a queation

[Rook]

Igor,

Igor V. did train alot of grappling with highly qualified samboists in Russia.

Vanderlai... These are good grapplers?

Vanderlai is a BJJ black belt and was the All Brazil Armed Forces Champion in both freestyle and greco-roman wrestling. He trains with world class grapplers six days a week.

 

[James Kovacich]

The thing is, Chuck is more qualified as a grappler than he is as a striker,
In Chuck Liddell, we arn't talking about a pure striker at all, but rather a very well qualified grappler who hits very hard.



.

Are you sure about that?
http://www.slokickboxing.com/instructors.htm
Chuck Liddell is the Master Instructor at SLO Kickboxing. He is currently ranked #1in the world. His martial arts career began at the age of twelve with Koei-Kan Karate today he holds 2 black belts and a national championship title. Chuck started the sport of wrestling in San Marcos High School in Santa Barbara his Sophomore year. He came to Cal Poly University, San Luis Obispo where he was a 4-year starter at the Division 1 Wrestling program. Chuck was also a State Champion in Freestyle Wrestling for California. After his wrestling career, he missed the competition.

As fate would have it, he heard of a former professional kickboxer by the name of John "The Train" Hackleman, world-class kickboxer ranked #5 in the world. Chuck went to John's dojo called the "The Pit" in the hills of Arroyo Grande, CA and learned the art of kickboxing and also earned his 2nd black belt in Kajukembo. Chuck went on to become a North American Champion for the IKF, WKA, WKC and the USMTA.

 

[James Kovacich]

You can't change physics. If my shoulders are on the ground, I won't be throwing a right cross. Instead, I might try a hook or an elbow, but much power is robbed from being unable to utilize the whole body - that's physical kinisthetics (I think that's the proper term).

I have to agree.

 

[Marginal]

Igor V. did train alot of grappling with highly qualified samboists in Russia.



Vanderlai is a BJJ black belt and was the All Brazil Armed Forces Champion in both freestyle and greco-roman wrestling. He trains with world class grapplers six days a week.

Neither is known for their grappling despite that.

 

[MJS]

When was this? There were fights where people with grappling and striking beat people with only grappling and there were fights where one person with grappling and striking beat another with grappling and striking. I can't think of an instance in which a good grappler lost to a pure striker.

I may be reading his comment wrong, but I take it as referring to beating the people strictly using striking skill as the method of ending the fight. While Chuck has excellent take down defense, he's not using grappling to end the fight. I may be wrong, but I can't recall a fight in which he used a submission to end it.

 

[MJS]

The thing is, Chuck is more qualified as a grappler than he is as a striker, and spends more time practicing his takedown defense and groundwork than he does his striking. He is a BJJ purple belt and an NCAA Division 1 Nationalist wrestler, and trains with world class grapplers and solid wrestlers 6 days a week. In Chuck Liddell, we arn't talking about a pure striker at all, but rather a very well qualified grappler who hits very hard.

How do you figure, when the majority of his fights are being won by strikes?

Taken from Sherdog For someone that you're claiming is more qualified as a grappler, I see only 1 fight won by submission. The rest are strikes or kicks.

 

[MJS]

Vanderlai is a BJJ black belt and was the All Brazil Armed Forces Champion in both freestyle and greco-roman wrestling. He trains with world class grapplers six days a week.

Taken from Sherdog

He may have a BJJ background, but the majority of his wins were not by submission, they were strikes.

 

[MJS]

Igor V. did train alot of grappling with highly qualified samboists in Russia.

Sherdog

Looking at this, he seems to be a bit closer to the submission end, although more wins were done by KO.

 

[Tez3]

When was this? There were fights where people with grappling and striking beat people with only grappling and there were fights where one person with grappling and striking beat another with grappling and striking. I can't think of an instance in which a good grappler lost to a pure striker.

I have seen it happen, rare I must admit though. The last time was in September on one of our shows, a pro fight. Phil 'Billy' Harris who's also a Judo international was beaten by David Smyth by a flying knee to the head in 37 secs round one! We knew of Billy's record though so it was David's gameplan to keep him standing and not try to go to the floor with him. David's grappling is very good but not Olympic standard! I have the DVD, I don't think it will play in the States but will send out to anyone who thinks they can play it. There's other good fights on it too.
http://www.mmauniverse.com/fighters/SS14964

 

[CuongNhuka]

ohhhh... I'm gonna take issue with this one. I'm quite sure I'm not a master, so maybe that's the problem, but I've spent a few minutes in the ring and on the mats. I seriously doubt I'll ever be able to throw a shovel kick from the floor that would do any good. Standing up, my shovel kick can and has sent opponents to the floor holding their thigh. I'm not taking issue with the intent of your post - I'm all for fighting to your strengths, I just have issues with words like "any" and "always" when dealing with non-choreographed movements. You can't change physics. If my shoulders are on the ground, I won't be throwing a right cross. Instead, I might try a hook or an elbow, but much power is robbed from being unable to utilize the whole body - that's physical kinisthetics (I think that's the proper term).

I would explain how one could (theoritcly) apply shovel kick from the ground. But, since I don't know how to do it, I cann't. If you could explain how to do it, I'll get right to it. But my point is the person who has mastered a technique/concept/system can apply anthing they know in some way. And you could throw a cross from your back. Sorta. If you have them in the guard, flex them out, and then throw a punch into there face. Sort of a cross.
That is called physical kinisthetics. And you cann't change the laws of physics. But doing kicks form the ground doesn't violete the laws of physics.

 

[Last Fearner]

why is it that about 80% of all stand up vs grappling fights ive seen have resulted in a win to the grappler?

Ordinarily, I would take issue with the "80%" as I often do with random "statistics." However, since the Chris' statement said "fights ive seen," then it is a fair estimate of what percentage chris has witnessed. To this, my answer is simple. It is because you have witnessed more fights where the grappler happened to beat a "stand up" fighter.

Most of the other comments in this thread have been fairly logical and accurate according to my own personal experience. The winner of any fight depends on a few factors. One is the physical attributes of the person fighting. Some of the things that give a person the "physical" advantage include: being stronger, quicker, having longer reach (for strikers), or having a shorter, more compact body structure (for throwing and grappling). A person who faces an opponent with greater physical attributes must do something else to overcome that disadvantage.

This is where I identify the second factor: Technical skills. This is what some would attribute to the "style" the individual studies, but I would suggest that is not really the case. Most people lump Martial Art schools in groups according to what their historical background is, and what area of technical skills they favor, and call this the "style." As it has been mentioned, most fighters today will train to be fairly well-rounded, and are able to handle a variety of situations.

I label the areas as three basic categories, which can be further divided into sub-categories. An unarmed attacker (in the street or in the ring) is going to do one of three things to me: 1. Strike me, 2. Throw me to the ground, or 3. grab and hold me. Any one, or combination of these three can be utilized by my attacker, as well as by me when defending.

A strike can be performed with virtually any part of the body (hand, foot, knee, elbow, head, shoulder, hip, and the list goes on), and can be done at long range, medium range, and close range. Strikes can be executed effectively while standing, sitting, or lying on the ground with minor adjustments to position, angle, and which strikes to use.

A throw can be performed by a skilled fighter which would either end the fight right there, or incapacitate the attacker to make a finishing strike, or hold a relatively easy application (including chokes, and twists to break bones).

The fact is that none of the techniques in any category have an inherent superiority over either of the other categories. A strike is only effective if it hits the target, and lands with enough force to do damage. A throw will only work if you are able to off balance your opponent, enter close enough to execute, and have the attacker land poorly so as not to be able to recover and continue to fight. Any hold achieved through the process of grappling will be effective if you can avoid being struck or thrown prior to full application. You can apply submission or injury holds while standing, sitting or lying on the ground as well.

If someone attempts to strike, then you can avoid the hit or reduce the major impact. If someone attempts to throw, then you should avoid being off balance or reduce the major impact. If someone attempts to grab and hold, you can avoid the grab, release from the grab, reverse the hold, throw them if they are standing, or strike them any way you can. If you are a good grappler, you might be superior in that category, but otherwise, striking can still prevail.

The third factor that I attribute to a successful match is the mental ability of the fighter. This includes a wide range of knowledge, skill, and individual qualities. Some of these include the following: trickery and deception, timing, quick reactions, mental focus, determination, motivation, perseverance, indomitable spirit, and how to properly apply the skills which they possess.

Consider that a person who trains with only one kicking technique, and nothing else, they would be limited in their options. However, if they became so quick, powerful, accurate, and skillful in the application of that one kick, there might not be anyone who could get past it. My High School wrestling coach used to tell a story about one of his past students who had mastered one skill - - a counter to a single-leg take-down which resulted in a pinning hold. He would stand with one leg forward, unprotected, just taunting his opponents to take it. If they did, his move never failed him. Not that he would have been unbeatable world-wide in any arena under any rules, but it worked for him then on the wrestling mat.

is it really 100% about the fighter , if it is then why do grapplers always win??!!

I think we can agree that this is not true. Not only do grapplers not "always" win, but there is not a higher percentage based on grappling vs. striking, or throwing unless there are restrictions by rules agreed upon.

I began my training in wrestling and Judo in 1965 at the age of five. Three years of Junior High wrestling, and three years of Senior High wrestling. When I was 15, I joined a Judo dojo and could beat the Black Belts in grappling - - until they applied a choke hold since I was not accustomed to these "illegal" maneuvers. I quickly learned. I knew these holds, but my years in wrestling had conditioned me not to use them, nor to defend against them. Today, I train smarter. I prefer to remain in the "out of range" position. "You want me, come and get me!" - lol.

If you can get past my legs, my hands are just as deadly. If you grab me, I can strike, kick, or throw at close range. If you take me down, and survive the fraction of a second it takes to do so, then I will grapple. I know what to do on the ground, but if you are better than me at grappling because that is your main focus, I will do enough to avoid being injured or restrained, and position myself to strike with deadly force. If I can get to my feet, all the better, but I do not rely on that option. I will strike with hands, elbows, knees, feet, etc. from a variety of trajectories.

That is my strategy! It might work, and it might not, but it depends mostly on the two (or more) individuals involved, and what skills they bring to the fight. You might be better than me in 99% of your chosen techniques promoted by your "style," but I will do my best to exploit that 1%.

CM. D.J. Eisenhart

 

[Tez3]

I've seen a couple of KO's from kicks from the floor. It's actually quite easy to kick up, it's something we train at. Ground and pound, throwing punches from the floor is also something we train. Throwing them up from undrneath and throwing them down from the top.
Good post Last Fearner! In a competitive situation, you find out your opponents strengths and weaknesses therefor you won't get an accurate indicatation of what wins more fights. As I said before with our lad David Smyths fight we knew his opponent was strong on the ground so it was intended that David keep the fight standing where the opponent wasn't nearly as strong. It has a lot to do with tactics how a fight goes. Self defence is a totally different situation.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Keep in mind that sport fighting is somewhat influenced by the rules of engagement and that what you see is often the competitors responding to the rules. This is especially true, for example, in football. The rules committee every year looks at how the rules affect the play and then make changes to the rules to balance out what the lgeal as a whole wants to see; more offensive, more defense, more passing more running. Every sport organization does the same things, tailor the rules for what they want, what they want to present to the audince. Then the copetitors respond o rule changes and change their tactics and strategies to work best within the rules.

And then it's cyclical, fighters win using a technique or philosophy and if it's successful, then everyone starts picking up on that offensively, until someone finds an effective defense for it, in which case that kind aof attack becomes less of a 'sure thing', so people move on to something else. It's an arms race of sorts as people are chasing each other to gain the upper hand and the tide drifts from technique to technique.

My limited knowledge of the history of these kinds of events is that for awhile that takedowns, submissions, etc...were very successful because it was new to a lot of fighters and a lot of them couldn't handle it (didn't know how to defend it) Now it seems take-down defense has become much better trained so there are more fights staying up. Someday it will change because the ground-fighters will start training more in moves to defeat sprawls and such (yes, they exist). Until someone invents the undefensible shoot or throw or the unpenatrable sprawl or kick, it will always be shifting back and forth. So it's impossible to take a look at a snapshot of time ('these days" or "the last five championship figts" or whatever) and draw a conclusion about the effectivness of a particular fighting style.

Personally, I prefer stand-up striking (for reasons other than competition) so I'm happy to see better takedown defense and more fights ending with hard strikes, knocks outs, TKOs, etc... but I'm not under the illusion that it's a better style of fighting, it's just what has come to more prominence more recently. the tide will shift and we will all learn something a bit better..

 

[exile]

Ordinarily, I would take issue with the "80%" as I often do with random "statistics." However, since the Chris' statement said "fights ive seen," then it is a fair estimate of what percentage chris has witnessed. To this, my answer is simple. It is because you have witnessed more fights where the grappler happened to beat a "stand up" fighter.

Most of the other comments in this thread have been fairly logical and accurate according to my own personal experience. The winner of any fight depends on a few factors. One is the physical attributes of the person fighting. Some of the things that give a person the "physical" advantage include: being stronger, quicker, having longer reach (for strikers), or having a shorter, more compact body structure (for throwing and grappling). A person who faces an opponent with greater physical attributes must do something else to overcome that disadvantage.

This is where I identify the second factor: Technical skills. This is what some would attribute to the "style" the individual studies, but I would suggest that is not really the case. Most people lump Martial Art schools in groups according to what their historical background is, and what area of technical skills they favor, and call this the "style." As it has been mentioned, most fighters today will train to be fairly well-rounded, and are able to handle a variety of situations.

I label the areas as three basic categories, which can be further divided into sub-categories. An unarmed attacker (in the street or in the ring) is going to do one of three things to me: 1. Strike me, 2. Throw me to the ground, or 3. grab and hold me. Any one, or combination of these three can be utilized by my attacker, as well as by me when defending.

A strike can be performed with virtually any part of the body (hand, foot, knee, elbow, head, shoulder, hip, and the list goes on), and can be done at long range, medium range, and close range. Strikes can be executed effectively while standing, sitting, or lying on the ground with minor adjustments to position, angle, and which strikes to use.

A throw can be performed by a skilled fighter which would either end the fight right there, or incapacitate the attacker to make a finishing strike, or hold a relatively easy application (including chokes, and twists to break bones).

The fact is that none of the techniques in any category have an inherent superiority over either of the other categories. A strike is only effective if it hits the target, and lands with enough force to do damage. A throw will only work if you are able to off balance your opponent, enter close enough to execute, and have the attacker land poorly so as not to be able to recover and continue to fight. Any hold achieved through the process of grappling will be effective if you can avoid being struck or thrown prior to full application. You can apply submission or injury holds while standing, sitting or lying on the ground as well.

If someone attempts to strike, then you can avoid the hit or reduce the major impact. If someone attempts to throw, then you should avoid being off balance or reduce the major impact. If someone attempts to grab and hold, you can avoid the grab, release from the grab, reverse the hold, throw them if they are standing, or strike them any way you can. If you are a good grappler, you might be superior in that category, but otherwise, striking can still prevail.

The third factor that I attribute to a successful match is the mental ability of the fighter. This includes a wide range of knowledge, skill, and individual qualities. Some of these include the following: trickery and deception, timing, quick reactions, mental focus, determination, motivation, perseverance, indomitable spirit, and how to properly apply the skills which they possess.

Consider that a person who trains with only one kicking technique, and nothing else, they would be limited in their options. However, if they became so quick, powerful, accurate, and skillful in the application of that one kick, there might not be anyone who could get past it. My High School wrestling coach used to tell a story about one of his past students who had mastered one skill - - a counter to a single-leg take-down which resulted in a pinning hold. He would stand with one leg forward, unprotected, just taunting his opponents to take it. If they did, his move never failed him. Not that he would have been unbeatable world-wide in any arena under any rules, but it worked for him then on the wrestling mat.


I think we can agree that this is not true. Not only do grapplers not "always" win, but there is not a higher percentage based on grappling vs. striking, or throwing unless there are restrictions by rules agreed upon.

I began my training in wrestling and Judo in 1965 at the age of five. Three years of Junior High wrestling, and three years of Senior High wrestling. When I was 15, I joined a Judo dojo and could beat the Black Belts in grappling - - until they applied a choke hold since I was not accustomed to these "illegal" maneuvers. I quickly learned. I knew these holds, but my years in wrestling had conditioned me not to use them, nor to defend against them. Today, I train smarter. I prefer to remain in the "out of range" position. "You want me, come and get me!" - lol.

If you can get past my legs, my hands are just as deadly. If you grab me, I can strike, kick, or throw at close range. If you take me down, and survive the fraction of a second it takes to do so, then I will grapple. I know what to do on the ground, but if you are better than me at grappling because that is your main focus, I will do enough to avoid being injured or restrained, and position myself to strike with deadly force. If I can get to my feet, all the better, but I do not rely on that option. I will strike with hands, elbows, knees, feet, etc. from a variety of trajectories.

That is my strategy! It might work, and it might not, but it depends mostly on the two (or more) individuals involved, and what skills they bring to the fight. You might be better than me in 99% of your chosen techniques promoted by your "style," but I will do my best to exploit that 1%.

CM. D.J. Eisenhart

This post deserves be a sticky in every forum, IMHO. I think Last Fearner has said the last word on this subject, in a sense, and it should put to rest all of the grappling vs. striking vs. mixed vs. whatever debates that surface with depressing regularity on all MA boards I've ever looked at. (It almost certainly won't, unfortunately, but that's not his fault...)

Note something else: close up, Master Eisenhart uses hands, elbows, locks, and a variety of other techs that TKD in some quarters isn't supposed to have, judging from the number of discussions in which the "TKD = kicking" comes up (and kicking from distance, at that). All experienced TKD practitioners—and MAists of any stripe—know better: their respective arts contain effective weapons for all fighting ranges, and use pretty much every available striking surface the body offers. The question, over and over again, is: do you train those weapons and resources that your art offers, and if so, how realistically? These simple truth get overlooked all the time, alas. Thanks again to LF for restating them lucidly and authoritatively.

 

[kcast]

My first thought is "90 percent of statistics are made up." (Somebody has something like that in their signature).
But seriously, 80 percent? What about,
• Matt Hughes (grappler) vs Georges St. Pierre (striker)?
• Tito Ortiz vs Chuck Liddell?
• Jeff Monson vs Tim Sylvia?
etc., etc., etc.

took the words out of my mouth!! Good point!

 

[Rook]

Are you sure about that?
http://www.slokickboxing.com/instructors.htm
Chuck Liddell is the Master Instructor at SLO Kickboxing. He is currently ranked #1in the world. His martial arts career began at the age of twelve with Koei-Kan Karate today he holds 2 black belts and a national championship title.

Within koei-kan karate, whatever that may be.

Chuck started the sport of wrestling in San Marcos High School in Santa Barbara his Sophomore year. He came to Cal Poly University, San Luis Obispo where he was a 4-year starter at the Division 1 Wrestling program. Chuck was also a State Champion in Freestyle Wrestling for California. After his wrestling career, he missed the competition.

Strong credentials. He did well on the national level as well.

As fate would have it, he heard of a former professional kickboxer by the name of John "The Train" Hackleman, world-class kickboxer ranked #5 in the world.

Ranked #5 by who? Hackleman is a very capable MMA trainer, but his self proclaimed credentials in everything from kickboxing to boxing to karate to kenpo rather exceed reality.

Chuck went to John's dojo called the "The Pit" in the hills of Arroyo Grande, CA and learned the art of kickboxing and also earned his 2nd black belt in Kajukembo. Chuck went on to become a North American Champion for the IKF, WKA, WKC and the USMTA.

You should realize that the "alphabet soup" for kickboxing is much much worse than for boxing and that most of these organizations mean little. I don't doubt Liddell's kickboxing abilities, but they are hardly at the same level as those of many others.

 

[Rook]

Neither is known for their grappling despite that.

Against the caliber of grapplers that Igor faced, that should be no surprise. However, he is still far from a pure striker.

Silva should be known as an excellent grappler. His skills may be underrated by whoever you are taking it from.

 

[James Kovacich]

Ranked #5 by who? Hackleman is a very capable MMA trainer, but his self proclaimed credentials in everything from kickboxing to boxing to karate to kenpo rather exceed reality.



.

John lists the professional organizations he was ranked from, if you think they are self proclaimed, then it's up to you to do the reseach and back it up. Otherwise it's hearsay. Heres his bio so you could prove it.
http://www.knucklepit.com/mixed-martial-arts-john_hackleman.htm

As far as the self proclaimed Kenpo. It's not Kenpo. He was promoted to 10th degree in Kaju kenbo by Waler Godin. Nothing self proclaimed there. John Hackleman is listed here under Walter Godin and his 10th degree promotion shortly before Godins death is public knowledge.
http://www.leewardkenpokarate.com/tree/tree.htm