Does your Art/System teach you to take the fight to the ground?

[Cryozombie]

With my interpretation of the art, the answer is "sometimes". The primary goal and strategy of Ninpo is survival, and if that means escape, escape. If it means taking them out quickly, then that is what I do. One of the primary tactics used to survive an unknown encounter, though, is to take your opponent out of their area of speciality, so if I find myself up against someone who is clearly a highly skilled and competant boxer or kicker, and I can't make distance to get away, I may very well move in and take them to ground, as it is less likely that they will have experience there. But once in more of a position of control, escape is the key. So if I take someone down, it is rarely to submit on the ground. It is to quickly take control and finish (to allow an escape) as soon as possible.

I would agree... but add the addition of at our dojo we train assuming he always has friends... so we make going to the ground a bit of a last resort, IF IT IS OUR CHOICE. And then when it is neccessary or happens, the goal is to get up and out, like Chris said, as soon as possible. We try to avoid going down there for pain compliance, restraint or submission, those can take too long and leave you vulnerable to a second guy.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Hola all,
Was just wondering about the above mentioned. This is mainly because when I first became an LEO the philosphy was "pig-pile" but with manning getting thinner and my city growing ever larger, in the last couple of years, our defensive tactics has done a 180. Where before DT was just something you had to suffer through in the Academy there is now in-service that is mandatory and all DT instructors offer side training.

When I first came on we taught FBI Arrest Control (personal opinion is "lame") and that no matter how good you are/were it would somehow end up on the ground in a wrestling match. Now it is, especially with the popularity of MMA and the nearness of an Army Post (with the Combatives being taught to every soldier; good for them) we are teaching (I am lucky enough to be an instructor in FBI and our own proprietary system) both to stay on your feet, to regain your feet as soon as possible if you go to the ground and some escapes, locks and pain compliance techniques if the ground is the only option (our ground work is basic, heck, all of our techniques are fairly basic, so that they can be remembered and have been field tested to work ---- so far, so good).

Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation?

Gracias

We are not taught in hapkido to take the fight to the ground as a general rule, though we are taught sweeps, throws and takedowns to put the attacker on the ground.

We are taught a couple of submission moves that involve going to the ground as part of the course. These are taught specifically because some of the students have asked to learn them and GM Kim knows them.

Otherwise, most of our "groundwork" involves trying to keep from being taken to the ground and getting off of the ground quickly should you end up there.

Daniel

 

[Balrog]

Speaking as a Taekwondo instructor and former police officer....

The last thing I would want to do as a cop is get to rolling with a bad guy. I would try to minimize that as much as possible and if I did taken to the ground, I'm gonna hurt the guy bad so that I can regain control.

I've been there and done that. Had one guy that was a high-school wrestler back in his day and he took my partner down and tried to get his gun. I went after him with a baton and hurt him bad before I could get him off my partner. My partner was hurt worse by the fact that he landed on a piece of broken glass that cut his back up badly.

 

[Drac]

Hola all,
Was just wondering about the above mentioned. This is mainly because when I first became an LEO the philosphy was "pig-pile" but with manning getting thinner and my city growing ever larger, in the last couple of years, our defensive tactics has done a 180. Where before DT was just something you had to suffer through in the Academy there is now in-service that is mandatory and all DT instructors offer side training.

And many agencies still dont do enough if any in house DT training..The department I use to work for would rather sit us in a class for 8 hrs of boring lecture that put us on the mats, but I am way off topic..

Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation?

Gracias

I never went to the ground..Who wants to roll around on broken glass and God knows what else..I have attended a Ground Survival program which gave me enough skills should I have ever wound up on there..

 

[derobec]

Otherwise, most of our "groundwork" involves trying to keep from being taken to the ground and getting off of the ground quickly should you end up there.

Don't get me wrong, I love groundwork -as a conditioner/strength builder/just for the shere enjoyment, but when we're talking about real fighting/survival Daniel's statement is just about as sensible as it gets.

All the Best,
William

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

One observation is that there is a difference between training for effective fighting on the ground in the event that you end up there and taking the fight to the ground.

Balrog said on another thread that SD is mostly common sense and that awareness and control of the environment will help you to avoid 99.9% of the dangerous scenarios that are possible, and that we train for that .1 percent of the time when common sense, awareness, and control of one's environment are not enough.

Of that 1%, being on the ground in a real fight may represent about a quarter percent, which means that without training for defense on the ground, you are much more likely to be screwed if you ever wind up there.

So in short, don't take the fight to the ground, but have some effective tools in the event that you wind up there.

My numbers are generalizations, not meant as hard data.

Daniel

 

[5rings]

My art is primarily close quarter defense C.Q.D. used for executive protection and other services. We do have some basic ground technique but they are mostly for restraints because of liability issues (excessive force) we base all fundamental self defense upon stats gathered from the U.S. Department of Justice, that deal with how many violent crimes have been executed in one particular area, how many were unarmed verses how many were armed (knife, gun, or other instrument of use). These allow us to constantly adjust our practice towards the most appropriate defense available for any given area. We try not to take for granted any information gathered that can be of use as such.

"Always try to think outside the Traditional Box"

 

[derobec]

So in short, don't take the fight to the ground, but have some effective tools in the event that you wind up there.

That's pretty much how I see things. We can't expect to always avoid being taken down so we'd best have some pressure tested idea as to how to conduct ourselves on the ground. Lets just not aide our adversary by putting ourselves there.

It might be interesting to get the perspective of one of the silat ground specialists, doubt that I'll be converted, but it would be nice to know how they see things.

Regards to All,
William

 

[Shifu Steve]

That's pretty much how I see things. We can't expect to always avoid being taken down so we'd best have some pressure tested idea as to how to conduct ourselves on the ground

I generally agree with the idea here. Training for groundfighting is worthwhile but I think in many cases you don't need to really stretch for effective techniques (such as learn some BJJ). If your comfort zone is on your feet and you have some effective close quarter techniques you like there, those typically can be applied on the ground anyhow, you just need to train them there to recognize their utility.

 

[repz]

Only time I had a serious expsoure to ground fighting was when I formally took BJJ. Though I had some training when I did san shou (hung ga school).

I love grappling for its strategy and tactics in rolling (its a lot of fun, and a very smart game), and I do believe (and I quote someone from another site) there is a time and place for everything, and if those circumstances do fall that grappling can be applied safetly, then I believe it would be an easy encounter. I would go even further and say I would feel a bit more safer if I were an experienced grappler grappling an everyday moron, then being an experienced strike fighting a moron, since I assume more people know how to strike, or box, then roll out of a mount, or apply a kimura lock. Again, this depends on the circumstance, enviornment, etc.

But, in most situations, in my experience, ground fighting is a no no. I have seen in the streets how their 'friends" wait until they guy either turns his back to them, or they go on the ground, to step in and pummel the guy. And to be 100 percent honest, if I see a cousin or close friend losing the upperhand in a fight, I would get involved, I wouldnt care that we outnumber you, I dont have any honor in the street, I wont go home and reflect how much of a fool I was to not let the fight be a "fair one", I want my 'friend' in this case, to be safe as opposed to watching him get his arm broken. And the last few dumb situations I have seen, I would never trust the people around me, nor want to be engaged in a position where i cant escape (I would want to run before LEO got there).

But as a whole, leaving out grappling, you leave out a range and I feel become less of a complete fighter, since street fighting is always "guesswork" (unless you are a thug or cop that doesnt mind losing his job), its best to patch up as many factors and situations as possible by eliminating as much guessing as possible (which means becoming more complete and aware of different ranges, which eliminates and surprises or unfamiliarity to the unknown, and so on).

 

[Shifu Steve]

But as a whole, leaving out grappling, you leave out a range and I feel become less of a complete fighter, since street fighting is always "guesswork" (unless you are a thug or cop that doesn’t mind losing his job), its best to patch up as many factors and situations as possible by eliminating as much guessing as possible (which means becoming more complete and aware of different ranges, which eliminates and surprises or unfamiliarity to the unknown, and so on).

I think that whether you're training for sport, self defense, or for the art itself, the point made above is one that should be kept in mind. I remember a post about a month ago by a TKD BB that wanted to train in a grappling art because he said he didn't have any grappling skills. I think that may have been short sighted because you don't necessarily need to concentrate in grappling to have a plan for being on the ground.

An earlier post in this thread attested to that and basically summed it up as having a plan to deal with the situation (i.e. being taken to the ground) and a transition back to your strength and comfort zone. For SD purposes I agree wholeheartedly. However, to address the original question behind the post, I think no matter what you study you can always find answers (some styles more so than others) for every range of combat. This process not only deepens your appreciation for your chosen art, but as repz said it makes you a more complete fighter.

Having no exposure to TKD I don't really know where those answers are. I suspect TKD relies heavily on stand up (I don't think that's a stretch) and long to medium range combat. However, I think that to write it off completely as a style that has no answers for being taken to the ground may be premature. Just because a given style doesn't focus on something doesn't mean that answers cannot be found deep within ones training. However I fully admit that I could be wrong specifically about TKD because I know next to nothing about it besides the emphasis on kicks. I only use it as an example because it appears to be on the far side of the spectrum between the ground and stand up.

 

[MJS]

Having no exposure to TKD I don't really know where those answers are. I suspect TKD relies heavily on stand up (I don't think that's a stretch) and long to medium range combat. However, I think that to write it off completely as a style that has no answers for being taken to the ground may be premature. Just because a given style doesn't focus on something doesn't mean that answers cannot be found deep within ones training. However I fully admit that I could be wrong specifically about TKD because I know next to nothing about it besides the emphasis on kicks. I only use it as an example because it appears to be on the far side of the spectrum between the ground and stand up.

Funny you should say that, because I used to, and still do, say that about Kenpo, the art I train in. My thoughts are that the ground game isn't there, others say that it is, and that its MY Kenpo that is lacking. And that may very well be, however, and I hate to sound like I'm singling someone out, but I can point to a Kenpo clip, put out by a high ranking Kenpoist, in which he is showing an escape from the mount. Personally, I dont think that if the person that was mounting, was actually doing it correctly, the defense that was shown, wouldn't work.

My theory is this: every art pretty much has answers to pretty much every attack. Kenpo has club, gun, knife, punches, grabs, takedown/tackle attempts, etc. But, IMHO, if you want to expand on that, and really be sure that you could defend against a grappling attack, look at a grappling art. I like to work with grapplers, so I can test my stuff. Will the bad guy who tries to mug me, be a pro MMA fighter? Probably not, but I dont want to assume he's a no skilled slouch either.

So, if I can make those grappling defenses work as well as having a plan a, b, and c, I'm that much better. Same with the weapons. After training in Arnis, I view the stick and especially the blade in a whole new light.

Are grappling moves 'hidden' in Kenpo, TKD or any other art? I'm sure they are. For me though, I'd rather have a more solid defense, whileat the same time, looking to find those answers.

 

[scottie]

With this being my 21st year in stand up Isshinryu and American Karate, having been in Law Enforcement 9 years, and having wrestled for or coached high school style wrestling for a little over 10 years; it really never made since why our police academy taught MMA type D Ts. I mean out of the almost 100 hours that D Ts were taught in our academy class. Seventy of them were all ground focused and or ground focused gun retention (which I do understand). It just never made since to me to take someone to the ground if he may or may not have a lot of friends around.
It was not until I went to a BJJ for LE and the first thing they asked us was, how many of you wrestled for at least 3 years in High School? All but 8 out of 46 people raised there hand. Then he asked what about MMA and 3 out of the 8 raised there hands. He then explained that was the purpose of his class to make us teach us the very basics of the ground game. He said the static at that time 2002 was 8 out of ten people that we arrest on the street, at least have 2-3 years of ground game. In karate would make MOST at least a new brown belt.
Now in nine years of Law Enforcement I have never been taken to the ground (not that people have not tried, and most defiantly not that I am so good that no one has been able too). However, I have taken many people to the ground to handcuff them most of which were not on purpose. Some have had good ground game and some have just laid there. But I thank God everyday for my ground time and training.
I am also a traditional Isshinryu guy. So I want to learn it in its purest form. I have seen some people teach ground fighting tech….s form the kata, but that always seemed to stretch it to me, maybe I am just not at guru status yet.
A lot of the people in the Harold Long lineage of Isshinryu Karate have added J Jit.. to the art. Two guys have even started their own style of J Jit.. based off of Isshinryu stand up. One of which that started the Isshinryu Cross Training Alliance and they are doing great things mind you
. As much as I can’t believe that I am saying this I don’t know that it is a bad thing if your purpose is to learn reality based fighting. Just don’t teach Ground fighting with MMA rules because then it becomes not reality based all over again.

Think I May even apply for the ICA!

 

[MJS]

With this being my 21st year in stand up Isshinryu and American Karate, having been in Law Enforcement 9 years, and having wrestled for or coached high school style wrestling for a little over 10 years; it really never made since why our police academy taught MMA type D Ts. I mean out of the almost 100 hours that D Ts were taught in our academy class. Seventy of them were all ground focused and or ground focused gun retention (which I do understand). It just never made since to me to take someone to the ground if he may or may not have a lot of friends around.
It was not until I went to a BJJ for LE and the first thing they asked us was, how many of you wrestled for at least 3 years in High School? All but 8 out of 46 people raised there hand. Then he asked what about MMA and 3 out of the 8 raised there hands. He then explained that was the purpose of his class to make us teach us the very basics of the ground game. He said the static at that time 2002 was 8 out of ten people that we arrest on the street, at least have 2-3 years of ground game. In karate would make MOST at least a new brown belt.
Now in nine years of Law Enforcement I have never been taken to the ground (not that people have not tried, and most defiantly not that I am so good that no one has been able too). However, I have taken many people to the ground to handcuff them most of which were not on purpose. Some have had good ground game and some have just laid there. But I thank God everyday for my ground time and training.
I am also a traditional Isshinryu guy. So I want to learn it in its purest form. I have seen some people teach ground fighting tech….s form the kata, but that always seemed to stretch it to me, maybe I am just not at guru status yet.
A lot of the people in the Harold Long lineage of Isshinryu Karate have added J Jit.. to the art. Two guys have even started their own style of J Jit.. based off of Isshinryu stand up. One of which that started the Isshinryu Cross Training Alliance and they are doing great things mind you
. As much as I can’t believe that I am saying this I don’t know that it is a bad thing if your purpose is to learn reality based fighting. Just don’t teach Ground fighting with MMA rules because then it becomes not reality based all over again.

Think I May even apply for the ICA!

Nice post! IMO, I think alot of the time, when people hear "grappling" or "MMA" they automatically think UFC, long, drawn out matches. If we look back to an old UFC match, with Maurice Smith and Mark Coleman, we saw the classic standup fighter, Mo, against the classic grappler, Mark. We also saw Mo frustrate the hell out of Mark. Mo trained some basic grappling with Frank Shamrock, and survived the ground attack by Mark and prevented all submission attempts by him as well. Then the fight was brought back to standing, where Mo KO'd Mark with a kick.

My point of this is...I dont think that someone should have to abandon their art to take up BJJ, but learn the basics. Drill the living **** out of those basics, over and over and over. Who cares about learning 30 variations to the mount escape or 30 different guard passes. Again, learn the basics, drill, drill and drill again, and chances are, unless you're fighting the evil twin of Royce or Rickson Gracie, chances are, against the average punk, it should be a walk in the park.

Of course, for LEOs, I'd also suggest what you mentioned, that being weapon retention on the ground.