July 23, 2006
Grappling Dominance
The following question was submitted by a subscriber of the Grapplearts newsletter.
Q: Why did grappling dominate early NHB / MMA events, but now striking seems to have the edge"
A: I think that the increased emphasis on striking is due to several factors.
Crosstraining: every successful striker in high-level MMA also has a background in some sort of grappling art. There was a time when the details of, and defenses to, the bread and butter submissions of Brazilian jiu-jitsu were closely guarded secrets. Techniques like the triangle, armbar, and rear naked choke are still very effective against 'untrained' attackers in a self defense situation, but you have to work to apply them at a high level in MMA. They are no longer 'surprise' attacks.
Takedown Defense: Fighters like Chuck Liddell and Mirko 'Cro Cop' Filipovic are known for their spectacular knockouts, BUT they use pummel, sprawl and whizzer to avoid going to the ground, use top ground positions to punish their opponents, and use the guard to avoid punishment on the bottom and stand back up to their feet. Their grappling skills allow them to keep the fight on the feet, where they are most dangerous.
Gloves and Handwraps: trying to knock someone out by punching them in the head barehanded is a risky proposition, as the small bones in the hand break relatively easily. Gloves and handwraps protect the hand of the puncher, not the head of the punchee, and make it possible to punch harder. Gloves also interfere with grappling: sinking the rear naked choke while wearing MMA gloves, for example, is significantly more difficult than with the bare hand.
Rules: the introduction of rounds was a boon to strikers. They were guaranteed a fresh start at their preferred range at the beginning of each round, provided they could stall on the ground until the end of the round. Now the rules mandate standing fighters back up to their feet if the action on the ground slows down, and we are even beginning to see referees break clinches. Personally I'd like to see some symmetry in the rules: if two fighters are on their feet and nothing is happening then stop the match and put them both on the ground,,,
Selection: for the majority of the North American audience MMA is a glorified tough man contest. The average viewer wants to see two guys standing in front of each other swinging for the fences. This armchair quarterback starts boo'ing as soon as the fighters hit the ground. The promoters know this, and to some extent select and promote strikers over grapplers. This is also why you are beginning to see fighters apologize for winning by submission rather than knocking an opponent out - the first time I heard of this happening I was completely flabbergasted.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Q: Why did grappling dominate early NHB / MMA events, but now striking seems to have the edge"
A: I think that the increased emphasis on striking is due to several factors.
Crosstraining: every successful striker in high-level MMA also has a background in some sort of grappling art. There was a time when the details of, and defenses to, the bread and butter submissions of Brazilian jiu-jitsu were closely guarded secrets. Techniques like the triangle, armbar, and rear naked choke are still very effective against 'untrained' attackers in a self defense situation, but you have to work to apply them at a high level in MMA. They are no longer 'surprise' attacks.
Takedown Defense: Fighters like Chuck Liddell and Mirko 'Cro Cop' Filipovic are known for their spectacular knockouts, BUT they use pummel, sprawl and whizzer to avoid going to the ground, use top ground positions to punish their opponents, and use the guard to avoid punishment on the bottom and stand back up to their feet. Their grappling skills allow them to keep the fight on the feet, where they are most dangerous.
Gloves and Handwraps: trying to knock someone out by punching them in the head barehanded is a risky proposition, as the small bones in the hand break relatively easily. Gloves and handwraps protect the hand of the puncher, not the head of the punchee, and make it possible to punch harder. Gloves also interfere with grappling: sinking the rear naked choke while wearing MMA gloves, for example, is significantly more difficult than with the bare hand.
Rules: the introduction of rounds was a boon to strikers. They were guaranteed a fresh start at their preferred range at the beginning of each round, provided they could stall on the ground until the end of the round. Now the rules mandate standing fighters back up to their feet if the action on the ground slows down, and we are even beginning to see referees break clinches. Personally I'd like to see some symmetry in the rules: if two fighters are on their feet and nothing is happening then stop the match and put them both on the ground,,,
Selection: for the majority of the North American audience MMA is a glorified tough man contest. The average viewer wants to see two guys standing in front of each other swinging for the fences. This armchair quarterback starts boo'ing as soon as the fighters hit the ground. The promoters know this, and to some extent select and promote strikers over grapplers. This is also why you are beginning to see fighters apologize for winning by submission rather than knocking an opponent out - the first time I heard of this happening I was completely flabbergasted.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Self Defense
The following question was submitted by a subscriber of the Grapplearts newsletter.
Q: For self defense would it be better to study the grappling arts or the striking arts?
A: Obviously it is best to have a background in both striking and grappling, but if you could only study one type of art then I believe that the grappling arts are superior for self defense. Rorion Gracie said it best: most real fights end up on the ground. For women the situation is even more extreme, as virtually 100% of rapes end up on the ground.
Another advantage of grappling is that it allows people to spar at close-to-full intensity with a relatively minimal chance of injury. This gives the average grappling practitioner a chance to apply his or her techniques under adrenal stress on a daily basis. To do the same thing with striking would be difficult and unappealing to most people. The average recreational striker doesn't want to getting blasted in the face with a full power right cross, or heave up their lunch after getting kneed in the ribs, as a regular part of their training.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Q: For self defense would it be better to study the grappling arts or the striking arts?
A: Obviously it is best to have a background in both striking and grappling, but if you could only study one type of art then I believe that the grappling arts are superior for self defense. Rorion Gracie said it best: most real fights end up on the ground. For women the situation is even more extreme, as virtually 100% of rapes end up on the ground.
Another advantage of grappling is that it allows people to spar at close-to-full intensity with a relatively minimal chance of injury. This gives the average grappling practitioner a chance to apply his or her techniques under adrenal stress on a daily basis. To do the same thing with striking would be difficult and unappealing to most people. The average recreational striker doesn't want to getting blasted in the face with a full power right cross, or heave up their lunch after getting kneed in the ribs, as a regular part of their training.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Multiple Attackers
The following question was submitted by a subscriber of the Grapplearts newsletter.
Q: What is your opinion on unarmed self defence situations involving two or more attackers against one.
A: Fighting multiple attackers is something that should be avoided at almost all costs. Doing it on the ground is even more dangerous, because it limits your ability to maneuver, use environmental weapons (ie club someone with a chair) and to disengage from the situation (ie run away). Fighting more than one person on the ground IS possible, but it is also very difficult, very tiring and very dangerous.
Everyone should try sparring two people simultaneously at some point in their martial arts career. Whether you spar them in a kickboxing or grappling context you will find out that sparring two people is at least FOUR times as difficult as sparring only one person. I'd suggest starting out by grappling two people at the same time: it is a painful sort of fun, but not nearly as painful as kickboxing two or more people simultaneously.
Generally I agree with the thought that in a self defense situation a person should try to stay on their feet and avoid going to the ground. Tthis is doubly true when faced with multiple attackers. The only exception I can think of is if you KNEW that by going to the ground you could take one of your attackers out very quickly using a jointlock. A flying armbar or jumping heelhook is always a risky proposition, but if you could break the joint and then get back to your feet right away the risk might be worth it.
In the vast majority of cases, however, if you do find yourself on the ground in a multiple attacker situation you should try your damnedest to get back to your feet (and then run). Is this easy to do? No! Is it always possible? No! The bottom line, however, is that people who are good at getting back to their feet tend to be good grapplers, and that it is grappling skill that allows you to get out of unfavorable grappling situations.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Q: What is your opinion on unarmed self defence situations involving two or more attackers against one.
A: Fighting multiple attackers is something that should be avoided at almost all costs. Doing it on the ground is even more dangerous, because it limits your ability to maneuver, use environmental weapons (ie club someone with a chair) and to disengage from the situation (ie run away). Fighting more than one person on the ground IS possible, but it is also very difficult, very tiring and very dangerous.
Everyone should try sparring two people simultaneously at some point in their martial arts career. Whether you spar them in a kickboxing or grappling context you will find out that sparring two people is at least FOUR times as difficult as sparring only one person. I'd suggest starting out by grappling two people at the same time: it is a painful sort of fun, but not nearly as painful as kickboxing two or more people simultaneously.
Generally I agree with the thought that in a self defense situation a person should try to stay on their feet and avoid going to the ground. Tthis is doubly true when faced with multiple attackers. The only exception I can think of is if you KNEW that by going to the ground you could take one of your attackers out very quickly using a jointlock. A flying armbar or jumping heelhook is always a risky proposition, but if you could break the joint and then get back to your feet right away the risk might be worth it.
In the vast majority of cases, however, if you do find yourself on the ground in a multiple attacker situation you should try your damnedest to get back to your feet (and then run). Is this easy to do? No! Is it always possible? No! The bottom line, however, is that people who are good at getting back to their feet tend to be good grapplers, and that it is grappling skill that allows you to get out of unfavorable grappling situations.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Armdrag Adversity
The following question was submitted by a subscriber to the Grapplearts newsletter.
Q: Do you have any tips/entries to the arm-drag?
A: The armdrag works best when his arms are stiff, and/or he is driving into you. Anything you can do to make him do either of those things will help set up the armdrag.
Try driving into him first - most guys will drive back or push you with their arms: voila!
Try grip fighting for wrist control - then hit the armdrag from there
Once in a while try hitting the armdrag with your right hand on his right tricep and your left hand controlling his left wrist - it makes it a lot harder for him to pull his arm out like that (at the cost of making it harder for you to move your hips)
Some guys are very tough to armdrag because they never give you the correct arm position or arm energy - not all techniques work on all people.
Finally, people who are very good at doing the armdrag don't need the correct energy for long. Once they get their hand on your tricep they always seem to be able to complete the move, even though their opponent knows it is coming. Their hand is stuck to the tricep like a remora on a shark. This is something that is worthwhile trying to emulate and add to your own game.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Q: Do you have any tips/entries to the arm-drag?
A: The armdrag works best when his arms are stiff, and/or he is driving into you. Anything you can do to make him do either of those things will help set up the armdrag.
Try driving into him first - most guys will drive back or push you with their arms: voila!
Try grip fighting for wrist control - then hit the armdrag from there
Once in a while try hitting the armdrag with your right hand on his right tricep and your left hand controlling his left wrist - it makes it a lot harder for him to pull his arm out like that (at the cost of making it harder for you to move your hips)
Some guys are very tough to armdrag because they never give you the correct arm position or arm energy - not all techniques work on all people.
Finally, people who are very good at doing the armdrag don't need the correct energy for long. Once they get their hand on your tricep they always seem to be able to complete the move, even though their opponent knows it is coming. Their hand is stuck to the tricep like a remora on a shark. This is something that is worthwhile trying to emulate and add to your own game.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
July 06, 2006
My Numbers
Whenever I read an interview with a fighter there is usually a question that goes something like "what do you do for conditioning?" Too often the fighter says something like: "I run, I swim, and I lift weights"
This generic answer is frustrating to me because I want details! How long does he swim? How often? What strokes does he use? When he runs, does he run steadily or does he do sprints? When he lifts weights does he bodybuild, powerlift, olympic lift or do circuit training?
I want to know these things for several reasons. Firstly they are interesting trivia. Secondly they may give me some good ideas for my own training. Thirdly - and this is what this week's tip is all about - part of me wants to see how my own level of conditioning stacks up against his.
Now I'm not a superstar competitor, but I do dispense conditioning advice fairly frequently in this newsletter. If I follow my own philosophy then I need to post my own training achievements for other people to scrutinize, criticize and compare.
So here are my 'numbers' (i.e. the best I ever did at an exercise or event). Keep in mind they reflect a 10 year span during which I fluctuated from 205 to 220 lbs, depending on my ratio of weight training to cardio at the time.
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
This generic answer is frustrating to me because I want details! How long does he swim? How often? What strokes does he use? When he runs, does he run steadily or does he do sprints? When he lifts weights does he bodybuild, powerlift, olympic lift or do circuit training?
I want to know these things for several reasons. Firstly they are interesting trivia. Secondly they may give me some good ideas for my own training. Thirdly - and this is what this week's tip is all about - part of me wants to see how my own level of conditioning stacks up against his.
Now I'm not a superstar competitor, but I do dispense conditioning advice fairly frequently in this newsletter. If I follow my own philosophy then I need to post my own training achievements for other people to scrutinize, criticize and compare.
So here are my 'numbers' (i.e. the best I ever did at an exercise or event). Keep in mind they reflect a 10 year span during which I fluctuated from 205 to 220 lbs, depending on my ratio of weight training to cardio at the time.
- 400 meter sprint: 1 minute, 17 seconds (yes this is slow: I don't have alot of fast twitch muscle)!
- 1.5 kilometer run: 9:45
- 1.75 kilometer run: 11:02
- 11 kilometer run: c. 55 minutes
- Firefighter Combat Challenge: 1:32
- Barbell squats: 225 lbs for 25 reps, 405 lbs for 2 reps
- Barbell bench press: 225 for 3 reps
- Body-weight pull-ups (good form): 20 reps
- Weighted pull-ups: 50 lbs for 5 reps, 80 lbs for 1.5 reps
Labels: conditioning
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
Wrestling Don't Get No Respect?
Ever since I wrote my Royce vs Hughes opinion piece I've been getting occasional emails politely accusing me of disrespecting wrestling. Nothing could be further from the truth. I believe that wrestling - freestyle, Greco-Roman and catch - has had a HUGE influence on modern MMA.
However I stand by my point that rearmount is emphasized in jiu-jitsu to an extent not found in other martial arts. Rearmount DOES exist in wrestling, and I was taught it in Judo, but in both arts it is but a means to an end rather than the ultimate position of domination in itself.
If Matt Hughes had knocked out Royce with a left hook I'd have said that boxing won. If he had double legged him and KO'd him with a slam then wrestling skills would have been the decisive factor in the match. If he had won with a heel hook then I would point to the influence of catch wrestling, shooto and/or pancrase on modern MMA. As it turned out, the strategy Matt Hughes used was directly drawn from the jiu-jitsu playbook, as introduced to the world by Royce Gracie, in about 1993.
These arguments can go around and around for a very long time, and so long as nobody interprets it as my being disrespectful to wrestling then all is well in cyberspace.
On another note, if you want to argue that wrestling gave Matt Hughes his work ethic to remain a champion for so long I'd have to agree with you...
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon
However I stand by my point that rearmount is emphasized in jiu-jitsu to an extent not found in other martial arts. Rearmount DOES exist in wrestling, and I was taught it in Judo, but in both arts it is but a means to an end rather than the ultimate position of domination in itself.
If Matt Hughes had knocked out Royce with a left hook I'd have said that boxing won. If he had double legged him and KO'd him with a slam then wrestling skills would have been the decisive factor in the match. If he had won with a heel hook then I would point to the influence of catch wrestling, shooto and/or pancrase on modern MMA. As it turned out, the strategy Matt Hughes used was directly drawn from the jiu-jitsu playbook, as introduced to the world by Royce Gracie, in about 1993.
These arguments can go around and around for a very long time, and so long as nobody interprets it as my being disrespectful to wrestling then all is well in cyberspace.
On another note, if you want to argue that wrestling gave Matt Hughes his work ethic to remain a champion for so long I'd have to agree with you...
bookmark this! del.icio.us | Digg it | reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | Google | StumbleUpon