Sanda

[JowGaWolf]

Keep in mind, you're showing videos from almost 20 years ago.

It doesn't matter because the strategy would still be the same. If the strategy is a working strategy then it doesn't matter how old that strategy is. BJJ uses strategies that are older than 20 years. But age of the the strategy doesn't determine it's effectiveness. Strategies for Jabs, kicks are older than 20 years. Same with grappling techniques.

 

[JowGaWolf]

It doesn't matter because the strategy would still be the same. If the strategy is a working strategy then it doesn't matter how old that strategy is. BJJ uses strategies that are older than 20 years. But age of the the strategy doesn't determine it's effectiveness. Strategies for Jabs, kicks are older than 20 years. Same with grappling techniques.

Take note that the fighter who throws the kick is standing. He just throws a kick in a low stance, but he had to be standing in order to get this kick in.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Are we talking about the ability to prevent a takedown, or the rules of Sanda versus MMA?

I'm talking about the differences in training, where one system trains not to go to the ground and the other system is willing to go to the ground. The fight theory of the 2 systems will affect how they approach their training and will affect how much time they spend training, not going to the ground vs training to go to the ground in a better position.

I'm not saying that one is better than other here. I'm simply saying that trying to take down someone who trains to remain standing is probably not as easy as people think. If a person is willing to go to the ground and fight it out on the ground, then they will take certain risks that someone who trains to remain standing is probably not going to take.

 

[Hanzou]

This is possible to do in SC or Judo tournament.

- no striking.
- wrestle with jacket.

Many people can maintain a clean 2-0 record (never been taken down - win 2 rounds in 3 rounds tournament). My teacher had maintained 2-0 record all his life. When he got 1-1-0 (win 1 round, lose 1 round, tie 1 round) record in his last tournament, he retired from his SC competition.

Many SC champions retired just because they lose 1 round in tournament. People take their clean 2-0 (never been taken down) record very seriously.

One of my senior SC brothers said if anybody could take him down just once, he would give that person a black belt. He said that about 40 years ago. Today, nobody could do that yet.

And like I told the Wolf; If you guys think those "anti-takedown" techniques work, don't waste your time trying to convince me, take it to the professional fighter realm and make a fortune as a MMA coach.

You'll of course have to demonstrate the effectiveness of your method. That's where the rubber meets the proverbial road.

 

[Hanzou]

The fact that you make this statement of "getting back to their feet" pretty much falls into line with "being on the ground". If someone is already on their feet then "get back to their feet almost instantly." The only Sprawl that wouldn't fall into this category is a standing sprawl where the practitioner sprawls but still remains standing.

This is what I'm talking about. In that I would say that the sprawler was never "on the ground", and was still on his feet the entire time, allowing for a pretty easy back take.

It doesn't matter because the strategy would still be the same. If the strategy is a working strategy then it doesn't matter how old that strategy is. BJJ uses strategies that are older than 20 years. But age of the the strategy doesn't determine it's effectiveness. Strategies for Jabs, kicks are older than 20 years. Same with grappling techniques.

Of course it matters. Those submissions I showed you from Dern and Hall weren't in Bjj 20 years ago, but they're a major part of it now. That alters how you have to deal with a Jiujitsu player, because you not only have to watch out for the upper takedowns that can lead to triangles, chokes and arm bars, but you now have to watch out for takedowns that focus on your legs that can lead to a myriad of leg locks. You can largely thank sport Bjj and the Danaher Death Squad for that.

Consider the video you analyzed (good analysis btw, I largely agree), at the point where the Bjj guy was on the ground kicking upwards, I was wondering why he wasn't going for a takedown since he had access to the leg from his back. I forgot that that video was from the early 2000s where those attacks weren't in the Gracie system at that time.

I'm not sure what the point of those videos are. All I'm seeing are guys knocked down or already down and getting the crap beat out of them. Where's the takedown defense?

 

[Hanzou]

I'm talking about the differences in training, where one system trains not to go to the ground and the other system is willing to go to the ground. The fight theory of the 2 systems will affect how they approach their training and will affect how much time they spend training, not going to the ground vs training to go to the ground in a better position.

I'm not saying that one is better than other here. I'm simply saying that trying to take down someone who trains to remain standing is probably not as easy as people think. If a person is willing to go to the ground and fight it out on the ground, then they will take certain risks that someone who trains to remain standing is probably not going to take.

I would say that the system that actually teaches ground fighting and all ranges of fighting is definitely the better system. I have seen nothing from Sanda that tells me that they have created a system that prevents a takedown. Rules forbidding takedowns is not the same as takedown defenses.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Rules forbidding takedowns is not the same as takedown defenses.

Sanda rules doesn't forbidding takedowns. It just doesn't allow pull guard and jump guard. When your opponent is on top of you, you already lost that round.

 

[Hanzou]

Sanda rules doesn't forbidding takedowns. It just doesn't allow pull guard and jump guard. When your opponent is on top of you, you already lost that round.

Sorry, when I think of takedowns, I’m thinking of immediate follow up into ground fighting. You are correct.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I would say that the system that actually teaches ground fighting and all ranges of fighting is definitely the better system. I have seen nothing from Sanda that tells me that they have created a system that prevents a takedown. Rules forbidding takedowns is not the same as takedown defenses.

Does BJJ train this kind of "single leg" defense?

 

[Graywalker]

Sanda, I find it more entertaining to watch. I like the throws, take downs and sweeps executed by Sanda fighters.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This is what I'm talking about. In that I would say that the sprawler was never "on the ground", and was still on his feet the entire time, allowing for a

Yes that type of sprawl I would consider not being on the ground. That sprawl is more like what Kung Fu Wang showed from the perspective that the idea is not to go to the ground when doing the sprawl. Any sprawl that has that main focus of remaining on the feet would be the same in my mindset. Yes, they are done differently but they all have the same end result. Remain on your feet so that you can utilize your mobility.

So to your point. Yes that would be a standing sprawl where the goal is not to go to the ground but to avoid being taken on to the ground so that the one can continue to use their mobility. The low stance that he uses works the same way that I have stated many times. There is an a range in which to your opponent can shoot for your legs. Take him out of that range and it become more difficult shoot for the legs. The lower the stance the more difficult it is to "get under" to grab the legs.

Of course it matters. Those submissions I showed you from Dern and Hall weren't in Bjj 20 years ago, but they're a major part of it now.

I don't know enough about BJJ in order say one way or another. If I were going to research, I would go back to see some older BJJ, Judo, or Japanese Jiu-Jitsu and compare it from that. There's a lot of things that people think are new in MMA but they really aren't. For example, when the "oblique" kick made the scene, everyone one was like "Wow, something news" but kung fu practitioners were like, yeah, no big deal, it's an old technique, one that is often done and forms or wood dummy training. TMA was clearly less impressed than the MMA world who thought it was something new. So new that someone gave it a new name. "oblique kick" For the longest that kick was referred to as a Shadowless kick or scoop kick, or simply, shin kick.

I think this is the same with MMA. all of the "new stuff" people think they see in MMA probably isn't at all. The MMA fighters that use the techniques would probably say the same thing. But like I said, I would have to actually be able to compare with older techniques. Before I make a claim that and MMA fighter is doing a "new technique"

Consider the video you analyzed (good analysis btw, I largely agree),

Thanks

at the point where the Bjj guy was on the ground kicking upwards, I was wondering why he wasn't going for a takedown since he had access to the leg from his back.

The BJJ fighter did a good job in using his environment to his advantage, when moved backwards, he moved into a corner where he knew he could restrict the Sanda fighter's movement. Right from the start positions himself so that his retreat would be closer to that corner. As a striker I want to avoid corners like that where my movement is restricted. I don't mind putting people in corners, but I can't be in one. I could be over analyzing it, but I think about how I spar and how I'm aware of my environment. Most of the time, I usually make sure that the student isn't going to get hurt by the surround environment, but in a real fight I most definitely make use of the environment.

My mindset about the environment, is that if I don't use the environment against my opponent, then my opponent will use the environment against me. I could be wrong, but I've seen many fighters make sue of the environment so I don't think I'm super smart for thinking that way. I think it's the common way of thinking, just like some people use the cage to restrict movement.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I would say that the system that actually teaches ground fighting and all ranges of fighting is definitely the better system.

I'm not sure if it would be the better system, but the practitioner would definitely be better prepared than someone who didn't train it at all. Boxers don't train kicks, so low kicks to the legs destroy them. Strikers in general, (Non-MMA fighters) don't train fighting on the ground, so when they are on the ground they become helpless. There's ground fighting in Kung Fu, but it's soooooo neglected when it comes to training. I know I don't train ground fighting like I should. That's why I stay out of that BJJ sandbox lol. I'll play with BJJ guys but not in their strengths.


BJJ invites me to play in their sandbox. I quickly say.. Nah. I'm good. I got some homework to do. lol.

 

[Bee Brian]

This is my concern. MMA seems ignore this part of training. If you are good in the ground skill, when I take you down, you won't have any desire to remain standing. Why should you? The ground game is where you want to fight me.

I'm afraid that as long as the MMA is popular, people won't train how to

- resist against take down.
- remain standing after throwing.

Since in Sanda, when you throw your opponent down, if you

- remain balance, you will get 2 points.
- fall down with your opponent, but you are on top, you will only get 1 point.

Kung Fu Wang, you always...

-divide your post
-into sections
-like this.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Kung Fu Wang, you always...

-divide your post
-into sections
-like this.

I have been a computer programmer all my life.

switch( expression )
{
case value-1: Block-1; Break;
case value-2: Block-2; Break;
case value-n: Block-n; Break;
default: Block-1; Break;
}

 

[Hanzou]

Does BJJ train this kind of "single leg" defense?

Yeah, the Guillotine.

 

[Hanzou]

Sanda, I find it more entertaining to watch. I like the throws, take downs and sweeps executed by Sanda fighters.

Definitely entertaining, but it’s important to note that it isn’t very popular even in China. Ramsey Dewey talks about it in a vid. It’s very interesting and you should look it up.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Yeah, the Guillotine.

Agree! With guillotine (reverse head lock), you can

- sweep your opponent's left leg,
- block his right leg,
- press him down,
- ...,

depend on his weight distribution. The single leg defense can be a good workshop material.

One single leg defense that I like is to:

- Over hook his left arm that hold on my leading right leg.
- Move my left foot behind my right foot (stealing step).
- Right leg spring/lift his left leg (like a leg spring, or leg lift throw).

 

[Hanzou]

Agree! With guillotine (reverse head lock), you can

- sweep your opponent's left leg.
- block his right leg.
- pull him down.
- ...

depend on his weight distribution. The single leg defense can be a good workshop material.

One single leg defense that I like is to:

- over hook his left arm that hold on my leg.
- right leg spring/lift his left leg.

You don’t even need to sweep. You can can choke him standing, and you’ll have it in before they can counter because their arms are still going at your leg. If they do fall forward you can fall with them into closed guard and finish the choke on the ground (and if it’s a self defense situation you can drive their face into the concrete).

 

[Bee Brian]

Agree! With guillotine (reverse head lock), you can

- sweep your opponent's left leg.
- block his right leg.
- press him down.
- ...

depend on his weight distribution. The single leg defense can be a good workshop material.

One single leg defense that I like is to:

- Over hook his left arm that hold on my leading right leg.
- Move my left foot behind my right foot (stealing step).
- Right leg spring/lift his left leg (like a leg spring, or leg lift throw).

Kung Fu Wang.

-There you
-go
-again.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Kung Fu Wang.

-There you
-go
-again.

I thought it's easier to read this way. For example,

A throw can be divided into the following steps.

- Use kick to set up punch.
- Use punch to set up clinch.
- Use clinch to set up throw.
- Use throw to set up ground game.

This is the way that I write my notes - list major points.

When someone write a long paragraph, it can make me sleepy. I don't like to read people's long paragraph. I don't like people to waste their time to read my long paragraph either.

Two things;

1.You’d be an idiot for doing something like that. That isn’t a self defense scenario, that’s a moron with a death wish.

2. I don’t care what martial art you practice, you’re likely to wind up on the losing end of that situation (possibly dead). So, I think it’s rather dumb to use that as some sort of counter to what I said.

I'm not the only person who is doing this.