Some more thoughts on "anti grappling".

geezer

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
6,837
Reaction score
2,848
Location
Phoenix, AZ
This comes out of a discussion I was having on the general forum. A lot of people have questioned the validity of some of the so called "anti grappling" taught to WCers and other stand-up, striking focused martial artists. And they are right to do so. Some of the "anti grappling" programs being promoted leave much to be desired.

On the other hand, properly understood, the concept of "anti grappling" as a method to escape and get back into your striking game is totally valid and something every striker should know. In other words, if you can't beat the other guy at his game, learn how to get back into your game. So the difference between grappling and "antigrappling" is basically a matter of your objective rather than methods.

The following clip illustrates the difference between very basic self-defense grappling and "anti-grappling" as taught to beginners. If you pay attention to the finishing strategies Stephan outlines from around 3:00 to 3:20 where he explains that instead of the grappler's solution of going to the armbar, you may prefer to disengage and run, or stay on top and finish with punches. These are more practical solutions for a person whose primary experience is in a striking art. In otherwords, "anti-grappling".

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,079
Reaction score
4,756
Location
Lexington, KY
Anyone who is interested in "anti-grappling" should watch the fights of Chuck Liddell. He was a master of using his wrestling skills to negate his opponent's takedowns so that he could finish fights with his striking.

Cung Le is another fighter who is good at this.
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
2,745
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
I don't believe "anti-grappling" exist. On the other hands, I do believe "anti-striking" exist. When a striker's arms gets wrapped, it's very difficult to break it free. If you can control your opponent's arm like the following picture, it will be very hard for your opponent to counter you.

If your

- right upper arm holds on your opponent's wrist area.
- right hand controls his elbow area.

This "2 points control" will disable your opponent's arm function completely.

Old saying said, "You should never apply your head lock if you can't achieved the following:

- have a completely control on your opponent's leading arm.
- put his head below and touch your chest.
- make his spine to bend either side way or forward.
- ..."

Chang_head_lock.jpg


arm_control.png


In the following clip, the grappler did not control his opponent's arm the way he should have. His opponent's arm has too much freedom.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
2,745
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
If you can also use your head lock hand to control his upper arm, that will give you a "3 points control" on his arm. It will complete disable that arm's function.



When an octopus (grappler) wraps on a shark (striker), it's not that easy for that shark (striker) to continue it's biting (striking) game. This is why IMO, the "anti-striking" is possible, but the "anti-grappling" is very difficult to do (if not impossible).

octopus_wrap_shark.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tony Dismukes

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,079
Reaction score
4,756
Location
Lexington, KY
When an octopus (grappler) wraps on a shark (striker), it's not that easy for that shark (striker) to continue it's biting (striking) game. This is why IMO, the "anti-striking" is possible, but the "anti-grappling" is very difficult to do (if not impossible).

octopus_wrap_shark.jpg

Have you watched any high-level "sprawl-and-brawl" specialists in the cage? There most definitely are folks out there who know how to use their grappling skills to keep from being taken down, or kept down, or tied up in a clinch for very long and who use that ability to keep their fights in the striking range.
 
OP
G

geezer

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
6,837
Reaction score
2,848
Location
Phoenix, AZ
This is why IMO, the "anti-striking" is possible, but the "anti-grappling" is very difficult to do (if not impossible).

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here, John. Escapes and reversals happen all the time in any grappling bout. As I see it, "anti grappling" is just that. Grappling skills directed at working your way back to a stand-up game. Like the shoulder-post and stand up in base clip Drop Bear posted. And yes, this kind of move is possible!

You seem to mean something different when you use the term "anti grappling".
 

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,484
Reaction score
1,085
This is more along the lines of the "anti-grappling" I brought up in the other thread;


I tend to laugh at stuff like this, but I know that that upsets some people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
2,745
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing here, John. Escapes and reversals happen all the time in any grappling bout. As I see it, "anti grappling" is just that. Grappling skills directed at working your way back to a stand-up game. Like the shoulder-post and stand up in base clip Drop Bear posted. And yes, this kind of move is possible!

You seem to mean something different when you use the term "anti grappling".

IMO, it's easier to get into clinch. It's harder to get out of a clinch. A clinch will lead into a take down. A take down will lead into ground game. The stand up game ends and the ground game starts.

I assume the "anti-grappling" strategy is used by a striker to deal with a grappler. If 2 grapplers deal with each other, the term "anti-grappling' will have no meaning. It's just a grappler uses his grappling skill to deal with another grappler's grappling skill. How successful can a striker without any grappling knowledge be able to avoid "clinch" is what we are taking about here. If "anti-grappling" will require someone to train grappling, after he has trained grappling, he is no longer a pure striker. The term "anti-grappling" also no longer make sense. He just uses his grappling skill against another's grappler's grappling skill.
 
Last edited:

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
18,942
Reaction score
4,522
Location
Covington, WA
This is more along the lines of the "anti-grappling" I brought up in the other thread;


I tend to laugh at stuff like this, but I know that that upsets some people.
I can't laugh at that crap. It's dishonest.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
G

geezer

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
6,837
Reaction score
2,848
Location
Phoenix, AZ
This is more along the lines of the "anti-grappling" I brought up in the other thread;


I tend to laugh at stuff like this, but I know that that upsets some people.

Go ahead, laugh. It's a free country. But while you're at it, could you pick out a couple of specific moves on the clip so we know exactly what you are laughing at?

I personally have always had a problem with the idea (also shown on this clip) that you could easily stop a well timed and commited shoot for a takedown with a flurry of punches (3:16-3:40). So for me the general problem here is the lack of realism on the part of the opponents. They seem like straw men.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Argus

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
722
Reaction score
258
Location
In my head!

Thoughts?

Edit:

Also, I'm curious if grapplers see any "grappling" / "anti-grappling" value in this kind of chi-sao:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
G

geezer

Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
6,837
Reaction score
2,848
Location
Phoenix, AZ
If "anti-grappling" will require someone to train grappling, after he has trained grappling, he is no longer a pure striker. The term "anti-grappling" also no longer make sense. He just uses his grappling skill against another's grappler's grappling skill.

Well it may not make sense, but this is exactly what I meant. To escape a grappler and get back to standup will require some skill at grappling. I don't believe striking alone is always enough. So maybe we don't disagree completely after all?
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
2,745
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
Also, I'm curious if grapplers see any "grappling" / "anti-grappling" value in this kind of chi-sao:

A grappler will grab on his opponent's wrists, move into elbows, and then move into shoulder, waist, or head. From a grappler point of view, to disable his opponent's arms mobility should be his highest priority. A grappler will never roll with his opponent's arms as shown in that clip.

To escape a grappler and get back to standup will require some skill at grappling. I don't believe striking alone is always enough. So maybe we don't disagree completely after all?

We may say the same thing by using different words. If you are a

- social person, the term "anti-social",
- communist, the term "anti-communist",
- striker, the term "anti-striking",
- grappler, the term "anti-grappling",

will have no meaning to you. If you are a "pure" striker who has no knowledge in grappling, you try to take a short cut by applying "anti-grappling" strategy to deal with a grappler, you may want to train how to avoid "clinch" and not allow your opponent to get you into head lock, under hook, over hook, bear hug, waist surround, double legs, single leg, ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Argus

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
722
Reaction score
258
Location
In my head!
A grappler will grab on his opponent's wrists, move into elbows, and then move into shoulder, waist, or head. From a grappler point of view, to disable his opponent's arms mobility should be his highest priority. A grappler will never roll with his opponent's arms as shown in that clip.

As if, of all things, we don't know how to handle that?

I'm sorry, but when it comes to someone trying to manipulate or control our hands, I don't think you'll find any art better adept at dealing with that than Wing Chun...
 

Kung Fu Wang

Sr. Grandmaster
MT Mentor
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
10,719
Reaction score
2,745
Location
Austin, Tx/Shell Beach, Ca
I'm sorry, but when it comes to someone trying to manipulate or control our hands, I don't think you'll find any art better adept at dealing with that than Wing Chun...
There is a difference between the "stick" concept and the "hook" concept. When you

- "stick" on your opponent's arm, it's easy for your opponent to move his arm away and break that "stickiness".
- "hook" on your opponent's arm, when your opponent moves his arm, his arm will pull your arm with it.

If WC "sticky hands" can integrate the "hook (grab)" concept, it will function the same as the wrestler's "octopus arms".
 

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,484
Reaction score
1,085
Go ahead, laugh. It's a free country. But while you're at it, could you pick out a couple of specific moves on the clip so we know exactly what you are laughing at?

Well for starters, the fact that they go through great pains to tell us that this is pure Kung Fu, and that they didn't pull it from another system. Why they found it necessary to point that out I have no idea.

The "anti-grappling" in that vid always begins in dominant positions (except for the last one). Just FYI; If you have a grappler in side control, or the mount, you don't need "anti-grappling". You're a pretty good grappler already. It's also not hard to do damage to someone when you already have a superior position on them. I can beat the crap out of anyone if I have them in side control and they're letting me pound their face into the pavement. You would think that people would use this stuff when they're in an inferior position.

The WC exponent did one of the most hilarious guard passes I've seen on video around 2:25. However, why would they show a guard pass in the first place? The guard is a defensive position, and a Bjj exponent (i'm assuming its bjj since that's where its most commonly seen) is only going to use it if you're the aggressor and you've pushed the Bjj exponent onto their back and forced them into that position. Do they think that you need to defend yourself from a Bjj person fighting in guard on the street? Like some Bjj tough guy is going to grab you and then do a guard pull onto the pavement? Its nonsense.

I guess the final part of the video was takedown defense? Hilarious. As you said, the chances of knocking someone out or down in a takedown attempt with a flurry of punches is pretty slim. If they know what they're doing, the slim becomes close to zero.
 

Argus

2nd Black Belt
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
722
Reaction score
258
Location
In my head!
There are different between "stick" and "hook". When you

- "stick" on your opponent's arm, it's easy for your opponent to move his arm away and break that "stickiness".
- "hook" on your opponent's arm, when your opponent moves his arm, his arm will pull your arm with it.

If WC "sticky hands" can integrate the "hooking" concept, it will function the same as the wrestler's "octopus arms".

With respect, I don't think you understand chisau.
 

Skip Cooper

Purple Belt
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
380
Reaction score
12
Location
Houston, TX
When an octopus (grappler) wraps on a shark (striker), it's not that easy for that shark (striker) to continue it's biting (striking) game. This is why IMO, the "anti-striking" is possible, but the "anti-grappling" is very difficult to do (if not impossible).





That was awesome. I'm now thinking about getting an tattoo of a octopus submitting a shark!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Hanzou

Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
6,484
Reaction score
1,085
Thoughts?

The guy is sprawling and clearly has a clue about the double leg takedown. I have no issue with that clip.

Also, I'm curious if grapplers see any "grappling" / "anti-grappling" value in this kind of chi-sao:

Good way to get your arm snapped.
 
Top