Defending against multiple attackers

By that logic, competitive push-hands is giving better feedback than MMA technical sparring, and breaking boards is better than shadow boxing.

The play-acting depends entirely on the people involved. I don't think it's wise to go hard very often, but when you do it will be the people who train with you who are most dangerous, because they are the people who know how you move and what your weaknesses are. Some drunken bum trying to clock me is not as scary as a training partner trying to take me apart.

Both technical sparring and more competitive sparring have their place in the learning process. Flow drills and general neuromuscular conditioning also.

Again, it's about triangulation.

A lack of armour is not a sure sign of ineffective practitioners, and neither is the presence of armour a sure sign of effective ones.

So how do you train both striking and grappling at higher intensities?

 

Damn it, it thought you where going full spock for a second. XP


Risk vs reward seems relevant here.

 

Train them to a high intensity as just grappling, and just striking, then have one person just striking with bigger gloves on and the other just grappling with smaller gloves on, and then transition to both striking and grappling, with mma sparring gloves at a lower intensity, but being aware of the flaws that might come from the lowered intensity.

Doing a lot of striking with small gloves is a recipe for injury, especially considering all the data about TBIs currently.

 

Tech sparring is just low intensity sparring (still gloved up) where both partners are going the same pace, but are still trying to win whilst keeping that same pace.

Sparring where your not being technical is again counter productive long term.

Have you ever taking part in mma tech sparring?

 

So you're saying that you never spar both striking and grappling at higher intensities?

And small gloves are not a recipe for TBI's. The extra concussive force allowed by protective equipment is a recipe for TBI's. Hence why American football is worse than rugby for brain damage, and boxing gloves are worse than bare-knuckle.

 

You can't honestly call that truly competitive. You're deliberately removing speed and intensity in order for people to learn. So whoever is faster and dominant is taking away their best tools for "winning". Have you never allowed yourself to get into an inferior position in technical sparring so that you could learn from the experience?

I've not sparred in an MMA gym, but everyone else who's ever talked to me about their MMA technical sparring has not described it in the win/lose terms you are giving.

 

Just a question, whats a TBI? Never sene the acronym before.

 

Traumatic brain injury.

Ps did you try Google before asking?

 

Traumatic Brain Injury.

*JINX!*

 

Yep removing physical attributes so you can focus on technical sparring is a very useful drill, your still trying to win, but you also have the risk of injury lessened so you can try new things /working from inferior positions.

But your still trying to win/not lose.

 

So why do you seem so dismissive of taking the same approach to multiple opponents?

 

More praxis would be useful here.

 

What you described is the same as any other light sparring I've done with anyone from any art, including common MMA foundation arts. How are you proposing it is different?

 

Because that's only one part of the approach, hard sparring is also very very important, and no one does it, because it's so very very low percentage.

 

You know how we have pages and pages of discussion with you misunderstanding the majority of terminology in my posts, that is why actual praxis would be useful here.

Which mma foundation arts have you been sparring with? Muay Thai?

 

Didn't you just say yourself that you never spar hard using your full skill set?

Also, did you mean that sparring against more than one opponent is very, very low percentage? How much training focus have you put on it? What concepts, principles and technical considerations have you been taught, and from what arts?

 

Yes, and boxing and BJJ. I've sparred with people who have trained at MMA gyms, just not at MMA gyms.

 

Fighting more then one person at a time is really really hard, I occasionally roll/wrestle multiples and tagteam and it's really really hard, years ago I used to kickboxing 2vs1, it was crazy hard too.

Aside from that, a little tjma with a few tactics and some SD drills from spear and C2, vs multiples, but in the main after doing occasional sparring with weapons, striking, clinch and groundwork against multiples, it's always been superhard.

What about yourself?

 

How did you get on vs Mt, boxing and BJJ?
Was this in your own class?

 

So, not much focus whatsoever then really, would you say? Why would you think that your opinion on it is authoritative?

If your opponents work well as a team, then you're doomed (but your opponents get good training in, it shouldn't just be about the "1", that's missing out most of the training). However, if they are acting as individuals then the difficulty is not an exponential rise (depending on your tactics). Obviously it's pointless to train it before you can hold your own against one person.

It's not the main focus of my training, which is unarmed 1-on-1, but I have received training and practiced it a fair amount over the years. It's not guess work though, we have a curriculum to convey a concrete set of principles and training exercises. It's also not a bolt-on, as all previous training is building toward it.

All I can say is that it's worked well for anyone I know who's had need to use it. Of course, I don't expect anyone to believe anecdotal evidence, and I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything!