Does your Art/System teach you to take the fight to the ground?

[Hudson69]

Hola all,
Was just wondering about the above mentioned. This is mainly because when I first became an LEO the philosphy was "pig-pile" but with manning getting thinner and my city growing ever larger, in the last couple of years, our defensive tactics has done a 180. Where before DT was just something you had to suffer through in the Academy there is now in-service that is mandatory and all DT instructors offer side training.

When I first came on we taught FBI Arrest Control (personal opinion is "lame") and that no matter how good you are/were it would somehow end up on the ground in a wrestling match. Now it is, especially with the popularity of MMA and the nearness of an Army Post (with the Combatives being taught to every soldier; good for them) we are teaching (I am lucky enough to be an instructor in FBI and our own proprietary system) both to stay on your feet, to regain your feet as soon as possible if you go to the ground and some escapes, locks and pain compliance techniques if the ground is the only option (our ground work is basic, heck, all of our techniques are fairly basic, so that they can be remembered and have been field tested to work ---- so far, so good).

Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation?

Gracias

 

[MJS]

Hola all,
Was just wondering about the above mentioned. This is mainly because when I first became an LEO the philosphy was "pig-pile" but with manning getting thinner and my city growing ever larger, in the last couple of years, our defensive tactics has done a 180. Where before DT was just something you had to suffer through in the Academy there is now in-service that is mandatory and all DT instructors offer side training.

When I first came on we taught FBI Arrest Control (personal opinion is "lame") and that no matter how good you are/were it would somehow end up on the ground in a wrestling match. Now it is, especially with the popularity of MMA and the nearness of an Army Post (with the Combatives being taught to every soldier; good for them) we are teaching (I am lucky enough to be an instructor in FBI and our own proprietary system) both to stay on your feet, to regain your feet as soon as possible if you go to the ground and some escapes, locks and pain compliance techniques if the ground is the only option (our ground work is basic, heck, all of our techniques are fairly basic, so that they can be remembered and have been field tested to work ---- so far, so good).

Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation?

Gracias

With the current popularity of MMA and the fact that many high schools and colleges offer wrestling programs, its very possible that the person we could be confronted with, will have some sort of grappling background. Of course, it doesn't even have to be a grappling art. Someone that plays/played football, may be inclined to just rush you. That being said, I feel thats it very important to have a solid understanding of the ground.

The arts that I focus on primarily, Kenpo and Arnis, both have techs. to take the person to the ground. These consist of sweeps and throws. Usually the follow ups dont really consist of us rolling with the person, but instead following up with strikes, kicks and various limb destructions.

Many of the head instructors in my Arnis group, have a BJJ background, and I dabble in it on my own as well, so should it go further, I feel fairly comfortable.

I think alot of the time, people hear grappling, and think it means rolling around, looking for submissions, etc., and while this is part of it, I feel that whats more important, is having enough of a basic understanding, to be able to escape, back to a standing position, should you find yourself on the ground.

Do I like to take it to the ground? I'd say it would depend on the situation. It wouldn't be my first pick, but if it did go there, fight dirty and get back up.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Isshin-Ryu does not have a ground game, so clearly the answer to the question is 'no'. However, I recognize that having a ground game is important, and for that reason, I do plan to invest some time in judo training at some point in the near future, even though it is not my primary focus. I don't know enough to know if 'every fight ends up on the ground' or not, but I'd like to have more experience with ground-fighting, as well as with learning how to fall properly, how to grapple, how to use more of the locks, throws, and pins that traditional Okinawan karate just does not generally have.

 

[Blade96]

Shotokan is mostly stand up but it does teach you how to take someone to the ground (though good luck me trying to take one of my big BB's to the ground with me being only a small slim girl lol like that'll be happenin')

I tried to trip a sandan (not my friend another one) once, with the 'he punch i block with jodan juji uke and grab his arm move in and hit behind his knee with my foot method,' all i did was make him lose his balance a little.

 

[Bruno@MT]

No. The prime directive in my art (ninpo) is to escape and get out.

 

[jks9199]

Isshin-Ryu does not have a ground game, so clearly the answer to the question is 'no'. However, I recognize that having a ground game is important, and for that reason, I do plan to invest some time in judo training at some point in the near future, even though it is not my primary focus. I don't know enough to know if 'every fight ends up on the ground' or not, but I'd like to have more experience with ground-fighting, as well as with learning how to fall properly, how to grapple, how to use more of the locks, throws, and pins that traditional Okinawan karate just does not generally have.

Ah -- but, Bill, Isshin-ryu DOES indeed have a ground game. It's just not a game of rolling around together. You'll probably start seeing that soon...

More generally, if I take you down, I've got a plan. I'm deliberately trying to limit your mobility and your options and maximize my control. Otherwise, if I'm down, I'm working on getting back up fast, because that's where I have the most options and am most comfortable.

 

[derobec]

Hi,

I think that it's good to train on the ground from a strength and general fitness level, wrestling sure 'puts in' more than it takes out of you. However, to be on the ground in a real-life situation is obviously less than ideal and should only be thought of as a temporary inconvenience to be corrected as soon as possible -that's my opinion.

As for taking an opponent to the ground by means of a restraining hold, as a civilian I've no interest whatsoever in 'restraining' an attacker. I mean, what am I going to do with him once restrained? Spend hours in the local Police Station giving statements at best, at worse being questioned about my role. Then, at the end of it all, the legal system will probably release him straight back onto the streets to pick up where he left off.

Kind Regards,
William

 

[seasoned]

Hi,
However, to be on the ground in a real-life situation is obviously less than ideal and should only be thought of as a temporary inconvenience to be corrected as soon as possible -that's my opinion.

As for taking an opponent to the ground by means of a restraining hold, as a civilian I've no interest whatsoever in 'restraining' an attacker. I mean, what am I going to do with him once restrained?
Kind Regards,
William

Very good points William.

 

[seasoned]

Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation? Gracias

Never. Deliberately taking someone to the ground has NO self defense value.

More generally, if I take you down, I've got a plan. I'm deliberately trying to limit your mobility and your options and maximize my control. Otherwise, if I'm down, I'm working on getting back up fast, because that's where I have the most options and am most comfortable.

From an LEO perspective this is the first option. Take them down for control purposes, but don't join them unless it is by accident. A ground game is a completely different art in itself. It is good to have a plan as jks9199 states, but, in self defense the fists and feet, as in striking, come first whether standing or on the ground.

 

[Chris Parker]

No. The prime directive in my art (ninpo) is to escape and get out.

With my interpretation of the art, the answer is "sometimes". The primary goal and strategy of Ninpo is survival, and if that means escape, escape. If it means taking them out quickly, then that is what I do. One of the primary tactics used to survive an unknown encounter, though, is to take your opponent out of their area of speciality, so if I find myself up against someone who is clearly a highly skilled and competant boxer or kicker, and I can't make distance to get away, I may very well move in and take them to ground, as it is less likely that they will have experience there. But once in more of a position of control, escape is the key. So if I take someone down, it is rarely to submit on the ground. It is to quickly take control and finish (to allow an escape) as soon as possible.

 

[jks9199]

Hi,

I think that it's good to train on the ground from a strength and general fitness level, wrestling sure 'puts in' more than it takes out of you. However, to be on the ground in a real-life situation is obviously less than ideal and should only be thought of as a temporary inconvenience to be corrected as soon as possible -that's my opinion.

As for taking an opponent to the ground by means of a restraining hold, as a civilian I've no interest whatsoever in 'restraining' an attacker. I mean, what am I going to do with him once restrained? Spend hours in the local Police Station giving statements at best, at worse being questioned about my role. Then, at the end of it all, the legal system will probably release him straight back onto the streets to pick up where he left off.

Kind Regards,
William

Are you certain that every person whom you have to defend yourself from is also someone you don't care about hurting? There's a practical reason to be able to restrain someone; lots of people call them "drunk uncle" techniques. There the things you have so that you don't have to crack someone's ribs or break their nose if it's a drunk buddy or kids or someone else that you just don't really want to hurt -- but don't want to have hurt you, either.

 

[Langenschwert]

There is certainly an emphasis on getting the OTHER GUY to the ground in Kunst des Fechtens. Lots of takedowns from double legs to hip throws... pretty much all the stuff you see in classical jujutsu. Of course, when armed, we often use the weapon to assist in the takedown, and then hit him with it after the throw.

There is a ground game, but it's dependant on the situation. We have what's called "Unterhalten" (holding down) which is most often used to set up a ground and pound, often with come kind of crucifix variant. It can also be used to set up a quick break or neck crank. There's no angling for submissions... the assumption is that you have no time to do so... he has friends coming who probably have edged weapons on them. There is some work from half and full guard too, but it's rather peripheral.

When the combatants are armoured it very often comes down to ground fighting with daggers. The idea is to pin him and stick a rondel (a type of dagger) in his visor, the palms of his hands or the soles of his feet... anywhere the armour converage is lessened or has gaps, like down the cuffs of the gauntlets. It's also common to throw the guy on his face and set up a break.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[derobec]

Are you certain that every person whom you have to defend yourself from is also someone you don't care about hurting? There's a practical reason to be able to restrain someone; lots of people call them "drunk uncle" techniques. There the things you have so that you don't have to crack someone's ribs or break their nose if it's a drunk buddy or kids or someone else that you just don't really want to hurt -- but don't want to have hurt you, either.

Hmm, On the face of it I'm pretty certain of my ability to differentiate between a 'drunk uncle' and a determined attacker.

But:

To be certain, even a close friend/family member would find I have an uncompromising attitude to being attacked. I'm a drinker myself but have never attacked anyone while drunk; also, I was brought up in an environment where beating wives and children was quite a common and unquestioned side effect of drinking. I find it difficult to draw a line here as I know how impervious to locks and restraints a drunkard can be.

My way may not be exceptable to many, but it's better than trying to prepare for 'half measure responses'.

Regards,
William

 

[StudentCarl]

Sending-YES; Taking NO.
In an SD situation I don't want to be on the ground on my own or with an opponent. If I'm hands-on, it means either unequal initiative or my MUC failed. If I can send an opponent to ground and not go myself, that's an opportunity for escape or to deal with other assailants.

TKD teaches me standup and take-downs, but I haven't learned any groundwork from TKD. I've taken from BJJ for that.

Carl

 

[Draven]

Hola all,Anyway, do you like to take a fight to the ground? Do you teach to take it to the ground in a real life "who is this person" and "I need to finish this" altercation?

Gracias

Like to go to the ground, no but several different MAs I've learned all involved me fighting on the ground at some point even down to Shotokan which has very "limited" ground fighting. I think groundfighting was important before the UFC & even more important so with yahoo and wonnabe trying to take the fight to the ground.

 

[Big Don]

We don't take the fight to the ground, but, we throw people on the ground and then kick,stomp and otherwise break them.

 

[jks9199]

Hmm, On the face of it I'm pretty certain of my ability to differentiate between a 'drunk uncle' and a determined attacker.

But:

To be certain, even a close friend/family member would find I have an uncompromising attitude to being attacked. I'm a drinker myself but have never attacked anyone while drunk; also, I was brought up in an environment where beating wives and children was quite a common and unquestioned side effect of drinking. I find it difficult to draw a line here as I know how impervious to locks and restraints a drunkard can be.

My way may not be exceptable to many, but it's better than trying to prepare for 'half measure responses'.

Regards,
William

The "drunk uncle" is an example, and a common name. It's not the limit of who you might use a measured response on. We've gone down this road several times of late (for example, What You Can/Can't Do.); the bottom line is that you have to be able to respond appropriately and in a measured fashion to an attack, not simply and mindlessly destroy anyone who dares attack you. Unless you have an interest in attending "Big Bubba Ray's Grey Bar Dancing School."

 

[derobec]

The "drunk uncle" is an example, and a common name. It's not the limit of who you might use a measured response on.
We've gone down this road several times of late (for example, What You Can/Can't Do.); the bottom line is that you have to be able to respond appropriately and in a measured fashion to an attack, not simply and mindlessly destroy anyone who dares attack you. Unless you have an interest in attending "Big Bubba Ray's Grey Bar Dancing School."

What is an appropriate response to someone that's trying to cave your head in? Irrespective of whether they're drunk/teenager/O.A.P/Confused... They are either a threat or not. If they're not a threat then the issue is redundant, if they are a threat then I'll trust in the old maxim of it being 'better to be judged by twelve than carried by six'.

I notice that you've not addressed the issue that it can be very difficult to apply a restraining hold on a person who has a temporarily increased pain fresh-hold through the use of alcohol/other drugs. trying to force such a restraint could even result in serious long term damage to the attacker's joints. Where do we stand then?

Also, you've still not told me what to do with the individual if I follow your advise and (manage to) tie him up on the floor.

I can see that we're going to have to differ on this one, but that's the beauty of life isn't it; we each have our own opinions.

Best Wishes,
William

 

[jks9199]

What is an appropriate response to someone that's trying to cave your head in? Irrespective of whether they're drunk/teenager/O.A.P/Confused... They are either a threat or not. If they're not a threat then the issue is redundant, if they are a threat then I'll trust in the old maxim of it being 'better to be judged by twelve than carried by six'.

I notice that you've not addressed the issue that it can be very difficult to apply a restraining hold on a person who has a temporarily increased pain fresh-hold through the use of alcohol/other drugs. trying to force such a restraint could even result in serious long term damage to the attacker's joints. Where do we stand then?

Also, you've still not told me what to do with the individual if I follow your advise and (manage to) tie him up on the floor.

I can see that we're going to have to differ on this one, but that's the beauty of life isn't it; we each have our own opinions.

Best Wishes,
William

I don't believe that you're following what I'm saying.

If your self defense training isn't including the ability to moderate your response to the situation, it's incomplete and poor preparation. For example, I know a man whose father has Alzheimer's; he has had to restrain his father for an extended period on more than one occasion -- including at least one incident where his father had a knife. Certainly he would have been legally (and perhaps morally; obviously, it's a rather thorny question!) using lethal force to subdue his father... but I rather doubt it's what most of us would advise him to do, if there was a way to avoid it!

Self defense really consists of dealing with the initial attack, doing something to effectively discourage or deter further attack, and then escaping. Defensive tactics for law enforcement include both proactive means to control someone as well as means to defend oneself and subdue an attacker for arrest. Military combatives generally drop the pretense of control, and seek to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible.

You asked what I would suggest a person do if they have someone restrained. There's no easy answer, because it may depend on the situation. My friend described above simply held and controlled his father until some level of rationality returned, while allowing the rest of the family to move to a position of safety. In other cases, you may hold someone for law enforcement (a bar bouncer, store or other security personnel for example), or simply wait for the person to calm down. Paint more of the picture, and I may be able to provide different ideas.

 

[derobec]

I don't believe that you're following what I'm saying.

If your self defense training isn't including the ability to moderate your response to the situation, it's incomplete and poor preparation. For example, I know a man whose father has Alzheimer's; he has had to restrain his father for an extended period on more than one occasion -- including at least one incident where his father had a knife. Certainly he would have been legally (and perhaps morally; obviously, it's a rather thorny question!) using lethal force to subdue his father... but I rather doubt it's what most of us would advise him to do, if there was a way to avoid it!

Self defense really consists of dealing with the initial attack, doing something to effectively discourage or deter further attack, and then escaping. Defensive tactics for law enforcement include both proactive means to control someone as well as means to defend oneself and subdue an attacker for arrest. Military combatives generally drop the pretense of control, and seek to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible.

You asked what I would suggest a person do if they have someone restrained. There's no easy answer, because it may depend on the situation. My friend described above simply held and controlled his father until some level of rationality returned, while allowing the rest of the family to move to a position of safety. In other cases, you may hold someone for law enforcement (a bar bouncer, store or other security personnel for example), or simply wait for the person to calm down. Paint more of the picture, and I may be able to provide different ideas.

Hi jks9199,

I think that it is you who are missing the point of my original post as well as my general approach. I have never said that I do not know how to restrain a person on the mat (whether compliant or not); my issue is with the efficacy of these techniques out there, in the real world.

When the attacker feels no need to comply with a restraint (yes, this does happen in real life because I've been there, as a younger less experienced man) you have a serious issue:

You apply a lock/other restraint, the attacker refuses to comply -where do you go then?

-this isn't the dojo, you don't have time to move through half a dozen techniques 'till such time as you find something that's going to work, because your attacker is still trying to bight your nose off/stomp hell out of your foot/butt you/ rip your genitalia/stick you with his knife -and if he's not doing that then chances are, his friends will be. If he has no friends then the passerby who hasn't seen the bigger picture may well wade in-

Do you abandon the restraint and hit him? Now that has got to open up some serious legal questions if someone witnesses that. 'officer, he had the guy in one of those judo locks, then all of a sudden stopped doing that and just hit him - he's crazy'.

I base my approach on personal experiences and those of people close to me:
-back of skull cracked with a length of wood when I was 20.
-four steel plates screwed into my jaw as the result of a gang of teenagers (wearing heavy rings) laying into me when all I was doing was walking home from work.
-my brother, stabbed seven times in the back by a gang.
-my fifteen year old nephew beaten and stomped on by a gang of eighteen.
-various other minor (but potentially far more serious) skirmishes over the years.

I know that there can be room for 'moderation' but I try to prepare for the worse case scenario -this isn't paranoia, it's common sense, I see no point in taking steps to prepare for anything less.

Sadly, I have exactly the same problem as you with regards to "paint(ing) more of a picture". You see, I can't paint any picture; it's the attacker(s) that carry the paint brushes and canvas. All I can do is to try and live my life happily, without unnecessarily hurting other people, but believe me, when someone tries to kill me I will not be a compliant victim, neither will I try to restrain someone until help arrives because I know that that may be longer than I have.

Presumably that's why law enforcers are issued with cuffs etc -because it's VERY hard to single handedly control a non-compliant prisoner by hand.

I stand by my belief that being on the ground in a fight situation is less than ideal, something best avoided.

Best Wishes,
William