waht contact level would you call this?

[sanjuro_ronin]

The second match seemed closer to full contact and it looked like they were throwing closed fists.

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkC35VbWGvw

[Judge Pen]

I voted hard contact only because they broke up the action in the clinch and once they went to the ground. I think they were trying to pop one another fairly hard, but there were obvious "rules of engagement" in place to make this less than a full contact fight.

[sanjuro_ronin]

When ever you look at a sport combat match or an organized fight, you need to ask yourself, "is every shot thrown going full speed full force?".
Not the case here, certainly in the second match the first exchange was full contact.

[Mega-Foot]

This was clearly very light contact, perhaps even point sparring no-contact (stopping 2 inches from target), but since the category of Light contact was the lightest contact allowed, I was forced to choose that.

[Samurai Jack]

I disagree that they weren't trying to hurt each other. Those were real punches to the face. If they had gone at it for awhile longer, I'm sure you'd have seen a knockout, or at least some blood.

Judging from the comments, it appears that people are saying they regularly spar at this level bare knuckle.

What about a boxing match? Is that not really full contact in your estimation? Anyone have clips of what they consider full contact (since for the majority, this obviously isn't it)?

[Yum Cha]

The "No, they don't." was specifically in response to "Open hands have to sweep.."

Fair enough, open hand strikes like palm, willow leaf and knife hand can come in straight. But, I think the general contention was open handed "slap" fighting vs closed hand "Fist" fighting. For what its worth, it didn't look like slap fighting to me.

I don't "follow" any form of "full-contact".
In the few matches I have watched, I've seldom seen anything like a front kick to the midsection.... perhaps it's "outlawed" too?
OTOH, even Muay Thai is not big on allowing the Uechi-style pointed-toe front kicks.
Given the "guard" positions used in those matches, there simply wasn't anything "there" to deter the use of front kicks which don't necessarily leave you open to "a big head shot".

Don't know what video you were watching, but I saw several effective front kicks used to attack and to jam attacks.

===================

I agree, there is a 'courtesy' involved here. There is another level it could go to, perhaps even two, but here's the distinction I make. Targetting vs power.

I think there is no question, they were trying to hurt eachother, maybe not maim. And I think there was honour on the line.

I didn't note the difference between full and heavy contact in the poll.

You can fight full contact with deference to soft targets and still get full contact training. Unfortunately, you may not follow through when you need to in a pinch, but there are always tradeoffs. Forewarned is fore armed.

Same goes to the lack of ground work. It may not be comprehensive, but the training skill is to be able to deliver power, full power. Not only the individual phyiscal execution of the power, but the way you have to comit your weight, you have to pass their defense carrying a bomb from the safe zone to the target. The importance of speed and balance relative to your big guns, all that.

Ground guys are used to full power. When you roll, you use it always. You may not choke a guy to death, but you use your power to get the tap, and you have to fight for the positioning, escapes, etc. It a great advantage in training. Strikers have a different challenge, as we all know.

[Yum Cha]

Anyone have clips of what they consider full contact (since for the majority, this obviously isn't it)?

Perhaps some will admit this is full contact?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ_T7GnAmrE

[Oso]

I think there is a distinction between trying to 'hurt' and trying to 'maim'.

i think there was 'control' in those fights as in: neither fighter was trying to permanently damage the other...bust a nose, crack a jaw, break a tooth; possibly. but neither was trying to put the other 'out' out.



I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.


We go this hard (and a bit harder, imo) w/ boxing gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces) but not as hard w/ light gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces).

[Samurai Jack]

I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.

Not here, perhaps, but it seems almost everyone claimed to fight using "hard contact" on this recent thread:

http://ezine.kungfumagazine.com/foru...lts&pollid=363

Now, doing a little math here, if 82% people on this board are saying that they "regularly fight hard contact", and over 70% claim that this is an example of "medium/hard" to "hard contact", then 57% of the folks on this board claim to be fighting this hard or harder.

If that's really the case (giving the benefit of the doubt), we've obviously got some seriously tough S.O.B.'s here. I'd like some examples of what this 57% considers full contact, wouldn't you?

[Oso]

perhaps, but I don't really care if someone doesn't want to post a vid of themselves sparring.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I think there is a distinction between trying to 'hurt' and trying to 'maim'.

i think there was 'control' in those fights as in: neither fighter was trying to permanently damage the other...bust a nose, crack a jaw, break a tooth; possibly. but neither was trying to put the other 'out' out.



I don't really see where anyone has said they do this regularly bare knuckle.


We go this hard (and a bit harder, imo) w/ boxing gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces) but not as hard w/ light gloves (and shin pads, cups and mouthpieces).

Even in my time, where kyokushin was "probably" a tad harder due to no or very limited wieght divisions, we never did hard contact all the time, certainly not bare knuckle.
Too much damage being done, not only to the bodies but the hands too.

I have always viewed sport as Hard contact and "real world altercations" as full contact, simply because you do hold your self back in the grand scheme of things in sport and the only time you go all out is when your bacon is on the line.

BUT, over the last little while, people like Knifefighter and others and their view have cause me to re-evaluate how I veiw sport combat and I think that I need to distinguish "sport full contact" from "combat/street full contact".

So, in terms of Sport combat arts, yes, some of those fights and all the MMA and Boxing ones are Full contact, in the sport sense - looking for the knock out but being respectful of the opponent.

[mantis108]

Thanks Mantis... Group hug!

My 'right?' was asking you for confirmation... because the opinion of most people on most of these boards is that that fight sucked. I wasn't actually saying so, but I really didn't know what your point was so I was asking what you thought of the Chinese fight, and from then what your comparison point was about this one.

While I believe public opinion is not to be ignored, yet as a martial artist I don't feel that I have the need to comply or to conform to that kind of opinion. I think the greatest gifts and attributes of martial arts are brains, hearts and courage. My favorite example of all time is Ali. On the stage of life, he would rather go to jail for his consciences and believes rather than comply with the interests and political agenda of the state. In the boxing ring, he achieved the "impossible" by wisely using rope-a-dope strategy at a time when the "public opinion" believed that George Foreman will more than likely knock the fu[k out of him. So personally, I don't subcribe to public opinion that much if at all.

The negativity of the critics of the Chinese fight is rooted in the hype IMHO, which was the Hong Kong head of the Wu Style Taiji (so called internal style), who was around 50 some years old, against a much younger 20 something Tibetant White Crane rising star in the the HK Kung Fu community. Both styles have a lot at stake riding on this. In some ways, the public exhibition of basic or rather fundamental fighting skills, which is to say it's in essence kick boxing, when both side have little idea or feel of what the other side is capable of it's better to play it safe but it disappointed people and shattered some myths and dreams. People rather romance Kung Fu (in this case an honorable deul) than to experience Kung Fu for real. Fighting to most are based on a romantic notion (no small thanks to martial novels and pop culture), so the martial arts merchants sugar coated the fundamental truth of fighting and sell "flowery fist embroidered legs". If a "master" isn't doing some fancy moves according to public perception of the identity of the master, he's viewed as being crapy in fighting. When "masters" fighting like everyone else, which is to say that fighting is fighting, where the expression of the human body in combative form is limited to the attribute it adapts to, people become angry not necessarily at the masters but rather at themselves of living a fantasy for all that time. So they turned that negative energy towards the masters and styles instead of taking a cold hard look at their own disability in discerning the truth. Yes, the truth is hard to face.

That kind of negative opinion, public or otherwise, doesn't help anyone especially those who are after the truth. It is just hot air and venting of incompetency in coping with the truth IMHO. Personally, I don't think it's healthy to discern qualities of martial artists based on that alone.

So my point was that I see the Chinese fight as lessons to be had and learn from it. I am grateful that they showed their skills and I am able to learn a thing or two through the documentation of it. It is the same as the Kyokushin fights. I would try to learn something from it rather than being judgemental to it. Besides the point of the discussion was the degree or level of contact, I used what I called a "Challenge scale" to shown how I get to my opinion that it is intense contact (with the intend to hurt or mime) not full contact (with the intend to kill or murder). It is like many that have pointed out eariler - it is an honorable duel with rules and accords in effect not non sensible street voilence. So the format allowed and the activities reflected is hard contact IMHO not full contact.

As for kyokushin, I’m not particularly partial to it: but I’ve had a little experience sparring and training with some kyokushin people.

Thanks for sharing.

I didn't know it was a fight for charity... that's cool. However, I'm not sure about the age point: at least with the taiji these are supposed to be arts that take years to develop into useful and devastating fighting skills: so from that perspective older guys should be in their prime, no? Then again, I don't know how old those guys were...!

Age might not matter as much as experience if it's street self defense. But as martial sports (as in the Chinese event) or any sport for that matter, age often is the decivisive point. Unless of course, you are Captain America - Randy "the natural" Couture. It's more possible for the older person to get hurt, which also is harder for him to recover from the aftermath, not to mention that recouping time in the ring is more favorable to the younger person. So...

The powress of the Taijiquan IME so far are more or less myth. I believe it's pretty good in getting people a swelled head than swell skills these days.

And no, though I don't really think it's relevant, I've never fought for charity, though I have done vast numbers of throws and breakfalls and sword cuts etc, for charity. And FWIW, I think fighting hard contact, limited rules, no protection, is a pretty daft thing to do for charity!

Well, it was the hype to draw crowd and it worked.

Thank you, the above cleared up what I was asking you about where you stood on both of the fights.

You are most welcome.

I don't know if you've ever seen many kyokushin on kyokushin fights, but IMO, they look more like untrained, unlovely slugfests than this one. You said that you thought this wasn't a great example of the potentially beautiful moves of kyokushin, but I think it actually showed more variety and style than kyo vs kyo. They didn't know what was coming against yiquan so they had to be a bit cagey and couldn't just bulldoze. I think these bouts show a lot more inventive use of footwork and evasion from the kyo guys than their usual slugfests.

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I think a well develop combination or a well timed terminating technique (ie a high kick to the head causing knock out, or a punch to the liver that drops the opponent, etc) is beautiful. That's what I meant by aesthetically pleasing fundamentals (style). You are right that kyo vs kyo fights sometimes are monolithic. These kyo vs YQ fights are relatively "colorful".

But anyway, since we are talking about fighting skills (and Oso started this thread because he wanted people’s opinions on the level of contact, not technical merit or aesthetics) bulldozing/muscling through is a relevant strategy, and as relevant as feinting for example.

You are right bulldozing through indeed is a relevant strategy. Be that as it may, it's not one that Kung Fu is found on IMHO. So...

And I really did mean that I didn’t distinction was possible generally, not as a direct reference to you.

Understood.

I pointed out that one of them was Matsui in response to your statement that you didn’t think it was a good show of kyokushin: i.e. because it’s Matsui (who is the HQ kancho) it should be a reasonable level. Then, in case you said anything along the lines of, “Ah, but Matsui isn’t that great, and the HQ trains a lot of bad fighters too, compared to [wherever]”, I pointed out that he does turn out a lot of good fighters. I wasn’t trying to say that all his fighters would be bad-ass, just that although some of the kyokushin have been criticized for weakness by some of their more hardcore offshoots, some kyokushin is still good.

I hear you and I thank you for sharing that.

The ‘Who are you?’ was completely just a gag… just by saying that I wouldn’t judge the head of kyokushin’s kyokushin because I don’t know enough about it… wasn’t very funny I guess Sorry.

My friend, in hind sight, I might have jumped the gun. So I am sorry to have over reacted. It's not easy to discern a joke from ridicule on a public forum sometimes. Anyway, I bare no ill will as I am sure you don't either. Let's move forward.

Warm regards

Mantis108

[golden arhat]

i think the kicks looked a little pulled

[sanjuro_ronin]

i think the kicks looked a little pulled

Not pulled, just "thrown" in there, with little real power behind it, sometimes typical when you are just throwing the kick in there to see what he does, you know, no real commitment.