No Mat: Who does it affect?

**Goju - Joe** · Posted On: 8/31/2006 11:51pm

Seriously though any throwing art should be trained on some sort of mats.

**ONE TWO THREE FOUR FIVE** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 6:17am

If we're going to debate the subject of wether or not grappling and takedowns should be trainned without a mat I'm going to have to throw my vote in for "Once in a while" If you have an interest in Self Defence stuff. Don't think it'll do much harm and it's fairly educational.

**Schwarde** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 7:23am

Throws should be trained on mats. But, once in a while it does a body good to practice falling without them. The mat tells your body what it wants to hear... the wooden floor of the dojo will let you know if you're falling properly real quick

**Kayne** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 8:12am

Yeah. A good, hard drop-knee throw onto a non-padded surface? Frankly I'd rather be the attacker; the sack-er rather than the sack-ee.

**Tom Kagan** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 10:42am

Originally Posted by eyebeams

You normally don't get long term injuries from direct impact alone, but from bad weight distribution and stress on the joints.

You know, I've thought about this for a while, but I still can't make sense of what you meant by "bad weight distribution". Could you elaborate? Perhaps you meant "muscular imbalance"?

**Teh El Macho** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 12:15pm

I'd say it greatly favors the attacker, in particular if the attacked does not know how to defend from a takedown or throw... or even better (for the attacker), if he does not know how to breakfall.

Takedowns and throws must be trained in mats. No questions about it IMO. Doing otherwise is just an unnecessary risk that yields very little benefit.

You really don't want to slam your knee on the mat when shooting for a takedown, but if it happens, it happens. Same if it to be done without mats, like in the d334dly street, with the glass and lava :tongue3: But again, if it happens it happens. The knee is a very hard thing, and you have to impact it very strongly to incur in damage, which you could even on a mat. That's just one example.

Anyways, I voted #1. It ain't the same to be at the receiving end of a takedown or throw without a mat as opposed to have one that (somewhat) cushions your falling ass.

**Zing!** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 12:49pm

For training, it only benefits the ibuprofen manufacturers, because the idea of training isn't to injure your opponent by judo-tossing him onto concrete. It's to learn; and you can't learn if you're too bruised to train.

But to play along, it greatly favors the attacker because, if the attacker goes to the ground too, he is generally able to plan his trip to the ground and partially land on the other guy.

If you're practicing takedowns without mats, you deserve whatever injuries you receive.

**bodhistate** · Posted On: 9/01/2006 2:42pm

Training without mats requires a great deal of control and correct form to avoid injury. You might not break your knee hitting it into concrete, but you sure can **** it up, same for wrists, elbows, and ankles. Impact damage depends on speed, force, the material you are hitting, how many times, etc, but it only takes one bad landing on a hard surface to maim and cripple you.

I've seen people throw themselves (getting a good three feet of clearance) in side and front falls onto concrete, as well as rolls from height (jumping over someone 5-6 feet tall and rolling out of it), and anyone whose scene Parkour knows it is possible, but they practiced falling and rolling a whole shitload first.

**Dr._Tzun_Tzu** · Posted On: 9/02/2006 1:31am

I really don't understand your poll, and the Middle one about tactics was a non-answer, the last one was an easy way out, and so that left Pro or Con. I really can't see someone having "tactics" in training. Tactics are used in combat.

TRAINING is obviously the trick question. But you refer to who does it "favor". Is training a contest? I hope partner training improves both peoples skills in every drill. o wait you may mean "sparring", but that is really more like Fighting then training. So your question only works if you mean sparring or fighting for real.

I think it must be cross Training contests between a mat trained grappler and hard floor trained striker, all things being equal (and each never training on the others surface), the Hardfloors have an advantage. and being training, the Grappler is further disadvantaged because he shouldn't be slamming his partner on the hard floor.

Same would go against a floor trained striker on a mat. I guess you could even flip it and have a grappler trained only on hardfloors and a striker only trained on matts? but thats stupid, or two strikers on a hard floor? obvious

What if its two grapplers TRAINING on a hardfloor? Who has the advantage there?

What if they both traing the same program at the same gym? is there an advatage at all? Its the same training?

Now if it was a Fight, on hard floor, it would just be about tactics, and neither would have an advantage because of the surface.

**Teh El Macho** · Posted On: 9/02/2006 12:14pm

On second thought, some training on a non-padded surface would be useful. But that sort of training should be limited to breakfalls and shoots (wearing knee pads of course). Throwing or taking your partner down on a hard surface is too much of a risk for your partner and the dividents you get are minimal.

What you have to be concerned in a hard surface is how to breakfall at worse. It would go without saying that sacrifice throws are not the first choice if and when you need to take somebody down.

The greatest concern when throwing somebody on hard surfaces is that you may go down with him, and in that case, you want to make sure your elbows and knees don't "stick out", but that's something pple already do in a mat.

In summary, breakfalls on hard surfaces may be a good idea. Anything else is not since the risks are too high and the rewards too minimal.