The Fundamental Problem of the Martial Arts
Much is made of the differences between the various styles of martial arts. What is common to all styles of combat is a core problem that each tries to answer. How can one successfully defend oneself against attack by a bigger, stronger, and more aggressive opponent? All martial arts, if they are to be considered martial, must furnish an answer to this fundamental question.
To be sure, this fundamental question is often complicated by bringing in additional concerns, such as whether there is more than one attacker, whether the attacker is armed or not, and so on. Some styles claim that a martial art must address a great many questions, ranging from moral conduct to broad questions of lifestyle. Nonetheless, the core problem that any martial art worthy of the name must address remains-how can one best defend oneself against attack by a physically superior opponent?
In response to this common problem it would seem that every country and culture has offered a different answer. There are a vast number of different martial arts. While there are some obvious similarities between styles, one cannot help but notice the dramatic differences. An immediate query that arises in the face of these competing answers to the fundamental problem is this: Which style gives the best answer to the fundamental problem of the martial arts?
Most people are familiar with the broad stylistic differences. Korean styles generally favor high, powerful kicking attacks. Japanese and Okinawan karate emphasize low stances with powerful linear blocks and punches. Wing Chun kung fu advocates an upright stance along with low kicks and intricate hand-trapping skills. The list of styles is long and each has its distinctive features.
A very different response to the fundamental problem of the martial arts is offered by the grappling styles. Unlike the vast majority of fighting styles, which have favored kicking and punching as the best route to victory, grappling arts focus on getting a hold on your opponent and using this grip to take him down to the ground. Once on the ground the opponent can be controlled in a pin or submission hold. Judo, sambo, and Olympic wrestling were for years the most well-known grappling styles.
There is little question that for most of the period after World War II, when martial arts first became very popular in the West, grappling arts were a distant second in popularity to the more spectacular-looking striking arts. Indeed, wrestling was for many years not even considered a martial art at all. Judo, despite its prestige as an Olympic sport was not taken seriously as a fighting art. Sambo, the national grappling style of the former Soviet Union, was barely known in the West until the 1990s.
So then, we are struck by the many different responses to the fundamental question of the martial arts. The question that begs for an answer has always been: Which style answers best the fundamental problem of the martial arts? This was the unavoidable question that for many years everyone asked, but no one tried seriously to answer.
Determining the Respective Merit of Styles through Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) Competition
There would seem to be a very simple way to determine which martial arts were superior to others. One could take fighters who were well qualified in their field and match them against fighters from other styles with no rules or interference to mar the result. One could then see if there were any styles that consistently outperformed the others over a period of time. This would furnish an empirical answer to the question of which style was the better one. While this might seem an obvious way to resolve the problem, it was not until the 1990s that mixed martial arts (MMA) competitions, pitting different styles against each other with very few rules, began in North America. Unbeknownst to most martial artists, such MMA events had been going on for years in South America. These however had been ignored, possibly because for generations Asia had been seen as the source of martial arts expertise. The early MMA events were bare knuckle, with either no time limit at all or a very long time limit, no weight categories, and very few rules–only prohibitions on eye gouging and biting. This was as close to a real fight as civil society would allow. Different stylists flocked to the events to represent their art.
Analysis of the Early MMA Events
Most people’s expectations of the early MMA events were simple enough. These expectations represented decades of misinformation and unjustified assumptions that had crept into traditional martial arts precisely because they had drifted so far away from the real combat that MMA events offered. The vast majority of martial artists assumed that whoever kicked and punched harder than everyone else, while taking less punishment, would win by simply blasting his opponents into bloody defeat. To the utter amazement of the martial arts community, this was not at all the case. The vast majority of the fights followed a very similar pattern. Both combatants would begin with punches and kicks then quickly go into a clinch. Then, either by accident or design, they would fall to the ground. Those fighters with expertise in grappling actively sought to take the fight to the ground while the others simply wound up there despite their intention not to. To the shock and embarrassment of most martial artists, once a fight went to the ground, most of the supposedly highly skilled martial artists were utterly lost and flailed about helplessly, utterly unsure how to cope with this unanticipated situation. Victory after victory was won by those fighters versed in grappling. A number of points quickly became clear. First, people trained only in standing striking skills were very vulnerable to being taken down to the ground, where their striking was almost useless. Second, grapplers could force strikers to play their grappling game (by closing the distance into a clinch or takedown) far more easily than strikers could force grapplers to play a striking game. Third, skill on the ground was a far more reliable indicator of success in MMA combat than striking ability. Fourth, submission holds-locks and strangles that force an opponent to give up or face severe injury to the joints or unconsciousness-were the most efficient route to victory, far more so than strikes.
Over time a combination of spectator demands and political pressure forced the addition of more rules governing MMA events. In spite of new rules, weight categories, rounds, and time limits current MMA events still carry much of the flavor of the early MMA shows. The skill level of the combatants has risen tremendously. No longer does one see naive entrants who know nothing of ground grappling. The emerging trend of current MMA events is the “complete” fighter, one well versed in both grappling and striking, comfortable on his feet, in the clinch, defending and initiating takedowns, and, crucially, on the ground.
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu in MMA Competition
Of all the many fighting styles represented in early MMA competition, none had a more decisive impact than Brazilian jiu-jitsu. Due to its unanticipated success against other styles, Brazilian jiu-jitsu went from obscurity to international renown in a staggeringly short time. The biggest MMA events in North America, the Ultimate Fighting Championship, Extreme Fighting, the World Combat Championship, and Martial Arts Reality, were all dominated by practitioners of Brazilian jiu-jitsu. Especially surprising to most viewers was the fact that the Brazilian jiu-jitsu fighters were almost always considerably smaller than their opponents. In addition, the victories were relatively bloodless affairs. The Brazilian fighters did not have to resort to bludgeoning their foes into defeat. Rather, they quickly took them to the ground and then caught them in various strangles and locks, forcing them to give up. In the few cases where Brazilian jiu-jitsu fighters were themselves taken down by their opponent, they were able to use their highly refined ground-grappling skills to win fights from underneath opponents. This was quite radical at the time, for most people had the notion that the man on top in a fight was almost assured of victory. Unfolding before everyone’s eyes was the realization of the martial arts dream-to see a fighting style that allowed a smaller, weaker man to overcome and defeat a larger, stronger, skilled opponent with a minimum of violence and blood. Early response to this success on the part of the martial arts community was varied. Some claimed that MMA competition was immoral or somehow contrary to the spirit of the martial arts. Others gave grudging admiration of the results but claimed that the new style would not work in a real street fight where there was a danger of weapons and multiple opponents. Progressive martial artists, however, quickly took note of the results and sought to learn Brazilian jiu-jitsu, either as a style they wished to emulate, or at least so they could learn how to counter the devastating moves and techniques that were wreaking havoc in MMA competition. In either case, progressive martial artists were anxious to learn this new art. This was the shot heard around the martial arts world-the revolution had begun.
An Analysis of the Success of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu in MMA Competition
Previous to the first MMA events in North America, few people would have considered Brazilian jiu-jitsu a style likely to dominate the others in open competition. 11 is worth asking why it was the case that Brazilian jiu-jitsu was able to do so well against other styles in such a consistent fashion. Answering this question can illuminate much that is important in fighting theory. Even a cursory analysis of the early MMA events quickly reveals a number of factors.
Brazilian jiu-jitsu could succeed regardless of whether the Brazilian jiu-jitsu stylist took his opponent down and landed in a top position or whether he was himself taken down and had to fight from underneath. In the unpredictable and chaotic action of real fighting this proved a great advantage. When facing a far larger opponent it was often the case that fighters quickly found themselves on their back and had to fight from there. The Brazilian jiu-jitsu fighters were very successful at this, often surprising their bigger, stronger opponents.
The training methodology of Brazilian jiu-jitsu allowed its practitioners to use the same strategy and techniques that they used in actual fights at full power on a fully resisting opponent. By constantly training in the same way they fought, the Brazilians were very comfortable once the action started – actual fighting had few surprises for them. The crucial role of training method is a subject to which we shall return later in more detail.
The point system utilized in training and BJJ competition is designed to reflect the most important elements of a real fight. Points are awarded according to how well a student moves into positions that allow him to dominate and finish an opponent in a real fight. This ingrains in the student the principles and body movements needed to do well in actual combat. For example, anyone can see that there is an obvious advantage to pinning your opponent down from on top of his chest. From there you can hold him down and strike him at will while he can do little in return. This fact is represented in the Brazilian jiu-jitsu point system by rewarding the attainment of this dominating position with the maximum of four points. This gives direct encouragement to the student to always seek this dominating position as he or she trains until it becomes an ingrained habit–one that will prove exceedingly useful in real combat.
The lack of restrictions upon students of BJJ as they train and compete in their sport prepares them well for the reality of actual combat. Real combat is totally without restrictions-you can do whatever you please to attain victory. In contrast, sporting combat is full of rules, restrictions, and referee intervention. For example, in boxing the referee stops the action as soon as the fighters enter a clinch. In Thai boxing the action is stopped as soon as one fighter goes to the ground. In Olympic wrestling one cannot apply submission holds at all. In judo one can only do so to the elbow joint (along with strangles). In Brazilian jiu-jitsu there is stunningly little referee intervention. Once a fight begins the referee does little more than count the points and keep the fighters inside the circle. The fighters can apply submission holds to the ankles, knees, hips, spine, neck, shoulders, wrists, and elbows. Also, strangles and muscle crushing is allowed. This lack of intervention and restriction prepares students for the unrestrained nature of real combat.
The fighting heritage of Brazilian jiu-jitsu was a crucial element in the success of Brazilian fighters in MMA competition. The Gracie family came from a long tradition in their native Brazil of fighting in MMA events. This experience gave them a good idea of what to expect when fighting with very few rules. In contrast, their opponents were largely heading into the unknown.
The possession of a simple, yet highly effective, combat-proven strategy married to highly refined technique imprinted in the student through daily training was a massive advantage. Most of the early entrants to MMA events had no real overall strategy as to how they would defeat their opponents other than a vague notion of smashing their opponents into submission. To their surprise they found this was far more difficult than anticipated, especially once they were locked in a clinch and fell to the ground. The Brazilian jiu-jitsu fighters, on the other hand, were always working within an overall strategy. They sought to dose the distance to their opponent as quickly as possible to limit any potential damage. From there they took the fight to the ground, where they could nullify their opponent’s skills. Once on the ground they were constantly looking to improve their position, advancing step by step toward their goal of getting to a position from where they could finish their opponent with a submission hold. This gave the Brazilian fighters a clear sense of direction al all limes in the fight. In addition they had the technical knowledge to implement that strategy in an efficient way. There was never any question of what they ought to be doing at any time in the course of the fight. This immediate sense of purpose and strategy was in marked contrast to the confusion and indecision of their opponents, most of whom had no idea what they ought to be doing at any point in the fight once they were in a clinch.
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu as an Answer to the Fundamental Problem of the Martial Arts
We have seen that the core problem at the heart of the martial arts is that of protecting oneself against attack by a bigger, stronger, and more aggressive opponent. MMA events gave the best available means of evaluating the different responses to that problem. The evidence furnished by these MMA competitions was very dear. Grappling was a potent element of real fighting that had been almost entirely neglected by the martial arts community. Traditional martial arts based upon standing striking and kicking skills proved incapable of dealing with grappling attacks that bound the strikers in a tight clinch and took them to the ground, where striking power was largely negated. Foremost among the grappling arts was the hitherto unknown Brazilian jiu-jitsu whose success was as unexpected as it was clear-cut. The record showed that Brazilian jiu-jitsu was undoubtedly one of the very best answers to our fundamental problem.
In the face of this success, it is worth asking: What is the answer of Brazilian jiu-jitsu 10 the fundamental problem of the martial arts? A clear statement of that answer can be offered now.
Contrary to the advice of most martial arts, BJJ does not advocate engaging in a standing striking battle with your opponent. Such a strategy exposes one to too high a risk of losing to a bigger, stronger opponent, since he will hit harder than you can as a result of his greater size and weight. In addition, experience has shown that such striking cannot be relied upon to stop and defeat an opponent who is determined to charge into you and grapple. The traditional doctrine of “one strike, one kill” is simply not borne out by experience. A much safer option is to close the gap and enter into a clinch, from where you can prevent your opponent from punching you while at the same time using grappling skill to off-balance your opponent and control his movement. From here you can either strike you r opponent with knees and elbows (preventing him from doing the same by off-balancing him and controlling his body through grappling technique) o r take the fight to the ground. Once in a clinch it is very likely that the fight will go to the ground, either by design (one fighter deliberately takes the other down) or by accident (one or both fighters trip and fall). A common misconception is that Brazilian jiu-jitsu always advocates taking a fight to the ground. In MMA events this is true, since you are engaged with only one opponent and the floor surface is favorable. In some street fights the Brazilian jiu-jitsu student might well decide to resist going to the ground, perhaps because he fears being kicked on the ground by his opponent’s comrades, or because the ground surface is hazardous. In such a case he or she can stay in a standing clinch and fight from there or break the clinch and look to escape. What BJJ recognizes as a hard fact of life that many traditional martial arts do not, is that in a real fight – it is usually not a mailer of choice whether you end up on the ground – it just happens – regardless of your stated intentions. The weakness of the answer given to the fundamental problem of the martial arts by most styles is that they do not take in to account the actions and intentions of the opponent, or the wild and chaotic nature of real fighting. Part of Brazilian jiu-jilsu’s an·swer to the fundamental problem of the martial arts is that fighting on the ground is not a choice, but is almost always made necessary by events. Ironically, the people who are best qualified to keep a fight standing are grapplers, since they spend a good deal time practicing clinching and takedowns. This makes them skilled at resisting takedown attempts when they so desire.
Nonetheless, the kind of positional dominance and control sought after by Brazilian jiu-jitsu practitioners is best attained on the ground, where most people do not know how to move and where body weight and the floor can be used to thwart an opponent. Hence the preference for taking a fight to the ground when circumstances favor it.
The essential idea behind Brazilian jiu-jitsu’s answer to the fundamental problem of the martial arts is this: You must constantly strive to put yourself in a position where you can control your opponent as much as possible. Thus allowing you to do maximal damage to him while exposing yourself to as little potential damage as possible. This is the answer in a nutshell. In practice this generally means getting into a tight clinch as quickly as possible, thus preventing your opponent from striking you effectively. From here you can control him by holding his head or upper body while off-balancing him, or better yet, slipping behind him. If you desire to stay standing you can attack with knees, elbows, and standing submission holds. If you decide to take the fight to the ground, or if you end up there anyway, you will seek to maneuver yourself into a controlling position where you can strike your opponent far more successfully than he can strike back and then finish with a submission hold. The coldly efficient theoretical core of Brazilian jiu-jitsu is the idea that you should seek always to place yourself in a position where you can damage your opponent while he cannot damage you. The myriad techniques of BJJ are designed to enable a fighter to bring about this goal. This strategy can only be realized by grappling with your opponent. After all, you cannot control your opponent without grabbing him in some way. This is half of the reason why Brazilian jiu-jitsu advocates grappling as the answer to the fundamental problem of the martial arts. The other half is the unavoidable fact that regardless of your intentions it is almost impossible for you to stop your opponent from grappling with you if he attempts it. The record shows that in a real fight he almost certainly will attempt it. This is why Brazilian jiu-jitsu advocates grappling as the most important part of its answer to the fundamental problem of the martial arts.
Ground Fighting and Self-defense
Ever since the advent of mixed martial arts events with very few rules, martial artists have been forced to acknowledge the crucial role played by grappling, both on the ground and standing. One often hears the adage, “If you do not know how to fight on the ground, you do not know how to fight.” In contrast to this recent enthusiasm for grappling, one also hears the opinion that whatever the pattern of fighting in a mixed martial arts event, in an actual street fight the ground is the last place you would want to be. Many people reason that putting oneself on the ground in a street fight is tantamount to suicide. By doing so you expose yourself to the danger of being kicked into defeat by other people, of being badly cut up and bruised On hard pavement, of being eye gouged, bitten, suffering attacks to the groin and other dangers. Thus the re is a split in opinion between those who advocate grappling for self-defense purposes and those who claim it is suitable only for MMA events. Brazilian jiu-jitsu takes a clear stand in this debate. Followers of the Brazilian style do advocate grappling for self-defense purposes. Nonetheless we must be clear that this does not mean that Brazilian jiu-jitsu practitioners always advocate taking a fight to the ground. Of course there will be times when common sense suggests that avoiding a ground-grappling situation is the sensible thing to do.
People tend to underestimate the versatility of Brazilian jiu-jitsu because when they see it in action in mixed martial arts events, ground fighting plays the major role. However, Brazilian jiu-jitsu has a great range of techniques in a standing clinch situation that allows a student to defeat an aggressor without going to the ground. Moreover, by constantly working on takedown practice, the grappling student becomes very adept at countering attempts to take him down. Ironically, this makes grapplers the best qualified among martial artists at remaining on their feet during an attack if they should elect to. Fights go to the ground either by accident or by design. If you should accidentally trip and fall while locked with an attacker any shortcomings in ground fighting will likely prove disastrous. At other times, grappling makes perfect sense, an option you can deliberately choose. There is no more effective means of overwhelming an aggressor than to take him to the ground where he can be controlled and dominated. This control gives you a tremendous range of options to apply, depending on the contingencies of the situation. One can be surprisingly gentle or very brutal toward one’s attacker when holding complete control over him-grappling gives you the choice. Should you not desire to go to the ground, whether for fear of multiple attackers or the fear of the hard cement pavement, you can use your grappling skills to avoid being taken down or to engage in standing grappling in the clinch. Do not think that Brazilian jiu-jitsu is entirely limited in its outlook toward self-defense. It does not mindlessly claim that you should always go to the ground. On the contrary, it will save you if you should be taken to the ground and it can allow you to dominate and control an attacker if you should choose to take the fight to the ground. However, it also gives you the tools to remain standing and to fight from there, should that be your choice.
Critics of grappling for self-defense purposes also claim that foul tactics, banned in mixed martial arts events-tactics such as biting, groin grabbing, and eye gouging, significantly undermine the street effectiveness of grappling. Doubtless such tactics can have some effect in a real fight, but one should not overestimate their role. If your attacker is close enough to engage in biting or eye gouging, then you are close enough to do the same to him. Moreover, you can use your grappling skills to gain a superior position from which your biting and eye gouging will be far more devastating than his. There are numerous counters to such foul tactics. A person well versed in grappling can readily adapt his body’s position to protect his vulnerable groin and eyes during a real fight. Accordingly, these threats represent more of a nuisance to the experienced grappler than a real threat.
Probably the most common complaint with regard to grappling as a viable means of self-defense is that grappling is useless against multiple opponents. The argument is that in locking with one attacker, one is easily attacked by his partners in crime. This is entirely true. Grappling skills will not allow you to destroy several attackers at once. Brazilian jiu-jitsu makes no claim to teach a method of overwhelming mass attacks. Should you be heavily outnumbered, Brazilian jiu-jitsu will not save you. But no other style of empty-hand fighting will save you either. The martial arts world is full of overinflated claims. One of the most common is that one unarmed man can defeat many aggressive, dangerous attackers at once. The irony is that many of the stylists who made such grandiose claims proved entirely incapable of defeating even a single attacker when put to the test in mixed martial arts competition. Such claims are the stuff of fantasy and belong more to the realm of martial arts movies than a book concerned with real fighting.
Related posts: