EPTOn December 30 2009 01:26 WheelOfTime wrote:
Might want to start off by explaining what BJJ is.
Might want to start off by explaining what BJJ is.
![[image loading]](https://home.comcast.net/~myspace1976/mypics/bjj1.jpg)
BJJ wins again - Page 4
| Blogs > NatsuTerran |
|
AmorVincitOmnia
Kenya3846 Posts
| ||
|
Onisparda
Canada516 Posts
On December 30 2009 01:26 WheelOfTime wrote: Might want to start off by explaining what BJJ is. http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=bjj | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 29 2009 16:42 jeddus wrote: And my purple belt is under Renzo Gracie. I'm calling shenanigans here. Either post ur name or proof. Sounds to me like you are a purple belt in the book, which equals not much of anything. I'm a black belt in all of Eddie Bravo's books, but yet I'm still only a 4th stripe white belt. And BJJ is no strikes FFS. Abu Dhabi: no strikes, BJJ Worlds: no strikes, Pan-Am: No Strikes, Brazilian Nationals: No Strikes Arnolds: No Strikes etc etc...... BJJ that includes strikes is not BJJ but a combination of the arts. For example if a BJJ school teaches Thai Boxing combined with BJJ, it's MMA. MMA means mixed martial arts, ie combining 2 or more martial arts. UFC does not equal MMA, they are 2 totally different things. For example the BJJ place I used to go to offered normal BJJ classes, and MMA classes. They are 2 totally different things. You can earn a black belt in BJJ with never throwing a punch. Why do you think Joe Rogan always makes comments that a black belt in BJJ is not a black belt in MMA BJJ. As soon as strikes are added shit changes. And to anyone that thinks BJJ does not work on the street they obviously have not tried it. 99% of people have not a clue what to do n the ground. The couple times I have got in a fight since starting MMA and BJJ classes, I take them down, they roll over post up and try and stand up, and it's over by that point. Or they shoot in with their necks in the open. It becomes no challenge unless the guy also knows grappling. Ever see bully beatdown? It's an extreme case, but same idea. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On December 29 2009 16:19 Diamondback2 wrote: dude you just proved you don't know anything near enough to be poppin off adive about what will work in a cage. BJJ is grappling only, no strikes whatsoever. Period. Watch a BJJ match and count the strikes (here's a hint, it's always 0) And for the love of god you are saying that one style vs one style striker win. Let's take a quick look at the some of the first guys to win UFC tourney's: Gracie x3, Severen x2, Frye x2, Coleman x 2, Randy, Kerr x2, Miletich, Bolander, Sakuraba, & Hendo. Out of 23 UC tournys (which wer emore or less one style vs one style) grapplers won 15 of them. One was won by Marco Ruas whom can only be described as complete so not counting him strikers won 7 tourny's or roughly 30%. Which means according to those numbers Grapplers won 70% of the time. Can't argue with facts.... Than if you look at champions across all time in the UFC (not tourny's, defenses count as a title won, so do interm) you are looking at 63 UFC title won by grapplers and 32 won by strikers. So 66% of the time in the UFC grapplers hold the belt. the stats don't add up in your favor. sorry i know ur batshit nuts bout WC but in a fight (1v1, one style) Grappling > striking. it's been proven 100's of times 63 because UFC has good strikers right? o wait they don't. UFC has "ufc quality" strikers. Everyone always says o grapplign this grappling that, but in fuckign reality most of UFC strikers, are terrible terrible brawlers and would get their ass absolutely handed to them by K-1 strikers, or any strong kick boxers for that matter. I know enough of what works in a fight to not have have to listen to you claiming how UFC actually proved anything to the world about martial arts, except for that cross training works... which is like.. duh? | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17165 Posts
On December 29 2009 21:48 jfazz wrote: Against untrained fighters, i think grappling and striking are about equal. Basically, you know what you are doing, and they do not. It doesnt matter how cleanly you beat them, so long as you do. I think when we discuss moderately skilled fighters (so not black belts, but not whites either), without cross-training, grappling does come out on top. Most strikers just do not know how to shut down a grappler, and only train against other strikers. At the same time, though grapplers afr often training against other grapplers, that is not fundamentally a bad thing, as the physics of takedowns, passing guard and submission attempts are the same. Basically, you dont need to train specifically against strikers, as grappling will work against them, while a striker MUST cross train, or he will have very little chance against a grappler. However, once we look at elite level fighters, the discussion becomes irrelevant. Look at Mirko Fillopovic, his takedown defence was insane, he even submitted Kevin Randleman, yet Cro Cop was the most feared striker of his era. He took his kickboxing and added elements to help round it out (most sprawl defence, some groundwork). I think strikers need a REALLY good mental game to fight against grapplers. As stated by a previous poster, a grapplers strategy can often be as simple as takedown, mount, submit. And its true. Strikers dont have it so easy, as saying "ill just punch him out" doesnt make a lot of sense. Different striking styles have to be taken into consideration, as well as stance, whether they are neuteral or leading with a foot, where their hands are, how they move their torsos etc etc etc. Even randoms can be a little tricky to fight, while I imagine they are deadfish to a grappler. Having said all of that, I weigh only 68kg, and I can KO someone with chainpunch. So striking martial arts do teach you something, but as others have said, you need a good teacher, as the McDojo problem is all to real. I have trained for two years under a Master, who trained under Wong Shun Leung, who was Yip Man's top student, and I have only recently made it to the second form in modified WSLWC. And I train 2 nights a week for three hours in pure WC, 1 afternoon a week crosstraining with a Gracie BJJ school. Our second form is perhaps the equivalent of a red belt, with third form being a blackbelt. First form sort of runs the ambit of everything else, people are often in it for a long time. However, there is another WC school nearby, and I know students there are into third form, training once a week for a year. Which is ridicuous. But that is the problem with striking martial arts in general, its very easy for teachers to feed their student "martial magic" rather than the real stuff, just to make money. I know TKD and karate have had similar problems. Some people just suck. I think with grappling, its much harder to fake, because you can train safely adnd put it into practice. If I wasn't doing full contact training, I would just have to take it for granted that what I am learning works, but thankfully I know that it does. Yet most striking martial arts have no contact training whatsoever, and resultantly the fighters they breed cannot take or give a punch, arent used to getting tired and dont know how to think in combat. So they are awful. If I could start completely over, I would still do WSLWC. Having used it repeatedly, I know it does what it is meant to - give you tools to fight. As my Sifu says, "you should master the system, not let the system master you". He encourages us to bring in elements form other martial arts to better round out our styles. I dont think anyone style cannot benefit from crosstraining. The greatest BJJ fighters of all time, the Nogueira brothers, are both amazing strikers (they train with the cuban national boxing team ffs!). You are welcome! You should check out some Tang Lang Quan techniques. They do have some close contact stuff as majority of the techniques you're using involves knees and elbows and many guard-breaking techniques. You also learn a couple of takedown moves but very little groundwork (like in most striking styles). The difference between TLQ and most common striking martial arts (Kickboxing, Taekwondo, Karate etc.) is the distance to your target, which in case of TLQ is usually much shorter as you start at a distance -> rapidly close in (they do have some long distance techniques too) -> co-co-co-combo -> takedown -> kicking/punching lying guy (not fun but effective). Some TLQ applications: | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
| ||
|
Freyr
United States500 Posts
On December 30 2009 03:07 Diamondback2 wrote: I'm calling shenanigans here. Either post ur name or proof. Sounds to me like you are a purple belt in the book, which equals not much of anything. I'm a black belt in all of Eddie Bravo's books, but yet I'm still only a 4th stripe white belt. And BJJ is no strikes FFS. Abu Dhabi: no strikes, BJJ Worlds: no strikes, Pan-Am: No Strikes, Brazilian Nationals: No Strikes Arnolds: No Strikes etc etc...... BJJ that includes strikes is not BJJ but a combination of the arts. For example if a BJJ school teaches Thai Boxing combined with BJJ, it's MMA. MMA means mixed martial arts, ie combining 2 or more martial arts. UFC does not equal MMA, they are 2 totally different things. For example the BJJ place I used to go to offered normal BJJ classes, and MMA classes. They are 2 totally different things. You can earn a black belt in BJJ with never throwing a punch. Why do you think Joe Rogan always makes comments that a black belt in BJJ is not a black belt in MMA BJJ. As soon as strikes are added shit changes. And to anyone that thinks BJJ does not work on the street they obviously have not tried it. 99% of people have not a clue what to do n the ground. The couple times I have got in a fight since starting MMA and BJJ classes, I take them down, they roll over post up and try and stand up, and it's over by that point. Or they shoot in with their necks in the open. It becomes no challenge unless the guy also knows grappling. Ever see bully beatdown? It's an extreme case, but same idea. Once again - BJJ has no universally defined curriculum. Please reread posts on previous page. Citing competitions as evidence is meaningless for reasons mentioned on the previous page. This is unimportant as striking is not the core of BJJ, or even a significant peripheral, but I still don't understand why you're arguing about this. I don't know which post you're referring to with the "street effectiveness" reference, but most of the criticism in that regard has to do with a self defense situation, NOT a one-on-one situation. What you are saying is obviously true in the latter scenario, but it is not advisable to follow someone to the ground in a self defense situation when you are in real danger for obvious reasons. That is not to say grappling is unhelpful in a 'real self defense' situation - obviously it can help you avoid being dragged down so that you can still get away, and if you do get stuck on the ground you're not as screwed as you otherwise might be if you didn't train grappling. | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 30 2009 03:28 Kiarip wrote: because UFC has good strikers right? o wait they don't. UFC has "ufc quality" strikers. Everyone always says o grapplign this grappling that, but in fuckign reality most of UFC strikers, are terrible terrible brawlers and would get their ass absolutely handed to them by K-1 strikers, or any strong kick boxers for that matter. I know enough of what works in a fight to not have have to listen to you claiming how UFC actually proved anything to the world about martial arts, except for that cross training works... which is like.. duh? Semmy Schilt has been TKO's by a man on the UFC 98 card in MMA. Gilbert Yvel. Whom has only fought in K1 once. Schilt has an impressive 1-1 record in the UFC and 4-3 record in PRIDE. Overeem has destroyed two top kickboxers in Badr Hari and Peter Aerts, in kickboxing. And Overeem has been beaten 6 times by guys in the UFC. Cro Cop whom has beaten kickboxing greats such as Jérôme Le Banner, Peter Aerts, and Remy Bonjasky is not only in the UFC but has posted a measly 2-3 record in the UFC. O yea he got TKO'd by Dos Santos, the guy fighting the guy that TKO'd Semmy Schilt, Yvel at UFC 108. So the UFC has no K1 level strikers? As for Thai Boxing they have some sick Thai boxers: Anderson Silva, Shogun, Wandy, Alves, Daley, Thigao Silva, Dos Santos, Vera, Berry, etc..... Plus they even have a Shotokan Karate guy, and a Kyokushin Karate guy as champs just for fun. The UFC has great strikers in every division. | ||
|
Kiarip
United States1835 Posts
On December 30 2009 04:36 Diamondback2 wrote: Semmy Schilt has been TKO's by a man on the UFC 98 card in MMA. Gilbert Yvel. Whom has only fought in K1 once. Schilt has an impressive 1-1 record in the UFC and 4-3 record in PRIDE. Overeem has destroyed two top kickboxers in Badr Hari and Peter Aerts, in kickboxing. And Overeem has been beaten 6 times by guys in the UFC. Cro Cop whom has beaten kickboxing greats such as Jérôme Le Banner, Peter Aerts, and Remy Bonjasky is not only in the UFC but has posted a measly 2-3 record in the UFC. O yea he got TKO'd by Dos Santos, the guy fighting the guy that TKO'd Semmy Schilt, Yvel at UFC 108. So the UFC has no K1 level strikers? As for Thai Boxing they have some sick Thai boxers: Anderson Silva, Shogun, Wandy, Alves, Daley, Thigao Silva, Dos Santos, Vera, Berry, etc..... Plus they even have a Shotokan Karate guy, and a Kyokushin Karate guy as champs just for fun. The UFC has great strikers in every division. I thought we were talking about back then. If you're talking about now, yeah they have some good strikers, a few world class that could compete pretty well in K1, they don't get demolished by grapplers though so... where's your point? | ||
|
Diamond
United States10796 Posts
On December 30 2009 04:59 Kiarip wrote: I thought we were talking about back then. If you're talking about now, yeah they have some good strikers, a few world class that could compete pretty well in K1, they don't get demolished by grapplers though so... where's your point? my bad i thought we were talking about now lol. ne ways w/e personally i believe BJJ is the best single style vs single style but to each thier own i guess. i sitll want some sort of proof from jeddus tho. i just don't believe he's a purple under renzo. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17165 Posts
On December 30 2009 04:00 Kiarip wrote: do they do contact sparring? Tang Lang? Depends on the sifu I guess. When I was training it, as a beginners we were assigned to spar with people who had 1 year or more experience. Full contact, no protection gear but some rules: - can't kick below the knee - no fists (had to punch with open palm or the side of your hand) As you progress it usually becomes full contact with minimum required protection: headgear, gloves (not boxing gloves, the ones used in most MMA fights) and sometimes shin guards and/or body armour. All depends on the teacher though but I guess in most instances you would be using some protection because most of the moves they teach you aren't ordinary punches etc. but specifically designed to break the nose etc. and you probably wouldn't like that (although I know guys who were training it using real full contact without any guards, several times after such sparring they would come home with broken ribs and other injuries like that). | ||
|
dogabutila
United States1437 Posts
Now, even though most of my stand up was trained long ago, and all my grappling exp is recent, I feel much more confidant in a fight standing. Even though I'm only 5'4 125, I feel that it is easier to stop a fight standing. The reason I feel this way is because even though I may be more skilled on the ground, anything can happen. My conditioning isn't what it should be, and anybody can get lucky if they are on top. You also never know what they have on them; I carry a pocketknife on me that a sharp person might notice and take out of my pocket and use against me. The key to winning fights is to control the range. With the amount of standup training i've done, this is not difficult for me. Having striking knowledge in every range is important to surviving stand up. The flaw with many TMA's is that they have no answer for different ranges. While TMA's in their original form are much more complete arts (and really resemble MMA [because they are generally mma]) most modern TMA focus exclusively on what it is known for. As it stands, there is no single art (although i've heard good things about KM) that gives you the necessary skills to deal with all situations you might encounter. BJJ partiuclarly (while maybe it is just because I am not super proficient at it), has weaknesses when the 'rules' are not protecting you. By rules I mean most assumptions that a MA works from. Even if you have somebody in guard, they can still land punches. If any single one can connect, you never know what might happen. So, while as another poster mentioned, yes the body is not as fragile as most TMA's would have you believe, and most of the 'fight stopping' techniques MA's teach won't work because they generally don't. Generally the theory behind them is off, even if the theory is right, your average artist won't have the precision or power to do it in a fluid dynamic environment. On the other hand, there are some assumptions that BJJ also makes that give it holes. Even though the body is stronger then other MA's would have you believe, any artist knows the puncher always has a chance. 'Lucky' punches can do significant amounts of fight changing damage at times. So regarding the video posted, sure the elbows usually won't do much // anything, it isn't safe to assume they will always be useless. The other thing is that if you break an arm or elbow the other person stops fighting. I was in a fight once and broke a guy's elbow and shoulder and then threw him. Thought that would have ended it. Sucker swept me and broke my nose before I got seperation. | ||
|
Draconizard
628 Posts
| ||
|
dogabutila
United States1437 Posts
Second, Bruce Lee trained in judo so beating him wouldn't be as simple as just taking him down. That and he was possibly the fastest man alive. Those guys saying so n so could beat him should probably learn more about Bruce. World level body builders admired his muscleature, yet that did not negatively affect his flexibility or speed. I forgot what his right straight speed was, but he could throw in a sickeningly short time. I would give him a fair chance against anybody in the world. Lastly, UFC strikers arn't all they are cracked up to be. Anderson Silva is touted to be one of the best strikers, but he was 1-1 boxing. His win came against a debut fighter. Not anything special. If he went up against a Roy Jones in his prime he would get destroyed. While Anderson is probably a better fighter overall, it makes me laugh when UFC or MMA fans say so n so is excellent at striking, and better then boxers etc. High level pro boxers will always be better at striking, that is all they do. | ||
|
TheosEx
United States894 Posts
On December 29 2009 16:19 Diamondback2 wrote: dude you just proved you don't know anything near enough to be poppin off adive about what will work in a cage. BJJ is grappling only, no strikes whatsoever. Period. Watch a BJJ match and count the strikes (here's a hint, it's always 0) And for the love of god you are saying that one style vs one style striker win. Let's take a quick look at the some of the first guys to win UFC tourney's: Gracie x3, Severen x2, Frye x2, Coleman x 2, Randy, Kerr x2, Miletich, Bolander, Sakuraba, & Hendo. Out of 23 UC tournys (which wer emore or less one style vs one style) grapplers won 15 of them. One was won by Marco Ruas whom can only be described as complete so not counting him strikers won 7 tourny's or roughly 30%. Which means according to those numbers Grapplers won 70% of the time. Can't argue with facts.... Than if you look at champions across all time in the UFC (not tourny's, defenses count as a title won, so do interm) you are looking at 63 UFC title won by grapplers and 32 won by strikers. So 66% of the time in the UFC grapplers hold the belt. the stats don't add up in your favor. sorry i know ur batshit nuts bout WC but in a fight (1v1, one style) Grappling > striking. it's been proven 100's of times 63 Except these were proven in a ring. As someone already stated, the type of fighting has its different applications. In real life, those grapplers would get utterly destroyed in the streets if fighting more than one person. Also, in real life, most people have these things called weapons. Needless to say, it would help to be good in this fighting style as well. Martial arts fanatics really do need to learn from each other, and stop trying to best each other's styles. | ||
|
Warrior Madness
Canada3791 Posts
| ||
|
madnessman
United States1581 Posts
googled silat mma and found a thread on bullshido about it: http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=83014 | ||
|
statix
United States1760 Posts
On December 30 2009 15:37 dogabutila wrote: Oh, a few other things I'd like to address. Tyson knocked people down with body shots as well, and pre-don king (when he actually trained) he was lightning quick. I'd pick him over any pure grappler any day, no matter who it is. Even a Gracie. You'd pick Tyson over a pure grappler? Tyson only trains himself to punch. No take down defense, no kicking ability, 0 ground game. 90% of Tyson's punches came from inside his opponents range which is a cake double leg for any legit wrestler. In an actual fight an elite level grappler would have Tyson on the mat before he really knew what was going on. Second, Bruce Lee trained in judo so beating him wouldn't be as simple as just taking him down. That and he was possibly the fastest man alive. Those guys saying so n so could beat him should probably learn more about Bruce. World level body builders admired his muscleature, yet that did not negatively affect his flexibility or speed. I forgot what his right straight speed was, but he could throw in a sickeningly short time. I would give him a fair chance against anybody in the world. While Bruce Lee did learn some grappling, wrestling, and judo, it was nowhere near the level of skill people have today. I think he went for in arm bar in Enter the Dragon which was pretty cool; but on the ground, Lee would be no threat whatsoever to even a blue belt by todays standards. I do believe ,however, that Lee would have embraced and excelled in BJJ had he gotten more exposure to it. Lastly, UFC strikers arn't all they are cracked up to be. Anderson Silva is touted to be one of the best strikers, but he was 1-1 boxing. His win came against a debut fighter. Not anything special. If he went up against a Roy Jones in his prime he would get destroyed. While Anderson is probably a better fighter overall, it makes me laugh when UFC or MMA fans say so n so is excellent at striking, and better then boxers etc. High level pro boxers will always be better at striking, that is all they do. I agree with most of this except for the part about boxers being the best strikers. They most certainly are the best punchers in the game...but strikers? Most boxers would get torn up in K-1. I don't think boxers would know how to react to kicks of any sort. This isn't even taking into account knees. Most of the stuff we see in boxing simply would not work in any kind of kickboxing environment. Bobbing and weaving, holding your hands at your waist while jabbing, leaving your front leg out in the middle of nowhere while throwing punches. Shit would get demolished. | ||
|
NatsuTerran
United States364 Posts
I'm still kicking myself for falling for this, but then again it was pretty well done. Here's Mark's jaw dropping post that lets the cat out of the bag:+ Show Spoiler + I've held off from weighing in until now because I wanted a couple of days to think about this. To be honest i wasn't very happy with my performance at all - my standup was terrible and while its not obvious from the vid alex actually caught me with one of those groin kicks... it hurt. And my shot was terrible like a few of you said, i was actually surprised by how well he avoided it. But the main thing is the eye gouging. You guys are all writing it off like it didn't matter but you know what i could feel his fingers over my eyes 5 or 6 times... and while i wouldnt feel comfortable employing that technique against someone else i think its fairly obvious that alex would be more than happy to use it against me. I think that sparring like this has made it obvious there's an inherent flaw in BJJ strategy, ok maybe alex would be choked out but he could have blinded me - you can talk about yuki nakai but to be honst thats not worth it for me. I want to study a system where i can win the fight without being blinded. I'm a british and irish champion in BJJ and i only won this fight out of luck because alex dived into my guard! So as a result i have spoken to alex and decided to begin training in the variant of wing chun he studies. I'm going to keep up my BJJ because i enjoy it and i feel its an important part of a fight, but its not enough. What happens if i run into someone like alex on the street? I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion but you guys can argue with me when youv'e participated in the same kind of challenge and experienced it for yourselves. | ||
|
StorkHwaiting
United States3465 Posts
On top of that, one of kung fu's most essential aspects is having excellent footwork. This WC guy's footwork was abysmal. There's three points in there when he's got both feet together which is just terribad. And his reaction to the leg grabs were also equally terrible. Instead of widening his base and pivoting to redirect momentum, he just frogged up. Plus, WC was a martial art created by a girl to fend off rapists AKA Chinese women's self-defense (lol jk) | ||
| ||
