90% of all fights end on the ground, truth or BS?

[DeusTrismegistus]

Well in the new BB magazine someone actually did a small study to see if this statistic was true. First he researched to find where the stat came from but could not find a source (98% of statistics are made up on the spot). So then he did his own small study by sampling 300 fight videos on youtube.

Short version of his results. Going by memory these will be close but not exact.
76% fights ended with one person on the ground
45% ended with both people on the ground
whoever went down first usually lost
people were almost never pushed down
most people fell or were tripped or thrown down

His conclusion in a nutshell is the ground game is important, but takedown defense was more important.

I personally would concur.

Anyone else read the article?

[Johnny Drama]

To be honest, fights on youtube aren't what I would want to base what I study on. That being said, I think most fights have some type of ground element in them. Wrestling is very natural to most people, more so then striking imo. Its no surprise a good portion tend to end up on the floor, especially since many people today train to bring you there. Knowing what to do on the ground is a type of takedown defense, because you don't feel like a fish out of water if everything goes wrong and you have faith/knowledge enough to get back up. Personally, I love studying wrestling and Jiu Jitsu.

[klonk]

The burden of proof belongs to the person making the claim that 90% of fights end up on the ground. (I have also heard 98% and 99% stated.) I have seen no proof forthcoming. It seems to be somethng BJJ enthusiasts say just because the others are saying it.

So one place to start would be to press the issue with the BJJ folks, by asking why they say what they do--show me the origin of the numbers. If they can do no such thing, feel free to discount the "statistic."

It is true beyond argument that at least some fights end up on the ground, so it is not a bad thing to get some insight and experience on how to stay up, and how to get up if you get downed!

[Walter Joyce]

If you do a search at the Shen Wu board I think that you'll find the source of the claim is from law enforcement statistics. I am not endorsing the claim, just pointing you in the direction of a possible source for the statistic cited.

I believe that one will tend to make their arguments based on on personal bias, i.e. if someone like to wrestle or grapple or go to the ground, odds are they will advocate for such skills. Personally I'd prefer a knock out to a submission, but that's my bias. Yes, you can knock someone out once you've taken them down.

[DeusTrismegistus]

To be honest, fights on youtube aren't what I would want to base what I study on. That being said, I think most fights have some type of ground element in them. Wrestling is very natural to most people, more so then striking imo. Its no surprise a good portion tend to end up on the floor, especially since many people today train to bring you there. Knowing what to do on the ground is a type of takedown defense, because you don't feel like a fish out of water if everything goes wrong and you have faith/knowledge enough to get back up. Personally, I love studying wrestling and Jiu Jitsu.

I think fights n youtube are actually very good to base a study on. For one these are actual fights and not ring matches. The context of the statistic is stated as a fight/self defense pertinent one. Most fights are between two untrained individuals which is what is mostly on youtube.

I do like ground but I like throwing more. I also like striking though. All are important to train and this little study only validated the importance of being well rounded. But it also showed as one of the most important things why it is important not to end up on the ground unless you are on top. Only 5% of the time did the person who went down first win the fight.

[Josealb]

I think fights n youtube are actually very good to base a study on. For one these are actual fights and not ring matches. The context of the statistic is stated as a fight/self defense pertinent one. Most fights are between two untrained individuals which is what is mostly on youtube.

If you base your research on youtube fights, to study what percent of them end up on the ground....guess what? you're going to end up with a percentage of how many fights ON YOUTUBE end up on the ground. Its like trying to figure out what movies are good or bad, by reading other peoples reviews instead of watching the movie itself.

Its worst when people actually take these kinds of studies for granted and use it themselves as a base for personal study.

[Johnny Drama]

I mean, is this my choice...choosing between youtube fights and sport fights? Being that the majority of youtube fights are between untrained people who are often drunk or impaired in someway, I'd choose sport fights if I had to do a survey. There is actually skill, conditioning compared to flailing and suckerpunches. I really wouldn't want to base my decision off of youtube fights, but if you want it from a self defense perspective, I suppose that could be a decent indicator, even then though...

As far as top/bottom on ground goes, I'd prefer top. But, bottom can allow you to escape/sweep and even submit if your good at it.

[yusuf]

..i think there is a linkage between the amount of yeast it takes for bread to rise and the amount of bullshit it takes for a fight to go to the ground

errr..

[shawnsegler]

The question is not whether or not they go to the ground, but whether or not they are finished by the time they go to the ground.

S

[wkfung108]

I think I read that, too, and one criticism for citing that study is that the average civilian has different goals than a police officer in a confrontation -- you probably want to survive, but the officer also needs to restrain.

I believe if you train as a groundfighter, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy in that you will naturally SEEK to take a fight to the ground, where you believe you have an advantage. To use an obvious name, why in the world would a Gracie choose to standup and box if he has the option of a takedown?

Me, I see the usefulness of ground training, but I just find it hard to believe that anybody living in a modern U.S. city would choose the ground as a primary/preferred fighting range, what with the hard sidewalks, hydrants, meters and other hard objects, and (esp. in NYC) piles of garbage, broken glass and animal feces around.

- Kent

If you do a search at the Shen Wu board I think that you'll find the source of the claim is from law enforcement statistics. I am not endorsing the claim, just pointing you in the direction of a possible source for the statistic cited.

I believe that one will tend to make their arguments based on on personal bias, i.e. if someone like to wrestle or grapple or go to the ground, odds are they will advocate for such skills. Personally I'd prefer a knock out to a submission, but that's my bias. Yes, you can knock someone out once you've taken them down.

[Josealb]

Yusuf, bread rises no matter if the amount of yeast is...hmm...off topic.

[DeusTrismegistus]

I mean, is this my choice...choosing between youtube fights and sport fights? Being that the majority of youtube fights are between untrained people who are often drunk or impaired in someway, I'd choose sport fights if I had to do a survey. There is actually skill, conditioning compared to flailing and suckerpunches. I really wouldn't want to base my decision off of youtube fights, but if you want it from a self defense perspective, I suppose that could be a decent indicator, even then though...

As far as top/bottom on ground goes, I'd prefer top. But, bottom can allow you to escape/sweep and even submit if your good at it.

Well what are the available resources for fight information?

We have police altercations, which if we are involved in we already fucked up.

We could use surveys to ask people about fight experiences which they were likely inebriated or hit really hard and may have happened several years ago and hope that they can remember what happened, who won, who went to the ground first if at all, and how they were taken there.

We can use sport fighting data but the answers will depend greatly on the specific sport and the rules involved. Wrestling or jujitsu comps will have 100% ground for both people, boxing will have some one person going down but almost never two, MMA will be very high in going to the ground because throughout most of its history it has been dominated by ground fighters.

Or we can use Youtube. The question is really if youtube provides us with a representative sample.

If you base your research on youtube fights, to study what percent of them end up on the ground....guess what? you're going to end up with a percentage of how many fights ON YOUTUBE end up on the ground. Its like trying to figure out what movies are good or bad, by reading other peoples reviews instead of watching the movie itself.

Its worst when people actually take these kinds of studies for granted and use it themselves as a base for personal study.

Youtube is much more likely a representative sample of all of society than any other medium than survey data, which has massive reliability problems. The data on a video is interpreted by the watcher and is the same every time it loads.

As far as basing the statistic on sport fights goes MMA is the only close to valid realm to test that, however I have never heard anyone use the 90% thing in reference to a MMA match it has always been in reference to street fights. To know if its valid you need a representative sample of ALL streetfights, not just between trained individuals.

The article is in Sept 2008 issue page 92 written by "Dr. Bakari Akil II is an assistant professor of communications at Middle Georgia College. He's studied Brazilian jujitsu for 3 years and holds a green belt in Judo. He currently trains with Team Praxis in Macon, Georgia. For mor information visit www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/who/ "

[yusuf]

JOse .. lol

..but seriously i actually heard a person from a famous muay thai / bjj school say that for multiple atackers the best place to be was on the ground with one of the assailants on top of you as a shield...



no seriously .. it becoms insipid and self fulfilling as already said...

[JAB]

Remember the context. I can hit you in your jaw and knock you to the ground, and technically according to the study, the fight ended up going to the ground!
That being said if you do not have a well rounded game you will be deficient in one are or more. Will that turn around and bite you in the ass? Perhaps if you fight often enough. But if you never fight, then no.
Context and perspective is crucial in arguments such as these. The more you fight, the greater the chance that you will fight someone and end up on the ground one way or another. Can't hurt.
It would be like a boxer saying he does not need to learn a hook because no one ever gets in that close on him. Someday somebody will, and then he is SOL!

Cheers
Jake

[Darth Rock&Roll]

Out of context and is bullshit statement pulled from authors ass apparently.
why you reading a rag like BB? lol