Controlling an opponent: grappling vs. IMA

[Patrick]

-

[Daniel]

Edited for brevity.

D.

Sarcasm. Oh yeah, like that´ll work.

[liokault]

[quote="paranoidandroid" ] Does anyone like to share his experience/opinion? If you believe that there is no difference between normal wrestling stand up and iMA,
[/quote]

I have read the op a few times and I can't quite make out what your getting at? A general discussion on stand up grappling?

[GrahamB]

I'm confused too.

I could be wrong, but you seem to be talking as if there is only one "ima" approach to stand up. Even within just one ima, like xingyi, there are 12 different approaches to stand up. For example, monkey is darting in and out almost playing the fool, while Horse is a stoic passive aggressive psychopath that just waits for that one opening then blasts the hell out of it, etc...

[Wanderingdragon]

In ima there really is only one approach to stand up, that is to offer nothing, to lead one into the void, is not mere imagery. The goal in ima is to develop the sensitivity so as a hairs touch will give clue to the force you will encounter, allowing one to use that force to direct an opponent at your will. As has been stated wrestling and grappling must have the presence of a solid structure to even to begin to seek a handle for control. The push hands that leads to stand up grappling or the strike that becomes entree to a hook or the bridge that becomes tangled in a struggle for power is low level scuffling. Honest empty force is not force that doesn't touch you it is force that you cannot touch.

[Patrick]

-

[fuga]

I don't think there is as wide a difference as you think (at least in terms of the broad framework you are using to define both sides).

Hooks and grips in grappling are there to control the center of the opponent. This is the same as your definition of how an IMA person would engage (structure and weak points).

As an example, I saw a direct similarity with an ankle pick that Luo De Xiu showed at a workshop and an ankle pick that a wrestler showed at a different time. Obviously there were differences but, in both cases, they used their structure to break my structure and bring my weight to my front leg (the one they wanted to pick). Saw similar stuff with some of the SC material that folks brought back from the John Wang Bay Area workshop.

Android, can you explain in more detail what you see as the differences?

-pete

[Wanderingdragon]

It is the same principle in ima on the ground the only difference is your structure is rooted in your back, when you find your way on top you get up, if you have to use your opponent as support so be it as long as you control his movement, if you push up on his face know that his hands and feet are free for breaking if they come your way. On your way up always know hands grab feet and legs kick destroy the weapons that come your way. If you go down on top always remember the ground is your ally slam hard, put all weight in elbows knees, hip or shoulder what ever will be contacting your opponent first make it the weapon he must contend with, this Initiates control. On top the pressure of the void should be like that of the deepest sea.

[Patrick]

-

[fuga]

I understand what are you saying.

Since you grapple, are you using this second method with success when sparring?

-pete

[Patrick]

-

[yeniseri]

I am clueless but I will give it a go!
When I control or attempt to do so, I have to grab the person in a manner to stop his advance or throw him so no 2 ways about it. My efficiency is based on 2 variables, i.e. his skill and my skill and these variables increase or decrease based on how soon someone falls or is thrown. Size is another variable so I don't pick fights with linebackers!
Is there an IMA way to control an opponent? No. Whether IMA or grappler or other, it is the conditioning that allows for a 'winner'!

P.S. I am still mystified by this IMA stuff as being somehow "all that" when it is not evn part of the" forms", "more forms" and "still more forms" syndrome. If "structure" were taught more often, then I would tend to agree that IMA, by virtue of superior results, is the ONE.

[Interloper]

Why do IMA and grappling have to be mutually exclusive? That's just the tired old stye vs. style thang that sold issues of Black Belt and Inside Kungfu magazines.

If you take the fundamental body skills that provide the power and structure for authentic IMAs, those skills are directly applicable to grappling. IMO, we need to separate out the often over-stuffed catalogues of visible -techniques- in the various traditional IMAs, and then see what we are left with at the core. Instead of thinking about "tai chi vs. grappling" or "xing-yi vs. grappling," think "internal power method that makes real tai chi powerful and real bagua and xing-yi powerful, and learn to how grapple with THAT.

[Patrick]

-

[Wanderingdragon]

Why do IMA and grappling have to be mutually exclusive? That's just the tired old stye vs. style thang that sold issues of Black Belt and Inside Kungfu magazines.

If you take the fundamental body skills that provide the power and structure for authentic IMAs, those skills are directly applicable to grappling. IMO, we need to separate out the often over-stuffed catalogues of visible -techniques- in the various traditional IMAs, and then see what we are left with at the core. Instead of thinking about "tai chi vs. grappling" or "xing-yi vs. grappling," think "internal power method that makes real tai chi powerful and real bagua and xing-yi powerful, and learn to how grapple with THAT.

Or forget everything but one thing to which you apply your every skill, and call it fighting.