Timeframes: Striking vs. grappling

[Hendrik]

Grappling relies on power and strength no more than striking does.

True.

IMHO, it is a different type of power even if the intensity level is the same.

Using a wrong type of power even with the same intensity will produce low efficeincy or low effectiveness.


By the time the grapper get close to the range within the shoulder and elbow,

almost most of the striker who without the grappling training was force into dealing with an unfamiliar type of power flow with low effectiveness.

By the time the grapper get contact the striker's body the striker left with only low effectiveness struggling which fall prey to the unknown un familiar situation.


How can one even dream to win in this type of situation? Cant.

Thus, some go learn grapping, and that is good, because that train one to be able to handle the situation.


It is anything wrong with this? Nope, in fact it is perfectly proper. However, is this still WCK? Nope, certainly no longer it.


As an analogy, to race two cars, one needs to know if both enginees could be par : interm of generating x amount of horse power, and rate of acceleration....etc.

If at this level it is a 30 /70 then the racer needs +20 from the skill to just compensate the weakness. and that means even just to par, one needs to have 20+ more skill. To win one will need even more.


So, it is obvious if the power platform is 30/70 in the elbow to body contact range, the skill is 20/80 in the elbow to body contact range... what is the chance to win?

For me, dont do it because it is a guarentee screw up.




Sure, people then come up with different type of tricks move this and that trying to explain away the weakness. however, that 30/70 cant be explain away disregards how one can demo or show it to one's students. because it is a conditional stuffs and the condiftion might not even exist in the real life contact.



Now, if the power generation compare the two is 50/50 to support oneself differently in the particular range, and the skill of the individual is 30/70 then there still a chance of par and even slight change of winning.



So, it is not time frame, IMHO, it is power generation frame. basically what is the accerelation in the evoke of power to support a specific style of technics.

As we all heard, WCK is famous on its Keng Geng or Fast accerelated Power, it goes as far as any part of the body while get into contact can generate those type of power. Now, without those type of power platform. There is no different between BJJ punch, TDK punch and WCK punch; and how can that type of punch or strike become effective in close range?

using a wrong type of motor/gear to drive a mis fit drill head is just looking for damage. even worse if one drop it harder or thinking the same amount of power will do the same job.

It is time to wake up to face reality.

Just some thought.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Uyeshiba, the founder of Aikido said, "The secret of Aikido lies in Atemi waza (Striking to vital points)".

The basic premise of standing joint locks is striking an opponent senseles first, then doing the armlock. To just do it without apply strikes is useless.

Anyone not believing Aikido is effective should look at Yoshinkan or its predecessor, Daito Ryu Jujutsu.

Robert has Sankyo'd the correct.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Originally Posted by chusauli
"The basic premise of standing joint locks is striking an opponent senseles first, then doing the armlock. To just do it without apply strikes is useless." (Robert Chu)
..............................

AND THIS RESPONSE BY DALE FRANKS:

"Real fighting does not work like that."
................................


***OH? REALLY? So you've never seen a fight or an mma match wherein strikes set up a lock or a submission hold from a standing position?

[k gledhill]

That was my understanding too...strike , then lock...

You only have to watch 6-7 UK policemen try to subdue ONE drunk 'squad'ie' [army recruit] outside a bar one night using ..."police arrest techniques" based on small wrist & elbow locks etc...it ends up on the ground with a 'kill the carrier' feel to it like a rugby scrum.... guys grabbing legs, some sitting on top of the guy....6-7 policemen for ONE guy.
...not a pretty sight...no wonder cops resort to a punch or two [or too many] to subdue the 'intent' of perp..."arrest techniques" work much better.

The guys I teach who do federal air jobs mention the same sort of restrictions to them, being given a short course of BJJ at the academy + some quasi boxing/ aggression tactics ..only they feel they will never use it until they do the initial 'come along' strike [or 5] first. But are restricted by ..a plane load of witnesses with videos !!

I give a 'suggestion' that using palm strikes [as I did in fights] will give the onlookers the impression your pushing the guy away [head first] it has a nice stunning effect on the head. Equivalent to being hit with a small phone book ...and you dont hurt your knuckles if the guy covers up his face, you can still hit the top of his head just as easily...strike , attack, charge , slam into bulkhead/wall trap arrest...retain weapon etc...VT can add to your arsenal. use VT then a locking system like _____? or your choice of 'sleepers'.

Palm strikes can also be an asset in court ...I gave evidence in statements that where actually 'guided' by the police officer to make me seem 'less' the aggressor in the incident by saying to use phrases like " I was attacked and 'threw my hands out to defend myself and the guy fell down'....

In actual fact I waited for a guy coming at me to hit me , head down trying to grab with his lead hand as he prepped his right to strike with...I struck him full force on the forehead with a palm strike [ sparring experience told me not to use knuckles ..bare hands get injured easily striking knuckles ]
He was out of it from that point standing up holding his head with both hands... I could have done whatever I wanted to him...but had several other guys to fight that night...If I recall it was 3 of us against 7-8 guys...
memories

Anyone watching 'could' have seen a guy push another away...on the head a he was being attacked.

[Knifefighter]

***OH? REALLY? So you've never seen a fight or an mma match wherein strikes set up a lock or a submission hold from a standing position?

First of all, let's differentiate between chokes, which work in an upright position, and joint locks, which rarely work.

Setting something up with a strike to land a choke, such as a guillotine, is completely different than beating the guy up and then thinking you can apply a standing joint lock.

If you think you can out strike someone and that is going to let you land a standing joint lock, you are in fantasy-land.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Actually, its not strike then lock, it more like strike, incapacitate and then control.
The key issue that most standing joint locks are either controls that can lead to joint breaking.
Its very hard to place a resisting opponent in any kind of standing joint lock, for a mirad of reasons, but the simplest is that it requires 2 hands to apply a joint lock to 1 limb, leaving his free limbs to beat you with and sense yo have commited both hands to the lock, you are at a disadvantage.

Some locks can be applied so fast that they become breaks, most aikido and hapkido wrist locks are like that, its just very, very hard to do so against someone actively trying to rip your face off and tea bag you silly.

[Knifefighter]

Actually, its not strike then lock, it more like strike, incapacitate and then control..

Again, real life does not work that way. If you've incapacitated someone with strikes, he's going down fast. If he's still standing, he's not incapacitated enough not to still be fighting you and keep you from applying the joint lock.

If you think someone is just going to stand there once he is "incapacitated", you are as delusional as the rest of these guys.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Again, real life does not work that way. If you've incapacitated someone with strikes, he's going down fast. If he's still standing, he's not incapacitated enough not to still be fighting you and keep you from applying the joint lock.

If you think someone is just going to stand there once he is "incapacitated", you are as delusional as the rest of these guys.

I am repeated what is usually stated when referring to the practical application of standing locks, that with which I agree to a certain point.
Standing joint locks are a very low percentage move, that is very clear.
Can they work on the untrained when they are in an incapacited state? yes, of course they can.
Perhaps "defenseless state" is a better term?
Either way, I have used them, my fellow ex-bouncers have use them, under those conditions, though typically in a 2-on-1 or 3- on 1, situation ( easier to get rid of someone with numerical advantage).
I had a situation at work a few years ago with an ex-employee and I was able to neutralise it with a standing joint lock ( against a wall in this case).
Again, not typical 1-on-1 situation but I feel that is a person makes the core of his training standing joint locks and traines them in a realistic fashion, then I believe that he will be able to do them well when the time comes.
Issue is that training joint locks in an "alive" way is a tad painful.

As for my delusions, I'd like to keep them in the Jessica Abba variety

[sanjuro_ronin]

Of course you can use them when you've got another person or two controlling the opponent.


The only person it's too painful for is the person who is getting his face smashed in while attempting to apply the standing lock.

As funny as that is:
I have had limited exposure to standing joint locks, only in the context of Yoshinkan Aikido and Hapkido, and it hurt big time, especially Hapkido, those ****ers love to make you flip around like a fish out of water.
Got me wrist dislocated and was out for a few weeks and decided that my uber sexiness was too awesome for hapkido.
Now, granted, getting things done to you in training is one thing and doing it in a practical situation is another, but under the context of what I was mentioning (training) hapkido joint locks were some of the most painful training I have ever done.

[Knifefighter]

Now, granted, getting things done to you in training is one thing and doing it in a practical situation is another, but under the context of what I was mentioning (training) hapkido joint locks were some of the most painful training I have ever done.

Training Hapkido joint locks, in which you let your opponent apply the lock, is nothing like sparring it. Of course they work and are painful when you let the opponent apply them.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Training Hapkido joint locks, in which you let your opponent apply the lock, is nothing like sparring it. Of course they work and are painful when you let the opponent apply them.

There is "free style" sparring in Hapkido too, certainly compared to Aikido it is VERY free style.
The thing is, even in that context SOME control must be exercised, it was in one of those session that my wrist was dislocated.
I think it harks back to the central issue of "too deadly", in this case to "painful", there is no way to train joint locks in the correct manner ( full contact, full resistence) without the dangers of broken joints, especially in the standing grappling game.
Remember that just that got his arm broken ( Dislocated elbow?) from that standing Wakigatame ? ( "armpit" lock") a few years ago?
Because you can't really train them the best way they become that much harder to be made effective.
My 2 cents on the matter.

[Knifefighter]

I think it harks back to the central issue of "too deadly", in this case to "painful", there is no way to train joint locks in the correct manner ( full contact, full resistence) without the dangers of broken joints, especially in the standing grappling game.

It's not that they are too dangerous to spar full force with. They are no more dangerous than training full force on the ground.

People get their limbs broken and dislocated all the time on the ground when training and competing.

[sanjuro_ronin]

It's not that they are too dangerous to spar full force with. They are no more dangerous than training full force on the ground.

People get their limbs broken and dislocated all the time on the ground when training and competing.

Granted, but, and I think you will agree on this, for standing joint locks to work they have to be applied under a different set of parameters.
An arm bar on the ground can be applied succesfully in a controlled way, even the amount of force can be controlled and still have some control over the limb and person because they are on the ground and mobility is more restrictive than standing, whereas a standing arm bar like the one I mentioned earlier ( Wakigatame) must be applied in a far more dynamic way to make it effective in a practical training session.
What I am saying is that standing joint locks need to be more dynamic than the ones applied on the ground and as such the potential for injury can be greater.

[Knifefighter]

Granted, but, and I think you will agree on this, for standing joint locks to work they have to be applied under a different set of parameters.
An arm bar on the ground can be applied succesfully in a controlled way, even the amount of force can be controlled and still have some control over the limb and person because they are on the ground and mobility is more restrictive than standing, whereas a standing arm bar like the one I mentioned earlier ( Wakigatame) must be applied in a far more dynamic way to make it effective in a practical training session.
What I am saying is that standing joint locks need to be more dynamic than the ones applied on the ground and as such the potential for injury can be greater.

If anything, they standing joint locks are safer than those done on the ground. The fact that they are so much easier to escape and counter makes it just that much easier to keep your opponent from applying one.

[sanjuro_ronin]

If anything, they standing joint locks are safer than those done on the ground. The fact that they are so much easier to escape and counter makes it just that much easier to keep your opponent from applying one.

In THAT regard, yes.