Does mixing belts in a gym tend to create drama?

[isshinryuronin]

If a bjj adjusts your TKD submission. He is probably going to ajust it for the better

It seems you're saying that BJJ submissions are better as that art specializes in it. If so, I agree. TKD's direct ancestor, karate, has a number of joint locks, but they weren't designed as on the ground (or standup) "finishing submissions" as HighKick called them.

Submissions finish a sport match, but in serious combat they are not valuable as after "submitting" the opponent can get up and continue the fight. So, karate doesn't teach much in the way of finishing submissions, but rather finishing breaks or dislocates sometimes in conjunction with strikes. Yes, BJJ submissions can (and accidentally do) have this result (or a lesser disabling one), but it is not I think the prime goal as popularly practiced.

Pain compliance (submission) is not a main concept in karate, nor is extended grappling leading to a submission. It's too much work for us lazy karate guys. Grappling for us lasts only a few seconds at the most (usually in a stand-up position), just enough time to get a joint into position for a quick strike or wrenching designed to quickly end the opponent's ability to fight for the foreseeable future.

This is, at least, the foundational doctrine of early karate. How much it is taught and practiced is another matter. When engaged on the ground, BJJ is very effective, so I'm not knocking it. I'm only discussing the different approaches and views re: submissions.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I can't believe this has 4 pages

 

[JowGaWolf]

Everyone does realize that schools do this very same thing but sports where students play more than one sport. Right? Last time I check TKD is a sport and BJJ is a sport.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

It seems you're saying that BJJ submissions are better as that art specializes in it. If so, I agree. TKD's direct ancestor, karate, has a number of joint locks, but they weren't designed as on the ground (or standup) "finishing submissions" as HighKick called them.

Submissions finish a sport match, but in serious combat they are not valuable as after "submitting" the opponent can get up and continue the fight. So, karate doesn't teach much in the way of finishing submissions, but rather finishing breaks or dislocates sometimes in conjunction with strikes. Yes, BJJ submissions can (and accidentally do) have this result (or a lesser disabling one), but it is not I think the prime goal as popularly practiced.

Pain compliance (submission) is not a main concept in karate, nor is extended grappling leading to a submission. It's too much work for us lazy karate guys. Grappling for us lasts only a few seconds at the most (usually in a stand-up position), just enough time to get a joint into position for a quick strike or wrenching designed to quickly end the opponent's ability to fight for the foreseeable future.

This is, at least, the foundational doctrine of early karate. How much it is taught and practiced is another matter. When engaged on the ground, BJJ is very effective, so I'm not knocking it. I'm only discussing the different approaches and views re: submissions.

Just to clarify, BJJ submissions are not at all based on pain compliance. The tap is simply an acknowledgment that your sparring partner could have caused significant structural damage to a joint or choked you unconscious.

 

[skribs]

It seems you're saying that BJJ submissions are better as that art specializes in it. If so, I agree. TKD's direct ancestor, karate, has a number of joint locks, but they weren't designed as on the ground (or standup) "finishing submissions" as HighKick called them.

Submissions finish a sport match, but in serious combat they are not valuable as after "submitting" the opponent can get up and continue the fight. So, karate doesn't teach much in the way of finishing submissions, but rather finishing breaks or dislocates sometimes in conjunction with strikes. Yes, BJJ submissions can (and accidentally do) have this result (or a lesser disabling one), but it is not I think the prime goal as popularly practiced.

Pain compliance (submission) is not a main concept in karate, nor is extended grappling leading to a submission. It's too much work for us lazy karate guys. Grappling for us lasts only a few seconds at the most (usually in a stand-up position), just enough time to get a joint into position for a quick strike or wrenching designed to quickly end the opponent's ability to fight for the foreseeable future.

This is, at least, the foundational doctrine of early karate. How much it is taught and practiced is another matter. When engaged on the ground, BJJ is very effective, so I'm not knocking it. I'm only discussing the different approaches and views re: submissions.

I will say that I think some BJJ folks (Drop Bear included) underrate the efficacy of TKD/Karate-style destruction techniques.

But BJJ submissions generally don't involve pain compliance (BJJ folks won't tap to pain, they'll tap to danger), and every single one of those submissions can either put someone to sleep or can cause serious damage. The reason they typically don't is because they're done in a slow, controlled manner, and the other person knows when to tap.

Kimuras taken too far have resulted in horrific arm breaks. There's tons of stories of leg injuries from kneebars and heel hooks. There's plenty of stories of people who tried to hold off an armbar for too long. I personally have almost choked someone out in class (by the time he tapped, he could barely move). We've had a few others go out because they fought it for too long.

I 100% stand by the way we do submissions in TKD/HKD, and outside of competition I think the way that they are done is quite effective. But the BJJ competition submissions aren't ineffective in a real scenario. They are as dangerous as limb destructions and chokes from any other art. And they're more likely to be able to apply them on someone who knows how to grapple and is resisting.

 

[skribs]

To highlight the point I was making above...

Photo is from my 3rd Dan, 4th level test a few years back.

This is the most common "armbar" we did in my Taekwondo class. This specific example was from a knife disarm. I'm hitting the armbar as my partner is performing his breakfall. I'm using my shin as a wedge to pull his elbow straight.

This can be done safely as a drill, as I can lock the arm straight and stop pulling. I believe (but have no evidence) that this would be effective if I cranked it, which is what I would do in a self-defense situation. If I hit it as my opponent is landing, he will not have time to recover out of it. I do not believe this would be effective in a sport jiu-jitsu setting, because I would stop to allow my opponent time to tap, and this position isn't secure enough that he would tap if given any mercy.

In this way, I consider this to be like a strike. You pull your strikes in sparring so you don't give your partner a concussion. You don't crank this type of armbar so that you don't break their arm. But a light tap isn't going to knock anyone out.

The advantage of this type of limb destruction over a BJJ style of submission is that I am much less entangled with my opponent. I am still standing, and so if there are other assailants, I can more easily turn my attention to them. In any situation, it's easier for me to run.

Now compare this with the BJJ armbar. I'm sure everyone knows what it looks like, but just for comparison sake:

In this armbar, you are doing a lot more to pin your opponent down. You have more connection points with which to control them and adjust to other submission techniques. Arguably this is still an easy position to lose compared to other arm attacks, because you sacrifice top position as you start to lock it in.

It works in sport jiu-jitsu because (done properly) your opponent is stuck while you slowly extend the arm. There's no need to crank it or treat it like a strike for it to be effective. If cranked or if slowly hyperextended, it will yield damage similar to what the Taekwondo armbar above does. Both techniques hyperextend the elbow. The advantage of the BJJ armbar is the amount of control you have while doing so.

The advantage the TKD armbar (and most of our limb destruction techniques) has is that we are generally standing or kneeling next to our opponent.

Having trained both, and I based on a video that (I think it was) Tony did, I've been playing around with using knee-on-belly instead of kneeling next to the opponent in a TKD/HKD style of attack.

 

[HighKick]

But that's the thing. If a bjj adjusts your TKD submission. He is probably going to ajust it for the better

Agree. And if a kicker adjusts your bjj stance or legwork, it is for the better.

 

[drop bear]

Having trained both, and I based on a video that (I think it was) Tony did, I've been playing around with using knee-on-belly instead of kneeling next to the opponent in a TKD/HKD style of attack.

If you really wanted to go prison rules and have an arm bar they can't defeat by just rolling towards you.

Go knee on neck.

 

[skribs]

If you really wanted to go prison rules and have an arm bar they can't defeat by just rolling towards you.

Go knee on neck.

In the example above, his momentum is rolling away based on the throw that put him down.

Like I said, it's a moment in time. Just like any punch can be defended in slow motion, but at full speed is more likely to land.

 

[isshinryuronin]

I've been playing around with using knee-on-belly instead of kneeling next to the opponent in a TKD/HKD style of attack.

I favor this position as well. Finishing a takedown by laying your knee on the opponent's hip area keeps him from countering as he's immobilized for a couple of seconds - plenty of time for you to land a finishing strike or break.