Ghost Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 I cant see the point in no cantact sparring. What is the point in learning how to just miss when you punch someone. In my opinion this leads to a slight error in range judgement in actual fighting. In fact, i cant see any advantage in no contact sparring so i am hoping some of you out there cant give me a clue!
Kirves Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 Personally I agree with you (I study a bare-knuckle knockdown style), but several styles/arts/instructors/schools/tournaments do no-contact sparring because a) they are afraid of injuries so they take the extreme precaution b) they say you must be able to control your techniques 100% so it is (in their mind) actually "cool" to be able to punch someone in the face and stop within fraction of an inch before contact. c) they target towards small kids
Neil Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 What do you mean in 'contact sparring'. I assume its the thing where two people join up and spare each other bare-knuckled? The kyukushin do this where the call it 'full contact' soarring where it is nothing more than hitting to the body, so it is hardly 'full contact sparring'. We do a sort of two man kumite, where you hit any part of the body. Has this got anything to do with fighting? No. It simply teaches movement and timing. If people think that sparring of any kind, be it boxing, kickboxing, muay thai or karate kumite is actually going to work in a fight they have got another thing coming. People just don't seem to understand hot people and animals fight in nature. You can even see boxers today who get in scrambles out side of the ring and it looks nothing like boxing! fighting is always close, never ranged. people are coming all over you and you need experiance in practicing applications in class against a live fit opponent who is trying to resist. There is no sparring in a fight. It can be a fun sport, or to teach movement and timing, and to get a bit of conditioning from it, but it will never work in a REAL encounter. In a fight you want to be coming in close, gauging fir eyes, grabbing his pulls, ripping his ears off, biting his nose, ripping his kidney muscle off, smashing your knees into his thighs, smashing the throat. So what do you think would work best when someone has come to pick on you and is starting pushing you against the corner, roughening you up, and just about to head but you? Jump up and down, duck and weave, 360 degree flying back kick, cat stance? Or destroy him with the above information? Neil
Kirves Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 I'm always a bit wary with the word "never". To say "sparring _never_ works" is quite a statement. Those who believe it, are free to do so. I don't believe that it will never work, but that's just my opinion. Another issue is this assumption that a fight always means ripping the other guys eyes out, crippling him for life and overall maiming the gsus out of him. Lucky for us, most aggressive situations are not this serious. It doesn't matter wether it is my sister (a waitress in a bar) or me (a security guard of a public/crowded building), both of us have to handle aggressive customers (some of them drunk or on drugs) almost on daily basis. Neither of us can blind, cripple or maim our customers in any way or we'll spend a long while in jail. True, if I'm attacked in the dark alley, I will be more aggressive myself in my response, but not all self defence/martial arts students train for that purpose alone. The person you are defending your family member against, may be a family member too! You don't want to kill him just for losing temper and slapping your sister too hard... Nor do you want to cripple or kill your customer who came back filing a complaint that went a bit overboard and got physical. Most of real life fights are these little incidents when you must be able to handle the situation and regain control without seriously hurting anybody involved.
Ghost Posted June 10, 2003 Author Posted June 10, 2003 I think full contact sparring is as close as you can get to a real fight and is very useful. There is no reason to stick to a set stance or anything in full contact sparring and a punch landed is just by how muchj it hurt and not if it was a text book punch. I think too many people have a clouded view of full contact sparring because they dont do it. Plenty of doormen and women use full contact systems very effectively so Neil you are just plain wrong on that. How can it be in effective, the opponent in no way goes along with what you are doing and resists with maximum effort. You are learning to hit a real opponent in the right place properly and at full speed. And believe me they dont want to get hit and nor do you. I would say thats about as close to a real fight as you can get in a training situation and I still dont see where no cantact sparring fits in!
tommarker Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 I cant see the point in no cantact sparring. What is the point in learning how to just miss when you punch someone. In my opinion this leads to a slight error in range judgement in actual fighting. In fact, i cant see any advantage in no contact sparring so i am hoping some of you out there cant give me a clue! Sparring without contact can be advantageous in many ways without a great deal of sacrifice. In our studio, the default level of sparring is "no contact." If you read my entire rant, maybe you'll at least respect why we do it. Sparring no contact allows everyone to participate. In our club, we don't have a rank restriction on sparring, and everyone spars everyone else, regardless of age, size, rank, etc. A full contact sparring match between a white belt and a third dan is going to end very poorly for the white belt. Especially if there is a significant size/strength disparity. If on your first night of sparring, you received a broken rib and were spitting blood, would you come back for another class? Most would not. The people who don't come back will never have the chance to grow and develop their skills because they basically fodder for the senior rank. You don't have to kick someone in the head full contact to teach them how to block. For most beginners, the sight of a foot flying at their head is usually enough to enage a response. If your assertion that sparring with no contact meant that we were training ourselves to "just miss" our target, then I would also imagine that we would have a pristine heavy bag, makiwara, and tons of unbroken wood in the corner. After all, we'd never be able to perform a break without learning how to hit something. It doesn't seem to be a problem. Another problem. How often can you spar full contact? Without equipment? Can you do it every class? I'll bet not. We can consistently practice without the problem of sustaining major injuries. While I will agree with you that it is important to learn what it is like to take a hit, I also find it to be a highly overrated experience. How many times do you need to get your ribs broken before you develop an aversion to it? Now, you'll remember that I said no contact was the "default" rule in our school. As the comfort level increases, the people sparring can agree on the level of contact. Some people may only be comfortable with a touch, some with a slightly harder tap. Others might be fine with heavier contact, but people rarely volunteer for "full contact" sparring. This allows a person who might have otherwise NOT JOINED a chance to learn skills, gain confidence, and eventually participate competently in an activity that others may have scared them away from. I don't find it a problem to throw a side kick with full force and stop an inch away from someone's head, and then turn around, and hit a target shield with that same kick and knock the holder over. You're still training your body to react to distances and judge them appropriately. I'm no longer posting here. Adios.
Ghost Posted June 10, 2003 Author Posted June 10, 2003 Nice responce, I would say for lower ranks that the sparring should be lighter and if on a regular basis contact does not have to be full power but can be full speed without doing a ton of damage. I still think there is a difference between hitting a bag where you are thinking about what you are doing and working off reflexes in fast sparring when it comes to range. I dont think sparring to the point of serious injury is at all wise but i think full contact means full speed and making proper contact but not needing to let the punch or whatever go all the way through. Unless you are training for a fight. Begginers can go light and slowbut still be making solid contact. It will hurt a little but do no damage, thats still full contact. So i still dont see a great deal of use for no contact sparring.
tommarker Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 Well, think about it from this perspective: People in their first year or so of karate probably have very little ability to control their strikes. Correct? Judge a ring with 6th and 5th kyus and see what I mean. Tell them "no contact" and they will probably still (especially if they are males, 16-25) whack each other from time to time. That's fine. We don't punish that.. it's a natural consequence that people are occasionally going to get whacked. Now tell them they are allowed to make contact, and watch the floodgates open. This is all well and good when your opponent has no problem with that, but it tends to get ugly when you have size mismatches. 1. This is when smaller and less experienced people can get hurt. 2. This is when smaller and less experienced people leave. 3. Smaller and less experienced people need more training than those who are naturally athletic and strong. If we can accept number 3, then numbers 1 and 2 are unacceptable. If you are sparring full contact, at FULL speed and making proper contact, then people ARE going to get hurt. If you're doing anything less, then it is not full contact. It's "contact" and possibly a little rougher than "brush and touch" but not FULL contact. Full contact means you try to knock the shit out of your opponent. And there are schools which do this too. For them "no contact" means "don't break anything." My basic point is that not everyone is going to be comfortable at first with hard contact, or even light contact. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be given the chance to overcome that. That's why starting a baseline of "no contact" is a good idea, IMHO. I'm no longer posting here. Adios.
Ghost Posted June 10, 2003 Author Posted June 10, 2003 Yes I respect your opinion but begginers should not be sparring. Less experienced people who want to spar can go light but still make contact. I would never go no contact. Thats my point. I totall agree sparring should be light for begginers but i would still make contact and if they have no control i would not let them spar. As is the case in my gym.
Neil Posted June 10, 2003 Posted June 10, 2003 Ghost I do agree with you that all that karate krap about control ise useless, since when do you even want to control a punch? When you need to save your life you want to be poundind into him destroying his body. However. Sparring in terms of two people facing up to each other and performing pucnhes and kicks from a range, scoring points and tickling their egos is not fighting. The whole point of two man kumite was introduced in Okiniwa as a movement drill. When Funokoshi sensei died, Nakayama introduced the sparring as a sport where you score points. The Kyukushin "Strongest Karate" is also a myth, with them apparently doing full contact. Full contact is street fighting. Full contact means anything goes. My teacher proved it wonderfully when he was training in malasia and found a Kyukushin dojo. He was then put into a ring with this guy who sttod well over 6ft tall. He was then told it was full contact. As the bell rang my teacher stuck his fingers in the mans eyes and was immidietly disqualified. Why? I havn't a clue! It was full contact, and yet not even the strongest karate can take it! Sparring taught in old day Karate and what I learn, was and in my class out of a few in the world who actually teach karate, teach it as a movement drill. Sparring has nothing to do with fighting. The closest thing in sport I have seen to a real fight is the UFC. Fighting is a brawl, sparring is not fighting. To learn real applications you have to try it against a live fit opponesnt who is trying to resist, this is not sparring. Sparring is putting your fists up and preparing for a punch up, not a fight. If you think sparring is going to ork in a fight you must have never had a fight in your life! To see a real fight in action, take 2 rottweilers, 2 alsations, get a great big bloody juicy steak, drop between them and watch how many times they block, or sparr.
Recommended Posts