# Ground fighting



## Mr. President (Jul 4, 2013)

A significant portion of the criticism of those who challenge Chinese martial arts, is "how are all those fancy moves gonna help you when you're on the ground"?

But I know that Chin Na has various ground applications, and perhaps some styles of Shuai Jiao as well. Are these methods comprehensive enough that they are able to deal with any ground fighter of any other martial art, like Sambo, Greco Roman, Judo, BJJ etc?


----------



## Cyriacus (Jul 4, 2013)

Whether they are or not, you cant learn how to grapple without grappling. Plenty of folks know how to grapple until they try and grapple with someone who knows how to grapple.


----------



## frank raud (Jul 4, 2013)

Probably not. The question is not are the Chinese techniques comprehensive enough, it is do they get practiced enough to be of use against a specialist in the grappling game.


----------



## clfsean (Jul 4, 2013)

The majority of TCMA's don't roll around on the ground if it can be at all helped. Much of that comes from the battlefield notion, you get knocked down, you get dead. SJ is about putting people on the ground. I've not seen much if any of the major SJ styles playing on the ground. Same with QN. It's about locking/tearing/breaking/immobilizing to put somebody on the ground. Again not saying either of these couldn't be used on the ground, but that's not what they're for. The "ground based" stuff I've seen ... Di Tang, Gou Quan... they're not about fighting on the ground. They're about getting up from the ground. In Lama Pai, we have a Di Tang set & from what I've seen of it, it's about getting up not fighting on, or knocking the opponent down so I can get up & stomp on him.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jul 4, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> Whether they are or not, you cant learn how to grapple without grappling. Plenty of folks know how to grapple until they try and grapple with someone who knows how to grapple.



This is so true!  Absolutely true!!!!


----------



## SuitableScroll (Jul 4, 2013)

I go with what Bruce Lee said... "If you go to the ground, you need to train harder or find a better teacher." If you are superior in striking, and know how to defend from being taken to the ground, you don't go to ground. Besides, you play to your strengths. You don't kick a kicker. You don't grapple with a grappler.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jul 4, 2013)

SuitableScroll said:


> I go with what Bruce Lee said... "If you go to the ground, you need to train harder or find a better teacher." If you are superior in striking, and know how to defend from being taken to the ground, you don't go to ground. Besides, you play to your strengths. You don't kick a kicker. You don't grapple with a grappler.



So if some guy comes up behind you and drags you down so him and his buddies can put you out of commission, i guess you just let them, because you, in your foolishness, need to train harder and find a better teacher. This is just the consequence of your foolishness. I mean, obviously. Because those guys care SO much about your striking skills.


----------



## mograph (Jul 4, 2013)

I think we have a logical end to this in a non-competition situation:

1. Train so that it is impossible for you to be taken to the ground by anyone.
2. If you can't do that (duh), learn to grapple well enough to escape or well enough to disable your opponent. Then escape.

The confusion may be that in CMA (as is my understanding), _choosing_ to go to the ground or attempting to get a submission is a bad idea. The former should be obvious (you may lose control of the situation and get into trouble), but in the latter case, you opponent could submit ... then knife you when you release him. Also, it would be a bad idea to go to ground when the opponent has friends: even if you get a superior position, they could kick the snot out of you.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jul 4, 2013)

mograph said:


> I think we have a logical end to this in a non-competition situation:
> 
> 1. Train so that it is impossible for you to be taken to the ground by anyone.
> 2. If you can't do that (duh), learn to grapple well enough to escape or well enough to disable your opponent. Then escape.
> ...



He can also knife you before you release him. Weapons are pretty handy (handy! haha!)


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 5, 2013)

mograph said:


> I think we have a logical end to this in a non-competition situation:
> 
> 1. Train so that it is impossible for you to be taken to the ground by anyone.
> 2. If you can't do that (duh), learn to grapple well enough to escape or well enough to disable your opponent. Then escape.
> ...



Avoiding the ground in a self-defense situation where possible is probably a good idea in most situations.  However you seem to be confused about what a submission really is.  Releasing someone unharmed when they submit is what you do in competition or when training with friends.  In a self-defense scenario where your opponent might have a knife, you choke your assailant unconscious or break their limbs.  There is no tapping out.


----------



## SuitableScroll (Jul 5, 2013)

If you have good situational awareness, then you shouldn't be snuck up on. And if by chance someone grabs you from behind, I don't know about you, but that's some of the first defenses I learned and practiced so if I was unfortunate enough to be grabbed I could escape it. I'm not saying, necessarily, that you would NEVER go to ground, but that should never be a choice and you should be properly prepared so you are not taken to the ground.


----------



## Cyriacus (Jul 5, 2013)

SuitableScroll said:


> If you have good situational awareness, then you shouldn't be snuck up on. And if by chance someone grabs you from behind, I don't know about you, but that's some of the first defenses I learned and practiced so if I was unfortunate enough to be grabbed I could escape it. I'm not saying, necessarily, that you would NEVER go to ground, but that should never be a choice and you should be properly prepared so you are not taken to the ground.



Oh god.

1: "Then you shouldnt be snuck up on". Do you seriously believe that? Do you think that your potential attacker thinks youre stupid? Are you actually literally stupid? No, youre not, right? Then why would you assume that your attacker is. 'Sneaking' up on people is damn easy.
2: Has it never occured to you that theres a defense against everything, and that the person trying to hurt you doesnt give a damn about your training? Has it occured to you that the reason people get hurt is because defense is NOT reliable? If you let your imagination run wild, it almost becomes better to be attacked than it is to attack someone. Think about that for a second. Also, dragging someone down from behind takes roughly one second, or less. Are you telling me your defense against a takedown from behind takes less than a second, including the time itll take for you to figure out whats going on, and identify the correct technique? Because you dont need to match his speed. You need to be faster, and you need to do something that will physically disable him. In less than a second, off balance, being taken down to the ground by an attack you cannot identify in time by a person or persons you cannot see. Right.
3: "I could escape it"? Could is the operative word here. And I could take you down. Do you consider yourself totally incapable of taking someone down from behind because *gasps* theres a possibility of resistance? No? Well then, why do you assume that your attacker doesnt feel the same way.
4: Going to the ground is great for the attacker. Its only bad for you, the poor victim. But learning to grapple is equally useful for _learning how to get back up quickly_.

Forgive the tone - This just tends to get the point across easier. Sometimes easy is clearer than nice. I can only hope you understand


----------



## mograph (Jul 5, 2013)

Tony Dismukes said:


> However you seem to be confused about what a submission really is.  Releasing someone unharmed when they submit is what you do in competition or when training with friends.  In a self-defense scenario where your opponent might have a knife, you choke your assailant unconscious or break their limbs.  There is no tapping out.


Fair enough. I was taking my position from a story about a professional grappler who was attacked, turned the tables, then either out of honour or habit, released the attacker when he tapped out. The attacker then pulled a knife and stabbed the grappler.

I now realize that that poor fellow was probably an unusual case.


----------



## mograph (Jul 5, 2013)

Cyriacus said:


> But learning to grapple is equally useful for _learning how to get back up quickly_.


Yes. I wouldn't bet my life on a perfect ability to avoid all potential situations where I could be taken down. To prepare for that possibility by learning enough grappling to get up quickly just seems prudent.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jul 5, 2013)

mograph said:


> Fair enough. I was taking my position from a story about a professional grappler who was attacked, turned the tables, then either out of honour or habit, released the attacker when he tapped out. The attacker then pulled a knife and stabbed the grappler.
> 
> I now realize that that poor fellow was probably an unusual case.



I could see that happening with someone who only trained for sport and never thought about the actual martial application of his art.  That's why when I teach beginners I always make sure they understand the street usage of the technique before worrying about competition aspects.


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (May 25, 2014)

Being proficient at grappling is more of having allot of hours of training rolling around on the ground just like being able to spar good you need to have allot of hours of sparring logged. 

It's why so many experienced TMA people get their butts handed to them against an amateur sport fighter that  might only have a couple years of training but 10 times the sparring hours logged in their training. 

Traditional arts do have techniques that help defend against going to the ground or how to fight and get back up off the ground but if you haven't practiced them for many hours their near useless against a experiences grappler. 

I personally think most TMA people should have a good defensive ground game so they can recover from a take down and get back up to their stand up.


----------



## drop bear (May 25, 2014)

SuitableScroll said:


> I go with what Bruce Lee said... "If you go to the ground, you need to train harder or find a better teacher." If you are superior in striking, and know how to defend from being taken to the ground, you don't go to ground. Besides, you play to your strengths. You don't kick a kicker. You don't grapple with a grappler.



And don't eyegouge from the bottom.


----------



## drop bear (May 25, 2014)

mograph said:


> I think we have a logical end to this in a non-competition situation:
> 
> 1. Train so that it is impossible for you to be taken to the ground by anyone.
> 2. If you can't do that (duh), learn to grapple well enough to escape or well enough to disable your opponent. Then escape.
> ...




It is a lot safer and easier to hold a guy if he is on the ground than it is if he is standing. It is also easier to beat on a guy if you are on top of him.

That is the whole point of a dominant position and people need to think really hard before they give up a dominant position in a fight.

If you want to keep the guy in a fifty fifty all the time you need significantly better skills than they have and you run the risk of eating a shot that will end your ability to defend yourself. What I mean by this is you are in front of him trading shots. It is a risky way to fight.

Now you don't need that many shots to end somone if they are on the ground so even a choice of putting the guy down giving him a couple and standing back up is pretty high percentage.

Can you outrace the five guys waiting to get you? Who knows it is a fight its risky. I am sorry but there is nothing that prevents that. The best defence is to have the five guys in your favour.

LiveLeak.com - MMA style street fight (comments)


----------



## mograph (May 25, 2014)

I could only see going to the ground as a percentage play if escape were not an option.


----------



## drop bear (May 25, 2014)

mograph said:


> I could only see going to the ground as a percentage play if escape were not an option.




What if they fall over. Do you curb stomp them or let them take the initiative and wait until they get back up?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 25, 2014)

Mr. President said:


> Chin Na has various ground applications, and perhaps some styles of Shuai Jiao as well. Are these methods comprehensive enough that they are able to deal with any ground fighter of any other martial art, like Sambo, Greco Roman, Judo, BJJ etc?



CMA doesn't have "ground fight". Some stand up locks can be applied to take your opponent all the way down to the ground. 






Some throws can be used to set up the ground game nicely. If you have strong "head lock", you can use it in your side mount and make our opponent to tap out.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 25, 2014)

ST1Doppelganger said:


> It's why so many experienced TMA people get their butts handed to them against an amateur sport fighter that  might only have a couple years of training but 10 times the sparring hours logged in their training.



This is why Chinese always believe that "3 years of CMA training cannot match with 1 year of wrestling training". When a CMA guy is working on his form "solo", a wrestler is already working on the mat "with partner".


----------



## drop bear (May 25, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is why Chinese always believe that "3 years of CMA training cannot match with 1 year of wrestling training". When a CMA guy is working on his form "solo", a wrestler is already working on the mat "with partner".



Wrestlers also traditionally have the hardest work ethic in any martial arts style.


----------



## mograph (May 25, 2014)

drop bear said:


> What if they fall over. Do you curb stomp them or let them take the initiative and wait until they get back up?


If escape were an option, I would take advantage of his falling down and run. If escape were not yet an option, standing, I would kick him on the ground until escape _became_ an option.  

I don't go to bars, hang around tough neighborhoods, nor do I engage in arguments about sports. I don't seek fights and I'm pretty good at deflecting angry people. I'm fifty-four years old and live a quiet life, so if I were ever to get into that kind of fight, it would probably be a life-and-death situation: no youthful head-butting or kung-fu-skills-proving here. I would try to do whatever it would take to get the hell out of there. 

Would I succeed? I don't know. But there's no way I would get down on the ground and get that close to a violent assailant if putting some serious distance between us were an option.


----------



## Buka (May 26, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Wrestlers also traditionally have the hardest work ethic in any martial arts style.



I think so, too.


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (May 26, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> CMA doesn't have "ground fight". Some stand up locks can be applied to take your opponent all the way down to the ground.
> 
> Some throws can be used to set up the ground game nicely. If you have strong "head lock", you can use it in your side mount and make our opponent to tap



Not fully true they have some ground fighting  styles like dog style and there was some ground fighting chin na apps back in the day. 

It just wasn't practical rolling around on the battle field against people with weapons so thats why they didnt concentrate on it and evolve it. For instance what we all know as the Brazilian guard wasn't realy made by the Brazilians it was a ground chin na position & most likely a ju jitsu position before BJJ took it. 

There's even a chin na book from around the 30's with a pic of the guard in it and yes I know BJJ was made and evolved a bit before the 30s.


----------



## drop bear (May 26, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> CMA doesn't have "ground fight". Some stand up locks can be applied to take your opponent all the way down to the ground.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




By the way for those that enjoyed the combat scenario thread and I said they were doing crappy throws.

This is an example of the working version of that.


----------



## qianfeng (May 27, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is why Chinese always believe that "3 years of CMA training cannot match with 1 year of wrestling training".
> 
> Its not "3 years of CMA training cannot match with 1 year of wrestling training", its &#8220;&#19977;&#24180;&#25331;&#19981;&#22914;&#24403;&#24180;&#25684;" meaning one year of fist fighting cannot match a year of wrestling not CMA is not match to wrestling.


----------



## wingchun100 (May 27, 2014)

Mr. President said:


> A significant portion of the criticism of those who challenge Chinese martial arts, is "how are all those fancy moves gonna help you when you're on the ground"?
> 
> But I know that Chin Na has various ground applications, and perhaps some styles of Shuai Jiao as well. Are these methods comprehensive enough that they are able to deal with any ground fighter of any other martial art, like Sambo, Greco Roman, Judo, BJJ etc?



Chin Na has to do with joint locks, not necessarily grappling. The best defense against grappling is to keep them out of grappling range.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> The best defense against grappling is to keep them out of grappling range.


This is very difficult to do. When you attack your opponent, you have to move in. If you just keep moving back, soon or later you will lose your courage to fight.


----------



## wingchun100 (May 27, 2014)

That is what you train to do though. If I train as a boxer, I want to stay in punching range. If I do tae kwon do, I want to stay in kicking range. Wing chun fits in somewhere right between the punching and grappling range. So you are always training to stay in YOUR comfortable fighting range, which may very well mean keeping them OUT of theirs...unless of course they train in the same or similar style.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2014)

Since it very difficult to maintain in certain range, we should train in all ranges. We should not have any weakness in certain range.


----------



## wingchun100 (May 27, 2014)

Maybe so, but the majority of people train in one range. Therefore, they train to maintain that range.


----------



## mograph (May 27, 2014)

Isn't a good strategy to move in, but not to _stay_ in? 

(Just asking.)


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2014)

mograph said:


> Isn't a good strategy to move in, but not to _stay_ in?
> 
> (Just asking.)


When you move in, if your opponent puts a "fishing hook" on your body, when you move back, you will pull your opponent with you. IMO, to "move in" but "not to stay in" just contradict to itself. It's like you want to have relationship with a girl but you don't want to marry her. Sometime it's not up to you but it's up to her. When she has your baby, you are "hooked".


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (May 27, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> Maybe so, but the majority of people train in one range. Therefore, they train to maintain that range.



Actually traditional martial artist are a dying breed and most adults are now taking some type of MMA kick boxing or grappling. 

MMA covers most of the ranges that exist, kick boxing covers the striking and then has the clinch & keeping an experienced grappler from shooting is easier said then done. 

Sadly if you encounter another martial artist on the street that is attacking you this is most likely what your going to be going up against. 

If you don't train in all ranges your going to get caught with your pants down and be wondering how this happened when you regain consciousness IMHO.


----------



## blindsage (May 27, 2014)

wingchun100 said:


> Chin Na has to do with joint locks, not necessarily grappling. The best defense against grappling is to keep them out of grappling range.



Joint locks are part of grappling, they are not separate things.


----------



## Buka (May 27, 2014)

mograph said:


> Isn't a good strategy to move in, but not to _stay_ in?
> 
> (Just asking.)



It depends on what you got. We used to call being on the inside as "in his kitchen". If you know how to work in the kitchen, you stay there and completely ruin his day. If you don't know how to work there, what the hell are you doing in the kitchen?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 27, 2014)

blindsage said:


> Joint locks are part of grappling, they are not separate things.



The term "grappling" is not very clear. Some people use it as "ground game only". Some people use it as "stand up throw + stand up lock + ground game".


----------



## drop bear (May 28, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> This is very difficult to do. When you attack your opponent, you have to move in. If you just keep moving back, soon or later you will lose your courage to fight.




And it is not correct anyway. The best defence against grappling is grappling.


----------



## drop bear (May 28, 2014)

mograph said:


> Isn't a good strategy to move in, but not to _stay_ in?
> 
> (Just asking.)




Yeah pretty much. You have to force the grappler to shoot from as are away as possible and as desparatly as possible. Hitting him hard creates that circumstance.


----------



## wingchun100 (May 28, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> The term "grappling" is not very clear. Some people use it as "ground game only". Some people use it as "stand up throw + stand up lock + ground game".



Thank you. And since we are all entitled to interpret terms as we want, my interpretation of grappling did not include joint locks.


----------



## wingchun100 (May 28, 2014)

And by that I mean interpret them within reason, of course. There are certain limits on how far an interpretation can be stretched. For example you couldn't say that someone who knows a thousand kicks and has two submission holds in their repertoire is a grappler. LOL


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 28, 2014)

ST1Doppelganger said:


> Actually traditional martial artist are a dying breed and most adults are now taking some type of MMA kick boxing or grappling.



Do you have a citation for that? I still see plenty of Karate/Kung Fu/TKD/Ninjutsu/etc schools around. MMA still looks like a minority pursuit to me.

BTW - "traditional" is a slippery term. Muay Thai and BJJ are older than TKD and most of the Japanese schools of Karate.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Yeah pretty much. You have to force the grappler to shoot from as far away as possible and as desparatly as possible. Hitting him hard creates that circumstance.


A good wrestler will wrap his opponent's arms and then move in. When his opponent's arms are wrapped, his opponent will lost his striking tool.


----------



## drop bear (May 28, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> A good wrestler will wrap his opponent's arms and then move in. When his opponent's arms are wrapped, his opponent will lost his striking tool.



You really are not likely to catch a persons arms if they can strike and are going full noise at you.


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (May 28, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Do you have a citation for that? I still see plenty of Karate/Kung Fu/TKD/Ninjutsu/etc schools around. MMA still looks like a minority pursuit to me.
> 
> BTW - "traditional" is a slippery term. Muay Thai and BJJ are older than TKD and most of the Japanese schools of Karate.



It's just a personal observation of what I've seen backed with no statistics. 

Agreed you still see allot of somewhat traditional schools (mostly mc dojos)  but when you look at those schools the majority of their students are children or young teens and are not 18 years of age or above or they are people looking for the health benefits of MA. (Still just an observation & not backed by any statistics). 


This is why I specifically said you most likely would be going up against a MMA, kick boxer, or grappler in a street conflict.
(Talking about adults self defense scenarios not school yard scenarios)

I'm also aware of the term traditional being a slippery term and thats why I specifically mentioned those three arts or groupings of arts. 

Again this is all just my opinion.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 28, 2014)

drop bear said:


> You really are not likely to catch a persons arms if they can strike and are going full noise at you.


It all comes down to "strategy".


----------



## Tony Dismukes (May 28, 2014)

ST1Doppelganger said:


> I'm also aware of the term traditional being a slippery term and thats why I specifically mentioned those three arts or groupings of arts.



The reason I mentioned it was that your original post referred to traditional martial artists as a "dying breed" and stated that most adults were now studying MMA, kickboxing, or grappling.  From my standpoint, most grapplers _are _traditional martial artists. The same applies to practitioners of Muay Thai (one of the more popular forms of kickboxing).


----------



## ST1Doppelganger (May 28, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> The reason I mentioned it was that your original post referred to traditional martial artists as a "dying breed" and stated that most adults were now studying MMA, kickboxing, or grappling.  From my standpoint, most grapplers _are _traditional martial artists. The same applies to practitioners of Muay Thai (one of the more popular forms of kickboxing).



Agreed they are considered  a type of TMA but they are still pretty much the main arts that are in the MMA arts so thats why I referred to them the way I did i guess I should have referred to them as sport fighting arts instead. 

My opinion is also bias since In my circumstance I've been looking for a Kung fu school for over three years now since I relocated and haven't found one i feel is worth giving my time to. 

I've found multiple Taekwondo  & MMA schools but there's only 2 Kung fu schools with limited scheduling amongst other limitations. 

I'd rather be learning what people call internal Chinese arts (got to love classification or grouping) but since there aren't any my best choice of schools for me is a club that has individual instructors for BJJ, Judo & Aikido. 

I guess I'm going back to my roots of BJJ & Judo and will be learning a new art of Aikido which I will admit has always intrigued me.


----------



## drop bear (May 29, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It all comes down to "strategy".




Which is technically flawed. You are stopping two hands with one And you are doing it by trying to chase each hand and catch it before they hit your head.

So they have more opportunity to hit you than you have to block.

Then you are trying to isolate one of his hands as it is flying at you before the other one nailes you in the head or the first one retracts.


The faster that drill is done the less it works. Unless the guy is only throwing big shots that you are more likely to catch.

And you can drill that full noise with a set of gloves and a mouth guard.


----------



## mograph (May 29, 2014)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It all comes down to "strategy".


Was this tested with a feint before a punch? Or a simultaneous high/low punch?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (May 29, 2014)

mograph said:


> Was this tested with a feint before a punch? Or a simultaneous high/low punch?



You can use this strategy to test any punching combination (not kicks). It has several main purposes:

1. If you just run toward your opponent with your big fist and try to hit on his face, you can put your opponent in "defense" mode.
2. You extend your big fist as close to your opponent's face as possible. This way, you don't give your opponent enough space to generate his powerful and fast punch. It works as similar to the boxing extend arm jab that you put your boxing glove right in front of your opponent's face..
3. Hide your head behind your big fist so your opponent will have hard time to hit your "head". This works similar to the boxing guard.
4. You only allow your opponent to punch from the left side of your left arm, or from the right side of your right arm. Your opponent will have no chance to hit between your arms. this will simplify your defense. You only have to protect your center from inside out. You don't have to protect your center from outside in.
5. It will create a good opportunity for you to get a "head lock" or "double over hooks" on your opponent. You can then use it to take your opponent down. This will be your main goal - to take your opponent down ASAP.
6. ...


----------

