I've heared a lot of good arguments against ground fighting, in that it's not very practical for the street;
One thing is that rolling on the mat is a world away from the concrete and general detritus of a street pavement.
You will get wrecked on even a slightly rough surface.
I've also heared it said that it is beter to learn how to counter/nullify a groundfighter, than waste time playing them at their own game.
Personally, I am learning BJJ at the moment, as well as some good ol' Jun fan, and I havn't got the experience to really know one way or the other.
"I've also heared it said that it is beter to learn how to counter/nullify a groundfighter, than waste time playing them at their own game."
this is what a lot of people assume. and they think there is a sometype of shortcut to beating say, bjj guys. they donīt understand taht you need to be in advantegous position before you can use your dirty tricks, say he has mounted you. try to gouge his eyes. he will gouge yours because he is in better position.
but you can use eye gouges and throat rips etc. to great effect, but before that, you need to learn positioning. and that takes alot of training
the fact is, you need to learn ground grappling... there are no shortcuts.
"One thing is that rolling on the mat is a world away from the concrete and general detritus of a street pavement.
You will get wrecked on even a slightly rough surface.
"
well, if youre good, hes the one getting wrecked, because your on top, but well, you donīt always choose the range where to fight
This message has been edited by waski on Nov 8, 2004 7:43 AM This message has been edited by waski on Nov 8, 2004 7:00 AM
Grapplers are at a disadavantage in a real fight because of two main points. The first is that a grappler must focus his attention on one opponent. This is a problem because most fights are not even or fair.
I have seen a BJJ fight a guy and pretty much owned him until the guys
friends walked over. After we pulled the buddies off the guy, well lets just say he won't be a model any time soon.
The second is the need for the grappling, you need to get in close and this can get in you in alot of trouble. The best way to do this is to get in quick and end the fight fast. The longer the fight takes the less its in your favor.
Personally though I think that grappling is a neccessary part of training for many reasons. It opens up options and that normally would not be open to a stand up fighter. Since alot of JKD is done in close knowing how to get to better positions from grappling can be a nice thing.
Alot of people don't know how to defend against a grappler. People don't expect to have someone grab them and pull them closer.
Simplicity is another good one. To be a good fighter you must be good at multiple attacks, and defenses from various angles. To be a good grappler all you need is to be good at three moves, maybe. Get good at putting on an armbar, a sleeper hold, and a take down and you can put a hurt on alot of people
The best reason though for getting to know at least some grappling is basics. If you have a basic understanding of grappling you will be able to handle more situations better.
from what I've experienced so far, I can at least say that being able to move around with ease on the groud (and general positioning) seem pretty useful, Its just that there is a lot of layering of technniques to use in BJJ.
Some people think that simplifying things mechanically is of utmost importance, because of what you will likely encounter on the street etc.
There seem to be a great divide in the world of JKD.
It seems a little silly to me, as surely the basic principles and philosophies are the same?
Hmmm, having been to a number of BJJ classes and studied a few of the gracie books, I have come to the conclusion that:
1) BJJ has some interesting and inovative techniques on the ground.
2) It is very good for the devlopment of stamina.
These are the good points. the negative are:
3) Alot of the moves have too many steps. This maybe just the way it is taught.
4) There is a lot of formula moves. Although not as many as more traditional styles, it is however already showing signes of stagnation.
5) It is one on one, even the Gracies admit fighting multiple people is foolhardy at best.
6)Training assumes you are going to the ground. In a sense it is narrow minded (not that stand up styles are any better in this front).
It is good to know grappling as someone said earlier as this helps you understand how not to be caught by grapplers. BJJ however is actually less usefull than Judo on the street. Why? well because Judo concentrates on throws i.e. moves which you can do standing up, where as BJJ is on the ground.
What is most likely to happen is that someone grabs up, at this point if you know how to throw someone away, it is better than going to the ground with them and waiting to get you head kicked in by their mates.
The statistic that says most people end up on the ground, should also read most people who do not know what to do when someone grabs them whilst they are standing up, end up on the ground. Admittedly it is longer, but I feel it is closer to the truth.
yeah, good takedown skills wheter they come from judo, freestyle, greco or whatever are very valuable things.
as for judo being better than bjj on the street, well may be but I would prefer both.
I totally agree that ground grappling is useless agains multiple opponents, but still, if you get taken down in a multiple opponent situation and you donīt know ground grappling, you cant sweep and get out of the situation this is one of the things what makes bjj skills useful
This message has been edited by waski on Nov 9, 2004 8:06 AM
bjj is fast. the moves may be intricate, but when you are good they are easy to slap on unless you are traning with someone who is equally as skilled as you are or more so.
if you get knoced on and mounted you better know how to escape. bjj has excellent escapes from the mount.
