Something I've noticed...

[Makalakumu]

When I grapple, I can usually up the intensity to full speed and everyone walks away happy. The same cannot be said about sparring. I've recieved far more injuries and I've given far more injuries sparring then I have grappling. Broken bones, torn cartiledge, sprains, deep bruises, concusions, etc, when I go all out in sparring, this usually is the result.

I understand that if we begin to include standing randori and falling, the mistmatch between the two quickly evens out. However, if we just look at newaza (rolling) this seems to be the case.

This leads me to wonder...

Are the grappling martial arts safer? Does the fact that they can be practiced more realisticly with less contact make them more effective?

upnorthkyosa

ps - I've practiced both striking and grappling arts equally so I wouldn't say that my observations are from an over focus on one.

 

[green meanie]

Are the grappling martial arts safer? Does the fact that they can be practiced more realisticly with less contact make them more effective?

I think so. I think that's one of the biggest reasons why grappling arts have had a lot of success in MMA-style events. You can go all-out and still practice safely because it's easier to control what happens in this type of training.

 

[FearlessFreep]

I know that a few months ago I went to a self-defense class based on TKD/Hapkido that I had not been to in awhile. It hurt...and stayed sore for awhile. Much worse than the amount of pain I suffer in a BJJ based self-defense class. So in one sense I believe you are right in that you can practice grappling arts at 'full speed' and not come away nearly as injured as you do with striking arts. Does that make it more effective? I don't know...I do know that I would probably rather be 'stopped' by a grappler than a striker

 

[Makalakumu]

I know that a few months ago I went to a self-defense class based on TKD/Hapkido that I had not been to in awhile. It hurt...and stayed sore for awhile. Much worse than the amount of pain I suffer in a BJJ based self-defense class. So in one sense I believe you are right in that you can practice grappling arts at 'full speed' and not come away nearly as injured as you do with striking arts. Does that make it more effective? I don't know...I do know that I would probably rather be 'stopped' by a grappler than a striker

One of the things that I've away with from my experience with martial arts is that realistic practice is what makes an art effective, not the art itself. It all comes down to good training. If BJJ (grappling in general) is easier to practice realistically, then it would follow that it would be more effective.

I'm not trying to take anything away from striking arts. They all have there place. However, I believe that this difference really does exist.

 

[beau_safken]

Im going to go with the theory of range of motion and momentum. Long legs long movements. While the grappling is at very limited distance and the moves do not involve a large range of motion like sparring generally. Just more momentum and such = more power to break, tear and such... Sounds ok to me ill go with it.

 

[FearlessFreep]

If BJJ (grappling in general) is easier to practice realistically, then it would follow that it would be more effective.

BJJ is also, it seems to me, much harder to practice solo. I have a heavy bag and some empty space at home, I can work my strikes over and over again until I'm exhausted, take a break, and come back for more. I can't get that that level of work in BJJ because most moves in BJJ require a human opponent it seems to preactice even reasonably. You can't reeally practice your bridging or your elbow escapes or your triangles or what have you without the presense of anther person there, but you can practice roundhouse kicks and punches and elbows strikes and knees with only minimal space and equipment. It's a lot harder for me to effectively train BJJ between classes than it is TKD. Even in the class room, because the moves are longer to accomplish, I get a lot less reps on them

As a result, I get a lot more training done with striking then with grappling, which makes it more effective for me.

(For what it's worth I'm talking 'self -defense' techniques, not really 'sparring'. I spar in TKD, and it's not very realistic for 'effectiveness', but I also work self-defense drills in TKD and we do make no-pad 'light' contact which still hurts)

Not meaning to really criticize one against the other, just different reflections over what I get out of both as I train in them

 

[SFC JeffJ]

If BJJ (grappling in general) is easier to practice realistically, then it would follow that it would be more effective.

BJJ is also, it seems to me, much harder to practice solo. I have a heavy bag and some empty space at home, I can work my strikes over and over again until I'm exhausted, take a break, and come back for more. I can't get that that level of work in BJJ because most moves in BJJ require a human opponent it seems to preactice even reasonably. You can't reeally practice your bridging or your elbow escapes or your triangles or what have you without the presense of anther person there, but you can practice roundhouse kicks and punches and elbows strikes and knees with only minimal space and equipment. It's a lot harder for me to effectively train BJJ between classes than it is TKD. Even in the class room, because the moves are longer to accomplish, I get a lot less reps on them

As a result, I get a lot more training done with striking then with grappling, which makes it more effective for me.

(For what it's worth I'm talking 'self -defense' techniques, not really 'sparring'. I spar in TKD, and it's not very realistic for 'effectiveness', but I also work self-defense drills in TKD and we do make no-pad 'light' contact which still hurts)

Not meaning to really criticize one against the other, just different reflections over what I get out of both as I train in them

I agree completely. Both striking and grappling have thier plusses and minuses. Best thing to do is crosstrain, crosstrain, and crosstrain.

 

[FearlessFreep]

How can I argue with a "Power Windows" avatar?

 

[green meanie]

Does that make it more effective? I don't know...I do know that I would probably rather be 'stopped' by a grappler than a striker

Good point. I just realized I should've explained myself better. I'm not trying to make a comparison between techniques, i.e. what's more effective an arm bar or a punch to the nose? But I do think that being able to safely train in an 'all out' environment is the most effective way to train. Grappling arts allow that, most striking arts don't.

 

[green meanie]

I agree completely. Both striking and grappling have thier plusses and minuses. Best thing to do is crosstrain, crosstrain, and crosstrain.

Agreed!!!

 

[FearlessFreep]

in an 'all out' environment is the most effective way to train. Grappling arts allow that, most striking arts don't.

Not really. Grappling drills end at the takedown or the tap. The fight doesn't end at the takedown or the tap. You can practice full speed up until a certain point at which the drill has to stop. Same with striking. You can practice full speed up until the point where the knuckle meet the nose or the blade-hand meets the throat, then you have to pull it.

You can make assumptions or educated guesses or simulate what happens next, but those are really just that.

But in both styles, in any training really, there comes a point where the drill stops and you can't train 'all out' passed that point. Up to that point you can


I think because grappling moves involve body mechanics that flow together until you reach that *one* point of attack (the armbar, the choke, etc..) that there s a perception that you can go 'all out'. But that's all just setup for the attack. In striking, that 'attack' happens several times during the course of the encounter. In both cases you have to pull the attack and not go full force through that point

How many have really trained to the point of punching their partner full force? How many have really trained to the point of really doing that figure-four to completion when the partner's shoulder or elbow breaks?

 

[SFC JeffJ]

Great points Fearless. Besides, how can I argue with someone who recognizes a Power Windows avatar?

 

[FearlessFreep]

Both striking and grappling have thier plusses and minuses. Best thing to do is crosstrain, crosstrain, and crosstrain.

I've learned SD from a TKD/Hapkido strinking point of view, with some Judo throws mixed in, and started learning SD from a BJJ point of view and while I enjoy the contrast in approaches, the one thing I'm fighting against is to fall into 'modal thinking'.

What I mean by this is thinkg eother "OK, the guy's five feet from me, I can kick him...oops, now he's in on me, time to grapple". I'm trying to keep in mind that both sets of technques should play different sides to the same coin, or really different colors to the same picture. Like using that Taekwondo kick to gain distance to get in close enough to a clinch. Or maybe throwing an elbow as I'm cloing the gap, or....just ways of thinking from a different position and situation that I'm not *just* doing TKD or *just* doing BJJ but I have a pallete of available techniques at disposal to apply in ways that may not fit in purely with one or the other

Which I guess sorta turns the original question sideways...

 

[still learning]

Hello, It is good to make a comparsion. Grappling is like hugging someone..harder to hurt the other person,even at full speed.

Sparring...is trying to hit someone with contact and both people moving in,out and all around. Getting hit is part of the training...but getting injure is not. Striking techniques are harder to control, sometimes we step into them too.

As a white belt to green...people use to hit my ribs! ...bruise ribs hurts for a few weeks. It happen several times too. Now I leave my ribs home.

In a fight it is better to strike them..then hug'em. They will hurt more! ....unless it is your wife/girl friend.....then hug them...alot..Aloha

 

[green meanie]

Grappling drills end at the takedown or the tap. The fight doesn't end at the takedown or the tap.

I disagree but I guess it all depends on how you train. If someone taps because they're passing out then that was the fight. The fight would've ended because they were going to sleep. If the tap came as the result of an arm lock... well, who knows? Maybe it'd be over, maybe not. I'd still take it over a training session of pulling punches any day.

Which brings up us to your questions:

How many have really trained to the point of punching their partner full force? How many have really trained to the point of really doing that figure-four to completion when the partner's shoulder or elbow breaks?

When we train we hit each other full force. It's risky but at some point it has to be done. It's an important part of the training; a necessary part. We don't do figure-fours or any joint locks to completion. It isn't necessary. When the tap comes the point has been made and that's enough. For us anyway.

 

[green meanie]

I'm trying to keep in mind that both sets of technques should play different sides to the same coin, or really different colors to the same picture. Like using that Taekwondo kick to gain distance to get in close enough to a clinch. Or maybe throwing an elbow as I'm cloing the gap, or....just ways of thinking from a different position and situation that I'm not *just* doing TKD or *just* doing BJJ but I have a pallete of available techniques at disposal to apply in ways that may not fit in purely with one or the other...

Now THAT'S what I'm talking about! Now we're getting somewhere. :cheers:

 

[Makalakumu]

A couple of things...

1. The business end of the strike is the force it applies. If that force isn't applied, then the reaction on both parts is skewed. With that being said, I think that contact is important in sparring. And, although I would not advocate all out contact all of the time, I would say that every striker needs to give a try sometime...with the proper saftey equipment.

2. Submissions and chokes also have a business end. It happens when the thing is locked on and one is ready to go. When uke taps the technique has progressed further then a pulled punch, IMO. Further, after one taps, the technique hasn't progressed far enough to injure uke.

While I agree that cross training is important, I also think that realistic training is important. With grappling, it seems as if this would be not only easier, but it could be something that one could do more often. And although I think the point that "strikers can work out more by themselves" has validity, it is important to remember that this is different then actually sparring.

 

[Hand Sword]

Realistically, I would say that the grappling arts are safer. The very fact that one can give up at a moments notice helps this. All you have to do is release pressure, or let go. If you whack someone, and start a second punch on it's way, you can't just stop it as they are stunned seriously, or falling. I think one can resist a grapplers hold to a point. But, one can't resist a solid hit. Even if one can take it, there is still some damage done.

 

[bushidomartialarts]

having done both long term....

i wouldn't say grappling arts are safer, but they have a significantly wider margin for error. striking sparring tends to result in more dings (bruises, sprains, minor breaks) but not a whole lot of major injuries. if something goes wrong when you're grappling, you're more likely to be out long-term.

in terms of realistic practice, sparring in any situation (grappling or striking) builds a lot of bad habits and isn't nearly as good for self-defense training as people seem to believe. it will help you remain calm, which is pretty key, and that counts for something.

 

[Hand Sword]

Great point! That counts for a lot! Thinking clearly is what it's all about. Much easier to do if you have a calm mind.