Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Comparing methodologies
#1
There was a pretty good discussion going on at a different board that I was involved in regarding the difference between old school/classic TKD and sport training. This boils down to the difference between self-defense training methodology and sport training methodology.

Unfortunately, there were three individuals that are sport-centered that lost their minds and took the thread off-topic to the point it was closed and some of their threads removed.

At any rate, I wanted to offer one of my posts here for consideration. It involved the differences between true SD training and so-called full contact sport sparring as far as effectiveness in the real world.

Quote:Excellent post. To take this a step further, in regards to sparring;
  • Do the opponents begin the sparring immediately, or is there a time prior to the physical conflict that verbal de-esculation skills can be attempted and practiced?
  • Is there an opportunity to evade or escape?
  • Do either have the option and/or ability to use improvised weapons?
  • Can either attempt to use cover and/or concealment?
  • Can several of the opposition have 'friends' join the conflict so that multiple opponents are now in the equation?
  • Is the same footwear always worn?
  • Are both parties required to abide by the same rules?
  • Any chance of going to the ground?
  • Any chance the 'good guy' can do a gross motor skill 'stun and run'?
  • Do they spar in all lighting conditions, including dim light conditions?
  • Do they always spar on a dry, level surface or are slopes and alternative surfaces utilized like the parking lot, grass etc?
  • Is a uniform and/or belt always worn, or regular street clothes?
  • Is the sparring session begun at a pre-arranged time or is one party completely surprised (read typical ambush)?
  • If a mistake is made, or a strike connects do the opponents continue or do they reset their positions and start again?
  • Are they always started in a standing position, facing each other? Or can one be on the ground at a postiton of disadvantage at the start?
  • Do they always train inside the school or can they train out in the parking lot between a couple of parked cars, a ditch, an elevator, a stairway, an alley etc?

These are just some of the considerations that may separate the two methodologies. This is what I'm talking about and that old school, in my experience (and not just TKD) addresses.

As a side note, one of those posters was eventually banned.  It's a shame when people can't disagree in an agreeable manner.  They supposedly teach their students courtesy yet can't be brought to express it themselves.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#2
I think that training methodology goes way beyond just the sparring aspect. Sometimes even more traditional schools don't go as full on as Kong Soo Do describes not due to a lack of SD respect, but more for safety or other considerations. I know we incorporate some of the things mentioned but it's rare because of safety and age considerations. However we do not do Olympic style sparring but incorporate hands as well as feet with equal emphasis on both.

For me I see many school TKD sports being very lopsided in training. A lot of sparring or sparring related drills, and those funneled into Olympic style competition. Then some forms with a lot of focus on execution but many times not as much focus on application. More self defense oriented training is not necessarily completely absent, but definitely far less emphasized.

On the other hand, traditional TKD has a broader base. Sparring is a component but doesn't dominate training. Forms are done, but there is focus on application as well as execution. The training also branches out with a lot of self defense work with partners and on mats to incorporate throws, takedowns, and the like. Elbows, knees, gouges, etc. are taught as valid and necessary techniques to have in the arsenal.

In a sense it is what the methodology has in its sights as an end goal. Is it competition or life? If it's competition naturally training will be geared towards winning within the bounds of those rules....and they will excel at it. If it's more life training it is geared towards more self defense and character development with the art as a vehicle. These students often may not fare as well in competition simply because they haven't spent the time training for it.
Reply
#3
I think their is room for both but self Defense has to be the primary. It is irresponsible to start with all sparring. if you don't know how to stand or block or punch or even kick correctly in your art you have no business doing sparring. I make my students weight until about the yellow belt before I even let them do point sparring because practicing the basics by knowing them threw repitition is more important than them learning it real quick memorizing it then moving on to fun time with sparring. We use two types of sparring other then just self defense hoshinsul we use it not as real fighting because it is not but it is used as only a training tool. you learn distance,reaction, and force your self to be more physical fit with your punches and kicks. For many the sport part of it makes them practice and streach but it is always used and i say again as a training tool and their tests and self defense techniques is the primary way to fight. Our more advanced students do more contact sparring the type my instructor learned with light sparring with no pads and later with pads but more kumite sparring with sweeps low kicks just not to joints, and light facial contact if your kicking and don't have your hands up. contact sparring is also used as a training tool and can be closer to real fighting and works well with self defense techniques because your throwing real ranges in the fight.
Some schools don't teach Um and Yang approach and I have found that I put out beter martial arts with this approach and can keep it safe.
Reply
#4
Does anyone use scenario-based training?  For example, we don't spar in the conventional sense of the term.  Rather we try to mimic a realistic scenario i.e. someone trying to mug you at an ATM/parking lot/hallway, or someone suspicious approaching you from behind, or someone pounding on your front door etc.  

After a scenario such as this is well look at realistic, appropriate responses;
  • Are you able to avoid the situation all together?
  • Are you able to talk your way out of the situation?
  • Are you able to evade the problem or escape the situation?
  • Do you yell to catch your attacker off guard as well as get others attention (i.e. yell 'fire' and not 'help')?
  • Are you looking for improvised weapons, targets of opportunity, avenues of escape?
  • Are you looking to see if there are multiple attackers?
These things should precede using force, if tactically sound.  In other words, if you can de-escalate the attacker or evade the situation without putting yourself in further danger you should take that option.
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#5
All the time we do scenario training. Knife and gun training from Atm scenario's putting your car keys in your door, we do reaction drills that make you fight a person and you don't know how they are going to grab you or strike at you, we do a lot of lectures and drills for fighting more than one person, at times we ask students to create a self defense technique using books, keys clothing whatever they might have on them at the time as a weapon, we do techniques from the ground with the main focus to get back on your feet, and we do things like sitting in chairs and fighting of an attacker or attackers. everything you mentioned I really make it a point to touch base on all of those aspects. In the Army I learned that anything that can happen will happen "Murphys Law" and so even when we do our hoshinsul techniques I always in one part tell the student ok what if something goes wrong here in your move what would you do. Its a way to drill them to adapt and over come by stressing them and forcing them to react quickly.
Reply
#6
Sparring is detrimental to effective self defense. I will concede that a few aspects of sparring will be of some minimal use (ie; balance and movement), but it will ingrain (if sparring is the focal point of training) tunnel vision at the attacker and here your allowing the attacker, the opportunity to do the same as you, so your actually dueling. The objectivity of SD is to eliminate the threat asap and sparring and the ingrained mindset that develops from overly focused sparring, again allows the attacker multiple attempts to do harm and as stated, Murphy's Law will always interject itself, if time is allowed for it to do so.

All those training scenario's mentioned above, have one major element and that is that a sparring application was never mentioned or present.
Reply
#7
(10-05-2016, 07:32 PM)d_spencer Wrote: All the time we do scenario training. Knife and gun training from Atm scenario's putting your car keys in your door, we do reaction drills that make you fight a person and you don't know how they are going to grab you or strike at you, we do a lot of lectures and drills for fighting more than one person, at times we ask students to create a self defense technique using books, keys clothing whatever they might have on them at the time as a weapon, we do techniques from the ground with the main focus to get back on your feet, and we do things like sitting in chairs and fighting of an attacker or attackers.  everything you mentioned I really make it a point to touch base on all of those aspects.  In the Army I learned that anything that can happen will happen "Murphys Law" and so even when we do our hoshinsul techniques I always  in one part tell the student ok what if something goes wrong here in your move what would you do.  Its a way to drill them to adapt and over come by stressing them and forcing them to react quickly.



Excellent!
Two thousand years ago wise men sought Christ, wise men still do.

Techniques are situational, principles are universal.

Fast as the wind, quiet as the forest, aggressive as fire, and immovable as a mountain.

He who gets there first with the most...wins!

Minimal force may not be minimum force!

We don't rise to the occasion...we sink to the level of our training.


Reply
#8
When your being attacked and you are trying to get other peoples attention the method of yelling fire and not help works better but some people say their is even a better method. when you yell for help often people don't know if you are playing but yelling fire does cause people to turn their heads and at least look but some experts are saying it does not cause an emotional response to actually help you. Think of the five W's who what why where and when. yelling things like " Who are you, Why are you coming towards me, Don't touch me, I don't know you don't come towards me" Basicly you are trying to paint a picture to others around you to not only get their attention but to give them all the information to then act. "an Emotional response to the situation" I don't know if it works really any better then yelling fire but it makes a little more cents to me. anybody else use this method ?
Reply
#9
Even better than yelling fire, yell 'he's got a gun"............In today's mass shooting world, people are more attuned to this type of event and will pay way more attention than a fire. Yelling fire will have most people looking for smoke instead as their first response as opposed to "gun" and immediately their on their horse or a few intrepid heros will attempt to intercede.
Reply
#10
Your wright that is way better. That was a great response I'm going to teach that to my students. Ive never heard that before but it makes the most scents.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)