Standing and Ground

[akedm]

I see some similar posts, but I want to make sure I am getting my understanding clear about the styles "standing" and "ground".

Karate and other “standing” martial arts are most effective at the beginning of a real fight. What I mean is most people agree the longer the fight the likelier it is to end up on the ground, and once on the ground it's going to end there too. And that’s where ju-jitsu (spelling?) and other “ground” arts are most effective. Now of course the idea is to gather a range of styles to address both sides of the fight, cause unless you (who are in Karate) get attacked by someone also in Karate or a similar style where you both want to stay on your feet, the fight’s going to the ground soon. But I'm not asking what styles make for a good all-around arsenal.

My thinking is Karate or other standing arts often emphasize a kick-and-run-away strategy of self defense or the surprise-one-devastating-hit for the fact that they want the confrontation to end in a few seconds; that they’re not equipped for the ground-work in a longer fight. Any smart attacker knows that if you get a Karateka a TKD practitioner on the ground they’re going to be a lot less effective than they were cause most of their trained arsenal is gone.

The ground arts: Are they also designed for quick attack and run away, or are they designed to stay and see the fight through, so to speak? It seems to me the latter is their design, which is a contrast to the standing arts, and probably for that very reason.

I ask because I’ve heard from a friend that the instructors at her Karate class do not “really teach” ground work – to what extent “really teach” means I don’t know – though they do say a real fight could very well end up on the ground. She asked then what do I do?

It seems to me then there’s an urgency to standing art training to end a fight quickly, whereas the ground arts don’t emphasize the same level of urgency.

I’d like your take. Are my assumptions and characterizations accurate? I know a lot of people here may be saying “No way!” and I’m ignorant here, so I’m asking, cause I’ve never seen ground work in TKD or Karate.

[JusticeZero]

OK, three terms, but one of them you'll only rarely see.

"Standing", "Ground", and "Floor".

"Standing" is upright striking and mobility, as well as standing throws ala Judo. Mobility and striking; with the case of the throwing arts, striking with the other guy's body and the tarmac. Ending a fight can include creating enough distance to be able to leave and outrun a damaged attacker.

"Ground" is wrestling ground and pound. As a rule, once you enter this range, you are committed to a single opponent for awhile; it's good for arresting, bad for escaping, unless you're studying it specifically to learn how to foil a specialist in this range as many do - probably including your friend.

"Floor" is a big part of what I teach, and you'll find snippets in a few other arts; there's maybe three or four arts that do a lot of floor, mine included. It covers what happens when you hit the ground, for whatever reason you aren't going to be left alone to just crawl back up to your feet, and the guy who you're fighting does -not- follow you down, but instead takes a bead on you to kick the snot out of you before you stand up.

Sounds like your ladyfriend aught ask us some questions sometime.

[akedm]

Thanks for the clarification, Justice. I'll pass along the forum website to her, but she's been so busy this April I haven't had a chance to talk to her much. I just remembered this question she told me about some months ago.

[tallgeese]

Most ground arts are just as concerned with finishing a fight as any standing practitioners are. It's just a difference in method. I know very few grapplers who wouldn't like to end a match quickly with a submission (in a real fight this becomes a break or choke to unconciousness of course).

[bushido_man96]

I don't think that the goal of a ground style is to stay on the ground. I believe that the goal of any Self-Defense situation is to get out as soon as possible, standing or ground.

I'd say that if you know the fight will be one-on-one, then you should do what you are comfortable with; ground or standing. Otherwise, you should try to look for a way out, and do what is necessary on the way.

The best way to learn to defend against ground fighting is to learn it. In Self-Defense, you won't be looking for a tap-out; if you find yourself there, you should probably break or submit, and then disengage and worry about other threats.

I hope this helps. I can understand your friend's concern; I am also a TKD practitioner, and we don't do any kind of ground fighting training, and I know it is a bad place for me to be, because I am terrible at it, although I have been picking up a few things here and there.

[ShoriKid]

I ask because I’ve heard from a friend that the instructors at her Karate class do not “really teach” ground work – to what extent “really teach” means I don’t know – though they do say a real fight could very well end up on the ground. She asked then what do I do?

The others have you pretty well covered on what ground fighters are seeking to do. It's the same as stand up fighters, end things quickly, taking the least damage possible.

What I'll address the above quoted section though. There is absolutely nothng wrong with the karate instructor not teaching ground work. They should no more teach ground work than mostly grappling instructors should be teaching striking. Bad instruction is often more dangerous than no instruction. If your friend wants to learn to fight from the ground, seek out qualified instruction.

Karate and other “standing” martial arts are most effective at the beginning of a real fight. What I mean is most people agree the longer the fight the likelier it is to end up on the ground, and once on the ground it's going to end there too. And that’s where ju-jitsu (spelling?) and other “ground” arts are most effective. Now of course the idea is to gather a range of styles to address both sides of the fight, cause unless you (who are in Karate) get attacked by someone also in Karate or a similar style where you both want to stay on your feet, the fight’s going to the ground soon.

I'd add in the cavet that "most" fights go to the ground for 2 reasons. One is that most people have no training and thus cannot maintain their balance or control the range of the fight well enough to keep from crashing into one another and going down under the weight of their attacker. Secondly, the most basic of instincts that most people have in a fight is to grab onto the attacker/target once action starts and get in close. If feels more like your doing damage then. Then, we get back to poor balance in a close grapple due to lack of training. If it comes to the often cited stat of 90% of fights going to the ground, I'll meantion that this number was taken from the LAPDs records of altercations and struggles officers were involving in while making arrests. While I don't wish to down play the good data that can be mined from that report, the thing to keep in mind is that police officers are trying to make an arrest. At some point they want to immobilize the subject and restrain them. It's a lot easier to do that when you have the person on the ground and can press them out flat or control limbs to get cuffs on them.

[JusticeZero]

Right; when I ask LEO's and bouncers and the like to omit the actual act of restraining for the arrest, the majority of their fights do not go to ground. (Barring the one LEO I talked to who's MA background was BJJ; he was going to the ground all over the place.)

The two things to watch for are that wrestling is a common martial art for a thug to have a background in, and that if someone realizes they are losing a standup fight that they may gamble that tackling you will even the odds.

That said, during one of our classes, some random thug type wandered in talking about their street fighting skills, that were heavily based on wrestling stuff. They bragged about how effective this tactic was, then proceeded to use one of the people present as a jungle gym for a minute and a half, trying and failing to take them down. So-oo, going to ground isn't quite so fated as groundfighters might want people to believe.

[MMA_Jim]

I see some similar posts, but I want to make sure I am getting my understanding clear about the styles "standing" and "ground".

Karate and other “standing” martial arts are most effective at the beginning of a real fight. What I mean is most people agree the longer the fight the likelier it is to end up on the ground, and once on the ground it's going to end there too. And that’s where ju-jitsu (spelling?) and other “ground” arts are most effective. Now of course the idea is to gather a range of styles to address both sides of the fight, cause unless you (who are in Karate) get attacked by someone also in Karate or a similar style where you both want to stay on your feet, the fight’s going to the ground soon. But I'm not asking what styles make for a good all-around arsenal.

My thinking is Karate or other standing arts often emphasize a kick-and-run-away strategy of self defense or the surprise-one-devastating-hit for the fact that they want the confrontation to end in a few seconds; that they’re not equipped for the ground-work in a longer fight. Any smart attacker knows that if you get a Karateka a TKD practitioner on the ground they’re going to be a lot less effective than they were cause most of their trained arsenal is gone.

The ground arts: Are they also designed for quick attack and run away, or are they designed to stay and see the fight through, so to speak? It seems to me the latter is their design, which is a contrast to the standing arts, and probably for that very reason.

I ask because I’ve heard from a friend that the instructors at her Karate class do not “really teach” ground work – to what extent “really teach” means I don’t know – though they do say a real fight could very well end up on the ground. She asked then what do I do?

It seems to me then there’s an urgency to standing art training to end a fight quickly, whereas the ground arts don’t emphasize the same level of urgency.

I’d like your take. Are my assumptions and characterizations accurate? I know a lot of people here may be saying “No way!” and I’m ignorant here, so I’m asking, cause I’ve never seen ground work in TKD or Karate.

You're assumptions are somewhat correct, and somewhat incorrect.

Karate and other standing styles of martial arts dont teach ground work because they simply dont know it. Even schools that claim to teach groundwork or grappling holds, they fall very much short of real grappling styles.

So, the hit and run style of karate fighting- yeah I agree with what you said. It (karatesque styles) are not designed for a fight- its for one shot and run away.

People always assume that the ground fight= longer fight- mostly because thats what they see on TV. Bear in mind when you watch jiu jitsu at work on tv, you have two well trained professional athletes who have both trained in the same styles. Regardless of the fight being on the feet or on the ground, its not going to end fast.

So people who try to sell you something by saying "we train to end the fight quickly" are doing just that- trying to sell you something. EVERYONE would like to end a fight as quick as possible.

Submissions will end a fight just as quickly as a KO will- A good boxer ko's an untrained opponent quickly because his opponent doesnt know the very basics of boxing, namely protecting himself from getting hit. The same thing applies to a good grappler in the same situation- he will quickly choke his opponent unconcious because his opponent has no idea what the proper defense for the choke is.

As to karate fighters being the exception to going to the ground, thats mostly inaccurate as well. Early UFC's had standup fighter vs standup fighter and they still found themselves on the ground. The reason is that in any standup exchange, one is bound to get the better of the other, in which case the person on the recieving end usually grabs the other to keep from getting hit. A struggle ensues, and lack of proper grappling base makes for people more often than not simply falling down on the ground.

As for those who argue against fights not going to the ground- most of them will. I've worked in a prison and a bar for close to 7 years. The only times the fights dont end up on the ground is when one person tries to hit and run- but thats mostly in the prison. Bar fights end up on the ground alot. One person cold cocks the other and follows him to the ground almost every time

[JusticeZero]

Even schools that claim to teach groundwork or grappling holds, they fall very much short of real grappling styles.

Arguably, that's mainly because they spend less time doing it. As you note later, it doesn't necessarily take all that much to help quite a bit.

EVERYONE would like to end a fight as quick as possible.

Submissions will end a fight just as quickly as a KO will- ..a good grappler .. will quickly choke his opponent unconcious because his opponent has no idea what the proper defense for the choke is.

This is true, and I don't know that many people deny this. It does, however, leave you far more committed than a striker in the same situation, and thus far more vulnerable. A striker does not need to win their fight to run.

..lack of proper grappling base makes for people more often than not simply falling down on the ground.

Something to be said for this, but from what I have heard, all but the most pigheaded and backwater of teachers have taken at least a few lessons from the UFC and added more attention to root and surefootedness. I daresay that the average standup fighter is quite a bit less likely to randomly fall over at a gentle breeze than they were years ago.

[tallgeese]

I'm not sure about the stat that used to be so prevalent tata abut 90 percent of fights end up on the ground. I've never actaully seen a study done to confirm that.

I will say that quite a few do just based on personal experiance. Sometimes this is just due to one of the combats knocking the other one there and continueing to beat him. IN which case, some training had better have been done there.

As for law enforcemnt altercations, it's pretty routine to end on the ground. Once a fight starts, most of us want the bad guy on the ground where we can contain him. Idealy, we're still up where we can work control. THat being said, me down and in a dominat position is fine as well, at least I"m not chasing him thru yards.