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

[Vajramusti]

The problem is that the techniques aren't sound, and the training method is pretty useless.

Again, if you're so worried about grappling that you need to construct an entire sub-system to address it, you should probably learn grappling first. Preferably Bjj, since its so popular and technical.

 

[Vajramusti]

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

??????????????????????????

 

[Kwan Sau]

and welcome to page 12....

 

[Xue Sheng]

Interesting thing is, we are at page 12 and I am still not exactly sure what "Anti-grappling" is supposed to be. Is it more grappling or is it something else. Look at some videos from Tim Cartmel and you see basic grappling to combat grappling, look at the wing chun group I use to train with and they had kicks from the ground, as to many CMA styles, that are used to prevent ground fighting if you fall down, look at an old CMA view of things and you get Qinna is the defense against grappling and if you listen to the guy I briefly trained JKD with and he said he hated grappling but he knew enough about it to knew how to get off the ground....

Now if we can get by the jabs, put downs and other useless bit of this thread.......What exactly is anti-grappling supposed to be?

 

[Vajramusti]

Interesting thing is, we are at page 12 and I am still not exactly sure what "Anti-grappling" is supposed to be. Is it more grappling or is it something else. Look at some videos from Tim Cartmel and you see basic grappling to combat grappling, look at the wing chun group I use to train with and they had kicks from the ground, as to many CMA styles, that are used to prevent ground fighting if you fall down, look at an old CMA view of things and you get Qinna is the defense against grappling and if you listen to the guy I briefly trained JKD with and he said he hated grappling but he knew enough about it to knew how to get off the ground....

Now if we can get by the jabs, put downs and other useless bit of this thread.......What exactly is anti-grappling supposed to be?

-------------------------------------------------
Another wandering thread. But- anti grappling is an empty label means different things to different people.
I am repeating from past posts. In the wing chun that I do-the better folks work on "body unity". Wing chun prefers not to deliberately go to the ground...our stance training and dynamics and foot work and body unity
is quite effective. But if one is taken to the ground or one slips and falls- body unity, understanding the forces at work including gravity and the combinations of major wing chun principles is quite helpful.
I don't recruit via chat lists but I do show my serious students what to do.

 

[Hanzou]

Interesting thing is, we are at page 12 and I am still not exactly sure what "Anti-grappling" is supposed to be. Is it more grappling or is it something else. Look at some videos from Tim Cartmel and you see basic grappling to combat grappling, look at the wing chun group I use to train with and they had kicks from the ground, as to many CMA styles, that are used to prevent ground fighting if you fall down, look at an old CMA view of things and you get Qinna is the defense against grappling and if you listen to the guy I briefly trained JKD with and he said he hated grappling but he knew enough about it to knew how to get off the ground....

Tim Cartmel's stuff isn't bad actually. Some of his reversals are actually based on sound principals and concepts. Additionally he states that his method isn't for use against skilled grapplers. Considering that a seasoned Bjj white belt a six-month MMAer, or High school wrestler could counter pretty much everything he's doing, it's an omission that I respect. At least his guys are attacking in a way an untrained grappler would attack. At least the guys he's working with are bigger and heavier than he is.

Now if we can get by the jabs, put downs and other useless bit of this thread.......What exactly is anti-grappling supposed to be?

Anti grappling is a sub-system designed to counter the rise of MMA. I would say that stuff such as Tim Cartmell's is solid. However the majority of anti-grappling is simply bad MA. Especially when they claim that what they're doing works against skilled grapplers. Wing Chun anti-grappling is just one of many.

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

??????????????????????????

What's your question?

 

[Xue Sheng]

-------------------------------------------------
Another wandering thread. But- anti grappling is an empty label means different things to different people.
I am repeating from past posts. In the wing chun that I do-the better folks work on "body unity". Wing chun prefers not to deliberately go to the ground...our stance training and dynamics and foot work and body unity
is quite effective. But if one is taken to the ground or one slips and falls- body unity, understanding the forces at work including gravity and the combinations of major wing chun principles is quite helpful.
I don't recruit via chat lists but I do show my serious students what to do.

Kind of what my Taiji sifu says, fighting standing up or laying down, same principals, although I agree with that I also feel there is a little more to it, if we are talking a skilled MMA or BJJ person.

Tim Cartmel's stuff isn't bad actually. Some of his reversals are actually based on sound principals and concepts. Additionally he states that his method isn't for use against skilled grapplers. Considering that a seasoned Bjj white belt a six-month MMAer, or High school wrestler could counter pretty much everything he's doing, it's an omission that I respect. At least his guys are attacking in a way an untrained grappler would attack. At least the guys he's working with are bigger and heavier than he is.

Tim Cartmell is a CMA guy and a BJJ guy. I suspect a good Qinna person could do as well too

Anti grappling is a sub-system designed to counter the rise of MMA. I would say that stuff such as Tim Cartmell's is solid. However the majority of anti-grappling is simply bad MA. Especially when they claim that what they're doing works against skilled grapplers. Wing Chun anti-grappling is just one of many.

Most CMA styles have something to deal with the ground, but it is not exactly grappling, it is more to how the heck to get off it because in old school CMA ground means death. Many were training and fighting people with all sorts of nasty weapons. That however does not make it superior to MMA or BJJ grappling, it just means they don't like being on the ground and getting off of it is more to qinna, but many CMA styles today do not train much qinna either

What's your question?

Not sure where that above quote came from since I do not see it in the post, but it does show up when I hit reply and it gives me quotes.

My question is as stated in post #224; What exactly is anti-grappling supposed to be?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This sound like a good anti-grappling clip to me. What do you guys think?

- A shoots in,
- B spins with an over hook,
- B then finish A with a reverse head lock.

Please notice the whole counter work because B has the knowledge to use "over hook". Without using the "over hook", B may not be able to spin his body and reverse his defense into offense.

 

[geezer]

Most CMA styles have something to deal with the ground, but it is not exactly grappling, it is more to how the heck to get off it because in old school CMA ground means death.

Death! Oh that's a relief. I always thought TCMAs hated going to the ground because it meant poo.

You know, 19th Century China with narrow, crowded streets, poor sewage systems, lots of animals, ...dogs, horses, donkeys, oxen... not to mention chamber pots, etc. ...and consequently lots of poo underfoot. Somehow I can't imagine a gentile master Yip rolling in that. I wouldn't want to either. I really hate just stepping in poo. Forget about rolling in it!

And I would definitely leave my street shoes at the door.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Death! Oh that's a relief. I always thought TCMAs hated going to the ground because it meant poo.

You know, 19th Century China with narrow, crowded streets, poor sewage systems, lots of animals, ...dogs, horses, donkeys, oxen... not to mention chamber pots, etc. ...and consequently lots of poo underfoot. Somehow I can't imagine a gentile master Yip rolling in that. I wouldn't want to either. I really hate just stepping in poo. Forget about rolling in it!

And I would definitely leave my street shoes at the door.

I'm sure that was a factor as well

 

[Hanzou]

Kind of what my Taiji sifu says, fighting standing up or laying down, same principals, although I agree with that I also feel there is a little more to it, if we are talking a skilled MMA or BJJ person.

Yeah, no offense to your Taiji Sifu, but if you tried to use standing principles on the ground, you're going to be in big trouble. When I first started Bjj, I naturally tried to utilize Karate principles, and I got effectively shut down. The shut down included white belts with less than 3-6 months experience. They just don't apply, so you need to adjust.

That's one of my biggest concerns with some of the content in those videos. I've seen one anti-grappling vid where a guy is in another person's guard, and he attempts to do some sort of punching combo to get out of it. The entire premise of that entire set up is wrong. For starters, no street thug or even MMA person is going to put you in a guard to attack you. The Guard is a position you enter when someone is pressuring you and you end up on your back. No one is purposely going to fall to their back in a street fight.

However, if by some 0.0000001% chance you run across some thug who grabs you, and then immediately does a Guard pull, then you're dealing with someone highly skilled in the Guard, and the stuff in those videos isn't going to work anyway. Grabbing someone's nuts? Trying to poke out their eyes? Biting them? Complete nonsense. You're going to get choked out, or get your shoulder or elbow dislocated before you even knew what happened.

The real question is why are there so many videos of non-grapplers fighting out of Guards? Simple, because they watched Bjj or MMA on video, and don't understand the purpose behind the position. If you don't even understand the WHY someone is doing something, how do you expect to know how to counter it?

Tim Cartmell is a CMA guy and a BJJ guy. I suspect a good Qinna person could do as well too

That doesn't surprise me. His methodology is very similar to Bjj's.

Most CMA styles have something to deal with the ground, but it is not exactly grappling, it is more to how the heck to get off it because in old school CMA ground means death. Many were training and fighting people with all sorts of nasty weapons. That however does not make it superior to MMA or BJJ grappling, it just means they don't like being on the ground and getting off of it is more to qinna, but many CMA styles today do not train much qinna either

While I think its a good goal to try to escape the ground as quickly as possible, I think its more important to learn how to be comfortable from that position if your first, second, or third escape attempt fails. My concern is that people who's goal is to escape the ground as quickly as possible become frustrated just as quickly. I've been doing this for almost 9 years, and occasionally some of MY escapes don't work even against novices. However, since I'm comfortable in bad positions, I can transfer to a different movement, or even go for a full counter.

Not sure where that above quote came from since I do not see it in the post, but it does show up when I hit reply and it gives me quotes.

My question is as stated in post #224; What exactly is anti-grappling supposed to be?

I was responding to Vaj.

You've already answered your own question when you mentioned Cartmell. That to me is proper anti-grappling.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Yeah, no offense to your Taiji Sifu, but if you tried to use standing principles on the ground, you're going to be in big trouble. When I first started Bjj, I naturally tried to utilize Karate principles, and I got effectively shut down. The shut down included white belts with less than 3-6 months experience. They just don't apply, so you need to adjust.

No offense to Karate, but Karate ain't Taiji either. But as I said in my post, I do believe there is a little more to it.

That's one of my biggest concerns with some of the content in those videos. I've seen one anti-grappling vid where a guy is in another person's guard, and he attempts to do some sort of punching combo to get out of it. The entire premise of that entire set up is wrong. For starters, no street thug or even MMA person is going to put you in a guard to attack you. The Guard is a position you enter when someone is pressuring you and you end up on your back. No one is purposely going to fall to their back in a street fight.

However, if by some 0.0000001% chance you run across some thug who grabs you, and then immediately does a Guard pull, then you're dealing with someone highly skilled in the Guard, and the stuff in those videos isn't going to work anyway. Grabbing someone's nuts? Trying to poke out their eyes? Biting them? Complete nonsense. You're going to get choked out, or get your shoulder or elbow dislocated before you even knew what happened.

The real question is why are there so many videos of non-grapplers fighting out of Guards? Simple, because they watched Bjj or MMA on video, and don't understand the purpose behind the position. If you don't even understand the WHY someone is doing something, how do you expect to know how to counter it?

Thanks for the critique of the video, but I never did take is all that seriously and to be honest I take very little seriously I see on YouTube.

But to stance; go after a skilled Police/Military Sanda person and you won't see a guard at all, they fight from whatever position they are in at the moment and they will not care standup, ground or anything else. Go after any good CMA person and they will not go into a guard stance, there is no time, so BJJ and MMA are not the founders of that.

While I think its a good goal to try to escape the ground as quickly as possible, I think its more important to learn how to be comfortable from that position if your first, second, or third escape attempt fails. My concern is that people who's goal is to escape the ground as quickly as possible become frustrated just as quickly. I've been doing this for almost 9 years, and occasionally some of MY escapes don't work even against novices. However, since I'm comfortable in bad positions, I can transfer to a different movement, or even go for a full counter.

Like I said, does not make it superior, just means they don't like being on the ground. But to be honest I am not convinced that a good Qinna person could not get off the ground of break, dislocate, or injure someone that tried to keep him there either, this also is not saying it is superior to a skilled BJJ person, it is just saying they have skills to and they should not be taken lightly or look down upon because they are not BJJ. But then high level Qinna people are by far fewer than competent BJJ people. .

 

[drop bear]

Kind of what my Taiji sifu says, fighting standing up or laying down, same principals, although I agree with that I also feel there is a little more to it, if we are talking a skilled MMA or BJJ person.

If the principles were the same you would automatically be able to fight on the ground. And competent strikers generally cant unless they understand the principles.

 

[drop bear]

While I think its a good goal to try to escape the ground as quickly as possible, I think its more important to learn how to be comfortable from that position if your first, second, or third escape attempt fails. My concern is that people who's goal is to escape the ground as quickly as possible become frustrated just as quickly. I've been doing this for almost 9 years, and occasionally some of MY escapes don't work even against novices. However, since I'm comfortable in bad positions, I can transfer to a different movement, or even go for a full counter.

We are trained to not be comfortable on our backs. And that is because of punching and that the guy on top can also grapple. Which makes subs a lot harder.

But if we include punching then escapes with intensity has a new role. If you are holding me down you cant hit me as easily.

Anti grappling should aim to make you uncontrollable down there. So rather than it being some half baked notion. It becomes a change in tactics. Like for example getting that wrestling turtle and stand rather than re guard and going for subs.

 

[drop bear]

Pretty much anybody fighting ben askren has to employ the anti grapple.

Then he got eye poked.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Pretty much anybody fighting ben askren has to employ the anti grapple.

Then he got eye poked.

The guy with the blue gloves has good anti-grappling skill. Everytime the other guy shoots in, he can manage to spin his body and end to be on top. Unfortunately, that "body spin" is not normally trained in most of the striking art.

So my question is, if there are some anti-grappling skills that's not noramlly trained in the striking art then how effecive their anti-striking skill can be?

 

[drop bear]

The guy with the blue gloves has good anti-grappling skill. Everytime the other guy shoots in, he can manage to spin his body and end to be on top. Unfortunately, that "body spin" is not normally trained in most of the striking art.

So my question is, if there are some anti-grappling skills that's not noramlly trained in the striking art then how effecive their anti-striking skill can be?

Sorry I don't understand

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Sorry I don't understand

- Your opponent holds on your waist and tries to take you down.
- Your body is leaning back in a 45 degree angle.
- Instate of falling backward and let your opponent to land on top of you, you "spin your body" and end with you on top of your opponent.

It's like to throw a cat in the air, that cat will flip it's body, and land on it's feet. This is not the skill that most strikers will spend their training time to develop.

The "body spin" can be seen in this clip too. He didn't end with on top of his opponent, but at least he ended witth next to his opponent and not under his opponent. IMO, don't let your opponent to land on top of you is an important skill. That "over hook leg lift" was the 1st "leg shooting counter" that I had learned back when I was in Taiwan.

 

[drop bear]

- Your opponent holds on your waist and tries to take you down.
- Your body is leaning back in a 45 degree angle.
- Instate of falling backward and let your opponent to land on top of you, you "spin your body" and end with you on top of your opponent.

It's like to throw a cat in the air, that cat will flip it's body, and land on it's feet. This is not the skill that most strikers will spend their training time to develop.

The "body spin" can be seen in this clip too. He didn't end with on top of his opponent, but at least he ended witth next to his opponent and not under his opponent. IMO, don't let your opponent to land on top of you is an important skill. That "over hook leg lift" was the 1st "leg shooting counter" that I had learned back when I was in Taiwan.

Yeah the grappling principles and striking principles are different. Even very simple ideas like the guy on the bottom trying to hug down the guy on top. Works stand up. Doesn't escape mount.

In fact escape mount is a good one because there are specific defences and all the flailing around in the world wont find them by accident.

 

[Jake104]

If the principles were the same you would automatically be able to fight on the ground. And competent strikers generally cant unless they understand the principles.

No offense, but again another statement that makes no sense? Let say I learn how to drive a car. Later I decide To race in a formula one car. Then I jump in a off-road Baja 1000 truck. Then I decide to race Nascar? Do the principles really changes? Or do I just have to adapt those same principles to that given situation? Of coarse Im not going to get my learners permit this week and next week race top fuel dragsters. But the principles are still there. Principles that fundamentally do not change. Instead can be built upon.