Full Frontal Fighting?

[Telfer]

Has anyone ever done a survey of the best fighters and the angle they prefer...the angle of the torso relative to their opponent that is?

The most popular angle seems to be 45 degrees, but coming from several years of Judo I cant break the full frontal habit...in spite of the guys at my MMA center saying this is WRONG!

The 80-85 degree angle preferred by Bill Wallace and Bruce Lee (both great kickers) seems overly defensive to me??? The more defensive I am the less offensive I can be.

Who else prefers to face their opponent straight on...and why???

 

[ap Oweyn]

The survey would need to take into account the ruleset from which each fighter comes. My personal feeling on angle is that I prefer more squared than less. A fairly typical boxing stance. The more side-on stance of Lee or Wallace doesn't sit right with me. In Bill Wallace's venue, attacking the back was off limits, either in terms of taking the back and throwing you or simply sticking a mock knife in your kidney. That's the big problem I see with that stance. Too easy to get behind the guy. That said, sanshou DOES allow for those sort of throws, and you still see plenty of guys successfully implement a more side-on stance.

Lee emphasized using the lead hand for alot of offense and defense. But the rear hand is often easier to deploy if you're slightly more squared. Hence its use in boxing, eskrima, etc. I'm from an FMA background primarily, and I want to be able to deploy the rear hand readily, because either I have a secondary weapon in it (even if that secondary weapon is just my fist) OR I want to be able to respond to the other guy's secondary weapon quickly with my "alive hand."

And, while I'm no expert in grappling, I think it's probably a lot easier to sprawl from that position as well. If one leg is less pronouncedly (is that a word?) in front of the other, it's easier to shoot both of them backward in a sprawl.

Just my thoughts.


Stuart

 

[tshadowchaser]

anyone who fights out of a front stance basicly takes on a full fighting posistion.
I teach this stance first and my students learn to fight out of it first.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

The survey would need to take into account the ruleset from which each fighter comes. My personal feeling on angle is that I prefer more squared than less. A fairly typical boxing stance. The more side-on stance of Lee or Wallace doesn't sit right with me. In Bill Wallace's venue, attacking the back was off limits, either in terms of taking the back and throwing you or simply sticking a mock knife in your kidney. That's the big problem I see with that stance. Too easy to get behind the guy. That said, sanshou DOES allow for those sort of throws, and you still see plenty of guys successfully implement a more side-on stance.

Lee emphasized using the lead hand for alot of offense and defense. But the rear hand is often easier to deploy if you're slightly more squared. Hence its use in boxing, eskrima, etc. I'm from an FMA background primarily, and I want to be able to deploy the rear hand readily, because either I have a secondary weapon in it (even if that secondary weapon is just my fist) OR I want to be able to respond to the other guy's secondary weapon quickly with my "alive hand."

And, while I'm no expert in grappling, I think it's probably a lot easier to sprawl from that position as well. If one leg is less pronouncedly (is that a word?) in front of the other, it's easier to shoot both of them backward in a sprawl.

Just my thoughts.


Stuart

I agree, it completely depends on the style you practice and the ruleset of your practice. I personally fight out of a stance closer to 85 degrees, as it leaves less of my body open to attack. If I am using the rear hand I typically lead with a front leg kick or front fist jab and square up to follow up with my rear hand.

When I have fought people who utilize a more frontal approach, I have the advantage because of the ruleset that we follow (no grappling, no attacks to the back). An opponent in this scenerio leaves many targets open compared to a more perpendicular stance.

 

[punisher73]

Depends on if you are talking about sport fighting vs. self-defense. Fighters like Bill Wallace developed their techniques and stances to maximize the ruleset in their favor. Wallace was SUPER fast with his kicks, and he could throw 3-4 variations all of that position and leg chamber. Wrestlers and other grapplers (judokas included) will square more to the target because they have better balance and are able to employ both hands equally for gripping.

When the crap hits the fan, you will square to the threat as a natural instinct. LOTS of training is going to be required to override the startle response. That is why alot of TMA's teach that position first, they understood that aspect and taught you to defend and attack out of it first, then later other positions/stances were used.

In sport fighting, you are going to do what is best required for the context. In boxing, for example, you are going to adopt a stance that allows you to move quickly in any direction and allows both arms to be used almost the same (allowing the rear hand slightly more back for power generation and smaller upper body target). Muay Thai will have a slightly more squared stance than boxing because they are also using elbows, knees, and kicks. An MMA fighter will need a blend between a striker's stance and a grapplers stance because he needs to be able to deliver his strikes effectlively, but also be able to defend the shoot and transition into grappling.

Look at what you want to accomplish and develop your own approach for what works best for you to employ the weapons that you need.

 

[blindsage]

I don't think people are fully addressing Telfer's question though, he's not asking about 45 vs. 85 degrees, he's asking about a more squared off face to face stance vs. those two.

Telfer, you will almost always have striking styles teaching against a face to face square stance, because in theory a 45 degree stance provides a balance between more inherent protection and an ability to attack. In practice there are plenty of trained fighters that don't strictly adhere to this. Watch some fight videos of Bas Rutten and you will see him fight squared off whenever it suits him. A lot of boxers don't actually strictly adhere to the 45 degree stance when in the ring (and a lot of them don't keep their hands up on either side of their head when in the ring either). Watch some Muay Thai fights, they often don't either. But the trick in this, and what is rarely if ever explained, is that those that don't strictly adhere to it do this because they've found what works for them better at times after they've trained long and hard and ingrained basic skills derived from fighting in the 45 degree stance. You have to learn the 'rules' and how they work before you can learn when and how it's appropriate and useful to break them.

 

[ap Oweyn]

I don't think people are fully addressing Telfer's question though, he's not asking about 45 vs. 85 degrees, he's asking about a more squared off face to face stance vs. those two.

I guess that's true. I might have implied more than I actually answered. I used to fight out of an 80 for taekwondo and later a 45 for... everything since really. And I continue to do so today because the 45 allows me to employ more of the tools I want to employ.

By implication, the question is whether Telfer feels that he can implement more of the tools he wants to employ from a full frontal posture than he can from whatever posture the MMA guys are advocating.

If there's one truth I've observed about MMA people, it's that they're perfectly happy to entertain something new if you offer credible evidence of its value. So if Telfer is able to 1) employ his technique and 2) avoid common pitfalls from his full frontal posture, I doubt he'll be taking flak about it for very long.

On the flip side, he may also want to look at how to implement his judo game from the 45 posture, in the event that the MMA guys are raising some valid concerns.


Stuart

 

[terryl965]

It is hard to adjust to a different position after years of doing things one way, but remember we all must adapt to what is needed at the time of a fight even if it is sport fighting.

 

[Langenschwert]

When unarmed in Kunst des Fechtens, we do things squared-up. We like to keep the "centre of our fight" (centre of gravity, whatever) facing the opponent whenever possible. The assumption is that there might be a concealed dagger... I'd like to have both hands up front as much as I can in that case. Also, since so much of our work is armed, we like to have the same stance for both weapons and unarmed.

Best regards,

-Mark

 

[Telfer]

Lots of good replies here. When I got into MMA I decided early on to play like John MacEnroe, close to the net, unlike his nemesis Bjorn Borg who plays a base line game.

Great kickers like to keep their distance, even if it means running around the ring. I prefer to use my knees and elbows because I'm already close.

Judo gave me terrible habits, always looking for a gi to grab, and sacrificing my standing position to throw. In a real scenario a primary objective is to stay off the ground.