SPARRING (Better to give than receive)

[Sagacious Lu]

So and I'm just asking because this is what i gathered from this statement.

If you don't get in the ring and get pummeled while pummeling someone else, then you're not training hard?

I haven't said anything about a ring because rings only exist in sports. However, if you aren't hitting and getting hit hard than yes I think your training is missing a critical element. If you aren't going full-speed than you will not be prepared to go full speed period.

We just don't throw on gloves and a mouth piece before we train. This isn't meant to be condescending it's just how we do it.

That's not condescending it just makes me think you aren't hitting hard enough. If we tried to hit as hard as we do without gloves or mouth pieces we'd all look like a bunch of Garbage Pail Kids. People don't go without protective gear because they're hard core, they go without because they know their partners won't do anything that will hurt them.

We "spar" in a sense by attacking each other but with limited power. Most people who train here now can evade pretty well and know there range. You will get throw, knocked down or hit if you mess up. However I don't need to try to take you head off to understand how to use a move.

If you know your range, power, and where you are at then when it's real you can take out all the stops.

This is what I really disagree with. In order to keep fighting effectively after you take a heavy shot is something you have to learn how to do. If you aren't genuinely hitting each other you won't be nearly as good at landing shots, but, even more importantly you won't be able to defend when the other person is determined to land a heavy blow. I'm not saying your lighter version is useless; I'm sure it has it's good points but it isn't a substitute for full (even if limited by rules and gloves) resistance.

So I guess instead of teaching each other we can beat on a person for 3 minutes non-stop and not hurt ourselves or possibly not incapacitate them.

This is a straw-man argument; no one believes that "real" fights last as long as a sport fight.

[Uke]

I haven't said anything about a ring because rings only exist in sports. However, if you aren't hitting and getting hit hard than yes I think your training is missing a critical element. If you aren't going full-speed than you will not be prepared to go full speed period.

If you know that RBSD is predicated on weapons, why would you train yourself to take shots? I understand that you have to toughen up, and contact is a way of doing that, but if you become accustomed to trading, that's exactly what you'll do in any situation let alone a one with weapons. This is important because I feel that when we say weapons can and most likely will be present, some of you think that the attacker will first produce the knife, then hold it up so that you can see that he has it, and then attack. No, it doesn't work that way. They want it quick, quiet and easy. If they are going to knife you, they don't want resistance. You'll have a second to respond and if you're responding as if you think its an empty hand attack you'll take a hit to give a hit. That's the sparring way. And that hit may be the last you ever take if there's a blade in his hand.

That's not condescending it just makes me think you aren't hitting hard enough. If we tried to hit as hard as we do without gloves or mouth pieces we'd all look like a bunch of Garbage Pail Kids. People don't go without protective gear because they're hard core, they go without because they know their partners won't do anything that will hurt them.

Hmmm ... so its smart to train in a way where you're punching so hard with wraps and gloves that if you attempt to do the same elsewhere without said wraps and gloves you'd break your hand and wrist? Would it be an assumption for me to say that some of you believe that you would punch differently if it were "for real"? And you also endorse using equipment like mouth pieces and gloves which you'll never have outside of the gym to train for realistic situations?

This is what I really disagree with. In order to keep fighting effectively after you take a heavy shot is something you have to learn how to do. If you aren't genuinely hitting each other you won't be nearly as good at landing shots, but, even more importantly you won't be able to defend when the other person is determined to land a heavy blow. I'm not saying your lighter version is useless; I'm sure it has it's good points but it isn't a substitute for full (even if limited by rules and gloves) resistance.

First off, no one is fighting effectively if they get caught with a heavy shot. No one. Not a pro, not an amateur, no one. Second, no matter the event, heavy shots are thrown throughout unless its a grappling tournament. They are blocked constantly. Otherwise the first couple of heavy shots would end a fight in the first round.

Next, you have illustrated an important point. A boxer/kickboxer picks his shots, waits for openings and plays the "give and take" game in order to get opportunities to hit back. That's not how our training is done at all. We work off of an initial attack, then follow up with lighter strikes to occupy our opponents focus, while delivering power shots in the broken rhythm of striking.

One of the most important aspects of combat, sport or reality, is to control your opponent's focus. Even in boxing, you work behind the jab because the jab effectively maintains distance and disrupts the man's focus long enough for you to attempt something else. You double up on the jab so that he doesn't see that straight right following it.

Same principle with RBSD, but different delivery. We first "shock" our opponents with an initial strike. Attacking from a natural, non-threatening stance allows us to do this. We don't take stances so that you have no indication that you're about to get blasted. Once our man is shocked, we overwhelm him with strikes. Each strike sets up the next one and keeps his mind on what just happened instead of what's coming next ... just like working off the jab, but in close quarters. You mix in heavy strikes during the barrage, like a broken rhythm so it isn't predictable.

I can't speak for everyone, but the way we do it isn't like kempo speed slapping. Each strike is delivered with purpose and with some amount of attention grabbing power. It's less about how fast you can hit and more about timing and how you can control your opponent's focus, vision, balance and movements by overwhelming him. Block. Strike. Sweep. Stomp. Throughout that sequence there's a lot going on ... all types of concepts like touch and go, high-low striking, closest weapon to the closest target, etc. It's about as far from competition as you're going to get in terms of combat because every element that would distinguish a combat method from being competitive was used to create RBSD. There is no pugilistic approach. There is no trading. There are no stances.

That's why you don't see sparring in RBSD. It would defeat the purpose and instill one of those bad habits I've been talking about for what seems like forever: Trading and the willingness to do it. That same willingness is an open invitation for someone to quietly slip you the blade. Now if you treat every attack like its meant to open you up, how much more do your chances of surviving increase?

This is a straw-man argument; no one believes that "real" fights last as long as a sport fight.

Fights might last that long, but self defense situations don't. Still, just because they don't last that long doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to dish it out for a full 3 minute round like boxers, right?

[Sagacious Lu]

...if you're responding as if you think its an empty hand attack you'll take a hit to give a hit.

That's a huge assumption, especially considering how much time you spend learning to bob, weave and block during sparring so that you DON'T get hit. The guy who's had to defend against more shots is the one that's more likely to avoid his attacker. By the way, what happens if you do get hit? What you're saying sounds like "we train to be so awesome we never get hit" but of course we know anyone can be hit. That means that when you do get hit you'll do all the natural (and stupid) things that people do because you never built up good habits. That can be as mild as blinking or as damaging as completely losing your balance. You're just making yourself more vulnerable.

Hmmm ... so its smart to train in a way where you're punching so hard with wraps and gloves that if you attempt to do the same elsewhere without said wraps and gloves you'd break your hand and wrist?

Yet people punch each other bare-fisted every day without hurting each other. Have you ever seen a hockey fight? They drop their gloves before the fight and slug it out all the time without hurting their hands. Not that that's the only place you see bare-handed punches work out just fine for the guy who threw them, it's just an obvious one that you can find plenty of video of in case you're skeptical.

Would it be an assumption for me to say that some of you believe that you would punch differently if it were "for real"?

Yes, I think I throw a punch the way I throw a punch. The basic mechanics don't need to change.

And you also endorse using equipment like mouth pieces and gloves which you'll never have outside of the gym to train for realistic situations?

The only thing these things do is reduce the chances that you (and your training partners) will get hurt. You use them (obviously) so that you can push yourself harder day in and day out without getting injured so badly that you have to stop training. Thus they allow you to much more closely simulate a real fight than you ever could without them. You're techniques don't work differently if you don't have them, you're just more likely to hurt the other guy or to lose a tooth personally. That's why they're essential to any kind of believable training in striking.

First off, no one is fighting effectively if they get caught with a heavy shot. No one. Not a pro, not an amateur, no one.

Do you think you know someone that's so amazing they just can't ever be hit by anyone? I thought we were talking about "reality".

Otherwise the first couple of heavy shots would end a fight in the first round.

That's right, that's why it's a good idea to learn how to defend against them.

Same principle with RBSD, but different delivery. We first "shock" our opponents with an initial strike. Attacking from a natural, non-threatening stance allows us to do this. We don't take stances so that you have no indication that you're about to get blasted. Once our man is shocked, we overwhelm him with strikes. Each strike sets up the next one and keeps his mind on what just happened instead of what's coming next ... just like working off the jab, but in close quarters. You mix in heavy strikes during the barrage, like a broken rhythm so it isn't predictable.

Fair enough but how do you ever hope to do this (or weather someone elses attack) without ever actually hitting anyone, let alone someone that's trying to hit back?

There is no trading. There are no stances.

If you're standing you have a stance, and you are trying to hit each other than shots will go both ways until one side gets a decisive advantage. This is just semantics.

Fights might last that long, but self defense situations don't. Still, just because they don't last that long doesn't mean that we shouldn't be able to dish it out for a full 3 minute round like boxers, right?

If you spend enough time practicing punching to be able to throw one good one than 3 minutes of it really isn't a big deal. The time it takes to get proficient will condition you. I'm not suggesting that you scrap all your ideas and take up boxing but now it sounds like you're making excuses for being out of shape. Being in better shape makes you leaner, quicker and more agile in addition to giving you more endurance. Why try to rationalize being out of shape?

[Uke]

Since you have cherry picked which points to respond to from my post I'll be do 10 points:

1)Its no assumption when I'm commenting on how pro boxers perform. Watch ANY boxing/kickboxing match and then look at the punch stats. There are some boxers that land over 100 punches a round! Not since Pernell Whitaker has there been a boxer so elusive that they were hard to touch.

2)If your preference it to hockey fight, I say go for it. Have you actually ever looked at the kinds of punches they throw in hockey games? They hit each other 50 times and both men are still standing. If that's how you were taught to punch then good for you. We went a different way with that.

4)As I said before, do what you like! I was just making a point. I'm sure you ain't punching like Tyson and even he is an example of what happens when you carry significant power and don't wrap your hands. I never suggested you change your mechanics.

5)So how do you know what you can take without protection? You fight with a cup and a mouthpiece, right? So how do you know you can take a kick in the balls and keep fighting? Seems to me that every boxer that catches even the slightest low blow experiences extreme pain and can't continue without a break. Practice is one thing but there isn't a time when you perform without the same conditions. You are always wearing protection.

6)I'm not saying that someone is untouchable, but if someone lands a heavy blow to the jaw and they have any real power you'll be rocked regardless if you're a pro or not. That's the point that you missed. You aren't going to improve the durability of your jaw no matter how much gum you chew, Sagacious Lu.

7)This point was skewed by your cherry picking. This was a direct counter point when Sagacious Lu wrote: "In order to keep fighting effectively after you take a heavy shot is something you have to learn how to do." If you take a clean heavy shot I doubt that you'll keep fighting. Maybe your idea of a heavy shot is different than mine, but landing a clean heavy shot usually gives the man who landed a clear path to end it. Its not important that I know what you train in, I just know that heavy blows are much more telegraphed than lighter blows and aren't as easy to land in ANY form of combat.

8)Actually read the first post in this topic. These misconceptions are explained away there.

9)You're not supposed to take a fighting stance, but we all just assumed you'd know what that meant.

10)I haven't rationalized being out of shape. I don't remember anyone speaking about being out of shape other than you and jubaji. Why not read the mugging article a bit closer if you think that RBSD practitioners are "out of shape". A reference to his conditioning is mentioned somewhere in the beginning.

The fact is that you can practice to land "one good one" all you want and never land a fight ending blow. There are boxing champions who are so feather-fisted that they never score a knockout. Practicing to land "one good one" and increasing your odds to be able to do so by first stunning and then overwhelming are two different practices. But you keep trying to land that "one good one". I'm sure your opponent will wait around until you do.

Without being able to quickly stop an assault all you are doing is sparring.

Or playing hockey.

[jubaji]

Just repeating the same dead-end points over and over and over...

[mellow]

So what sort of sparring- or sparring substitute does this guy endorse? Does he think he has a better idea and if so how does he set up his sparring drills? Some of the things he's saying make sense to me but I also know that getting hit (thrown, submitted etc.) is both humbling and painful. When you introduce that reality a lot of people take their check books to schools that give the illusion of teaching their students to fight without requiring them to use their skills against genuine resistance- thus making the training more or less worthless for self-defense. Usually when people start talking about sparring being a bad idea they're just making excuses for not training hard.

You might want to try reading the whole article.

[Sagacious Lu]

Since you have cherry picked which points to respond to from my post I'll be do 10 points:

Yeah, you always use a lot more words than you need to get your point across so I have to sift through to see what I feel like I need to respond to.

1)Its no assumption when I'm commenting on how pro boxers perform. Watch ANY boxing/kickboxing match and then look at the punch stats. There are some boxers that land over 100 punches a round! Not since Pernell Whitaker has there been a boxer so elusive that they were hard to touch.

Do you really think those boxers aren't trying to avoid getting hit? The only thing this proves is that no matter how good you are you CAN be hit. That's why it's a good idea to be prepared.

2)They hit each other 50 times and both men are still standing.

50 times? Not even close, one or the other almost always hits the ground in less than a minute- without any broken hands. They don't have time for that many punches. However that just goes to show that you can in fact get hit and keep fighting.

4)As I said before, do what you like! I was just making a point. I'm sure you ain't punching like Tyson and even he is an example of what happens when you carry significant power and don't wrap your hands. I never suggested you change your mechanics.

You can go find a bunch of guys that did break their hands and I can find a bunch that didn't. That's not going to prove anything.

5)So how do you know you can take a kick in the balls and keep fighting?

Because it has happened to me.

Practice is one thing but there isn't a time when you perform without the same conditions. You are always wearing protection.

Yes, protection is the reason I can train day after day without getting injured. Getting hit with gloves isn't as painful as getting hit without them but it's a lot more realistic than not getting hit at all.

6)I'm not saying that someone is untouchable, but if someone lands a heavy blow to the jaw and they have any real power you'll be rocked regardless if you're a pro or not. That's the point that you missed. You aren't going to improve the durability of your jaw no matter how much gum you chew, Sagacious Lu.

Just because you're "rocked" doesn't mean you've lost the fight. Believe it or not some people can keep their composure even when they're dazed and thus hang in there long enough to recover and eventually win. This doesn't come from gum chewing, it comes from the experience of getting hit and fighting through it.

If you take a clean heavy shot I doubt that you'll keep fighting.

If you get knocked out you're unconcious and it's over. Otherwise you can keep fighting. Punches don't always KO the person they hit.

9)You're not supposed to take a fighting stance, but we all just assumed you'd know what that meant.

If you're on your feet you might want to think about balance, just a thought. FYI some ways of standing are better for this than others.

10)I haven't rationalized being out of shape. I don't remember anyone speaking about being out of shape other than you and jubaji.

You're the one that asked whether you should be able to "dish it out" for a (single) 3 minute round. IMHO if you're out of gas before one lousy round is over than you definately need more conditioning.

Without being able to quickly stop an assault all you are doing is sparring.

How many assaults have you stopped quickly? What guarantee do you have that if you get assaulted you'll be able to stop it quickly?

You might want to try reading the whole article.

I did read it, I found it to be verbose and lacking in useful content.


Before I get bogged down in another one of Uke's fillabuster attempts would someone please address this:

What drills do you guys think ARE good?

[Mick Coup]

I actually promote and advocate a whole spectrum of force-on-force training - not just hitting equipment - but I carefully avoid going down the classic 'sparring' route for the reasons outlined in the aforementioned article.

Key facets to facilitate this are starting such active drills from less prepared positions, both physically and psychologically, and making the engagements very short in duration to ensure constant offensive action is maintained over and above all else. Often the participants have to cover ground to engage their adversary in order to promote hitting with extreme forward momentum as opposed to the circle and probe affair that sparring effects. To this end, such training is full-contact, has no restricted targets, and utilises 'supersafe' type headgear, karting neck braces and groin protection - nothing else.

In short I stress 'reverse engineering' what a fight requires, rather than 'forward engineering' what training provides. I train as I know I will have to fight, and not try to fight as I've trained, hoping it will suffice - this isn't the only approach obviously, and everybody's mileage certainly varies but this has proven to be the most effective and, more importantly, efficient approach for myself and those that I train.

To be quite clear, I'm not a fan of the general 'RBSD' approach - and personally I cannot even stand the term, as it is wholly redundant in my opinion. Too many follow a collection of 'dirty tricks' as being the solution, and seem to fantasise about how effective various seemingly nasty methods 'should' be in actual application, without ever trying them on a resisting person. I do not acknowledge this too-typical situation - it's like having a pile of spare parts and accessories piled high in your garage, but not even a basic vehicle to drive!

Hope this wasn't too verbose, or lacking in content.

Mick

[kingoftheforest]

Thanks Mick. that's about sums up what some of us have been saying for years.

Just because you don't "spar" doesn't mean that the contact training you do isn't effective.

We practice scenarios from walking down the street with your hands in your pockets. Too someone trying to mug you while you tell them what time it is.

We even do drills on getting in and out of your car and being attacked.

This has all been gone over numerous times before to the same end. Those who can accept that there may be ways to train difference and just as if not more effective than they do now have no problem.

Some either don't want to admit change is good and some are just guarding the rice bowl.

I say take what you can, try, what you want and don't waste time on what you personally feel is a waste of time, whatever that may be.

[Uke]

I actually promote and advocate a whole spectrum of force-on-force training - not just hitting equipment - but I carefully avoid going down the classic 'sparring' route for the reasons outlined in the aforementioned article.

Key facets to facilitate this are starting such active drills from less prepared positions, both physically and psychologically, and making the engagements very short in duration to ensure constant offensive action is maintained over and above all else. Often the participants have to cover ground to engage their adversary in order to promote hitting with extreme forward momentum as opposed to the circle and probe affair that sparring effects. To this end, such training is full-contact, has no restricted targets, and utilises 'supersafe' type headgear, karting neck braces and groin protection - nothing else.

In short I stress 'reverse engineering' what a fight requires, rather than 'forward engineering' what training provides. I train as I know I will have to fight, and not try to fight as I've trained, hoping it will suffice - this isn't the only approach obviously, and everybody's mileage certainly varies but this has proven to be the most effective and, more importantly, efficient approach for myself and those that I train.

To be quite clear, I'm not a fan of the general 'RBSD' approach - and personally I cannot even stand the term, as it is wholly redundant in my opinion. Too many follow a collection of 'dirty tricks' as being the solution, and seem to fantasise about how effective various seemingly nasty methods 'should' be in actual application, without ever trying them on a resisting person. I do not acknowledge this too-typical situation - it's like having a pile of spare parts and accessories piled high in your garage, but not even a basic vehicle to drive!

Hope this wasn't too verbose, or lacking in content.

Mick

Another well written piece, Mick. I especially liked the phrase "circle and probe affair" that you used to describe sparring. Very accurate.

[Uke]

Just repeating the same dead-end points over and over and over...

Tell me about it. I take the time to reply to questions and then those same questions just reappear in the following posts as if they were never there. Hence the cherry picking.

[jubaji]

Yes you do post long responses, but we all say the same things. You keep saying you don't want to say one thing is better than another, but then you spend 3 paragraphs essentially explaining why 'your' way is better. You say "you will fight like you train," then spend 2 paragraphs explaining why you don't train full contact. You admit the need to train empty hand skills, then fall back on "I'll always have my knife" when the way you choose to address that area is questioned. You say you don't discount anyone's actual experiences, but then go on forever about what is 'real street confrontations' and the like as if no one reading has ever been in any 'real' situations. And on and on and on. Sag Lu writes longish replies addressing these and other points and you go back and start all over again.

If we are going to say we agree to disagree that's fine, but if it is followed by "and here's why I'm right and you're not" we will never escape the loop.

[kingoftheforest]

There is any easy way to escape the loop.

Stop reading and replying to what Uke says. Since all that you do with Uke's longish posts is quote them and then add one line commentary. You never actually discuss why "whatever it is that you train" works better, techniques to back it up, or how to apply them.

[Mick Coup]

From my experience on forums a lot of problems are caused by issues relating to context - unless this is first established and adhered to, everyone ends up responding to the wrong questions with the right answers, and vice versa!

Being too specific in response to a general point can, and usually is, a source of conflict - as is being over-general to a very specific issue.

Obviously some folk just like to act like dicks, and having an anonymous online persona is the perfect vehicle for this...

It's only the internet - most of the sniping comments certainly wouldn't be made in a face to face scenario!

Mick

[Tant01]

Like fresh air to breath!

I actually promote and advocate a whole spectrum of force-on-force training - not just hitting equipment - but I carefully avoid going down the classic 'sparring' route for the reasons outlined in the aforementioned article.

Key facets to facilitate this are starting such active drills from less prepared positions, both physically and psychologically, and making the engagements very short in duration to ensure constant offensive action is maintained over and above all else. Often the participants have to cover ground to engage their adversary in order to promote hitting with extreme forward momentum as opposed to the circle and probe affair that sparring effects. To this end, such training is full-contact, has no restricted targets, and utilises 'supersafe' type headgear, karting neck braces and groin protection - nothing else.

In short I stress 'reverse engineering' what a fight requires, rather than 'forward engineering' what training provides. I train as I know I will have to fight, and not try to fight as I've trained, hoping it will suffice - this isn't the only approach obviously, and everybody's mileage certainly varies but this has proven to be the most effective and, more importantly, efficient approach for myself and those that I train.

To be quite clear, I'm not a fan of the general 'RBSD' approach - and personally I cannot even stand the term, as it is wholly redundant in my opinion. Too many follow a collection of 'dirty tricks' as being the solution, and seem to fantasise about how effective various seemingly nasty methods 'should' be in actual application, without ever trying them on a resisting person. I do not acknowledge this too-typical situation - it's like having a pile of spare parts and accessories piled high in your garage, but not even a basic vehicle to drive!

Hope this wasn't too verbose, or lacking in content.

Mick

Not at all. We are honored to have you here Mr. C.

Thanks and hope to read more from you!

~Tant01