# Adding grappling



## guy b. (Mar 10, 2016)

Assume for a moment that your wing chun does not contain significant (or effective) grappling. Assume that you will have no problem resisting the urge to grapply and that your VT will remain your primary tool for fighting. 

Which style of standing grappling do you think is easiest/most useful/least disruptive to add to the system?

I think that wresting is a very poor choice because it conflicts directly with the platform of VT and interferes with the ideas being developed. If you add wresting it is going to be very hard to prevent yourself from wrestling when the opportunity arises, from making chi sau into a kind of standing grappling, and doing other things which degrade your VT. The long range techniques of wrestling (level change and shooting in) are non-integratable with wing chun, unless you create some kind of hybrid where VT concepts are reduced in importance, i.e. what some might call a jumbled mess. 

I think that judo and/or shuai jiao are good choices because of the non-square hip placement which differentiates them strongly from VT and makes them more likey to remain as backup systems in the event of VT failure. They are also much more practical choices than wrestling if the aim is remain standing, and they contain significant and very good close range sweeping and tripping foot techniques which are not trained very well by many VT people, and which build balance and confidence in leg usage. 

Of course for ground BJJ is the choice, nothing compares. On the ground is not the time to think of VT. 

Thoughts?


----------



## Phobius (Mar 10, 2016)

Currently grappling is only those bits and pieces that exist in GJJ. Reason being the time investment.

One thing to note however and that is by shaping your body and muscles for ground fighting you actually prepare yourself for grappling as well. Otherwise for grappling I actually agree with you on your comment about shuai jiao and a backup if your WC fails you.

But once more, time is the key ingredient. I have a select amount so for now I wont look into a grappling specific art, as long as some of the elements are present in GJJ.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 10, 2016)

I agree that Shuai Jiao would be a good addition/backup to WC. In fact, I would say that it is there to some degree already, just that most of us have become blinded to it as the HK WC is more striking oriented.
Like Phobius stated, time, or lack of it, is my biggest enemy, so I have to focus on one primary thing. I have been fortunate enough though to do some training in recent weeks with Tony Dismukes from here on the forum and it's been a big help.
Tony has been helping me with the concept of using just enough grappling to regain my feet...BTW Tony, my jaw is still hurting from the guillotine variation from last weekend!


----------



## wckf92 (Mar 10, 2016)

yak sao said:


> I agree that Shuai Jiao would be a good addition/backup to WC. In fact, I would say that it is there to some degree already, just that most of us have become blinded to it as the HK WC is more striking oriented.



I agree with you on this. 



yak sao said:


> Like Phobius stated, time, or lack of it, is my biggest enemy, so I have to focus on one primary thing. I have been fortunate enough though to do some training in recent weeks with Tony Dismukes from here on the forum and it's been a big help.



This is my view also. WC is a very broad topic of study. I'd rather master one than attempt to master many. Also, I think its awesome you and Tony linked up. Good to hear that forum members are working together. Well done.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 10, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Assume for a moment that your wing chun does not contain significant (or effective) grappling. Assume that you will have no problem resisting the urge to grapply and that your VT will remain your primary tool for fighting.
> 
> Which style of standing grappling do you think is easiest/most useful/least disruptive to add to the system?
> 
> ...


I agree with you.
Shuai jiao would be the recommended grappling system for Kung Fu.  In Kung Fu your overall goal should be to fight standing up without getting on the ground with your opponent. Shuai Jiao follows this mind set and has techniques designed to counter someone who is trying to put you on the ground. The best thing about Shuai Jiao is that it's a natural fit to kung fu which means you'll be able to blend the techniques into your punching.

Judo would be my second recommendation, as it's more stand up than BJJ.  BJJ would be my last recommendations because their strength is to be on the ground.  I'm from the old school where being on the ground is a really bad thing.  If you have watched the 5 vs 5 MMA fights then you'll see clearly the down falls of being on the ground.   If you are fighting 1 vs 1, then you should be fine, but from a self-defense perspective I never assume that there is only 1 attacker.   I'm not saying that BJJ is trash, I'm just saying that it doesn't blend well with the concepts and thinking of Kung Fu.  If VT is your main skill set then you need try to keep the fight where you have the strongest skill set.


----------



## geezer (Mar 10, 2016)

@Guy: Excellent topic for a thread. Don't have time to contribute just now, but I've enjoyed all the input so far.


----------



## PiedmontChun (Mar 10, 2016)

Personally, I think BJJ and Judo can complement WC/WT/VT well, though my own preference would be Judo. Reason being is that it focuses on grappling while still standing, and if trained under the right teacher (from my limited knowledge) it still incorporates "newaza" or ground grappling, even if its not as highly focused and specialized on the ground like BJJ is.

As a WT only person, I would be leery of going to the ground at all with a BJJ person, but I would be leery against a good judoka even while still on my feet since they can set up sweeps and throws with blinding speed and precision.


----------



## KPM (Mar 10, 2016)

I've trained a little Silat and have toyed with incorporating some of the sweeps and manipulations.  It works fairly well.  Anyone ever watch Maul Mornie's vids?  His version of Silat has relatively upright stances and resembles Wing Chun more than most Silat systems I have seen.     I've never done Shuai Jiao, but I agree that it looks like it would be an excellent choice.


----------



## wtxs (Mar 10, 2016)

Guy B. - of all those "non-attached" type of fighting you so embraced , why would you even contemplate or have anyone else to add some form of grappling to their WC?  Would it not be what you been having soooo much beef about ... such as "attached fighting"?

Maybe we are wrong about you, maybe you are not so one dimensional after all.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 10, 2016)

wtxs said:


> Guy B. - of all those "non-attached" type of fighting you so embraced , why would you even contemplate or have anyone else to add some form of grappling to their WC? Would it not be what you been having soooo much beef about ... such as "attached fighting"?



As a teenager and into my early 20s I did judo; that was what I started with. I was a reasonable standard regional level player and used to compete quite a lot. From judo I got into bjj and I have trained in bjj longer than I have VT. Bjj is easier to continue than judo and not as hard on the body. I love grappling.

I think to learn grappling it is best to do it properly, not via VT. I think that the strength of VT is striking, not grappling. I don't think VT has any real answers on the ground or in standup grappling. I think that learning some grappling is essential, ground most importantly but standup also useful.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 10, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Assume for a moment that your wing chun does not contain significant (or effective) grappling. Assume that you will have no problem resisting the urge to grapply and that your VT will remain your primary tool for fighting.
> 
> Which style of standing grappling do you think is easiest/most useful/least disruptive to add to the system?
> 
> ...



All grappling interferes with striking. They have two different sets of mechanics.

Folk wrestling is really good because you get points for standing back up. So as soon as you hit the ground you are fighting back to your feet.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I agree with you.
> Shuai jiao would be the recommended grappling system for Kung Fu.  In Kung Fu your overall goal should be to fight standing up without getting on the ground with your opponent. Shuai Jiao follows this mind set and has techniques designed to counter someone who is trying to put you on the ground. The best thing about Shuai Jiao is that it's a natural fit to kung fu which means you'll be able to blend the techniques into your punching.
> 
> Judo would be my second recommendation, as it's more stand up than BJJ.  BJJ would be my last recommendations because their strength is to be on the ground.  I'm from the old school where being on the ground is a really bad thing.  If you have watched the 5 vs 5 MMA fights then you'll see clearly the down falls of being on the ground.   If you are fighting 1 vs 1, then you should be fine, but from a self-defense perspective I never assume that there is only 1 attacker.   I'm not saying that BJJ is trash, I'm just saying that it doesn't blend well with the concepts and thinking of Kung Fu.  If VT is your main skill set then you need try to keep the fight where you have the strongest skill set.



Judo and Shuai Jiao are very similar standing. SJ has the 'fast wrestling' tradition but not sure if this is taught in many places in the west. I would go with whichever has the better place to learn in your area


----------



## guy b. (Mar 10, 2016)

drop bear said:


> All grappling interferes with striking. They have two different sets of mechanics.



The freestyle stance, arms, posture are too similar to VT I think, and very confusing in the VT training drills. Something like judo which emphasises hips in, turning and leg throws more than square stance, arm and hand fighting, and lean as freestyle, is much more obviously different and less disruptive to your VT. Less likely to come out when you don't want.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 10, 2016)

guy b. said:


> The freestyle stance, arms, posture are too similar to VT I think, and very confusing in the VT training drills. Something like judo which emphasises hips in, turning and leg throws more than square stance, arm and hand fighting, and lean as freestyle, is much more obviously different and less disruptive to your VT. Less likely to come out when you don't want.



On the other side.  You will learn to perform and defend a double leg.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 10, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Which style of standing grappling do you think is easiest/most useful/least disruptive to add to the system?
> 
> Thoughts?


In another forum, I suggested people to add grappling into their Taiji. Someone called me "anti-Taiji". I assume it won't be long before someone will call you "anti-WC".


----------



## guy b. (Mar 10, 2016)

drop bear said:


> On the other side.  You will learn to perform and defend a double leg.



True, you are unlikely to learn even rudamentary double or single legs with current judo rules


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 17, 2016)

Frankly GJJ/BJJ is your best bet. Most Modern Bjj clubs incorporate wrestling, Judo, Sambo, Catch and other grappling arts alongside old school Bjj. Further, GJJ schools will veer towards a self defense focus alongside a sport/MMA focus, so you can pick and choose what variety of grappling you want.

GJJ/BJJ academies are also popping up everywhere, so availability is also a benefit.


----------



## geezer (Mar 18, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Frankly GJJ/BJJ is your best bet. Most Modern Bjj clubs incorporate wrestling, Judo, Sambo, Catch and other grappling arts alongside old school Bjj. Further, GJJ schools will veer towards a self defense focus alongside a sport/MMA focus, so you can pick and choose what variety of grappling you want.
> 
> GJJ/BJJ academies are also popping up everywhere, so availability is also a benefit.



These are good points.

What little grappling I can apply instinctively is based on the wrestling I did 45-50 years ago as a kid. ....Very simple reactions like a sprawl and cross-face to counter a shoot. Unsophisticated but reliable. And I have no practical ground game except escapes to get back to my standup art, WC. If I were younger and had time to study another art it would definitely be BJJ (and I'm still working on that) ...in fact I have been bold enough to break with my lineage and openly recommend cross training in BJJ at the Relson Gracie school in our part of town rather than depending on the the (IMO) highly dubious WC/WT "Auntie Grappling" previously discussed on this forum.

Auntie Grappling ...not really ready for the 21st century:
https://whowerethey.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/dobb050.jpg


----------



## drop bear (Mar 18, 2016)

geezer said:


> These are good points.
> 
> What little grappling I can apply instinctively is based on the wrestling I did 45-50 years ago as a kid. ....Very simple reactions like a sprawl and cross-face to counter a shoot. Unsophisticated but reliable. And I have no practical ground game except escapes to get back to my standup art, WC. If I were younger and had time to study another art it would definitely be BJJ (and I'm still working on that) ...in fact I have been bold enough to break with my lineage and openly recommend cross training in BJJ at the Relson Gracie school in our part of town rather than depending on the the (IMO) highly dubious WC/WT "Auntie Grappling" previously discussed on this forum.
> 
> ...


----------



## guy b. (Mar 19, 2016)

geezer said:


> What little grappling I can apply instinctively is based on the wrestling I did 45-50 years ago as a kid. ....Very simple reactions like a sprawl and cross-face to counter a shoot. Unsophisticated but reliable. And I have no practical ground game except escapes to get back to my standup art, WC.



I think this is a sensible enough approach. Getting a ground game is a long slow process over the age of about 40 for most people. Since you already have ability standing why not focus your efforts on remaining there or getting back there if you are not there? VT itself takes a lot of training to remain usable.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 19, 2016)

guy b. said:


> I think this is a sensible enough approach. Getting a ground game is a long slow process over the age of about 40 for most people. Since you already have ability standing why not focus your efforts on remaining there or getting back there if you are not there? VT itself takes a lot of training to remain usable.


I think there's an assumption that anyone who learns BJJ will be able to defend themselves on the ground and that's not always the case.  I know people like their BJJ and MMA, but don't make the same mistake many Kung Fu students make.  Just because you take it doesn't mean you'll be good at using it in a real fight. Nor does it means that you'll have enough skill in BJJ to beat someone who may be stronger or faster.




I think people who think BJJ is an ultimate solution run the risk of that other martial artist have made by thinking that their fighting system is the ultimate solution.  I'm pretty sure that the boy with grappling skills thought he had it in the bag.  But even BJJ fighters lose.





If I have 5 years of striking experience and 1 year of BJJ experience. I will most likely try to win the fighting with my striking because it's my strength in comparison to my BJJ.  If I try to win the fight on the ground with 1 year of BJJ then I could seriously be asking for trouble by not fighting in my area of strength.  In this scenario I could see myself using BJJ as you stated by trying to recover from being on the ground so I can quickly get up and use my striking experience.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 20, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> If I have 5 years of striking experience and 1 year of BJJ experience. I will most likely try to win the fighting with my striking because it's my strength in comparison to my BJJ.  If I try to win the fight on the ground with 1 year of BJJ then I could seriously be asking for trouble by not fighting in my area of strength.  In this scenario I could see myself using BJJ as you stated by trying to recover from being on the ground so I can quickly get up and use my striking experience.



This has been my position all along, fight your fight. Don't box a boxer, don't wrestle a wrestler. If I tried what little ground game I have against an experienced grappler, I'm toast. The best strategy for me is to regain my feet where I can use my strengths against him.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 20, 2016)

Exept sitting on someone and punching them is a better position than both trading punches standing.


----------



## Phobius (Mar 20, 2016)

Groundgame is still good to be better than the boxer, after all. Do not box a boxer.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 20, 2016)

yak sao said:


> This has been my position all along, fight your fight. Don't box a boxer, don't wrestle a wrestler. If I tried what little ground game I have against an experienced grappler, I'm toast. The best strategy for me is to regain my feet where I can use my strengths against him.



Standing up is applying your ground game.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 20, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Standing up is applying your ground game.



yes I suppose it is, but my point is to not attempt to out wrestle them. My strong suit is standing on my feet.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

guy b. said:


> I think this is a sensible enough approach. Getting a ground game is a long slow process over the age of about 40 for most people. Since you already have ability standing why not focus your efforts on remaining there or getting back there if you are not there? VT itself takes a lot of training to remain usable.



Because gravity is an ever-present force, and it doesn't take much to lose your footing and end up fighting off your back. The idea that you can stop all things from taking you off your feet is nonsense, and is right up there with ki-master martial arts. I've seen master Judo players get dunked by high school wrestlers with simple double leg takedowns and ankle picks, and those guys are masters of maintaining balance.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think there's an assumption that anyone who learns BJJ will be able to defend themselves on the ground and that's not always the case.  I know people like their BJJ and MMA, but don't make the same mistake many Kung Fu students make.  Just because you take it doesn't mean you'll be good at using it in a real fight. Nor does it means that you'll have enough skill in BJJ to beat someone who may be stronger or faster.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What a silly argument. Are you trying to imply that Kung Fu makes you able to stop *any* assailant trying to punch you in the face? I have vids of Kung Fu masters with over 30 years of training getting KO'd by a random kids with a few months of MMA training.

No one here is saying that Bjj makes you invincible on the ground. Yeah, you can take Bjj and still get your face caved in if you run across the wrong person. However, that applies to ANY martial art. My argument is that Bjj can give you the tools to get out of that situation if you practice them enough. Additionally over the course of the last 2 decades Bjj has incorporated aspects of other grappling systems to make it very comprehensive. Further, since Bjj is so different than Kung Fu, adding it to your training regimen won't impede your progress in your base style.


----------



## Buka (Mar 21, 2016)

Bjj is like sex. Some people think it's over rated. Some people just don't like it. Some people have heard all about it but haven't had the opportunity.

I don't think anybody doing any form of stand up fighting should do any Bjj at all. Not one little bit.
There's enough people in this world that can kick my ***, I don't need any more of them.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 21, 2016)

guy b. said:


> The long range techniques of wrestling (level change and shooting in) are non-integratable with wing chun,



For the record, level changing and shooting in aren't really meant to be long range techniques. Some wrestlers in MMA (especially in the early days of the sport) would shoot from long range in an attempt to avoid the striking range, but that is becoming less effective now that all MMA fighters know how to wrestle. A wrestling shot should ideally start from no further than the range where you can hit your opponent with a jab. A little closer than that is probably even better.

I'm coming at this question from a different angle. I'm already fairly comfortable with long range striking and very comfortable with grappling. I'm learning WT to polish my skills in that transitional range where strikes and clinching are both possible. In this range, I don't think striking and grappling are opposed - I think they complement each other. Hitting someone can open them up for a takedown or lock or control position. Off-balancing someone with a sweep or a pull or a push can set them up for a strike. If you try to hit *or* grab your opponent and they use their arms to present an obstacle, then being able to clear that obstruction (whether with a pak sao or a wrestling style arm drag) should be a useful skill.

I have some experience in this range already (primarily Muay Thai clinch plus some dirty boxing), but from working with @yak sao I can tell that he has a better game in that area than I do, so I'm having fun learning what he has to teach. In the long term I think it will integrate well with what I already do.


----------



## geezer (Mar 21, 2016)

I think Tony's got it absolutely right. WC is in it's element right before the clinch. It's weakness is that most WC guys don't know what to do when it becomes a clinch and/or goes to the ground. If you're good with both areas, you've got a good game!


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> most WC guys don't know what to do when it becomes a *clinch* and/or goes to the ground.


I'll let the BJJ guys to address the ground issue. I only try to address the "clinch" issue here.

It's not that hard to integrate "clinch" into the WC stick hand training if you don't care about the term "pure WC". For example, during the WC sticky hand training, you can also train

- head lock,
- over hook,
- under hook,
- waist surrounding,
- bear hug,
- ...

At the same time, you can also train how to counter it. 

For example, if you can straight your arm straight up in the air, nobody on this planet will be able to "under hook" you. It's such a simple counter skill that should be included in any MA system. 

IMO, this is a good starting point for WC system to include the grappling.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 21, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I'll let the BJJ guys to address the ground issue. I only try to address the "clinch" issue here.
> 
> It's not that hard to integrate "clinch" into the WC stick hand training if you don't care about the term "pure WC". For example, during the WC sticky hand training, you can also train
> 
> ...



Gracie JJ teaches a lot of takedowns from the clinch so if you learn a stand up system with a good clinch set up, Gjj will compliment it quite well.


----------



## geezer (Mar 21, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Because gravity is an ever-present force....



Random thought. In the future it's likely that people will engage in H2H combat in places where gravity is _not _an "ever-present force," that is to say in low-zero gravity environments. Without gravity, striking arts will really suffer, both in power generation and in the ability to control range and position (since every action causes an equal and opposite reaction). If you punch or kick without holding on to something, the force will send your body gliding backwards. But many aspects of grappling would be relatively unaffected, and others could be selectively adapted.

If anybody else is thinking about this, I would expect to see this reflected in science fiction movies. Maybe it already has been, but I haven't noticed?


----------



## yak sao (Mar 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> Random thought. In the future it's likely that people will engage in H2H combat in places where gravity is _not _an "ever-present force," that is to say in low-zero gravity environments. Without gravity, striking arts will really suffer, both in power generation and in the ability to control range and position (since every action causes an equal and opposite reaction). If you punch or kick without holding on to something, the force will send your body gliding backwards. But many aspects of grappling would be relatively unaffected, and others could be selectively adapted.
> 
> If anybody else is thinking about this, I would expect to see this reflected in science fiction movies. Maybe it already has been, but I haven't noticed?



I think if you're holding on to the person you're hitting you would be ok, unless they're wearing a space helmet, then head shots would be pretty much useless.
Throws would not amount to much, at least from a damaging standpoint, and of course, the ground game would be nullified because there ain't no ground...gravitationally speaking.
Good grief, I've got to get out more.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 21, 2016)

found this...it's been done.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 21, 2016)

geezer said:


> Random thought. In the future it's likely that people will engage in H2H combat in places where gravity is _not _an "ever-present force," that is to say in low-zero gravity environments. Without gravity, striking arts will really suffer, both in power generation and in the ability to control range and position (since every action causes an equal and opposite reaction). If you punch or kick without holding on to something, the force will send your body gliding backwards. But many aspects of grappling would be relatively unaffected, and others could be selectively adapted.
> 
> If anybody else is thinking about this, I would expect to see this reflected in science fiction movies. Maybe it already has been, but I haven't noticed?


Some of Steve Barnes's novels address this. "Null boxing" is a form of zero-gee combat sport. Barnes is a martial artist in real life, so he's thought it through.


----------



## Lameman (Mar 23, 2016)

Wait a minute, doesn't wing chun have a lot of grappling in it? A lot of the stuff on you tube (wing chun & tai chi) has a lot of, at least potential, grappling.  Now, I don't think it has a lot of ground fighting, but it wasn't designed for that. It's usually fairly easy to stay standing and make your opponant pay for over-commiting to a takedown.


----------



## Steve (Mar 23, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Some of Steve Barnes's novels address this. "Null boxing" is a form of zero-gee combat sport. Barnes is a martial artist in real life, so he's thought it through.


I enjoyed his Aubrey Knight books.  Read them many, many years ago.


----------



## Steve (Mar 23, 2016)

Lameman said:


> Wait a minute, doesn't wing chun have a lot of grappling in it? A lot of the stuff on you tube (wing chun & tai chi) has a lot of, at least potential, grappling.  Now, I don't think it has a lot of ground fighting, but it wasn't designed for that. It's usually fairly easy to stay standing and make your opponant pay for over-commiting to a takedown.


It's super easy to stay standing.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 23, 2016)

Steve said:


> It's super easy to stay standing.



Unless you have a pesky opponent who is hell bent on putting you on the ground....then it may be a bit of a problem.


----------



## Steve (Mar 23, 2016)

yak sao said:


> Unless you have a pesky opponent who is hell bent on putting you on the ground....then it may be a bit of a problem.


that never happens... On the street.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 23, 2016)

yak sao said:


> Unless you have a pesky opponent who is hell bent on putting you on the ground....then it may be a bit of a problem.


If that happens, just point out to your opponent all the broken glass and AIDS needles and molten lava on the ground and I'm sure they'll reconsider their intent.


----------



## yak sao (Mar 23, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If that happens, just point out to your opponent all the broken glass and AIDS needles and molten lava on the ground and I'm sure they'll reconsider their intent.



That may give him more incentive, I didn't say he was necessarily going down there with you, he might just slam you down


----------



## yak sao (Mar 23, 2016)

...molten lava ???


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 23, 2016)

yak sao said:


> That may give him more incentive, I didn't say he was necessarily going down there with you, he might just slam you down


And here you demonstrate that you understand the situation better than all the people who say that they don't train grappling because it's too dangerous to ever go to the ground.


----------



## geezer (Mar 23, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> And here you demonstrate that you understand the situation better than all the people who say that they don't train grappling because it's too dangerous to ever go to the ground.



That's like a self fulfilling prophesy. It's too dangerous to go to the ground.... _especially _if you don't know any grappling!!! 

....and what do you do when you end up there anyway?


----------



## yak sao (Mar 23, 2016)

geezer said:


> That's like a self fulfilling prophesy. It's too dangerous to go to the ground.... _especially _if you don't know any grappling!!!
> 
> ....and what do you do when you end up there anyway?



 Hell yeah It's too dangerous to go down there, there's molten lava down there !!!


----------



## drop bear (Mar 24, 2016)

Steve said:


> It's super easy to stay standing.



Just be mark hunt.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> The freestyle stance, arms, posture are too similar to VT I think, and very confusing in the VT training drills. Something like judo which emphasises hips in, turning and leg throws more than square stance, arm and hand fighting, and lean as freestyle, is much more obviously different and less disruptive to your VT. Less likely to come out when you don't want.


I don't know WC/VT, but I'm curious about this comment. I'd rather train something that uses the stances and approach I've already trained, rather than looking for something that uses drastically different stances. I wouldn't expect learning to grapple from the same stances to cause problems - you'd be reinforcing the mechanics of stability and learning to do different movements from the same point. If the concern is that the person might unconsciously pull out a grappling technique during VT, I wouldn't expect that to happen often. In our style, there are some techniques that aren't learned until quite late (usually after 3-4 years of training). We don't use those techniques on folks who haven't learned them, regardless of their skill level, and we unconsciously avoid them when the wrong belt color (no other indicator necessary) attacks us.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Frankly GJJ/BJJ is your best bet. Most Modern Bjj clubs incorporate wrestling, Judo, Sambo, Catch and other grappling arts alongside old school Bjj. Further, GJJ schools will veer towards a self defense focus alongside a sport/MMA focus, so you can pick and choose what variety of grappling you want.
> 
> GJJ/BJJ academies are also popping up everywhere, so availability is also a benefit.


In general, a good recommendation. Just be aware that even some of the GJJ schools are getting focused on competition (BJJ or MMA) rather than self-defense. You should be able to figure that out by watching a class and asking a few questions, though.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I'm curious about this comment. I'd rather train something that uses the stances and approach I've already trained, rather than looking for something that uses drastically different stances. I wouldn't expect learning to grapple from the same stances to cause problems - you'd be reinforcing the mechanics of stability and learning to do different movements from the same point. If the concern is that the person might unconsciously pull out a grappling technique during VT, I wouldn't expect that to happen often. In our style, there are some techniques that aren't learned until quite late (usually after 3-4 years of training). We don't use those techniques on folks who haven't learned them, regardless of their skill level, and we unconsciously avoid them when the wrong belt color (no other indicator necessary) attacks us.



Nothing uses the approach trained in VT. Learning to grapple from a similar stance is a recipe for confusion.

A good example of this can be seen with right handed Judo fighters who enter MMA and learn to box southpaw so that they can keep the judo stance and power hand forward. Generally their boxing is very weak, being weak hand back and weighted like a grappler, and their judo also suffers with timing issues and from wrong weighting (trying to strike). They are caught in a no mans land of half boxing half judo which is worse than either.

Judo fighters that learn to box conventionally do much better, swiching naturally to judo in the clinch and not suffering from interference outside of it.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Frankly GJJ/BJJ is your best bet. Most Modern Bjj clubs incorporate wrestling, Judo, Sambo, Catch and other grappling arts alongside old school Bjj. Further, GJJ schools will veer towards a self defense focus alongside a sport/MMA focus, so you can pick and choose what variety of grappling you want.
> 
> GJJ/BJJ academies are also popping up everywhere, so availability is also a benefit.



BJJ is your best bet to learn grappling on the ground. It is far from your best bet to learn grappling on your feet. Standup grappling has been woeful in most BJJ clubs I have attended over the years, apart from those with active judo and wrestling classes, usually taught by an outside instructor, or connected to an MMA team. There are many that just do BJJ on the ground, and even if you find one that teaches some standup grappling you will be much better served at a club that specialises in it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> BJJ is your best bet to learn grappling on the ground. It is far from your best bet to learn grappling on your feet. Standup grappling has been woeful in most BJJ clubs I have attended over the years, apart from those with active judo and wrestling classes, usually taught by an outside instructor, or connected to an MMA team. There are many that just do BJJ on the ground, and even if you find one that teaches some standup grappling you will be much better served at a club that specialises in it.


That lines up with my observation, as posted in another thread mere moments ago. I'd love to find a BJJ school that still does considerable stand-up work - would love to see how it differs from Judo.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Nothing uses the approach trained in VT. Learning to grapple from a similar stance is a recipe for confusion.
> 
> A good example of this can be seen with right handed Judo fighters who enter MMA and learn to box southpaw so that they can keep the judo stance and power hand forward. Generally their boxing is very weak, being weak hand back and weighted like a grappler, and their judo also suffers with timing issues and from wrong weighting (trying to strike). They are caught in a no mans land of half boxing half judo which is worse than either.
> 
> Judo fighters that learn to box conventionally do much better, swiching naturally to judo in the clinch and not suffering from interference outside of it.


That makes sense. I'm not sure if the issue is that the Judo players are trying to stay close to what they know, or if it's that they aren't really adopting Boxing principles (because they're using their weak side for power). As I think about it, I tend to lead with my left (weaker) hand in both grappling and striking, until I enter. I suppose that's the result of having both included in our core curriculum, so they combine seamlessly. 

Now if I could just get my left shoulder to start working right again...I need to get back to sparring.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Mar 24, 2016)

gpseymour said:


> I tend to lead with my left (weaker) hand in both grappling and striking, ...


IMO, it's not which hand that you put forward but which leg that you put forward that matter the most. In wrestling, you have

- "rooting leg" that you always put behind.
- "attacking leg" that you always put forward (closer to your opponent).

Since very few people can develop both legs equally, you may not have much choice if you like to

- trip your opponent with your right leg (you will need right leg forward to be close to your opponent's leg), and
- punch your opponent with your right hand (you may need right hand back so you can rotate your body for knock out "cross").


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> BJJ is your best bet to learn grappling on the ground. It is far from your best bet to learn grappling on your feet. Standup grappling has been woeful in most BJJ clubs I have attended over the years, apart from those with active judo and wrestling classes, usually taught by an outside instructor, or connected to an MMA team. There are many that just do BJJ on the ground, and even if you find one that teaches some standup grappling you will be much better served at a club that specialises in it.



Which is why I said Gjj, not Bjj. Gracie JJ schools still practice a great deal of stand up. Particularly Relson, Renzo, and Rickson schools.

Again if you observe Gracie in Action, the early UFCs featuring Royce, and Rickson's fights in Pride, you'd notice that the Gracie boys had little problem taking people down.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, it's not which hand that you put forward but which leg that you put forward that matter the most.



Absolutely


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Which is why I said Gjj, not Bjj. Gracie JJ schools still practice a great deal of stand up. Particularly Relson, Renzo, and Rickson schools.
> 
> Again if you observe Gracie in Action, the early UFCs featuring Royce, and Rickson's fights in Pride, you'd notice that the Gracie boys had little problem taking people down.



GJJ strength is the self defence curriculum. They are still very weak compared to a decent standup grappling teacher in that particular area, as I am sure they would themselves acknowledge.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Which is why I said Gjj, not Bjj. Gracie JJ schools still practice a great deal of stand up. Particularly Relson, Renzo, and Rickson schools.
> 
> Again if you observe Gracie in Action, the early UFCs featuring Royce, and Rickson's fights in Pride, you'd notice that the Gracie boys had little problem taking people down.



They are not exactly gsp either


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> GJJ strength is the self defence curriculum. They are still very weak compared to a decent standup grappling teacher in that particular area, as I am sure they would themselves acknowledge.



Isn't your goal self defense?




drop bear said:


> They are not exactly gap either



You're right. The Gracies actually finished fights.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Isn't your goal self defense?



Gracie self defence curriculum is a strength of GJJ. It is not the be all and end all of either self defence or fighting in general


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Gracie self defence curriculum is a strength of GJJ. It is not the be all and end all of either self defence or fighting in general



Who said it was? My point is that if your goal is grappling for self defense Gjj is simply the better option because that is its focus.

Also you didn't answer the question.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> My point is that if your goal is grappling for self defense Gjj is simply the better option because that is its focus.



The GJJ SD curriculum is a basic survival focused approach to self defence through grappling. It is not the best approach to self defence through grappling. Adding realistic pressure tested standing grappling skills would make it very much better. It is a basics course. Anyone interested in grappling for self defence would benefit from the GJJ SD curriculum, but could also go much further and do much better with some effort. 



Hanzou said:


> you didn't answer the question.



It didn't seem relevant.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> The GJJ SD curriculum is a basic survival focused approach to self defense through grappling.



Err.. The entire system is based around self defense. It's not a course. I'm not talking about that online combatives program where at the end you earn a fake blue belt and can open up a "Gracie Garage". I'm talking about old school Gracie JJ itself from White belt to Red Belt.



> It is not the best approach to self defense through grappling.



Name a better one.



> Adding realistic pressure tested standing grappling skills would make it very much better.



It does that.



> It is a basics course. Anyone interested in grappling for self defense would benefit from the GJJ SD curriculum, but could also go much further and do much better with some effort.



Again, I don't think we're talking about the same thing here.




> It didn't seem relevant.



If your goal is self defense grappling why wouldn't you want to learn something designed precisely for that purpose?


----------



## guy b. (Mar 24, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> The entire system is based around self defense. It's not a course. I'm not talking about that online combatives program where at the end you earn a fake blue belt and can open up a "Gracie Garage".



Neither am I. Gracie JJ has a focused old style jiu jitsu self defence applications curriculum. For example demonstrated here: 






The system as a whole is more based on survival than modern sport BJJ, but I wouldn't call it a comprehensive approach to self defence in any way. It will allow survival in some kinds of situations, and it always has an eye on real fighting, which is a strength. But it fails to address many aspects of fighting (and grappling) in a comprehensive way. The only way it addresses many of these aspects is through the kind of approach in the video, which is not sufficient beyond a bare bones approach. But it is good that GJJ has it. 



Hanzou said:


> Name a better one



Any approach building on weaker areas of GJJ would be better, for example adding training with good standup grapplers.



Hanzou said:


> It does that.



There are much better ways



Hanzou said:


> If your goal is self defense grappling why wouldn't you want to learn something designed precisely for that purpose?



It is one mans idea of self defence through grappling. It is BJJ as a system, which is good, but things can be added which will certainly improve it. Effective standing grappling training for example. Going to a GJJ club will simply not make you as good a standup gi grappler as going to a good judo club, for example. Having good standup grappling makes survival more likely in a self defence situation. There is nothing to say that such extra training cannot be directed in a self defense situation via the GJJ system philosophy.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Mar 24, 2016)

drop bear said:


> They are not exactly gsp either





Hanzou said:


> You're right. The Gracies actually finished fights.



GSP has finished as many fights as Royce (13). Royce does have a better finishing percentage (65% finishes vs GSP's 48%), but GSP has a better winning percentage (93% vs Royce's 75%). GSP also was fighting much tougher opponents.

None of which is all that relevant to drop bear's original point, which is that GSP has better takedown skills than just about any Gracie I can think of.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

guy b. said:


> Neither am I. Gracie JJ has a focused old style jiu jitsu self defence applications curriculum. For example demonstrated here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Again, it would be very helpful if you stated exactly what those aspects are.

Also it should be noted that Gjj self defense extends quite a bit beyond what you saw in that vid.




> Any approach building on weaker areas of GJJ would be better, for example adding training with good standup grapplers.



Which it does. Why do think you saw wrestling and Judo instructors in a Bjj school? They're not just there to teach. 



> There are much better ways



Such as?



> It is one mans idea of self defence through grappling. It is BJJ as a system, which is good, but things can be added which will certainly improve it. Effective standing grappling training for example. Going to a GJJ club will simply not make you as good a standup gi grappler as going to a good judo club, for example. Having good standup grappling makes survival more likely in a self defence situation. There is nothing to say that such extra training cannot be directed in a self defense situation via the GJJ system philosophy.



No, having good grappling period makes survival more likely in a self defense situation. Standing grappling skills don't mean much if a person takes you down (or knocks you down) mounts you, and proceeds to start punching you in the face. 

Now you may say that your superior stand up grappling would prevent that from happening, but here's the problem; your goal is to also take this person to the ground and control them. What happens when that person you're pinning slips out of your hold and slaps on a choke or joint lock? Again that's comprehensive grappling versus specialized grappling. 

Which is why you have wrestling and Judo instructors in Bjj schools.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 24, 2016)

Tony Dismukes said:


> GSP has finished as many fights as Royce (13). Royce does have a better finishing percentage (65% finishes vs GSP's 48%), but GSP has a better winning percentage (93% vs Royce's 75%). GSP also was fighting much tougher opponents.
> 
> *None of which is all that relevant to drop bear's original point,* which is that GSP has better takedown skills than just about any Gracie I can think of.



Yeah, that's why it's called "joking" Tony.  I'm well aware that GSP is a fantastic grappler.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 25, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> Why do think you saw wrestling and Judo instructors in a Bjj school? They're not just there to teach.



I have trained BJJ for many years and in many different places in the UK and Europe. Since the focus of bjj is on ground grappling, the standard of standup grappling is just not as good (in general) as it is at good wrestling and judo clubs which focus on standup grappling. Where such schools bring in quality outside teachers the standard in those places is generally better. But it isn't the same as a judo or wrestling school because the quality of opponent is just not there. 

When Roger Gracie came to London for example, he trained judo at the Budokwai in order to improve his standup. He could of course have focused on the Gracie SD curriculum for standup, and trained with his own students only. But he didn't, because he isn't stupid. 

In the UK there has been a lot of cross training over the years, with good judo people coming into bjj (e.g. Dave Coles, Graeme Welsh) and good bjj people cross training in judo (e.g. Carlson's guys). There is also the MMA influence which tends to have more of a wrestling influence. I have never met anyone as resistant to the idea that training in standing grappling will help the BJJ competitor in their development as a total grappler, and vice versa. I think you are simply trolling?



Hanzou said:


> Such as?



Cross training standup grappling. Cross training with good strikers. 



Hanzou said:


> Standing grappling skills don't mean much if a person takes you down (or knocks you down) mounts you, and proceeds to start punching you in the face.



Lol, you are trolling. Having good standup grappling _makes you less likely to be taken down_. Improving standup grappling will improve outcomes for the BJJ trained person. 

Adding BJJ is a good idea for the average wing chun trained person because it will improve their chances of survival should the fight end up on the ground. It is a good first step. But adding standup grappling as well is better, because it reduces the chance of the fight ending up on the ground in the first place.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 25, 2016)

guy b. said:


> I have trained BJJ for many years and in many different places in the UK and Europe. Since the focus of bjj is on ground grappling, the standard of standup grappling is just not as good (in general) as it is at good wrestling and judo clubs which focus on standup grappling. Where such schools bring in quality outside teachers the standard in those places is generally better. But it isn't the same as a judo or wrestling school because the quality of opponent is just not there.



Its important to note that neither Wrestling or Judo are self defense systems. Both teach you primarily how to deal with other wrestlers and Judoka. Your typical wrestling and Judo school isn't going to show you how to deal with someone punching or kicking you for example.



> When Roger Gracie came to London for example, he trained judo at the Budokwai in order to improve his standup. He could of course have focused on the Gracie SD curriculum for standup, and trained with his own students only. But he didn't, because he isn't stupid.



Er... Roger is a professional MMA and sport Bjj fighter. Of course he wouldn't focus on the Gracie SD, he's going to focus on various aspects of his game to make him a better overall fighter in a sport context. Yeah, if you're seeking to fight professionally, I would definitely recommend learning wrestling and Judo alongside your Bjj. Of course its important to note that no one enters MMA without a background in Bjj. Think about that for a minute.



> In the UK there has been a lot of cross training over the years, with good judo people coming into bjj (e.g. Dave Coles, Graeme Welsh) and good bjj people cross training in judo (e.g. Carlson's guys). There is also the MMA influence which tends to have more of a wrestling influence. I have never met anyone as resistant to the idea that training in standing grappling will help the BJJ competitor in their development as a total grappler, and vice versa. I think you are simply trolling?



Uh, because we're talking about self defense, not competing in MMA or sport grappling. Further in either of those contexts, you're expected to know Bjj anyway.



> Cross training standup grappling. Cross training with good strikers.



And again, which grappling art do you believe does it better than Bjj? You're not going to be cross-training with good strikers in Judo or Wrestling, or even learning how to deal with strikers in either wrestling or Judo. Bjj specifically teaches you how to deal with strikers while grappling.



> Lol, you are trolling. Having good standup grappling _makes you less likely to be taken down_.



But it never makes you _immune_ to the takedown. So its pretty important to know what to do if you get taken down.

And btw, you DO learn good stand up grappling in Bjj.



> Improving standup grappling will improve outcomes for the BJJ trained person.



Of course it would. But we're not talking about a Bjj trained person. We're talking about someone with NO grappling experience seeking grappling instruction for self defense.



> Adding BJJ is a good idea for the average wing chun trained person because it will improve their chances of survival should the fight end up on the ground. It is a good first step. But adding standup grappling as well is better, because it reduces the chance of the fight ending up on the ground in the first place.



Um no. Bjj teaches them self defense grappling, which is better than learning sport grappling. Now, if a person is seeking to be a competitor in MMA or sport Bjj, adding wrestling or Judo are fantastic ideas (especially wrestling). However, even in those cases you need Bjj to be competitive.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 25, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> which grappling art do you believe does it better than Bjj? You're not going to be cross-training with good strikers in Judo or Wrestling, or even learning how to deal with strikers in either wrestling or Judo. Bjj specifically teaches you how to deal with strikers while grappling.



GJJ teaches you to deal with striking and standup grappling in a rudimentary way. The strategies it teaches are reasonable for a ground focused fighter, or for an average person interested in basic survival with a ground focus. But the skill set it imparts is limited in the extreme.

The best way for anyone to gain skills in the areas that GJJ is weaker, assuming that they started with that, would be to go and train those skill sets with people who are good at them - i.e. decent strikers and standup grapplers. There is no reason in the world for anyone to limit themselves to a single system approach. There is also nothing stopping the BJJ focused person who cross trains from utilising the new skills they gain through the framework of the GJJ strategic approach to fighting. 



Hanzou said:


> we're talking about self defense, not competing in MMA or sport grappling



There is no such thing as "self defence". There is only fighting. GJJ has a particular strategic approach to fighting which is realistic for some kinds of real fight situations, and less so for others. Anyone that wishes to utilise that strategic approach (which is the most valuable aspect of the GJJ self defence curriculum) is not prevented from doing so by cross training. 



Hanzou said:


> and again, which grappling art do you believe does it better than Bjj? You're not going to be cross-training with good strikers in Judo or Wrestling, or even learning how to deal with strikers in either wrestling or Judo. Bjj specifically teaches you how to deal with strikers while grappling.



BJJ techniques for this are rudimentary and basic. You are better served by understanding the approach of standup strikers and standup grapplers by doing those things with people who are good at them.

GJJ takes a particular strategic approach to combat through which any cross training in standup grappling or striking can be focused, if you so desire. 



Hanzou said:


> you DO learn good stand up grappling in Bjj



Lol, please stop trolling. I can't really face continuing this insane conversation. GJJ has a strategic and systematic approach to fighting, that is true, and it is a strength. But you will not be good in the areas where GJJ makes rudimentary suggestions unless you specifically train with people who are good.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 25, 2016)

guy b. said:


> GJJ teaches you to deal with striking and standup grappling in a rudimentary way. The strategies it teaches are reasonable for a ground focused fighter, or for an average person interested in basic survival with a ground focus. But the skill set it imparts is limited in the extreme.



I'm curious; How is a comprehensive grappling approach that includes standing and ground grappling, locks, chokes, and strike countering "limited" yet a specialized approach that only involves standing grappling versus another standing grappler from the exact same skill set "not limited"?



> The best way for anyone to gain skills in the areas that GJJ is weaker, assuming that they started with that, would be to go and train those skill sets with people who are good at them - i.e. decent strikers and standup grapplers. There is no reason in the world for anyone to limit themselves to a single system approach. There is also nothing stopping the BJJ focused person who cross trains from utilizing the new skills they gain through the framework of the GJJ strategic approach to fighting.



We ARE talking about someone who is cross training. You do remember the title of this thread right? We are assuming that this person is coming from a striking base who already has exposure to going against good strikers. Bjj will reinforce that background since it teaches you to fight from an unfamiliar range (the ground) along with dealing with someone trying to punch you in the face while you're attempting to grapple. Again, that type of training isn't available in your typical wrestling and Judo schools.



> There is no such thing as "self defense . There is only fighting. GJJ has a particular strategic approach to fighting which is realistic for some kinds of real fight situations, and less so for others. Anyone that wishes to utilize that strategic approach (which is the most valuable aspect of the GJJ self defense curriculum) is not prevented from doing so by cross training.



Uh, yes there is. If you're a grappler training how to deal with someone on top of you and punching or stabbing you in the face that is self defense training. If you're a grappler only training on how to defend against other grapplers from your style, that's sport training. If you're a grappler in a style that purposely bans certain moves because its against the rules, you're training for sport.



> BJJ techniques for this are rudimentary and basic.



And very effective. Self defense kind of has to be rudimentary and basic. Complex and fancy isn't a good idea.



> GJJ takes a particular strategic approach to combat through which any cross training in standup grappling or striking can be focused, if you so desire.



As a wrestler or a Judoka, you can definitely cross-train with strikers. However, that isn't the same thing as having your system being designed with that in mind. Further, you have to seek out someone to cross train with, when its far more efficient to simply train in the system that already does it by default.



> Lol, please stop trolling. I can't really face continuing this insane conversation. GJJ has a strategic and systematic approach to fighting, that is true, and it is a strength. But you will not be good in the areas where GJJ makes rudimentary suggestions unless you specifically train with people who are good.



So you're saying that Bjj practitioners never train with skilled strikers or stand up grapplers, yet you yourself said that you've been in Bjj schools "for many years" where they actually have wrestling and Judo instructors? Further, you're saying that after all the various ways that Bjj has been tested against other styles over the years that Bjj somehow isn't good against other grappling and striking styles?

Insane indeed.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 25, 2016)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, it's not which hand that you put forward but which leg that you put forward that matter the most.


For us, that's the same thing. We rarely present cross-stances (where one hand is forward and the other foot), because of the easy off-balance this presents on one side.


----------



## guy b. (Mar 29, 2016)

Hanzou said:


> How is a comprehensive grappling approach that includes standing and ground grappling, locks, chokes, and strike countering "limited" yet a specialized approach that only involves standing grappling versus another standing grappler from the exact same skill set "not limited"?



There is no better way to learn to counter striking or standing grappling (or ground grappling) than to learn them and to practice them frequently.

A person who is proficient at boxing will find it easy to get past the arms safely and clinch. A person who is proficient at wrestling or judo is also proficient at spoiling the attacks of wrestlers and judoka enabling them to stay standing more effectively or to end up on the ground in a better position.

For that matter a person who is proficient at bjj is proficient at spoiling and escaping the attacks of bjjers, giving them the time and ability to stand back up, stall, or attack with strikes on the ground if they so desire.

The Gracies have produced a particular systematic approach to combat which may suit the ground focused fighter (although they would obviously benefit from also training in striking and standing grappling for the reasons outlined above), but is unlikely to suit the striking focused fighter in a system with its own strategic approach.



Hanzou said:


> Complex and fancy isn't a good idea



Complex and fancy is not the flip side of the rudimentary and basic approaches to combat taught in the Gracie SD curriculum.



Hanzou said:


> its far more efficient to simply train in the system that already does it by default.



GJJ takes a ground grappling focused approach to real fighting which is contradictory to many other systematised approaches to fighting. For this reason it is a good backup system for the primary striker but not a good choice as an overall approach, unless they wish their striking system to take a back seat. Furthermore, many of the standing methods taught in GJJ are naïve and even dangerous in certain situations. Without real quality experience of standup grappling, striking and weapons, the person who only trains GJJ as an answer to everything is unlikely to be able to make these approaches work in reality. Direct live experience is everything in fighting. Applications and plans tend to fall to bits under pressure.


----------

