What martial arts fits my parameters?

[marvin8]

Not sure "anti grapple" is the right term to use...that's something I typically associate with certain TMA that make claims about stopping shoots and leg picks.

Like, kneeing someone in the face when they shoot, works. Catching their head and punching it, also works. But I wouldn't call those "anti" anything. Just basic striking that happens to work well against grappling.

More "anti-grappling" with knee in the face, in Masvidal vs Askren...

https://imgur.com/WQVGHCt

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Anti-grappling exists, as evidenced by MMA fights.

My definition of

- anti-grappling is someone doesn't want to learn grappling but wants to deal with grappler.
- anti-striking is someone doesn't want to learn striking but wants to deal with striker.

If you learn grappling, of course the anti-grappling is possible.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I was gonna say, I thought we were discussing MMA fighter (not a "striker") vs wrestler.

The OP clearly said that he doesn't want to learn stand up striking.

I don't want to learn striking while standing but on the ground.

 

[drop bear]

Not sure "anti grapple" is the right term to use...that's something I typically associate with certain TMA that make claims about stopping shoots and leg picks.

Like, kneeing someone in the face when they shoot, works. Catching their head and punching it, also works. But I wouldn't call those "anti" anything. Just basic striking that happens to work well against grappling.

Now, a CMA guy claiming their art has deadly "anti grapple" that's something different and usually BS on review. Some CMA are (in)famous for the "grapple can't take me down!" Stuff ...and there is always ample video out there where it doesn't work.

If you were goings to be technical it would be grapple to strike or something. Because you are still using grappling. Just for a different end result.

 

[drop bear]

The OP clearly said that he doesn't want to learn stand up striking.

Which is fine. Just skip the stand up striking days and still attend the MMA sparring.

Mma classes are generally broken down that way anyway.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Which is fine. Just skip the stand up striking days and still attend the MMA sparring.

Mma classes are generally broken down that way anyway.

Even if the OP doesn't want to throw any punches, he still needs to deal with his opponent's punches.

You can't choose your opponent in street fight. You also need to have a safe sport environment to train that.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One good punch can KO anyone,

This is why I believe one's MA training is not complete if he has no ability to deal with incoming head punches. When I said that in a Judo forum many years ago, everybody hated me for saying that. Today, I'm sure people will hate me if I say this in any BJJ forum.

What do you think B's answer will be?

A: Dear master! I truly don't want to learn those 20 forms that you try to teach me. I just want to learn how to deal with punches, so my head won't get punched. Can you just teach me that?
B: ...

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One good punch can KO anyone,

To be able to "deal with head punch" is much more important than to be able to deal with

- body punch,
- head/body kick,
- take down, or
- ground game.

The issue is "How to train that?" IMO, this can be an interested discussion subject.

 

[Dirty Dog]

To be able to "deal with head punch" is much more important than to be able to deal with

- body punch,
- head/body kick,
- take down, or
- ground game.

And how, exactly, do you reach the conclusion that blocking a high punch is the single most important thing you can learn?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

And how, exactly, do you reach the conclusion that blocking a high punch is the single most important thing you can learn?

Old saying said that in a fight, if you don't punch at your opponent's head, you may have to fight him from sun raise until sun set.

You can knock down your opponent with less force for your head punch than for your body punch.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Old saying said that in a fight, if you don't punch at your opponent's head, you may have to fight him from sun raise until sun set.

You can knock down your opponent with less force for your head punch than for your body punch.

I'm honestly not sure which of these two lines is sillier.

 

[marvin8]

Anti-grappling exists, as evidenced by MMA fights. I believe all top-rated professional MMA fighters include striking training.

Aljamain Sterling (grappler) vs Sean O'Malley (striker):

1. Sean (with pink hair) leads Aljamain by moving laterally.
2. Sean feints, controls Aljamain's lead hand, kicks (push) and steps back (pull) to draw Aljamain's counter pressure and reaching.
3. Aljamain tries to grab Sean's lead wrist and throw a straight left.
4. Sean moves laterally and throws a right hand knocking down Aljamain.

https://imgur.com/P27aR8w

Yet, your student does not use your two armed long guard. "He used kicks to close the distance, [then] clinch."

In MMA, elite grapplers integrate striking and grappling with proven strategies, tactics and techniques.

More "anti-grappling" with knee in the face, in Masvidal vs Askren...

https://imgur.com/WQVGHCt

I don't believe anti-grappling is possible. But I do believe anti-striking is possible.

My definition of

- anti-grappling is someone doesn't want to learn grappling but wants to deal with grappler.

Out of the two posted fights against grapplers (adhere then punch and knee to face, before clinch), what do you believe is not possible?

 

[drop bear]

Even if the OP doesn't want to throw any punches, he still needs to deal with his opponent's punches.

You can't choose your opponent in street fight. You also need to have a safe sport environment to train that.

The whole point of a street fight is you can choose your opponent.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Out of the two posted fights against grapplers (adhere then punch and knee to face, before clinch), what do you believe is not possible?

Maybe ant-grappling is not the proper term. anti-clinch may be better. Anti-clinch assumes the clinch has been established.

 

[marvin8]

Maybe ant-grappling is not the proper term. anti-clinch may be better. Anti-clinch assumes the clinch has been established.

However, that would limit it to wrestling rules. Since the OP asks, "To summarize I want a martial arts that teaches you how to close the distance..." Let's use your first definition.

My definition of

- anti-grappling is someone doesn't want to learn grappling but wants to deal with grappler.

Regardless, now will you answer the question?

Out of the two posted fights against grapplers (adhere then punch and knee to face, before clinch), what do you believe is not possible?

 

[Oily Dragon]

To be able to "deal with head punch" is much more important than to be able to deal with

- body punch,
- head/body kick,
- take down, or
- ground game.

The issue is "How to train that?" IMO, this can be an interested discussion subject.

Well, I can tell you that a very effective way of punching someone in the head is to take them down first.

And that applies to both street fight and sport combat that allows it.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Anti-grappling exists, as evidenced by MMA fights. I believe all top-rated professional MMA fighters include striking training.

Aljamain Sterling (grappler) vs Sean O'Malley (striker):

1. Sean (with pink hair) leads Aljamain by moving laterally.
2. Sean feints, controls Aljamain's lead hand, kicks (push) and steps back (pull) to draw Aljamain's counter pressure and reaching.
3. Aljamain tries to grab Sean's lead wrist and throw a straight left.
4. Sean moves laterally and throws a right hand knocking down Aljamain.

https://imgur.com/P27aR8w

Yet, your student does not use your two armed long guard. "He used kicks to close the distance, [then] clinch."



In MMA, elite grapplers integrate striking and grappling with proven strategies, tactics and techniques.

My anti grappling has always been grappling. When Tony tried to grab me, I used circling arms. WHICHis common in kung fu systems but is often misunderstood. Anti grappling, should probably be called something else. Grappling Prevent maybe, since you are denying another person's ability to grab you.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Out of the two posted fights against grapplers (adhere then punch and knee to face, before clinch), what do you believe is not possible?

Anti-striking assumes the fists are flying. If A takes B down before B even has chance to punch at A, I won't call that anti-striking.

Anti-grappling assumes the grappling has already happened (such as a head lock). If A knocks B down before B even has chance to throw A, I won't call that anti-grappling.

When A knocks/takes B down while B is doing nothing, I won't call that "anti" anything.

This is anti-grappling. The grappling has happened to a striker. The striker has to deal with it (assume the striker has no grappling training).

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Well, I can tell you that a very effective way of punching someone in the head is to take them down first.

And that applies to both street fight and sport combat that allows it.

That's the combat Shuai Chiao strategy. It's called "follow on attack".

When you

- hold a matchbox and strike it, that matchbox will fly away.
- put a matchbox on the ground and step on it, even a kid can smash that matchbox.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

This is why I believe one's MA training is not complete if he has no ability to deal with incoming head punches. When I said that in a Judo forum many years ago, everybody hated me for saying that. Today, I'm sure people will hate me if I say this in any BJJ forum.

Nah, most BJJ practitioners who practice BJJ as a martial art agree with you on that. (I certainly would.)

There is an increasing contingent of BJJ practitioners who only train for sport and so aren't concerned about dealing with punches or being complete martial artists, but they wouldn't necessarily disagree with you, they just don't care about "complete MA training".

There are a few who think they can train just the sport grappling aspect and somehow will be automatically capable of dealing with strikes despite never training with them, but I'd say those are a delusional minority.