The ability to manipulate and control an opponent (once taking them to the ground) is an essential skill set that we attempt to impart upon our students. Though not always applicable (in every situation), when it is (and is safe to do so), possessing this ability can allow the user to prevent injury as well as escalate to any necessary control levels (including injury).
When beginning to guide student's through this process, we explain (and provide literature in regards to) the range of motion (ROM) for the bodies limbs. These ranges are the (clinical) standards. It's our opinion that with these, the student can estimate the limits that one can motion a limb (before dislocation/damage results). From the learning of those standards, one can limit (or create) the amount of injury being inflicted upon an uke/controlled subject. Although pain, is usually the associated indication of reaching a range limit, it should not be considered the major indicator for having effected control over a subject. If/when a subject is under the influence of (some) substance (drugs, alcohol, medication etc.) pain will be the last thing that a subject may experience.
Understanding the natural motions, ranges and limits of those motions can provide the tori/student with the necessary knowledge to vary a technique's application to correct any miss-application or for countering any attempted escapes (by the uke).
The placement of an aggressor/uke, face-down upon the ground can/will negate any (serious) attempts on their part, of continued or retaliatory strikes/aggressions against the tori. The tori also has the choice of blacking out the individual, if that would assist the tori in safely escaping a situation should the need arise. If a reader (of this blog) has access to the forum, they can examine the video's that have been provided there, showing the take-down aspect of the various technique's demonstrated there.
System's that emphasize placing the uke(aggressor) upon their back, are Sport based, plain and simple. If one is only placed upon their back, they still have all 4 limbs available for retaliatory strikes (not conducive to effective control of that subject). Oyata does have techniques and corrections, for if/when an uke lands on their back. Though not a planned action, it does happen (just not intentionally).
The whole MMA, and BJJ fanfare of late, is attempting to rewrite reality (IMO). It's actually a rarity for a fight to go to the ground (If, the defender has any training to prevent it from occurring to begin with). Once it does, it usually becomes a strength based conflict. Technique's and system's that emphasize those technique's(that are based upon strength) tend to appeal to young and strong students. Which (I suppose?) is fine (if your within that category), “I” am not, yet have no problem dealing with it, when presented with that situation. What I've observed, is that student's assume, that grappling begins on the ground. It should begin, when the uke/aggressor moves in to get hold of you. Whether they have attained (or are attempting to attain) that hold, one's defense should have already began.
When I observe their attempts being made for (their) take-downs, the tori's (lack of) preventative/counter motions are incredible (to myself). I can understand missing one's initial strikes (during their approach), but the lack of (effective) counter-strikes/holds being applied (against them) including once they (the aggressor) have achieved their hold (and/or take-down) are (or should be) embarrassing (IMO). Whether one's hands are trapped (inside of the aggressor's hold), or free (on top of the aggressor's grip), the tori has numerous targets available for utilization.
Regardless, if/when one end's up on the ground, a different approach (usually) needs to take place. Yes, you can cover (and hope for an opening for a counter-strike), but opportunities are few and far between (if the uke has already achieved a “mounted” position). The ground and pound methodology which seems to permeate these methods is (or should be) embarrassing in and of itself. I'm not saying they won't (eventually) work, but really doesn't fall into the “trained” professional category either. The mere fact that they train to mount someone, I find particularly bizarre to begin with. It serves no function, it offers no controlling abilities, leaves the person on bottom completely able to counter-strike, and mandates the “top” person to focus (only) on the person which they are sitting upon. I realize that they offer all these cute wrap-ups and holds, but I have yet to see one that doesn't leave the individual vulnerable at some point through it's enactment (especially, if the person has compatriots who will come to their aid when that situation occurs).
For our student's, we only recommend the placement of an aggressor/uke upon the ground if certain prerequisites are met. #1 That the uke/aggressor has no obvious friendly affiliations around (that would offer their assistance should you drop them and attempt a controlling technique). #2 That they can be placed there prone (upon their stomach), unless one is knowledgeable in the methods of immediately turning them over to attain the preferred prone position. Not every situation will allow for these circumstances to occur, when they don't (unfortunately), one will (often) be forced to inflict sufficient injury, to not allow the aggressor to retaliate (once the tori releases them).
Because we (tend to) gravitate towards L.E. training and application, we do an extensive amount of ground manipulation. When dealing with the L.E. application aspects, it's often necessary to avoid causing any (serious) physical injury to the uke (ie. suspect). This includes the passive resistance prisoner. These prisoners present particular problems for an arresting officer. The visual aspect (for observer's) can become an annoyance, LOL, but when the officer performs techniques that simply motivate the suspect in a particular direction (with limited physical contact upon the suspect), this seems to placate those who choose to whine about police brutality (when none exists).
Because we (tend to) gravitate towards L.E. training and application, we do an extensive amount of ground manipulation. When dealing with the L.E. application aspects, it's often necessary to avoid causing any (serious) physical injury to the uke (ie. suspect). This includes the passive resistance prisoner. These prisoners present particular problems for an arresting officer. The visual aspect (for observer's) can become an annoyance, LOL, but when the officer performs techniques that simply motivate the suspect in a particular direction (with limited physical contact upon the suspect), this seems to placate those who choose to whine about police brutality (when none exists).
