Defense against grapplers

[Ueshirokarate]

I'll second what's been said above once, the best way to defeat grappling attacks (takedowns too) is to learn to grapple. ps1 give solid advice to the tactics, the best way to learn these is by studying a grappling style. As MP stated, if your partner does not have an adequate understanding of said takedown (or grappling tactics) they can't give you a good feed.

To do well against a grappler, you have to train to be one.

I am not arguing against this idea. It is exactly why I studied judo and why I now take BJJ. The thread was more about taking techniques from kata and then applying them to defend against a grappler. As instructors, it is unrealistic to expect all your students to also study grappling styles. Most people don't have the time to do more than one MA. However, it does make sense as an instructor to teach your students how to defend against such attacks applying techniques from your style and drill them, don't you agree?

[tallgeese]

If they are there, yes.

However, why not take the step to cross train in the styles that specialize in those aspects. Even if it's a seminar based cross training thing (more time efficient if you don't have time to train in more than one art) even that will, in many cases, give a better understanding of countering those tactics that your concerned with than applying estimations of what movements might be.

Now, conceptually, you can take certain things out of non-grappling styles that might be useful. Basing, ect. that comes from one's base art. But your going to need some grapplers to clarify how and what might be useful. If you don't have this, as MP points out, you're not going to realistically assess your pattern.

If you've got that grappler, might as well use him to show you counters. I worked with wrestlers in this manner for a long time before I had access to shootfighting and later BJJ. It started out as a situation where I worked what I knew to counter. It quickly became "show me what you do".

[Ueshirokarate]

If they are there, yes.

However, why not take the step to cross train in the styles that specialize in those aspects. Even if it's a seminar based cross training thing (more time efficient if you don't have time to train in more than one art) even that will, in many cases, give a better understanding of countering those tactics that your concerned with than applying estimations of what movements might be.

Now, conceptually, you can take certain things out of non-grappling styles that might be useful. Basing, ect. that comes from one's base art. But your going to need some grapplers to clarify how and what might be useful. If you don't have this, as MP points out, you're not going to realistically assess your pattern.

If you've got that grappler, might as well use him to show you counters. I worked with wrestlers in this manner for a long time before I had access to shootfighting and later BJJ. It started out as a situation where I worked what I knew to counter. It quickly became "show me what you do".

From my experience, if you train true karate there is a technique to counter every grappling attack. In my opinion, this is why kata is so darn important. It has within it, every technique you would ever need. The challenge in my view is to remove the mickey mouse bunkai and figure out exactly how these techniques apply or don't apply to a given attack.

The intent of the thread really wasn't about my training, I think I have a decent foundation in grappling between my judo and bjj experiences. Once again, my primary concern is teaching with the scope of the style of the school in which you teach. I believe that if it isn't your own style and you are under the direction of others, it is not ok to bring techniques in from outside the style. However, it is being a true martial artist to study other styles and how to apply the techniques in your system to counter potential opponents.

[sensei8]

If they are there, yes.

However, why not take the step to cross train in the styles that specialize in those aspects. Even if it's a seminar based cross training thing (more time efficient if you don't have time to train in more than one art) even that will, in many cases, give a better understanding of countering those tactics that your concerned with than applying estimations of what movements might be.

Now, conceptually, you can take certain things out of non-grappling styles that might be useful. Basing, ect. that comes from one's base art. But your going to need some grapplers to clarify how and what might be useful. If you don't have this, as MP points out, you're not going to realistically assess your pattern.

If you've got that grappler, might as well use him to show you counters. I worked with wrestlers in this manner for a long time before I had access to shootfighting and later BJJ. It started out as a situation where I worked what I knew to counter. It quickly became "show me what you do".

From my experience, if you train true karate there is a technique to counter every grappling attack. In my opinion, this is why kata is so darn important. It has within it, every technique you would ever need. The challenge in my view is to remove the mickey mouse bunkai and figure out exactly how these techniques apply or don't apply to a given attack.

The intent of the thread really wasn't about my training, I think I have a decent foundation in grappling between my judo and bjj experiences. Once again, my primary concern is teaching with the scope of the style of the school in which you teach. I believe that if it isn't your own style and you are under the direction of others, it is not ok to bring techniques in from outside the style. However, it is being a true martial artist to study other styles and how to apply the techniques in your system to counter potential opponents.

That was quite a SOLID post!!

[sensei8]

In the past I've said this before...don't succumb to the grappler's attacks; don't be overwhelmed by it because it's not the style that's overwhelming imho, no, it's the practitioners use of the style that can be overwhelming. I still believe that Alex is dead on...learn to grapple effectively or one will be in a world of trouble once the fight goes to the ground. Make the ground ones best friend in case one becomes horizontal.

[Ueshirokarate]

In the past I've said this before...don't succumb to the grappler's attacks; don't be overwhelmed by it because it's not the style that's overwhelming imho, no, it's the practitioners use of the style that can be overwhelming. I still believe that Alex is dead on...learn to grapple effectively or one will be in a world of trouble once the fight goes to the ground. Make the ground ones best friend in case one becomes horizontal.

I think we all agree with the notion of training a grappling style. Heck, the founder of Matsubayashi was ranked in Judo. That said, many students are challenged to just dedicate enough time to learn one type of martial arts. This is why I think sharing our experiences and knowledge is invaluable to such students. Your suggestion of an unwilling uke is spot on. As an instructor, this should be you. Of course as the instructor, you need to be doubly skilled and not only be an unwilling uke but one that uses control. You should know exactly what level your students are at and only push them slightly beyond what they can handle.

[tallgeese]

If they are there, yes.

However, why not take the step to cross train in the styles that specialize in those aspects. Even if it's a seminar based cross training thing (more time efficient if you don't have time to train in more than one art) even that will, in many cases, give a better understanding of countering those tactics that your concerned with than applying estimations of what movements might be.

Now, conceptually, you can take certain things out of non-grappling styles that might be useful. Basing, ect. that comes from one's base art. But your going to need some grapplers to clarify how and what might be useful. If you don't have this, as MP points out, you're not going to realistically assess your pattern.

If you've got that grappler, might as well use him to show you counters. I worked with wrestlers in this manner for a long time before I had access to shootfighting and later BJJ. It started out as a situation where I worked what I knew to counter. It quickly became "show me what you do".

From my experience, if you train true karate there is a technique to counter every grappling attack. In my opinion, this is why kata is so darn important. It has within it, every technique you would ever need. The challenge in my view is to remove the mickey mouse bunkai and figure out exactly how these techniques apply or don't apply to a given attack.

The intent of the thread really wasn't about my training, I think I have a decent foundation in grappling between my judo and bjj experiences. Once again, my primary concern is teaching with the scope of the style of the school in which you teach. I believe that if it isn't your own style and you are under the direction of others, it is not ok to bring techniques in from outside the style. However, it is being a true martial artist to study other styles and how to apply the techniques in your system to counter potential opponents.

Yes, reading thru the subsequent posts it does seem we are pretty much in agreement for our own purposes of getting better. It's passing it on that we seem to disagree on. Good point, Ueshiro.

The bolded statement above I guess is at the heart of where we don't have similar philosophies. I have no problems by going outside a system, finding a tool that works well, integrating it into what I do, then showing others how it fits. I'd never claim it's mine, or out of my system, ect. Give credit where it's due and then let the students be as well rounded as you are.

The big challenge as I see it, is the integrations step. A tool is useless unless it fits into your response pattern well. This will be even more true of students who have less experience in doing such things.

[sensei8]

In the past I've said this before...don't succumb to the grappler's attacks; don't be overwhelmed by it because it's not the style that's overwhelming imho, no, it's the practitioners use of the style that can be overwhelming. I still believe that Alex is dead on...learn to grapple effectively or one will be in a world of trouble once the fight goes to the ground. Make the ground ones best friend in case one becomes horizontal.

I think we all agree with the notion of training a grappling style. Heck, the founder of Matsubayashi was ranked in Judo. That said, many students are challenged to just dedicate enough time to learn one type of martial arts. This is why I think sharing our experiences and knowledge is invaluable to such students. Your suggestion of an unwilling uke is spot on. As an instructor, this should be you. Of course as the instructor, you need to be doubly skilled and not only be an unwilling uke but one that uses control. You should know exactly what level your students are at and only push them slightly beyond what they can handle.

Again...another quite SOLID post!!

[Ueshirokarate]

Yes, reading thru the subsequent posts it does seem we are pretty much in agreement for our own purposes of getting better. It's passing it on that we seem to disagree on. Good point, Ueshiro.

The bolded statement above I guess is at the heart of where we don't have similar philosophies. I have no problems by going outside a system, finding a tool that works well, integrating it into what I do, then showing others how it fits. I'd never claim it's mine, or out of my system, ect. Give credit where it's due and then let the students be as well rounded as you are.

The big challenge as I see it, is the integrations step. A tool is useless unless it fits into your response pattern well. This will be even more true of students who have less experience in doing such things.

This is purely my point of view. Obviously some will disagree.

With 18 katas (20 in our schools), 7 pre-arranged drills and all the other stuff that goes along with this, Matsubayashi has more curriculum within it than most can effectively learn and drill. I think in all Matsubayashi schools, some things are neglected just due to the fact that there is so much to learn and drill. From my view, if you start adding things from outside you are diluting your system.

I am not opposed to learning other techniques and adopting them for yourself. However, a student I am teaching in a school in our system has signed up to learn our system. They didn't join an MMA, Judo or BJJ school. Learning how to apply our system's techniques fall within the scope of learning our system, whereas adapting techniques from outside does not. If it isn't my own developed style with my name on the certificates, I am not going to bring in my techniques (no matter how effective or where learned), unless it is to understand the system I am teaching's techniques better. If I were the head of the system, I would get pretty angry at someone trying to teach something outside of our system, as this will change the system and while it may be an improvement in some cases it won't be for the better. Also studying outside techniques outside the scope of inside techniques takes time away from the study of your style.

Make sense?

[sensei8]

I can't find any fault with what Alex and Ueshirokarate both have pointed out; both have solid points.

Preference I suppose.