gzk

Muay Thai. I have some of the basics from shootfighting, but I'd like to pursue striking further.

As has been mentioned, the gi is now illegal in UFC, but it was legal in PRIDE and was worn by some fighters, especially judoka like Hidehiko Yoshida. I would guess it's legal in DREAM as well. The gi can be used to the advantage of the fighter wearing it when the other is not because the extra friction makes it harder to escape submissions, pummel for underhooks, escape from side control or mount, or posture up and disengage a tight guard.

In UFC 4 Keith Hackney beat Joe Son by submission due to groin strikes (as mentioned), having used grappling to achieve a somewhat dominant position (he back-trips Son as Son attempts a standing guillotine; Son effectively keeps himself in a kind of side control by hanging on to the guillotine when he has no leverage) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4iZ-NEz-mg Wanderlei Silva has been noted for using soccer kicks and stomps when the rules allowed it when he fought in Pride in Japan and various Vale Tudo promotions in Brazil. Here's a particularly brutal example against Mike Van Arsdale in an International Vale Tudo Championship fight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uddB2L-KGf0 Gerard Gordeau illegally eye-gouged Yuki Nakai in a Vale Tudo Japan fight and blinded Nakai permanently in one eye. But he still lost - Nakai made him tap to a heel hook. It's not on Youtube but it is on the Rickson Gracie documentary called "Choke".

Got my BJJ blue belt tonight Wasn't sure I was quite good enough to get it, and I keep thinking about all those holes I know are in my game that the colour belts will start exposing that the other whites didn't most of the time, but I'm happy Maybe I should avoid posting too much to keep my forum belt the same colour

Competed on Saturday in our affiliation's nationals (well technically Asia-Pacifics, since we have a school or two in Malaysia). Managed to drop a weight class from last year. First minute was gi grip fighting, which I generally don't like, but I managed to get an underhook and used it to get a wedge takedown which got me 2 points (2 more than last year ) and ended up in his half guard. Before I realised my posture was poor he got a cross-collar choke on me. I tried to cross-face out of it but couldn't and was forced to tap. Damn! That guy did go on to finish 3rd in our division, though. Ahh well, better luck next year.

Helio Gracie did BJJ until he died this year, aged 95. You're still a young 'un

Wouldn't it pretty much become a BJJ/wrestling match though? And Muay Thai. A lot of MT is clinch striking. It would probably be closer to a "real fight" than an MMA fight in a large arena where you can circle off and consider your options.

I agree with you about the Gracies' motives and I agree that the rule changes have been good for the sport overall. Some of the reffing and judging I don't like, but the rules are fine. However, I don't think, based on the facts, that those rules favour grapplers or that the rule changes are/were at the behest of grapplers, as some seem to believe.

We must also remember that the cage and rules set up for MMA were created by the Gracies to showcase and accommodate their style over others. Yeah... it's designed to favor grappling so much, it kind of upsets me... Why do you believe that? I strongly disagree. Refs who either do not understand grappling or are just nervous about fans growing bored will 'stand 'em up' in the middle of a guard pass or submission setup. This happens routinely. You will never see a fight stopped when both fighters are standing and dancing around each other refusing to engage, with the fight restarted in an under-over clinch. Judges who do not understand grappling hand victories to "lay n pray" fighters, because they are either directed to do so or cannot tell the difference between a fighter posturing up in his opponent's guard and landing hard punches and the same fighter with his posture broken and being controlled by the bottom fighter. Merely being on top does not mean you are in a dominant position. This type of judging does not favour grapplers. The techniques that are banned are designed to favour the sport being able to be sanctioned, not to favour grapplers. You could not put on an event in the US with soccer kicks, stomps and headbutts. The original Gracie rules permitted all these things and more. The Gracies ceased involvement with the UFC when the rules became more restrictive. Where did they go? Japan, with longer rounds, legal stomps and soccer kicks. The cage is used to prevent fighters being thrown out of the arena. In a matchup between a striker and a grappler, who do you think would be more susceptible to being thrown? At first they were designed for that (by the Gracies). Now it just turns out that they're still favored, even though it is no longer on purpose. Look at that Nick Diaz guy. In a recent fight he was getting pounded so badly by the opponent's kicks and knees to the head. So what does the guy do? lay one knee on the ground. Now "he is grounded" and he cannot be kicked or kneed in the head. So cheeky. Look at Tales Leites vs Silva. He'd get TOUCHED and he'd drop to the floor and spread his legs. He did this the whole fight. Silva was so frustrated. So many people wished Silva could stomp the guy right between his openly spread legs for making one of the most boring title matches in MMA history. If you're a puny striker you can pretty much turtle your way to the end of the fight (back on the ground, spread legs, hand to the sides of your face). Yes, the ref will stand you up. Then you can dance around, and drop again. All those 5 minute hug-fests could end quickly if kneeing to the groin or a headbutt to the face were allowed. Look at the prohibitions... no kicking while the opponent is "grounded" (there is a difference between lying in the floor and putting one knee in the ground on purpose, but the rules do not care!), no kneeing while the opponent is "grounded". No disqualification for turtling your way to victory. No kicking in the kidneys. No strikes to the groin. See a pattern? The limitations on grappling, as far as I know are "no small joint manipulation". Ok, so maybe you are right, UFC is no longer designed to favor grapplers. Now it just turns out that it strongly does, but not on purpose. Read my post on page 4- most of the rules are in tact against grappling. The Gracies stopped fighting after you saw a Ken Shamrock use the rules (time limit) to "tie" Royce Gracie in a superfight. They prefer to fight with no rules, no time limit, anything goes. I did see it... there's some limitations for Grapplers as well, but I still feel strikers get the worse part, just so the sport can be on TV. I really don't think Gracie would love a ruleset in which he can be headbutt (especially with the back of the head!) or hit in the groin when he is pulling his ground game. The headbutt/stomp/groin shot would be possible most of the time when people are in the ground... especially the headbutt. Then why did the Gracies make those techniques legal in the original UFC ruleset? Why did they fight for several decades in Brazil before the UFC under Vale Tudo rules in which those techniques were also legal?

What I meant was that perhaps these techniques open avenues for new applications of judo. I'm not suggesting judokas should sprawl and go for an anaconda choke like a BJJ player might; maybe there is a new way to pin or throw for ippon from there, or a new setup for an old throw? If there isn't now, surely they would evolve?

It will certainly do that, but I don't believe it's necessary. Leg shoots are a relatively recent introduction to BJJ (via American wrestlers, I believe) and I don't see how anyone would confuse BJJ with freestyle wrestling or Sambo. BJJ took some of the counters from these styles, evolved its own, and created new opportunities to use conventional BJJ techniques from these new situations, eg: the plethora of chokes that are now used from sprawl control, that you won't see in Sambo or freestyle. Why couldn't Judo take that route?

http://www.intjudo.eu/?Menu=News&Action=Full&type_id=1&id=284&lang_id=2&mid=4 Thoughts?

Depending on the exact positioning, and how loose the grip on the leg is, you may be able to get a kimura/figure 4 on the gripping arm. You reach through and get the grip, then use your other leg to kick the guy over your head as you roll back. You end up with side control and the kimura grip. You could also go for a front choke/guillotine and fall back to guard with it. Another option is to spin or roll under and go for a legbar or heel hook. Some guys even like to bait the leg grab with hillarious results

Why do you think the Gracies designed the rules to favour grapplers? Gis were allowed, sure. Royce choked with the gi, but he could also have been choked with it. The cage can help with takedowns, it can also, unlike ropes, be pushed off of to create space to escape the grappler's control. Headbutts, groin strikes, striking the back of the head, kicks, knees and stomps to any part of the body were allowed, which don't favour grapplers any more than strikers, except that perhaps, grappling skill would permit achieving a superior position to deliver them. Correct. That is a particular exploitation of the rule that favours grapplers. But Diaz can be kneed in the body, or punched in the head. His opponent can disengage, and Diaz will be stood up, However, if Diaz, as a grappler, lands a takedown, and remains standing, as in a high single leg, or a judo type throw, his opponent, the striker, may take advantage of the rule, and cannot be kicked, stomped, etc. Yes, it was boring. But Silva won. Leites invited Silva to challenge him at his preferred range and Silva refused and continued fighting at his preferred range, stand-up. If Leites had taken Silva down, and Silva disengaged, he would not be made to get back on the ground. Leites gained nothing by employing those tactics except perhaps forestalling the inevitable and giving himself another chance to initiate a striking exchange. He certainly gained nothing from the judges and at no time did Silva engage him on the ground, so he gained nothing in terms of grappling. And you'll lose by decision, unless you happen to land a hard side kick to the knee. You used to be able to win by KO from an up-kick to the face. That is now illegal. It wasn't a winning tactic for Leites against Silva, nor for Belfort against Sakuraba in Pride. Do it more than once in the UFC and you're unlikely to be re-signed. They didn't when those moves were legal. Besides, you won't see a "5 minute hug-fest" in the UFC, because the ref will "stand 'em up" if the fighters fail to "keep it workin" for more than about 2 seconds. Actually, you can knee the body of a grounded opponent, just not the head. Kicking the kidneys was mainly done by grapplers who pulled guard, when it was legal. You cannot and have never been allowed to eye gouge or fish hook, which are technically both grappling techniques. You cannot pinch, which is also a grappling technique. You cannot grab the shorts or gloves or throw the opponent out of the arena. All grappling techniques. The rule against striking the back of the head is less favourable to grapplers than you might initially think. The primary position in which this is possible is when a grappler takes the back with hooks in or with a body triangle. The opponent, trying to defend the strikes, would leave himself open for a choke; defending the choke would get him knocked out. And you can't turtle or buttscoot your way to victory. It hasn't, doesn't, and won't happen.

We must also remember that the cage and rules set up for MMA were created by the Gracies to showcase and accommodate their style over others. Yeah... it's designed to favor grappling so much, it kind of upsets me... Why do you believe that? I strongly disagree. Refs who either do not understand grappling or are just nervous about fans growing bored will 'stand 'em up' in the middle of a guard pass or submission setup. This happens routinely. You will never see a fight stopped when both fighters are standing and dancing around each other refusing to engage, with the fight restarted in an under-over clinch. Judges who do not understand grappling hand victories to "lay n pray" fighters, because they are either directed to do so or cannot tell the difference between a fighter posturing up in his opponent's guard and landing hard punches and the same fighter with his posture broken and being controlled by the bottom fighter. Merely being on top does not mean you are in a dominant position. This type of judging does not favour grapplers. The techniques that are banned are designed to favour the sport being able to be sanctioned, not to favour grapplers. You could not put on an event in the US with soccer kicks, stomps and headbutts. The original Gracie rules permitted all these things and more. The Gracies ceased involvement with the UFC when the rules became more restrictive. Where did they go? Japan, with longer rounds, legal stomps and soccer kicks. The cage is used to prevent fighters being thrown out of the arena. In a matchup between a striker and a grappler, who do you think would be more susceptible to being thrown?