Reklats

BJJ

So, the one person WANTED to go to the ground and got their way. Same thing. If both people WANT to stay standing then they generally will. If both people want to grapple they'll grapple. If only one person wants the ground they're more likely to get it than the other person is to successfully remain standing, as a rule of thumb.

You're going to have a different cost/benefit ratio with different techniques though. I did taekwondo for a year. Eventually I got fed up with the * techniques wasting my training time and quit. I started doing jiu jitsu, and I felt like I improved as a fighter in the next month more than I did in the last year at TKD.

I'd say it depends on what the people fighting want. If you're looking at police fights I bet most of them go to the ground because they're about subduing, not bludgeoning someone into submission.

Matsumura seems like an art that is heavily "simulated." I know you've never practiced "throwing someone by their neck onto the side of their skull, while striking them the entire time from many angles." You'd go through too many training partners. The sport aspect of BJJ is what makes it so great. If you think standing wristlocks will work, you can show up and TRY THEM on a bunch of people who are fully resisting. You won't get much success. Tibby- Read my reply, try to comprehend for a few seconds what it means, and then base your reply accordingly. I'm not going to start repeating myself. I like throws. Never argued against throws. Yeah, that's what I thought.

Some moves can be countered in more ways, and the counters are easier. That makes them less effective. I think trying locks standing gives the person more ways out. So you admit my point. I was saying that a car would be a substitute for the ground. You agree that you'd rather do a lock against a car than freestanding, then why wouldn't you rather do a lock against the ground than freestanding? This makes too little sense for me to agree with or refute. What makes you an expert on the tactics used by all these professions anyway?

what are you talking about?

This proves something, actually. Each time you've brought up "resisting" you've defined it in the way it would affect a joint lock drill. To you resisting is pushing in a direction. To me resisting is twisting my hand away when you grab it, or going for a takedown when you stand there trying to think through your follow process. (We don't call it follow, we call it basic human instinct. That way we can save time patting ourselves on the back and tellng each other how deadly we all are.) To someone else it might be elbowing you in the teeth. About the police- If someone is resisting their method seems to be pin and handcuff. Smash them agains a car and handcuff them, or against the ground, and handcuff them with your knee in their back. THe whole point being that immobilizing someone before you try to manipulate them works better. Which is what standing locks don't do.

I didn't mean resisting that particular move. I meant resisting in general. I think standing joint locks are great for demos, but if it came to applying them in real life on a hostile person they'd be a very low percentage shot, and therefore not worth doing.

In denial.

Yeah, kimo would've been able to go again easily as long as HIS BROKEN ARM DOESN'T BOTHER HIM. What could Kimo have done in a street fight that he couldn't have done in that ring? If anything the ring was an advantage for him because (other than not actually getting his arm broken) he knew what to expect from Royce ahead of time. Did you notice how scared he was to go to the ground? Also don't forget that Kimo outweighed Royce by like ~70lbs. Do you think they'd let boxers with a weight difference like that go at it?

But would you be able to get a standing lock on someone who is fully resisting? I'm sure they work in drills during practice.

Dude, have YOU seen the fight? The rules in the ufc were different then compared to now. If I remember correctly the match went 12 minutes straight before Royce won by armbar. Kimo also had a pretty messed up face from getting punched repeatedly. Does your friend do BJJ?

If there are sharp rocks or glass: The result of a takedown by me is much more likely to put HIM on his back and on anything sharp. So if I'm locked in a room so I cant get away to flee to the cushiony grassness of outside and there's sharp rocks and glass and HIV needles and whatnot on the floor, I won't pull guard, I'll take him down and mount him. If I'm up high somewhere where I might fall and die: I'll make sure I never get in a fight on a movie set. If you don't have room to grapple, how do you have room to stand up fight? Finally, EVERYONE can be taken down. Worst case scenario I pull guard and drag him down on top of me.

First of all a disclaimer- please forgive my japanese spellings and attempts at naming judo moves. About the need to follow people down: The other day we were sparring starting on our feet but without strikes. Usually this involves a lot of single/double leg takedowns, with some weird stuff like firemans carrys sneaking in. So, I clinched with my partner, and I felt like doing something crazy that a judo guy had shown me a while back. I did my imitation of a throw that I cant begin to spell. Something see-o-nage.... (word here?) Seonage.... somethign like that... anyway I chucked him over my shoulder. He landed on his back, completely stunned. The worst thing he would've thought to see from me before this would've be a hip toss. Anyway, my point: if we'd been on anything harder than a mat, I probably wouldn't have needed to follow him down. However, I don't know if I'd feel comfy getting as judo-lubby-dubby with someone in a real fight. If he had dropped his weight, taken my back and slipped on a rear naked choke it would've been all over. I wouldn't want that to happen in a real situation. I'd rather risk the guilitine going in for the double leg.

How would you realistically train multiple attackers? The whole BJJ training idea is that you're better off having a bunch of less-deadly techniques that you've practiced hundreds of times against a FULLY RESISTING opponent- As opposed to having a battle plan where you'll do the "deadly leopard eye claw strike" on the first guy, then the "perilous rhino groin stomp" on the next attacker, followed by a "floating swallow cranium plunge" on whoever is foolish enough to oppose you next, without ever having REALLY practiced any of them because they're "too deadly." I don't think anyone could train attacks by multiple opponents well because you'd have to dispatch people as quickly as possible, which you cant do with training partners.

Absolutely. However, its more likely that a fight will end up on the ground than it will remain standing. Because of this fact I choose to do the majority of my training where the majority of fights happen, in the clinch/ground range. How many fights do you see that happen at karate sparring range? As for standing joint locks like wrist locks...I think they're a low percentage shot. It might work, or you might get elbowed/punched in the face. A good 'ol takedown or throw/sweep is more reliable.

We do some strikes on our feet, but we focus on clinching. I know some judo throws (ones I consider effective in a gi/no gi situation). Stand up grappling like akido and hapkido (those are the only ones I've been exposed to) seem relatively ineffective compared to just taking down and working from there. A clinch/ground game makes up the vast majority of a fight, so wouldn't it make sense to train that the most?

Here's an excerpt from a biography of Takamatsu Sensei: "After Takamatsu Sensei arrived at that spot, he spent most of his time on his back and could get around only by crawling. He would wash his rice in the river and just leave it on a rock in the sun to split open, and he would then eat it. One day, Old Man Tamaoki came and found him there and told him that he had tapeworms . "We’ll have to get rid of them," he said, and started to chant an incantation. Well, Takamatsu Sensei had his own ideas about such things and apparently said, "Come on, old man, you don’t expect that to work, do you?" By that time, he didn’t care whether he died or not. But a week later, a huge tapeworm – almost the size of two bowls of noodles – came out of him." Anyway besides for THAT... Brazilian jiu-jitsu wasn't designed for the ring, it just happens to be good in the ring. It's good in the ring because its an incredibly effective combat system. What would a BJJ person do when confronted with 4 people out to get him? Punch the nearest one in the face and run away. What would any other art do differently to be more effective? Chi attack the nearest one and then run away?

*grappling

Going back to your original numbers- if there's 3-4 people that want to kill you, you're screwed no matter what. No style is really going to help you fight and win. A grappler can run away just as well as a stand up guy. Star Wars RULES. It makes GREAT off teh wall examples.

We do absolutely no kata. Unless you consider neck bridging and escape movements kata... in that case football teams do tackling kata...

What if there are 8 or 9? What if they have guns? What if they have light sabres?! What if they use the force!??

http://www.roycegracie.com/rgjjn/rgjjnlisting.htm I think kenpo is karate, which is nothing like bjj.

Gracie Jiu-jitsu here.