Head pressure - good, bad, or gray area?

[Wing Woo Gar]

I'm not saying that fighting or full contact sparring is necessary. I'm saying sparring to win occasionally is necessary.

And like I said, this isn't just for fighting. If I play chess, I can spend a ton of time trying out new strategies, but if I don't make earnest attempts to win occasionally, I'll be lacking.

If I play basketball, I can drill rebounding in one-on-ones, focus on defense, try my 3 point, whatever. But if I don't try to win, I won't know when to do the right thing to maximize that, and I won't have the confidence to rely on what's my actual strength, when I enter an actual game.

None of that has to do with fighting, risking injury, or being abused. and I wasn't replying to anything stating that either, I was replying to jowga saying 2. Make Mistakes / Learn -> Win. is preferred over 1. Win/lose -> Learn, implying that this is a binary choice, not a spectrum.

I think it’s a ratio that changes depending on the skill level of the participants and the real or imagined goal of the activity. Do enough fighting or hard sparring and you will certainly be injured at some point. Whether the goal is to learn or to win can certainly change the result of any exercise. Both are necessary ingredients that need the moderation, experience, and guidance of a competent instructor. The success of the student will vary wildly based on both the quality and the quantity of all these factors. Personal goals and individual psyches will weigh in differently at different points of progression in the training. I hope I’m making sense at this point. I’m not trying to argue against anything necessarily, just giving an opinion based on my experiences.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I guess I’m missing your point then. I can’t imagine not doing everything possible to win a fight. With sparring I’m trying to figure things out, and trying new things because the risk is lower, but definitely striving to be successful(win). Maybe you can help me understand the subtle difference between what you mean and what I thought I heard? It sounds like we are missing each other ever so slightly but I want to get the gist of what you are saying.

Jowga mentioned (and has mentioned in the past as well), his goal is to learn, not necessarily to win.

I find the best way to explain stuff through examples, and I'm going to use judo as an example - even though he doesn't practice judo, I don't know his style of kung fu, and think you and I both understand judo. Hopefully that helps get my viewpoint across.

Also disclaimer: if anyone comes to this thread to learn how to deal with head pressure, feel free to ignore this post. It's on a tangent, and you'll just end up reading a long post, not finding what you're looking for. If you're reading the tangent and want to read more about it, enjoy.

So for instance, if he wants to practice a tai otoshi, he might spend more of his time in randori trying to set up a tai otoshi, and developing strategies to use that. Or ways to use the threat of it to accomplish something else (ie: you try two tai otoshi's, they both fail, and then you 'go' for a third, when they adjust their weight switch to a shuffle step and do a kibisu gaeshi instead). So in that example, even if he doesn't throw them with the technique he's practicing, he still uses that technique to throw them.

Which is great! And obviously, his ultimately goal is still to get them to the ground, with that caveat (trying to incorporate tai otoshi somehow). Alternately, his main goal for a day may be to avoid sweeps, and force his opponent to use throws - also a good use of randori. With a specific goal, which would probably help him improve his footwork and balance.

Which, again, is great! I am absolutely not advocating against this. It's how you learn how to use something new. But lets say you spend most of your time doing these, then go to a judo competition. There's a good chance that you'll lose. Not because your technique is lacking, but because you never focused 'purely' on winning before. Performing his own foot sweeps may be his best technique, but he might not be as good at them as he could be, because he spends so much time focusing on other stuff. So he has great breadth, but not great depth into any specific technique. Or the opposite might be true; he might spend a lot of time training his foot sweeps, but all of a sudden his opponents in the tournament realize this and he has trouble transitioning; in this situation he'd have too great depth, but not enough breadth.

To fix this, he can do randori sometimes with the goal of winning, regardless of how he wins. Then he can learn what he naturally gravitates towards, what his limits are when naturally flowing through randori, and tweak how to combine all the different things he's worked on to make it one cohesive personal style.

I think it’s a ratio that changes depending on the skill level of the participants and the real or imagined goal of the activity.

It absolutely is a ratio. At the beginning of training, (IMO) you'd be better off spending a lot of time just sparring to learn. Then once you understand the foundations, but are struggling, start sparring to win a bit - then it becomes flexible. At one plateau you might realize you need to focus on winning more, at another you might notice that you need to advance specific skills more (which you'd learn what you need to advance by sparring to win, but that's just a side note )

Do enough fighting or hard sparring and you will certainly be injured at some point. Whether the goal is to learn or to win can certainly change the result of any exercise. Both are necessary ingredients that need the moderation, experience, and guidance of a competent instructor. The success of the student will vary wildly based on both the quality and the quantity of all these factors. Personal goals and individual psyches will weigh in differently at different points of progression in the training. I hope I’m making sense at this point. I’m not trying to argue against anything necessarily, just giving an opinion based on my experiences.

I think that there's still some confusion here. Sparring to win does not equal fighting or hard sparring. It can, but it doesn't have to. And from my experience, both intents can be done as safely as each other - the big issue is if you can trust your partner. Something I learned in kali is going at half speed (particularly for beginners). If you and I both go half speed, we can perform the same techniques, without worrying about seriously injuring each other when we hit, and we can both try to win going at that speed. I can speed myself up at any point to 'win' (which I think would be the same as someone trying to crank a head or ankle lock, or punch too hard) and it'd almost definitely work since if you're twice as fast as your opponent you don't need technique. But that wouldn't be sparring to win in a productive manner, since I wouldn't win if my opponent chose to do the same thing, and then we'd be at the same point (my skill vs. his skill). Just as an example of the intent to win without the risk of injury.

I agree with the rest of what you've written here. Which makes me think we're more in agreement than it seems.

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

Jowga mentioned (and has mentioned in the past as well), his goal is to learn, not necessarily to win.

I find the best way to explain stuff through examples, and I'm going to use judo as an example - even though he doesn't practice judo, I don't know his style of kung fu, and think you and I both understand judo. Hopefully that helps get my viewpoint across.

Also disclaimer: if anyone comes to this thread to learn how to deal with head pressure, feel free to ignore this post. It's on a tangent, and you'll just end up reading a long post, not finding what you're looking for. If you're reading the tangent and want to read more about it, enjoy.

So for instance, if he wants to practice a tai otoshi, he might spend more of his time in randori trying to set up a tai otoshi, and developing strategies to use that. Or ways to use the threat of it to accomplish something else (ie: you try two tai otoshi's, they both fail, and then you 'go' for a third, when they adjust their weight switch to a shuffle step and do a kibisu gaeshi instead). So in that example, even if he doesn't throw them with the technique he's practicing, he still uses that technique to throw them.

Which is great! And obviously, his ultimately goal is still to get them to the ground, with that caveat (trying to incorporate tai otoshi somehow). Alternately, his main goal for a day may be to avoid sweeps, and force his opponent to use throws - also a good use of randori. With a specific goal, which would probably help him improve his footwork and balance.

Which, again, is great! I am absolutely not advocating against this. It's how you learn how to use something new. But lets say you spend most of your time doing these, then go to a judo competition. There's a good chance that you'll lose. Not because your technique is lacking, but because you never focused 'purely' on winning before. Performing his own foot sweeps may be his best technique, but he might not be as good at them as he could be, because he spends so much time focusing on other stuff. So he has great breadth, but not great depth into any specific technique. Or the opposite might be true; he might spend a lot of time training his foot sweeps, but all of a sudden his opponents in the tournament realize this and he has trouble transitioning; in this situation he'd have too great depth, but not enough breadth.

To fix this, he can do randori sometimes with the goal of winning, regardless of how he wins. Then he can learn what he naturally gravitates towards, what his limits are when naturally flowing through randori, and tweak how to combine all the different things he's worked on to make it one cohesive personal style.

It absolutely is a ratio. At the beginning of training, (IMO) you'd be better off spending a lot of time just sparring to learn. Then once you understand the foundations, but are struggling, start sparring to win a bit - then it becomes flexible. At one plateau you might realize you need to focus on winning more, at another you might notice that you need to advance specific skills more (which you'd learn what you need to advance by sparring to win, but that's just a side note )


I think that there's still some confusion here. Sparring to win does not equal fighting or hard sparring. It can, but it doesn't have to. And from my experience, both intents can be done as safely as each other - the big issue is if you can trust your partner. Something I learned in kali is going at half speed (particularly for beginners). If you and I both go half speed, we can perform the same techniques, without worrying about seriously injuring each other when we hit, and we can both try to win going at that speed. I can speed myself up at any point to 'win' (which I think would be the same as someone trying to crank a head or ankle lock, or punch too hard) and it'd almost definitely work since if you're twice as fast as your opponent you don't need technique. But that wouldn't be sparring to win in a productive manner, since I wouldn't win if my opponent chose to do the same thing, and then we'd be at the same point (my skill vs. his skill). Just as an example of the intent to win without the risk of injury.

I agree with the rest of what you've written here. Which makes me think we're more in agreement than it seems.

Yes far more in agreement. This is mostly just the same way I see it. I don’t do any fighting anymore, and I think light sparring with the exception of weapons training can build bad habits. We are essentially on the same page. Thank you for this clarifying post. Tangents can be useful.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Unfortunately this is not a good option if you’re being held in mount - against anyone with a little knowledge you’ll likely expose your arms and end up in a worse position

I just asked my wife to give me a side mount with head squeeze. I had no problem to put one of my hands on her forehead and push her head back. When she deals with my arm, my head squeeze issue has already been solved.,

 

[drop bear]

I just asked my wife to give me a side mount with head squeeze. I had no problem to put one of my hands on her forehead and push her head back. When she deals with my arm, my head squeeze issue has already been solved.,

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In your video, you are using both arms to squeeze your opponent's head in a full mount position. I don't think you can generate much squeezing power by using 2 arms.

I'm not a BJJ guy. But I believe the head squeeze is more effective to be used in the "side mount". You use your upper arm and lower arm (from the same arm) to squeeze your opponent's head.

 

[dunc]

If your opponent tries to deal with your arm/arms, he has to release his head squeeze first. Your problem has been solved. If your arms can't deal with your opponent's arms, that's different issue.

"Head lock" can be countered by "eyebrow wiping". But "eyebrow wiping" can also be countered by ...

I don't have video for "eyebrows wiping" used in the ground game. But it's used in stand up commonly. Your arm strength is always stronger than your opponent's neck strength.



The most common head lock counter:



Apparently, you have not experienced a strong head squeeze yet.

Hi
I was responding to the particular situation from the OP
Namely that he was in the bottom of mount. Reaching up to fish hook is essentially giving your opponent a gift of both an opportunity for them to move their hips higher up your body and a fully outstretched arm. So really bad option
I agree with your point that techniques like these work well in other situations just not the one in the OP
Same as the squeezing point (apologies my post should have been clearer here). There are many effective ways to squeeze the head that you will need to tap to (particularly the jaw), but these aren’t really accessible from the top mount position without compromising balance (there are some options but they are high level)

 

[dunc]

This “mothers milk submission” is the suffocating option I referred to (as opposed to a head crush) and is legit
Mostly used to force your opponent to raise their arms so you can progress up the body

 

[drop bear]

In your video, you are using both arms to squeeze your opponent's head in a full mount position. I don't think you can generate much squeezing power by using 2 arms.

I'm not a BJJ guy. But I believe the head squeeze is more effective to be used in the "side mount". You use your upper arm and lower arm (from the same arm) to squeeze your opponent's head.

I pretty much did that one today. Went for a mother's milk.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If you're goal is always just to learn, you end up okay not winning.

Not really. If you are always learning, then it simply means that you aren't in competition. The fix for that is simple. create a competition where there is a winner and loser. Or a competition where your goal is to prevent certain things from happening. When I sparred against the Sanda team, it wasn't about winning or losing. It was about my ability to be successful in using my techniques. In that example, my success is their failure. If I'm successful with attacking and defending, then winning becomes a byproduct.

This will also work to a certain point, but if someone never gets serious about trying to win in practice, and gain experience with that specific struggle, there will be opponents they don't win against, and they'll plateau and will remain stuck if they don't take a step back and re-evaluate.

When I trained for a competition with my sparring partner. IT wasn't about me beating him. It was about being more successful and being more effective. The end result was that I was able to outperform him even though he was taller than me. When I dazed him, it was all about connecting the punch, it wasn't about dazing him. Him getting dizzy was a byproduct of my success. When he kicked me, my focus wasn't about winning or losing. It was about successfully defending the kick, the knot that he got on his shin was a by product of that.

I used to coach a youth basketball team and one of the things I noticed is that when they focused on winning, they weren't focused on making their shots, they weren't focused on getting on defense. All they cared a bout was scoring more points. So I started to coach them to focus on the task at hand. I explained that if they focus on defense then their opponent's can't score. When they focus on Offense then it means we'll score. When they made the game about that, we did well. But the moment it became about winning, then it all became about soring so people didn't pass when they needed to and didn't defend when they needed to. Fighting is like that to me. The mind should be focused on the task at hand; winning and losing are just a byproduct of that.

If I were to compete today, my focus would be the same thing. How can I hit the ribs so that they can break or bruise. How can I move to avoid my opponent's attacks where my success in defense means his failure on offense.

I'm saying sparring to win occasionally is necessary.

I really wish the world "Win" could be banned. Here's the deal with Win and Lose. Both or byproducts of your successful / unsuccessful attempts of being offensive and defensive. Focus more on being successful with your techniques and "Win will come on its own." "Win / Lose" requires some type of competition. Focusing on being successful with your techniques does not. If I want to get good at single leg take downs, then I can work on that with a partner who will resist. If I often fail at it then my success rate is low. From there I keep training to increase my success rate. What can I do to increase my success rate. Once I gain the skill and ability to be successful with that technique. I can then use it to help win. The techniques I have to pull from the more opportunities I have to be successful at accomplishing a goal. (take someone down, puch them in the face. defending against an attack.)


Lets take a look at a missile defense system. That system first focused on success rate long before it is in a situation where "Winning and losing" is a thing. This is how functional martial arts development in. I've seen many people focus on winning and still fail to do so simply because they did not bother to develop their ability to be successful with their techniques.

 

[dunc]

Not really. If you are always learning, then it simply means that you aren't in competition. The fix for that is simple. create a competition where there is a winner and loser. Or a competition where your goal is to prevent certain things from happening. When I sparred against the Sanda team, it wasn't about winning or losing. It was about my ability to be successful in using my techniques. In that example, my success is their failure. If I'm successful with attacking and defending, then winning becomes a byproduct.


When I trained for a competition with my sparring partner. IT wasn't about me beating him. It was about being more successful and being more effective. The end result was that I was able to outperform him even though he was taller than me. When I dazed him, it was all about connecting the punch, it wasn't about dazing him. Him getting dizzy was a byproduct of my success. When he kicked me, my focus wasn't about winning or losing. It was about successfully defending the kick, the knot that he got on his shin was a by product of that.

I used to coach a youth basketball team and one of the things I noticed is that when they focused on winning, they weren't focused on making their shots, they weren't focused on getting on defense. All they cared a bout was scoring more points. So I started to coach them to focus on the task at hand. I explained that if they focus on defense then their opponent's can't score. When they focus on Offense then it means we'll score. When they made the game about that, we did well. But the moment it became about winning, then it all became about soring so people didn't pass when they needed to and didn't defend when they needed to. Fighting is like that to me. The mind should be focused on the task at hand; winning and losing are just a byproduct of that.

If I were to compete today, my focus would be the same thing. How can I hit the ribs so that they can break or bruise. How can I move to avoid my opponent's attacks where my success in defense means his failure on offense.

I really wish the world "Win" could be banned. Here's the deal with Win and Lose. Both or byproducts of your successful / unsuccessful attempts of being offensive and defensive. Focus more on being successful with your techniques and "Win will come on its own." "Win / Lose" requires some type of competition. Focusing on being successful with your techniques does not. If I want to get good at single leg take downs, then I can work on that with a partner who will resist. If I often fail at it then my success rate is low. From there I keep training to increase my success rate. What can I do to increase my success rate. Once I gain the skill and ability to be successful with that technique. I can then use it to help win. The techniques I have to pull from the more opportunities I have to be successful at accomplishing a goal. (take someone down, puch them in the face. defending against an attack.)


Lets take a look at a missile defense system. That system first focused on success rate long before it is in a situation where "Winning and losing" is a thing. This is how functional martial arts development in. I've seen many people focus on winning and still fail to do so simply because they did not bother to develop their ability to be successful with their techniques.

I feel that you need to train to develop new skills, which pretty much means losing for a while until you get them down
But you also need to develop the skill of controlling the fight and finishing - ie winning
So I oscillate between these training goals depending on who I’m training with &/or what my focus is

 

[Wing Woo Gar]

I pretty much did that one today. Went for a mother's milk.

Just curious here, how would a bite work or not work during this? It sure seems like there’s a chance that you could be bitten badly in that position. Also, if the person in guard is able to keep arms inside there is an appreciable risk to collarbone/ mediastinum exposure. I realize there is a counter for everything so I’m just spitballing.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

these aren’t really accessible from the top mount position

Now I understand the difference. You are talking about top mount. I assume that head squeeze = side mount.

I re-read the OP's 1st post. He didn't mention about "top mount". He did mention "lay his belly on my face". But this can happen in side mount as well (may be side of belly).

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I feel that you need to train to develop new skills, which pretty much means losing for a while until you get them down

When opportunity arrives, you

- try and fail (this is good).
- are afraid to try (this is bad).

 

[drop bear]

Just curious here, how would a bite work or not work during this? It sure seems like there’s a chance that you could be bitten badly in that position. Also, if the person in guard is able to keep arms inside there is an appreciable risk to collarbone/ mediastinum exposure. I realize there is a counter for everything so I’m just spitballing.

Sort of. In jujitsu you are not allowed to bite. But I am also not allowed to throw elbows.

So yes you could. But there are a bunch of high percentage counters if you do.

If it was super life or death. I could probably smother the guy to death with it and the biting wouldn't really get him out of that. It would just suck and I would have injuries.

What they call a shoot out. So they have a submission and I have a submission and we see which of us breaks first.

So I would probably win the shoot out.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Sort of. In jujitsu you are not allowed to bite. But I am also not allowed to throw elbows.

So yes you could. But there are a bunch of high percentage counters if you do.

If it was super life or death. I could probably smother the guy to death with it and the biting wouldn't really get him out of that. It would just suck and I would have injuries.

What they call a shoot out. So they have a submission and I have a submission and we see which of us breaks first.

So I would probably win the shoot out.

What if your opponent bites one of your fingers off? Will you continue to choke him, or will you go to ER to reconnect your finger back ASAP?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

What if your opponent bites one of your fingers off? Will you continue to choke him, or will you go to ER to reconnect your finger back ASAP?

I can’t think of any choke I do where it would be physically possible for my opponent to bite my fingers.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

In jujitsu you are not allowed to ....

In Chinese wrestling you are not allowed to punch. But you train punch anyway. It makes no sense to let ruleset to stop you from training effective counters.

 

[Dirty Dog]

What if your opponent bites one of your fingers off? Will you continue to choke him, or will you go to ER to reconnect your finger back ASAP?

Since I have never once, in 40+ years in the ER, seen a patient who had their finger bitten off while choking someone, I must assume that they universally continue the choke.

 

[drop bear]

What if your opponent bites one of your fingers off? Will you continue to choke him, or will you go to ER to reconnect your finger back ASAP?

I will continue to choke him untill he dies. Then reattach the fingers.