Anti-Grappling

[7r14ngL3Ch0k3]

^ Great post.

[DickHardman]

^ Great post.

thanks, i appreciate it.

[Uke]

Whats your point with all this? What are you trying to prove?

And strikers(of any amount of skill, who have fought in any time era, against most kinds of grapplers) have gotten taken down right off the bat and put into a bad position then submitted. Not because they were tired, but because they lacked the grappling skill/ awareness. Plain and simple.

First off, why are you being hostile? We've talked about this before just recently. I'm not trying to prove a thing. Every post isn't meant to argue or prove something, so tone down the hostility and we'll remain civil.

[Tom Yum]

Mo Smith beat alot of top guys using striking. And Conan wasn't the best of them. He could have been tired or whatever, but he still got knocked out. I could say that the strikers only get submitted because they're all tired. They got beat because they got beat.

Pete Williams caught Coleman with a similar kick. Was Coleman tired?

No.

Conan never faced a striker on the same level as Mo Smith, who also developed a strong base in grappling defense from Shamrock.

Once the better strikers developed a base in grappling, they made grapplers play their game.

[7r14ngL3Ch0k3]

First off, why are you being hostile? We've talked about this before just recently. I'm not trying to prove a thing. Every post isn't meant to argue or prove something, so tone down the hostility and we'll remain civil.

Hahaha i wasnt being hostile. Funny how you just totally took that the wrong way. I just highlighted it in bold so you'd make sure to answer it.

Carry on........

[jubaji]

Well that would mean that you were wearing a T-shirt when you typed that because you and the rest of the ground grappling monkeys think thought that you'd "figured out" a way to nullify striking by laying on your asses and holding on like you were slow dancing.

I've never said that. Of course you have a proven track record of blatantly lying and fabricating so that's nothing new for you, ignorant punk.

All wrestlers and BJJ players thought grappling was undefeatable for quite some time.

Another lie, you pathetic sack of crap.

What I don't understand is why you call yourself a grappler. Grappling doesn't always end up on the ground.

Gee, ya don't say! Grapplers know what grappling is far better than you (of course).

And no Bunny, all striking is not anti-grappling.

Oh, I know. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST.

Just the strikes that lay you out when you're trying to use your famous grapplin' know-how.

That's just striking. Go return the T-shirt and get your money back.

Its not just striking either. It can be grappling too. Like when you try to use a triangle choke on someone on the street and they pick you up Quinton Jackson style and powerbomb you on a fire hydrant. Oh, but I guess someone of your caliber wouldn't fall prey to the mistakes that someone like Ricardo Arona would make, huh Bunny?

I've never put a triangle choke on someone on the street, but if conditions developed such that you found yourself in such a position, YOU would just shit yourself and cry. Don't kid yourself 'Jackson.'

First off, if you were to lay on the street, I'd stomp the shit out of you because shoes and boots are very hard.

Who would be more likely to "lay on the street"? Helpless little fish like you who are poorly equipped to prevent that condition. Again you kid yourself.

You miss a shot and I'm going to stomp your wrist, your neck, or your fingers. On a soft mat, that does little to no damage. On pavement, many of the ring friendly risks will have your ass in a sling.

LOL! Too funny. Lectures on the 'reality' of grappling in a 'street' situation from someone who has never done so. All of the problems of being on the ground are YOURS because you lack the ability to control that aspect of things.

A quick stomp to your ankles on the pavement would pay much more dividends than a low roundhouse to the leg while you're laying on your back.

Once again, YOU are more likely to be the one lying on his back. And I can't think of anyone more deserving...

There's no such thing as anti-grappling.

Correct.

[Uke]

No.

Conan never faced a striker on the same level as Mo Smith, who also developed a strong base in grappling defense from Shamrock.

Once the better strikers developed a base in grappling, they made grapplers play their game.

Thanks for the response, Tom. But when you write grappling defense, wouldn't that be the same as anti-grappling? Isn't it just semantics? Isn't anti-grappling or grappling defense a striker's method of preventing being taken to the ground and if by some chance he is using what he's got to get back up?

Its not limited to just strikes. It can be other grappling methods, but what distinguishes anti-grappling methods from regular grappling is that its goal is to get back to your feet while newaza grappling's goal is to keep you on the ground. No BJJ player struggles to get back up on his feet. Most MMA wrestlers want to keep you on the ground as well and ground and pound, because most throws don't work on the heavily padded floor of the mat or ring. Did you see Kevin Randleman suplex Fedor? I thought for sure that belly to back would have ended the match, but just like I've been saying, MMA negates a lot of the reality with its rules, ring and padding. Fedor got up immediately and won the match.

I digress. The point is that grapplers in MMA are really ground grapplers. They have no desire to get back to their feet and the aim of their techniques reflect that. Anti-grappling is nothing more than the skill set that prevents and deters takedown attempts and sweeps. But some idiots need to feel like their saying something by likening what I'm discussing to Emin Boztepe.

Helps Bunny feel important.

[BoarSpear]

Thanks for the response, Tom. But when you write grappling defense, wouldn't that be the same as anti-grappling? Isn't it just semantics? Isn't anti-grappling or grappling defense a striker's method of preventing being taken to the ground and if by some chance he is using what he's got to get back up?

Its not limited to just strikes. It can be other grappling methods, but what distinguishes anti-grappling methods from regular grappling is that its goal is to get back to your feet while newaza grappling's goal is to keep you on the ground. No BJJ player struggles to get back up on his feet. Most MMA wrestlers want to keep you on the ground as well and ground and pound, because most throws don't work on the heavily padded floor of the mat or ring...

I digress. The point is that grapplers in MMA are really ground grapplers. They have no desire to get back to their feet and the aim of their techniques reflect that. Anti-grappling is nothing more than the skill set that prevents and deters takedown attempts and sweeps. But some idiots need to feel like their saying something by likening what I'm discussing to Emin Boztepe.

Helps Bunny feel important.

Nicely summed up, again.

[jubaji]

you stink of fear, you fucking fraud

anti-grappling? Isn't it just semantics? Anti-grappling is nothing.

There ya go, champ.

[jubaji]

hey! free T-shirt!

what distinguishes anti-grappling methods from regular grappling is that

is that one exists and the other does not, one teaches the skills that gives someone real options in that range and the other gives a free T-shirt and an entirely false sense of security.

[Tom Yum]

Thanks for the response, Tom. But when you write grappling defense, wouldn't that be the same as anti-grappling? Isn't it just semantics? Isn't anti-grappling or grappling defense a striker's method of preventing being taken to the ground and if by some chance he is using what he's got to get back up? Anti-grappling is nothing more than the skill set that prevents and deters takedown attempts and sweeps.

But some idiots need to feel like their saying something by likening what I'm discussing to Emin Boztepe..

When you mention anti-grappling in the MA world, people liken it to Boztepe's anti-grappling methods because they are heavily marketed by that name and now has some brand-name recognition in both the TMA and MMA world.

Most people would call it what it is: takedown defense.

Likewise, if you say quarter pounder in context to food, most people will think of a hamburger. If you say we're going to have hamburgers, that does not mean one is going to get quarter pounders.

Anti-grappling is a subset of takedown defenses, particular to and marketed by Boztepe's WT system and not judo, wrestling or shuajiao systems.

[DickHardman]

if a girl scout was to come to ukes house, im pretty sure she would probobly be able to sell him every box of cookies she had.

[jubaji]

if a girl scout was to come to ukes house, im pretty sure she would probobly be able to sell him every box of cookies she had.

and kick his ass.

[Uke]

When you mention anti-grappling in the MA world, people liken it to Boztepe's anti-grappling methods because they are heavily marketed by that name and now has some brand-name recognition in both the TMA and MMA world.

Most people would call it what it is: takedown defense.

Likewise, if you say quarter pounder in context to food, most people will think of a hamburger. If you say we're going to have hamburgers, that does not mean one is going to get quarter pounders.

Anti-grappling is a subset of takedown defenses, particular to and marketed by Boztepe's WT system and not judo, wrestling or shuajiao systems.

Actually, its not just takedown defense. I just above explained that if in the event you find yourself on the ground, the anti-grappling skill set is not limited to grappling and you can use whatever you've got to get up.

The focus here is to get up on your feet and be mobile and ready. I understand that Boztepe has created his own set of anti-grappling skills, but anti-grappling existed before Boztepe and after. It does have very strong ties to Shuai Chiao as they're knowledge of stand-up grappling is far superior to BJJ and wrestling. Boarspear mentioned that Baqua had excellent anti-grappling and one of China's greatest grapplers advocated it. You are basically obsessing over the trademarked name, not the concepts or the techniques. Continuously likening anti-grappling to Wing Tsun's techniques doesn't hurt me, it just limits your own understanding of its history and development.

But that's par for the course on this forum.

Call it what you like, but what's important is that grappling is becoming less and less effective as people analyze and counter it. In just the mid-90's grapplers were dominant and strikers couldn't solve the guard. A year or two later What gave grappling its 15 minutes of fame was the Gracies, and the fact that strikers didn't know how to avoid takedowns and get out of the guard.

The 15 minutes is up. And that's why ground grapplers are reduced to preaching that:

"Most people don't train and most people don't carry weapons".

Keep believing that.

[SamuraiGuy]

Uke, your point about Quinton Jackson and Ricardo Arona is a little off....

For whatever reason I want to clarify this.

While Ricardo Arona is a better grappler than ANYONE on this forum, underhooking the leg isnt something you have to be on his level to know. That is all he had to do to prevent Rampage from molesting him. It's really... really not complicated at all... so this getting slammed by someone is easily avoidable... the question is if you remember to do it, which obviously Arona didnt.

Second, not everyone is Rampage, a man described by Matt Lindland as having "Insanely powerful hips" now lindland being a olympic silver medalist in wrestling and rampage not having wrestled in highschool, you'd think Lindland would put quinton down with no problem, when they fought this wasnt the case.

The point is not everyones like, or even close to Rampage in terms of strength/hip strength/slamming ability. And you dont have to be a ADCC champ to underhook a leg.

I dont care about the rest of your argument, just wanted to point out this isnt a valid point.