View Full Version : Against persons with no grappling experience?
Charlie Kondek
17th October 2002, 13:50
What is the opinion of the authors on the effectiveness of BJJ against your run-of-the-mill (that is to say, deadly but "non-traditional") brawler? How effective is it in a "street" confrontation?
To that end, I'd also be interested to know if anyone has done a study to determine what those untrained in grappling are most likely to do in a real fight, and what are the best defenses against this?
Tim Cartmell
18th October 2002, 00:21
Charlie,
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu can be divided into three categories: sport grappling (with or without a gi), self-defense (for the street) and Vale Tudo (no-holds-barred ring competition). Besides sport techniques, BJJ also includes a set of 'self-defense' techniqes designed to deal with the most common street attacks. Interestingly, most all of them involve taking the opponent to the ground into a control position while remaining on your feet. The strategy for street ground fighting is also somewhat different from sport tournament strategy. There is, of course a great amount of overlap technically among the three categories. The self defense techniques tend to be relatively simple and straightforward, and they don't require any outstanding physical attributes to execute. The techniques cover the most common situations that occur in real fights (the attacks Shojin lists above and a few others).
We know from experience what untrained fighters do when taken to the ground. For real life examples, look at tapes of the early UFCs or Prides when trained grapplers took down opponents that had no ground fight training.
Charlie Kondek
18th October 2002, 12:55
Thank you, that's an eye-opener! I had no idea BJJ was so versatile.
Asia
26th October 2002, 16:20
look at tapes of the early UFCs or Prides when trained grapplers took down opponents that had no ground fight training.
Tim,
No offense but I always hate when pple site UFC as a source for BJJ effectiveness. No matter what you say it is a SPORT. It is NOT the same mind set as a real confrintation.
BJJ also includes a set of 'self-defense' techniqes designed to deal with the most common street attacks. Interestingly, most all of them involve taking the opponent to the ground into a control position while remaining on your feet.
THANK YOU!!! You proven to be a real BJJ man (don't want to know how many so called BJJ brown to black belts I encounter) I wish you would get the word out so when pple FAKE the funk they know what they are talking about. Most BJJ guys think GROUND is everything and ANYONE who has been in enough scrapes know that isn't true. (When pple say this I site my recent experiences in Kosovo when dressed in full battle rattle and haveing to deal with a RIOT! I would love for someone to explain how 'ground and pound' would work there.)
Hissho
26th October 2002, 20:00
Asia,
While I don't disagree that the the ground isn't eveything, and many sport grapplers only think of the takedown and ground and pound, try being a cop, instead of military.
Cops go hands on at much closer distances while armed far more than military units will, and do so most often when they cannot simply shoot or stab the other guy but must control him, and prevent him from going for weapons.
Often times in the real world that DOES end up on the ground.
And while the UFC may not be a real fight, many of the physical elements will be the same, real fight or sport. It can be seen a number of times on police car camera videos that they show you again and again in the academy and in DT training: suspects striking or tackling officers, taking them down, mounting them and slamming punches into their heads or slamming their heads into the ground, usually followed by them trying to take the sidearm.
Looks a lot like the UFC, only no gun, and no ref is there to stop the fight...mindset is different, primal elements are often the same.
Kit LeBlanc
Asia
27th October 2002, 05:47
Cops go hands on at much closer distances while armed far more than military units will, and do so most often when they cannot simply shoot or stab the other guy but must control him, and prevent him from going for weapons.
I agree with this Kit but this occupational hazard and not like everday life, same for military. Just a small part of the rest of the world.
Cops deal with their antagonist as very close quarters where grappling is natural. So I can see this happening quite abit, but like I said you are only showing one small scope.
Most fights are NOT like UFC. Most fights do NOT got to the ground. I ask simply for proof on the latter because my experience has shown me otherwise. Siting UFC is like me siting the Daytona 500 and saying most drivers get in car crashes. Fight I have seen and participated in are quick, not rolling for minutes like a Pride match. And even though I've grounded and pounded pple this happened very little compared to pushing shoving and belting the guy.
mindset is different, primal elements are often the same.
And that there is the key. In shooting (since we used cops and military) the same elements of BRM are in effect whether training on the range or for real. The MINDSET is what will make the difference. I know guys who shoot great but when faced with actually KILLIG someone they have problems. (they think they are weak I tell them they are human.)
NoMan
27th October 2002, 13:58
Originally posted by Asia
And that there is the key. In shooting (since we used cops and military) the same elements of BRM are in effect whether training on the range or for real. The MINDSET is what will make the difference. I know guys who shoot great but when faced with actually KILLIG someone they have problems. (they think they are weak I tell them they are human.)
I've spent the better part of the past year boxing instead of grappling, so I'll have to go from memory.
Anytime I grappled against a brawler, I won. Plain and simple, brawlers have a limited amount of grappling moves, and prefer to use big hamfists to clobber the opponent. The exception is guys who like to tackle first, and depend on knocking the wind out of you while simultaneously getting in position to pound you.
I've used grappling in fights because I took it there, (and no, not always on the ground, which isn't a great place to go not just because of the obvious problem of other people's friends, but because I've seen many fighters actually injure their ankles getting up from it, as weird as it sounds, there's stuff everywhere and one guy got up funny and ended up really messing his ankle up), but in most fights, it goes there if you want it to, or you just end up there.
I prefer grappling because it has a greater control potential, while pounding away on a guy will result in legal trouble. The exception to this is fighting friends, which ironically, is where I received most of my scars. (hmm...?) Stand-up grappling allows you to use your opponent as a shield, if anyone else is trying to get in and attack you, they first have to maneuver around the friend, and this helps when you can't really see too well anyway. (Why is the lighting in many bars so bad?)
Providing I have the room, the best maneuver I have found that is unstoppable is a simple kick with the shin to the thigh. No one expects it, and it almost always drops them. It's a non-lethal area, and that means less chance of a lawsuit.
Hissho
27th October 2002, 19:03
LeTerian,
Agreed in that these are not everyday life for most people. But what most people get into most of the time are not what I consider "fights."
Most POLICE confrontations are of the pushing-and-shoving variety that you mention. One guy pushes or shoves, gets spun around and cuffed, end of story. Many involve the guy getting a little squirrelly and you throwing a lock or control on him and him going "Okay, I give up!" Click go the handcuffs, end of story.
These hardly qualify as "fights." Nor does the swinging dick pushing-and-shoving, sucker punch and run type BS that make up the majority of physical confrontations that civilians will encounter. These certainly don't go to the ground and it is foolish to try to intentionally bring them there if there is no need. The 95% "stats" that everyone quotes relating to ground altercations come from LAPD and are generally woefully misrepresented by grapplers because it is clear they have not read the study. That study shows that of serious fights that LAPD got involved in (i.e. active and CONTINUED resistance from suspects, 95% involved one of five patterns, and of those five patterns, around 66% went to the ground.)
Even civilian wise, the ground and pounds that you mention you have been involved in probably happened with your more serious altercations. That is, it has gone way past pushing-and-shoving or a simple sucker punch and run. Now the guy is on top of you, continuining the assault, you are defending and bringing the fight back to him because he is not backing down. The MAJORITY of these kinds of altercations probably will go to ground, by mistake or by design, and end up in the ground and pound type situation as you describe unless one of the parties disengages and flees. Disengaging is probably the best option in many cases. The reason the ground situation happens more for police is because police can't just disengage and run away, we are tasked with arresting the guy. That;s when the control that No Man speaks of comes into play.
When I speak of similarities to the UFC I mean in terms of physical dynamics of violence, without weapons. For the vast majority of civilian altercations, which occur without weapons, the dynamics will be very similar.
Watching BJ Penn strike Kaoru Uno and daze him, then hammer him repeatedly with blows to head 'til he went down, then stand over him and continue to pound on him was very much what would happen in reality if someone sucker punched you, knocked you down, then proceeded to hammer you unmercifully. The difference is that the ref stepped in and stopped it whereas in the real world, Uno would probably be dead now, as he was unconscious and totally unable to respond.
If it had been in Pride it would probably have been more realistic, because in Pride you can stomp on the guy who is down and soccer kick him in the head.
Of course pulling out a knife or a stick or a gun is going to change things. But at close quarters it will look far more like UFC with weapons (maybe Dog Brothers?) than it will a typical kata or cooperative training exercise.
Kit LeBlanc
Charlie Kondek
15th November 2002, 13:14
So, the other day I rented the UFC that took place in Motown (IX was it? Motor City Madness) and watched Don Frye battle Amaury Bitetti, a BJJ-er. Bitetti got Frye in the guard, and I expected him to be "safe" there - we always think of the guard as the safe place to rest, stall or plan your counter-assault... but Frye got up on his feet, leaned his chest into Bitetti's, and worked him with elbows to the head and blows to the ribs. They re-started, but pretty much the same thing happened, and I think Bitetti would have had it had Frye been allowed to continue.
What went wrong?
The next time I rolled with a buddy we started picking it apart. Bitetti should have been able to arch his back, push Frye away, and roll over - did he just get nailed and not be able to get his game back together? I guess what I'm asking is, strengths/weaknesses of the guard, and what about Frye's approach in this case to countering it?
(I want this book, partly because it discusses attacks while in the guard.)
Mike Williams
15th November 2002, 14:03
My understanding (gleaned solely from watching recent-ish UFCs and panicking on the couple of occasions I've tried rolling Vale Tudo style), is that underneath is NOT where you want to be if strikes are allowed.
I think the guard should mainly be used as a transitional position. You might well end up there, but if you do you should be looking to sweep/reverse a.s.a.p.
In the early days of UFC, pulling guard worked because many fighters were so concerned at being on the ground that they would just try to escape, leaving themselves open to submissions.
Now everybody is comfortable on the ground and has learnt to strike effectively from that position, it's a different game. Trying to stall or set up submissions from the guard tends to get your face turned to mush these days.
Still wouldn't want to fight Vale Tudo against an experienced BJJer, 'though!
Cheers,
Mike
Kevin73
15th November 2002, 16:54
I watched Mario Sperry's tape series #1 on Vale Tudo, and he even states that the sport BJJ guard will get you hurt if strikes are allowed. He was referring to where you allow your opponent to sit up like you mentioned in the Frye fight. Sperry says that they only place you want him if you have guard is very close (hugging him to you so he can't raise up and punch) or very far away (arching and pushing away with your legs so he's to far to punch).
I think this advice is the best for dealing with the potential for strikes coming in and not when you are concerned with only holding the opponent to look for submissions in a sport tournament.
BTW: Royce Gracie has a new book out also on BJJ self-defense and addresses many of the SD attacks that have been asked about. There isn't anything in it shown from "the guard", although it does have escapes from the ground on there.
GRAPPLER
8th December 2002, 04:55
THE TWO SCENARIOS THAT WERE GIVEN WAS TO HUG IN CLOSE
OR ARCH YOUR BACK AND GET THE ATTACKER AWAY FROM YOU.
THE LATTER OPTION LEAVES YOUR VITALS COMPLETELY OPEN
WHILE PROTECTING YOUR HEAD,THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE ON
THE STREET.I'M A FIRM BELIEVER THAT SPORT GRAPPLING IS
A PLUS,BECAUSE IT GIVES YOU A DELIVERY SYSTEM,TO GET
YOUR GROIN STRIKE IN,THROAT SHOT,ARMBAR,ETC.WHITHOUT A
DELIVERY SYSTEM I DON'T SEE HOW IT CAN FLOW TOGETHER PROPERLY.GRAPPLING IN THIS FRAME OF MIND ALSO TEACHES
YOU TO ALWAYS KNOW WHERE YOUR VITALS ARE AT ALL TIMES IN A
CONFLICT.I THINK THIS WOULD APPLY ALSO TO A STANDING
ART AS WELL.
THE QUESTION I WAS HOPING TO GET ANSWERED IS WHAT
IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BJJ AND AIKIJUJUTSU AS FAR
AS TECH. AND APPLICATIONS GO.
TAKE CARE
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.