“All animals grapple -
well all predators. Tigers, Lions, Wolves all will grab hold of prey and bring it down to the ground to finish it off. Prey will lash out with it’s hooves; but
predators will grab on. Rule of thumb - Prey strikes - Predators grapple. There- that should end the wrestler vs striker debate once and for all.”
Got this from Michael E. Reilly’s web site. Food for thought.
Go tell that to Mike Tyson.
Well, I guess Mr. Reilly has never seen a venomous snake attack. :rolleyes:
JWT
Venomous snakes are predators, and they strike.
Scopions are predators, and they strike.
Big cats also walk on all fours, do you?
Silva is one mean deer!
Badger
Grab this…
Eagles and falcons and such don’t grapple.
How does Tyson do that combo? Jab, Jab, Chomp…yea I think that’s it.
That doesn’t really end the wrestler vs. striker debate. That wouldn’t explain the rise in victory by KO, TKO or ref stoppage in MMA events (unless someone is going to say that the rules “favor strikers” 
).
Also, street thugs/criminals (could be considered “predators”) generally use weapons (guns, knives, etc.) and those attacks could generally be considered “strikes”.
It’s an interesting analogy, but I don’t agree that it “ends” anything.
I believe that hawks, eagles and scorpians hold and strike (ground and pound?) their prey.
LOL, badger!
Paul,
Eagles and falcons grab with their talons and lift their prey off the ground. That is closer to grappling than it is striking.
Of all the toys I got to play with in the USMC, I cannot recall one that “grappled”, and of all the effective ones, all of the strike!
Here we go…try to grab this
Tnwingstun
you are my new favorite butt kicker!!! nice pic man
Grappling
Tigers, wolves, etc have vicious claws and very sharp teeth. Humans have, evolutionarily speaking, lost these. If you want to go to the expense of having 2"canines implanted in your jaws and razor blades in your fingertips then I’d say that you would be the danged best grappler in the world. It is dangerous, academically speaking, to apply behavioral scemas accross species lines especially when dealing with species of higher cognition (us). A good comparison to humans would be a dog that had it’s canines pulled, or a cat that has been declawed in such a situation. Humans can bite and claw but these injuries are seldom life thrteatening. When a tiger latches onto its prey death is almost always a forgone conclusion. And the intent is to kill so the tiger can continue to eat and reproduce, insuring the survival of the species. When hunting these predators humans did not grapple with them they developed weapons to effectively kill them from a relatively safe distance. And the predator/prey model you used involves a stronger opponent (Tiger) against a weaker one (gazelle) or any of the other mainstays of the tiger diet. You will find that infighting among predators themselves sometimes produces different martial behaviors because the playing field has been leveled. When predators hunt it is, many times, in packs and almost always against a weaker opponent. Expenditure of energy and risk are factors to consider. That is why they pick out the weakest ones along the margins of the herd to attack. I’m not saying that the hypothesis is wrong altogether but before you make lofty claims like this a little book knowledge might save you some trouble. Why not examine our closest(genetically speaking) relatives - chimpanzees. See how they fight each other. You find a lot of posturing, displays, and usage of rudimentary weapons but when a larger, more powerful opponent wanders into the area they dont get them into the gaurd and choke them out - they usually head for the trees!
If you’re trying to say that to be a predator one must evolve from a striker to a groundfighter then you have no idea
what a real predator is.
Will Barbra Boxer not let you guys out of the caves??
and big cats that “grapple” with their prey also clean their own bûttholes with their tongue. go ahead and emulate that, too.
we don’t have huge teeth and we don’t have claws. rather, we have hands and feet, elbows and knees, and we can use the weapons we were given with. if that’s by grappling with something, feel free. if it’s striking, ditto. but don’t think that because a hugely fanged and solidly clawed lion grabs onto it’s prey’s neck with its teeth and holds it there for a while to both kill the prey and to rest from its charge is the ideal way or even a legitimate metaphor for the grappling vs. striking argument.
Here you go tigerstyle
Eagles and falcons grab with their talons and lift their prey off the ground. That is closer to grappling than it is striking.
sounds like striking to me!
A stooping peregrine is a hurtling wedge of streamlined feathers, its feet lying back against the tail and wings half-closed. At such speeds it delivers a fierce blow to the prey with a half-closed foot, the usual method of disabling or killing medium-sized and large prey. If the quarry is too heavy to carry, it is allowed to fall to the ground, and the bird lands beside it to feed. It catches lighter prey in midair or else strikes it down and then retrieves it. Small prey such as swallows or sandpipers are snatched in mid-flight with the talons
“…before you make lofty claims like this a little book knowledge might save you some trouble.”
This is not my claim, just something I got from the website of the person I cited in my post above (a little book knowledge in reading comprehension and retention might do you a bit of good). Like I said, just food for thought and discussion. Myself, I believe in a combination of striking and grappling. I don’t have a preference for one or the other.
Wow!
We were on this thread like a ‘pack of dogs on a three legged cat!’
Hey JWT,
Is your wienie dog a striker or a grappler?
Badger