Grappling takedown - back of head wide open?

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't think I have a pre-determined image. That is why I am exploring here.

You can get a training partner. Ask him to attack your leg 15 times and see the ratio between your hammer fist can knock on the back of his head vs. he can take you down.

Nothing can be more valuable than your personal test result.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

You can get a training partner. Ask him to attack your leg 15 times and see the ratio between your hammer fist can knock on the back of his head vs. he can take you down.

Nothing can be more valuable than your personal test result.

That person has to be trained though. I would get a wrestler or a rugby player personally

 

[drop bear]

Yeah but interestingly the jujutsu styles didn’t seem to go there much

Gi vs no gi maybe?

 

[hoshin1600]

Perhaps, during ancient or medieval - more brutal - times, the art of the double leg or single leg takedown was not indulged in so much due to this very reason?

.I wasnt assuming he was going that far back

the helmet does have a neck guard lol .... that said I still don't think that going for the double leg take down be the first option

the medieval knight had armor that weighed about 100 pounds. the samurai armor could weigh up to 50 pounds. either way the armor makes you top heavy. not really very conducive for double leg takedowns.

 

[hoshin1600]

I am not necessarily talking about grappling in a sports context, here, I am talking about in a more martial context, and perhaps why it was not apparently as celebrated as a martial art as it is today

what do you mean celebrated? do we have a national grappling day on the calendar that we can take off work?
i am sort of under the impression that Greco- Roman wrestling has been in the olympic games since 1896 ....thats kind of a big deal. Sumo is the national sport of Japan. Greece had a huge wrestling interest and not just in the sport context. its well known Alexander the great's troops practiced Pankration which was a form of MMA type wrestling and boxing.

wrestling | History, Styles, & Facts
"No sport is older or more widely distributed than wrestling, often in highly local styles that have persisted to the present day.
Wrestling probably originated in hand-to-hand combat, and in particular as a sportive form of combat substituting the submission of a contestant for his death. Works of art from 3000 BCE depict belt wrestling in Babylonia and Egypt, and the Sumerian Gilgamesh epic has a description of such wrestling. Loose wrestling in India dates to before 1500 BCE. Chinese documents from 700 BCEdescribe loose wrestling, as do Japanese records from the 1st century BCE. The belt wrestling practiced locally in the 20th century by the Swiss, Icelanders, Japanese, and Cossacks differed little from that of the Egyptians in 2500 BCE."

 

[hoshin1600]

I just can't understand why grappling was popular in the more ancient past, and yet today it seems to be even more celebrated.

i think that is your impression and i dont think its accurate. it is popular to watch on TV now but in the past it was part of a young mans education to learn weapons and the arts of self defense,,,you know to actually practice and learn not just stare at a image in a box.

and I cannot believe that during all the brutal fighting that occurred in varying martial contexts that these techniques and methodologies were not already understood and thoroughly tested.

what techniques and methods and who says they were not understood and tested? are you saying your the first person ever to think about hitting the back of the neck?

 

[hoshin1600]

it would appear to me that the back side of the helmet was very well thought out and specifically designed with the concept of protecting the back of the neck.

 

[Shakya]

what techniques and methods and who says they were not understood and tested? are you saying your the first person ever to think about hitting the back of the neck?

The techniques and methods from wrestling that have been dominating sportive MMA bouts.

Exactly, I cannot believe that in the ancient, more brutal past, they would not have developed techniques that, when a takedown is sprawled successfully, attack the back of the head instead of, say, going for the guillotine, which can be more complicated to pull off.

As we saw in the 'What happens when you fail a takedown' on the street video, people just tend to go for the simplest, most direct shot to the head.

And I think it is worth noting here that I did say in my very first post "if one's partner sprawls successfully" and therefore finds him or herself in a favorable position. It seems that no takedown shot technique is invincible - its counter can be trained and applied, just like any counter to a martial art attack can be.

I think a few posters on this thread are assuming that I am suggesting that a hammerfist could land successfully as they are being taken down by a successful double leg, or single leg takedown. I am not suggesting that.

it would appear to me that the back side of the helmet was very well thought out and specifically designed with the concept of protecting the back of the neck.

Indeed, I agree, and yet as others have pointed out, these guys were apparently more concerned about swords, arrows, and clubs, rather than takedowns, as would a JiuJitsu practitioner be if he was on a battlefield full of guys decked out in this gear, I expect.

Please do keep asking questions if you are still not clear about what I am asking. I did my best to lay it out in the first post, but we all have our unique perspectives on the world, and sometimes it requires finer detail to understand one another.

Thanks again, Shakya.

 

[Shakya]

Welcome to MartialTalk, Shakya. Hope you enjoy it.

As to your question, in fighting, something is always open. I don't think it's any more of chink than any other chink. (My, didn't that sound odd?)

Thanks, Buka. I am enjoying it

Yes, something is always open, and yes no art is better than another, I agree - there is no such thing as 'an absolute Way' (as LaoTzu says in his very first line of TaoTeChing).

I believe that all paths lead up the same mountain - it just requires diligent practice - discipline, and testing.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

The techniques and methods from wrestling that have been dominating sportive MMA bouts.

Exactly, I cannot believe that in the ancient, more brutal past, they would not have developed techniques that, when a takedown is sprawled successfully, attack the back of the head instead of, say, going for the guillotine, which can be more complicated to pull off.

As we saw in the 'What happens when you fail a takedown' on the street video, people just tend to go for the simplest, most direct shot to the head.

And I think it is worth noting here that I did say in my very first post "if one's partner sprawls successfully" and therefore finds him or herself in a favorable position. It seems that no takedown shot technique is invincible - its counter can be trained and applied, just like any counter to a martial art attack can be.

I think a few posters on this thread are assuming that I am suggesting that a hammerfist could land successfully as they are being taken down by a successful double leg, or single leg takedown. I am not suggesting that.


Indeed, I agree, and yet as others have pointed out, these guys were apparently more concerned about swords, arrows, and clubs, rather than takedowns, as would a JiuJitsu practitioner be if he was on a battlefield full of guys decked out in this gear, I expect.

Please do keep asking questions if you are still not clear about what I am asking. I did my best to lay it out in the first post, but we all have our unique perspectives on the world, and sometimes it requires finer detail to understand one another.

Thanks again, Shakya.

Even if they sprawl correctly, if you have good technique for your takedown that option wont be there. The guillotine is more likely to succeed. So, even if instinct is just to hit it, people that train will look for something that works better than instinct.

 

[Shakya]

Even if they sprawl correctly, if you have good technique for your takedown that option wont be there. The guillotine is more likely to succeed..

Could you perhaps post a photo or a video and explain why for us?

Here are two videos that support what I am talking about, for example:

 

[dunc]

If we are talking about old jujutsu and grappling , has anyone remembered that the samurai and many other cultures wore armor?

Sure, but it’s worth noting that grappling in armour is only part of the grappling curriculum of the old styles. They spent most of their time out of armour (but armed) and the curriculum reflects this

 

[hoshin1600]

I cannot believe that in the ancient, more brutal past, they would not have developed techniques that, when a takedown is sprawled successfully, attack the back of the head instead of, say, going for the guillotine, which can be more complicated to pull off.

This is what I was referring to before. Who says they didn't have techniques? Your making a presupposition that they didn't and I think this is incorrect. They are not common now due to rule set but it doesn't take a prodigy to see an opening an strike it. Hitting the back of the head is not a novel idea, we all know it. That's why there's a rule against it.
I think you'd putting more importance on this then it deserves.

 

[now disabled]

the medieval knight had armor that weighed about 100 pounds. the samurai armor could weigh up to 50 pounds. either way the armor makes you top heavy. not really very conducive for double leg takedowns.

I would agree totally

 

[JowGaWolf]

Ok. There is another issue. If you are hitting someone you are not stopping the takedown. So you need to hit from a position that won't land you on your back.

Or you have to basically knock them out with those shots

Completely agree. gotta secure a striking structure first. Which is why it's so risky to try to strike a take down attempt before securing that structure. Striking will lose all of it's power once someone breaks that structure.

 

[JowGaWolf]

You can get a training partner. Ask him to attack your leg 15 times and see the ratio between your hammer fist can knock on the back of his head vs. he can take you down.

Nothing can be more valuable than your personal test result.

ha ha ha.. not sure who would be crazy enough to be a test subject for that.

 

[now disabled]

Indeed, I agree, and yet as others have pointed out, these guys were apparently more concerned about swords, arrows, and clubs, rather than takedowns, as would a JiuJitsu practitioner be if he was on a battlefield full of guys decked out in this gear, I expect.

Yes they would be concerned with what you state and also musket fire as they would have been far in a way more likely to kill than a double leg takedown or a blow to the back of the head whilst doing so.

The battlefield is a greatly different arena to that of the street, (andalways has been and will be, except in hollywood where it ...well enough said) so really saying they did or did not have techniques is really a theoretical point. Also it could be added that by the time of the middle Edo period on wards there would be few, if any that had actually fought in battle, oh yes they trained for such (sorta, kinda, maybe) but did and were the tactics or techniques they leaned the same, personally I doubt it as the schools evolved and taught what was in demand or indeed they were permitted to teach (the shogunate -be it right or wrong and opinions do vary- kept a very tight leash of things and what they permitted or did not permit) If you are meaning when they were not all bedecked in armour (and do bear in mind that some- not all- of the armour was ummm ceremonial ) did they learn takedowns etc then I would expect they did and as they came from a background of studying the "arts of warfare" (but dobear in mind that MA was not exactly available to all as it is now) then they would like folks today understand all to well where the weak areas were and are good grief lol there are the lineages that state (again up to one if you believe said or not) fallen soldiers corpses were examined and criminals executed so the human body could be better understood. Again if logical thought is given they didn't just happen upon "things" I have no doubt there was trial and error and if it didn't work they didn't keep teaching it (or if they did there be dead students of the school and the school would eh not be studied) However that said it was done for a wholly different purpose than today. It was yes self defense but fora different purpose and again not all had access to said training it was kinda reserved for those who were of a certain class, ie Samurai (well sorta depending on the exact time period) and for a reason that was done.

The context and the time periods have to be taken into account (just as they have today) and even what is taught today as being ancient or what ever word your using .....(a)well is it ?(b) is it the same ?(c) have things been added and taken out or lost or forgotten? (a) no (b)no but has roots there (c) yes, yes and more than likely. Even what are termed modern arts have changed in the last century or so, how something was taught pre WWII can be different from now and even what is taught and how in Japan can be different from what is taught outside Japan lol (again depending on what who and where lol) as it has evolved and taken on what it has needed and will most likely continue to do so (again depending on who,where and why)

Don't get to hung up on or fooled by some one saying it old style or ancient or the like as things have changed and even within the "old schools" some of what was taught no longer is (and hasn't been for some time) and even if the scrolls they have passed to them it may or may not be understood or taught to the current head or teaching master (he may not have been taught it or given the right to teach it) or indeed he might not be able to read it !!! (for example take Takeda Sokaku he was illiterate yet he taught Koryu -(ok again depends on what you believe and what you do not) and it is the predecessor of Aikido (well mostly) and it has had things removed for example the pure ju-jutsu and has taken on the aiki-jujutsu and aiki no jutsu.

I think where you may be getting confused is what you are looking at is modern MMA and modern fighting (be it of any style) and then trying to ask yourself what would they have done way back, that great up to a point, but what goes on in a sports ring isn't the same and what happens in the street well ok it could be life and death certainly but way back when it was lol as if you pissed off someone from the Samurai class or of higher rank in the street then ummm you were gonna die, kick a Samurai in the nuts or piss against his favorite tree and the same outcome, if not on the spot then fairly soon thereafter lol today it is somewhat different lol. It isn't until fairly modern times that the sport side was cultivated and as stated elsewhere the wonderful TV was invented and the even more wondrous internet that has placed things at the masses fingertips and well some is to put on a spectacle and a show and thereby rules have got to be there else people get hurt or worse killed so what someone from feudal japan might have done andwhat is done is kinda different. Also you are gonna have to seperate what happens in a ring to what happens in the real world (yes there are ways and rules we all have to obey) are two different things and what you may do on the street to defend yourself is and can be wholly different than in a ring and also it is (and always has been) oh so much quicker and more than likely violent and there is unlikely to be a ref or judges around to say nope you can't do that lol

 

[Shakya]

This is what I was referring to before. Who says they didn't have techniques? Your making a presupposition that they didn't and I think this is incorrect. They are not common now due to rule set but it doesn't take a prodigy to see an opening an strike it.

It's okay, you were taking my comment out of context - my "I can't believe they didn't..." statement was rhetorical - as in "I assume that they did". Anyway, it doesn't matter, let's move on shall we, haha.

 

[Shakya]

Completely agree. gotta secure a striking structure first. Which is why it's so risky to try to strike a take down attempt before securing that structure. Striking will lose all of it's power once someone breaks that structure.

Yes, that structure would be a successful sprawl, for example, no?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sure - was there a particular reason why they banned it? Was there a casualty?

Nah. There was a period when MMA was widely banned and it's commercial future was in doubt. As part of the push to get it accepted, a bunch of rules were put in place to at least create the impression that it wasn't just a "blood sport." Some of the rules were genuine improvements to safety, others were just to make regulators happy. The "no striking the back of the neck" rule was probably adopted from boxing.

Perhaps this is a matter of technique, however? Because in most grappling training scenarios no one is ever intending to strike to the back of the neck, and therefore no such positioning is sought?

Yes, I've seen that, but what about hammer fist?

Yes, that structure would be a successful sprawl, for example, no?

The difficulty is that many of the best structures for stopping the takedown (such as a sprawl) aren't ideal for striking. In the case of a sprawl, the defenders body is mostly horizontal, which isn't good for striking. The attackers head is typically in contact with the sprawler's hip, which isn't a great angle for striking. The sprawler has to keep constant body contact and weight on the attacker to prevent follow up, and that gets in the way of effective striking.

If you want to hit the person shooting in, a hip check probably gives better structure. That's a trickier defense to pull off effectively, though.

the medieval knight had armor that weighed about 100 pounds. the samurai armor could weigh up to 50 pounds. either way the armor makes you top heavy. not really very conducive for double leg takedowns.