Posted by: Supremor
Is the best really worth emulating? - 07/11/06 03:21 PM
Here's a question that came to me while I was watching some videos of top tournament competitors at world championships.
In martial arts competition, there are a number of rules which act as limiters to the fighting. These rules often make success more probable if a competitor uses certain tactics. For example, in point sparring (the name Bill Wallace comes to mind) one achieves more points for a head kick than for a body punch. Result: Competitors look for the head kick and become adept at delivering it. Speed is also a very important factor, since many point-sparring competitions are semi-contact. Result: Competitors become very fast. This is common to all sports- athletes train to have the attributes MOST suitable to the competition rules.
I was watching the ITF TKD world championships a few weeks ago, and what I saw was something quite unlike how I would choose to spar. Since the ITF is semi-contact continuous point-sparring at the world championships, the competitors all had a lightning quick first step and an ability to place their legs wherever they liked, then get out. Very few showed what I would call sound fighting sense- guard up, following through after the first hit, etc. I was a bit disappointed since I felt that it was not representative of ITF sparring at all, which I feel it has more similarities with kickboxing than anything else.
So, are the top competitors in any martial sport the people we should aspire to spar like in our own pursuit of "martial skill"(cringe-worthy phrase). Boxers are fantastic with their hands, and many ameteur boxers feel that if only they could throw punches like Julio Diaz then they'd be great fighters. Of course they miss the point that good punching alone is not sufficient.
So my question is this, should we hold the top tournament fighters in such high regard and try to emulate them, even though it may skew our own training away from more effective SD training. Is the idea of Bill Wallace or Lennox Lewis being an object of aspiration unfounded.
In martial arts competition, there are a number of rules which act as limiters to the fighting. These rules often make success more probable if a competitor uses certain tactics. For example, in point sparring (the name Bill Wallace comes to mind) one achieves more points for a head kick than for a body punch. Result: Competitors look for the head kick and become adept at delivering it. Speed is also a very important factor, since many point-sparring competitions are semi-contact. Result: Competitors become very fast. This is common to all sports- athletes train to have the attributes MOST suitable to the competition rules.
I was watching the ITF TKD world championships a few weeks ago, and what I saw was something quite unlike how I would choose to spar. Since the ITF is semi-contact continuous point-sparring at the world championships, the competitors all had a lightning quick first step and an ability to place their legs wherever they liked, then get out. Very few showed what I would call sound fighting sense- guard up, following through after the first hit, etc. I was a bit disappointed since I felt that it was not representative of ITF sparring at all, which I feel it has more similarities with kickboxing than anything else.
So, are the top competitors in any martial sport the people we should aspire to spar like in our own pursuit of "martial skill"(cringe-worthy phrase). Boxers are fantastic with their hands, and many ameteur boxers feel that if only they could throw punches like Julio Diaz then they'd be great fighters. Of course they miss the point that good punching alone is not sufficient.
So my question is this, should we hold the top tournament fighters in such high regard and try to emulate them, even though it may skew our own training away from more effective SD training. Is the idea of Bill Wallace or Lennox Lewis being an object of aspiration unfounded.