rooting and takedowns

[Jade Tigress]

I saw this post probably right after PeaceWarrior started it and I decided not to get involved in it because I was fairly sure that it would, no matter how sincere PeaceWarrior was in posting it, inevitably degenerate into a my way is better than your way argument. Instead of an attempt to understand and learn as I believe it was originally intended.

With that said and my original trepidation for NOT getting involved in this thread proving to be true; Lets just get it out of the way now and save time.

Rooting and stance training is good
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is
No its not
Yes it is

I leave you to your argument.

XS

*sigh* Yes indeed. Thanks for getting that out of the way XS.

 

[Andrew Green]

I'd reword it a little:

This stuff works!
Ok, show us!
No
please
No, it works
So... show us...
Ok, here's some of my guys trying to move me while I use it
They are hardly trying, show us against someone outside your group.
No.


This is easy to end, one of the folks that claims they can do it grabs a guy with a camera, heads over to the local university wrestling club and tries it out. Comes back, posts the video.

So why, with all of the people making these claims, has no one produced any evidence that it works by using it against the people they claim it will work against?

I have a feeling the results would be like that Pressure point group that got featured on a news program. There stuff stopped working on the reporter, and on the BJJ club they went to to try it out as part of the feature.

 

[Flying Crane]

I'd reword it a little:

This stuff works!
Ok, show us!
No
please
No, it works
So... show us...
Ok, here's some of my guys trying to move me while I use it
They are hardly trying, show us against someone outside your group.
No.


This is easy to end, one of the folks that claims they can do it grabs a guy with a camera, heads over to the local university wrestling club and tries it out. Comes back, posts the video.

So why, with all of the people making these claims, has no one produced any evidence that it works by using it against the people they claim it will work against?

I have a feeling the results would be like that Pressure point group that got featured on a news program. There stuff stopped working on the reporter, and on the BJJ club they went to to try it out as part of the feature.

OK, I'm also reluctant to get involved in another argument that seems to be going in the direction of MMA/Modern vs. Traditional, but i'll see if I can put this a different way.

Rooting is important in traditional martial arts, and it has to do with proper stance training. I only wish my earlier instructors had pushed me harder with this. I am doing my best to make up for lost time.

Rooting gives you stability and makes all of your techniques more powerful, whether they be striking, blocking, or even standup type grappling and trapping techniques.

Rooting, all by itself, is not a silver bullet to stop all assailants. Rooting demonstrations are isolating the stance and the rooting, and simply showing what can be accomplished with it, as opposed to weak stances and poor root. But rooting, to have any usefulness, must be integrated into everything else that you do.

If one demonstrates rooting, void of anything else, a determined and/or strong and/or skilled grappler could of course cut under his base and throw him down. It would be more difficult than if one was not rooted, but nothing about rooting, all by itself, will magically prevent a grappler from toppling someone.

But good rooting, integrated into all other elements of the traditional arts, makes the traditional arts much more powerful. And this is often what is lacking today in traditional martial artists. These skills build the foundation, and without them, the rest of the art is shaky, even weak, even worthless if bad enough. But these skills take time, effort, dedication, and often don't show immediate results, so many people don't pursue them and simply write them off as fantasy, archaic, and useless.

You've got to see the whole picture, and understand how everything interacts and entwines the whole. To isolate something like rooting, and claim that a grappler could overcome this and therefor it is pointless, is a pointless argument.

I could also state that a double-leg takedown is useless. I could develop a strong defense against it, and every time you tried to do it to me, I could destroy you with my defense, IF THAT IS ALL YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DO IN THE DEMONSTRATION.

But of course this isn't the only thing in grappling. It is only one element of the whole picture, and to isolate it, take it out of context, and make it a single, predictable technique, does nothing to convince anyone, including myself, that it is a worthless technique, when properly integrated into the whole system.

 

[PeaceWarrior]

I will PM it to you later.

Ok cool

Wrestling is a international sport, so it has nothing to do with "America". All it would take to convince a coach to give it a try would be ONE guy walking in the door and using this method to stop all his wrestlers attempts to take them down.

Im not trying to say that rooting makes you invincible to takedowns, but it can definetly enhance your ability to "stay rooted." I havent sparred any grapplers but I have pushed and been pushed (hard) since I started my stance training, and I have noticed that I feel much more "wedge like" on my feet, and I can easily redirect the force away from me by sinking into the earth.

I know some JJJ and Judo guys, and they work on stance training.

And for Andrew Green:

I agree, someone should go out with a video camera and test it against grapplers. Absolutely. I will make sure, when I learn how to do it (and really, fully understand it - not some half *** attempt) , to prove it on video. That way I can know for myself if it works or not, and that others can observe.

I think its funny though how "video evidence" has somehow become the
"be all, end all" of these arguments.

So say some guy does a little stance training and claims he cant be uprooted. Now this guy goes out and video tapes himself getting slammed over and over buy amateur wrestlers. Does this prove rooting to be a myth or ineffective? Actually, it doesnt prove anything either way. Its all in the practitioner.

 

[PeaceWarrior]

OK, I'm also reluctant to get involved in another argument that seems to be going in the direction of MMA/Modern vs. Traditional, but i'll see if I can put this a different way.

Rooting is important in traditional martial arts, and it has to do with proper stance training. I only wish my earlier instructors had pushed me harder with this. I am doing my best to make up for lost time.

Rooting gives you stability and makes all of your techniques more powerful, whether they be striking, blocking, or even standup type grappling and trapping techniques.

Rooting, all by itself, is not a silver bullet to stop all assailants. Rooting demonstrations are isolating the stance and the rooting, and simply showing what can be accomplished with it, as opposed to weak stances and poor root. But rooting, to have any usefulness, must be integrated into everything else that you do.

If one demonstrates rooting, void of anything else, a determined and/or strong and/or skilled grappler could of course cut under his base and throw him down. It would be more difficult than if one was not rooted, but nothing about rooting, all by itself, will magically prevent a grappler from toppling someone.

But good rooting, integrated into all other elements of the traditional arts, makes the traditional arts much more powerful. And this is often what is lacking today in traditional martial artists. These skills build the foundation, and without them, the rest of the art is shaky, even weak, even worthless if bad enough. But these skills take time, effort, dedication, and often don't show immediate results, so many people don't pursue them and simply write them off as fantasy, archaic, and useless.

You've got to see the whole picture, and understand how everything interacts and entwines the whole. To isolate something like rooting, and claim that a grappler could overcome this and therefor it is pointless, is a pointless argument.

I could also state that a double-leg takedown is useless. I could develop a strong defense against it, and every time you tried to do it to me, I could destroy you with my defense, IF THAT IS ALL YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DO IN THE DEMONSTRATION.

But of course this isn't the only thing in grappling. It is only one element of the whole picture, and to isolate it, take it out of context, and make it a single, predictable technique, does nothing to convince anyone, including myself, that it is a worthless technique, when properly integrated into the whole system.

I agree 100%!

 

[Andrew Green]

Rooting gives you stability and makes all of your techniques more powerful, whether they be striking, blocking, or even standup type grappling and trapping techniques.

Ok, and that is fine. No one I think will disagree there. But the issue is the claim that rooting is a viable defence against wrestling style takedowns, it is not.

Where I disagree is when people do treat traditional concepts, which have a function, as a magic bullet for everything. Rooting, as a concept, is fine. But IMO when people start making nonsense claims about how it is a super skill that beats all others they dimish any argument for the concept having any use at all.

I could also state that a double-leg takedown is useless. I could develop a strong defense against it, and every time you tried to do it to me, I could destroy you with my defense, IF THAT IS ALL YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DO IN THE DEMONSTRATION.

That's a demo I know Randy Couture has been known for at seminars. Line everyone up, tell them exactly how he is going to take them down and tell them to stop them, then proceed to land everyone of them on there back

 

[Xue Sheng]

OK, I'm also reluctant to get involved in another argument that seems to be going in the direction of MMA/Modern vs. Traditional, but i'll see if I can put this a different way.

Rooting is important in traditional martial arts, and it has to do with proper stance training. I only wish my earlier instructors had pushed me harder with this. I am doing my best to make up for lost time.

Rooting gives you stability and makes all of your techniques more powerful, whether they be striking, blocking, or even standup type grappling and trapping techniques.

Rooting, all by itself, is not a silver bullet to stop all assailants. Rooting demonstrations are isolating the stance and the rooting, and simply showing what can be accomplished with it, as opposed to weak stances and poor root. But rooting, to have any usefulness, must be integrated into everything else that you do.

If one demonstrates rooting, void of anything else, a determined and/or strong and/or skilled grappler could of course cut under his base and throw him down. It would be more difficult than if one was not rooted, but nothing about rooting, all by itself, will magically prevent a grappler from toppling someone.

But good rooting, integrated into all other elements of the traditional arts, makes the traditional arts much more powerful. And this is often what is lacking today in traditional martial artists. These skills build the foundation, and without them, the rest of the art is shaky, even weak, even worthless if bad enough. But these skills take time, effort, dedication, and often don't show immediate results, so many people don't pursue them and simply write them off as fantasy, archaic, and useless.

You've got to see the whole picture, and understand how everything interacts and entwines the whole. To isolate something like rooting, and claim that a grappler could overcome this and therefor it is pointless, is a pointless argument.

I could also state that a double-leg takedown is useless. I could develop a strong defense against it, and every time you tried to do it to me, I could destroy you with my defense, IF THAT IS ALL YOU WERE ALLOWED TO DO IN THE DEMONSTRATION.

But of course this isn't the only thing in grappling. It is only one element of the whole picture, and to isolate it, take it out of context, and make it a single, predictable technique, does nothing to convince anyone, including myself, that it is a worthless technique, when properly integrated into the whole system.

Yup, that pretty much covers it.

 

[East Winds]

Xue Sheng,

As a Zhan Zhaung and Yi Chuan practitioner, we dinosaurs rule!!!!:rofl:

Very best wishes

 

[7starmantis]

Ok, and that is fine. No one I think will disagree there. But the issue is the claim that rooting is a viable defence against wrestling style takedowns, it is not.

I have to agree with Andrew here. (uh oh, I may get my membership from the CMA secret society revoked for agreeing with the MMA guy)

Using "rooting" to defend against a takedown where you just attempt to out root the power of the takedown is breaking the principles behind rooting and not only breaks principles of CMA but its preety silly to try and do.

Where I disagree is when people do treat traditional concepts, which have a function, as a magic bullet for everything. Rooting, as a concept, is fine. But IMO when people start making nonsense claims about how it is a super skill that beats all others they dimish any argument for the concept having any use at all.

I dont disagree and I'm not trying to say rooting is a magic bullet, but if your up for an experiement....
Start doing 10 straight minutes of low horse stance (staff across the knees) everyday (straight through, no getting up) for a month. Then compare your ability to defend a takedown with how it was before the horse stance training. If nothing else your legs will be crazy strong and that certainly can't hurt your defenses, eh? If your serious I would suggest starting at maybe 5 minutes a day rather than 10 straight. Your right, it doesn't do anything in and of itself but combined with your other training and skill its very usefull.

That's a demo I know Randy Couture has been known for at seminars. Line everyone up, tell them exactly how he is going to take them down and tell them to stop them, then proceed to land everyone of them on there back

Thats completely different from what he said though.


7sm

 

[Xue Sheng]

Excuse me but I have a couple questions

Could someone please point out where someone in the post, other than Andrew, said rooting would be a defense against a take down?

Also please point out to me how and where the heck this rooting all of a sudden became associated with "magic bullet"?

 

[Andrew Green]

very first post, and even the title of th thread.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Andrew

You may want to reread tht with less bias.

Hello,

I have heard of Taijiquan masters being able to root themselves so well that even many people cannot push them over. I have also heard of something similiar in Aikido, where one can become so firmly rooted in the ground that they cant be picked up or moved by anybody. I am wondering what the mechanics of this are and what training is necessary?

And I thought this would definetly have some application when sparring (or fighting) a grappler whose main intention is to uproot and take to the ground. Has anybody here successfully used these rooting principles in a fight against an experienced grappler whos full intention is to take it to the ground?

Hmm...

Funny I see no mention of a magic bullet or a statement that says rooting is a defense against a take down.

I see a thought and a question about it though.

Nor have I seen anywhere else in the post where anyone other than you alluded to it as such.

 

[Flying Crane]

Excuse me but I have a couple questions

Could someone please point out where someone in the post, other than Andrew, said rooting would be a defense against a take down?

Also please point out to me how and where the heck this rooting all of a sudden became associated with "magic bullet"?

Yeah, dammit, the term I used was "Silver Bullet", not "Magic Bullet". Now get it right!!!

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok, and that is fine. No one I think will disagree there. But the issue is the claim that rooting is a viable defence against wrestling style takedowns, it is not.

Well, I think we can agree, all by itself, it is not. But strong rooting and strong stances, properly integrated into a well-trained traditional art, can make for good defenses against all kinds of attacks, including wrestling style takedowns.

Where I disagree is when people do treat traditional concepts, which have a function, as a magic bullet for everything. Rooting, as a concept, is fine. But IMO when people start making nonsense claims about how it is a super skill that beats all others they dimish any argument for the concept having any use at all.

Agreed again, but where I disagree is when proponents of one art make claims about the effectiveness of other arts that they have not studied and do not understand. I think we all need to remember to keep things in perspective.

That's a demo I know Randy Couture has been known for at seminars. Line everyone up, tell them exactly how he is going to take them down and tell them to stop them, then proceed to land everyone of them on there back

He is also an elite athlete and competitor, and it is unlikely that many people from any art could do well against him. Just because someone of his caliber can do it, doesn't mean he has proven other methods to be worthless. Again, a little perspective is needed here.

 

[Andrew Green]

Agreed again, but where I disagree is when proponents of one art make claims about the effectiveness of other arts that they have not studied and do not understand. I think we all need to remember to keep things in perspective.

Yep, Like claiming a defence works against takedowns when everyone that trains in grappling says it won't

He is also an elite athlete and competitor, and it is unlikely that many people from any art could do well against him. Just because someone of his caliber can do it, doesn't mean he has proven other methods to be worthless. Again, a little perspective is needed here.

True, I can't... unless they got very little to no skills

ps: sorry about the magi / silver bullet thing. You also used "Magically" and I kinda merged them... my bad...

 

[Flying Crane]

Yep, Like claiming a defence works against takedowns when everyone that trains in grappling says it won't

I really think we all have a lot to learn from each other. It's really frustrating when a thread gets started about something, and then the next thing we know, it's turned into another silly, pointless argument over MMA vs. Traditional. I really believe that all approaches have a lot to offer.

Each system has its specialty, and it certainly makes sense for others, who have a different specialty, to pay attention when the specialists speaks up on the topic. MMA proponents probably test out their material harder than many (not all) traditionalists today do, and seem to look for the methods that most quickly develop effective skills. OK, it makes sense for traditionalists to listen up when the MMA people want to share their experiences.

But traditionalists have methods that perhaps give greater longevity to one's practice, and can reap huge rewards further down the road, in addition to also being an effective and viable self defense method in the mean time. MMA people would do well to listen up when the Traditionalists want to share some info about that.

Granted, everyone can decide for themselves what information and approach and methods to embrace. I for one have a dislike for the grappling arts. I simply lack the interest to pursue them. I trained a bit of judo while in college, with a buddy who had been a wrestler in high school, as well as a judo green belt. It was just the two of us, throwing each other around in the padded exercise room, nothing formal about the training. I actually enjoyed it at the time, but now I just don't feel the pull to train in that method. OK, that's my choice. But I also am very very clear and honest with myself about the fact that grappling is absolutely my weakest facet in my abilities and training. I don't try to fool anyone about that, esp. myself. It's just my choice. I may decide to do something about that someday, there are some great judo and BJJ people here in San Francisco, I could certainly train with them. But I just lack the interest, and I know that if I ever had to face one of them, if I allowed it to turn into a grapple, i'm in serious trouble.

But I don't for a minute believe that my lack of grappling experience means I am useless in a fight, and neither do I believe the statistic that the Gracies like to toss around, about how most every fight goes to the ground. I think that statistic is taken out of context and doesn't imply what they want it to imply, and they have used it very successfully as a marketing point in selling their art. OK, good for them, but I think that statistic is actually somewhat deceptive. I can't prove it, I don't have other statistics to back up what I am stating here, but something just smells a bit fishy with it.

I believe completely that the arts I have studied have tremendous merit. I simply understand where my weak points are, and I accept that.

But getting back to my point, I get tired of watching the MMA people and Traditionalists trying to discredit each other. It's just stupid and bogus, in either direction. People need to open up a bit, listen to each other, take from it what you will, make your own decisions about it, but stop this irritating argumentive approach to these discussions. And I direct this to the parties on both sides of the argument. We really do have a lot that we can all learn from each other, if we would just stop arguing about it, and open our minds up a bit.


ps: sorry about the magi / silver bullet thing. You also used "Magically" and I kinda merged them... my bad...

just watch your step, next time ...

 

[Andrew Green]

Each system has its specialty, and it certainly makes sense for others, who have a different specialty, to pay attention when the specialists speaks up on the topic. MMA proponents probably test out their material harder than many (not all) traditionalists today do, and seem to look for the methods that most quickly develop effective skills. OK, it makes sense for traditionalists to listen up when the MMA people want to share their experiences.

But traditionalists have methods that perhaps give greater longevity to one's practice, and can reap huge rewards further down the road, in addition to also being an effective and viable self defense method in the mean time. MMA people would do well to listen up when the Traditionalists want to share some info about that.

Now if this could become a common view point we'd all be in much better shape

 

[Flying Crane]

Now if this could become a common view point we'd all be in much better shape

I guess we gotta start somewhere.

 

[DavidCC]

That, is a demonstration, a parlour trick, I can do unbendable arm demos too, but when it comes down to it, they don't mean much.

Depends on how you use it. If I get my "unebndable arm" fused across your shoulders, I control the depth of our encounter pretty well.

What is a "parlour trick"? a precise definition please.

 

[DavidCC]

So... show us...
Ok, here's some of my guys trying to move me while I use it
They are hardly trying, show us against someone outside your group.
No.

that is not me and those are not my guys LOL
but I do know them and they don't "hardly try" anything, not with that teacher LOL.