Takedown vs Throw

[Kung Fu Wang]

Can't remember where but I once saw an attempt at ippon seionage turn into an monkey take the back roll and immediate RNC.

It's just something people watch out for in MMA, you're better off sweeping IMHO

When Benny Urquidez threw his opponent, Benny

- wrapped his opponent's leading arm.
- under hooked his opponent's back arm.

Since his opponent had no free arms, it was difficult for his opponent to counter Benny's hip throw.

If you train the throwing art properly, the chance that your opponent may counter you can be decreased.

To have the ability to be able to break apart your opponent's control (such as arm wrap, under hook, over hook, head lock, ...) quickly do require some extra training.

 

[Oily Dragon]

The only difference between MMA and kickboxing, or Sanda is the ground game. If a kickboxer (such as Benny Urquidez) can use a throw to knock out his opponent, the MMA guys should be able to do the same.

I'm still waiting for another double suplex. The first time I saw Dan Severn do it I lost my mind.

 

[Oily Dragon]

When Benny Urquidez threw his opponent, Benny

- wrapped his opponent's leading arm.
- under hooked his opponent's back arm.

Since his opponent had no free arms, it was difficult for his opponent to counter Benny's hip throw.

If you train the throwing art properly, the chance that your opponent may counter you can be decreased.

To have the ability to be able to break apart your opponent's control (such as arm wrap, under hook, over hook, head lock, ...) quickly do require some extra training.

I'm sure that spinning back kick took a lot out of his opponents ability to counter too.

It winds me just watching it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Why don't we see throw like this in UFC that a throw can knock opponent out?

May be UFC guys no longer train throw like this.

It takes time to develop a good throw. May be UFC guys prefer to spent time to develop something else instead of to develop a good throw.

I have a feeling that MMA may hurt the throwing art in the long run. Why should one train throw if he can just drag his opponent down and then apply his ground game?

The only difference between MMA and kickboxing, or Sanda is the ground game. If a kickboxer (such as Benny Urquidez) can use a throw to knock out his opponent, the MMA guys should be able to do the same.

It does happen in MMA. It's just hard to make it happen reliably against skilled, tough grapplers who know how to take a fall.

Here's a throw which not only knocked out the loser, but forced him to retire from MMA with permanent injuries.

Here are a bunch of big throws, most of which didn't cause immediate knockouts because the fighters being thrown were really tough and knew how to take a fall. (Also the octagon floor, while not exactly soft, is a lot more forgiving than concrete.)

Here are some more throws which did produce knockouts:

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Will you call this throw, or take down?

I'd call that a throw, though that's only by my own normal usage, and doesn't help us answer the question in the OP.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I would call that a takedown. I'm not vested in the terms, I'm more interested in distinguishing the difference in application. A takedown (or we might say, the act of simply tripping, pushing or moving someone to the ground) verse a throw (taking them down with a lot of force, typically involving air time, where both feet leave the ground, dropping from a height, usually with dynamic speed and power applied, sometimes but not always landing on top of them after the impact).

That's why I wanted to know your distinction. I can take several things you'd call takedowns and make them fit your definition of throw, simply by doing them harder, bigger, or with an adjustment. Take my leg sweep (Judo's osoto gari, I think - a different thing from what many refer to as "leg sweep"). Do it slowly, and it's a takedown by this definition (fall would be quite similar to KFW's video). Move at speed and with good timing, and both feet will leave the ground - especially if you take both their legs.

So, my answer, given we're using that distinction, is that it depends on the situation. I could see instances where I'm only concerned with making them fall down. I can also see instances where I'd want them to hit HARD (perhaps even deciding to land on top of them, to add force).

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

So, my answer, given we're using that distinction, is that it depends on the situation. I could see instances where I'm only concerned with making them fall down. I can also see instances where I'd want them to hit HARD (perhaps even deciding to land on top of them, to add force).

I think the opposite of this, which is why I agree with your definition, oddly enough. In my mind, when I'm throwing/taking down someone (outside of training), how hard I do it/how much lift they get doesn't matter to me. What does, is whether or not I fall with them, and there are times that I both do and don't.

So I like to separate by "I go down with them" (takedown) and "I stay upright when they fall (if done successfully)" (throw). There are times I want to stay upright, and for those I'd go with throw. And times I don't care too much, and then I'd go takedown since those are higher % typically.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think the opposite of this, which is why I agree with your definition, oddly enough. In my mind, when I'm throwing/taking down someone (outside of training), how hard I do it/how much lift they get doesn't matter to me. What does, is whether or not I fall with them, and there are times that I both do and don't.

So I like to separate by "I go down with them" (takedown) and "I stay upright when they fall (if done successfully)" (throw). There are times I want to stay upright, and for those I'd go with throw. And times I don't care too much, and then I'd go takedown since those are higher % typically.

That's definitely part of the equation! Part of what folks should know about their throws is which ones can be easily converted into "takedowns" by the other guy. It's pretty easy to do with our leg sweep (grab some gi and hold on, and the guy standing on one leg will probably have to come with you). So when you don't want to follow them down, you either don't use those techniques, or you have to have more control of the other guy (most likley, of his arms).

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

That's definitely part of the equation! Part of what folks should know about their throws is which ones can be easily converted into "takedowns" by the other guy. It's pretty easy to do with our leg sweep (grab some gi and hold on, and the guy standing on one leg will probably have to come with you). So when you don't want to follow them down, you either don't use those techniques, or you have to have more control of the other guy (most likley, of his arms).

For leg sweep in particular, it also matters what you're wearing, what they're wearing and their position.

If we're both wearing jackets, while theoretically, a leg sweep is a throw that will sweep them up and knock them out, it's very easy for them to grab my jacket and take me down with them. If I'm wearing a tee that's less likely, same if I disorient them with a hook punch first, or do a very quick instep to surprise them. A tai otoshi, on the other hand, will end up with a throw almost no matter what-I'm less likely to succeed, but they are much less likely to take me down with them when I perform it.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

it's very easy for them to grab my jacket and take me down with them.

This is why not to allow your opponent to have free arms is important.

Here is an example. You can "tuck" one of your opponent's arm under his other arm when you take him down.