That's really typical, the thing about the pressure points. I did 3 years of karate with no real emphasis on pressure points. If we did pressure points we did them very seldom and because of this I would never react by using one in an altercation. I would say the rules are fair. What he said about BJJ is true, if you train purely BJJ and nothing else you'll probably have less chance of defending yourself properly in a multiple attacker situation than the stand up guy, thats not really that great a concern though. If you can keep a bjj guy with 1 year experience at a striking distance you really shouldn't be that worried. He has to accept that he's going to be hit on his way in and not everyone can do that, meaning he might stay up for a while and try to strike. Also, after a year of BJJ I doubt his takedowns would be unstoppable. It does depend on the training he's doing, but there is a lot more emphasis on ground work than there is on the stand up side of bjj. Just because he shoots for you or grabs you doesn't mean your going down necessarily. You could try to sprawl and stand back up or possibly run a short distance when you think he'll go for it. I think if you got him (a 1 year bjj guy with no striking training) in the face once with a pretty good shot and followed up on it the fight would be over. I just think that people get too crazy about bjj. The Gracies did prove that it was a great system, but they have trained their entire life. Just because you've done a year of grappling doesn't mean you can beat every TMA guy there is.
Some of the karate moves are symbolic anyway. For instance, spinning your opponent and punching to the back of their head is a demonstration that you could have grabbed their neck from behind and crushed their windpipe to see them off in about 6 seconds. (My sensei demonstrated that on me last night, and my throat is still a bit sore - he only did it lightly.)
The problem with facing a BJJ, Judo or whatever grappling guy for strikers is simple. If they get one succesfull take down, you lose. Once you are on the ground thats it, game over. Put simply it's a race to see if they can trip you up before you can knock them out and generally the grappler will win that match because humans only nbeed to have one leg removed and with a smalla mount of force they fall over. It's a dumb ass design I know but there you go, I've been campaigning for an extra set of legs for years but no one ever listens to me. To put it another way, to move humans have to unbablance themselves, all you have to do is interfere with them briefly and again they fall over, it's really simple stuff. Knocking someone unconscious on the other hand is not so easy, you need to hit quite a small target that (If the grappler has any sense at all) should be covered by their arms anyway, and ytou need to hit it quite hard. I've tried both and it is definatly easier to take someone down than it is to KO them (Talking about Joe Public here). The other advantage the grappler has is there trainning. generally grappling arts train quite well because they can compete with wehat they learn, test it against fully resisting opponent and what they aim to do carries over very easily into a real fight one on one. I could go into the concept of positional dominance and pinning here as it relates to real life fighting but I wont because I'll just bore you
Without a question? We dont know what kind of karate this school is, we dont know the poster, dont know his strengths.
Rubbish. No matter what stance you train, you can always be taken down. It's like saying a true wing chun punch will always knock your opponent over. Its mythos. If he wants to prove his theory, I will be happy to meet him. Karate stances are good, but you should not kid yourself that you will never get taken over Rubbish again. If your sensei is relying solely on pressure point strikes, he is doing something wrong. When faced with multiple opponents, I find BJJ extremely useful. You need to be able to control one of your opponents to deal with the rest. People think that the multiple attackers will come at you one by one. They won't. Learning how to shoot, sprall and control opponents are the best way of getting out of the trouble. Tell your sensei to go down to Clapham on a friday night and look at the fights that spill out of clubs Please understand I rate karate highly (I did it for 7 years), but you have to get realistic - use the karate wisely instead of arrogantly. Do not assume that your sensei is invincible. He is not.
good post by moosey and also agree with the "giant" I love karate and everything about it but what you instructor is saying is narrow minded to say the least. As for the whole thing about UFC........well im not going to even bother typing out a huge reply.....its been done to death. If you spar at your club all out with people throwing toe punt kicks to the shin,nuts,grabbing and pulling your hair,biting,hitting you with every object they can pick up or knife or bottle and full force strikes to pressure point areas then fair enough. UFC does have rules and isnt real street stuff - im willing to bet that you dont fight as hard as them in your club though - full force strikes to the coupon etc. My point is, how the hell can you criticise it if you dont train to the same extent (or beyond i.e. the "rules") yourself. As i say, if you do train as above then fair enough - apology granted!.
it seems fairly obvious to me then... i have to get my "know it all friend" off his a$$...get him to take bjj and for us to train for a year and duel this out...like in the old days....lol PS: if anyone has a video of a karate-ka vs. BJJ please post :love: i love these posts however, keep them rollin'
Thats beacause 95% of karate schools do not train with the clinch or stand-up grappling of some sort(even though it's all over thier katas) If you do train with clinching and stand up grappling, a karate fighter may be able to stand up. Though that said, even really really good karate schools dont cover defence against a take down, so yes, the BJJ may more then likely take the karate guy to the ground.
First, I personally would not disrespect any style by dismissing it entirely as "pretty" and essentially useless. Second, it is important to remember that it is never really as simple as style vs. style, in actuality it is man vs. man. That is the whole problem with all of the "vs" debates. We have all seen the effectiveness of Brazillian Jiu Jitsu. No one of a sound mind would question that is an outstanding and useful art. But it is arrogance to assume that any style makes you invincible. What if the karate practitioner is of blinding speed and the disposition to instantly obliterate the knee, or shatter the larynx as soon as he sees his oponent? What if it is Mas Oyama? Personally I think that the whole "Single punch, instant death" thing would pose a problem for fighters of virtually any style.
Dude, there are a million [insert art here] vs BJJ videos on the internet, all of which show every other art being pwned by BJJ. Don't take it too seriously, it's just part of the huge BJJ craze that sprung up a few years ago.
Agreed. I was buying into that for a while and almost joined a BJJ club. I might still try it sometime, if anything just to get some decent ground skills. On some of the videos I've seen the striker would hold back from knocking the crap out of the grappler. They also seemed to have horrible balance.
Not only that, but the environment in those videos are generally leaning more toward BJJ success. Padded gloves, no win until a "submission," general area as opposed to specific area striking, the "striker" being trained in only a kicking/punching art for starters.
