This is an interesting area to consider. Different groups approach this problem differently. Some clubs persist in believing that if your stand-up game is good enough, that's all you need. On the other extreme, some totally embrace grappling, train their own brand of grappling and take on the grapplers at their own game. I take a middle of the road approach and favor the use of a well tested "anti-grappling" curriculum. Now before some of you get all high and mighty on the subject, let me clarify.
By an "anti-grappling" approach, I mean developing strategies to deal with a grappling attack and get back to your best game, rather than fight the other guy's game. So you need to work clinches, learn to counter takedowns, and if you go down, you need to learn how to fall, how to avoid and escape mounts, and how to bring it back to your punching game whether on your feet or on the ground. Basically, I think this is what Mook was saying too.
It's the same strategy any fighter uses. You learn to bring it back to your best range. Yesterday I was training with a Tibetan White Crane stylist. I'd close on him to get to my strongest range, while he kept evading, keeping distance so he could play to his long-bridge game. It's the same for kickers versus boxers. You don't want to confront the other guy on his terms, so you need to know what to do when you get out of your range so you can recover. That's all "anti-grappling" is for WC. It is not the same as a fully developed grappling art.
Now, that said, I have nothing against cross-training. And if you really want to take on a grappler on his own terms, great... start studying a good grappling art. Kamon Guy, for example, studies BJJ. Sounds good to me. But I see that as beyond the scope of WC. IMO, modern, evolving WC needs to confront the reality of today's fighting styles, but it should still focus on what WC does best and not try to be all things to all people.
