Challenging the 85% rule

[Hebrew Hammer]

With the rise of MMA and BJJ, odd statistics about ground fighting started to appear...not sure where these numbers came from (most likely ground fighting arts themselves) but I don't buy it.

It usually comes in the form of this statement "85% of all fights end up on the ground". They usually don't clarify if it's street or MMA fights that do but I'm willing to bet that this statement is false in either case. I've seen or been in a few 'street' fights over the years and usually the only one who ends up on the ground is the guy getting knocked out or the one turtling to protect himself against pummeling.

If it's a street fight going to ground is a mistake in my mind, it limits your options of escape and makes you more susceptible to attack from other unseen opponents potentially getting blindsided. If ground fighting is what you've trained in, I suppose it's your best option, most of the street fights I've seen usually involve multiple attackers, blunt weapons or bar type weapons...bottles and pool cues, etc. Do you think that 85% of all street fights end up on the ground?

Even if we use the MMA model, I'd say that the statement is also false, it seems to me that more fighters are choosing to keep the fights on their feet even if they both have BJJ blackbelts. The percentage would closer to 50-60% of all MMA fights end up on the ground? Again I have no empirical evidence, just a rough estimate of the fights I watch. Do you think that the 85% rule applies to MMA?

[Lucas]

i been in two fights that 'went to the ground' I was just a teenager for one and I 'gnp' the guy, before that was a term that i know of. I had not ever even trained. the other i was brutally beaten by a group of people. pretty unavoidable.

all the other tussles ive had have not gone to ground fighting. not a large amount by any means, just a handful.

one i hit this dude with my skateboard and busted his face up and ran lol. he went to the ground.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Every fight that I never finished standing, I finished on the ground.
:D

[Robinhood]

What percentage were skilled MA people ?

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://danidogdays.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/quickmemebrianfantana.jpg

[Raipizo]

With the rise of MMA and BJJ, odd statistics about ground fighting started to appear...not sure where these numbers came from (most likely ground fighting arts themselves) but I don't buy it.

It usually comes in the form of this statement "85% of all fights end up on the ground". They usually don't clarify if it's street or MMA fights that do but I'm willing to bet that this statement is false in either case. I've seen or been in a few 'street' fights over the years and usually the only one who ends up on the ground is the guy getting knocked out or the one turtling to protect himself against pummeling.

If it's a street fight going to ground is a mistake in my mind, it limits your options of escape and makes you more susceptible to attack from other unseen opponents potentially getting blindsided. If ground fighting is what you've trained in, I suppose it's your best option, most of the street fights I've seen usually involve multiple attackers, blunt weapons or bar type weapons...bottles and pool cues, etc. Do you think that 85% of all street fights end up on the ground?

Even if we use the MMA model, I'd say that the statement is also false, it seems to me that more fighters are choosing to keep the fights on their feet even if they both have BJJ blackbelts. The percentage would closer to 50-60% of all MMA fights end up on the ground? Again I have no empirical evidence, just a rough estimate of the fights I watch. Do you think that the 85% rule applies to MMA?

Maybe a kinda my style is superior than this persons style so use mine kinda thing.

[donjitsu2]

Found this awhile back...

http://www.uncagedfighter.com/2010/09/do-90-of-all-fights-really-go-to-ground.html

[Robinhood]

What percentage were skilled MA people ?

Probably 98% unskilled.

[Hebrew Hammer]

Fighting Myths - notes from the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers Conference

One of the myths about personal protection is the old misquoted statistic, "90% of all fights wind up on the ground." This statistic has been used to sell ground fighting systems as the ultimate in self defense. If you have been in the martial arts or personal protection game long enough you have certainly heard this thing tossed around. You may have even heard the source - "according to the LAPD".

That statistic is wrong, AND misused.



The ASLET conference featured training in joint lock takedowns with retired sergeant John L. Sommers, the very man who conducted the use of force study with the LAPD and designed their defensive tactics program. His study looked at 6000 use of force reports from the LAPD and found that 60% of the time the arresting officer was knocked to the ground. One of the major reasons for this is that California has the 3 strikes rule and recidivist criminals are more likely to fight back to try to get away. Here are some of the main problems with the way this statistic is misused:



1. The percentage is 60% not 90% the numbers are frequently inflated to seem more convincing. While 60% is a majority, that means that more than one third of incidents did not result in an officer being knocked down. Also, the statistics did not measure "fights" but officer use of force reports.

2. The actual study was of officer use of force incidents in LA and did not study self defense situations involving civilians. You cannot apply the data from one representative sample to an entirely different population. If 98% of the population of the Philippines eats rice for three meals a day, you cannot also say that people living in Kansas also eat rice for three meals a day. It is a non-representative sample.

3. The use (misuse) of statistics is frequently combined with false but logical-sounding conclusions. A single data point is used to represent conclusions that the data does not indeed support. This makes an argument sound very credible even when it is not. Example = 100% of all people that consumed carrots in 1889 are now dead - therefore carrots kill you, so you better stop eating them.



On top of all this, the statistic is used to make people think that going to the ground is a good idea.

To quote Sergeant Sommers, (who worked with the Gracies, the Machados, Benny Urquidez and several other top martial artists) "I don't ever recommend you go to the ground." The very author of the study and designer of the training program thinks going to the ground is a very bad idea.



It sounds to me like it is a good idea to stay off the ground but know what to do if you do wind up there. This is what I have been saying, and what law enforcement and military folks have told me for years. Notice I did NOT say that you shouldn't study ground fighting. On the contrary, I think it's very important. But you do not want to waste time doing arm bars and triangle chokes, you want to do what you must to get back on your feet as fast as possible.



Also keep in mind that the moment you throw somebody to the ground, climb on them, and punch them - you are committing assault and battery in most jurisdictions. The hockey dad case in Massachusetts is an example. Thomas Junta was assaulted in front of his children. He then grounded and punched his assailant who hit his head on the concrete and died. Mr. Junta is now serving time for involuntary manslaughter.





Additional information regarding civilian fights.



Male versus Male - Age 18 and up

In studying real life fights involving this group of civilians, we find that no more than 40% fights ever went to the ground. When the fights did go to the ground, it was typically due to two main reasons:

1. Ineffective technique that led to the combatants becoming fatigued and frustrated and proceeding to a grapple, and then to falling on the ground.

2. One of the combatants actually tripping and falling.



Male versus Female - Age 18 and up

The percentage is much higher with male versus female. This is due to the nature of the attack. Men attack women for the purpose of control and exploitation, such as rape. Going to the ground is typical for these assaults.



Children versus Children

It is not uncommon for the typical schoolyard brawl to end up in a wrestling match on the ground. The assaults are usually not intended to inflict physical harm but rather to control. Hence punches and strikes may not be considered. The outcome of these altercations are typically much less severe than real adult confrontations.




I highlighted a few points in this article...

Interesting, makes sense that the Po po would keep stats on this...especially since they have to subdue and restrain people...if this is accurate then only 60% of their arrests involve going to the ground and male vs male street fights go to the ground 40% of the time.

[Hebrew Hammer]

Probably 98% unskilled.

Did you just quote and then answer yourself???? Who are you trying to troll?

[Hebrew Hammer]

Maybe a kinda my style is superior than this persons style so use mine kinda thing.

Possibly, I think it had more to do with the hype and success of the early UFC ground fighters...Gracies and wrestlers. I remember even hearing some fight announcers quoting these statistics as they were accepted facts.

[mooyingmantis]

Found this awhile back...

http://www.uncagedfighter.com/2010/09/do-90-of-all-fights-really-go-to-ground.html

Thanks for that link! Very informative!

[Raipizo]

Possibly, I think it had more to do with the hype and success of the early UFC ground fighters...Gracies and wrestlers. I remember even hearing some fight announcers quoting these statistics as they were accepted facts.

Interesting article. Even if they are statistics it doesn't mean they'll always be true.

[Kevin73]

thanks for posting that, I was going to but ya beat me to it.

I have heard a bunch of crap when it comes to fight statistics in this regards (not to actual documented use of force stats)

90% of fights go to the ground, was touted by the Gracies

Strikers responded with....

100% of fights start standing up

Uh.....I have known and seen fights where the person is sitting down when attacked.

Neither one tells you the whole picture, but it does tell you that you need to be prepared in all ranges.

[Raipizo]

thanks for posting that, I was going to but ya beat me to it.

I have heard a bunch of crap when it comes to fight statistics in this regards (not to actual documented use of force stats)

90% of fights go to the ground, was touted by the Gracies

Strikers responded with....

100% of fights start standing up

Uh.....I have known and seen fights where the person is sitting down when attacked.

Neither one tells you the whole picture, but it does tell you that you need to be prepared in all ranges.

Really I mean what if you're on a bus and sitting down or something. There are plenty of exceptions.

[Kevin73]

Really I mean what if you're on a bus and sitting down or something. There are plenty of exceptions.

Exactly, people use statistics and even make up their own statistics to sell their point. The Gracies did it with the over 90% claim, and the stand up side did it with their fictional 100% claim.

[Jimbo]

I always knew that the "90 percent of all fights" statistic was made up or purposely inflated by the Gracie's to promote their art. That does not mean it isn't a great art ( IMO, BJJ/GJJ is the best ground-grappling style); but that the percentage was not based on fact. How can you say "this or that percent of all fights" happen this way or that, when I'm sure many/most fights go unreported? Do they have actual, first- hand knowledge of every single fight that happened in history up to today? Of course not.

It's kind of like when some people say something like, "98 percent of all martial artists are mall-ninja wannabes". Or "95 percent of all MAists took up training because of Bruce Lee." It's an argument that is impossible to back up.

[sanjuro_ronin]

100% of all fights that end up on the ground, end up on the ground.
That is a fact that no one can dispute.

[Lucas]

I dispute that fact.

[YouKnowWho]

100% of all fights that end up on the ground, end up on the ground.
That is a fact that no one can dispute.

Agree. A fight will be ended by either knock down or take down. If 2 persons are still standing, that fight is not over yet.

In battlefield, only a dead enemy is a good enemy. Any wounded enemy may come back and kill you in next battle.

[mooyingmantis]

I enjoyed the link, but my guess is that those statistics are out of date.

Cops where I live don't grapple with anyone. They simply pepper spray and taze you liberally. Rinse and repeat! :D

[Raipizo]

I enjoyed the link, but my guess is that those statistics are out of date.

Cops where I live don't grapple with anyone. They simply pepper spray and taze you liberally. Rinse and repeat! :D

And they are nice tools to have but if you can't reach them or are resistant, which is very well possible. Ground fighting is essential.

[Frost]

Only study i know of done about actuakl sreet encounters

Part1

By Bakari Akil II, Ph.D.

People who have been following MMA, submission grappling and martial arts since 1994 have been aware of the increasing emphasis placed on ground fighting. Yes, a lot of the push is because ground-fighting experts are trying to convince people to become involved in their martial art or trying to attract more students to their studios. However, there is an extreme seriousness to their claims as well. People can get injured, maimed or killed if they aren’t able to defend themselves.

As a serious MMA or submission grappling fan you’ve probably either heard or read the following claims:

Ninety to Ninety-five percent of fights go to the ground; or

Most fights go to the ground

These claims have become a part of the lexicon of grappling gurus and their participating disciples, including me. However, is it true?

As a person who has been involved in some aspect of martial arts since I was nine years old, I have been apart of the tradition of accepting claims, verbatim, from martial arts professionals. Most of the advice has been wise, while other times it has landed me in situations I don’t want to talk about. So when I heard this claim coming from so many Jiu-jitsu and submission grappling experts in the mid 1990s I accepted it at face value.

However, as an academic, this statement over the last few years has begun to bother me. I began to wonder on what basis this claim can be made. Are there any studies that have been conducted to verify these assertions? Finally, I reached a standstill in my thoughts on the subject. I needed to know what was fueling the mantra that 90 to 95 percent of fights go to the ground. Is it an urban myth or is it for real?

So over a period of three months I designed an implemented an exploratory study with the expressed interest of trying to see if there was any validity in the claim that 90 to 95 percent of fights go to the ground or that most fights go to the ground. Over 300 street fights were analyzed during this study. The results were clarifying as well as totally unexpected.

For the purposes of my study, I needed actual fights between average citizens. However, it is nearly impossible to find access to enough physical fights between two people to analyze in person, especially in a timely and safe manner. Therefore an alternative method had to be chosen in order to study this question. This problem was resolved by using the readily available data uploaded and archived on the popular video sharing site, YouTube. The video sharing website provided the researcher with an abundant amount of data to analyze the question regarding how often fights end up on the ground and by what methods do fighters end up on the ground. For the purposes of this study, a content analysis was conducted where 300 fights were dissected over a two month period in order to address the question of whether 90 or 95 percent of fights go to the ground.

For a more detailed description of the abstract, literature review, hypothesis, methodology, findings and conclusions, contact bakil@mgc.edu.

Below are the research questions and the findings from the study:

Research Question

RQ1: What percentage of fights end with both fighters having gone to the ground at some point during the physical confrontation?

RQ2: What percentage of fights end with only one fighter having gone to the ground at some point during the physical confrontation?

RQ3: By what methods do fighters end up fighting off the ground? (i.e., punch, kick, takedown, push)

Findings

Although the findings cannot be generalized to the entire population; in this study both fighters ended up on the ground in 42% of the fights analyzed. This percentage increased substantially (72%) when analyzed for at least one fighter going to the ground.

So what do these numbers indicate for research questions one (RQ1) and two (RQ2)? It means that the people who have been making these claims are not far off the mark. They just have to be more specific. In other words, there is more than a good chance that if two people fight, one of them is going to end up on the ground (72% in this study). The chance that both will end up there is much less (42% in this study), but it is still substantial enough that one should focus on ground defense.

The third research question that needed to be answered is how do those fighters end up on the ground? The answer to that query is that in our study, 57% of the fighters who ended up on the ground were taken down by a throw, a trip or being pulled to the ground. Being pushed only accounted for 7% of fighters who ended up on the ground. So learning how to grapple and more specifically; how to apply and stop takedowns is vital to fighting.

The other most common way that fighters ended up on the ground was by being punched. This accounted for 35% of the total incidents where a fighter was sent to the ground. One other important point is for martial artists or others who might rely on kicking techniques. Out of 300 analyzed fights and 600 fighters, only one person fell to the ground because of a kick. However, that kick did result in a knockout of the person on the receiving end.

[Lucas]

what do they mean by one fighter goes to the ground? is that meaning the other did not follow and it stood back up? or does it mean that was when the other figher got KO/etc. and went down for the count?

if only one fighter goes to the ground, and the other does not, then either the other guy gets back up and they continue, or the fights over.

so in terms of, ground fighting, that study shows 42% of fights end up in some sort of a ground fight.

[Frost]

what do they mean by one fighter goes to the ground? is that meaning the other did not follow and it stood back up? or does it mean that was when the other figher got KO/etc. and went down for the count?

if only one fighter goes to the ground, and the other does not, then either the other guy gets back up and they continue, or the fights over.

so in terms of, ground fighting, that study shows 42% of fights end up in some sort of a ground fight.

I suppose it means one guy at sometime went to the ground in a fight 70% of the time, whether it stopped there, he got the cr&p kicked out of him whilst on the florr, or managed to stand back up all these would still mean at one point a fighter was on the ground

So in 42% of the time both guys were on the ground and 72% of the time one person was on the ground, both those figures are high enough to suggest learning how to both fight on the ground and deal with a standing opponent whilst on your back might be wise

[Samwise85]

I think there is also an issue with the methodology of using Youtube to study fights (note I have not read the the methods section of the paper, which, being a bit of a methods nerd I would like to do). In short, there is not way tell why the person posting did so. Were they a friend of the victor? Did they simply film the altercation? Was the altercation staged? Did the victor get a hold of the footage and post it? Unless the author of the paper contacted the posters of the material and received honest answers to these or similar questions there is really no reliable way to determine whether his results are valid. Further, the author notes his own bias as a ground fighting practitioner which could describe his willingness to accept results that support his underlying thesis. Finally, there is no indication as to whether individuals in the respective street fights he observed have martial arts training and might therefore be more likely to either take an opponent to the ground or avoid it. I do not mean to undermine this interesting work, but it doesn't really seem to have a solid empirical basis for the claims of causation that it makes.

Remember: There are lies, **** lies, and then there are statistics - Benjamin Disraeli

[David Jamieson]

There's no such rule.

the 85% thing is merely a meme. It's not true. It can't be proven or shown to be true at all.

In wrestling 100% of the fights go to the ground.
In boxing, 0% of the fighting goes to the ground.

There. Is that enough to dispel the bull**** myth?
It should be ample. :p

[Frost]

There's no such rule.

the 85% thing is merely a meme. It's not true. It can't be proven or shown to be true at all.

In wrestling 100% of the fights go to the ground.
In boxing, 0% of the fighting goes to the ground.

There. Is that enough to dispel the bull**** myth?
It should be ample. :p

not really but i cant decide if you are being serious or missing he point of the thread :)

[sanjuro_ronin]

I've won 100% of all the fights I have ever won.
:D

[Hebrew Hammer]

I've won 100% of all the fights I have ever won.
:D

You couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag, 60% of the time.

[sanjuro_ronin]

You couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag, 60% of the time.

If I was in a wet paper bag, it would have to be a pretty big one and probably big enough to smother me if it was wet, so you are probably right !

[David Jamieson]

applying math and stats to fighting is goofy. lol

it's fighting. you can get good at it if you apply yourself.
who gives a sh1t where it happens?

[MightyB]

The answer is Judo. :D

[HumbleWCGuy]

I have been in 16 or 17 street confrontations. Only 2 went to the ground.

One was because I felt like it was the easiest way to restrain a kid without hurting him although, I placed some some undue risk on myself with his buddies surrounding us.

The other time was when I I jumped in mount to finish a guy who I was pounding senseless.

I have only had 12% of my fights to to the ground with it being my option. Of course, I am pretty much from the Cobra Kai school of street fighting, "Strike first, strike hard, no mercy sir!"

[HumbleWCGuy]

My casual observations of street fight is that the two parties agree to go to the ground to avoid injuries.

[Hebrew Hammer]

My casual observations of street fight is that the two parties agree to go to the ground to avoid injuries.

You mean in like Twister? If I'm taking someone to the ground in a fight it's not to avoid injuries, it's to inflict them and I usually don't ask them nice before I do it.

Care to expand on your casual observation?

[HumbleWCGuy]

You mean in like Twister? If I'm taking someone to the ground in a fight it's not to avoid injuries, it's to inflict them and I usually don't ask them nice before I do it.

Care to expand on your casual observation?

Both parties are scared because the have no training so both parties are often happy to go to the ground, a few punches are thrown and a mutual tackle ensues. Technically, one initiates, but the other is happy to ride it to the ground hoping to control the situation when it hits the ground.

They just end up rolling on the ground until someone breaks it up because authorities are coming. It's much easier to strike from a standing position. Mostly guys want to avoid getting hit hard.

You can try to analyze it from a trained perspective, "I do this. I would do that." That's not my opinion of how it works with a couple of untrained guys. Jail is quite a bit different too. Those guys aren't trained, but are seasoned fighters often. Fights don't go to the ground much in jail.


I have never seen a situation where two guys have no grappling training and one initiates a tackle and the other resits it by trying to stay on his feet.

[Aero]

90% of fights may or may not end up on the ground, but 100% of all fights start standing up. Unless you're attacked while you're sleeping in bed or something silly.

XD

[donjitsu2]

90% of fights may or may not end up on the ground, but 100% of all fights start standing up. Unless you're attacked while you're sleeping in bed or something silly.

XD

Not true.

As we were laying in bed last night, I told my wife that her sister was looking pretty good ever since she started working out...that was one of the worst fights I've ever been in.


:p

[Raipizo]

Not true.

As we were laying in bed last night, I told my wife that her sister was looking pretty good ever since she started working out...that was one of the worst fights I've ever been in.


:p

Did you go to the ground?

[Hebrew Hammer]

I'm pretty sure he went straight for the North/South position, then the full mount.

[Hebrew Hammer]

Both parties are scared because the have no training so both parties are often happy to go to the ground, a few punches are thrown and a mutual tackle ensues. Technically, one initiates, but the other is happy to ride it to the ground hoping to control the situation when it hits the ground.

They just end up rolling on the ground until someone breaks it up because authorities are coming. It's much easier to strike from a standing position. Mostly guys want to avoid getting hit hard.

You can try to analyze it from a trained perspective, "I do this. I would do that." That's not my opinion of how it works with a couple of untrained guys. Jail is quite a bit different too. Those guys aren't trained, but are seasoned fighters often. Fights don't go to the ground much in jail.


I have never seen a situation where two guys have no grappling training and one initiates a tackle and the other resits it by trying to stay on his feet.

So you're basing this on incompetence of the fighters involved or that they aren't trying to injure the other guy, it's not through skill? For most drunken brawls I would agree with the premise that if it goes to the ground it's not based on skill but the lack there of. But I doubt they are just agreeing to take it there.


applying math and stats to fighting is goofy. lol

it's fighting. you can get good at it if you apply yourself.
who gives a sh1t where it happens?

Actually applying stats to fighting can be an excellent tool for improving results, evaluating tendancies, and preparing yourself. How can knowledge be a bad thing?

[HumbleWCGuy]

So you're basing this on incompetence of the fighters involved or that they aren't trying to injure the other guy, it's not through skill? For most drunken brawls I would agree with the premise that if it goes to the ground it's not based on skill but the lack there of. But I doubt they are just agreeing to take it there.




No I am basing it on the idea that people are more scared of getting hurt than they are committed to hurting the other guy. It seems like you have some notion that I am suggesting compassion for the opponent exists in the "go to the ground agreement".

[donjitsu2]

No I am basing it on the idea that people are more scared of getting hurt than they are committed to hurting the other guy.

I think this statement may be true for some, but certainly not everyone.

[Kevin73]

90% of fights may or may not end up on the ground, but 100% of all fights start standing up. Unless you're attacked while you're sleeping in bed or something silly.

XD

I've come across quite a few working in LE that started while one person was sitting in a chair/barstool.

[HumbleWCGuy]

I think this statement may be true for some, but certainly not everyone.

Of course, we are dealing with people. There are tons of moderating factors. I don't buy into the 85% rule anyway, but If a person had any chance of observing a lot of fights going to the ground, It would have been in this sort of situation.

[Hebrew Hammer]

No I am basing it on the idea that people are more scared of getting hurt than they are committed to hurting the other guy. It seems like you have some notion that I am suggesting compassion for the opponent exists in the "go to the ground agreement".

It was an interesting choice of words...didn't think compassion more along the lines of I don't want to lose or look bad.

[Dragonzbane76]

Who cares about the statistic. We can agree that there is a chance for it to happen. So be prepared either way.

[MightyB]

Who cares about the statistic. We can agree that there is a chance for it to happen. So be prepared either way.

Truth is - formal grappling training whether you get it from Judo, Jiu Jitsu, or Sambo is a lot of fun.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Who cares about the statistic. We can agree that there is a chance for it to happen. So be prepared either way.

It was a part of a marketing strategy to encourage people to spend their time and dollars engaged in one type of training versus another. I think that it is fair to challenge a statistic like this to see if it has merit if it is supposed to inform us about how we should budget our limited time to train.

[Bacon]

It was a part of a marketing strategy to encourage people to spend their time and dollars engaged in one type of training versus another. I think that it is fair to challenge a statistic like this to see if it has merit if it is supposed to inform us about how we should budget our limited time to train.

But the Gracie's proved an importatn point. Strikers who are not prepared to deal wi groundfighting are at a severe disadvantage. Even a shootfighter like Ken Shamrock lost because even thiugh his wrestling was good his ground game wasn't.

[Lucas]

I just keep a pack of ninja midgets that follow me everywhere in case it goes to the ground, they jump in with flails and beat the guy(s) off of me. Works 100% of the time. Thats a free local statistic for you guys.

[HumbleWCGuy]

But the Gracie's proved an importatn point. Strikers who are not prepared to deal wi groundfighting are at a severe disadvantage. Even a shootfighter like Ken Shamrock lost because even thiugh his wrestling was good his ground game wasn't.

I am not disagreeing with that assessment. I am merely saying that there are reasons to discuss the 85% rule. We understand that we need to know it all, but according to the rule, grappling should be everyone's base art, but I don't think that the rule is based in reality.

[Bacon]

I am not disagreeing with that assessment. I am merely saying that there are reasons to discuss the 85% rule. We understand that we need to know it all, but according to the rule, grappling should be everyone's base art, but I don't think that the rule is based in reality.

True and the Gracie account also comes from police stats which don't transfer over to civilians. But even assumingnthe number is something like 35% it means you still better have some ground game. And considering how defenseless most people are on the ground, and how much damage a well done throw can cause, and how many fight usually end up in a standing clinch (often by the way), it's prudent to train in a grappling art.

[MightyB]

100% of all martial arts masters who have no legitimate ground fighting training look like mentally challenged individuals when they are taken down.

* cited from a highly respected source... me :)


After all the years of hard work and training in whatever - would you want to look like a noob if by chance some BJJ Blue Belt or high school wrestler happens to take you down?

Pull your heads out of your but ts and do some ground training. Accept that it's needed and move on.

[HumbleWCGuy]

True and the Gracie account also comes from police stats which don't transfer over to civilians. But even assumingnthe number is something like 35% it means you still better have some ground game. And considering how defenseless most people are on the ground, and how much damage a well done throw can cause, and how many fight usually end up in a standing clinch (often by the way), it's prudent to train in a grappling art.

The police stat thing makes a lot of sense. Most people are reluctant to hit a cop. SWAT cops wear helmets so you can't hit the head even if you wanted to.

[godzillakungfu]

SWAT cops wear helmets so you can't hit the head even if you wanted to.
Swat is tactical and you are wwwaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy past any type of physical confrontation when they show up.

[HumbleWCGuy]

Swat is tactical and you are wwwaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy past any type of physical confrontation when they show up.

A buddy of mine does tactical training for his department. He says that it does occasionally happen. If a guy has 2 strikes and is looking at number 3, they will try to tackle a SWAT officer and run or just engage in a bit of wrestling to get by in a narrow hall.

I know what you mean. If SWAT ever showed where I was at. I am hitting the floor and staying there until I am told otherwise. I am not taking an butt stroke to the face. But, then again, I am not facing 80 years if they catch me.

[godzillakungfu]

A buddy of mine does tactical training for his department. He says that it does occasionally happen. If a guy has 2 strikes and is looking at number 3, they will try to tackle a SWAT officer and run or just engage in a bit of wrestling to get by in a narrow hall. Yes, you are waaaaaaay past a physical confrontation.

[wiz cool c]

in my experience about 50% of the fights i had went to the ground.so you need to know both ground fighting and stand up, ok we know.But a blue belts worth of bjj is more then enough knowledge for alomost any street fight.

[Scott R. Brown]

Since every fight begins with feet touching the ground, 100% of fights start on the ground.

Since every fight ends with feet or body touching the ground, 100% of fights end on the ground.

The ground is very popular it seems!

[Lucas]

You never met my combat yoga master Dhalsim!

[Syn7]

If two unskilled people clash, yes it stands a significant chance of going down. When people don't know what to do they just swing and hold on. If they both hold on, they end in a grapple and usually, but not always, this ends up on the ground. Especially when you take education into consideration. Almost everyone does some wrestling in school and with their buddies when they are kids. Significantly less people actually practice fighting.
It's also cultural. most cultures teach some form of grappling to kids in school. Where I live wrestling is part of the legal curriculum. It must be taught, no excuses.
When it comes to trained fighters, it depends entirely on the raining. If two BJJ cats fight on the street, I would say yes it stands a huge chance of going down. If two boxers go at it, it will probably stay standing. Till the end anyways.

There is no one formula to define all fighting. It really depends on the fighters.

MA's are not delusional because they think fights stay standing (which is not always true), they are delusional because so many think that you can trade back and forth like on TV in a real fight, catch punches and do small point(not joint) manipulation in a frenzied combat situation with strikes from a distance.