im sorry, when i talk to someone i usually presume they have the reading ability to reflect their physical age. guess i was wrong. or maybe you have some flash powder in your eyes.
I'm sorry, I guess I will just take your word for it then I'm trusting that way...Then again, I'm guessing you lack the logic to assume that, I might assume that you could be lying
OK guys how about we cool it? Everyone has an opinion and you all have the ability to convey it in a civilised manner. Bullshido is Bullshido it has it's uses and does some good stuff just as MAP does. This thread IMO is to discuss sparing as it relates to Bujinjkan Taijutsu and that’s the key. We have been told such exercises can be detrimental to our art we’re not on about other arts and as people have said it is just one tool in the box there are others.
i have a login there called, funnily enough, ikken hisatsu. this is a good time to stop digging. in order to help you out with that i have a special guest-
Guys, take a look again. Ikken here is not kagekaze on Bullshido. Ikken here, while having his own opinion, has never (that i can recall) trolled on the ninjutsu side of MAP. He may not agree with our training methods, but I don't recall him being a jerk about it.
I certainly agree with your sentiment. Thought i would add something I wrote in my journal the other month regarding this topic. I was approaching the topic from the perspective of training for 'combat' rather than "point sparring" or "sport orientated activities". "If the argument is that 'sparring' is considered folly and a waste of time then obviously I do not agree. This got me thinking, if we assume that there are times that kumite (generic term for the sparring) has a place in conflict then is it the case are there are times where 'taijutsu' does not? Essentially the answer would need to be 'of course not', why else are we training if not to develop our movement such that our goal within a conflict can be accomplished with the minimum of effort and the greatest of ease. However, look at the question from this perspective for a second. Why is it that taijutsu 'works' within the training environment? Obviously the major factor is the amount of skill the person performing the movement has. The other major factor, that people seem to forgot, is training partner capitulation. The way I see the different levels of training for conflict (for that is the purpose of the Art) is through differing levels of opponent capitulation. In my opinion the goal 'taijutsu movements' is to achieve a dominant / advantageous position (in terms of kukan). At this point it is easy to apply brilliant technique and it is easier to control the opponent. Within the confines of the dojo this position is not only obtained through skill but also partner capitulation. "I'll punch, you defend." That's fine for training and gives a good starting point for learning the Art. It would be vary dangerous to only train with this mindset. If partner capitulation is taken out of the equation, in that the partner will resist or counter the application of movement and technique, then a dominant position or control of kukan is harder to obtain. It is obviously not impossible though but it is very much dependant on the skill level of the two protagonists. A greater level of fluidity and understanding is required. Obviously many dojo's practice exercises like the one described above. It is simply a natural progression of the training. Taking the example further; assume that the partner is now resisting and attempting to counter movements, add in a highly aggressive intent for causing damaged (on your person) and the will to do so. Doing the above exercise allows people to experience the sensations of 'combat' within a safe enviroment. This is the key. The main question is: do the effortless movements within the dojo with the capitulating partner easily translate to effortless movements within the scenario described above when that person has little or no experience of that particular stress? I don't think they do. Correlation between the two will become easier to achieve assuming that any training done is actually preparing the student for conflict. Until faced with this type of situation it would take a very confident / arrogant / stupid MA'ist to say this would pose no problems. The ease of translation would most likely depend on the time spent learning the Art, the person's taijutsu 'ability', the quality of training done, the ability of the opponent and finally, those unknown factors that always seem to come into play. The effect of capitulation within training is that the tables become weighted in favour of the practitioner. Like I said, fine for learning and playing. But taijutsu has a place when the tables are evenly weighted or, god forbid, weighted in the favour of the aggressor. The only way to train for that is to increase the difficulty of the application of movement and the mental stress of the situation. What training tool allows students to experience a controlled level of conflict, both in the physical and mental realms, and tests abilities to perform within a conflict when the tables are not weighted in favour of the defender (in other words, having their partner 'allow' a lock to go on)? I have said many times before, 'sparring' (or whatever you want to call it) is just a tool for training. It is not the be-all-and-end-all but also shouldn't be thrown away as a pointless exercise. There are those that see sparring movements as completely different to 'taijutsu' movements and pigeon hole them as such. Personally, I see them as one in the same. Developing adaptation of movement is the primary focus of 'sparring' excercises. It is not simply about trading blows or rolling about the floor. The danger of not including some sort of sparring exercise is that people become a bit over confident in their abilities or worse, simple deluded in any analysis of their abilities. There should be cross over between practical 'fighting' ability and 'safe dojo' movements as they are the same thing and only differ in the complexity of the mental and physical interaction. At the end of the day the focus of training should be to provide the students with a means of defending themselves or providing the tools for ending a conflict or potential conflict with the minimum of fuss and effort."
The only way to prepare for getting hit is to actually dip your foot in the water. Also sparring will look poor and un-organised that is actually how it will look in an actual fight with as much or as little taijitsu as you want. Trust me.
Bouk Teef, One of the problems I have with your comments is that everyone that does sparring says they are doing it for training for the street- even if it is obvious that they are not. People will not work with the reality of knives and yet still say that they do sparring because they want to survive on the street. Sparring can be an ego trap. It is a way to show that you are better than someone else. It attracts people who have issues and need to prove themselves somehow. People start out trying it to improve as part of their training, and end end up as it being the reason for their training. Another is the idea of a 'resisting' opponent. In the example I gave, when one arm release does not work, you flow into the one that will work. The whole idea of trying a certain technique against someone who knows enough about it coming to try to resist it strikes me as counter to what I have heard Soke saying. Instead of trying to overcome resistence, as you talk about, I would rather hit him with another move while he is still concentrated on the first. And obviously, many of the shihan in Japan like Nagato sensei feel the same way. I wonder if some of the people with good relationships with the Japanese could put together an article with comments by them on the matter. Then we could just post a link to it in the FAQ section and stop trying to argue about the matter every three weeks. If we could get Soke's ideas about sparring, that would save us all a lot of time.
The problem with that is that sparring is not combat. So it is not like putting your foot in the water. Facing someone with a knife is a lot different from facing someone on the mat. Trust me.
Grimjack, it doesn't matter what Soke or any of the Shihan say. If it doesn't fall into a set training idealogy that some people feel is neccesary, nothing that anyone says will change their mind. Some people feel that they need to spar, fine. Let them. Those of you that feel the need to spar, keep in mind that we are discussing Bujinkan training methodology here, which does not include sparring. And nothing you say will change that. You can say what you want and you can go over to Bullshido and spout off all you want, but the fact remains that we train the way we do, because it does work.
How many knife weilding people have you faced - just for clairty? Also after the first move has been done and not worked it then becomes a more high tempo and greater stakes spar which looks untidy but should still work. Your first move fails then he is on you and your under pressure.
so filipino styles dont count for what reason? in a club filled with people who are egotistical idiots, yes it could be a problem. in a club where everyone is helping everyone else to whatever goal (we save our "fighting" for the ring) we are all team mates. there is no ego when we spar except in a friendly rivalry way. i dont believe it attracts people who have issues or who need to prove themselves. because of my gargantuan superiority complex i have no need to prove myself to anybody.
Agreed. But I am not so insecure with my training that I feel the need to go to other forums to tell them if they don't train my way they suck. It would be nice if we saw the same respect here on MAP from them.
Its not just your Ikkens way though: Its the way of many many arts. Ninjitsu has a specific close nit group and training style which is different to what many people expect to see. Granted it does not mean it is incapable of working but many people can not articulate why they do what they do and just follow what they are told blindly. This raises questions to its effectiveness. I know what worked for me when I did Ninjitsu and still keep some of it to hand now but I also know what I felt was not practical. I keep an open mind and always question what I am shown or told as it keeps my fresh and means I learn from other experienced people around me.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the core of the issue. And my last contribution to this thread. You'd be amazed just how rarely I feel the need to go to another martial arts forum to enlighten them as to why they are delusional. If you feel the need to do that here, perhaps you should ask yourself why.
funnily enough the only person doing that here is one of your fellow ninjas. last time i checked, there was no rules about having a discussion in a forum if you dont do the art. i see a lot of people in here who get a bit het up if someone dares to express a different method of training. i dont think anyone apart from the obvious people in this thread are trying to attack ninjitsu.
I'm just going to comment about the post regarding Takamatsu-sensei's training in Japan and China, one because I feel it is taken out of context, and two, because my name was thrown up over on Bullshido in a more derogatory fashion. One, Takamatsu's matches did not have rules, and two, were rarely ever "sparring matches" as most he participated in were to the death. This is not the kind of sparring you are talking about doing. Secondly, as someone above pointed out, in order to do Soke's Budo, both Soke and the Shihan have told us not to spar or it will hinder our taijutsu. I, too, wish to move like Soke and Shiraishi-sensei and not like Mike Tyson or Ken Shamrock. I don't need to hear opinions from people doing MMA. Why? Because I know guys that don't spar in their training that go out and use their training for their jobs almost every day. People want to go around talking about Dale giving "bullshido" quotes? I bet he has more experience dealing with aggression outside of matches with rules than most of the MMA guys that like to come around and tell us how we need to train to learn -our- art. But don't take my post to mean I care about what you say. I just hate to see misconceptions thrown around. I still know that most people that put down the Bujinkan would still never come to Japan and attack a shihan, even if they had their airfare paid for and lodging provided. It's too easy to sit back and pretend that your way is the best and only way. Quite frankly, I don't see why both training methods can't be okay for learning how to fight, but then that thing called "ego" exists. Oh, and if you think that just because you've trained in the art gives you insight and the right to speak on its training methods, it doesn't. I don't care if you were once a judan because for all we know, your ego shown through the minute you walked into the training hall and so soke gladly fed said ego and sent you on your way. The fact will still remain that people that don't incorporate sparring into their training go out and work in situations that require their training knowledge on a regular basis and they are alive and well today. Everyone's mileage may vary. Personally, I still get nailed fairly regularly even training in Japan, so despite my background in sparring arts years ago, I still am used to getting hit. But now I'm just rambling so this post is done and so is my interest in this thread. We all know that no one's training methods will change. So really, why are we still posting?
