Posted on 03/03/2004 9:55:00 AM PST by Willie Green
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:35:34 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Webster's New College Dictionary defines 'submit' as 1. To surrender or yield oneself to the will or authority of another. 2. To subject to a condition or process. 3. To commit to the consideration or judgment of another.
In Bill Vucick's world, the definition of submit can be slightly more graphic: straddling an opponent who is flat on his back, unloading rounds of punches to his face until it bleeds like well-tenderized raw chuck.
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
Wonder if the military has any training like that.
There were some fantastic matches, big guys taken out by little guys, or where the guy who looks like he was losing all of a sudden gets the other guy in some funky hold and makes him tap out.. great stuff man.
SHAME ON YOU Willie Green for bringing up this neanderthal subject on such an intellectual website :)
I'm pretty sure I'd rather be a spectator than one of the participants.
Yep, thats what I meant. Most of the fights I ever had were such things, one on one I mean. On the streets though, you gotta hit and run. Sh*t, to be honest, if it comes down to multiple attackers, my martial art of choice would be "aim well, pull trigger"...
That's true, some martial artists like Brazilian Jujitsu may dismiss the claim...but, HEY! Combat works...weeds/willows 'em out....It always depends the variables "the situation..the distance..the ground...etc."
The Savate guy ended up in the finals against a UFC legend (and winner of most of their tourneys) Royce Gracie. A Brazilian practitioner of Jujitsu and weighing in at only 185, Gracie was probably the best martial artist I've ever seen. .....completely neutralizing the strengths of guys much larger than himself using primarily grappling techniques. It was amazing to watch.
As he reloaded, Pryor felt a foot brush up against his boot. At first, he thought it was another American. It wasn't. An al-Qaeda fighter struck Pryor hard from behind. The blow, possibly from a wooden board, dislocated Pryor's shoulder and broke his collarbone.
The fighter jumped on Pryor's back and clawed at his face, tearing off his night-vision goggles.
Pryor had only a single thought: You're not going to kill me. "That's how I attack things," he says later.
With one good arm, Pryor grabbed his enemy by the hair. But the man's weight, combined with the 80 pounds of Army gear that Pryor wore, caused the two to fall. They landed on Pryor's left elbow, and the impact jammed his shoulder back into its socket.
Now he could fight with both hands. In a few desperate seconds, Pryor broke the man's neck and finished him with a 9mm pistol.
Worked pretty good for him. I don't really have any experience, but my understanding is you don't plan on rolling with the guy for minutes/hours- take him down, choke him out, or break part of him.
From my limited experience in "stand up" martial arts, I think the techniques in grappling/fist & foot MAs both assume a) surprise, and b) unfamiliarity on the part of your opponent with what you intend to do.
In everything from boxing, to MuayThai, to no holds barred, the competitors dance around for a while, feeling each other out- trying to get shots in w/out taking one themselves.
In a self defense situation, I would think you'd commit with maximum energy right off the bat- Hit first, hit often...and cheat!
my $.02 from a guy with yellow belts from four different schools *grin*
the only effective gun control...any other measure leaves the populace @ risk.
If there are multiple attackers and they have guns, the ultimate defense is to avoid the situation proactively, if that fails run away as fast as you can, and if that is impossible, have your own gun. There is no martial art that handles the situation you describe so it is not really fair to criticize grappling for this reason.
I do think that the UFC has gravitated to grappling for two principal reasons: (1) it is fairly easy to take an opponent off balance and take a one-on-one fight to the ground--once there, grapplers tend to prevail; and (2) the rules ban some of the more effective martial arts techniques from other disciplines like eye-gouges, throat strikes and the like. Eye gouges in particular make closing and taking a fight to the ground a very risky proposition. But in the UFC, grapplers don't have to weigh that risk.
Mind you, I think these are good rules. But they tilt the balance in favor of grapplers. Other than lock two guys in the octagon until one of the two is unconscious, dead or sumbits with no rules, there is no way to judge the 'ultimate' empty-hand fighting technique for street combat. Any rules will always favor one approach or the other.
I think one reason grappling prevails is that, for the longest time, it has been the most underrated fighting style, except for those "in the know". In other parts of the world, with far less rules in no holds barred fights, grappling STILL tends to dominate. Its just a damn good system, in a one-on-one fight. What often happens though is that grappling is used primarily, grapplers in this arena can stay away from most hits. However, while moving around and grappling, if they see an "in", they will take it, and strike (punch, chop, kick), often with devastating effect.
I saw one fight where the guys were grappling on the floor, the guy on top got up for a second, charges back, RIGHT INTO THE KICK of the guy on the floor. Almost killed him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.