Anti-grappling.

[RTKDCMB]

What is "anti-striking"?

Also there is striking in Bjj.

And I am sure there is grappling in WC.

 

[Hanzou]

And I am sure there is grappling in WC.

And where can we go to see these WC masters using their grappling skills against highly skilled grapplers? When has a WC master stepped up and challenged professional grapplers to show his/her skill in a public arena or showcase?

Oh that's right, never.

As Tony said, Bjj has already proven that it is effective against striking. Say what you will about the Gracies and Bjj, but at least they stepped to the plate and put their butts on the line to prove their claims. We have hundreds of challenge matches and thousands of MMA and NHB fights to pull from to validate their claims. No one doubts the validity of BJJ versus a person punching and kicking, but the difference is that the exponents of Bjj earned that respect.

WC exponents who push anti-grappling can't say the same.

 

[Danny T]

And I am sure there is grappling in WC.

Yeah, but not defined nor refined as what is BJJ. There is grappling in Muay Thai, Shotokan, Boxing, and many other 'striking' arts as well. Again not defined the same as Judo, BJJ, GJJ, Catch, Sambo, etc.

 

[Buka]

Scientists say: "we will develop perfect people before we develop a prefect martial art for all people."
Congress to hold hearings.

And I'm sure we'll start a thread on the best way to hold those damn hearings, too.

 

[K-man]

From K-Man's link, 6th paragraph: "Attacking the groin, which is not allowed in MMA, on the street, is one of the first places to attack when being pinned from a mount position."

For argument sake let’s imagine we end up on the back and someone is sitting in full mount on top of us (which in MMA would be one of the most dominant positions). This is not so the case on the street as the person on top of you with 99% certainty will expose his groin to attack. Attacking the groin, which is not allowed in MMA, on the street, is one of the first places to attack when being pinned from a mount position.

With respect, what you are quoting is being taken out of context. What is written here is an example of a situation, not a specific defence against the mount. Secondly, if I am reading it correctly, it specifically excludes a trained grappler by saying that on the street there is a high probability that the groin will be exposed. Obviously attacking the groin is not always an option and if it is available it is not necessarily the best option, but it is a legitimate target in RBSD.
:asian:

 

[RTKDCMB]

And where can we go to see these WC masters using their grappling skills against highly skilled grapplers? When has a WC master stepped up and challenged professional grapplers to show his/her skill in a public arena or showcase?

Oh that's right, never.

As Tony said, Bjj has already proven that it is effective against striking. Say what you will about the Gracies and Bjj, but at least they stepped to the plate and put their butts on the line to prove their claims. We have hundreds of challenge matches and thousands of MMA and NHB fights to pull from to validate their claims. No one doubts the validity of BJJ versus a person punching and kicking, but the difference is that the exponents of Bjj earned that respect.

WC exponents who push anti-grappling can't say the same.

Not every martial art feels the need to challenge everybody or stroke their own ego and not every art wants or needs to or is designed for competition. I am not sure what upsets you so much about an art besides BJJ that dares to suggest they have grappling in it

 

[Hanzou]

Not every martial art feels the need to challenge everybody or stroke their own ego and not every art wants or needs to or is designed for competition. I am not sure what upsets you so much about an art besides BJJ that dares to suggest they have grappling in it

It has nothing to do with stroking an ego. It has everything to do with making claims like this;

Emin Boztepe takes on the grappler. In this DVD, he demonstrates effective techniques for countering anything a grappler might use. Bonus escrima techniques are again included.

In this new and spectacular work, Sifu Victor Gutierrez addresses the techniques of Chi Gerk (sticky legs) and Anti-Grappling for advanced Wing Tsun’ers.

He examines how to deal with advanced grapplers, who know how to implement the softness of adhering to us, while looking for the empty space to move into and exert maximum pressure.

This video will uncover the secrets of how to defend against grapplers by using the most advanced techniques and effective Wing Tsun

With absolutely nothing to back it up.

 

[Tez3]

And where can we go to see these WC masters using their grappling skills against highly skilled grapplers? When has a WC master stepped up and challenged professional grapplers to show his/her skill in a public arena or showcase?

Oh that's right, never.

As Tony said, Bjj has already proven that it is effective against striking. Say what you will about the Gracies and Bjj, but at least they stepped to the plate and put their butts on the line to prove their claims. We have hundreds of challenge matches and thousands of MMA and NHB fights to pull from to validate their claims. No one doubts the validity of BJJ versus a person punching and kicking, but the difference is that the exponents of Bjj earned that respect.

WC exponents who push anti-grappling can't say the same.

This is not just style bashing this is an overt display of machismo, "my style is better than yours". why should anyone have to prove it to others?

If you are happy with what you do why would you have to 'step up and prove it', if it works it's works, if it doesn't, it doesn't. C'est la vie....... ou mort.

Discussion is one thing, downright disrespect another. Sneering at another style is surely against the rules here.

The Gracies put their 'butts on the line' for commercial reasons, it's a business as is the UFC which was originally designed to showcase, market then cash in on their success. Props to them that they succeeded but that doesn't mean they are the epitome of the only style that 'works'.
As for 'trial by video' that's a nonsense too. What does posting a video prove? Nothing frankly, it doesn't mean the person performing is good or bad it proves he's performing for the camera nothing else.

BJJ is only as good as the person doing it, as is any other style.

 

[Hanzou]

This is not just style bashing this is an overt display of machismo, "my style is better than yours". why should anyone have to prove it to others?

And once again Tez, you bring up an argument that never existed in the first place.

RTK was comparing anti-grappling's claims of effectiveness against grappling to Bjj's claims of effectiveness against striking.

The difference is that Bjj has proven its effectiveness against striking arts. Anti-grappling on the other hand has not proven its effectiveness against grappling.

No one is bashing anything here, we are stating facts pure and simple.

 

[Tez3]

And once again Tez, you bring up an argument that never existed in the first place.

RTK was comparing anti-grappling's claims of effectiveness against grappling to Bjj's claims of effectiveness against striking.

The difference is that Bjj has proven its effectiveness against striking arts. Anti-grappling on the other hand has not proven its effectiveness against grappling.

No one is bashing anything here, we are stating facts pure and simple.

And once again you fail to understand what I've written. I'm not bringing up any argument, I'm saying you are style bashing which you are. Others are discussing, you are style bashing.

 

[drop bear]

That depends on the grappler and striker, it's a bit hard to grapple when you are knocked unconscious.

At about an even level of training. Grapplers tend to win out.

 

[Hong Kong Pooey]

It has nothing to do with stroking an ego. It has everything to do with making claims like this;



[/FONT][/I][/COLOR]With absolutely nothing to back it up.

Just curious, have you actually watched the dvds you cited?

 

[Hanzou]

Just curious, have you actually watched the dvds you cited?

Yes. We discussed them in great detail here;

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63-wing-chun/116176-some-more-thoughts-anti-grappling.html

Here's Gutierrez' preview for his DVD;

 

[Argus]

Answer me this: Why, Hanzou, do you always bring up the worst video examples of "anti-grappling"?

You can't argue that "anti-grappling" doesn't exist, and can't be effective. It's a strange term to use, but in any case, anytime you can thwart a grappler's game and come on out top with striking, you've successfully retained your game while thwarting his, and avoiding truly grappling in the process, have you not? You don't have to grapple a grappler. Now, I'm not saying that there is a fool proof method for this, or that it's even easy to do in the first place. You won't always be able to avoid grappling. But you can, and the more you train to that end, in a realistic way, with grapplers, the more likely you'll be able to.

I can't help but think you are spinning things with an agenda sometimes. While I applaud your crusade against unrealistic defenses against grapplers, you tend to come off as stating that grappling is the end all be all, and that it's a waste of time to counter grappling with anything other than grappling. If that's the case, we might as well just throw away all of these "useless arts" and depart upon a mass exodus to the one and only true martial art, BJJ.

 

[Hong Kong Pooey]

Yes. We discussed them in great detail here;

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/63-wing-chun/116176-some-more-thoughts-anti-grappling.html

Here's Gutierrez' preview for his DVD;

Sorry I meant in their entirety rather than just snippets.

 

[Steve]

And once again you fail to understand what I've written. I'm not bringing up any argument, I'm saying you are style bashing which you are. Others are discussing, you are style bashing.

And so is this post from you a personal attack? Doesn't seem to address the topic at hand very much. Rather, seems pretty focuses on an individual poster. It certainly isn't the kind of post that will help keep the conversation from spiraling downward.

Glass houses, as they say.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[RTKDCMB]

At about an even level of training. Grapplers tend to win out.

And what evidence do you base that on? Let me guess, the early UFC, YouTube and the Gracie challenge.

 

[Tez3]

And so is this post from you a personal attack? Doesn't seem to address the topic at hand very much. Rather, seems pretty focuses on an individual poster. It certainly isn't the kind of post that will help keep the conversation from spiraling downward.

Glass houses, as they say.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

so you are happy for the 'discussion' to continue with disrespect for other styles?

That is not a personal attack on him, as you probably know but if you are back to having a go at me that's fine, I've broad shoulders but I don't see why sneering at other people's styles should go unremarked and that's what it is a remark.

 

[Hanzou]

Answer me this: Why, Hanzou, do you always bring up the worst video examples of "anti-grappling"?

Saying that I bring up the worst examples implies that there are better examples. Feel free to post the better examples. I'm willing to check them out.

You can't argue that "anti-grappling" doesn't exist, and can't be effective. It's a strange term to use, but in any case, anytime you can thwart a grappler's game and come on out top with striking, you've successfully retained your game while thwarting his, and avoiding truly grappling in the process, have you not? You don't have to grapple a grappler. Now, I'm not saying that there is a fool proof method for this, or that it's even easy to do in the first place. You won't always be able to avoid grappling. But you can, and the more you train to that end, in a realistic way, with grapplers, the more likely you'll be able to.

You have to grapple a grappler when you're in an inferior position, such as being pinned on the ground, or with the grappler being on top of you in mounted position. At that point, striking isn't a good idea, because the grappler's position is so dominant that their retaliation to your strikes are far more devastating, or if they're trained in a submission style they can break a limb or choke you. Which is why Tony said what he said about punching him in the groin while he's on top. You're not going to win that battle.

Now you can argue that your goal is to never end up in that position, but considering the takedown defenses I've seen out of anti-grappling, a grappler is going to get you in that position pretty easily. You may think its hard for someone to get on top of you and start raining blows down on you, but it really isn't, especially if they're trained. Transitions come swift and decisively when you're up against someone who is a novice at grappling.

I can't help but think you are spinning things with an agenda sometimes. While I applaud your crusade against unrealistic defenses against grapplers, you tend to come off as stating that grappling is the end all be all, and that it's a waste of time to counter grappling with anything other than grappling. If that's the case, we might as well just throw away all of these "useless arts" and depart upon a mass exodus to the one and only true martial art, BJJ.

Well, there's a good reason why everyone in MMA learns grappling. I know some people on here don't take that seriously, but they really should. There's far more validity in that than in anything coming out of anti-grappling.

 

[seasoned]

ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Wes Yager
Senior Moderator