Why do people think grappling arts always beat striking arts?

[Kung Fu Wang]

Thank you. I am sure you can do it too, it is not that hard. In all honesty its just prediction, you know they are going to jab, everyone jabs at the face. Just react at the right moment and you got it.

I prefer to use different methods to disable a "lighting speed" jab or cross.

We train how to grab a jab and cross too. But the main purpose for our training is to enhance the ability for the "octopus strategy" that you have better chance to grab on your opponent's wrist when his arms are

- not moving, or
- moving in slow speed.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I use my block to slow down punches. This makes it easier to catch punches no matter how fast the come in.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I use my block to slow down punches. This makes it easier to catch punches no matter how fast the come in.

If you can use one arm to block on the elbow of your opponent's punching arm, you can use the other hand to grab on his wrist. This is the beauty of 2 against 1.

 

[EvanWinther]

Watch UFC 1. It was when UFC was just created and it wasn't MMA fighters. They tried to get the best fighters of many different martial arts and the BJJ guy destroyed everyone.

 

[Ironbear24]

Watch UFC 1. It was when UFC was just created and it wasn't MMA fighters. They tried to get the best fighters of many different martial arts and the BJJ guy destroyed everyone.

Royce Gracie destroyed everyone. not bjj, people at the time didn't train to fight against grappling so they didn't know what to do to fight it. Afterward people learned that they needed to protect themselves against it and now looked what happened, nobody goes far with just bjj alone. Even Royce himself is bad now, he beat matt hughes by cheating and he was even caught using steroids.

 

[RTKDCMB]

Watch UFC 1. It was when UFC was just created and it wasn't MMA fighters. They tried to get the best fighters of many different martial arts and the BJJ guy destroyed everyone.

Everyone whom he personally fought anyways.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Even Royce himself is bad now, he beat matt hughes by cheating

Royce lost to Matt Hughes. No cheating involved.

 

[Ironbear24]

Royce lost to Matt Hughes. No cheating involved.

I meant ken shamrock. My mistake.

 

[Buka]

How did Royce cheat against Shamrock?

 

[Ironbear24]

Illegal shot to the groin. Royce used the excuse "well when I was in ufc they were legal."

Thats ridiculous because when your family holds ownership in the business and is friends with the owner you should know the rules.

 

[SenseiHitman]

Why do the same set of concepts get applied in two ways that appear different? The samurai preferred grappling technique due to the type of armor the enemy on the battlefield was wearing. The priest preferred striking due to the type of clothing the bandit was wearing. The samurai and priest were both well versed in each method. They both preferred to chose the path of least resistance to achieve victory. A samurai in a bathhouse would fight like a priest, a priest on the battlefield would fight like a samurai. One can use the opponents force against them to gain effective power in strikes or manipulations, and when striking or manipulating force is applied on the weak points of the attacker. If you do not understand one you really do not understand the other.

 

[Juany118]

It's a matter of odds. There's a reason why professional warriors such as knights and samurai favoured grappling as the unarmed portion of their arts.

Yes, a good Muay Thai fighter can KO a wrestler. However, if he doesn't, he's in serious trouble. As a striker, you only get one good chance to deal with a grappler trying to close with you. The grappler, once close has say two or three chances to grapple you before you can reset range or land a sweet elbow. If he's good at throwing you get hit with a planet. Ouch.

There are no absolutes though, as we've all seen. Sometimes grapplers get knocked out. Sometimes strikers get submitted or broken by grapplers.

In short, bet on the grappler over the striker, but don't bet your house on it.

The first part is a common misconception. The reason armed, and often armored, warriors and Knights used grappling unarmed arts isnt related to any inherent superiority of grappling, a good unarmored/armed striker can deal with a good unarmored grappler. The reason can be anwered by answering the following questions.

1. Which makes more sense. Striking at an individual armed with a weapon, who will use that weapon to parry your strike, or grappling with them to minimize or even remove that weapon from the equation.

2. Does it make more sense to punch, kick, elbow and knee a person wearing armor, or to use grappling techniques that allow you to damage the joints which can still move, and be moved, due to the articulation of the armor?

Striking is not necessarily about getting a KO. Via striking in a real fight you can have a fully conscious opponent that can't do crap. A kick to a knee that sheers a knee cap and/ or hyper extends the joint, broken clavicles, legit broken ribs (not fractured). With proper striking techniques, using leverage principles, you can hyper extend elbows and with proper striking you can even have a fully conscious guy who simply can't see for crap, not because their eyes are swollen shut alla Rocky but because there are strikes where you directly hit the eye. There are so many things that can be done.

Additionally few traditional martial arts are pure striking. Even Wing Chun, which is seen as a stereotypical striking art, has Chin Na involving wrists and elbows.

As someone else noted the main issue is that a lot of strikers and even some striking arts in particular are simply not good at applying maximum force once a grappler gets inside a certain range, however that is FAR from universal.

 

[Buka]

Illegal shot to the groin. Royce used the excuse "well when I was in ufc they were legal."

Thats ridiculous because when your family holds ownership in the business and is friends with the owner you should know the rules.

You were commenting in response to young Evan's post concerning UFC 1 (he was completely correct, by the way) and you said that Royce defeated everyone and "at the time" people didn't train to fight against grappling...I assumed you were commenting on UFC 1.... until Matt Hughes was mentioned. My error. You're confusing the hell out of me in this thread. Maybe slow down, let an old fella catch up.

 

[Langenschwert]

1. Which makes more sense. Striking at an individual armed with a weapon, who will use that weapon to parry your strike, or grappling with them to minimize or even remove that weapon from the equation.

2. Does it make more sense to punch, kick, elbow and knee a person wearing armor, or to use grappling techniques that allow you to damage the joints which can still move, and be moved, due to the articulation of the armor?

Grappling was also a the greater part of the unarmed and unarmoured art of chivalric classes. While strikes are shown in the manuals (Codex Wallerstein shows some kicks, punches, and open-hand strikes), they are clearly subordinate to grappling even in a "street clothes" environment. The wrestling of Master Ott was very influential, and none of that is good with armour. You want Hundzfeldt for that.

Of course a good striker can damage a good grappler to the point of uselessness. It's just hard to do, much like knife defence, only not as one-sided. Yes, you can disarm a knife attacker successfully without harm to yourself. However, chances are you're going to go to the hospital, and it's very likely you're die if attacked by a knife user. In a lesser way, if you're trying to disable a grappler via striking, you had better do it VERY well, or you're in for a whole whack of trouble if you fail.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

if you're trying to disable a grappler via striking, you had better do it VERY well, or you're in for a whole whack of trouble if you fail.

What's the possibility that your

- kicking leg will be caught?
- punching arm will be wrapped?

If you are good, after your opponent's 1, 2 punches, you should be able to obtain a clinch.

 

[Langenschwert]

What's the possibility that your

- kicking leg will be caught?
- punching arm will be wrapped?

If you are good, after your opponent's 1, 2 punches, you should be able to obtain a clinch.

That's what I'm saying. My co-instructor at my club started out as a striker back in the day. He was a damn fine kickboxer. He then did some sparring with BJJ guys and got tied in knots despite his high-level striking.

He then started training grappling with a vengeance. He's one of the best grapplers I have ever known.

 

[Juany118]

Grappling was also a the greater part of the unarmed and unarmoured art of chivalric classes. While strikes are shown in the manuals (Codex Wallerstein shows some kicks, punches, and open-hand strikes), they are clearly subordinate to grappling even in a "street clothes" environment. The wrestling of Master Ott was very influential, and none of that is good with armour. You want Hundzfeldt for that.

Of course a good striker can damage a good grappler to the point of uselessness. It's just hard to do, much like knife defence, only not as one-sided. Yes, you can disarm a knife attacker successfully without harm to yourself. However, chances are you're going to go to the hospital, and it's very likely you're die if attacked by a knife user. In a lesser way, if you're trying to disable a grappler via striking, you had better do it VERY well, or you're in for a whole whack of trouble if you fail.

But don't forget it's not just about armored, it's about armed as well. Only a fool with punch at a guy wielding a blade but trying to grapple with them for control of that blade? Dangerous still but far more sensible and if you were a member of those classes you were entitled to carry more than just a knife, unlike the commoner.

 

[EvanWinther]

I think a lot of grappling sports also teach how to combat a punch kick etc.

 

[Kickboxer101]

I think a lot of grappling sports also teach how to combat a punch kick etc.

Tell that to ronda rousey

 

[Steve]

Tell that to ronda rousey

agree to an extent. rousey's striking may not be at the level of a holly holms. but it's good enough to beat the crap out of pretty much anyone on this forum.