Grappling, is it needed?

[ATC]

There have been many threads on the need to know how to fight on the ground or being able to grapple. Well is it really needed or is the need more of knowing how to stay on your feet?

I have seen a quite a few matches where the grappler was nullified by a striker that knew how to stay on his feet or defend the take down. If more practice is done with this aspect of one’s skill would this not be a better solution than going to the ground?

I am not saying that you should not have some sort of ground techniques, but I think too many forget about teaching how to stay up or defend the take down. I have seen too many TMA artists get taken down so easily. I think if TMA classes incorporated defense against the take down they would be better off.

And I mean real take down defense. Not the same just knee them or elbow. Any real grappler would just use that knee defense as a means to take you down.

Thoughts?

 

[Steve]

There have been many threads on the need to know how to fight on the ground or being able to grapple. Well is it really needed or is the need more of knowing how to stay on your feet?

I have seen a quite a few matches where the grappler was nullified by a striker that knew how to stay on his feet or defend the take down. If more practice is done with this aspect of one’s skill would this not be a better solution than going to the ground?

I am not saying that you should not have some sort of ground techniques, but I think too many forget about teaching how to stay up or defend the take down. I have seen too many TMA artists get taken down so easily. I think if TMA classes incorporated defense against the take down they would be better off.

And I mean real take down defense. Not the same just knee them or elbow. Any real grappler would just use that knee defense as a means to take you down.

Thoughts?

First, just for clarity's sake, grappling is any kind of clinch fighting, whether standing or on the ground. Aikido, for example, is grappling.

Second, are we talking about MMA or self defense?

MMA is a little misleading, in that guys like Chuck Liddell and BJ Penn are renowned for their take down defense. They are both accomplished grapplers. Liddell has terrific wrestling skills and BJ Penn isn't called the Prodigy for nothing.

Also, without clothes, these guys get sweaty and slippery, making it much easier to disengage. Grips and cloth make a big difference.

My personal opinion is that self defense training should be geared toward worst case scenario. What do I do if I'm UNDER a competent grappler? If I were seriously interested in training MA for self defense, I'd make a point of training every range of combat: Striking, clinch and ground work.

 

[Earl Weiss]

There have been many threads on the need to know how to fight on the ground or being able to grapple. Well is it really needed or is the need more of knowing how to stay on your feet?

If you know yourself and know your opponent you will not be defeated in 10,000 battles. - Sun Tzu

 

[Bill Mattocks]

In a self-defense situation on the street, you could find yourself thrown to the ground by surprise, or you could slip on the ice. Anything could happen. You could throw a kick and lose your balance.

So I could say that having a ground game is important, leaving aside the entire question of whether or not a person can manage to avoid being knocked to the ground. Hell, somebody could hit you with a car and jump out and start pounding you. Presuming you can still move, you probably want to be able to respond if you can't get to your feet.

Just my 2 cents. For what it is worth, I have no ground game and precious little stand-up game. On my to-do list.

 

[ATC]

First, just for clarity's sake, grappling is any kind of clinch fighting, whether standing or on the ground. Aikido, for example, is grappling.

Second, are we talking about MMA or self defense?

MMA is a little misleading, in that guys like Chuck Liddell and BJ Penn are renowned for their take down defense. They are both accomplished grapplers. Liddell has terrific wrestling skills and BJ Penn isn't called the Prodigy for nothing.

Also, without clothes, these guys get sweaty and slippery, making it much easier to disengage. Grips and cloth make a big difference.

My personal opinion is that self defense training should be geared toward worst case scenario. What do I do if I'm UNDER a competent grappler? If I were seriously interested in training MA for self defense, I'd make a point of training every range of combat: Striking, clinch and ground work.

Thanks for the clarification. Maybe I should have named the post "Staying off the ground".

It should be for any case, MMA or even SD. Although the two do differ. In the case of MMA you are really in a combat situation with a person of equal or there about talent and physical abilities. In SD you may just need to fend off an attack from an unknown attacker after your money or whatever.

In the case of MMA I see many that look to do their work after being taken down. They don't even attempt to prevent the take down. As if they never thought about trying to stay up but rather what to do after being taken down.

In the case of SD things get a little blurry as most times things are unexpected.

If I think about it there are two kinds of SD. The unexpected and the Ut Oh trouble is about to happen and I have nowhere to go so I must get ready. In the Ut Oh kind of SD this may be the case where keeping on your feet is best and would be best to know how to keep on your feet if possible.

However there are situations where even in the unexpected you can stay on your feet. I know that my GM (when he taught us) allowed us to attack him at anytime any way. So when his back was turned I bear hugged him and tried to pick him up and body slam him. I am 6'2" close to 200 pounds, he is 5'10" maybe, and 160 at most. Well he imediatly wrapped his legs around one of my legs stopping my slam in its tracks, causing me to pause and then dropped out of my bear hug only to flip me to the ground (hard too) then stopping me with a few strikes. Point is, he did not go down and stopped my attempt to get him down. Even from the back and unexpected. Well semi unexpected. He did know that someone would attack him. But he did not know who, when, or how. it was over in a blink of an eye really.

That is what I am trying to convey. Understanding how to stay up and in control when someone intends to take you down.

I understand that yes you may slip or fall or whatever, but when you can stay up can you. Do you have the tools to do so. I think to little time is spent on teaching how to do this.

 

[dortiz]

To say you wont end up there is a huge risk if you want to pretend we are talking self defense. Dont wanna be there but just in case, you better have some game.
I think the bigger point is with so many folks watching it, training it ,you will find good and sloppy, but many folks trying to go there. So you may as well know as much if not more and be good at it.
I have personally seen folks bum rushed, deliver a strike and still get taken down.

 

[dancingalone]

Well, yes, I think some fundamental training in grappling is useful. At a minimum you'll learn some things about leverage that will carry over into any martial art, even if it is primarily a kicking system.

You can't say you are training for self-defense credibly if you don't introduce and teach your students how to defense against common things like head locks, bear hugs, tackles, double leg wraps, etc. And even if you naturally prefer to stay on your feet and want to train for that, you still need to learn things like the sprawl or how to break out of a clinch.

 

[ATC]

Well, yes, I think some fundamental training in grappling is useful. At a minimum you'll learn some things about leverage that will carry over into any martial art, even if it is primarily a kicking system.

You can't say you are training for self-defense credibly if you don't introduce and teach your students how to defense against common things like head locks, bear hugs, tackles, double leg wraps, etc. And even if you naturally prefer to stay on your feet and want to train for that, you still need to learn things like the sprawl or how to break out of a clinch.

This is getting more to my original point. Do we teach enough of this? Should we be teaching more or spending more time on this type of thing. Since TKD is not a ground based art, I think we need to spend some time teaching how not go there. And once you are there, how to get back up.

 

[terryl965]

What I like to say is this learn everything you can apply what can work for you and leave the stuff alone that does'nt, but for all means learn it all if you have the chance.

 

[Disco]

The rational of having a "ground game" has come about because of the MMA scene. The majority of folks constantly either confuse or really don't understand the concept of self defense when it comes to this subject. I'd venture to say that every martial art taught offers some aspect of self defense in gaining one's footing again from a grounded position. Look at the techniques that are not allowed in MMA "competition" and you have your basic self defense attributes. Now granted, most schools don't really practice these elements enough, but none the less, they are there to learn and use and their not that difficult to incorporate.

 

[Andy Moynihan]

Current FBI statistics have it that about 10% of gunfights occur at the 21 foot "self defense standard" distance,, 40% at 9feet in, and 50% at 5 feet to contact distance. That's one guy shooting the other while close enough to touch him.

Now if those are stats for *armed* encounters, involving purpose-built *distance* weapons, what distance do you think unarmed trouble is going to take place at?

I realize that , this being the TKD section this is not going to be a popular thing to hear, but I have to ask, are we talking here about *TKD* or are we talking about *Self defense*?

If we are talking about self defense,then whether talking about sprawling/groundfighting/throwing/locking/short strikes, the fact remains constant: If you can't fight at grappling/contact distance--you can't fight.

That's not *my* law, it's Nature's and it's just the way it is.

 

[MJS]

There have been many threads on the need to know how to fight on the ground or being able to grapple. Well is it really needed or is the need more of knowing how to stay on your feet?

I have seen a quite a few matches where the grappler was nullified by a striker that knew how to stay on his feet or defend the take down. If more practice is done with this aspect of one’s skill would this not be a better solution than going to the ground?

I am not saying that you should not have some sort of ground techniques, but I think too many forget about teaching how to stay up or defend the take down. I have seen too many TMA artists get taken down so easily. I think if TMA classes incorporated defense against the take down they would be better off.

And I mean real take down defense. Not the same just knee them or elbow. Any real grappler would just use that knee defense as a means to take you down.

Thoughts?

I'll start by saying that Steve makes a good point. Too many times, when people hear 'grappling' they assume its just the ground, when in fact, it starts from the clinch, which is done while standing. Now, I know people will say, "I'll just eye gouge, groin hit, etc." and I have those tools as well. However, I feel that its important, very important, to have a backup plan. IMO, if one has to rely on those things all the time, they're missing out on something.

IMHO, I think that every art could benefit from some ground experience. Too many times, I've heard people say that they'll never end up there. Well, its nice to know that so many people can predict the future, because its very possible to end up there.

Now, if some want to train BJJ, advance thru the ranks, etc., thats great. For me, I'm really not interested in that. I like to take all of the positions, work a handful of escapes, techs, etc., from each, and drill the hell out of them over and over and over and over. I'll refer back to an early UFC with Mark Coleman and Maurice Smith. Smith had trained with Frank Shamrock, so he had the basics down, enough so, that he frustrated the **** out of Coleman, who could not finish him. Smith knew enough to survive the ground and eventually get back to his feet, where he KO'd Mark with a kick. That is what I feel is important...enough to survive.

I agree with you on the real takedowns. Its one thing to have someone shoot on you that really doesnt know what they're doing, and a totally different ball game to have a BJJ guy or wrestler shoot. Granted, the guy on the street may not be a world class grappler, but with the increasing popularity of MMA, you never know. I'd rather know that I could defend against someone with some good skill, and know that I'd stand a real good chance of surviving against someone with little skill.

So yeah, in a nutshell, I feel that having some basics is important.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Well imagine you are taken down and the person on top of you is bigger, stronger and understands the ground game. That would really be a bad day! It can happen to anyone so... I think we all need to prepare to function in any altercation. One involving weapons/tools, kickings, hand strikes, trapping hands and joint manipulation and of course grappling. By understanding how things work in these areas and within the long, medium and short ranges we give ourselves better odds in a moment of violence!

So I am all about preparation and training in all areas!

 

[Andrew Green]

You don't "need" anything, at least not unless you have a goal that requires it.

That said, if you want to learn to avoid takedowns, you need people that can do them well. If you want to avoid ground fighting, you need someone that can do it well.

So if you want your club to be able to avoid takedowns and ground fighting, you need people that can do those things, which means training them.

 

[Hand Sword]

I judge things academically. With that, the Martial Arts claim self defense training. Looking at these situations, grappling is one of the areas that occur. So, while true, one can gain skill at staying upright with enough training, nothing in this life is ever 100%! So, I say yes, grappling should be addressed simply because there is a chance that you will encounter it at some point and it's better to have familiarity with it or at least a basic idea.

 

[rlp271]

If we're talking about self-defense situations, then yes, grappling is absolutely necessary. Clinch distance is where any real fight is going to happen. If we're talking about a self-defense situation, you rarely ever see it coming, and it happens fast. You aren't going to be able to square off with them from kicking range and open things up. If you can, you're the luckiest man on the planet, or you're not in a self-defense situation, you're just fighting someone. Big difference.

 

[Earl Weiss]

? Should we be teaching more or spending more time on this type of thing. Since TKD is not a ground based art, I think we need to spend some time teaching how not go there. And once you are there, how to get back up.

1. Whether you need to teach something more is a judgement call
2. How to avoid going there i s good.
3. How get back up is good.

You left out something very imprtant. You need to learn / teach how to finish on the ground with strikes and other techniques particularly those that may be considered illegal for sport.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

There have been many threads on the need to know how to fight on the ground or being able to grapple. Well is it really needed or is the need more of knowing how to stay on your feet?

As others have pointed out, grapples are not limited to ground fighting. As to what is needed, I am of the opinion that defense against take-downs is pretty important, but one should never fall under the delusion that they will never be taken down. I think that once on the ground, grappling skills geared towards getting out of a hold and back on your feet or towards finishing the fight are likewise pretty important.

I have seen a quite a few matches where the grappler was nullified by a striker that knew how to stay on his feet or defend the take down. If more practice is done with this aspect of one’s skill would this not be a better solution than going to the ground?

Not a better solution so much as a higher priority during the fight. If you are a full range striker, your first priority is to keep your opponent in your comfortable range and away from you. Second priority is to have some infighting skills so that you can still strike if your opponent gets in closer. Third priority is defense against takedowns/grapples in order to either stay on your feet or keep from taking damaged from a grapple, such as an arm bar or a standing choke. Fourth priority is to be able to defend yourself in the event that you go down. I view it as more of an order of operations rather than a one being better than the other.

Having said that, if it the thing that you will do the least, you need to train enough in it so that you can actually use it effectively if the situation ever arises.

I am not saying that you should not have some sort of ground techniques, but I think too many forget about teaching how to stay up or defend the take down. I have seen too many TMA artists get taken down so easily. I think if TMA classes incorporated defense against the take down they would be better off.

I need to point out that judo, BJJ, hapkido, aikido, and a whole slew of other arts that incorporate grappling, ground fighting, or both are all TMA. I prefer to avoid such sweeping terms in discussions of this nature.

And I mean real take down defense. Not the same just knee them or elbow. Any real grappler would just use that knee defense as a means to take you down.

Thoughts?

I think that it is very important to learn to defend against someone trying to take you down. Since there are mats for that, there really is no reason for such defenses to be ignored.

Daniel

 

[MJS]

Just to expand a bit more, and Dan just hit on this as well. Pretty much every art incorporates some form of takedown defense or defense against a grappling type of attack. In Kenpo, I have defenses against lapel grabs, chokes, bearhugs and attempted takedowns. However, IMHO, if someone wants to expand further in that area, then I feel they're going to have to look at an art that specializes in that area.

Now, I know, some people will say, "You dont need to do that. All you need to do, is just look deeper in your art and you'll find it." and thats an option. But, and I'm speaking just for myself here, I'd much rather lean towards an art in which the focus is on exactly what I'm looking for. If I want grappling, I'll look at BJJ, Sambo, Judo, Wrestling. If I want to improve on my weapons, I'll look at the FMAs.

Many times, from what I've seen personally, people will apply a defense and because it worked, they assume that it'll be a sure shot. Not the case IMO. With the exception of certain people that I work with, nobody else has grappling experience. So, instead of giving myself a false impression that my tech. will work against someone who probably isn't providing me with a real attack, as I said earlier, I'd rather work with someone who will, that way I know, should I end up facing the average Joe, I'll still stand a good chance of success.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Now, I know, some people will say, "You dont need to do that. All you need to do, is just look deeper in your art and you'll find it." and thats an option.

I am generally of the opinion that one should look deeper into their art. However, there comes a point, usually about second dan or the equivalent thereof where the student has the basics of his or her art down solidly and should have an idea as to whether or not a heretofor untrained in skill set is part of higher dan curriculum and whether or not that skill set is there as enrichment or as something to apply practically.

The student should ask his or her instructor, but if the instructor is evasive or says something along these lines, "we don't teach that because our art allows you to keep anyone away from you without grapples," then it might be time to do a little cross training.

Considering that second dan is generally a minimum of three years, even at a McDojang, and more than likely four to five years, I do not feel that it is unreasonable to expect that a student at that level would know if it is a part of the art or not.

Not to mention that looking deeper into the art may take longer than it takes you to find yourself in a situation where you really need the skills.

Daniel