PDA

View Full Version : Human Weapon Kali Takedown Defense: Um what?



Pages : [1] 2 3

T3hJudoChop
11/27/2007 8:38pm,
So I was trying to find some Human Weapon clips on youtube, when I came across this one for a Kali takedown defense. All I could say is...uh...what?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTIrehTIGOA

Gaje tries to explain it at the end of this clip too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEc64UOOU6Q

So, like, am I missing something, or is this the crapple?

Seriously, what is it with the double leg takedown that makes people want to demonstrate it so poorly?

Virus
11/27/2007 8:56pm,
Yes, it's the crapple and it's going to be extremely difficult to pull off on a resisting opponent.

Letum
11/27/2007 9:03pm,
I never understood the stand and strike down principle or variations there of that some schools advocate, surely a human being launching himself at you is going to have alot more force then all that?

Sprawl FTW I'm afraid.

At a TKD seminar, whilst they were going over "grappling" I mentioned this, the response? "Have you seen the matadore against the bull?"...I'm still not sure exactly what he was implying.

Best grapple defence = a red cloak and dancing out of the way?

SFGOON
11/27/2007 9:07pm,
Although, if someone were bold enough to try to shake your hand, you could make short work of them with that move.

The Question
11/27/2007 9:47pm,
I'm gonna go out a limb and say that that is not teh crapple. No, that is not crappling at all.
It is an extremely valid takedown defense when coupled with a sprawl. I had it done to be repeatedly in training today. It's not fun.

Hex
11/27/2007 10:03pm,
Might be an okay defense against a shoot, but I don't see it "crushing veterbrae" as the video claims.

T3hJudoChop
11/27/2007 10:18pm,
I'm gonna go out a limb and say that that is not teh crapple. No, that is not crappling at all.
It is an extremely valid takedown defense when coupled with a sprawl. I had it done to be repeatedly in training today. It's not fun.

maybe if you dont know how to do a proper shoot, like shooting for the waist with your arms extended, then yeah, sure, it might work.

Although, since you have worked with it, how do you stop your opponent from sliding the head to the outside of the elbow?

The Question
11/27/2007 10:49pm,
Although, since you have worked with it, how do you stop your opponent from sliding the head to the outside of the elbow?

Keep your weight on them and wrap your wrist around their head/neck. It's not easy to simply pull way.

T3hJudoChop
11/27/2007 11:20pm,
Keep your weight on them and wrap your wrist around their head/neck. It's not easy to simply pull way.

I'm trying to see what you are saying, but based on the examples provided by Gaje, at what point are you wrapping your wrist around their head/neck? One arm is holding one of the "shooting arms" out, and the other arm is occupied with pushing the head or neck down with the forearm.

Really, the biggest offense is that the opponent isn't even attempting a takedown. Not even a level change? Honestly, it just looks like an aggressive hug. When you practice this, do you honestly shoot for your opponent's waist?

poidog
11/27/2007 11:40pm,
Really, the biggest offense is that the opponent isn't even attempting a takedown. Not even a level change? Honestly, it just looks like an aggressive hug. When you practice this, do you honestly shoot for your opponent's waist?
While I agree that the defense shown is NOT crappling, it is also NOT a valid defense against a trained grappler. It IS a valid defense against someone untrained in the technical takedown. Much like pure grapplers won't have the best knife attacks, FMA people will not have the best shoot. The defense was developed by FMA folk against getting tackled by other FMA folk.

It's not inherently bullshit, but against a dedicated grappler, it's not going to work. It would be a last resort technique for me. After a sprawl. And a stab. And another stab. And for good measure, a slice.

Aloha, Poi

EDIT (11/28/07): It has since been proven I am the incorrect. To see why, go to post #25. D'oh!!

T3hJudoChop
11/28/2007 8:56am,
While I agree that the defense shown is NOT crappling, it is also NOT a valid defense against a trained grappler. It IS a valid defense against someone untrained in the technical takedown. Much like pure grapplers won't have the best knife attacks, FMA people will not have the best shoot. The defense was developed by FMA folk against getting tackled by other FMA folk.

It's not inherently bullshit, but against a dedicated grappler, it's not going to work. It would be a last resort technique for me. After a sprawl. And a stab. And another stab. And for good measure, a slice.

Aloha, Poi

Sorry Poi, I don't buy that explanation. Gaje specifically mentions grapplers in his clip, even going so far as to say, that he is the one in control of the grappler who is going in for a takedown. He may be right about that part actually, since anyone who thinks a shot attacks the waist is already in trouble before they start.

Isn't takedown defense designed by people who don't normally do takedowns, or, at the very least, a double leg, a recipe for crappling?

We've heard it before: "X" grappling technique isn't designed for grapplers, but for untrained people. How good does that sound if we replace the term grappling with knife defense? "X" knife defense isn't designed for knife fighters, but for untrained people. It sounds even sillier.

wakinonioi
11/28/2007 9:32am,
That was sort of ridiculous...

Jack Rusher
11/28/2007 10:39am,
Sorry Poi, I don't buy that explanation.

I think he's right within a certain domain. We've seen this sort of thing from many instructors now. They re-define "shoot" to mean "tackle" and then demonstrate a reasonable way of defending a lazy tackle. The instructors are also right that the tackles they're likely to encounter in the wild look more like what's in the above videos than what happens at a wrestling tournament, which makes it difficult to convince them to train against the more effective but somewhat rarer shoot.

Cuchulain
11/28/2007 10:43am,
I think it's a valid defence against a lazy shoot. Which we see in all levels of fighting be it in the final round of a UFC bout or in Anthony vs Rudy or in a street fight.

T3hJudoChop
11/28/2007 11:45am,
I think he's right within a certain domain. We've seen this sort of thing from many instructors now. They re-define "shoot" to mean "tackle" and then demonstrate a reasonable way of defending a lazy tackle. The instructors are also right that the tackles they're likely to encounter in the wild look more like what's in the above videos than what happens at a wrestling tournament, which makes it difficult to convince them to train against the more effective but somewhat rarer shoot.

My problem is Gaje's very specific use of the word "grappler". I doubt Gaje is a stranger to the term and what it implies. But, assuming this is for a tackle, and not a shoot, to the waist at a low enough speed for you to weave your arm the way he recommends, it doesnt take much experience to simply rotate your head to the outside of the elbow and forearm.

selfcritical
11/28/2007 11:57am,
Gaje's weird like that. The only seminar i've been to with him the first day he covered some dumog, and when demoing the technique he always has people do the lazy tackle, arms outstretched, etc. Then as soon as we rep the technique he started yelling "no.....SHOOT!, and then showed the normal wrestling shoot, which then modified the technique". A lot of the dumog techs have a "just add sprawl" formula to them. I have neither seen nor tried this one. Most of the ones i've seen look like variations on a cow catcher.