Understanding the groundwork framework

Hi all,

I noticed a number of folks mentioned that their styles have limited groundwork so I thought its be interesting to talk about some of the ways I think about the goals and strategies of groundwork.

For me, the goal of groundwork is to continually reduce opponents mobility relative to yours until the success of a threat (e.g. technical or complete striking or submission) become inevitable.

The comparison to chess with often used to corny cliche but it is very apt.

Mobility is limited by the number of controls each opponent has on the other. Having a greater number of controls the the opponent is the best way to reduce their mobility relative to yours.
A threat becomes more likely to succeed, if you have a greater number of controls.

There are 3 types of controls; threats, stability and anatomical controls

• threats are the equivalent of a check in chess. You must deal with a threat before you deal with other controls.
• Stability, compromised stability is a control over your opponent as they cant orientate or use much force without stability.
• Anatomical controls are an overwhelming control an you/opponent might have over an opponents/your hips, shoulders, neck or limbs.

For me, there is a prioritisation hierarchy:

1. Neutralising/negating opponent's threats (even partially)
2. Then recovering your own stability
3. Then removing their anatomical controls
4. Then establishing your own control.
5. Then removing their stability
6. Then advancing your own threats

Hierarchy of priorities talked about in jiu jitsu university is on a macro scale e.g. general overall strategy:

1. Survive first (focus on what will kill you)
2. Escape (advance your position)
3. Sweep (advance your position)
4. Control (advance your position)
5. Submit (advance your position)

I actually find the prioritisation hierarchy works well in micro transactions (when escaping a position generally you try to neutralise or negate the choke, get stable and then remove anatomical controls by grip stripping or removing leg hooks).
I'll discuss elaborate on micro transitions later.

Understanding how good positions differ from bad positions require an understanding of the factor that make someone less mobile.

Applying this framework to a few standard groundwork positions:


- face down with an opponent on your back is the worst position for you as your hips and shoulders are pinned so you are immobile and have no anatomical control over their body but they have control over your entire body. You have no stable base to produce any movement from and all threats are open to the opponent.



- lying face up with an opponent on your back is slightly better, you arent pinned down but your opponent has control over your torso and shoulders.
Your stability is reliant on your opponent as they are under you.



- an opponent in a mounted position controls your hips and my control your head and is open to threats (e.g. strikes) although you are stable (your stability can be negated with grape vining) and you could possibly disrupt the opponents stability.

Let's briefly discuss a scenario in which the 3 types on controls are not addressed and the frame work is ignored from Sensei @fahid almuher of YouTube fame:


This is a microtransaction, it is a single position.
Using my framework, I would:

• Prioritise neutralising/negating the threat I.e. the effect of the choke first
• the focus on getting stable by falling to one side
• Then focus on stripping the anatomical controls I.e. strip the grips remove the foot hooks at my hips.

This will give me enough mobility move and wiggle my way out.
E.g.


You'll notice that Sensei Fahid does not prioritise the choke that may kill him.
Further more, he maintains the "table top" position which can allow the opponent to pick the side he wishes to drop sensei.
Lastly there is no attempt to strip the grips or remove the foot hooks.

@Dunc and @Dead_pool - what are your thought on my framework and strategizing (I've ripped off danaher)? Where is it lacking?
(Same question to my coach, if hes reading)

ALSO - folks from other styles - what is your framework for groundwork?

 

Whilst it's great to think these things through I do blame Danaher for over complicating things and really really really making very bad use of the English language at times.

 

I'm not a fan of his videos to be honest hence me trying to make things shorter (why does he talk so slowly!)

I wanted to be able to explain to people unfamiliar with groundwork why bad videos are bad. For me, it comes down to control and is three components: threats, stability and anatomical control.

It's made it a lot easier in bad positions in hard rolls to remember those 3 things.

 

My framework paraphrases Chris Haueter,
be the guy on top,
once on top stay on top,
if on bottom have a guard that can't be passed.
Finally remember the first rule be the guy on top.

Additional points if on bottom or in trouble make space, if on top kill space. Always be the one controlling the hip battle and always be the one controlling the undertook battle

 

I've had a thinkg about this and I think it's quite a limiting framework.
It's the chess equivalent of telling someone to always start as white and keep your one move advantage.

Additionally it doesnt factor in the lack of clear top position with leg locks

How do you deal with get stuck in a bad position or a leg entanglement?

 

To paraphrase Kurt Osiander - "If you ended up there, you screwed up long ago"

Things I learnt on back-takes in both BJJ and past experiences in real life job of security. Both are treated widely different.
In BJJ, I'm a lot calmer when someone takes my back, because I know I'm not going to die (unless I'm with a new newbie, then theres a grey area). I will do my best to roll on and be on top (even if they got my back still). I can break down the grips slowly - my general go to is have a hand between my throat and the crushing forearm which buys me seconds, if not at least 2 hands on 1 (the choking arm). Because you can't do other theoretical escapes if you're unconscious due to deprivation of oxygen. Body positioning, I'm looking to get my butt to be touching the ground, whilst my opponent is laying on their side, which forces them to go for the mount, from there, the strangle is released and we will scramble. I'll be in a new position wherever that may be but at least I'm temporarily out of danger.

In a SD situation, 99% its someone jumping on your back (much like SifuFahids video actually). Thankfully 99% of the time, no ones going for a choke, its usually a piggy back ride because they dont know what they're doing with maybe a pawing strike - or god forbid its a stabbing or a swift bonk on their head with an object (not happened to me, but has happened to colleagues and other people). But to focus on the grappling, I would ( and have ) do my best to shrug them off, bang onto walls, lamp posts, cars. Ideally I would seo-nagi with a follow through but as I'm expelling unmentionable rear matter (because, I have an unknown someone on my back), instinct kicks in before muscle memory. Most of the time, an arm grab and a somewhat seo-nagi happens.. I can fantasise that, through my years of training martial arts in its various forms, I can have that Robert Downey Jr/Sherlock Holmes moment, where I'm calculatingly breaking down a sequence of moves to disable my attacker, but in reality for me its "oh dear oh dear oh dear".

TLDR version - get them off my back by any means necessary and get on top and detain. My aim is also to take their back and make them face the ground for mine (and other's) safety.

 

If stuck in a bad position create space and be the one controlling the hip battle.

What does this mean if stuck in side control create a frame to create space and keep their weight off you, move your hips away and don't let the guy on top kill that space, win the underhook battle or control your hips.

If stuck under mount create space with frames, use your hips to off balance them, don't let them lock your hips down.

If back mounted clear the leg hooks which are controlling your hips and thus allowing him to win the hip battle, create space by getting first a shoulder and then your back on the floor and scrap your opponent off

Leg entanglements, to get a successful leg lock you need to control the opponent's knee and hips so there's no movement in the joint chain you are looking to lock, so clear any control of the hips, ie if he hits single x guard clear the foot off the hip then kill the space and put heavy pressure on them so they can't elevate you to attack again, likewise clear the knee line by creating space ie turn face down and use your other foot to push the triangle off your knee if being heel hooked,
what you really do by clearing the knee line is actually free your hips to move and create space between you both.

To prevent the leg locks in the first place, be the guy on top, keep away from his hips, kill space so he can't use his hips, hooks etc to elevate you. Be heavy we all know to hit a leg lock you need to elevate your opponents weight onto his hands and off his legs so don't let him.

Now is that all there is, no theres clearing the hands winning the head battle etc, and of course there's exceptions such as hand fighting close when leglocked so your opponent can't extend you and finish the lock, just as you stack when arm barred etc, but even once doing those specific things to actually escape you still need to be the one creating space if in trouble and freeing your hips, or the one killing space and controlling the hips if in domination position.

 

You and icefield are such wrestlers hahaha
I think the top dominance advice is great as a game plan and under ideal conditions, you'll keep top position.

By framework I was wondering if there were any hard and fast rules that you use for all positions, regardless of the position itself?

I like the prioritisation hierarchy as it helps me focus on the task at hand by just repeating the mantra "threat, stability, controls".

Is there anything you guys use to not panic and to prioritise when you are in a really terrible position?

 

BJJ folks love talking about "structure" in online videos but I've never heard a definition of it. What is structure?
(Like in layman's terms for a dumb dumb like me)

I think theres a huge problem in sensei @fahid almuher not addressing the choke first. Give someone $1000 to choke him out and no pinch of the leg will get them to loosen the choke.

 

I'm always going for the hands first, and try to face them as much as I can. (Slight body blade if standing)

I was doing sleeve grips before I was doing BJJ because its a much more versatile grip than a sweaty wrist grab. Obviously not an option in wrestling but I like to keep the hands for detain/control.



In regards to anything else, its risk assessment. In SD I'm keeping my distance, I got my fence up. I'm looking at their hands. I'm listening to what theyre saying to gauge how I'm going to react. As well as around me for further dangers (situational awareness).

For me its time. If I'm in a vulnerable/rubbish position, I'm figuring out what could slow down the action to buy me time to think and react.
In grappling, its frame off, space, improve my position/situation.



If I'm working its detain and hold and hope my partner jumps in. If Im (rarely) by myself, its control and keep control, with pain compliance until help comes. I'm not looking to break anything or have anyone lose conciousness but I'm not making it a pleasant experience (for them).

 

If they are on your back standing, then it is a lot easier to defend, you don't have to follow the "BJJ" hierarchy as much.

Defend the immediate threat of the neck.
I recall even at high level Roger Gracie Vs Buchecha, (2017 I think). Buchecha went to remove the hooks first instead of protection of the neck.

Standing I've done a seio nage on someone jumping on my back with RNC, certainly easier than trying to pinch the hamstring.

 

Great article, I'll reply properly when I'm home, BUT this partially ignores limb control positions, which are the exceptions to positional control, (although generally both operating systems just run at the same time). And the different contexts of the situations (often you can get away with hip throwing a bad standing strangle, because it's often done by people who are bad at the attack, however on a strategic level it may also mean you rely on people attacking you badly....)

Rethinking 'Position before Submission'

Random thoughts, I'll attempt to structure them properly later.

 

Top quality advice.

 

This part of this article was very enlightening. I was wanting someone to bring up leg locks and this article is a perfect explanation of "relative positions"

Relative to your opponent, the anatomical control over a a limb means that even if someone tries spinning out your leglock, your attachment to their limb means relative to them (like by hooking the far leg in the ash garami position), you stay in control relative to how your opponent moves:


I should probably adjust my mental model to a points system of controls.
I'm really looking forward to more of your feedback.

 

Even leg entanglements and kimura controls (and you can probably add head arm or guillotine controls to these limb positions as well) still rely on you controlling the hips when attacking or freeing the hips when defending (lower limb attacks for example) or controlling and killing space (kimura rolling attacks, crucifix etc)
The only other principle I'd add to my original list is control the grip fight not just the underhook and head battle, if you dominate grips you take a lot of limb only attacks out of the picture

 

Sorry to name drop. When Josh Barnett Kimura'd me in a demo, he shut my whole body down with pure pressure. And like you say @icefield it was all in the hips as he was on top like a wrestler would. Literally the only thing I could move was the arm that was about to be Kimura'd. And he barely needed to turn it and I was tapping.
However, Im also just assuming thats a situational/positional thing, as he has a whole video on the Kimura/DWL on simply repositioning the shoulder before the crank which is do-able from all angles.

 

Just having a Kimura grip from side control bottom, doesn't mean I have the same amount of control, being in NS top does. But if the Kimura'ie doesn't want to get reversed/subbed, then they only have a few options of movement.

I would argue a NS kimura, is both positionally strong, as well as limb controlly strong.

Ps sorry for the terrible English.

 

Yah, I found that chest to chest NS Kimura is a lot better. Although in my head Im also thinking there's "less of me" on top...if that makes sense.
My preferred is the headmount kimura. Something about having my knee shoving their face down to the mat, whilst sitting on the side of their neck...just....satisfying.