Anti-Grappling Demos

[yipman_sifu]

This is some of Sifu Victor Gutierrez demonstrations about anti-grappling methods. REMEMBER that this is only in a case of a REAL encounter. I mean don't tell me why hasn't it been tested in the UFC or Pride. The difference between these vids and Frank Shamrock one is that these are more made for finishing the opponent rather than submission which Shamrock does in his version.

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 1/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 2/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 3/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 4/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 5/6

Wing Chun Anti Grappling Anti Takedown part 6/6

*NOTE: the links provided may be slow in process to some PC's. If that happens, go to youtube.com and type (anti grappling) in the search and you will find those to be the 1st 6 results from the search only.

 

[Street Brawler]

Well, it depends my friend .

using the sort of "Ground Chi Sao" you are showing is demonstrated by Sifu Victor here. This Sifu is from the EWTO branch and they have this in their training.:ultracool What I can say in here is that these techniques are effective by it's practitionar, not by itself. It all depends on the individual training. Once in a brawl, chances go to luck sometimes . I personally think that a good Wing Chun trainer will be hardly taken down, becuase if a grappler failed in a takedown, he is in a trouble. I won't say things just like this, it's from what I trained and brawled personally .

Regarding to some claims that Anti-grappling came after BJJ was popular in the UFC and Pride. Let me put it this way. The term Anti-Grappling seems to be this way , but beleive me that the ground Chi Sao techniques are at least from the old Yipman days himself. The idea is only about lowering the Chi Sao level and keep the centerline theory while burst chain punches when the gap is there.

This concludes that the term Anti may be a marketing issue in the Martial arts world (just an assumption, not sure), but the techniques were there from even the Leung Jan days .

This how the EWTO talks about Anti-grappling.

http://www.wingtsun.com.au/site/Gallery/Articles/wingtsunantigrappling.html

All the best and wish we never have a brawl at any turf :uhyeah:

 

[Andrew Green]

It is a marketing term, I don't think I saw a single person in those that looked like they had much at all for grappling skills, which, IMO, makes it rather hard to "anti-grapple"

The "Anti-grappling" got started because grappling was dominating in competition, it is a neccessary component of competition, and all the striking only schools needed something to fill that "hole" that many people where beginning to see in there training methods. So "Anti-grappling" was born.

So I don't like for a couple of reasons:

1) I have yet to see it shown being used effectively against a skilled grappler.

2) Why reinvent the wheel? Why ignore the principles that skilled grapplers have developed to use against other skilled grapplers, and why do it without trying it against skilled grapplers?

 

[Si-Je]

Those are some good clips. My other instructor trained with him and we incorporate the anti-grappling into our charts. Yet, I just call it "ground work" or "ground fighting". It seems to put people off, and confuse the principle behind the techniques calling it anti-grappling.
I've found the techniques to be highly effective. I'm no sifu, and definately not strong or large. I've used it against bigger men up to 225 lbs, 6'4" tall. Very smart and simple technique, and true to the effortlessness of WC/WT.
I does look like you expend more effort on video, but in reality its all angles, distribution of weight, force, and re-direction. You "roll with" the opponents force instead of meeting it head on and using strength to submit.
There are submission techniques you can apply if so desired just like when standing, but I've found that when your attacker is stronger and larger than you, if you spend your energy trying to "submit" you compromise your situation. I mean, why submit someone who is truely trying to hurt you? It's nice to try to be the better "man", but don't let that get you killed.

"offence is defense, defense is offence. Each is the cause and result of the other."

 

[Si-Je]

The "Anti-grappling" got started because grappling was dominating in competition, it is a neccessary component of competition, and all the striking only schools needed something to fill that "hole" that many people where beginning to see in there training methods. So "Anti-grappling" was born.

So I don't like for a couple of reasons:

1) I have yet to see it shown being used effectively against a skilled grappler.

2) Why reinvent the wheel? Why ignore the principles that skilled grapplers have developed to use against other skilled grapplers, and why do it without trying it against skilled grapplers?

Chinese Wrestling has been around for centuries. "grappling" was just made popular by the gracies and UFC. Which was good because it made MA's realize they need the knowledge, but bad because many think it's the end all to beat all. The ground is NOT where you want to be, but if you get put there, better know what to do. balance.

As for using it against a "skilled" grappler. what is your defination of "skilled". I've seen these videos of the gracies challenging kung fu, karate and kickboxing guys. all well and good. gracie was beaten by an american wrestler and striker! Who are they challenging to show off this "grappling". Both of my instructors have effectively used the anti-grappling techniques against skilled grapplers, people who teach BJJ and MMA. I have used it against students of MMA at our school, people twice my size and weight, very effectively. Ah, yes, no video, nothing on t.v.

as for "re-inventing the wheel" the Gracie grappling is the new wheel in town. lol! I studied japanese ju-jitsu for years and this stuff is old technique. The chinese have had wrestling, ground fighting, grappling whatever for hundreds of years. The greeks have wrestled long ago. ETC... there's nothing really that "new" about ground fighting. By whatever name you call it.
I don't know where this Brazalian grappling stuff came from, but it's definately the new stuff.

 

[Andrew Green]

Chinese Wrestling has been around for centuries. "grappling" was just made popular by the gracies and UFC. Which was good because it made MA's realize they need the knowledge, but bad because many think it's the end all to beat all. The ground is NOT where you want to be, but if you get put there, better know what to do. balance.

I got no doubts of this. But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993.

As for using it against a "skilled" grappler. what is your defination of "skilled". I've seen these videos of the gracies challenging kung fu, karate and kickboxing guys. all well and good. gracie was beaten by an american wrestler and striker!

Umm... so a top level grappler (wrestler) beats a top level grappler (BJJ) and this shows what about Kung Fu?

I have used it against students of MMA at our school, people twice my size and weight, very effectively. Ah, yes, no video, nothing on t.v.

Cool, put it on tape and stick it up somewhere. I'd love to see it.

as for "re-inventing the wheel" the Gracie grappling is the new wheel in town. lol!

The Gracies have never claimed to reinvent a wheel, they are Judo based, and fully admit it. They claim to have modified Judo, not created something. Which is why it is still called "Juijitsu"

there's nothing really that "new" about ground fighting. By whatever name you call it.

Exactly, groundfighting has been around forever, the principles of it have been around forever, so why reinvent the wheel with this anti-grappling stuff? Why not use what is there, and has been shown to work against grappling repeatidly?

I don't know where this Brazalian grappling stuff came from, but it's definately the new stuff.

No one says it is.

 

[Street Brawler]

I got no doubts of this. But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993.



Umm... so a top level grappler (wrestler) beats a top level grappler (BJJ) and this shows what about Kung Fu?




Cool, put it on tape and stick it up somewhere. I'd love to see it.



The Gracies have never claimed to reinvent a wheel, they are Judo based, and fully admit it. They claim to have modified Judo, not created something. Which is why it is still called "Juijitsu"




Exactly, groundfighting has been around forever, the principles of it have been around forever, so why reinvent the wheel with this anti-grappling stuff? Why not use what is there, and has been shown to work against grappling repeatidly?



No one says it is.

Now lets understand something my friend:ultracool . With all my respects to the Gracies and BJJ. You have to know that the Gracies never faught a real fight in their lives, have anyone ever saw BJJ in the streets against attackers with knives and street stuff , exactly opposite to wing Chun people that always state their victories in streets, bars, beaches, and any place with no rules. What I mean is not that BJJ is a bad thing in fighting, on the contrary. BJJ is in general better than Wing Chun in the ring of the UFC since it has submission skills which Wing Chun don't, but be sure that these submission techniques would work for the ring and only for the ring. that's why Frank Shamrock's skill in avoiding takedowns is the best till now on the ring, and his stuff worked against Ortiz with no doubts. Now I have a question, how you can judge Anti-grappling without even training in it?, can you tell me something you read about Wing Chun?, do you know how the system works, and how it's applications are made for all fighting ranges?:ultracool . I personally know that you trained in wrestling and have a certain gratitude to the art of fighting you spent years training in , and know that systems like Wing Chun and other CMA don't participate in tournaments. that's why people like you always demand the video prove stuff to state your opinion:mst: .

Anti-grappling is made for non regulated fights where you can do anything to survive, it's all Wing Chun aspects but in a different position. Tell you this pal:ultracool , never judge something before you experience it or exposed to it, becuase it might not be as you expect:ultracool .

All the best my friend

 

[Andrew Green]

never judge something before you experience it or exposed to it, becuase it might not be as you expect:ultracool .

Have you spent any serious amount of time in a grappling school? Are you not doing the same thing? I can say that as someone with a bit of time spent grappling, these things will not work against skilled grapplers.

I also think you are missing the history of BJJ if you think none of them fought outside a ring...

 

[Street Brawler]

Have you spent any serious amount of time in a grappling school? Are you not doing the same thing? I can say that as someone with a bit of time spent grappling, these things will not work against skilled grapplers.

I also think you are missing the history of BJJ if you think none of them fought outside a ring...

:ultracool Vale Tudo. Oh yes I forgot that it was a source of anything fights the Gracies (Helio and Carlos). Well it was hosted and still have rules, otherwise we should have seen dead people in there:ultracool , or it might as most people said didn't have rules, and everything was permited. so why don't we have injuries. The only reason lies behind is that those matches contained mostly submission based fighters that submit their opponent rather than KO, that's why when UFC started, the Gracies were very happy to know how it was similar to what their father was doing, that's why they were victorious in those matches in the early days. (fighters in those matches don't concentrate on fast punching and striking vital areas, rather than submission, and the Gracies were better at that time).

Regarding if I personally did any grappling. My answer would be that I am a brawler, and I fight only for real. If for grabbing, i want to learn something that makes me get up if I were taken down, and ground sensitivity (Anti-Grappling) is perfect, as I can finish the situation with it, rather than taking time to submit my opponent while his mates might help him:ultracool . If you train something for fighting, be sure to learn the applications that will help for the street rather than the ring, becuase it differs and I tried it. Beleive it that in the streets, non-fighters people might be dangerous in a crowd, so it's all the street concepts there. :ultracool

Regarding MMA, it's very good and I like it as a whole base. I mean it can help you alot in the streets also. Now regarding which is better Wing Chun or MMA. This is a silly question, becuase it all depends on your personal training and devotion:ultracool , and hope that you keep up the good training pal.

 

[Si-Je]

I got no doubts of this. But I also have no doubts that you will not find any references in it to "chi sau in guard" from before 1993."

This is true, but doesn't take away the extreme effectiveness of the technique against a grappler. Emin established the anti-grappling and is still improving upon it as are his students and such. It'll only get better. My instructor's used these techniques time and again in real life situations where the prize was your life.

"Cool, put it on tape and stick it up somewhere. I'd love to see it."

Heard this before. People want to see it, but when they do, they still don't believe it. That's why I get practice in class so much! lol! There's always some guy that has to be proven to. We have videos on our site. You can see it if you'd like. It's demo, to show prospective students a bit of what we do. Nothing as exciting as the Guiterrez videos. (we don't actually punch our students lol!) And even though I explain that the student I"m working with was 225 lbs. and he knew I was 5 months pregnant at the time, it's still not enough that I'm able to roll him off and mount him to strike. He's not a grappler, WC was his first art, but I haven't been able to get video of the grapplers that come into class. They don't stay long. That student left us for 6 months to train BJJ and came back to test it on my instructor. That BJJ training didn't do him any good on the instructor or I.

"The Gracies have never claimed to reinvent a wheel, they are Judo based, and fully admit it. They claim to have modified Judo, not created something. Which is why it is still called "Juijitsu""

Well, I've heard gracie teachers refer to their ju-jitsu as the first art ever. Plus, they spell it different to differienciate. They do make claims that they invented BJJ totaly themselves. Which, I agree. It's NOTHING like the ju-jitsu I've studied at all.

"Exactly, groundfighting has been around forever, the principles of it have been around forever, so why reinvent the wheel with this anti-grappling stuff? Why not use what is there, and has been shown to work against grappling repeately? "

Because when a more effective technique is brought forth it only makes sense to utilize it. Being a small woman, I could train, lift weights, take steriods whatever to get big and strong enough to learn to fight like these UFC MMA guys. But that would be a lesson in futility, I'll NEVER be as strong as a man, so I must be smarter. It's much easier to learn to outmanuver your opponent than to use strength. Even as a man.
Besides, I'd never teach the females we have in class to fight like men, that would just get them killed. be reasonable.

I really think the name "anti-grappling" causes people to be turned off to the techniques. It's an apt name for what you are doing, but the connotation is negative. Counter grappling or ground fighting might get people to relax a bit and open up to it more.

 

[profesormental]

Greetings!

The anti-Grappling name is used in my opinion to rouse and interest those in striking arts, like Wing Chun and other CMA, and offer tools of grappling that they might not have a training regimen for.

And that is ok.

Yet it is obvious to me that the applications shown here are not efficient for sport.

Maybe for Vale Tudo, yet for MMA as it is practiced now, the rules wouldn't allow for efficient use of several of these tactics.

Wing Chun as taught to me has the Shuai Jiao concepts down, yet the finish came in with strikes.

I had to get training in Submission wrestling, Judo/Jujitsu for perfecting the execution of grappling finishes, which I use when I do not want to really hurt the opposition.


So at the end of the day, it is just a focus on defenses and tactics for several common grappling attacks.

And that is ok.

I personally think that understanding of the grappling mindset and strategies is a wiser way to go, yet what Sifu Gutierrez shows is a valid yet basic set of tools. So further development by practitioners is advised.

Sincerely,

Juan M. Mercado

 

[Street Brawler]

Greetings!

The anti-Grappling name is used in my opinion to rouse and interest those in striking arts, like Wing Chun and other CMA, and offer tools of grappling that they might not have a training regimen for.

And that is ok.

Yet it is obvious to me that the applications shown here are not efficient for sport.

Maybe for Vale Tudo, yet for MMA as it is practiced now, the rules wouldn't allow for efficient use of several of these tactics.

Wing Chun as taught to me has the Shuai Jiao concepts down, yet the finish came in with strikes.

I had to get training in Submission wrestling, Judo/Jujitsu for perfecting the execution of grappling finishes, which I use when I do not want to really hurt the opposition.


So at the end of the day, it is just a focus on defenses and tactics for several common grappling attacks.

And that is ok.

I personally think that understanding of the grappling mindset and strategies is a wiser way to go, yet what Sifu Gutierrez shows is a valid yet basic set of tools. So further development by practitioners is advised.

Sincerely,

Juan M. Mercado

Hello Juan

The only issue about grappling is that it is not going with Wing Chun concepts in all its aspects for many reasons.

Grappling is like Wing Chun in it's soft method of fighting (not using force against force), but it's theory in making the grabbing of your opponent as your goal is what is not that practical for a real fight. Watching some UFC, Pride fights. You will realize that grapplers takes lots of chances to grapple, and that is becuase they are secured by the rules that does not allow their opponent to hit them in vital places to cause serious damage, so it's to their favor. In a real fight, it's different. I mean failing in grabbing your opponent means you are in great danger, since you will be exposed and hit at any place.:ultracool

Anti-Grappling is more made for a real fight, where attacking and finishing your opponent is your first objective, rather than submitting than takes time. Now what I say is a theoritical issue. regarding if it will fit fighters, this totally depends on the practitionar and his training. I personally had an experience with it and it helped me once against a BJJ fighter. that doesn't mean that BJJ is bad:ultracool . if I challenged Rickson, he would have breaked every bone of my body , so that depends on your training, and hope that we all train well .

All the best from the Brawler

 

[Andrew Green]

If that is true, then how come Grappling played a even more important role in Vale Tudo fights where those strikes where allowed?

 

[Si-Je]

My instructor says BJJ is a great art for sport. But in the street with multiple attackers it is completely useless, or at a club where there is not enough room and people come out of the woodwork to jump in the fight, BJJ is not practical.
He knows several soldiers who used BJJ in combat in close quarters that have seriously injured themselves with broken hips, knees, and sholders as a result of falling down stairs, fighting on the concrete. As opposed to those who knew a striking art were able to defeat their opponent and move on to the next attacker.
I personally think anti-grappling can be used effecively in UFC and sport, it just has to be diluted. Instead of striking vitals like the back of the neck, throat, groin, etc there are plenty of spots left on the body to do damage. The temple, the nose, the ear, (side of the head) jawline, solarplexes, ribs/kidney, etc. Forearm shivers are legal and effective. use that on the opponents throat, back of the neck, side of the neck this can give you more control of a grappler. the Body follows the head. control the head, control the grappler.
Iceman wins with nothing but striking. You just need the anti-grappling to keep them from hitting and submitting you when your on the ground long enough to strike rapidly and repeatedly. Keeping mobile like a wrestler while striking.

 

[Andrew Green]

Liddell is a top level wrestler, that is why he wins with striking

 

[Si-Je]

He's also Kempo Karate. But good point. Good old generic american wrestling will defeat BJJ.
See, when I took Japanese Ju-Jitsu we were completely defensive. Our technique started when we were grabbed, or taken to the ground. That's when we did our stuff. To use Ju-Jitsu as offensive attack is risky and just plain won't work in realility. In the higher rank you learned to be more offensive with the tate dori (standing escapes, joint locks while standing) but generally this was impractical. You waited until your opponent made a move and used that force and energy to devastate limbs, throw, choke, whatever. (all mainly done while standing) As far as we went to the ground was to your knees (usually the knees slamming down on the fallen opponents rib cage, face, chest, groin.)
These grappling entries compromise your vitals and practially hand your opponent victory. Why low tackle someone and expose your entire spine?
Because UFC rules are designed around making BJJ look good.
Why expose your entire face to an opponents knees and feet?
because UFC doesn't allow you to kick these dudes in the face!
I've just been told your not even allowed to grab their neck and/or head as they take you to the ground.
weak.
You give me your head, and I'm gonna tear it off. I'll get taken to the ground anyways, I'm small. But my opponent will pay for it.
The anti-grappling techniques are plentiful enough to be effective in the ring, you just can only use the very very basics of it. There are so many limitations to UFC these days it's ridiclous. I watched it when it first came out, gruesome stuff. That was true no holds barred fighting. I just can't believe that people STILL think that UFC is no holds barred fighting these days. And that they base their decisions on what is truely effective in reality on that stupid show. Very frustrating. Reality isn't that pretty and organized. And neither is fighting.
So, I'm sorry I brought up the UFC thing. I really don't care about what they train and styles they use in UFC.
But, apparently, like Microsoft, they are the industry standard. Marketing geninus's, selling a inferrior product to the layman, while getting rid of real competition with lies and tricks.

 

[Street Brawler]

If that is true, then how come Grappling played a even more important role in Vale Tudo fights where those strikes where allowed?

Hello Andrew,:whip1:

Like I said, as long as I know. Vale tudo were a kind of showing how the little man can beat larger opponents. Fighters challending the gracies were huge and depended mostly in sheer power and strength rather than techniques. that's why those BJJ brothers were victorious over and over. Now those opponents were not that good in striking rather than wrestling or catching ot whatever, so BJJ dominated and it was great:mst: . Facing boxers like Tyson or lets go to old times. Someone like George Foreman was not in the Gracies mind?. I personally will tell you something. A complete fighting system must be able to let it's practitionar to fight for real fights and to end it fast. BJJ is a great art in the ground and for submission, that's why it is a great sport as mentioned by the previous poster. As for it's gi stuff. I beleive that a complete system will require you to fight with anything you wear.

Regarding Iceman. he is one of my best fighters in the ring. Iceman Liddel is a MMA fighter with all abilities for a real fight, so he is an exceptional fighter. Of course my best fighter ever in the MMA is Frank Shamrock, he is as I consider a fighting legend and hope that we all take as a fighting example (better than Ken with no doubts).

 

[Andrew Green]

They had a open challenge, advertised in Black Belt magazine before the UFC even started, with a good sized prize attached to beating them. They also made a habit of challenging top ranked people, such as boxers.

"Anyone, anywhere, anytime" I think was the motto.

 

[Street Brawler]

They had a open challenge, advertised in Black Belt magazine before the UFC even started, with a good sized prize attached to beating them. They also made a habit of challenging top ranked people, such as boxers.

"Anyone, anywhere, anytime" I think was the motto.

someone like Antonio Portugal. I know pal:ultracool . there is nothing wrong with that, Helio was a better fighter after all, but my point is that it is was still a regulated fight where killing an opponent is not allowed and that makes the difference:ultracool . Lets face a fact in here. During Pride fighing when Royce faught Sakabura. he lost only becuase sakabura was a good striker, altough Sakabura is a wrestler, he defeated the Gracies with 90% of attacking, and it was the first time Royce fights someone with a good attacking skills. Another time is like someone said here before his fight with the Japanese K1 fighter Tokoro. royce was almost useless to good Muay Thai fighter. Finally he recognized the importance of cross training and applied striking into his art to fight Matt Hughes:ultracool , but he did not succeed into that. Matt gave him a sort of punches that the refree stopped the fight.:ultracool

 

[Andrew Green]

How many fights have you been in where killing a person is allowed? Even in real life that's going to get you in big trouble.