Methodology against grappler. Your thoughts?

[donnaTKD]

What is your methodology or school of thought when fighting/sparring a grappler?

One which is popular, however not very practical in sparring do to risk of injury, is to strike the back of the neck and head with elbow or hand. Another is to raise your knee into there face. Both aggressive and not always going to work.

One I was contemplating is to step back and turn, pulling them past.

What are your thoughts here? What has worked for you? What do you theorize?

i wait for them to make first move - cos my first move is always a stright knee down the middle either he's made of stern stuff or he's gunna go down before he's got a full grip oon my legs

if he goes for my shoulders then i might try a hip throw or a drag past with a reverse elbow and add a trip into the mix

if he thinks that he'd like to kick me then that's easy enough - catch it then throw it across his body and kick to the head

drag past reverse elbow, spinning knee.

 

[Steve]

Pretty much, except I would say that in a real fight (with strikes) top of guard still has a bit of an edge. Bottom of guard is as close to neutral as you are going to get from the bottom but it's still not completely equal.

I get that. Either way, bottom guard isn't considered a dominant position. It is, at best, neutral.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Argus]

In MMA, the best anti-grapplers are solid grapplers. The quintessential example of this was Chuck Liddell. An excellent wrestler who used his skill as a wrestler to avoid the ground. The best way to stay on your feet to take advantage of your striking is to be a skilled grappler.

Some day I'll make it out to a BJJ school so that I'll know what I'm talking about whenever "grappling" or "the ground" comes up

I'm very interested to hear from grapplers how best to counter grappling, though. When you say "the best way to take advantage of striking is to be a skilled grappler," what do you mean, exactly?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

When you say "the best way to take advantage of striking is to be a skilled grappler," what do you mean, exactly?

If you are fighting a grappler and you lack grappling skills of your own, you have to be very, very careful about how you strike. If you throw a kick or a really committed punch or any kind of extended combination then the grappler can use that against you to clinch and take you down. This greatly reduces the effectiveness of your strikes.

On the other hand, if you have good clinch and takedown defense then you can freely use your full striking arsenal without worrying that you will end up in a bad situation. Even better, when the grappler tries to lead with his own attacks you can stuff his takedown attempts and make him pay with some solid strikes. Now he's the one who has to be afraid of committing to his attacks.

Of course, what's best is to have solid offensive and defensive skills in both the striking and grappling ranges. That way there is no safe zone for your opponent at any range.

 

[drop bear]

?? BJJ is not traditionally a bottom game, although some of the modern sport players have turned it into such. Classic traditional BJJ doctrine has always been that being on top is better. The guard is just an equalizer for when the other guy manages to get on top.

Would you say the bjj top game is as comprehensive as say a wrestling top game?

 

[drop bear]

Some day I'll make it out to a BJJ school so that I'll know what I'm talking about whenever "grappling" or "the ground" comes up

I'm very interested to hear from grapplers how best to counter grappling, though. When you say "the best way to take advantage of striking is to be a skilled grappler," what do you mean, exactly?

Well it is the other half of grappling.

The not getting taken down bit

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

When you say "the best way to take advantage of striking is to be a skilled grappler," what do you mean, exactly?

If you throw a kick or a really committed punch or any kind of extended combination then the grappler can use that against you to clinch and take you down. This greatly reduces the effectiveness of your strikes.

It's much

- easier for a grappler to reduce a striker's striking skill effectiveness.
- harder for a striker to reduce a grappler's grappling skill effectiveness.

When a striker also cross trains grappling, his striking strategy will be changed as well.

For a

- "pure" striker, a punch is just a punch.
- "cross trained" striker, a punch is more than just a punch. Old saying said, "When you miss your punch, you should never pull your hand back empty". A grappler's punch can be like a hook that will pull back anything that he can touch in order to help him to obtain his "clinch".

A grappler can turn his striking arms into a hook. That hook may help a grappler a great deal, but it may not help a striker very much.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Would you say the bjj top game is as comprehensive as say a wrestling top game?

In some ways more comprehensive, but that's not really what you're asking.

Wrestlers are (on average) better at the art of actually staying on top. I'd say that has more to do with the time they spend training it and their phenomenal physical conditioning than with having more techniques for the position. They also tend to be better at takedowns, which means they get to start out on top against most people.

BJJers have better submission and guard passing skills from the top, but they usually aren't as good with takedowns as the wrestlers, so a wrestling vs BJJ match will usually end up with the BJJ guy on his back. That doesn't mean the BJJer wants to be on his back, just that the wrestler is better at getting the top position. The BJJ player would prefer to be on top, and against someone who doesn't have superior wrestling skills he will usually be able to get there.

 

[drop bear]

In some ways more comprehensive, but that's not really what you're asking.

Wrestlers are (on average) better at the art of actually staying on top. I'd say that has more to do with the time they spend training it and their phenomenal physical conditioning than with having more techniques for the position. They also tend to be better at takedowns, which means they get to start out on top against most people.

BJJers have better submission and guard passing skills from the top, but they usually aren't as good with takedowns as the wrestlers, so a wrestling vs BJJ match will usually end up with the BJJ guy on his back. That doesn't mean the BJJer wants to be on his back, just that the wrestler is better at getting the top position. The BJJ player would prefer to be on top, and against someone who doesn't have superior wrestling skills he will usually be able to get there.

So less comprehensive top game. I mean the guy who gets on top has the better top game.

 

[Argus]

If you are fighting a grappler and you lack grappling skills of your own, you have to be very, very careful about how you strike. If you throw a kick or a really committed punch or any kind of extended combination then the grappler can use that against you to clinch and take you down. This greatly reduces the effectiveness of your strikes.

On the other hand, if you have good clinch and takedown defense then you can freely use your full striking arsenal without worrying that you will end up in a bad situation. Even better, when the grappler tries to lead with his own attacks you can stuff his takedown attempts and make him pay with some solid strikes. Now he's the one who has to be afraid of committing to his attacks.

Of course, what's best is to have solid offensive and defensive skills in both the striking and grappling ranges. That way there is no safe zone for your opponent at any range.

I see. So, you are advocating "being familiar" with grappling methodology, and having some grappling to fall back on, but not necessarily using grappling in response?

I guess I'm wondering what constitutes "grappling skills," though. The line gets a little blurry with some arts like WC or (I would presume even more so) Taiji, as we're quite familiar with controlling limbs, being grabbed, pulled, pushed, put in the occasional lock, and all manner of things. Granted, take-downs, chokes, and ground fighting is all foreign to us, and certainly warrants study.

In my very limited experience training with grapplers (by which I mean one Judoka and a few amatures), I found the most important thing to be simply not letting them get underneath you, and keeping your arms and elbows in tight and close to the center so that you can avoid winding up in a clinch. Getting offline, and controlling the opponent's head/neck when possible met with good results for me. I try to retain my normal WC structure, but sink lower and take care that a leg isn't grabbed.

Does this jive with the experience of those of you who are, or have trained with competent grapplers?

 

[Steve]

Would you say the bjj top game is as comprehensive as say a wrestling top game?

Freestyle wrestling? Folk wrestling? Catch wrestling? If you're referring to freestyle wrestling, a million times yes. What wrestlers typically bring to BJJ (ie, white belt in BJJ/experienced freestyle wrestler) is excellent wrestling take downs, excellent shoulder pressure on top, great body awareness and ability to move/transition well on top, solid competitive spirit and work ethic and a lot of bad habits. Wrestling is an excellent foundation for BJJ and can give someone a huge head start in many ways.

 

[Steve]

In some ways more comprehensive, but that's not really what you're asking.

Wrestlers are (on average) better at the art of actually staying on top. I'd say that has more to do with the time they spend training it and their phenomenal physical conditioning than with having more techniques for the position. They also tend to be better at takedowns, which means they get to start out on top against most people.

BJJers have better submission and guard passing skills from the top, but they usually aren't as good with takedowns as the wrestlers, so a wrestling vs BJJ match will usually end up with the BJJ guy on his back. That doesn't mean the BJJer wants to be on his back, just that the wrestler is better at getting the top position. The BJJ player would prefer to be on top, and against someone who doesn't have superior wrestling skills he will usually be able to get there.

Wrestlers all start off with heavy shoulders and light hips, making them very easy to sweep. This is particularly true in the transitions. They settle into positions very heavy, and they tend to move very fluidly, but their hips tend to get very high as they sacrifice pressure in favor of speed and athleticism. So, sweeping on the transitions is typically pretty easy, until they learn some BJJ.

So, I'd say I agree that a wrestler may start on top, but until that wrestler ALSO has BJJ, they won't stay there long.

 

[Steve]

Some day I'll make it out to a BJJ school so that I'll know what I'm talking about whenever "grappling" or "the ground" comes up

I'm very interested to hear from grapplers how best to counter grappling, though. When you say "the best way to take advantage of striking is to be a skilled grappler," what do you mean, exactly?

I think this was answered very well already, but I'll just echo what was said. What I was referring to is your ability to defend the takedown, and if taken down, your ability to regain your feet. Defending the takedown and returning to standing from the ground are both skills learned by training in a legit grappling style.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

So less comprehensive top game. I mean the guy who gets on top has the better top game.

Nope, that's not what comprehensive means.

BJJ top game: takedowns, guard passes, controlling top position, submitting opponent from top
Wrestling top game: takedowns, controlling top position

BJJ bottom game: protecting self while on bottom, escaping/reversing from bottom, submitting opponent from bottom
Wrestling bottom game: escaping/reversing from bottom

Wrestlers don't have a more comprehensive top game, they have a more specialized top game. Naturally they're better within the limits of their specialization. On the other hand, who is more likely to pass your guard or submit you when they're on top - a wrestler or BJJ player?

I'm not arguing about who has the better top game, mind you. That would depend on the question, better for what?

 

[Stonebrow]

That sounds about right. A grappler needs to get underneath you to get any leverage on you. Wrestling 101: lower your center of gravity, shoot.

 

[drop bear]

Nope, that's not what comprehensive means.

BJJ top game: takedowns, guard passes, controlling top position, submitting opponent from top
Wrestling top game: takedowns, controlling top position

BJJ bottom game: protecting self while on bottom, escaping/reversing from bottom, submitting opponent from bottom
Wrestling bottom game: escaping/reversing from bottom

Wrestlers don't have a more comprehensive top game, they have a more specialized top game. Naturally they're better within the limits of their specialization. On the other hand, who is more likely to pass your guard or submit you when they're on top - a wrestler or BJJ player?

I'm not arguing about who has the better top game, mind you. That would depend on the question, better for what?

OK we will go with better then. And better for finishing on top while engaged in a grapple.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Wrestlers all start off with heavy shoulders and light hips, making them very easy to sweep. This is particularly true in the transitions. They settle into positions very heavy, and they tend to move very fluidly, but their hips tend to get very high as they sacrifice pressure in favor of speed and athleticism. So, sweeping on the transitions is typically pretty easy, until they learn some BJJ.

So, I'd say I agree that a wrestler may start on top, but until that wrestler ALSO has BJJ, they won't stay there long.

This is my experience as well working with collegiate level wrestlers in BJJ. I would also add that it was easy to sweep them while they are training with a Gi but in No-Gi it was substantially harder but was still doable. However, after they learn a bit say after a month or so the collegiate level wrestlers I worked with became a bear to deal with.

 

[Buka]

I know we all live in different parts of the world, so I don't know what's readily available in a lot of places, but in today's day and age, grappling, in one form or another, is all over the place. Especially compared to say, ten years ago. I think anyone in a striking art, who's serious about their art and/or loves training, and is concerned about practical self defense for themselves and any one they might teach, should spend some time training in a ground art, even if it's for only a few months. Shouldn't be too hard to find some place. I think you'll love it and it can only make your own overall game better. And it can only make you a better instructor in what you already do.

And it's really fun.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

OK we will go with better then. And better for finishing on top while engaged in a grapple.

If by "finishing on top" you mean ending up and staying on top as opposed to finishing with a submission, then I agree.

 

[Hanzou]

I know we all live in different parts of the world, so I don't know what's readily available in a lot of places, but in today's day and age, grappling, in one form or another, is all over the place. Especially compared to say, ten years ago. I think anyone in a striking art, who's serious about their art and/or loves training, and is concerned about practical self defense for themselves and any one they might teach, should spend some time training in a ground art, even if it's for only a few months. Shouldn't be too hard to find some place. I think you'll love it and it can only make your own overall game better. And it can only make you a better instructor in what you already do.

And it's really fun.

I second that.

Some of the takedown defenses coming out of the striking arts are laughably bad.