MORE,
In a post in another thread re grappling, I erred in citing cultural reasons as a reason why the grappling component was so absent in TCMA. I was wrong to write that. The techniques are there. You have to be able to see it. The active study of grappling helps highlight what was there all along.
mickey
we must always remember that evloution IS life, what does not evolve dies.
This is the same for MA.
Its OK not to agree and be simple and basic minded… heck people dont believe Darwin adn still call it a theory LOL, but whether you agree or not does not change the dynamics facts and natural progession of eveloment in everthing , so you either except it and include it in your learnings, teachings and paths or become well…a dinosaur
The basic underlying argument is, Do you have to fight BJJ the BJJ way. I think it would do many a world of good to at least look in on what is being done and how you would at least TRY to gum up their entry or find a quick exit. Its being done in MMA all the time. Sure, many of those are experienced grapplers. But where is this other paradigm coming from? Not from grappling.
If you can’t keep your balance and stay on your feet, then you need to learn to roll around on the ground, still it is more of a sport than a MA.
[QUOTE=Robinhood;1142963]If you can’t keep your balance and stay on your feet, then you need to learn to roll around on the ground, still it is more of a sport than a MA.[/QUOTE]
I don’t know where to begin with the wrongness of this.
Lebaufist,
For you to fight against BJJ you must first understand it. BJJ is not without its weak points. The question is can you handle its strengths? You do not compromise anything to maintain your edge.
mickey
[QUOTE=Lebaufist;1142958]The basic underlying argument is, Do you have to fight BJJ the BJJ way. I think it would do many a world of good to at least look in on what is being done and how you would at least TRY to gum up their entry or find a quick exit. Its being done in MMA all the time. Sure, many of those are experienced grapplers. But where is this other paradigm coming from? Not from grappling.[/QUOTE]
Its coming from strikers who understand that to use their game effectively they need to become very good at grappling but then adapt it to their goals, they might not be looking for submissions, holding position etc but you can be sure that they have extensive experience in these things, they have to in order to be able to nullify what’s being done to them
You might not have to fight BJJ the BJJ way, but if you don’t understand and have experience at what they do, you will get hurt if you try to stop them using strikes and a limited ground knowledge
In MMA you will find no one at a decent level who does not train straight submission grappling only at least a few days a week, be it BJJ or no gi BJJ as well as straight wrestling, the reason for this is obvious and should also explain why the approach you are talking about wont work
You can hit all you want, if you don’t train enough pure grappling to have the escapes down and the positions down you are going to get hurt when the BJJ guys decides to also hit back
Does Mantis have ground fighting?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=bBJUcc8QCPk
LOL Phil, apparently yes and by the looks of it he is the master. thanks fo the laugh so early in the day
[QUOTE=Frost;1143043]Its coming from strikers who understand that to use their game effectively they need to become very good at grappling [/QUOTE]I don’t agree at all. You don’t have to be a BJJ BB to learn to stop a take down. Grappling hasn’t cornered the market in mobility.
[QUOTE=Lebaufist;1143058]I don’t agree at all. You don’t have to be a BJJ BB to learn to stop a take down. Grappling hasn’t cornered the market in mobility.[/QUOTE]
Nope but you do have to be a very good wrestler to stop the takedown, and have a ground game just in case you get taken down, by good I mean have trained wrestling heavily in your style and competed in grappling events, otherwise even good strikers will get destroyed against good grapplers, witness paul daley and dan hardy
By the way Best strikers in MMA,
Anderson silva, BJJ blackbelt, jose aldo, also BJJ blackbelt, machida BJJ blackbelt, shogun I could keep going but you get my point
it takes a very high level of wrestling skill to be able to just stop a shoot. I remember sparring a local amateur mma fighter at trevor whittman’s gym. We were working striking with takedowns in the session he was around 5 foot 6 or seven at a 156 pounds and im six foot two and was 210 at the time.
he had a backround in wrestling. I only stuffed one of the little *******s shoots.
So what about all the people who aren’t BB? They just get taken down. No sorry this is a fallacy. Superman doesn’t exists and no style will make you one. Its not rocket science.
[QUOTE=goju;1143079]it takes a very high level of wrestling skill to be able to just stop a shoot. I remember sparring a local amateur mma fighter at trevor whittman’s gym. We were working striking with takedowns in the session he was around 5 foot 6 or seven at a 156 pounds and im six foot two and was 210 at the time.
he had a backround in wrestling. I only stuffed one of the little *******s shoots.:([/QUOTE]
Isn’t that more a reflection of your inability?
[QUOTE=Lebaufist;1143101]Isn’t that more a reflection of your inability?[/QUOTE]
With his reach AND size advantage the fact they he couldn’t stop his shoot is an example of the OTHER guys skill in shooting in AND His lack of skill in stopping the shoot.
Yes, but we have no gauge to measure the skill of either. I don’t assume that the person I describe knows nothing. I don’t assume that the person I describe doesn’t have contact sense. But just enough. I don’t assume that the person I describe hasn’t fought at a lower range. I.E. kickboxers.
Its easy for the grappler in his equation to just keep going without a deterrent.
AFAIC, while on the feet, both are equal. Its who takes whom where after contact that matters to the grappler. I mean, really, its not magic, grapplers, mostly wrestlers(because BJJ takedowns are crap, IMHO) practice takedowns all the time. However, what you do against it doesn’t necessarily have to follow wrestling rules. And sometime their own paradigms can be used against them.
Its only a matter of practice. If I train to stop a take down as much as the next guy trains to do a takedown, Then you have a potential problem with that takedown. I don’t have to be a BB to do so.
Any technique needs its conditions met in order to work. Gum up a portion of those conditions and you are going to find that what you aimed for is lost.
[QUOTE=Lebaufist;1143111]Yes, but we have no gauge to measure the skill of either. I don’t assume that the person I describe knows nothing. I don’t assume that the person I describe doesn’t have contact sense. But just enough. I don’t assume that the person I describe hasn’t fought at a lower range. I.E. kickboxers.
Its easy for the grappler in his equation to just keep going without a deterrent.
AFAIC, while on the feet, both are equal. Its who takes whom where after contact that matters to the grappler. I mean, really, its not magic, grapplers, mostly wrestlers(because BJJ takedowns are crap, IMHO) practice takedowns all the time. However, what you do against it doesn’t necessarily have to follow wrestling rules. And sometime their own paradigms can be used against them.
Its only a matter of practice. If I train to stop a take down as much as the next guy trains to do a takedown, Then you have a potential problem with that takedown. I don’t have to be a BB to do so.
Any technique needs its conditions met in order to work. Gum up a portion of those conditions and you are going to find that what you aimed for is lost.[/QUOTE]
Well, if you wanna look at in a “scientific way”:
The vast majority of evidence we have from over the last 20 years clearly demonstrates that IF a trained grappler wants to take someone down, they are going down.
That has been empirically proven over and over.
Then there is gravity and the often proven fact that it is far easier to go down than to stay up.
The point too was that i wasn’t trying to play his game.In fact the whole point of the sparring session was to get used to the mma environment of having to strike on the feet and defend the take down at the same time. I’m very good with my striking and used my jab and foot work to keep him away to some degree but it wasnt enough. A good wrestlers shoot is very fast and on top of that they are freaking strong and grind you down to the mat.. On top of that if you have a wrestler who has adapted himself well to mma he will uses strikes and feints to set up the shoot or wait for you to miss with your strike then go.
it’s really something you have to experience first hand. it will change your perspective on alot of things.
[QUOTE=Lebaufist;1143111] If I train to stop a take down as much as the next guy trains to do a takedown, Then you have a potential problem with that takedown.[/QUOTE]
It’s much easier to train defense than offense. When your opponent shots at your leg, all you need is to drag his head all the way to the ground. How hard can that be? If you spend 3 years in single leg counters and your opponent spends 3 years in single leg, 3 years later, you single leg counter may make your opponent’s single leg fail. The problem is even if your opponent cannot take you down with his single leg, you can’t take him down with your single leg either. Is it better to develop offense skill that you may use someday than to develop defense skill that you may never use in your life time?
[QUOTE=YouKnowWho;1143117]It’s much easier to train defense than offense. When your opponent shots at your leg, all you need is to drag his head all the way to the ground. How hard can that be?[/QUOTE]
Pretty **** hard, actually. If they are decent, and they want you on the ground, you are going to the ground. Like SR says, you are arguing against decades of hard evidence and solid proof.
It’s like you don’t want to accept this, and are willing to say anything if it means diluting it.
****, man, nobody is saying abandon TCMA. But without a ground game, you are asking for a terrible outcome. Instead you are saying things which have been proven to be inaccurate, and you are rehashing a discussion that has been put to bed already.