grappling vs striking

[samuri-man]

in self defence which in more effective. and no biased oppinions!!!!

[Chojin]

Striking personally! Grappling to close for my liking!

[Ikken Hisatsu]

oh for the love of god....

[LilBunnyRabbit]

in self defence which in more effective. and no biased oppinions!!!!Running away.

You're going to get biased opinions. Many strikers will say striking, many grapplers will say grappling, simply because that's the ones that they do. You'll also get others saying the opposite to the ones they do, because they've been persuaded that what they do isn't effective self-defense. Finally you'll get a variety of MMAists who'll say either, depending on personal preference, or both. Is this post intended to do anything other than start an argument?

[Graifox]

i reckon the most effective strategy is run away, anything else is pot luck.

*Rubs a few scars as proof*

[Ikken Hisatsu]

striking for the striking bits, grappling for the grappling bits. your idea that you can choose what kind of fight you will have is disconcerting.

[samuri-man]

ikken that's not an option and i say striking for you don't need to be that close to punch someone. :yeleyes: :yeleyes:

[Ikken Hisatsu]

dont need to be that close for someone to bumrush you to the ground from behind either. this is a topic solely designed to start the same tired old arguement that happens every week. grappling AND striking skills are required to be a well rounded fighter, because you do not always get to choose where the fight goes. if i had to choose one though, it would be grappling. any monkey can throw a punch and have a strong jaw- few can grapple worth a damn.

[samuri-man]

Running away.

You're going to get biased opinions. Many strikers will say striking, many grapplers will say grappling, simply because that's the ones that they do. You'll also get others saying the opposite to the ones they do, because they've been persuaded that what they do isn't effective self-defense. Finally you'll get a variety of MMAists who'll say either, depending on personal preference, or both. Is this post intended to do anything other than start an argument?
now that you put it that way it a dumb topic to think of PLEASE LOCK IT DOWN

[Thomas]

You need both. You need to have tools in your toolbox for all occassions.

[BackFistMonkey]

if i had to choose one though, it would be grappling. any monkey can throw a punch and have a strong jaw- few can grapple worth a damn.

who said I can punch ? and the who CENSORED said I thought I could grapple ?

As for grappling or striking ?

I am going to sit the fence and simply say "Yes "

Peace :love: and Hippy Stuff

Back Fist Monkey

[Aegis]

My view is still the same: Both. Without both, you have large gaps in your repertoire. I for one practice a mostly grappling style (jujutsu) and know that my striking is a fairly weak area for me, which is why I intend to do some striking for a while at some point in my martial arts "career"

Having said this, my personal leaning is more towards the grappling side of my training for self defence, as it gives more options for dealing with an opponent than just hitting them hard enough to make them stop. You can restrain them, get out of their restraints, fight them on the floor and deal with any weapons they might have (within reason of course), all using grappling only. It's easier if you incorporate strikes though.

Remember, personal opinion only, so don't read that as me bashing striking arts. I know that people can make them work, I've just not tried much myself

[samuri-man]

Striking can be effective for everyone, within reason, but grappling is difficult for a small guy against a giant resemeling the statue of liberty. And often strikes are too fast and hard to grapple. I mean that if you can't get near someone for the flurry of punches and kicks then you can't fight back with grappling techniques.

Remeber distance is a very good defence. :woo:

Then agian some people striking against a really conditioned opponent is just as ineffective.
:bang: :bang:

Thats why i think karate and jujitsu are good, as karate has some grappels and jujitsu some strikes. Well, enough of each other to get you outta strife.

But then if thats the case what chance do you have if using both ineffectivly or fighting someone who uses both.
:confused:
I want to just stick with strikes, more painful and more easily effective.
:D

[rtkd-badger]

OK, what if you are crash tackled from behind :confused: , or sucker punched :eek: providing you havnt been knocked out from either hitting your head on the ground,wall or fist, bat, lump of wood you have to fight back with wot eva you have. If you are on the ground you have to grapple. On the feet you have more options, stand and fight, move in close and grapple or RUN. I'd take the last option :D

[Athleng Nordic]

Equal in my opinion. Both should be learned.

[alex_000]

They complete eachother. I refuse to choose.

[d33pthought]

Well, I think it all depends on what you want to accomplish. If you want to subdue your attacker, then grappling all the way. If you want to put the guy in traction for a month, go with striking. We did drills for both last night: covered everything from wrist locks and hip throws to shattered jaws and pressure points.

Striking and grappling both work equally well for self-defense, though.

[seany85]

All the ranges have equal importance, you cannot neglect one for another one.

[Yukimushu]

You need both. You need to have tools in your toolbox for all occassions.

Very well said :D

You don't take a knife to a gun fight... you take a knife and a gun.


May i ask?... what is 'stricking'?

[Thomas]

.

May i ask?... what is 'stricking'?

"Stricking" is when you hit them so fast, the "i" sound doesn't even have time to be "long"... hence the soft "i" sound....

[Yukimushu]

"Stricking" is when you hit them so fast, the "i" sound doesn't even have time to be "long"... hence the soft "i" sound....

Wow :D im going to have to find a school that teaches me how to strick :D

[leo]

hmmm i said strikeing for the reason that the majority (not all) of grappiling is holds which is just stupid imo, you are just as immobilised as them and you have to let go at somepoint, also throws are overly complicated for my likeing, a punch to the face is much easier and more effective imo

[leo]

tho i would agree that it is best to have both

[El Tejon]

Striking, kicking, throwing, and grappling.

You cannot separate the four methods of boxing. They are a matched set. :D

[d33pthought]

Holds are good: For example, holds can cause extreme pain on the part of the holdee, even if you're both on your feet. You can immobilize a person with a one-handed hold, and do any number of things with the your other three limbs. Throws can be simple or complicated. Judo has some of the simplest throws I've ever felt, while Hapkido and Aikido have some of the most complicated. It only gets difficult when you're trying to sweep and hold at nearly the same time.

A simple punch isn't nearly as effective as a lot of people tend to believe. At least, I'd like to think that people stopped coming made with glass jaws...

[Thomas]

On the same line...I really think a person has to add more context to "self defence" to see which skills you are more apt to need. For example:

(1) Late night, bad part of town, accosted by a pair of big guys = Pre-emptive striking may be my first choice

(2) Same as #1, but they jump me from behind and take me down = grappling with intent to hurt them and/or escape back to my feet and run.

(3) Mugger coming out an alley quickly at me = striking and running

(4) Mugger grabbing me and pushing me against a wall = striking and/or submissions (afterall he is grabbing me, which is my range for countering grabs)

(5) Student or child freaking out at school and attacking me = escorting locks or submissions that don't leave marks and don't do a lot of damage.

and etc.

For me, I am not sure what kind of situation I may end up in... I want to be ready for anything, so my choice is to learn as much as I can and put it into practice in the dojang (and in life)

[leo]

Holds are good: For example, holds can cause extreme pain on the part of the holdee, even if you're both on your feet. You can immobilize a person with a one-handed hold, and do any number of things with the your other three limbs. Throws can be simple or complicated. Judo has some of the simplest throws I've ever felt, while Hapkido and Aikido have some of the most complicated. It only gets difficult when you're trying to sweep and hold at nearly the same time.

A simple punch isn't nearly as effective as a lot of people tend to believe. At least, I'd like to think that people stopped coming made with glass jaws...

if it immobilizes a person after you have let go then it is not a hold, haveing said that i cant remeber what it is called, but i will post the name when i remeber lol

[alex_000]

Nice post Thomas. I agree You can't relly only on striking or grappling because each SF case is different.



(5) Student or child freaking out at school and attacking me = escorting locks or submissions that don't leave marks and don't do a lot of damage.


Do you get that a lot?

[Aegis]

hmmm i said strikeing for the reason that the majority (not all) of grappiling is holds

Incorrect. Grappling is blocking, locking, throwing and holding, and the transition between these areas. Most styles of grappling do not focus much on just holding someone down, instead they put a joint lock on. Now, a joint lock can instantly cause huge local damage to that joint, rendering it pretty much useless for the rest of the fight, and probably causing enough pain to stop most poeple from attacking you. As others have said, these can be done standing, and it can be a very quick technique if required. On the other hand it can also be used to restrain rather than badly damage, so it has its advantages. It's not as quick a defence as a counterstrike, but it's very reliable and multi-purpose ;)

you are just as immobilised as them and you have to let go at somepoint,

Incorrect, often you are only immobilised if you try to hold the lock on (ie restraining the opponent). If you want to get out, the break the joint and continue fighting. Not really an issue of mobility, and while you are "immobilised" you can actually use the other guy as cover from his mates.

also throws are overly complicated for my likeing,

Fair enough, that's your choice

a punch to the face is much easier and more effective imo

If a guy came up to you in a bar and started pushing you about, would you prefer to punch him in the face or lock up one of his arms to escort him off the premesis? Punching him in the face in that situation would probably have little chance of being considered reasonable force...

Conversely, if someone tried to break a chair over your head, would you be confident enough to only use strikes, or would you wish you knew about throwing in a circle when someone swings somethign heavy at you?


All in all, I stand by my original claim that both grappling and striking (or stricking) are needed to win fights, especially fights where it's not as simple as 2 guys squaring up and both starting at the same time.

[LilBunnyRabbit]

All in all, I stand by my original claim that both grappling and striking (or stricking) are needed to win fights, especially fights where it's not as simple as 2 guys squaring up and both starting at the same time.Thanks for that, I now have this mental image of two guys squaring up, swinging a punch each, and then both falling over. :D

[d33pthought]

I wouldn't put that past some of the guys I know at college, Rabbit :D

BTW: Thanks, Thomas! ;)

[Ikken Hisatsu]

hmmm i said strikeing for the reason that the majority (not all) of grappiling is holds which is just stupid imo, you are just as immobilised as them and you have to let go at somepoint, also throws are overly complicated for my likeing, a punch to the face is much easier and more effective imo

this kind of ignorance is exactly why this thread is going to go down the toilet, just like every other thread of its nature.

like everyone with a clue has said, you need both to truly be effective. doesnt matter if you are a super awesome puncher, IF you hit the deck you need to know what to do. how can it be made simpler?

[Matt_Bernius]

Ok, as pointed out before this is an asinine question as it implies that the two are mutually exclusive or one has implicitly more value. They're not. Both are tools. Put a different way:

Which is better a hammer or a screwdriver?

It all depends on the situation. I'll tell you that a hammer seems like the perfect tool until the first time you are asked to put a screw into a wall.

In the same way suggesting that one is more important or functionally better than the other is all fine and good until you walk out on the street and are faced with a situation where your pat answer doesn't work.

Case and point, what happens if you're tackled and you don't know how to sprawl. Striking suddenly becomes less effective. Or as a counter, the ever popular you're in a broken glass filled parking lot and faced with multiple opponents, not quite the moment to grapple.

Or perhaps the most mind blowing situation, the person throws a loopy hook and falls into you, your both standing but tied up and you start kneeing. Wait is it grappling (intertined limbs jockying for control) or striking (knees 'o plenty)? You chocolate fell into my peanut butter... (and boy am I sadly culturally dating myself with that reference).

This question is the pat vulgar type that people love. Often it represents an attempt by someone to justify the lack of one or the other in their training regiment. And if that isn't the case, then why does it matter?

From a self defense eduction perspective, striking education typically comes first because it's more easily accessible. But I don't know of any robust self defense systems that don't teach grappling as well.

- Matt

[Ikken Hisatsu]

quite. if you are only asking this because your school lacks one or the other samuri, go cross train. thats what I did.

[leo]

this kind of ignorance is exactly why this thread is going to go down the toilet, just like every other thread of its nature.

like everyone with a clue has said, you need both to truly be effective. doesnt matter if you are a super awesome puncher, IF you hit the deck you need to know what to do. how can it be made simpler?

Ikken Hisatsu, if you wernt so ignorant as to read the post i made directly after the one you are talking about before saying i dont have a clue you would have realised that i agreed to what you just said that you need both to be truly effective. so in future please take the curtosy to read things properly before you go around saying i dont have a clue about what im talking about.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

so why post it in the first place?

[d33pthought]

So what's the score now? I think Ikken's leading, but Matt seems to have take a big jump forward in ranking.

[leo]

Incorrect. Grappling is blocking, locking, throwing and holding, and the transition between these areas. Most styles of grappling do not focus much on just holding someone down, instead they put a joint lock on. Now, a joint lock can instantly cause huge local damage to that joint, rendering it pretty much useless for the rest of the fight, and probably causing enough pain to stop most poeple from attacking you. As others have said, these can be done standing, and it can be a very quick technique if required. On the other hand it can also be used to restrain rather than badly damage, so it has its advantages. It's not as quick a defence as a counterstrike, but it's very reliable and multi-purpose
myself tending to vier away from grappling arts am slightly biased so it isnt really my place to say what grappling is just that i choose strikeing over grappling. When i said a hold that immobilizes someone is not called a hold i am talkign in terms of shaolin kung fu, but i choose not to grapple much becasue i find throws innefective in most situations locks pointless becasue you have to let go sometime, blocking i class as strikeing and holding as clinching. Different people have different ideas, i think my idea of grappelign differs from yours slightly. but my main point is i have found that most grappeling moves cannot end a fight and so prefer strikeing, but that is my opinion

[leo]

so why post it in the first place?
i was saying it as if i had to choose between the two, i personaly am more of a stand up fighter because i find grappelign not that effective, but i still beleive it is better to have both

[d33pthought]

but my main point is i have found that most grappeling moves cannot end a fight and so prefer strikeing, but that is my opinion

You've never felt a proper joint lock, then, have you? Also, having come from a supposedly shaolin kung fu backgroung myself, I can safely advise you to get out and crosstrain! There is soooo much you're missing out on it's not even funny!

[Hiroji]

there really is no need for this thread!!! the proof of the pudding is in the eating. go watch some UFC please!

[Matt_Bernius]

i was saying it as if i had to choose between the two, i personaly am more of a stand up fighter because i find grappelign not that effective, but i still beleive it is better to have bothBut that's the problem, most folks will say that the one they are comfortable with is the most important. And that's not only a mistake but it's irresponsible.

Put a different way, if all you know is a hammer, the whole world starts to look like a nail. But that doesn't make everything a nail.

All these questions tend to do is reenforce stereotypes and keep people's fragile egos from being wounded at the thought that their training may not be complete or well rounded.

- Matt

ps. Deep, do I continue my lead with this one?

[Ikken Hisatsu]

you talk about fighting as if grappling and striking are two different "options". they arent. you can do one and be a sub par martial artist, or you can do both and be well rounded.

[leo]

You've never felt a proper joint lock, then, have you? Also, having come from a supposedly shaolin kung fu backgroung myself, I can safely advise you to get out and crosstrain! There is soooo much you're missing out on it's not even funny!
im not sure i understand, are you saying i do shaoling kung fu? because if you are you are wrong, i ahev been cross training in any art i come across since i was 6, the main style that i train in now is korean kickboxing but i still train in other styles at home and fight ppl of other styles and cross trainers.
perhaps to stop myself gettign into an argument with people i should explain my way of thinking in martialarts:
i believe no matter what the style you do is cross training is best even with another style that u think is crap, everythign has their uses in differnrt situatuations, even the round house kick of one martial art may have an advantage over the roundhouse kick of anotehr martial art in certain situations. what i eman is i beliebe cross trainign is best but still have preferances in teh styles and techniques

[d33pthought]

You could ask your sifu what he knows about close-range entrapment techniques like they have in wing chun, or maybe something different. It's certainly worth knowing, and you might be surprised what's in your system that's not generally taught. For example, I asked my kwanjangnim about defenses against punching, and he showed me two or three moves that work against lead and trailing-hand punches. I even threw as fast a jab as I could muster at his face, and he still managed to lock up my arms! Now, that was certainly not something I expected to find in Taekwondo!

Oh..in one of your previous posts, you said you were talking in terms of shaolin kung fu, so I assumed that's what you are studying now. My bad, then.

[leo]

But that's the problem, most folks will say that the one they are comfortable with is the most important. And that's not only a mistake but it's irresponsible.

in a fight what you are most comfortable with is the most important, y do a fancy kick on someone that has the advatages of being powerful fast and unexpected when u r not comfortable at pullign the move off? chances are you will fail to pull it off and get in a worse situation

[Thomas]

. When i said a hold that immobilizes someone is not called a hold i am talkign in terms of shaolin kung fu, but i choose not to grapple much becasue i find throws innefective in most situations locks pointless becasue you have to let go sometime, blocking i class as strikeing and holding as clinching. Different people have different ideas, i think my idea of grappelign differs from yours slightly. but my main point is i have found that most grappeling moves cannot end a fight and so prefer strikeing, but that is my opinion(bold face added - Thomas)

This is a topic that sometimes gets overlooked: releasing holds. Students need to practice safe ways to release hold... usually with a couple things in mind:
(1) Use the lock to apply direct pressure in the direction you want, essentially using the trapped joint as a spring to sendd them away so that you can disengage and run before they recover. This must be practiced against resisting opponents

(2) Take the lock or hold into a destroying technique to make the person incapable or unwilling to continue the fight, e.g. turning a wrist lock into a wrist break, plus a disengage technique

(3) Turning the lock or hold into something that renders the opponent unconscious, e.g. a headlock into a choke out. Agani, add a disengage and escape.

A student can know all the holds and locks they need but they need also to know (1) how to set them up and get into them (you don't just catch wrists out of the air) and (2) how to disengage from your opponent without putting yourself right back into danger

[leo]

you talk about fighting as if grappling and striking are two different "options". they arent. you can do one and be a sub par martial artist, or you can do both and be well rounded.
i presume this message was meant for me, in fighting i agree grappling and striking are the same thing, just differnt areas of it, i just happen to find the striking side of it more effective, yes it is better to be an all rounded fighter, but unless i got the wrong end of this poll it asked which is more effectove grappling or strikes? i chose strikes because although yes i would use both i would use far more strikeing than grappling, if i get into a grapple i get out as quickly as i can by useing pressure points and leverage.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

if i get into a grapple i get out as quickly as i can by useing pressure points and leverage.
oh lord.... go down to your nearest bjj school and try this out. seriously.

[Hiroji]

Ok this is how i see it. if your going to enter a MMA fight your gonna need, believe it or not, to know MMAs!!! which will include grappling if you are to stand a chance! in a karate/boxing fight your gonna need striking and not really any grappling. correct me if im wrong. in the street, in a real fight, ur gonna need both for sure. but you can no all the striking/grappling you want, if you aint right mentaly it wont mean dick.

[leo]

(bold face added - Thomas)

This is a topic that sometimes gets overlooked: releasing holds. Students need to practice safe ways to release hold... usually with a couple things in mind:
(1) Use the lock to apply direct pressure in the direction you want, essentially using the trapped joint as a spring to sendd them away so that you can disengage and run before they recover. This must be practiced against resisting opponents

(2) Take the lock or hold into a destroying technique to make the person incapable or unwilling to continue the fight, e.g. turning a wrist lock into a wrist break, plus a disengage technique

(3) Turning the lock or hold into something that renders the opponent unconscious, e.g. a headlock into a choke out. Agani, add a disengage and escape.

A student can know all the holds and locks they need but they need also to know (1) how to set them up and get into them (you don't just catch wrists out of the air) and (2) how to disengage from your opponent without putting yourself right back into danger

good post

[Thomas]

Do you get that a lot?

I have been really lucky (knock on wood) that I haven't had to be physical with my students. Part of it comes from being seen as a pretty laid back teacher with a fair discipline code and also from my confidence and attitude in school (tooting own horn)... I think most students resepct me pretty well. For the others, I hang a lot of martial arts pictures up (starring me) and I discuss classes and stuff sometimes. The students have a pretty healthy respect for me physically. I know of a couple of cases where students who were "supposed to fight" waited until after my class and far down the hall to begin.

At the same time, at the dojang I try to focus on training the different levels of contact and work on non-damaging technqiues because someday I may have to use it. It's very sobering thinking about explaining to a parent why you hit a kid a lot smaller than you...

[leo]

Ok this is how i see it. if your going to enter a MMA fight your gonna need, believe it or not, to know MMAs!!! which will include grappling if you are to stand a chance! in a karate/boxing fight your gonna need striking and not really any grappling. correct me if im wrong. in the street, in a real fight, ur gonna need both for sure. but you can no all the striking/grappling you want, if you aint right mentaly it wont mean dick.
i agree, my point is that i will try to use strikes more than grappling as much as i can, tho there are one or two grapplign styles i think are jus tas effective as strikeing, as a a generalisation i think a strike is more effective

[leo]

oh lord.... go down to your nearest bjj school and try this out. seriously.
how many times have you been attacked by a bbj fighter on the streets? i think what styles u like can greatly depend on where you are from, if any one else on here is from swasnea in wales then im sure they woudl agree that strikeign is much better than grapplign simply due to teh way we have to fight here, hence most teenage boys in my city do kickboxing or boxing

[d33pthought]

I asked an instructor of mine what to do against a boxer once...he was like: "Okay, throw me a punch." I did, and he leaned back slightly and kicked me in the ribs. Not only did I not even begin to make contact, but but he proved the old adage: Nothing wrong with a twelve foot ladder if you only have to reach ten :)

[Matt_Bernius]

in a fight what you are most comfortable with is the most important, y do a fancy kick on someone that has the advatages of being powerful fast and unexpected when u r not comfortable at pullign the move off? chances are you will fail to pull it off and get in a worse situationThere's no question that when ever possible you should, in a fight, stay where you are most confortable. The exact opposite is true for training. Because, in the real world, fights rarely happen on your terms (unless you're prepared to initiate them).

The fact of the matter is that dumb polls like these become people's justficiations for studying one thing or the other. As such, they're dangerous and short sighted. For all the reasons Thomas (nice posts as always) and others have put forward you need a robust and well rounded training program in order to develop a robust and well rounded self defense skill set.

As such neither striking or grappling can be more important in self defense.

[leo]

There's no question that when ever possible you should, in a fight, stay where you are most confortable. The exact opposite is true for training. Because, in the real world, fights rarely happen on your terms (unless you're prepared to initiate them).

The fact of the matter is that dumb polls like these become people's justficiations for studying one thing or the other. As such, they're dangerous and short sighted. For all the reasons Thomas (nice posts as always) and others have put forward you need a robust and well rounded training program in order to develop a robust and well rounded self defense skill set.

As such neither striking or grappling can be more important in self defense.
ill give you that, but if u think about it you have just said exactly as what i have been saying, with the exceptiion that i have a preferance

[Ikken Hisatsu]

how many times have you been attacked by a bbj fighter on the streets? i think what styles u like can greatly depend on where you are from, if any one else on here is from swasnea in wales then im sure they woudl agree that strikeign is much better than grapplign simply due to teh way we have to fight here, hence most teenage boys in my city do kickboxing or boxing

fact remains that using pressure points etc against someone, even an untrained person, is NOT an anti grappling curriculum.

[El Tejon]

Well said, Matt.

I'm always partial to "a fight is not what you want it to be; it just is."

You are far more eloquent. :D

[Matt_Bernius]

ill give you that, but if u think about it you have just said exactly as what i have been saying, with the exceptiion that i have a preferanceNo. Actually what I believe what you are saying is that you would perfer to use striking in a self defense conflict.

What I'm saying is that neither striking nor grappling is more important in a self defense conflict.

Major difference there.

- Matt

[leo]

fact remains that using pressure points etc against someone, even an untrained person, is NOT an anti grappling curriculum.
that is your opinion, not mine, i value pressure points in grappling situations

[GojuKJoe]

you should do whatever the moment calls for. i can't believe this thread is still goin. it's just a pointless argument.

[leo]

No. Actually what I believe what you are saying is that you would perfer to use striking in a self defense conflict.

What I'm saying is that neither striking nor grappling is more important in a self defense conflict.

Major difference there.

- Matt
i do prefer to use strikeing, im not saying either is more important, i just find strikeing is more effective in most situations.

[d33pthought]

pressure points are a good idea if all you want to do is keep a person still AFTER you've thrown him on the ground. They are by no means a viable way of GETTING a person to the ground, though. I know this because after every self defense technique the master instructor demonstrates on me (and that'd be every technique I'm there for), he applies a very painful, very immobilizing single or double-finger pressure point technique.

[leo]

pressure points are a good idea if all you want to do is keep a person still AFTER you've thrown him on the ground. They are by no means a viable way of GETTING a person to the ground, though. I know this because after every self defense technique the master instructor demonstrates on me (and that'd be every technique I'm there for), he applies a very painful, very immobilizing single or double-finger pressure point technique.
my use of pressure points is not to take someone to the ground, its to get myself off the ground

[d33pthought]

Oh. In that case, it might work. It'd be insanely difficult, from what I can imagine, though. Especially if the guy you're fighting has any idea of how to wrestle.

[GojuKJoe]

if someone had me on the ground and i was struggling to get up, i'd be biting him and poking his eyes. i wouldn't worry about fancy pressure points

[Matt_Bernius]

Oh. In that case, it might work. It'd be insanely difficult, from what I can imagine, though. Especially if the guy you're fighting has any idea of how to wrestle.Forget about how to wrestle... if they have any notion of ground and pound you're in trouble. Pressure points are way to subtle, especially against someone who is adrenally charged. Basics ground awareness and positioning is key here. Striking can work, but you need to be correctly positioned. Otherwise its grappling for separation and or striking position.

- Matt

[leo]

Oh. In that case, it might work. It'd be insanely difficult, from what I can imagine, though. Especially if the guy you're fighting has any idea of how to wrestle.
if he trained to use grapling on the floor and i trained to use pressure points, it seems pretty even, i dont see why useing pressure points would hinder me, it hasnt in the past.

[leo]

if someone had me on the ground and i was struggling to get up, i'd be biting him and poking his eyes. i wouldn't worry about fancy pressure points
funny u should say eyes, since they are pressure points, as for biteing, i dont want aids thanx

[GojuKJoe]

all you should think about, is getting out of the situation, not about the consequences. hesitation could cause you a lot of problems.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

if he trained to use grapling on the floor and i trained to use pressure points, it seems pretty even, yet again, you are displaying the obvious fact that you have never fought a grappler. go challenge even a low ranked judoka or bjjer, and see how far you get using pressure points.

[d33pthought]

It's not that using pressure points would be hard for you so much as a problem of scale: You're aiming for small, but very sensitive places which, if exploited, can be debilitating. However a training grappler will be doing similar things, but on a larger scale. Like turning your ankle, wrist, elbow, or shoulder into a pressure point when he locks them or breaks them.

[leo]

yet again, you are displaying the obvious fact that you have never fought a grappler. go challenge even a low ranked judoka or bjjer, and see how far you get using pressure points.
as ive said i have, now you go and fight someone who does dim mak and grapple with them

[Ikken Hisatsu]

I call BS. prove it. no one else has.

[leo]

It's not that using pressure points would be hard for you so much as a problem of scale: You're aiming for small, but very sensitive places which, if exploited, can be debilitating. However a training grappler will be doing similar things, but on a larger scale. Like turning your ankle, wrist, elbow, or shoulder into a pressure point when he locks them or breaks them.
although yes pressure points are small, some can be quite large and there are so many of them, aslong as you know the sorts of places that pressure points are and where the dangerous ones are so u can avoid them u shouldnt have too much of a problem.

[d33pthought]

Hell, if leo lived near me I'd spar him just to end the debate, and I'm not even a grappler by preference! That said, I'm pretty much washing my hands of the whole thing, though it is amusing to see the posting ping-pong going back and forth.

[GojuKJoe]

i like the pressure point philosophy of, pick any part of the body and smash it

[leo]

i like the pressure point philosophy of, pick any part of the body and smash it
lol, sounds liek a good plan!!! tho i really think people are mis interpetating what i am saying, this debate is annoying me now whether pressure points work is a matter of opinion and experience same goes for grappling, how the hell did thsi debate last so long

[Matt_Bernius]

Hell, if leo lived near me I'd spar him just to end the debate, and I'm not even a grappler by preference! That said, I'm pretty much washing my hands of the whole thing, though it is amusing to see the posting ping-pong going back and forth.
Good points D33p... and as a Mod, I'm stepping in to remind everyone that the debate needs to stay civil or the thread is going to be locked down.

Ikken & Leo, unfortunately when we get to the dreaded issue of proof this thing turns into a shouting match. While empirical data may point to one side (or the other) it's never enough of a counter for the "in my experience argument".

Both side have said their peice, lets take a deep breath and move on.

- Matt

[d33pthought]

Honestly, I couldn't tell you.

[Ikken Hisatsu]

i did say this thread would end up like this.... im off too. leo can train in ignorance if he wants, its his welfare not mine.

[Hiroji]

ok three little letters to end this thread : UFC.

[Matt_Bernius]

ok three little letters to end this thread : UFC.*sigh*

out of the frying pan...

[Hiroji]

ok three little letters to end this thread : UFC.

dont get upset myfriend. some people will find out the hard way

[Hiroji]

*sigh*

out of the frying pan...

sorry mate :Angel:

[Slindsay]

I think we are missing the point of the thread here, the point was which one is more effective for self defence, not which one is better.

If you ask me the UFC is not conclusiveproof that you have to know how to grapple for self defence, in self defence what you are looking to do is RUN AWAY, I accept that you may have no choice but to grapple a lot of the time but you also may not have much choice but to strike, i.e. the old example of the other guy having mates with him or not having a particularly safe floor to go to.

Personally I would say which is better, stand up or groun fighting cos then I can just say stand up and include loads of arm locking anyway.

Also like Ikken said earlier most people dont know how to grapple worth a damn so you dont neccessarily have to train so long in grappling to beat them in that area, plus fighting dirty in groundfighting is pretty much the same as fighting dirty stand up but easier, you still gouge they eyes grab the groin, headbutt etc. but your opponent is moving less.

[shaolin_hendrix]

I voted striking because it's more effective for me personally, and probably in my style. But every style is different, as is every person! I'm guessing a judo, shiao chiao, or monkey master would say grappling, while a tae kwon do, hsing-i, or snake master would say striking.

[d33pthought]

It's possible for a strike to lead into a standing grapple, and vice versa. It's really cool when it happens vice versa.

[samuri-man]

OK, what if you are crash tackled from behind :confused: , or sucker punched :eek: providing you havnt been knocked out from either hitting your head on the ground,wall or fist, bat, lump of wood you have to fight back with wot eva you have. If you are on the ground you have to grapple. On the feet you have more options, stand and fight, move in close and grapple or RUN. I'd take the last option :D
he's right agianst a large implement you need to grapple or get hit in the head okthis is bad for my reputation ppppppppllllllllleeeeeaaaaaassssssseeeeeee close this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[LilBunnyRabbit]

he's right agianst a large implement you need to grapple or get hit in the head okthis is bad for my reputation ppppppppllllllllleeeeeaaaaaassssssseeeeeee close this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Actually there are other options, there always are. :rolleyes:

[munkiejunkie]

sam, I would say, take them to the ground in any way you can, then stomp on thier face

[samuri-man]

Actually there are other options, there always are. :rolleyes:
what are these options

[samuri-man]

sam, I would say, take them to the ground in any way you can, then stomp on thier face
i was wondering how you'd react to this one.

[munkiejunkie]

just what i wanted to hear

[rtkd-badger]

sam, I would say, take them to the ground in any way you can, then stomp on thier face
What if?????? after you take them to ground they get the better of you? :bang: