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

[Hanzou]

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.

What's BS about it? If you're a competent fighter on the ground why wouldn't you play to your strength? You think a fat guy is going to dance around like Mohammad Ali and pepper you with jabs, or do you think that fat guy is going to bum rush you and try to take you down to the pavement? Alternatively, if you're fighting a guy who is better than you at striking, are you going to continue to get the tar beat out of you, or are you going to move in for a clinch/takedown?

Now before I move on, I need to clarify to avoid confusion; I'm not talking about rolling around with some guy on the pavement. I'm talking about takedowns/throws into a dominant position. If for some reason you can't get that dominant position, you have multiple ways to get out of inferior positions, and you have the Guard.

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.

Not even the Gracies claim that all fights go to the ground, so I don't know where you're getting that argument from. I certainly never made that argument. All I said was that fighting on the ground is where the most serious damage takes place. Its a natural phase of the fight if neither fighter can gain dominance in a standing position, or as a strategic move for a more experienced grappler versus a less experienced grappler.

I think its funny that people like to pick on the Gracies as marketers (as if the Gracies haven't already proven their claims to the MA world) when wrestlers and larger fighters have been using that very same strategy for decades. You think a wrestler-type is going to try to punch or kick you? No, they're going to attempt to tackle you, assume a dominant position, and commence pounding your face into the ground. All it takes is a missed kick or a missed punch, and down you go. In that situation, mount defense and the Guard is your best friend.

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.

If you can end a confrontation with a jab and a jog, then that's fine. However if you can't, you better be prepared to do more than kicking and punching to get out of that situation. Especially if you're up against someone larger and stronger than yourself.

 

[seasoned]

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.

Agreed, and if she studied a striking art she may not be on the ground. She definitely would not have taken him there on her own power, as a self defense move. But, because she finds herself there, then, some ground work as a supplement too, I would hope, a complementary art of striking, would help her to prevail.


Everyone is saying the same things, only using their primary art has the starting point.

As I said in the past, any "self defense art" worth it's salt, would contain ALL aspects of combat, which would grow off of their main art.

Now, all of the above is very basic self defense in how to win in a street confrontation. All of your eggs are not in one basket, but you are carrying a bag lunch with many goodies.

OP, "Can BJJ work in a real fight??????" absolutely!
IMHO "Would Karate work in a real fight?????" absolutely!

Would both complement each other, "not in a sporting event with a rule set in place, but, in the dark of night, unequivocally.

Now we all just need to go and train, because the real enemy is not here on these boards, but lurks in the shadows on any street any where.................anytime.

 

[MJS]

What's BS about it? If you're a competent fighter on the ground why wouldn't you play to your strength? You think a fat guy is going to dance around like Mohammad Ali and pepper you with jabs, or do you think that fat guy is going to bum rush you and try to take you down to the pavement? Alternatively, if you're fighting a guy who is better than you at striking, are you going to continue to get the tar beat out of you, or are you going to move in for a clinch/takedown?

I'm sorry, but you're missing the point I'm trying to make. Either it's by accident or it's intentional, but it's not worth repeating. Why? Because you're still not going to get it.

Now before I move on, I need to clarify to avoid confusion; I'm not talking about rolling around with some guy on the pavement. I'm talking about takedowns/throws into a dominant position. If for some reason you can't get that dominant position, you have multiple ways to get out of inferior positions, and you have the Guard.

So, that's your answer to every problem then, just takedown or throw and get into a dominant position? Ok.

Not even the Gracies claim that all fights go to the ground, so I don't know where you're getting that argument from. I certainly never made that argument. All I said was that fighting on the ground is where the most serious damage takes place. Its a natural phase of the fight if neither fighter can gain dominance in a standing position, or as a strategic move for a more experienced grappler versus a less experienced grappler.

Where am I getting that from? From the Gracies! LOL! Come on man, you know as well as I do, that that's been their line for a long time.

I think its funny that people like to pick on the Gracies as marketers (as if the Gracies haven't already proven their claims to the MA world) when wrestlers and larger fighters have been using that very same strategy for decades. You think a wrestler-type is going to try to punch or kick you? No, they're going to attempt to tackle you, assume a dominant position, and commence pounding your face into the ground. All it takes is a missed kick or a missed punch, and down you go. In that situation, mount defense and the Guard is your best friend.

Likewise, I think it's funny when guys like yourself, find it necessary to swing from the nuts of every Gracie/grappler out there. LOL! Hey, as I've said, I'm not anti BJJ. I've trained in it, I have said that if people want to learn the ground game, go check out BJJ. But I don't walk around like their God. LOL!

If you can end a confrontation with a jab and a jog, then that's fine. However if you can't, you better be prepared to do more than kicking and punching to get out of that situation. Especially if you're up against someone larger and stronger than yourself.

I'm still interested in hearing your answer to the question I asked about Rickson.

 

[Hanzou]

So, that's your answer to every problem then, just takedown or throw and get into a dominant position? Ok.

Why wouldn't I? Takedowns and throws have a higher chance of neutralizing a confrontation than punching and kicking. As they say "The planet never misses".

Where am I getting that from? From the Gracies! LOL! Come on man, you know as well as I do, that that's been their line for a long time.

The Gracies said that 90-95% of fights go to the ground. Not that I personally believe that statistic, but 90-95% doesn't equal 100%.

Likewise, I think it's funny when guys like yourself, find it necessary to swing from the nuts of every Gracie/grappler out there. LOL! Hey, as I've said, I'm not anti BJJ. I've trained in it, I have said that if people want to learn the ground game, go check out BJJ. But I don't walk around like their God. LOL!

So since I respect and defend the Gracies against misquotes and falsehoods I "swing from their nuts"? Okay... :uhohh:

And in case you haven't noticed, I consider myself a grappler.

I'm still interested in hearing your answer to the question I asked about Rickson.

I first need to see EXACTLY what Rickson said and what was the context of the quote. The only thing that link showed was a guy on a forum paraphrasing something that Rickson said.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

this is called a knee tap takedown and is not unknown in BJJ. We practice knee taps as well as "ankle picks."

Not saying whether BJJ has this technique or not but the different outcome that may come out of it.

in BJJ, and that's control after the takedown.

You (general YOU) will need to train "take down and control" for "sport" environment. There is no argument on that.

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

being so off balance after the throw compared to what was shown in the video.

You will also need to train "take down and take off" in "street" environment. Here is a clip to show that "you make yourself to be off balance on purpose".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDr56bPE-RY&feature=youtu.be

This training is ignored by some people which can suit for the street environment much better. When you train "take down and take off", you will need to keep your momentum going so you can run many steps after your take down. The dynamic rooting is different from the static rooting.

- Your make yourself to be off balance intentionally,
- take advantage on your body momentum,
- run your opponent down, and
- then regain your balance back.

You can take your opponent down but you don't have to go down with him. It's better to have that option.

 

[Steve]

Agreed, and if she studied a striking art she may not be on the ground.

Pure speculation, and my personal opinion is that this is irresponsible if sold to women for "self defense." I am not a bjj nuthugger. I love it for what it is, and will freely admit that it is the perfect martial art for self defense. But, as in other similar threads, there is a growing amount of misinformation and questionable opinions based upon ignorance going on in this thread. Hanzou has touched on an area of self defense in which BJJ is UNIQUELY well suited to help a person protect herself, and that's in the case of a sexual assault. I insisted that my middle daughter train in BJJ for at least a year. I will do the same for my youngest daughter. I don't want to necessarily create a killer, but if a date decides to try and take advantage of her, I feel much better knowing that she is familiar with guard and not completely unaware of how to reverse her position or defend herself from her back.

Suggesting that a striking art will keep a woman on her feet during a sexual assault is EXACTLY the same kind of blind arguing you're getting on Hanzou's back about for MMA.

She definitely would not have taken him there on her own power, as a self defense move. But, because she finds herself there, then, some ground work as a supplement too, I would hope, a complementary art of striking, would help her to prevail.


Everyone is saying the same things, only using their primary art has the starting point.

As I said in the past, any "self defense art" worth it's salt, would contain ALL aspects of combat, which would grow off of their main art.

Now, all of the above is very basic self defense in how to win in a street confrontation. All of your eggs are not in one basket, but you are carrying a bag lunch with many goodies.

OP, "Can BJJ work in a real fight??????" absolutely!
IMHO "Would Karate work in a real fight?????" absolutely!

Would both complement each other, "not in a sporting event with a rule set in place, but, in the dark of night, unequivocally.

Now we all just need to go and train, because the real enemy is not here on these boards, but lurks in the shadows on any street any where.................anytime.[/QUOTE]

 

[K-man]

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.

What don't you understand? Nobody is saying BJJ isn't effective for self defence. Nobody is saying one style or another is better for self defence.

The topic is done and dusted. BTW have we passed the record yet? Two hundred and thirty posts in two threads, and that's just your contribution!
:asian:

 

[MJS]

Why wouldn't I? Takedowns and throws have a higher chance of neutralizing a confrontation than punching and kicking. As they say "The planet never misses".




The Gracies said that 90-95% of fights go to the ground. Not that I personally believe that statistic, but 90-95% doesn't equal 100%.




So since I respect and defend the Gracies against misquotes and falsehoods I "swing from their nuts"? Okay... :uhohh:

And in case you haven't noticed, I consider myself a grappler.




I first need to see EXACTLY what Rickson said and what was the context of the quote. The only thing that link showed was a guy on a forum paraphrasing something that Rickson said.

Sigh....its just not worth it anymore. It's like talking to a brick wall with you.

 

[yawarakarate]

Isn't this a pointless conversation?

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

The "ground control" and "free mobility" contradict to each other. You can't have both at the same time. When you lost your mobility, you just can't get it back. The simple question is which one is more important in the street environment?

 

[MJS]

Isn't this a pointless conversation?

Yes!

 

[Hanzou]

The "ground control" and "free mobility" contradict to each other. You can't have both at the same time. When you lost your mobility, you just can't get it back. The simple question is which one is more important in the street environment?

Actually they don't contradict each other. Ground control is merely another possible phase in a fight. You might not be able to escape a situation until you have ground control. The girl being taken advantage of, or you getting tripped up in an altercation and winding up on your back is a prime example of just such a scenario. You're going to need ground control in order to get out of that situation. This is especially true if your assailant is larger and stronger than you are and has a dominant position.

Chokes, locks, holds, and sweeps are all viable for someone on their back in a bad situation. Once you put the clown to sleep, you can escape far more easily.

 

[Steve]

You will also need to train "take down and take off" in "street" environment. Here is a clip to show that "you make yourself to be off balance on purpose".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDr56bPE-RY&feature=youtu.be

This training is ignored by some people which can suit for the street environment much better. When you train "take down and take off", you will need to keep your momentum going so you can run many steps after your take down. The dynamic rooting is different from the static rooting.

- Your make yourself to be off balance intentionally,
- take advantage on your body momentum,
- run your opponent down, and
- then regain your balance back.

You can take your opponent down but you don't have to go down with him. It's better to have that option.

Isn't that the same knee tap takedown you linked to before? I didn't mention it last time, but since it seems to be your "go to" I will share that I have doubts about how effective that technique might be. High up on the opponent's leg like that, above the knee, your chances of actually upsetting his balance are slim. What we typically drill is something much closer to this:

In the video above, the uke's balance is upset by the control of his ankle/foot. There is much less risk involved, a much higher percentage of success and yet the person demonstrating the technique is still standing and able to engage on the ground OR take off running.

Regardless, I understand your point. Where we disagree is that it seems that you believe every takedown in BJJ results in both parties being on the ground. That is not the case. As you say, "you can take your opponent down, but you don't have to go down with him." Right. Pretty obvious and not unique to your style.

 

[Steve]

The "ground control" and "free mobility" contradict to each other. You can't have both at the same time. When you lost your mobility, you just can't get it back. The simple question is which one is more important in the street environment?

Emphasis is mine. When you've lost your mobility, you absolutely can get it back. As with anything, you have to learn how.

So, I would say that, if you are a woman with no BJJ or equivalent training, you are right. Taken down, she will be immobile and unable to regain her mobility. However, the entire point is that, with proper training, a woman defending herself from guard IS mobile, is NOT helpless and CAN defend herself effectively. Whether that means attacking from guard, reversing her position OR regaining her feet and disengaging. That is what you learn. That you don't believe it's possible is a testament to how little you know.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I have doubts about how effective that technique might be. High up on the opponent's leg like that, above the knee, your chances of actually upsetting his balance are slim.

The contact point is behind the knee joint and not above the knee, that's why it's called "knee seize" in Chinese wrestling. Here is another clip.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzA1MjQ1OTAw.html

Your clip is "leg seize" that you use leg to do 1/2 the job and then let your hand to do the other 1/2 of the job. There are over 20 different ways to get the "single leg".

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Whether that means attacking from guard, reversing her position OR regaining her feet and disengaging. That is what you learn. That you don't believe it's possible is a testament to how little you know.

When your back touch the ground, even if you may be able to get back up within 1 second, you still lost your "mobility" by my definition. There is a difference between "willing to lose mobility" (such as you drag your opponent down) vs. "forced to lose your mobility" (such as your opponent drags you down). You have choice in the 1st situation. You may not have choice in the 2nd situation.

 

[Steve]

The contact point is behind the knee joint and not above the knee, that's why it's called "knee seize" in Chinese wrestling. Here is another clip.

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzA1MjQ1OTAw.html

Your clip is "leg seize" that you use leg to do 1/2 the job and then let your hand to do the other 1/2 of the job. There are over 20 different ways to get the "single leg".

Yeah, and m my opinion is that the knee is risky. But that's really beside the point. The point is that you have some misconceptions about bjj.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Steve]

When your back touch the ground, even if you may be able to get back up within 1 second, you still lost your "mobility" by my definition. There is a difference between "willing to lose mobility" (such as you drag your opponent down) vs. "forced to lose your mobility" (such as your opponent drags you down). You have choice in the 1st situation. You may not have choice in the 2nd situation.

The difference isn't how you got there. The difference is what you can or cannot do once there. You are saying you would be helpless. I don't think I would be. You are saying you would be immobile. I would agree. I would not be.

Once again, as in other threads asking these same lines, I'm asking you guys to stick with what you know, abd I work agree to do the same. I really try to avoid making an *** if myself by speaking with authority on subjects about which I know little

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ballen0351]

When its all said and done. You go to what your trained. If your a BJJ guy and are trained well enough in it then yes its effective in a real fight. Would it be effective for me. No I don't train seriously in it I'm a dabbler. I wouldn't go to the ground for several reasons. Is it smart to go to the ground if your trained in it? Sometimes and other times not so much.
Other then at work I don't go around getting in to fights. I've seen a lot of then start and end and normally they don't last long enough to even go to the ground before bouncers or friends or cops break it up. 2 guys fighting it out for 5 min just isn't the norm in real life. So do what you do best. For Steve its BJJ for me its not. At work I use more Judo/aikido then strikes because it looks bad on youtube when a cop is punching someone. It looks equally as bad to use arm bars or chokes. I do use knees and shin and leg kicks often as pain compliance but even now they would rather I just use the TASER.
Not at work if I needed to fight I'd stay up and strike until I had a chance to get away. I have no reason to stay and fight but again in real life I'd pull my gun and tell you to run away or prone you out and wait for cops. So i guess maybe im a bad example.

So to answer the origional question can BJJ work? Sure it can just like so can Judo, Goju, Ishinryu, Shotakan, TKD, Kung Fu, wrestling, and all other Martial Arts after all thats what they are made to do.

 

[Steve]

I agree, Ballen, with just about everything you said. But, here's the question. What do I reasonably need to know? I mean me... a middle aged, regular, boring guy.

That's the real question. It's not about what "works" or not. They all work, as you say. And... depending upon the circumstances, they all DON'T work. That's pretty much the only part where I think we diverge.

Beyond that, self defense for me is 99.9999999% about living a quiet life with my family in a safe, semi-rural area of King County. I don't go to bars, don't drink to excess and try not to be a jerk. I mitigate risk by avoiding a risky lifestyle. I enjoy living quietly and hanging out with my kids and my wife. THAT'S self defense.

If asked whether BJJ is good for self defense, I would say it's good for me. I am relatively fit. I'm active. I can run a bit before I collapse from fatigue. If someone were to grab me, I feel like I can grip fight effectively and free myself. If someone takes me to the ground where I'm on the bottom, I feel comfortable that I can reverse my position and disengage.

So, once again, what do I reasonably need to know? If I am a cop in an urban area? Maybe something different. But I'm not. And neither are most of you guys who are arguing relentlessly that self defense is about fighting multiple, drug crazed attackers in a ring of lava, on a bed of broken glass and dirty needles. If you want to spend your time preparing for that, knock yourselves out. Go ahead. IMO, it's like preparing for a tornado in Seattle. Could it happen? Well... I guess it's POSSIBLE. But how likely? Not very. Could I find myself at the mercy of a gang of thugs? Sure. I guess it's within the realm of possibility. But is it likely? No. Not even remotely.

Regarding specific techniques, it's clear that some of you guys have some gross misunderstandings of what BJJ is and isn't. This same sort of argument from ignorance came up in another thread. As I said then, I don't care what you do. I hope you enjoy your training and presume you're getting what you need from it. Have fun. It obviously makes sense to you. I try to be very careful not to make presumptions about what you train or how you train, and to only comment on what you choose to share. Because, beyond that, I don't know what your style teaches... and even if I did, I don't know what your school teaches. I'm asking you guys to reciprocate. You clearly don't know the first thing about BJJ beyond what seems to me to be self serving propaganda.

I was posting from a phone a few days ago, so I hope the point came through regardless of the typos.