Postby Jay Vail » Sun May 01, 2005 6:18 am
Jake,
Talhoffer, 1459, shows some ground fighting: notably a full nelson, a guy sitting on another in something resembling the “top mount,” and another guy sitting on a guy’s back, pulling his head back in which may be intended as a neck break. Unfortunately Brian Hunt’s translation does not extend to this part of the manuscript, so we cannot know for certain what is intended.
Other pictures in the 1459 do not display ground fighting techniques, as we are accustomed to thinking about them, but rather show one guy killing the other with a dagger. Gladiatoria has some of the same. In fact all of the Gladiatoria plates published on the ARMA website that depict ground work show it in the context of dagger use against a grounded man.
Talhoffer 1567 (Rector’s translation) shows men on the ground, notably plate 202, which shows the completion of ringen’s uchi mata version. It is silent about what happens next, however. Plate 189 shows two men on the ground, one stabbing the other with a dagger.
The Codex Wallerstein has a few pictures of men on the ground, plate 145 (in which one guy is holding two guys down with his feet; can’t be taken seriously), 146 (a guy kneeling on a guy’s back and pulling his head back by the hair), and 147 (a guy holding three captured men). Groundwork techniques in the Codex thus are few. In fact, they are outnumbered by the techniques against the face punch (of which there are at least 10).
Leafing through my collection of works, I can find very few that address ground work in any meaningful way. My search today however was not a comprehensive survey.
This dearth of groundfighting in ringen has been a source of angst for the ground fighting enthusiasts among us for some time, and as the recent discussions on the other thread have shown, it has excited both bewilderment and high emotion.
Gene’s suggestion, citing his Chinese wrestling teacher, is an old one we have heard before: that men in the old days didn’t fight on the ground much because they were worried on the battlefield about the opponent’s friends, who could easily intervene. I think that’s partly true.
I’ve witnessed probably 35-40 street altercations over the years of varying degrees of intensity, from push and shoves to punchouts in which the participants intended to do each other serious harm. Some of these alternations went to the ground, some did not. From this admittedly unscientific survey, I drew one major conclusion: in the real world of street defense, wrestling on the ground is not desirable.
The objective of wrestling on the ground is the submission of the opponent through holds and chokes. These take too long to achieve in many instances, require too much strength, and force you to concentrate on a single opponent at the expense of others who may be there for safety in a really dangerous situation.
This is not to say that wrestling moves are not helpful. They most certainly are. But in the really serious fights I have seen, where the participants were seriously intent on harming each other, the ground wrestling portion of the altercation was used only to the point where one of the players achieved a dominant position (often the “top mount”) and pounded the other guy’s head in with blows. In every instance I can recall, once one guy got the top mount and started pounding away, the fight was over. So, in the real world of serious fighting “in earnest” as Doebringer would say, men do not seem to use wrestling except as a subsidiary means to the ultimate end of delivering decisive blows.
Second, Gene’s observation that on the ground you are in danger of the intervention of the opponent’s friends is absolutely true. I have seen this happen more than once, with harmful consequences. I have also seen bystanders intervene as well.
These two factors may explain why there is so little focus in the fightbooks on ground fighting. The old masters simply did not think it was that necessary. Wrestling is good fun, good sport, and good training, but when your life and well-being are on the line, ground work is a minor a part of the art of defense.
Of course another possible explanation is that the old masters were intent on transmitting techniques for fighting in earnest, not for sport, and there was plenty of sport wrestling out there, which most men practiced, so they were familiar with it and did not need a book on it.
Regards, JV