drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
So that he can fall into your guard and be submitted.
Seriously though big guys dont get up off the ground all that easily. So if you can knock him over he is more easily attacked.
Judo vs. Wrestling against heavier, stronger strikers?
- Thread starter WarriorMonk7
- Start date
So that he can fall into your guard and be submitted.
Seriously though big guys dont get up off the ground all that easily. So if you can knock him over he is more easily attacked.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Nah. It is still false. You can do both fine.
How to protect your head and not to be punched when you move in will require a lot of training. If you can catch that 1 second and do the right thing, you will succeed. Otherwise, you will fail. IMO, the risk is there but the reward will be great.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
lklawson
Grandmaster
Wow. Just... wow...
Not jumping down your throat, but, man, what a paradigm shift! I remember when boxing was called "The Sweet Science." Heck, I've read a great deal of material (and republished a good bit of it) from when Boxing, particular amateur boxing, was called (and thought of) as "Scientific Boxing." Very technical in the way people thought about it. Not "complex" per se, but, instead, "sophisticated." I believe that this still holds true. There's a lot of sophistication available in boxing if you apply yourself to its study.
The same goes for wrestling (and most grappling arts in general). There are still some who talk about "scientific wrestling" (usually applied to the older concepts of Catch as Catch Can wrestling). But, instead of being "complicated," they offer sophistication to people willing to delve deeply into the study.
Yes, in both cases, you can simply restrict yourself to the basics. Nothing wrong with that; the basics are a pretty good place because it generally works pretty solid. But there's a level of sophistication which can be built which exceeds the basics, building upon it.
Again, not grumping at you, I just find it a little shocking to my system to see someone describe "The Sweet Science" as "more like a test of endurance and reflex and strength."
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Hanzou
Grandmaster
LoL @ I got a bad shoulder. Nice way of getting out of the arm bar of an elite grappler.
Hope that guy signed up. He'd be a monster in Bjj with the proper training.
One of Robson's students posted on Reddit the other day confirming that the story was legit.
The guy didn't sign up for lessons, though. Claimed he travelled a lot and couldn't commit to classes. Just collected his *** whooping and took off.
At the lower levels boxing can feel like just a test of reflexes and endurance. When I talk to experienced professionals though, it's amazing how much depth and sophistication and nuance they have in their understanding of the art.Wow. Just... wow...
Not jumping down your throat, but, man, what a paradigm shift! I remember when boxing was called "The Sweet Science." Heck, I've read a great deal of material (and republished a good bit of it) from when Boxing, particular amateur boxing, was called (and thought of) as "Scientific Boxing." Very technical in the way people thought about it. Not "complex" per se, but, instead, "sophisticated." I believe that this still holds true. There's a lot of sophistication available in boxing if you apply yourself to its study.
The same goes for wrestling (and most grappling arts in general). There are still some who talk about "scientific wrestling" (usually applied to the older concepts of Catch as Catch Can wrestling). But, instead of being "complicated," they offer sophistication to people willing to delve deeply into the study.
Yes, in both cases, you can simply restrict yourself to the basics. Nothing wrong with that; the basics are a pretty good place because it generally works pretty solid. But there's a level of sophistication which can be built which exceeds the basics, building upon it.
Again, not grumping at you, I just find it a little shocking to my system to see someone describe "The Sweet Science" as "more like a test of endurance and reflex and strength."
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Ironbear24
Senior Master
Wow. Just... wow...
Not jumping down your throat, but, man, what a paradigm shift! I remember when boxing was called "The Sweet Science." Heck, I've read a great deal of material (and republished a good bit of it) from when Boxing, particular amateur boxing, was called (and thought of) as "Scientific Boxing." Very technical in the way people thought about it. Not "complex" per se, but, instead, "sophisticated." I believe that this still holds true. There's a lot of sophistication available in boxing if you apply yourself to its study.
The same goes for wrestling (and most grappling arts in general). There are still some who talk about "scientific wrestling" (usually applied to the older concepts of Catch as Catch Can wrestling). But, instead of being "complicated," they offer sophistication to people willing to delve deeply into the study.
Yes, in both cases, you can simply restrict yourself to the basics. Nothing wrong with that; the basics are a pretty good place because it generally works pretty solid. But there's a level of sophistication which can be built which exceeds the basics, building upon it.
Again, not grumping at you, I just find it a little shocking to my system to see someone describe "The Sweet Science" as "more like a test of endurance and reflex and strength."
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Yeah I didn't mean to bash anytbing, It may he because I'm used to doing all the nuances and technical stuff in striking that I feel it's easier than the logic puzzle that is grappling.
lklawson
Grandmaster
Nah, I didn't think that's what you were doing. It's all good.
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Similar threads
