more Karate in the UFC

[rmurray]

This is getting off topic. If you refuse to beleive that kicking and stomping a downed opponents head might be useful to win a fight... That's fine with me.

I happen to know the damage adds up fast and the fight is in your hands right away. A downed opponent gives you many targets regardless of where they cover up, and ample opportunity to safely exploit them. Even a highly skilled fighter doesn't maintain much of a chance once he has taken his seat on the floor at the feet of a determined opponent.

I'm not sure why I have encountered opposition to what I would consider established truths. As a community of martial artists we should at least be humble enough to agree on simple, sound fundamentals; or we will lack credibility as a whole.

[isshinryu5toforever]

I never said it doesn't work. I said it might not be as easy as you think. I then asked you, in very flat, plain terms how you planned on getting said grappler to the ground in a controlled manner.

If you can stomp on someone's head with full force, then yes, you will likely win automatically. You seem to think that someone falling down automatically means they lose due to stomps. As determined as the person standing is to stomp on their opponent, their opponent is equally as determined to get up or take them down, especially if they're a skilled grappler.

I insist that for all of time, in parking lots the world over; Maintaining posture while getting your opponent off his feet yields a very high percentage of wins.

Yes, I agree with this. I never said I didn't. I did however question how easy it would be to take down someone skilled at grappling and stay in said posture.

That same fighter might have beaten that same opponent in a streetfight by sweeping, tripping, or throwing him early in the fight and thrashing him with kicks.

(emphasis mine)

My question, from the beginning, was how you were going to do this. Striking is an answer, but that's not a takedown. You said that a striker had zero reason to grapple because he couldn't perform head stomps and head kicks on the ground. My question from the beginning was how a striker could take down and control a grappler to be able to stomp on his head.

The majority of these stomps come from being able to control your opponent on the ground.

Also notice how many times the head stomps really aren't the key to victory. They're a follow up when the person is already staggered, tired, and finished.

I never said head stomps absolutely do not work, I just said it might not be as easy as you've been letting on.

[brickshooter]

I agree with RMurray.

Pride allowed "kicks" to the head of ground fighters and attacks (knees) to the top of the head. Consequently, ground fighter were extremely careful in their takedowns. And they were reluctant about being on the ground in general. Even the legendary Gracies learned how to fight standing up in order to survive. It was extremely dangerous to be on the ground versus a seasoned fighter.

The UFC bans of these head kicks versus ground fighters and top of the head attacks changed the way fighters fought. Even if one gets caught in a spraw defense, there's no danger of getting repetitive knees on the cranium. And without head kicks versus a ground fighter, an attacker must try to punch a ground fighter with his shorter and weaker limb - his arms. If he misses, he's now on the ground with a grappler.

The UFC rules protecting ground fighters compelled MMA fighters to focus more on ground fighting.

The safety rules definitely shape the fighters.

I still saw an awful lot of takedowns and ground fighting in Pride. Head stomps are dangerous, but Fedor was pretty much the only guy to win using them on a consistent basis. If you're fighting Fedor, well you're likely to end up on the ground one way or another. For the majority of fights however, people weren't afraid to take it to the ground.

If head stomps were allowed, you wouldn't see people turtling or just laying there on their backs. You would still see a lot of takedowns and ground fighting though.

You also glossed over the part where I asked, how a striker would get a superior grappler to the ground? You mentioned sweeps and trips, but how exactly do you pull those off against someone much better at them than yourself?

Punch. After connecting or if he backpedals, you sweep. If in a clinch, apply knee strikes, once the defender raises his one knee to block a follow up attack, you sweep. Or in the alternative, if caught in the clinch grab his collar and uppercut. If you sense him looking to the ceiling because of your uppercut, you sweep.

[James L]

Hey all,

Long time lurker, first time poster.

I had to comment on this discussion. To put my comments into perspective my background before starting my Karate training (in which I still consider myself very much a neophyte) was in grappling. Specifically, 5 years of high school wrestling, 9 years of Judo, and 2 years of Brazilian Jiujitsu.

I just wanted to post that anybody who has a theory on how to spar or fight a grappler, and who hasn't actually tried out that theory in resistant training or sparring with a skilled grappler, is at serious risk of deluding themselves.

The only way someone could beat a skilled grappler with head stomps and/or downward kicks and knees is if they incapacitated that grappler first with a strike that seriously disoriented them, or if the grappler was somehow incapacitated by the throw itself. Considering how much grapplers train to take falls, however, I wouldn't count on that second option. Perhaps the grappler might have an unlucky slip and the striker times a well delivered blow. That would be a very rare occurrence.

Honestly, The thought that someone is going to sweep me onto the ground and I will be helpless to their downward strikes is a stretch. If I go to the ground disoriented by strikes of course that might be another story.

I can say that I am 110% comfortable on the ground, whether my opponent is standing or is on the ground grappling with me. The fact that you are standing and I am on the ground is not something that intimidates me.... I still feel quite comfortable in my ability to defend myself, take my opponent down, or stand back up.

I don't want to start a "striking versus grappling" debate or anything like that, I love Karate and the training I am getting at my dojo. Grappling is a lot like swimming though: you can't theorize about it, you have to get wet to understand it.

From the perspective of developing self defence skills I highly recommend people participate in full contact sparring with a skilled grappler and test out their theories. It can be a very eye opening experience.

Best wishes in your training.

Cheers,

James

[RW]

I agree with murray.

Many of the takedowns we see today in the UFC wouldn't fly if kicking/kneeing a downed opponent was allowed. And forget about stomping on someone in the floor! How many submission artists and wrestlers would go for that? Not as many. How many would rely solely on those skills? (think: fighters like jake shields and chael sonnen who blanket, manhug and lay and pray their way to victory) Even less.

I'm not saying karate would reign supreme (Muay thai is probably a better art, and this is coming from a shotokan guy!), but it'd be one of the most dominant ones.

[isshinryu5toforever]

I agree with murray.

Many of the takedowns we see today in the UFC wouldn't fly if kicking/kneeing a downed opponent was allowed. And forget about stomping on someone in the floor! How many submission artists and wrestlers would go for that? Not as many. How many would rely solely on those skills? (think: fighters like jake shields and chael sonnen who blanket, manhug and lay and pray their way to victory) Even less.

I'm not saying karate would reign supreme (Muay thai is probably a better art, and this is coming from a shotokan guy!), but it'd be one of the most dominant ones.

This all comes back to control. How are you going to control an opponent on the ground? How are you going to get him on the ground to begin with?

I posted a video earlier, watch it and tell me how many of those knees to the head and stomps came from people who are purely strikers. Then, tell me how many of them came from someone who knew what he was doing on the ground and was controlling his opponent. Almost of the fight ending head stomps came from people who were dominating on the ground, and decided to get up and step on someone's face.

Like James L. said, roll with someone that knows their stuff on the ground. Try what you're talking about. It won't be as easy, or work as well, as you think. If you think stopping a double leg takedown is easy, workout with some wrestlers. If you think you won't have an ippon seonagi dropped on you in close, EVER, workout with someone who does good judo. I know many a BJJ guy that can make trying to step on them a frustrating process by controlling your legs with their legs while they're on their back. As soon as you miss one, they're either getting up or taking you down.

That stuff takes away a lot of tools and nullifies a lot of striking power in close. Grappling happens in three phases, clinch, throw, and then the ground. If you can't control someone in all three phases, you can't stomp on their face. You CAN knock someone down by strikes, but that's a knockdown, and you shouldn't have to stomp on their head if you hit them flush standing up.

[yamesu]

I think (from skimming through the posts) most of the commenters here have forgotten, or are unaware of, the actual evolution of the UFC....

Look back to UFC 1, 2 and 3.

It was brutal. No gloves, all strikes and holds allowed, it was a REAL no holds barred competition.

Nowdays, and after much deliberation, the UFC has shifted to bring in many rules which favour certain styles of striking and grappling over others. Yes, Im not saying it favours grappling over striking, but conversely, that there are styles of grappling that are favoured within the points scoring system over others - and the same same for striking styles.

The finesse has been taken out of the UFC over the last decade, and it has (IMHO) become nothing more than new-aged WWE..... I realise this will upset a lot of people, but think about it. Its all about the hype, the fighters character and personas, and last but not at all least, advertising...

Now, back to the original point... Look at the Gracies, when BJJ was first introduced to the UFC it was unbleivable! And it was done wearing full gi attire, something which is not allowed in current UFC torunaments...

This to me is simply favouring certain styles over others!

I would like to see more Karate in the UFC (GSP and Machida are two of my fav fighters!), but foremost, I would like to see UFC go back to its roots....UFC appears to have become a game moreso than a test of fighters and styles. This gravely dissapoints me personally. I believe the UFC no longer represents what it was orginally intended for.

OSU.

[DeadlyAlliance]

It is hard to tell, but most UFC fans have a bias opinion about karate in general. When mentioning MMA, you will barely hear anybody include karate in their arsenal or used as a form for training. It's either bjj, muay thai, or boxing ... those being the most popular ones.

[sensei8]

I'm only spitballing here, but, I believe that the reason(s) for UFC having so many rules boils down to one thing...availability!! UFC wants to be in multiple venues across the USA, and to be allowed in this state or that state, rules have to be adopted no matter how far it is from how it was in the UFC 1,2, or 3.

This is my guess!

[bushido_man96]

I think (from skimming through the posts) most of the commenters here have forgotten, or are unaware of, the actual evolution of the UFC....

Look back to UFC 1, 2 and 3.

It was brutal. No gloves, all strikes and holds allowed, it was a REAL no holds barred competition.

Nowdays, and after much deliberation, the UFC has shifted to bring in many rules which favour certain styles of striking and grappling over others. Yes, Im not saying it favours grappling over striking, but conversely, that there are styles of grappling that are favoured within the points scoring system over others - and the same same for striking styles.

The finesse has been taken out of the UFC over the last decade, and it has (IMHO) become nothing more than new-aged WWE..... I realise this will upset a lot of people, but think about it. Its all about the hype, the fighters character and personas, and last but not at all least, advertising...

Now, back to the original point... Look at the Gracies, when BJJ was first introduced to the UFC it was unbleivable! And it was done wearing full gi attire, something which is not allowed in current UFC torunaments...

This to me is simply favouring certain styles over others!

I would like to see more Karate in the UFC (GSP and Machida are two of my fav fighters!), but foremost, I would like to see UFC go back to its roots....UFC appears to have become a game moreso than a test of fighters and styles. This gravely dissapoints me personally. I believe the UFC no longer represents what it was orginally intended for.

OSU.

I don't think the UFC is a "game." Its a fight competition, like other fight competitions, but is more inclusive than all others, minus a street fight. In ways, the UFC is better now than it was. Its availability has increased, and there are more events now than before. Yes, there is advertising, but, it takes money to promote these events, and to get the best quality fighters out there to compete.

Another point that isn't being brought up when comparing UFC now to UFC then, is the quality of the fighters. The fighters are better atheletes today than they were when the UFC first began. Training has gotten better, and the fighters are more well-rounded. This makes a difference, as well. Everyone that competes in the UFC now has a modicum of experience in all ranges of the fight, unlike the early UFCs, where there were many single-disciplined fighters. So, with the amount of skill that is out there, I don't think allowing head stomps to a downed opponent would make a whole lot of difference in the fights. Would you see it from time to time? Sure. Could it make a difference from time to time? Sure. But overall, I don't think that fact that it isn't allowed doesn't affect or alter who wins or loses all that much.