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

[Phobius]

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.

Are you sure then that it was invented at this point? I have heard many claim, even from BJJ/GJJ, that 100 years ago that most of jiu jitsu knowledge had become fractioned such as parts of it in styles as judo and aikido. Due to historical events or simply sports.

First when jiu jitsu was introduced to Gracie again did it come to life anew as a full fledged system. Not seen it stated that it was ever invented by Gracie. Helio did perfect the techniques but not seen anything as to whether the techniques were rediscovered or reinvented.

As for the triangle choke, noone knows when it was invented, or rather I do not know. However it was caught in video already in 1920 for the first time by a judo master I believe.

 

[JowGaWolf]

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

Well today is your lucky day. Those sweeps that you saw in the video were always trained in form and then directly to sparring. The punches were the same way. The video that you saw was 6 months after joining the school. All of those attacks that you saw me do were learned without a "partner drill." We learn technique, through repetitive practice without partners. This allows us to focus on the technique and not on trying to hit someone. Then when it's time to train on actually using the technique we spar.

The only time we do anything that is close to "partner drill" as you describe it is when we are trying to get a basic understanding of how something works. We also use partner drills for is Chin-na, throws, and anti-grappling because for us, those require the ability to sense movement and weight.

It may be difficult to believe but this is how we train.

 

[drop bear]

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.

 

[Hanzou]

Are you sure then that it was invented at this point? I have heard many claim, even from BJJ/GJJ, that 100 years ago that most of jiu jitsu knowledge had become fractioned such as parts of it in styles as judo and aikido. Due to historical events or simply sports.

First when jiu jitsu was introduced to Gracie again did it come to life anew as a full fledged system. Not seen it stated that it was ever invented by Gracie. Helio did perfect the techniques but not seen anything as to whether the techniques were rediscovered or reinvented.

As for the triangle choke, noone knows when it was invented, or rather I do not know. However it was caught in video already in 1920 for the first time by a judo master I believe.

No one knows exactly when it was invented, just that a Judoka invented it in the early 20th century. My point was that you wouldn't be seeing a triangle choke in early Bjj because they didn't know the move. Further, since it's introduction, several forms of entry and application have developed around that technique. The same applies to the closed guard and the half guard. While the position itself may have existed for centuries, the system built around those positions are a very recent development.

The point is that Bjj today looks very different from Bjj 100 years ago.

 

[Phobius]

I agree, and this is a point I think many TMAs fail to understand. TMA today looks very different to what it was 100 years ago. All arts did. Problem is that there is no way around such a change because you train with your master, not with your masters master and so on...

Meaning you only get the last interpretation. Each generation will increase the complexity and diversity of your art. Some versions will disappear after some generations and others will increase in validity or simply through good marketing.

Today with all the information sharing and YouTube I believe such a change to increase in speed. Problem however with those two gifs you shared was that first of all it was two bad ones and most likely at least one of them was very old. Things dont look the same today as it does in the videos you watch on YouTube.

Even worse are that some masters (not styles) seem to wish to so called "undo" the change that occurs in their style and most often by "reinventing" some secret technique to be the be all master all technique to defeat the world and end poverty. I am fairly certain these things exist in BJJ as well in regards to people becoming too obsessed with the sport part and get weird opinion on the self defense aspect of it.

We are all in the same boat, styles always change. Whether it is changing back to something it once was or to something completely new is not something I would have any clue on.

Therefore I say again, validate your own knowledge and trust yourself. The rest matters not.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Wrestlers and grapplers have been using the low stance for many centuries as a standard and I think the purpose of the low stance was lost for many Chinese Martial arts style even though practitioners of chinese martial arts are always showcasing low stances in their forms. When I see pictures like the one you posted then it begins to make sense to why so many CMA's have a low stances in their fighting system. I know the function of the low stance is lost on most CMA practitioners just from watching all of the youtube fights bjj vs kung fu, and kung fu sparring competitions where the CMA guy is always taken down while they are in a high stance.

You rarely see a kung fu practitioner take a low stance in a fight even though almost every CMA practitioner can spew with pride of why stances are so important. Unfortunately none of them will say that the low stance helps to address those who want to grapple, but that's because they don't understand the purpose of the low stance.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Meaning you only get the last interpretation. Each generation will increase the complexity and diversity of your art. Some versions will disappear after some generations and others will increase in validity or simply through good marketing.

This is very true, this is why Jow Ga looks slightly different depending on the lineage and why the same form has different variations.

Problem however with those two gifs you shared was that first of all it was two bad ones and most likely at least one of them was very old.

I can only speak about the gif for the Jow Ga, The technique that he was using was not a grappling or anti-grappling technique. What that Sifu did was to use a striking technique against a grappling attack. Our anti-grappling technique when done in form has this characteristic of both arms out in front, (see 0:28 - 0:29) In this particular video my SiGung is only doing part of the actual technique. The stance that is done does not go with anti-grappling technique that he is showing with both arms out. The reason why is because Jow Ga is big on not showing how things work to the public, this way the meaning will be lost to anyone trying to learn from the video. But if you do see someone do that in any of the Jow Ga forms, then that's what they are showing, part of our anti-grappling technique. Notice that it's not a strike to the face or the body

 

[Hanzou]

I agree, and this is a point I think many TMAs fail to understand. TMA today looks very different to what it was 100 years ago. All arts did. Problem is that there is no way around such a change because you train with your master, not with your masters master and so on...

Meaning you only get the last interpretation. Each generation will increase the complexity and diversity of your art. Some versions will disappear after some generations and others will increase in validity or simply through good marketing.

Today with all the information sharing and YouTube I believe such a change to increase in speed. Problem however with those two gifs you shared was that first of all it was two bad ones and most likely at least one of them was very old. Things dont look the same today as it does in the videos you watch on YouTube.

I disagree. You can still purchase those Victor Gutierrez Anti-grappling DVDs online, and those DVDs carry an extremely high rating among its purchasers. So not only are people still buying those DVDs, but they actually believe that those flawed anti-grappling techniques are effective. I seriously doubt Gutierrez, or Boztepe are saying that the anti-grappling stuff they created is nonsense. In fact, I'm pretty sure both are still teaching that silliness to a new generation of their students.

That Jow Ga vid is from 2013.

Even worse are that some masters (not styles) seem to wish to so called "undo" the change that occurs in their style and most often by "reinventing" some secret technique to be the be all master all technique to defeat the world and end poverty. I am fairly certain these things exist in BJJ as well in regards to people becoming too obsessed with the sport part and get weird opinion on the self defense aspect of it.

In the case of Bjj, that style changes based on pressure from outside forces, and much of that arises from its tradition of testing its effectiveness as often as possible. So Bjj has changed or added to over the decades based on whatever is pressuring its effectiveness. If something doesn't work, its forgotten, or tossed aside. If someone comes up with an innovative way to do a new hold, choke, guard, etc. It will be rapidly adopted and become part of the style.

Take half guard for example. That hold has been in Judo for decades, but Judoka (and Bjjers) only used it as a holding position for time to run out. Eventually it disappeared from Judo almost entirely. It was never seen as a go-to move until the 1990s when a Bjj sport practitioner used it offensively because he had a damaged knee and couldn't use full guard. Later Eddie Bravo and Lucas Leites adapted the half guard for MMA. Now there are practitioners who base their entire fighting style off of half guard, and an entire sub-system of techniques have arisen from that one neglected position. All of which is now a part of Bjj.

Stuff like that simply doesn't happen in TMAs.

 

[geezer]

In the case of Bjj, that style changes based on pressure from outside forces, and much of that arises from its tradition of testing its effectiveness as often as possible. So Bjj has changed or added to over the decades based on whatever is pressuring its effectiveness. If something doesn't work, its forgotten, or tossed aside. If someone comes up with an innovative way to do a new hold, choke, guard, etc. It will be rapidly adopted and become part of the style.

...Stuff like that simply doesn't happen in TMAs.

This isn't just the case with BJJ, it's true of every competitive sport. If it's an activity that's open and out there being tested regularly by a lot of people, it will rapidly evolve and improve.

TMAs are just the opposite. They are not typically so open and regularly tested against non-traditional challeges, so there is no basis for evolution. Instead you get hypothetical debates over whose sifu or sensei is more awesome, who has the deadliest secret technique, yada yada yada.

Traditions are fine, but there is a downside to being overly secretive, rigid, authoritarian, and generally being "stuck in your ways".


...er now you see why I wasn't always so popular in my old WT assn.

 

[drop bear]

Wrestlers and grapplers have been using the low stance for many centuries as a standard and I think the purpose of the low stance was lost for many Chinese Martial arts style even though practitioners of chinese martial arts are always showcasing low stances in their forms. When I see pictures like the one you posted then it begins to make sense to why so many CMA's have a low stances in their fighting system. I know the function of the low stance is lost on most CMA practitioners just from watching all of the youtube fights bjj vs kung fu, and kung fu sparring competitions where the CMA guy is always taken down while they are in a high stance.

You rarely see a kung fu practitioner take a low stance in a fight even though almost every CMA practitioner can spew with pride of why stances are so important. Unfortunately none of them will say that the low stance helps to address those who want to grapple, but that's because they don't understand the purpose of the low stance.

A low stance stops you striking as well as you could. So if you are not facing good takedowns there is no point. If I do Thai. Imfloat my front foot.

Mma has a half and half.

 

[Jake104]

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.

Cool aid anyone???

 

[Jake104]

 

[Jake104]

Triangles start @11:30 mark

Still think the wheel was reinvented? It looks like circa 1960. Maybe they learned that from the Gracie's IDK?

 

[JowGaWolf]

Traditions are fine, but there is a downside to being overly secretive, rigid, authoritarian, and generally being "stuck in your ways".

I agree which is why I'm glad that we spar with other fighters

A low stance stops you striking as well as you could. So if you are not facing good takedowns there is no point. If I do Thai. Imfloat my front foot.

Mma has a half and half.

The horse stance has variable height. The only thing you can't do in a horse stance is initiate a proper shoot for the legs or waist. (but I could be wrong), but considering that no one train how to shoot by using a horse stance, my guess would be that it doesn't work.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Triangles start @11:30 mark

Still think the wheel was reinvented? It looks like circa 1960. Maybe they learned that from the Gracie's IDK?

Someone form the Gracie camp was quoted that the triangle choke has always been a part of jui jitsu

It is a common misconception that the triangle did not exist in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu before Rolls Gracie, who (according to some circles) would have found the technique in an old Judo book. When asked about the veracity of this statement, Mario Tallarico, Rolls Gracie’s second black belt, said:

"The triangle was a very old technique from Judo that was used in Jiu Jitsu from the beginning. As it was not associated with the armbar or the crossing of the arm to the side, it was too easy to defend and seldom used".
Source

Discovery vs invention in jiu jitsu another good article

Old footage of a variation of the triangle choke
criador do Sankaku-Jime (triângulo no Jiu-Jitsu)

 

[Hanzou]

Cool aid anyone???

If you're implying that I'm somehow wrong about any of that, please feel free to actually prove it instead of making pointless comments.

Further what's the point of showing those Judo videos? The person asked about Bjj, not Judo, and I said that the Triangle Choke came from Judo at some point in Bjj's development.

I also think its hilarious that you're focusing on merely the Triangle choke, and not on the closed guard or the half guard, which were far more pivotal developments in Bjj than the Triangle choke.

 

[Phobius]

Closed guard is not an invention of BJJ, wasnt it even introduced to BJJ by a Judo practitioner? Believe this to be an old technique going back to very beginning of grappling.

As for half guard it is an old technique as well, Look up 'niju garami'.

 

[Hanzou]

Someone form the Gracie camp was quoted that the triangle choke has always been a part of jui jitsu

It is a common misconception that the triangle did not exist in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu before Rolls Gracie, who (according to some circles) would have found the technique in an old Judo book. When asked about the veracity of this statement, Mario Tallarico, Rolls Gracie’s second black belt, said:

"The triangle was a very old technique from Judo that was used in Jiu Jitsu from the beginning. As it was not associated with the armbar or the crossing of the arm to the side, it was too easy to defend and seldom used".
Source

Discovery vs invention in jiu jitsu another good article

Old footage of a variation of the triangle choke
criador do Sankaku-Jime (triângulo no Jiu-Jitsu)

And you contradict yourself in your own post. The first article states that Oda created the Triangle Choke in the early 20th century, but then you post another article that says that nothing is invented, just rediscovered.

The point is this; Bjj looks different than it did 100 years ago. Frankly it looks different than it did in the 1950s and 60s when Helio was fighting. Why? Because it has evolved in that time period. Going back to the original point of this line of discussion, that puts it on a different track than styles like Jow Ga or Wing Chun that focus on trying to stay as close to the old ways as possible with their forms and traditions.

 

[Hanzou]

Closed guard is not an invention of BJJ, wasnt it even introduced to BJJ by a Judo practitioner? Believe this to be an old technique going back to very beginning of grappling.

As for half guard it is an old technique as well, Look up 'niju garami'.

Again, it's not the hold itself, its the position and the system built around the original hold.

For example, this is Judo "half guard";

This is Bjj half guard;

This is Leites Half Guard;

In Judo, the development of the half guard stopped at the hold. Just like the development of the guard in Judo stopped at the trunk hold. It was Bjj exponents that developed the complex systems around those holds, and made them viable grappling positions. As I stated earlier, before the 1990s, practitioners in both Judo and Bjj viewed the hold that we now call Half Guard as a position of desperation that no one wanted to end up in. After Roberto Correa, Eddie Bravo, and Lucas Leites, the half guard is now viewed as a viable, and potentially devastating grappling position.

In fact, the development of the half guard has moved so far away from the original Judo hold that the original hold is now considered an incorrectly done half guard.

 

[Phobius]

that puts it on a different track than styles like Jow Ga or Wing Chun that focus on trying to stay as close to the old ways as possible with their forms and traditions.

This statement is not correct. There are traditionalists and McDojos in Wing Chun (dont know about Jow Ga) but while McDojos are a majority by concept alone this does not mean you know anything about Wing Chun and how it develops.

The only fact I need to back me up on this, simple, I do not train the way you say I do. Neither does anyone I know personally.

However yes there are those that think Ip Man's way of teaching is an old tradition, as such that all forms are holy in their existence. My belief is that he wanted to teach his system using the tools he could. The system however is the concept and made understandable through all forms he taught. Once you understand the art concept in truth you perfect it for your own use.

Being very tall myself it was quickly understood that an art is not mirroring the techniques as taught by your teacher but understanding the true intention within those techniques.