What martial arts fits my parameters?
- Thread starter kingofjong
- Start date
My definition of
- anti-grappling is someone doesn't want to learn grappling but wants to deal with grappler.
- anti-striking is someone doesn't want to learn striking but wants to deal with striker.
If you learn grappling, of course the anti-grappling is possible.
The OP clearly said that he doesn't want to learn stand up striking.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,998
- Reaction score
- 8,766
If you were goings to be technical it would be grapple to strike or something. Because you are still using grappling. Just for a different end result.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,998
- Reaction score
- 8,766
Which is fine. Just skip the stand up striking days and still attend the MMA sparring.
Mma classes are generally broken down that way anyway.
Even if the OP doesn't want to throw any punches, he still needs to deal with his opponent's punches.
You can't choose your opponent in street fight. You also need to have a safe sport environment to train that.
Last edited:
This is why I believe one's MA training is not complete if he has no ability to deal with incoming head punches. When I said that in a Judo forum many years ago, everybody hated me for saying that. Today, I'm sure people will hate me if I say this in any BJJ forum.
What do you think B's answer will be?
A: Dear master! I truly don't want to learn those 20 forms that you try to teach me. I just want to learn how to deal with punches, so my head won't get punched. Can you just teach me that?
B: ...
Last edited:
To be able to "deal with head punch" is much more important than to be able to deal with
- body punch,
- head/body kick,
- take down, or
- ground game.
The issue is "How to train that?" IMO, this can be an interested discussion subject.
And how, exactly, do you reach the conclusion that blocking a high punch is the single most important thing you can learn?
Old saying said that in a fight, if you don't punch at your opponent's head, you may have to fight him from sun raise until sun set.
You can knock down your opponent with less force for your head punch than for your body punch.
I'm honestly not sure which of these two lines is sillier.
Out of the two posted fights against grapplers (adhere then punch and knee to face, before clinch), what do you believe is not possible?
Last edited:
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,998
- Reaction score
- 8,766
The whole point of a street fight is you can choose your opponent.
Maybe ant-grappling is not the proper term. anti-clinch may be better. Anti-clinch assumes the clinch has been established.
Last edited:
However, that would limit it to wrestling rules. Since the OP asks, "To summarize I want a martial arts that teaches you how to close the distance..." Let's use your first definition.
Regardless, now will you answer the question?
Last edited:
Oily Dragon
Senior Master
- Joined
- May 2, 2020
- Messages
- 3,257
- Reaction score
- 1,653
Well, I can tell you that a very effective way of punching someone in the head is to take them down first.
And that applies to both street fight and sport combat that allows it.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 14,849
- Reaction score
- 6,409
My anti grappling has always been grappling. When Tony tried to grab me, I used circling arms. WHICHis common in kung fu systems but is often misunderstood. Anti grappling, should probably be called something else. Grappling Prevent maybe, since you are denying another person's ability to grab you.
Anti-striking assumes the fists are flying. If A takes B down before B even has chance to punch at A, I won't call that anti-striking.
Anti-grappling assumes the grappling has already happened (such as a head lock). If A knocks B down before B even has chance to throw A, I won't call that anti-grappling.
When A knocks/takes B down while B is doing nothing, I won't call that "anti" anything.
This is anti-grappling. The grappling has happened to a striker. The striker has to deal with it (assume the striker has no grappling training).
Last edited:
That's the combat Shuai Chiao strategy. It's called "follow on attack".
When you
- hold a matchbox and strike it, that matchbox will fly away.
- put a matchbox on the ground and step on it, even a kid can smash that matchbox.
Nah, most BJJ practitioners who practice BJJ as a martial art agree with you on that. (I certainly would.)
There is an increasing contingent of BJJ practitioners who only train for sport and so aren't concerned about dealing with punches or being complete martial artists, but they wouldn't necessarily disagree with you, they just don't care about "complete MA training".
There are a few who think they can train just the sport grappling aspect and somehow will be automatically capable of dealing with strikes despite never training with them, but I'd say those are a delusional minority.
