BJJ wins again - Page 4

On December 30 2009 01:26 WheelOfTime wrote:
Might want to start off by explaining what BJJ is.

On December 30 2009 01:26 WheelOfTime wrote:
Might want to start off by explaining what BJJ is.

On December 29 2009 16:42 jeddus wrote:
And my purple belt is under Renzo Gracie.

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

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!

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.

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?

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.

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?

On December 30 2009 04:00 Kiarip wrote:
do they do contact sparring?

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

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.

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.