Why do people think grappling arts always beat striking arts?

[Hanzou]

I feel every one is over thinking this. People think BJJ is better because the Gracie promotional machine "said so".
If you were around before UFC you may remember Rickson Gracie adds in magazines like black belt trying to promote his video tapes that were all the rage in technology back in the late 80,s. Then to promote it further he made the UFC. And wow by chance they won "things that make you go humm"
So people still quote Ricksons add, 90% of fights go to the ground, and BJJ will beat a striker every time. So if you believe BJJ is the best and is better, congratulations you drank the purple cool aid.

This again, really?

People thought Bjj was better because they saw multiple examples of the Gracies beating every type of fighter imaginable. It wasn't just the UFC, it was also the Gracie challenge tapes, Rickson fighting in Japan, and multiple other examples.

It wasn't because they said so, it was because the Gracies stepped up and put their style to the test.

Let's also not forget that 20 years later, Bjj is STILL a mainstay of MMA.

 

[Andrew Green]

It may be just me, but I've been noticing a trend in the UFC where the fighters aren't as willing to accept going to the ground as an ultimate truth. It appears that many fighters are getting better at not being taken to the ground and if they are taken to the ground, they don't stay there for long, in comparison to how the UFC used to be.

Kick boxers found success a long time ago. Maurice Smith, a kick boxer, took the title from Mark Coleman, a wrestler way back in UFC 14.

But he had to go and learn enough about wrestling to be able to do that.

Really what it comes down to is on the ground you can except a much higher level of control over your opponent. Put a untrained person against a high level grappler on the ground and they aren't going anywhere without getting themselves in deeper. In stand up even with fairly basic training you can learn to cover up and clinch in a way that will be relatively effective pretty quickly. Getting off the bottom against a high level grappler is a lot harder then getting ahold of a striker.

I've seen plenty of matches where guys with terrible striking just push forward through it to get a grip and then take it to the mat, once on top they have enough dominance that the other guys isn't getting out.

Same for not staying down once down, that's been around a long time. Chuck Liddell was known for being near impossible to keep down 15 years ago. He id it because he was a high level wrestler, who preferred to stand and punch in fights.

The big difference between now and then in the UFC is that just about everyone is fairly well rounded. That and "performance" matters a little more... the 30 min stalemates in guard that used to happen would not be tolerated anymore. Even high level fighters like John Fitch and Ben Askren have a hard time because there style is not "fan friendly". The size of the sport has made money more of a factor, which means putting on a show is important as well as fighting.

 

[Steve]

I feel every one is over thinking this. People think BJJ is better because the Gracie promotional machine "said so".
If you were around before UFC you may remember Rickson Gracie adds in magazines like black belt trying to promote his video tapes that were all the rage in technology back in the late 80,s. Then to promote it further he made the UFC. And wow by chance they won "things that make you go humm"
So people still quote Ricksons add, 90% of fights go to the ground, and BJJ will beat a striker every time. So if you believe BJJ is the best and is better, congratulations you drank the purple cool aid.

it wasn't Rickson. It was rorian. And advertising a product is completely independent of whether it functions as advertised or not. People sell things all the time that do exactly what they say it does in the ads.

 

[drop bear]

Same for not staying down once down, that's been around a long time. Chuck Liddell was known for being near impossible to keep down 15 years ago. He id it because he was a high level wrestler, who preferred to stand and punch in fights.

As people get better at defending submissions they have more capacity to hit without getting caught.

So laying on your back and trying to create an opportunity becomes higher risk.

So the rules of dominant position change a bit for mma. In that a guy on his back is in trouble regardless as to whether he has pulled guard or not.

So the general rule of thumb is get back up.

Our guys are choosing turtle over guard after an escape. So that we can escape more easily.

 

[Buka]

I feel every one is over thinking this. People think BJJ is better because the Gracie promotional machine "said so".
If you were around before UFC you may remember Rickson Gracie adds in magazines like black belt trying to promote his video tapes that were all the rage in technology back in the late 80,s. Then to promote it further he made the UFC. And wow by chance they won "things that make you go humm"
So people still quote Ricksons add, 90% of fights go to the ground, and BJJ will beat a striker every time. So if you believe BJJ is the best and is better, congratulations you drank the purple cool aid.

The Gracies sure do have a grand promotional machine. Well oiled, that puppy.

But, bro, I was around before the UFC. Rickson was my instructor before the UFC was even a gleam in Art Davie's eye. I don't remember any video tapes of Rickson in the 1980's. Rorion Gracie, sure, but not Rickson.

I can tell you, unequivocally, that Rickson is the nicest gentleman I've known in Martial Arts and I've known quite a few. (some of whom you know) You would really like him. I can also tell you he's the best fighter I've ever known, period. And that's out of a fairly big sample size. I know, I'm "teacher defending". Damn right I am.

As for purple cool aid....I really like purple kool aid.

 

[hoshin1600]

Yes I stand corrected it was Rorion. I was going off memory rather than look it up.
I should state I have nothing against BJJ. I really enjoy it. I think it's a great style and it is effective at what it does.
However the question was asked ..let me re phrase it to my understanding of the question...."why is there a perception that BJJ grappling will consistently beat a striker"
Answer...because of the marketing.
It has already been pointed out that many of the biggest names in UFC are known for striking.
I think if a study was done the statistics would show that there is no evidence to prove this perception.

 

[hoshin1600]

it wasn't Rickson. It was rorian. And advertising a product is completely independent of whether it functions as advertised or not. People sell things all the time that do exactly what they say it does in the ads.

Again..I am not saying grappling is not effective. But advertising does have a major impact on how BJJ is perceived by the unknowing non martial artist public . Those first impressions will stick and then that person will join a BJJ or MMA gym and continually reinforce that idea that his style is the best.
When asked many many MA will say their particular style is the best. We all see it quite often right here on this forum. Many of us know that it's the fighter not the style..so why then is this topic any different.

 

[Steve]

Yes I stand corrected it was Rorion. I was going off memory rather than look it up.
I should state I have nothing against BJJ. I really enjoy it. I think it's a great style and it is effective at what it does.
However the question was asked ..let me re phrase it to my understanding of the question...."why is there a perception that BJJ grappling will consistently beat a striker"
Answer...because of the marketing.
It has already been pointed out that many of the biggest names in UFC are known for striking.
I think if a study was done the statistics would show that there is no evidence to prove this perception.

how did grappling become synonymous with bjj? The question wasn't what you're saying. It was, "why do people think grappling will blah, blah, blah." While all Bjj is grapplinG, not all grappling is BJJ.

And once again, efficacy and advertising are not the same things. Wing chun is what it is due to advertising. Tkd is what it is because of advertising. Whether they work or not is irrelevant. Of course, establishing efficacy helps sell the product.

 

[hoshin1600]

how did grappling become synonymous with bjj? The question wasn't what you're saying. It was, "why do people think grappling will blah, blah, blah." While all Bjj is grapplinG, not all grappling is BJJ.

And once again, efficacy and advertising are not the same things. Wing chun is what it is due to advertising. Tkd is what it is because of advertising. Whether they work or not is irrelevant. Of course, establishing efficacy helps sell the product.

grappling became BJJ because i was typing on my phone and its easier to type. and because BJJ is the most known.

 

[hoshin1600]

so lets look at the stats shall we.

MOST WINS IN TITLE BOUTS,
George st-pierre--12
anderson silva--11
jon jones--10
randy couture--9
matt hughes--9
demetious johnson--9
jose aldo--7
tito ortiz--6
ronda rousey--6
bj penn--5
tim sylvia--5
chuch liddell--5
pat miletich--5
frank shamrock--5

LONGEST REIGNING CHAMPIONS
1-anderson silva
2-st- pierre
3-jose aldo
4-jon jones
5-demitious johnson
6-tito ortiz
7-dominic cruz
8-ronda rousey
9-pat miletich
10-cain velasquez

you all can decide who won by striking and who won by submission or decision.

 

[hoshin1600]

And once again, efficacy and advertising are not the same things.

The question wasn't what you're saying. It was,

TITLE OF THREAD,
"why do people think grappling arts ALWAYS beat striking arts"

i am not sure what your point or argument is steve.
efficacy is not part of this equation for me. the question was NOT will grappling beat striking or CAN it beat striking by why do people "THINK' it will always beat striking.
common sense and the record will show it will not ALWAYS beat striking. but the OP question implies that people believe that it will there fore there is a perception that does not match reality and i propose that it is because of marketing.
feel free to disagree it is only my reasoning.

 

[Don Johnson]

It seems that the majority are contributing based on a sport scenario. In real life violence on the street, where multiple attackers and weapons are common, you better be a striker, you better get good at staying on your feet, and you better know enough on the ground to hurt the guy and get up as soon as possible. I love the video of the grappler in the mount exercising ground and pound on his opponent while exclaiming his superiority, then the victim's girlfriend comes up and soccer kicks the "champion" in the head and knocks him out.

In sport, devastating strikes to vulnerable targets are forbidden to minimize injury both while standing, and while on the ground. A few people mentioned people don't like to get hit. That is very true. Now imagine that the striking is not simply a moment of discomfort and potential KO. Imagine the strikes include life changing targets such as thumbs in the eyes, strikes to throat, neck, spine, groin without protection, sides of the knees. By the way, biting is ok too. I'm not sure if biting is considered striking or grappling... By the way, striking includes sticks, knives, bottles and bricks, even ballistics. Sure you want to rely on grappling for self defense, and the protection of your family?

 

[SenseiHitman]

Yin and Yang are not antagonistic they are complimentary. They are two parts of the same thing. Like the front and back of a door. He who does not understand one does not totally understand the other. Both grappelers and strikers apply many of the same concepts to get leverage on their opponent. For example, in jujitsu the opponents momentum is used to add power to the throw just like allowing the attackers momentum to add power to a strike. So why do some people think grappling works better than striking? It is partly because of the rules in most MMA fights. In the typical MMA fight, the rules allow the grappeler to use just about everything he practices in the dojo, however, many of fight stopping targets struck in self defense are forbidden, and the gloves the fighters wear take the edge of the strikers weapons, but nothing softens the application of leverage the grappelers use, If the BJJ guys were limited to Judo rules and their leverage was padded like the karate guys who are limited by kickboxing type rules, I suspect the fights would be more balanced. I must also say, when the fights were first popular the BJJ guys had a history of similar events to draw experience from before the UFC came along, and to their credit, they train very hard and are in top condition. So yeah, a fighter with more background, who is in better condition with rules slanted to his favor will have an advantage. What I really love about MMA is it got the so called karate gurus feathers in a ruffle, they had to scramble and learn something real so they could maintain their guru status. In my opinion, every healthy young martial arts practitioner should compete in some sort of full contact fight at least a couple times. We all have a coward inside us we need to learn to confront and manage in times of high stress. Full contact fights can give a student an environment to face and practice subduing the inner coward without losing his life over it. I know this because full contact fighting helped do that for me.

 

[RTKDCMB]

It wasn't because they said so, it was because the Gracies stepped up and put their style to the test.

And they put it on video and showed it to everyone they could for a specific purpose. Putting out videos of them losing challenge matches would not suit that purpose. Most martial arts schools and practitioners neither wanted to nor needed to put out challenge videos to promote their art.

Let's also not forget that 20 years later, Bjj is STILL a mainstay of MMA.

So is the striking art of Muay Thai.

 

[Kenpoguy123]

I feel every one is over thinking this. People think BJJ is better because the Gracie promotional machine "said so".
If you were around before UFC you may remember Rickson Gracie adds in magazines like black belt trying to promote his video tapes that were all the rage in technology back in the late 80,s. Then to promote it further he made the UFC. And wow by chance they won "things that make you go humm"
So people still quote Ricksons add, 90% of fights go to the ground, and BJJ will beat a striker every time. So if you believe BJJ is the best and is better, congratulations you drank the purple cool aid.

Maybe 90% of fights do go to the ground but 100% start standing. The fact is jiu jitsu is a great martial but it's not perfect nothing is. Jiu jitsu absolutely works but so does every other style. Let's be real here the early ufcs were worked in the Gracie's favour look at his first ever opponent it was pathetic. He only fought the tougher ones later in the tournament and look at when he retired from ufc when he was getting harder fights and struggling more. The ufc was made to show how great the Gracie's were. A Gracie owned the ufc, the main referee was Gracie's student. Again this isn't disrespecting the art I have a lot of respect for it but the early ufcs were basically just commercials for the Gracie's

 

[Jaeimseu]

Maybe people think grapplers will win because strikers are apparently ineffective if they aren't allowed to gouge out eyes or strike "forbidden" targets with techniques too dangerous for the ring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hanzou]

And they put it on video and showed it to everyone they could for a specific purpose. Putting out videos of them losing challenge matches would not suit that purpose. Most martial arts schools and practitioners neither wanted to nor needed to put out challenge videos to promote their art.

Yeah, because most MA schools utilize fancy kicks and forms in order to wow the crowds. It was fairly easy to market TKD for example because you had those beautiful aerial and spinning kicks to show off.

People aren't going to naturally flock to a grappling style where you're on the ground in missionary position with your legs wrapped around your opponent's waist. You have to prove that doing weird stuff like that works, or no one is going to come to your school.

So is the striking art of Muay Thai.

Not as much as Bjj.

 

[Hanzou]

Maybe 90% of fights do go to the ground but 100% start standing. The fact is jiu jitsu is a great martial but it's not perfect nothing is. Jiu jitsu absolutely works but so does every other style. Let's be real here the early ufcs were worked in the Gracie's favour look at his first ever opponent it was pathetic. He only fought the tougher ones later in the tournament and look at when he retired from ufc when he was getting harder fights and struggling more. The ufc was made to show how great the Gracie's were. A Gracie owned the ufc, the main referee was Gracie's student. Again this isn't disrespecting the art I have a lot of respect for it but the early ufcs were basically just commercials for the Gracie's

Art Jimmerson was a golden gloves middle weight champion boxer. When he fought Royce Gracie his boxing record was 29-5. I'd hardly consider that "pathetic".

It's also important to note that over 20 years later, not a single person has ever come forward to say that the first UFCs were rigged in any way.

 

[Kenpoguy123]

Art Jimmerson was a golden gloves middle weight champion boxer. When he fought Royce Gracie his boxing record was 29-5. I'd hardly consider that "pathetic".

It's also important to note that over 20 years later, not a single person has ever come forward to say that the first UFCs were rigged in any way.

Yeah and he came in there with 1 boxing glove. He did that for the money nothing else he tapped before anything happened

 

[Hanzou]

Yeah and he came in there with 1 boxing glove. He did that for the money nothing else he tapped before anything happened

Did you actually watch the fight? He wore one glove because he was still boxing and didn't want to damage his jabbing hand. He tapped because Gracie was on top and was using his upper chest to suffocate him while also punching him in the face. Jimmerson couldn't roll him off of him because he had zero grappling experience.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Enjoy.

And yeah he did it for the money. All professional fighters do it for the money.