What are some thoughts on a system of traditional jujitsu that places an extremely small emphasis on ground fighting and a much larger emphases on standing locks and pain compliance techniques? Has this type of system ever been proven and if this type of teaching was mixed with a striking art would it make for a well rounded martial artist? Just curious on what you guys think.
LEOs etc love standing compliance techniques. However you need to practice ground grappling, clinch, and striking with aliveness (in addition to come-alongs, joint takedowns, standing holds etc) in order to be well rounded.
This is actually somewhat similar to my karate training. We don't do judo randori, but otherwise the bases are covered for those who want it.
If you dont have a good ground game, then you are NOT a well rounded martial artist. In my past experiences standing joint locks have not been the most effective.(just my opinion)
Originally Posted by sharkattack4173
Standing jointlocks are by definition not as effective as ground jointlocks. I don't have the ground to pin you against, and it's very difficult to use my legs to control you. I have less than half the control over you.
Originally Posted by hoodedmonk
However, they are both necessary and somewhat effective when used against untrained people. A standing Kimura (as a push or as a lock), Americana, or straight armbar (with the armpit or the forearm) are all very much harder to make work against a knowledgeable, resisting opponent, but it can still be made to work. Think of the standing entry to Kimura that the Gracie Killer used.
Same goes for bent wristlocks. If I know about them, or squirm out in time, they're worthless. But it can be a good option as a LEO/corrections officer/social worker.
Know this: I am arguing for the worth of these techniques ONLY as a complement to alive training.
67 words. Cutting it a bit close arn't you?
Originally Posted by sharkattack4173
I do JJJ. What system are you refering too?
I have made use of it. No I do not have vids, no I don't care if you believe me. There are strikes in JJJ, some styles are more like Karate, mine is based more on Judo. Strikes tend to encourage complience rather than damage, but can be modified if need be.
I find these comments interesting, I only ask because I cant recall ever seeing such a technique employed in an MMA match. These techniques do however seem effective against an untrained attacker.
The only standing-finish submissions in MMA are guillotines AFAIK. There's a good article in Asian Journal of Martial Arts (they changed their website so NO LINK FOR YOU!) that semi-statistically broke down what techniques worked in MMA. Basically it proved that 1) sub grappling, 2) "traditional" BJJ-style grappling, 3) ground and pound, and 4) (kick)boxing won everything.
If you count stuff that starts standing and ends up on the ground, then Kimuras, flying triangles, flying armbars, ankle locks...lots of stuff happens in MMA.
Waki-gatame, hara-gatame, etc don't happen in MMA for the same reason that RNCs don't finish while standing--you have more control with the ground, and your legs, in use. Plus, pain compliance doesn't work against professional fighters because...well...they don't care and they know how to escape effectively. They don't overextend, and they know how to stay facing the opponent.
This is a good example of Errant's consistent message that street vs. sport is a false dichotomy.
Are you training for self defense, or are you training to fight (competition)? They are very different scenarios with very different strategies. Self defense means to do only what is necessary to get yourself out of a bad situation; in other words, avoid or shorten a confrontation. In a self defense situation, the last place you want to be is on the ground, so the ground work should only emphasize the minimum necessary to deal with the situation if you are taken down. Most traditional forms of Japanese Jujitsu are taught for self defense, not competition.
If your goal is to learn to fight, that is, prove yourself against a comparable fighter, then you had better get very good at the ground game. Most matches start with a few punches, then a clinch, then it goes to the ground, and that's where it stays until somebody wins. So, as long as you can be sure he doesn't have a weapon or a few friends that want to join in on the action, go ahead and have some fun rolling around on the ground. A good wrestling program will serve you well.
Self defense and competitive style fighting are two totally different aspects of the martial arts. You need to decide which one you want to do, then pick a style that fits your goals. I don't care what anyone says, in my 35 years of experience and training in many different styles of martial arts, there is not one single martial art out there that is perfectly suited for both.
You are wrong. Sport vs. self-defense is not a valid dichotomy in martial training.
"You are wrong".
Hmm, a bold statement from a karateka.
Oh well, everyone to his opinion. His points seem quite OK to me. I'm only curious as to why his first post is in this forum rather than in Newbietown, where we might get to know something more re his 35 years of experience.