Some more thoughts on "anti grappling".

[mook jong man]

They train and try to prevent.

Grappling tends to beat striking. From my experience anecdotally but as to the mechanics of why. I have not been able to come up with a good explanation.

I think maybe it is positional dominance. The grappling positional dominance is a lot greater than the striking one. So if we fight striking I push you into a corner I have the dominant position but it is a 60/40

If I get on top in a wrestle it is a 90/10

And that is if you can wrestle.

If you can't it becomes a 90/10 as soon as I clinch so I need one opening to finish the fight and when I get that. I am constantly being made safer and putting you at risk. So the longer I clinch the less chance you have of knocking me out and more chance of me taking you to the floor. On the floor the odds stack up against the striker again.

Striking it only becomes 90/10 if you are seriously rocked otherwise every exchange has the opportunity for me to nail you with a shot and regain momentum. Or in grapple vs strike clinch and gain that momentum.

Depends who is doing the striking though doesn't it.

What if the person doing the striking was able to generate force from positions you did not think was possible or had not counted on.
Because that is what Wing Chun does.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Do all the grappling arts train by getting punched really hard in the face then trying to apply their techniques?

Or do they train tactics and techniques to try and prevent that from happening?

Now we try to compare the following 2 different training.

1. not to get punched on the head.
2. not to get clinched.

Here is a simple test.

- A can only apply head shot while B can only apply clinch.
- If A can hit B's head first, A win that round.
- If B can successfully obtain a valid clinch on A first, B wins that round.

Test this for 100 rounds and record the result. I had tested this so many times, the final result was always to B's favor. If you apply the right strategy (such as the rhino strategy), it's not that easy for your opponent to punch on your head.

The grapplers do treat the "head shot" issue seriously and have solution for it. Does the strikers also treat the "clinch" issue equal seriously and have similar solution for it?

If anybody can write a book or publish a DVD that have "Strategy against Clinch", that person's name will be famous in the TMA history forever.

 

[geezer]

Now we try to compare the following 2 different training.

1. not to get punched on the head.
2. not to get clinched.

Here is a simple test.

- A can only apply head shot while B can only apply clinch.
- If A can hit B's head first, A win that round.
- If B can successfully obtain a valid clinch on A first, B wins that round.

Test this for 100 rounds and record the result. I had tested this so many times, the final result was always to B's favor. If you apply the right strategy (such as the rhino strategy), it's not that easy for your opponent to punch on your head.

John, I like your idea of "testing" various approaches, but the 100% "either/or" test you propose here is so artificial as to be useless. Stand-up/striking arts set up their strikes with a variety of other techniques. To say that the "puncher" can only punch is absurd, just as is saying that the grappler can never punch. Such a scenario has nothing to do with any kind of a real fighting exchange.

Furthermore you say that you have done this test many times. I don't doubt it, but recognizing that you have very extensive grappling experience (shuai chiao) and your opponents are probably not strikers of equal experience, the results will be biased. Especially under the artificial conditions imposed by your "test".

Now take the "rhino" or "big fist" defense as shown in that clip you like to post. The striker is behaving in a totally unrealistic manner trying to punch around that ponderous wedge structure used by the defender. Any fighter unfettered by the rules of the drill would grab, check, or otherwise knock aside that clumsy "big-fist" structure to make way for his punch. We certainly would do that in Wing Chun, and I can't believe that other styles would do something similar. Strikers aren't all vulnerable idiots you know!

 

[drop bear]

Depends who is doing the striking though doesn't it.

What if the person doing the striking was able to generate force from positions you did not think was possible or had not counted on.
Because that is what Wing Chun does.

Striking isnt done by magic. There are consistent elements that come into play.

 

[mook jong man]

Striking isnt done by magic. There are consistent elements that come into play.

Who's talking about magic , magics got nothing to do with it.

What is has got to do with however , is having a decent stance to generate power from and having various stuctures in the proper alignment in which to properly transmit that force into the target.

No magic , just a high degree of skill.

 

[drop bear]

Who's talking about magic , magics got nothing to do with it.

What is has got to do with however , is having a decent stance to generate power from and having various stuctures in the proper alignment in which to properly transmit that force into the target.

No magic , just a high degree of skill.

And so are predictable and counterable. It is not a trick nobody else knows.

 

[mook jong man]

And so are predictable and counterable. It is not a trick nobody else knows.

Well obviously they don't know it , or otherwise everybody would be able to do a 1 inch punch now wouldn't they.

 

[drop bear]

Well obviously they don't know it , or otherwise everybody would be able to do a 1 inch punch now wouldn't they.

How long does it take to learn? One of my coaches up at the moment is an ex wing chun guy. So I imagine he could throw one inch punches at me if he wanted to.

 

[mook jong man]

How long does it take to learn? One of my coaches up at the moment is an ex wing chun guy. So I imagine he could throw one inch punches at me if he wanted to.

Well , I have been training in Wing Chun since July of 1989 and I am still perfecting mine.
It is an ongoing process , there is no time when you say I have now "arrived".

You could see in the video I posted of my late Master , he was still getting tips on doing it properly from his Master , and my Master had already been training for 40 years.

 

[Hanzou]

John, I like your idea of "testing" various approaches, but the 100% "either/or" test you propose here is so artificial as to be useless. Stand-up/striking arts set up their strikes with a variety of other techniques. To say that the "puncher" can only punch is absurd, just as is saying that the grappler can never punch. Such a scenario has nothing to do with any kind of a real fighting exchange.

Furthermore you say that you have done this test many times. I don't doubt it, but recognizing that you have very extensive grappling experience (shuai chiao) and your opponents are probably not strikers of equal experience, the results will be biased. Especially under the artificial conditions imposed by your "test".

Now take the "rhino" or "big fist" defense as shown in that clip you like to post. The striker is behaving in a totally unrealistic manner trying to punch around that ponderous wedge structure used by the defender. Any fighter unfettered by the rules of the drill would grab, check, or otherwise knock aside that clumsy "big-fist" structure to make way for his punch. We certainly would do that in Wing Chun, and I can't believe that other styles would do something similar. Strikers aren't all vulnerable idiots you know!

I think that belief was backed up by the results of NHB tournaments like Vale Tudo and UFC where grappling arts tended to dominate striking/standing arts. This in turn caused striking arts to be forced into developing answers for grapplers, which is where those absurd "Anti-grappling" techniques come from.

Before that, striking arts like Wing Chun didn't care about ground fighting or grappling at all. Brazilian Jiujitsu and similar arts showed how dominating that strategy can be against an unprepared opponent.

 

[Vajramusti]

I think that belief was backed up by the results of NHB tournaments like Vale Tudo and UFC where grappling arts tended to dominate striking/standing arts. This in turn caused striking arts to be forced into developing answers for grapplers, which is where those absurd "Anti-grappling" techniques come from.

Before that, striking arts like Wing Chun didn't care about ground fighting or grappling at all. Brazilian Jiujitsu and similar arts showed how dominating that strategy can be against an unprepared opponent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are entitled to your opinion and your perspective..
However, your categorization of wing chun is uninformed.
Ip Man's wingchun is not just a striking art. It emphasizes control
and doing what can be done at any given moment.
The few wing chunners in UFC were doing pretty bad wing chun.

On a civil forum like this best to state each other's perspectives and then move on.

 

[geezer]

I think that belief was backed up by the results of NHB tournaments like Vale Tudo and UFC where grappling arts tended to dominate striking/standing arts. This in turn caused striking arts to be forced into developing answers for grapplers, which is where those absurd "Anti-grappling" techniques come from.

Before that, striking arts like Wing Chun didn't care about ground fighting or grappling at all. Brazilian Jiujitsu and similar arts showed how dominating that strategy can be against an unprepared opponent.

Hanzou, I think what you say has a lot of truth to it. And over time, strikers in MMA bouts have been forced to cross train and become better all round fighters. Also, I'd agree that back in the 70s and 80s a lot of WC people didn't pay serious attention to ground fighting. So when BJJ came along and shook up the martial arts scene, some of those guys were left scrambling for answers. And sometimes came up with some pretty poor ones. However, as Vajramusti points out, this doesn't mean that WC doesn't have concepts that can be applied to ground work. It simply means that few had the knowledge of how to make that transition.

BTW I still think Johns "test" for striking vs grappling is pretty unrealistic. Whats wrong with looking at actual bouts? Now if you want to discuss why grappling can be so dominant, I thought Drop Bear had some really interesting ideas about this.

 

[kung fu fighter]

Where's the incorrect assumption?

This stuff actually exists.

all this is just BJJ basics incorporated with some wing chun hand techniques. it might only work against someone who has no training, but I can assure you none of it will work on an intermediate BJJ student or a decent high school wrestler.

This in more in line with pure WCK way of thinking

 

[Vajramusti]

Those videos are silly.

 

[Hanzou]

all this is just BJJ basics incorporated with some wing chun hand techniques. it might only work against someone who has no training, but I can assure you none of it will work on an intermediate BJJ student or a decent high school wrestler.

None of that is Bjj basics. That is watching a video on Bjj or MMA and then coming up with nonsensical methods of ground fighting. If you actually learn Bjj basics, you wouldn't come up with that nonsense in the first place.

This in more in line with pure WCK way of thinking

That crap is just as bad as the crap I posted.

 

[Steve]

all this is just BJJ basics incorporated with some wing chun hand techniques. it might only work against someone who has no training, but I can assure you none of it will work on an intermediate BJJ student or a decent high school wrestler.

This in more in line with pure WCK way of thinking

Fun fact. At 1:29 in the first video, he could easily execute what is called "Tripod" sweep in BJJ, reverse his position and come up on top, either to pass guard or stand up where he wants to be. Instead, because he knows no actual grappling, he remains on his back, in a position that you guys say you NEVER EVER want to be in. He'd need to control the ankle and then pretty much execute the sweep.



You can see in the image above, the point of execution and the similarity with the position in the video.

View attachment $tripod sweep.jpg

 

[mook jong man]

Fun fact. At 1:29 in the first video, he could easily execute what is called "Tripod" sweep in BJJ, reverse his position and come up on top, either to pass guard or stand up where he wants to be. Instead, because he knows no actual grappling, he remains on his back, in a position that you guys say you NEVER EVER want to be in. He'd need to control the ankle and then pretty much execute the sweep.

View attachment 18944

You can see in the image above, the point of execution and the similarity with the position in the video.

View attachment 18943

Yep , and if your close enough to grab his ankle , he's also close enough to bend down and punch your head into the concrete.

 

[Hanzou]

Yep , and if your close enough to grab his ankle , he's also close enough to bend down and punch your head into the concrete.

I'd like to know how you'd be able to do that when your leg is planted into their hip, you're obstructing their rear leg, and you have control of one of their arms....

 

[drop bear]

Well , I have been training in Wing Chun since July of 1989 and I am still perfecting mine.
It is an ongoing process , there is no time when you say I have now "arrived".

You could see in the video I posted of my late Master , he was still getting tips on doing it properly from his Master , and my Master had already been training for 40 years.

So it takes years to get right And it seems to take thirty seconds of aiming before you can fire it off. Honestly not the biggest threat

 

[drop bear]

Yep , and if your close enough to grab his ankle , he's also close enough to bend down and punch your head into the concrete.

It is a fight. You may get punched. But yeah we use that sweep and we allow the head punching.