contact

[Haduken]

Can a non contact system still be considered to be MA at all? Or like Tao Bo and Boxercise, is it not just an exercise class looking a bit like MA?

[cavallin]

hmm what about if they do patterns though? have you heard of a system that does only sparring and it's no contact??

[Haduken]

it doesn't have to be only sparring... or only patterns, although i would argue that any style that is only patterns is just dancing - still shouldn't any system have contact to consider itself an MA?

[pj_goober]

it doesn't have to be only sparring... or only patterns, although i would argue that any style that is only patterns is just dancing - still shouldn't any system have contact to consider itself an MA?
depends on your definition of Martial arts. by most classical definitions no, a pattern only styles can still be MA.

[Haduken]

indeed it does PJ goober, however, i the defining of MA is a whole other kettle of fish... and i don't quite have the energy for that one today, lol, so to turn t around a bit, does anyone out there practice a non-contact art, and do they consider it MA?

[pj_goober]

well if they didn't they wouldn;t be on MARTIAL ARTS planet would they :rolleyes:

[Haduken]

you are not making this easy are you PJ... i know this... i am interested to hear WHY they feel it is an MA

[pj_goober]

you are not making this easy are you PJ... i know this... i am interested to hear WHY they feel it is an MA

ask a stupid question get a sarcastic answer...

[Haduken]

i don't remember asking you anything

[Moony]

you are not making this easy are you PJ... i know this... i am interested to hear WHY they feel it is an MA

Alos, and i'm not getting at you, it's only goo that your talking to. the rest of PJ are doing other things.

Moony

[Haduken]

is pj goober more than one... i don't understand?

[pj_goober]

is pj goober more than one... i don't understand?

ignore moony, shes being silly.
No i am only one person.
You did ask a question though, and it was a stupid one. hence the sarcastic (but still valid nonetheless) answer.

[Moony]

is pj goober more than one... i don't understand?

My bad, i was being silly due to my insider knowledge. PJ is many people, Goo just stuck it on the front of his name for some reason.

Getting back on topic.....

It depends in what context your talking about. If you mean 'fighting System' then none contact MA's won't fit in it, doesn't stop them being MA's though IMO.

Moony

[Haduken]

what makes something being an MA then moony?

and gooby i wrote: "does anyone out there practice a non-contact art, and do they consider it MA?" - so unless you pratice a non-contact art (which i wouldn't advise with a gob like yours :D), then i wasn't asking you was I?

[Timmy Boy]

I can hear a load of "the difference between a martial artist and a fighter is..." coming on :D

[Haduken]

oh dear... what i thought was a simple little conversation starter too :D
by the way... what is the difference between an martial artist and a fighter? :D KIDDING!!! :D

[ap Oweyn]

ignore moony, shes being silly.
No i am only one person.
You did ask a question though, and it was a stupid one. hence the sarcastic (but still valid nonetheless) answer.

Actually the original question was a fine one. Your response, on the other hand, has been just shy of useful.

Haduken,

In my opinion, arts need to have a contact component if they're going to be applicable. Sparring using as many variables as possible (including a degree of contact that at least familiarizes you with the sensation of being hit) is essential if you're looking to apply what you know.

That said, there's always going to be a sliding scale where sparring with contact is concerned. You're always trying to strike the perfect balance between safety, realism, range of techniques, and freeform practice.

Take kyudo for example. Japanese archery. Obviously, training that against a fully resisting opponent would be tricky. It would be an interesting experiment to see such a thing institutionalized the way that kendo institutionalized contact training for swordsmanship. But there's also a phenomenon there where kendo (and indeed Western fencing) takes on techniques, strategies, and tactics of its own. So it becomes less and less a genuine representation of swordfighting. It's a tough balancing act.

But in so far that it's reasonable, I think we need to train with contact. I'm from FMA. So "reasonable" might mean padded sticks, a helmet, no kicking in the kneecap, etc. You've got to weigh what you want to gain with what you're willing to risk.

Something like taebo or boxercise is not martial arts. It's martial arts inspired. But, advertising not withstanding, there's no effort made whatsoever to train application. No partner drills. No sparring. Etc. Now, whether someone in that class could pull out a decent sidekick in a pinch is too case-by-case to guess. But in institutional terms, I don't think the intent of taebo and similar programs is to convey a combative sense.


Stuart

[sliver]

I hearby nominate Suart for the title of "reasonable," a grand honorific we should all aspire to. Well said mate.

[ap Oweyn]

Hey cheers Sliver. I appreciate it.


Stuart

[Haduken]

good post...I agree...I feel that contact plays a huge part in preparing a student. One of my main arguments against schools that practice with too little contact is the story of many a trained 'martial artsist' with years of dojo training with no real contact, getting into a live situation, thinking they can handle themselves, taking one shot, and everything they ever learnt went out of there head because they are so unused to being hit... it is a part of mental conditioning aswell as physical, IMHO

[ap Oweyn]

good post...I agree...I feel that contact plays a huge part in preparing a student. One of my main arguments against schools that practice with too little contact is the story of many a trained 'martial artsist' with years of dojo training with no real contact, getting into a live situation, thinking they can handle themselves, taking one shot, and everything they ever learnt went out of there head because they are so unused to being hit... it is a part of mental conditioning aswell as physical, IMHO

Absolutely!

[Casado]

I've observed that in schools where sparring is very limited that students are often more sloppy.

I also believe that it's important to practice techniques against people of different shapes and sizes. Sparring improves speed and accuracy, as well as allowing students to experience what it really is like when faced with force. Training gently with a partner and having a laugh might be good fun, but it's not going to help you when someone squares up to you in a bar and you have a fraction of a second to decide what to do.

If sparring is limited, a punch in the mouth will probably cause shock for a few seconds. That's long enough for the attacker to pumel the student.

Isn't this why sparring has become more popular in MAs in recent years? Even 'gentle' arts like Aikido.

[Haduken]

i don't believe it is restricted to sparring though casado, i think you can pressure test your system in many ways... but they all involve contact :D

[tellner]

Yes. Kyudo and firearms training.

[stillness]

I have not trained in this system, but I believe that Capoeira is no contact. Do you consider it a martial art? Most do, I believe.

[tellner]

I have not trained in this system, but I believe that Capoeira is no contact. Do you consider it a martial art? Most do, I believe.
It's not exactly "no contact". More like "if you're good you won't get hit much".

[firecoins]

Tae Bo and Cardio Kick Box are nothing more than step aerobics or spinning class. They are created as a money making aerobics class are a "craze" amoung heath enthusists. They are not MA.

Now aikido is an MA which for the most part has no sparring. Or at least its controversial in whether to have it or not. It is an MA either way. Martial Arts can have a spiritual side to it which Aikido has.

[Slindsay]

Now aikido is an MA which for the most part has no sparring. Or at least its controversial in whether to have it or not. It is an MA either way. Martial Arts can have a spiritual side to it which Aikido has.

No ones saying they can't. To be honest for something to be called a MA I think all it needs is to aim to make people who study it better fighters. Even if no contact at all is involved it would still be a Martial Art. It would just suck at preparing people to fight.

[Haduken]

aikido may not have much 'sparring' but sparring is not the only way to pressure test and have contact, as i said before, any aikido club worth its salt pressure tests its techniques... yoshinkan aikido training will leave you bruised and battered

[pj_goober]

To properly answer this thread rather than just being sarcastic...

No, i don't believe that a martial art HAS to have contact. I think that anything proclaiming to teach self defence should, but then i also think that anything proclaiming to teach self defence should spend as much time on avoidance, awareness and the such like as on the phsical aspects of MA. So most things that people think of as "self defence" (including my own style) are severly lacking when it comes to genuine self defence.
But anyway - self defence should have contact.
What about "fighting arts" - arts that proclaim to make you a better fighter? I think that for them to be truely effective they should contain contact, but is it absolutely 100% essential..no. A style claiming to make you a better fighter with no contact is likely to be rubbish, but just because something is rubbish doesn't change the nature of what it is. a Bigmac is a rubbish burger - but its still a burger.

What about martial arts that have no self defence application, and no fighting application, i'm thinking Tai chi, iaido etc...
In my opinion there is no doubt that they are Martial arts, almost every practitioner of them would claim they are, almost all outsiders would agree. Why then are they martial arts? because they come from roots which are martial in origin.

Then theres the case of Tai bo, boxersize etc. I personally don't think they are martial arts, although honestly i think i'd struggle to defend that point of view from someone who thought they were...

[ap Oweyn]

Now that's a good post.

EDIT: That's not to say I agreed with the whole thing. But it actually said something. I agree with the points below that taijiquan can be applied and sparred with, for example.

[tellner]

What about martial arts that have no self defence application, and no fighting application, i'm thinking Tai chi,

Correction here. Taiji properly taught is a devastating martial art. Unfortunately almost nobody who claims to teach it has the skills, knowledge or training. The slow as molasses "tie chee" in the park of the crystal-gazing bark-eating set has about the same relation to the martial art that Pad Thai does to Thai pads.

[Matt_Bernius]

What about martial arts that have no self defence application, and no fighting application, i'm thinking Tai chi, iaido etc...Tellner took Tai Chi, I'll take Iaido-

Iaido has a heck of a lot of application, but within its context: the Upper Class in 16th century Japan. In fact, any martial art is, at its core, a codaifed collection of doctrine, strategy, and tactics designed to help practioners survive and succeed under specifical defined combat conditions.

And the fact is, many martial arts practiced today are NOT optimized for modern combat or the immediate conditions being faced in one's community. They're all stylized in one way or another. But they don't cease being martial arts.

- Matt

[pj_goober]

ok, the taiji thing i'll accept, as it was based on a common perspective of tai chi - i've been to one tai chi session and it was highly dubious to my mind. but whatever. that wasn't the point.

Iaido, what ever you say about 16th century japan, it has no CURRENT self defence or fighting application (IMNVHO)...I don;t live in 16th century japan..do you?

[Matt_Bernius]

Iaido, what ever you say about 16th century japan, it has no CURRENT self defence or fighting application (IMNVHO)...I don;t live in 16th century japan..do you?Show me most martial arts and I'll be happy to pull out techniques that have little to no relivance to modern self defense or were designed for very specific cultural conditions. Heck, I don't need to go further than unifroms.

They're still martial arts. And I've never seen an Iaido professor claiming that thier martial art's function is for modern self defense. I can't say the same for other systems teaching antiquated techniques.

- Matt

[pj_goober]

Go back and read what i said. in no way was i suggesting that Iaido is not a martial art.

What about martial arts that have no self defence application, and no fighting application, i'm thinking Tai chi, iaido etc...
In my opinion there is no doubt that they are Martial arts, almost every practitioner of them would claim they are, almost all outsiders would agree. Why then are they martial arts? because they come from roots which are martial in origin.

you're right most martial arts do have techniques which are of no relevance to the realities of fighting, the defining feature of an art like Iaido (and there are others Iaido was just an example) is that NO techniques do have real applications, outside of 16th century Japan.

So essentially we agree, but you didn't read what i was saying. ;)

[Matt_Bernius]

So essentially we agree, but you didn't read what i was saying. ;)Yeas (and sadly for me) yes. Light knuckle rapping duely noted.

- Matt