Anyone who has read this
blog, is familiar with the fact that I adamantly disagree with
the concept of “sparring” (as it is most commonly pursued and
performed).
That doesn't mean
that I disagree with every form of it though. I regularly have
my students participate in 1, 2 and 3-step Kumite. The difference (in
how I have my students participate) is in how that
kumite practice is performed.
Kumite is used as a
training exercise. The majority of the initial exercises are to
acclimate the student to striking with power/force.
We will have 1 student
don the protective gear, and the other has none. In most of the scenarios, the student with no gear will be the tori (thus,
they can be allowed to strike full-power upon the uke).
Depending upon the
individual technique, the party that puts on the protective gear can
be alternated. Unlike the more typical “dancing” tap
fest (that usually constitutes a “match”), by not
wearing gear, the tori can more realistically apply
(actual) techniques upon a protected uke.
This allows the ability
to feel the application (at full-power) when performed
upon someone that is (able to) resist/respond (when the tori
performs their defensive action).
Unlike the more common
free-form manner of sparring (with points, and a ring
and all that), by restricting the motions allowed, to be only 1 to 3
strikes (by the tori and/or uke), and by being protected, the uke
can perform strikes without concern of being (seriously) injured.
Conversely, there are exercises where we have the tori "suit-up" and allow the uke to strike the tori using (full-power) strikes to their head (which is encased in the protective headgear we provide). The uke is allowed to use arm pads (because this is where the strikes are often focused during this training).
The focus of this manner of practice, is to experience the technique's performance (with sufficient stressor's in place, to provide a level of error into the practiced motion).
The focus of this manner of practice, is to experience the technique's performance (with sufficient stressor's in place, to provide a level of error into the practiced motion).
Though there is no
perfect manner of practice, what proves to be the most
productive (for each student) will be different.
Through this manner of practice, we're hoping to provide the safest
method that we can (while providing the most practical
application experience).
Our concern is that our
students don't become dependent upon the protective gear
that's being utilized during the
practice (therefor it is usually
the uke only, who is
using that equipment).
These
practice sessions commonly can't be continued for extended periods of
time. Even though wearing protective gear, being the recipient
of repeated impacts can prove to be quite exhausting.
We
will usually alternate our training sessions between Tuite, kumite and kata/exercise practice. We don't tend to emphasize the
bunkai aspect of
training (it's just something that occurs
and is mentioned during the course of training).
Kyusho
practice requires special
conditions as well (it's not always “safe” to randomly perform neck
strikes, LOL). Having acquired (usually through being constructed by us)
protective “neck” padding, there can be some limited
practice of those manner of strikes being performed as well.
The
limited motion (1, 2, 3 step) kumite (IMO) is closer to an actual
conflict than any of the “sport” models being currently promoted. My own experience has shown that confrontations rarely last
beyond a few strikes. If they have run longer, somebody
was screwing-up, LOL.
It isn't the concept of "Kumite" that I disagree with. It's the competitive aspect that serves no purpose in Life-Protection training. Our students are not concerned with "trophies" or awards. Their "ego's" don't require re-fueling through some manner of competitive interchange between one another (or anyone else for that matter).
Our student's seek to understand how to protect themselves, in the most efficient manner that's possible (for them). This manner of performing kumite practice, is utilized for just that purpose, yet another method of practice.
6 comments:
Is the ippon-sanbon kumite you are describing scripted or unscripted? By that, I mean does the tori know what the uke will do before they do it and is the uke allowed to respond naturally to the counter that occurs? I am used to "ippon kumite" and "sanbon kumite" being used to describe completely scripted, unrealistic partner drills, so I was curious. Thank you!
For our (beginning) student's purposes, the exercise is scripted. The goal is to (first) understand how/if the tori's strike will effectively nullify the uke's (striking) arm.
These exercises are intended to familiarize the student with “at-speed” application of the practiced techniques (focusing primarily upon technique placement upon the uke's arms, and the results thereof).
“Realism” is a vague term itself (different to each individual). Many of the more simplistic practice methods are often more “realistic” than those performed with everyone wearing enough padding to jump off a building without concern for injury, LOL.
Different people/systems utilize the terms “ichi-ban”, “ni-bon” and “san-bon” differently. We use the more direct translation of 1, 2 and 3 motions kumite. It is a “training” exercise, and is not intended as an equivalency to combat.
Thank you for your response! I suppose that my question, then, would be do your students ever get an opportunity to pressure-test their techniques against unknown attacks, whether through these drills or others?
With regards to "unrealistic partner drills," I was simply referring to the Shotokan-esque method of doing attack-and-defend type drills.
Hmm,.. well, our manner of (that type of) practice is “different” from most that I've had experience with (in regards to what your calling “pressure-test”).
Our beginning students are taught to perform “their” technique/motion (that's pre-planned in their head), regardless of what/how the aggressor attacks them (when the situation allows for one to do so, which most do).
Our (Root?) defensive motions will achieve their “goal”, regardless of which manner (Left/Right) attack is being utilized. Until experienced (“first-hand”), it's an awkward concept to get one's head around, LOL.
That is definitely an awkward concept to envision--I have learned techniques that can be done the same against several different attacks, but not all of them.
Most schools do their pressure-testing through sparring, although I don't believe the way it is usually done is all that useful for self defense training. We typically pressure-test our defensive techniques by having an uke attack (unscripted) with any of the methods commonly used according to crime statistics and peoples' experience, and they try to react to what is being done by the tori as realistically as possible (flinching, grabbing, falling, resisting, etc.--whatever an untrained person might do). It gets intense when done properly, and I feel it keeps us honest but I am always open to seeing other methods. We do also spar (usually medium-contact with grappling allowed) but that is mostly for fun and getting accustomed to being hit and not stopping.
I would love to see how you go about all of this, one day. Thank you, again, for your responses!
Well, it is a different approach to how “defense” is commonly being accomplished, LOL. The taught defensive motion(s) are began the same (regardless of the opening aggressive action).
There are (actually) only 8 possible ways (Left and Right) for an aggressor to strike (using the arm's) the tori (in the head, which is the most common 1st strike attempt made).
With only “minor” variation (between them), the opening defensive action for all are identical. They only vary in their continuation and follow-up.
The "main/initial" purpose of a defensive technique is to protect the defender (tori), after that it's variations of what to do with the uke.
Post a Comment