Striking v. Grappling as a base for self-defense/MMA

[dastars]

I know it's a timeless topic, but hopefully this will have a slightly different angle.  I'm curious to see what you all think is a more important foundational knowledge for self-defense or MMA competition; striking or grappling. 

I'm of the opinion that grappling, while limited in multiple-attacker environments, is an inevitable part of most fights (unless you hit like a truck, which I don't), and is far less intuitive than the stand-up/striking element.  It seems to me that if you don't know what you're doing on your feet, you can swing your fists and feet and do some damage; once a fight gets grounded, it's more complicated, and harder to just intuitively respond.

Thoughts?

[sifutimg]

Yup, definately a timeless topic but a good one however.  So many opinions.  What comes to me here is both striking and grappling are both important, but striking is the priority in my humble opinion.  Not training-wise but strategy-wise.  A few black belts I know went and trained the grappling stuff and they noticed that it trained the strikes out of them with the various rules and goals of grabbing, controlling, and submittal.  These places were however very focused on the judo/jujitsu aspects unlike what you find in the mixed martial crowd.  I agree that many fights do in fact go to the ground and your training should include both aspects at a high level, but as a strategy in the moment I prioritize striking.  However if you have the likes of Sigung Bono across from you, I would run and run fast.

Cheers,
Sigung Tim Gagnier

[KajuJKDFighter]

This is a very tough question. I feel it is much harder to be an effective striker then an effective grappler.  I can teach someone to be self reliant on the ground in months, but a great striker takes years to develop.  Those of you that know me know me know my base is stand up, boxing most of my life since a kid. I have also been teaching grappling arts for about 15 yrs or so.  I teach to strike on the ground and use it efficiently so as not to waste your energy and lose position or base.  I would say almost all the schools of grappling I have seen or had contact with their students have really taught no striking at all.  I feel a moderate grappler can take a great striker with no grappler experience to the ground with relative ease, which would be big trouble for the striker if he couldn't get back up. With a little ground defense a good striker could defend the takedown or at least survive the ground work from submission, strike back or maybe get up.  Striking though in reality few in techniques in compared to grappler is tough to master.  Grappling with the thousands of techniques is easier to learn with even a little effort put in.  Training strikes is much harder on the body.  Kickbox a couple times a week and your are banged up (if your really training), you can grapple daily and rarely have injury.  Endurance is a huge factor but much more of a factor in MMA fights since the skill of the fighters and rules keeps the fights going much longer then your average 30 second street fight....So where was I...oh yeh, knock 'em out, if you can't, go to the ground and knock 'em out, or choke them or break a joint...Then go home and have two cold ones.  One for your bumps one for your belly......

[Hokuto Shinken]

Good to be here.  I am a beginner kajukenbo-ka (sp?), but a journeyman martial artist.  Thanks for reading my two cents worth .  I believe the foundational base for MMA and self-defense does not necessarily have to be the same.
 
With self defense applications, I think you need to go with a striking base.  A lot of the problems I see with grappling is that there would be too many X factors when applying it to a self defense situation.  Mobility, and perhaps the necessary speed to escape, are lost.  As mentioned earlier, you lose the ability to defend against multiple attacks.  There are no mats and rules, so you'll more than likely be on concrete with your opponent biting you in the calf if you ever try an armbar.

With MMA, you can go with either, as natural strengths and weaknesses will differ.  For example, I'm naturally a better grappler than a striker.  In fact, I consider myself a horrid striker.  So I would probably benefit more from using grappling as a base, and focusing more on learning how to defend a striker than learning how to strike.

However, I think what is true for both MMA and self-defense is you must be able to take a hit, which was touched upon by Todd Reiner earlier.  Tyson said it best: "Every fighter's got a plan until they get hit in the mouth."  If you don't have the composure and discipline to take a hit, you will panic and forget your training.  Once the training is peeled away, all you have left is your instinct.  And for some people, that instinct may tell them to RUN. 

One recent example I can think of comes from Pride FC's Total Elimination 2005.  In the bout between Sakuraba and Yoon Don Sik (an Olympic caliber judoka), Sakuraba landed a good combo on Yoon in the first minute of the fight, Yoon panicked, went down on all fours, and covered up, then Sakuraba went in for the kill.  Fight over.

[sleddog]

I have come to believe that a combination of abilities is necessary for success in MMA. Not just "grappling" but wrestling (free style) for take downs and body control, Jui Jitsu (I prefer Brazilian, but not necessarily) or submission wrestling for their attacks to submission, and striking from either Muay Thai or boxing for the sparring and ring savy. Anything else can be added as well and a specific training methodology to tie them all together. Physical training is extremely important starting with cardio fitness but including resistance training and muscular endurance. I think fighters would improve incredibly if they worked with a kinesiologist that could evaluate the strengths and weaknesses and treat them accordingly. Plyometric training is important for developing explosive power (ask any power lifter) which is an asset in the ring.

Self defense skills should be evaluated and trained the same way. Evaluate your strengths and improve upon them. Same with the weaknesses. If you think that someone won't grab you during a fight, what do you do if they do? I think that principles are more important that techniques. Spar with contact to condition you to the possibility of getting hit.

I do have a practical frame of reference. I am presently involved with an MMA team (BTT-Canada) and we have about 10 fighters at the moment fighting in various shows such as UFC, IFC, TKO and APEX. Our best known fighter is George St Pierre. He beat Frank Trigg at the last UFC.

[ZDawson]

Why does this have to be an “and/or” question. Training for a physical confrontation is always a challenge. If you train in a range from the worse situation possible; its dark, wet, your on a hill in the middle of the street, the guys you are facing are killers. To the best situation possible, Good light, indoors with flat matted floor, and your facing a friend. In doing this you develop a set of tools. The tools as I see them are: striking (hand-kicks), ground work, standup grapple (breakaways–throws). After you have developed these tools the hard part becomes which tool to use this time. This is often situation based. You have to ask the right questions; who is your opponent? What is the environment? Is this one on one or will others join in? What level of force do I need to control the situation?  How much time do you have? Often these decisions have to be made in a spit second.  Ground work is a tool. Striking is a tool. You would not use a hammer to do the work of a screw driver. A friend of yours is drunk at his bachelor party; he’s going to drive away. You’re trained only in Boxing. So you smash him in the face and he hits his head on the curb. An arm bar may have worked a little better. You’re walking though an alley, three men walk up to you with knives. You trained in Ju Jitsu; you grab the first one for a hip throw. The others stab you and your dead. Kajukenbo is the equivalent to a martial arts tool box. It allows you to develop the right tool for the right situation at the right time. So train as the name implies Ka(Karate)Ju(Jujitsu/Judo)Ken(Kenpo)Bo(Kung Fu). Become a well rounded problem solver. Not a one dimensional fighter.

[Danjo]

I have to agree with what Loren Christensen said about this. He said that none of his fights have ever gone to the ground, but that it would behoove anyone to learn enough grappling skills to be able to deal with it if it was necessary. He sugested learning a grappling MA until you had earned at least one belt rank worth of ability. Even in the MMA bouts these days, the fight often goes to the ground, but it very often ends with pounding/strikes on the ground, so elbows, palm heel strikes etc. are very useful tools.

[Trent Sera]

I think this question depends on a lot of different things.  First of all, I think the person's body type and their natural athletic ability makes a big difference if the person should have a striking base or a grappling base.  I think taller people have a definite advantage in striking because of their reach advantage.  Natural athletic ability is another major factor because speed and agility are two things that can be developed but to be really fast with your hands or feet or be super agile is more of a god-given gift.  For example, no matter how much the average Joe trains, he is not going to have the hand speed of professional boxers.  So, if you are taller and naturally fast and agile, I think you should be a striker.  But, if you are shorter and have average speed, you should be a grappler.

For MMA, you definitely have to be proficient at both striking and grappling.  The best MMA fighters in the world are all well-rounded with striking and grappling. I think the fighters who are exceptional strikers and good grapplers are the ones that are the best right now.  Fighters like Chuck Liddell.  Fedor Emelianenko, Andrei Arlovski, Shogun, BJ Penn, etc.  The fights start standing so if the striker can keep it there it is to his advantage.  The grapplers have to execute a takedown to get it to their advantage, but it is easier to defend against takedowns than to be able to pull one off especially when the other guy knows how to defend and is trying to knock you out.

However, I think overall grapplers have an advantage in MMA because it is a lot harder to defend chokes, joint locks, and strikes on the ground.  The reason is because your opponent has control of you and there is so little space to defend yourself in.  Against strikers, you can easily move out of range of the strikes because your opponent doesn't have control of you.

For self-defense, I am gonna assume that the attackers are average Joe's who don't train but know how to initiate attacks.  I think striking is definitely better because all it takes is a couple of seconds to get in a good strike and end the attack.  A grappler would have to take the person down and do his moves which would take a lot longer.  In self-defense situations where there are multiple attackers, striking is definitely better.  How would you defend yourself if you are tied up with another guy on the ground?

Just to let you know my background, I have trained in Kajukenbo since 1985 and BJJ since 1995.  Mahalo from Maui.

[Mitch Powell]

Greetings,

I often hear the term "going to the ground" associated with MMA events. What should be said is "going to the mat." Most UFC and other MMA events protect their fighters by having a mat to fall on. That mat has done as much as anything to promote MMAs. If the fights were held on a street, roadway, cement, etc., I think intentionally going to the ground would be rare.

If my work at OPD has taught me anything, it's this. if you hurt them first with a strike or kick, it's a lot easier to apply a lock, control hold, throw, etc. to take them down.

Also, ground and pound is the quickest way to overcome and attacker. Speed is important when you fight. Locking is benefical at certain times, but can be too time consuming. Controlling a person with a hold is great until you get tired of holding on to them. When it's you drunk uncle at a party, a lock may be all you need. When it's some crack-head that just pulled a knife you need to destroy them as fast a possible-that means punching, elbowing, chopping, slapping, kicking or kneeing.

[supertim2003]

Prof. Powell and others have made a great point regarding going to the ground in a street fight situation.  In my younger more reckless days I found myself in a number of fights with maybe two of them going to the ground.  My point is in street defense very few people are interested in hitting the concrete intentionally or otherwise.  Grappling skill is great, but if both fighters are of about the same skill level the bigger man has a huge advantage (no weight classes in the street).  MMA I think the grappler have a big advantage and in pretty much all the weight classes from middle weight and down are dominated by men who's strength is grappling.  Chuck Liddell really is the first light heavy in some years who has held the belt as a great striker, but I think the UFC would be more interesting if they broke the fighters a little sooner when they are on the mats.

[KajuJKDFighter]

You just have to know both.  If your not skilled in the ground work you are easy to get to the ground.  If your a skilled striker you can strike if you end up there also....work those weak points till you have to change and work another weak point because you got so good at it.....

[Dean Goldade]

You just have to know both.  If your not skilled in the ground work you are easy to get to the ground.  If your a skilled striker you can strike if you end up there also....work those weak points till you have to change and work another weak point because you got so good at it.....

I have to agree. You can't focus on just one or the other.

 - You might be a great grappler, but if you want to get to a striker, you better know enough about striking to get close enough to take him down, or you will end up sleeping.

 - You might be a great striker, but if for some reason you end up on the ground, you better know enough to buy time and survive and then know how to get back to your feet. You also better know how to strike from the ground.

To take it even further you really need to be proficient in all the ranges. The more you understand about long range striking and kicking, CQC elbows knees, headbutts, and joint locking, Ground fighting, and weapons the better prepared you will be for the real deal.

I train and try to teach my students how to use firearms, how to strike and kick, how to lock and throw, how to groundfight, and how to use impact and edged weapons... I am always out searching for better ways and working with different people to learn more, so I can pass it on to my students. The more you know about the different tactics, the better prepared you are to defend against them.

Once you understand the ranges, you will most likely have a favorite, but at least you will be functional in the rest of them.

Just my .02

Keep up the hard training.

Dean.

[KajuJKDFighter]

As you know Dean I stress the four ranges (kicking, punching, trapping, grappling and weapons; stick and knife) but though I have trained fairly extensively in guns and shooting I hadn't incorporated it for students untill recently. It was very well received and fun.....You always need to be searching for your students educations...............that's our jobs as teachers.....

[Dean Goldade]

As you know Dean I stress the four ranges (kicking, punching, trapping, grappling and weapons; stick and knife) but though I have trained fairly extensively in guns and shooting I hadn't incorporated it for students untill recently. It was very well received and fun.....You always need to be searching for your students educations...............that's our jobs as teachers.....

Brother, you have always inspired me to be well rounded. I didn't think much of grappling, till you tied me up in knots.. :-) Now I love it. You run a top notch show at your place, all your guys and gal's are tough and walk the walk. I strive to do the same, and leave a good group of students and instructors to lead the pack in the future. I truly feel fortunate to have a like minded brother to bounce ideas off of, and to learn from. Thanks...

When you step outside the box and really see what you need, and what you are lacking it is one of the most discouraging and enlightening moments you can have... You just gotta have balls enough to go get what you don't have, and continue to improve. I don't think I will ever feel like I know enough. I just love this stuff too much...

Keep up the hard training brother

Dean.

[KajuJKDFighter]

Nice to hear your comments Dean, I couldn't agree any more.  Really if your a martial artist that wants to be progressive you need to evaluate your skills in all ranges and levels and find out where the weak links are then work them till they are strong.  Then  start the process again till the day your gone and training in a different place.....though I here Bruce is still teaching....

"Your Tombstone will have two dates on it, but it's the dash in the middle that matters the most."