Discussion in 'Grappling / Brazilian Ju Jitsu / Wrestling' started by Hanzou, Sep 19, 2014.
Starting to make a comeback all round. There are a few mmaers looking very seriously at it.
I like the statement that Wigan is the home of Catch Wrestling! Truly though some hard men from there, you wouldn't want to mess with those wrestlers.
Lots of grind and lots of those rides. It just opens people up and wears them down. Perfect for things like mma because you can hit. You don't necessarily need the sub to have the technique be worthwhile.
You know you are in that scarf hold and no tap. Who cares? You are punching them in the face.
The Snake Pit has seminars and training for MMA fighters, Neil Adams the Olympic Judoka also has Judo for MMA so with the BJJ as well our MMA fighters have plenty of choice of weapons in their arsenals! A fighter who can't find techniques that suit them whether they are big or small out of that lot should probably give up lol.
Chris beat me to it, but that guy is no more RBSD than I am the grandmaster of Sinanju.
Easiest one I could find. There is a theme though that rbsd is geared towards giving skills that you do not have to be an elite athlete to implement.
I would hope that any worthwhile martial art would give you skills that you do not have to be an elite athlete to implement. Given that 99.99% of us are not elite athletes, they would be kind of pointless if they didn't.
Obviously, you do need to be an elite athlete to compete in the UFC or Metamoris or venues of that nature. That's because you would be facing elite martial artists who are also elite athletes. Most of us are not preparing for that scenario.
Which sort of takes away the point that catch only works for physical guys. And bjj works for less physical guys.
Eh, I don't think it's controversial to say
a) having more physical attributes (strength, speed, flexibility, endurance, etc) is always a helpful thing no matter what art you are practicing
b) some arts/techniques require a higher minimum degree of those attributes in order to be effective
I don't have enough experience with catch wrestling to say whether it actually requires a higher minimum degree of athleticism than BJJ. Maybe so, maybe not. I was inspired by the video to catch one of my training partners a couple of times with that Barnett-style chest compression recently. It seemed pretty easy, but the guy was about my size and only a blue belt. I doubt I could have gotten the tap against one of the big guys. Maybe I could if I was actually trained in catch and knew all the nuances of the technique or maybe it's just a technique to use on bigger guys.
It can be a sneaky false positive though. Quite often if the martial arts is competitive it appears that it is more inclined to work for physical people. Because physical people do better.
It is like the other end of the spectrum where wrestling is considered more explosive than bjj. Which is considered slow.But that is up to the people doing it.
The submission is what it is. Like a lot of submissions.
There is nothing new under the sun. Reminds me of Funakoshi talking about how the "Naha based" styles of karate were geared towards bigger, stronger men and the "Shuri based" styles of karate were geared more towards the average, smaller guy.
It is all marketing. Whether people want to admit it or not, STRENGTH IS A TECHNIQUE. A good athelete/martial artist knows when to apply it and when not to. Too many factors that play into a fight or combat sport.
In reference to the "RBSD argument", it is usually in relation things like eye pokes, throat attacks etc. that don't require large amounts of force to damage the attacker. You don't have to be in great shape to punch someone in the throat. That is very true. But, it also assumes that you are the one starting the attack and striking first and NOT trying to survive the initial assault or ambush by a much larger attacker and getting yourself into position to use that tactic effectively.
IF size/strength don't matter in grappling (or any other martial art) then why do we have age divisions and weight divisions in combat sports?
what? No, there isn't
not any more than there is in many, many martial arts
including sport systems. Judo teaches (and emphasises) efficiency of motion, so that a small person can easily throw a much larger one
BJJ has long proclaimed that it's point of difference is the "scientific application of leverage", meaning that a smaller, weaker person can defeat a stronger one by utilising better technique (small bone of contention
it's hardly a point of difference
), Wing Chun talks about it's founding by a woman, to highlight it's methods of application using direct-line angles to defeat the strength of an incoming attack...
The point I'm making here is that, well, for all your comments about RBSD, nothing you've posted shows any actual understanding of what it actually is
which is why I've been asking you to clarify what you believe it to be
I mean, you gave a poster child for idiocy, who's nothing to do with RBSD, as an example
because it was the "easiest one you could find"
if it's not actually an example of what you're trying to demonstrate, then it's not the easiest you could find
as it's not what you were looking for.
How is it a false positive to have "more physical people" (whatever that means) have more success in something that you're saying works better for these "physical people"? Surely that's just a positive (in terms of validation of the idea)
I do judo. It is pretty commonly accepted it is harder to do on a bigger stronger person. Same with bjj. Maybe I do a strange version.
It certainly seems harder to do on bigger stronger guys.
Then you're focusing on strength, rather than technique… and you're ignoring the aims, ideals, and focus of the systems themselves.
Of course it's harder to do on bigger stronger guys… which is why you need to get better at it… constant striving towards the ideals of the arts… which are that technique trumps strength.
If it is ,of course, harder to do on bigger stronger guys then by definition it is designed for the bigger person.
Which is generally pretty obvious but also generally ignored in the hope it goes away. Fighting is physical. There is no escaping that.
Technique increases strength.
Er… yeah… uh, look, to be blunt, you're expressing what I call a young man's mentality. Yes, it's harder… that's why you train to get better… not stronger, better… there's no "ignoring" going on… in fact, it's embraced. That's why you train. If it was all trumped by strength, you'd just spend your whole time lifting weights.
And no, technique doesn't increase strength… better technique increases the power to the technique… honestly, there's a bit of a difference…
Or you would just have weight classes in competitions. To give little guys a chance.
OK split hairs on the difference? A power lifter relies on technique to lift more weight. His technique by all measurable difference makes him stronger. His strength also makes him stronger. Same with martial arts.
Not relying on strength is a teaching concept to try to get people to get as much out of their strength as they can by improving technique.
Yeah… that's not why there are weight classes, so you know… and while both technique can enhance (and amplify) strength, and strength can help technique (to a far lesser degree), not relying on strength isn't the same as saying you don't use any… and improving technique is the entire point of training technique.
OK so why are there weight classes then?
Oh by the way. The rbsd argument?
Your basically arguing it.
Broadly, to make a more entertaining (and even) contest… by limiting other factors… while that can "give the little guys a chance", it's not actually the reasoning… in fact, it's more about the bigger guys being evenly matched… which is why you can fight in higher weight classes, but not lower ones.
That's the thing I've been trying to highlight to you since you started saying it… it's not an "RBSD argument"… it's a martial arts argument… and you don't have a clue what you're talking about in either regard.123
Separate names with a comma.