I'm sorry, but this whole "Anti-Grappling" thing horrifies me

[Marnetmar]

Can someone explain to me how any of this can possibly work?

 

[K-man]

What exactly are you questioning?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Can someone explain to me how any of this can possibly work?

It works by demonstrating the techniques on compliant students who have no idea how grappling works.

Actually some of the techniques being demoed are valid if they are done correctly, which they mostly aren't in this video. Others are valid tactics if you just happen to end up on the ground while fighting someone who doesn't know how to grapple - it's just a misnomer to call them "anti-grappling."

 

[Tez3]

Under the video there is a disclaimer which indicates what you see isn't necessarily what the videos will be about.

"You can buy this DVD at Everything Wing Chun - Books Videos DVDs Wooden Dummy Butterfly Swords Long Poles more Wing Chun Kung Fu Ving Tsun Kung Fu Martial arts. or download it at www.WingChunVideos.com. This sample is intended to show production quality and/or sample of instruction quality only, and may not represent what this DVD is all about. Please read the full description on Everything Wing Chun - Books Videos DVDs Wooden Dummy Butterfly Swords Long Poles more Wing Chun Kung Fu Ving Tsun Kung Fu Martial arts."

 

[geezer]

It works by demonstrating the techniques on compliant students who have no idea how grappling works.

Actually some of the techniques being demoed are valid if they are done correctly, which they mostly aren't in this video. Others are valid tactics if you just happen to end up on the ground while fighting someone who doesn't know how to grapple - it's just a misnomer to call them "anti-grappling."

Good points. Almost anything works on compliant demo partners. Some people are compliant out of reverence for their instructor. Another way to keep them compliant is to basically scare the poop out of them. Victor Gutierrez is a strong scary SOB. Now, I've never actually met him, but based on what I've seen and heard, I'd be pretty compliant if I were attending one of his seminars.

I wasn't always such a push-over. In the late 1980s, I met and attended a seminar with a certain Turkish WT guy who was visiting the US from Germany (where he had just earned notoriety for defeating a famous "grandmaster" of "traditional" WC in a challenge fight). At that time this individual was a martial arts beast, and very effective at striking arts. However (as the old videos of his infamous challenge match show) his grappling skills were not yet well developed. BTW Joy will remember this event, since he attended a public demo given by this individual right after the seminar I'm speaking of.

Anyway, at on point in , this instructor swept me and followed me to the ground. Well, I grew up wrestling (my big brother was a state champion in high school and varsity wrestler at his college). So in spite of being much smaller than this guy, I reversed him and momentarily took control. I quickly found out that you DO NOT make such an individual look vulnerable without being punished. ...Needless to say I was quite compliant for the rest of the seminar!

BTW I have encountered this same individual on a couple of occasions since and can say that he seems to be an excellent instructor as well as a superior athlete, and he was quite friendly to me. So, there's no criticism intended. I'm just pointing out one reason why people are so compliant!

 

[Vajramusti]

Good points. Almost anything works on compliant demo partners. Some people are compliant out of reverence for their instructor. Another way to keep them compliant is to basically scare the poop out of them. Victor Gutierrez is a strong scary SOB. Now, I've never actually met him, but based on what I've seen and heard, I'd be pretty compliant if I were attending one of his seminars.

I wasn't always such a push-over. In the late 1980s, I met and attended a seminar with a certain Turkish WT guy who was visiting the US from Germany (where he had just earned notoriety for defeating a famous "grandmaster" of "traditional" WC in a challenge fight). At that time this individual was a martial arts beast, and very effective at striking arts. However (as the old videos of his infamous challenge match show) his grappling skills were not yet well developed. BTW Joy will remember this event, since he attended a public demo given by this individual right after the seminar I'm speaking of.

Anyway, at on point in , this instructor swept me and followed me to the ground. Well, I grew up wrestling (my big brother was a state champion in high school and varsity wrestler at his college). So in spite of being much smaller than this guy, I reversed him and momentarily took control. I quickly found out that you DO NOT make such an individual look vulnerable without being punished. ...Needless to say I was quite compliant for the rest of the seminar!

BTW I have encountered this same individual on a couple of occasions since and can say that he seems to be an excellent instructor as well as a superior athlete, and he was quite friendly to me. So, there's no criticism intended. I'm just pointing out one reason why people are so compliant!

--------------------------------------------------------
-I remenber the event and the later demo in Arizona quite well. He drew blood from the mouth of his demo partner.

Yes things can work on compliant partners but conversely if you beat up on partners pretty soon you wont have partner.

A fight is a fight. A demo is not a fight. Its a simulation. The demonstrator has a responsibilty to explain and the observer has to try his/her best to understand.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

All demo are 1/2 fake and 1/2 real. The

- 1/2 fake is your opponent will give you that opportunity.
- 1/2 real is you have to finish it.

If your opponent has to help you to finish, that will be 100% fake.

 

[Vajramusti]

All demo are 1/2 fake and 1/2 real. The

- 1/2 fake is your opponent will give you that opportunity.
- 1/2 real is you have to finish it.

If your opponent has to help you to finish, that will be 100% fake.

---------------------------------------

True

 

[K-man]

I think this is all a beat up on WC. We had a very long discussion on 'anti-grappling' some time back and a certain member put up videos and tore strips off the lot of it. I thought at the time it was style bashing.

Since then I have had time to think more about it. People bag TMAs for not adapting to new concepts. Here we have a style, WC, adding an element to their training which, for better or worse, they have labeled 'anti-grappling'. Now I might have thought the detractors might have welcomed that as an improvement, but no, it is 'hilarious'.

Having watched a number of these 'anti-grappling' videos I have come to the realisation that 'anti-grappling' is what every style of martial art, apart from those that want to fight on the ground, does, just without the name. Karate doesn't want to stay fighting on the ground, Aikido doesn't want to be fighting on the ground, nor do Kung fu, TKD, Baguazhang, Systema, Krav or any other style you want to name. They all teach that you don't want to be on the ground but that if you do go to the ground you regain your feet ASAP.

What you might argue is that the videos shown don't demonstrate what they are trying to show as well as a BJJ black belt might show, but hey, we aren't training to fight BJJ black belts and we aren't planning to fight in the ring. In fact many of us are training with no desire to fight at all. In the unlikely event we might need our fighting skills, the person we are likely to be fighting will most likely be unskilled. To spend years training ground skills in the unlikely event that we will need them to fight on the ground against a skilled grappler is, to me a waste of time, unless that is the training you enjoy and want to do.

So, to those who keep wanting to bag 'anti-grappling', do something positive. Post some videos that will help those of us who don't want to stay on the ground instead of tearing down everything you see.

End of rant!

 

[Vajramusti]

I think this is all a beat up on WC. We had a very long discussion on 'anti-grappling' some time back and a certain member put up videos and tore strips off the lot of it. I thought at the time it was style bashing.

Since then I have had time to think more about it. People bag TMAs for not adapting to new concepts. Here we have a style, WC, adding an element to their training which, for better or worse, they have labeled 'anti-grappling'. Now I might have thought the detractors might have welcomed that as an improvement, but no, it is 'hilarious'.

Having watched a number of these 'anti-grappling' videos I have come to the realisation that 'anti-grappling' is what every style of martial art, apart from those that want to fight on the ground, does, just without the name. Karate doesn't want to stay fighting on the ground, Aikido doesn't want to be fighting on the ground, nor do Kung fu, TKD, Baguazhang, Systema, Krav or any other style you want to name. They all teach that you don't want to be on the ground but that if you do go to the ground you regain your feet ASAP.

What you might argue is that the videos shown don't demonstrate what they are trying to show as well as a BJJ black belt might show, but hey, we aren't training to fight BJJ black belts and we aren't planning to fight in the ring. In fact many of us are training with no desire to fight at all. In the unlikely event we might need our fighting skills, the person we are likely to be fighting will most likely be unskilled. To spend years training ground skills in the unlikely event that we will need them to fight on the ground against a skilled grappler is, to me a waste of time, unless that is the training you enjoy and want to do.

So, to those who keep wanting to bag 'anti-grappling', do something positive. Post some videos that will help those of us who don't want to stay on the ground instead of tearing down everything you see.

End of rant!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont do videos. But I dont use the label anti grappling.And I dont stay on the ground if I end up on the ground.

 

[K-man]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont do videos. But I dont use the label anti grappling.And I dont stay on the ground if I end up on the ground.

And that is exactly what I am saying!

 

[Steve]

I think the real flaw here is simply developing strategies based upon misconceptions, and then using these flawed strategies to develop techniques, which you then teach to others untested. That is all. It could be anti anything, and this could be true. I only see the flaws so well highlighted because I have experience in this area. If a bjjer were to develop an anti-wc curriculum grounded in poor technique and fundamental misunderstandings of the subject, I'm sure the folks here would express similar concerns.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Post some videos that will help those of us who don't want to stay on the ground ...

The "body slam" will be a good "anti-grappling" strategy. The problem is you have to be a good grappler in order to use it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

If a bjjer were to develop an anti-wc curriculum grounded in poor technique and fundamental misunderstandings of the subject, I'm sure the folks here would express similar concerns.

That's true. When I posted my "anti-striking" strategy by using "rhino guard", I got similar concerns as, "It won't work against a good boxer ...".

IMO, "anti-" is a bad word to use. It will upset many people.

 

[K-man]

The "body slam" will be a good "anti-grappling" strategy. The problem is you have to be a good grappler in order to use it.

Mate, it's not even an option for smaller, older or weaker people when confronted by someone bigger, stronger, and younger. To me, that's grappling, not anti-grappling.

 

[K-man]

That's true. When I posted my "anti-striking" strategy by using "rhino guard", I got similar concerns as, "It won't work against a good boxer ...".

IMO, "anti-" is a bad word to use. It will upset many people.

I know you have posted this video many times. For me, it is not something that appeals at all, but if it works for you, great, go for it.

 

[drop bear]

I think this is all a beat up on WC. We had a very long discussion on 'anti-grappling' some time back and a certain member put up videos and tore strips off the lot of it. I thought at the time it was style bashing.

Since then I have had time to think more about it. People bag TMAs for not adapting to new concepts. Here we have a style, WC, adding an element to their training which, for better or worse, they have labeled 'anti-grappling'. Now I might have thought the detractors might have welcomed that as an improvement, but no, it is 'hilarious'.

Having watched a number of these 'anti-grappling' videos I have come to the realisation that 'anti-grappling' is what every style of martial art, apart from those that want to fight on the ground, does, just without the name. Karate doesn't want to stay fighting on the ground, Aikido doesn't want to be fighting on the ground, nor do Kung fu, TKD, Baguazhang, Systema, Krav or any other style you want to name. They all teach that you don't want to be on the ground but that if you do go to the ground you regain your feet ASAP.

What you might argue is that the videos shown don't demonstrate what they are trying to show as well as a BJJ black belt might show, but hey, we aren't training to fight BJJ black belts and we aren't planning to fight in the ring. In fact many of us are training with no desire to fight at all. In the unlikely event we might need our fighting skills, the person we are likely to be fighting will most likely be unskilled. To spend years training ground skills in the unlikely event that we will need them to fight on the ground against a skilled grappler is, to me a waste of time, unless that is the training you enjoy and want to do.

So, to those who keep wanting to bag 'anti-grappling', do something positive. Post some videos that will help those of us who don't want to stay on the ground instead of tearing down everything you see.

End of rant!

The use of dogma.

So wing Chun wants a ground system but wants it to follow the principles of wing chun. And you wind up with a classical mess.

There are plenty of good videos out there. And we have an open mat every Saturday. No shortage of opportunity.

 

[drop bear]

I think the real flaw here is simply developing strategies based upon misconceptions, and then using these flawed strategies to develop techniques, which you then teach to others untested. That is all. It could be anti anything, and this could be true. I only see the flaws so well highlighted because I have experience in this area. If a bjjer were to develop an anti-wc curriculum grounded in poor technique and fundamental misunderstandings of the subject, I'm sure the folks here would express similar concerns.

Yeah mma is now coining the term anti jujitsu a bit. But it is thrown against actual jujitsu guys.

 

[drop bear]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont do videos. But I dont use the label anti grappling.And I dont stay on the ground if I end up on the ground.

You stay on the ground if you cant wrestle.

 

[Danny T]

In fighting there is no such thing. Even boxers grapple. Standing clinch work Is Grappling, Lop Sao Is Grappling!!
Grappling is to grasp, seize, hold, clinch etc. be it standing or on the ground.
He calls what he does Anti-Grappling yet he shows numerous examples (poor but non the less) of grappling as anti grappling???