Grappling takedown - back of head wide open?

[drop bear]

To counter that he should have been controlling that head or twisting the pinned guys torso. The moment he feels that head pop loose then he needs to re establish control.

Hard to do while you are pumping a guy with your elbows.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The next progression from there is a sit out.

I truly don't understand why his opponent tries to control his body and not controlling his arms. Giving your opponent 2 free arms is always a bad idea.

 

[drop bear]

I truly don't understand why his opponent tries to control his body and not controlling his arms. Giving your opponent 2 free arms is always a bad idea.

Yeah. I would be head arm if I could.

 

[Shakya]

Perhaps, but its oftentimes under-practiced and archiac compared to modern grappling.

Indeed - under-practiced in recent centuries at the very least- a point I have been suggesting could have been due to striking being of more concern, and grapplers not posing much of a threat anymore due to sprawl-type counters to takedowns followed by strikes to back of the head having been drilled in thoroughly.

Regarding what posters have been saying here about 'there will be a follow-up to the first foiled takedown', and 'there won't be time to strike after the first sprawl,' well GSP was demonstrating exactly that potential, so I don't understand how the opposite holds true.

Yes, he repositions himself to strike the head - I am not saying it is a simultaneous sprawl and strike. I am saying that after the sprawl has been successfully carried out, there a significant opportunity for a head strike move, as GSP shows.

Of course it can depend on a variety of variables as to whether the grappler's plan B works, or whether the post-sprawl strike move works, but both fighters being equal, I am assuming that the guy who has sprawled successfully holds more cards.

I also accept what others have said here about knee to the face after successful sprawl, but I still think that back of the head would probably guarantee more of a knockout.

 

[now disabled]

Indeed - under-practiced in recent centuries at the very least- a point I have been suggesting could have been due to striking being of more concern, and grapplers not posing much of a threat anymore due to sprawl-type counters to takedowns followed by strikes to back of the head having been drilled in thoroughly.

What do you mean by under practiced in recent centuries?

Grapplers not posing a threat anymore due to sprawl type counters, unless I'm missing something (and if I am I stand corrected) that kind of contradicts the first under practiced!?

I also accept what others have said here about knee to the face after successful sprawl, but I still think that back of the head would probably guarantee more of a knockout.

If you catch a person with a knee strike to the face then I would say it be just as effective as the strike to back of neck, If a person is attempting to do a double leg on ya and you catch them with a knee to face, is it not more likely you are sending them in the opposite direction from yourself ? As a strike to back of neck, will that not made them come in on you, as in fall forwards onto you ? Just a thought in a SD situation that you might feel it more advantageous to not make the opponent fall towards you?

 

[Shakya]

What do you mean by under practiced in recent centuries?

Grapplers not posing a threat anymore due to sprawl type counters, unless I'm missing something (and if I am I stand corrected) that kind of contradicts the first under practiced!?

I meant that there was perhaps a phase of grappling takedowns being countered with the threat of strikes to back of head, to the point that such an attack was no longer considered a threat - no one was trying it in a serious no rules duel, and so the counter to such a takedown itself was no longer practiced because the threat of takedown wasn't being posed anymore.... until Gracies and UFC happened, of course, and it was rediscovered by the world.

If you catch a person with a knee strike to the face then I would say it be just as effective as the strike to back of neck, If a person is attempting to do a double leg on ya and you catch them with a knee to face, is it not more likely you are sending them in the opposite direction from yourself ? As a strike to back of neck, will that not made them come in on you, as in fall forwards onto you ? Just a thought in a SD situation that you might feel it more advantageous to not make the opponent fall towards you?

If you had first successfully sprawled, then the person would be underneath you, no? (in a kind of turtle). Then successfully landing a hammerfist to back of head would send their face into the ground, I expect.

 

[now disabled]

I meant that there was perhaps a phase of grappling takedowns being countered with the threat of strikes to back of head, to the point that such an attack was no longer considered a threat - no one was trying it in a serious no rules duel, and so the counter to such a takedown itself was no longer practiced because the threat of takedown wasn't being posed anymore.... until Gracies and UFC happened, of course, and it was rediscovered by the world.


If you had first successfully sprawled, then the person would be underneath you, no? (in a kind of turtle). Then successfully landing a hammerfist to back of head would send their face into the ground, I expect.

In duels ? sorry but using grappling in a duel ...well I dunno what to say there, unless you are talking of empty hand fights ? as in a duel say between swords well ,,,,you lose your sword and duel is done and so are you basically.

I was alluding to before or as the opponent goes to take you then strike, as in don't wait to counter counter the initial movement

 

[Shakya]

In duels ? sorry but using grappling in a duel ...well I dunno what to say there, unless you are talking of empty hand fights ? as in a duel say between swords well ,,,,you lose your sword and duel is done and so are you basically.

Well, duels also famously occurred with pistols. But I am using the phrase loosely to include open hand duel type fights, as were occurring, it seems, in the context of where BJJ was created - see this vid at 0:42, for example:

It's still part of Brazilian culture now, it seems - capoeira of course, and like the "funk dance battles", fought in NY city in the 60s as precursor to breakdancing.

 

[now disabled]

Well, duels also famously occurred with pistols. But I am using the phrase loosely to include open hand duel type fights, as were occurring, it seems, in the context of where BJJ was created - see this vid at 0:42, for example:

Ok never heard of that before, I still don't quite get where your going with this as it all seems to be based around sports or such like. That guy just looks like he has mixed in something else which if it works for him then cool

It's still part of Brazilian culture now, it seems - capoeira of course, and like the "funk dance battles", fought in NY city in the 60s as precursor to breakdancing.

 

[drop bear]

If you had first successfully sprawled, then the person would be underneath you, no? (in a kind of turtle). Then successfully landing a hammerfist to back of head would send their face into the ground, I expect.

Your hands are busy at north south.

 

[drop bear]

In duels ? sorry but using grappling in a duel ...well I dunno what to say there, unless you are talking of empty hand fights ? as in a duel say between swords well ,,,,you lose your sword and duel is done and so are you basically.

I was alluding to before or as the opponent goes to take you then strike, as in don't wait to counter counter the initial movement

I thought grappling was pretty common in sword duels.

 

[Shakya]

Here is what happened in a UFC fight when Travis Browne struck his opponent, who was going for a grappling takedown, in the back of his head with his elbow:

I am guessing that this would have been a common scene in brutal fights where grappling takedowns were attempted in the past. Of course it is illegal in MMA.

And here is Browne talking about that exact situation, the exact description of "back of the head" in UFC, and about how he thought, in 2014, that that detail "is going to modify a lot of what happens now - when people get tired of trying to just shoot for sloppy doubles." I am not sure exactly what he means in that last sentence (watch from 1:22):

I am assuming that if grapplers and pro MMA fighters were hit like that more often, they would not be as confident in the fighting value of the takedown as they are at present? - When both fighters are equal, and there are no rules, for example.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I thought grappling was pretty common in sword duels.

I agree grappling is common with most weapons. I recently posted that there is grappling in the staff form that I do. The first thing I think of when I think of knife fight is not getting stabbed and grabbing a the stabbing hand.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I am assuming that if grapplers and pro MMA fighters were hit like that more often, they would not be as confident in the fighting value of the takedown as they are at present? - When both fighters are equal, and there are no rules, for example.

nope. they would just improve their technique and shoot with better technique.

The video that you showed has everything that many have talked about. Stopping the attempt, being in a striking structure, maintaining the striking structure that allows repetitive strikes. It took 5 elbows to the back of the head to KO the fighter.

Self-defense perspectives would have told people not to expose their back like that in a real fight simply because your vision is gone. You can't see and deal with multiple attackers. You don't know if the guy you are holding on to is going to pull a knife out and stick it into your back, your sides, or even your face.

 

[Shakya]

I agree grappling is common with most weapons. I recently posted that there is grappling in the staff form that I do. The first thing I think of when I think of knife fight is not getting stabbed and grabbing a the stabbing hand.

Right, so it seems that grappling as an option during non-sportive fighting is simply being rediscovered, rather than as a result of modern insights that 'upgrade' TMA.

The traditional wushu stances of Chinese kungfu, for example, can be seen to be incredibly useful for grappling - especially the three in the top row of this illustration - horse stance for lowering center of gravity whilst lifting, bow stance for sprawling takedowns, and collapsed (squatting) stance for side control leverage options.

You can watch from 2:24 in this video - good mobility with leg out like in collapsed stance is useful:

Here is a rare display of the Shaolin version, using these stances:

Unfortunately the guy in the video is apparently now a convict.

Perhaps it is just a matter of time before we see some of these low kungfu-looking stances in MMA bouts?

nope. they would just improve their technique and shoot with better technique.

... and be more weary of strikes to the backs of their heads at all times also, right? I think it would definitely change the dynamics.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I thought grappling was pretty common in sword duels.

From my understanding (based on western sword arts, not so much chinese/japanese, but I assume it's the same), you learn grappling, because if you end up up close and you don't know it then you're screwed. But, while you spend a decent amount of time training that, the hope in an actual duel would be never to have to use that. You see it more in weapons sparring because in some sparrings you continue past the first strike, so you need to follow up with something.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Right, so it seems that grappling as an option during non-sportive fighting is simply being rediscovered, rather than as a result of modern insights that 'upgrade' TMA.

Correct. grappling is always an option when it comes to fighting. Only sports fighting strips fighting down to kicking only, punching only, grappling only. In terms of TMA especially CMA, fighting is a dirty and aggressive activity that you may or may not benefit from or come out of without serious harm. Traditionally all of the systems used for combat were never meant to be kind to the enemy or sportsman like. Most of them have evolved into a sport. No one says, "lets make a technique to break someone's arm, as fun sport." or "lets create a sword for technique to cut someone for laughs."

The traditional wushu stances of Chinese kungfu, for example, can be seen to be incredibly useful for grappling - especially the three in the top row of this illustration - horse stance for lowering center of gravity whilst lifting, bow stance for sprawling takedowns, and collapsed (squatting) stance for side control leverage options.

I'm not a fan of Wushu so I won't commit on that as a fighting system. I will however say you are correct about the horse stance for lowering center of gravity, but it has very little to do with that or lifting. I use a horse stance against grapplers and the lowering center of gravity and lifting is just a small benefit.

Bow stance is also different. It's not used for sprawling or how most people think of bow stance. Bow stance actually breaks structure. There are popular misconceptions about the martial arts stances when it comes to grappling. You can see lots of bow stances here.

Horse stance, Bow stance, cross stance, and cat stance are often misunderstood.

and be more weary of strikes to the backs of their heads at all times also, right? I think it would definitely change the dynamics.

Nope they won't be more weary of the strikes to the back of the heads. One of the benefits of a good Fighting Technique is that addresses those dangers with you having to think about the danger. The concept of one hand blocking while the other hand strikes is common in many punching techniques. This concept allows you to better protect your head while punching. You don't have to sit there and be weary about being hit in the head each time you punch.

As long as you follow the technique then chances are that your opponent will think you are too protected to hit you in the head.
or
Your guarding and will be in good position to better protect you in the event that your opponent punches you at the same time you punch. Below has some perfect examples of this. Follow that simple concept of one hand defends and the other hand protects, means you have one less thing to worry about.