Thank you Mr. Technical.
Well of course, I can't do what you do, so I do what I do. Technical yes. Technical pretty much regresses to mechanical
Fence/shell/pike
- Thread starter MattJ
- Start date
Well of course, I can't do what you do, so I do what I do. Technical yes. Technical pretty much regresses to mechanical
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,949
- Reaction score
- 8,692
Then somewhat misquoted
Loose strength because you are structurally using them wrong. I think that I am still semantically correct.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,949
- Reaction score
- 8,692
Yes you are, but bear, look beyond semantics
Ok. I am not sure where you are going with this.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,949
- Reaction score
- 8,692
Or you can watch the UFC.
Do you have an example of this working in the U.F.C?
Or you can watch the UFC.
Intrigued?
- Thread Starter
- #29
Lots of examples of underhooks in the UFC, espcially against the cage. Here's 2 I found right away :
First minute or as Shane pushes Frank back to the cage.
about 5 minutes in, Cerrone uses it against Henderson.
Really tons of them dude, feel free to check for yourself.
Danny T
Senior Master
Underhooking yes. But not with a sprawl.
- Thread Starter
- #31
Ok......? I'm not stuck on underhooks AND sprawl. Apparently you guys are. I don't have time to search youtube for EXACTLY what you guys want. It is in BJ Penn's Mixed Martial Arts:The Book of Knowledge, in the Countering The Takedown section page 72. Feel free to tell him how wrong he is. I've seen it used in the UFC, and I've used it myself. Not sure where all the doubt is coming from. This isn't even a new technique, or something I made up - I am not nearly good enough at grappling. I guess haters gonna hate.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,949
- Reaction score
- 8,692
There is no hate just information. If you want a solid takedown defence crossface,overhook,sprawl. If you want to do something else. Go for it.
you can Underhook on a single leg. Or underhook off the cage.
If you shell up you are vulnerable to takedowns. That is why you force a person to shell up in the first place. It is still an option. But you need to take account of its weaknesses.
If you suggest shelling up is fine because they are only going to throw hey makers. Fair enough. Go with that.
Danny T
Senior Master
Whoa!!
This is a discussion board and when one puts something out as you have we are going to discuss the positive and negative aspects.
Maybe what I am defining as a sprawl is somewhat different to what you define as sprawl.
When in a underhook on a person as you have shown what I call a sprawl will put my neck and back in a very precarious position.
Page 72 just shows a basic sprawl, no underhook. Perhaps you meant page 74? There he shows a sprawl with his left arm catching the shoulder in what you could sort of call an underhook, although I would see it as more of a crossface. It's definitely not what we normally think of when you mention underhooks.
Last edited:
Getting back to the original video, I think it's a perfectly reasonable basic self-defense progression against an untrained attacker. It's easy to teach, can be learned and remembered fairly quickly, and is adequate against an average unskilled attacker. It's not at all ideal against a trained fighter in the cage, but that's not what it's for.
My biggest complaint about the video is that distance management is not explained at all and what is demonstrated is on the sloppy side. The entire progression depends on proper distance management for effectiveness. If I was teaching the progression, distance control would be the core of the lesson.
My biggest complaint about the video is that distance management is not explained at all and what is demonstrated is on the sloppy side. The entire progression depends on proper distance management for effectiveness. If I was teaching the progression, distance control would be the core of the lesson.
- Thread Starter
- #37
It was a bit sloppy, yes. If you watch, the orange belt starts attacking me while I'm still talking. Caught me a bit off guard (like real life), which is why you hear me laughing as I do the pike. The vid was meant to be a short introduction, not an encyclopedic compendium. The fence is all about basic distance control. So many people go into bad situations with their hands down, nose-to-nose, etc. The fence gets people away from that. It's not perfect (as you can see) but it takes a lot of the element of surprise away from the opponent.
drop bear -
Yeah, I actually detect some hate. Some of you have continually reframed the debate to a very narrow, fairly off-topic thing (underhooks), despite me saying that's not all I use or teach. You don't like the fence? No problem, use something else. The shell is indeed vulnerable to takedowns, but the fence is not.
drop bear -
Yeah, I actually detect some hate. Some of you have continually reframed the debate to a very narrow, fairly off-topic thing (underhooks), despite me saying that's not all I use or teach. You don't like the fence? No problem, use something else. The shell is indeed vulnerable to takedowns, but the fence is not.
The fence is vulnerable to punches kicks, pulls, squeezes, bites, middle knuckle punches, slaps, and laughs.
Similar threads
