# Well rounded taekwondo



## Axkick1 (Dec 25, 2017)

Hello all, I have been going back and forth about which grappling style to train in on the side. I have a black belt In tang soo do but recently I’ve started training in Olympic style taekwondo. I have some experience in judo newaza but it is very basic. I would like to know what grappling art helps a taekwondo practitioner or is most beneficial to taekwondo. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 25, 2017)

Any. Depends more on your way of thinking, really.
Personally, I prefer stand up grappling arts (like Hapkido and Akido) over ground arts (like BJJ) simply because it is my opinion that being on the ground in a self defense situation is  Bad Idea (tm). Other will disagree.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2017)

Like DD, I have a preference for remaining standing. Judo is a good place to work from if, especially if you like the idea of competing (even within the dojo). You'll get a more limited range of responses in Judo than in something like Hapkido, because they tend to distill down to what works against other Judoka (and further, often, to what is allowed in competition), which is a much smaller population of techniques than what will work on everyone else. There's good and bad to that smaller list of techniques, IMO.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Like DD, I have a preference for remaining standing. Judo is a good place to work from if, especially if you like the idea of competing (even within the dojo). You'll get a more limited range of responses in Judo than in something like Hapkido, because they tend to distill down to what works against other Judoka (and further, often, to what is allowed in competition), which is a much smaller population of techniques than what will work on everyone else. There's good and bad to that smaller list of techniques, IMO.


Hmmm very interesting. Thank you both for your input. What are your takes on Brazilian jujitsu with taekwondo? Or wrestling?


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 26, 2017)

Helps you in what way? Because if your looking for help in taekwondo competition then grappling isnt any use for that. If it's for mma then you'll need more than just one grappling art and if it's for self defence any is good


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> Hmmm very interesting. Thank you both for your input. What are your takes on Brazilian jujitsu with taekwondo? Or wrestling?


Both will work well with TKD, but I share DD's thoughts on avoiding the ground. Both wrestling and BJJ have a focus on moving to the ground. The best use of this is that you'd also be training on how to avoid going to the ground. That latter, you'd also get a good focus on from Judo, with the added benefit of much more focus on being able to put the other guy down without necessarily going to the ground, yourself (though there's a reasonable amount of that in Judo, too). With other standing grappling (Aikido, Hapkido, etc.), it depends on the school how much you learn to avoid being taken to the ground. If there's resisted training (two people trying to put each other on the ground), you'll get that benefit. If not, probably not.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Helps you in what way? Because if your looking for help in taekwondo competition then grappling isnt any use for that. If it's for mma then you'll need more than just one grappling art and if it's for self defence any is good


I’m predominant a kicker (taekwondo stylist) and I like that. But to me a worse case scenario is coming across an extremely good kickboxer or a grappler. I want to have a good understanding of the ground, if for some reason I end up there. If I’m not able to get back up to my feet I want to be able to know I can handle myself. When a conflict arises my goal is to not go to ground if the assistant I’m facing is a regular person or doesn’t know grappling, but as I said before, if they are for some reason a competent grappler I’d like to be able to hold my own with them with the eventual goal of getting back to my feet.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Both will work well with TKD, but I share DD's thoughts on avoiding the ground. Both wrestling and BJJ have a focus on moving to the ground. The best use of this is that you'd also be training on how to avoid going to the ground. That latter, you'd also get a good focus on from Judo, with the added benefit of much more focus on being able to put the other guy down without necessarily going to the ground, yourself (though there's a reasonable amount of that in Judo, too). With other standing grappling (Aikido, Hapkido, etc.), it depends on the school how much you learn to avoid being taken to the ground. If there's resisted training (two people trying to put each other on the ground), you'll get that benefit. If not, probably not.


I want to avoid the ground but I also want a style that gets me out of sticky grappling situation and back to my feet and if I end up on the ground and can’t get up I’d be able to competently hold my own and even negate my attackers ground submissions.


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> I’m predominant a kicker (taekwondo stylist) and I like that. But to me a worse case scenario is coming across an extremely good kickboxer or a grappler. I want to have a good understanding of the ground, if for some reason I end up there. If I’m not able to get back up to my feet I want to be able to know I can handle myself. When a conflict arises my goal is to not go to ground if the assistant I’m facing is a regular person or doesn’t know grappling, but as I said before, if they are for some reason a competent grappler I’d like to be able to hold my own with them with the eventual goal of getting back to my feet.


Then I'd say jiu jitsu. Wrestlers don't spend a lot of training off their back, judo from what I know spends more time in a standing clinch and works on throwing your oppenont and it has some emphasis on mat work but it's not the focus. But jiu jitsu spends a lot of time on your back teaching either submissions from your back or sweeps and reversals.


----------



## KenpoMaster805 (Dec 26, 2017)

Juijutsu akido Krav Maga and Kenpo


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 26, 2017)

KenpoMaster805 said:


> Juijutsu akido Krav Maga and Kenpo


Krav Maga and kendo aren't grappling arts


----------



## skribs (Dec 26, 2017)

I don't think the goal of BJJ is to get on your back.  I think BJJ recognizes it as an eventuality and seeks to dominate in the worst case scenario.

I think Judo is a well-rounded complement, but I personally train Hapkido along with my Taekwondo, because my TKD master teaches Hapkido.


----------



## DanT (Dec 26, 2017)

The first question to ask yourself is: "which distance of fighting does my art lack the most?"

If we were to give ratings out of 3:

3/3 Comprehensive
2/3 Decent
1/3 Lacking
0/3 Non-existent

For TKD we could say:

Kicking: 3/3
Punching: 2/3
Clinch: 1/3
Stand-Up Grappling: 1/3
Ground-Fighting: 0/3

This is on a school by school basis, but for the most part represents a good majority of TKD schools out there.

Now if we look at BJJ:

Kicking: 0/3
Punching: 0/3
Clinch: 1/3
Stand-Up Grappling: 1/3
Ground-Fighting: 3/3

I think for this reason, BJJ is an excellent compliment to your TKD training.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2017)

skribs said:


> I don't think the goal of BJJ is to get on your back.  I think BJJ recognizes it as an eventuality and seeks to dominate in the worst case scenario.
> 
> I think Judo is a well-rounded complement, but I personally train Hapkido along with my Taekwondo, because my TKD master teaches Hapkido.



Guard in BJJ is an offensive position. But they are still either trying to get on top of you or take your back. 

I still think wrestling has a heavier focus on standing back up. Otherwise split the difference and do submission wrestling.

For striking you basically want to be on top of the guy.


----------



## skribs (Dec 26, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Guard in BJJ is an offensive position. But they are still either trying to get on top of you or take your back.
> 
> I still think wrestling has a heavier focus on standing back up. Otherwise split the difference and do submission wrestling.
> 
> For striking you basically want to be on top of the guy.



My point is, if I go up against a BJJ fighter, is his fighting stance going to be on his back?  Or is he going to stand up, and then try to bring me down to his level?

-----



DanT said:


> The first question to ask yourself is: "which distance of fighting does my art lack the most?"
> 
> If we were to give ratings out of 3:
> 
> ...



This is also why I thought Judo would be pretty good, since I'd rate it higher in clinch/stand-up and still a 2/3 in Ground.  It's still going to make up where Taekwondo is lacking, just where Taekwondo is lacking less.  Really, any grappling art will complement Taekwondo in that fashion.  Hapkido will really help with the stand-up grappling, Wrestling will really help in the clinch, etc.

Where BJJ + TKD will get you more threes, I think Judo or Wrestling will get you more 2+ scores on your chart.

I actually think it would be fun to see where each art (based on the average school for the art) ranks in the various traits.  That could be an interesting table.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 26, 2017)

skribs said:


> My point is, if I go up against a BJJ fighter, is his fighting stance going to be on his back?  Or is he going to stand up, and then try to bring me down to his level?



From the Bjj-ers I know, generally the second.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2017)

skribs said:


> My point is, if I go up against a BJJ fighter, is his fighting stance going to be on his back? Or is he going to stand up, and then try to bring me down to his level?


Well they may jump on their back or butt flop which I would not recommend for self defence. Or MMA. Unless you are an absolute gun BJJer.


----------



## skribs (Dec 26, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> From the BJJ-ers I know, the second. They're not going to just plant on the ground and wait.



That's...my point.  That BJJ isn't just about sitting on the ground waiting for the fight to come to him.  The point I was trying to argue was whether the philosophy of BJJ is "I want the fight to go to the ground" or if it is "I don't want to be screwed if the fight goes to the ground."


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?


It really depends on what your reasoning is, which I believe everyone's already stated above. Theres no 1 answer, and in overly-simplified terms: hapkido traditionally goes well with TKD, judo will help you grappling while staying standing, BJJ will help you if you end up on the ground. It's up to you what you value more.


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?


Just do what interests you most...this question is silly in my opinion because firstly do you really plan to be in that many street fights that you need this as a priority. If not then just do what you enjoy most this is a hobby not a career for most people you don't /have/ to do any of it. I do jiu jitsu it's got weaknesses I know that and I don't care because I enjoy it. I don't train it to be well rounded or so I can beat someone on the street if I go down. I do it because its fun and I enjoy it.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 26, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Just do what interests you most...this question is silly in my opinion because firstly do you really plan to be in that many street fights that you need this as a priority. If not then just do what you enjoy most this is a hobby not a career for most people you don't /have/ to do any of it. I do jiu jitsu it's got weaknesses I know that and I don't care because I enjoy it. I don't train it to be well rounded or so I can beat someone on the street if I go down. I do it because its fun and I enjoy it.



On that note. I enjoy the functionality of martial arts because I am more able to use it.

Regardless of self defence the more well rounded someone is the more they can productively interact with other martial artists.


----------



## DanT (Dec 26, 2017)

skribs said:


> My point is, if I go up against a BJJ fighter, is his fighting stance going to be on his back?  Or is he going to stand up, and then try to bring me down to his level?
> 
> -----
> 
> ...


I can say for my primary art (Wing Chun):

Kicking: 2/3
Punching: 3/3
Clinch: 3/3
Stand-Up Grappling: 1/3
Ground-Fighting: 0/3

And Shaolin:

Kicking: 3/3
Punching: 3/3
Clinch: 1/3
Stand-Up Grappling: 3/3
Ground-Fighting: 2/3

I think BJJ complements almost any art apart from the few other Ground-Fighting specific arts such as Sambo.


----------



## DanT (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?


I would say BJJ. It helps you with the area you're the least proficient in.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Just do what interests you most...this question is silly in my opinion because firstly do you really plan to be in that many street fights that you need this as a priority. If not then just do what you enjoy most this is a hobby not a career for most people you don't /have/ to do any of it. I do jiu jitsu it's got weaknesses I know that and I don't care because I enjoy it. I don't train it to be well rounded or so I can beat someone on the street if I go down. I do it because its fun and I enjoy it.


Good for you. I’m asking because I’m curious and want to hear other martial artists views.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 26, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Just do what interests you most...this question is silly in my opinion because firstly do you really plan to be in that many street fights that you need this as a priority. If not then just do what you enjoy most this is a hobby not a career for most people you don't /have/ to do any of it. I do jiu jitsu it's got weaknesses I know that and I don't care because I enjoy it. I don't train it to be well rounded or so I can beat someone on the street if I go down. I do it because its fun and I enjoy it.


Maybe I do plan on being in many street fights. I always want to be prepared. I love martial arts as a hobby AND as a method of self protection. I try to practice by both ways of thinking.


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 26, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> Maybe I do plan on being in many street fights. I always want to be prepared. I love martial arts as a hobby AND as a method of self protection. I try to practice by both ways of thinking.


Well if you plan to get in street fights then you really need to take a look at yourself. Being prepared is one having it take over your whole thinking is a bit silly in my eyes and honestly it really makes no difference how much you train you can always be caught unprepared a random idiot could walk up to a professional fighter and put him down with a punch in a bar. I've seen it happen or a mugger could come up and stab a fully trained soldier. Training doesn't make you invincible. It helps but it's not everything. There are people out there with no training who are tough and strong and fit and vicious and have no remorse or morals. I've been training martial arts for over 30 years and I wouldn't fancy my chances against people like that. Best way to be prepared is self preservation. You see a crowd of people shouting and swearing and seem drunk, cross the road move away from them things like that that's the best way for self defence


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 27, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> I want to avoid the ground but I also want a style that gets me out of sticky grappling situation and back to my feet and if I end up on the ground and can’t get up I’d be able to competently hold my own and even negate my attackers ground submissions.


For that combination, I'd be thinking either Judo (because there's a really good focus on not being taken down, plus some reasonable groundwork) or BJJ (because that builds strong competency on the ground, and many places do teach getting up after you get control back). There are probably other solutions, and whether either of those is a good answer for you will ultimately depend upon what's near you. Since you already train, you probably know that finding a school/instructor that you like is important, so you'll train more regularly and stick with it long enough to gain competency.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 27, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?


For what you want, Judo is more likely to enhance your ability to stay standing (and handle a clinch). BJJ is more likely to help you handle things on the ground. Decide whether you're more interested in dominating on the ground (advantage to BJJ) or being harder to take down (advantage to Judo).

Hapkido, from what I've seen (pretty limited exposure) doesn't have a strong ground game, and typically doesn't do nearly as much resisted training, so you won't get the benefit of training to stop someone from taking you down. On paper, it doesn't fit what you are asking for (though the right Hapkido school actually might).


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 27, 2017)

I’ll give my wrestling point of view here...

Wrestlers do NOT want to be on their back.  That’s the absolute worst place to be during a wrestling match.  Wrestlers will work to get off their back any way possible - either a reversal or an escape (back on their feet).  Wrestlers won’t spend time on their back trying to set up stuff in competition (unless they’re really good and going against someone who’s awful). 

Wrestling spends a lot of time training takedowns, and therefore a lot of time defending them.  This is a big reason why MMAers who have no wrestling experience but do have a lot of grappling experience cross-train in wrestling.  If wrestling has a forte in MMA, it’s takedown defense.

Wrestling has some big drawbacks, depending on your priorities...
They train to fall on their stomach instead of their back to avoid a pin.  Great for wrestling competition, bad for SD.
No submissions and chokes.  After some time, you can easily come up with your own, but you’re really not doing that during regular practice.

Wrestling pros...
Takedowns and avoiding them (throws and legs)
Getting off your back
Intense conditioning and mental toughness
Getting the job done as quickly as possible
- BJJ seems very patient with people content to stall and wait as long as it takes for an opening.  Wrestling has strict stalling rules and due to short time limits, wrestlers won’t wait around for opening
   - This all relative, of course

Wrestling is getting a lot of MMA attention.  For pure SD reasons, I’d go BJJ or Judo personally because the chokes and submissions are the ultimate point.  Wrestling’s ultimate point is a pin.

Wrestling is a very tough sport and will turn just about anyone who takes it seriously into a capable self-defender (is that a word?).  There’s less adaptation of technique to pure SD in Judo and BJJ.

I have no experience in Judo nor BJJ to really speak of.  I wrestled from grades 3-12, and coached it on and off for a 10 year period.  I was an on-the-mat assistant, not a barking orders head guy   I could have a false idea of what really goes in Judo and BJJ, but I know quite a few practitioners.

And between wrestling, Judo and BJJ, rolling is rolling.  The principles of body control, balancing your and your opponent’s weight, body positioning, etc. all carry over across them.  The throws are very similar too.  There’s some variation in them, but they’re not night and day differences that I see and one style doesn’t have a superior version of every single throw IMO.

One advantage wresting has over the other two is no reliance on the uniform to do techniques.  No-gi BJJ does this too, but not everyone does no-gi.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 27, 2017)

A lot will depend on the individual school of BJJ/Judo/Hapkido/etc. Both the quality of the instruction and the focus on what context to apply the skills in will vary.

Since you are primarily concerned with defending yourself and getting back to your feet if the fight goes to the ground against your will, I can offer some generalizations which you would need to check against the specific schools available to you in your area.

*BJJ*
Pros: Has some of the most technically advanced curriculum for fighting on the ground, especially if you are stuck in an inferior position. Also you will get lots and lots of live sparring time in ground fighting so you will know exactly what you can and can't pull off under pressure against a tough opponent.

Cons: Many BJJ schools these days are heavily focused on tournament competition, which means they may neglect stand-up clinching (including takedowns and takedown defense), defense against striking, and working to regain the feet. (On the other hand, many of these schools will also have an MMA program which will address those deficits.)

*Judo*
Pros: You'll develop excellent takedown skills, decent takedown defense, the ability to fall safely if you are taken down, and at least some ground grappling including the fundamentals of escaping when someone has you pinned. You'll get lots of live takedown practice against resisting opponents.

Cons: Most dojos these days are focused on the sport aspect of the art and don't cover the adaptations you have to make in order to protect yourself from  punches while throwing your opponent. Those adaptations aren't tremendously hard to make, but if your school doesn't cover them you'll have to do some extra-curricular work to master them. Depending on the dojo, work on the ground can range from adequate to excellent, however there will probably not be much focus on defending strikes or regaining the feet.

*Wrestling*
 Pros: Possibly the best for developing clinching, takedowns, takedown defense, and the ability to regain your feet. Also it typically comes with a training culture which strongly emphasizes physical conditioning and mental fortitude. Lots of live grappling, so you'll have confidence in knowing exactly what you can pull off in a real situation.

Cons: Mostly available in scholastic settings (elementary, high school, college) for . Hard to find a stand-alone training facility for adult hobbyists. Your best bet would be to find an MMA gym that has a good wrestling coach. Dealing with strikes isn't part of the wrestling curriculum, but the nature of the art makes it easy to adapt to an environment where people are trying to hit you (more so than Judo). Unless you're lucky enough to have access to the rare catch wrestling school, you won't be learning submissions, but those aren't so relevant to your stated goals.

*Hapkido/Aikido*
Pros: Some useful concepts and techniques for standing situations where someone is trying to grab you. Some techniques (standing joint locks) which can be effective in certain specialized situations. You'll develop good skills in falling safely.

Cons: Little to no groundwork. If groundwork is taught, it is generally not good quality. You may be lucky enough to find a Hapkido school with adequately competent ground fighting, but I don't believe that's the norm. Not all schools include live sparring and many of the standard grappling techniques are low-percentage or useful only for specialized circumstances.

*Sombo*
Pros: Much like Judo and wrestling (since Sombo is essentially a blend of the Judo and various folk wrestling traditions). If you find a combat Sombo school it will include striking applications.

Cons: Hard to find.

*Miscellaneous other Jujutsu styles*
There are lots of modern eclectic jujutsu systems. Shingitai, Danzan ryu, Small Circle, and so on. Sometimes they call themselves traditional Japanese jujutsu, although they're not really all that traditional. Sometimes they'll flaunt their modern development. Typically they are built on a base of Judo and a grab bag of other arts. Quality can vary considerably, but many of them do teach solid standup and ground grappling from a combative perspective. (Others look good, but the quality really isn't there. Caveat emptor.)

*Silat*
I don't have a lot of personal experience with Silat, but some Silat systems do have an extensive curriculum for situations where one or both combatants are grounded. From what I've seen, it's typically not as good as jujutsu based systems from a pure grappling standpoint, but it's interesting because it's built on the assumption that bladed weapons will be present. This can change the tactics significantly - for example you may not want to take full mount on a downed opponent because he might snatch your own knife out of your belt holster and use it against you. I'll leave it to those with more experience to break down the pros and cons.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> I’ll give my wrestling point of view here...
> 
> Wrestlers do NOT want to be on their back.  That’s the absolute worst place to be during a wrestling match.  Wrestlers will work to get off their back any way possible - either a reversal or an escape (back on their feet).  Wrestlers won’t spend time on their back trying to set up stuff in competition (unless they’re really good and going against someone who’s awful).
> 
> ...


Wow very insightful, thank you!! Yes I was waiting for a wrestler to give their point of view. I figure if I am ever in an alternating I’ll start with my kicks and if I tried to get taken down wrestling would be beneficial for me staying in control and off my back. Catch wrestling would be great because they have submissions


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> A lot will depend on the individual school of BJJ/Judo/Hapkido/etc. Both the quality of the instruction and the focus on what context to apply the skills in will vary.
> 
> Since you are primarily concerned with defending yourself and getting back to your feet if the fight goes to the ground against your will, I can offer some generalizations which you would need to check against the specific schools available to you in your area.
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for breaking each grappling style down for me! I’ve always fancied wrestling and Russian sambo. It’s hard to pick just one. I guess I’ll just have to analyze my needs and pick one.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 27, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> Thank you so much for breaking each grappling style down for me! I’ve always fancied wrestling and Russian sambo. It’s hard to pick just one. I guess I’ll just have to analyze my needs and pick one.


Do you have everything near you? I'd suggest figuring out what's nearby and narrowing down, so you don't decide on one, then get disappointed when you cant find it.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 27, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> Thank you so much for breaking each grappling style down for me! I’ve always fancied wrestling and Russian sambo. It’s hard to pick just one. I guess I’ll just have to analyze my needs and pick one.


First thing is to see what's available for in your area. No point in getting your heart set on (for example) catch wrestling if the closest school is 300 miles away.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> Do you have everything near you? I'd suggest figuring out what's nearby and narrowing down, so you don't decide on one, then get disappointed when you cant find it.


Yes I understand. There is a catch wrestling school about 1 hour south of me. In work traffic it’s like two hours though. There are a plethora of Brazilian jujitsu schools near my house. Also taekwondo schools. My main passion is taekwondo but I want to do some grappling on the side so I am more well rounded.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> First thing is to see what's available for in your area. No point in getting your heart set on (for example) catch wrestling if the closest school is 300 miles away.


You are right. Trying not to get my hopes up but I’d really like to train wrestling. If it’s not near me I won’t make a fuss about it though.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 27, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> Wrestling is getting a lot of MMA attention. For pure SD reasons, I’d go BJJ or Judo personally because the chokes and submissions are the ultimate point. Wrestling’s ultimate point is a pin.



A pin is fine if your goal is to hit people.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

drop bear said:


> A pin is fine if your goal is to hit people.


Exactly! I’m not trying to be a master grappler, it would be nice, but right now I’m more focused on negating a grapplers attempts to get me to the ground.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 27, 2017)

Also I was drawn to wrestling because it doesn’t seem to rely on a jacket or gi. Seems like anyone can learn wrestling and use it anywhere. Not to say you can’t train no-gi but wrestling is the original “no-gi” lol. Am I right?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2017)

drop bear said:


> A pin is fine if your goal is to hit people.


If it’s a full pin. But a wrestling pin, I think, can be momentary, and may not really show control.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> Also I was drawn to wrestling because it doesn’t seem to rely on a jacket or gi. Seems like anyone can learn wrestling and use it anywhere. Not to say you can’t train no-gi but wrestling is the original “no-gi” lol. Am I right?


Yes. That’s a limitation for schools that teach competition Judo or BJJ. It’s another of the adjustments that Tony referred to - not difficult to make, but you might have to make it yourself in some schools.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 28, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If it’s a full pin. But a wrestling pin, I think, can be momentary, and may not really show control.



Three unopposed strikes thrown in a second can end a fight.


----------



## Axkick1 (Dec 28, 2017)

So what is the best grappling style to train in in addition to WTF Taekwondo?


----------



## Headhunter (Dec 28, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> So what is the best grappling style to train in in addition to WTF Taekwondo?


Any of them


----------



## Buka (Dec 28, 2017)

BJJ or wrestling.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Three unopposed strikes thrown in a second can end a fight.


Agreed. What does that have to do with my post?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 28, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Agreed. What does that have to do with my post?



OK. Op is predominantly a striker and wants a grappling system that rounds his system out. So where he wants to be is mostly standing and striking.

So the necessity to hold someone down for any length of time is pretty unimportant.

In the couple of seconds they are pinned OP can just punch them. If the other guy isn't really controlled. So what? Other guy stands up and OP can TKD the dude in the face.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 28, 2017)

Axkick1 said:


> So what is the best grappling style to train in in addition to WTF Taekwondo?


Clearly there's no definitive answer. What do you expect to gain from asking again a third time?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2017)

drop bear said:


> OK. Op is predominantly a striker and wants a grappling system that rounds his system out. So where he wants to be is mostly standing and striking.
> 
> So the necessity to hold someone down for any length of time is pretty unimportant.
> 
> In the couple of seconds they are pinned OP can just punch them. If the other guy isn't really controlled. So what? Other guy stands up and OP can TKD the dude in the face.


That's true, if the pin has him with at least one hand free. Wrestling pins aren't really built around the concept of having a hand free to pin. And those that are momentary (by which I meant that they are fleeting, and don't actually represent a time of the kind of control found in a submission, for instance) wouldn't normally present an especially good opening for punching. MMA has done a good job of highlighting which positions present a good opportunity for punching, and most don't involve trying to get both of the other guy's shoulders to stay on the mat. I'm sure some wrestling pins could be adapted to a good punching opportunity, but those that are momentary are probably the least of them.


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 28, 2017)

kempodisciple said:


> Clearly there's no definitive answer. What do you expect to gain from asking again a third time?


We’re like Will Farrell’s character in Austin Powers: we HAVE to answer any and all questions after they’re asked 3 times.


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 28, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If it’s a full pin. But a wrestling pin, I think, can be momentary, and may not really show control.


You pretty much have to be in full control to be awarded a pin.  Not a written rule, but an understood rule.  I’ve never seen an accidental pin, so to speak.  Maybe the in the WWF, but not real wrestling.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 28, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> You pretty much have to be in full control to be awarded a pin.  Not a written rule, but an understood rule.  I’ve never seen an accidental pin, so to speak.  Maybe the in the WWF, but not real wrestling.


I'm thinking of video I've seen, and it seemed (mind you, I'm almost completely ignorant of the rules) that the pin only had to be for a moment - it could almost (but not entirely, from what I saw) be in a transition. The pinner had to be in control and pushing for the pin, but it didn't put them in control to the point that they could have switched to something like punching.

That's based upon some very unscientific reviews by someone who doesn't understand the rules, so the impression could be entirely wrong. In which case, I have no idea what was going on. (Maria, no comments on that!)


----------



## drop bear (Dec 28, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That's true, if the pin has him with at least one hand free. Wrestling pins aren't really built around the concept of having a hand free to pin. And those that are momentary (by which I meant that they are fleeting, and don't actually represent a time of the kind of control found in a submission, for instance) wouldn't normally present an especially good opening for punching. MMA has done a good job of highlighting which positions present a good opportunity for punching, and most don't involve trying to get both of the other guy's shoulders to stay on the mat. I'm sure some wrestling pins could be adapted to a good punching opportunity, but those that are momentary are probably the least of them.



Look up half Nelson.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 29, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If it’s a full pin. But a wrestling pin, I think, can be momentary, and may not really show control.


Here's the thing about getting a pin in wrestling competition: it's true that the scoring pin is only momentary. But in order to get that pin even momentarily against a tough wrestler you have to control his body beforehand in order to maneuver him into the scoring position. In a real fight, that body control offers lots of opportunities for strikes even when there is no official "pin." One relevant term you might look up is "ride."


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 29, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Look up half Nelson.


Unless I'm mis-using the term, that's not a pin. There's certainly much in the wrestling repertoire that allows control for punching - I was speaking specifically to pins.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 29, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Unless I'm mis-using the term, that's not a pin. There's certainly much in the wrestling repertoire that allows control for punching - I was speaking specifically to pins.



OK but there is much in the repertoire that allows control for punching.

Now if you ask really nicely you could get a wrestler to knock you down and hold you in place. I know I haven't met a decent wrestler who couldn't pin me indefinitely.


----------



## Anarax (Jan 1, 2018)

Axkick1 said:


> Hello all, I have been going back and forth about which grappling style to train in on the side. I have a black belt In tang soo do but recently I’ve started training in Olympic style taekwondo. I have some experience in judo newaza but it is very basic. I would like to know what grappling art helps a taekwondo practitioner or is most beneficial to taekwondo. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thank you.



You might want to check out what's available within driving distance, then research what interests you. Trying each grappling class out is probably the best approach. Judo and Japanese jujitsu are great styles I would check into if I were you. Have you considered Hapkido? I know a lot of martial artist that have trained both tang so do and Hapkido.


----------



## Axkick1 (Jan 2, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> Clearly there's no definitive answer. What do you expect to gain from asking again a third time?


Because no one was really answering my question. So instead you are on here asking Me a question about my question??? Lol!


----------



## Axkick1 (Jan 2, 2018)

Anarax said:


> You might want to check out what's available within driving distance, then research what interests you. Trying each grappling class out is probably the best approach. Judo and Japanese jujitsu are great styles I would check into if I were you. Have you considered Hapkido? I know a lot of martial artist that have trained both tang so do and Hapkido.


Yes that is a good idea my friend. I will have to do that. I’m Kinda leaning towards judo.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2018)

> Personally, I prefer stand up grappling arts (like Hapkido and Akido) over ground arts (like BJJ) simply because it is my opinion that being on the ground in a self defense situation is Bad Idea (tm).





> Judo is a good place to work from if, especially if you like the idea of competing (even within the dojo). You'll get a more limited range of responses in Judo than in something like Hapkido, because they tend to distill down to what works against other Judoka (and further, often, to what is allowed in competition), which is a much smaller population of techniques than what will work on everyone else





> Both wrestling and BJJ have a focus on moving to the ground. The best use of this is that you'd also be training on how to avoid going to the ground. That latter, you'd also get a good focus on from Judo, with the added benefit of much more focus on being able to put the other guy down without necessarily going to the ground, yourself (though there's a reasonable amount of that in Judo, too). With other standing grappling (Aikido, Hapkido, etc.), it depends on the school how much you learn to avoid being taken to the ground. If there's resisted training (two people trying to put each other on the ground), you'll get that benefit. If not, probably not.





> Then I'd say jiu jitsu. Wrestlers don't spend a lot of training off their back, judo from what I know spends more time in a standing clinch and works on throwing your oppenont and it has some emphasis on mat work but it's not the focus. But jiu jitsu spends a lot of time on your back teaching either submissions from your back or sweeps and reversals.





> Juijutsu akido Krav Maga and Kenpo





> I think for this reason, BJJ is an excellent compliment to your TKD training.





> Otherwise split the difference and do submission wrestling.





> Where BJJ + TKD will get you more threes, I think Judo or Wrestling will get you more 2+ scores on your chart.





> hapkido traditionally goes well with TKD, judo will help you grappling while staying standing, BJJ will help you if you end up on the ground. It's up to you what you value more.





> I would say BJJ. It helps you with the area you're the least proficient in.





> For that combination, I'd be thinking either Judo (because there's a really good focus on not being taken down, plus some reasonable groundwork) or BJJ (because that builds strong competency on the ground, and many places do teach getting up after you get control back)





> For what you want, Judo is more likely to enhance your ability to stay standing (and handle a clinch). BJJ is more likely to help you handle things on the ground. Decide whether you're more interested in dominating on the ground (advantage to BJJ) or being harder to take down (advantage to Judo).


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2018)

Axkick1 said:


> Because no one was really answering my question. So instead you are on here asking Me a question about my question??? Lol!


Read the above post, I quote about 10 different, direct answers that I saw in this thread, before you asked the question. The issue is not that you haven't been given a direct answer, it's that the answer changes depending on what you value, so you will get different answers from different people, rather than a consensus among everyone of "do judo" or "do bjj". You have a decision to make, and we can't make it for you.

If you really want to make the decision, read post 31 by Tony, and make a decision based on that post. In addition to making sure you have whatever it is close enough that you could train first.


----------



## Axkick1 (Jan 3, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> Read the above post, I quote about 10 different, direct answers that I saw in this thread, before you asked the question. The issue is not that you haven't been given a direct answer, it's that the answer changes depending on what you value, so you will get different answers from different people, rather than a consensus among everyone of "do judo" or "do bjj". You have a decision to make, and we can't make it for you.
> 
> If you really want to make the decision, read post 31 by Tony, and make a decision based on that post. In addition to making sure you have whatever it is close enough that you could train first.


No lol I wanted someone to break down why a certain grappling style would be beneficial to taekwondo or coincide with the already established techniques of taekwondo. There was 1 or 2 people that did that and that’s great! That’s what I wanted but in the beginning a lot of people were just bantering about topics that were not relevant to my original questions. So I was trying to stear or “guide” the thread back to where I wanted it to go.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2018)

Axkick1 said:


> No lol I wanted someone to break down why a certain grappling style would be beneficial to taekwondo or coincide with the already established techniques of taekwondo. There was 1 or 2 people that did that and that’s great! That’s what I wanted but in the beginning a lot of people were just bantering about topics that were not relevant to my original questions. So I was trying to stear or “guide” the thread back to where I wanted it to go.


Most wouldn't necessarily coincide with the already established techniques (with the exception of hapkido, where the two arts are generally taught together). For the most part, it's on you to understand the pros/cons of each art, and decide which is most important for you.

For instance, my first grappling art to cross train was judo (sort of). That was because my style of fighting involves breaking distance, getting close, then disengaging back out of distance. It's not all I can do, but it's what I'm best at. So my biggest issue was people getting a grip while I was in close, and having to fight my way back out. Sparring judokas helped me with that. But that had nothing to do with judo coinciding with techniques I already knew.

Based on generalizations, I would go with either BJJ or wrestling. Reasoning behind that is that TKD (in general) focuses a lot on kicks, so you have that range down, so I would imagine that you can stay in that range, and people would try to close the distance to get away from your kicks. If you know BJJ or wrestling, you can take it to the ground and have an advantage there as well.

But that's based purely on stereotyping/generalizations. That's why I referred you back to post 31, where Tony lays out pros/cons of each so you can decide which one fits best with your strategy, rather than which one has techniques that coincide with TKD techniques.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Jan 3, 2018)

Axkick1 said:


> No lol I wanted someone to break down why a certain grappling style would be beneficial to taekwondo or coincide with the already established techniques of taekwondo. There was 1 or 2 people that did that and that’s great! That’s what I wanted but in the beginning a lot of people were just bantering about topics that were not relevant to my original questions. So I was trying to stear or “guide” the thread back to where I wanted it to go.


Also, if you hang out on this forum, you'll discover a lot of bantering, and veers off topic. When the posters are answering similar questions all the time, it's natural.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2018)

kempodisciple said:


> Also, if you hang out on this forum, you'll discover a lot of bantering, and veers off topic. When the posters are answering similar questions all the time, it's natural.


Off-topic? On Martial Talk? Blasphemy!!


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 4, 2018)

Axkick1 said:


> I want to avoid the ground but I also want a style that gets me out of sticky grappling situation and back to my feet and if I end up on the ground and can’t get up I’d be able to competently hold my own and even negate my attackers ground submissions.





Axkick1 said:


> It seems like some people are split on the issue. From what I’m seeing most people seem to recommend Brazilian jujitsu, judo or hapkido. So which of these 3 would be the most beneficial to round out a taekwondo stylist and make him more comfortable on the street or in a grappling encounter?



I am not sure what you really want, nor for that matter, it you know what you really want.  I think somebody already asked you but I didn't see what I thought was in informed answer, so it is difficult to give an answer.  Confused?

BJJ, Judo and Hapkido all have different philosophies in how they react to an attack.  You need to find out what those are, preferably from schools in your area if they exist.  What little I know about BJJ and Judo, they have no problem making contact while both are on their feet.  But the preferred goal seems to be to get an opponent to the ground and apply some technique for a pin or submission.  That is OK if that is what you are looking for to complement your TKD.  But as others have stated, I personally would prefer not to be on the ground.  From the little I know if either, I think Judo is a little more willing to perform a throw staying on their feet, and walk away if the opponent has the common sense to allow that to be the end of the confrontation.  BJJ and Judo practitioners are welcome to correct me because as I said, I don't really know those arts.

There are a lot of flavors of Hapkido.  Besides that, Kuk Sool Won has a lot of defenses that are shared between them and Hapkido.  But I think most, and certainly the Hapkido I studied, are all very defense minded.  We normally wait for and respond to an attack.  Many strike and kick defenses will start with a block/evasion, then a grapple, often dislocating a joint, and finishing with the opponent on the ground receiving a strike or kick.  Even if an opponent starts with a grapple, we will have a defense that may often result in the opponent being on the ground (not us other than kneeling), and receiving a kick or strike.  Those are very common things.  That said, we do teach recovery from being taken to the ground, but it is usually at higher belts so you can more easily pull them off based on your prior knowledge.

That is why I would also think if a person is looking for an add-on to TKD or even Karate, Hapkido is a good supplement.  But if BJJ or Judo can honestly say they tend to use their grappling to get to a strike or kick, then they might be OK as well.  But again, I don't think that is their main thrust.  Regardless, if you have gone to Hapkido, BJJ and Judo schools, and prefer one over the other two, do the one you prefer.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 4, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> I am not sure what you really want, nor for that matter, it you know what you really want.  I think somebody already asked you but I didn't see what I thought was in informed answer, so it is difficult to give an answer.  Confused?
> 
> BJJ, Judo and Hapkido all have different philosophies in how they react to an attack.  You need to find out what those are, preferably from schools in your area if they exist.  What little I know about BJJ and Judo, they have no problem making contact while both are on their feet.  But the preferred goal seems to be to get an opponent to the ground and apply some technique for a pin or submission.  That is OK if that is what you are looking for to complement your TKD.  But as others have stated, I personally would prefer not to be on the ground.  From the little I know if either, I think Judo is a little more willing to perform a throw staying on their feet, and walk away if the opponent has the common sense to allow that to be the end of the confrontation.  BJJ and Judo practitioners are welcome to correct me because as I said, I don't really know those arts.
> 
> ...



Hapkido would have to actually work though. At some point you have to be grappling someone fighting back. And you have to be beating them.

With a lot of grappling arts this is a given. They grapple people and either win or loose. And so a lot of the grappling is directed towards that end. This is why people go to the ground to finish. Because you are just more likley to win from there.

So while fighting on the ground may not be optimal for self defence because of situational issues. (The ground may be lava) You still have to have a method that wins fights. Then be situationally apropriate.

And unfortunately being on top of someone with your weight pinning them down is about the best way to do that.

Standing wristlocks would in theory be better for self defence if anyone could reliably do them.

What you find tends to happen is that mowing someone in to the ground makes sure they go there. But then you wind up on the ground on top of them.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 5, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Hapkido would have to actually work though. At some point you have to be grappling someone fighting back. And you have to be beating them.



Are you saying that Hapkido doesn't actually work?  I would naturally disagree strongly with that.  To put it kindly, I think you just are uninformed on Hapkido.  You might want to look again at what I have said about Hapkido.  We generally wait for an attack (although we don't have to) and respond to that, usually in a way that does no good for the attacker. 

Talking about the ground needs clarification.  As you see in the second YouTube video you posted, the attacker does indeed end up on the ground, but not the defender, other than maybe with one or two knees on the ground.  Most of what I have seen in BJJ is seems the defender will also be on the ground, usually not just on one knee, but totally on the ground.  Again, I am not a BJJ practitioner, so I could be wrong, but from what I have seen, I am not.

In the first You Tube you posted, that appears to be some sort of competition.  There have to be rules.  The Hapkido I learned did not have rules to be used in competition, as we didn't do competition unless we sparred TKD fashion.



drop bear said:


> With a lot of grappling arts this is a given. They grapple people and either win or loose. And so a lot of the grappling is directed towards that end. This is why people go to the ground to finish. Because you are just more likley to win from there.
> 
> *So while fighting on the ground may not be optimal for self defence because of situational issues.* (The ground may be lava) You still have to have a method that wins fights. Then be situationally apropriate.



Two important points there, just misinterpreted by you.  More likely to win?  I can only speak about the Hapkido I studied.  We did not practice Hapkido as an art to compete in.  Again in the Hapkido I studied, we did not go to the ground, but very likely our attacker would, and be pinned by the locking of a joint. 



drop bear said:


> And unfortunately being on top of someone with your weight pinning them down is about the best way to do that.
> 
> Standing wristlocks would in theory be better for self defence if anyone could reliably do them.



Most of the joint locks I learned finished with the opponent on the ground, not me.  And very seldom would we be standing and let the opponent stand, while administering a lock.  Nor would it have to be a wrist lock only.  We did not use our weight to pin an opponent, but rather some lock.  That allows the Hapkido person to be much more mobile if needed.

Sorry if you are unable to reliably do a joint lock.  But you can't properly blame Hapkido for that, rather your lack of ability.  That may be an innate inability, or most likely, a lack of proper instruction.



drop bear said:


> What you find tends to happen is that mowing someone in to the ground makes sure they go there. But then you wind up on the ground on top of them.



That sounds like something specific to your art, but not to mine.  If you are happy with it, great, keep doing it.










[/QUOTE]


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 5, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> In the first You Tube you posted, that appears to be some sort of competition. There have to be rules. The Hapkido I learned did not have rules to be used in competition, as we didn't do competition unless we sparred TKD fashion.



I think drop bear's point in posting those two videos is that the Hapkido used by practitioners against someone who is fighting back looks very different from the Hapkido demonstrated on compliant partners who are trying to make the demonstrator look good.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 5, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Are you saying that Hapkido doesn't actually work? I would naturally disagree strongly with that. To put it kindly, I think you just are uninformed on Hapkido. You might want to look again at what I have said about Hapkido. We generally wait for an attack (although we don't have to) and respond to that, usually in a way that does no good for the attacker.



If you can present a case for Hapkido working as it is supposed to then I am happy to hear it. 

I am not saying it doesn't work. It is more I haven't seen it work. So where there is a wealth of evidence that arts like judo, BJJ, Wrestling works. I just haven't seen the case made for Hapkido.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 6, 2018)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think drop bear's point in posting those two videos is that the Hapkido used by practitioners against someone who is fighting back looks very different from the Hapkido demonstrated on compliant partners who are trying to make the demonstrator look good.


 
I can't argue that.  But don't put too much emphasis on wanting to look good.   While that is true, as I would suspect anyone demonstrating their art would want to do, it is also not wanting to damage your demonstration partner.  I'm sure you know that, but if it isn't said, some who aren't familiar with demonstrations of Hapkido, might misunderstand your intent.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Jan 6, 2018)

drop bear said:


> If you can present a case for Hapkido working as it is supposed to then I am happy to hear it.
> 
> I am not saying it doesn't work. It is more I haven't seen it work. So where there is a wealth of evidence that arts like judo, BJJ, Wrestling works. I just haven't seen the case made for Hapkido.


 
Good grief!  You apparently haven't read anything I have said.  You seem to simply wish to portray Hapkido in a bad light, even though you know nothing about it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 6, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Good grief!  You apparently haven't read anything I have said.  You seem to simply wish to portray Hapkido in a bad light, even though you know nothing about it.


Evidence for sport is easy. It's tougher to find evidence (even if it exists) for non-sport training.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 6, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Evidence for sport is easy. It's tougher to find evidence (even if it exists) for non-sport training.



It is all the same evidence. If I wanted to make the case for a double leg takedown then elbows. I could make that case 4 ways.

Expert and anecdotal accounts.
Evidence from video in competition.
Evidence from video in street fights.
Actually doing the technique to you resisted.

So the idea that is a sport technique that is only backed by sports evidence is false.

That would be an example of a technique backed by evidence.

I could then make the case for that in sport where applicable or street where applicable.

This is not all that complicated. Where you have to get complicated is when you don't have evidence. Then you have to take all these round about paths to justify a technique.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 6, 2018)

oftheherd1 said:


> Good grief!  You apparently haven't read anything I have said.  You seem to simply wish to portray Hapkido in a bad light, even though you know nothing about it.



OK. I know nothing about it. So if you make a case for it working I am willing to be convinced.

OP knows nothing about grappling. So I have been making a case for what works and why it works.

And so far you have been giving a lot of bad information.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 6, 2018)

drop bear said:


> It is all the same evidence. If I wanted to make the case for a double leg takedown then elbows. I could make that case 4 ways.
> 
> Expert and anecdotal accounts.
> Evidence from video in competition.
> ...


Wow, a bad misread, DB. Sport is easy to find evidence for, because it is sport. There are competitions, and many of them have video we can watch to see that evidence.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Wow, a bad misread, DB. Sport is easy to find evidence for, because it is sport. There are competitions, and many of them have video we can watch to see that evidence.



Evidence is easy because of sport. And YouTube.

This sport evidence idea is not really accurate.

I mean why can I find so many videos of boxers, for example, in street fights?

Do you think that is a sport thing?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 7, 2018)

drop bear said:


> Evidence is easy because of sport. And YouTube.
> 
> This sport evidence idea is not really accurate.
> 
> ...


You're still missing my point. Boxing is easier to find because of all the boxing matches we can also find it in. A non-sport style, all you'll have is the rest (assuming it exists). I've seen punching in street encounters, but unless the video poster tells me it's a boxer, it's not always obvious. If someone punches someone in a street encounter, we have a ton of styles that punch could come from. Many even punch a bit like boxing. We can find evidence of techniques in street encounter videos, but unless we happen to know the defender's style, it's hard to get evidence for an art/system that way. But with sport, we often know the style being used (especially in style-specific competitions), so it's easier to find that evidence.

So, no the "sport evidence idea" is not inaccurate. The evidence is easier to find for sport. Yes, it is mostly the same range of evidence, except arts not used (much/at all) in competition, you can mostly only easily find outside evidence for techniques, not the system, except your first category (expert and anecdotal accounts - something you in the past have universally dismissed as "just stories").


----------



## drop bear (Jan 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> You're still missing my point. Boxing is easier to find because of all the boxing matches we can also find it in. A non-sport style, all you'll have is the rest (assuming it exists). I've seen punching in street encounters, but unless the video poster tells me it's a boxer, it's not always obvious. If someone punches someone in a street encounter, we have a ton of styles that punch could come from. Many even punch a bit like boxing. We can find evidence of techniques in street encounter videos, but unless we happen to know the defender's style, it's hard to get evidence for an art/system that way. But with sport, we often know the style being used (especially in style-specific competitions), so it's easier to find that evidence.
> 
> So, no the "sport evidence idea" is not inaccurate. The evidence is easier to find for sport. Yes, it is mostly the same range of evidence, except arts not used (much/at all) in competition, you can mostly only easily find outside evidence for techniques, not the system, except your first category (expert and anecdotal accounts - something you in the past have universally dismissed as "just stories").



You are looking at things backwards. You are not really trying to identify which art is best. You are looking at best methods and that just becomes the art.

Which is what the arts are doing anyway. And why you can't really tell karate from boxing at a certain skill level.

You are identifying meta concepts.

This throws " sport evidence " out the window. 

So you basically don't see standing armbars done anywhere. You don't see armbar takedowns done anywhere. You don't see them because there is almost always something easier and safer to apply.

(And they are mostly trained wrong)

And before you worry about street. Your methods have to work first. 

That means you pretty much always go for easier and safer. Rather than what seems more street.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 7, 2018)

drop bear said:


> You are looking at things backwards. You are not really trying to identify which art is best. You are looking at best methods and that just becomes the art.
> 
> Which is what the arts are doing anyway. And why you can't really tell karate from boxing at a certain skill level.
> 
> ...


Weather original comment was about an art, not techniques. You are correct that armbar evidence would be evid nice for a similar armbar in any system. That doesn’t change that it’s easier to find evidence for Judo than for NGA, for example. The techniques that we share, the evidence is universal. It’s even arguable that similar techniques can borrow some credibility. 

You are not incorrect. But what you are refuting is a claim I didn’t make.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 7, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Weather original comment was about an art, not techniques. You are correct that armbar evidence would be evid nice for a similar armbar in any system. That doesn’t change that it’s easier to find evidence for Judo than for NGA, for example. The techniques that we share, the evidence is universal. It’s even arguable that similar techniques can borrow some credibility.
> 
> You are not incorrect. But what you are refuting is a claim I didn’t make.



It is easier to find evidence for judo throws because more people can make them work.

Probably because the just work better.

Doesn't mean it is all judo. Street systems do judo throws.

Same with sports. It is easier to find evidence for sports move because more people can make them work.

That is not because there is this "sports evidence" it is just evidence.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 7, 2018)

drop bear said:


> It is easier to find evidence for judo throws because more people can make them work.
> 
> Probably because the just work better.
> 
> ...


You’re not saying anything different than I just said. That’s what I just told you.


----------

