Shotokan for self defence.

[Drose427]

Hackney employs the right strategy, unlike many of strikers in the Gracie challenge matches, who were far too passive. Note that the commentators did say that Royce has rarely been hit, and that his chin will be tested in the match against Hackney.

Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy


and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time.

its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.

Grab a striker and find out

 

[Laplace_demon]

Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy


and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time.

its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.

Grab a striker and find out

1: 34 --http://Keith Hackney Vs Royce Gracie - Video

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

he simply didn't get hit that much.

The way that he stands, he extends his arms out much further away from his head than his opponent does. This would give him less striking ability but more grappling ability. His hands will be closer to his opponent's body than his opponent's hands close to his body.

When you extend your arms out, your opponent's arms have to pass your arms to hit you. That will give you more chance to wrap his arms.

If your opponent can use spear to keep you away, it's pretty hard to get to his body. You have to pass his spear first. That's the strategy used by most grapplers.

 

[Steve]

I am not sure were you get the notion that the rules favour the striker...

From the rules, lol. Everything from the pacing of the fight, dictated by the ref, to the lack of grips on the uniform to the cage itself. Grappling is less fun to watch for the lay spectator. Don't misunderstand. Grappling is a very important component of MMA, but the rules ensure that striking is rewarded and encouraged.

 

[Laplace_demon]

From the rules, lol. Everything from the pacing of the fight, dictated by the ref, to the lack of grips on the uniform to the cage itself. Grappling is less fun to watch for the lay spectator. Don't misunderstand. Grappling is a very important component of MMA, but the rules ensure that striking is rewarded and encouraged.

Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.

 

[Steve]

Nowhere in the video did the commentators say that...just watched it twice for you...but whatever you think buddy


and the video unraveled your point, Even today fighters are getting KOe'd by strikers swinging out while trying to grapple, we see it all the time.

its not as easy as youre imagining to just wrestle through a striking opponent.

Grab a striker and find out

Once again, it's pointless to draw any conclusions about striking vs grappling from the ufc. Every fighter is both a competent striker and grappler. I think you're both arguing flawed positions here.

 

[Steve]

Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.

not anything systemic. While there are specific strikes that are illegal, the entire rule set is engineered to make grappling less effective.

 

[Drose427]

Once again, it's pointless to draw any conclusions about striking vs grappling from the ufc. Every fighter is both a competent striker and grappler.

Yeah but the guy throwing punches many times is pulling a Keith hackney, not really using any grappling or wrestling concepts or anything. Just swinging away whenever someones within range.

Its far more difficult to grapple like that than Laplace is thinking

I also tried using the example that when you see videos of Boxers or other style defending themselves by doing that. The attackers rarely even get close enough to grab them before getting decked. Folks that dont strike at all have a far harder time getting in if they can at all.

not anything systemic. While there are specific strikes that are illegal, the entire rule set is engineered to make grappling less effective.

My grappling is limited mostly to Wrestling with some BJJ, what exaclty about the ruleset makes grappling less effective?

Off the top of my head I know positional resets do, sometimes grappling takes time the ref wont give them. But I've never really thought about it before

 

[Steve]

My grappling is limited mostly to Wrestling with some BJJ, what exaclty about the ruleset makes grappling less effective?

Off the top of my head I know positional resets do, sometimes grappling takes time the ref wont give them. But I've never really thought about it before

First, I want to qualify this by saying that I'm not complianing, and understand completely why this exists. But this myth that grappling is somehow favored in MMA is just ludicrous. Grappling is boring for many fans to watch. Dana White gets pissed when there's too much grappling. He hates it, particularly if it's the grinding, take down style grappling favored by wrestlers. Fans often don't understand what they're seeing, and while it's very technical, it doesn't LOOK technical.

Positional resets is a big one, because grappling is often a grind. Lay and pray, while very boring to watch, is a way for a superior grappler to smother and prevent an opponent from mounting any kind of offense whatsoever.

But, fundamentally, the uniform favors strikers over grapplers. It's a contrived situation unique to competition. In self defense, unless you're being attacked in a locker room shower, you are unlikely to be grappling in a situation so ill suited for catching a submission. Many of the chokes and joint locks that are fundamental to sound grappling are functionally impossible to catch due to the slipperiness and lack of grips in MMA.

Rounds themselves favor strikers. A grappler can be working for something and when the round ends, they start standing.

The cage favors strikers in that it is often difficult to work for a submission up against the cage. The cage is used to protect your back and is a huge help for guys working to regain their feet. Often, the grappler has to pick up the guy on the bottom to move him away from the cage.

Any more, the only submission typical in an elite level mma match is the RNC. Otherwise, any submission is just too risky. There's an occasional head/arm choke or even less common now, a triangle from guard. But for the most part, guys are all competent enough grapplers to avoid these, and can muscle out of most anything if they're sweaty enough.

These things are systemic. They exist fundamentally within the ruleset to create a situation that handicaps grappling. While it's true that there are techniques that are illegal, both for grapplers and strikers. But overall, strking is like hitting home runs in baseball. Striking sells tickets, and so over the years, the rules have evolved to ensure that grappling is tightly controlled and heavily restricted.

 

[jks9199]

Folks,
I'm trying to figure out what the last three pages have to do with Shotokan and self defense. It's been an informative discussion, and would make a great thread on it's own...

 

[Tez3]

Folks,
I'm trying to figure out what the last three pages have to do with Shotokan and self defense. It's been an informative discussion, and would make a great thread on it's own...

The problem comes when people look to MMA to 'prove' something doesn't or can't work. In MMA you know who your opponent is weeks sometimes months ahead and you can spend a lot of time studying your opponent and their style of fighting in order to plan your tactics, a luxury you don't have when you are attacked and need to use techniques to defend yourself which is where karate comes in, being designed in the first place for civilian empty hand self defence....

 

[RTKDCMB]

am not talking about Sumo wrestlers (face palm...)

Then you should have been more specific.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular.

Meanwhile, in the real world...

 

[RTKDCMB]

This post may have nothing to do with "Shotokan".

Not all punches are effective knock down/out punches. But all take down are effective take downs.

During some valid clinch, the striking won't be effective at that moment.

TMA's (including Shotokan) have had defenses for headlocks from the very beginning.

 

[RTKDCMB]

one of the lowest shots you can do wrestling is an low/swing single, to which a striker can

A. Knee you
B. Drop his knee on you (you see this in wrestling if you actually wrestled) and then pound the heck out of you
C. Sprawl/catch (which most strikers have somewhat of a grasp on, varying degrees) before you get full outside and pummel you hammerfists and uppercuts just like Hackney did in that clip.

D. Drop an elbow on your head or back.
E. Bunch of other stuff.

 

[Tez3]

Laplace_demon said:
"Pride and UFC is the closest we have to reality and self defence. Pride in particular."

And it's this thinking that is taking away from the discussion of Shotokan and self defence.

No, it's not the closest we have. Pride and UFC are companies, businesses not martial arts styles, the aim is to make money by selling entertainment.
I've already outlined why MMA fights are different from self defence. There's no doubt of course training in a full contact style helps self defence training but in now way does MMA represent a self defence situation. MMA fights are quite artificial in many ways, self defence is very real if you have to use it.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Plenty of rules which prohibits strikers toolbox too.

And you still think it is the closest, most realistic method to self defense?

 

[Laplace_demon]

And you still think it is the closest, most realistic method to self defense?

Does it accurately reflect the likely outcome between different type of fighters in unarmed combat? For sure. The final results IRL would look pretty much the same. Against weapons it' s bad news which ever style you practise.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Does it accurately reflect the likely outcome between different type of fighters in unarmed combat?

No it only accurately reflects the outcome between different types of fighters in a combat sporting environment under a specific rule set..

 

[Laplace_demon]

No it only accurately reflects the outcome between different types of fighters in a combat sporting environment under a specific rule set..

Original UFC was no holds barred and the same trend was true...