- This topic has 6 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Recently a fellow Kravista asked me why RNC standing was seldomingly employed. The only example I could come up with was a Matt Hughes fight from a little while ago in UFC (and wasn’t he submitted by BJ Penn by a pseudo-standing RNC?).
I was trying to rationalize the \”because their solid technique prevents them from getting there\” argument. But hey, some of best MMA grapplers still succumb to basic arm bars and triangles.
Maybe my friend and I haven’t watched enough MMA fights…..
What do you think?
PS. Sincere congrats to my peeps in Rohnert Park for their recent Fighting exploits. Holla at ya boy in DC!!
Interesting question. My guess would be that the simple answer is probably the correct one (are you familiar with the theory of Occam’s Razor)?
The answer, I would guess, is this: in a standup fight, both fighters work to face each other. They are more mobile, and it is more difficult to get the opponent’s back. On the ground, fighters turn their backs when they are taking too many punches, and thus expose themselves to the choke. But even on the ground you see it less often these days because guys are aware of it and keep their chins tucked.
BTW, another example of a standing (or semi-standing) choke is way back in in one of the early UFCs. Ken Shamrock and Royce Gracie were fighting. Gracie got Shamrock’s back while Shamrock was crouching down. Shamrock went down for an ankle lock and Gracie caught him in the choke.
I agree, it’s just hard to get into that position in a MMA fight. The standing RNC I think is more of a surprise move, something you might do sneaking up on someone from behind (special ops soldiers might do this, if they don’t want to shoot an enemy, because they don’t want to make any noise while sneaking up on the enemy’s base.).
Or you could do it suddenly, when standing next to someone, starting the fight that way. Or if you are with a couple of friends, fighting against only one guy. The others distract him, then you get behind him…. I think this sort of thing works best with an element of surprise. If the fight is already on, especially in a mixed martial arts setting, where you have two fighter equal in size and skill I think it’s just hard to get all the way to the back and if you do you might just go for a takedown first and then for a choke (you might have better control that way).
I had a think about this and agree with the above about it being hard to get your opponents back while standing (though far from impossible), especially in a mma fight. I was also thinking that if you did get your opponents back would you not be better off taking him down and consolidating a position of dominance than a standing RNC (in a mma fight).
If you are standing you would probably keep your feet on the ground and not try and get your hooks in (is it still a RNC technically speaking then?). This could leave you open to getting slammed (see Bas Rutten’s stuff on an example of how). Same deal if you jumped up and put your hooks in. The guy could throw himself backward and you end up getting slammed (with his body weight on top of yours).
Sounds riskier than a takedown (suplex) that lands you in a dominant position and takes the wind out of the other guy.
A few months ago, my friend’s younger brother was really angry for some reason and jumped on my back, did the hold, and wrapped his legs around me. For a small person, he could apply a lot of force. Anyway, I tried to grab his leg to twist his ankle, but he started flailing. So, I arched my back and fell like a log. This seems to be the exact thing Angry Angel mentioned.
A skilled person can use a number of tactics against a standing choke hold after loosening the grip. They could take you down by reaching under their legs and grabbing one of yours and pulling up (seen in some jujutsu), by lifting you up and whipping you sideways, by grabbing both legs behind the knees for a backbreaker-type takedown, forward hip throw, or an arm and leg sweep, as in kung fu styles. But all of these are only possible after loosening the grip, which is possible while standing but difficult while on the ground. When standing, you still have backhand elbows, rear headbutts (maybe), and rear thrusting, stomping and scooping kicks. And you can create space for moves like hitting or grabbing the groin. When on the ground, these can become limited, because you can’t kick, and can’t create space for effective strikes.Re:
quote \”johnwhitman\:The answer, I would guess, is this: in a standup fight, both fighters work to face each other. They are more mobile, and it is more difficult to get the opponent’s back. On the ground, fighters turn their backs when they are taking too many punches, and thus expose themselves to the choke. But even on the ground you see it less often these days because guys are aware of it and keep their chins tucked.BTW, another example of a standing (or semi-standing) choke is way back in in one of the early UFCs. Ken Shamrock and Royce Gracie were fighting. Gracie got Shamrock’s back while Shamrock was crouching down. Shamrock went down for an ankle lock and Gracie caught him in the choke.
I believe Royce managed to get Ken’s back when he (ken) attempted to turn into Royce to escape the cross side- when he did, he left his neck wide open (I dont think Royce technically had any hooks at all)
As far as why you dont see the RNC, I absolutely agree with that one- its pretty hard to get to someones back standing in an MMA match (certainly much more difficult than a submission wrestling match). The whole idea of a fighter being more mobile on his feet is a reason why you dont not just RNC’s, but many submissions on the feet. If you did manage to get someones back in MMA, I’d imagine it be much more practical to take them down and then work to get hooks in to take the back.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
