particular need. Its just a different "spearhead", its the same "shaft". So in sparring, it doesn't matter that you are fighting with a "blunted spear". You can practice whats important; speed , power, accuracy and defense are still being sharpened. Once proper striking is gained, directing that strike to a particular area with a particular "spearhead" isn't a big deal.

Second, form. The issue here is sparring without being taught proper form. Whether its one move or whole sets, its important to have proper form in your techniques. Inproper form is what makes techniques sloppy.

As per techniques not being useable. I tend to gravitate toward the burden being on the fighter not the technique. In an old marksman joke we see the issue.

"Its interesting to note how when somebody makes the mark he says he's a good shot, but when he misses he says its a bad gun."

I've seen this time and time again. Particular moves being called "bad" either because of stylistic bias, inabilty, or lack of knowledge as to usage and placement. I'm sure everyone can give examples of things in his own system that one can't use. But to be honest, its more likely inabilty or a lack of understanding that is at fault.

As per the term "low/high percentage" this strikes me as not usefull. Sure everyone can throw a basic straight punch and front kick; as they should because basics are key to everyone. But, this term tends to be misused IMO since it leads some to beleive that you don't need more than this. It places a judgement on techniques from a position of the novice. "I don't THINK this technique can work because X." When others are useing said technique everyday.

" Putting on gear lets you test under pressure without sending each other to the hospital. How can you expect to pull your techniques off under the pressure of a real fight- where your adrenaline dump causes you to lose between 30 to 70% of your learned motor skills- when you can't even pull them off in sparring?"

I actually agree with this. My only caveat is that 30% to 70% is a huge flux and the whole point of sparring. To be able to meet confrontation. To most, the intitial confrontation even at the school level will initiate the adrenal response. The whole point is to get down to that 30 % level and below. When a person becomes confident under pressure in his basic speed , power and focus, that person will not have much of a problem directing his strikes and techniques. He will be able to use whatever "spearhead" he chooses.

Personally, after a few years of contact, my teacher would admonish me for using too much in sparring. Too much of the things I learned were coming out. It happens. I had to tune down and use less in order not to really injure someone. Because after a whille, you've been hit enough, fear subsides and you just let go and do what the body has been trained to do. "No mind" . Once there is no mind the body is free to flow and move as it chooses. Which is usaully better that when directed by the frontal lobe.

[Fu-Pow]

Great Post SifuAbel!

[SifuAbel]

whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

tank yooze :D

[David Jamieson]

kf-

the only one who is deluded is the one who cannot see the joke that is made.

don't be such a doofus.:rolleyes:

I'm sure all your combat ring fighting is the only thing of any martial value...whatever. LOL, now that IS deluded. Man, your cup is so full, I don't think you can get anymore tea in it.

abel, you made the point better than i did. kudos

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel

Second, form. The issue here is sparring without being taught proper form. Whether its one move or whole sets, its important to have proper form in your techniques. Inproper form is what makes techniques sloppy.

Can you not make the corrections while sparring? In MT, you will start sparring fairly soon, but you will have a coach making corrections as you go. Same thing in bjj. It's not uncommon to start rolling in your second class. What happens? you get tooled. but you gain valuable experience at the same time. Then as you drill more, you will apply the corrections that you have been given, and in time, your experience becomes apparent to you - And you are that much further ahead of the guys who haven't been sparring.

As per techniques not being useable. I tend to gravitate toward the burden being on the fighter not the technique. In an old marksman joke we see the issue.

"Its interesting to note how when somebody makes the mark he says he's a good shot, but when he misses he says its a bad gun."

I tend to liken that joke to CMA people supporting a guy who has done several arts, one of which was king fu, and touting him as a good CMA if he wins a fight, but then when a CMA guy gets mauled, they say "but he didn't have THE kung fu...", but I digress.

I've seen this time and time again. Particular moves being called "bad" either because of stylistic bias, inabilty, or lack of knowledge as to usage and placement. I'm sure everyone can give examples of things in his own system that one can't use. But to be honest, its more likely inabilty or a lack of understanding that is at fault.

I don't rule them out as BAD techniques, but rather high/low %, which I'll address below, since you touched on it.

As per the term "low/high percentage" this strikes me as not usefull. Sure everyone can throw a basic straight punch and front kick; as they should because basics are key to everyone. But, this term tends to be misused IMO since it leads some to beleive that you don't need more than this. It places a judgement on techniques from a position of the novice. "I don't THINK this technique can work because X." When others are useing said technique everyday.

we don't say anything not basic is low %. If it's advanced and works the majority of the time for plenty of people, then it can be considered high %. When a person has their chin down, good head movement, and is active, how hard is it to punch them in the throat even once? Conversely how difficult is it for me to catch you with a jab or cross to the face? A kick to the groin vs a kick to the thigh?


I actually agree with this. My only caveat is that 30% to 70% is a huge flux and the whole point of sparring. To be able to meet confrontation. To most, the intitial confrontation even at the school level will initiate the adrenal response. The whole point is to get down to that 30 % level and below. When a person becomes confident under pressure in his basic speed , power and focus, that person will not have much of a problem directing his strikes and techniques. He will be able to use whatever "spearhead" he chooses.

Sounds good...

Because after a whille, you've been hit enough, fear subsides and you just let go and do what the body has been trained to do. "No mind" . Once there is no mind the body is free to flow and move as it chooses.

true.

[SifuAbel]

"Can you not make the corrections while sparring?'

Sure, but you will also have to weed out a thousand bad habits. Plus, being corrected IS being taught form. Being taught the proper way to punch on a bag is also being taught form. You can't escape it.

"I tend to liken that joke to CMA people supporting a guy who has done several arts, one of which was king fu, and touting him as a good CMA if he wins a fight, but then when a CMA guy gets mauled, they say "but he didn't have THE kung fu...", but I digress."

:rolleyes: Yes, please, you digress.
The above has very little to do with my point. Jason Delucia is the only one you can make that comparison with. The other guys you've seen on clips don't have any other examples to compare to. And you can't blanket it because Onasis wins one fight and Delucia loses another. They are two different people. Even with his wins, I still say delucia isn't that clean. If Onasis lost some I'd still say he has good kung fu. So this ponit of yours is flawed and a little old. Sour grapes, really.

[SifuAbel]

"When a person has their chin down, good head movement, and is active, how hard is it to punch them in the throat even once?"

That easy, don't do it then. Do it when its open. Why would I want to do something thats out of place and at the wrong time?

[SifuAbel]

We should start a thread to identify what exactly is this nebulous percentage people keep talking about.

The only ones qualified to speak about what works in their own style are the people whom practice it. Otherwise, its just an outside opinion.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
:rolleyes: Yes, please, you digress.
Abel, I was quite impressed with your first post above... a well thought-out post without any personal put-downs. I had a feeling it couldn't last though.

As far as sparring and when to do it vs. not to do it vs. the importance of having good form and technique before beginning sparring- these are some of the basic beliefs that separate "traditional" martial arts from progressive, modern ones.

[SifuAbel]

"Conversely how difficult is it for me to catch you with a jab or cross to the face? A kick to the groin vs a kick to the thigh?"

There are no guarantees here either.

You still have to reach your opponent, get through his guard and make contact. All the while without being stopped by his defense or being countered and pummeled back.

Defense is defense, offense is offense. The guy with the chin down is defending the throat strike. The guy with a good guard and parry defends the punches. Both could land, neither could land; Its a numbers game.

[SifuAbel]

You know as well as I do that the above IS as nice as I get.




When to do it?

After a little while. Its not years or anything. At least it shouldn't be. I was sparring at 3 months. I sucked, obviously. Within time I didn't suck. Then I got good. But at least at the end of those 3 months I had an idea at least of how to punch, kick, step correctly, how to hold a guard and how to fit strikes to certain areas. My dilema then was how to put all that together, which is the next step.

When not to do it?

Day 1. Why create bad habits that you have to break down later instead of at least teaching how to do the basics right first? How to step , how to punch , how to kick, etc. Whats so nebulous about that?

Being thrown into a ring on day 1 and getting beat up doesn't teach anything but fear.

The only thing older than fighting is sex, and only by about 15 minutes.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
Being thrown into a ring on day 1 and getting beat up doesn't teach anything but fear. I believe a good teacher should be able to have students spar on day one while using the techniques they have learned that day with good form and without getting beat up.

[SifuAbel]

thats more drilling than sparring.

[Mika]

Terminology is important. If touching hands - any which way - is called sparring, then I agree with KF. But since many understand sparring as something much more involved and free flowing than just partner drills, I would say that some time is needed before actual sparring.

I used to have a requirement (when I was teaching in the US) that the student have a yellow belt (first earned belt) before he or she could spar. Partner drills we did do from day 1, so I am not referring to them. When a student had a yellow belt and had practiced with me a few months, I would know enough about his personality so he or she wouldn't just try to knock someone out immediately. Also, that way the student had proven he or she knew the names of the techniques and no class time would have to be wasted on explaining terms.
Knowing fundamental terminology also increases safety as all students are doing the same thing during warm-up drills.

Cheers :)

//mika

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
"Conversely how difficult is it for me to catch you with a jab or cross to the face? A kick to the groin vs a kick to the thigh?"

There are no guarantees here either.

You still have to reach your opponent, get through his guard and make contact. All the while without being stopped by his defense or being countered and pummeled back.

Defense is defense, offense is offense. The guy with the chin down is defending the throat strike. The guy with a good guard and parry defends the punches. Both could land, neither could land; Its a numbers game.


No guarantees, but the target area is bigger.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel

That easy, don't do it then. Do it when its open. Why would I want to do something thats out of place and at the wrong time?

the point is that fighting stance 101 teaches us to keep our chin down. combined with head movement, the throat is a hard target to go for. I maintain that it's low %.

[SifuAbel]

It won't stay that way forever.

I don't obsess about it. If I can do it, I'll do it; if I can't, I won't. Its that simple.

The head is a bigger target area but more mobile.

IF is the middle word in life. Variables are the only constant. The outcome of a fight is the sum total of the variables. Anything more is just speculation.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel

:rolleyes: Yes, please, you digress.
The above has very little to do with my point. Jason Delucia is the only one you can make that comparison with. The other guys you've seen on clips don't have any other examples to compare to. And you can't blanket it because Onasis wins one fight and Delucia loses another. They are two different people. Even with his wins, I still say delucia isn't that clean. If Onasis lost some I'd still say he has good kung fu. So this ponit of yours is flawed and a little old. Sour grapes, really.

As long as you've been on KFO, you should know better... It's rather rare to see a clip posted that isn't ripped apart by most posters - delucia, ng vs chan, the classic "dude, where's my keys?" thread, some mantis clips, etc. There were even some mantis guys tearing apart fa_jing's wc/jkd teacher, and a mantis sifu he was sparring with. bozteppe/cheung, etc.

And actually, delucia and O aren't the only two. The same thing was said about the WC guy that competed - I think it was dave levicki (1-3). On other forums, I've seen comments about scott baker. Other CMA guys who have made an appearance in ufc include felix mitchell and thadeus luster.

[SifuAbel]

Right, "A" WC guy, not "THE" wing chun guy or "THE BEST" WC for that matter. One guy that people want to use as the ultimate example of Wing Chun.

It just seems so small.

The 3 "CMA" guys(out of God knows how many other cometitors) in UFC that somehow represent all of kung fu.

The chan ng match which is a joke even among CMA teachers.

Botztepe's sucker blidside of cheung then running away. Not exactly a match.

And the other hand full of clips here and there. Its hardly representative.

If the shoe were on the other foot you may understand.

If someone showed you these less than 10 clips that showed what you do( and in our case sporadic samples from completely different styles) in a less than flattering way and you knew there was much more than this in what you study, wouldn't you stand up and say "whoa, thats not the whole deal!"?

And lets say that your favorite sport WASN'T filmed and televised on a regular basis,and said person only saw these 10 and no other out of the hundreds of thousands of practitioners throughout the world. Does that person actually have a full view to base an opinion?

It does go both ways too.

My point simply was that people on both sides of any camp will root for their home team even within the same types of systems. Making a generalization from a single moment in time is just wrong.

In the case of the WC guy, If I critique him, I'm critiquing JUST him, not the style or the entierty of CMA. To me he was a poor representative AT THE TIME.
If people wan't to run with it and twist it into some excuse for or against, thats their problem. If people want to cast this guy as the golden calf of some nebulous proof that will justify some stance, thats their business. They can and will believe what they want to believe. However , most WC guys would still sit back and say "Dayum!, that guy was FAT and he sucked!" And with all that he at least beat one person.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
Right, "A" WC guy, not "THE" wing chun guy or "THE BEST" WC for that matter. One guy that people want to use as the ultimate example of Wing Chun.

It just seems so small.

The 3 "CMA" guys(out of God knows how many other cometitors) in UFC that somehow represent all of kung fu.

It's not a way of saying they represent all of kung fu. I'm addressing what you guys are saying in response to them stepping up. If they were MMA, than the mma crowd would be like - "good job for getting in there, you win some, you lose some," not "well, his thai boxing sucked and his ground work was mediocre, so yeah, he's not a REAL mma guy..."

The chan ng match which is a joke even among CMA teachers.

And yet these jokes were masters?

In the case of the WC guy, If I critique him, I'm critiquing JUST him, not the style or the entierty of CMA. To me he was a poor representative AT THE TIME.

I completely agree with that. I don't think cma on a whole sucks because a few guys got tooled. I do think that if they are going to compete, however, they would have to make some changes to their training regimens. It's just that the critique - from other cma - is ALWAYS negative, with the exception of O.

[MasterKiller]

It's not a way of saying they represent all of kung fu. I'm addressing what you guys are saying in response to them stepping up. If they were MMA, than the mma crowd would be like - "good job for getting in there, you win some, you lose some," not "well, his thai boxing sucked and his ground work was mediocre, so yeah, he's not a REAL mma guy..." How many times have I heard "tomato can" tossed around? Too many to count. :rolleyes:

It's just that the critique - from other cma - is ALWAYS negative, with the exception of O.Well, you're lumping about 800 styles together under the cma banner, so, stylistically, you are going to have people talking trash. That's life.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
If someone showed you these less than 10 clips that showed what you do( and in our case sporadic samples from completely different styles) in a less than flattering way and you knew there was much more than this in what you study, wouldn't you stand up and say "whoa, thats not the whole deal!"?

And lets say that your favorite sport WASN'T filmed and televised on a regular basis,and said person only saw these 10 and no other out of the hundreds of thousands of practitioners throughout the world. Does that person actually have a full view to base an opinion?It's pretty simple. If we felt our "styles" were being misrepresented, we would record some footage of our fights and present that as "how it should be done."

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
thats more drilling than sparring. You just made my point about the difference between traditional and modern training. Traditional methods would drill it, while modern training would spar.

If I am using a only a jab, but am trying to land it while defending against your jab and you are doing the same, it is sparring. We are using isolated tools, but we are still sparring.

[SifuAbel]

To me, sparring is a free flow with contact. Doing one jab and defending it over and over again is still a drill. We do the exact same thing, but we call it a drill. Not doing the above in whatever name you choose is not "traditional" its just incomplete.

[SifuAbel]

"If they were MMA, than the mma crowd would be like - "good job for getting in there, you win some, you lose some," not "well, his thai boxing sucked and his ground work was mediocre, so yeah, he's not a REAL mma guy..."'

Doubtful, if the guy was MMA and he sucked, you would say he sucked. Not to would be a dishonest whitewash. By the above you're suggesting that the MMA crowd would just pat him on the back and say "good job, you may suck but you're MMA so thats ok, keep on sucking." ....?!?!

Its a matter of HOW the WC guy fought, not IF he won or lost that matters to me.

"It's just that the critique - from other cma - is ALWAYS negative, with the exception of O."

Its still a very small number. Saying it "always" happens is a blanket. We aren't talking about 50 matches here, we're talking about 3(in UFC).

Pehaps when more CMA people get a hold of video recorders and get a little more vain we will see more stuff on an amateur level. And since the san shu/da people are separating themselves from CMA and becomeing yet another animal, we will have find yet another pro venue. I must admit MK is correct when he says "Well, you're lumping about 800 styles together under the cma banner, so, stylistically, you are going to have people talking trash. That's life."

"And yet these jokes were masters?"

In whose eyes? Certainly not mine, or in the eyes of many others. These guys were masters in their own little circle, in their own minds. Its yet another blanket to call those guys "THE" masters. These guys have no connection to me or my line, why would I even care if they sucked, or botztepe or anybody outside of my circle for that matter? We're NOT all one big happy family.

[David Jamieson]

We're NOT all one big happy family.

That's for sure. Even in the same family there is often unrest.

All that aside, the "top" is relative to the stack it belongs to.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
To me, sparring is a free flow with contact. Doing one jab and defending it over and over again is still a drill. We do the exact same thing, but we call it a drill. Not doing the above in whatever name you choose is not "traditional" its just incomplete. Hmmm... two people are moving around. They are both allowed to throw the jab whenever they feel it will be most effective. They are both trying to land the jab on the other person, trying to get through each other's defenses. Each is trying to use his jab defenses and movement to keep the other from landing the jab. Seems like sparring to me.

[SifuAbel]

Except that its ALL they are doing. They know that its coming. They know its not going to continue beyond that. They know ONLY a jab will be thrown.

Drill.

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
Except that its ALL they are doing. They know that its coming. They know its not going to continue beyond that. They know ONLY a jab will be thrown.

Drill. So, by that reasoning when I am using only boxing, but not using my kicking, elbows, knees, takedowns or groundwork, I am only drilling?

[Brad]

Could you just call it a sparring drill? :p

[Lowlynobody]

Knifefighter - that logical progression does not work.

[SifuAbel]

I agree, It doesn't work at all.

If you are free boxing thats one thing, if you are working a particular technique thats a drill.

[Mika]

As I said on page 3 of this thread, terminology is important. Without agreement on terms, the discussion will become more or less twisted.

Who cares what the dictionary definition of drilling or sparring is as long as you can agree on how they are defined? The point is not to argue definitions here, is it?

Here's my two cents: if it's prearranged, it's drilling. If you cannot know what the other guy is gonna do and when he is gonna do it, it's sparring.

But really, all that was not the point of this thread, right? Back to the issue at hand...;)

Cheers,

Mika

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Mika
Here's my two cents: if it's prearranged, it's drilling. If you cannot know what the other guy is gonna do and when he is gonna do it, it's sparring. Exactly.

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Exactly. So, if you know he's only gonna jab at you, how is that sparring? Because he doesn't give you a timetable of how many seconds will lapse between jabs before you begin?

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
So, if you know he's only gonna jab at you, how is that sparring? Because he doesn't give you a timetable of how many seconds will lapse between jabs before you begin? Because you don't know when is going to throw it, whether he is going to set it up with feints or broken rhythm, whether he is coming in low or high, whether he is going to single or double jab, etc., etc.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
Because you don't know when is going to throw it, whether he is going to set it up with feints or broken rhythm, whether he is coming in low or high, whether he is going to single or double jab, etc., etc.
Bollocks. You're contradicting yourself now. You just agreed that anything set up is a drill. If the drill is just jabbing, no matter how he sets it up, you know he's only going to jab. If you don't know what he's going to do, that's sparring.

Abel's spot on here and you're wrong KF. You're not even sticking true to the definitions you've already agreed to.

Feints, broken rhythm, whatever, you know he;s going to end up only jabbing. That's a drill.

[SifuAbel]

Ok.....................

I guess serpent took that one.

:D

The definition discussion has turned to the difference between the dynamic drills and the purely static drills. And the misconception that "traditional"(this term is getting rather small) players only do static drills. Not so.

[SifuAbel]

To get back to the original topic.


One way to see a student is like a radio with a volume control.
You turn him on , let him warm up. Turn him up to 1. Every so often you give the volume another notch. With in time he's set to 5. In a little while longer you can set him to 10. By then the police are knocking on your door for disturbing the neihbors.

:D

[Knifefighter]

Originally posted by Serpent
Feints, broken rhythm, whatever, you know he;s going to end up only jabbing. That's a drill. OK, let's say your allowed to jab/cross. Is it sparring then? How about jab/cross/hook? Then? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist/spinning backfist? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist/spinning backfist/bob & weave? When do you think it becomes sparring?

[Ultimatewingchun]

Man, you guys are really nit-picking here on definitions...How about this - In TWC (Traditional Wing Chun) we call this a differentiation drill:

Your partner will either throw a jab...or a jab/cross...or a jab/hook...or a rear front kick.

Just one example of a differentiation drill. Now you must respond appropriately to each move(s)...If you miss one - your partner repeats it before going back to trying to fool you.

Now as time goes on and you start adding more and more moves and combinations into the mix - the more spontaneous the whole thing starts to become...especially when you start attacking whenever you want - no longer just waiting to respond to his attack.

So when does this stop being a drill and become full-fledged sparring?

When both of you have the option of attacking or defending with any move you want.

But the truth is...why get caught up on these definitions?

Up until the final stage that I just described they are all "sparring drills"...aren't they? And if you want to call them something else - so what?

As long as each participant is getting something out of them - what does it matter what they are called?

[SifuAbel]

Originally posted by Knifefighter
OK, let's say your allowed to jab/cross. Is it sparring then? How about jab/cross/hook? Then? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist/spinning backfist? Jab/cross/hook/uppercut/overhand/backfist/spinning backfist/bob & weave? When do you think it becomes sparring?

When you stop doing all the above drills...........

[Lowlynobody]

When its not limited to set techniques/combos and is free flowing. Real simple. Why worry?

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by SifuAbel

Doubtful, if the guy was MMA and he sucked, you would say he sucked. Not to would be a dishonest whitewash. By the above you're suggesting that the MMA crowd would just pat him on the back and say "good job, you may suck but you're MMA so thats ok, keep on sucking." ....?!?!

He does get a pat on the back. He got one because regardless of how bad he sucks, he stepped up and fought. That alone deserves respect.


Its still a very small number. Saying it "always" happens is a blanket. We aren't talking about 50 matches here, we're talking about 3(in UFC).

I'm talking about beyond UFC. I'm including other crap on kfo too - clips, pics, fights, webistes... this forum is full of negative criticism about CMA.

"Well, you're lumping about 800 styles together under the cma banner, so, stylistically, you are going to have people talking trash. That's life."

that's acceptable. But outright saying someone's kung fu sucks is hardly stylistic.




In whose eyes? Certainly not mine, or in the eyes of many others. These guys were masters in their own little circle, in their own minds. Its yet another blanket to call those guys "THE" masters.

I didn't make a blanket statement. I didn't say THE masters - you added that, even though it was not there in the quote you pasted. However, from what I saw, those two hardly deserved the title of master, regardless of who gave it to them.


These guys have no connection to me or my line, why would I even care if they sucked, or botztepe or anybody outside of my circle for that matter? We're NOT all one big happy family.

And you shouldn't be. However, that doesn't stop criticisms from flying.

[SifuAbel]

"... this forum is full of negative criticism[s] about CMA."

You can say that again.

[MasterKiller]

Originally posted by SifuAbel
"... this forum is full of negative criticism[s] about CMA."

You can say that again. Not really. This forum is full of negative criticism about certain styles and divisions of CMA. Every CMA player here loves CMA....but usually only as it relates to their style or division.

The negative criticism of all CMA comes from the MMA camp. But yeah, there's plenty of that, too.

[SifuAbel]

thats what I meant, indirectly.

[SevenStar]

The MMA camp criticizes aspects of CMA, not everything about all CMA.