Sparring questions??

[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.

[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.

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.

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
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?