# Ground Fighting



## Hanzou (Sep 5, 2014)

Everytime this comes up in a conversation about self defense, the first thing people say is that its not a good idea to fight on the ground because of multiple attackers. I could definitely see that being a problem. However, it would appear that outside of that issue, its a pretty darn good idea to know how to fight on the ground, gain a dominant position, and either finish the fight, or get out of the situation.

Here's an example;






Don't worry, its short.

As you can see, the most damaging blows take place when the larger guy is on top, pummeling him into unconsciousness. I think some knowledge of ground fighting would have helped that guy. Of course, I think some common sense would have helped him out quite a bit more. In any case, because of his highly vulnerable position on the ground, this guy could have easily been killed, or permanently injured.

You could argue that if the smaller guy would have controlled the bigger guy, his friend would have jumped in. Frankly, I'd take that chance over getting punched in the head multiple times with no way of stopping the impact.

What do you think?


----------



## Buka (Sep 5, 2014)

I couldn't agree more.

 I think the guy in the green shirt might have had some training, too.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Sep 5, 2014)

just walking away instead of trying to be a bad *** would have saved a beating.  Ground fighting may have its place but being intelligent could have saved this idiot a beating.
 and once again if the bloke that got pounded had been winning I am sure the third person would have blindsided him


----------



## oftheherd1 (Sep 5, 2014)

I would always intend to stay on my feet and off the ground.  The Hapkido I was taught did have ground techniques to get me back up if I ended up on the ground for some reason.  Some techniques just got me away and up, some damaged the opponent in the process.


----------



## cloud dancing (Sep 5, 2014)

Watch wado ryu and other dvds/Karate masters teach/tuaght on ground /while disABLING ONE ATTACKER throw kicks
from ground can kick genitals/knees/as high as waist and disable multiple attaCKERS
all serious karate involves kicking when down.ground fighting does not NECISSARILY mean grabs nor wrestling
kicking /feet have more power than hands /kicks will disable in 12/3/6/9 o'clock postiions
w/o any grappling.
As the insane psychiatrist said to Batman/while pouring gasoline onto him
then flicking his bick--"i think you need to LIGHTEN UP.--- I SPY


----------



## Buka (Sep 5, 2014)

The fact the first thing people say is it might not be a good idea to  fight on the ground because of multiple attackers, to me, is a martial  misnomer. I'm not saying there's no truth to it, but this whole idea  seems to have come from the Martial world (as I know it) as an anti  grappling advertisement. Yet, I never hear "boxing isn't a good self  defense art because you might end up on the ground". Or the same about  Karate (again, as I know it) Us Karate guys will all tell you "I'm  comfortable on the ground. When we get knocked down sparring, we  immediately cover, our legs are up and we're cognizant about fighting  the guy off." While this is true to some extent, I believe the karate  world in general has a different opinion of it now. I think the last  twenty years, since UFC 1, has changed the world of martial arts,  especially Karate. And specifically, through BJJ.

I can't even count how many Martial Artists I know. Far  more than in any other field, including LEOs. Since the UFC era really  got under way, most of those I know started some study in a ground game.  Either a supplement that came from a grappling art, or a more focused  and practiced look at their _own_ art's ground techniques. As a DT  instructor in law enforcement, we included basic ground defense, as well  as offense, as part of our curriculum in 1992. This was taught to us by  a BJJ instructor, specifically to supplement what we already did,  rather than as a straight BJJ course. It changed things dramatically, it  better prepared our officers in defensive tactics. And it really opened  our eyes in an allover view of training.

Before the UFC age, nobody I knew knew what a guard was.  Everybody knows now. And everybody I know has either studied it to some  extent or at least has played with it. Again, I'm only referencing my  own world, and the people I know in it. But that's a good cross section  of people, not a small study group.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 5, 2014)

Having good grappling skills for self-defense is very important.  Sure in self-defense no one really wants to be on the ground because your mobility is restricted.  Yet, there is a pretty decent chance that it might go to the ground.  If it does I want to be the one who can dominate the situation, get up and get out of there!


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 5, 2014)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Having good grappling skills for self-defense is very important.  Sure in self-defense no one really wants to be on the ground because your mobility is restricted.  Yet, there is a pretty decent chance that it might go to the ground.  If it does I want to be the one who can dominate the situation, get up and get out of there!



If that idiot had not been such an idiot, and was trained in something including ground work, would he at least got his hands behind his head. Did not see the arms pinned?


----------



## Danny T (Sep 5, 2014)

For the sake of discussion let's remove the 'self-defense' aspect.
Do you want to be an excellent fighter in as many environments that there is even a remote possibility of being in?
How about learning to effective vs a blade, a firearm, a stick, a baseball bat or whatever?
In the truth of fighting; boxing, muay thai, karate, tae kwon do just for examples Grappling/Wrestling/Clinching/Seizing/Grabbing/Tripping/Throwing/Falling happens. Going to the ground HAPPENS!!
To be an excellent all around fighter whether for your personal pleasure, self-defense, or whatever your reason learn to handle yourself on the ground. Otherwise you are in denial.


----------



## EddieCyrax (Sep 5, 2014)

bigger lesson from this video is "know your limitations"

1 vs 2 = bad for you
1 vs 2 individuals that out weigh you by alot = bad for you

1 vs 2 where monkey dance concludes and they walk away - why are you still following them???



On Topic
I believe having knowledge on the ground is only a positive.   If ever in a self-defense mode my goal is to stay on my feet, but if taken down I want to ensure I have enough skills to survive.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 5, 2014)

No one helps anybody these days do they?
Instead they just get their phones out , start filming and put it up on the Internet as fast as they can.

I think it's time for people to put the bloody camera phones down and start intervening in these things.
The guy was obviously an idiot , but he was already beaten , so why the need to sit on his back and keep hitting him.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 5, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> If that idiot had not been such an idiot, and was trained in something including ground work, would he at least got his hands behind his head. Did not see the arms pinned?



I didn't have time to watch the video this morning.  However, the world is full of idiots.  There are lots of them.  If we could get people not to monkey dance as much the world would be a much nicer place! 

The point I made is that grappling skills for self-defense are very important even if you do not want to be on the ground. (which you should not because of your mobility being restricted)  Yet, you might be taken there so they are very important to know.  I personally believe every martial practitioner who is interested in self-defense should have training in weapons/tools, kicking, hand strikes, trapping and joint manipulations and grappling.  Not to mention just as equally important is training in awareness, avoidance, de-escalation, legal use of force and the specific laws regarding self-defense in their state, country, etc.  If you are well rounded as a martial practitioner you will hopefully be in a better position to protect yourself and your loved ones if needed!


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 5, 2014)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> I didn't have time to watch the video this morning.  However, the world is full of idiots.  There are lots of them.  If we could get people not to monkey dance as much the world would be a much nicer place!
> 
> The point I made is that grappling skills for self-defense are very important even if you do not want to be on the ground. (which you should not because of your mobility being restricted)  Yet, you might be taken there so they are very important to know.  I personally believe every martial practitioner who is interested in self-defense should have training in weapons/tools, kicking, hand strikes, trapping and joint manipulations and grappling.  Not to mention just as equally important is training in awareness, avoidance, de-escalation, legal use of force and the specific laws regarding self-defense in their state, country, etc.  If you are well rounded as a martial practitioner you will hopefully be in a better position to protect yourself and your loved ones if needed!



Thanks and well put. It has to be as I eased into that reply! The latter I am well versed in, not the former. However, grappling I do know about, but what level, if any, I don't know, but that to me that set seems unorthodox, which I do know well. Food for thought, thank you Brian


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (Sep 5, 2014)

Its simple if you want to be a complete martial artist and are a striker then you better learn the basics of ground work. (As well as learning how to fight with your back against a wall or in a space that confines your mobility)

Just like a grappler should learn the basics of striking while on their feet. 

My ground game could allow me to easily finish a person on the ground but its the last place i want to be since the ground could be used as a weapon, limits your mobility and is a very bad place to be when fighting an armed opponent or multiple opponents.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 5, 2014)

The ground decision is about dealing with a potential threat over an actual threat. So you worry about getting a beat down by that one guy before you worry about the beat down by the five mysterious random guys.

And of course the only way to get up off the ground is to have ground skills.

I go the ground all the time in fights. I have been kicked in the head by a bystander once. And then a mate of mine clamped him. Like anything it is about situational awareness and working to fit the situation and not working to a script.

Did that last weekend dropped a guy in a scarf. His mates came over and told me to get off him. I said I would if they take care of their mate. They did. Everybody was happy.

Now I can get up seriously fast from a scarf hold so the threat is not as bad as people think.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 5, 2014)

ST1Doppelganger said:


> Just like a grappler should learn the basics of striking while on their feet.


I used to think this is true but not any more. A striker definitely need to learn some grappling skill, but a grappler may not need to learn the striking skill.

 When a striker punches a grappler, if that grappler can "wrap the striker's punching arms and take him down right at that moment", he doesn't need to learn the basics of striking. When an octopus fights against a shark, that octopus doesn't need to have sharp teeth as along as that octopus has good wrapping skill.

You run toward me, swing your arms, and try to knock my head off. I also run toward you, have no intention to punch you, concentrate 100% on using both of my arms to wrap your arms. Will you be able to hit on my head first, or will I be able to wrap your arms first? It will be very interested to test this 100 times with your training partner, record the result, and share the result in this forum.


----------



## Buka (Sep 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The ground decision is about dealing with a potential threat over an actual threat. So you worry about getting a beat down by that one guy before you worry about the beat down by the five mysterious random guys.
> 
> And of course the only way to get up off the ground is to have ground skills.
> 
> ...



Yeah, you can get up from a scarf hold because you're strong, but I'm 139 pounds and when I'm rolling with heavier people, and everyone I train with is heavier than me, when I'm caught in a good scarf, I'm screwed. The threat is real to me, I gotta stay out of that.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 5, 2014)

Buka said:


> Yeah, you can get up from a scarf hold because you're strong, but I'm 139 pounds and when I'm rolling with heavier people, and everyone I train with is heavier than me, when I'm caught in a good scarf, I'm screwed. The threat is real to me, I gotta stay out of that.




When I have him in it. We tend to wrestle to be on top or to stand up though


----------



## Buka (Sep 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> When I have him in it. We tend to wrestle to be on top or to stand up though



Ah, okay, gotcha. Man, I love to be on top, but, alas, I'm usually in bottom game.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 5, 2014)

Buka said:


> Ah, okay, gotcha. Man, I love to be on top, but, alas, I'm usually in bottom game.




Yeah a lot of people go to their back. I personally believe there are two different strategies involved with a top game and a bottom one. For the streets I am on top or standing.


----------



## Steve (Sep 6, 2014)

As others have said, there was a lot of wrong in that video.  I don't know what was going on, but that dude had plenty of opportunities to avoid the fight.

But, after being taken down, there were plenty of opportunities to disengage and stand back up.  It's a shame he had no grappling skills.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Sep 6, 2014)

i often hear all the debates on the effectiveness of ground skills and whether or not you should learn it.  i think all this chatter misses the point.  i think the real issue to be considered is when and how to use ground game skills. something that is very important to keep in mind is weapons.  "a knife is to be felt, not seen"  many times you dont know a weapon is involved untill you see your own blood.  this is where i like to make the distinction between knowing ground fighting and when to use those ground skills.  i teach my students that they MUST assume the bad guy has a weapon.  like i said many times you dont know its there untill its too late.  yes i like ground fighting, however to use those skills as the first line of defense or a first reaction response to a threat is in my opinion a mistake.  you must have a ground game for as the op says, when the fight goes to the ground but i do not want to take it there if i can help it.  it would be a foolish mistake to charge in for a double leg take down only to find a knife sticking out of your spine.  imagine pulling gaurd and land with a knife in your face.  so when and how to use ground game skills is more the issue than whether or not to learn them.  the old saying goes "you will fight as you train"  therefore logic will show you that if you want to use ground skills in a fight then you must not apply those skills in a sport oriented manner. we all known this as self evident but sometimes that sport VS street application is difficult to define. the more sport training you do the less your eyes will SEE the pitfalls of that aplication applied to street situations.
and for the record if your using your skills to fight inside or outside a bar room, that is not a legit self defense situation. if you can walk away and you dont your just an idiot.  everytime you engage in violence you run the risk of serious bodily injury and death. you could step backwards into a moving vehicle you could slip on a wet spot on the floor and smash your head causing brain damge.  you just never know.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 6, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The ground decision is about dealing with a potential threat over an actual threat. So you worry about getting a beat down by that one guy before you worry about the beat down by the five mysterious random guys.
> 
> And of course the only way to get up off the ground is to have ground skills.
> 
> ...



You got away with a Scarf. Admittedly I had no idea what that was until this morning, and by sheer luck, I found out via google. Yeah bear, nice ending


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 6, 2014)

If the only major pitfalls of ground fighting is that your opponent might have a weapon, or superior numbers, then that's a pretty dominant method of fighting IMO.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 6, 2014)

drop bear said:


> The ground decision is about dealing with a potential threat over an actual threat. So you worry about getting a beat down by that one guy before you worry about the beat down by the five mysterious random guys.
> 
> And of course the only way to get up off the ground is to have ground skills.
> 
> ...



Nice ending Bear


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 6, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> If the only major pitfalls of ground fighting is that your opponent might have a weapon, or superior numbers, then that's a pretty dominant method of fighting IMO.



You seem to be dismissing those 2 possibilities rather lightly, no?

I wonder what is the statistical probability of either of those scenarios in a real life SD situation? 

P.S. I would also include all situations with multiple opponents rather than just superior numbers


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 6, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> You seem to be dismissing those 2 possibilities rather lightly, no?
> 
> I wonder what is the statistical probability of either of those scenarios in a real life SD situation?
> 
> P.S. I would also include all situations with multiple opponents rather than just superior numbers



Multiple opponents and weapons is dangerous regardless of what you practice.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 6, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I used to think this is true but not any more. A striker definitely need to learn some grappling skill, but a grappler may not need to learn the striking skill.
> 
> When a striker punches a grappler, if that grappler can "wrap the striker's punching arms and take him down right at that moment", he doesn't need to learn the basics of striking. When an octopus fights against a shark, that octopus doesn't need to have sharp teeth as along as that octopus has good wrapping skill.
> 
> You run toward me, swing your arms, and try to knock my head off. I also run toward you, have no intention to punch you, concentrate 100% on using both of my arms to wrap your arms. Will you be able to hit on my head first, or will I be able to wrap your arms first? It will be very interested to test this 100 times with your training partner, record the result, and share the result in this forum.



I think it's good to have some all round skills. Relying on one over the other is personal option, if you specialise in BJJ why wouldn't your game plan be to go to the ground asap if you don't have the confidence in your stand up and vise-versa.

I've fought against primary grapplers, some were good some terrible. But I can get some in a holding position rather easily too and prevent them getting techniques to work, then I can just pound them if they are preventing me from getting up in a dominant position and am happy to stay on the ground and rest if I can't get an advantage. This is becoming more common as well IMO, just keeping them at bay, you see it in the octogon, sitting there, riding the clock down. They are not as effective as they used to be in the sport.

I've witnessed more fights over in the first 10 seconds than going to the ground, it's all about perspective right. When does a fight start and when does it finish?

When was the fight over in the clip and just became violence?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Sep 6, 2014)

> If the only major pitfalls of ground fighting is that your opponent might have a weapon, or superior numbers, then that's a pretty dominant method of fighting IMO.



the words people choose to use often reveals a lot about how they see the world.  i am not interesting fighting.  i am interested in life and death threats and self protection.

everyone has their own version of reality.  if BJJ is your response to a threat and feel its best for you...great.  but for myself it is only a last resort, defensive game plan for when everything else went wrong.  if i am using it then i screwed up along the continuum big time.  ground work just does not fit into the scenario i see playing out in my reality . being on the ground is just not where i want to be ...ever.  will it happen yes, but its not what i want.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 6, 2014)

hoshin1600 said:


> the words people choose to use often reveals a lot about how they see the world.  i am not interesting fighting.  i am interested in life and death threats and self protection.
> 
> everyone has their own version of reality.  if BJJ is your response to a threat and feel its best for you...great.  but for myself it is only a last resort, defensive game plan for when everything else went wrong.  if i am using it then i screwed up along the continuum big time.  ground work just does not fit into the scenario i see playing out in my reality . being on the ground is just not where i want to be ...ever.  will it happen yes, but its not what i want.



The common misconception of Bjj is that its only ground fighting. There's actually strikes and standing throws taught within the system, at least in more traditional schools.

The other misconception is that Bjj stylists want to be on their back, so that they perform guard pulls. In actuality, the goal with take downs is to be in the mounted or side position, so you won't see much in the way of guard pulls outside of competition Bjj. The guard was developed if all else fails and you wind up on your back. In a situation, the mount is the most desired position by far.

Thus my response to a threat with Bjj is pretty varied since I'm trained to fight from every conceivable range. I only mentioned the power of fighting from the ground because its very powerful. The vast majority of the population simply don't know how to fight in that range.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 7, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> You got away with a Scarf. Admittedly I had no idea what that was until this morning, and by sheer luck, I found out via google. Yeah bear, nice ending



Not so much about getting away with it. It is about playing the percentages. I mess the guy up. And you really have to mess a guy up controlling them with striking. Chances at i  am fighting his mates. The thing people forget about the ground is multiple on one sucks pretty bad standing up as well. 

So from the ground I can handle the guy with the option of abandoning my position if the risk becomes greater. Either negotiate or threaten or even give the guy a few decent free shots before I have to eject from there.

If it is multiple guys all trying to punch my head in then I would not go to ground by choice. But if the choice is taken from me. Scramble finish on top and get up.

The scarf is good if you are going to be there for a while. It is just easier on my body because I am sitting down.


----------



## Argus (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Multiple opponents and weapons is dangerous regardless of what you practice.



And going to the ground in either of those cases is not far removed from suicide. At least better your chances significantly by staying on your feet.

There are many more reasons why going to the ground is generally a bad idea in a self defense situation, but if you'd rather like to ignore them, that's up to you, I guess.

Now, that's not to say that BJJ isn't useful for self-defense, or that it doesn't contain useful stand-up techniques. Just use it appropriately, and don't belittle stand-up arts for focusing on resolving a fight without going to the ground. While preparing to defend yourself on the ground _should you need to_ is definitely a wise thing to do, it should be the last thing on your list of priorities. Why train for the worst case scenario, and the worst case position, when you can train not to get in that position to begin with? It would make sense that priorities should go something like avoidance, de-escalation, stand-up work, and lastly, ground work. If you're on the ground, a whole lot of things have already gone wrong, and you've committed yourself to one opponent and taken "running away" off of the table completely. That's just not a smart position to put yourself in if you had a choice.

Also, you must recognize that you can't just say "if, then."
"If it's just one opponent," how do you know he doesn't have buddies, or that someone else won't join in the fight, or that he is unarmed, or that you are guaranteed to win regardless and he won't get a lucky punch in or overwhelm you with brute force in a way that you did not anticipate? You won't know -- not until someone comes up and starts kicking you in the side of the head, or you're getting stabbed, or your head happens to get knocked against the concrete. Your priority should be to escape a dangerous situation, not commit yourself to it. Time is of the essence, and ending or disengaging from the fight by the quickest and least risky way possible is what you should be thinking about.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> And going to the ground in either of those cases is not far removed from suicide. At least better your chances significantly by staying on your feet.
> 
> There are many more reasons why going to the ground is generally a bad idea in a self defense situation, but if you'd rather like to ignore them, that's up to you, I guess.
> 
> ...



So the bulk of your training is awareness,deescalation and running? And then a bit of hands on bashing people tacked on somewhere?


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 7, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> You seem to be dismissing those 2 possibilities rather lightly, no?
> 
> I wonder what is the statistical probability of either of those scenarios in a real life SD situation?
> 
> P.S. I would also include all situations with multiple opponents rather than just superior numbers



Whether this counts or not towards the point you have made, but I have experienced a situation like that as a teenager. I got jumped by a bully and his gang. There were no knives or anything that I remember, but ruck sacks do hurt a bit. Ended up with a split eye brow after one of them kicked me in the head. Still kinda feel that trainer.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 7, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Not so much about getting away with it. It is about playing the percentages. I mess the guy up. And you really have to mess a guy up controlling them with striking. Chances at i  am fighting his mates. The thing people forget about the ground is multiple on one sucks pretty bad standing up as well.
> 
> So from the ground I can handle the guy with the option of abandoning my position if the risk becomes greater. Either negotiate or threaten or even give the guy a few decent free shots before I have to eject from there.
> 
> ...



Did not think my reply posted, internet connection dropped out. Would that be termed a choke hold then? 



			
				dropbear said:
			
		

> If it is multiple guys all trying to punch my head in then I would not go to ground by choice. But if the choice is taken from me. Scramble finish on top and get up.



Last time I encountered that it was three coked up Colombians who jumped me and tried to take me to the ground. They were built like Whippets luckily. When their drugged up, I actually think it is easier to contain and diffuse a situation. They tend to make very early mistakes which you can pretty much mentally counter before hand.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 7, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Did not think my reply posted, internet connection dropped out. Would that be termed a choke hold then?
> 
> 
> 
> Last time I encountered that it was three coked up Colombians who jumped me and tried to take me to the ground. They were built like Whippets luckily. When their drugged up, I actually think it is easier to contain and diffuse a situation. They tend to make very early mistakes which you can pretty much mentally counter before hand.



I tend to arm bar. Not this one a leg on that I can't find.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8K4sSo-B9-Q

This one.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=66utLNxCKcQ


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 7, 2014)

drop bear said:


> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=66utLNxCKcQ



That looks brutal. That must some supreme skill not to snap a bone.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> And going to the ground in either of those cases is not far removed from suicide. At least better your chances significantly by staying on your feet.
> 
> There are many more reasons why going to the ground is generally a bad idea in a self defense situation, but if you'd rather like to ignore them, that's up to you, I guess.
> 
> ...



And yet here we are again with more misconceptions.

For starters, the goal of the Bjj takedown is not to end up in this position (white gi);







The goal of the Bjj takedown is to end up in this position (white gi);






Or with the opponent facing down.

The top position (guard) is a defensive position, so yes you're in the position if something has gone wrong. However, no smart Bjj guy is going to purposely put themselves in that position when they could end up in the second position. Further, good luck kicking me in the head while I'm in that second position. If I'm on top of someone, I can do many nasty things to them before their buddy comes to their aid. Additionally, I can simply disengage and stand back up again. 

Let's also keep in mind that throwing someone to the ground can end a fight more quickly than trading blows with someone. Anyone remember that video of the security guard and the thug? They were trading blows for several minutes before other cops broke them up, and the security guard was trained. You trade punches with a bigger person, you're going to get jacked up, and probably knocked out. If I go for a clinch and slam them into the concrete with a hip throw or Osoto Gari, the fight's probably over right then and there. If not, I can mount him and start pummeling him in the face until he's done, or his buddy tries to intervene.

Yeah, we train throws in Bjj. It came from Judo after all. 

BTW, aren't all weapon disarms from grappling range? Which art do you think is better adept at doing something like that? An art that specializes in striking, or an art that specializes in controlling the limbs of the body?

I'm only doing any of this if I have no other options on the table (i.e. I can't walk away or escape, or said person is going to hurt someone else).


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> And going to the ground in either of those cases is not far removed from suicide. At least better your chances significantly by staying on your feet.
> 
> There are many more reasons why going to the ground is generally a bad idea in a self defense situation, but if you'd rather like to ignore them, that's up to you, I guess.


how clear can this be said?  Let's break this down.

1:  Going to the ground is a bad idea (ie suicide).  We all agree with this.
2:  Going to the ground should generally be avoided as a strategy.
3:  In most fights outside of competition, we will not know what training our opponent (or multiple opponents) have.

Can we agree that these three things are universally accepted as true?  Hanzou, you would agree with these things.  Right?  Kman?  Argus?  Anyone disagree? 

Okay.  Let's move on then.  If being on the ground is suicide, wouldn't it be among the MOST IMPORTANT things for you to learn?  If you don't train appropriately to improve your position, escape from inferior positions, control your opponent, regain your feet and disengage, are you not essentially committing suicide?  And let me be clear, I'm not saying you MUST be a BJJ black belt.  But, come on, guys.  If you are saying this stuff and aren't AT LEAST a _competent_ BJJ blue belt, you're delusional.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> how clear can this be said? Let's break this down.
> 
> 1: Going to the ground is a bad idea (ie suicide). We all agree with this.
> 2: Going to the ground should generally be avoided as a strategy.
> ...



Like I said before;



Hanzou said:


> I'm only doing any of this if I have no other options on the table (i.e. I can't walk away or escape, or said person is going to hurt someone else).



I actually almost got into a streetfight earlier this year. It would have been 1 on 1, the guy had no weapons. He was just some thug looking to start some crap outside my home. Instead of slamming him into the concrete, I politely asked him to leave or I was calling the cops. He started cursing loudly in my face and I just calmly looked at him as if he was an ant on the sidewalk. He then turned and quickly walked away. 

No fuss, no muss.

Now if he had put his hands on me, or tried to attack my wife and/or kids, that scenario would have played out very differently.


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2014)

I hear you, Hanzou.  

The arguments we hear over and over are solid.  It's the next step/conclusion that takes a strange turn.

1:  Ground fighting is usually a bad idea for self defense.
2:  If you are on the ground in a street fight, regaining your feet should usually be your number 1 goal.

To this point, I think everyone here agrees.  It's the next thing.

3:  So, it's not as important to train as the rest of our curriculum.  

That boggles my mind.  If being on the ground is tantamount to "suicide," would it not be a critical and integral part of your training?  I would think it would be the first and most important part.   If I were a student, and my instructor said, "If you end up on the ground, you're dead."  I'd be like, "So, why are we training this other stuff?"


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> I hear you, Hanzou.
> 
> The arguments we hear over and over are solid.  It's the next step/conclusion that takes a strange turn.
> 
> ...



Which is why I showed the video in the OP. Yeah, the guy was an idiot, but beyond that, analyze the actual fight itself;

1. The most damage occurred when both guys hit the ground. If you notice, no one got significantly hurt in the exchange of blows. However once it hit the pavement, the real damage came into play. It went from someone getting a few scrapes to someone possibly getting killed from head blows.

2. The bigger guy instantly had the advantage, and used his weight to dominate.

3. NO ONE came to this guy's aid. NO ONE came to pull this guy off of him when it was clear that the other guy was unconscious. All we hear is ONE GUY telling the bigger guy to stop. Everyone else was getting a Youtube video. The bigger dude relented and finally disengaged. However, if no one else was around, that beatdown would have lasted a lot longer.

Again, its not about me running up to some random meathead and Guard pulling him into closed guard. Its about the meathead tackling me, or swinging at me, or grabbing me and trying to wrestle me down, or pushing me backwards. In all of those situations, I better know what to do when we hit the ground together. ESPECIALLY if he's larger than me. If you don't know what to do, you're going to get seriously hurt, or worse.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2014)

Also , when you do get the mount , remember your head is at the prime height for kicking.
Keep your head on a swivel , do your damage quickly.
No more than three quick strikes , and get back up again fast.
Scan around for anymore attackers.
Tunnel vision is very real and one of the ways to combat it is by getting into the habit of turning your head around all the time while you are doing your techniques.

Warning , this video has a lot of swearing in it.

[video=youtube_share;y70nwuOfY3Y]http://youtu.be/y70nwuOfY3Y[/video]


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Also , when you do get the mount , remember your head is at the prime height for kicking.
> Keep your head on a swivel , do your damage quickly.
> No more than three quick strikes , and get back up again fast.
> Scan around for anymore attackers.
> Tunnel vision is very real and one of the ways to combat it is by getting into the habit of turning your head around all the time while you are doing your techniques.



To be fair though he wasn't in the mounted position, he was still between his opponent's legs (i.e. in his opponent's guard, even though he was clearly out of it). If you notice, while he had control over his hands, his body weight is still stretched out over his opponent's body, pretty much laying on top of him as opposed to sitting on top of him.

Look at the picture I showed and the video above. The mount is when you're sitting on your opponent's abdomen or chest. If he had been in mounted position, he would have had more control over his opponent, and probably seen that kick coming.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Multiple opponents and weapons is dangerous regardless of what you practice.



Well done for stating the obvious...

Wouldn't you agree that if you do have multiple opponents you'd be better off being on your feet and knocking them out quickly like this guy? 




How well do think he would have fared if he'd taken one of them to the ground?


----------



## Argus (Sep 7, 2014)

drop bear said:


> So the bulk of your training is awareness,deescalation and running? And then a bit of hands on bashing people tacked on somewhere?



Nope. But then, I'm not training for self-defense. If I were, I'd be doing something akin to RBSD.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Well done for stating the obvious...
> 
> Wouldn't you agree that if you do have multiple opponents you'd be better off being on your feet and knocking them out quickly like this guy?



Of course. Which is why we learn striking and standing throws in Bjj. 



> How well do think he would have fared if he'd taken one of them to the ground?



Except a lone defender wouldn't take someone to the ground in a situation like that. In that scenario, you're more likely to be taken to the ground by someone else. 

Now tell me, how do you think you'd fare if you get taken to the ground by multiple people, and have no idea what to do when you get there?


----------



## Argus (Sep 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> how clear can this be said?  Let's break this down.
> 
> 1:  Going to the ground is a bad idea (ie suicide).  We all agree with this.
> 2:  Going to the ground should generally be avoided as a strategy.
> ...



Eh, if we agree, that's great. But that wasn't the impression I was getting from Hanzou's comments:



Hanzou said:


> If the only major pitfalls of ground fighting is that your opponent might have a weapon, or superior numbers, then that's a pretty dominant method of fighting IMO.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> To be fair though he wasn't in the mounted position, he was still between his opponent's legs (i.e. in his opponent's guard, even though he was clearly out of it). If you notice, while he had control over his hands, his body weight is still stretched out over his opponent's body, pretty much laying on top of him as opposed to sitting on top of him.
> 
> Look at the picture I showed and the video above. The mount is when you're sitting on your opponent's abdomen or chest. If he had been in mounted position, he would have had more control over his opponent, and probably seen that kick coming.



Yes , my mistake he was in the guard.
But even in the mount , that's a place you still do not want to be spending a lot of time there.
Do damage quickly and get back up.
Under the effects of adrenaline , you tend to see nothing or hear nothing but the opponent, so it is quite likely the kick would still have landed.
Whether he was in the mount or the guard.

Actually he probably would have been safer on the bottom , truth be known.


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> Eh, if we agree, that's great. But that wasn't the impression I was getting from Hanzou's comments:



I think people are misunderstanding each other.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Yes , my mistake he was in the guard.
> But even in the mount , that's a place you still do not want to be spending a lot of time there.
> Do damage quickly and get back up.
> Under the effects of adrenaline , you tend to see nothing or hear nothing but the opponent, so it is quite likely the kick would still have landed.
> ...



Strategy is great but if you don't train it, you can't expect to be able to do it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Of course. Which is why we learn striking and standing throws in Bjj.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Same as any SD situation if I had no idea what to do!

I'd be looking to get back on my feet asap or it's game over for me. Same as anyone if they're on the ground fighting against several guys.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> Yes , my mistake he was in the guard.




No, he wasn't in guard, he was in his opponent's guard. Ironically he was actually in an inferior position, despite the other guy being stunned. He should have passed his guard and entered a more dominant position.



> But even in the mount , that's a place you still do not want to be spending a lot of time there.
> Do damage quickly and get back up.
> Under the effects of adrenaline , you tend to see nothing or hear nothing but the opponent, so it is quite likely the kick would still have landed.
> Whether he was in the mount or the guard.



No argument there. Still, it's easier to see what's going on around you while on your knees than laying on you stomach.




> Actually he probably would have been safer on the bottom , truth be known.



His issue was that he had no idea what he was doing, not what position he was in. What's laughable is that people will actually believe that this guy is a Bjj exponent or something silly like that. A Bjj student with a month of Bjj practice would know to pass that guard and either stand up or mount.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> Nope. But then, I'm not training for self-defense. If I were, I'd be doing something akin to RBSD.



Who would also not spend the bulk of their time avoiding fighting.

Normally it is a case of "the best thing to do is run away. Now we will spend the next hour learning to kill a man with our bare hands."


----------



## drop bear (Sep 7, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> That looks brutal. That must some supreme skill not to snap a bone.



I have done a few shoulders here and there. Broken one bone. But I was seriously cranking that arm. Did the arm in a hammerlock.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Argus said:


> Eh, if we agree, that's great. But that wasn't the impression I was getting from Hanzou's comments:



If I said that the only way you can stop Hanzou-Ryu Ninjutsu is either with a gun, or having multiple people attacking me at once, you'd think I was either full of myself, or full of something else entirely.

Yet that's exactly the main argument against Bjj. You basically need a weapon or a posse to take down a Bjj guy. 

Talk about an ego booster....


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 7, 2014)

mook jong man said:


> No one helps anybody these days do they?
> Instead they just get their phones out , start filming and put it up on the Internet as fast as they can.
> 
> I think it's time for people to put the bloody camera phones down and start intervening in these things.
> The guy was obviously an idiot , but he was already beaten , so why the need to sit on his back and keep hitting him.



no one gets involved cos of the legal situation -- 

(1) you get involved you're going to jail -- 
(2) you don't involved you'll prolly still go to jail cos you're an accessory to the fact.


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> no one gets involved cos of the legal situation --
> 
> (1) you get involved you're going to jail --
> (2) you don't involved you'll prolly still go to jail cos you're an accessory to the fact.



Well you could at least use your phone for ringing the police , or an ambulance.
Instead of pretending you are the next Steven Spielberg.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Same as any SD situation if I had no idea what to do!
> 
> I'd be looking to get back on my feet asap or it's game over for me. Same as anyone if they're on the ground fighting against several guys.



Well that's the point; You should know what to do, and there's an art out there that shows you what to do.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Well that's the point; You should know what to do, and there's an art out there that shows you what to do.



I do know what to do. Get back on my feet asap.

You seem to have pretty much ignored the fact that in the clip I posted the guy was up against multiple opponents and his skills, strategy (staying on his feet) and tactics enabled him to avoid being surrounded and deal with the threats one at a time very quickly and efficiently before any of his opponents could take him to the ground.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 7, 2014)

Is this Sci-Fi?


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 7, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> I do know what to do. Get back on my feet asap.
> 
> You seem to have pretty much ignored the fact that in the clip I posted the guy was up against multiple opponents and his skills, strategy (staying on his feet) and tactics enabled him to avoid being surrounded and deal with the threats one at a time very quickly and efficiently before any of his opponents could take him to the ground.



I acknowledged that in that situation, it was a good idea to stay on your feet and stay mobile. 

However every situation isn't like that one.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> You basically need a weapon or a posse to take down a Bjj guy.



I'm a little confused, is this what this posts and the others is about to you?


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 7, 2014)

transk53 said:


> is this sci-fi?



this is sparta !


----------



## Steve (Sep 7, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> I'm a little confused, is this what this posts and the others is about to you?


It's a bunch of guys essentially saying the same thing.   The only difference is some think it's enough to hope for the best.  "I'll just get on my feet ASAP!"  Famous last words.


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 8, 2014)

i just get the feeling that he goes out looking for a scrap so he can try out the latest move he's been taught............

jmo


----------



## Buka (Sep 8, 2014)

I don't have the multiple quote thing down, so forgive the long way..

Steve said "_I think people are misunderstanding each other_" 

I think he's right.

Hanzou said "_BTW, aren't all weapon disarms from grappling range? Which art do you  think is better adept at doing something like that? An art that  specializes in striking, or an art that specializes in controlling the  limbs of the body?"
_
Having done a lot of both myself, it's the art that specializes in controlling limbs of the body.I'm not saying anyone else's style doesn't have these qualities, I'm just saying what I've found to work the best in these situations.

Steve_  "If being on the ground is suicide, wouldn't it be among the MOST IMPORTANT things for you to learn?" 
_While  I don't like the term suicide as it applies to self defense on the  ground because I really believe this way of thinking was started by us stand up guys, I really love it in the context of this sentence as tactical  principle. To me, it's just doesn't make any sense to ignore this.  Regardless of what art, style, tactical principles you embrace, how  could one not want to have a better game on the floor, ground, top,  bottom whatever? Because although I use the word "game" we all know it's anything but.

An analogy I like (concerning ground work in it's relationship to stand up) came from a student a long while ago. He had trained with us a couple years, then life got in the way and he was gone for a few years. When he came back, we had incorporated ground fighting into our art for a couple years. This ground fighting was taught to us and implemented through good Jiu-jitsu instructors. When that student came back and got into the swing of things for a few months I asked him how he liked the stuff that he hadn't seen before. 

He said, _"It's like I've been cooking Italian food for two years and somebody, just now, introduced me to garlic."_


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 8, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> I'm a little confused, is this what this posts and the others is about to you?



More or less. As Steve said, the multiple opponent and weapon argument is an excuse and a sales tactic so that styles that don't utilize that range of combat can ease the fears of their students. What's nonsensical about that argument is that it your conceding that a person with ground skills will probably demolish you in a fight if you don't have a weapon or have friends with you. Wouldn't such a concession make you want to learn that style of fighting so that you won't get demolished?

I can really think of no other MA on the planet where its *detractors* make such wild claims in its favor. Yet, Bjj is that MA.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 8, 2014)

I don't think anyone is saying you can't win a fight in a SD situation by taking it to the ground, but it's not the smartest *percentage play* when there are so many unknown factors.

Has anyone mentioned terrain yet btw? There could be broken glass on the ground, barbed wire, brass tacks, caltrops, dog faeces, urine, vomitus, nettles, thistles, poison ivy, fire ants etc etc All things I wouldn't want to be rolling around on!

Add to that the possibility of weapons and additional participants *which can be introduced at any time* and these are all good reasons in my opinion to stay on your feet. 

You could quite easily end up losing from a winning position due to the later introduction of other people, as we've seen already.

You have better visibility from your feet, and are in a better position to leg it.

Oh and dogs too, I'd rather give it a kick from a standing position if it's trying to defend it's low-life owner who's attacked me.



Hanzou said:


> You basically need a weapon or a posse to take down a Bjj guy.



Or be better at BJJ. Or be a better ground fighter in some other system. Or be bigger and stronger with some grappling skills. Or have the striking skills to incapacitate him before he takes you down. 

Or slip him a mickey lol

But I don't necessarily have to take him down, I may only have to keep out of range until the cavalry arrive or hamper him long enough to make my escape.

I also don't think anyone has said that it's a bad idea to have some ground fighting skills, or some tactics/techniques for getting back up  on your feet if you do find yourself on the ground. Just that it's not a good idea to have the aim of taking it there. 

The above is based on the assumption that we're still discussing whether or not it's a good idea to take a fight to the ground in a real life self defence situation, and is in response to the whole thread rather than just the line quoted, but I'm no good at that fancy multi-quoting stuff!


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 8, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> More or less. As Steve said, the multiple opponent and weapon argument is an excuse and a sales tactic so that styles that don't utilize that range of combat can ease the fears of their students. What's nonsensical about that argument is that it your conceding that a person with ground skills will probably demolish you in a fight if you don't have a weapon or have friends with you. Wouldn't such a concession make you want to learn that style of fighting so that you won't get demolished?
> 
> I can really think of no other MA on the planet where its *detractors* make such wild claims in its favor. Yet, Bjj is that MA.



Again, your dismissing the multiple opponents scenario rather lightly imo.

Bad guys often tend to hunt in packs, and bullies love an audience - usually of their friends.


----------



## Steve (Sep 8, 2014)

Buka, you're my new hero.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 8, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> More or less. As Steve said, the multiple opponent and weapon argument is an excuse and a sales tactic so that styles that don't utilize that range of combat can ease the fears of their students. What's nonsensical about that argument is that it your conceding that a person with ground skills will probably demolish you in a fight if you don't have a weapon or have friends with you. Wouldn't such a concession make you want to learn that style of fighting so that you won't get demolished?
> 
> I can really think of no other MA on the planet where its *detractors* make such wild claims in its favor. Yet, Bjj is that MA.



I definitely see the advantage playing to your strengths. Of course your opponent will have them too, so will either give you an advantage or disadvantage. I also think there is a difference between a ground fight, and a fight going to the ground.

If I'm trained to grapple, I'd likely keep it at the ground and continue the struggle of skill and strength. If I'm trained to recover from going to the ground, I'd get up. If I'm trained in how to get up against a person trained in taking the fight to the ground, I will get up in a more controlled manner, a lot slower albeit. Then it again comes down to skill of the combatants and strength, or ability to re-direct.

*If* you can pick your fighting ground and opponent, you have an advantage. If I was a JJ trained (or a MA with it's heritage) and I liked a ground fight, I'd be an outdoors type fighter, bit of space. If I'm a striker I'd pick an environment more suited to give it advantage.

This is the part of the distinction I see in Sports Vs. IRL fighting. When I *spar* with grapplers, I stay on the ground because I like to learn how they fight and get the experience. Or they are more skilled then I am and I have little choice, but depending on their skill and my advantages\disadvantages I'll change my tactics, I win some I lose some. I see it no different to getting owner in a striking fight, i can have multiple landed on me before I get my guard up, and other times I dominate.

I agree weapons and multiple opponents is a whole different ball game. I definitely don't think this is the only way to defeat a grappler. (If that's what you think is true and I don't want to take you out of context)

It's hard using YouTube to prove a point, since there is such an abundance of "wins" and "losses" to both ground and stand-up fighting.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 8, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Again, your dismissing the multiple opponents scenario rather lightly imo.
> 
> Bad guys often tend to hunt in packs, and bullies love an audience - usually of their friends.



I'm not dismissing it. I'm pointing out that no martial art really prepares you for multiple attackers or weapons. So to ding Bjj as being weak against multiple attackers or weapons is a bit silly. When you're unarmed and against more than one person, or against an armed person, you're at a disadvantage no matter what you know.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 8, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I'm not dismissing it. I'm pointing out that no martial art really prepares you for multiple attackers or weapons. So to ding Bjj as being weak against multiple attackers or weapons is a bit silly. When you're unarmed and against more than one person, or against an armed person, you're at a disadvantage no matter what you know.



Ahh, yes I thought that's what you meant, but it read to me that the only way to defeat a BJJ practitioner was to use a weapon or multiple people.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 8, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> The above is based on the assumption that we're still discussing whether or not it's a good idea to take a fight to the ground in a real life self defence situation, and is in response to the whole thread rather than just the line quoted, but I'm no good at that fancy multi-quoting stuff!



All of that is more based on the fact that street fighting sucks and should be avoided at all costs. Everything you mentioned above can just as easily happen to you if you're trying to stay on your feet, and get knocked down, sucker punched, tackled from behind, whatever. 

Here's the point; Training to get back up as soon as possible isn't the same as training to fight on the ground. That stupid thug in the video didn't want to get taken to the ground, but he was taken there, and when he was, the fight went from a silly scrap to a very serious altercation. The guy could have died or suffered severe brain injury. People really need to learn how to fight from the ground completely, and that includes not only escapes, but also how to end the altercation if necessary. Frankly some of the "ground tactics" taught in a lot of martial arts is a bad joke, and clearly just implemented because Bjj forced them to implement it.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 8, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> Ahh, yes I thought that's what you meant, but it read to me that the only way to defeat a BJJ practitioner was to use a weapon or multiple people.



No, that's the other side of the argument. Again, its a sales tactic. "Bjj teaches you how to just defeat one person. Our martial art will teach you how to defeat gangs of armed bandits!"


----------



## drop bear (Sep 8, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> All of that is more based on the fact that street fighting sucks and should be avoided at all costs. Everything you mentioned above can just as easily happen to you if you're trying to stay on your feet, and get knocked down, sucker punched, tackled from behind, whatever.
> 
> Here's the point; Training to get back up as soon as possible isn't the same as training to fight on the ground. That stupid thug in the video didn't want to get taken to the ground, but he was taken there, and when he was, the fight went from a silly scrap to a very serious altercation. The guy could have died or suffered severe brain injury. People really need to learn how to fight from the ground completely, and that includes not only escapes, but also how to end the altercation if necessary. Frankly some of the "ground tactics" taught in a lot of martial arts is a bad joke, and clearly just implemented because Bjj forced them to implement it.




Silly question but what if you are copping a beating stand up. Do you ground them or pressure on?

One of the best ways you counter a flurry is to double leg someone.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 9, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Silly question but what if you are copping a beating stand up. Do you ground them or pressure on?
> 
> One of the best ways you counter a flurry is to double leg someone.



Yeah,  I used this video as a prime example for why people would go for a clinch and takedown:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3k1PfjUaq0s

Observe how long that brawl lasted, and the damage to the thug in that video versus the length of the brawl and the damage to the thug in the OP. Big difference.


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 9, 2014)

i would have said the same if you're taking a hammering then you do what you can to get away from it and if you ground them then it's a whole different ball game


----------



## drop bear (Sep 9, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah,  I used this video as a prime example for why people would go for a clinch and takedown:
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3k1PfjUaq0s
> 
> Observe how long that brawl lasted, and the damage to the thug in that video versus the length of the brawl and the damage to the thug in the OP. Big difference.




Yeah and not much risk of a bunch of ransoms jumping in


----------



## Buka (Sep 9, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Yeah,  I used this video as a prime example for why people would go for a clinch and takedown:
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3k1PfjUaq0s
> 
> Observe how long that brawl lasted, and the damage to the thug in that video versus the length of the brawl and the damage to the thug in the OP. Big difference.



I've referenced that clip in DT before! In two ways, actually. In how not to get your *** written up and suspended. But more to the point - what should he have done here? Which, of course, is what you said above... take him down and wrap him up.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 9, 2014)

Some thoughts ...

If you are in an actual self-defense situation, that means the other guy is the one who got to decide how and when and where to attack. This means that all the discussion of what range you would _prefer _to fight at is mostly irrelevant. If you didn't succeed in anticipating and avoiding the situation, then the fight will begin in the manner the attacker dictates. This could mean a sucker punch or tackling you to the ground from behind or using weapons or multiple attackers. It probably will _not _involve a fair fight with a single opponent squaring up in front of you waving his fists. (If it does, then 95% of the time you should be able to walk away.)

What that means is that you should be prepared to deal with the situation you find yourself in: on the ground, standing up, wobbly from a sucker punch, outnumbered, out-armed, whatever.

As far as choosing to go to the ground if you have the opportunity to do so, that's a situational call. I can list a number of scenarios where taking the fight to the ground would be a good idea if you have superior ground-fighting skills. I can list probably more scenarios where it would be a bad idea.

The potential pitfall for BJJ practitioners is failing to prepare for those different scenarios ahead of time. If all your training is focused on getting the fight to the ground and finishing it there, then you are likely to instinctively react that way in a real fight even if it isn't appropriate for the situation at hand. You need to have considered the different possibilities and trained for them before the situation ever arises. I've put my students through scenario training and many of them get the sort of tunnel vision which is useful for winning a match but dangerous in a self-defense situation.

This isn't just a danger for BJJ, of course. I've had stand-up guys get locked into that same mindset where they don't distinguish between the needs of competition and the needs of self-defense survival.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 9, 2014)

*Absolutely Tony and very well put!*

It is important to have multiple options.  You should be able to avoid the situation because you were paying attention and aware.  You should be able to run if needed or utilize tools/weapons if warranted.  You need the ability to kick, strike with your hands if the situation warrants it or trap and lock for control.  You also may need the ability to counter a takedown or initiate a takedown and go the ground if the situation dictates that this would be a good strategy.  In the world of self-defense and personal protection there will be no one thing fits all situations.  There are just to many variables!


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 9, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I'm not dismissing it. I'm pointing out that no martial art really prepares you for multiple attackers or weapons. So to ding Bjj as being weak against multiple attackers or weapons is a bit silly. When you're unarmed and against more than one person, or against an armed person, you're at a disadvantage no matter what you know.



Yes you're at a disadvantage against multiple attackers, yet you're beloved youtube has many clips of one person overcoming the odds and getting the better of the situation against multiple opponents, and all the ones I've seen have done it by staying on their feet, or at least getting back up quickly if they do get taken down.

Is that not proof that some MAs or at least certain training CAN prepare you for multiple opponents?


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 9, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> All of that is more based on the fact that street fighting sucks and should be avoided at all costs. Everything you mentioned above can just as easily happen to you if you're trying to stay on your feet, and get knocked down, sucker punched, tackled from behind, whatever.



I'd disagree completely, there's a far higher likelihood of the things I mentioned happening if YOU want to take it to the ground than if you're trying to stay on your feet.

Simples.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 9, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> I'd disagree completely, there's a far higher likelihood of the things I mentioned happening if YOU want to take it to the ground than if you're trying to stay on your feet.
> 
> Simples.



What if I have the numbers advantage. Taking them to the ground nullifies them.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 9, 2014)

drop bear said:


> What if I have the numbers advantage. Taking them to the ground nullifies them.



Then I guess that would be one of the situations Tony & Brian mentioned where it makes sense to do so.

Somewhat unusual for a self defence situation though, no?


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 9, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Yes you're at a disadvantage against multiple attackers, yet you're beloved youtube has many clips of one person overcoming the odds and getting the better of the situation against multiple opponents, and all the ones I've seen have done it by staying on their feet, or at least getting back up quickly if they do get taken down.
> 
> Is that not proof that some MAs or at least certain training CAN prepare you for multiple opponents?



Nope. 

The example you showed for example was a boxer. Boxers never train for multiple opponents. The guy simply had the benefit of fighting in a cone where all of his opposition was coming from the front of him, so he could tag them as they came into range while he backed up. If he had opponents coming from all directions, that situation may have turned out quite different. Boxing doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, boxing teaches you how to fight so that you can knock people out with punches. If you know how to fight well, there's a good chance you can take more than one untrained moron down.

 There's a big difference there, because there's a lot of martial arts out there that DON'T teach you how to fight period.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Then I guess that would be one of the situations Tony & Brian mentioned where it makes sense to do so.
> 
> Somewhat unusual for a self defence situation though, no?




No. I have friends.

Really I do.

Don't judge me.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 10, 2014)

I can see that you may want to go down like this.







But I can't see any good reason to go down like this.


----------



## RTKDCMB (Sep 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


>



I think I saw my cat do that as a kitten.


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

wtf is that in the 2nd vid ????? moonwalk on your shoulders ????? 

no wonder the other guy looks unimpressed   i'd just be kicking hell out of him - i mean there's more than enough to go at and his arms are pinned to the floor for balance - so nice and easy to stand on while you kick hell out of his head


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I can see that you may want to go down like this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sport Bjj is not the same as self defense Bjj.


----------



## Steve (Sep 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I can see that you may want to go down like this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


To be clear, you're comparing a technique in the top gif to a strategy in the bottom.  Not quite apples and oranges.  Dude's not executing any technique here.  Rather, he's executing a strategy in a competition based upon a set of rules.  The same athlete with the same skills will often look very different based upon the rules.  The best will compete in multiple rulesets in order to avoid getting locked in.  As an example, I mentioned Josh Barnett earlier.  Here's a guy who looks very different when he's in a grappling match, such as Metamoris, or an MMA match, or a submission wrestling match, such as Abu Dabhi.  

It's a grappling competition, so the rules are actually the exact opposite of an MMA match.  In an MMA match, the guy standing controls the range.  If he wants to stand, he can.  In a Sub Wrestling match, the guy on the ground controls the range.  If he doesn't stand, the guy standing is required to engage or he is "fleeing combat."  He'll get warned, then he'll get penalized, and if he continues to refuse to engage, he will be DQd.  

Back to the point, though.  Here are some questions:

1:  Do you think this is the only strategy he ever uses?  In other words, do you really think he'd use this same strategy in another context?
2:  What do we know about his technique?


----------



## Steve (Sep 10, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> wtf is that in the 2nd vid ????? moonwalk on your shoulders ?????
> 
> no wonder the other guy looks unimpressed   i'd just be kicking hell out of him - i mean there's more than enough to go at and his arms are pinned to the floor for balance - so nice and easy to stand on while you kick hell out of his head


LOL.  You would not.  If you took a swipe at his head, you'd be ejected from the competition, and possibly arrested for assault.  What an inappropriate thing to say.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> To be clear, you're comparing a technique in the top gif to a strategy in the bottom.  Not quite apples and oranges.  Dude's not executing any technique here.  Rather, he's executing a strategy in a competition based upon a set of rules.  The same athlete with the same skills will often look very different based upon the rules.  The best will compete in multiple rulesets in order to avoid getting locked in.  As an example, I mentioned Josh Barnett earlier.  Here's a guy who looks very different when he's in a grappling match, such as Metamoris, or an MMA match, or a submission wrestling match, such as Abu Dabhi.
> 
> It's a grappling competition, so the rules are actually the exact opposite of an MMA match.  In an MMA match, the guy standing controls the range.  If he wants to stand, he can.  In a Sub Wrestling match, the guy on the ground controls the range.  If he doesn't stand, the guy standing is required to engage or he is "fleeing combat."  He'll get warned, then he'll get penalized, and if he continues to refuse to engage, he will be DQd.
> 
> ...



That does make sense to me now.


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 10, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> wtf is that in the 2nd vid ????? moonwalk on your shoulders ?????
> 
> no wonder the other guy looks unimpressed   i'd just be kicking hell out of him - i mean there's more than enough to go at and his arms are pinned to the floor for balance - so nice and easy to stand on while you kick hell out of his head



You are supossed to eat more vegetables, not create them


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> LOL.  You would not.  If you took a swipe at his head, you'd be ejected from the competition, and possibly arrested for assault.  What an inappropriate thing to say.



why is it inappropriate ????? the title of this thread is GROUND FIGHTING so in that context i'd well served by putting him out cold  

take a swipe at his head - not my first move - my first move would be a kick to the lower back given how stressed it is already it wouldn't take too much to do serious damage and then let the fun begin


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> You are supossed to eat more vegetables, not create them



yeah well - i'm not into cannibalism just yet so i'll stick to creating them for the time being


----------



## Transk53 (Sep 10, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> why is it inappropriate ????? the title of this thread is GROUND FIGHTING so in that context i'd well served by putting him out cold
> 
> take a swipe at his head - not my first move - my first move would be a kick to the lower back given how stressed it is already it wouldn't take too much to do *serious damage* and then let the *fun* begin



?


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 10, 2014)

drop bear said:


> No. I have friends.
> 
> Really I do.
> 
> Don't judge me.



You've got .... FRIENDS?!? Real ones?

Sorry dude, I've lost all respect for you now 

Seriously though, in my experience and from what I've heard, it's somewhat unusual for people to instigate violence against superior numbers. However your experience may be different.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


>



Pmsl!

Thanks for this, so funny. Is there a link to the full vid you can post please?

 I want to learn that style for if I ever have to fight on the ground!


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> ?




serious damage to the lower spine putting them out of commision before moving on to the other soft and hardish parts


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Pmsl!
> 
> Thanks for this, so funny. Is there a link to the full vid you can post please?
> 
> I want to learn that style for if I ever have to fight on the ground!



you'd better hope that you never come into contact with me and my friends if you're gunna fight IN THE STREET like that - you'd get proper mullered


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 10, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Nope.
> 
> The example you showed for example was a boxer. Boxers never train for multiple opponents. The guy simply had the benefit of fighting in a cone where all of his opposition was coming from the front of him, so he could tag them as they came into range while he backed up. If he had opponents coming from all directions, that situation may have turned out quite different. Boxing doesn't train you to fight multiple opponents, boxing teaches you how to fight so that you can knock people out with punches. If you know how to fight well, there's a good chance you can take more than one untrained moron down.
> 
> There's a big difference there, because there's a lot of martial arts out there that DON'T teach you how to fight period.



Dude, you said I'm wrong then proved my point! His boxing training enabled him to come off best against 4 guys. 

Anyway, it's been fun and entertaining for a while but I'm bowing out of this debate now as I tire of arguing with someone who reads into my replies what he likes rather than what I've actually written.

Until next time, good day sir!


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 10, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> you'd better hope that you never come into contact with me and my friends if you're gunna fight IN THE STREET like that - you'd get proper mullered



Na, once you've all fallen on the floor holding your guts from laughing so hard I can simply stroll away!


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Na, once you've all fallen on the floor holding your guts from laughing so hard I can simply stroll away!



LoL :lfao:   we'd prolly score you out of 10 for your attempt at break dancing :lfao:


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 10, 2014)

If you thought that was good , you should have seen the bloke in the next match.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> Is there a link to the full vid you can post please?
> 
> I want to learn that style for if I ever have to fight on the ground!


I don't have the original clip. Someone made a gif file out of the original clip and posted in another forum. 

IMO, there are different situations for ground fight.

1. You throw your opponent and follow him down to the ground.
2. You throw your opponent and your opponent drags you down with him.
3. Your opponent throw/drag you down.
4. You go down by yourself while your opponent is still standing.

Both 2 and 3 may not be under your control, but 1 and 4 can be totally under your control. The 4th situation is what we are discussing here. Will you go down while your opponent is still standing?

Here is another interest clip.


----------



## Hong Kong Pooey (Sep 10, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I'm not dismissing it. I'm pointing out that no martial art really prepares you for multiple attackers or weapons.



What do you know, it seems that some people on this very forum claim they do train to prepare for multiple opponent situations: 

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63...-i-e-survive-long-enough-practise-run-fu.html

I think you need to go and set them straight 

Seriously though, I forgot to say thanks for this and your other thread that I've recently posted on as they've reinforced a very important principle to me: never get dragged into a war of attrition with a bjj guy!

Cheerio


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> What do you know, it seems that some people on this very forum claim they do train to prepare for multiple opponent situations:
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63...-i-e-survive-long-enough-practise-run-fu.html
> 
> ...



People can claim all they like. If you're not learning how to fight, you're not even going to be able to stop one guy from caving your face in. You'd be surprised how many out of shape, flabby black belts/sashes there are out there who can't even bust a grape in a fruit fight.

Compare how a boxer trains to your typical McDojo martial artist. You shouldn't be surprised that a boxer can do well in a fight, because they're actually trained how to fight.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 10, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> wtf is that in the 2nd vid ????? moonwalk on your shoulders ?????
> 
> no wonder the other guy looks unimpressed   i'd just be kicking hell out of him - i mean there's more than enough to go at and his arms are pinned to the floor for balance - so nice and easy to stand on while you kick hell out of his head




It was a beej fight.

And the butt flopper won.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> You've got .... FRIENDS?!? Real ones?
> 
> Sorry dude, I've lost all respect for you now
> 
> Seriously though, in my experience and from what I've heard, it's somewhat unusual for people to instigate violence against superior numbers. However your experience may be different.



Closer to this kind of thing.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eBKecFy9jp8&has_verified=1&layout=tablet&client=mv-google

So yes but also no.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 10, 2014)

Hong Kong Pooey said:


> What do you know, it seems that some people on this very forum claim they do train to prepare for multiple opponent situations:
> 
> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63...-i-e-survive-long-enough-practise-run-fu.html
> 
> ...



And as I have said on that thread. You put 2 mma fighters against 1 in a cage and the 1 guy goes down in seconds. Generally. Unless there is a massive skill difference.

This because your 2 fighters go in hard and accept they may have to eat a shot.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nKkJGwLBtp8

If your two fighters are legitimately terrible?
http://www.themarysue.com/mma-batman-spider-man-robin/


----------



## Steve (Sep 10, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> I don't have the original clip. Someone made a gif file out of the original clip and posted in another forum.
> 
> IMO, there are different situations for ground fight.
> 
> ...


I think you've really hit on the gap and I appreciate the clarity you bring to the subject.  Some people here _are _talking about situation 4.  I and, if I'm not mistaken, others including Hanzou are mostly talking about situation 3.  

As others have said, there are few situations where 1 will be the smart thing to do.  If you're in a street fight, there are some situations where taking the fight to the ground is the smart thing to do.  As Tony Dismukes said, there are many more where it's NOT the smart thing to do.  There are likely zero situations where 4 is the smart thing to do.  Situation 3 is where half the folks on this thread are in denial, frankly.  

And most of those who are in denial are the same hypocrites who are the first to cry and whine about "bashing" on their own arts when anyone has the temerity to question them, while gleefully bashing the young man in the grappling tournament.  Some real stand up dudes (no pun intended).


----------



## Steve (Sep 10, 2014)

Just in case anyone wants to see the entire video.  For what it's worth, the kid wins that match by triangle choke in less than 1 minute.  A pretty effective strategy for that rule set.  As I mentioned earlier, it works because in a sub grappling match, the guy who is standing MUST engage or he risks penalties and eventually DQ.






If the goal is to win a medal in a tournament, this worked.  As a strategy, I think we can all agree that it is a bad one outside of a tournament.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> I think you've really hit on the gap and I appreciate the clarity you bring to the subject.  Some people here _are _talking about situation 4.  I and, if I'm not mistaken, others including Hanzou are mostly talking about situation 3.
> 
> As others have said, there are few situations where 1 will be the smart thing to do.  If you're in a street fight, there are some situations where taking the fight to the ground is the smart thing to do.  As Tony Dismukes said, there are many more where it's NOT the smart thing to do.  There are likely zero situations where 4 is the smart thing to do.  Situation 3 is where half the folks on this thread are in denial, frankly.
> 
> And most of those who are in denial are the same hypocrites who are the first to cry and whine about "bashing" on their own arts when anyone has the temerity to question them, while gleefully bashing the young man in the grappling tournament.  Some real stand up dudes (no pun intended).



I always feel like I'm the slow witted one in these threads. Are you saying that getting to your feet is not a viable option even if it is what you are trained to do? Hence training to regain your feet is a flawed practice, and people should be training to fight on the ground?

I agree fights take on all shapes and sizes, and outcomes.


----------



## Steve (Sep 10, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> I always feel like I'm the slow witted one in these threads. Are you saying that getting to your feet is not a viable option even if it is what you are trained to do? Hence training to regain your feet is a flawed practice, and people should be training to fight on the ground?
> 
> I agree fights take on all shapes and sizes, and outcomes.


first, the ones who DON'T feel slow witted are probably the ones causing problems!   Seriously, I don't get that impression of you at all and appreciate that you asked a clarifying question, rather than jump to the wrong conclusion.  

Regarding your question, that's not at all what I am trying to say.  If anything, I'm saying that training in a style like Judo, BJJ, Sambo, CaCC Wrestling, Folk Wrestling or some other legitimate grappling art is, IMO, the best way to train to stand up. In other words, the best way to ensure that the fight remains standing is to train as a grappler.  If you're not training from the very worst positions against people who are trained to keep you there, you are not learning to stand up, even if you are walking through the techniques.  

Situation 3, as outlined by Kung Fu Wang, is where your opponent throws you or takes you to the ground, and then decides to follow you to the ground.  In other words, in spite of what training you might have or how effective your instructor told you your anti-grappling is, you are on the ground.  Oh crap.  And he's on top of you.  He's sitting on your diaphragm, keeping you from breathing, and he weighs a metric ton.  What now?

If it sounds bad, that's a good sign, because it IS bad.  It sucks.  It's uncomfortable, and it takes a LONG time to develop the coordination and skill to regain guard, defend yourself, disengage and regain your feet from under mount.  In my opinion, if you're not AT LEAST an experienced blue belt in BJJ or equivalent in some other legitimate grappling art, you just don't know how crappy it really is, and are in denial if you think that your techniques will work against anyone with any training.  

When a grappler discusses ground fighting in a self defense situation, the grappler is GENERALLY thinking about the third scenario, where you find yourself in the worst case scenario, mounted by a bad guy.  Did you want to go there?  No.  But there you are.  

When some martial artists, and we all know them when we read their posts, refer to ground fighting, they insist on referring to scenario 4, where you choose to lay down and yell, "Get in my guard" to a bad guy.  As though anyone thinks this is a good idea.  It's a reflection of their insecurity, in my opinion.


----------



## Steve (Sep 11, 2014)

Crickets for almost 24 hours!  I think I did it.  I won the argument!


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 11, 2014)

Steve said:


> Crickets for almost 24 hours!  I think I did it.  I won the argument!



LOL, I've actually forgotten what the question was.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 11, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> LOL, I've actually forgotten what the question was.



I posted the video to showcase how quickly things can go south in an altercation. In that video, you saw how a silly scrap quickly turned into a possibly life-ending fight.

On the flip side, the guy who dominated the ground quickly and decisively ended the confrontation.

The point is, the ground is a very important combat range. People really should learn it, and respect it.

Steve and Kung Fu Wang's posts were excellent.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 11, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I posted the video to showcase how quickly things can go south in an altercation. In that video, you saw how a silly scrap quickly turned into a possibly life-ending fight.
> 
> On the flip side, the guy who dominated the ground quickly and decisively ended the confrontation.
> 
> ...



I think MAist generally do understand that. I really enjoy yusul sparing, it gives me a reality check with how to manage people's body weight and forces me to work on principles rather than technique in some instances. In fact we have a number of moves that are for keeping the opponent from getting up and forcing them back down in some situations. I guess if it's stand-up, on the ground, long short... it's all about being in control and fluid in all ranges.


----------



## Argus (Sep 11, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I posted the video to showcase how quickly things can go south in an altercation. In that video, you saw how a silly scrap quickly turned into a possibly life-ending fight.
> 
> On the flip side, the guy who dominated the ground quickly and decisively ended the confrontation.
> 
> ...



I don't think anyone even argues that. Being able to at least handle yourself on the ground is a good skill for any martial artist, even if it's not your focus. That's a pretty universally accepted sentiment.

You seem to be overly zealous about defending BJJ, though. I can't see why you failed to recognized any of Hong Kong Pooey's points. It just comes off as having an agenda. I could make a similar thread about how BJJ guys need to respect stand-up arts more, and not think that their art is the end-all-be-all, and you might get how this thread comes off.


----------



## Steve (Sep 11, 2014)

Argus said:


> I could make a similar thread about how BJJ guys need to respect stand-up arts more, and not think that their art is the end-all-be-all, and you might get how this thread comes off.


You are probably well meaning, but this is so funny I snorted beer out my nose!   Look at any stand up thread that focuses on anti grappling or has a title something like "how to remain standing."  Lots of guys who don't know what they're talking about gleefully sharing their ignorance.  It's kind of a thing.  



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 11, 2014)

Argus said:


> I don't think anyone even argues that. Being able to at least handle yourself on the ground is a good skill for any martial artist, even if it's not your focus. That's a pretty universally accepted sentiment.
> 
> You seem to be overly zealous about defending BJJ, though. I can't see why you failed to recognized any of Hong Kong Pooey's points. It just comes off as having an agenda. I could make a similar thread about how BJJ guys need to respect stand-up arts more, and not think that their art is the end-all-be-all, and you might get how this thread comes off.



I recongized Pooey's point just fine. He was simply too broad in the application of that point. The reason the boxer was able to fend off multiple attackers wasn't because he was trained to fight multiple attackers, or simply because he was trained in stand up, it was because he was trained to fight period. Boxers don't train to fight multiple attackers, they train completely for one opponent.  As I stated before; You can train for multiple opponents all you want, but if you're fighting like this;






You're not going to survive a fight against one meathead, much less several coming at you at once.


----------



## Buka (Sep 12, 2014)

I just watched that vid. Makes me kind of proud to have a sense of humor.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

They were wicked fast.


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 12, 2014)

Steve said:


> Just in case anyone wants to see the entire video.  For what it's worth, the kid wins that match by triangle choke in less than 1 minute.  A pretty effective strategy for that rule set.  As I mentioned earlier, it works because in a sub grappling match, the guy who is standing MUST engage or he risks penalties and eventually DQ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



just a little bit of a bad idea ????? i'd say that you'd get killed very easily


----------



## Steve (Sep 12, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> just a little bit of a bad idea ????? i'd say that you'd get killed very easily



Who said "little bit?" I didn't qualify my statement in that way.  You did.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 12, 2014)

yeah but you left your statement open for it though and i jsut filled in the blanks that we were all thinking anyways.

it might work in that arena - fair enough - but try that in the real world and you get hammered no doubt about it --- it is a little bit of a bad idea.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 12, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> yeah but you left your statement open for it though and i jsut filled in the blanks that we were all thinking anyways.
> 
> it might work in that arena - fair enough - but try that in the real world and you get hammered no doubt about it --- it is a little bit of a bad idea.



The point is that no one would try that in the "real world". Bjj stylists are smart enough to know the difference between what works in the competition arena, and what would work in a self defense situation. 

What you should be thinking about is if that guy can slap on a choke from upside down in under a minute against an equally skilled grappler, imagine what he can do to someone he's actually trying to hurt who doesn't know how to defend against any of the holds or submissions of Bjj.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> The point is that no one would try that in the "real world". Bjj stylists are smart enough to know the difference between what works in the competition arena, and what would work in a self defense situation.
> 
> What you should be thinking about is if that guy can slap on a choke from upside down in under a minute against an equally skilled grappler, imagine what he can do to someone he's actually trying to hurt who doesn't know how to defend against any of the holds or submissions of Bjj.


It's not beyond someone to do that IRL seen it a few times.

I've also seen offense used as a defense as DonnaTKD has indicated, many times as well.

You need awareness in all these situations, like any fight if you can size up and predict their fighting style and approach you can prepare much better.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 12, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> It's not beyond someone to do that IRL seen it a few times.



You've seen someone fight from inverted guard in real life? Really?


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

Plenty of times, I'm surprised you don't think so either. In almost the exact way it unfolds in the clip. 

It is normally from a failed attempt like in the clip, but the difference being the guy on the ground is in defense.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

Steve said:


> Just in case anyone wants to see the entire video.  For what it's worth, the kid wins that match by triangle choke in less than 1 minute.  A pretty effective strategy for that rule set.  As I mentioned earlier, it works because in a sub grappling match, the guy who is standing MUST engage or he risks penalties and eventually DQ.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What would be the best method to get around this from the standing kids point of view. I'm thinking he felt pressured into the position from the ref, what approach should he have taken?


----------



## Steve (Sep 12, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> yeah but you left your statement open for it though and i jsut filled in the blanks that we were all thinking anyways.
> 
> it might work in that arena - fair enough - but try that in the real world and you get hammered no doubt about it --- it is a little bit of a bad idea.



I left no blanks to fill in.  I made a simple, clear statement.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve (Sep 12, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> What would be the best method to get around this from the standing kids point of view. I'm thinking he felt pressured into the position from the ref, what approach should he have taken?



In a tournament?  If not, a boot to the head seems like as good a strategy as any.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

Steve said:


> In a tournament?  If not, a boot to the head seems like as good a strategy as any.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Yep. In a  tournament. The kid on the ground looked pretty agile.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 12, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> It's not beyond someone to do that IRL seen it a few times.
> 
> I've also seen offense used as a defense as DonnaTKD has indicated, many times as well.
> 
> You need awareness in all these situations, like any fight if you can size up and predict their fighting style and approach you can prepare much better.



I've seen this clip trotted around as an example of how a Bjj exponent would fight in a given situation, and it's nonsense. A better example would be how the Gracies or Pedro Sauer fight. In those examples, the Bjj exponent is striking to set up a clinch and then a takedown. The ending position is almost always either in mounted, or rear mounted position, setting up ground and pound, or the RNC. Occasionally you'll see Guard, but that's usually when they fight against experienced grapplers, and need to tire them out.

I find it bizarre that you've seen the inverted Guard a "few times" in a SD situation when its pretty rare even in competition where the rules protect you from getting jacked up in that position. You don't even see it in the UFC, because the guy doing it like that would get punted like a football.


----------



## Steve (Sep 12, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> Yep. In a  tournament. The kid on the ground looked pretty agile.



Really he's looking fir the triangle or possibly the kneebar.  There are different ways to manage it.  I tend to not stand, instead work low fir north south and then make him regret trying that crap on me.  Depends in how good he is.   Sometimes it's best to hang back, wait fur him to spin fir the triangle and use that as an opportunity to pass.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 12, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I've seen this clip trotted around as an example of how a Bjj exponent would fight in a given situation, and it's nonsense. A better example would be how the Gracies or Pedro Sauer fight. In those examples, the Bjj exponent is striking to set up a clinch and then a takedown. The ending position is almost always either in mounted, or rear mounted position, setting up ground and pound, or the RNC. Occasionally you'll see Guard, but that's usually when they fight against experienced grapplers, and need to tire them out.
> 
> I find it bizarre that you've seen the inverted Guard a "few times" in a SD situation when its pretty rare even in competition where the rules protect you from getting jacked up in that position. You don't even see it in the UFC, because the guy doing it like that would get punted like a football.




I think it's more from failures to apply a technique or the result of attempts to pull down, or strike to the head sending them down, I see my kids do this all the time. I've seen scraps like this very often in pubs, pool halls outside nightclubs at night etc. Commonly fueled by alcohol, but not always.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 12, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> I think it's more from failures to apply a technique or the result of attempts to pull down, or strike to the head sending them down, I see my kids do this all the time. I've seen scraps like this very often in pubs, pool halls outside nightclubs at night etc. Commonly fueled by alcohol, but not always.



You're seriously saying that you've seen people fighting from inverted guard in real fights, not in BJJ tournament competition?


----------



## drop bear (Sep 12, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> You're seriously saying that you've seen people fighting from inverted guard in real fights, not in BJJ tournament competition?




I have always wanted to do it. I am going to pick the guy I do it to.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VXNroQ1-dWs

 Not the inverted just a butt flop.


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 13, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> You're seriously saying that you've seen people fighting from inverted guard in real fights, not in BJJ tournament competition?



yeah seriously, they were nowhere near as graceful as you see in the clip. They never started there, but went down after the first contact.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 13, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> yeah seriously, they were nowhere near as graceful as you see in the clip. They never started there, but went down after the first contact.



Not buying it, sorry. Inverted guard is an advanced, specialized skill for grappling in a position that most people aren't comfortable even being in. I train at a well established BJJ gym with several black belts. Only a few people at our gym play inverted guard at all and most of them use it just as a transitional tool. None would use it in a real fight.  Inverted guard is not a natural position to fall into and no one is comfortable fighting in it without serious training.

You may have seen some drunk person fall down and flail their legs in the air, but that's not inverted guard.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 13, 2014)

I would be really surprised as well ever to see it in a fight anywhere.  More like what Tony said someone falling with their legs up but that is not an inverted guard.

*Could I see someone transitioning through utilizing an inverted guard for a micro second*.  Maybe!  Now as to the inverted guard itself.  It is stupid!  Stupid in competition, stupid in self defense.  Just not a high probability and I cannot believe anyone would waste time on it!  Not all thoughts or advances in BJJ is good.  This is one!

While I agree that any sane BJJ practitioner would not utilize it during a fight.  Unfortunately you fight like you train.  His instincts might take him there and that would be unfortunate for him as he would probably get stomped!


----------



## donnaTKD (Sep 13, 2014)

jezr74 said:


> What would be the best method to get around this from the standing kids point of view. I'm thinking he felt pressured into the position from the ref, what approach should he have taken?



stand up straight and drop him on his head  

you might be able to stand up straight and then collapse to the side so that you end up on his back with his legs round your head from where you'd be able to squeeze out and put an ankle lock on him - maybe......


----------



## jezr74 (Sep 13, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Not buying it, sorry. Inverted guard is an advanced, specialized skill for grappling in a position that most people aren't comfortable even being in. I train at a well established BJJ gym with several black belts. Only a few people at our gym play inverted guard at all and most of them use it just as a transitional tool. None would use it in a real fight.  Inverted guard is not a natural position to fall into and no one is comfortable fighting in it without serious training.
> 
> You may have seen some drunk person fall down and flail their legs in the air, but that's not inverted guard.


Nothing to be sorry about. If the guys in the fight wanted to be in that position by choice or not, I wouldn't know. As to their skill level, it's irrelevant to me as well, it's just something I've seen.

Drunken failings or not I've seen this, alcohol has been involved as I've said. But if they are in that position and try to, or attempt to, get a hold and stay down with opportunity to get up. They are doing it in my opinion, if they are a blue belt, just found themselves there or read it in a magazine I don't know. You may know better than to try this in real life as a tactical decision in an encounter, but I'll assume you understand the risks involved more and naturally go for other options.

I have to say I'm really surprised people have not seen it happen more. It's not overly common definitely, but I've seen it enough that it's been topical when talking with mates. I've seen it been successful as well.


----------



## Steve (Sep 13, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> stand up straight and drop him on his head
> 
> you might be able to stand up straight and then collapse to the side so that you end up on his back with his legs round your head from where you'd be able to squeeze out and put an ankle lock on him - maybe......



You'd do that in a grappling tournament?  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (Sep 13, 2014)

Steve said:


> You'd do that in a grappling tournament?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Drop down inverted guard right back at them until the ref just gives up in disgust.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Sep 14, 2014)

donnaTKD said:


> stand up straight and drop him on his head



Once again, we are talking about a sport with rules. This isn't a fight. Your suggestion is roughly equivalent to suggesting the batter in a baseball game should try to win by turning around and smashing the catcher in his head with the bat.

There are those within the BJJ community who would like to see grappling competition stay closer to combative realities, but as it stands it is a sport and you can't blame the people who want to excel at that sport for finding different ways to win within the confines of the given rules.


----------



## drop bear (Sep 14, 2014)

I went to the ground on a guy again last night. Some big angry dude come out of prison with no social skills. 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KX3BacOqEik

Its a good one for if they are right up in your face threatening to bash you.

Mine was nowhere near as impressive as that. But bad guy wound up on his back with me on top. So winners are grinners.


----------



## Hanzou (Sep 14, 2014)

drop bear said:


> I went to the ground on a guy again last night. Some big angry dude come out of prison with no social skills.
> 
> http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KX3BacOqEik
> 
> ...



You're a bad dude Drop Bear. I couldn't pull something like that off even if I tried.

I prefer the more subtle (no-gi) Judo hip throws;

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qJh-CcyRgDI

In anycase, I'm glad you're okay.


----------

