Illustrating, once again, why all my shirts are tearaway.
that’s actually an interesting fight. It shows how things really are on the street. It’s just BOOOM boom boom boom boom, non stop. Right there, that shows you need to know a decent amount about stand up fighting, ground fighting, and take downs. If i were the reciever there, I think I’d try to lift his legs up and take him to the ground (where I’d attempt to hurt him bad and emberass him infront of his friends). Or, I would try to get a good shot at his legs. Maybe a right hook? It’s really hard to say since I’m sitting here, all calm, and in that kind of moment, it’d be much different.
That was a two-man set.
It’s really hard to say since I’m sitting here, all calm, and in that kind of moment, it’d be much different.
absolutely.that’s why it’s my opinion that fine motor skills are nearly worthless in a fighting situation. gross motor skills only.
and “coulda, woulda, shoulda” are very true. even in competitions I always think “man why didn’t I do this?”
and AP is correct once again.
cuts shirts in half and sews in breakaway velcro seams
Things like this should remind us to train for any and every situation.
Okay, if I were going to try and draw any real-world conclusions from that clip…
Better know how to handle the closest possible range right off the bat. The aggressor didn’t dance around at kicking range. He didn’t size the guy up like you might in a sparring match. He walked right in, grabbed the guy’s shirt, threw him down, etc.
The guy on bottom never really covered from that initial closing sequence. If he could’ve stayed on his feet or, at the very least, hit the ground under his conditions rather than the aggressor’s, that would’ve been better.
I think at his age, I would’ve been in precisely the same boat.
I wonder what led up to this fight. and considering it was filmed from just before it began that “mike’s friends” had a camcorder already running..
Originally posted by Kymus
Things like this should remind us to train for any and every situation.
I think it is a great example of training to make the fight go your way. The guy in the sweatshirt was aggressive, avoided the take-down, and kept striking. He didn’t need to go to the ground and submit the guy because his game plan was working.
He didn’t need to go to the ground and submit the guy.
Now why did you have to go and be an ******* and say **** like this?
Don’t think bjj’ers have a sprawl? on of the most ironic thing about training in grappling is that it makes you much harder to get taken down. ask any wrestler, judoka, bjj, sambo guy..
and if the loser would actually have been successful with that double leg, he would have been flat on his ass and may have needed that skillset..
WTF is wrong with you? seriously. grow up kid. not everything has to be about your insecurity..
Another fight video
http://content.collegehumor.com/media/movies/fight_after_school.wmv
Originally posted by MasterKiller
He didn’t need to go to the ground and submit the guy because his game plan was working.
That’s true
All good. But it woulda been more exciting if the instigator (meaning the guy who attacked physically first) of the fight lost.
All we saw from that is the person who started the fight won the fight. Great martial art principles there.
Yah, yah, I know. It’s a technical discussion, so, as you were.
-123
All I see is pages of meaningless symbols!
I mean the link not this forum:D what do I need to down load?
Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
[quote]and if the loser would actually have been successful with that double leg, he would have been flat on his ass and may have needed that skillset..
and “coulda, woulda, shoulda” are very true. even in competitions I always think “man why didn’t I do this?”
WTF is wrong with you? seriously. grow up kid. not everything has to be about your insecurity.. [/B]
If it had ended with an arm-bar, you can bet your @ss someone would have piped up about proof that a solid ground game is needed for every encounter.
At any rate, I wasn’t being contrary or insecure. I was responding to Kymus’ observation that you have to train for everything. I believe it’s best to train to make things go your way, and not to try to train to fight the other guy’s way.
We spend a lot of time here talking about the dreaded shoot and it’s dangers. This guy avoided a bad one and kept hitting, which is what many strikers claim can happen. It’s just good to see solid stand-up principles proven in action.
Originally posted by Liokault
[B]All I see is pages of meaningless symbols!
I mean the link not this forum:D what do I need to down load? [/B]
you need Windows Media Player support for your browser. try going to Microsoft.com and see if they have something for you to download there
MK - your immediate jump to “anti-bjj” makes you the a$$hole. if some grappler would have said that then he would be the a$$hole. but you said it first. congrats. so now you’re taking the preemptive a$$hole approach now.
I believe it’s best to train to make things go your way, and not to try to train to fight the other guy’s way.
fact: fights go to the ground. Fact: no one wants to be there, so you’d better know what to do to get back up and be in control. bjj isn’t always about the submission. 90% of bjj is about POSITIONAL DOMINANCE (how many times have I said this?) The submission is just a possible conclusion that has it’s own advantages/disadvantages over striking.
Man… having watched these 2 clips, all I can say is I have ALOT to learn about street fights 
The speed at which things happen, the shirt over the head thing, the tendency for the fight to hit the ground… how does one begin to prepare for this?
I’ve never been in a street fight, and only been in kung fu for 5 months. These guys would’ve handed me my @$$!
Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
MK - your immediate jump to “anti-bjj” makes you the a$$hole. if some grappler would have said that then he would be the a$$hole. but you said it first. congrats. so now you’re taking the preemptive a$$hole approach now.
Whatever. I didn’t say it like that. But if you read it that way, I guess I can’t help that.
If I didn’t know any better, I might think you posted that clip just to start this argument anyway.
Besides, I’m not Anti-BJJ. I see a lot of value in it.
fact: fights go to the ground. Fact: no one wants to be there, so you’d better know what to do to get back up and be in control. bjj isn’t always about the submission. 90% of bjj is about POSITIONAL DOMINANCE (how many times have I said this?) The submission is just a possible conclusion that has it’s own advantages/disadvantages over striking.
At any rate, this fight shows the advantages of an aggressive striking attack. That was my point.
Originally posted by ShaolinTiger00
[B]MK - your immediate jump to “anti-bjj” makes you the a$$hole. if some grappler would have said that then he would be the a$$hole. but you said it first. congrats. so now you’re taking the preemptive a$$hole approach now.
fact: fights go to the ground. Fact: no one wants to be there, so you’d better know what to do to get back up and be in control. bjj isn’t always about the submission. 90% of bjj is about POSITIONAL DOMINANCE (how many times have I said this?) The submission is just a possible conclusion that has it’s own advantages/disadvantages over striking. [/B]
calm down man. You’re blowing everything out of perportion and putting words in his mouth. He didn’t even imply that ground fighting is useless or whatever it is that you’re trying to say he said. He just said that given the circumstance, it wasn’t needed then.