New Article on Ground Fighting

[Steven Ott]

Yes I agree with that. I was looking through your section on Paulus Hector Mair and there is an imge of a fighter who dropped his own sword to do a double leg takedown. ( I can't seem to figure out how to post an image) In the above mentioned article, there are images of people grappling while their weapons lay around them. I don't know if that means if they were disarmed or if they abandoned their weapons to begin a groundfight. I have found that there are alot of better swordsman than me, but some of these guys I'm a better groundfighter than. So for me in that one-on-one scenario my life is safer on the ground. Taking down someone with a long weapon seems to be easier than taking down someone with a dagger. Anyhow before it sounds like I am disagreeing I really am not, but from the above article, it seems that ARMA is beginnning an effort to understand armed combat on the ground and I see that as a good thing. I believe a trained warrior and hit the ground, fight and come up both victorious and alive.

[RayMcCullough]

Steven: Ground fighting should be avoided in the majority of all Self defense situations because of the higher level of danger of staying there as Gene stated; friends, hidden weapons,immobility, etc....
I'm not saying make a rule that you cannot ground fight. I will how ever use the Art to discourage it; Ringen am schwert, droping knees on opponents who try and pull guard, pull my knife,etc....

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"? "

No, of course not. But I do practice killing techniques; Solid blows with the edge, pommel strikes, thrusts, slices, treat the weapons as weapons, etc....
Avoiding "MMA rules", rules that impose an unrealistic approach to fighting, "sword tag", and using unrealistic tools will all lead to sportification.

Steven Ott: "I have found that there are alot of better swordsman than me, but some of these guys I'm a better groundfighter than. So for me in that one-on-one scenario my life is safer on the ground. Taking down someone with a long weapon seems to be easier than taking down someone with a dagger."

When they learn to grapple with their sword, you will not be able to ground fight them as easy. Jeff Hanson is a good example of a good grappler who did not do so well against swordsman who were good at Ringen am schwert. Now Jeff is good at Ringen am schwert and a very dangerous Fencer.

Steven Ott: "Anyhow before it sounds like I am disagreeing I really am not, but from the above article, it seems that ARMA is beginnning an effort to understand armed combat on the ground and I see that as a good thing. I believe a trained warrior and hit the ground, fight and come up both victorious and alive."

Agreed!

[Steven Ott]

By the way, since grappling never really died in the west. What is the criteria for source manuals?

[Stacy Clifford]

Well since it's part of our name, it has to be from the Renaissance or thereabouts. ARMA's focus is on written works between about 1300 and 1650. Not that other time periods aren't interesting to us, but defining our range and sticking to it helps focus and improve our scholarship.

[Jonathan Newhall]

A good argument that a friend of mine made on the concepts of avoiding groundfighting where possible was that, if you are not supposed to get on the ground with them, what ARE you supposed to do to them after you throw them?

Ringen isn't my expertise, so I figured I would ask. Stomping them is asking to get your leg pulled, as he noted, and I've not seen any techniques on what to do to them after throwing them. Is it just assumed that the throw will be the finish? That seems like a dangerous thing to assume!

[Sal Bertucci]

Generally, you should then pick something up and stab them. This would usually be a dagger.

[Jonathan Newhall]

Any information on what to do if a dagger is lacking? (You lost yours, or something, I dunno?)

[Sal Bertucci]

The manuals seem to expect you to know what to do once you've thorwn them. Generally you are supposed to throw them in a way that will kill/diable them, but people like Ringeck say to position yourself by pinning them and then punch then in the face to your hearts content.

[Gene Tausk]

A good argument that a friend of mine made on the concepts of avoiding groundfighting where possible was that, if you are not supposed to get on the ground with them, what ARE you supposed to do to them after you throw them?

Ringen isn't my expertise, so I figured I would ask. Stomping them is asking to get your leg pulled, as he noted, and I've not seen any techniques on what to do to them after throwing them. Is it just assumed that the throw will be the finish? That seems like a dangerous thing to assume!

Aside from Sal's comment on the dagger, with which I completely agree, incidentally, the variations on "what to do after throwing them" are too many to mention.

You are assuming from a sport mindset that, once you throw the person, or trip him, or in any other way get him off of you, even momentarily, the next step is to do some groundfighting. This is logical, assuming you are in an MMA, BJJ, Sambo match or the like. However, for the world of the Medieval warrior, the goal was to kill the person. So, after the person was thrown or in any way removed from you, the next step would be to (a) get a weapon (usually the aforementioned dagger) and stab away, (b) retreat and get a weapon (c) hit (pummel) or kick the person, etc.

If you believe that the only option after a throw is to grapple with a person, then try the following experiment. Agree with six or seven of your friends to engage in a grappling match. One of you will be allowed to hide a taser on you for use during the match. See how this changes the dynamics. Incidentally, I am not advising using a taser without everyone's permission and foreknowledge and getting the proper medical clearances.

The above exercise, BTW, is not an original idea. It comes from the Army, where such exercises have clearly been shown to change the dynamics of grappling.

[Jonathan Newhall]

Well, Gene, I do understand that climbing on top of a guy on the ground definitely removes your advantage that you had just gained from the throw itself - but, the thing I wonder is, without a convenient way to dispatch him (the weapon), it isn't exactly logical where to take it next. Hopping right on top of him is stupid, but then again so is just doing nothing and letting him get back up.

I guess hopping on him and punching him in the face until dead or otherwise incapacitated is the best we've got so far? That does involve hopping right down there with him, though, so it doesn't seem ideal from this article's standpoint?

[Gene Tausk]

Well, Gene, I do understand that climbing on top of a guy on the ground definitely removes your advantage that you had just gained from the throw itself - but, the thing I wonder is, without a convenient way to dispatch him (the weapon), it isn't exactly logical where to take it next. Hopping right on top of him is stupid, but then again so is just doing nothing and letting him get back up.

I guess hopping on him and punching him in the face until dead or otherwise incapacitated is the best we've got so far? That does involve hopping right down there with him, though, so it doesn't seem ideal from this article's standpoint?

As stated several times on this thread, the ideal situation for a medieval fighter is to pull out his dagger and begin attacking. This is one of the main goals we work towards in Ringen, as well as defending from such blows. It does not involve "hopping right down there with him."

If you want to practice BJJ or the like, great. However, it is not Ringen.

[Stacy Clifford]

You don't have to sit down on a guy you've thrown to the ground in order to attack him with a dagger (or a fist for that matter), kneeling or crouching will get you in position for a strike well enough while keeping your feet under you to rise quickly. Actually, I pulled out my rondel waster just now and found no difficulty at all in stabbing my equipment bag on the floor while standing up in a low, wide fighting stance just by bending over (good thing the blinds were closed...). Daggers back then were long, you didn't need to be able to hit them with a hammerfist to get the point three inches deep. Of course you can argue that there are counters to defend against all this if you're the one on the ground, but the whole point of being a martial artist is to know what those counters are and be reasonably prepared for them so you can take advantage of the dominant position you've achieved and keep it.

[Jonathan Newhall]

Well, Gene, I do understand that climbing on top of a guy on the ground definitely removes your advantage that you had just gained from the throw itself - but, the thing I wonder is, without a convenient way to dispatch him (the weapon), it isn't exactly logical where to take it next. Hopping right on top of him is stupid, but then again so is just doing nothing and letting him get back up.

I guess hopping on him and punching him in the face until dead or otherwise incapacitated is the best we've got so far? That does involve hopping right down there with him, though, so it doesn't seem ideal from this article's standpoint?

As stated several times on this thread, the ideal situation for a medieval fighter is to pull out his dagger and begin attacking. This is one of the main goals we work towards in Ringen, as well as defending from such blows. It does not involve "hopping right down there with him."

If you want to practice BJJ or the like, great. However, it is not Ringen.

You seem to misunderstand me, Gene. I am aware that this article in particular addresses Ringen almost never advising someone to go to ground against a thrown opponent, and for good reason!

However, what I am inquiring about is how, then, you are meant to dispatch them? As Stacy says, using a long dagger from a low standing position is no problem, and that does seem fairly easy and effective, but my follow-up to that is what are you supposed to do if you do NOT have a dagger? I am aware that in the middle ages and renaissance many men, in fact some would say almost every man, carried daggers or knives of one sort or another, but there was always the possibility of not having such an item with you, and I don't think that such a martially effective method of combat as Ringen would ignore that possibility; just I do not know what it DOES advise you to do should such a situation come up.

As I said, "hopping right down there with him" is NOT what you want to be doing, but striking at an opponent from a standing position is very inviting for him to grab you and pull you down, too, so what, then, is the recommended course of action with no weapon at your disposal?


As to your points, Stacy, that is something that I should keep in mind is the length of the daggers from back then - they weren't exactly pocket knives, after all! Still, though, I can't help but wonder what one should be doing to a thrown opponent if no such weapon is at hand.

[Stacy Clifford]

Well as I mentioned, a kneeling or crouching position is low enough to reach somebody with your fists while still allowing you to quickly regain your feet. Also, many of the throws in ringen seem aimed at stunning or injuring your opponent, so I don't think kicking is out of the question. The caution to a martial artist would be to not get careless and allow your feet to be grabbed out from under you. Just because basic attacks have counters doesn't mean you can't use them, you just have to pay attention to what you're doing and use them judiciously.

[Gene Tausk]

How do you dispatch them? Well, as discussed, their are myriads of ways to do this. I am wondering where we are disconnecting here.

So, in no particular order or classification:

GOAL ACHIEVED - opponent is thrown to the ground and you are standing. You do not wish to go to the ground. What is next?

1. Pull out dagger and stab
2. Kick them
3. Run away
4. Stomp them
5. If weapon is nearby, go and get weapon and while opponent is getting up, attack with weapon
6. If no weapon nearby, then as opponent attempts to get up, kick him or punch him since he is in a disadvantageous position trying to get up
7. If no weapon nearby, then as opponent attempts to get up, trip him again
8. Call for help
9. If you are in a natural environment, pick up clods of dirt and throw it at opponent's face. As opponent is attempting to get dirt out of his face, perform actions 2 or 4
10. If you are in a natural environment, pick up a small rock, throw at opponent's face. As opponent either picks up both hands to block or gets hit by said rock, perform actions 2 or 4

This is just from the top of my head

Incidentally, I don't follow you where you say that kicking someone is an open invitation for him to grab you. If you are not the one that is on the ground, you are in a superior position so long as you are not playing by sporting rules.