Research and Discussion Forums

[Webmaster]

A new article is now available in the essays section on what has been perhaps an under-examined aspect of Ringen, the distinctive dearth of ground fighting in the manuals:

http://www.thearma.org/essays/WheresAlltheGroundFighting.html
_________________
0==[>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Stacy Clifford
ARMA Webmaster

[I. Hartikainen]

This is very good. I agree 100%.

- Ilkka
_________________
Marozzo.com

[LafayetteCCurtis]

Where should I look for the references on how modern combat experience shows the overly great emphasis on groundfighting in combatives training? I'm not doubting the statement--it sounds quite reasonable after all--but I'm curious about the specific incidents that led to the conclusion.

[Randall Pleasant]

The Modern Army Combatives page gives a look at how much it is like MMA.
http://moderncombatives.org/articles.html
_________________
Ran Pleasant
Scholar-Adept
ARMA DFW

[Steven Ott]

the emphasis is on groundfighting but I don't think the army sees that as a negative. Comabtives has an emphasis on no-gi submission wrestling because I think it allows its soldiers to train and fight hard without injuring each other. I roll with these guys on occasion and it really a building-up exercise to develop strength, confidence, toughnes and endurance while allowing you to push hard. Don't expect bayonet charges and intense hand-to-hand combat from U.S. soldiers. To do so would negate the firpower and technological advantages our soldiers have and give the enemy a better chance of killing them. In combat you never surrender your advantage
_________________
In this life peace can never be an external force-only an internal source

[Randall Pleasant]

[Steven Ott]

Biting and clawing change the game completly, but that is how animals fight and if its a fight to the death it usually goes to the ground, not that humans can fight like that, we don't generally sink our teeth into our enemies throats. The advantage of groundfighting for people is the abilty to limit how your opponent can attack you. An oppponent that is free standing is free to move. On the ground not only do you limit his motion but you can feel what he is doing, it adds a different level of sensory perception. There are disadvantages to groundfighting as well. From the standpoint of sword fighting, it seems to me that the bind is the most unpredictable and dangerous place to engage an opponent. Being in open fight or in a grapple seem a little easier to control. Maybe people went to the ground to negate the bind
_________________
In this life peace can never be an external force-only an internal source

[Sal Bertucci]

Actually fighting from the bind can much safer than not. For the expressed reason that you mentioned of being able to feel your opponent's actions. Also, you can have this opportunity to feel his actions while standing and avoiding the negatives of being on the ground.

We may not sink our teeth into our opponents throats to kill them, but if I were in a real fight for my life and having difficulty I wouldn't hesitate to bite fingers, arms, etc. Also, using clawing motions is a fairly natural thing to do, and I've even seen it used in some Asian Martial Arts.

Lastly, I've never seen any of the Masters advise to go to the ground as a means of negating the bind, and from experience can tell you it isn't a good idea. On the other hand a large portion of the techniques that we have discuss what to do from the bind.

[Stacy Clifford]

John Clements has done a lot of research on historical combat wounds, both civilian and military, and he's mentioned many times that accounts of biting, scratching, eye-gouging and other outright animalistic behavior are quite common in the historical record, and that biting can have quite devastating effects despite our lack of canine jaw power. When your life is on the line and/or you really hate somebody, nothing is sacred and your lizard brain becomes a very powerful thing. A book on that wound research is in the works.

Also, groundfighting may limit some kinds of attacks, but it liberates others. I think it's actually much easier to bite somebody in an octopus death match on the ground, and I've been pinned a few times in such a way that biting was the only thing I could have done (and I knew it right then and there), but was pretty sure it would have gotten them off of me fast if I had. In friendly wrestling you just have to concede defeat in those situations, but in a lethal struggle it would be far from over. And you don't EVER want to go rolling around on the ground with a dagger in play, even your own. You are just as likely to get stabbed by your own dagger as the other guy's.
_________________
0==[>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Stacy Clifford
Free-Scholar
ARMA Houston, TX

[Steven Ott]

True, biting on the ground is much easier. Just as kicking is easier from standing. When in combat there is a trade-off. If you are wearing armor, many biting techniques will be negated. When you look at alot of the dagger techniques you see a lot of grappling counters, mostly from standing. But whenever you grapple live from standing, going to the ground is a distinct possibilty, either from a throw or takedown or from a stumble. Also remember biting someone in a life or death struggle may cause alot of painbut may not actually prevent your opponent from hurting you. Can you grapple with daggers? Yes. Is it dangerous? Yes But fighting with daggers standing is well-dangerous. Is one more dangerous than the other? I don't think so. I think we train and feel safer sparring from a standing position but in either instance you can die
_________________
In this life peace can never be an external force-only an internal source

[RayMcCullough]

"But whenever you grapple live from standing, going to the ground is a distinct possibilty, either from a throw or takedown or from a stumble."

But to stay on the ground is not advantageous. Getting up quickly is paramount. Throwing the opponent and remaining standing is a better position than throwing him and going with him to the ground.

I cannot run away (or move) if necessary if I am on the ground. I can if I am standing.
_________________
"The Lord is my strenght and my shield, my heart trusteth in Him and I am helped..." Psalms 28:7

"All fencing is done with the aid of God." Doebringer 1389 A.D.

[Steven Ott]

I agree. On a battlefield being on the ground is a bad position. (Unless there are alot of projectiles flying about, like the modern battlefeild) But getting up maybe dependent on your adversary. I think groundfighting with weapons is plausable and maybe if you train at it-it may be as safe as standing and fighting with weapons. As a wrestler and and having trained in submissions, I really see possibilities in ground fighting. When I have sparred with swords and been allowed to do takedowns and mount I have found it relatively easy to do and it clearly shows that on the ground, the dagger is the weapon of choice. And I believe the armbar the safest way to deal with it. But I am far from an expert. I have been "killed" on the ground but not as much as when I'm standing.
_________________
In this life peace can never be an external force-only an internal source

[RayMcCullough]

Not just on the battlefield though. Any self defense situation be it "battlefield" or "street".

Do you think that if the masters wanted us to fight on the ground with weapons they would have told us to and given instruction on how to?

Do the masters teach us "Submission wrestling"? No.
Why not?

Don' t think in a sporting mindset when sparring/free-playing in Martial Arts. It will lead to sporting actions and will slowly degrade the art to a sport/game.
_________________
"The Lord is my strenght and my shield, my heart trusteth in Him and I am helped..." Psalms 28:7

"All fencing is done with the aid of God." Doebringer 1389 A.D.

[Steven Ott]

Everyone when they spar goes in with the mindset that they are not going to kill their opponent, and hopefully none of us want to. Is that "sportification"? We don't gouge eyes, bite, attack the groin. "Sportification" can lead to rules with degrade the martial art aspects, that has clearly happened in wrestling, boxing, fencing, kendo etc. But as Musashi said, there is no substitute for mortal combat and by saying avoid groundfighting you impose a rule on combat that doesn't exist. Maybe it isn't the best tactic for every situation but it does work. It seems to me that the majority of fightbooks studied deal mainly with a one-on-one dual of like weapons, which is probably the best way to study. But that is far from the reality of war. Any matial art based on a blade, is a killing art and therfore harder to learn. And until the zombie invasion of 2012, I intend to keep my sword in it's sheath
_________________
In this life peace can never be an external force-only an internal source

[Gene Tausk]