Anti Grappling or Learn Jujitsu?

[Alan Armstrong]

For martial arts self defence to be practiced realistically, in fact it isn't realistic.

Places people need to defend themselves in are on trains and buses, elevators and public staircases, parking lots and in their own car, or in an office or a public washroom; parkways and crossing bridges.

Places and environments that are very un-dojo like do need to be considered as potential places of danger.

Dojos are a safe place to train in and are most likely the place that being attacked in will never happen!

I disagree- what ever environment you're in your opponent is also in too, therefore both of you are back to neutral as it were. For example, I've been in fights in bars, bathrooms, sidewalks, city streets, basements, parking lots, and so forth. The altercation doesnt suddenly change because the environment did and no one was more difficult than the other. In short, it sounds like a strawman argument to me...

As you can only speak from your own experiences (TJ-Jitsu) then that is your perspective alone and not representative of everyone everywhere.

Using the environment is very important in an altercation due to using it to ones own advantage, if a person knows how.

If a person doesn't no how to use the environment to ones own advantage, then yes I agree that it will be a level playing feild for both involved.

[TJ-Jitsu]

For martial arts self defence to be practiced realistically, in fact it isn't realistic.

Places people need to defend themselves in are on trains and buses, elevators and public staircases, parking lots and in their own car, or in an office or a public washroom; parkways and crossing bridges.

Places and environments that are very un-dojo like do need to be considered as potential places of danger.

Dojos are a safe place to train in and are most likely the place that being attacked in will never happen!

I disagree- what ever environment you're in your opponent is also in too, therefore both of you are back to neutral as it were. For example, I've been in fights in bars, bathrooms, sidewalks, city streets, basements, parking lots, and so forth. The altercation doesnt suddenly change because the environment did and no one was more difficult than the other. In short, it sounds like a strawman argument to me...

As you can only speak from your own experiences (TJ-Jitsu) then that is your perspective alone and not representative of everyone everywhere.

Using the environment is very important in an altercation due to using it to ones own advantage, if a person knows how.

If a person doesn't no how to use the environment to ones own advantage, then yes I agree that it will be a level playing feild for both involved.

Fair enough, but you'd have to show me an example of someone more aware of the environment than his opponent and further it by showing how he was taught such awareness and where he was able to execute it

[Alan Armstrong]

Just growing up in the environment and being aware of the surroundings we learn by watching and doing.

Take a City Man from any major European city and drop him off in the wilderness in Africa.

His environment has drastically changed, his survival tactics need to change with the environment.

Same holds true for a person that has grown up in remote areas and end up displaced in a city.

A friend of mine many years ago in Ethiopia, while on a rural bus, was stopped by bandits, they demanded money.

He bluffed and confronted them to let them pass, so they let them all go.

He bluffed them with a can of baked beans, without the label on, he screamed at the bandits that he will pull the firing pin and blow them up if they don't let them go.

Point being, where he came from (many years ago in a time of famine) hand grenades where more accessible than tins of baked beans.

[TJ-Jitsu]

Just growing up in the environment and being aware of the surroundings we learn by watching and doing.

Take a City Man from any major European city and drop him off in the wilderness in Africa.

His environment has drastically changed, his survival tactics need to change with the environment.

Same holds true for a person that has grown up in remote areas and end up displaced in a city.

A friend of mine many years ago in Ethiopia, while on a rural bus, was stopped by bandits, they demanded money.

He bluffed and confronted them to let them pass, so they let them all go.

He bluffed them with a can of baked beans, without the label on, he screamed at the bandits that he will pull the firing pin and blow them up if they don't let them go.

Point being, where he came from (many years ago in a time of famine) hand grenades where more accessible than tins of baked beans.

Point taken, but when it comes to probabilities vs possibilities, I prefer to focus on the first over the second.

[Alan Armstrong]

In all probabilities, if my friend had thrown the tin of baked beans at the bandits, they would have most possibly run to save their lives and the bus driver would have sufficient time to make an escape by driving away.

If the bandits did take the time to examine the tin of beens that was thrown at them, it would still have given the driver enough time to make a getaway, the bandits could very well end up fighting each other for it's content.

[MasterPain]

I have yet to see a better anti-grapple than grappling used in reverse.

[TJ-Jitsu]

I have yet to see a better anti-grapple than grappling used in reverse.

Please explain.

That makes about as much sense as saying I strike in reverse.....

[MasterPain]

Grappling in reverse is using grappling skill to get back to a standing, striking position. As opposed to whatever people want to call anti-grappling, which tends to be all theory. In other words, if a person wants to be able to stand and strike with a grappler, they need at least a basic understanding of grappling. They need an understanding of overhooks, underhooks, head control, a few escapes from negative positions. "Anti-grappling" seems to assume that a pure striker can avoid ever being taken down. It doesn't tend to work that way.

[MasterPain]

And of course, the more grappling skill, the better. Not everyone will want to dedicate the time and effort needed to be a great grappler, maybe they just love a striking art. But there is no substitute for effective grappling skill. To think otherwise is just wishful thinking.

[TJ-Jitsu]

Grappling in reverse is using grappling skill to get back to a standing, striking position. As opposed to whatever people want to call anti-grappling, which tends to be all theory. In other words, if a person wants to be able to stand and strike with a grappler, they need at least a basic understanding of grappling. They need an understanding of overhooks, underhooks, head control, a few escapes from negative positions. "Anti-grappling" seems to assume that a pure striker can avoid ever being taken down. It doesn't tend to work that way.

The point Im trying to suggest is that there is only grappling- anti grappling or grappling in reverse suggests doing something that isnt otherwise being attempting in grappling.

I mean, I grapple to get to my feet all the time- I just also happen to have a leg, arm, or neck when I do get to my feet. I then finish and sometimes submit.

Lets invent a scale that guages grappling abilty- call it 1-10. Usually when someone is attempting to "just" get to their feet they tend to only understand grappling until point 5-Im being very generic and vague here. As he gets better (say a 7) he could attempt to multitask and stand up with something in order to cut the fat and immediately go on the offensive. At the end of the day though, whether someone is "just" standing up or standing up as part of a sweep/counter, the standing part still looks exactly the same, barring a few details that a more experienced grappler will be better using. Its not the techniques but the fighters strategy, know what I mean?