BJJ Sparring... Some questions

for most of the bjjers i've talked to who train for self defense, the approach isn't "how can i get this jerk to the ground so i can choke him," or "how can i dump this jerk on his head so he'll leave me alone," it's "ah crap, i'm on the ground, now what do i do?"

the philosophy in this case is that bjj is the last line of self defense (after talking, running, shooting, cutting, punching) - and one doesn't often want to go to the triarii, as it were.

 

No - I'm not doubting that someone highly skilled in throws could use them effectively, but real fighting is scrappy and not bound by the agreement inherent in randori (ie that two people will face up in a certain way and use sanctioned techniques in a certain way). By way of example, how many "throws" do you see in MMA? Most takedowns are shoots or pretty scrappy adaptations - the fighter then deals with how it ends up.

I did judo for a while and got thrown all over the shop, but that was because I stood in the classic Judo gi grip and moved in the agreed fashion with people that knew more thows than me. Change that to me coming wading in with a blitz of punches and kicks and how well would that work then? I'm sure a a lot of "throwers" are convinced they'd be OK, but a lot of throwers train in a scenario that relies on certain grips and the fact that the other guy is not out to hit you repeatedly in the face.

The factors involved in a SD situation completey change the dynamics for someone who trains mainly throws.

I'm not about to tell everyone they're wrong if they think different - it's just my opinion that MMA is about as close as you're going to get to real fighting in a controlled environment...and there's a reason why you don't get many MMA guys training endless throws/judo, but they do train goundwork - mainly from BJJ.

Just saying what I see...some might say I need to get out more

Exactly - I'm not that intersted in throwing a guy, more interested in getting away and if I can't, defending, striking and if i do end up on the deck, dealing with that. If you're on the floor, you're on the floor - doesn't matter how you got there or if it was technical or not. The task is then to get away from that situation.

 

I'd say that this is more because the kids who are training for MMA are working on a formula that they believe is a good one. Karo Parysian is a bona fide badass, and he makes many of the throws work because he's taken the time to learn them.

I don't disagree with you completely, but I think it's specious to conclude that if the MMA guys don't train it, it's not worth training. MMA fighters that I know are splitting their time between several disciplines and are making hard decisions about how to spend their time.

 

I'm not saying it's not worth training - just for me, training huge variations of throws is not what I want to do. A takedown is a takedown - the end result is the same however you do it. I'm just taking a pragmatic view of how to get to a final objective.

I'll explain it this way - for years I played Rugby at a pretty decent level - there's a textbook way of tackling someone and you can train it over and over...but in a match, your only objective is to bring the guy with the ball down..how you do it is not your concern...simply getting him down is. Kinda how I see throws.

 

There is a huge difference between a drag-down takedown and one of Karo's uchi-mata headspike to the mat.

 

No doubt.... but one guy doesn't legitemise the many hundreds of thousands of others that can't do what he does. The rest of us mere mortals take what we can get

 

Not really. Some will end up with you in your opponent's guard. Some will give you side control, scarf hold, or north-south. Some will merely put your opponent on the ground, others might slam him down hard. Some takedowns you can shoot in for from a distance, others are better for the clinch. Still others are used to counter other takedowns. There is a lot of variation here. It's not just, "I shoot for a double and now the fight is on the ground."

 

To me it is - on the ground is on the ground - somewhere I'd rather not be so then I need to know how to get out of there or finish it from there. Doesn't matter a jot to me how I got there... just how I get to not being there.

I guess this is the difference between where this thread started (Sparring) and training with SD in mind. Why would I want to ever be close enough to my attacker to throw him in an SD scenario? If I'm that close I'm either in a lot of trouble, doing other nasty things to persuade him that he doesn't want to be there or, worse, at risk of being taken down myself (hence needing to know how to deal with that). Throwing the guy is the last thing on my mind and if i do get to the last thing on my mind I'm not gonna be too fussed about how I land - I'll react to that when it happens.

Foolish? Maybe. Realistic? Definitely.

 

What about knowing how not to get there in the first place?

Why would you ever want to be close enough for him to punch or kick you?

Regardless of whether this is a good idea (the whole thing about being able to avoid being taken down or thrown, being able to counter attempts at doing so by your opponent, and being able to land in a more favorable position all seem kind of useful), it doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of variation here. The end result is NOT always the same and how you get there can definitely matter.

 

Alister, you're making it sound like we're talking about techniques that are shrouded in hocus pocus. The take downs that Karo executes are technical. Sure. But they're techniques that have been pressure tested, work and can be learned as reliably as any BJJ technique.

There are also many throws that are just that... throws. You execute the throw, and while your opponent is down, you get up and split. If your intent is to get away and NOT go to the ground, then if someone attempts to throw you and you counter, either by preventing the take down or by countering with an offensive throw of your own that puts the guy down so you can get away... aren't you according to your own definitions training good SD?

 

On the other hand, look at San Shou. Despite wearing boxing gloves (very difficult to get a good grip) and having only 2 seconds of clinch time, they pull off "big air" throws on quite regular basis. Hip throws, double leg lifts, even the standing fireman's carry.... and this is an environment where you have aggressive punching, kicking (and sometimes kneeing) coming at you. I'm not sure if this is some subtlety created by different rulesets, or if it's just that San Shou fighters actually train high throws much more than MMA fighters do (who, as far as I can tell, tend to mostly work with shoots and leg takedowns).

 

There are plenty of throws in MMA. It's just that most of them are used by the fighters with judo/sambo (or sometimes Greco-Roman) backgrounds and there are far more fighters that come from wrestling backgrounds or train shooting range takedowns.

The throws in MMA aren't usually high-amplitude, but those throws are lower percentage anyway--except uchimata and maybe a few others.

Look at Fedor, for example. He doesn't shoot much, but he takes most of his opponents down at will, usually by clinching and throwing them. I think part of the reason this strategy is so successful is that the MMA fighters are focusing on sprawling as takedown defense and aren't as adept at defending against throws. Also, there are more variables. If I shoot, I can go for a number of takedowns (low single, high single, high crotch, high double, etc.), almost all of which are defended against by circling and sprawling. If I clinch, I can go for arm drags, inside leg trips, outside leg trips, duck-unders, hip throws, I can even drop and go for a leg takedown. There are more defenses required to handle all these variables.

 

Absolutely!! People don't know how to defend throws simply because they don't train them

MightMcClaw - I was also going to use the example of Sanshou. Another I would use is Combat Sambo...plenty of throws, pick-ups, trips & sweeps used aginst punches, kicks, knees

The problem being that to become adept in using throws you do need to put in the time & effort to train them, and too many people will say "its not for me" simply because its NOT the quick option to learn that a lot of people see the basic shoot. But consequently you don't learn how to defend them either.

Alister, with respect, I think you said that throwing someone is that last thing on your mind in a fight. I can assure you that if you train throws it will always be the last thing you think about, but it'll happen anyway. Its called instinct. Better that than ending up on the floor in a manner you have no control over surely?

 

It's hard to disagree with any of the points made since my last post...so I'm not going to

Yes, I want to avoid the ground if I can, no I do not want to be in striking range.

Throws are cool if you want to train that. For me, my "game" does not include them and I still take the view that in SD terms I don't want to be close enough to throw someone. BJJ includes enough about defending base for me to feel comfortable should I need that and if the worst happens and I end up grounded, how I got there is insignificant, I just haveto be able to deal with that.

I'm at risk of repeating myself and getting even further from the original topic (which was sparring) and having the same discussion overa and again.

I'll simply say, IMO, if you're training for competition or combat sport - cool, learn all the good stuff. A SD focus has very different and far more pragmatic objectives, so the mindset you carry and the way you develop your "armoury" is very different. I'm not denying the potential effectiveness of throws - they're just of little interest to me. There'll be loads that disagree with me, but I can live with that - it's what makes it all so interesting isn't it?

 

Hi,
There may be a connection between the slow sparring and the less accomplished throws.
The way it was explained to me was that the mindset of judo and jujitsu is slightly different: In judo you have to be explosive, looking to end the fight immediately; while in jujitsu there is more emphasis on improving position and working in small steps. Of course people can do both, but perhaps people gravitate towards the sport with the mindset that suits them best.

 

that's more due to rules, though, rather than lack of focus on throws. judo rules dictate the pace of newaza, and since bjj lacks that particular artificial stimulus, things develop more naturally - which is to say, with a gi on and no short time limit, the game is more likely to become slower and more technical. better right than rushed, etc.