Anti-Grappling Techniques...

[jobo]

So, who do you train with and do they know you think you know everything and they don't know anything?

there very good at teaching girls and weak uncoordinated men how to defend themselves, I'm getting a bit disenchanted as I dont want to learn what to do if someone grabs hold of me in some silly role play game. I want to learn karate

 

[Tez3]

there very good at teaching girls and weak uncoordinated men how to defend themselves, I'm getting a bit disenchanted as I dont want to learn what to do if someone grabs hold of me in some silly role play game. I want to learn karate

So what style is this and where? Perhaps if you weren't so up yourself you could actually learn karate, I can't think of anywhere where an ego the size of yours would actually fit.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not over confident in my art, in fact I'm not that confident to be honest, a lot of it is counter intuitive to me and i would probably drop it in a real fight and go back to what I know works.

You got to fix this, otherwise you are just training for health benefits.

 

[JowGaWolf]

So, who do you train with and do they know you think you know everything and they don't know anything?

I pictured you sitting on the phone talking to his instructor. And then he returns to school and gets a surprise sparring match

 

[Tony Dismukes]

you've joined the list of people on here who just start making up facts,,,, the op asked about dealing with,a grappler not a skilled grappler,. Just an ordinary grappler.

I am looking for something that will work even with very experienced grapplers

Want to try again?

on the other point, if a wrestler is throwing punches, he is no longer wrestling. Thats a simple statement of fact

If a wrestler uses his grappling skill to hold you down while he punches your face in, then he is still wrestling. He's wrestling and striking at the same time. Multitasking - it's a useful concept.

You might have an opinion that the definition of wrestling should preclude that sort of multitasking, but given that you are not a grappler, I don't think your personal definition takes precedence over those who do grapple.

Putting aside all this back and forth, I might note that your advice (as qualified by your later statements concerning your personal experience) boils down to "be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent, then you can just hit him until they fall down." This is undoubtedly an effective approach, but do you think it's really useful advice for anyone who doesn't already have those advantages?

 

[Tez3]

What techniques, if any, have any of you come across that are effective to counter a grappler after a takedown has happened?

. I am looking for something that will work even with very experienced grapplers.

the op asked about dealing with,a grappler not a skilled grappler,. Just an ordinary grappler.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I'm not sure why people have an assumption that they can out wrestle someone and never train to wrestle.

 

[wingchun100]

The best anti-grappling technique is to not grapple with a grappler.

The time for eye pokes and dirty tricks is before they get ahold of you.

End the fight quickly or find a way to disengage and retreat. Once you're on the ground or in the clinch....too late.

That's kind of like when people ask the best counter to an arm bar. I have always said, "Make sure they aren't able to pull one off."

 

[jobo]

Want to try again?


If a wrestler uses his grappling skill to hold you down while he punches your face in, then he is still wrestling. He's wrestling and striking at the same time. Multitasking - it's a useful concept.

You might have an opinion that the definition of wrestling should preclude that sort of multitasking, but given that you are not a grappler, I don't think your personal definition takes precedence over those who do grapple.

Putting aside all this back and forth, I might note that your advice (as qualified by your later statements concerning your personal experience) boils down to "be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent, then you can just hit him until they fall down." This is undoubtedly an effective approach, but do you think it's really useful advice for anyone who doesn't already have those advantages?

experienced and skilled are NOT the same thing
he isn't wrestling any more he is doing some mma nonsense

yes, if you cant out grapple them, then punching kicking them is a very good strategy

 

[Tony Dismukes]

experienced and skilled are NOT the same thing

Ahh, I get it. You figured the OP was asking about dealing with attackers who have lots of experience but also have some sort of learning disability which prevented them from learning anything or acquiring any skills from that experience. Well done! That's a scenario which doesn't get discussed enough.

yes, if you cant out grapple them, then punching kicking them is a very good strategy

Sure thing, while you're still standing up. The original question written by the OP was what to do once you have already been taken down. Do you think that trying to punch and kick an opponent who is sitting on your chest is a very good strategy for winning a fight? If so, there's a lot of real world evidence suggesting you are incorrect on that point.

BTW - was your last sentence ("yes, if you cant out grapple them, then punching kicking them is a very good strategy") meant to be an answer to my last question in the post you were responding to ("I might note that your advice (as qualified by your later statements concerning your personal experience) boils down to 'be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent, then you can just hit him until they fall down.' This is undoubtedly an effective approach, but do you think it's really useful advice for anyone who doesn't already have those advantages?")? If so, you seem to be missing the point that "be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent" isn't advice a person can just choose to follow unless they are the aggressor picking fights with selected victims who are unskilled and physically inferior.

 

[jobo]

Ahh, I get it. You figured the OP was asking about dealing with attackers who have lots of experience but also have some sort of learning disability which prevented them from learning anything or acquiring any skills from that experience. Well done! That's a scenario which doesn't get discussed enough.


Sure thing, while you're still standing up. The original question written by the OP was what to do once you have already been taken down. Do you think that trying to punch and kick an opponent who is sitting on your chest is a very good strategy for winning a fight? If so, there's a lot of real world evidence suggesting you are incorrect on that point.

BTW - was your last sentence ("yes, if you cant out grapple them, then punching kicking them is a very good strategy") meant to be an answer to my last question in the post you were responding to ("I might note that your advice (as qualified by your later statements concerning your personal experience) boils down to 'be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent, then you can just hit him until they fall down.' This is undoubtedly an effective approach, but do you think it's really useful advice for anyone who doesn't already have those advantages?")? If so, you seem to be missing the point that "be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent" isn't advice a person can just choose to follow unless they are the aggressor picking fights with selected victims who are unskilled and physically inferior.

well there are levels of skill, every one has some grappling skill, just not very much. For instance you clearly have an amount of experience at grappling, but not very much skill, other wise you would be earning mega bucks in the ufc.

so your a typical very experianced, but not very skillful grappler. Just sort of person my advice was,intended for fighting against. If its a top level grappler then it proberbly won't work very well, but for hobby bjj it should be fine

 

[Touch Of Death]

well there are levels of skill, every one has some grappling skill, just not very much. For instance you clearly have an amount of experience at grappling, but not very much skill, other wise you would be earning mega bucks in the ufc.

so your a typical very experianced, but not very skillful grappler. Just sort of person my advice was,intended for fighting against. If its a top level grappler then it proberbly won't work very well, but for hobby bjj it should be fine

So if you aren't fighting professionally, you are not skilled?

 

[jobo]

Ahh, I get it. You figured the OP was asking about dealing with attackers who have lots of experience but also have some sort of learning disability which prevented them from learning anything or acquiring any skills from that experience. Well done! That's a scenario which doesn't get discussed enough.


Sure thing, while you're still standing up. The original question written by the OP was what to do once you have already been taken down. Do you think that trying to punch and kick an opponent who is sitting on your chest is a very good strategy for winning a fight? If so, there's a lot of real world evidence suggesting you are incorrect on that point.

BTW - was your last sentence ("yes, if you cant out grapple them, then punching kicking them is a very good strategy") meant to be an answer to my last question in the post you were responding to ("I might note that your advice (as qualified by your later statements concerning your personal experience) boils down to 'be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent, then you can just hit him until they fall down.' This is undoubtedly an effective approach, but do you think it's really useful advice for anyone who doesn't already have those advantages?")? If so, you seem to be missing the point that "be bigger, stronger, and faster than your unskilled opponent" isn't advice a person can just choose to follow unless they are the aggressor picking fights with selected victims who are unskilled and physically inferior.

the advice such as it was, it wasn't given as,advice, but anyway, the advice that you should be bigger stronger faster than your oppoinent is very much in your own hands as you should train to be bigger stronger faster than your oppoinent,
if you are not then train harder

 

[jobo]

So if you aren't fighting professionally, you are not skilled?

people were popping pictures of ufc fighters up to make the point that wressling was effective, so in the same vain . No if your not good enough to earn a good living out of beating people up, then you are short of being called skilled. So let's call them,semi skilled

 

[Touch Of Death]

people were popping pictures of ufc fighters up to make the point that wressling was effective, so in the same vain . No if your not good enough to earn a good living out of beating people up, then you are short of being called skilled. So let's call them,semi skilled

Are you certain?

 

[jobo]

Are you certain?

am I certain that ufc fighter are skilled ? Yes therefore any one less skilled is only semi skilled

 

[Tony Dismukes]

For instance you clearly have an amount of experience at grappling, but not very much skill, other wise you would be earning mega bucks in the ufc.

In the words of Inigo Montoya, "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

In this case you are apparently using "skill" to mean, world class athleticism (strength, speed, conditioning), and the competitive drive to get to the very top of a sport dominated by elite athletes (most of whom don't earn anywhere close to megabucks). You are totally correct that I do not possess those things. However since those things are not part of the definition of "skill", your statement is a non-sequitur.

As far as your advice being fine for use against "hobby" BJJ, you can try that experiment for yourself. Find a typical hobbyist BJJ black belt (not a professional fighter), allow him to start on the ground on top of you, then try your suggested tactics and report back. If you really want to test your theory, then you can make sure you are "allowing some equality in physical and skill abilities" by finding a BJJ black belt your own size, but I'm betting you can probably find some smaller practitioners who would be willing to help you try your ideas out.

 

[jobo]

In the words of Inigo Montoya, "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

In this case you are apparently using "skill" to mean, world class athleticism (strength, speed, conditioning), and the competitive drive to get to the very top of a sport dominated by elite athletes (most of whom don't earn anywhere close to megabucks). You are totally correct that I do not possess those things. However since those things are not part of the definition of "skill", your statement is a non-sequitur.

As far as your advice being fine for use against "hobby" BJJ, you can try that experiment for yourself. Find a typical hobbyist BJJ black belt (not a professional fighter), allow him to start on the ground on top of you, then try your suggested tactics and report back. If you really want to test your theory, then you can make sure you are "allowing some equality in physical and skill abilities" by finding a BJJ black belt your own size, but I'm betting you can probably find some smaller practitioners who would be willing to help you try your ideas out.

who are you comparing your skill level against. You we're posting pictures of mma fighters to show that grappling worked, but now you are being compared unfavourably to them you are taking issue with it

I'm sure you are better than others in your group, but as they sent very good its not much of a recommendation for you

my point was you knock them over before they get on top of you, you don't need grappling skills then

 

[Tony Dismukes]

am I certain that ufc fighter are skilled ? Yes therefore any one less skilled is only semi skilled

Okay, I think I understand that logic. Let's see...

Winners of the Nobel Prize in physics are intelligent, therefore anyone less smart is only semi-intelligent.
Bill Gates is wealthy, therefore anyone with less money is only semi-wealthy.
Nonagenarians are old, therefore anyone younger is only semi-elderly.

Gotcha. We just need to remember to use "semi-" before any of our self-referential adjectives from now on.

 

[jobo]

Okay, I think I understand that logic. Let's see...

Winners of the Nobel Prize in physics are intelligent, therefore anyone less smart is only semi-intelligent.
Bill Gates is wealthy, therefore anyone with less money is only semi-wealthy.
Nonagenarians are old, therefore anyone younger is only semi-elderly.

Gotcha. We just need to remember to use "semi-" before any of our self-referential adjectives from now on.

yes all of those are comparatives. Compared with bill gates most people are poor. But you started posting pictures of ufc fighter, compared to them we are all only semi skilled fighters

if you don't want to be compared to them, don't post pictures of them to show grappling is effective