# Anti-Grappling Demos



## yipman_sifu (Sep 24, 2006)

This is some of Sifu Victor Gutierrez demonstrations about anti-grappling methods. *REMEMBER *that this is only in a case of a *REAL *encounter. I mean don't tell me why hasn't it been tested in the UFC or Pride. The difference between these vids and Frank Shamrock one is that these are more made for finishing the opponent rather than submission which Shamrock does in his version.

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 1/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 2/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 3/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 4/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 5/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 6/6

*NOTE: the links provided may be slow in process to some PC's. If that happens, go to youtube.com and type (anti grappling) in the search and you will find those to be *the 1st 6 results from the search only*.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 24, 2006)

Well, it depends my friend . 

using the sort of "Ground Chi Sao" you are showing is demonstrated by Sifu Victor here. This Sifu is from the EWTO branch and they have this in their training.:ultracool What I can say in here is that these techniques are effective by it's practitionar, not by itself. It all depends on the individual training. Once in a brawl, chances go to luck sometimes . I personally think that a good Wing Chun trainer will be hardly taken down, becuase if a grappler failed in a takedown, he is in a trouble. I won't say things just like this, it's from what I trained and brawled personally .

Regarding to some claims that Anti-grappling came after BJJ was popular in the UFC and Pride. Let me put it this way. The term *Anti-Grappling* seems to be this way , but beleive me that the ground Chi Sao techniques are at least from the old Yipman days himself. The idea is only about lowering the Chi Sao level and keep the centerline theory while burst chain punches when the gap is there. 

This concludes that the term Anti may be a marketing issue in the Martial arts world (just an assumption, not sure), but the techniques were there from even the Leung Jan days .

This how the EWTO talks about Anti-grappling.

http://www.wingtsun.com.au/site/Gallery/Articles/wingtsunantigrappling.html

All the best and wish we never have a brawl at any turf :uhyeah:


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 24, 2006)

It is a marketing term, I don't think I saw a single person in those that looked like they had much at all for grappling skills, which, IMO, makes it rather hard to "anti-grapple"

The "Anti-grappling" got started because grappling was dominating in competition, it is a neccessary component of competition, and all the striking only schools needed something to fill that "hole" that many people where beginning to see in there training methods. So "Anti-grappling" was born.

So I don't like for a couple of reasons:

1)  I have yet to see it shown being used effectively against a skilled grappler.

2)  Why reinvent the wheel?  Why ignore the principles that skilled grapplers have developed to use against other skilled grapplers, and why do it without trying it against skilled grapplers?


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 24, 2006)

Those are some good clips.  My other instructor trained with him and we incorporate the anti-grappling into our charts.  Yet, I just call it "ground work" or "ground fighting".  It seems to put people off, and confuse the principle behind the techniques calling it anti-grappling.
I've found the techniques to be highly effective.  I'm no sifu, and definately not strong or large.  I've used it against bigger men up to 225 lbs, 6'4" tall.  Very smart and simple technique, and true to the effortlessness of WC/WT.
I does look like you expend more effort on video, but in reality its all angles, distribution of weight, force, and re-direction.  You "roll with" the opponents force instead of meeting it head on and using strength to submit.  
There are submission techniques you can apply if so desired just like when standing, but I've found that when your attacker is stronger and larger than you, if you spend your energy trying to "submit" you compromise your situation.  I mean, why submit someone who is truely trying to hurt you?  It's nice to try to be the better "man", but don't let that get you killed.

"offence is defense, defense is offence.  Each is the cause and result of the other."


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 24, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> The "Anti-grappling" got started because grappling was dominating in competition, it is a neccessary component of competition, and all the striking only schools needed something to fill that "hole" that many people where beginning to see in there training methods. So "Anti-grappling" was born.
> 
> So I don't like for a couple of reasons:
> 
> ...


 
Chinese Wrestling has been around for centuries.  "grappling" was just made popular by the gracies and UFC.  Which was good because it made MA's realize they need the knowledge, but bad because many think it's the end all to beat all.  The ground is NOT where you want to be, but if you get put there, better know what to do.  balance.

As for using it against a "skilled" grappler.  what is your defination of "skilled".  I've seen these videos of the gracies challenging kung fu, karate and kickboxing guys.  all well and good.  gracie was beaten by an american wrestler and striker!  Who are they challenging to show off this "grappling".  Both of my instructors have effectively used the anti-grappling techniques against skilled grapplers, people who teach BJJ and MMA.  I have used it against students of MMA at our school, people twice my size and weight, very effectively.  Ah, yes, no video, nothing on t.v.  

as for "re-inventing the wheel" the Gracie grappling is the new wheel in town. lol!  I studied japanese ju-jitsu for years and this stuff is old technique.  The chinese have had wrestling, ground fighting, grappling whatever for hundreds of years.  The greeks have wrestled long ago.  ETC... there's nothing really that "new" about ground fighting.  By whatever name you call it.
I don't know where this Brazalian grappling stuff came from, but it's definately the new stuff.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 24, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Chinese Wrestling has been around for centuries.  "grappling" was just made popular by the gracies and UFC.  Which was good because it made MA's realize they need the knowledge, but bad because many think it's the end all to beat all.  The ground is NOT where you want to be, but if you get put there, better know what to do.  balance.



I got no doubts of this.  But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993.



> As for using it against a "skilled" grappler.  what is your defination of "skilled".  I've seen these videos of the gracies challenging kung fu, karate and kickboxing guys.  all well and good.  gracie was beaten by an american wrestler and striker!



Umm...  so a top level grappler (wrestler) beats a top level grappler (BJJ) and this shows what about Kung Fu?




> I have used it against students of MMA at our school, people twice my size and weight, very effectively.  Ah, yes, no video, nothing on t.v.



Cool, put it on tape and stick it up somewhere.  I'd love to see it.



> as for "re-inventing the wheel" the Gracie grappling is the new wheel in town. lol!



The Gracies have never claimed to reinvent a wheel, they are Judo based, and fully admit it.  They claim to have modified Judo, not created something.  Which is why it is still called "Juijitsu"




> there's nothing really that "new" about ground fighting.  By whatever name you call it.



Exactly, groundfighting has been around forever, the principles of it have been around forever, so why reinvent the wheel with this anti-grappling stuff?  Why not use what is there, and has been shown to work against grappling repeatidly?  



> I don't know where this Brazalian grappling stuff came from, but it's definately the new stuff.



No one says it is.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 24, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> I got no doubts of this. But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Now lets understand something my friend:ultracool . With all my respects to the Gracies and BJJ. You have to know that the Gracies never faught a real fight in their lives, have anyone ever saw BJJ in the streets against attackers with knives and street stuff , exactly opposite to wing Chun people that always state their victories in streets, bars, beaches, and any place with no rules. What I mean is not that BJJ is a bad thing in fighting, on the contrary. BJJ is in general better than Wing Chun in the ring of the UFC since it has submission skills which Wing Chun don't, but be sure that these submission techniques would work for the ring and *only for the ring*. that's why Frank Shamrock's skill in avoiding takedowns is the best till now on the ring, and his stuff worked against Ortiz with no doubts. Now I have a question, how you can judge Anti-grappling without even training in it?, can you tell me something you read about Wing Chun?, do you know how the system works, and how it's applications are made for all fighting ranges?:ultracool . I personally know that you trained in wrestling and have a certain gratitude to the art of fighting you spent years training in , and know that systems like Wing Chun and other CMA don't participate in tournaments. that's why people like you always demand the video prove stuff to state your opinion:mst: .

Anti-grappling is made for non regulated fights where you can do anything to survive, it's all Wing Chun aspects but in a different position. Tell you this pal:ultracool , never judge something before you experience it or exposed to it, becuase it might not be as you expect:ultracool .

All the best my friend


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 24, 2006)

Street Brawler said:


> never judge something before you experience it or exposed to it, becuase it might not be as you expect:ultracool .



Have you spent any serious amount of time in a grappling school?  Are you not doing the same thing?  I can say that as someone with a bit of time spent grappling, these things will not work against skilled grapplers.

I also think you are missing the history of BJJ if you think none of them fought outside a ring...


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 24, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> Have you spent any serious amount of time in a grappling school? Are you not doing the same thing? I can say that as someone with a bit of time spent grappling, these things will not work against skilled grapplers.
> 
> I also think you are missing the history of BJJ if you think none of them fought outside a ring...


 
:ultracool Vale Tudo. Oh yes I forgot that it was a source of anything fights the Gracies (Helio and Carlos). Well it was hosted and still have rules, otherwise we should have seen dead people in there:ultracool , or it might as most people said didn't have rules, and everything was permited. so why don't we have injuries. The only reason lies behind is that those matches contained mostly submission based fighters that submit their opponent rather than KO, that's why when UFC started, the Gracies were very happy to know how it was similar to what their father was doing, that's why they were victorious in those matches in the early days. (fighters in those matches don't concentrate on fast punching and striking vital areas, rather than submission, and the Gracies were better at that time).

Regarding if I personally did any grappling. My answer would be that I am a brawler, and I fight only for real. If for grabbing, i want to learn something that makes me get up if I were taken down, and ground sensitivity (Anti-Grappling) is perfect, as I can finish the situation with it, rather than taking time to submit my opponent while his mates might help him:ultracool . If you train something for fighting, be sure to learn the applications that will help for the street rather than the ring, becuase it differs and I tried it. Beleive it that in the streets, non-fighters people might be dangerous in a crowd, so it's all the street concepts there. :ultracool 

Regarding MMA, it's very good and I like it as a whole base. I mean it can help you alot in the streets also. Now regarding which is better Wing Chun or MMA. This is a silly question, becuase it all depends on your personal training and devotion:ultracool , and hope that you keep up the good training pal.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 24, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> I got no doubts of this. But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993."
> 
> This is true, but doesn't take away the extreme effectiveness of the technique against a grappler.  Emin established the anti-grappling and is still improving upon it as are his students and such.  It'll only get better.  My instructor's used these techniques time and again in real life situations where the prize was your life.
> 
> ...


 
I really think the name "anti-grappling" causes people to be turned off to the techniques.  It's an apt name for what you are doing, but the connotation is negative.  Counter grappling or ground fighting might get people to relax a bit and open up to it more.


----------



## profesormental (Sep 25, 2006)

Greetings!

The anti-Grappling name is used in my opinion to rouse and interest those in striking arts, like Wing Chun and other CMA, and offer tools of grappling that they might not have a training regimen for.

And that is ok.

Yet it is obvious to me that the applications shown here are not efficient for sport.

Maybe for Vale Tudo, yet for MMA as it is practiced now, the rules wouldn't allow for efficient use of several of these tactics.

Wing Chun as taught to me has the Shuai Jiao concepts down, yet the finish came in with strikes.

I had to get training in Submission wrestling, Judo/Jujitsu for perfecting the execution of grappling finishes, which I use when I do not want to really hurt the opposition.


So at the end of the day, it is just a focus on defenses and tactics for several common grappling attacks.

And that is ok.

I personally think that understanding of the grappling mindset and strategies is a wiser way to go, yet what Sifu Gutierrez shows is a valid yet basic set of tools. So further development by practitioners is advised.

Sincerely,

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

profesormental said:


> Greetings!
> 
> The anti-Grappling name is used in my opinion to rouse and interest those in striking arts, like Wing Chun and other CMA, and offer tools of grappling that they might not have a training regimen for.
> 
> ...


 
 Hello Juan

The only issue about grappling is that it is not going with Wing Chun concepts in all its aspects for many reasons.

Grappling is like Wing Chun in it's soft method of fighting (not using force against force), but it's theory in making the grabbing of your opponent as your goal is what is not that practical for a real fight. Watching some UFC, Pride fights. You will realize that grapplers takes lots of chances to grapple, and that is becuase they are secured by the rules that does not allow their opponent to hit them in vital places to cause serious damage, so it's to their favor. In a real fight, it's different. I mean failing in grabbing your opponent means you are in great danger, since you will be exposed and hit at any place.:ultracool 

Anti-Grappling is more made for a real fight, where attacking and finishing your opponent is your first objective, rather than submitting than takes time. Now what I say is a theoritical issue. regarding if it will fit fighters, this totally depends on the practitionar and his training. I personally had an experience with it and it helped me once against a BJJ fighter. that doesn't mean that BJJ is bad:ultracool . if I challenged Rickson, he would have breaked every bone of my body , so that depends on your training, and hope that we all train well .

All the best from the Brawler


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

If that is true, then how come Grappling played a even more important role in Vale Tudo fights where those strikes where allowed?


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 25, 2006)

My instructor says BJJ is a great art for sport.  But in the street with multiple attackers it is completely useless, or at a club where there is not enough room and people come out of the woodwork to jump in the fight, BJJ is not practical.
He knows several soldiers who used BJJ in combat in close quarters that have seriously injured themselves with broken hips, knees, and sholders as a result of falling down stairs, fighting on the concrete.  As opposed to those who knew a striking art were able to defeat their opponent and move on to the next attacker.  
I personally think anti-grappling can be used effecively in UFC and sport, it just has to be diluted.  Instead of striking vitals like the back of the neck, throat, groin, etc there are plenty of spots left on the body to do damage.  The temple, the nose, the ear, (side of the head) jawline, solarplexes, ribs/kidney, etc.  Forearm shivers are legal and effective.  use that on the opponents throat, back of the neck, side of the neck this can give you more control of a grappler.  the Body follows the head.  control the head, control the grappler.  
Iceman wins with nothing but striking.  You just need the anti-grappling to keep them from hitting and submitting you when your on the ground long enough to strike rapidly and repeatedly.  Keeping mobile like a wrestler while striking.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

Liddell is a top level wrestler, that is why he wins with striking


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 25, 2006)

He's also Kempo Karate.  But good point.  Good old generic american wrestling will defeat BJJ.
See, when I took Japanese Ju-Jitsu we were completely defensive.  Our technique started when we were grabbed, or taken to the ground.  That's when we did our stuff.  To use Ju-Jitsu as offensive attack is risky and just plain won't work in realility.  In the higher rank you learned to be more offensive with the tate dori (standing escapes, joint locks while standing) but generally this was impractical.  You waited until your opponent made a move and used that force and energy to devastate limbs, throw, choke, whatever.  (all mainly done while standing)  As far as we went to the ground was to your knees (usually the knees slamming down on the fallen opponents rib cage, face, chest, groin.)
These grappling entries compromise your vitals and practially hand your opponent victory.  Why low tackle someone and expose your entire spine?
Because UFC rules are designed around making BJJ look good.
Why expose your entire face to an opponents knees and feet?
because UFC doesn't allow you to kick these dudes in the face!
I've just been told your not even allowed to grab their neck and/or head as they take you to the ground.
weak.
You give me your head, and I'm gonna tear it off.  I'll get taken to the ground anyways, I'm small.  But my opponent will pay for it.
The anti-grappling techniques are plentiful enough to be effective in the ring, you just can only use the very very basics of it.  There are so many limitations to UFC these days it's ridiclous.  I watched it when it first came out, gruesome stuff.  That was true no holds barred fighting.  I just can't believe that people STILL think that UFC is no holds barred fighting these days.  And that they base their decisions on what is truely effective in reality on that stupid show.  Very frustrating.  Reality isn't that pretty and organized.  And neither is fighting.  
So, I'm sorry I brought up the UFC thing.  I really don't care about what they train and styles they use in UFC.  
But, apparently, like Microsoft, they are the industry standard.  Marketing geninus's, selling a inferrior product to the layman, while getting rid of real competition with lies and tricks.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> If that is true, then how come Grappling played a even more important role in Vale Tudo fights where those strikes where allowed?


 
Hello Andrew,:whip1: 

Like I said, as long as I know. Vale tudo were a kind of showing how the little man can beat larger opponents. Fighters challending the gracies were huge and depended mostly in sheer power and strength rather than techniques. that's why those BJJ brothers were victorious over and over. Now those opponents were not that good in striking rather than wrestling or catching ot whatever, so BJJ dominated and it was great:mst: . Facing boxers like Tyson or lets go to old times. Someone like George Foreman was not in the Gracies mind?. I personally will tell you something. A complete fighting system must be able to let it's practitionar to fight for real fights and to end it fast. BJJ is a great art in the ground and for submission, that's why it is a great sport as mentioned by the previous poster. As for it's gi stuff. I beleive that a complete system will require you to fight with anything you wear. 

Regarding Iceman. he is one of my best fighters in the ring. Iceman Liddel is a MMA fighter with all abilities for a real fight, so he is an exceptional fighter. Of course my best fighter ever in the MMA is Frank Shamrock, he is as I consider a fighting legend and hope that we all take as a fighting example (better than Ken with no doubts).


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

They had a open challenge, advertised in Black Belt magazine before the UFC even started, with a good sized prize attached to beating them.  They also made a habit of challenging top ranked people, such as boxers.

"Anyone, anywhere, anytime" I think was the motto.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> They had a open challenge, advertised in Black Belt magazine before the UFC even started, with a good sized prize attached to beating them. They also made a habit of challenging top ranked people, such as boxers.
> 
> "Anyone, anywhere, anytime" I think was the motto.


 
someone like Antonio Portugal. I know pal:ultracool . there is nothing wrong with that, Helio was a better fighter after all, but my point is that it is was still a regulated fight where killing an opponent is not allowed and that makes the difference:ultracool . Lets face a fact in here. During Pride fighing when Royce faught Sakabura. he lost only becuase sakabura was a good striker, altough Sakabura is a wrestler, he defeated the Gracies with 90% of attacking, and it was the first time Royce fights someone with a good attacking skills. Another time is like someone said here before his fight with the Japanese K1 fighter Tokoro. royce was almost useless to good Muay Thai fighter. Finally he recognized the importance of cross training and applied striking into his art to fight Matt Hughes:ultracool , but he did not succeed into that. Matt gave him a sort of punches that the refree stopped the fight.:ultracool


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

How many fights have you been in where killing a person is allowed?  Even in real life that's going to get you in big trouble.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> How many fights have you been in where killing a person is allowed? Even in real life that's going to get you in big trouble.


 
Exactly my friend:ultracool . that's why I want to make a point clear about Wing Chun. It's a self-defence that can really makes you kill someone. It's not a sport, not that fancy. and does not takes time. Most CMA are like this , this includes the self-defence Sanda which Sanshou was derived from it. Ths stuff you see Cung Le do is from a real self-defence system that were used for the Chinese army for ending fights in the fastest time . 

All the best:uhyeah:


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

no... even if you kill someone in self-defence you're likely going to find yourself in a lot of trouble.


----------



## zDom (Sep 25, 2006)

I'd like to hear from a legal professional to confirm this, but it is my understanding that an assault by more than a single attacker is considered a lethal attack which allows for the use of deadly force.

I'm not advocating the use of deadly force, of course, and to me the true measure of self defense is the ability to defend WITHOUT resorting to lethal or crippling techniques.

On the other hand, that is one of the benefits of BJJ grappling: the ability to subdue an opponent without resorting to lethal or crippling techniques.

Scalability, IMO, is important to have in martial artist's repertoire as not every self defense situation is a life-or-death matter. Take for example a drunk, belligerent friend.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> no... even if you kill someone in self-defence you're likely going to find yourself in a lot of trouble.


 
that's out of topic pal:ultracool , but as long as you are good to people around you and fights only when needed, this is no problem, and if you killed someone for self-defence, I think the law will not find you guilty. In the streets, you need to use something deadly for a fight, and as most of the time we are not armend. Wing Chun is a very good solution for that. Once your opponent is with a gun and he is from a distance pointing at your head:shooter: . i think it's better to be a wise guy and let him take your money as long as he is keeping the distance. once he is near, you can surprise him, but be sure to be well trained for what is next, becuase you can be dead in just seconds without even hearing the gun shot in your head:shock: .

All the best pal.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 25, 2006)

zDom said:


> I'd like to hear from a legal professional to confirm this, but it is my understanding that an assault by more than a single attacker is considered a lethal attack which allows for the use of deadly force.
> 
> I'm not advocating the use of deadly force, of course, and to me the true measure of self defense is the ability to defend WITHOUT resorting to lethal or crippling techniques.
> 
> ...


 
In a real fight:mst: , you cannot even thnk to control and subdue, there is no time beleive me. you need fast solution based on your reflexes, that's something mentioned from "Blitz Defence" techniques for street encounters. If you are intersted, visit the EWTO.com to read about these stuff.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 25, 2006)

zDom said:


> Scalability, IMO, is important to have in martial artist's repertoire as not every self defense situation is a life-or-death matter. Take for example a drunk, belligerent friend.



Yup, and a often ignored aspect.


----------



## zDom (Sep 25, 2006)

Street Brawler said:


> In a real fight:mst: , you cannot even thnk to control and subdue, there is no time beleive me. you need fast solution based on your reflexes, that's something mentioned from "Blitz Defence" techniques for street encounters. If you are intersted, visit the EWTO.com to read about these stuff.



Lets not veer off topic, but I've "been there, done that."

I've been in encounters that my attacker was earnest, but it was "all too easy" (like slow motion) for me. Every fight is different.

Subduing is completely do-able and appropriate at times, even in "real" fights.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 25, 2006)

Submission is doable, and useful if you are well trained.  And BJJ is not the best art for that, believe it or not.  In Ju-Jitsu that's all we trained was for submitting in class (couldn't be breaking each others arms).

But as for the street.  I don't recomend it.  If the attacker is someone you know, that's a different situation than an unknown person in the street.  Some drunk friend is not going to take as much technique and effort to control than a skitzer freak boy that muggs you in the street for crack money.  Or a rapist that wants to violate you and then kill you so you don't tell.  Or some stupid gang crap, where they don't care about human life and kill just because they can.  Think.  Use what the situation calls for.
I'm not subduing some rapist, gang banger, drugged out punk, or mouthy street thug.  I don't look for trouble, and these types of street confrontations are no game or sport.  It's kill or be killed.  Don't even begin to kid yourself that because your a martial artist that you should take it easy on these types of people in the street.
Whether it's self defense or not, are you going to hang around after being attacked, waste the guy, and then wait for the cops to give a statement to?!  Think.  No way I am!  Screw that, if the person is trying to kill you and you have to kill or maim in self defense why put yourself in that situation?  Especially for some unknown person who picked you as a victum?  
Now, if the person knows you, it's a different situation.  A friend, accquaintace, whatever knows your name, where you work/live, then you have more to deal with.  I don't know about men.  But women are killed, and raped 90% of the time by someone they know.  So what you as a man would do with that situation is different than what I would do.
I've talked to a lawyer on this topic.  And he informed me that as soon as someone even flinches at you in a hostile manner, verbally threatens you, or acts like their going to perform violence to you that is considered assault.  Done.  They've assaulted you and you defended yourself.
If you think about this crap while in the street you'll get yourself killed.  Live to fight another day, even if that other day is a day in court.
These are all specificly different situations that you must have some idea of what you need to do to survive.  What a man needs to do is different than a woman.  If you know the person is a friend or co-worker, whatever then you are limited to what you can do morally and legally, if it's some crazy crackhead your options are more abundant.
My motto:
Live first, go to court later.


----------



## zDom (Sep 25, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> What a man needs to do is different than a woman.



Very true. But this is really getting into another topic -- one that I had planned to start a thread on: scalability (I'll do so sometime soon)

Look for it tonight or tomorrow and we'll delve into these issues in some detail.

(Now back to our regularly scheduled content?)


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 25, 2006)

Most true!  I was thinking that very thing too.  Anti-grappling and it's coolness. lol!  right-o?
back on topic.


----------



## profesormental (Sep 26, 2006)

Greetings!

Now that we're back on topic...

Matches in China at the early 1900's the death of opponents was acceptable, and in one tournament happened very much, were several Masters were lost in the challenges... so to protect the master's lives, the tournament was stopped, which eventually lead to the rules of San Da.

Then as in any sport, the rules of engagement created parameters for optimizing the winning of the contests.

People that have developed KO power will not go for grabs.

People without KO power that want to avoid getting hit, will tactically favor grappling.

My Sifu went to Brazil in the 80's and avoided grabbing, got his hits in and won by KO. He knows his Wing Chun, yet his knowledge of the game and combat sports also contributed.

All in all, the rules are there so we can practice as hard as we can without injuring each other every day.

Simulating combat as best as possible gives better preparation for combat. Yet never confuse the simulation with the real thing.

Knowing that will put many discusions in the speculation and conjecture category, not in the proven and truth category.


Thus even Vale Tudo is a very good simulation, yet not the real thing...

the real thing has many legal costs associated with it to be tried every day...

except in some bars and environments... but that is another story!

Sincerely,

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## Ram (Sep 26, 2006)

Anti-grappling is nothing more than a ploy to sell stuff to artist who are too afraid to learn grappling.
 You either Strike(includes blocking),take down/thorw,or grapple.
I currently train at a CMA Hopgar school. My current Sifu also fights MMA. To be a competent fighter you have to be able to do all of the listed above. That is why a lot of CMA get schooled in MMA events. They do not spend the proper amount of time training grappling. 



> Exactly my friend:ultracool . that's why I want to make a point clear about Wing Chun. It's a self-defence that can really makes you kill someone. It's not a sport, not that fancy. and does not takes time. Most CMA are like this , this includes the self-defence Sanda which Sanshou was derived from it. Ths stuff you see Cung Le do is from a real self-defence system that were used for the Chinese army for ending fights in the fastest time .


 
 I love Cung Lee. Cung Le also trains in grappling.Grappling is deadly very quickly, it dose not take much pressure to go from a lock or choke to a break.



> It's not a sport, not that fancy. and does not takes time. Most CMA are like this


 
CMA even when done right is still the king of fancy:boing2: 





> the real thing has many legal costs associated with it to be tried every day...


 
You want to see street real self defense look here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8mBe0_Ha78&mode=related&search=

Bas rocks!!!!!!!!!


----------



## yipman_sifu (Sep 26, 2006)

Ram said:


> CMA even when done right is still the king of fancy:boing2:


 
My friend. Please don't judge stuff you haven't even practise. Wing Chun is a very bad looking system in fighting. It was tested in streets and had astonishing results. I think you should read about it more before writing this.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 26, 2006)

I'll take anti-grappling technique over grappling any day.  Done both.  Grappling takes too much strength, and effort, time, and energy.  Anti-grappling gets it done asap.  Why choke someone out who's seriously trying to hurt you when you can break their neck in a second?  or knock them out cold and end the conversation?
Submission is fun, but you try to submit a street attacker you'll get killed or seriously injured.  There may be more than one, they may have buddies, it could be a ruse.  
Besides, I"m personally not going to roll around on the concrete with some man between my legs playing submission footsie.  I don't want a man between my legs!  why do that when I can kick him in the face, neck, body, etc.  
As for CMA being fancy.  Sure, most seem that way, that's because there is alot of technique involved.  But Wing Chun has stripped away the inessential movements (that's the whole theory behind it!) and is a really ugly art in comparison to maybe Wu Shu. lol!
But, fighting is ugly any way you do it, so it fits.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 26, 2006)

You want to see street real self defense look here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8mBe0_Ha78&mode=related&search=

Bas rocks!!!!!!!!![/quote]

Wow darlin'!  I've never seen drunken bar brawling 101 on video before!  His self defense works for him because he's tall and strong.  If I tried that stuff, especially with an opponent with a knife I'd get killed. lol!
He seems like a pretty neat guy, though.  He's funny.
He seems to know the sneaky feints that people use in a bar.  I've seen most of those little deceptions, good to know what to look for.

Mental note about knife defenses usually taught.  The knife strikes that alot of martial artist teach you to defend against are NOT how a knife fighter will come at you with a blade.
Knife fighting is about deception, flow, and re-direction.  These guys won't just swipe at you like a cat, most times you won't even see the blade. 
My other instructor teaches and trains Zapota and Savate dance de laroo, and he's the knife man.  He's just now starting to teach me a bit.  When the schools up and running I'll get to train more.


----------



## zDom (Sep 26, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> most times you won't even see the blade



Yep. If someone is really good with a knife you won't see it before you feel it.

And, from experience, if it is a puncture wound you might not even realize you've been stabbed: you can easily mistake it for a punch.


----------



## Ram (Sep 26, 2006)

> My friend. Please don't judge stuff you haven't even practise. Wing Chun is a very bad looking system in fighting. It was tested in streets and had astonishing results. I think you should read about it more before writing this.


 
 I have two friends that do Wing chung and did a month at their gym.It has its ups and downs like anything I have seen. Compared to most grappling I have done it is very pretty.:angel: 



> Why choke someone out who's seriously trying to hurt you when you can break their neck in a second? or knock them out cold and end the conversation?
> Submission is fun, but you try to submit a street attacker you'll get killed or seriously injured. There may be more than one, they may have buddies, it could be a ruse.


 
 A neck crank can easily be turned into a neck break. Of course I would try not to to get knocked down in a street brawl but if I did I want to be able to handle myself. Knocking someone out who is high on PSP is very hard to do and they could probably knock you down if you have no where to run.  You would not submit a street attacker you would use a arm bar to break an arm. A neck crank to snap the neck.You can use grappling to gain a position where you can get up and get away or to pummel your attacker. Of course you try not to get knocked down in a street fight because yes thier could be others, but if I did I can handle myself.




> Wow darlin'! I've never seen drunken bar brawling 101 on video before!


 

LoL:ultracool 



> Knife fighting is about deception, flow, and re-direction. These guys won't just swipe at you like a cat, most times you won't even see the blade.


 
 I remember someone telling me that the best place to look to study knife attacks is a prison. Very fast very deadly. Prison knife and shank work is almost a new martial art.


----------



## Ram (Sep 26, 2006)

> Grappling takes too much strength, and effort, time, and energy.


 
 Depends on the moves some take almost no energy and allow a smaller weaker person to face a much larger and stronger opponent.


----------



## TCBA_JOE (Sep 26, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Grappling takes too much strength, and effort, time, and energy.


Actually the point of BJJ is not using strenght. As for effort, time, and energy... doesn't anything that is worthwhile? Also, all martial arts take effort, time, and energy.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 27, 2006)

:ultracool *BJJ and submission does fit the streets*, The only people who will say this will be the disciples of this art. Can anyone tell me here how many times BJJ were used out of a ring?. Even if you are skilled, you cannot use it against many fighters . Whenever people watches Anti-grappling and they are training BJJ. they would say: oh, they don't grapple for real. Hey guys . Have you ever saw any grappler in the UFC, have you seen how they grapple. they are completely exposed to being hit in their neck, but they know that rules will not permit their opponents to do this since it's prohibited. In a real fight, a grappler does not stand a chance most of the time against any striker with good attacks. We personally have in the EWTO instructors with Jujitsu and grappling background, and most were not trainers of the arts, they were instructors. they say that these arts are good to a certain degree to learn, but once to consider it everything, it starts to make no sence . Royce Gracie himself crossed-train in MMA after realizing that grappling is not everything about fighting. you must be a well rounded fighter for all situations. I hope this makes the point clear.


----------



## Odin (Sep 27, 2006)

Street Brawler said:


> :ultracool *BJJ and submission does fit the streets*, The only people who will say this will be the disciples of this art. Can anyone tell me here how many times BJJ were used out of a ring?. Even if you are skilled, you cannot use it against many fighters . Whenever people watches Anti-grappling and they are training BJJ. they would say: oh, they don't grapple for real. Hey guys . Have you ever saw any grappler in the UFC, have you seen how they grapple. they are completely exposed to being hit in their neck, but they know that rules will not permit their opponents to do this since it's prohibited. In a real fight, a grappler does not stand a chance most of the time against any striker with good attacks. We personally have in the EWTO instructors with Jujitsu and grappling background, and most were not trainers of the arts, they were instructors. they say that these arts are good to a certain degree to learn, but once to consider it everything, it starts to make no sence . Royce Gracie himself crossed-train in MMA after realizing that grappling is not everything about fighting. you must be a well rounded fighter for all situations. I hope this makes the point clear.


 
Royce also traveled around Dojo's all round the world to prove that jujitsu works in any situation...many a time was his neck expose, he was forced to train striking after the art the gracies created started to leave them behind...... the fact is that sometimes all these moves that TMA arts give all the faith in dont actually work aswel as they might think.
Ive always said to be good at fighting you have to fight, and as you do you learn what really works and what doesnt.
its really frustrating for a fighter to be told by someone that doesnt fight how to fight...it makes no sense.


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 27, 2006)

Odin said:


> Royce also traveled around Dojo's all round the world to prove that jujitsu works in any situation...many a time was his neck expose, he was forced to train striking after the art the gracies created started to leave them behind...... the fact is that sometimes all these moves that TMA arts give all the faith in dont actually work aswel as they might think.
> Ive always said to be good at fighting you have to fight, and as you do you learn what really works and what doesnt.
> its really frustrating for a fighter to be told by someone that doesnt fight how to fight...it makes no sense.


 
Lets me put something clear in the view:ultracool . The Gracies challenged people according to their rules, and did not challenged people travelling around. People used to come to Royce's Dojo fighitng him with Rorion talking about the techniques used in BJJ. these challenges were more about introducing their art to the people. Now the other fact about them is the Gracies only taped their victories. They always had a problem with the Walid Ismail issue. Walid is another BJJ trainer from the Carlson Gracie side. they only wanted to show that BJJ is totally their creation, rather than their father's and uncle. that's doesn't concern us, but I said it to show you that they were not loyal about taping these matches, they may have lost to some other fighters, but who knows?.

This is off topic, but still these matches are nothing reality where everything is to their favor. a nice soft mat and a gi:ultracool . Regarding his neck exposed. Let me remind you a something pal. Do you remember a fight taped between Royce gracie and a latino animal kungfu expert called "Jason De lucia". Royce already defeated this guy in UFC. This guy wanted a rematch and lost again. what I can remember is that at this rematch, Jason was able to have his hands around Royce neck in the first of the fight, but guess what. he couldn't crack it becuase it would kill his opponent. This means time was given to Royce to do something else like punching until Jason left his hands then Royce submitted him. 

Now Wing Chun was made for no time. It is made to finish any situation in the fastest time possible. Anti-grappling is a well made program which finish ground situations to be able to go up again, not to go down like grapplers do!. I mean logically, it is more practical for a *REAL *fight. I am highlighting real again and again in this thread:whip1: . 

Regarding that TMA techniques do not work as you said. What techniques pal, can you tell me some of them?, becuase I didn't get this point:ultracool .

All the best.


----------



## Marvin (Sep 27, 2006)

I watched the first video, and from what I saw the guy that was closing, did not know what he was doing. First of all, the instructor was telling him how to close the distance. And when he did he closed incorrectly. On the 1st entry around 1:25 bad head position and the 2nd around 1:45 no level change he just bends over and grabs the legs, very bad form.
 Another problem with the demo is what I call static/dynamic problem. The defender gets to be dynamic, but the attacker, once he does his technique, he has to freeze and let the defender go to work on him.
The problem as to grapplers arent used to getting is an assumption (hopeful) from people who have never taken an honest look at their own training or a grapplers training. 
And another problem is that this is a friendly discussion forum an invite to come and show what you are talking about, gets perceived as a challenge match.
So, I invite all of you who believe that anti-grappling works, to go find a local freestyle club or actually, a Greco-Roman wrestling club would be better. State your intentions and see what the outcome is. Most of those guys and gals love to workout and look forward to any opportunity to train. That is what I did. I doubt if anyone will do it, but if you do give me an e-mail or call my club. Im sure we probably will have had the same experience and I would love to chat about it!


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 27, 2006)

Marvin said:


> I watched the first video, and from what I saw the guy that was closing, did not know what he was doing. First of all, the instructor was telling him how to close the distance. And when he did he closed incorrectly. On the 1st entry around 1:25 bad head position and the 2nd around 1:45 no level change he just bends over and grabs the legs, very bad form.
> Another problem with the demo is what I call &#8220;static/dynamic&#8221; problem. The &#8220;defender&#8221; gets to be dynamic, but the &#8220;attacker&#8221;, once he does his technique, he has to freeze and let the &#8220;defender&#8221; go to work on him.
> The problem as to grapplers aren&#8217;t used to getting is an assumption (hopeful) from people who have never taken an honest look at their own training or a &#8220;grapplers&#8221; training.
> And another problem is that this is a &#8220;friendly discussion forum&#8221; an invite to come and show what you are talking about, gets perceived as a &#8220;challenge match&#8221;.
> So, I invite all of you who believe that anti-grappling works, to go find a local freestyle club or actually, a Greco-Roman wrestling club would be better. State your intentions and see what the outcome is. Most of those guys and gals love to workout and look forward to any opportunity to train. That is what I did. I doubt if anyone will do it, but if you do give me an e-mail or call my club. I&#8217;m sure we probably will have had the same experience and I would love to chat about it!


 
We are talking about techniques, not challenges. I mean in a real fight pal:ultracool , you will use Greco Roman stuff!, I don't think so . I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition. I mentioned before that submission fighting is better than Anti-grapplling in a UFC or in a challenge, and I prersoanlly like Frank Shamrock stuff in those Avioding takedowns demos he showed. Coming to real fight is different Marvin. It is not that place you tell your friend lets fight and see what works ans what will happen. it is where you must use fast techniques that ends the brawl. Do you think I would go to a wrestling club and ask them for the brawl then :ultracool . I cannot punch, nor mobilize my moves the way I want. I will only be able to grab, and this will make me useless:ultracool .

Anti-grappling is not a submitting ground-fighting. If I go down. I will punch and strike, rather than choke and submit. 

A question Marvin, what do you know about Wing Chun? , can you tell me some?.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 27, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Why choke someone out who's seriously trying to hurt you when you can break their neck in a second?  or knock them out cold and end the conversation?



I've wanted to learn to break necke in a second, I just have a hard time finding volunteers willing to let me try...  

And a good Greco-Roman guy would have very little trouble dropping a untrained guy hard on his head from a clinch.  Which I imagine has a better shot of seriously injuring someone then most of the stuff shown in the video.

As this video shows it, anti-grappling is being used to defend against guys with very poor grappling skills that lack intention in there attacks.  Which, IMO, makes the term rather misleading and marketing driven.  

And it is a reinvention of the wheel without a understanding of how wheels really work.  Wrestlers and Judo fighters have been avoiding takedowns for many years.  And they have been avoiding takedowns from people that know how to do them.  Yet anti-grappling is nothing like the takedown defence used by people that really understand takedowns, why is that?


----------



## Ram (Sep 27, 2006)

I love how street brawler keeps saying 





> I mean in a real fight pal:ultracool


 

LoL. I gave some examples of grappling in a "real fight". All you have to do is train some grappling to get decent at it and you will become a better anti-grappler than these anti-grappling demos can show you.Take a month or two of classes at the local judo or jujitsu club and you will see what I mean.

p.s. In a real fight a hidden .357 snub nose revolver will end a fight a lot quicker and with far less training than any martial art. :shooter:


----------



## Odin (Sep 27, 2006)

Street Brawler said:


> We are talking about techniques, not challenges. I mean in a real fight pal:ultracool , you will use Greco Roman stuff!, I don't think so . I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition. I mentioned before that submission fighting is better than Anti-grapplling in a UFC or in a challenge, and I prersoanlly like Frank Shamrock stuff in those Avioding takedowns demos he showed. Coming to real fight is different Marvin. It is not that place you tell your friend lets fight and see what works ans what will happen. it is where you must use fast techniques that ends the brawl. Do you think I would go to a wrestling club and ask them for the brawl then :ultracool . I cannot punch, nor mobilize my moves the way I want. I will only be able to grab, and this will make me useless:ultracool .
> 
> Anti-grappling is not a submitting ground-fighting. If I go down. I will punch and strike, rather than choke and submit.
> 
> A question Marvin, what do you know about Wing Chun? , can you tell me some?.


 
I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition

that one line is something I have heard a lot on this forum and to be honest really winds me up, my only assumption of the people that make this statement would be that them themselves have not actually had any fights  nor have an idea of what real fights are like.....(im not talking the demo's you do in your class) 
Why would MMA just be about ground work???why would grapperling only be about submissions???You ever heard the saying position before submission?
The more you know about grapperling the more you can defend against a grapple..any kind of grapple..whether it be a grappler from Rich Franklin or a grappler from a fat guy outside a club you will always be able to to come off on top if you know what your doing, grabbing your opponent is the second most commonly used tactic used in a street fight!....and unlike most other arts when you defend these thing you do so with someone who really wants to take you down not someone that is going to ask you ''are you ready?'' four times before attempting the move only to then wait for you to do the correct response,you will have someone that will twist and turn and move they're hands all over your face and funny enough try to take you down as if his life depended on it... I notices aswel in those videos that there wasn't any 'plan b'? this is another thing that confuses me, these TMA techniques don't seem to have any back up plans you know just in case the move you just did didn't work out how you thought it would, ask any good fight in the world no matter what the sport and they'll have a plan a b c d and e for every move they do.....actual fighting leaves far to many variables for only one technique to work.

Like I keep saying it really really really annoys me that people that don't actually fight try and tell fighters how to fight..how the hell are you going to try and tell people like chuck Liddell and wanderlei Silva they're MMA is only good for compitions and wouldn't actually work in a street fight?how mad is that??

and more to the point if these 'anti-grapples' actually work we would see them in the octagon, these fighters come from all kinds of different backgrounds and all integrate what they have learnt before someone by know would have tried to defend a takedown with a wing chun 'anti-grappler' they would all be doing them now.


----------



## Marvin (Sep 27, 2006)

Hi Street Brawler, I will answer your questions to the best of my ability. I broke your post up so I could address each point in turn.


Street Brawler said:


> We are talking about techniques, not challenges. I mean in a real fight pal:ultracool , you will use Greco Roman stuff!, I don't think so .





Street Brawler said:


> I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition.


Here is the one of the main problems we have with the comparison to begin with, the concept the delivery system transcend the event. What I mean by that is that a single leg, under hook, jab etc. if done correctly will work regardless of the "venue" ring street practice, whatever. That is not to say they will work every time. Fights, street or ring, are messy, chaotic affairs


Street Brawler said:


> I mentioned before that submission fighting is better than Anti-grapplling in a UFC or in a challenge, and I prersoanlly like Frank Shamrock stuff in those Avioding takedowns demos he showed.


 I have never seen Frank's stuff, so I can't comment.


Street Brawler said:


> Coming to real fight is different Marvin. It is not that place you tell your friend lets fight and see what works ans what will happen. it is where you must use fast techniques that ends the brawl.


Street Brawler, unfortunately I am fully aware of the difference between a street fight and sporting event. I don't really care to talk about my "street fight" experiences in public, but if you send a PM to either Rich Parsons or Tusilan, both are highly regarded members of this forum, either one of them will be able to a give you a no BS answer to any question you have about me or my experiences. If that is unsatisfactory, e-mail me directly. I prefer to talk about training methods instead of anticdotal (sp?) experiences.


Street Brawler said:


> Do you think I would go to a wrestling club and ask them for the brawl then :ultracool . I cannot punch, nor mobilize my moves the way I want. I will only be able to grab, and this will make me useless:ultracool .


I don&#8217;t expect you to grab or wrestle; I want you to do *your thing*. Let me give you my story of when I went to the wrestling club. I had a similar line of thought as you do now. So I went to the club and told them what I wanted to do. I said that I wanted to see if I could use my skills as a martial artist to keep from being taken down. I offered to wear boxing gloves and foot pads so I would not hurt the other guys. The guys said no need to for that as they were curious as well, and they thought the gloves might give them an unfair advantage. Well, long story short, I couldn&#8217;t do anything except get dumped on my bean. 
Another story, I was a seminar with a Greco/ Roman wrestler, who has since gone on to make quite a name for himself in MMA. After we warmed up, he lined everyone up at the seminar and told us what technique he was going to use to take us down, and he said we could do *anything* we thought of to stop him. Not one of us at the seminar could stop him from taking us down let alone give him enough game to change the technique he used to take us down. 
The problems with these stories are that they are just that, stories. Anyone reading them could just say "O, those guys just have never run into a real (insert martial art here) expert/master.



Street Brawler said:


> Anti-grappling is not a submitting ground-fighting. If I go down. I will punch and strike, rather than choke and submit.


Not if you are so overwhelmed that you can barely think let alone punch. Again I encourage you to do what I did. I&#8217;m sure you may be able to sacrifice some of the lethality of your techniques, for the sake of your own personal knowledge? Find out for yourself, if your stuff works I will be the first one asking you for help


Street Brawler said:


> A question Marvin, what do you know about Wing Chun? , can you tell me some?.


Sure, I know some, what would you like to know? 
But, after I answer I expect you to share your knowledge of grappling, fair enough?


----------



## profesormental (Sep 27, 2006)

Greetings!

I agree that grappling has very valid combat applications, specially in the control area.

I also agree that against experienced grapplers the anti grappling wouldn't look as good as trained in the demos seen. Most of the attempts didn't seem very commited.

This is necessary for training. Yet if you're trained, stopping a commited attack should be demoed.

This means that against somebody that really wanted you down, not every time the anti grappler would gain positional advantage... i.e. he would get slammed or taken down.

Valid methods are displayed, yet the experienced grappler has thought of many of them, and has counter-measures.

Yet in the positioning and movements of the anti grappler, I didn't see many structural counter-measures for the attacks of expereinced grapplers (who rarely have just one option in their attack patterns).

For example, several times I saw the anti grappler get held and ready to be taken down, while hitting, so the grappler didn't concentrate completely on lifting, yet he was stepping back. If you lower your stance while pushing the hip forward, it would make it harder to be takend down and the hits would be more effective.

The grappler could've just gone for a single leg and run through the guy and down he would go.

Unfortunately, it shows that more improvement is needed, yet they are getting the idea.

So an evolution of this would be to counter how an experienced grappler attacks... with several options at a time, while engaging with a structure and strategy that has into account those common strategies.

Does that make sense?

On another point. It is widely acknoleged that you fight as you train.

Thus if all your repertoire is sport oriented, you will tend to fight as such.

Combat/Self preservation oriented tools are different in several aspects, and have built into them an objectives/rules of engagement mechanism as to choose severity of response (if you have good, complete training!).

Sometimes, the severity setting is set on "kill", instead of "stun". For self preservation it should be set to "survive".

In sports, it is set to "win" and "dominate", which in terms of situational awareness and survival is not always useful. Yet in many fight type situation it is set that way for competitors.

This also applies for the uses in law enforcement.

So that is the main problem in my view.

This reminds of a story.

Antonio Illustrisimo was a very respected escrimador (filipino MA). There was once a tournament in which many figters came to hit each other with sticks and such for competition.

Someone challenged the Illustrisimo clan and he said that he fights with swords and he will kill the challenger. His escrima is for killing, and the competition will be used as a false gauge of what would happen for real.

I'm not completely in agreement with him, yet you get the idea.

Enjoy!

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 27, 2006)

Marvin said:


> I So, I invite all of you who believe that anti-grappling works, to go find a local freestyle club or actually, a Greco-Roman wrestling club would be better.  Im sure we probably will have had the same experience and I would love to chat about it!


 
Both of my instructors have done this on several occasions.  One loves to compete and test technique, the other just had to prove to his son that BJJ grappling diddn''t work for the street and get him out of that class.

My Chief instructor has know soldiers that have used BJJ in combat and lost, broken hips, legs, etc falling down stairs, being attacked by multiple attackers and fighting urban warfar on concrete.

As for grapplers being trained to "take a punch", fine.  Take it.  and then take the next one, and the next one, and the next one, and then the elbow, knee, chop etc.  Wing Chun doesn't stop until you stop moving.  If you train to take a punch your training to lose.  You can't "take" a punch repeadedly in the back of the neck, death or paralisis is a bummer duder.
Or what I call, "chain kicking" on the ground getting kicked full force in the face, neck, and head.  Get real.  It amazes me, and maybe it's an american thing, that people are soooo desensitized to violence that they see someone getting kicked in the temple (which can kill you.  superfoot wallace once broke a mans neck in competition and with a return combo accidentially re set it.  ouch!  The man was parilized!) or punched repeatedly in the head, face and they think it doesn't hurt, or is not effecitve.  I've been hit.  Ouch.  By very large men.  Sure, I can take it, do I want to?  Frag no!  I don't have to prove that I'm tough enough to get my head beat in.  And these grapplers getting hit by other striking forms are no where as efficient and devastating as the Wing Chun punching.
If my little 118lb weakling self can chain punch a 250lb floor punching bag and move that sucker all over the room doing so, I'm pretty sure I can hurt a large attacker with chain punching.  (I can't even move the darn bag back to position I have to chain punch it back! lol!)


----------



## barriecusvein (Sep 27, 2006)

why do chun students always feel the need to defend this anti grapple crap?

there was no anti grappling before grappling 'sprung to fame' during the early ufc's. since then, people have taken chun concepts and tried to apply them on the ground. to me, this is just stupid. if your going to strike on the ground then the most important thing is to have top position. i have never seen any video or other evidence of somone winning a fight by striking from the bottom. one of the main goals of wrestling is getting top position once your on the ground, so why not just incorporate wrestling moves into chun? wrestling has been about for so long its inconcievable that it could be bettered by some chunners in 13 years or so.

to those people who say 'if someone tries to take me down, im gonna knee him in the face and elbow the **** out of his spine'. have you ever tried to do this, or simulated it at least, against someone vaguely competant who seriously wants you on the deck? unless you are alienly fast, a takedown you dont know is coming is going to get to you before you react and bring up your knee. the chance for a knee really only comes from a botched take down attempt, or a slow telegraphed one. thats the grapplers mistake, not your skill giving you that strike. watch some ufc matches, and see how many take down attempts are foiled by knees to the head (which is a legal move).

the elbow to the spine, well you are only in range for this once the guy has grabbed you. once he has grabbed you he will lift your leg (or legs) off the ground. this means you only have the effective weight generated by your muscles in your strike (in the case of both legs lifted), or significantly reduced effective body weight (in the case of one leg lifted). both of which are much less than having your whole body weight behind it. although i have no experience on the recieving end of one of these strikes thrown at full power, i'm willing to bet that it won't cause the horrific damage you think it will.

the final problem with wing chun and anti grappling is that most people in my experiance just dont train with enough realism. you say you train for the street. how? by doing chi sau? come on, thats about as far removed from the street as possible. sparring is the best simulation of a real fight i know of, and the best training simulation is going to give you skills that are the most appropriate for the street. if you guys defending anti grappling do train with full resistance opponents and sparring then i take this point back. 

o yeah, one other thing. 'chun was tested in the beimos and performed <insert greatly complimentary word here>'. fine, i'll believe you. but that was for the guys in the beimos, not you. you need to test it in the best way you can safely. i know thats not really the topic of this thread, but i wanted to say it anyway.

and for the record, i've been practicing wing chun for 2 years and really enjoy it.


----------



## Ram (Sep 27, 2006)

> My Chief instructor has know soldiers that have used BJJ in combat and lost, broken hips, legs, etc falling down stairs, being attacked by multiple attackers and fighting urban warfar on concrete.


 
  LoL do you even know what grappling is about??????????? I mean just read the various posts here. Grappling is about not getting taken down if you don't want to be. If you do to gain a dominant position for strikes or bone breaks.
 Soldiers train in strikes,weapons,and grappling if grappling did not work then it would be removed from their training. I remember reading a article about how soldiers used BBJ in combat 



> Owens said the Army system is similar to the mixed martial-arts techniques used in the Ultimate Fighting Championship or the Japanese Pacrease tournament. Its proven itself in combat, he added.
> One of the instructors was in Afghanistan last year clearing buildings and a mujahedeen jumped on him. He had to get him off his back and he ended up breaking the guys arm, Owens said.-Sgt. 1st Class Cliff Owens


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 27, 2006)

barriecusvein said:


> if your going to strike on the ground then the most important thing is to have top position. i have never seen any video or other evidence of somone winning a fight by striking from the bottom.
> 
> --I have used striking from below.  You do it until you can roll them off you and to keep them from putting you in submission or hitting you.  And you won't see this on video.  Because UFC won't go for it.
> 
> ...


 
as for incorporating wrestling in WC.  Use Suai Chai (can't spell it)  chinese wrestling is pretty good stuff.  or just WC concepts on the ground.  That's all anti-grappling is.  You do what you do standing up on the ground.  very effective.  works for me every time.


----------



## Marvin (Sep 27, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Both of my instructors have done this on several occasions. One loves to compete and test technique, the other just had to prove to his son that BJJ grappling diddn''t work for the street and get him out of that class.


 Your instructor went to his sons bjj class to challenge the instructor to show his son that bjj was not for the street?!?!?What did he show his son that did work on the street?



Si-Je said:


> As for grapplers being trained to "take a punch", fine. Take it. and then take the next one, and the next one, and the next one, and then the elbow, knee, chop etc. Wing Chun doesn't stop until you stop moving. If you train to take a punch your training to lose. You can't "take" a punch repeadedly in the back of the neck, death or paralisis is a bummer duder.


I think someone has given you misinformation here, I know of no one who "trains to take a punch" punches happen in fights. If you are used to the presure then it doesn't suprise you whin it happens in the ring or the street. let me give you one example of how it is commonly trained, you will find this or somthing like it at most gyms. Boxer feeds shooter slow punchig combos, a simple jab/cross. if shooter is in a bad position she gets punched in the mellon. A few rounds of that and the shooter keeps her hand up, so she doedn't get punched in the face nearly as much. And as the shooter gets better the combos get faster and harder. understand? Plus and I keep coming back to this it is very hard to 
continuously punch someone in the face as they are lvl changing on you.[/COLOR]


Si-Je said:


> Or what I call, "chain kicking" on the ground getting kicked full force in the face, neck, and head. Get real. It amazes me, and maybe it's an american thing, that people are soooo desensitized to violence that they see someone getting kicked in the temple (which can kill you.


 Not quite sure what you are trying to say here. Do you mean after you get the grappler to the groun you will finish them off with a flurry of kicks? 





Si-Je said:


> superfoot wallace once broke a mans neck in competition and with a return combo accidentially re set it. ouch! The man was parilized!)


 can you show me the article or email link about this story? 





Si-Je said:


> or punched repeatedly in the head, face and they think it doesn't hurt, or is not effecitve. I've been hit. Ouch. By very large men. Sure, I can take it, do I want to? Frag no! I don't have to prove that I'm tough enough to get my head beat in. And these grapplers getting hit by other striking forms are no where as efficient and devastating as the Wing Chun punching.


So what you are saying is tha NO grapplers have ever experienced fighting wing chun folks?

Si-Je I think you missed my point, have YOU experimented outside of your comfort zone? Have you verified your instructor&#8217;s claims? You are taking a lot of assumptions on blind faith. this may be presumptuous of me, but in your post you said 



Si-Je said:


> If my little 118lb weakling self can chain punch a 250lb floor punching bag and move that sucker all over the room doing so, I'm _pretty sure_ I can hurt a large attacker with chain punching.


  so you don't know if your techniques work or not? The big problem with you hitting the bag, as you know Im sure, is that a bag does not give honest feedback. Don't make the mistake of thinking you have unstoppable technique, just because someone told you it was. It is always dangerous to say " oh I would just, do this or this"


----------



## Street Brawler (Sep 28, 2006)

Odin said:


> I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition
> 
> that one line is something I have heard a lot on this forum and to be honest really winds me up, my only assumption of the people that make this statement would be that them themselves have not actually had any fights nor have an idea of what real fights are like.....(im not talking the demo's you do in your class)
> Why would MMA just be about ground work???why would grapperling only be about submissions???You ever heard the saying position before submission?
> ...


 
Hey pal, Relax . Did I say I am a better fighter than Liddel and Silvia. NO man. I just said that grappling is not a complete fighitng strategy like most MMA fans think it is. Liddell, Ortiz, Shamrock, Fedor, and silvia are all MMA proffessioanl fighters. They are not only ground fighters Odin:whip1: . After all I have just spent most of my threads saying that Wing Chun was never made for an octagon fight. You people must know how other fighting systems work to judge certain stuff. Now you say that ground fighting is a second step fighting in a street fight. Odin my friend:mst: , I faught brawls, and It's all your business wheather you want to beleive it or not. These fights included grapplers that were useless as long as they cannot touch you. If you are a fast striker, no matter where you go and think, you are better than a grappler if you strike good. that's why grappling stuff was forgotten in fights and never been used until those Braziliazns braught it again, Why?. It is not becuase it was not there. Clinching and grappling were among fighitng arts in China, Japan and even in the Western world. It was not used in fights becuase it was useless against real striking:ultracool . So when the Gracies came back with it, people was not used to it, that's why they got dominated with it. Just after a while, it starts to lose again. Cesar Gracie was knocked out in 21 seconds by Shamrock. This shows how training in all fighitng ranges is important . I dont' say be just a boxer and you will win, and not a pure grappler, but be a well rounded fighter will all fighitng abilties.

Now Wing Chun is complete in all fighing ranges, and many instructors from all fighting arts started to join WT. The only problem exist in about WT is that it's a Chinese fighting systems, and westerners in general wouldn't like the idea of learning the Chinese sort of thing, rather than stick to their Wrestling stuff which is with all my respect, not the best choice used in a street fight. This is especially in the states, were you find BJJ has been popularized alot my the media sources in there. As to Europe, and especially Germany. Many fighing instructors joined WT. This includes fighters from Karate, Wrstling, Jujitsu, and Boxers.:ultracool


----------



## Odin (Sep 28, 2006)

Street Brawler said:


> Hey pal, Relax . Did I say I am a better fighter than Liddel and Silvia. NO man. I just said that grappling is not a complete fighitng strategy like most MMA fans think it is. Liddell, Ortiz, Shamrock, Fedor, and silvia are all MMA proffessioanl fighters. They are not only ground fighters Odin:whip1: . After all I have just spent most of my threads saying that Wing Chun was never made for an octagon fight. You people must know how other fighting systems work to judge certain stuff. Now you say that ground fighting is a second step fighting in a street fight. Odin my friend:mst: , I faught brawls, and It's all your business wheather you want to beleive it or not. These fights included grapplers that were useless as long as they cannot touch you. If you are a fast striker, no matter where you go and think, you are better than a grappler if you strike good. that's why grappling stuff was forgotten in fights and never been used until those Braziliazns braught it again, Why?. It is not becuase it was not there. Clinching and grappling were among fighitng arts in China, Japan and even in the Western world. It was not used in fights becuase it was useless against real striking:ultracool . So when the Gracies came back with it, people was not used to it, that's why they got dominated with it. Just after a while, it starts to lose again. Cesar Gracie was knocked out in 21 seconds by Shamrock. This shows how training in all fighitng ranges is important . I dont' say be just a boxer and you will win, and not a pure grappler, but be a well rounded fighter will all fighitng abilties.
> 
> Now Wing Chun is complete in all fighing ranges, and many instructors from all fighting arts started to join WT. The only problem exist in about WT is that it's a Chinese fighting systems, and westerners in general wouldn't like the idea of learning the Chinese sort of thing, rather than stick to their Wrestling stuff which is with all my respect, not the best choice used in a street fight. This is especially in the states, were you find BJJ has been popularized alot my the media sources in there. As to Europe, and especially Germany. Many fighing instructors joined WT. This includes fighters from Karate, Wrstling, Jujitsu, and Boxers.:ultracool


 
''Hey pal, Relax
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 . Did I say I am a better fighter than Liddel and Silvia. NO man. I just said that grappling is not a complete fighting strategy like most MMA fans think it is. Liddell, Ortiz, Shamrock, Fedor, and silvia are all MMA professional fighters. They are not only ground fighters 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Odin .''

*????when did I way it was??that doesn't make sense what you just wrote,how can MMA's think that grapplering is a complete art when they don't just grapple ,they cross train??If they thought that all they needed to do was grapple why would they train muay thai and boxing???*
*I think you should go to an MMA website and actually check it out.*
*Try my club....http://www.londonshootfighters.com/Show.php..have a look.*

*Bro I train in mma I know this !!!its the rest of the martial arts world that doesn't seen to understand what MMA is,everytime its mentioned I hear the shouts of 'ground fighting doesn't work in the streets!!!'' like going to ground is the end all mma if it was it would be jujitsu not MMA!*
*ps I mentioned Liddel and silva to make a point since they are mainly strikers*.

'' After all I have just spent most of my threads saying that Wing Chun was never made for an octagon fight. ''

*It did actually check the tapes of the first UFC's wing chun fighters competed quite a lot at the beginning most where took down and submitted.*

''You people must know how other fighting systems work to judge certain stuff.''

*Hence why MMA's cross train boxing for hands,muay thai for kicks and knees wrestling for takedowns and jujitsu for ground work, different situation different style ( :*

 ''Now you say that ground fighting is a second step fighting in a street fight. Odin my friend
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 , I fought brawls, and It's all your business whether you want to believe it or not. These fights included grapplers that were useless as long as they cannot touch you. If you are a fast striker, no matter where you go and think, you are better than a grappler if you strike good.''

*I disagree with that,its all apples and oranges, if you are a good grappler you can take someone down without being hit,regardless of striking ability.*

'' that's why grappling stuff was forgotten in fights and never been used until those Brazilians brought it again, Why?. It is not because it was not there. Clinching and grappling were among fighting arts in China, Japan and even in the Western world. It was not used in fights because it was useless against real striking
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 . So when the Gracie's came back with it, people was not used to it, that's why they got dominated with it. Just after a while, it starts to lose again. Cesar Gracie was knocked out in 21 seconds by Shamrock. ''

*where do you get your information from??*
*The gracies simply created the ufc to show that their jujitsu (not mma) was a superior fighting stly to prove it they set a 'no rules' to combat people using excuses.*
*Ken shamrock was the only fighter that cross trained in the first ufc.*
*Still to this day the Gracies train in gracie-Jujitsu not MMA,MMa is the evolution of what works in a combat situation,many of the Armed forces hand to hand tactics are that of MMA.*

''This shows how training in all fighting ranges is important
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 . I don't say be just a boxer and you will win, and not a pure grappler, but be a well rounded fighter will all fighting abilities.''

*Like MMA???Bro im confused what your saying here,first you said MMA is not complete then your saying that knowing both grapplering and striking makes you complete (which is what mma is!)*
 

''Now Wing Chun is complete in all fighting ranges, and many instructors from all fighting arts started to join WT. The only problem exist in about WT is that it's a Chinese fighting systems, and westerners in general wouldn't like the idea of learning the Chinese sort of thing, rather than stick to their Wrestling stuff which is with all my respect, not the best choice used in a street fight''

*yeah your right us westerners train in Japanese Karate,jujitsu,kendo Thai Muay thai, muay boran, Israeli krav maga Brazilian capporiera and Pilipino stick fighting BUT NO ONE WE WONT TRAIN IN CHINESE ARTS!!!!! come on bro that a weak point you just made.*


.''
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 This is especially in the states, were you find BJJ has been popularized alot my the media sources in there. As to Europe, and especially Germany. Many fighting instructors joined WT. This includes fighters from Karate, Wrestling, Jujitsu, and Boxers.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




''

*Thats too much of a broad statement there bro.*
*I could say the same.*
*__________________*


----------



## Jade Tigress (Sep 28, 2006)

* Mod. Note*
Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Moderator


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 28, 2006)

Since I was named dropped here ( :wavey: ) I'll provide some food for thought.

This is taken directly from the grappling section in one of our combative programs:

_Principle #1: Be not afraid

A common feeling for the uninitiated is a fear of grappling and the clinch. Psychologically one can feel awkward, claustrophobic and a loss of control, especially if the opponent is dominating. This can be demoralizing, confusing, and scary. Often the reaction is to panic and burn excessive energy; and if this does not remedy the situation, often what follows is a loss of the winning mindset due to a feeling of helplessness. Thus, the uninitiated &#8220;gives up&#8221; and loses the fight. Losing the fight on the street can mean death or bodily injury.

To overcome this one must first cognitively accept that grappling by itself is no more dangerous then standing and fighting. On your back on the ground, for example, may not be the best place to be on the street, but by itself the position you're in will not cause you to lose the fight. Second, one must recognize that the best way to understand how to handle grappling positions on the street is to train from those positions in practice. Once one realizes these principles, then one must train accordingly, and make grappling positions a part of ones comfort zone. To summarize differently, to understand grappling, you must grapple. There are no shortcuts. By training grappling you will remove the mystery behind it, which will dissipate those common fears, and make you a well-rounded fighter.

Paul Janulis
(c) Tulisan Company 2006
All Rights Reserved
_
Just something to think about...

Paul


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 28, 2006)

Marvin said:


> Your instructor went to his sons bjj class to challenge the instructor to show his son that bjj was not for the street?!?!?What did he show his son that did work on the street?"


 
He kept it pretty clean, all he did was very basic anti-grappling.



Marvin said:


> I think someone has given you misinformation here, I know of no one who "trains to take a punch" punches happen in fights. If you are used to the presure then it doesn't suprise you whin it happens in the ring or the street. let me give you one example of how it is commonly trained, you will find this or somthing like it at most gyms. Boxer feeds shooter slow punchig combos, a simple jab/cross. if shooter is in a bad position she gets punched in the mellon. A few rounds of that and the shooter keeps her hand up, so she doedn't get punched in the face nearly as much. And as the shooter gets better the combos get faster and harder. understand? Plus and I keep coming back to this it is very hard to
> continuously punch someone in the face as they are lvl changing on you


I understand that, that's just training your technique, feeling out what works before you go in hot and heavy.  I've just heard alot of grapplers talk about how they "take" a couple of hits so they can get the takedown.  I've found that many MA's in general feel it's necessary to get hit pretty regular to toughen up so to speak.  
What I've found working with some of the BJJ guys that come into class, is that 50% of the time, yes they do take me to the ground.  Their fast, and the angle of entry is so low as to make punching difficult.  Plus, kicking or kneeing them in the head (which is right there) usually come with the price of going to the ground.  That's where the anti-grappling comes in.  It keeps their weight off of you, allows you to re-direct their energy much easier.  When they move to strike, or choke, or attempt an armbar their weight and balance shifts.  If you learn to use that to your advantage you can get them off you and mount to strike and get back up from the ground much quicker.



Marvin said:


> Not quite sure what you are trying to say here. Do you mean after you get the grappler to the groun you will finish them off with a flurry of kicks? can you show me the article or email link about this story?
> So what you are saying is tha NO grapplers have ever experienced fighting wing chun folks?


Yes, many of these grapplers want to be in between my legs on top so they can armbar, strike, whatever.  By simply putting your knees together and using your feet to kick, and unbalance them it keeps them from getting set do their technique.  There are some videos on youtube from Sifu Guiterrez links on the first post of this forum.  Theirs not email link or article on this "story" it's just known anti-grappling technique.  Really, not many people in the states know the anti-grappling enough to teach it.  Just a couple of Emins students.  
As for grapplers having experience fighting wing chun, I'd have to say no.  If any not many.  And most WT/WC schools do not teach anti-grappling.  Only Emins students, he came up with the stuff and split off from the other federations because of it and the politics.



Marvin said:


> Si-Je I think you missed my point, have YOU experimented outside of your comfort zone? Have you verified your instructors claims? You are taking a lot of assumptions on blind faith. this may be presumptuous of me, but in your post you said
> so you don't know if your techniques work or not? The big problem with you hitting the bag, as you know Im sure, is that a bag does not give honest feedback. Don't make the mistake of thinking you have unstoppable technique, just because someone told you it was. It is always dangerous to say " oh I would just, do this or this"


 
As for my "comfort zone" I've done MA since I was 10 years old.  I've done karate, Judo, Japanese Ju-Jitsu, Kung fu, escrima, kali, etc.  When I started WC I was a gung ho Ju-Jitsu stylist.  I've tried many time to get my instructor in about every lock I could think of.  Never happened.  I studied Ju-Jitsu for over three years and made Sempi, I was no slouch.  
As for my instructors claims of sparring and fighting BJJ stylists, I've seen him do it.
The bag was just an example.  Moving a 250lbs sand bag around the room litterally when I can't even move it without punching should say something.  I've used the chain punching sparring in women's black belt division last year and won against a woman who had 50lbs on me.  
I agree it's dangerous to say" oh I would just, do this or this." in reguards to fighting.  You can never anticipate or plan a fight.  And when I competed last time I was really surprised and disapointed that I only used grade 1 and 2 techniques.  But with the rules that's really all you can do, no elbows, knees, etc.  
What I've seen is that alot of WT/WC stylists don't use their technique when they compete.  I don't know, they freak out or something, I've talked to quite a few online and they don't have any faith in it's effectiveness.  I'm not sure why this is so, but this is why they lose.  Whatever art you are studying, if you don't believe in it, you defeat yourself.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 28, 2006)

Ram said:


> LoL do you even know what grappling is about??????????? I mean just read the various posts here. Grappling is about not getting taken down if you don't want to be. If you do to gain a dominant position for strikes or bone breaks.
> Soldiers train in strikes,weapons,and grappling if grappling did not work then it would be removed from their training. I remember reading a article about how soldiers used BBJ in combat


 
That was what has been told to us by an Army trainer who was in the war and was a black belt in BJJ.  My instructor was in the U.S.M.C just 3 years ago, was a trainer, and in recon.  He's used WC and Kempo karate in the field, he's used the anti-grappling with multiple attackers in the street and in recon.
I know what grappling is about, I just don't think that it's practical for realistic situations.  I've trained Ju-Jitsu, and used it on occasion.  But the Ju-Jitsu I trained was Japanese and we NEVER went to the ground on purpose.  I have a saying, "don't do a technique that doesn't place you at the advantage."
I don't see how grabbing someone and falling on your butt to the ground to get them in an armbar is an advantage for me.  I don't see how tackling a large dude around the knees, hips, or whatever is even going to work for me.  I've tried it on large men 6 foot and up.  It's suicide I tell you.  I don't want their massive weight on my body, I don't want to mount someone and grapple them from between their legs.  These things do NOT give me an advantage over my opponent.  It just puts me in a very compromising position.  It seems men tend to really like this stuff.  I want the fight over quickly and go home unscathed.  If I have to eye strike, or chop the throat till they quit breathing, fine with me.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 28, 2006)

Originally Posted by *Odin* 

 
_I think you are mixing stuff between what is useful for a real fight, and what is useful for a competition

that one line is something I have heard a lot on this forum and to be honest really winds me up, my only assumption of the people that make this statement would be that them themselves have not actually had any fights nor have an idea of what real fights are like.....(im not talking the demo's you do in your class) 
Why would MMA just be about ground work???why would grapperling only be about submissions???You ever heard the saying position before submission?
The more you know about grapperling the more you can defend against a grapple..any kind of grapple..whether it be a grappler from Rich Franklin or a grappler from a fat guy outside a club you will always be able to to come off on top if you know what your doing, grabbing your opponent is the second most commonly used tactic used in a street fight!....and unlike most other arts when you defend these thing you do so with someone who really wants to take you down not someone that is going to ask you ''are you ready?'' four times before attempting the move only to then wait for you to do the correct response,you will have someone that will twist and turn and move they're hands all over your face and funny enough try to take you down as if his life depended on it... _
_  --  *that's well and good, but when you are grabbed by somone.  Do you grab them back?  Yes, if your a grappler, No if you use anti-grappling.  When a grappler grabbs me, well, then I know where his hands are and what their doing.  This leaves me free to strike and kick, etc.  It's a different way of thinking as well as fighting.  You realize you have more options than you previously thought before.*_
_I notices aswel in those videos that there wasn't any 'plan b'? this is another thing that confuses me, these TMA techniques don't seem to have any back up plans you know just in case the move you just did didn't work out how you thought it would, ask any good fight in the world no matter what the sport and they'll have a plan a b c d and e for every move they do.....actual fighting leaves far to many variables for only one technique to work.
*  --haveing plan B will not always help you.  Their's too many factors in a fight.  "never anticipate the outcome of the engagement."--bruce lee.*_
_*In the guiterrez videos on anti-grappling these students study and train european wrestling and grappling.  These guys aren't able to execute "plan B" because he's really HITTING them.  Their rougher in Europe, it seems.  We don't train like that, we use gear, but he's getting the point accross that while you try to set up to get "position" before "submission" he's pounding your face.*_
_*Like I said, theirs not alot of people in the states that know the anti-grappling techniques.  Their Emin's creation, and it's only been around for 6-8 years, so it is still evolving.  WT doesn't train this WC doesn't train anti-grappling, no one does except EBMAS, (I think Systema does too, it looks like they do the same stuff).*_
_*Plus, the anti-grappling is NOT just ONE technique.  It's basically chi sau with your whole body, you flow, keep moving so they can't submit, re-direct the opponents strength and force.  The more they try to hurt you, the easier it is to roll them off, strike, and get off the ground faster.*_


----------



## Ram (Sep 28, 2006)

> I don't see how grabbing someone and falling on your butt to the ground to get them in an armbar is an advantage for me.


Let me explain again. You use grappling to try not to be taken down but if you do get taken down it will do you a 100% more good than anti-grappling.



> *whole body, you flow, keep moving so they can't submit, re-direct the opponents strength and force. The more they try to hurt you, the easier it is to roll them off, strike, and get off the ground faster.*


Sounds like grappling to me. You either Strike or grapple a good martial artist knows both standing up ,mid range , and on the ground. But Anti-grappling????? That is like saying I have a anti-gun knife LoL.



> *We don't train like that, we use gear, but he's getting the point accross that while you try to set up to get "position" before "submission" he's pounding your face.*


 
 Yes, it is a classic grapplers move with strikes called ground and pound. Again you can be a striker and learn some grappling and a grappler that learns striking. Either way you have admited that grappling works in combat. You should learn some to make yourself a complete martial artist.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 28, 2006)

I'll be honest, I like to punch my way into better positions


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 28, 2006)

the difference with anti-grappling is that you do NOT grab and wrestle the opponent back.  If you say as an example, grab my "gi" or shirt with both hands, I don't concentrate on making you release your grip from me.  I simply use my two free hands to strike.
or, if you use both your arms to get me into an armbar to submit.  I don't try to muscle out of the armbar, or use my free hand to grab you back,  I strike you while using forward force with the trapped arm to get free of the armbar.

It's hard to explain in writing.

Tan sau will more often than not get you out of joint locks whether standing or on the ground.  It really blew my mind when he started teaching me this.  From my training in Ju-Jitsu I was trained that when your put in a joint lock you are at the opponents mercy (there's a few counters but generally when someone locks out on you your done.)
This is not so with Wing Chun.  
You use Tan Sau, Dai Sau and Bong Sau to negate the joint lock in a fluid motion while stepping into, or moving into the grappler trying to break.  See, the joint locks work much better against a resisting attacker.  If you resist too much with a joint lock, you in effect break your own arm.  All a grappler has to do is hold on.
But if you do NOT resist, relax the body and flow forward into the oppoent you take away alot of their leverage on the joint.  Simply bending the elbow, and shooting the hand palm up in Tan Sau toward your opponents body will negate the lock.  
This is done with one arm, while the free arm is striking.
I know it sounds weird.  It freaked me out when he first explained it to me, and I didn't buy it either.  I had to do it, and experience it before I believed it.  I had a strong "grappling" background when I came to WC and thought as many of you do that once I had someone in a joint lock that was it, it was either submit or break.  But I found that the WC very very basic concepts and anti-grappling worked so very well.
Honestly, it seems too well.  I can keep a grappler at bay for a long while without getting winded or tired because you don't resist their force.  You use angles, weight distribution, and re-direction of their weight and force against them just like you do when your standing up.
I've had guys get off me after sparring totally huffing and puffing out of breath, because of the effort that the used to try to submit me.  And I was still fresh, ready to do some more.  

"take the path of least resistance, be like the nature of water."
"sometimes to overcome a stronger current water must go underneath or below to overcome the stronger flow."

I cannot take a full force take down and stop a heavier stronger person, so to overcome I flow with them.  If they wish to take me to the ground I do not resist but go with their force and use it against them by continueing their forward force.  By not opposing, I can adapt more quickly to the direction of their attack.


----------



## Ram (Sep 28, 2006)

> You use Tan Sau, Dai Sau and Bong Sau to negate the joint lock in a fluid motion while stepping into, or moving into the grappler trying to break. See, the joint locks work much better against a resisting attacker. If you resist too much with a joint lock, you in effect break your own arm. All a grappler has to do is hold on.
> But if you do NOT resist, relax the body and flow forward into the oppoent you take away alot of their leverage on the joint. Simply bending the elbow, and shooting the hand palm up in Tan Sau toward your opponents body will negate the lock.


 
 That would be called grappling.



> I've had guys get off me after sparring totally huffing and puffing out of breath, because of the effort that the used to try to submit me.


 
Hey now that's too much information LoL :uhyeah: 



> I cannot take a full force take down and stop a heavier stronger person, so to overcome I flow with them. If they wish to take me to the ground I do not resist but go with their force and use it against them by continueing their forward force. By not opposing, I can adapt more quickly to the direction of their attack.


 
Grappling again. Their seems to be a lot of grappling in anti-grappling lol why not just call it grappling defense?


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 28, 2006)

my dear, you are missing the concept.
This is not grappling.  For I do not grab the opponent back.
Using Tan Sau to "wiggle" out of an armbar is not grappling technique.
This is pure WC.  This is the stuff we do with joint locks standing in around grade 3 or 4, depending on the teacher.  Even when we put an opponent in a lock we do not grab the arm or wrist.
Plus, when a grappler grabs you, you do not wrestle them back by grabbing, or grasping them.  That would be playing their game.
you can check out a couple of our videos on our website homepage.  or look at the Guiterrez stuff again.
He actually hits.  In our videos and class we don't hit the students.


----------



## monji112000 (Sep 29, 2006)

Si-Je,

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...rappling&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title


 Grappling doesn't equal grabbing the opponent. I have seen many &#8220;grapplers&#8221; Ground and pound and even BJJ fighters punch and kick from the ground. This is even when someone is trying to do a submission. Its not so simple to say I punch you &#8220;grab&#8221;.


 You can call your &#8220;style&#8221; anti-grappling but thats not to say its Wing Chun. It isn't, thats a simple fact. Maybe its &#8220;your Wing Chun&#8221;.


 As Ram said it is &#8220;grappling&#8221; or wrestling, you fail to see that ideas are not limited to one group of people/style. When you use a idea like redirecting, or jamming or covering you can apply it on many levels in many ways. You can apply it with two knifes in your hand or in a Chess game.. Its Wing Chun ideas, used in a different environment.  


 Anyone can create a wrestling or anti-grappling style(doesn't mean it works), but to be able to take Wing Chun theory and then apply it in a new arena takes allot. It takes a person to master Wing Chun (you won't find many people that have), then learn how to grapple, and then start to find similar ideas and new ways to use his ideas.


 Much like a artist who creates a new &#8220;method&#8221; of art.  


 Honestly I have seen the &#8220;ant-grappling&#8221; by the &#8220;wing chun masters". LOL its really just really bad. I am not BJJ master but honestly. FIRST LEARN WING CHUN!  


 I hate it when you guys use the stupid rabbit punches and claim that its Wing Chun...if you are standing or on the ground.. no power exists from punches used in that way. They are very easy to counter and they are only a drop in the bucket when it comes to punches used in wing chun.


 Chain punches are *great* some times.  You have to learn how and why to use a tool.


 I am 100% positive that if you really learn the theory and the drills that Ip man passed down. Then think about the ideas behind them. THEN start to train with people who are good at ground fighting, you will find what you are looking for.  


 I am not saying that BJJ/Sambo/ect.. is the best or even worth training, just that you have to give respect were its doe.   


 I enjoy training with people of all styles. Keep a open mind, you often find people who know much more than you do.


----------



## Andrew Green (Sep 29, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> or, if you use both your arms to get me into an armbar to submit.  I don't try to muscle out of the armbar, or use my free hand to grab you back,  I strike you while using forward force with the trapped arm to get free of the armbar.



Right here there is a big problem.  If I got you in a armbar, and you start hitting me, what is keeping me from breaking your arm?

There is a reason that when people in MMA events are caught in these things there attention shifts from hitting the other guy to worrying about how they are going to get there arm out of there.

But the really important thing that "anti-grappling" seems to miss is that position is important, there are times when you are safe striking back, but there are other times where if you try to strike you will put yourself in bigger trouble.

In fact a common tactic on the ground, or in the clinch is to give the other person what they percieve as a opportunity to hit you, and then use there attempt at hitting you to get a throw, lock, choke, improved position or whatever else they might be looking for.


----------



## Si-Je (Sep 30, 2006)

Andrew Green said:


> Right here there is a big problem. If I got you in a armbar, and you start hitting me, what is keeping me from breaking your arm?


 
If you read my last post I went into great detail about this.  Using Tan Sau with the arm that is put into an armbar, relaxing, and corkscrewing your arm and body, will get your arm free of the arm bar, leaving your other arm free to help you get out of that position.



Andrew Green said:


> But the really important thing that "anti-grappling" seems to miss is that position is important, there are times when you are safe striking back, but there are other times where if you try to strike you will put yourself in bigger trouble..


 
This is duley noted.



Andrew Green said:


> In fact a common tactic on the ground, or in the clinch is to give the other person what they percieve as a opportunity to hit you, and then use there attempt at hitting you to get a throw, lock, choke, improved position or whatever else they might be looking for.


 
With WC punching your do not "commit" yourself when striking, thus you don't shift your weight or balance, thus you do not fall into these grappling feints.  Same as when standing and punching, the same principles appliy on the ground.  The principles of Wing Chun do NOT change whether standing, sitting, or on the ground.  They work either way.  Chi Sau is also cruital on the ground, the sensitivity training from those drills help you flow with the grappler.

And in respose to the other guy.  Anti-grappling was developed by a master of Wing Tsun, a turkish wrestler, and a man who has studied BJJ extensively.  The anti-grappling technique didn't just "come from the imagination of wing chunners.  All of the principles, simplicity, techniques, and theories of WT were used to devise anti-grappling.  
This is something that those who don't seem to understand or validate the techniques should just try.  Once you FEEL these techniques, experiement with them, and learn about them you will start to understand more.  The eyes decieve, and you won't learn or understand the concepts of anti-grappling from a book or video.  Just like WT/WC, you can't truely learn by books, discussion, or video, you MUST feel, and experience it in class.
I still highly recomend anyone studying WT/WC to train as extensively as possible in anti-grappling.  It will make you a well balanced fighter and defender.  And it is a part of wing chun.  It's just part of the evolution of wing chun, which is always in effect.  If you do not adapt, no matter what art you study, it becomes stagnant.  This happens much in kung fu.  Keep the traditional, the techniques that are proven and tested to work, but don't be afraid of new thought and technique.


----------



## monji112000 (Oct 4, 2006)

> With WC punching your do not "commit" yourself when striking, thus you don't shift your weight or balance, thus you do not fall into these grappling feints.


Hmm I have never heard that, that is something that differers from my lineage.
What do you mean by "commit".  I would say that you must treat every attack like a real attack, and cover, it doesn't matter if its a feint or not. This is a Wing Chun principle that I have learned many times.






> Same as when standing and punching, the same principles appliy on the ground. The principles of Wing Chun do NOT change whether standing, sitting, or on the ground. They work either way.



 Its hard to make a black and white statement like that. In Wing Chun you have many different punches, and the only one that I can see working exactly the same as standing is chain punching. I would not consider chain punching as a viable option from your back in many situations. You can take ideas from the chain punch application and use the ideas. Taking ideas, not just blindly using the exact technique.  


 Again its not a black and white statement that Wing Chun principles don't change if you are on the ground. Everything changes! But many things stay the same or are similar.


 From a mount position.
 Your horse is none existent, when someone is at a mount position on you.  
 You have very little mobility so many of the punches arn't realistic.  You can only punch with your arm muscle. You have no footwork and horse to generate power.
 Kicking isn't really possible.
 ect..

 I am not saying that you can't use Wing Chun for ground fighting. I am only saying that you have to use your head. You must be fluent in a ground fighting style that is effective. I personally don't consider turkish wrestling as a viable base to building on.   


 IF you would tell me that someone had 4 years of High School/ College wrestling and maybe some BJJ training.. ok that would be something to take note of.


 Emin's Wing Chun and his ground fighting are vary similar, If you like his Wing Chun then you are going to like his ground fighting.


 If you want to learn to ride a horse GO TO SOMEONE who can already ride a horse.


 I am always open to new ideas, and thoughts.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 4, 2006)

monji112000 said:


> Hmm I have never heard that, that is something that differers from my lineage.
> What do you mean by "commit". I would say that you must treat every attack like a real attack, and cover, it doesn't matter if its a feint or not. This is a Wing Chun principle that I have learned many times..


 
What I mean by "commit", is that when your punching your not leaning and throwing your body weight into the punches.  The arm is like the head of a battering ram reinforced by your entire body moving forward, keeping the body straight and relaxed at the same time.   This allows you to flow with where your opponent moves at an instant.  Different than say a boxer, karate, etc, that uses muscle and strength to "throw" their body into the strike.  Thus, leaning and becoming "top heavy".  

We keep totally relaxed with our hands and arms until the very moment of impact, then we tense for the strike.  This way you can flow with your opponent, feeling and re-directing your opponent.  I am not "committed" to any movement until I feel pressure, or contact from my opponent.




monji112000 said:


> Its hard to make a black and white statement like that. In Wing Chun you have many different punches, and the only one that I can see working exactly the same as standing is chain punching. I would not consider chain punching as a viable option from your back in many situations. You can take &#8220;ideas&#8221; from the chain punch application and use the ideas. Taking ideas, not just blindly using the exact technique. .


 
Your concept and approach stay the same.  If you shift your body weight on a wrestler or grappler you set yourself up for what they are planning.  You relax the body, do not give reistance of physical muscling and strength.  You tense up that's what they want, it's eaiser to manipulate the joint the more you resist.

Chain punching is very effective on your back, remember the opponent is applying force upon YOU.  They are leaning into your strikes trying to choke or armbar.  Chain punch when they are at arms distance, elbow and forearm shiver when they are too close to punch.  When they lean forward to choke the litterly run into your punch/elbow.  The harder they try to hurt you, the harder they come into you the more they get hurt.  Wing Chun concept still does not change here.  Your taking their inertia, force, weight, mass, and strength and using it to hurt them.



monji112000 said:


> From a mount position.
> Your horse is none existent, when someone is at a mount position on you.
> You have very little mobility so many of the punches arn't realistic. You can only punch with your arm muscle. You have no footwork and horse to generate power.
> Kicking isn't really possible.
> ect...


 
My "horse" stance is nonexistant, but my body is still able to move.  using your feet planted on the ground behind them you can still pivot your body side to side, foot plant and roll using your hips that are under him to roll, keep moving the entire lower body while keeping your hands at guard.  If you can produce power from a 6-1 inch punch, why not while on the ground?  Plus, punching is not all you have to work with, in mount the groin, inside of the theigh lower stomach, all are more accessable.  Chain punch there.  You also have Chi, use it.  Use their chi/force/momentum against them.  
When the strike, re-direct like you do standing up, at the same time torque your entire lower body to take advantage of the foreward force they've given you and roll them off.  When you do, the groin is all yours, your between their legs now.


----------



## Rook (Oct 5, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> What I mean by "commit", is that when your punching your not leaning and throwing your body weight into the punches. The arm is like the head of a battering ram reinforced by your entire body moving forward, keeping the body straight and relaxed at the same time. This allows you to flow with where your opponent moves at an instant. Different than say a boxer, karate, etc, that uses muscle and strength to "throw" their body into the strike. Thus, leaning and becoming "top heavy".


 
The body shouldn't be thown into the strike.  This is a beginers mistake in any striking system.  The whole-body striking in karate and boxing ussually means the opposite of arm punching, where the hips movement provides the main force.  



> We keep totally relaxed with our hands and arms until the very moment of impact, then we tense for the strike. This way you can flow with your opponent, feeling and re-directing your opponent. I am not "committed" to any movement until I feel pressure, or contact from my opponent.


 
Ok.  



> Your concept and approach stay the same. If you shift your body weight on a wrestler or grappler you set yourself up for what they are planning.


 
If you don't shift your position their momentum will carry you to the floor.  



> You relax the body, do not give reistance of physical muscling and strength. You tense up that's what they want, it's eaiser to manipulate the joint the more you resist.


 
This part is true.  



> Chain punching is very effective on your back, remember the opponent is applying force upon YOU. They are leaning into your strikes trying to choke or armbar.


 
How are they leaning into your strikes?  



> Chain punch when they are at arms distance, elbow and forearm shiver when they are too close to punch. When they lean forward to choke the litterly run into your punch/elbow. The harder they try to hurt you, the harder they come into you the more they get hurt. Wing Chun concept still does not change here. Your taking their inertia, force, weight, mass, and strength and using it to hurt them.


 
You do realize that if anyone who your size or larger is mounted on you, you won't be able to reach above their shoulder unless they move down to choke you?  Try having someone sit on your chest and then reach up to see the disparity in reach. 



> My "horse" stance is nonexistant, but my body is still able to move. using your feet planted on the ground behind them you can still pivot your body side to side, foot plant and roll using your hips that are under him to roll, keep moving the entire lower body while keeping your hands at guard.


 
This is fundamental grappling technique.  



> If you can produce power from a 6-1 inch punch, why not while on the ground?


 
The 6 inch and one inch punch rely on your body acting in unison.  The person sitting on you segments your body, preventing you from using the whole body as one.  




> Plus, punching is not all you have to work with, in mount the groin, inside of the theigh lower stomach, all are more accessable.


 
See above about being able to punch with power from bottom mount.  

When a grappler is mounted, his groin should not be exposed.  You would have to reach under him to get to the testicles.  The inside of the leg can take alot of damage, as can the stomach.  



> Chain punch there. You also have Chi, use it. Use their chi/force/momentum against them.
> When the strike, re-direct like you do standing up, at the same time torque your entire lower body to take advantage of the foreward force they've given you and roll them off. When you do, the groin is all yours, your between their legs now.


 
Most people don't overcommit to the point that they are easy to roll off when striking.  If you can roll him over, you will be, as suggested, in his guard.  The groin is protected by the grapplers ability to swiftly transition to a triange or armbar if you take one arm out of guard and leave the other in - and when his position shifts to the armbar, the groin will be out of reach.


----------



## monji112000 (Oct 6, 2006)

> What I mean by "commit", is that when your punching your not leaning and throwing your body weight into the punches. The arm is like the head of a battering ram reinforced by your entire body moving forward, keeping the body straight and relaxed at the same time. This allows you to flow with where your opponent moves at an instant. Different than say a boxer, karate, etc, that uses muscle and strength to "throw" their body into the strike. Thus, leaning and becoming "top heavy".


     Well yes and NO. A good boxer uses his body weight yes, but also a great deal of mechanics not muscling the person. Sure some people do use less mechanics.. but a good western/thai boxer uses a great deal of body mechanics. A karate punch is delivered with body mechanics also..   
       Wing Chun has more than one way of applying power. Its sounds like you are talking about crashing power or impact power. But, when you turn your horse and strike from a short distance you have no impact you are relying on your body mechanics. Its actually very similar to a Karate or Western boxing cross. Its not the SAME, but most of the theory is VERY VERY SIMILAR.  Karate and Wing Chun use the heel as a foundation and push off from the ground. A Western Boxer will use his balls on his feet rotate more. This causes more power initially, but is much slower.  
     We (Wing Chun) have punch that we throw our whole body. I don't know if you or your lineage practices these types of punches but they are in the style.


> We keep totally relaxed with our hands and arms until the very moment of impact, then we tense for the strike. This way you can flow with your opponent, feeling and re-directing your opponent. I am not "committed" to any movement until I feel pressure, or contact from my opponent.


 Yah everyone punches that way.  EVERY GOOD STRIKER hits relaxed then tenses at the last moment.  


> Your concept and approach stay the same. If you shift your body weight on a wrestler or grappler you set yourself up for what they are planning. You relax the body, do not give reistance of physical muscling and strength. You tense up that's what they want, it's eaiser to manipulate the joint the more you resist.


 OK I won't argue how to properly fight on the ground, but I will make a point to say that you MUST shift your weight to fight standing up. Are you saying never to turn your horse?


> Chain punching is very effective on your back, remember the opponent is applying force upon YOU. They are leaning into your strikes trying to choke or armbar.


 Actually this is a common misconception. 9 out of ten times someone is going to 1. Grab you with one hand 2. Make a large amount of distance and then strike very hard. If you have someone smothering you, sure a quick chain punch to his face for a second would work well. He will back up for a second, that will give you time to maybe get out from under him.  Thats about it.  
      The other problem with JUST chain punching is that you arn't covering. He is pulling back and hitting you with everything he has and you MUST COVER.
 If you tell me that you are going to only chain punch when he is press against you trying to do some type of submission..  
 1. you have no distance to pull your punches back so no power
 2. he will be expecting you to punch.


 Use your head, you can't just blindly copy and paste things to the ground.


 CHI ? Ok you can use your Chi.... whatever works for you.
       Punching from a small distance isn't about the arm. Its about your horse, your body mechanics of the shoulder ect.. How you turn and use the ground as your power. On your back you have NO HORSE. No power can be generated from a none-existent horse. You have only a small amount of motion from twisting, and your arm muscle thats it. SURE if he lifts up to throw a big punch, and then lands into a punch you have extend.. that will be impact power.. but again you have to cover to protect your self.
       Yah you have many things to work with.. but hey if he is smothering me I can bite, jab him with my finger in his eyes ect..  but I am not a ground fighter. But I was under the impression you were talking about using Wing Chun.
 Its best to train with people who do this type of fighting if you want to be competent in that area. Again keep a open mind. I am not saying that Wing Chun has any deficiencies, or that you can't apply what you know to defeat someone who takes you to the ground.. just use your head.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Oct 6, 2006)

*Mod Note

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Moderator*


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

Ok, I've had a hard time describing and explaining these techniques.  It's like writing a book really, and I'm not an author.

*Punching and re-directing   While standing.* 
1.  We do NOT call basic stance a horse stance.  It is only shoulder width apart, the toes and knees are turned in, hips up and forward, back straight.

2.  *When punching* we utilize the spine in unison with the punch, not the arms, not like a boxing cross punch.  The only way they may be similar is because they are straight punches.  a boxer jabs and retracts, we do not retract, you punch "through" the target, not tap it like a boxer.  Chain punching power comes from the spine, speed, and your ENTIRE body weight as you step forward into the target still chain punching.  I have generated much power this way, and yes, the basic stance reinforces that power by bringing your body weight and mass behind the punching.

3.  *Chi Sau* - Done properly standing is a great sensitivity drill, you can apply chi sau to fighting.  as soon as you have contact with the opponent your sensitivity leads you were to strike.  Maybe schools don't teach the practical applications of chi sau, I don't know, but we do.  We use sensitivity in spontaneous drills and attacks in class to get used to surprise, and to learn to deflect and adapt.  I really don't understand why people have no faith in chi sau as a practical application, It has improved my reaction time, muscle memory, and made it possible for me to respond very effectively to attack in sparring.

*These concepts on the ground.*

1.  *Wing Chun basic stance (your horse)* is used to keep the opponent from getting between your theighs.  You keep your knees pointed inward, touching even, as the grappler trys to get between your legs to choke or strike.  Your feet are up under their arms, head, or shoulders.  (This allows you to "roll" them over pretty easily).  Now, wait.  The stance keeps the distance between you and the grappler.  I've had grapplers try to pry my legs apart with BOTH hands and they have always failed, wasting time and effort, allowing me time to roll them over to strike.  Now, as they lean forward into your closed knees to try to choke, armbar, or strike their weight is either grounded at your butt or forward as they try a technique.  They cannot get the right angle for an armbar because they are too far away from you, you can strike them as the lunge forward to sktrike, choke, or try to armbar.  And "cover" from their strikes quite effortlessly.

2. * Striking from your back.  *Chain punching, like I said eariler is NOT all you have to offer on your back.  You can chop, elbow, forearm shiver, eye gouge, palm strike, bit, etc.  Now, as a grappler trys to get into my "guard" which would be #1 above.  They have to lean forward.  We keep our hands up at ready position as we do when standing, Wing Chun wo sau.  Simply make a fist with the front hand as they lunge forward.  Pow, a strike, follow up with chain punching, and move your feet under their armpits, at their head, shoulders, whatever, and roll them in the direction they are striking at you.  I assure you, they will lose ballance and go right over, allowing you to get off your back.  If this doesn't work, kick the hips pushing them back from you, putting them in range to be kicked in the face, again allowing you to get up off your back.  Most of your power from striking on the ground still comes from your spine, structure, and your opponents force.  The harder and more aggressive they come into you the harder they get hit.  Especially if they are tense.  All very basic wing chun concepts.
3.  *Chi Sau on the ground*- We utilize chi sau on our backs as the grappler "rains down with bombs" their striking can all be deflected with Dai sau, pac sau, etc, and you use chi sau (because the distance is so close this works perfectly) to re-direct their force to roll them off you.  You don't lay there all day doing chi sau.  You get your moment, take it, and shift with their force to get up while you follow through with a barrage of chain punches to add to their chaos.
ex.  a persons mounting me and throws a hook punch, I deflect using Dai sau, then flow to bong sau and feed their arm through where it was origionally going in the first place.  I don't BLOCK and stop the strike, I feed it on through, therefore shifting his weight either to the right or the left and use my legs, body and arms all to roll him off while punching the entire time, following the opponent until I'm on top constantly striking.  That's what I mean about using chi sau.  you only use chi sau for a moment, to give you the position you need to end the fight.  chi sau is a tool, that I feel is not being taught, understood, or used properly.  you don't hammer a nail in with a screwdriver.  And you don't use chi sau when lat sau, chain punching, kicking, elbows, etc is needed more.

These concepts are understood more when in actual practice.  You should try these techniques with a school that understands the WT/WC ground fighting.  When you FEEL these concepts in action you'll understand much easier what is going on.  Reading and videos will show you some mechanics, but like anything elese in WC you must feel it to understand it.  It would be like me trying to explain foreward force, chi, or even chi sau (which I attempted a little lol!) in writing.  It's not the same at all until you actually do and feel it.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

Good example.
We went to a BJJ seminar and took one of our best students.  He's an excellent martial artist, very fit and young.  He has one arm.  Every single BJJ technique requires both arms, so none were effective for him at all.

We showed him the anti-grappling techniques for his body type and he was able to keep his partner from choking, armbaring, or striking him.  He used these techniques against BJJ and was highly effective, much to the confusion of his partner.

He chain punched with one arm (augmented for his body type) he forearm shivered, used bong sau to re-direct his partner and thus his entire body to roll into a side mount position to strike the opponent and get off the ground.  

We do NOT stay on the ground, the whole idea is to get back up ASAP, and finish the attacker, to be ready for a possible next attacker.  Hence, the term, "anti-grappling".  You don't stay on the ground with the opponent, your goal is to get UP.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

monji112000 said:


> Si-Je,
> 
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...rappling&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
> 
> ...


 
anti-grappling is not a "style" it is part of a style.  an addition to WT.  The creater of this addition was a Master of WT, learned BJJ, and Turkish wrestling.  He didn't just wake up one morning an say, "gee, I'll create something new."  He studied the other styles, and found a way to counter them.  This took much work, training, testing, etc.




monji112000 said:


> I hate it when you guys use the stupid rabbit punches and claim that its Wing Chun...if you are standing or on the ground.. no power exists from punches used in that way. They are very easy to counter and they are only a drop in the bucket when it comes to punches used in wing chun.
> .


 
This has not been the case for me.  I've seen how other schools use chain punching and I agree some of it has no power.  But, these "stupid rabbit punches" you speak of are either from those who aren't doing technique correctly, or from your ignorance of WC chain punches.  When I chain punch I've generated enough power to physically move my partner back (who's 6'4" 200lbs) holding the body bag.  
I still think it's funny that so many people think that they can be hit repeatedly in the face and not have any affect.  Maybe we are desensitized in the States.  But hitting people in the face will hurt, and this is not the movies.  



monji112000 said:


> Chain punches are *great* some times. You have to learn how and why to use a tool.
> .


 
I agree!



monji112000 said:


> I am 100% positive that if you really learn the theory and the drills that Ip man passed down. Then think about the ideas behind them. THEN start to train with people who are good at ground fighting, you will find what you are looking for.
> 
> 
> > Again, this has been done.  WT is made to change and evolve.  Many schools don't want to do this, they stay with the old and don't try the new.  Bruce Lee changed WC, anti-grappling is a new concept for many people who don't want to accept it as Wing Chun concept.  This is very unfortunate, for them.  I am still relatively new to WC, but my openness has allowed me to be more accepting of new ideas, and techniques, and to reconize it's weaknesses.  Thus, I have learned much from my teacher.  Who's teacher was both Fung and Emin.  He's taken two different styles of WT/WC and combined them.
> ...


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

No power with punching and striking?  you should tell her that. lol!
This is a pretty good video.  One of my favs, it's really hard to find women doing WT online.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&n=2&videoID=1223494642


----------



## Rook (Oct 6, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Ok, I've had a hard time describing and explaining these techniques. It's like writing a book really, and I'm not an author.
> 
> *Punching and re-directing While standing.*
> 1. We do NOT call basic stance a horse stance. It is only shoulder width apart, the toes and knees are turned in, hips up and forward, back straight.


 
Ok.



> 2. *When punching* we utilize the spine in unison with the punch, not the arms, not like a boxing cross punch. The only way they may be similar is because they are straight punches. a boxer jabs and retracts, we do not retract, you punch "through" the target, not tap it like a boxer.


 
Everyone punches through the target.  It is probably the single most fundamental rule of striking in any striking art on earth. 



> Chain punching power comes from the spine, speed, and your ENTIRE body weight as you step forward into the target still chain punching. I have generated much power this way, and yes, the basic stance reinforces that power by bringing your body weight and mass behind the punching.


 
Ok.  



> 3. *Chi Sau* - Done properly standing is a great sensitivity drill, you can apply chi sau to fighting. as soon as you have contact with the opponent your sensitivity leads you were to strike. Maybe schools don't teach the practical applications of chi sau, I don't know, but we do. We use sensitivity in spontaneous drills and attacks in class to get used to surprise, and to learn to deflect and adapt. I really don't understand why people have no faith in chi sau as a practical application, It has improved my reaction time, muscle memory, and made it possible for me to respond very effectively to attack in sparring.


 
Most people won't play along enough to allow people to use it.  

*



			These concepts on the ground.
		
Click to expand...

*


> 1. *Wing Chun basic stance (your horse)* is used to keep the opponent from getting between your theighs. You keep your knees pointed inward, touching even, as the grappler trys to get between your legs to choke or strike.


 
The grappler absolutely does NOT want to be between your legs.  You want to get him there to keep him from getting side control, NS or full mount.  Any grappler will do his utmosts NOT to be caught between your legs.  



> Your feet are up under their arms, head, or shoulders. (This allows you to "roll" them over pretty easily). Now, wait. The stance keeps the distance between you and the grappler. I've had grapplers try to pry my legs apart with BOTH hands and they have always failed, wasting time and effort, allowing me time to roll them over to strike.


 
There is no way in heck that anyone would want to pry your legs apart in grappling.   They want your legs together because it keeps you from applying guard.  I can't  believe that anyone, trained grappler or not would be trying to open the legs - they should want them together.  



> Now, as they lean forward into your closed knees to try to choke, armbar, or strike their weight is either grounded at your butt or forward as they try a technique. They cannot get the right angle for an armbar because they are too far away from you, you can strike them as the lunge forward to sktrike, choke, or try to armbar. And "cover" from their strikes quite effortlessly.


 
No one in his right mind will lean over over the closed knees if he doesn't have to.  He will try to move around to side control.  Even if he can't no one should be trying to get a submission from that position.



> 2. *Striking from your back. *Chain punching, like I said eariler is NOT all you have to offer on your back. You can chop, elbow, forearm shiver, eye gouge, palm strike, bit, etc. Now, as a grappler trys to get into my "guard" which would be #1 above. They have to lean forward.


 
They don't actually have to lean forward at all.  



> We keep our hands up at ready position as we do when standing, Wing Chun wo sau. Simply make a fist with the front hand as they lunge forward. Pow, a strike, follow up with chain punching, and move your feet under their armpits, at their head, shoulders, whatever, and roll them in the direction they are striking at you. I assure you, they will lose ballance and go right over, allowing you to get off your back. If this doesn't work, kick the hips pushing them back from you, putting them in range to be kicked in the face, again allowing you to get up off your back. Most of your power from striking on the ground still comes from your spine, structure, and your opponents force. The harder and more aggressive they come into you the harder they get hit. Especially if they are tense. All very basic wing chun concepts.


 
Have you ever actually tried this on a trained grappler?  



> 3. *Chi Sau on the ground*- We utilize chi sau on our backs as the grappler "rains down with bombs" their striking can all be deflected with Dai sau, pac sau, etc, and you use chi sau (because the distance is so close this works perfectly) to re-direct their force to roll them off you. You don't lay there all day doing chi sau. You get your moment, take it, and shift with their force to get up while you follow through with a barrage of chain punches to add to their chaos.
> ex. a persons mounting me and throws a hook punch, I deflect using Dai sau, then flow to bong sau and feed their arm through where it was origionally going in the first place. I don't BLOCK and stop the strike, I feed it on through, therefore shifting his weight either to the right or the left and use my legs, body and arms all to roll him off while punching the entire time, following the opponent until I'm on top constantly striking.


 
Thats actually what every single person either does or trys to do from bottom mount.  



> That's what I mean about using chi sau. you only use chi sau for a moment, to give you the position you need to end the fight. chi sau is a tool, that I feel is not being taught, understood, or used properly. you don't hammer a nail in with a screwdriver. And you don't use chi sau when lat sau, chain punching, kicking, elbows, etc is needed more.
> 
> These concepts are understood more when in actual practice. You should try these techniques with a school that understands the WT/WC ground fighting. When you FEEL these concepts in action you'll understand much easier what is going on. Reading and videos will show you some mechanics, but like anything elese in WC you must feel it to understand it. It would be like me trying to explain foreward force, chi, or even chi sau (which I attempted a little lol!) in writing. It's not the same at all until you actually do and feel it.


 
Hmm.


----------



## Rook (Oct 6, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> Good example.
> We went to a BJJ seminar and took one of our best students. He's an excellent martial artist, very fit and young. He has one arm. Every single BJJ technique requires both arms, so none were effective for him at all.


 
They require modification.  I have grappled with seniors with one half and missing one complete - most of the techniques are still possible.  



> We showed him the anti-grappling techniques for his body type and he was able to keep his partner from choking, armbaring, or striking him. He used these techniques against BJJ and was highly effective, much to the confusion of his partner.


 
How trained was his partener?





> He chain punched with one arm (augmented for his body type) he forearm shivered, used bong sau to re-direct his partner and thus his entire body to roll into a side mount position to strike the opponent and get off the ground.
> 
> We do NOT stay on the ground, the whole idea is to get back up ASAP, and finish the attacker, to be ready for a possible next attacker. Hence, the term, "anti-grappling". You don't stay on the ground with the opponent, your goal is to get UP.


 
Getting up is a common goal.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

Yes, Rook.  I have used these exact techniques on grapplers several times.  And yes, these grapplers when they take me down always try to get between my legs.  We don't have BJJ guard, we don't wrap our feet behind the attackers back.

and yes, i've had many grapplers try to pry my knees apart, becasue they get in the way of them striking, choking, and arm baring.  

And Yes, I've had these MMA grapplers lean over my knees to try to strike many times.  They do lean you learn sensitivity you can feel their body shift, etc.  as explained earlier.

And no, BJJ is NOT good for one with one arm, you could make it work if you tried really hard.  But it isn't practial.  our student did well against a partner who'd been studing BJJ for a year. Plus, we didn't have to modify the WC concept very much for our student.  the guy got his full arm in an armbar and he used the same arm to get out of it using tan sau and corkscrewing his body out of the hold.  same WC concept.

and no, we don't let a grappler get to our side, that spells trouble.  

I've explained the techniques in painful detail.  read again, and try in class. or don't.  you agree with my WC concept and then say it can't be applied to the ground fighting.  Try it, then come back.  actually try the anti-grappling at a school that teaches it, then come back and tell me your experiences.  until then, I don't know what to say to you.  I've given thorough explanation on specific techniques, and mechanics of what we do.  Yet you still don't understand.  You have already formed an opinion on something you haven't tried, and no little to nothing about.  I was trying to explain it to those that haven't been exposed to anti-grappling, but if you've already got your mind made up, then study BJJ.  

And Yes, I have done these techniques on grapplers many times and many times my size.  Trust me, they work fine, if you do what I've stated.  I wouldn't state this is as very effective if I hadn't tried it out on well trained grapplers, and if my teacher hadn't used the techniques too.  He's used them in the U.S.M.C in combat, in recon, against black belts of BJJ, against american wrestlers well versed in "grappling'.  

You can believe it or not, it's up to you.  Just sharing knowledge I've learned by doing, no big deal. you don't agree, free country.


----------



## monji112000 (Oct 6, 2006)

OK we can see very clearly that two different opinions are present.


 One that Emin's Anti-grappling is a viable solution.


 The other that it isn't.  


 I am sure you arn't going to convince me and I can't convince you.
 I also noticed that Emin's WT is much different than the Wing Chun I have seen for many years. This is a main reason why I think its smarter to add someone's name or description and not just change a spelling.
 I will note that you really don't understand how a modern western boxer fights. But, I am sure we will also disagree on his/her methods.
 I am sure you guys train Chi sao allot. I have seen only one clip of Emin doing chi sao, and it looked better than most clips ... for a few seconds.
 Actually a good ground fighter is will get on top of your body and control you. Its not beneficial to be between your hips, unless the person is trying to rape you. This is a very real situation, but don't confuse the two.
 Its not so simple to say that they will just roll over if you hit them with a fist.  


 Please take a note of this clip




 

 Notice that  
 1. notice how the Ground and Pounder doesn't enter between the person's legs (his guard).
 The best place to be is mounted on the person.
 2. notice how while the person on the ground was hitting with all him might, it didn't really do much effect.
 3. notice how full extension of the hand isn't realistic every time someone is trying to hurt you.


 YES you can poke the guy in the eyes and many other street fighting stuff. I am not saying that this isn't a option.  
 Pelase watch this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzMXch1FYDs&mode=related&search=
 take note of something:
 1. look at how Bas is mounted, this is what people love to do, and its deadly if you are the bottom.  


 2. Notice how bas is &#8220;trapping&#8221; to the center.. hmm looks like a idea someone told me in class the other day. So WC isn't MMA?


 3.Notice the traingle when the person tries to raise his hips and get out from under the mount. When you jam with your bong sao, you avoid jamming with this area of the triangle, because its the weakest.


 Please take note of this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVbEvRQh-kM&mode=related&search=


 1. notice that around 2:29 Bas &#8220;traps&#8221; one hand then does a straight punch. The reason being he is clear , with little chance of taking a heavy shot. The other hand can still hit, but its limited, plus you need timing ect..  


 Please take note of this clip:




 

 notice that


 1. the bottom person was in a &#8220;closed guard&#8221;, and how the bottom person could strike (ie chain punch)..but he has a great deal of punches coming at him. If he trys to punch, he will open himself up. They will exchange blows and he will probably take more then the top ground and pounder.

2. Notice how the top ground and pounder is constantly using one arm to apply pressure or grab the bottom person's hand(s).  


 If this was a standing fight, then I would say learn to keep a proper distance, and learn to cover. Its not so ...?  


 (I hate tank )
some clips to watch  




 



I have been at the bottom. Please don't pretend that its a peace of cake.

good luck training:asian:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Oct 6, 2006)

Si-Je said:


> and no, we don't let a grappler get to our side, that spells trouble.


 
Just curious, how do you stop them from getting to your side and if they do get there what do you do?


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

Okay, no.  when he's trapping the opponents hand to punch his leg position behind his back is no good.    from there the opponent can punch and attacke you while he's between your legs.  This mentality that the opponent is "in your guard" and that your "safe" is false.  
Point is, he is PAST your guard and is in range to strike, and choke you.

Keeping your knees together and NOT letting them in between your legs is the key.  That's what I'm trying to convey.  

as for keeping a grappler from getting to your side, there are several ways to do this depending on their position.  Kicking, corkscrewing your body on the ground so they do not get to a side position.  
This guy in the videos are completely open to get Bas off their side.
Plus, no one's using their arms to defend while Bas is striking from on top.  

The same for the guys in the first video street fighting.  The guy on the ground is desperate, he has no technique for striking from on his back.  You show me a video of completely untrained people and say that it is evidence of the ineffictivness of anti=grappling.  False.
Neither of those guys know anything but street fighting, see that stuff all the time in my neighborhood.  The guy doing the take down may have learned some BJJ, but his opponent knows nothing.  Hense, he is beaten.
This is what annoys me the most about BJJ stylists.  They fight untrained people, and show videos that mean nothing.  All while stating the awsomeness of BJJ grappling.  or, they fight people who do not know any ground fighting technique at all, and state how superior they are.  If you play by a grapplers rules, then you are a slave to those rules when fighting, and chances are the grappler will win.  

look again at Sifu Guiterrez's videos.  His students train wrestling and BJJ.  They are actually getting hit in the head, neck, and face when he's showing these techniques.  That's how they train over there.  The reason the don't have a "back up plan" is because their getting punched in the eye.  lol!  

It's just really disheartening to me to see Wing Chun students, practitioners and teachers down their own system.  And that are unwilling to embrace something new.  
Again.  
Go to a school that teaches anti-grappling, try it.  and come back and let me know what you think.  until you do that, your not going to understand it, and your opinion of it has no basis.
I've studied and trained Ju-Jitsu for years, wrestled, whatever.  I at least base my opinion on past experience.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 6, 2006)

Pardon,
I'm getting a little frustrated here.  I've explained it the best I can again.  What's left is for those that read it to either try it, or not.  It's up to you.  I can't really change minds here, I know.  
I'm just speaking from what has worked 100% for me so far.  
I've stated my lineage already, which is Jim Fung and Leung Ting directly to Yip man third generation.  If that doesn't qualify "my wing chun" enough to be legitimate, I really don't know what to say.  

But it really doesn't matter.  I know the value of what I'm being taught, and I've seen the way others teach WT/WC online videos, and the students that come to our class from other teachers.  And my opinion of them isn't always diplomatic, for I see things that aren't being taught.

We do teach differently than most.  I'm finding that out.  But, so does Emin and Fung, my teachers teachers.  

Pardon if I got a bit riled up on that last post.  Just got a little frustrated.  I thought I had explained it all so clearly.

Please feel free to look at our videos on the school website, off my space account or my teachers my space account to see more of what we do.  Their listed in my profile.


----------



## Ram (Oct 6, 2006)

> look again at Sifu Guiterrez's videos. His students train wrestling and BJJ.


 
They grapple then learn to defend it.That is what I have been saying all along. All a CMA person has to do is learn about basic wrestling or bjj techniques and you can see them coming.That way you can avoid them and then ground and pound a proven technique against Bjj championed by hybrid freestyle fighters.
  Still no anti-grappling just grappling and ground and pound.


----------



## Ram (Oct 6, 2006)

Here are some good grappling defense videos. Or you can call them anti-grappling LoL  :lfao: 

Avoiding Takedown is Simple Part -Frank Shamrock

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDnnmENhJp4&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o7oYn_9qvc&mode=related&search=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WUphbFk2iw&mode=related&search=


----------



## bcbernam777 (Oct 7, 2006)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Just curious, how do you stop them from getting to your side and if they do get there what do you do?



And hence the purpose of the Bui Jee


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 7, 2006)

Not really.  all you need to know is the basic entries for takedowns that a MMA or grappler will try to use to get you to the ground.  These guys trained enough to understand grappling, wrestling, etc.  Emin was into turkish wrestling and boxing before he trained WT.  He just knew from experience how to design counters for this kind of attack.  

These videos really proves my point.  When executing a Grappling takedown entry they crouch and lean forward into you head first.  With their head at you waist level or lower.
Thus, shifting their weight forward into you.  

I've only spoken about what to do when your already on the ground with a grappler, these are some of the things you do when they lunge in for a takedown.

*Anti-grappling counter:* 
1.  a good heel kick to the face, or a knee under the chin or face will deter this take down.

2.  Your stance will change from traditional WC when dealing with a grappler trying to execute a take down on you.  Keeping your legs apart, it makes it harder for them to grab both legs to take you down.  More of a butterfly swords stance.  Many schools do not do this, they stay in advanced stance, big mistake.  grapplers LOVE this foot foreward stance, makes it easy for them to take you down.  Stick to basic (horse) and widen it as they come in,  droping your center of gravity to keep your feet.

3.  Plus, you elbow the back of the neck/spine as they come in while your kicking or kneeing them in the face.  Chain punching works great here too (being a woman, I prefer the palm strike to the back of a man's head, chops, forearm shiver.)  

4.  As a bonus, you can tuck the top of their head into your stomach, with a forearm at their throat and the other clamping on the back of their neck.  Sure they can take you down, but from this position you can break the neck if you keep the head all the way to the ground.

I'm not very impressed with the encounters I've had with grappling.  They were always fun to practice and spar, but these are techniques that are pretty usless to me.  I would NEVER run head first into a large man's groin level and try to pick him up off the ground.  man, that would be stupid! lol!  I've taken Judo and have been able to throw large men, but by using leverage and keeping my back straight.  I'd just hurt myself really bad using grappling on an opponent.  (and yes, I've given it the old college try at seminars and in class, that's how I know it won't work for me against a true agressor).  Definately a strong man's sport my friends.



The WC "takedowns" I'm learning are much different.  You keep your center of gravity grounded and your upper body straight.  Alot of manipulation of the head and neck to take down the opponent while striking and kicking, of course.  always striking, kicking, stepping into your opponents space all at the same time.  Deflecting their strikes when necessary.  You can have an attacker on the ground much quicker and without compromising your own position in the fight.


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 8, 2006)

monji112000 said:


> I have been at the bottom. Please don't pretend that its a peace of cake.
> 
> good luck training:asian:


 
I didn't mean to imply that it was a "peice of cake".  But there is much you can do. 

We were training last night, looking at the MMA and BJJ clips you posted.  Very good references for us, if this is the way people are fighting.  

We started as the "man on the bottom" (Bas's partner) while an opponent is at your side, elbowing or kneeing.  He leans over the opponent big time as he's cocking his knee back to knee the head or ribs.  His weight is forward on his hands.  This is what I was talking about, the opportune moment you must take advantage of when your on your back.  The body weight shift.

As he was in guard position on top, he leaned all his body weight foreward on the partner on the ground to choke, just like I said.  Again, using their forward force and pressure to re-direct them off of you completely.  You don't stay on the ground if possible, but if your there there is plenty to punch, knee, elbow, and forearm shiver.  even head butt (but that's not my preference lol!)

Thanks for the videos, I see alot of opportunity and holes to use to get out of these positions.  It's hard to train this with my teacher because he doesn't fight like these guys at all.  It's hard for him to mimic these positions for training, for what he would normaly do is so completely different and much harder to counter.  

Like I said the grappler grapples you to the ground, their hands, body and legs are pinning you down.  okay, now for him to actually do damage to you they MUST move (shift body weight ) to punch, knee, elbow, etc.  Thus, when they shift body position to be able to do these things is when you respond.  With your entire body as one.  deflecting, striking, kicking/kneeing, moving, unbalancing them, and corkscrewing your body to get out from under them.  No ONE technique will work.  Just like Wing Chun standing, you do more than one thing at a time on the ground too.


----------



## Journeyman (Oct 9, 2006)

Can someone explain to me why a person who is supposedly knowledgable about martial arts would go to the trouble of making videos that are so clueless about the art they are trying to counter?  Gutierrez's techniques *might* be *somewhat* effective against grappling, but the fact they they're being demonstrated against very poor examples of grappling diminishes the credibility.  If you're going to make a videos of that type, why not do it right?  His book "Wing Tsun: The Tao of the Action" suffers from the same failing.  How do Boztepe's compare in that regard?


----------



## Lisa (Oct 9, 2006)

*FINAL MODERATOR WARNING:

PLEASE KEEP THE CONVERSATION POLITE AND RESPECTFUL.  THERE HAVE BEEN TWO MODERATOR WARNINGS PLACED THAT HAVE BEEN IGNORED.  ANY FURTHER SUCH ACTION WILL RESULT IN THIS THREAD BEING CLOSED DOWN.

THANK YOU.

Lisa Deneka
MartialTalk Super Moderator
*


----------



## monji112000 (Oct 9, 2006)

it is, I didn't see the need for the first one.

you can't disagree??


----------



## Lisa (Oct 9, 2006)

monji112000 said:


> it is, I didn't see the need for the first one.
> 
> you can't disagree??



Disagreeing is one thing, sniping or making fun of another member is not.


----------



## Journeyman (Oct 9, 2006)

Hi Lisa,

It would be helpful if you would quote some of the objectionable passages in this thread, so people can get some idea of what constitutes "sniping" or "making fun".  Since your latest warning came immediately after my post, it makes me wonder if it was directed at me, but I don't see how I could have possibly sniped or made fun of another member unless Victor Gutierrez is a member, and even then calling my criticism of his videos and book sniping or making fun is a stretch.


----------



## MJS (Oct 9, 2006)

Journeyman said:


> Hi Lisa,
> 
> It would be helpful if you would quote some of the objectionable passages in this thread, so people can get some idea of what constitutes "sniping" or "making fun". Since your latest warning came immediately after my post, it makes me wonder if it was directed at me, but I don't see how I could have possibly sniped or made fun of another member unless Victor Gutierrez is a member, and even then calling my criticism of his videos and book sniping or making fun is a stretch.


 
Here are the general posting rules of the forum.
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=141&

I do not believe that the warning was due to your post, but instead to others that have been made.  

Mike


----------



## ed-swckf (Oct 9, 2006)

MJS said:


> Here are the general posting rules of the forum.
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=141&
> 
> I do not believe that the warning was due to your post, but instead to others that have been made.
> ...


 
So who broke the rules?  And with what commentry?


----------



## Lisa (Oct 9, 2006)

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Several of the posts in this thread were brought to the attention of the Moderating team.  After discussion it was decided that in thread warnings not directed specfically at anyone would be placed in hopes to make everyone aware and double check their posting habits.  If the issues were regarding you specifically, we will contact you about it privately.  

Lets return to topic please and discuss the videos at hand.

Lisa Deneka
MartialTalk Super Moderator


----------



## The Master (Oct 9, 2006)

So, are we here to discuss rules and poo flinging and hot tempers, or are we here to discuss anti-grappling?


----------



## Si-Je (Oct 10, 2006)

This is apparently a pretty controversial topic.  The anti-grappling techniques are fairly new, only about 6-8 years old and still changing.  I've read many posts on several boards and sites and discovered that the anti-grappling techniques are generally not accepted, understood, or seen as valid.
People tend to get pretty heated sometimes.  Grappling and BJJ has really become the status quo it seems.  I'm facinated with the anti-grappling because it is so new and different, but it seems that many others do not feel the way I do about it.  
The origionator of the post is just honestly curious to the mechanics, and practicality of anti-grappling.  I've tried to answer questions as best I could about the techniques.  But it seems that I haven't really been too successful.  
If anything I said was viewed as derogitory, trolling, or antagonistic I do apologize.  This was not my intention at all.  I do have strong opinions about grappling and anti-grappling just from personal experiences.  but I never ment to come off rude.


----------



## storkandrodent (Feb 22, 2007)

Please understand this.

There is no anti-grappling in Wing Chun, just as there is no anti-TKD, anti-Judo, anti-kickboxing, anti-MT, or any specific response to a movement from another martial art.

Wing Chun is not a set of techniques. It is not a set of responses to different movements from other martial arts. There is no hard and fast 'If your opponent attacks with A, respond with B'. There are so many martial arts that if Wing Chun had anti-everything, it would be a confused set of one billion techniques. Wing Chun is not this. It is a system that can be adapted to any scenario. It uses its principles of redirection, force absorption, minimum use of brute strength, and maximisation of body weight with movements to overcome attackers of all styles and of all physical strengths.

Wing Chun is a very direct martial art. It trains the practitioner to end a fight in a matter of seconds. Fights start standing up, and a Wing Chun pracititioner of any reasonable skill level will be able to efficiently finish a fight standing up. If you do go to the ground, Wing Chun is still applicable. You can execute all of your movements (besides pivoting of course) and the advantage is that the earth becomes your stance.

If you go out and train grappling for the sake of using it against other grapplers, you will always lose. Why? Because they will be much more experienced than you at it. The aim is to make your opponent play your game, rather than the other way around.

There is no reason to feel intimidated by the over representation of grappling on hyped up television fighting tournaments. Think about this - can a grappler overcome multiple opponents? Will they really be able to take down an opponent twice their size? Can they stop a powerful strike? Can they generate striking power? Wing Chun is capable of all these things and much more.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 23, 2007)

A long while back in this thread, I posted an portion of an article from one of our combatives programs in regards to grappling. The point of it was 2-fold; to state that one must remove the psychological aversion or fear of grappling to learn how to counter grappling circumstances, and that the only way to remove that fear and to understand grappling circumstances it to grapple. I think that my point was largely ignored, so I have decided to put it a different way.

The point does not mean that you have to give up your discipline, be it Wing Chun or whatever, to go be an MMA fighter.

This does mean that you have to actually get in there with a qualified grappling instructor (BJJ, Judo, Wrestling, whatever) and at least learn how to maneuver from the different positions (side mount, guard, clinch, etc.) and to at least get some idea of what to do from these positions. Grappling is not about submissions or moves or styles in as much as it is about positioning. You cannot get the positioning, timing, and kinestetic awareness from doing stagnent moves on a cooperative training partner.

I believe that "anti-grappling" was created as a fear based response to the idea of grappling, and of grapplers in general. Instead of facing those fears, some have created a fantasy of how to defeat these feared opponents or how not to get caught in those feared situations. "Anti-grappling" was created from fear, and placates on the fears of other martial artists out there who seek some alternative solution besides simply facing those fears.

And because the anti-grappling movement is a dysfunctional response to fear through the creation of fantasy, people are very emotionally invested in the illusionary notion that these anti-grappling skills trained on stagnent partners would work against a live, resistant opponent. And that is why this thread has degraded, emotions are running high, and insults are slung all around.

That is my opinion on the subject. Take it or leave it. But my opinion is only an opinion, and I haven't been rude in its presentation. So, if it upsets you, then you need to really ask yourself why that is...


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 23, 2007)

storkandrodent said:


> If you go out and train grappling for the sake of using it against other grapplers, you will always lose. Why? Because they will be much more experienced than you at it. The aim is to make your opponent play your game, rather than the other way around.


 
This gives me the opportunity to isolate one of my points.

You will not be able to isolate a skilled grappler to your game if you do not know the basics of positioning in grappling and how to move in between them or prevent them; this can only be learned through training skills, grappling skills, against a live, resistant person.

I don't need to be a better grappler then my opponent to win the fight, but I better at least know how to grapple.


----------



## Ali Rahim (Feb 23, 2007)

Cruentus said:


> This gives me the opportunity to isolate one of my points.
> 
> You will not be able to isolate a skilled grappler to your game if you do not know the basics of positioning in grappling and how to move in between them or prevent them; this can only be learned through training skills, grappling skills, against a live, resistant person.
> 
> I don't need to be a better grappler then my opponent to win the fight, but I better at least know how to grapple.


 
He has a very good point there  I started wrestling in Jr. high School and through collage level and also became a high school wrestling coach I never had any problem knocking out any grapplers because of that fact; they simply couldnt out wrestle me.

Ali.


----------



## storkandrodent (Feb 23, 2007)

The answer is to spar with grapplers to gain awareness of what they might do. I have sparred with very experienced practitioners of different grappling styles, and none of them were able to take me to the ground. Even when I held still and allowed them to grab one of my arms, I could still subdue them with simple Siu Nim Tau movements.



Cruentus said:


> I don't need to be a better grappler then my opponent to win the fight, but I better at least know how to grapple.



Better at least know how to grapple? For what purpose if you're not going to be using grappling against a grappler?

Unless your goal is to train Wing Chun for the UFC, then the answer is to stop idolising MMA fighters from televised tournaments and focus on improving your skill in Wing Chun and sparring awareness against all types of attackers.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 23, 2007)

storkandrodent said:


> The answer is to spar with grapplers to gain awareness of what they might do.


 
That is definatily a good start. All I am saying is that one needs to work against a live resisting opponent, and to gain some rudimentary understanding of grappling and positioning so one can defend. I don't see what has been marketed as "anti-grappling" addressing these problems in that way. That doesn't mean that Wing Chun can't address the problem, however, if approached properly.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 23, 2007)

storkandrodent said:


> There is no reason to feel intimidated by the over representation of grappling on hyped up television fighting tournaments. Think about this - can a grappler overcome multiple opponents? Will they really be able to take down an opponent twice their size? Can they stop a powerful strike? Can they generate striking power? Wing Chun is capable of all these things and much more.


 
Can any MA do those things? Really...? Grappling is not a be all end all. It is a big part of over fighting, your stand up and clinch game must be realistic as well. But a person must have realistic ideas and expectations of what they can do. That can only be found by training with a resisting opponent that is trying to stop you from doing your thing and at the same time trying to do there thing. Like Cruentus said allot of this stuff is made up from fear, "fear of the unknown" and the inability to let go of one's ego. It is hard for some people that are high levels in an art to accept that they may have holes in their game, I mean, after all, it took a lot of hard work to get there right? So instead of acknowledging that there may be something lacking in there training or worse yet that their training was not very functional, they may grab onto or invent something that looks like it might work.  Just never assume what you are doing functionally works.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 23, 2007)

Marvin makes a good point that I think people forget, in that grappling is really a range or a context of a fight, not a seperate art or style. So to say, "I don't train grappling" or "I don't need to learn grappling skills because I can use anti-grappling" would be like saying "I don't train striking," or "I don't need to learn striking skills because I can just wrestle or throw a person."

There are arts that seem to train that way, like Aikido for example. But all the good Aikido players that posessed any skill that would work in the real world that I have met all had some striking skills, an understanding of how a striker (be it wing chun or boxing or what have you) would come at them, and how they would handle that range and context. Similarly, I have met wing chun people who understand basic grappling skills, and how the context of that fighting range will go so they can try to arrange the fight to remain in their prefered striking/trapping range.

And they didn't need to put up false presumptions to learn these skills, and they didn't need to abandon wing chun. They just simply trained with some skilled grapplers, and learned that range and context.


----------



## Si-Je (Feb 25, 2007)

I see alot of people complain that those that practice anti-grappling don't train enough with a "resisting" opponent.  Anti-grappling utilizes Wing Chun principles, concepts, and style on the ground.  Thus, a resisting opponent would only make the anti-grappling techniques more effective.

Just like when standing using wing chun principles, an opponent that tenses, uses force, brute strength, and such the anti-grappling techinques simply re-direct the opponent's force just like when standing.

The man that developed the anti-grappling studied wrestling, BJJ, Ju-Jitsu and such before he came up with the anti-grappling.  These types of styles have been studied and understood by the founder of this ground fighting system.  There really is no need to study other grappling styles to be effective with the anti-grappling.  Just practice and "play" with it, and experiement with other stylists, and partners.


----------



## jsampras3 (Mar 25, 2007)

I have to respond to Si-Jie (in a respectful way of course).

I think you need to do a little more BJJ work, because you fundamentally don't understand how BJJ works.

Much of BJJ deals with how to AVOID being between your legs. If i am between your legs, i am in your "guard" and you are in the best situation you can be when you are on the bottom. There are ZERO submissions/chokes/armbars i can do from your guard. Not one.

Edit: I forgot one more thing. If I have my legs around you, there are MANY chokes/armbars/other submissions i can do to you. So having your legs around someone is actually very good for you. If you trained more grappling, you would realize this and fight more effectively on the ground

What other people have tried to explain is the only way to do submissions is to AVOID being in between your legs, or if I am stuck there get out and either sit on top of you with my knees around your body (mount position) or on your stomach facing sideways (side control/crossbody). 

You seem to have no idea what a BJJ person's goals are or how they would fight. This seems strange because you claim to spar with BJJ people all the time and defeat them regularly.  This tells me that you are either inflating your claims, need to train with some competent BJJ people or need to try to understand BJJ a little better.

If Wing Chun people have no idea what grapplers are trying to do, how can you be sure that your anti-grapples will work?


----------



## Si-Je (Mar 25, 2007)

1.  I trained Goshin Ju-Jitsu for 3 years.  I know the entries, and the stratagies behind Ju-Jitsu.  Although we diddn't call it "grappling".  And we didn't shoot face first into your knees and try to force a takedown.  We threw you off a punch or grab.  We worked to stay on your side, and such.  Yes, I'm aware of this mentality.  But, it's flawed in a practical sense.  Your opponent is going to hit and kick you with their other hand while your trying to armbar them, and while your using all this energy to get around their body to the side.  I'll tell you from personal experience.  When the guy is six footish 250 lbs. thats a long walk on the mats to their side, especially when their fighting you.  I still have to manuver past legs twice as long as mine, and well whatever.  It takes too much time and energy.  And while your trying to do all this your getting hit, kneed, kicked, head butted, whatever.

2.  Every time I've trained or worked with a grappler, they want to try to shoot into my waist, knees, or torso and wrestle me to the ground.  They do this with much speed and confidence, and when they eat a knee to the face they don't argue that they can "take" that strike.  That's why we have them wear face shields so there is no arguement.  They feel the hits and how they are re-directed and unable to excecute their intended technique.  It's wing chun principles on the ground.  You don't need to know the specifics of other fighting style to use it effectively.

3.  This "guard position is severely flawed.  Locking your ankles around your attackers back does not put you in an intelligent position to defend.  Your opponent can still strike you, eye gouge you, ear slap, chop the throat, choke you, and armbar.  Plus, if they outweigh you, you've got their entire bodyweight on your chest and stomach.  Plus, my hubbies 6'4", I'm 5'5", I can't even lock my ankles around his back, so this "guard position" is impractical for true self-defense.  For my chances of being attacked by someone my size are slim.  The anti-grappling keeps them off me, allows me to deflect punches, tan sau out of arm bars, use sensitivity to use their weight and force to get them off me and back on my feet.  

4.  I know many feel that BJJ is something "new" and improved, but it's not.  It's a rehash and over-simplification of Ju-Jitsu which has been around for centuries.  minus the 80 standing throws, standing chokes, standing armbars, standing joint locks (tate dori) striking and kicking.  Personally, I'm not interested in someone trying to sell to me that I should or even could get a running start and throw myself at some big guys tree trunk legs and magickally take them down without hurting myself.  Or even worse, grabbing their shoulders or midsection and twisting and trying to trip them to get the take down while I'm getting punched, elbowed, or just plain picked up and body slammed.  I'm a buck 10, and easy to throw or pick up.  Lets be realistic.

5.  When I trained Japanese Ju-Jitsu I'd never use BJJ.  Now that I've been training the anti-grappling I'll never use Japanese Ju-Jitsu again.  Don't need to, found a better way for me.  Whatever works for you is fine for you, I know what works for me.  
Peace out


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 25, 2007)

jsampras3 said:


> Much of BJJ deals with how to AVOID being between your legs. If i am between your legs, i am in your "guard" and you are in the best situation you can be when you are on the bottom. There are ZERO submissions/chokes/armbars i can do from your guard. Not one.



Sure there are, lots of leg locks.  And if you are fighting a untrained person, there are gi-chokes as well, but most trained fighters will be able to avoid these.

Of course ground and pound tactics are definately in favour of the top guy 



Si-Je said:


> And we didn't shoot face first into your knees and try to force a takedown.  We threw you off a punch or grab.



I think this is a sign of someone that has either spent all there time starting from there knees, or training sport grappling only.  As dangerous if no rules fighting is your goal as is ignoring the ground IMO.



> 2.  Every time I've trained or worked with a grappler, they want to try to shoot into my waist, knees, or torso and wrestle me to the ground.  They do this with much speed and confidence, and when they eat a knee to the face they don't argue that they can "take" that strike.



Again, I think that is a sign of inexperience.  If you are training to take down someone that is striking you, those things are trained as well.  I don't know what the skill level of the people you where working against is, but my guess is that they are not very good with takedowns in a MMA / no rules situation.

Which, of course, is as dangerous as ignoring such things.



> 3.  This "guard position is severely flawed.  Locking your ankles around your attackers back does not put you in an intelligent position to defend.  Your opponent can still strike you, eye gouge you, ear slap, chop the throat, choke you, and armbar.



There is a lot more to guard then you describe, it is not a static position, but a very active one, especially when you do not have control of the upper body.

That, and if you have a skilled fighter you will not be able to choke then from within there guard, and armbars are impossible regardless.



> Plus, if they outweigh you, you've got their entire bodyweight on your chest and stomach.  Plus, my hubbies 6'4", I'm 5'5", I can't even lock my ankles around his back, so this "guard position" is impractical for true self-defense.  For my chances of being attacked by someone my size are slim.  The anti-grappling keeps them off me, allows me to deflect punches, tan sau out of arm bars, use sensitivity to use their weight and force to get them off me and back on my feet.



If they outweigh you, you're likely going to end up on your back whether you like it or not.  "Guard position" as you call it in no way requires locking your feet.  Most grappling instructors will even tell you to avoid doing that for the most part. 



> 4.  I know many feel that BJJ is something "new" and improved, but it's not.  It's a rehash and over-simplification of Ju-Jitsu which has been around for centuries.



Older then that, the Greeks where doing Pankration thousands of years ago, and I imagine grappling predates them by quite a bit as well  

Your understanding of grappling seems rather shallow too be honest.  You might equivicate it too me saying all Kung Fu guys are easy to beat, they strike a fancy pose and do a fancy kick, you can just close, clinch and pound them or take them down.  

The tactics you describe will not work against a trained fighter, a low level sport grappler maybe, but someone with "no rules" training?  Not likely.  And the tactics you ascribe to the grappers are rather shallow in your understaning of what we actually do.  ex Guard is not simply hook your feet behind there back.  That is silly in ineffective, we know that.  We don't actually just hook are feet and call it a day.

Go back and watch some of the early no rules events, many of the strategies you describe where tried, and failed misserably.  Since then many of been tried in training, tried to adapt them and make them work, and again, many of them have been tossed out after being tried as inpractical.


----------



## Si-Je (Mar 25, 2007)

I've watched the fights, MMA, UFC, etc.  The Ju-Jitsu I took did not submit, we went for the break.  

I didn't state any specific technique to defend against grapplers other than stating the use of anti-grappling and wing chun principles.  
And it seems that every time I mention training and sparring with MMA fighters and grapplers on line people immediately down their skill level.  Someone they've never met and assume that just because I've defended myself successfully against grapplers with wing chun and anti-grappling, that the grappler must have been some trash opponent.  I find this very rude to the people I train with, and offensive to myself.

Just because I could thwart a grappler with wing chun then he/she must have been a low level or terrible grappler.  Pretty insulting.  Since to make such an assuption about these grapplers and myself is basically stating that I'm a joke, and these friends of mine are not good at what they train.

Point of the matter is.  It doesn't matter if I understand BJJ or grappling, this is not required for me to defend effectively against it.  Sensitivity, and weight distrubution are key.  As for the arm bars and such.  I have a pretty extensive knowledge with joint locks and choke holds.  Far more technical than what is used in BJJ.  They work too hard for the joint lock, don't utilize control of the wrist, and use more movement and muscle than is necessary for execution even of the most basic joint locks in Ju-Jitsu.  

And I do agree that it is very likely that a larger opponent will eventually get me personally to the ground.  How much they pay for taking me down decides if it is worthwile to them to do so.  Which I use anti-grappling techniques right away, which not only buys me time to get out of a grappling position, but plain hurts my opponent.  

I understand grappling, but I really don't think that many of the nay sayers of anti-grappling have ever trained it, or fought against it.  You've just decided that it doesn'r work by judging what you think you see happening in videos.  These are instructional even, try some of it on the mats, experiment with it.  You missing out on good stuff, promise.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 25, 2007)

Si-Je said:


> It doesn't matter if I understand BJJ or grappling, this is not required for me to defend effectively against it.



I think I have just found the biggest flaw in your plan.



> really don't think that many of the nay sayers of anti-grappling have ever trained it, or fought against it.



You'd be wrong, if something seems at all plausable, it gets tried and tested. That's part of the package with a sport based system.  If someone puts something on the table, it gets tried.  Because if I find something that works that no one else has, that is a big advantage for me.  As a result, many things get tested, some work, some don't.


----------



## profesormental (Mar 26, 2007)

Greetings.

I agree with the concept that if you want to defend against an attack, you must understand the attack. The mindset, strategy and tactics of the opponent must be studied in order to create a successful defense.

Yet even the best laid plans fail due to variables.

This is a general comment not directed at anyone.

The heart of the matter is the following:

nothing works all the time. some things work better than others for different people.

You plan of action should be tailored to the environment of the situation, i.e. sport, self defense, etc.

Whatever you practice, if it developps the skills you want and fill your criteria for efficiency, effectiveness and fun, then keep at it.

And again, no plan of action is appropiate for all situations and/or is not the optimal plan for a certain objective.

That being said, against the same skilled opponent (olympic level grappler), I've had 50-50 success rate with "anti-grappling" tactics (not the same as WT anti-grappling... some similarities though). Also, I've taught him certain Chin-Na technologies that helped him get a competitive edge and almost beat the #1 National Judo player here (ran out of steam and lost by points... better luck next time!).

The same I use for better control of opponent.

The times he got me, he adapted and I didn't adapt in time.

Sometimes I misjudged his forward momentum, braced and he got better control...

Does it mean that my strategy doesn't work... no.

It means I need more practice and more experience as to missjudge less and be accurate more.

Hope this helps.

Juan M. Mercado


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2007)

Si-Je said:


> Point of the matter is. It doesn't matter if I understand BJJ or grappling, this is not required for me to defend effectively against it. Sensitivity, and weight distrubution are key. As for the arm bars and such. I have a pretty extensive knowledge with joint locks and choke holds. Far more technical than what is used in BJJ. They work too hard for the joint lock, don't utilize control of the wrist, and use more movement and muscle than is necessary for execution even of the most basic joint locks in Ju-Jitsu.


 
I agree and disagree with this comment.  Let me explain.  There are defenses to a number of attacks in many arts.  In Kenpo for example, we have club, knife, grab defenses as well as ones against armlocks, chokes and tackles.  IMO, if someone really wants to test something, or have a better understanding of it, it may be a good idea to seek out an art that specializes in an area.  We can have someone shoot in on us, but if they're not shooting like a solid grappler would, whats going to happen with my defense, should I encounter someone that can really shoot?  

Don't misunderstand this as my saying the defenses will not work.  Yes, they do work, but your defense of something will greatly improve if you understand how someone operates.  I'm not saying to necessarily cross train, but to cross reference other arts.

By training in BJJ and Arnis, my grappling and over all ground game and defense has improved, as well as my weapon work.  The FMAs are very solid with their weapons.  I've come to understand the blade much, much more and have adapted some of their ideas into my Kenpo weapon work.




jsampras3 said:


> Much of BJJ deals with how to AVOID being between your legs. If i am between your legs, i am in your "guard" and you are in the best situation you can be when you are on the bottom. There are ZERO submissions/chokes/armbars i can do from your guard. Not one.


 
So you're saying there are no leg locks that can be done from here?  With all due respect, I beg to differ on that. 

Mike


----------



## monji112000 (Mar 26, 2007)

This isn't a complicated subject. If you want to be effective against a opponent, then you must train with that opponent. If you have no &#8220;real&#8221; experience with that opponent then you will start basing your technique  on nonsense.   


 If you want to compete in Muy Thai tournaments, then I would suggest going and training with them. See if your techniques can handle the it, and if they can't try to find why and see if you can fix it. Some people would just add whatever method they find to fix the problem or others would go back and see how they don't 100% understand Wing Chun.
 Sometimes Wing Chun doesn't answer the question directly for MANY reasons( and maybe not at all).


 Its just common sense, a Skilled BJJ fighter (it would seem that striking is normal in BJJ) could really hurt most people. I would say the same about Muy Thai, boxing, and misc style like Catch can .  Why? I honestly don't think technique plays as much into the equation as people think.  If you look at the level of training, time , and &#8220;aliveness&#8221; that these &#8220;styles&#8221;/sports require you will quickly understand why they dominate.  
 Technique flaws are very quickly seen when you use them in &#8220;almost&#8221; real situations constantly.  


 Its night and day , lets face it most of us don't have the time, effort or even knowledge to start training in the manner they do.  Instead of saying we don't have anything to learn from them, why not admit to our loss. I would also suggest learning about modern training methods. Seeing how they can help. Most Wing Chun schools/ students don't train how our seniors did.  6 days a week, 5 hours a day , constant fighting (real) , constant aliveness training.


 So the Ant-grappling vrs Grappling questions isn't really a question. Wing Chun vrs BJJ ect..


 Its the fighter (and his training methods) vrs. the fighter (and his training methods).


 All BS put aside.


----------



## Si-Je (Mar 26, 2007)

I see your desire to understand other types of fighting styles.  I assure you that I have trained other styles pretty extensively.  Tang soo do for three years, goshin ju-jitsu up to brown belt, other styles of kung fu, kali, and many other styles.  
I've been to BJJ seminars, I've sparred with a young man who is on the varsity wrestling team at his school, fights in MMA cage fights, this is one of the grapplers I practice with on occasion.
He doesn't like alot of our techniques with anti-grappling because they're against the rules of MMA and cage fighting.
But, he still can't get through the kicking, stance, and chi sau on the ground that we use to defend even though we've shown him how we do it.  He still uses American wrestling and BJJ.  
This is one example of the people we "cross-train" with.  
I do agree you must train your techniques as often as possible and as realisticly as possible.

As for having a grappler who truely shoots into us in training.  The grapplers we've sparred with have learned very quickly that the harder they shoot the harder they get hit.  (hense all the head gear we wear) So, they try to get smarter about it, they try to shoot into our side.  So, we use basic stance (horse, whatever) and do not give them our side.  Our punching technique doesn't comit us to forward movement or throw our weight into the punch so we can immediately adapt to the movement of the opponent.  Chain punching is static, it doesn't give the opponent wieght to throw or work with.

I have great faith through experience and training that WT anti-grappling will work for me.  I've started to learn how to get out of armbars while on the ground, standing, and such using simple wing chun movements.  This cannot be taught through videos, trust me.  You have to do it and feel it.
The best defense against a grappler or ju-jitsu (when I say ju-jitsu, I mean Japanese stylist) or BJJ is simple relaxation.  They want you to tense up.  I remember from when I trained ju-jitsu.  We liked the tense, and resisting opponent, it made the joint lock come easier.
If you relax your body and limbs, it allows you to adapt faster to joint pressure, buys you time to change your position, and makes it more difficult for them to flex your joint and cause pain or submission.

Of course, while you relax you are striking, kicking, corkscrewing your entire body, kneeing, elbowing the opponent, keeping pressure on them to keep them from regrouping for another angle of attack.  Constantly moving, flowing, and adapting.  For those of you who train wing chun, one of the key principles of wing chun is relaxation, to be fluid like water.  Always ever changing and adapting.  If you do not understand this key principle of wing chun then you do not understand wing chun.  This is so crutial, that it will decide your fate of failure or victory.

And again, I will reiterate.  If you don't have any confidence in what your training, it will fail.  If you concentrate more on what others are training then you will not fully understand what you are training.  If your constantly thinking about what your attacker might, should, or probably will try to do to you, you give them that opportunity to execute it.  Train, understand, and have confidence in what you know.  Don't hesitate and use it, don't think, don't stratigize, react, and roll with what is given you.  Your training to stress out about what MIGHT happen in a fight, which is a waste of energy.  Don't anticipate, anything.  Your opponents skill, style, statagy, strength, or weaknesses.  Stay open for opportunities and capitalize on them when you reconize them.  Another key principle of Wing Chun.  DON'T ANTICIPATE THE OUTCOME OF THE ENGAGEMENT.  Don't anticipate anything.  Just be.


----------



## MJS (Mar 26, 2007)

Si-Je said:


> I see your desire to understand other types of fighting styles. I assure you that I have trained other styles pretty extensively. Tang soo do for three years, goshin ju-jitsu up to brown belt, other styles of kung fu, kali, and many other styles.
> I've been to BJJ seminars, I've sparred with a young man who is on the varsity wrestling team at his school, fights in MMA cage fights, this is one of the grapplers I practice with on occasion.
> He doesn't like alot of our techniques with anti-grappling because they're against the rules of MMA and cage fighting.
> But, he still can't get through the kicking, stance, and chi sau on the ground that we use to defend even though we've shown him how we do it. He still uses American wrestling and BJJ.
> ...


 
Ok, good points.  It seems that you're already doing what I mentioned in my post, so I give you props for that. 



> And again, I will reiterate. If you don't have any confidence in what your training, it will fail. If you concentrate more on what others are training then you will not fully understand what you are training. If your constantly thinking about what your attacker might, should, or probably will try to do to you, you give them that opportunity to execute it. Train, understand, and have confidence in what you know. Don't hesitate and use it, don't think, don't stratigize, react, and roll with what is given you. Your training to stress out about what MIGHT happen in a fight, which is a waste of energy. Don't anticipate, anything. Your opponents skill, style, statagy, strength, or weaknesses. Stay open for opportunities and capitalize on them when you reconize them. Another key principle of Wing Chun. DON'T ANTICIPATE THE OUTCOME OF THE ENGAGEMENT. Don't anticipate anything. Just be.


 
Oh, I do have faith in what I train in.  After 21yrs in Kenpo, if I wasn't happy or confident, I think I'd have switched arts by now.   I love crosstraining.  All of my instructors and workout partners crosstrain, so its hard to not get involved in that mix.   Between my Kenpo for my standup, BJJ for my ground work and Arnis for weapon work, IMHO, I feel that my needs are met very well.   Again, its not that I don't have faith, but I a) want to further expand on certain areas, and b) the 3 that I mention blend together very well. 

Mike


----------



## Si-Je (Mar 26, 2007)

I don't cross train other arts.  Simply sparr with them.  I don't train wing chun and then go to a BJJ class and train their style of ground fighting.  Just Wing Chun.
I studied Tang so do exclusively for three years, japanese ju-jitsu exclusively for 4 years, and now wing chun exclusively for 4 years now.

My hubbie and my other instructor discect wing chun movements and apply them in sparring with other stylists.  And if it needs improvement then they do so.
They don't cross train in other arts.  Both have studied martial arts for over 20 years.  
My hubbie has a black belt in Okinawan Kempo, studied in Japan and the states, has rank in Judo, Kendo, twice rank in Wing Chun from two masters. 
My other instructor has rank in wing chun and Savate, and a black belt in Kempo and Chinese wrestling.  They studied these arts exclusively when they trained them, for a full understanding of the arts.
Our ground fighting consists of WT anti-grappling, some marine corps stuff, chinese wrestling, and what seems to work consistantly. 
Reguardless of all the other arts trained we primarily focus on Wing Chun.  Use Wing Chun, and train exclusively Wing Chun.  And follow Wing Chun principles.
I truely wish I could have started training Wing Chun earlier in my life instead of the other arts I trained.  They were just the best I felt were available at the time.  For 10 years I wanted to train wing chun, just never had a school close enough to me until these past 4 years.  Sure would have made my past experiences defending myself much easier.  lol!

p.s.  The anti-grappling videos shown in this thread are 10 years old.  This was filmed when anti-grappling was just beginning.  It has evolved and been even more refined since then.  Just something to concider.


----------



## Andrew Green (Mar 26, 2007)

Si-Je said:


> p.s.  The anti-grappling videos shown in this thread are 10 years old.  This was filmed when anti-grappling was just beginning.  It has evolved and been even more refined since then.  Just something to concider.



Would you be willing to post some newer material?


----------



## Si-Je (Mar 26, 2007)

There hasn't been any newer videos made.  We've been wanting to get an instructional video made to sell as well.  But we will be working on making more mini videos to post in the near future.
We will be talking with Budo productions soon to see about making a new video.
With running a new school we've been really swamped. But this is something we plan on doing asap.  I'll post them when we make some more for you guys, and if we find more from Emin and Guiterrez we'll definately let you know.


----------



## Si-Je (Jun 20, 2008)

Found some newer videos!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThnbP-rkP90

This is a good instructional video to get a better concept of the intention of anti-grappling.  I'm still looking for more videos online.  But we're stuck with dial-up!  arrrggghghhghhhh!
and downloading videos take forever!
I will post some more when I find more.


----------



## Si-Je (Jun 20, 2008)

Check this video out.

Neat stuff, and newer too.


----------

