# What Paul Vunak said about BJJ



## PhotonGuy

Paul Vunak once said that a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style. I don't know if he was paid to make such a statement but after hearing that I became skeptical of Paul.


----------



## drop bear

Video Paul Vunak LOSES IN STREET FIGHT Frequency

Understandable if he has been toweled up by a bjjer on the street.


----------



## drop bear

I don't know how legitimate that vid is by the way.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

drop bear said:


> Video Paul Vunak LOSES IN STREET FIGHT Frequency
> 
> Understandable if he has been toweled up by a bjjer on the street.


 I can't tell from the video if there is any truth to the claim that the guy getting choked out is Vunak. The picture quality isn't good enough to tell.

However, given that Vunak started training BJJ with Rorion Gracie in 1983 and has been training BJJ ever since, I would be very skeptical of claims that he was choked out by a blue belt in a street fight.


----------



## Mephisto

PhotonGuy said:


> Paul Vunak once said that a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style. I don't know if he was paid to make such a statement but after hearing that I became skeptical of Paul.


Judging by some of your comments here I'm skeptical of you. Paul is a recognized authority on self defense buy I still question what he says. In fact I question everything I read, expert or not, no one is beyond question. So if this statement is cause for you to use rational thought, go right ahead, it's about time.

As for a one year BJJ beating a 20 year martial artist? I believe Bruce Lee made a quote about a person with a year of wrestling and boxing being able to beat most martial artists, I'd have to verify that though. The fact is if you can't grapple you have to be a very high level striker to overcome a Bjjers ground game. If said Bjj guy is also very experienced you're in trouble. Paul is one to advocate dirty fighting and it seems even he realizes you can't  bite, claw, and knee stomp your way out of every situation. Ground fighting is an important skill to have, There are plenty of videos out there of experienced strikers going to the ground where neither fighter is skilled.


----------



## Danny T

drop bear said:


> Video Paul Vunak LOSES IN STREET FIGHT Frequency
> 
> Understandable if he has been toweled up by a bjjer on the street.


Hard to say that is Vu for certain. Doesn't appear to be Vunak by his stance and the way he carries himself. 

If this was him and he did get choked out where is all chatter over his getting choked out?

This is more likely put out by someone who has a dislike for Vunak and is attempting to discredit him.


----------



## Mephisto

Danny T said:


> Hard to say that is Vu for certain. Doesn't appear to be Vunak by his stance and the way he carries himself.
> 
> If this was him and he did get choked out where is all chatter over his getting choked out?
> 
> This is more likely put out by someone who has a dislike for Vunak and is attempting to discredit him.


This video made the rounds a while back, there definately was some chatter but I don't know that it was ever taken seriously.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Mephisto said:


> This video made the rounds a while back, there definately was some chatter but I don't know that it was ever taken seriously.


 If you check out the comments for the video on YouTube, the consensus that the guy doesn't even look like Vunak.


----------



## Buka

When I first watched the vid  just now, I thought the guy in the black was supposed to be Vunak.

The guy that got choked? Doesn't look anything like Vunak. Not even close.

Could this be the first time the internet is wrong? Oh, the horror.


----------



## Buka

Back in the early nineties I heard that statement, too. About a BJJ guy with one year experience. Man, I just shook my head and laughed.

I can only speak for me and the guys I trained with and the guys I taught. We trained hard, we fought hard and we fought all the time, in Karate, kickboxing and boxing.

A year and a half after hearing that absurd statement, which was a year after training BJJ....I respectfully agreed with it completely - at least against me and mine. I am not speaking about anyone else in striking arts, just us.

I'm not sure if it's true anymore, because all the karate guys I know now all do grappling training. Again, I'm just speaking of the folks I know now and knew then.

You young guys are lucky. Martial Arts has come a long way.


----------



## PhotonGuy

Mephisto said:


> Paul is a recognized authority on self defense buy I still question what he says. In fact I question everything I read, expert or not, no one is beyond question. So if this statement is cause for you to use rational thought, go right ahead, it's about time.


Some people will say just about anything if money is involved.



Mephisto said:


> As for a one year BJJ beating a 20 year martial artist? I believe Bruce Lee made a quote about a person with a year of wrestling and boxing being able to beat most martial artists, I'd have to verify that though.


Supposedly Bruce Lee also said he would lose in a fight against Muhammad Ali, that he wouldn't stand a chance with his small Chinese hands. But like what you said about him saying a person with a year of boxing and wrestling beating most martial artists, it could be all hype. 



Mephisto said:


> The fact is if you can't grapple you have to be a very high level striker to overcome a Bjjers ground game. If said Bjj guy is also very experienced you're in trouble. Paul is one to advocate dirty fighting and it seems even he realizes you can't  bite, claw, and knee stomp your way out of every situation. Ground fighting is an important skill to have, There are plenty of videos out there of experienced strikers going to the ground where neither fighter is skilled.



I do believe it is important to know ground grappling and that's why I took it up, but there is more to fighting than just grappling just like there is more to fighting than just striking. I was once at this seminar which taught hand to hand combat that they would teach in the military and somebody asked a question about ground fighting. The instructor said that being able to ground grapple was good but if you're in a street situation where you end up being taken to the ground the thing to do is just get back up. Don't try to fight on the ground but get back up. This is especially true if your opponent has friends and you try ground grappling with him, his friends will give you a shoe party.


----------



## Hanzou

PhotonGuy said:


> I do believe it is important to know ground grappling and that's why I took it up, but there is more to fighting than just grappling just like there is more to fighting than just striking. I was once at this seminar which taught hand to hand combat that they would teach in the military and somebody asked a question about ground fighting. The instructor said that being able to ground grapple was good but if you're in a street situation where you end up being taken to the ground the thing to do is just get back up. Don't try to fight on the ground but get back up. This is especially true if your opponent has friends and you try ground grappling with him, his friends will give you a shoe party.



What a bunch of nonsense. If you don't know how to fight on the ground, your chances of getting back up are greatly diminished. Especially if the guy wants to keep you there, or if he outweighs/outmuscles you, or (heaven forbid) he's a semi-skilled grappler.

Saying that "the best ground defense is to never get there in the first place" is a great bumper sticker for your gym or club. In the real world, if you don't know what you're doing within that range of combat, you're screwed. A couple of his cronies possibly kicking at you is nothing compared to a guy on top of you smashing your head into concrete.


----------



## MJS

PhotonGuy said:


> Paul Vunak once said that a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style. I don't know if he was paid to make such a statement but after hearing that I became skeptical of Paul.



LOL.  As someone else said, question everything.  I've heard good and bad things about Paul.  I've seen a number of his videos.  I thought they were good.  Would I train with him?  Sure.  He's trained with some quality people.  As for the 1yr BJJ guy beating a 20yr striker...this most likely stems from the BJJ/UFC craze.  If we looked at the early days, we saw strikers, who claimed years to stand up exp, getting owned by Royce.  Personally, I have to raise the BS flag, when I hear stand up guys say that they'll never get taken down.  Hell, if that's the case, then I'd like to think that every MMA fighter out there, would seek out that stand up guy, to learn the magic he's teaching.  

This is why I will always say that even if you don't actually devote years to learning BJJ, go seek out a quality grappler, and learn the basics.  Something is better than nothing.  Will the basics help you against a high quality BJJ BB?  Probably not.  Then again, the average Joe probably isn't going to be a high level BJJ BB anyways, so......

As an example....the UFC fight with Mark Coleman and Mo Smith.  Mo trained with Frank Shamrock.  Mark was a pure wrestler.  Mo, even when he was taken down, used his grappling knowledge to survive, and get back to his feet, where he eventually KO'd Mark, with a kick.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Does anyone have a link to the actual quote of Vunak actually making this claim in the first place?

If he did say something like that, I would suspect it was something more like "a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style* if the fight went to the ground*."


----------



## PhotonGuy

Tony Dismukes said:


> Does anyone have a link to the actual quote of Vunak actually making this claim in the first place?
> 
> If he did say something like that, I would suspect it was something more like "a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style* if the fight went to the ground*."



He was making that claim in the old MMA magazines in the early 90s. If you've got any magazines such as Inside Karate from back then you could find him making that claim.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> What a bunch of nonsense. If you don't know how to fight on the ground, your chances of getting back up are greatly diminished. Especially if the guy wants to keep you there, or if he outweighs/outmuscles you, or (heaven forbid) he's a semi-skilled grappler.
> 
> Saying that "the best ground defense is to never get there in the first place" is a great bumper sticker for your gym or club. In the real world, if you don't know what you're doing within that range of combat, you're screwed. A couple of his cronies possibly kicking at you is nothing compared to a guy on top of you smashing your head into concrete.


Hanzou, just curious, what would your advise be to someone who has -0- experience in striking and has just began groundwork or has -0- experience in any type of training if placed in a position of defending themselves in a physical altercation.


----------



## Andrew Green

PhotonGuy said:


> Paul Vunak once said that a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style. I don't know if he was paid to make such a statement but after hearing that I became skeptical of Paul.



He also released a bunch of videos about how to bite people...






Rear naked choke defence - eat all the meat off his arm...

The "self-defence" world is full of weird claims and advice I'm not sure I'd want to take seriously.  

Grappling is a important part of being a well rounded fighter.  But don't take the claims made by people promoting their own products to seriously regardless of how famous they are.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

PhotonGuy said:


> He was making that claim in the old MMA magazines in the early 90s. If you've got any magazines such as Inside Karate from back then you could find him making that claim.



The reason I'm asking is that the exact phrasing and context of the quote make a difference.

"a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style."

is different from

"a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in some other style if the fight goes to the ground."

is different from

"anybody with one year of training in BJJ could beat anybody with 20 years of training in any other style"

is different from

"a person with one year of training in BJJ could beat somebody with 20 years of training in a style that doesn't include grappling."

and so on.  If you read the original quote back in the 90s, I wouldn't be confident that you can remember the exact details.



Andrew Green said:


> He also released a bunch of videos about how to bite people...



Actually, I would take instruction in biting methodology from Vunak over most other folks, for a few reasons.

1) He's studied an art (Kina Mutai) which has a detailed methodology for biting
2) He's actually done experimentation (with raw meat) to figure out the most effective way to bite.
3) He's not using biting as an excuse for not learning how to grapple. He's got many years of BJJ training. (Which also means he knows how to control an opponent to set up the bites.)
4) I've been to a seminar with one of his students (Roy Harris) and was very impressed with the width and depth of his knowledge. Roy didn't go over biting at that seminar, but he had an excellent methodology for training eye gouges and head butts which I still use.


----------



## Blindside

PhotonGuy said:


> He was making that claim in the old MMA magazines in the early 90s. If you've got any magazines such as Inside Karate from back then you could find him making that claim.



You brought the quote up in your original post, you provide verification to make this thread valid.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Paul Vunak is an interesting cat.  He is definitely skilled at what he does whether it is striking, joint locks, grappling or weapons. His movement is very good and he has a lot to offer on the martial side if you can get past certain things.

ie: 




There is a thread some where on MartialTalk about this.

In regards to the quote does anyone have him on film saying it?  Or in a magazine article?  Or is this all speculation?


----------



## Buka

I remember when I first heard that statement.  I remember like it was yesterday. I don't know the date, other than the early nineties, but I remember when I fist heard it, where I was standing on my dojo, which gi I had on and how fricken ticked off I was. But I swear to God I don't think it was Vunak who said it. Or at least that's not what I was told. But....it was hearsay to me, so I don't know. I just never associated it with Vunak. Or at least that's how I remember it.


----------



## Drose427

PhotonGuy said:


> Some people will say just about anything if money is involved.
> 
> 
> Supposedly Bruce Lee also said he would lose in a fight against Muhammad Ali, that he wouldn't stand a chance with his small Chinese hands. But like what you said about him saying a person with a year of boxing and wrestling beating most martial artists, it could be all hype.
> 
> 
> 
> I do believe it is important to know ground grappling and that's why I took it up, but there is more to fighting than just grappling just like there is more to fighting than just striking. I was once at this seminar which taught hand to hand combat that they would teach in the military and somebody asked a question about ground fighting. The instructor said that being able to ground grapple was good but if you're in a street situation where you end up being taken to the ground the thing to do is just get back up. Don't try to fight on the ground but get back up. This is especially true if your opponent has friends and you try ground grappling with him, his friends will give you a shoe party.





Hanzou said:


> What a bunch of nonsense. If you don't know how to fight on the ground, your chances of getting back up are greatly diminished. Especially if the guy wants to keep you there, or if he outweighs/outmuscles you, or (heaven forbid) he's a semi-skilled grappler.
> 
> Saying that "the best ground defense is to never get there in the first place" is a great bumper sticker for your gym or club. In the real world, if you don't know what you're doing within that range of combat, you're screwed. A couple of his cronies possibly kicking at you is nothing compared to a guy on top of you smashing your head into concrete.



Hanzous exactly right. You cant just say "well I'll get back up." When the fights started, it doesnt work like that. Why do you think so many striking arts teach preemptively striking when you feel your life is threatened? Because if you can drop the guy before it turns in to a fight, you never have worry about ground game. But the better schools understand this still isnt as good as having _some_ sort of ground game, which is why we ALWAYS tell students to expose themselves to as much as they can because we know we dont roll, and it's dangerous and imo its irresponsible if you're an SD school to say "just get back up." IF you can't teach grappling, let your students know and recommend they add some degree on. 


To give a better example, Photon guy have you ever wrestled? Not with friends but in an actual match? The reason the take down is so important, is because most of the time that person has control. Even if you get back into a base, you're basically getting an *** kicking until you can get squared.up. It doesnt matter whos more skilled, when you're in a position like that its a major uphill battle. On the street, that guys probably gonna jump right on you and follow you the entire time while wailing on your face.

Yes, getting off the ground would be the absolute best thing to do. But you're most likely not gonna get the chance


----------



## drop bear

A lot of what is good for striking is crap for grappling. And a grappler will more successfully eat strikes to get a takedown than a striker will eat takedown attempts to get punches in.

so you really cant defend grappling with striking. What you can do is use grappling to stay on your feet and strike.


----------



## Hanzou

Danny T said:


> Hanzou, just curious, what would your advise be to someone who has -0- experience in striking and has just began groundwork or has -0- experience in any type of training if placed in a position of defending themselves in a physical altercation.



I would tell the first person to keep learning ground work, and I would tell the second person to get some training period. The reality is that a good Bjj school should teach you striking while teaching you grappling, with the emphasis being on the grappling. Old school BJj is very similar to MMA, which is also very good for defending yourself in a physical altercation.


----------



## PhotonGuy

Brian R. VanCise said:


> In regards to the quote does anyone have him on film saying it?  Or in a magazine article?  Or is this all speculation?


I would have to dig up one of my old martial arts magazines but Im sure I can find one with him saying that in it.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

PhotonGuy said:


> I would have to dig up one of my old martial arts magazines but Im sure I can find one with him saying that in it.


If you do, please post the exact quote and the context.


----------



## PhotonGuy

Hanzou said:


> What a bunch of nonsense. If you don't know how to fight on the ground, your chances of getting back up are greatly diminished. Especially if the guy wants to keep you there, or if he outweighs/outmuscles you, or (heaven forbid) he's a semi-skilled grappler.
> 
> Saying that "the best ground defense is to never get there in the first place" is a great bumper sticker for your gym or club. In the real world, if you don't know what you're doing within that range of combat, you're screwed. A couple of his cronies possibly kicking at you is nothing compared to a guy on top of you smashing your head into concrete.





Drose427 said:


> Hanzous exactly right. You cant just say "well I'll get back up." When the fights started, it doesnt work like that. Why do you think so many striking arts teach preemptively striking when you feel your life is threatened? Because if you can drop the guy before it turns in to a fight, you never have worry about ground game. But the better schools understand this still isnt as good as having _some_ sort of ground game, which is why we ALWAYS tell students to expose themselves to as much as they can because we know we dont roll, and it's dangerous and imo its irresponsible if you're an SD school to say "just get back up." IF you can't teach grappling, let your students know and recommend they add some degree on.


Well the guy who was teaching the class where he said that you should get back up if you're taken down in a fight had been a Navy SEAL with over 1000 hours of SCARS. SCARS is the fighting system that they used to teach Navy SEALS before they fired the guy who was teaching it. This guy also had backgrounds in other martial arts. By the way Hanzou I wouldn't recommend calling what a Navy SEAL says about fighting nonsense. Those guys do know what they're talking about and you don't want to get on their bad side. But aside from that I've learned from other sources such as books that going to the ground in a street confrontation is not always a good idea if the guy has got friends as you will get stomped by them.



Hanzou said:


> To give a better example, Photon guy have you ever wrestled? Not with friends but in an actual match? The reason the take down is so important, is because most of the time that person has control. Even if you get back into a base, you're basically getting an *** kicking until you can get squared.up. It doesnt matter whos more skilled, when you're in a position like that its a major uphill battle. On the street, that guys probably gonna jump right on you and follow you the entire time while wailing on your face.
> 
> Yes, getting off the ground would be the absolute best thing to do. But you're most likely not gonna get the chance



Yes. The first wrestling I did was as a child in summer camp. After that I was on the wrestling team in the 8th grade. Aside from that I've also done some Judo which is similar to wrestling except instead of trying to pin your opponent you're trying to get them in a submission hold. Speaking of wrestling I was going to bring that up. You can win in wrestling by of course pinning your opponent but if you don't win by pinning you can win by points. You get points for a takedown when you take your opponent down to the mat, reverse if you gain control of your opponent on the mat when he was in control of you, and also escape which is if your opponent takes you down and has control and you are able to get away. Another words, if you can get back up. So since one of the skills sometimes used in wrestling is to get back up after it goes to the ground and you even get points for it, that shows that it can be done.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> I would tell the first person to keep learning ground work, and I would tell the second person to get some training period. The reality is that a good Bjj school should teach you striking while teaching you grappling, with the emphasis being on the grappling. Old school BJj is very similar to MMA, which is also very good for defending yourself in a physical altercation.


Interesting..., no help to that person who is untrained and is in need of something to do now. 
I agree they should gave some training and continue in it to become proficient. 
The question remains as to what the untrained person should do if in the altercation prior to getting trained or the training has just begun or there is no proficiency as yet? What advise do you give that person?


----------



## Matt Bryers

As someone who has trained Jiu-Jitsu for over 15 years, as well as wrestled in High School, and competed in MMA - I believe this original comment does have some truth, but also not exactly reality either.  The real question I think is: Is Jiu-Jitsu effective against a skilled opponent in a violent street altercation.  

There are a few thoughts / remarks on Jiu-Jitsu for Self-Defense:

Scenario #1:

If you're in a pure 1 vs 1 fight, and your opponent has Jiu-Jitsu and you have.... a ____ Karate style - my money is on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.    The reason being is that the Jiu-Jitsu guy will know how to close the distance and bring the fighter to the ground.

Just watch some Gracie Challenge footage and  you'll see: Gracie Challenge Archives - Warrior Combatives Academy

OR just watch ANY UFC for the 1990s.  The early 2000s were all about Wrestlers.

Scenario #2:

If you're in a 1 vs 1 fight, and your opponent has Jiu-Jitsu - but you also train _____ Karate, but spar / train in a more realistic standpoint to defend against takedowns, good in the clinch, etc.... then I'd say it's a 50/50 shot.  

Scenario #3:

If you're in a 1 vs 1 fight, and your opponent has Jiu-Jitsu and you have trained in _____, but your buddy decided to jump in.... Jiu-Jitsu loses.

====================

I tell this story to my students all the time.  I used to work Security at a popular night club for 9 years (along with bartending).  A fight broke out one night and as I got involved, I ended up locking up with one fighter in attempt to bring him out.  I don't remember the exact circumstances of how I got there, but I ended up on my back in guard.  Cool right? I can now use Jiu-Jitsu to submit this guy and get him out.  WRONG.  I got kicked, punched, kicked some more, and held on for dear life hoping some other bouncer would come to help.  Eventually they did.  But my ribs, my head, my face... all paid the price.  Jiu-Jitsu was NOT great in a crowd environment.

====================

Another story from working, as we were bringing people out, we all got shoved out into the street and the fight continued.  I got pulled down from behind and then another "opponent" started attacking me from the front.  I was able to use tome nage (to a certain degree) to throw him off and then use the technical stand-up to get back to my feet.  Jiu-Jitsu worked then because I was able to use it to get back to me feet and fight from there.

=====================

Final Remarks:

I personally believe (and I am biased) that Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is the ultimate ground martial art.  And the REASON is not just because the techniques work, but because the way BJJ is trained.  BJJ fighters spar (roll) hard EVERY class.  45 minutes to an hour a night - we roll.  That's typically 50% of the students training is live fighting.  You can't even begin to understand the benefits of what the students are learning in those sessions.  Not only are they developing their skills, but they're also developing sensitivity, awareness, and the "feel" of a fight.  Irreplaceable.  

If more styles employed more realistic fighting / sparring - I believe they would be more effective in all scenarios.


----------



## Hanzou

PhotonGuy said:


> By the way Hanzou I wouldn't recommend calling what a Navy SEAL says about fighting nonsense. Those guys do know what they're talking about and you don't want to get on their bad side.



I'm shaking in my boots..... 




> But aside from that I've learned from other sources such as books that going to the ground in a street confrontation is not always a good idea if the guy has got friends as you will get stomped by them.



Of course its not always a good idea. Nothing is optimal all of the time.


----------



## Hanzou

Danny T said:


> Interesting..., no help to that person who is untrained and is in need of something to do now.
> I agree they should gave some training and continue in it to become proficient.
> The question remains as to what the untrained person should do if in the altercation prior to getting trained or the training has just begun or there is no proficiency as yet? What advise do you give that person?



So you're asking me what advice I should give someone who is untrained and about to fight someone? I would tell them to keep their hands up as much as possible.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> So you're asking me what advice I should give someone who is untrained and about to fight someone? I would tell them to keep their hands up as much as possible.


" -0- experience in any type of training if placed in a position of defending themselves in a physical altercation." Yes that was the question.

That's all, just keep your hands up as much as possible?  And, if taken to the ground, again just keep your hands up? Nothing more?


----------



## Hanzou

Danny T said:


> " -0- experience in any type of training if placed in a position of defending themselves in a physical altercation." Yes that was the question.
> 
> That's all, just keep your hands up as much as possible?  And, if taken to the ground, again just keep your hands up? Nothing more?



Well you're not being clear on how much time I have to teach this person. A month? A Day? A matter of hours? I can probably show him some fundamentals in an hour or so, but that doesn't mean he'd be able to use them in a fight.


----------



## Danny T

Hanzou said:


> Well you're not being clear on how much time I have to teach this person. A month? A Day? A matter of hours? I can probably show him some fundamentals in an hour or so, but that doesn't mean he'd be able to use them in a fight.


I apologize for coming off unclear. Not trying to be.
I didn't ask as to what you would teach the person the term I used was: "Advise".
I asked what your advise would be. That would be your opinion or suggestion about what should be done if in a physical confrontation. 

Keeping your hands up as best as possible is good just wanting to know if you would have more advise or opinion for an untrained person or even one who has just begun getting training if that person being untrained were in a physical confrontation.

I hope that is a bit more clear. Thanks.


----------



## drop bear

Danny T said:


> I apologize for coming off unclear. Not trying to be.
> I didn't ask as to what you would teach the person the term I used was: "Advise".
> I asked what your advise would be. That would be your opinion or suggestion about what should be done if in a physical confrontation.
> 
> Keeping your hands up as best as possible is good just wanting to know if you would have more advise or opinion for an untrained person or even one who has just begun getting training if that person being untrained were in a physical confrontation.
> 
> I hope that is a bit more clear. Thanks.



Honestly keeping your hands up is about as much advice as a person can handle in a fight.

personally i would advise them to have fun.

honestly it is too late by that stage.


----------



## drop bear

we actually have the situation Danny describes. Here is the tradie fight night that some of our guys do. And then get volunteered into cornering. 

Some of these guys have zero experience. And you cant really tell them much. Just give them a pat on the head and let them go for it.

And yes it really can be the disaster that you think it would be.


----------



## Danny T

drop bear said:


> we actually have the situation Danny describes. Here is the tradie fight night that some of our guys do. And then get volunteered into cornering.
> 
> Some of these guys have zero experience. And you cant really tell them much. Just give them a pat on the head and let them go for it.
> 
> And yes it really can be the disaster that you think it would be.


This is not what I was describing. This is not a physical confrontation this is an agreed upon fight contest. If one doesn't know how to fight they are foolish to do this type of contest.
I'm asking about a situation one is confronted in a violent angry or self-defense situation.

So someone with no or very little training should simply stand there with their hands up? That's the advise, that and have fun?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

My advice for an untrained person about to get into a violent confrontation?

Don't.

Seriously, do whatever you can to avoid the fight and get out of there. 

I or Hanzou or anyone else could offer advice for surviving or winning the fight, but even the best advice wouldn't help someone who doesn't have the experience to implement it under stress. Heck, even trained fighters often have a hard time hearing and following their corners instructions in a fight.


----------



## drop bear

Danny T said:


> This is not what I was describing. This is not a physical confrontation this is an agreed upon fight contest. If one doesn't know how to fight they are foolish to do this type of contest.
> I'm asking about a situation one is confronted in a violent angry or self-defense situation.
> 
> So someone with no or very little training should simply stand there with their hands up? That's the advise, that and have fun?





Danny T said:


> This is not what I was describing. This is not a physical confrontation this is an agreed upon fight contest. If one doesn't know how to fight they are foolish to do this type of contest.
> I'm asking about a situation one is confronted in a violent angry or self-defense situation.
> 
> So someone with no or very little training should simply stand there with their hands up? That's the advise, that and have fun?



ok so the street huh?

I am not sure how there would be any difference.


----------



## drop bear

drop bear said:


> ok so the street huh?
> 
> I am not sure how there would be any difference.



Oh and if you think that is foolish. You would love a brophy tent.


----------



## Buka

drop bear said:


> Oh and if you think that is foolish. You would love a brophy tent.



I had never heard the term Brophy Tent so I looked it up. 

That's way cool old school.


----------



## Danny T

Tony Dismukes said:


> My advice for an untrained person about to get into a violent confrontation?
> 
> Don't.
> 
> Seriously, do whatever you can to avoid the fight and get out of there.
> 
> I or Hanzou or anyone else could offer advice for surviving or winning the fight, but even the best advice wouldn't help someone who doesn't have the experience to implement it under stress. Heck, even trained fighters often have a hard time hearing and following their corners instructions in a fight.


Agreed. I stress being aware and don't be there. However, things do happen.

Hands up and stay covered is good advice, as well is to do your best to maintain distance, while attempting to defuse the situation. Move and keep moving. Either circle right and left or rush in and tie up the other persons arms. Both have their good points, both have their bad points. Rushing forward and staying close prevents power hits but puts you in a situation where you will be standing grappling and could quickly go to the ground. If on the ground cover and keep moving. I standing and circling be aware of what is around you if you can create enough distance then get away as quickly as you are able. Just standing there with your hands up taking a beating is foolish.



			
				Drop Bear said:
			
		

> ok so the street huh?
> 
> I am not sure how there would be any difference.


Or, in a bar, an eatery, a store, in your home... not just in the street.
How about in a 'non sporting' environment. You see no difference in how one would respond in a sport environment vs a non-sport. Just stand there with your hands up. 
Completely different mindset and responses are different.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Danny T said:


> Move and keep moving. Either circle right and left or rush in and tie up the other persons arms. Both have their good points, both have their bad points. Rushing forward and staying close prevents power hits but puts you in a situation where you will be standing grappling and could quickly go to the ground. If on the ground cover and keep moving. I standing and circling be aware of what is around you if you can create enough distance then get away as quickly as you are able.


 That's all good advice, but as I said it's probably going to be wasted on someone without training or experience. It takes training, experience, or (preferably) both for most people to be able to execute any sort of game plan other than whatever comes naturally to them in a fight.


----------



## drop bear

Danny T said:


> Agreed. I stress being aware and don't be there. However, things do happen.
> 
> Hands up and stay covered is good advice, as well is to do your best to maintain distance, while attempting to defuse the situation. Move and keep moving. Either circle right and left or rush in and tie up the other persons arms. Both have their good points, both have their bad points. Rushing forward and staying close prevents power hits but puts you in a situation where you will be standing grappling and could quickly go to the ground. If on the ground cover and keep moving. I standing and circling be aware of what is around you if you can create enough distance then get away as quickly as you are able. Just standing there with your hands up taking a beating is foolish.
> 
> 
> Or, in a bar, an eatery, a store, in your home... not just in the street.
> How about in a 'non sporting' environment. You see no difference in how one would respond in a sport environment vs a non-sport. Just stand there with your hands up.
> Completely different mindset and responses are different.



yes no difference in this case. Noob street fighter and noob boxer are going to do pretty much the same thing.

The mindset will be pretty much the same as well.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Tony Dismukes said:


> My advice for an untrained person about to get into a violent confrontation?
> 
> Don't.
> 
> Seriously, do whatever you can to avoid the fight and get out of there.
> 
> I or Hanzou or anyone else could offer advice for surviving or winning the fight, but even the best advice wouldn't help someone who doesn't have the experience to implement it under stress. Heck, even trained fighters often have a hard time hearing and following their corners instructions in a fight.



Yes, if you can avoid conflict that should always be your number one goal!


----------



## FriedRice

Matt Bryers said:


> Scenario #1:
> 
> If you're in a pure 1 vs 1 fight, and your opponent has Jiu-Jitsu and you have.... a ____ Karate style - my money is on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.    The reason being is that the Jiu-Jitsu guy will know how to close the distance and bring the fighter to the ground.
> .



Good post.  Even most of the pure Muay Thai guys with a decent fight record would usually become like, upsidedown turtles, once taken down and would get smothered, not knowing what to do. And once the BJJ is mounted, his poor striking skills while standing, becomes pretty deadly when he's got all the leverage and with the pure Standup Fighter's head   sandwiched to the cement, with hardly nowhere to go. A fist going into the face, with the back of the head going into solid cement is just easy concussion city. 

And even if the Nak Muay is a decent KO artist, it's not really that easy to KO someone. I've seen High School wrestlers destroy chopsocky Black Belts way before UFC 1, by taken them down and just raining punches, and it made me a believer.  Wrestlers were GNP'ing in streetfights way before Mark Coleman coined that phrase. Some BJJ Blue Belts are also beasts, especially the ones that are serious wrestlers but never go to BJJ consistently enough to get promoted to Purple or higher. Some of our Blues can tap Purple and Browns.


----------



## FriedRice

Danny T said:


> This is not what I was describing. This is not a physical confrontation this is an agreed upon fight contest. If one doesn't know how to fight they are foolish to do this type of contest.
> I'm asking about a situation one is confronted in a violent angry or self-defense situation.
> 
> So someone with no or very little training should simply stand there with their hands up? That's the advise, that and have fun?




If someone untrained and with no fight experience, absolutely have to fight with nowhere to run....then their best bet, IMO, is just to go crazy with whatever punches they will instinctively throw....at full power...and high volume.  Just go because the other guy, if he's untrained, will be doing the same. Hopefully, both gas out w/neither being seriously damaged or your guy gets lucky and lands something.

Teaching someone to keep their hands up, circle, relax, chin down, etc... all takes training and real sparring, which would include full power sparring to KO someone, in order to really understand and apply the mechanics. And it requires getting hit hard, in the head quite a lot to really get used to it and keep fighting instead of cowering down and die, like most noobs or non-fighters do when they are getting demolished.

Although, probably the one easy thing to teach that's significant is to tell them to make sure that their fists are  clenched as hard as a rock, at all times, to lessen the chances of breakage. In general, this is how the Krav Maga people approach such training. The Level 1-2 noobs are usually trained with proper striking techniques, but to go crazy in hopes of overwhelming their attacker and end the fight. It's when they get to the higher levels, that more emphasis will be on being more relaxed, picking shots, less gassing out and fight more like real fighters, which are the MMA/Sports fighters.  In general, this is when many of them quit Krav Maga, because getting hit for real in the face, hard, even with headgear, is just too realistic.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> There are a few thoughts / remarks on Jiu-Jitsu for Self-Defense:
> 
> Scenario #1:
> 
> If you're in a pure 1 vs 1 fight, and your opponent has Jiu-Jitsu and you have.... a ____ Karate style - my money is on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.    The reason being is that the Jiu-Jitsu guy will know how to close the distance and bring the fighter to the ground.
> 
> Just watch some Gracie Challenge footage and  you'll see: Gracie Challenge Archives - Warrior Combatives Academy
> 
> OR just watch ANY UFC for the 1990s.  The early 2000s were all about Wrestlers.


|
*This is way too much of a glittering generality.*  To start out don't get me wrong.  I believe the Gracie's adapted the traditional Japanese jujitsu to a rounded, versatile & diverse technical system.  A highly skilled BJJ stylist is definitely a force to be reckoned with.  Some of the combat versions I've seen are superlative for self defense.
|
I also like the descriptive scenario's approach you laid out.  It is, however, a sport-oriented approach, not a traditional karate approach.
|
This is complete BS that a skilled traditional karate fighter doesn't know to handle fighting distance.  The 'distance' you speak of is taught Day-1 in kihon technique, ippon kumite & kihon kata.  What's true is that most karateka train physically instead of mentally.  In traditional karate, it's not distance per se that you are learning, it's mental discipline.  Therein lies the weakness.
|
The applied goal in traditional karate is to disable the opponent quickly & efficiently.  Your example describes sport karateka or kickboxers who train to go "12" rounds trading punches.  In traditional karate, if the opponent moves in, you smash him.  If he doesn't move in, you can move in and smash him.  What is so magical about BJJ artists closing the distance???


----------



## Matt Bryers

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> In traditional karate, if the opponent moves in, you smash him. If he doesn't move in, you can move in and smash him. What is so magical about BJJ artists closing the distance???



Simple, because that's what Jiu-Jitsu guys do and train for...closing the distance and taking an opponent out.  All I said was I'd put my money on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.  I believe the odds are in his favor.  

And I don't come to this conclusion randomly.  I have competed in Kyokshushin, BJJ, wrestling, and MMA.  I have also trained extensively with top-level kyokushin fighters and kickboxers.  Combine that with "history" that any time a non-jiu-jitsu guy or non-wrestler faces a jiu-jitsu guy - the jiu-jitsu guy wins.  

Jiu-Jitsu LIVES in the close combat world.  That is why it is taught to our military and police officers... not karate.  That is why it is basically a "requirement" for fighting MMA.... not karate.  Regardless of traditional or not.

Jiu-Jitsu just works... I'm sorry to offend you, but the proof is in the pudding.  If traditional karate or other traditional martial arts are so effective for real combat then how come our law enforcement, military, or security professionals use it. 

Karate is NOT the ultimate self-defense martial art.  Nor is Jiu-Jitsu.  But if you're going to pit a traditional karate guy against a jiu-jitsu guy.... I'm sorry... but it's not going to work.

And now for some fun videos:


----------



## Matt Bryers

Or....


----------



## Drose427

Matt Bryers said:


> Simple, because that's what Jiu-Jitsu guys do and train for...closing the distance and taking an opponent out.  All I said was I'd put my money on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.  I believe the odds are in his favor.
> 
> And I don't come to this conclusion randomly.  I have competed in Kyokshushin, BJJ, wrestling, and MMA.  I have also trained extensively with top-level kyokushin fighters and kickboxers.  Combine that with "history" that any time a non-jiu-jitsu guy or non-wrestler faces a jiu-jitsu guy - the jiu-jitsu guy wins.
> 
> Jiu-Jitsu LIVES in the close combat world.  That is why it is taught to our military and police officers... not karate.  That is why it is basically a "requirement" for fighting MMA.... not karate.  Regardless of traditional or not.
> 
> Jiu-Jitsu just works... I'm sorry to offend you, but the proof is in the pudding.  If traditional karate or other traditional martial arts are so effective for real combat then how come our law enforcement, military, or security professionals use it.
> 
> Karate is NOT the ultimate self-defense martial art.  Nor is Jiu-Jitsu.  But if you're going to pit a traditional karate guy against a jiu-jitsu guy.... I'm sorry... but it's not going to work.
> 
> And now for some fun videos:



While I agree, your average Strikers who haven't been exposed to jiujitsu  simply can't out grapple them, some points I wanna make:

Militaries and police agencies around the world DO teach Karate/judo or TKD/Hapkido. We don't in America because it's just not part of our culture.

But our Militarys hand to hand draws from all these styles. I believe it even says so in the MCMAP handbook.

Also, if a striker has exposure to BJJ, it's not as easy of a win as it was in the early days of UFC. Even if the striker hasn't trained much JJ himself, he'll have an idea of what to avoid and what to watch out for.

It's also difficult to consider Karate in some capacity not a "requirement" in the same note that BJJ in some capacity is, considering the kickboxing you see from kickboxers  uses techniques from Karate. I mean that's where kickboxing comes from.


----------



## Matt Bryers

Like I said, I'm talking about odds here and my experiences.  I have trained with high level strikers in a variety of martial arts including traditional martial arts styles.  SOME of these high-ranked / high-level strikers I have trained with are now actually students of mine in combat jiu-jitsu and sport BJJ.    I also have taught seminars to military, police and SWAT.  They need / want Jiu-Jitsu and grappling, they don't need Karate.  

I also have a few police officers who train directly under me and have thanked me many times for their ability to use solid jiu-jitsu in real-combat that keeps them safe and ends the confrontation quickly.

So it's very hard for me to be convinced or even slightly swayed over the internet, when everyday I see quite different.

Let me also state this.   I have a great deal of respect for ALL martial arts.  I believe all martial arts have value and can be effective.  This is why I have trained in MANY different styles of martial arts including American Kenpo, Shorin-Ryu, and Kyokushin Karate.  In fact, 2 of those place I have trained at asked me to be their self-defense instructors.  This is how I started teaching and allowed me to eventually open up my facility.

So... at the end of the day.... my firm belief is that Jiu-Jitsu OR wrestling OR Grappling is a far superior style to anything else.  I don't want to be that dick who says my style is better than your style.  But when asking what is the better martial art for street combat..... I'm going with Jiu-jitsu!


----------



## Matt Bryers

And the next response from everyone will probably be: "Well what about multiple attackers"

And my response to that is: 

1.) Train multiple attackers and use good wrestling / jiu-jitsu to move around your opponents.
2.) I have started training in Defence Lab to enhance my "chaotic fighting" ability.

What I typically say is Jiu-Jitsu or grappling based martial arts are best for one vs one or for controlling an attacker.  But Jiu-Jitsu is not as effective for multiple opponents; especially on the ground.  You need to train to fight multiple opponents and need to have jiu-jitsu or grappling ability to defend against a multiple opponent scenario where undoubtedly someone will try to put you on the ground.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> Simple, because that's what Jiu-Jitsu guys do and train for...closing the distance and taking an opponent out.  All I said was I'd put my money on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.  I believe the odds are in his favor.


|
I agree & concur that BJJ, Jiu-Jitsu guys train to close the distance and taking an opponent out.  What you left out is ME, the opponent.



Matt Bryers said:


> And I don't come to this conclusion randomly.  I have competed in Kyokshushin, BJJ, wrestling, and MMA.  I have also trained extensively with top-level kyokushin fighters and kickboxers.  Combine that with "history" that any time a non-jiu-jitsu guy or non-wrestler faces a jiu-jitsu guy - the jiu-jitsu guy wins.


|
Again, I have no reason to doubt your success.  The weakness in your evaluation is that the type of striking opponents you are facing are not training true to traditional karate standards, IN MY ESTIMATION.
|
I told the vignette about the very aggressive kickboxer type I was matched up with when I was new to my current school.  Took him out in seconds in the 1stt exchange.  DONE. He had most of the students at the school intimidated with his aggression and physical presence.



Matt Bryers said:


> Jiu-Jitsu LIVES in the close combat world.  That is why it is taught to our military and police officers... not karate.  That is why it is basically a "requirement" for fighting MMA.... not karate.  Regardless of traditional or not.


|
I think Jui-Jitsu is great in MMA or self defense.  Particularly when you are forced into grappling situation.  However, traditional karate also has a grappling component, and if you go back far enough, there is a lot of Jiu-Jitsu type technique I am told.  Personally, my grappling game is rudimentary and weak compared to yours and I am going on the record saying so.
|
The applied goal of traditional karate is, in a physical confrontation, to disable your opponent quickly & efficiently.  That could mean maiming or killing the opponent.  You just might KO him, or knock the fight out of him.  Depends.....  People assuming that traditional karate lacks infighting is totally wrong.  See Okinawan style for best examples.....



Matt Bryers said:


> Jiu-Jitsu just works... I'm sorry to offend you, but the proof is in the pudding.  If traditional karate or other traditional martial arts are so effective for real combat then how come our law enforcement, military, or security professionals use it.


.
|
Your proof is in the pudding you are eating.  I eat a different pudding.  It's called Smash 'Em.
|
Of course Jiu-Jitsu works.  I actually agree.  Does it work against a karate fighter like me?  Well....  Frankly, I think say BJJ is adopted so widely because is it more sport-oriented in how most train.  That makes BJJ easier to learn and faster to become proficient at.  I think the BJJ system is very well rounded and practical.  It really has so many pragmatic advantages where you want to restrain or control your opponent, not smash 'em.  So Jui-Jitsu is well suited for the population you reference.  but it is a statistic and has it's limits.



Matt Bryers said:


> Karate is NOT the ultimate self-defense martial art.  Nor is Jiu-Jitsu.  But if you're going to pit a traditional karate guy against a jiu-jitsu guy.... I'm sorry... but it's not going to work.


|
Well yes & no.  For devil's advocate on your side, I'll take Shotokan karate which I usually use for illustration; and therefore, I will AGREE on that basis with your proposition.  Yet is Shotokan done well good for self defense--Absolutely.  We have to be careful we don't lump everyone practicing Shotokan into the McDojo category.  That's where your conclusion your Jiu-Jitsu guy > Traditional Karate guy flops....
|
YES, the vids defeat your case completely.  Better vids could pose a disscussion.



Matt Bryers said:


> And now for some fun videos:


I
I have seen this vid before.  REALLY????
|
>The so-called karate expert lolls around with his hands down then half-runs forward in @ a quick pace completely upright and smack into the takedown.
> The S-C karate expert fails to raise any guard, fails to execute any strike of any kind, completely.  I thought karate of any ilk had kicks and punches of some sort, or so I thought I've witnessed once upon a time.
|
The traditional karate principles are completely absent from the "Shotokan" opponent:
> As the Jiu-Jitus "closes the distance," rushing straight into ME, the 1st thing I'd do is the kihon front kick to the head.  Is this hard?
> How about a hammerfist to the side of the head as he leans in to grab.  It's in the Shotokan syllabus this S_C expert was supposedly responsible for....
> And what happened to the Knee strike to the chin & head that sent Chinzo Machida's RFA Grappler opponent out on a stretcher and never to be seen again in MMA????  Was that some mirage???  Vid's all over YT....
CLOSING QUESTION: Can you close the distance on me faster than I can Smash you???  There's another vid out there of a rather mediocre Shorin Ryu stylist in his 1st MMA bout KO'ing with a kick to head a close-the-distance (fail) grappler who had a 3-win record of GNP.  Mr. Wrestler also left on a stretcher....  I THINK THE REAL QUESTION IS WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS VIDEO?
|
P.S. The S-C Shotokan stylist out-of-box doesn't employ traditional Shotokan mental or physical posture.... to a traditionalist glaringly obvious....
P.s.s. One last suggestion about us 'karate fail' guys.  I was just @ another post where a proponent of the Heian kata would be quite appropriate to input here.  I'll leave the specific follow up to you....


----------



## drop bear

Matt Bryers said:


> Like I said, I'm talking about odds here and my experiences.  I have trained with high level strikers in a variety of martial arts including traditional martial arts styles.  SOME of these high-ranked / high-level strikers I have trained with are now actually students of mine in combat jiu-jitsu and sport BJJ.    I also have taught seminars to military, police and SWAT.  They need / want Jiu-Jitsu and grappling, they don't need Karate.
> 
> I also have a few police officers who train directly under me and have thanked me many times for their ability to use solid jiu-jitsu in real-combat that keeps them safe and ends the confrontation quickly.
> 
> So it's very hard for me to be convinced or even slightly swayed over the internet, when everyday I see quite different.
> 
> Let me also state this.   I have a great deal of respect for ALL martial arts.  I believe all martial arts have value and can be effective.  This is why I have trained in MANY different styles of martial arts including American Kenpo, Shorin-Ryu, and Kyokushin Karate.  In fact, 2 of those place I have trained at asked me to be their self-defense instructors.  This is how I started teaching and allowed me to eventually open up my facility.
> 
> So... at the end of the day.... my firm belief is that Jiu-Jitsu OR wrestling OR Grappling is a far superior style to anything else.  I don't want to be that dick who says my style is better than your style.  But when asking what is the better martial art for street combat..... I'm going with Jiu-jitsu!



Sort of. For a technique to work you have to consider a few factors. The technique itself and just how effective it is on its own merits. The ability of the person to do the technique and the ability of the other guy to defend it.

so you can train as a high percentage fighter but then you have to deal with the other will be dedicating his training to defend your attack style.

Grappling beats striking is tricky. A good pure grappler will beat a pure striker. But a striker can employ grappling to stand and strike.

And some fights are won against exceptional grapplers with strikes. The idea that you will automatically be taken down is just not true anymore.


----------



## Tez3

Matt Bryers said:


> That is why it is taught to our military and police officers



It isn't taught to our police or military I'm afraid. The needs of police and military are different from each other as they are from individuals. Police officers want people, suspects, on the floor to control then, hand cuff them and remove them. They don't want to suspects to be standing. Our military regard MMA as a sport as is BJJ. Hand to hand combat doesn't have a huge place in training either. Certain units such as the Royal Marine Commandos tend to like to do a lot of it as they do a lot of sneaky beaky stuff where they have to silence people etc quite old school. In the Paras, milling ( stand up fighting) is used to test recruits for bravery and willingness to get stuck in but no ground fighting is taught. some basic self defence may be but rarely.


----------



## ShotoNoob

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I agree & concur that BJJ, Jiu-Jitsu guys train to close the distance and taking an opponent out.  What you left out is ME, the opponent.


|
We have an "MMA Bashing" Thread with all kind of activity.  I think MMA is super for pressure testing traditional karateka.
|
Here we have BJJ expert wiping out the Shotokan karate expert-opponent.  I have to add one more qualification.  Has the Shotokan 'expert' here ever taken / passed his Yellow-Belt Test Ippon Kumite?  Embellish any one....


----------



## Tames D

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I agree & concur that BJJ, Jiu-Jitsu guys train to close the distance and taking an opponent out.  What you left out is ME, the opponent.
> 
> 
> |
> Again, I have no reason to doubt your success.  The weakness in your evaluation is that the type of striking opponents you are facing are not training true to traditional karate standards, IN MY ESTIMATION.
> |
> I told the vignette about the very aggressive kickboxer type I was matched up with when I was new to my current school.  Took him out in seconds in the 1stt exchange.  DONE. He had most of the students at the school intimidated with his aggression and physical presence.
> 
> 
> |
> I think Jui-Jitsu is great in MMA or self defense.  Particularly when you are forced into grappling situation.  However, traditional karate also has a grappling component, and if you go back far enough, there is a lot of Jiu-Jitsu type technique I am told.  Personally, my grappling game is rudimentary and weak compared to yours and I am going on the record saying so.
> |
> The applied goal of traditional karate is, in a physical confrontation, to disable your opponent quickly & efficiently.  That could mean maiming or killing the opponent.  You just might KO him, or knock the fight out of him.  Depends.....  People assuming that traditional karate lacks infighting is totally wrong.  See Okinawan style for best examples.....
> 
> .
> |
> Your proof is in the pudding you are eating.  I eat a different pudding.  It's called Smash 'Em.
> |
> Of course Jiu-Jitsu works.  I actually agree.  Does it work against a karate fighter like me?  Well....  Frankly, I think say BJJ is adopted so widely because is it more sport-oriented in how most train.  That makes BJJ easier to learn and faster to become proficient at.  I think the BJJ system is very well rounded and practical.  It really has so many pragmatic advantages where you want to restrain or control your opponent, not smash 'em.  So Jui-Jitsu is well suited for the population you reference.  but it is a statistic and has it's limits.
> 
> 
> |
> Well yes & no.  For devil's advocate on your side, I'll take Shotokan karate which I usually use for illustration; and therefore, I will AGREE on that basis with your proposition.  Yet is Shotokan done well good for self defense--Absolutely.  We have to be careful we don't lump everyone practicing Shotokan into the McDojo category.  That's where your conclusion your Jiu-Jitsu guy > Traditional Karate guy flops....
> |
> YES, the vids defeat your case completely.  Better vids could pose a disscussion.
> 
> 
> I
> I have seen this vid before.  REALLY????
> |
> >The so-called karate expert lolls around with his hands down then half-runs forward in @ a quick pace completely upright and smack into the takedown.
> > The S-C karate expert fails to raise any guard, fails to execute any strike of any kind, completely.  I thought karate of any ilk had kicks and punches of some sort, or so I thought I've witnessed once upon a time.
> |
> The traditional karate principles are completely absent from the "Shotokan" opponent:
> > As the Jiu-Jitus "closes the distance," rushing straight into ME, the 1st thing I'd do is the kihon front kick to the head.  Is this hard?
> > How about a hammerfist to the side of the head as he leans in to grab.  It's in the Shotokan syllabus this S_C expert was supposedly responsible for....
> > And what happened to the Knee strike to the chin & head that sent Chinzo Machida's RFA Grappler opponent out on a stretcher and never to be seen again in MMA????  Was that some mirage???  Vid's all over YT....
> CLOSING QUESTION: Can you close the distance on me faster than I can Smash you???  There's another vid out there of a rather mediocre Shorin Ryu stylist in his 1st MMA bout KO'ing with a kick to head a close-the-distance (fail) grappler who had a 3-win record of GNP.  Mr. Wrestler also left on a stretcher....  I THINK THE REAL QUESTION IS WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS VIDEO?
> |
> P.S. The S-C Shotokan stylist out-of-box doesn't employ traditional Shotokan mental or physical posture.... to a traditionalist glaringly obvious....
> P.s.s. One last suggestion about us 'karate fail' guys.  I was just @ another post where a proponent of the Heian kata would be quite appropriate to input here.  I'll leave the specific follow up to you....


Very impressive. Can I see some of your badass stuff on video by any chance?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tames D said:


> Very impressive. Can I see some of your badass stuff on video by any chance?


NO.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tames D said:


> Very impressive....


|
What's impressive about the video is not what the poster said it proved.  What's impressive about the vid is how dangerous facing a good grappler is.  Making a mistake or getting caught with your guard down.... oh no....  I definitely (most) wouldn't want that grappler getting his hands on me.  I'd be toast (probably).


----------



## Tames D

ShotoNoob said:


> NO.


I already knew the answer to my question.


----------



## Tez3

Ok I know it's four pages in but who the hell is Paul Vunak?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Bruce Lee -> Dan Inosanto -> Paul Vunak


----------



## Matt Bryers

I stand firm in my original statement basically stating that:

*Jiu-Jitsu based / grappling based martial arts have a stronger carry-over into reality-based self-defense than other arts.  
*
If someone asked me "I have 6 months to train to learn some useful self-defense, what should I take?"

My answer is always going to be Combative Jiu-Jitsu / BJJ or a reality-based combat style like Krav, Filipino based. or Defence Lab.  It's not going to be Karate... or similar _traditional _martial arts. 

Until someone can show me otherwise, not just with words, I just don't trust in it's effectiveness for modern street combat.

In regards to:



ShotoNoob said:


> CLOSING QUESTION: Can you close the distance on me faster than I can Smash you???  There's another vid out there of a rather mediocre Shorin Ryu stylist in his 1st MMA bout KO'ing with a kick to head a close-the-distance (fail) grappler who had a 3-win record of GNP.  Mr. Wrestler also left on a stretcher....  I THINK THE REAL QUESTION IS WHAT IS GOING ON IN THIS VIDEO?



....asking me if I can *"close the distance on you before you smash me"* over the internet is just lame.  I trust in my ability, but there's only one way to ever answer this question..... we try it!  Which is why we have an open door policy at my school.  If you want to train, spar, roll, etc - sign the waiver, pay the mat fee, and you're good to go!.  So if you're ever in Connecticut:

Jiu-Jitsu and Strength Academy
229 Shunpike Rd
Cromwell, CT 06416
email: mbryers@jiujitsuct.com
phone: 860-869-4843

This is not a challenge, it's just an opportunity to train.  I cross-train with other schools, stylists, etc on a daily basis.  There we can test, learn and improve.  Saying you can smash me over the internet in quite... childish.  And one of the reasons why I joined this forum over others was because I didn't see any crap like this.  

And finally, I care more about percentages that one-off stories about some karate guy who beat a wrestler at some MMA fight.  You're talking about a small percentage.  There are legends in the cage who use their karate in MMA, (GSP / Machida / Liddell), but they have black belts in BJJ and/or a strong background in wrestling which allows them to use their karate effectively.


----------



## punisher73

I always hate hearing quotes like that, they are to generic to be of any meaning.

1 year of BJJ vs. 20 years of striking.  Huh?  One year of a good BJJ school vs. 20 years of a strip mall karate school with no contact sparring?  Yep, I believe it.  One year of a sports emphasis BJJ school where beginners only start from their knees (yes, they are out there) vs. 20 years of a hard contact style like Kyokushin?  Not gonna probably happen.

In speaking of generalities, grappling involves nullifying a striker's gameplan to close distance, take down etc.  Most strikers, don't undestand the realities of this or train accordingly to stop it.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> I stand firm in my original statement basically stating that:
> 
> *Jiu-Jitsu based / grappling based martial arts have a stronger carry-over into reality-based self-defense than other arts.
> *
> If someone asked me "I have 6 months to train to learn some useful self-defense, what should I take?"
> 
> My answer is always going to be Combative Jiu-Jitsu / BJJ or a reality-based combat style like Krav, Filipino based. or Defence Lab.  It's not going to be Karate... or similar _traditional _martial arts.
> 
> Until someone can show me otherwise, not just with words, I just don't trust in it's effectiveness for modern street combat.


|
Right.  If you have been reading the full content of what I have been posting, you'll see I agree in large part with what you're saying here.  I think BJJ is well designed for pragmatic purposes, and furthermore, is great for MMA and readily adaptable for self defense.  I have no reason to doubt that your combat adaptation is very effective self defense.  This would be particularly true within the 6 month time frame you speak to.
|
Where your reply goes astray is that you believe that other arts do not have a strong or stronger carryover...  Well, OK it's internet so words & pics & vids are what we have.  Matt, did you or did you not type in a post....  Like RBSD, let's be REAL. 



Matt Bryers said:


> In regards to:
> ....asking me if I can *"close the distance on you before you smash me"* over the internet is just lame.  I trust in my ability, but there's only one way to ever answer this question..... we try it!  Which is why we have an open door policy at my school.  If you want to train, spar, roll, etc - sign the waiver, pay the mat fee, and you're good to go!.  So if you're ever in Connecticut:
> 
> Jiu-Jitsu and Strength Academy


|
Hey, a challenge is  legitimate.  But I don't do full contact.  Why? Injury.  As to posting a hypothetical over the internet which is backed up by not just my personal experience but in the REAL examples I've provided--not mention all the observations of same I've witnessed  over the years....  Then the REAL challenge falls on you to respond to the PRINCIPLES I've laid out.


Matt Bryers said:


> 229 Shunpike Rd
> Cromwell, CT 06416
> email: mbryers@jiujitsuct.com
> phone: 860-869-4843





Matt Bryers said:


> This is not a challenge, it's just an opportunity to train.  I cross-train with other schools, stylists, etc on a daily basis.  There we can test, learn and improve.  Saying you can smash me over the internet in quite... childish.  And one of the reasons why I joined this forum over others was because I didn't see any crap like this.


|
The statement is a hypothetical.  The vid you posted is a staged event.  Two guys got together to present the 'effectiveness' of BJJ vs. Shotokan karate.  Who independently evaluated the participating karateka?  Answer with 'lame' & crap' is lame because all you do is repeat your conclusion.  Repeating your conclusion proves what?  Name calling proves what? 
|
You say you want to train and improve.  You want to roll & train with others.  Yet when someone presents you with a competitive argument that is spelled out with several, specific traditional karate principles, you respond with "childish." Hmmm.



Matt Bryers said:


> And finally, I care more about percentages that one-off stories about some karate guy who beat a wrestler at some MMA fight.  You're talking about a small percentage.  There are legends in the cage who use their karate in MMA, (GSP / Machida / Liddell), but they have black belts in BJJ and/or a strong background in wrestling which allows them to use their karate effectively.


|
NO, you're talking a large percentage of the people you spar with.  It's the percentage of people with karate uniforms on who have achieved the traditional skills that is relatively small.  That's the percentage of Karateka I'm speaking about.  And that grappling training that is referenced about Machida, Liddell have been quoted a bijjion times, just like the Gracie's BJJ was 'invincible' in early UFC.  Of course grappling skills are valuable.  I've said that over and over.  Liddell's grappling background was actually wrestling.  LiIke another great, Matt Hughes.  Like Brock Lesnar.  If I relied on *BIG* names like you, I could point to these guys and so criticize BJJ.  Of course that would be lame.  The better word would be superficial.....
|
You've got your heart invested in BJJ, I get it.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> I stand firm in my original statement basically stating that:
> 
> *Jiu-Jitsu based / grappling based martial arts have a stronger carry-over into reality-based self-defense than other arts.
> *


|
I used to work with a Shukokai karate black-belt.  This person was younger that me by at least 10 years.  He likes full contact because it's REAL.  He gets together regularly with a BJJ brown-belt at the time.  How did the full contact go according to the Shukokai karateka?
|
He said he tries to KO the BJJ as he approaches for takedown.  He said if the BJJ gets him down, the BJJ ties him all up, there's little he can do-- then often gets choked out.  OTOH, he has KO'd the BJJ several times.  Sounded like a Mexican standoff in terms of percentages.
|
I trained with Shukokai for a couple of months.  Don't do full contact as I said.  Yet the Shokokai is scared of me (sounds silly I know).  The reason I presume is that I have demonstrated (to Shukokai) what I COULD do.
|
I'm certainly not as physically imposing an individual as you are.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Tames D said:


> I already knew the answer to my question.


|
+1 for you (and your assumptions).


----------



## ShotoNoob

dup


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> Simple, because that's what Jiu-Jitsu guys do and train for...closing the distance and taking an opponent out.  All I said was I'd put my money on the Jiu-Jitsu guy.  I believe the odds are in his favor.


|
Simple answer, the traditional karateka is MENTALLY trained to respond so DYNAMICALLY he will KO you on the way in.  Matt, you cannot prove your position by restating the hypothesis.  When someone assaults me, comes at me to do physical harm, I do the same concept in I will do my UTMOST to KO them as they approach.....  Is it a guarantee any one can win--of course the answer is NO.



Matt Bryers said:


> And I don't come to this conclusion randomly.  I have competed in Kyokshushin, BJJ, wrestling, and MMA.  I have also trained extensively with top-level kyokushin fighters and kickboxers.  Combine that with "history" that any time a non-jiu-jitsu guy or non-wrestler faces a jiu-jitsu guy - the jiu-jitsu guy wins.


|
And we've got an aggressive kickboxing style senior in our school who has run over most of the school.  I took him out in seconds in the 1st exchange.  He then got PO'd like you and tried to chase me down and pummel me for about the next thirty seconds.... never laid a hand (or foot) on me.  Instructor stopped it.  Wake up call for him.... I guess...  BTW after the 1st exchange, I went karate defense only....  



Matt Bryers said:


> Jiu-Jitsu LIVES in the close combat world.  That is why it is taught to our military and police officers... not karate.  That is why it is basically a "requirement" for fighting MMA.... not karate.  Regardless of traditional or not.


|
Again I largely agree.  In fact for MMA, I think BJJ is probably the ideal grappling art.  I put in a short story here about the Shukokai Black-Belt full contact fighter I worked with vs. a BJJ Brown-Belt he went against in private, agreed upon.  Please take a look @ that post.



Matt Bryers said:


> Jiu-Jitsu just works... I'm sorry to offend you, but the proof is in the pudding.  If traditional karate or other traditional martial arts are so effective for real combat then how come our law enforcement, military, or security professionals use it.


|
I spoke to this....



Matt Bryers said:


> Karate is NOT the ultimate self-defense martial art.  Nor is Jiu-Jitsu.  But if you're going to pit a traditional karate guy against a jiu-jitsu guy.... I'm sorry... but it's not going to work.


|
Never said karate was the ultimate.  NEVER. What I said is that the BJJ is not going to repeat the performance set out in the video against me.  The response will be a UNIVERSE in difference.  BTW, I think the style of karate I train is better than some others, but my style is far, far from the most sophisticated TMA, or style of karate for that matter.  FOR THE RECORD.



Matt Bryers said:


> And now for some fun videos:


|
COMPLETELY LOVED THE VID, I APPLAUD YOUR POST(S), RESPECT YOUR SERIOUS TRAINING & INVESTMENT IN YOUR BJJ /
|
BOTTOM LINE: QUESTION (CHALLENGE) THE EFFICACY OF THE VID.


----------



## Tames D

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> +1 for you (and your assumptions).


Typical for people that toot their own horn


----------



## ShotoNoob

dup


----------



## ShotoNoob

Matt Bryers said:


> Like I said, I'm talking about odds here and my experiences.  I have trained with high level strikers in a variety of martial arts including traditional martial arts styles.  SOME of these high-ranked / high-level strikers I have trained with are now actually students of mine in combat jiu-jitsu and sport BJJ.    I also have taught seminars to military, police and SWAT.  They need / want Jiu-Jitsu and grappling, they don't need Karate.


|
They don't need karate or bjj is more pragmatic or practical for them?  I think the latter is the case.



Matt Bryers said:


> I also have a few police officers who train directly under me and have thanked me many times for their ability to use solid jiu-jitsu in real-combat that keeps them safe and ends the confrontation quickly.
> 
> So it's very hard for me to be convinced or even slightly swayed over the internet, when everyday I see quite different.


|
I acknowledge, I'm sure this is true.  I agree about the benefit.  I'm referencing the vid: BJJ vs. Shotokan karateka.



Matt Bryers said:


> Let me also state this.   I have a great deal of respect for ALL martial arts.  I believe all martial arts have value and can be effective.  This is why I have trained in MANY different styles of martial arts including American Kenpo, Shorin-Ryu, and Kyokushin Karate.  In fact, 2 of those place I have trained at asked me to be their self-defense instructors.  This is how I started teaching and allowed me to eventually open up my facility.


|
You trained a number of different arts.  I choose to concentrate on 1style of traditional karate.  There's a Thread on the validity of these approaches right now.  Have you been there?
|
For many reason, including reading your posts, I can see the successful business formula you've evolved.  No question.
|
Yet when I post a differing opinion on a FORUM, I get "badass," and "toot your horn."  Quality--HIGH LEVEL--responses all the way.........



Matt Bryers said:


> So... at the end of the day.... my firm belief is that Jiu-Jitsu OR wrestling OR Grappling is a far superior style to anything else.  I don't want to be that dick who says my style is better than your style.  But when asking what is the better martial art for street combat..... I'm going with Jiu-jitsu!


|
Fine, you've made a personal choice.  However, in a Forum that covers all kinds of styles, including the karate's, I think it phenominal that we haven't seen a reply pointing to any other (among the scores & scores & scores) Shotokan karate vid.  Interesting....
|
Especially true of you since you claim to have trained in 2 styles of karate, with "high-level" partners..?????  NO need to TWIST my arm, here's vid:




|
I actually had another JKA vid in mind.  Admittedly, the sensei in this vid is a JKA Karate Champion.  Appropriate though since your training environment is so "high-level"(*see footnote*).
|
Your concept of BJJ as superior to the karateka is "simple" you say.  Here's a "simple" challenge.  Compare the movement of this Shotokan JKA black-belt to the movement of the Shotokan "Expert" in your BJJ vid.  It's that SIMPLE....
|
What's even simplier to see is that no other karate stylist here, including an instructor held in high regard such as yourself, could post a vid like this.  Note the vid allows a switch into additional vids featuring this Shotokan Black-Belt.  ENJOY...
|
Footnote: Your "internet" words, not mine.


----------



## ShotoNoob

KARATE BUNKAI DEMONSTRATED IN FOLLOW-ON VID:
|
In a follow-on vid embedded in the above, Tatsuya Naka demonstrates certain Shotokan bunkai.  Shotokan is not my preferred style of traditional karate.  I can readily see why Matt Bryers and many others don't  find these appealing.  I don't care very much for some of these myself.
|
IMO, the larger lesson is to take a step back and ask what are these Masters trying to get across?  How about that grappling does exist in traditional karate----karate is not just a reverse punch.  Maybe the greater lesson is that grappling is strategically important, and if you get that by cross training BJJ, hey you've accomplished the greater lesson of traditional karate training.
|
Another lesson is the versatility presented in the range of bunkai.  BJJ of course is going to provide the best versatility if one is going to focus on grappling alone.  Still. Shotokan karate a largely striking art, makes known the tactical importance & versatility in one having a grappling repetrior.
|
When we appraise traditional karate in it's proper light, it's not just about stereotypes--like having the fastest reverse punch out there with little power.....


----------



## drop bear

punisher73 said:


> I always hate hearing quotes like that, they are to generic to be of any meaning.
> 
> 1 year of BJJ vs. 20 years of striking.  Huh?  One year of a good BJJ school vs. 20 years of a strip mall karate school with no contact sparring?  Yep, I believe it.  One year of a sports emphasis BJJ school where beginners only start from their knees (yes, they are out there) vs. 20 years of a hard contact style like Kyokushin?  Not gonna probably happen.
> 
> In speaking of generalities, grappling involves nullifying a striker's gameplan to close distance, take down etc.  Most strikers, don't undestand the realities of this or train accordingly to stop it.



Yeah both styles are training to stop strikers. So the striker is at an automatic disadvantage.


----------



## ShotoNoob

punisher73 said:


> In speaking of generalities, grappling involves nullifying a striker's gameplan to close distance, take down etc.  Most strikers, don't understand the realities of this or train accordingly to stop it.


|
Not understanding is in the weakness of the practitioner, not the art.  With strikers, this comes about from the striker training reactively to what's always seen in training, i.e. the heavy bag.  The when a Gracie BBJ moves in and ducks, well the heavy bag didn't do that so the striker is now clueless....  Not what I would call traditional karate....
|
Stating the objective is to "... nullify the striker's game plan;" says nothing rather than a starting point.  There's no action, no technique, no description of how the grapple r mystically accomplishes said objective.  And again with a  bit of thinking, striker against striker has the same pragmatic goal.  The only thing that's changed is one uses take-downs, the other uses strikes...  Either way, the assailant must still approach you & lay hands on you.
|
I know as ShotoNoob, I study principles but come on.......


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> Not understanding is in the weakness of the practitioner, not the art. With strikers, this comes about from the striker training reactively to what's always seen in training, i.e. the heavy bag. The when a Gracie BBJ moves in and ducks, well the heavy bag didn't do that so the striker is now clueless.... Not what I would call traditional karate....



There are specific defences against grapplers it is not really a case of good training or bad. If you don't train to stop takedowns you probably wont.


----------



## Instructor

20 years is a long time.  Most of the people I know with 20 years of training have learned how to fight on the ground, especially in this day and age.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> There are specific defences against grapplers it is not really a case of good training or bad. If you don't train to stop take downs you probably wont.


| 
Again, your view in the conventional sense of how martial art styles are practiced is "true."
|
By traditional karate standards, however, patently false.  The Tatsuya Naka vid and related definitely demonstrates what I am saying.
|
Again, if you are training against a partner who only throws a straight punch at your chest (aka IPPON KUMITE) AND, all you do in that training is learn to REACT to just what the partner does.... then yes you are correct.
|
No doubt this is how the Matt Bryers and his "high profile" hard contact sparring partners look at it....
=====================================================================================
Here's how I look at it.  Same idea with the "Kiai Master vs MMA" vid.  No one over there seems to accept my conclusion.
Despite all the talent here, I guess I have to go through it step-by-step....
|
Step1. Kiai Master throws students all over the place.  they are like the proverbial putty in his hands.
Step2. Kiai Master and MMA fighter pare off, Kiai Master waves hands @ Mr. MMA, NO EFFECT.
Step 3: Mr. MMA PUNCHES OUT Kiai Master.
|
Under the applied goal of traditional karate (or any traditional martial art), the working objective  in a physical confrontation is to use your technique to disable the opponent.
|
Kiai Master's technique is completely useless, both on offense & defense.  Kiai Master is dispatched by Mr. MMA.
|
Hence, the PRINCIPLES behind the ability the Kiai Master demonstrated he could apply is a hoax--fraud; OR, he is incompetent in those PRINCIPLES.  Either way, the Kiai Master is a fraud since he couldn't substantiate his ability when the vid starts out demonstrating he had some ability to throw 'opponents' over all the place & he was in complete control....  THIS IS PRECISELY WHY I LIKE MMA AS A PRESSURE TESTING ENVIRONMENT FOR TMA.
|
BTW: the 3rd alternative is that the whole video was staged by MMA advocates.  Whatever, in terms of legitimate martial arts, the vid is NONSENSE....


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> Stating the objective is to "... nullify the striker's game plan;" says nothing rather than a starting point. There's no action, no technique, no description of how the grapple r mystically accomplishes said objective. And again with a bit of thinking, striker against striker has the same pragmatic goal. The only thing that's changed is one uses take-downs, the other uses strikes... Either way, the assailant must still approach you & lay hands on you.



You rely on striking itself. Good striking. Hands high, light feet ,chin down. Is terrible grappling.


----------



## punisher73

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Not understanding is in the weakness of the practitioner, not the art.  With strikers, this comes about from the striker training reactively to what's always seen in training, i.e. the heavy bag.  The when a Gracie BBJ moves in and ducks, well the heavy bag didn't do that so the striker is now clueless....  Not what I would call traditional karate....
> |
> Stating the objective is to "... nullify the striker's game plan;" says nothing rather than a starting point.  There's no action, no technique, no description of how the grapple r mystically accomplishes said objective.  And again with a  bit of thinking, striker against striker has the same pragmatic goal.  The only thing that's changed is one uses take-downs, the other uses strikes...  Either way, the assailant must still approach you & lay hands on you.
> |
> I know as ShotoNoob, I study principles but come on.......



I didn't realize that you needed an "indepth" description.  But, here is a quick video explaining a common approach used by BJJ to close the distance on a striker.





The video even points out that boxers tie up and clinch to nullify strikes.  You're right, there is nothing "mystical" about it, but grapplers spend a large amount of time closing that distance safely to nullify strikes.  Go look at the early UFC's and the "Gracie Challenge" videos, don't you think that SOMEWHERE one of these "traditional guys" would have been able to stop them from closing distance, taking them down and imposing their gameplan on them?  It didn't happen.  The first time we saw a "striker" beat a BJJer in an MMA/NHB competition was back with Maurice Smith KO'd a BJJ guy named "Conan" Silviera (sp?).  How did he do it?  He trained with a wrestler and grappler and spent LARGE amounts of time learning how to stop a skilled takedown and then getting back to his feet.  This strategy was also implemented by Chuck Liddell with great success in the UFC to win the crown.

My point?  Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist.  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.

I know others have more experience then me, but I have been at this game for the last 20 years.  In fact, I started the same year as UFC 1.  I have seen the trends and how times and training have changed.  Working in law enforcement and corrections for the past 18 years, I can also say that more and more criminals are watching things like the UFC and trying those moves, even if they don't have formal training.  It's out there and unless you have a skilled grappler trying those moves on you and you can counter then you are deceiving yourself.


----------



## ShotoNoob

punisher73 said:


> I didn't realize that you needed an "indepth" description.  But, here is a quick video explaining a common approach used by BJJ to close the distance on a striker.



WHAT I realize IS that you don't understand traditional karate.  Let's look at video together.  I'll take it "indepth" point by point, to help both of our realizations.

1. YOUR POINT: The video even points out that boxers tie up and clinch to nullify strikes.
|
COUNTERPOINT: My vids point out karateka doing same.  Please review my material.

2.  YOUR POINT.:You're right, there is nothing "mystical" about it, but grapplers spend a large amount of time closing that distance safely to nullify strikes.
|
COUNTERPOINT: Karateka also spend a large amount of time closing the distance.  Again plain in my vids.  I guess your BJJ 'large amount of time' is automatically better than my Karate 'large amount of time?'
|
3. YOUR POINT:  Go look at the early UFC's and the "Gracie Challenge" videos, don't you think that SOMEWHERE one of these "traditional guys" would have been able to stop them from closing distance, taking them down and imposing their gameplan on them?  It didn't happen.  The first time we saw a "striker" beat a BJJer in an MMA/NHB competition was back with Maurice Smith KO'd a BJJ guy named "Conan" Silviera (sp?).  How did he do it?  He trained with a wrestler and grappler and spent LARGE amounts of time learning how to stop a skilled takedown and then getting back to his feet.  This strategy was also implemented by Chuck Liddell with great success in the UFC to win the crown.
|
3. COUNTERPOINT: I'm not impressed with the quality of the 'kareteka or their performance in the early UFC.  Go watch the Gerard Gerdeau
vs. Royce Grace fight---PRIME EXAMPLE. UFC 1
|
Chuck Liddell primarily implemented a strategy of KO'ing wrestlers.  Which he implemented twice against WRESTLER, Randy Couture.  UFC Championship fights....  Didn't you realize that.  Randy Couture did.
|
4A. YOUR POINT My point?  Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist.  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.
|
4A. COUNTERPOINT: Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist. ****AGREED****
|
4B. YOUR POINT:  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.
|
4B. COUNTERPOINT: Again, I've written exactly to this point IN PRINCIPLE, @ many a T.  However, I'll put it in sport karate terms.  Even in the UFC / MMA they acknowledge time & time & time & time again how karate fighting is about distance & timing.  Obviously in MMA, this includes grapplers.  BUT YOU, are saying the MMA / UFC experience doesn't hold water in terms of distance and time yet it's widely acknowledged in MMA.  I also gave two relatively recent examples of karateka devastatingly KO'ing MMA grapplers.  One was a skilled kumite fighter, the other was a new black-belt in his 1ST match against a three-time winner....
|
Your argument that the BJJ closing the distance is different, so karateka sparring striking can't defend.  The larger principle is you don't know the principles about how karateka are training in striking.  I'll give you a short analogy.  The same argument is made over & over that since certain karate styles don't allow head punches in sparring, they can't handle head punches from other styles such as MMA. boxing.  Every one in my school knows and everywhere else should know too this is ridiculous.  The boxers in my school, as well as the black-belt who cross-trains in boxing all agree.  This belief is the typical Monkey-see, the Monkey-can-only-do Myth.  Do you realize you are relying on karateka only being able to respond to some exact experience, like monkeys?

5. YOUR POINT: I know others have more experience then me, but I have been at this game for the last 20 years.  In fact, I started the same year as UFC 1.  I have seen the trends and how times and training have changed.  Working in law enforcement and corrections for the past 18 years, I can also say that more and more criminals are watching things like the UFC and trying those moves, even if they don't have formal training.  It's out there and unless you have a skilled grappler trying those moves on you and you can counter then you are deceiving yourself.
|
5. COUNTERPOINT: FIRST, I have already addressed the UFC issue.  *SECOND, I have already gone on RECORD multiple times in multiple threads AGREEING that grappling especially BJJ is a valuable & desirable skill.  Yet you  claim to have the 'REALIZATIONS.'  What you have is position that has been repeated to me continuously when your response is incompetent regarding my accurate position.*  THIRD, you are deceiving yourself by ignoring the examples I have presented and explain.  And there couldn't be any better example than CHUCK LIDDELL, which you yourself made.
|
NOW, I will speak to the BJJ vid you posted in a post below, SPECIFICALLY IN DEPTH.


----------



## ShotoNoob

punisher73 said:


> I didn't realize that you needed an "indepth" description.  But, here is a quick video explaining a common approach used by BJJ to close the distance on a striker.


|
|PREFACE:  I LIKE THE VID. CLEAR INSTRUCTION.  WORKABLE TACTICS  ****AGREED****
|
STOP TIME 0:56: HG throws low kick @ opponent.  Did you realize that the 1st set of Ippon kumite in my style uses a kick to close the distance?  Are you advocating when HG throws a kick we kicking karateka will be utterly stunned & freeze immobile?
We're off to a great beginning, and I'm just getting started.  Give me a minute while I post another vid.



I think this is a general Shotokan vid not JKA.
|
// HG's BJJ Vid:
1. HG has closed the distance his head slightly bowed.  Explain to me why the opponent in your vid isn't immeidately countering with a punch when the Shotokan competitors in my vid are moving all around, then springing forward very, very fast--my Shotokan guys are firing off strikes???  Doesn't the opponent in your vid realize this is what sport karateka, Shotokan point fighting kumite train to do?  let's continue...
|
2. Do you realize the opponent is using a boxing / kickboxing guard?  Do you realize the defensive implications of this under traditional karate principles.  Same for stance.  And what happened to the high mobility strategy that Shotokan kumite point fighters employ.  Does the HG realize that Shotokan kumite employs great & rapid mobility?  It's not in the video yet.
|
3. STOP TIME 1:12. HG has opponent throw left jab.  Does HR realize, re my vid, that this is not Shotokan punching form?  I won't even ask if HG realizes the implications of his head position....  let's go a bit further...
|
STOP TIME 1:24. Opponent misses with jab.  HG use the typical boxer head movement to dodge & duck.  Well, the opponent has already blown several Shotokan karate point fighting laws, so what's some more....  Like remaining rooted in an upright position leaning off balance ripe for a takedown.  The opponent's punching hand is frozen and his other hand (out of position) is completely passive.  Does either HG or the opponent realize how Shotokan kumite point fighters employ their striking hands (a universe away from what's shown)?
|
LOOK, I'LL STOP HERE....  I do like the vid.  It's very instructional.  But it's presented in a vacuum, which my vid Specifically addresses.  And using that oft criticized Shotokan karate point fighting kumite style....


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> You rely on striking itself. Good striking. Hands high, light feet ,chin down. Is terrible grappling.


|
Please refer to my Shotokan vid / posts.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> You rely on striking itself. Good striking. Hands high, light feet ,chin down. Is terrible grappling.


}
Take some time...
|
STOP TIME 1:46.  HG with hands up, is 'magically' able to shield against any impact from opponent's punches; furthermore,  opponent arms remain outstretched when HG goes for grab.  I can think of more arts than karate that know what to do here.  And it is in the Shotokan syllabus as well as my vids....  There's also something in traditional karate called chambering any one realize the implications...?


----------



## punisher73

ShotoNoob said:


> WHAT I realize IS that you don't understand traditional karate.  Let's look at video together.  I'll take it "indepth" point by point, to help both of our realizations.
> 
> 1. YOUR POINT: The video even points out that boxers tie up and clinch to nullify strikes.
> |
> COUNTERPOINT: My vids point out karateka doing same.  Please review my material.
> 
> 2.  YOUR POINT.:You're right, there is nothing "mystical" about it, but grapplers spend a large amount of time closing that distance safely to nullify strikes.
> |
> COUNTERPOINT: Karateka also spend a large amount of time closing the distance.  Again plain in my vids.  I guess your BJJ 'large amount of time' is automatically better than my Karate 'large amount of time?'
> |
> 3. YOUR POINT:  Go look at the early UFC's and the "Gracie Challenge" videos, don't you think that SOMEWHERE one of these "traditional guys" would have been able to stop them from closing distance, taking them down and imposing their gameplan on them?  It didn't happen.  The first time we saw a "striker" beat a BJJer in an MMA/NHB competition was back with Maurice Smith KO'd a BJJ guy named "Conan" Silviera (sp?).  How did he do it?  He trained with a wrestler and grappler and spent LARGE amounts of time learning how to stop a skilled takedown and then getting back to his feet.  This strategy was also implemented by Chuck Liddell with great success in the UFC to win the crown.
> |
> 3. COUNTERPOINT: I'm not impressed with the quality of the 'kareteka or their performance in the early UFC.  Go watch the Gerard Gerdeau
> vs. Royce Grace fight---PRIME EXAMPLE. UFC 1
> |
> Chuck Liddell primarily implemented a strategy of KO'ing wrestlers.  Which he implemented twice against WRESTLER, Randy Couture.  UFC Championship fights....  Didn't you realize that.  Randy Couture did.
> |
> 4A. YOUR POINT My point?  Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist.  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.
> |
> 4A. COUNTERPOINT: Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist. ****AGREED****
> |
> 4B. YOUR POINT:  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.
> |
> 4B. COUNTERPOINT: Again, I've written exactly to this point IN PRINCIPLE, @ many a T.  However, I'll put it in sport karate terms.  Even in the UFC / MMA they acknowledge time & time & time & time again how karate fighting is about distance & timing.  Obviously in MMA, this includes grapplers.  BUT YOU, are saying the MMA / UFC experience doesn't hold water in terms of distance and time yet it's widely acknowledged in MMA.  I also gave two relatively recent examples of karateka devastatingly KO'ing MMA grapplers.  One was a skilled kumite fighter, the other was a new black-belt in his 1ST match against a three-time winner....
> |
> Your argument that the BJJ closing the distance is different, so karateka sparring striking can't defend.  The larger principle is you don't know the principles about how karateka are training in striking.  I'll give you a short analogy.  The same argument is made over & over that since certain karate styles don't allow head punches in sparring, they can't handle head punches from other styles such as MMA. boxing.  Every one in my school knows and everywhere else should know too this is ridiculous.  The boxers in my school, as well as the black-belt who cross-trains in boxing all agree.  This belief is the typical Monkey-see, the Monkey-can-only-do Myth.  Do you realize you are relying on karateka only being able to respond to some exact experience, like monkeys?
> 
> 5. YOUR POINT: I know others have more experience then me, but I have been at this game for the last 20 years.  In fact, I started the same year as UFC 1.  I have seen the trends and how times and training have changed.  Working in law enforcement and corrections for the past 18 years, I can also say that more and more criminals are watching things like the UFC and trying those moves, even if they don't have formal training.  It's out there and unless you have a skilled grappler trying those moves on you and you can counter then you are deceiving yourself.
> |
> 5. COUNTERPOINT: FIRST, I have already addressed the UFC issue.  *SECOND, I have already gone on RECORD multiple times in multiple threads AGREEING that grappling especially BJJ is a valuable & desirable skill.  Yet you  claim to have the 'REALIZATIONS.'  What you have is position that has been repeated to me continuously when your response is incompetent regarding my accurate position.*  THIRD, you are deceiving yourself by ignoring the examples I have presented and explain.  And there couldn't be any better example than CHUCK LIDDELL, which you yourself made.
> |
> NOW, I will speak to the BJJ vid you posted in a post below, SPECIFICALLY IN DEPTH.



For the record, Gerard Gerdeau was an international Kyokushin Champion and 4th Dan, also a Savate Champion as well.  Chuck Liddell one the first fight against Randy Couture and then lost the next two rematches against him.  The examples that you gave are more exceptions to the rule than the norm. 

I do understand "traditional karate", having studied it for over 20 years.  I have also seen that in the vast majority of fights/contests the grappler usually has the advantage unless the striker has also trained with grapplers or their teacher has had grappling training to show proper attacks.  

We can all find "anecdotal" stories of people who beat other people.  We see it all the time to show why Style X is effective because so and so used it "on the street" to win a fight or protect themself.  If you look at the raw data of fights in contests with striking/grappling, the grapplers hold the advantage whether you like it or not.


----------



## MJS

punisher73 said:


> I didn't realize that you needed an "indepth" description.  But, here is a quick video explaining a common approach used by BJJ to close the distance on a striker.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The video even points out that boxers tie up and clinch to nullify strikes.  You're right, there is nothing "mystical" about it, but grapplers spend a large amount of time closing that distance safely to nullify strikes.  Go look at the early UFC's and the "Gracie Challenge" videos, don't you think that SOMEWHERE one of these "traditional guys" would have been able to stop them from closing distance, taking them down and imposing their gameplan on them?  It didn't happen.  The first time we saw a "striker" beat a BJJer in an MMA/NHB competition was back with Maurice Smith KO'd a BJJ guy named "Conan" Silviera (sp?).  How did he do it?  He trained with a wrestler and grappler and spent LARGE amounts of time learning how to stop a skilled takedown and then getting back to his feet.  This strategy was also implemented by Chuck Liddell with great success in the UFC to win the crown.
> 
> My point?  Most traditional stylists DO NOT train against a skilled takedown artist.  I have seen time and time again that what they call a "takedown" is actually what a grappler would call an unskilled "tackle".  There is no real set up or masking with strikes to judge distance and keep the other person occupied, it is just a charge in from a long ways out.  VERY different than a skilled takedown.
> 
> I know others have more experience then me, but I have been at this game for the last 20 years.  In fact, I started the same year as UFC 1.  I have seen the trends and how times and training have changed.  Working in law enforcement and corrections for the past 18 years, I can also say that more and more criminals are watching things like the UFC and trying those moves, even if they don't have formal training.  It's out there and unless you have a skilled grappler trying those moves on you and you can counter then you are deceiving yourself.



EXCELLENT post!!!!  You hit the nail on the head, and then some, with what you said here!  Not much more that I could add, so I won't.   Well, OK, maybe a little..lol.  Regarding the unskilled tackle comment: agreed 100% and this is something that I'd often get into heated debates about with certain Kenpo folks.  Their reply to that was usually, "Well, on the street, it's unlikely you're going to face a Royce Gracie, so why train for that?"  Well, as you said about the inmates...people watch this stuff, they play around with it in their back yard.  Wrestling is a sport offered in many schools/colleges, so yeah, the odds of running into someone who actually knows how to 'shoot in' for that takedown, are high.  

It's really amazing how much your skill level will go up, when you're training with someone who actually knows what they're doing.  *That 'your' is generic, not talking about you specifically.*


----------



## Hanzou

Having been on both sides of the fence (Shotokan, Judo, and finally Bjj), I can state with confidence that there's a lot of people learning Karate, TKD, Kung FU, or some other traditional art and are not learning any sort of grappling defense whatsoever. What's worse, if you close the distance on some of these practitioners, they freak out and don't know how to react, much less defend against a takedown attack, due to their lack of true sparring or fighting experience.

Check out this clip;






I consider the grappling abilities of this guy to be very sub-par, yet he asserted his dominance on these Karateka pretty decisively by simply closing the distance. Compare that to that Gracie vid above, or to what I consider the cream of the takedown crop;






Those Karateka wouldn't stand a chance in hades of defending that level of takedown. And before someone says that the chances of fighting an experienced grappler is slim, consider that there's plenty of teenage boys doing wrestling and football, and a lot more than that watching MMA and doing backyard wrestling.


----------



## ShotoNoob

punisher73 said:


> For the record, Gerard Gerdeau was an international Kyokushin Champion and 4th Dan, also a Savate Champion as well.  Chuck Liddell one the first fight against Randy Couture and then lost the next two rematches against him.  The examples that you gave are more exceptions to the rule than the norm.


|
For the record, Gerard Gordeau was then a KYO-kickboxing stylist, not a JKA traditional Shotokan karateka.  As an authority on karate, do you realize the distinction?  Your key word.
|
For the record, you support the anecdotes, yet fail to support the anecdotes with facts.  Chuck Liddell lost the 1st  match to Randy Couture through classic MMA GNP.  Liddell came back to KO Couture twice to take the UFC LHW crown, and secondly to successfully defend the title.  LIddell also TKO'd Oritz, a wresting stylist, at least twice.  These were also UFC championship bouts  I believe.  to help our 'realizations,' you are welcome to check my facts.



punisher73 said:


> I do understand "traditional karate", having studied it for over 20 years.


|
So you say... Who was it who remarked about 'advanced beginners?'



punisher73 said:


> I have also seen that in the vast majority of fights/contests the grappler usually has the advantage unless the striker has also trained with grapplers or their teacher has had grappling training to show proper attacks.


|
Again, you keep quoting your position as 'proof.'.  I will go on record saying that Matt Bryers program appears to me to be very sound;  and moreover, his combat BJJ style perfectly suited to the population he is presenting it too.  *I would definitely agree and award Matt B. the win if you are talking Matt's School versus the average traditional karateka student.*
|
_* A good sport karateka black-belt and Matt B's pupils are going to start having problems (see my vid posts).  A bona-fide  traditional karate black-belt, Matt B's grapplers, well again see my posts.*_ 



punisher73 said:


> We can all find "anecdotal" stories of people who beat other people.  We see it all the time to show why Style X is effective because so and so used it "on the street" to win a fight or protect themself.  If you look at the raw data of fights in contests with striking/grappling, the grapplers hold the advantage whether you like it or not.


|
YES. the Gracie BJJ protagonists brought up the anecdotes.  And I crushed them...  with SPECIFICS, not realizations....
|
Whether you admit it or not....


----------



## Hanzou

ShotoNoob said:


> YES. the Gracie BJJ protagonists brought up the anecdotes.  And I crushed them...  with SPECIFICS, not realizations....
> |
> Whether you admit it or not....



Well there's also the fact that every pure traditional karate fighter has done nothing but embarrass themselves on the MMA/NHB circuit....


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> Having been on both sides of the fence (Shotokan, Judo, and finally Bjj), I can state with confidence that there's a lot of people learning Karate, TKD, Kung FU, or some other traditional art and are not learning any sort of grappling defense whatsoever. What's worse, if you close the distance on some of these practitioners, they freak out and don't know how to react, much less defend against a takedown attack, due to their lack of true sparring or fighting experience.


|
Recreational sport karate, Matt Bryers Sport JuiJutsu will most certainly wipe them out...........**** ***NO ARGUMENT*** *****.
|
Where are we on the spectrum of traditional karate?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> Well there's also the fact that every pure traditional karate fighter has done nothing but embarrass themselves on the MMA/NHB circuit....


|
More "Realizations."


----------



## Hanzou

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Recreational sport karate, Matt Bryers Sport JuiJutsu will most certainly wipe them out...........**** ***NO ARGUMENT*** *****.
> |
> Where are we on the spectrum of traditional karate? OH.... more 'RELAIZATIONS.'



Again, where are the traditional karate stylists in MMA or NHB? What's stopping a traditional karateka from entering MMA or NHB and becoming a multi-millionaire?


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> Again, where are the traditional karate stylists in MMA or NHB? What's stopping a traditional karateka from entering MMA or NHB and becoming a multi-millionaire?


|
I put up material, please respond to the material.


----------



## ShotoNoob

Hanzou said:


> Again, where are the traditional karate stylists in MMA or NHB? What's stopping a traditional karateka from entering MMA or NHB and becoming a multi-millionaire?





ShotoNoob said:


> |
> I put up material, please respond to the material.


|
On 2nd thought, no response to my posts is necessary....


----------



## punisher73

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> For the record, Gerard Gordeau was then a KYO-kickboxing stylist, not a JKA traditional Shotokan karateka.  As an authority on karate, do you realize the distinction?  Your key word.
> |
> For the record, you support the anecdotes, yet fail to support the anecdotes with facts.  Chuck Liddell lost the 1st  match to Randy Couture through classic MMA GNP.  Liddell came back to KO Couture twice to take the UFC LHW crown, and secondly to successfully defend the title.  LIddell also TKO'd Oritz, a wresting stylist, at least twice.  These were also UFC championship bouts  I believe.  to help our 'realizations,' you are welcome to check my facts.
> 
> 
> |
> So you say... Who was it who remarked about 'advanced beginners?'
> 
> 
> |
> Again, you keep quoting your position as 'proof.'.  I will go on record saying that Matt Bryers program appears to me to be very sound;  and moreover, his combat BJJ style perfectly suited to the population he is presenting it too.  *I would definitely agree and award Matt B. the win if you are talking Matt's School versus the average traditional karateka student.*
> |
> _* A good sport karateka black-belt and Matt B's pupils are going to start having problems (see my vid posts).  A bona-fide  traditional karate black-belt, Matt B's grapplers, well again see my posts.*_
> 
> 
> |
> YES. the Gracie BJJ protagonists brought up the anecdotes.  And I crushed them...  with SPECIFICS, not realizations....
> |
> Whether you admit it or not....



You said that Gerad Gerdeau was not a good representation of "traditional karate".  Yet, Kyokushin is one of the 4 recognized traditional japanese karate styles.  So what is YOUR definition of "Traditional Karate".  That might make this conversation more productive.  Gerdeau was/is a high ranking black belt in a TRADITIONAL style.  Now, you want to put other qualifiers on his qualifications.  

I stand corrected on Chuck Liddell vs. Randy Couture.  I thought it was 2-1 the other way.  That being said, read what I first wrote about Chuck Liddell.  He used grappling to beat the grappler.  Chuck Liddell was a collegiate wrestler in addition to his karate training and later hawaiian kempo training.

Let's use an example closer to home.  Lyoto Machida.  GREAT traditional karateka who is also a BJJ blackbelt.  It's the understanding of the ground game that makes him so dangerous on his feet.  Because, he's not afraid to go to the ground if it happens.

I'm not even going to address an insult calling me an "advanced beginner".  Ever stop to think that the people who disagree with you have been there and done that and understand things that a "ShotoNewbie" might not yet?


----------



## drop bear

ShotoNoob said:


> |
> Again, your view in the conventional sense of how martial art styles are practiced is "true."
> |
> By traditional karate standards, however, patently false.  The Tatsuya Naka vid and related definitely demonstrates what I am saying.
> |
> Again, if you are training against a partner who only throws a straight punch at your chest (aka IPPON KUMITE) AND, all you do in that training is learn to REACT to just what the partner does.... then yes you are correct.
> |
> No doubt this is how the Matt Bryers and his "high profile" hard contact sparring partners look at it....
> =====================================================================================
> Here's how I look at it.  Same idea with the "Kiai Master vs MMA" vid.  No one over there seems to accept my conclusion.
> Despite all the talent here, I guess I have to go through it step-by-step....
> |
> Step1. Kiai Master throws students all over the place.  they are like the proverbial putty in his hands.
> Step2. Kiai Master and MMA fighter pare off, Kiai Master waves hands @ Mr. MMA, NO EFFECT.
> Step 3: Mr. MMA PUNCHES OUT Kiai Master.
> |
> Under the applied goal of traditional karate (or any traditional martial art), the working objective  in a physical confrontation is to use your technique to disable the opponent.
> |
> Kiai Master's technique is completely useless, both on offense & defense.  Kiai Master is dispatched by Mr. MMA.
> |
> Hence, the PRINCIPLES behind the ability the Kiai Master demonstrated he could apply is a hoax--fraud; OR, he is incompetent in those PRINCIPLES.  Either way, the Kiai Master is a fraud since he couldn't substantiate his ability when the vid starts out demonstrating he had some ability to throw 'opponents' over all the place & he was in complete control....  THIS IS PRECISELY WHY I LIKE MMA AS A PRESSURE TESTING ENVIRONMENT FOR TMA.
> |
> BTW: the 3rd alternative is that the whole video was staged by MMA advocates.  Whatever, in terms of legitimate martial arts, the vid is NONSENSE....



 I just got to watch that video and did not see any takedown defence. And so am a bit confused as to how that makes a point.


----------



## ShotoNoob

drop bear said:


> I just got to watch that video and did not see any takedown defence. And so am a bit confused as to how that makes a point.


|
EDIT: AH, it may be there; bottom line as I stated the KIAI vid is nonsense to me.  Please refer to the Gracie BJJ vs. Karate posts I have made.

Yes, I know how you are confused.  And I'm also sure that you standing in the shoes of a striker would be overwhelmed by the Gracie JuiJutsu  guys in the BJJ video.
|
Bottom Line: Traditional karate doesn't work for you.  To borrow a line from Danny T., "then don't do it."
|
Crossing training in the general grappling arts is for you...........IMO.


----------



## ShotoNoob

HANZOU & I AGREE ON THIS:





Hanzou said:


> I disagree. People also take up MMA for self defense purposes, and personal fitness.


|
I'm all in favor of practitioners taking up "MMA" for self defense.  The Matt Bryers BJJ program, and he has an extensive striking background as well.
|
DROP BEAR, hows this sound?


----------

