has anyone else found this to be the same

[respectmankind]

now, for everyone who might start a fight, before i say this, i want you to know i do not think grappling is better than striking, in fact i am a striker. but striking is a much easy to learn that grappling, unless you going for dancing and pretty striking, but meh.

[Starchaser107]

Interesting,
yes striking is first nature , its easier to learn than grappling. Grappling is extremely effective , but alot more difficult to master.
I cant say that one is better, it depends on the circumstance, but , both are important in being a well rounded fighter. both will help you in real situations.

[Xebsball]

It depends dude, i for example know lots of people, even smaller than me that strike better/faster/stronger than me.
And that + other stuff leads me to the conclusion that my body is naturally more adaptable to grapling.
And there is also of course people like you: natural strikers.

[Mr Punch]

Starchaser. I don't think striking's any more natural than grappling. When I was a kid I used to roll around on the floor and beat a lot. Sometimes with other people!!:D

I always found the timing in striking to be easier than the timing in grappling though. Learning when and how to relax in grappling's harder.

[guohuen]

I think there are two kinds of natural fighters, grapplers and strikers. Some may be both, but I've never met one. I'm a natural grappler. Most of my 35 years in MA has been becoming a striker.
As a child I could take down much larger, older kids with little effort. Problem was some of them hit. I wasn't smart enough to figure out that I needed to learn how to strike. Others figured that out and offered it to me.