A short while back I posted about things I did (or wish I did sooner) to improve my Kempo. One of the things I mentioned that caught some attention was my wish that I could go back in time and never point spar. Although I’m definitely feeling the love for a certain Shotokan site, I know someone is going to bring up their article Facing a Harsh Reality: Sparring Measures Skill (You just aren’t as fast as you thought), but there’s a bit of technical difference in the problem I see, and the premise they put forward. I actually agree for the most part with their article, as point sparring is a test of skill. They however think point sparring can be a reasonable test of fighting skill, as it shares many attributes with ‘the real show’. I disagree wholeheartedly, mainly for two reasons.
First, I feel that point sparring rewards bad habits. If I were a football coach, and trained my team to go near, but not over the goal line, and to kick just the slightest bit outside the uprights for field goals, and punished them for actually scoring, I would be unsuccessful when faced with a team that actually played football. The ingrained habits of repeated practice would interfere mightily. Second, there is a negative transfer if I ‘graduate’ to a more accurate style of sparring, in that the sparring skills I already know will slow my progress in developing skills in a more realistic environment. Pulling punches, awkward body posture, stopping if you actually get a good shot in – these don’t make for good real world skills. When I started medium and harder contact continuous sparring, I had a really hard time making good contact with my opponents / training partners for a good long while. I think folks who have never point sparred pick up faster without having to ‘unlearn’ bad habits.
So I don’t spar? No, of course I do. It’s absolutely essential to bridging the gap from theory to application. I just avoid standard point sparring like the plague. My favorite ruleset is medium / hard contact to the body with lighter contact to the head. Play until one partner submits or reaches an indefensible position. If it goes to the ground, go with it. Get rid of the concept of ‘winning’, as it makes people do dumb things to ‘avoid losing’. As soon as we reach a resolution, swap out partners.
But what about kids? Newbies? Nobody just wants to hop in and play fight club. Kids can start with light contact. I actually also enjoy ‘slow’ sparringin that kids (and adults) can explore sparring ideas without ingraining bad ‘stopping’ habits, and it’s a cinch to speed things up as they get more comfortable. Additionally, light contact continuous sparring is a great conditioning exercise and with proper equipment isn’t too intense for anyone.
To liven things up, one can change the rules of the game. If you assign new rules for scoring, students will break out of ruts. One game I like to play is to assign a point value for a certain technique or strategy, and have the students spar continuously while trying to pull it off. What I don’t do is tell the opponent what the altered rule is. This keeps it fresh, and folks are so focused on pulling off the desired move, that neither side usually cares to keep score. If you inject a little ridiculousness now and then, the kids will ask you to play every week. For the other end of the scale, if you have a hardcore class and want to emphasize the potential liabilities of ground work in a crowded public place, try this variation. Have the rest of the class surround the ring, and give out three coins during the match. Assign one competitor heads, and the other tails. If the fight goes to the ground, the folks with the coins count to five and flip. Each helps the competitor that matches their coin toss. Every now and then, signal them not to flip, and just ‘stand by’. It really keeps folks on their toes.
Sparring is a valuable tool, and an essential testing ground for application. It’s a great form of exercise, and can be adjusted for the newest student, and the hard core old dog. Just don’t train your students to miss and then stop to admire their almost good work.
I don’t think the point of the 24FC article was that sparring is a “reasonable test of skill.” My understanding was actually the opposite – as one of the comments summarized, the point was that while it is silly to say that point sparring is an accurate reflection of fighting ability, it is equally silly to say that sparring is devoid of any useful skills to compare. Comment 20 on the article is an excellent summary of the point.
Although the author backs away from the relationship between sparring and testing self defense skill in comments 13 and 20, the title of the article is clear that it is a test of skill, and he takes pains to clarify the difference between testing skill and testing ability.
So, sparring tests skills inherent in self-defense, but doesn’t necessarily test self-defense ability, at least as far as I can tell from the article as is stated here:
from 24fightingchickens.com
I still fall on a net negative balance as far as benefit. The drawbacks outweigh the benefits of point sparring. There is the example of the author ‘demolishing the newbies’ at his MMA practice, but I can’t see why that comes solely as a benefit of sparring as opposed to his other TMA training.