The Importance Of Ground Skills

[SaulGoodman]

A lot of people (not me) in the wing chun community say it's "complete" and works in all ranges including the ground. The following clip shows a Las Vegas cop subduing a guy using very identifiable jiu jitsu skills. I have been taking ground fighting for a long time now as I believe Wc is WOEFULL in that range.
My question to anyone who doesn't feel they need to add to their skill set is, how would you have used wing chun on the ground to control this guy?

And let's not go down the road of "I'm not a cop so wouldn't be in that situation in the first place" etc

 

[Tez3]

I'm going down the road of police tactics being quite different to those needed as a civilian who is attacked. The gaols are different, the techniques are different. Police take people to the ground because they need to handcuff and subdue them not because they want to 'fight' on the ground. A police officer doesn't want to 'fight', their aim is to subdue, control and usually get them into vehicle with minimum fuss, doesn't always happen like that but that's always the hope.
The technique used by the officer (who did well) can also be attributed of course to Judo and the takedown was pure rugby. I would say that if the officer wasn't trying to handcuff and detain him he may well have used other techniques. In self defence the idea is to get away from the attacker not detain him so 'ground work for police officers' is a slightly different discussion to 'ground work for self defence'. You may not like it but of course many civilians wouldn't find themselves in that position, well not in the police officers at any rate lol, maybe as the arrested person though

 

[Phobius]

might be "off topic" but why the fists and elbows and taser instead of a wristlock or similar? typical racist us-cop bastard.

Adrenaline and concern for safety? If a guy resists a cop he might be willing to kill or be killed as well no matter a broken wrist. I dont think we should judge the cop without more facts.

Takes a special kind of idiot to attack or resist a cop.

to wing chun: i'm sure there's no style with more exaggerated and overrated practitioners.

Could be you are right, there are a lot of practitioners of WC and as such there is a very high amount of practitioners with grand illusions.


Now back to my opinion, I guess it does not matter since I dont think WC has much to teach on the ground. Doing a bit of GJJ training this has proven to me more than anything that ground game may fit WC concept but if it ever has been part of the system that knowledge is long gone.

It is not about having something to support ground game, it is about training it and learning not only what you can do but what your opponent may do towards you.

So no, cross train. MMA is not a stupid idea in its core.

 

[SaulGoodman]

I'm going down the road of police tactics being quite different to those needed as a civilian who is attacked. The gaols are different, the techniques are different. Police take people to the ground because they need to handcuff and subdue them not because they want to 'fight' on the ground. A police officer doesn't want to 'fight', their aim is to subdue, control and usually get them into vehicle with minimum fuss, doesn't always happen like that but that's always the hope.
The technique used by the officer (who did well) can also be attributed of course to Judo and the takedown was pure rugby. I would say that if the officer wasn't trying to handcuff and detain him he may well have used other techniques. In self defence the idea is to get away from the attacker not detain him so 'ground work for police officers' is a slightly different discussion to 'ground work for self defence'. You may not like it but of course many civilians wouldn't find themselves in that position, well not in the police officers at any rate lol, maybe as the arrested person though

Good post, I appreciate that in a "self defense" situation that the ground is the worse place to be and that regaining ones feet is the best choice. However, if the bad guy WONT let you do that and he's proving to be a handful (like the guy in the clip) again my question is how would the "pure" Wc guy get himself out of this hole? Bearing in mind if he doesn't have ground skills it's doubtful he will be able to hold base for a striking finish/escape and won't have the necessary mechanics/skills to reverse/escape side control or mount

 

[SaulGoodman]

might be "off topic" but why the fists and elbows and taser instead of a wristlock or similar? typical racist us-cop bastard.

That last comment isn't very productive.

 

[MAfreak]

That last comment isn't very productive.

if you don't get angry on excessive violence, i do. otherwise i wouldn't have postet here since i'm no wing chun guy. but since the black guy didn't punch, a "figure four" grip on the wrist would have been possible to get control over him (and yes i did so too once in a real situation, when i don't wanted to hurt the other one, so i don't talk just theoretically).

 

[Gnarlie]

There are US LEOs on this site, MAfreak. What experience do you personally have of US Law Enforcement that allows you to make such a sweeping statement?

I get the feeling that you make judgements based on pretty limited evidence.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[PiedmontChun]

It depends on what your aim is. Someone taking you to the ground and you are defending yourself on the ground or trying to subdue someone who is trying to run away (versus an actual fight)? BJJ would be great. Trying to say WC was made to do the same is silly. If your goal is to submit someone without injury, then no, WC has minimal tools for such a goal.

In this clip, there were numerous opportunities for punch or elbow strikes, or to get back up and fight, but that was not the officer's aim of course. The punches around 1:10-1:12 were what helped put him back in a dominant position from what it looks like though.

I've never met a WC person (online or otherwise) who makes the claim that WC equips you to grapple on the ground. So that is a bit of a straw man in my opinion. WC principles do carry over to the ground in many ways, which some schools train.

 

[Tez3]

Bearing in mind if he doesn't have ground skills it's doubtful he will be able to hold base for a striking finish/escape and won't have the necessary mechanics/skills to reverse/escape side control or mount

Thank you for polite, reasoned posting.
I don't know about US police officers but when I trained we were taught how to take someone down, how to control and keep them where we wanted them.
Just a thought, I don't know if this holds water or not, if someone, presumably like the officer in the video, has trained in a ground style is it likely that training will kick in rather than his police training? Would the officer in the video be actually making it more complicated by reversing, changing position etc?
I'm not as you will have gathered WC which I know doesn't answer your questions, sorry. Interesting though which is why I chimed in.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

to wing chun: i'm sure there's no style with more exaggerated and overrated practitioners.

Just so you know, I'm fairly certain there is a rule against style bashing, which you seem to like to do. Just pointing out, since you posted in the wing chun forum bashing wing chun with nothing productive to add.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I think the clip of a cop arresting a suspect is kind of off-topic. I'm pretty new to WT/WC, but I don't think it was really designed for LEOs to control/handcuff suspects.

The ground skills I've been sharing with my WT friends are focused on fundamentals of how to protect themselves on the ground, escape from the bottom, and get back to their feet safely so they can apply their WT. The underlying principles aren't too different from WT/WC (@yak sao says from what I've shown him so far that they're pretty much the same), but the details of application in context are different enough that it's worth working with someone who actually has training on the ground.

 

[SaulGoodman]

It depends on what your aim is. Someone taking you to the ground and you are defending yourself on the ground or trying to subdue someone who is trying to run away (versus an actual fight)? BJJ would be great. Trying to say WC was made to do the same is silly. If your goal is to submit someone without injury, then no, WC has minimal tools for such a goal.

In this clip, there were numerous opportunities for punch or elbow strikes, or to get back up and fight, but that was not the officer's aim of course. The punches around 1:10-1:12 were what helped put him back in a dominant position from what it looks like though.

I've never met a WC person (online or otherwise) who makes the claim that WC equips you to grapple on the ground. So that is a bit of a straw man in my opinion. WC principles do carry over to the ground in many ways, which some schools train.

I agree that certain aspects of wc do carry over but they won't save you when someone has got a high mount on you and they're trying to punch your head into a canoe shape...

As regards wc people not seeing the need to train grappling? They are out there, maybe we're just too enlightened on this forum to buy into that nonsense

 

[SaulGoodman]

I think the clip of a cop arresting a suspect is kind of off-topic. I'm pretty new to WT/WC, but I don't think it was really designed for LEOs to control/handcuff suspects.

The ground skills I've been sharing with my WT friends are focused on fundamentals of how to protect themselves on the ground, escape from the bottom, and get back to their feet safely so they can apply their WT. The underlying principles aren't too different from WT/WC (@yak sao says from what I've shown him so far that they're pretty much the same), but the details of application in context are different enough that it's worth working with someone who actually has training on the ground.

That's interesting Tony. Have they shown you their "anti ground fighting" techniques yet? I did Leung ting wt for a few years and was taught things that wouldn't even work on the zombies from "the walking dead"...

 

[Tony Dismukes]

That's interesting Tony. Have they shown you their "anti ground fighting" techniques yet? I did Leung ting wt for a few years and was taught things that wouldn't even work on the zombies from "the walking dead"...

So far everybody has been happy to defer to my expertise on the ground. Yak sao has shown a couple of ideas vs standing grappling which seemed reasonably sound. He calls it "anti-grappling". I call it "grappling applied for the purpose of avoiding the takedown." Potayto - potahto.

 

[PiedmontChun]

I agree that certain aspects of wc do carry over but they won't save you when someone has got a high mount on you and they're trying to punch your head into a canoe shape...

As regards wc people not seeing the need to train grappling? They are out there, maybe we're just too enlightened on this forum to buy into that nonsense

I can't comment on what "people out there" think, only those I actually have any contact with. I guess my question to you, since you are the OP, is what exactly was the response you were looking for? For agreement we should all cross train grappling, or just a tacit acknowledgement that WC doesn't actually address grappling on the ground? The topic seems to come up quite a bit here, but I would point out that most striking systems don't have technical grappling from a guard or mount position. If you know a school that does, great, but I would posture that is an exception. The kid at the karate dojo down the street might learns some basic escape techniques from the ground along their locks, throws, and sweeps - but they would not fare much better (if at all). I've read Hapkido claims that they are a complete system addressing all ranges but highly doubtful that they grapple from the mount / guard position very much (again, maybe there are exceptions to this generalization). I'm not style bashing, just being realistic and also acknowledging they way in which someone defines "complete system" is important.

If I were ever to be mounted, I don't have a BJJ or wrestling toolset to draw from, but I do have some minimal tools from the WT system to avoid getting in bottom of mount position and dealing with it if it happens.

As for cross training: I work full time, have a family, pursuing higher education, have other hobbies that compete for time and money, and I'm not entering any MMA competitions (I'm a bit old for that too anyway). So where's the need? You might get similar sentiments from plenty of WC people. Again, it comes down to what is your aim or goal.

 

[JowGaWolf]

A lot of people (not me) in the wing chun community say it's "complete" and works in all ranges including the ground. The following clip shows a Las Vegas cop subduing a guy using very identifiable jiu jitsu skills. I have been taking ground fighting for a long time now as I believe Wc is WOEFULL in that range.
My question to anyone who doesn't feel they need to add to their skill set is, how would you have used wing chun on the ground to control this guy?

And let's not go down the road of "I'm not a cop so wouldn't be in that situation in the first place" etc

Video is not a good lead in. WC would have been the wrong tool set to use to arrest or control the guy. If a WC approach were taken then it would have happened before the ground. My guess would be that some kind of Chi na technique would have been used to destroy the joint which would have made it easier to control guy. If we were looking at a street fight, then the guy running away would have been enough for the WC practitioner to stop the attack.

From what I've seen of WC practitioners, they have no interest is taking the mount. So a WC practitioner tackling someone and getting on their back is not likely unless they have another martial art skill set that allows them to wrestle.

 

[MAfreak]

i didn't bash the style but practitioners and someone here said, i'm right (illusions from many practitioners). i really like some ideas of the style.
and to the question of us-cops, i think, every now and then videos going to public showing unjustified violence to black people is enough.

 

[Gnarlie]

and to the question of us-cops, i think, every now and then videos going to public showing unjustified violence to black people is enough.

A few rare and isolated incidents reported in the news is enough for you, with zero direct personal experience, to assert what is in your words 'typical'?

Not exactly sound logic.

The same flawed logic leads you to make erroneous sweeping statements about styles.



Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[SaulGoodman]

I can't comment on what "people out there" think, only those I actually have any contact with. I guess my question to you, since you are the OP, is what exactly was the response you were looking for? For agreement we should all cross train grappling, or just a tacit acknowledgement that WC doesn't actually address grappling on the ground? The topic seems to come up quite a bit here, but I would point out that most striking systems don't have technical grappling from a guard or mount position. If you know a school that does, great, but I would posture that is an exception. The kid at the karate dojo down the street might learns some basic escape techniques from the ground along their locks, throws, and sweeps - but they would not fare much better (if at all). I've read Hapkido claims that they are a complete system addressing all ranges but highly doubtful that they grapple from the mount / guard position very much (again, maybe there are exceptions to this generalization). I'm not style bashing, just being realistic and also acknowledging they way in which someone defines "complete system" is important.

If I were ever to be mounted, I don't have a BJJ or wrestling toolset to draw from, but I do have some minimal tools from the WT system to avoid getting in bottom of mount position and dealing with it if it happens.

As for cross training: I work full time, have a family, pursuing higher education, have other hobbies that compete for time and money, and I'm not entering any MMA competitions (I'm a bit old for that too anyway). So where's the need? You might get similar sentiments from plenty of WC people. Again, it comes down to what is your aim or goal.

What response am I looking for? The tone of your reply seems a little unfriendly. Is it because you didn't like my observation on the wt grappling defences? I invested a lot of hours training in that system and truly believed I would give any would be grappler a very hard time if they tried taking me down. It was only when I started training submission wrestling that I realized that an awful lot of my anti-grappling skills were wanting. Anyhow, I put the clip up to generate conversation, shared experiences, useful insights that might help people or maybe change people's minds about the usefulness of even rudimentary grappling skills. Not trying to start a flame war or a grappling is better than standup conversation. If you don't feel the subject is worth discussing, then that's your choice.

 

[JowGaWolf]

might be "off topic" but why the fists and elbows and taser instead of a wristlock or similar? typical racist us-cop bastard.

to wing chun: i'm sure there's no style with more exaggerated and overrated practitioners.

I'm going to give a culture view of this since I'm ole skool and black.

Rules for for black people when dealing with the cops.
1. Don't talk back disrespectfully, aka "being loud and wrong":
2. Don't fight back
3. Don't try to run.

Those 3 things are almost always guaranteed to get a black person in more trouble than what they want to deal with. Those 3 things also don't help in trying to calm a police officer down. The only way to win against a police officer is to fight it out in court. Since that is the only way to win, then the less of 1-3 you do the better.

I'm not sure why people think that running away from a police means that they can't punch you in the face or hit you. In this case not sure why the black guy thought putting the police officer in a head lock would make the situation any better. The problem with #1- #3 is that it changes the context in which the police officer is going to deal with you. These actions escalate the situation.

As a black teenager, my father gave me the talk about how to deal with police officers and told me straight out that there are good police officers and bad police officers. The bad police officers are looking for a reason to rough me up so I need to always present myself in a way that deescalates the situation. He told me that I don't get the same "benefit of doubts" that white people get, and that by being black means that the first assumption will always be negative. Because of that first assumption I have to present myself to show that I don't fit the assumption. That's just how life is.

If I need to fight for my rights, then I need to do it through the court where I can actually win. Trying to win a fight with a police officer on the street is a no win.

So you asked why the fist and elbows, and taser instead of a wrist lock? Because he did #2 and #3. Had he just been respectful like he started out then he would have been arrested without a wristlock. But since he did #2 and #3, he had to get roughed up. Now he lost on the street and he'll lose in court because of his actions.

I'm not saying that following what police officers tell you will keep a black person out of danger, but I am saying that not following a police command will definitely make your day worst. There is no scenario where running away from a police officer is going to make anything better.