The predictability of MMA

They are known as the Big Four: Boxing, Kickboxing, Wrestling, and Brazilian Jujitsu. There are ,amu mixed martial arts fans would love for us to believe that all you need is the Big Four, and you will have all of the techniques that you need for MMA or self-defense. Nopw you know that I am over this like a cheap suit on a skinny man :) I am actually enjoying this as I type. After all, if may quote Popeye " I am what I am and thats all that I am."

OOOOOkay. First of all, MMA pundits tell us that MMA( or NHB as it was known in its infancy) was the ultimate expression of real street effectiveness in martial arts. It was style versus style. The undeniable truth in their eyes. First, jujitsu wizard Royce Gracie laid waste to a host of skilled(and not so skilled) fighters. So jujitsu, Brazillian Jujitsu is in. Then, some high level wrestlers( Dan Severn, Mark Coleman, Kevin Randleman, and a host of others) learned that if they could stuff a jujitsu man's takedowns, they would not fall prey to submission attempts. Wrestling is definitely in.

BBBBBUTTT, what to do now that you are both standing and staring at each other. Oh yeah, you punch and maybe even kick them. Boxing is a popular sport in America, and certainly proven for its effectiveness in an above the waist, fistic encounter. Plus Mike Tyson, Roy Jones jr. and Oscar De La Hoya were providing some serious evidence of the finesse involved in the "sweet science." Boxing was sooo in.

To handle the devastating effectiveness of the true heavy hitters out there, someone remembered that often times a good kick will end the fight, or at least keep a skilled puncher so off balance that they cannot land their haymakers. Less getting punched in the head? They loved it, so kickboxing was now in as well. Thai boxing seemed to be among the most effective and simple of the kickboxing systems, so throw it in the mix, because MMA was all about the speed of the learning curve.

Whew!! We have everything covered. MMA gyms are popping up all over the country. They teach the Big Four (BF from now on) and off into the MMA mix they go. We know their names: Militech, Chute Box, Lion's Den, Dragon's Lair, the Top Teams (American and Brazillian) and a variety of others.

Many school and many fighters produced some highly skilled fighters. They had refined and evolved in the MMA sense of the word. An interesting gumbo of results began to surface. You had world champion Bjj players being stalemated and arm-locked by bjj purple belts. Check out the Roberto Traven and Frank Mir fight. You had highly skilled wrestlers being outscrambled in the submission game. Check out Frank Shamrock versus Olympic Gold medallist Kevin Jackson. You had pro boxers being knocked out by grapplers. Check out Jens Pulver versus Takanori Gomi. MMA practitoners were gloating and grinning like the Cheshire cat in the face of any traditional martial artist they could find. After all, this was all the proof they needed. The traditional martial arts were on their way out we were told. Man, would it ever end? YUP. Something started happening along the way. People started to win with techniques that were NOT a part of the BF. Check out the way Shonie Carter sent Matt Serra to the land of "who and where am I" by way spinning back fist. Look at Kazushi Sakuraba's humbling of Vitor Belfort with not one but two spinning back kicks to the body. And lastly, look at the way the hammerfist is being used to break the grip of a person resisting an armlock. OR look specifically at the Ricardo Arona versus Mauricio "Shogun" Rua. Rua send Arona to talk to the Sandman( in Portuguese I would presume) by way of a mounted hammerfist.

"Anthony, where are you going with all of this?" you may ask. Anthony is all about telling you. See, the only real difference in the efficacy of traditonal martial arts, and the BF is the intensity and focus with which you train. Now that traditional martial artists are taking advantage of the amazing leaps in athletic science, the only differences between the combative skills of MMA guys and traditional artists is the philosophical component. Shall I toss in a few more examples? Okay, you win. How about David Louiseau's fight-ending spinning back kicks? How about Patrick Smith punting Rudgard Moncayo into the next time zone by way of front kick. How about when Karo Parisian puts on his in fight judo clinics against some of the UFC's best, notably, welterweight standout Diego Sanchez? Okay, I am done gloating I think :)

What I am saying is simple folks.If all you have is a limited toolbox of fighting techniques, sooner rather than later, the counters for the techniques, and your personal preferences, will be discovered, and exploited. That is why one can often see a much less skilled but noticeably more athletic fighter win out over technicain with limited tools. For all of you traditional guys turned MMA, look back into your traditonal roots. You may find more answers there than you think. And thinking one step ahead of your opponent will only help you. That is is folks, I am gonna head out of here. I am suffering from a serious apple juice jones these days. Gotta feed the monster :)

The standing clinch, and why you need it

My beloved readers. Both of you :)

Ya know what? I made a really interesting observation the other day. In most traditional martial arts, there seems to be a still-standing divide between the standup artists, and the grappling artists. I am not going to go down the road of which is better, we have beaten that to death. But I am going to to make a suggestion that I think we should all heed. Myself included. I have begun my way down the path that I am suggesting. I don't want you to think I am a hypocrite.

The tried and true method of takedown in freestyle wrestling and in mixed martial arts is the double leg takedown. It is so popular because it is in fact so effective. It takes the least amount of energy and is very difficult to defend when the opponent is unsuspecting. It can also lead to very punishing impact that can knock the wind out of your opponent. See Tito Ortiz versus Evan Tanner for illustration.

Now, that works very well in MMA, Judo and in wrestling matches. The mats are soft enough so that you can change levels very easily with minimal risk. Plus, you are loose, limber and ready to rumble in those situations. But let us look at the flip side shall we? You know that I am ALL about realistic self-defense, so here I am trying to help you out.

The old double leg, as stated is very effective in taking someone to the ground. Ideal maybe in a one on one situation. But most of us know that the days of mano a mano, one on one fighting has gone by the wayside. And the problem with the double leg is that it can leave you very vulnerable. You will be on the ground with little ability to see the world around you.

What then, would keep a friend of the person that you are fighting from booting you into outer space? Or worse yet, pulling a tire iron, bat, or knife? While statistically this represents a smaller percentage of fight situations, it is not so small that we should not consider the possibility. I contend that the greatest grappler that I have ever seen, Rickson Gracie could in fact be waylayed by two average fighters in the streets. Now before you start burning my effigy in public places, hear me out. Without a doubt, Rickson would take one of the knuckleheads to the ground with little effort, and be well on his way to mounting and pounding, or securing a fight-ending choke. While this would take him only a few seconds to secure, it would be more than enough time for someone to come and land a crushing blow with a foot or other weapon. End of fight, off to night night time.

But I dare say that I have a more favorable option. Instead of opting for the simpler and decidedly cooler looking double leg takedown, I would recommend a standing clinch tie-up. Now the beauty of the standing clinch, made ever so obvious by Greco-Roman wrestlers, Judoka and Thai-Boxers, is that you can remain standing and still be able to easily avoid being punched or kicked by your opponent. Woo-Hoo! That means that you do not have to go to the ground. Not to mention that standing clinches can be effectively initiated in any clothing. Double leg take-downs are not so easy with jeans, wallets, keys and cell phones thrown into the mix.

The beauty of the standing clinch also is that if a friend of your opponent decides to join the fray, you have not committed your entire body to the clinch. You can still move your feet quite well, and if you have to, keep your clinched opponent in between yourself and the person wanting to join the fight. This tactic works especially well for bouncers and security. They are not looking to subdue someone as much as control them. So that is ideal.

The standing clinch may seem easy to deal with, and it really does look simple. I hear people say all of the time, "why don't they just step back and punch the guy clinching them?" The answer is rather simple, because you can't. An effective clinch prevents you from both freeing your hands, AND finding the distance and angle to do so. Wait a minute, it seems I am forgetting something.

OH YES, I remember!! For you fans of "well what if I want to throw them?" Check out a Greco-Roman wrestling match. Maybe Sambo or Judo. There are a WHOLE lot of effective throws that happen above the waist. Hip throws work particularly well for Judoka, Sambo Players, and Greco-Roman wrestlers. For the Judo fans out there, there are also a whole host of leg trips and reaps that you can use to take the fight out of an opponent. There is not shortage of ways to get down and dirty without literally getting down.

I feel like I have to mention something for the strikers out there who are screaming" What about us!" Come on now, you know I love you guys too! From the standing clinch there is ample room to unload some NASTY knees and elbows from the standing clinch. And while their hands are too tied up to block them, the KO factor increases big time. Anyone doubting the efficacy of the standing clinch for stikers should maybe check out the Shidokan, or some Thai-Boxing matches. My point will be made nicely.

Anyhow folks, I am outta here faster than a turkey on Thanksgiving. Until next time..............

Defending the takedown

Folks,

I was just having some discussions with a couple of grappling fanatics. They were telling me how once and for all, a person would have to know how to grapple, in order to defeat a grappler. I think that the logic is attrocious, but I wanted to have a productive conversation, and I held my tongue.

Now the number one goal of a grappler is to bring the fight into a clinch, and then work their magic once a strikers punches and kicks are no longer effective at such a close range. In the early days, the world was smitten with how a smaller grappler would be able to effectively clinch with a larger striker, and subdue him or her, once they were in the desired clinch. Grapplers boasted about how 9 times out of 10, they would be able to do this without taking significant damage. " The takedown is inevitable" they would say, chests all puffed out with pride. And for the most part, the world believed it, because after all, if it was something we could see, then it must be true.

Then, strikers learned something. All they had to do was defend the takedown, and then, "KAPOW!!" sandman time baby. Eureka!! they had found it. And then the paradigm shifted. Strikers neandered on down to the local college and learned a little something wrestlers already knew. It was called sprawling. Basically, when a grappler attempted a double leg, or single leg takedown, strikers would sprawl (check into any book on wrestling for illustrations) and the stand back up and make with the haymakers. More and more, we saw skilled grapplers getting pounded after attempting takedowns. "BUT" grapplers would cry out in loud voices. "Strikers had to learn grappling moves, in order to deal with a grappler." Man, the grapplers were correct, and geez were strikers angry. So the game of "my art is better than your art" continued.

But, for the striking purists out there, I have something for you. I have told you before, but some of you didnt listen. Circular motion, it works folks. If a grappler goes for the takedown, DO NOT move back in a straight line. It allows the grappler to use momentum and body weight to aid them in the takedown attempt. Move in cirles. It will allow you to strike with force without being taken down. Make your punches count folks, glancing punches do NOT do the job. Sit on your punches and punish a grappler for EVERY attempt. Commit to your strikes. Use your knees and elbows with bad intention. If you arent sure what it looks like, watch Marco Ruas use masterful footwork against Paul Varelans (who was one foot taller and 100 pounds heavier). OR watch Anderson Silva's knockout of superb grappler Carlos Newton. It will kind of give you an idea of what I am talking about.

Lastly, I would like to talk a moment about the strikes that you should use to defend yourself against a grappler. Now I love my jab/ right cross like anyone else, but it is NOT the best combo in this situation. The old 1-2 can ground you, making you a little less mobile, and a lot easier to takedown. I would recommend leading with the right cross. It allows you to keep your hips away from a grappler while striking effectively. Also, circular motions followed by lead hand hooks and elbows have an amazing effect on the intentions of would be takedown artists. Practice it folks. SLOWLY with your sparring partners please. I get enough angry blogs as it is :)