These posts have been removed from the sword and shield v single-sword thread in an attempt to preserve clarity in both discussions.

*I had a big reply posted up but it got eaten* :\

Anyway, to paraphrase;
- I'll concede most of your points

- I'll slightly re-phrase my arguement and say that CW is the best foundation for a mixed martial artist.

- I respect Sakuraba for showing that CW could be superior to bjj on it's own terms, if the wrestler understood how bjj worked.

- I think our difference over the influence thing comes about because (as far as I understand) you believe Carlos put a bit of a Brazillian spin on jj and called it jj, whereas I, not really knowing either way, took him at his word and consider he invented the style using principles of jj and testing it out in vale tudo comps.

just to claryfy: I ment Codex wallerstein when I wrote CW, I wonder if we are talking about the same thing. (the jungle of abbrevations)

Oh it was not you I commented that to rather to Taylor

yepp. But in the text there is, as I remember it, a reference to grabbing the arm after making space to do it by taking the thumb and then break the arm or something like that. Don´t have the text transcribed or translated here at work.

Martin

Yeah mate, I knew it was the Codex you were referring to. :D

[quote="David Black Mastro"]

Rabbe Jan-Olof Laine wrote:

There's some fighting off of one's back in Petter's 17th century manual too, but I haven't seen anything to suggest a truly comprehensive method of guardwork, as worked in judo and BJJ. The whole concept of this seems to be a purely Japanese innovation, that was later embraced (and retained) by Brazilian practitioners.

There are a handful of techniques for fighting from your stomach and from your back in the treatise by Martin Huntfeltz on judicial dueling in harness - this is included in the von Danzig manuscript, and elsewhere. These are a part of Huntfeltz's Unterhalten and Ston (Holding Down and Standing Up), essentially a sub-treatise within the treatise that deals with ground fighting. There are several page's worth of fairly ghastly things to do to your man on the ground too, including how to work him over with your dagger, and in the case of one of the fighting from one's back counters, prevent him from doing the same to you.

I suspect there's more of this stuff out there - I've got manuscripts in my possession that I've barely scratched the surface of, let alone the ones out there I haven't even seen.

Ground fighting is very important in medieval judicial duels - outside interference is strictly prohibited, often on pain of death. I suspect you don't find a lot of this stuff in early (or later) Western arts because it really is useful only in limited situations - dueling and sport. Submission holds on the ground in other tactical situations are simply invitations for the pinned man's friends to cut your throat from behind, unless you have psychological forces on your side, ie. you have authority (you're a cop) or pseudo-authority (you're a bouncer, security guard, etc.) that dissuades such interference.

All the best,

Christian

Well I tell ya this much, MMA is hard to do in mid forties, for me it finally became impossible due to my back.
Here is the website of the school I trained at www.hackneyscombat.com

The attatchment is a picture of Keith Hackney and myself from last year.

[quote="David Black Mastro"]

Christian Henry Tobler wrote:

The only thing I questioned was the specific idea of fighting off of one's back, which seems more of a Japanese approach (based on the existing evidence, at least). I would love to see the Huntfeltz treatise, however.

David,

I apologize - it just dawned on me that I never got back to you on this. Huntfeltz's treatise appears in von Danzig and several other sources, always as a subset to his gloss of Liechtenauer's armoured judicial combat.

I have the entire von Danzig work translated - the problem lies in identifying the right book project to have it in. As I'm now doing separate training books anyway, I'm not inclined to try to photographically interpret the entire von Danzig (a la "Secrets") - it's just too huge for that and would require two or three books, a tricky thing given that several of its treatises overlap each other considerably.

Instead, I'll likely bundle this translation with one or two others into some kind of "Three Medieval Fight Books" sort of title.

I've got a cache of manuscript candidates heading my way right now from Europe, so these may help to define just how such a project might take shape.

Now, lest I get you too pumped on this, bear in mind that Hunfeltz has only a little on fighting on your back - it's mostly how to put the other guy down and hold him long enough to dispatch him with the dagger.

All the best,

Christian

Hi All!

Here we come to the question of context again. It´s all up to situation. In a juridical fight submission could be used quite safley in the meaning that your opponents friends hardly is going to intervine. But in a barbrawl nhey sertenly would. Then it is the thing with what if you do the submission a little harder and with more speed, soome techniques then become breakings rather than submissions. This was the case David and I was talking about.

It goes like this;
Sakuraba is standing with his back against Gracie in a position simmilar to the one on the picture from CW.

S press away G´s left hand with his own right hand (in this case the whole hand because of Pride FC rules, but in a "real" fight a thumbgrip would do exellent).

When he got a small space between his body and G´s left arm he gets his arm in that space frum under and grabs G´s wrist with his own left hand.

Here he keep holding G´s hand and arm in this grip but turns to the left ad press his arm upp and around G´s position counterclockwise with force and speed until they both land on the ground in a arm bar.

The thing is that in this movment G´s elbow (and possibly shoulder) is dislocated in a quite horrofying way and the match is over.

What I think I mean is that the way a human body is constructed is the same all over the world and has been the last few 10 thousands years and the techniques would be simillar in many fightingsystems. Some of the things we look at in the manuals are probaly around still, and MMA is sometimes the closest thing to ringen we have. Also if we want to reconstruct ringen we should not disregard the friendly play that is refered to in many recordings from the past as a way to train for the real thing. And then we are very close to the Vale tudo/MMA stuff we see today in the media, IMO!

and all, thanks for a really nice discussion, hope it continues;)

Martin

Hi Christian,

Christian Henry Tobler wrote:

David Black Mastro wrote: Christian Henry Tobler wrote: The only thing I questioned was the specific idea of fighting off of one's back, which seems more of a Japanese approach (based on the existing evidence, at least). I would love to see the Huntfeltz treatise, however. David, I apologize - it just dawned on me that I never got back to you on this.

No biggie, bro. :)

Quote:

Huntfeltz's treatise appears in von Danzig and several other sources, always as a subset to his gloss of Liechtenauer's armoured judicial combat.

OK.

Quote:

I have the entire von Danzig work translated - the problem lies in identifying the right book project to have it in. As I'm now doing separate training books anyway, I'm not inclined to try to photographically interpret the entire von Danzig (a la "Secrets") - it's just too huge for that and would require two or three books, a tricky thing given that several of its treatises overlap each other considerably. Instead, I'll likely bundle this translation with one or two others into some kind of "Three Medieval Fight Books" sort of title. I've got a cache of manuscript candidates heading my way right now from Europe, so these may help to define just how such a project might take shape. Now, lest I get you too pumped on this, bear in mind that Hunfeltz has only a little on fighting on your back - it's mostly how to put the other guy down and hold him long enough to dispatch him with the dagger.

Hey, every little bit of info is well worth the effort! Thanks for the heads up, and I look forward to eventually seeing this stuff.

Best Regards,

David

Just a couple of questions David, :D

Quote:

I just think he continued what Maeda taught him. Maeda likewise tested his skills in mixed matches against Western wrestlers and boxers. FWIW, he was undefeated in these mixed matches.

I thought he lost both attempts at the catch tournaments he made? I'm guessing then it was by pin?

Quote:

Check out Mark Hewitt's Catch Wrestling, for a list of all the known early CACC vs. judo/jujutsu matches

And was cacc universally beaten by jj? I'm fairly sure I remember reading Farmer Burns commenting that jj had nothing in it that a good catch wrestler wasn't equipped to deal with?

Cheers mate. :)