Drunken Monkey Posted December 20, 2003 Posted December 20, 2003 but that's kinda my point. that's why i say no one invents moves. a move is a body position. as long as the body can do it, it has probably been done. that's why i say that to say that the gracies invented the spider guard is to say that no grappler before them ever used that type of guard. get my point? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
SevenStar Posted December 20, 2003 Posted December 20, 2003 let's say you and I are training together. we are constantly butting heads and nothing more. Then, you get a notion - "hey, what happens if I use my arm?" and you swing - you invented a punch. Were you the first one ever to punch? probably not. you reinvented the wheel, but that's fine, as there's nobody else to train with. At some point in history, that happened for the first time. We don't instinctively know how to sweep someone. through practice, they figured out how.
Drunken Monkey Posted December 20, 2003 Posted December 20, 2003 maybe i just dont like the idea of 'inventing' moves. it suggests too much. saw a position that works and they singled it out. that position existed before they named it. lots of people probably did it before they named it. so they picked it out and saw it's potential. fine, i grant them that but to say they invented it is a going a bit far in my opinion. post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
kotegashiNeo Posted December 25, 2003 Posted December 25, 2003 I would like to see a BJJ take on a tradtional koubodo expert and use the spider guard lol. martial arts are journey of self discovey not technique. Kisshu fushin oni te hotoke kokoro
SevenStar Posted December 26, 2003 Posted December 26, 2003 use judo to throw/disarm, if he happens to get in your guard via a reversal before you can sub him, then set him up for spider guard.
jeffrogers Posted January 9, 2004 Posted January 9, 2004 Gracies just exposed more of the importance of ground game. Granted I feel the same way they didn't invent sh*t they braught a good art. That maybe they modified moves that worked better for there body's but I agree. Some one at some time in history probably done the same move. But what they did do is expose the art and importance to understand how to deal with the ground game. As well as they helped push out with the event of the UFC of Full contact style VS. Style competion. Were before it wasn't a big or mainstream as it is today in the martial arts community besides point sparrint tournaments and a few underground fights and challange matches it wasn't really focuses on. Which also push off the idea and notion for more cross training. Which I feel really pushed the knowlege base or opened the eyes of the martial arts community. How woulda TMA do against a grappler. okay if he trained to stop grapplers or defend against them. By training with them. But if not and just went in there with his particular stand up style I don't think he would do very well. Reason I feel the gracies did so well in the mid 90's. They aren't a big force in the MMA fights now. There styles or Teaching methods of course are a big force. Royce started it all with UFC as far as the MMA Craze in the US. But they aren't as fighters they aren't a huge force now compared to top UFC fighters like courture, ortiz, liddel, hughes, syliva. or top pride fighters, Jackson, silva, sakaraba, henderson. Just my thoughts. -Jeff
Sim Posted January 24, 2004 Posted January 24, 2004 I often see competitions such as the UFC and the like being used as a way to prove which style would beat the other in a real life fight. The most common statement being that it proves ground fighting styles are superior to stand up or traditional styles. Most people who claim this do not realize that the rules in these competitions help “protect” a ground fighting stylist from the stand up fighter. Of course, the promoters of these competitions want you to believe that there are virtually no rules. As in kickboxing, there are no kicks or strikes allowed directly to the knee joint, ankle or groin. This is the reason why you see round kicks aimed at the thigh instead of the knee. You will also notice that there are no stomping kicks to the ankle or knee joint. The knee is a rather fragile structure and a blow like this would be likely to cripple a fighter and possibly end his career. Again, as in kickboxing, punches or strikes to the throat or side of the neck are not allowed; the reasons for this being obvious. There are also no attacks allowed to small joints such the fingers and wrists. Bill Wallace has also stated that the matt in the octagon is so soft that it makes punching and kicking on it very difficult. If there were literally no rules allowed at all in the UFC, you would see stand up fighting coming out on top more often. The fights would also be much shorter. Many fights would end with kicks to the crotch, broken knees, bitten off ears, broken fingers, gouged eyes and deaths from punches landed to the throat. A good example of this was back when I was in high school. A wrestler attacked another guy on the bus and tried to use his wrestling techniques, only to come away with a shirt soaked in blood. This was because the kid that was being attacked simply started chomping on the wrestler’s chest. The wrestler immediately started screaming and crying in pain from the rather deep bite wounds. My point here is that the UFC and the like are NOT examples of real fighting and should not be used as a way to prove which style is “best”. I am not saying that if there were no rules the strikers would always win, just that strikers would win more often than they do in the UFC. “In competition, the fight often ends on the ground. In a real fight, it ends when one person can no longer continue fighting” –Benny “The Jet”
jeffrogers Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Actually you have your points. We can take pride for example were Vanderli Silva did quite some damange with a Knee to his opponents head. When his opponent was on the ground on all fours. Were before it wasn't allowed. So that gave him an advantage also made the grapplers more aware of positioning because what before was against the rules and so it was safe is now dangerous to go to. So less rules would give strikers more of an advantage. But not much. Pretty much first few UFC's there were few rules. Except you couldn't eye gouge or bite. You could still go to the groin and do alot of other moves. So in reality those fighters only hope was biting or eye gouging because the rest of there techniques were ineffective other wise they would have made them work. -Jeff
Treebranch Posted January 25, 2004 Posted January 25, 2004 Jeffrogers their techniques weren't the problem. They were the problem, they were badly trained. I didn't see any technique from those people at all. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Recommended Posts