Freeplay,Sparring, Assault? Terminology Question

[Peter S]

Out of interest, what terms do people use for freeplay, sparring, assaults, fights etc? My own personal classification is that:

• Freeplay is anything with more than a moderate number of options for a participant. Usually used for whatever's gone beyond a simple decision tree drill.
• Sparring is freeplay with a focus on honing technique, attributes, etc as much as "winning". It's when you get to throw your whole art at someone and see how it does, and adjust it in consequence. You might be happy with sparring despite losing every point, if you walked away with a greater understanding or proficiency.
• Fighting is used for a competitive match where you're trying to bring your A-game. In sparring you might well focus on weaker areas, but in a competitive fight you're trying to win. I think I'd prefer to use "bout" for that, since then I could talk about fight for the hypothetical with-sharps-and-fatalities version, but there you go.

[JohnPatterson]

we use sparring to describe all 3

[Darijan R.]

Accordig to those categories, we/I only do fight. We call it simply Fechten (fencing) with one Gefecht (bout) that may be fought over several Gänge (rounds). I don't believe in loose freeplay or any such things, honing technique I do against a palus/dummy.

[Jesse Eaton]

I think Peter has a good point here. We use all three at Kron, though I think bouting is a better term than sparring and tourney bouting is a better term than fighting. But I'm far from set on those terms. I think it would be useful to make these distinctions within the community, for discussion purposes.

[ericbryanwiggins]

Out of interest, what terms do people use for freeplay, sparring, assaults, fights etc? My own personal classification is that:

• Freeplay is anything with more than a moderate number of options for a participant. Usually used for whatever's gone beyond a simple decision tree drill.
• Sparring is freeplay with a focus on honing technique, attributes, etc as much as "winning". It's when you get to throw your whole art at someone and see how it does, and adjust it in consequence. You might be happy with sparring despite losing every point, if you walked away with a greater understanding or proficiency.
• Fighting is used for a competitive match where you're trying to bring your A-game. In sparring you might well focus on weaker areas, but in a competitive fight you're trying to win. I think I'd prefer to use "bout" for that, since then I could talk about fight for the hypothetical with-sharps-and-fatalities version, but there you go.

I make the same kind of distinctions, but tend to use bouting, instead of fighting, for matches where the only satisfactory result is to "win."

[Peter S]

Well, this was provoked by this article, which calls for the adoption of "Bouting" for scored competitive freeplay and "Assaults" for non-scored (but, he is clear to make out, no less competitive) freeplay. It seems to deny any sparring (in the boxing-derived sense of light freeplay in which you might not be trying to win but to hone technique) in favour of going straight from specific, choreographed sequences to assaults.

[keith cotter-reilly]

Having read his argument, which is well written and sourced, I have to disagree. I believe that "sparring" or whatever you call it has a place in practice and most likely always has had a place. In every martial art and sport that I have ever done there is a sparring element. In soccer it was called position drilling, in Judo randori, Karate it is kumite, etc.

In here we can have open training, to specific, to simple "honing" as stated in the article. I find it hard to believe that martial artists as skilled as the old Masters would neglect, or not think, of such a training tool.

Now saying that you can call it whatever you want. The English language (as well as every other language) has changed over the years and new words are added for old ideas. I wonder if this is what has happened here?

[Mike Ruhala]

I believe in using historical terminology for historical arts as much as is possible. Many years ago, before I had any formal training in Western sword arts, I used the word "spar" all the time because it was the only term I could think of for some weird reason. As I started reading the historical sources more closely and getting some professional training I began to realize that word doesn't really relate to swordsmanship. Nowadays I think it just sounds goofy and ignorant, like calling a mask a "helmet" or a fuller a "blood groove."

Having read his argument, which is well written and sourced, I have to disagree. I believe that "sparring" or whatever you call it has a place in practice and most likely always has had a place. In every martial art and sport that I have ever done there is a sparring element. In soccer it was called position drilling, in Judo randori, Karate it is kumite, etc.

In here we can have open training, to specific, to simple "honing" as stated in the article. I find it hard to believe that martial artists as skilled as the old Masters would neglect, or not think, of such a training tool.

Yeah, and in fencing its called fencing... at least in English.

[Richard Marsden]

Shut your mouth about my blood-grooves.

[Mike Ruhala]

What you have are blood gutters. It seems like such a small thing but it is nevertheless an important distinction.