Anyone Care To Contribute? [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

Vapour

03-17-2003, 09:59 AM

I did notice that most people in this forum don't have high opinion of karate/tkd/kungfu. Main reasons for this seems to be the emphasis these traditional styles place on kata/form practice and their ineffectiveness against grapplers. My artcile is in defence of these tradition though I personally don't practice these style myself (mine is taijiquan and judo). I happen to be a Japanese living in u.k. and I thought I can provide an insight.

Firstly, let me be the first to say that if all you do is kata practice and you tries to apply kata in a competition or real fighting, it will never work. Secondly, I did watch the video clip of match between a shotokan karateka and a grappler. It was pitiful.

One thing I did notice about the old fashioned karate school back home and karate/tkd/kungfu schools in the West is that the Western schools rarely put emphasis on conditioning of fists and other part of the bodies. Instead, their empahsis seems to be on teaching kata which the beginner student say "wow, that's a cool move" and teaching them to do sparing which is quite fun for students.

On the other hand, traditional karate school back home focused on conditioning of bodies with main focus on hands (after all, karate is called empty hand in Japanese). Sparing was sometimes non-existence for beginner(i.e. non black belt). The beginner's training was geared toward simple and boring exercise of repeatedly hitting wooden board covered by rope. You just kept punching left and righ repeatedly often until your fists start to bleed, then doing the same for a simple kick left and right again and again. Then you do blocking of such kick and punch by your arms so you can take such assults. The purpose of these exercises is to make karateka's empty hands and leg lethal so when he hit something, he break it. Then once that is achieved, you move into other form of conditioning such as repeatedly thrusting your finger into sand. Later, size of sand get bigger then you will swich to wooden chip and lastly stones so when karateka thrust his palm into someone's abdominal area, it will cause serious internal damage.

I don't know about now because marital sports event became popular in Japan as well but when I was kid, you could easily identified karateka by simply looking at their knuckle because their knuckle was flater and had bruse from repeated abuse. If I have to choose to fight either 1)a guy who spend years learning lot of katas and 2) a guy who only know one way to punch and kick but he done this so many time over and over hitting tree that his low kick is likely to break your leg and his straight punch into your frontal skull could possibly cause death, I would certainly avoid 2) and pick 1). 1) is like someone who collect lot of guns for personal protection but somehow have forgotten to buy bullets. I would rather have one gun and lot of bullet.

In old school, sparing was non contact, that is, you have to stop the punch or kick just before the impact. This was because any full competitive contact sparing among these people result in serious injury. Now a day, this has been replaced by point scoring system where the power of strike is not rewarded at all. Also because of this, stance of "so-called" full-contact practioner are very high so they can focus on agility. And variations of hand shape which was one of the main characteristics of karate as a style is completely ignored in these event. When was the last time you hear tkd practioner complaining about how their fist or arm hurt from repeated conditioning. You are more likely to hear about how their streching is going or how they did in sparing.

Now, I'm not trying to start flame by saying that old school karatekas kick ass of grapplers. But, I do believe that grapplers are weak against these style if and only if karateka/tkdist/KFist has been trained properly. More effective style for old fashioned karate/tkd would be traditional jujitu, aikido or hapkido which focus on lock, throw and joint manipulation with focus on evasion. Watch some Steven Segal's movies and see how he deal with knife attack. (I know SS is a ***** and anything he did after Under Siege are **** but his techniques are decent).

My view is that grappler are more effective against traditional jujitu/aikido/hapkido and jijitu/aikido/hapkido are effective against karate/tkd and karate/tkd are effective against grapplers. So it's a classic paper-rock-scissors. It is good thing that grapplers are kicking ass of modern karate and tkd because they are simply pointing out what these modern school lost.

Vapour

03-17-2003, 10:06 AM

True, but these events aren't bear fisted event like old-style-boxing, thai boxing or some kungfu competition held in Orient(SouthEast Asia mainly). And considering the insurance issue, there will never be a bearfisted event in the West or Japan unless one goes underground.

Contac of bear knuckle to the face will inflict sever injuries to the facial tissue and was the reason boxing gloves were invented. There is also a distinct possibility of frontal skull fructure if a barefist sink straight into face. Worse case is when fist land on the back of the head just above the neck which could cause actual death. That is why backfisting is absolutely banned in boxing. If practioner train in traditional karate/tkd/kungfu, their skill, techniques and conditioning of hands are, in fact, geared toward causing such effect. So likelyhood of death is much higher. If a karakeka can break a brick, you should assume that being hit in the head by such a person is equivelant to the same brick smashed into your head.

Therefore, if one ever host barefist knockout competition, the punch to the head must be absolutely banned or a death and multiple of crippling injuries will be the outcome and the organizer(s) will face civil and criminal consequences.

Boxing match have so many rounds because of the grove. In real fight, often, one clear hit in the face and you are out.(I once got punched in the face so I know what I'm talking about. :() But if one cannot get knockout from one single punch, best tactics is to cover you head and charge, take one or two hits and take the opponent to the ground and go for the submission. So MMA competition heavily favour the grappling tactics.

But why not. MMA practioners are doing particular form of combat system which focus on taking someone into the ground so their sparing should be desinged in that way. In Judo, one clear throw is a win. That is because in real fight, if you throw someone onto the ground, that is it. Even if the guy don't pass out, stamp him or kick his head which is easy.

But if you are karate/tkd/KungFu fighter why perticipate in MMA event whose main purpose is to train you to be a grappler while you spend awful lot of time to be good kick-boxer. Only thing you leanrn from this event is that it is better to be grappler than kick boxer. The proper sparing rule for kick-boxing arts should be no grappling and number of safety restriction to make strike non-lethal

The restrictions are there not only to prevent injury but also to let people focus on particular skill which is fundamental to its art. So, in MMA, people wear grove and in Judo, you aren't allowed to hit and one clear throw is considered as a knockout and in karate/tkd competition, one clear punch or kick is a win because in real fight, that should have happended.

Vapour

03-17-2003, 10:17 AM

Read this

"For example, dropping onto an opponent lying on the ground can break his ribs or, if he has heart disease, kill him due to the Valsalva effect and a guillotine or a clothesline applied with force is liable to severely damage his voice box (larynx) which is made of brittle cartilage.
....
Many amateur wrestlers advertise for and claim that they are indulging in "no holds barred" wrestling bouts but, because they are using real force to apply submission holds, caution needs to be exerted to the point that the wrestling can no longer in all honesty be called "no holds barred". They may say that they are wrestling with no holds barred but there must be a tacit code to their wrestling that says, I won't do it to you unless you do it to me. And since few of them want to get kicked in the face or dropped on their heads, they only do to their opponents what they would find acceptable to be done to themselves, so neither suffers any remarkable injuries. If such a tacit code of reticence did not exist, many of these amateur "no-holds-barred" wrestlers would have been dragged up before the courts to answer charges of actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, manslaughter or murder, or whatever the equivalent charges in their own countries happen to be, while their opponents would have had to recuperate in hospital if they were lucky.

If you want to indulge in a form of wrestling which is more ferocious than submission wrestling or, say, combined boxing and submission wrestling why not call it something else, such as Brutal Wrestling to distinguish it? People who make false claims are often despised." (I have no idea what is Valsalva effect. I ripped this from gay wresling site. :))

SevenStar

03-18-2003, 11:58 PM

Originally posted by Vapour

My view is that grappler are more effective against traditional jujitu/aikido/hapkido and jijitu/aikido/hapkido are effective against karate/tkd and karate/tkd are effective against grapplers. So it's a classic paper-rock-scissors. It is good thing that grapplers are kicking ass of modern karate and tkd because they are simply pointing out what these modern school lost.

What are you basing that on?

SevenStar

03-19-2003, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Vapour
True, but these events aren't bear fisted event like old-style-boxing, thai boxing or some kungfu competition held in Orient(SouthEast Asia mainly). And considering the insurance issue, there will never be a bearfisted event in the West or Japan unless one goes underground.

before gloves, thaiboxers wore wraps. mma gloves aren't that thick. they pose no real hinderance.

Contac of bear knuckle to the face will inflict sever injuries to the facial tissue and was the reason boxing gloves were invented.

gloves were created to protect the hands.

If a karakeka can break a brick, you should assume that being hit in the head by such a person is equivelant to the same brick smashed into your head.

I bet most boxers could break a brick - some of them may have a broke hand afterwards, but better broken hand than broken skull.

Therefore, if one ever host barefist knockout competition, the punch to the head must be absolutely banned or a death and multiple of crippling injuries will be the outcome and the organizer(s) will face civil and criminal consequences.

Boxing match have so many rounds because of the grove. In real fight, often, one clear hit in the face and you are out.(I once got punched in the face so I know what I'm talking about. :() But if one cannot get knockout from one single punch, best tactics is to cover you head and charge, take one or two hits and take the opponent to the ground and go for the submission. So MMA competition heavily favour the grappling tactics.

they last long because there are two very skilled fighters against eachother. Look at tyson's record - many of his fights resulted in 1st round KOs. when someone is outclassed, of gets caught slipping at the right moment, it can mean lights out. If boxers can produce that power with gloves, an iron palm/fist guy should be able to also, right? I've been punched in the face too - it doesn't always mean lights out, unless you're glass jawed maybe. matter of factly, the one time I was close to being knocked out, it wasn't a street fight, it was in the ring against another trained fighter.
And, the best tactic is whatever works at that time - knee him, take him to the ground, slam him into a wall, etc. what you do depends on the oportunity.

But why not. MMA practioners are doing particular form of combat system which focus on taking someone into the ground so their sparing should be desinged in that way. In Judo, one clear throw is a win. That is because in real fight, if you throw someone onto the ground, that is it. Even if the guy don't pass out, stamp him or kick his head which is easy.

too many assumptions. A throw doesn't guarantee victory by any means. In an ideal situation it will, but it doesn't always work that way. MMA doesn't necessarily focus on going to the ground. That's a stylistic preference. look at chuck liddell. He prefers to remain standing, and is good at defending takedowns.

But if you are karate/tkd/KungFu fighter why perticipate in MMA event whose main purpose is to train you to be a grappler while you spend awful lot of time to be good kick-boxer. Only thing you leanrn from this event is that it is better to be grappler than kick boxer. The proper sparing rule for kick-boxing arts should be no grappling and number of safety restriction to make strike non-lethal

why would a karate/tkd/kung fu guy want to be like a kickboxer? and grappling is not better in mma. being versed in all striking ranges is. stand up and ground. people train various styles to get that - that's why it's MIXED martial arts, not just grappling.

The restrictions are there not only to prevent injury but also to let people focus on particular skill which is fundamental to its art. So, in MMA, people wear grove and in Judo, you aren't allowed to hit and one clear throw is considered as a knockout and in karate/tkd competition, one clear punch or kick is a win because in real fight, that should have happended.

once again, gloves protect the hands, and, in judo, you are allowed ground work, or you may be restarted if the throw isn't clean. Why? because a throw may not always end it. As I said, a clean throw may not even end it, but it's a sport, so of course it has to stop somewhere. and in the street, it's likely you won't get a one punch knockout, depsite what you think SHOULD have happened. And, according to the rules, the strike doesn't have to be clean. I can back fist you on top of the head and still get a point. that will get a person killed in the street.

SevenStar

03-19-2003, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by Vapour
Read this

"For example, dropping onto an opponent lying on the ground can break his ribs or, if he has heart disease, kill him due to the Valsalva effect and a guillotine or a clothesline applied with force is liable to severely damage his voice box (larynx) which is made of brittle cartilage.
....
Many amateur wrestlers advertise for and claim that they are indulging in "no holds barred" wrestling bouts but, because they are using real force to apply submission holds, caution needs to be exerted to the point that the wrestling can no longer in all honesty be called "no holds barred". They may say that they are wrestling with no holds barred but there must be a tacit code to their wrestling that says, I won't do it to you unless you do it to me. And since few of them want to get kicked in the face or dropped on their heads, they only do to their opponents what they would find acceptable to be done to themselves, so neither suffers any remarkable injuries. If such a tacit code of reticence did not exist, many of these amateur "no-holds-barred" wrestlers would have been dragged up before the courts to answer charges of actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm, manslaughter or murder, or whatever the equivalent charges in their own countries happen to be, while their opponents would have had to recuperate in hospital if they were lucky.

If you want to indulge in a form of wrestling which is more ferocious than submission wrestling or, say, combined boxing and submission wrestling why not call it something else, such as Brutal Wrestling to distinguish it? People who make false claims are often despised." (I have no idea what is Valsalva effect. I ripped this from gay wresling site. :))

wrestling is actually pretty mean. they have alot of tactics that many judo guys frown on because they don't fall into the "gentle way" element. However, grappling in general - wrestling, judo, bjj, etc. produces plenty of injuries - more than you'll see in any point tourney. ring fighting may produce injuries also, but to a lesser extent than grappling. I find it hilarious when people can laugh at grappling's false claims and then talk seriously about how cma is too brutal for the ring...

SevenStar

03-19-2003, 12:42 AM

last thing... hold your breath. that's the valsalva effect. Basically, it's a closing or tightening in the throat and upper chest.

If the pressure on the chest is too great, blood flow can be stopped or may cause rupturing of blood vessels.

scotty1

03-19-2003, 02:59 AM

I liked this from a contributor:

"It seems that many arts, including or perhaps especially the Chinese IMA, used to have far more drills and exercises geared toward combat application, as well as different kinds of contact sparring. It seems that a lot of that was lost, and it is up to present day practitioners to revive those aspects in light of traditional principles - and hopefully with modern rationalism and empiricism in mind. "

Woah there, Nelly. :)

Merryprankster

03-19-2003, 04:15 AM

Seven,

No doubt about wrestling being rough. There's all sorts of stuff I did wrestling that I got told wasn't nice when I started BJJ. I mean, a head tap isn't really a head tap in wrestling--you're trying to f--- the guy up--when you snap him down, you're clubbing him on the back of the neck. When you get elevation, you try to drop the SOB as hard as you can.

Funny that.

Knifefighter

03-19-2003, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by Vapour
That is because in real fight, if you throw someone onto the ground, that is it. Even if the guy don't pass out, stamp him or kick his head which is easy.

If you throw someone, the chances are it will be a fight ender if the other guy is not a grappler and has no takedown training. The grappler who has studied takedowns and throws will normally know how to land to minimize injuries.

Vapour

03-19-2003, 09:13 AM

I have to disagree on the theory that boxing grove was invented to protect fist. Even though boxing grove do serve function of protecting fist for modern boxers, that is not case for classical boxing where they fought barefist. The classic boxer knew how to avoiding damaging kuckle when they punch. The reason grove was invented was to protect the one being punched and to move boxing into more respectable and legal environment. Damaged knuckle does not count as crippling or near fatal injury, being hit in the face severly, on the other hand, does.

As of wresling being tough, I never question that grappling is a tough sports. However, claim that they engage in NHB is simply bogus. As I said, just as many ways some of strikes especially to the head could cause cripling (and sometimes fatal) injuries, so does certain holds in grappling though grappling is slightly safer than striking due to the speed in which techniques are applied. As of throw, there are number of throw which won't let you land softly, especially if the throws were combined with lock and bones will break if the thrower won't let go the lock before the landing.

Black Jack

03-19-2003, 10:07 AM

Vapour,

Training gloves have an interesting history. Jack Broughton was the second bare-knuckle boxing champion of the 18th century. He made his fortune nut only from the money and prizes he won in the ring, but also from the fees for teaching pugilism to the gentlemen of Engilsh aristocracy for self defense from the thugs who hunted the London streets.

The aristocracy at that time frowned on their sons suffering from the marks of the prizefighters trade. Broken noses, cauliflower ears, scars, disfigurement....were to high a price to pay for a hobby. In response to this Broughton had his noble students spar while wearing big training mits called "mufflers". They were designed to protect the face as well as the hands in training.

Bare-knuckle fights in those days were really a combination of boxing, rough and tumble wrestling, and dirty fighting.

Vapour

03-19-2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by SevenStar

What are you basing that on?

Something I noticed when doing judo is that it is very difficult to take someone on to the ground. Judo make it slightly easy because of jacket which allow number of throw which isn't possible without it. If you do Sumo, this is more apparent because in sumo only way to win is to take down your opponent on to the ground or to push the guy off the ring but sumo has special belt which make it easier to do throw as well.

Unless you have huge weight advantage, it is not so easy to take someone onto the ground from tackle especially if elbow to the back of the head (often instant knockout and possibly fatal) or knee to the face (not necessarily fatal but very painful nontheless) are allowed. If you taclke and failed to take someone to the groud on that instance, you have to disengage or you get hit at the back of your head which is fatal. That is why spinning backfist and elbowing to the back of the head is banned in all boxing and kickboxing event.

In my view, more realistic grappling strategy against genuine karate/tkd/kungfu practioner who has conditioned fist is to tackle and tries to control their arm and upper body first rather than aiming for lower body. This is more apparent when opponent has weapon in selfdefence situation. It is easier to takedown if you tackle lower body but it is far riskier. Even then you have to worry about his kick and knee especially if you miss.

For example, look at this gracie video

http://www.gracieacademy.com/multimedia/videoclips.shtml

Almost all the clips in that site is about grappling, however, check out the clips in self-defence section. In that section, all the move are throws, joint controls and when there is one instance in which gracie charge he charge to control the hand which held weapon. These moves are specialities of aikido and hapkido where they attempt to control and throw opponent by lock.

If your opponent has weapon or has very powerful punch or kick, and your style is close quarter fighting or grappling, your best tactic is to charge at instance before the opponent make committed attack (very difficult, takes years to master the timing) or instance after the committed attack (safer but still difficult nonthless), this is in fact the tactics practiced a lot by aikido and hapkido.

It is often said that it is what you don't see which is most important. In gracie or any grappling arts, it is the timing of charging which is fundamental to their arts as self defence.

Well that is my view anyway. Please comment. :)

Vapour

03-19-2003, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by Black Jack
Vapour,

Training gloves have an interesting history. Jack Broughton was the second bare-knuckle boxing champion of the 18th century. He made his fortune nut only from the money and prizes he won in the ring, but also from the fees for teaching pugilism to the gentlemen of Engilsh aristocracy for self defense from the thugs who hunted the London streets.

The aristocracy at that time frowned on their sons suffering from the marks of the prizefighters trade. Broken noses, cauliflower ears, scars, disfigurement....were to high a price to pay for a hobby. In response to this Broughton had his noble students spar while wearing big training mits called "mufflers". They were designed to protect the face as well as the hands in training.

Bare-knuckle fights in those days were really a combination of boxing, rough and tumble wrestling, and dirty fighting.

Hmmm, i.c. Okey dokey. Thanks you for the info.

Black Jack

03-19-2003, 11:07 AM

Just trying to point out that "yes" gloves were made to protect the hands in training. You mentioned bare-knuckle history which I know a little about...sheesh:rolleyes:

CrippledAvenger

03-19-2003, 11:31 AM

As an addendum to Black Jack's point, the Dempsey-Willard title fight, WITH gloves ended up wth Dempsey shattering the heavyweight champion's cheek, breaking several of Willard's ribs, and generally maiming the man.

So, once again, gloves are really not for the benefit of the one being hit.

Knifefighter

03-19-2003, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by Vapour
If you taclke and failed to take someone to the groud on that instance, you have to disengage or you get hit at the back of your head which is fatal.

Are you basing this on all the guys you have seen killed by blows to the back of the head or some BS that your clueless instructor told you.

Knifefighter

03-19-2003, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Vapour

For example, look at this gracie video

http://www.gracieacademy.com/multimedia/videoclips.shtml

Almost all the clips in that site is about grappling, however, check out the clips in self-defence section. In that section, all the move are throws, joint controls and when there is one instance in which gracie charge he charge to control the hand which held weapon.

Out of all the things learned in the Gracie curriculum, the "self-defense" portion is the one area in which many Gracie students will tell you they feel is unrealistic.

Vapour

03-19-2003, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter

Are you basing this on all the guys you have seen killed by blows to the back of the head or some BS that your clueless instructor told you.

If you know any competition which allow strike to the back of the head, let me know.

Vapour

03-19-2003, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by Knifefighter

Out of all the things learned in the Gracie curriculum, the "self-defense" portion is the one area in which many Gracie students will tell you they feel is unrealistic.

Because the best against weapon is not to charge against your opponent but do Nike defence. :)

CrippledAvenger

03-19-2003, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by Vapour

If you know any competition which allow strike to the back of the head, let me know.

As legal blows? Nothing really to my knowledge.

However, it is worth noting that many professional boxers get rabbit punched at some point in their carreer. You have a dirty-enough opponent and they'll find a way to sneak that shot in to the back of the head. Now, I'll have to review the boxing deaths list that's on EJMAS (I think... I have it bookmarked somewhere), but I don't know how many boxers have died from those. Not many recently, at any rate, so I'd hesitate to call it a "Fatal" shot.

But if enough evidence suggests that it is, then I'll admit it straight up.

Knifefighter

03-19-2003, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Vapour
If you know any competition which allow strike to the back of the head, let me know.

A variety of MMA venues in Brazil have allowed these strikes for years. Many times BJJ fighters take their opponents' backs and hammer the back of the head, neck, and spine with elbow shots.

The first three or four UFCs all allowed this.

Every challenge match done at the Gracie academy has allowed these strikes.

The Dog Bros stick fighting gatherings allow these strikes with a stick.

I've personally been hit in the back of the head and spine many times with elbows, fists, and sticks. Hasn't killed me yet.

Merryprankster

03-19-2003, 08:49 PM

I'm going to say it since nobody else feels like being a *****.

Vapour, you're living in a fantasy world. The things you are discussing are LOW percentage. You MIGHT severely injure somebody with an elbow to the neck or spine, but in real life, 99.9% of the time, the "defenses" you are describing and "reasons," for the things you believe will wind up with you flat on your back and some guy boot stomping your face in.

SevenStar

03-19-2003, 09:01 PM

LOL, so much for trying to be nice about it :D

FatherDog

03-19-2003, 11:43 PM

Excellent, MerryPrankster posted before I was able to, so I'm able to continue looking like a pleasant, reasonable guy.

....except for the fact that Vapour IS living in a fantasy world.

As mentioned, most of the early UFCs allowed elbows to the back of the neck. And although it was illegal, Branco Cikatic elbowed Mark Kerr 5 or 6 times in the back of the head whilst Kerr was taking him down... all it did was **** Kerr off.

When you are being taken down, you are off your feet and your balance is being taken. No matter how hard and conditioned your fists and elbows are, you cannot efficiently issue power strikes unless you sprawl out, something that traditional karate does not teach. Period.

Vapour

03-20-2003, 04:11 AM

There is a sport which trying to do take down all the time. Sumo. Sumo begin every fight with each contestant having very low stance and they charge (or tackle, whichever you want to call it). If the opponent's stance is up, we (I did fair bit of sumo when I was a kid. It's such a fun game) alway try to get their leg. Most sumo contest end with push out rather than throw (which include take down). To be honest, the tackling posture is not stable position. It is great to push into one direction but once you are static, low stance is the least favourable position. It's pretty obvious but if you upper body is not upright, you don't have root that is unless you have someone to lean on. But this simply means that your root depend on your opponent. Sumo wrestler train their flexibility extensively (even low ranking sumo wreslter can do split) so that they can maintain as low stance as possible while maintaining upright posture.

I practice judo so I say this again. It is not easy to do take down. Otherwise every judo competition would end up with each contestant trying to charge into opponent leg. In judo, when someone is physically weaker than the opponent, he is often forced to squat down. At this point, it is relatively easy to be flipped because the guy doesn't have root. Not looking down is one of the many things you get told off when you are a beginner.

Sure elbow or knee won't have any power if root is off. The thing is that it is not so easy to take someone's root.

Merryprankster

03-20-2003, 04:49 AM

Vapour, you are correct that a TACKLE is not a stable position.

A SHOT, however, is.

In judo it's hard to score ippon from a leg attack. Since ippon is the goal, Judoka train more pickups and throws than single leg, double leg, and knee and ankle pick variations. However, the Russians and Europeans have been VERY successful with their pick-ups and leg attacks. Maybe YOUR Judo doesn't use them much, but these guys are champs at them--whole clubs and judoka specialize in pickups.

In sumo, a shot isn't useful--the knee hits the ground so you'd lose. Sumo is also all about the throw--but you can't use a sacrifice throw of any sort because you'll lose--you have to make sure the opponent hits FIRST, regardless of who initiated and who has ultimate control. And yes, more are won by push-out. Take the push-out away and they'd be won by THROWS. It's a function of the rules.

In folk and freestyle wrestling, where your grips and attack methods are not restricted (I can throw, shoot, snap down hit the mat first as long as I am the one who winds up in control, etc) the most often used scoring techniques are leg attacks--shots.

And dropping somebody on their ass who thinks whacking somebody on the back of their head is a "defense" is REALLLLLLLLY easy.

But thanks for playing our game!

Vapour

03-20-2003, 05:17 AM

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Vapour, you are correct that a TACKLE is not a stable position.

A SHOT, however, is.

In judo it's hard to score ippon from a leg attack. Since ippon is the goal, Judoka train more pickups and throws than single leg, double leg, and knee and ankle pick variations. However, the Russians and Europeans have been VERY successful with their pick-ups and leg attacks. Maybe YOUR Judo doesn't use them much, but these guys are champs at them--whole clubs and judoka specialize in pickups.

In sumo, a shot isn't useful--the knee hits the ground so you'd lose. Sumo is also all about the throw--but you can't use a sacrifice throw of any sort because you'll lose--you have to make sure the opponent hits FIRST, regardless of who initiated and who has ultimate control. And yes, more are won by push-out. Take the push-out away and they'd be won by THROWS. It's a function of the rules.

In folk and freestyle wrestling, where your grips and attack methods are not restricted (I can throw, shoot, snap down hit the mat first as long as I am the one who winds up in control, etc) the most often used scoring techniques are leg attacks--shots.

And dropping somebody on their ass who thinks whacking somebody on the back of their head is a "defense" is REALLLLLLLLY easy.

But thanks for playing our game!

From your statement such as "Since ippon is the goal", I could see that you are rather poorly informed or confused here. In judo, as almost everyone knows, you get ippon not just from clear throw but also from ground work, choke or arm lock (you also missed that ippon doesn't mean throw). To take someone onto the groud and be in control is aim in judo as well. And please pick up any judo books. You can see that pick ups and leg attack is considered as minor attack in judo not just by my judo club.

On the other hand, I must admit that my knowledge of western wrestling is quite minimum. So I'm not knowledgeable enough to answer why this disparities arise. Since it is quite obvious that you have very little knowledge of judo, it is probably more appropriate to leave this matter to someone who does.

In regard to the hit to the back of the head, I would assume that you have no expertise in the field of medicine nor have any experience of being hit severly on this part of anatomy. So it is probably more appropriate to leave this to someone with proper medical knowledge thought the fact that virtually all competition ban attack to this area of anatomy make me suspect that they have very valid medical reason to ban this move.

Vapour

03-20-2003, 05:39 AM

I just read brief overview of wrestling rules.

"In Greco-Roman, a wrestler may not attack his opponent's legs, nor use his own legs to trip, lift or execute other moves. The wrestler must wrestle from standing without the top of his head against his opponents chest. "

"In freestyle, both the arms and legs may be used to execute holds or to defend against attack. If legs are used as part of the attack by an agressor, no points are scored and the wrestlers are returned to standing. Only one official needs to see the leg usage for the move to be nulified.

If legs are used to prevent a move, the attacker receives whatever points are gained, a caution point or points, and choice of position. If a throw from standing is blocked, the attacker receives 2 points plus the position choice. If a move on the mat is prevented, the attacker receives 1 point plus choice. In either case, the offender receives a single caution. "

I. C. In judo we are allowed to throw or flip someone with leg.

Merryprankster

03-20-2003, 05:41 AM

From your statement such as "Since ippon is the goal", I could see that you are rather poorly informed or confused here. In judo, as almost everyone knows, you get ippon not just from clear throw but also from ground work, choke or arm lock. To take someone onto the groud and be in control is aim in judo as well. And please pick up any judo books. You can see that pick ups and leg attack is considered as minor attack in judo not just by my judo club.

LOL. I train with Rhadi Ferguson, an internationally ranked Judoka, on a regular basis, and my regular instructor holds a judo black belt. My point is that the "way to win," in sport judo, is ippon from a throw. Of course you can get osaekomi or chokes and locks. But the rules of sport judo support trying for a throwing ippon--not throwing for koka or wazari--and leg attacks usually don't earn you an ippon. Neither do a host of other successful wrestling-type attacks, like arm drag trips and front headlock snap-down type takedowns.

Judo rules limit matwork--period. You have to show continuous progress--which is left to the interpretation of the referee. In folkstyle wrestling if I am holding the guy down, but not scoring any points or turning the guy over, it's HIS responsibility to get back up. In Judo, they stand you back up. If I have a lock on you and you standup, we both get restarted standing. There is no time to work slowly and deliberately because you have no idea when the ref will decide you're not making progress. Judo matwork is usually fast and furious--there's nothing wrong with that. But Judo remains "all about the throw," when compared to other arts that allow more mat time.

And no, pick-ups and leg attacks are not "minor," in judo. They are considered minor by some people, but, once again, European Judo and Russian Judo are rife with leg attack and pick-up specialists who have performed quite admirably on the international circuit. Khabarelli anyone--a pick up machine!

So, I'd say my knowledge of Judo is at least decent, even if my execution of same sucks. I do use an uchimata-ko-uchi-gari-o-uchi-gari combo occasionally, but it's still not pretty.

w/regards to the medical establishment they have a very valid reason to ban those attacks--it's called liability. While the threat of anybody getting very serious injuries from what you are talking about are slim, the effects CAN be devestating, and that means huge lawsuits. Of course they're going to limit it.

Once again, I didn't say that these things won't work, I said the probability is so low that I wouldn't dare rely on them. In a ring, the ref will stop the fight. In the street, if that elbow doesn't work--and it's likely not to--you'll wind up getting curbstomped.

Not my cup of tea.

Merryprankster

03-20-2003, 05:45 AM

"In freestyle, both the arms and legs may be used to execute holds or to defend against attack. If legs are used as part of the attack by an agressor, no points are scored and the wrestlers are returned to standing. Only one official needs to see the leg usage for the move to be nulified.

You're misinterpreting this, but that's o.k. First, it wasn't written well, and it's obvious English isn't your first language.

In Greco-Roman, the legs cannot be used. In freestyle, they can. The author was making a poor attempt to show you the difference by talking about freestyle. The rules you listed are GRECO ONLY. Not all wrestling.

Merryprankster

03-20-2003, 05:54 AM

Here, this is a better quick overview:

Freestyle
Freestyle wrestling concentrates on attacking the entire body of the opponent. Wrestlers start on their feet, and points are accumulated by taking the opponent to the mat and exposing his back. Matches are one five minute period in the open and high school divisions, and two periods with a short break in between for younger age groups.

Since the emphasis in Freestyle is on attack and exposure, just controlling the opponent from on top with no continuous back exposure is considered a stalemate, and both wrestlers are brought to their feet after a short time in order for the bout to continue.

Also, since back exposure is emphasized, a wrestler can easily score points or pin himself by exposing his own back unless he is very careful how he performs his movements.

One more very important point about both Freestyle and Greco-Roman is that there is no penalty for failed moves. if a wrestler attempts a takedown and ends up being taken down by his opponent, his opponent does not score points.

Greco-Roman
Greco-Roman is the oldest wrestling style, and very popular in some parts of the world. Like Freestyle, Greco-Roman concentrates on taking your opponent to the mat and exposing his back, but without using or attacking the legs. Points for takedowns and exposures are nearly identical between Freestyle and Greco-Roman, so long as legs are not used. Both Freestyle and Greco-Roman, in addition to Judo, are recognized Olympic sports.

Vapour

03-20-2003, 06:19 AM

O.K. Now, this is much better. Just to balance you out, my judo instructor is 7th dan so I think he is experienced enough. But anyway, my dad is better than your dad is, ahhhh, silly so let stop there.

You aren't that clear on the explanation, but in freestyle, so you can use techniques similar to judo sweep or flip such as Osotogari or haraigoshi?

Another question. This is more of grappling technique to counter but would't attempt to go for the leg get very easily countered by neck crank?

I'm saying this because when I just started my judo, my mate who hasn't done judo and I had a bit of play. When we touched, he immediately got me into neck lock then he swung (yanked) me (my neck) to take me down. I immediately jumped myself to avoid pressure to my neck and I immediately tapped. I explained to him that attempt to throw someone by neck lock is illegal. My neck was sore for a week. But it could have been worse.

On the account of damage to back of the head. I won't discuss this until I ask someone who has proper knowledge of sports injury.

SevenStar

03-20-2003, 10:27 AM

you don't know how to do a proper double leg, I'd guess. you head should not be down, you should be looking straight ahead. consequently, he would not have been able to guillotine you.

As far as the hit to the base of the neck, based on the comment above, your stike to my neck would not do any significant damage to me before I took you down. plus, once your balance has been taken those strikes will lose most of their power.

I haven't read the recent judo comments yet, but I'll check them out.

And listen to MP - he knows what he's talking about.

SevenStar

03-20-2003, 10:35 AM

groundwork is limited in judo. too many people want "the big ippon" and the aim is throwing. Consequently when alot of judoka go to the ground, they lay on their belly and turtle up. Of course judo has ground work - my club loves it - but not all clubs do.

Merryprankster

03-20-2003, 06:09 PM

Vapour,

I don't want to get in a ****ing contest about rank either--that wasn't the point at all--I was just trying to say that I do know enough about judo to comment intelligently on it. I also wanted to point out that I train with currently competing judoka who are very familiar with "what is going on," in the competition circuit, and these judoka will tell you that pick-ups and leg attacks are common in Judo today.

There's judo and there's judo. What I mean by that is there are different philosophies on judo. It's generally accepted that the Russians and Eastern Europeans really led the way on pick-ups and leg attacks in Judo. They introduced the common use of completely new gripping series and introduced moves that had never been used before. An example is the Khabarelli. He was a Georgian pick-up specialist who used a pick-up variation that people hadn't seen before. There was no name for it in Japanese--so they called it the Khabarelli. It's still called that and still frequently seen, especially from Russians and Europeans.

The Japanese do tend to use fewer pick-ups and leg attacks, and they have not emphasized them to the same degree that some other places have--obviously, this hasn't affected their success in any way. But this is not unusual in a sport. An example might be the difference between Iowa and Oklahoma State wrestling. Iowa beats you into the ground with a physically aggressive, heavily conditioned style. Royce Alger is a prime example, and he did very well on the international circuit. Oklahoma State has produced such notables as John Smith--one of the slickest leg attack artists in wrestling. They aren't as physically abusive.

Which style is better? Neither--they both win. Whether you're using a standard lapel and sleeve grip and a natural posture, or a more crouched posture with an over the back belt grip and a cross-sleeve grip doesn't really matter.

There are many people who feel like pick-ups and leg attacks are "Cheap Judo," or "Power Judo," and that these attacks are "not as technical," as a tradtional throw. I don't buy this. The goal of sport Judo is to make back and mat meet in the most expeditious way possible. Whether I use de ashi barai or a high crotch combined with a cross-sleeve dump is immaterial if I put their back on the ground.

Now, the reason that European and Russian and even U.S. Judo looks different from the Japanese team is because they have had heavy exposure to other indigenous wrestling styles, so they found different ways of doing things.

However, because of this influence, pick-ups and leg attacks are now a very real part of competition Judo around the world. So to call them "minor," isn't really accurate. Some people may not use them much, and consequently they may not teach them much...but that doesn't make them minor attacks.

Now, to answer your wrestling questions--there is a huge difference between a tackle and a shot.

If you are attacking the leg with a tackle, the head is down, the body is hunched over, and there is no leverage, biomechanically. It's very easy for your opponent to neck crank the crap out of you (which is exactly what happened to you). A shot on the other hand, looks more like this:

http://www.lesgutches.com/

Click on techniques, then click on double leg. Note the position of Les' torso as he shoots in, and how he uses his head to secure leverage to drop his opponent. Also notice how he recovers into a strong base so he can lift and drive his opponent at will. It's a classic double leg from wrestling, and it is hard to manipulate their neck because their spine is aligned as though they were doing a squat--it's a very biomechanically stable position as compared to the hunched over, drunken frat boy tackle.

And, to answer your question, in freestyle and folkstyle wrestling, any throw that you do in judo you can do in free and folkstyle. Perfectly legal. I use a ****zer grip uchimata all the time as a counter to a single leg attack. Obviously, you aren't allowed to attack with chokes and locks, but any takedown from judo is legal.

However, the presence of leg attacks and lack of a gi alters both gripping and posture, so you tend to see fewer of some moves than others. For instance, it's not really easy to do a footsweep while wrestling because it's hard to get that big a pull. They happen from time to time, and I've watched Rhadi pull them off--sans grips even-- but it's still unusual. Also, if you miss, shucking your grip off is much easier when wrestling so you've exposed yourself to a huge leg attack opportunity. I have used a footsweep type attack with some success, but it's after a no-gi verison of uchi-mata--I combine it with Ko-uchi-gari and I have to alter both my hip position and body mechanics slightly to get it to work. It looks far more upright and the opponent is taken down more vertically than spread out.