DF: Can BJJ work in a real fight??????

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
5,915
Reaction score
4,494
Location
Lexington, KY
As I've said countless times...any art can be effective, but it all comes down to how it's trained. Can BJJ be useful? Of course. But like everything, assess each situation and act accordingly. To intentionally go to the ground...well, that's foolish, IMO, but thats just me.

The portion of the quote that I've bolded is the important thing to remember.

Speaking as someone with a brown belt in BJJ and almost a decade of serious training in the art, deliberately choosing to go to the ground in a fight would not be my first choice in most circumstances. That said, there are circumstances where it might be the best choice. In other circumstances, I might not get to choose where the fight goes.

Ideally what you want is
a) the ability to quickly assess the situation and determine the best option (fight standing, fight on the ground, run away, etc)
b) the ability to take the fight where you want it to go (get the takedown if you want to fight on the ground, prevent the takedown if you want to fight standing, create distance if you want to run, etc)
c) the ability to defend yourself standing or on the ground if the fight doesn't go where you want it to

Hopefully we can all agree on that much at least.
 

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,270
Reaction score
982
No need to re-read what you said, as I'm well aware of your stance. You missed my point though. I said, that I wonder what the top guys, ie: Rickson, and the like, think about YOUR position of going to the ground no matter what.
http://www.kenpotalk.com/forum/showthread.php/14989-Multiple-Opponents-and-BJJ?p=176731#post176731

Hmm...and here you have someone quoting Rickson, who states that in Brazil, its a 1 on 1 fight, with everyone else in a circle, watching. Yet he goes on to say in the US, he'd use stand up and run away.

Your next paragraph contradicts itself. Actually, I agree, and it's a no brainer that we should get away ASAP, rather than prolong the situation by clinching up and intentionally taking the person down. What you seem to be missing, is regardless of your strength, what you might normally do, may not be the best option.

I'm bowing out of this debate. This is going to turn into another 40 page cluster **** just like the last thread did. To close, I'll say this...NOBODY is saying that BJJ is a bad art. At least *I* am not saying that. If *I* thought it was bad, *I* would never have devoted the time that I have to learning what I know. But, I'm not one to swing off the nuts of the Gracies and the rest of the grapplers out there, thus my comment of assessing each situation and acting accordingly.

Rickson would stand up and run away in a multiple opponent situation. Its important to note that every self defense situation isn't against multiple opponents.

And yes, I do think you need to reread what I'm saying, because you (and others) seem to merge self defense with fighting a gang of people all by yourself. You also seem to think that I'm advocating pulling guard while fighting 10 people at the same time. That isn't what I'm saying or advocating. What I'm saying is that taking someone to the ground is a viable method of fighting in a self defense situation. In my case, its a preferred method of fighting in a self defense situation, due to my wrestling, Judo, and Bjj background.
 

seasoned

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,687
Reaction score
677
Location
Somewhere out there
Rickson would stand up and run away in a multiple opponent situation. Its important to note that every self defense situation isn't against multiple opponents.

And yes, I do think you need to reread what I'm saying, because you (and others) seem to merge self defense with fighting a gang of people all by yourself. You also seem to think that I'm advocating pulling guard while fighting 10 people at the same time. That isn't what I'm saying or advocating. What I'm saying is that taking someone to the ground is a viable method of fighting in a self defense situation. In my case, its a preferred method of fighting in a self defense situation, due to my wrestling, Judo, and Bjj background.

What people are trying to say is, a situation may start out one on one until you go to the ground. Once you are on the ground and winning, these people come out of the woodwork and thats when the real damage gets done.
Now, by chance, you're dealing with friends and acquaintances, that take the opportunity to stomp, hit and run.
It is all relative, ground people went to get a person down as fast as possible, and stand up people went to get off the ground as soon as possible....
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
18,485
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Covington, WA
Is there a point where, considering the theoretical nature of the discussion, you guys can agree to disagree. It's all opinion. :)

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
 

seasoned

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,687
Reaction score
677
Location
Somewhere out there
Is there a point where, considering the theoretical nature of the discussion, you guys can agree to disagree. It's all opinion. :)

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

I agree............ :)
 

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
What people are trying to say is, a situation may start out one on one until you go to the ground. Once you are on the ground and winning, these people come out of the woodwork and thats when the real damage gets done.
Now, by chance, you're dealing with friends and acquaintances, that take the opportunity to stomp, hit and run.
It is all relative, ground people went to get a person down as fast as possible, and stand up people went to get off the ground as soon as possible....
But here's where it gets even worse. You take the bad guy to the ground and you have the dominant position. The bystanders don't know who the bad guy is and think it is you. All of a sudden you have multiple attackers. I know of it also happening to LEOs which is another reason they didn't like being on the ground. Silly really, they should have been able to just stand up. ;)
:asian:
 

K-man

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Dec 17, 2008
Messages
6,193
Reaction score
1,221
Location
Australia
Is there a point where, considering the theoretical nature of the discussion, you guys can agree to disagree. It's all opinion. :)

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2
Count me in. I'm with you! :)
 

seasoned

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,687
Reaction score
677
Location
Somewhere out there
But here's where it gets even worse. You take the bad guy to the ground and you have the dominant position. The bystanders don't know who the bad guy is and think it is you. All of a sudden you have multiple attackers. I know of it also happening to LEOs which is another reason they didn't like being on the ground. Silly really, they should have been able to just stand up. ;)
:asian:

Great point, LEO's put people to the ground, but, as a rule do not go with them, unless by accident.
If by accident, THIS is where knowledge of ground is important, so as to get up as quickly as possible. If a cop doesn't want to go to the ground, or, stay on the ground, why would anybody else.

Why, because it's situational. LEO's and military train ground work not to go to the ground, but to cover all bases of combat in case they end up there.



Act 2, picking up the dead horse and beating it once more.............
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,430
Reaction score
2,610
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
put people to the ground, but, as a rule do not go with them, ............
This is a very important point in street situation.

The following clip is the opposite of the BJJ approach. You take your opponent down and run like hell at the same time. Can you use "pull guard" or "jump guard" to achieve this? You just can't. Do BJJ guys train this kind of "mobility"? I don't think so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZyeQV17IGs&feature=youtu.be

IMO, both "ground skill" and "mobility skill" are important. But because the sport rule sets, the mobility training is ignored by some people.
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
18,485
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Covington, WA
This is a very important point in street situation.

The following clip is the opposite of the BJJ approach. You take your opponent down and run like hell at the same time. Can you use "pull guard" or "jump guard" to achieve this? You just can't. Do BJJ guys train this kind of "mobility"? I don't think so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZyeQV17IGs&feature=youtu.be

IMO, both "ground skill" and "mobility skill" are important. But because the sport rule sets, the mobility training is ignored by some people.

Okay. Hold on. Since when is pulling guard THE BJJ approach to self defense?

I drill throws in which I could easily stay standing. I drill throws in which I typically end up in knee on belly.

Look. Here's the thing. I wish you guys would stick to what you know. Talk more about what you do and try to presume less about what we do. I'll do the same.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
5,915
Reaction score
4,494
Location
Lexington, KY
Yeah, pulling guard is mostly a sport technique. In a real fight I would almost never even consider it. (Okay, I could come up with a theoretical set of circumstances to justify it, but it would be highly unlikely.)
 

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
18,485
Reaction score
4,076
Location
Covington, WA
This is a very important point in street situation.

The following clip is the opposite of the BJJ approach. You take your opponent down and run like hell at the same time. Can you use "pull guard" or "jump guard" to achieve this? You just can't. Do BJJ guys train this kind of "mobility"? I don't think so.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZyeQV17IGs&feature=youtu.be

IMO, both "ground skill" and "mobility skill" are important. But because the sport rule sets, the mobility training is ignored by some people.
Also, for what it's worth, this is called a knee tap takedown and is not unknown in BJJ. We practice knee taps as well as "ankle picks."

There is what I'd consider a difference between the video and what would be fairly common in BJJ, and that's control after the takedown. I don't think that the typical Jiu Jitiero would practice being so off balance after the throw compared to what was shown in the video. But, I don't know what the point of the video was, so I might be mistaken.
 

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,270
Reaction score
982
What people are trying to say is, a situation may start out one on one until you go to the ground. Once you are on the ground and winning, these people come out of the woodwork and thats when the real damage gets done.
Now, by chance, you're dealing with friends and acquaintances, that take the opportunity to stomp, hit and run.
It is all relative, ground people went to get a person down as fast as possible, and stand up people went to get off the ground as soon as possible....

Or some fights ARE one on one. Some fights friends sit back and watch their buddy get their butt kicked because they feel they deserve it. Some fights you have just as many friends around as the other guy, so if his friends jump in, your friends will jump in.

What Steve said.

Just to to flip the script a bit, imagine a woman on her back with an assailant between her legs trying to rape her. If that woman studied Bjj she can enter the guard position and be capable or defending herself.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
427
Location
Cromwell,CT
The portion of the quote that I've bolded is the important thing to remember.

Speaking as someone with a brown belt in BJJ and almost a decade of serious training in the art, deliberately choosing to go to the ground in a fight would not be my first choice in most circumstances. That said, there are circumstances where it might be the best choice. In other circumstances, I might not get to choose where the fight goes.

Ideally what you want is
a) the ability to quickly assess the situation and determine the best option (fight standing, fight on the ground, run away, etc)
b) the ability to take the fight where you want it to go (get the takedown if you want to fight on the ground, prevent the takedown if you want to fight standing, create distance if you want to run, etc)
c) the ability to defend yourself standing or on the ground if the fight doesn't go where you want it to

Hopefully we can all agree on that much at least.

And this sir, is something that I can agree with! :)
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
427
Location
Cromwell,CT
Rickson would stand up and run away in a multiple opponent situation. Its important to note that every self defense situation isn't against multiple opponents.

And yes, I do think you need to reread what I'm saying, because you (and others) seem to merge self defense with fighting a gang of people all by yourself. You also seem to think that I'm advocating pulling guard while fighting 10 people at the same time. That isn't what I'm saying or advocating. What I'm saying is that taking someone to the ground is a viable method of fighting in a self defense situation. In my case, its a preferred method of fighting in a self defense situation, due to my wrestling, Judo, and Bjj background.

Please don't make me go and find posts in which you have said that no matter what, you'd go to the ground. No, not every fight will be against 2+ people, not every fight will involve weapons. I can accept, as Tony said, that in some cases, taking the guy down may be the best option. Him and I both agree on that fact that you need to assess each situation accordingly, due to the fact, that as I've pointed out, each is different. However, in your case, you've flat out said that because the ground in your strong point, you'll always opt to take the person there. That is where you and I disagree, and at this point, we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and I believe that Rickson said that a fight in the US would be different than in Brazil.
 

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,270
Reaction score
982
Please don't make me go and find posts in which you have said that no matter what, you'd go to the ground. No, not every fight will be against 2+ people, not every fight will involve weapons. I can accept, as Tony said, that in some cases, taking the guy down may be the best option. Him and I both agree on that fact that you need to assess each situation accordingly, due to the fact, that as I've pointed out, each is different. However, in your case, you've flat out said that because the ground in your strong point, you'll always opt to take the person there. That is where you and I disagree, and at this point, we'll probably have to agree to disagree.

Oh, and I believe that Rickson said that a fight in the US would be different than in Brazil.

What exactly are we agreeing to disagree on? Whether or not I prefer to take someone to the ground in a SD situation?

This entire thing started because a poster said that it was "foolish" to go to the ground in a fight. I responded to that post and then for someone mentioned something I said in a completely different thread. My argument still stands; It's not foolish to take a fight to the ground in a SD situation.

Now clearly some around here are confused when I say that. So let me clarify; I'm NOT talking about pulling or jumping guard. I'm talking about a takedown into a dominat position where I'm on top, knee on belly, mounted, or even in side control. Now if I do happen to wind up on my back because he took ME down, I have guard position.

Please google these positions so that we can reduce the confusion levels in this thread.

As for Rickson, again it's obvious that he's talking about multiple attackers. You're at a severe disadvantage in that situation regardless of what art you practice.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
427
Location
Cromwell,CT
What exactly are we agreeing to disagree on? Whether or not I prefer to take someone to the ground in a SD situation?

We are agreeing to disagree on the part in which I say that it's foolish to always opt to go to the ground, and where you say that it's your strong point, so you'll always opt to go there.

This entire thing started because a poster said that it was "foolish" to go to the ground in a fight. I responded to that post and then for someone mentioned something I said in a completely different thread. My argument still stands; It's not foolish to take a fight to the ground in a SD situation.

That poster was probably me, and I stand by what I said. Now, to clarify...if by chance we end up there, ok, do what you have to, in order to get back up. Don't stay there unnecessarily. IF the situation, as Tony said, warrants taking the person down, I suppose I can buy that. But, to state that no matter what, in every single situation, going to the ground is the best option, sorry, but I have to raise the BS flag.

Now clearly some around here are confused when I say that. So let me clarify; I'm NOT talking about pulling or jumping guard. I'm talking about a takedown into a dominat position where I'm on top, knee on belly, mounted, or even in side control. Now if I do happen to wind up on my back because he took ME down, I have guard position.

I wasn't the one who commented on that, it was someone else. Of course, I do find it interesting with assuming that you'll always end up in the dominant position. Furthermore, not every fight ends up on the ground, despite what the Gracies claim. Of course they're going to say that...they're in the business to make money and market their art.

As for Rickson, again it's obvious that he's talking about multiple attackers. You're at a severe disadvantage in that situation regardless of what art you practice.

Ok. And I do agree with the mult. person stuff, however, as I've said, depending on how you train, a stand up art can better serve that purpose. Question for you: Do you feel that Rickson shares your feelings about going to the ground, no matter what? Sorry, I don't know about you, but if it was a toss up between punching the guy in the face and getting the hell out of the situation, or intentionally tying up, well, I think you know what I'd pick.
 
Top