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

[drop bear]

So to learn a language you just sit down and study a dictionary (not a translated one at that, after all that is where the training and self experience comes in) until the end of time?

Studying a form would be like reading the words of another language to yourself over and over. Trying to use a technique from a form would be like picking a word and guessing what it means before putting it in a sentence. Without grammar or even a slight hint of its actual meaning the likelyhood of it being the correct word would be very slim to none.

That is what training is for. You should have known this being a martial artist yourself.

Dictionary's evolve.

 

[Tez3]

I'm not sure how one can criticise a martial art one doesn't know or train in. it seems to me that if it's not BJJ the style/art is considered to be rubbish. It's simply a case really of 'my style is best yours is old fashioned and rubbish' with these guys.

 

[Hanzou]

So to learn a language you just sit down and study a dictionary (not a translated one at that, after all that is where the training and self experience comes in) until the end of time?

Studying a form would be like reading the words of another language to yourself over and over. Trying to use a technique from a form would be like picking a word and guessing what it means before putting it in a sentence. Without grammar or even a slight hint of its actual meaning the likelyhood of it being the correct word would be very slim to none.

That is what training is for. You should have known this being a martial artist yourself.

As Drop Bear pointed out, language, and consequently dictionaries evolve and adapt over time. If you holed yourself up in a room and just studied colonial American English, and then started trying to communicate with people in modern America, people wouldn't know what you're talking about. The American language has changed significantly over the last 300+ years. Heck, it's changed significantly in the last 100 years. We've added new words, while many words have fallen out of use.

So studying a form is like learning a language from decades or even centuries ago. The problem arises when you attempt to use that language against a modern language that evolves rapidly in a changing environment.

 

[Hanzou]

I'm not sure how one can criticise a martial art one doesn't know or train in. it seems to me that if it's not BJJ the style/art is considered to be rubbish. It's simply a case really of 'my style is best yours is old fashioned and rubbish' with these guys.

I'm pretty sure that wrestling, sambo, judo, and other grappling styles have been mentioned, not just Bjj.

Further, evidence has been displayed showing these TMAs responding to grappling using their "anti-grappling" methods, and failing miserably.

No one is saying that the arts themselves are "rubbish". What I'm saying is that the anti-grappling portions of these arts are rubbish. Oftentimes the anti-grappling portions are completely fabricated nonsense concocted by modern exponents trying to retain students in a rising MMA/Bjj landscape.

 

[Tez3]

What I'm saying is that the anti-grappling portions of these arts are rubbish. Oftentimes the anti-grappling portions are completely fabricated nonsense concocted by modern exponents trying to retain students in a rising MMA/Bjj landscape.

and you know this to be true of every style and every practitioner? or is the truth more like it's true only of those non experts who insist on posting videos of their inadequacies on You Tube?

 

[Phobius]

Further, evidence has been displayed showing these TMAs responding to grappling using their "anti-grappling" methods, and failing miserably.

Funny enough this statement is a matter of opinion. When a style shows something that works then you say "this is taken from <insert grappling style>".

I changed my post, simply because I feel your issue might be that you spend too much time on YouTube. Not seen more than a single old video that even slightly reflect what I train in my style... and my style currently is WT. Which should have many students.

(My sifu believes that we should never take something as truth unless we can validate it ourselves, so trial and error)

 

[Tez3]

My sifu believes that we should never take something as truth unless we can validate it ourselves, so trial and error)

What an eminently sensible person!

 

[Hanzou]

and you know this to be true of every style and every practitioner?

Every traditional style that claims to have anti-grappling techniques that can disable grapplers and MMA practicioners?

Yes.

 

[Hanzou]

Funny enough this statement is a matter of opinion. When a style shows something that works then you say "this is taken from <insert grappling style>".

When we see stuff like this;

or this;



It's not a matter of opinion.

I changed my post, simply because I feel your issue might be that you spend too much time on YouTube. Not seen more than a single old video that even slightly reflect what I train in my style... and my style currently is WT. Which should have many students.

You need to read more closely. I have no issue with WT. I have issue with WT anti-grappling.

 

[JowGaWolf]

In kung fu, there is a statement that goes something like this "If you have a strong stance then you can prevent someone from taking you to the ground." For many years I was trying to understand what this means because it didn't make sense that I could still keep my root if someone is lifting me. A few months ago I think I discovered what this refers to.

I think the statement of preventing the take down refers to the height of a stance. From what I can tell there is an optimum height for shooting. The effectiveness of the shooting technique is greatly reduced if the grappler shoots too high or too low. Shooting too high puts the grappler in danger for various short range strikes and martial arts counters like joint locks and throws. It also means that the grappler is no longer able to by pass strikes making it difficult to grab the target. If a shooter is shooting too low then they are basically shooting at an angle where they are scrapping their faces on the ground. Remember the tactic of a grappling shoot is to go under the punches.

During the sparring exercise (which only allowed punches and grappling takedowns) I decided to test two different stances, the first stance was a mid height horse stance, the second stance was a low horse stance. The mid height horse stance worked well but my opponents still wanted to shoot for the take down, but when I took the low horse stance the shooting attempts almost stopped completely except for 1 attempt. This low horse stance was used on than about 5 of their fighters. Including one fighter who only tried do take downs. While sitting in the low horse stance I noticed that they were hesitant to go in for the shoot. I reviewed the videos of our sparring session and soon realized that the hesitation was because my low stance put my fists at their optimum level to shoot at. In order for them to shoot they would need to shoot at a level that was too low in order to get under my punches. Even if they did shoot I would still be too low for them to deal with my weight properly. A low stance also meant that my legs aren't close enough to grab both. I know the stance made a big difference because my fellow Jow Ga brothers took a different approach (using only a high stance) and were taken down. The only significant difference between the what they did and what I did was the stance.

The downside to my stance is that it burned a lot of energy to maintain it, so now I have a better understanding of why my Sifu said I should be able to hold my stances for 3 minutes. Now the statement "If you have a strong stance then you can prevent someone from taking you to the ground." makes more sense to me.

As for the one guy that tried to shoot on me while in a low stance, he was unsuccessful with the take down. He was able to grab one leg and my waist when I moved forward to do a low sleep. Because I tried to execute the sweep at a low stance he had to shoot lower than he should to manage.

If I've made this confusing then the short explanation is to think of yourself lifting a 100 pound heavy bag by shooting waist height. This should be easy because you can use your legs to help in a lift. Now shoot leg height on the heavy bag and try lifting it, Still easy right because you can lift the bag in a manner that causes the top weight to fall backwards making it easier to lift the bag. Now take the same bag and lay it down. Now shoot on that. Let me know how that works. This is what the low stance does to the shoot, but without strong legs, a person won't be able to sit in that stance for long.

So technically I should be able to beat the take down with my stance for the amount of time that I'm able to keep the low stance.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

So technically I should be able to beat the take down with my stance for the amount of time that I'm able to keep the low stance.

There is no perfect stance to deal with throw. No matter how you may stance, the vertical line from the line defined by your feet is your weak balance angle.

For example, if you stand in horse stance, a

- leg hook on your leg, and
- hand push on your shoulder/neck,

can take you down, no matter how strong your horse stance may have.

As long as you put weight on your leading leg, your opponent can take you down by "foot sweep".

Also your high, middle, low, wide, narrow, strong, weak "horse stance" is not going to help you to stop this throw either.

The best defense against take down is to "change" your stance from one into another at the right moment with good timing.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

When we see stuff like this;

or this;



It's not a matter of opinion.



You need to read more closely. I have no issue with WT. I have issue with WT anti-grappling.

Besides "single leg" and "double legs", there are over 300 different throws. Even if you have developed some skill to deal with "leg/legs shooting", you still need to develop other skills to deal with other throws (take downs).

 

[JowGaWolf]

There is no perfect stance to deal with throw. No matter how you may stance, the vertical line from the line defined by your feet is your weak balance angle..

None of the guys were doing a horse stance. My horse stance doesn't face opponents like that, mainly because that's a good way to get kicked in the groin. So that inner hook wouldn't work. Trying that inner hook would put that person in the range of my big punches.

As long as you put weight on your leading leg, your opponent can take you down by "foot sweep"

Sweeping my horse stance doesn't work either. The low stance makes it easier for me to see sweeps. It also give me more than enough room to retreat. If the sweep is too telegraphed then that low stance allows me to do a heel kick while my opponent is on one leg trying to sweep me. I'm making this statement from experience in doing it. There are other option as well such as pulling back into a cat stance. I do sweeps all the time and that sweep video looks questionable as to realism of the sweep being demonstrated. Especially the one at (0:30)

Again I'm staying this because I've dealt with these attacks before. While in a low stance

None of those videos showed the attacker having to deal with punch and kicks. I think there is an assumption about the saying where people assume that the person in a strong stance is not punching back or kicking, or doing anything else other than just standing there. This is where people go wrong in trying to defeat something with a strong stance. Nothing in that saying states that the person isn't moving in a low stance, transitioning into different stances, attacking, or counter attacking. Most people just automatically assume that there's this kung fu guy just standing there while someone attacks without striking back (similar to the videos that you showed.)

 

[JowGaWolf]

Kung Fu wang
This is a video of me doing some light sparring. Take notice of how my body doesn't face my sparring partner the same way as the guys in your video face each other. I'm smaller guy doing the sweeps. I will remove the video once you have seen it.
Me doing some light sparring

 

[Jake104]

Dictionary's evolve.

i think twerk is in the dictionary now?

Syllabification: twerk
Pronunciation: /twərk/

(also twirk)informal
Definition of twerk in English:
verb
[NO OBJECT]
Back to top
A dance or dance move involving thrusting hip movements and a low, squatting stance:between flaunting their curves and doing a little twerk here and there, the dancers' rendition of the video was quite impressive
------------------------------------------------

Same thing girls used to do in the 70's 80's and 90's. Shaking of the buttocks. But now the kids call it twerking. Did shaking the buttocks evolve? Is BJJ that much different than JJJ ground game from 100 years ago? In both cases was the wheel really reinvented?

 

[Jake104]

How dare I compare JJJ or Kosen Judo to BJJ. Let the hate begin.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

This is a video of me doing some light sparring.

The clips that I put up was "skill developing - your opponent gives you that opportunity" clips. The clip that you put up is "skill testing - your opponent won't give you any opportunity" clip. It's apple and orange comparison. You have to "develop" your skill before you can "test" it.

When your opponent doesn't give you that opportunity, you have to create that opportunity by yourself. For example, if you want to "hook" your opponent's left leg when he has right leg forward, you will attack his right leg first, when he steps his right leg back, his left leg will be exposed for your attack.

 

[JowGaWolf]

You have to "develop" your skill before you can "test" it

Kung Fu Wang.
My sifu doesn't teach his students this way. We develop our skills by doing:
1. Forms
2. Sparring

We don't test our skills. According to your definition of "skill testing" the opponent won't give you any opportunity" For us that's not testing, that's the reality of a fight and my school trains based on the reality of a fight. The reality of all fights is this: Your enemy / opponent isn't going to willingly give you an opportunity to do them harm. Because of this reality we develop our skills by not willingly giving our sparring partners the opportunity. I don't see how it's apples and oranges. Not all offensive techniques will work on the same defense. The videos won't that you show won't work on me because of the way I face my opponent. The only way those techniques would work on me is if I face my opponent in a similar manner that is shown in the video.

I'm not saying trips and throws won't work against me, I'm just saying those techniques won't work against the type of stance that I take. There are other throws and trips that work against my stance but if I think those are coming, then I change my stance, but still keep it low.

 

[Hanzou]

Is BJJ that much different than JJJ ground game from 100 years ago? In both cases was the wheel really reinvented?

Uh yeah, Bjj ground work is very different from ground work 100 years ago. There wasn't even a closed guard system in Bjj until the latter half of the 20th century, The Half Guard system didn't develop until the late 80s, The Triangle Choke wasn't invented until about the 1930s or 40s, and on and on and on.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

My sifu doesn't teach his students this way. We develop our skills by doing:
1. Forms
2. Sparring.

No matter what MA style that you may train, I don't believe you can develop skill just from solo form to sparring without going through "partner drill".