Sparring vs. not

[John_Clements]

And yet...Isn't it the light, soft, tappy tap kind of touch sparring that is so far from the reality of combat that many martial artists will cite as their reason for not doing some form of mock combat, or at least acknowledging its value? I mean, I myself have been disgusted with some of the "sword tag" free-play I've seen being done here and there, as it reflects so little of what actual combat is about and gives such a false impression of how swords really handle.

JC

[Richard Strey]

Isn't it sparring or free-play that trains your perception? From my experience, you first learn the "dry" movement, then the correct timing with a partner and -in the end- you learn to look out for the opportunity to put that new knowledge to use. I'm wondering how that perception could be trained *without* sparring.

P.S.: I -and others from my group- have gotten a lot of weird looks and not-so-nice comments in the past, when we mentioned that we also do live-action roleplaying. We have found that (apart from fun) it is a great training tool, once you see it for what it can provide: Not realistic weapons, not realistic fights (no grappling etc.), but lots and lots of unknown opponents that will attack you with intent and in unpredictable ways. Great training for your timing, perception and sense of distance.
I should also mention that over here, many LARPers wear reenactment-quality armor and our padded weapons (a sandwich construction of closed-cell foam around a fiber-glass rod, coated with latex and a PU finish) are closer to ARMA's that the pool-noodle-onna-stick kind I have seen used in the US.

[Brian Hunt]

To spar or not to spar, that is the question. Whether tis nobler to engage, or not to engage, and thus suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous opinions. Or to take arms against a sea of opponents, and by opposing end them. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

This thread is of great interest to me. I have practiced martial arts of some type or another for the greater part of my life. I do not claim to be an expert at any of them, but I am well studied. My main teacher for many years always taught that you must fight to learn to fight (fighting meaning full contact sparring). When he left the area one of his students who has his black belt took over. He hates sparring, so now all they do is the kata's with one or two point attacks to "teach you how to fight." I no longer attend even though I am very close to a Black Belt in this style due to the fact that I so totally disagree with him over what it takes to learn to defend oneself. For arguments sake, I have never lost a sparring match to this man, not even once. Of course, he has not sparred for years now, but he does a beatiful Kata. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I have also seen so many people who do the "tippy tap" karate tournaments, who although they know how to engage someone, they have a false sense of what it takes to win a fight. I even saw one brown belt lose a fight in high school due to the fact that he threw a punch to the nose of his oppnent and due to the way he trained pulled his punch by habit and never even hurt the guy who was a high school wrestler. Lets say it did not end well for the brown belt. If he had solidly landed his first punch, he might have won. Oh well, you fight like you train, if you don't train for reality, someday reality will let you know the error of your ways.

I will always feel that people who do not spar with intent, and as close to realism as you can get without actually harming/injuring your partner (hard to train if they are in a cast or something and even harder to get to new training partners), will not be able to handle themselves well when it gets real. For as my old teacher used to say, the only rule to a fight is that there are no rules.

Just my opinion, take it or leave it.

Brian Hunt


"Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our English dead! In peace there's nothing so becomes a man As modest stillness and humility; But when the blast of war blows in our ears, Then imitate the action of the tiger: Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood."
--William Shakespeare King Henry V , Act 3 scene 1

[Guest]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now understandably, the more any martial art is made into a game or sport revolving around artificial rules and restrictive conditions, the less concern there is for the brutality and earnest application of lethal technique. Only "play-fighting" can certainly engender bad habits and a lack of appreciation for the inherent violence of real fighting.

And yet...Isn't it the light, soft, tappy tap kind of touch sparring that is so far from the reality of combat that many martial artists will cite as their reason for not doing some form of mock combat, or at least acknowledging its value? I mean, I myself have been disgusted with some of the "sword tag" free-play I've seen being done here and there, as it reflects so little of what actual combat is about and gives such a false impression of how swords really handle.

As stated by J.C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is exactly why many in the martial arts world feel that free sparring is not beneficial. As you know, techniques done under full power with full intensity behave differently than when they are softened. They come with much greater force, speed and commitment and are not so easily warded or ”Put By”. There is an inherent “Sense of Urgency” that comes over you (when you have little or no body protection) that will genuinely motivate you to save your skin. Now by the contrary, when you have body protection, you can and will be more bold and are more prone to take risk.

Different weapons have different characteristics. We can get away with full speed and power (maybe) utilizing training rapiers and even some blunted swords work. But even these require at least some protection for the users. As the weapons get larger and heavier, it becomes less practical to free spar, they are just too dangerous unless you are well armored or thus, rules have to be introduced.

Rules are dangerous because they instill boundaries and a false sense of security. Everyone knows that if you train with rules, they can, and many times will become instinctive. Look at the example of controlled power used during free sparring. You gain confidence that your ward will protect you, then one day, someone smashes through your guard and you are sore hurt or slain. Another is a full on 110% committed thrust (sword or rapier). These come with so much force and power, it is not so easily put by, you find that it require serious commitment, even in your parry to steer them off course.

Look at what many of the old masters have spoke of: About fighting will full force and speed, the examples of fellows with little skill and stout courage chopping in a blow and slain his enemy. Silver, Digrassi, Ringeck, the list goes on, so many have spoke of these types of things.

Di-Grassi talks about the delight of skirmishing, but also cautions about the reality of a real life threatening fight. I think that he best describes it because he specifically addresses it. Observe and follow the true principals in a real fight.

Free sparring is great to give you a sense of self and promote interaction with your opponent through judgment, distance, timing, etc. It allows you to respond and transition from technique to technique, to probe and sense your opponent’s weaknesses and you take advantage of them. But most importantly, hopefully it exposes your own weaknesses and maintains your humility.

[John_Clements]

Hi Richard,

I know what you mean about developing timing and distance through LARP type play, it's true. But that's all it develops ---and with a lot of bad habits along with it unfortunately. Still, it can be good fun and good for youth. I did it for several years myself.

What brand of padded LARP swords are those? I handled some in Munich that were very nice, if they had double thick cores they would have been superb martial arts sparring swords.

JC

[John_Clements]

Well said, Bob. Good points.

Weapons play does have inherent differences I think than unarmed sparring. It's far easier to discern what would have been lethal or debilitating techniques.

My colleague George Turner insightfully once observed there is a certain schizophrenia at work with fencers when they free-play. Their weapon is "real" their target is "real" and the technique or cut they deliver as taught is also "real." But the outcome is nothing in the way of real-world results. It's hypothetical only. So each time they deliver a particular technique the reality repeatedly is that no harm is done. But in their minds-eye, there is a result, such as the opponent being seriously cut or their leg falling off. Thus, they continue to think that in a real fight these same "unreal" actions will transform into lethal actions. But why would believe that something that doesn't hurt in practice will kill in reality? The answer then is that practice must consist of executing realistic techniques in as realistic a manner as possible so that in any safe mock-combat consideration can be made as to what degree it actually approximates lethal fighting in earnest.

George also suggested that one reason why some people react so negatively to someone who spars "more martially" with differently rules, is that their innate understanding of physics frightens them. He suggested they might play with swords all they want and convince themselves their blows are powerful. But when they face a weapon suddenly coming around at speeds they instinctively know will hurt very badly, there's a gut reaction of, "My god! That thing could kill me!" Suddenly the sword dance isn't very much fun...shades of Leckuechner's Rule number 12: "If you frighten easily, don't learn fencing."

We might recall how the great 19th century swordsman and fencing historian Captain Sir Richard Burton writing on then differences between foil play and epee duels in his, The "Sentiment of the Sword", noting it was common in French fencing schools of the time that blows or attacks could "be attempted once or twice in the assault, but never in a duel, because of the great dangers involved." Complaining how people playing in the fencing class were beginning to do artificial techniques that were ineffective or suicidal in real combat, Burton wrote, "How often you hear in the salles d'armes 'I do this in an assault; I should never attempt it in the field.'" He also added in contrast, "the faults which we would avoid in the salle d'armes are useful in the field".

JC

[Richard Strey]

Hi John.
You are right about the bad habits... which is why I said you have to see LARP "the right way" to get a benefit beyond fun without the drawbacks. But then, it's useful to be able to defend yourself against bad habits, as well. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" />

I've spent some time searching the web for a graphic swordbuilding guide that would be informative to you, but I have had no luck so far. I can, however point you to the online shop (bear with me):
Schatzkammer
Click on "Online-Shop"
Prod. Übersicht (Product Index)
Wehr und Waffen (Arms and Weapons)
Schwerter (Swords)
The sixth one should be the Anderthalbhänder (Hand and a Half Sword). Click for details. The image is distorted, though, as the hilt appears to be too long. This is basically what I use in a LARP environment to win all my "fights". The blade length is exactly that of a purpleheart waster, the hilt is about 20% longer. The weight is half that of a steel sharp (about 780g vs. 1550g of my Pavel Moc sword, at the same blade length).

The training weapons we are currently making are modified by coating the fiberglass core in contact glue and covering it with fabric tape. This reduces the flex considerably, while adding weight as well. The Cross has a core of several layers of leather riveted together and actually works (yay!), the grip contains lead cord (the stuff you have sewn into the bottom of your courtains) and the pommel is pear shaped. The finish is latex and a poly-urethane covering.
Which leaves us with a sword looking similar to the one in the picture, at "real" weight and -once silicone oil is applied- it actually slides against the other weapon. Still, a little *boing* remains. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

[John_Clements]

Sounds good. Would love to see two generic no frills versions to test.

Are you involved in their production???

JC

[Richard Strey]

Yes, I am. Right now, we are building a handful of "post-prototypes" privately. The additional steps that go into the "special" properties of the weapon beyond that of a LARP-prop prohibit the professional production anyway. It just takes too much time. <img src="/forum/images/icons/wink.gif" alt="" /> We plan to bring some to the "1st International Festival for Historical German Martial Arts" in Bayreuth this November. To show off, compare and maybe inspire others. So if any ARMA members would be present, we could compare training tools and get ahead in that area. I'm looking forward to that.

[Shane Smith]

That sounds interesting.Where is Bayreuth on the map for those of us not in the know?Thanks <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

[Richard Strey]

Southern Germany. <img src="/forum/images/icons/laugh.gif" alt="" />

[Guest]

My 2 cents.

I left Eastern Martial Arts because it became too political and tooo sporty. Martial Artists walking around cocky because they can fight "sporty" at a tournment but can't hold thier ground in a "real" fighting situation. Thats why I really enjoy UFC.

As for sparring, and I've heard other so called "Western Martial Artists" mock the ARMA "free play"system. ARMA's methodology is exactly why I joined ARMA. I looked around other WMA organizations and finally, after monitoring the ARMA Forum, said "hey this is for me". I wish ARMA was around when I was a teenager.

You can't practice a fighting art and not fight....nuff said.

[Brian Hunt]

Todd,

I will add my 2 cents here and make if 4.

I so totally agree with everything you said, that there is no reason to even add to it, just step up and agree. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Brian Hunt

[Jake_Norwood]

Much the same is true here. My father, an ex-airborne Ranger, was chatting with me one day about swordsmanship. We were watching my sister perform in a "live steel" demonstration with the "Stormy Knights" (ARMA-TN might know what I'm talking about, she's a regular at the Tennessee Ren Faire outside of Franklin). My father said, "these guys remind me of a lot of the [Army] reservists [who have never been on real active duty] that come out and play soldier once a month and strut around thinking that they're warriors or actually know what their doing. They're just pretending. What you [ARMA] guys do is something else. That's what I see when I compare these guys to you guys--what you're doing is the real thing."

Now, my dad is no expert on swordsmanship, but he's seen some crazy stuff. He was basing his opinions on ARMA videos and the flouyshing and sparring that he had seen me do. Both of those things are integral to the ARMA methodology of practicing with intent and the hypothetical reality of "what if I really had to fight for my life with this stuff?" We just can't do these things without sparring.

I thought WMA was pretty cool before ARMA, but it was the realization that I'd get to use what I was learning--even on a mock combat level--that really sold me on the then-HACA.

Jake