To strike or to grapple

[Drunken Monkey]

just a few questions....

 

and mainly for the guys who train in or have trained in a 'grappling' style.

 

what was the teaching of strikes like in that training.

 

i mean, what/how did you deal with that aspect?

 

also, did the training emphasise the grappling aspect (joint lock, control, breaks throws) above everything else?

 

or did it have strikes that would lead to grappling.

 

not sure if this is making sense.....

 

so.

 

let's take a basic scenario.

 

you are being attacked.

 

the aggressor if going to throw a basic straight punch.

 

how would you teach the beginner to deal with it?

 

receive/block/parry?

 

then go straight to a throw, lock, control etc etc?

 

or

 

did you also teach/show strikes where they possible, or was purely about grappling?

 

i.e in the above scenario, it would be:

 

receive, punch, grab arm, throw/control/whatever...?

 

i ask this cos during my training, i was always shown things that i could do, as opposed to things that i would do.

 

during chi sau, if the opportunity came for me to apply a lock of some sort, i could go for it and then the game changes.

 

i mean, i wasn't ever taught strictly striking or strictly grappling.

 

of course there were times when specific techniques were shown so that i could understand how they work.

 

really sorry for the appalling grammar/english.

 

i just ate one too many fish fingers and my stomach is telling me all about it.....

[White Warlock]

Hmm... you're right... that was a horrible post you just made.

 

In wrestling, i was never subjected to "what ifs" on striking. It was all about wrestling.

 

In judo, strikes were dealt with as utilities for a throw. I.e., "thanks for the arm, i needed that."

 

in san soo, strikes were a common, "what if." They were either avoided, blocked, parried, exploited (as in the judo approach), pre-empted, or ignored (post-empted). Granted, san soo only carries with it 'some' groundwork... so maybe this isn't a good one to toss as a response to your queries. Unless, of course, you're referring to 'grappling.' Because there is plenty of grappling (stand-up to takedown) in san soo.

 

Then again, maybe i'm not quite understanding your question.

[Vito]

wow, 7star put it really really well. me, i try and post when its late and i dont make good points like that. but to go on record- sure aikido and judo are pretty much entirely stand up grappling- bjj has plenty of stand up grappling moves, you just dont hear about them much. (go pick up any number of the books the gracies have put out, youll see plenty of techniques.) and slamming a guy to the ground is a seriously painful thing to do- potentially fight ending of he lands right, or wrong, depending how you define it.

[SevenStar]

At my school, the main coach, a purple belt, also trains muay thai, so when he teaches a self defense technique against a strike, we are doing it against a properly done strike, as opposed to the many striking schools that show defenses against a "double leg" that is attrocious because the teacher has never learned the proper way to do one. It actually does matter, because the situation, defense, etc. is different.

 

As for being subjected to learning the strikes - no, we're not. It's a grappling system. If it's an nhb session, then yeah, we'll go over strikes while on the ground and such, but the grappling itself and the self defenses do not rely on strikes. In the example you gave, I would lower my level and shoot in. From there, I have several takedown options.

[47MartialMan]

Trained striker......per when someone lands you feel, you go down.....

 

The application depends on the situation and the amount of training per individual

[SevenStar]

Are you saying that if a trained striker hits someone, they go down? That's not necessarily true.

[47MartialMan]

No, per say a professional boxer against someone whom cannot take a hit.

 

The boxer is a trained striker is he not?

[Shane]

This is a hard one!

 

I'm going with striking, I know most fights go to the ground well, I guess if I can only strike then I'm going down striking and I'm going to keep striking. I'm a firm believer in HARD HARD HITS I think they can help decide an outcome of a fight very fast, but ofcourse not always hits alone!!!!!!!!

 

great post

[Hudson]

It's been said again and again. While a good percent of fights end up on the ground, they all start standing up. So what would I chose? Striking! Even if you get on the ground, there is still a huge amount of striking groundwork, especially in kicks. And if you had an open arm, a strike to the neck, ribs, head, etc; would end it pretty quickly.

[Vito]

true, but on the ground is much different, and a trained bjj dude vs a trained mt dude on the ground is no contest.