DF: Can BJJ work in a real fight??????

[Koshiki]

Yes, BJJ can work in a real fight.

http://www.wgme.com/news/top-stories/stories/wgme_vid_19619.shtml

This happened a few days ago at a school I've been playing at across town. It's actually a Shaolin Kempo Karate school, but the instructor also trains BJJ and took the guy down and choked him out with a rear-naked, so I guess that's close enough! Does that end the debate? BJJ is shown to actually work?

 

[Ironcrane]

Does that end the debate? BJJ is shown to actually work?

It's been shown many times that it works before, but the debate still goes on.

 

[K-man]

It's been shown many times that it works before, but the debate still goes on.

The stupid thing is, who is saying it doesn't work?
:idunno:

 

[Koshiki]

The stupid thing is, who is saying it doesn't work?
:idunno:

Every time someone says, "never go to the ground in a 'real' fight," I tends to be interpreted as, "ground fighting doesn't work." Not the same thing, but the confusion is understandable. I guess. Sorta.

 

[Hanzou]

Every time someone says, "never go to the ground in a 'real' fight," I tends to be interpreted as, "ground fighting doesn't work." Not the same thing, but the confusion is understandable. I guess. Sorta.

Well that argument is a terrible one. Here's why:

-Sometimes you can't stop being taken to the ground.
-Ground fighting can provide advantages over stand up if your assailant is bigger and stronger than you are and you can't get away.
-Ground fighting can allow you to subdue someone if you don't want to hurt them.
-Ground fighting can allow you to gain a dominant position in order to run away.

Obviously you need to be aware of your situation and judge accordingly. However, to say "never go to the ground in a "real" fight" is pretty silly.

 

[Dinkydoo]

Obviously you need to be aware of your situation and judge accordingly. However, to say "never go to the ground in a "real" fight" is pretty silly.

....but saying "There isn't a situation where I wouldn't go to ground in a self defence situation", isn't.....

 

[Steve]

....but saying "There isn't a situation where I wouldn't go to ground in a self defence situation", isn't.....

Can you clarify this, Dinkydoo? I'm not following. Do you mean that you agree there are times when you would go to the ground in a self defense situation, or are you saying the opposite? The double negative got me a little turned around, and it sounds like you might be trying to post sarcastically.

 

[Koshiki]

Well that argument is a terrible one... ...Obviously you need to be aware of your situation and judge accordingly. However, to say "never go to the ground in a "real" fight" is pretty silly.

I think we're all in agreement that it's a silly argument. K-man said it's a stupid argument. I agreed, and explained why I think people believe it. I'm assuming (this may be dangerous) that we all agree that there are times when you have to fight on the ground, and that there are times to remain standing if you can. People hear this, and assume that, because of the risks, you shouldn't train to fight on the ground. I'm assuming anyone with either a few years of realistic training or some experience with actual violence eventually decides that at least some minimal ground skill are necessary, Even if only so you can get back on your feet and start doing whatever it is you do best, again.

....but saying "There isn't a situation where I wouldn't go to ground in a self defence situation", isn't.....

Good thing no one has said that, then! Hanzou, I believe, said that there are reasons you may wish to go to, or end up on, the ground. Thus, having an idea of what to do there is a good idea.

Can you clarify this, Dinkydoo? I'm not following. Do you mean that you agree there are times when you would go to the ground in a self defense situation, or are you saying the opposite? The double negative got me a little turned around, and it sounds like you might be trying to post sarcastically.

I think he may have assumed Hanzou was saying "always go to the ground," instead of "it's an option, and sometimes people end up there accidentally."

 

[Dinkydoo]

Hanzou literally said on another thread that he doesn't think there is a self defence situation where he wouldn't go to ground.

I found it ironic that he thought claiming the opposite was silly.

There might be times when I'd take an opponent to ground, but I'd rather avoid it if possible.

 

[Tenacious_Red]

Can I also add here that officers are practically trained, "Chin Na" as defensive techniques, and turn around and teach woman's/street defense with the same idea and moves...so you are correct, there are fundamentals. Now ask an officer how they have applied those techniques in real life. Sometimes, you will find the mental aspect prepared you and other times the physical...maybe both...but like with training it takes practice, and not everyday you are entering bizarre street fights...well I'm not. Are you planning to?

 

[MJS]

As I've said countless times...any art can be effective, but it all comes down to how it's trained. Can BJJ be useful? Of course. But like everything, assess each situation and act accordingly. To intentionally go to the ground...well, that's foolish, IMO, but thats just me.

 

[K-man]

Originally Posted by Zack Cart
Every time someone says, "never go to the ground in a 'real' fight," I tends to be interpreted as, "ground fighting doesn't work." Not the same thing, but the confusion is understandable. I guess. Sorta.

Well that argument is a terrible one. Here's why:

-Sometimes you can't stop being taken to the ground.
-Ground fighting can provide advantages over stand up if your assailant is bigger and stronger than you are and you can't get away.
-Ground fighting can allow you to subdue someone if you don't want to hurt them.
-Ground fighting can allow you to gain a dominant position in order to run away.

Obviously you need to be aware of your situation and judge accordingly. However, to say "never go to the ground in a "real" fight" is pretty silly.

I think that what is meant by 'never go to the ground' means to most people 'never intentionally go to the ground'. The most obvious exception to that would be the wrestler. However, in the street situation the wrestler would be the same as the rest of us, vulnerable to attack by others so even the wrestler, the guy who normally has most reason to go to the ground, would revert to keeping his feet and throwing his opponent to the ground, given the choice.

Of course a fight can go to the ground and it obviously does in a significant number of situations. Would I want to go to the ground with a bigger, stronger opponent even if I can't get away? I don't think so. Who knows what skills your opponent might have? Deliberately going to the ground in this situation does not make sense to me.

Ground fighting certainly can allow you to subdue someone without hurting them but that doesn't mean you should go to the ground. You can subdue people standing up without hurting them too. Standing up also offers the choice of using them as a shield if they have mates. What you are effectively saying is that you need to be on the ground for BJJ to be effective and I know that is not the case.

Ground fighting is hardly designed to allow you to run away. Systema trains you to get up quickly if you are taken to the ground, Krav the same. I teach the same thing in karate. Ground fighting is ground fighting. If you choose to go to the ground you'd better be prepared to stay there. Personally, I would prefer to retain my feet and put my opponent on the ground. If that is just not possible and I end up on the ground, I want to get back on my feet ASAP.

I think what we have here is a difference in mindset between reality based self defence and sport. If you want to use BJJ for self defence, well and good, but adapt it to the environment. Deliberately going to the ground in a real fight should not be the first option.
:asian:

 

[Hanzou]

I think that what is meant by 'never go to the ground' means to most people 'never intentionally go to the ground'. The most obvious exception to that would be the wrestler. However, in the street situation the wrestler would be the same as the rest of us, vulnerable to attack by others so even the wrestler, the guy who normally has most reason to go to the ground, would revert to keeping his feet and throwing his opponent to the ground, given the choice.

Except in the majority of altercations when both parties can't establish dominance standing up, one or both parties attempts to take the fight to the ground for control. Especially if one person is significantly stronger than the other. If both parties just stand up and trade blows, there's no big problem. You may end up with a black eye and a bruised ego. However we all know that the real damage comes into play when people clinch, wrestle to the ground, and the person who gains the dominant position starts doing significant damage to the person in the inferior position on the ground.

You can survive a few shots to your head and jaw. You can't survive someone sitting on top of you slamming your head repeatedly into concrete.

Of course a fight can go to the ground and it obviously does in a significant number of situations. Would I want to go to the ground with a bigger, stronger opponent even if I can't get away? I don't think so. Who knows what skills your opponent might have? Deliberately going to the ground in this situation does not make sense to me.

Wouldn't the same thing apply to a standing situation? You have no idea what skills your opponent might have, yet you have to fight that opponent. Your chances are greater that your opponent doesn't know how to fight on the ground versus standing up, since fighting while standing is fairly easy to learn. We see this with many untrained brawlers stomping stand up fighters all the time. How many times do you see a guy off the street submit a black belt in Bjj? What's more, a lot of that person's strength is neutralized on the ground versus standing up, especially if they arent trained on the ground.

Ground fighting certainly can allow you to subdue someone without hurting them but that doesn't mean you should go to the ground. You can subdue people standing up without hurting them too. Standing up also offers the choice of using them as a shield if they have mates. What you are effectively saying is that you need to be on the ground for BJJ to be effective and I know that is not the case.

No, what I'm saying is that fighting on the ground provides numerous advantages that shouldn't be overlooked. Obviously it also has disadvantages, but clearly ground-fighting and BJJ has proven itself as a viable method of self defense.

Ground fighting is hardly designed to allow you to run away. Systema trains you to get up quickly if you are taken to the ground, Krav the same. I teach the same thing in karate. Ground fighting is ground fighting. If you choose to go to the ground you'd better be prepared to stay there. Personally, I would prefer to retain my feet and put my opponent on the ground. If that is just not possible and I end up on the ground, I want to get back on my feet ASAP.

If you've gained the dominant position on the ground, that places you in an excellent position to run away. Its going to be pretty hard to run away if your assailant is on top of you pounding your face into the concrete. Bjj trains you to get that dominant positioning from an inferior position efficiently and effectively. That's what I was talking about.

 

[Hanzou]

As I've said countless times...any art can be effective, but it all comes down to how it's trained. Can BJJ be useful? Of course. But like everything, assess each situation and act accordingly. To intentionally go to the ground...well, that's foolish, IMO, but thats just me.

I don't believe its foolish at all. My strength is in takedowns and groundfighting, so that's exactly what I'd do in a fight.

 

[MJS]

I don't believe its foolish at all. My strength is in takedowns and groundfighting, so that's exactly what I'd do in a fight.

Well, good luck to you then. I wonder if some of the top guys, would agree with you. IIRC, someone once asked Rickson what he'd do in a particular situation. Can't recall what was asked, but I do believe he didn't say go to the ground.

So you're saying that whether you're facing a weapon, whether you're facing more than 1 person, whether you're in a crowded environment, that you'd still always go to the ground? Like I said, foolish, but that's just me.

 

[K-man]

I don't believe its foolish at all. My strength is in takedowns and groundfighting, so that's exactly what I'd do in a fight.

Then you deserve all you will get. Most thugs act up in front of their mates. Very few take anyone on alone. If you take on someone and go to the ground good luck. To me that is not a sensible strategy.

Except in the majority of altercations when both parties can't establish dominance standing up, one or both parties attempts to take the fight to the ground for control. Especially if one person is significantly stronger than the other. If both parties just stand up and trade blows, there's no big problem. You may end up with a black eye and a bruised ego. However we all know that the real damage comes into play when people clinch, wrestle to the ground, and the person who gains the dominant position starts doing significant damage to the person in the inferior position on the ground.

I'd love to know where you read that. Most fights are over in seconds. What you are describing happens in the ring.

You can survive a few shots to your head and jaw. You can't survive someone sitting on top of you slamming your head repeatedly into concrete.

True, but it could be you on the bottom.

Wouldn't the same thing apply to a standing situation? You have no idea what skills your opponent might have, yet you have to fight that opponent. Your chances are greater that your opponent doesn't know how to fight on the ground versus standing up, since fighting while standing is fairly easy to learn. We see this with many untrained brawlers stomping stand up fighters all the time. How many times do you see a guy off the street submit a black belt in Bjj? What's more, a lot of that person's strength is neutralized on the ground versus standing up, especially if they off the street trained on the ground.

On the assumption I don't want to fight in the first place, I don't want to be tied up on the ground so old mate's friends can rush in and kick the crap out of me. I haven't seen many altercations that are truly one on one. You will never see a guy off the street submit a BJJ blackbelt or any other person for that matter. That is sport terminology again! On the street you don't submit. At best if you lose you get the crap beaten out of you, worst case you die or end up in a wheelchair. That is why to fight on the street, if you can avoid it, is just plain stupid.

No, what I'm saying is that fighting on the ground provides numerous advantages that shouldn't be overlooked. Obviously it also has disadvantages, but clearly ground-fighting and BJJ has proven itself as a viable method of self defense.

No! You've just stated again that there are numerous advantages on the ground. In a street fight I don't see any. And, come on, you're next statement is pure Bulls#1t! "Clearly ground-fighting and BJJ has proven itself as a viable method of self defence." Your statement is totally correct but it is totally out of context. If I was the best BJJ person in the country I still would not be trying to go to the ground in a street fight. You can apply your BJJ techniques standing up without risking your life on the ground.

If you've gained the dominant position on the ground, that places you in an excellent position to run away. Its going to be pretty hard to run away if your assailant is on top of you pounding your face into the concrete. Bjj trains you to get that dominant positioning from an inferior position efficiently and effectively. That's what I was talking about.

With rules in the ring I'm sure you are right. There are no such certainties on the street.

What you demonstrate in post after post is your obsession with competition. You have absolute bugger-all understanding of reality based self defence. While you are young and strong your preferred option may even work for you if the other guy is alone. As you get older there will always be that someone bigger and stronger who will kick your ****. To suggest to other people to go down your track of self defence could get them killed or badly injured.
:asian:

 

[Hanzou]

Well, good luck to you then. I wonder if some of the top guys, would agree with you. IIRC, someone once asked Rickson what he'd do in a particular situation. Can't recall what was asked, but I do believe he didn't say go to the ground.

So you're saying that whether you're facing a weapon, whether you're facing more than 1 person, whether you're in a crowded environment, that you'd still always go to the ground? Like I said, foolish, but that's just me.

Reread what I said. I said that intentionally going to the ground isn't foolish if that's where your strengths lie. In fact, I've seen wrestler-types do it constantly.

Obviously if you're in a situation where you can't properly defend yourself, you should probably get out of that situation as quickly as possible.

 

[K-man]

Reread what I said. I said that intentionally going to the ground isn't foolish if that's where your strengths lie. In fact, I've seen wrestler-types do it constantly.

Obviously if you're in a situation where you can't properly defend yourself, you should probably get out of that situation as quickly as possible.

Well at least you got this post half right ( but I'd leave out probably)!

 

[Hanzou]

Then you deserve all you will get. Most thugs act up in front of their mates. Very few take anyone on alone. If you take on someone and go to the ground good luck. To me that is not a sensible strategy.

I love how in every "self defense scenario" thugs have lots of friends, but the martial artist is a loner. :lol:

I'd love to know where you read that. Most fights are over in seconds. What you are describing happens in the ring.

I'm talking about the fights that result in clinching and attempted takedowns. The natural reaction of getting hit is to close the distance to stop from getting hit. So if you're tagging some guy in the face, they're going to try to get in on you and wrap you up so you can't hit them anymore. That's common sense. Now do fights get broken up before that happens? Sure. Do fights get broken up while two guys are wrestling around in a clinch to try to get them on the ground? Sure. Those fights aren't a problem. The fights that are a problem are the fights that end up on the ground with someone having a dominant position and can do severe damage to you.

Again, a few shots to your face and a black eye is no big deal. A bigger guy on top of you choking you or bashing your head in is a big deal. That's the kind of injury that can cause permanent damage.

True, but it could be you on the bottom.

It could be. Which is why its a good thing I've learned and trained in various methods on how to get out of the bottom position.

On the assumption I don't want to fight in the first place, I don't want to be tied up on the ground so old mate's friends can rush in and kick the crap out of me. I haven't seen many altercations that are truly one on one. You will never see a guy off the street submit a BJJ blackbelt or any other person for that matter. That is sport terminology again! On the street you don't submit. At best if you lose you get the crap beaten out of you, worst case you die or end up in a wheelchair. That is why to fight on the street, if you can avoid it, is just plain stupid.

Ah the old "his friends will beat the crap out of you if you do ground fighting" bit. Well let's look at this a bit more closely....

If you've regained or maintained the top position, that means you can disengage at any time. His friends rush in, you stand up. Its simple. If I'm taking someone to the ground, I'm maintaining the dominant position, which is why I said takedown into ground fighting. Nearly every Bjj/Judo/Wrestling takedowns ends with you in a dominant position on the ground.

If you're on the bottom, his friends probably aren't going to rush in because they'll think their friend is winning. However its important to note that if you're on the bottom, you're probably there against your will. So if his mates DO rush in while you're on the bottom, this entire argument\ of standing up or being on the ground is null and void. You will need Bjj training to get off your back in the quickest, most efficient way possible. If that means choking, sweeping, or neutralizing your assailant from your back, then so be it.

No! You've just stated again that there are numerous advantages on the ground. In a street fight I don't see any. And, come on, you're next statement is pure Bulls#1t! "Clearly ground-fighting and BJJ has proven itself as a viable method of self defence." Your statement is totally correct but it is totally out of context. If I was the best BJJ person in the country I still would not be trying to go to the ground in a street fight. You can apply your BJJ techniques standing up without risking your life on the ground.

You can apply your Bjj techniques standing AND on the ground without risking your life.

With rules in the ring I'm sure you are right. There are no such certainties on the street.

I'm not seeing how ring rules have anything to do with that. What I described is exactly what Bjj was designed to do, and it was designed way before the ring rules were ever established.

What you demonstrate in post after post is your obsession with competition. You have absolute bugger-all understanding of reality based self defence. While you are young and strong your preferred option may even work for you if the other guy is alone. As you get older there will always be that someone bigger and stronger who will kick your ****. To suggest to other people to go down your track of self defence could get them killed or badly injured.
:asian:

I don't believe I ever said I was invincible, or that I could take down hordes of people with Bjj. All I'm saying is that if I'm in a fight, I'll use what I'm best at doing, and that's grappling.

I'll be sure to invite my Bjj friends so that we can keep it a fair fight.

 

[MJS]

Reread what I said. I said that intentionally going to the ground isn't foolish if that's where your strengths lie. In fact, I've seen wrestler-types do it constantly.

Obviously if you're in a situation where you can't properly defend yourself, you should probably get out of that situation as quickly as possible.

No need to re-read what you said, as I'm well aware of your stance. You missed my point though. I said, that I wonder what the top guys, ie: Rickson, and the like, think about YOUR position of going to the ground no matter what.
http://www.kenpotalk.com/forum/showthread.php/14989-Multiple-Opponents-and-BJJ?p=176731#post176731

Hmm...and here you have someone quoting Rickson, who states that in Brazil, its a 1 on 1 fight, with everyone else in a circle, watching. Yet he goes on to say in the US, he'd use stand up and run away.

Your next paragraph contradicts itself. Actually, I agree, and it's a no brainer that we should get away ASAP, rather than prolong the situation by clinching up and intentionally taking the person down. What you seem to be missing, is regardless of your strength, what you might normally do, may not be the best option.

I'm bowing out of this debate. This is going to turn into another 40 page cluster **** just like the last thread did. To close, I'll say this...NOBODY is saying that BJJ is a bad art. At least *I* am not saying that. If *I* thought it was bad, *I* would never have devoted the time that I have to learning what I know. But, I'm not one to swing off the nuts of the Gracies and the rest of the grapplers out there, thus my comment of assessing each situation and acting accordingly.