David Jacobs' BJJGround Submission only is unbearable

4/16/18 2:53 AM
7/27/13
Posts: 2420

Its unwatchable. 

I do believe submission only started from a good place. People were sick of competitors solely “fighting for points & advantages” in an IBJJF setting while watching the clock wind down.

The theory was that if there were no points and ONLY submissions it would make for not only more entertaining matches, but also more realistic fight scenarios. There would be less barimbolos and more armbars. The fighters would be going for the kill.

Ive tried watching several submission only events and it was so passive/lack luster. 2 fighters sitting on their butts looking bored while they play with each others legs until one of them got 2 on 1 leg control. There’s virtually no incentive to attempt a guard pass as it expends a tremendous amount of energy, and even if you managed to do it in no gi, there’s  high likely hood the opponent on bottom will just sneak his leg back in eventually. Why expend that much energy to get a good position for a submission when youre already in a position for a submission, and can just learn the leg entanglement game. 

The points were established to replicate the importance of position in an actual fight.  I still feel the points make for more realistic fight scenarios, and I would still rather watch 2 bjj practitioners fighting to achieve/prevent a guard pass with all their effort then play with eahothers legs. Yes certain rules need to be put in place to make it more entertainting, but the answer isn’t submission only. Amateur wrestling has many established rules and is notorious for its fast paced exciting matches. Do you know how incredibly boring it would be if it was changed to “pin only” wrestling. 

4/16/18 8:25 AM
9/7/17
Posts: 136

I like your analogy to 'pin only' wrestling. I've used that analogy before as well as KO only boxing, etc.

I like sub-only but in small doses. I don't think it;s the end all be all. In general my take has always been that exciting grapplers will generally be exciting regardless of the rules. What I do like about sub-only is that when you get exciting and well rounded grapplers doing them then you do see a lot of fun matches where they're attacking from all angles and aren't worried about losing position. That aspect is cool.

My biggest gripes with sub-only are that matches become less memorable to me for 3 main reason.

1. I only remember the end, because any cool guard passes or sweeps or back attacks during the match don't count for anything, and maybe the opponent wasn't fighting them 100%. In a points match I feel like everything matters and a good points match has me more on the edge of my seat.

2. Sub-only can make subs harder. Craig Jones even says this. Points matches force people into more dilemmas ("Do I defend the guard pass to not get scored on or do I defend the choke?" "Do I defend the second hook to prevent points or go ahead and defend the choke?") So ironically points matches show a wider variety of subs I think. Most subs in sub-only seem to be most heel hooks, and then some RNCs, some front headlock subs, and some subs from the kimura grip.

3. Sub-only lacks that 'final minute' factor. That final minute where someone is down by a small margin and can score a sweep or a pass or something to win, and you see this intense final minute or two.

4/16/18 9:48 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 3201
I've said it many times on here, the best match format would be no time limit points where you win either by submission or by reaching a specific points target. Cuts out the issues with sub only and the stalling that can occur in standard points formats.

James
4/16/18 9:53 AM
9/7/17
Posts: 138
Sir Taps - I've said it many times on here, the best match format would be no time limit points where you win either by submission or by reaching a specific points target. Cuts out the issues with sub only and the stalling that can occur in standard points formats.

James

Exactly this.

So for a brief period Jeff Glover was running a tournament called Sunday Rollout and he said he modified the rules from an old obscure Gracie format, but the rules were first to 12 points or submission. Whichever came first. It was a weekly tournament and I think it only lasted for a few months but I think the majority of their matches did end by submission and they stayed exciting because there was always an incentive to push the pace whether it be positionally, or attacking subs, or both. Plus 12 points is enough to see at least a couple good transitions and positions.

4/16/18 1:30 PM
4/26/13
Posts: 3759
Sir Taps - I've said it many times on here, the best match format would be no time limit points where you win either by submission or by reaching a specific points target. Cuts out the issues with sub only and the stalling that can occur in standard points formats.

James

I will highly warn against this.  Olympic tkd went this route for a few years and it was a disaster.  First one to 12 won.  All of the sudden in the second round matches would become sudden death.  It was hated by everyone and a bad representation of the art and ineffective in determining who is best.

 

I also don’t want to see a victory by point margin.  Defeats a core principle of Jiu Jitsu that the fight can be won at any moment.

i believe fight to win currently has the bet rule set.  Time limit, judged on aggression and skill display, and no draws.

4/16/18 1:52 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 3202
Easters - 
Sir Taps - I've said it many times on here, the best match format would be no time limit points where you win either by submission or by reaching a specific points target. Cuts out the issues with sub only and the stalling that can occur in standard points formats.

James

I will highly warn against this.  Olympic tkd went this route for a few years and it was a disaster.  First one to 12 won.  All of the sudden in the second round matches would become sudden death.  It was hated by everyone and a bad representation of the art and ineffective in determining who is best.

 

I also don’t want to see a victory by point margin.  Defeats a core principle of Jiu Jitsu that the fight can be won at any moment.

i believe fight to win currently has the bet rule set.  Time limit, judged on aggression and skill display, and no draws.


I think there's a difference though between scoring in a striking art vs grappling. As long as there's good reffing to stop fighters disengaging to just try and win by takedowns, then I think it could work for BJ. But I take your point.

James
4/16/18 2:10 PM
7/31/09
Posts: 4055

I’d like to see the first to 12 or sub but you have to have some sort of time limit for the sake of practicality. 30 min should be sufficient. If it gets to the time limit then award the win to the person with the longest top control. That might be too punitive against guard play, but it would certainly shake things up.

Also, it would be interesting to see bjj with pinning or passivity rules in place. Mainly I’d just like to see it out of general curiosity because every other major grappling art rewards the pin/control heavily.  I think sambo awards points for pins but it isn’t always a win based on the rule set. 

4/16/18 8:22 PM
7/18/05
Posts: 7065
robbie380 -

I’d like to see the first to 12 or sub but you have to have some sort of time limit for the sake of practicality. 30 min should be sufficient. If it gets to the time limit then award the win to the person with the longest top control. That might be too punitive against guard play, but it would certainly shake things up.

Also, it would be interesting to see bjj with pinning or passivity rules in place. Mainly I’d just like to see it out of general curiosity because every other major grappling art rewards the pin/control heavily.  I think sambo awards points for pins but it isn’t always a win based on the rule set. 

So pretty much like the old Gracie Tournaments.

4/17/18 12:46 AM
6/5/14
Posts: 198

Sub

4/19/18 1:12 AM
2/5/06
Posts: 2991

What if you could win by submission or maintaining a dominant position like mount/back/side for a certain time period like a minute? This would be similar to winning in Judo with an opponent throw, submission, or 30 second pin. This would give a valid reason to attempt to pass the guard and get a dominant position and people would fight like hell to not get passed. Downside would be extreme stalling from people getting a dominant position.

4/19/18 5:55 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 3204
robbie380 - 

I’d like to see the first to 12 or sub but you have to have some sort of time limit for the sake of practicality. 30 min should be sufficient. If it gets to the time limit then award the win to the person with the longest top control. That might be too punitive against guard play, but it would certainly shake things up.

Also, it would be interesting to see bjj with pinning or passivity rules in place. Mainly I’d just like to see it out of general curiosity because every other major grappling art rewards the pin/control heavily.  I think sambo awards points for pins but it isn’t always a win based on the rule set. 


Passivity rules do exist, but aren't used enough IMO.

I've posted about it before on here, but I'd really like to see a comp run using points for major control positions only - side control, mount, and back mount. I don't like seeing someone sweep from guard, finish up in their opponent's half guard, and then celebrate. You've not finished the job yet, you don't have full control. BJJ is a system of control, yet it allows for scoring without having total control.

James
4/19/18 8:26 AM
2/1/08
Posts: 1518
Sir Taps - 
robbie380 - 

I’d like to see the first to 12 or sub but you have to have some sort of time limit for the sake of practicality. 30 min should be sufficient. If it gets to the time limit then award the win to the person with the longest top control. That might be too punitive against guard play, but it would certainly shake things up.

Also, it would be interesting to see bjj with pinning or passivity rules in place. Mainly I’d just like to see it out of general curiosity because every other major grappling art rewards the pin/control heavily.  I think sambo awards points for pins but it isn’t always a win based on the rule set. 


Passivity rules do exist, but aren't used enough IMO.

I've posted about it before on here, but I'd really like to see a comp run using points for major control positions only - side control, mount, and back mount. I don't like seeing someone sweep from guard, finish up in their opponent's half guard, and then celebrate. You've not finished the job yet, you don't have full control. BJJ is a system of control, yet it allows for scoring without having total control.

James

But it's also supposed to encourage positions of use in a fight, and being on top in a fight is definitely of value. Would you want to take away incentives for takedowns and other ways to get on top?
4/19/18 8:49 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 3206
I get your point, but you'd get rewarded for being on top, but only when you have complete control. Why settle for half control?

James
4/19/18 2:22 PM
2/1/08
Posts: 1519
Sir Taps - I get your point, but you'd get rewarded for being on top, but only when you have complete control. Why settle for half control?

James

Because top in of itself is of value in a fight, even if you are not in side control.  I think taking someone from neutral standing or bottom position to being on top should be rewarded, just like any other positional improvement.  

4/19/18 3:50 PM
1/1/01
Posts: 3207

That's where we disagree. IMO positional improvement is only worthwhile if you do something with it, and I think currently we have a situation in comps where people sweep for the sake of the points, not to then continue and progress.

 

James

4/19/18 4:37 PM
2/1/08
Posts: 1520

How is getting on top and then "not doing something with it" any different than getting to side control or mount and not doing something with it? 

4/20/18 1:09 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 12818
You want action....Have a pin and back rule, 45sec....you dead. Ippon throw onto the back. Sitting=lose. No gripping restrictions, but have stalling and defensive grip rule.....3or4 shido and lose. All subs/attacks legal down to rape choking, neck crank and wrist locking.
4/20/18 5:01 AM
2/15/14
Posts: 472
Sgt. Slaphead - You want action....Have a pin and back rule, 45sec....you dead. Ippon throw onto the back. Sitting=lose. No gripping restrictions, but have stalling and defensive grip rule.....3or4 shido and lose. All subs/attacks legal down to rape choking, neck crank and wrist locking.

ADCC has basically all of what you described besides the parts about pin, ippon, and sitting lose. Minus points for guard pulls and incentives for takedowns that land in dominant positions really encourage more wrestling and clinch skills. They could enfore stalling better though. 

All subs allowed and slams in addtion. As close as you can find for now

4/20/18 7:43 AM
4/25/11
Posts: 2242

Sporr Jiu jitsu needs a tech fall victory path.

If you are up by 8 or 10 the match should be over. Also there should be stalling rules enforced, first a warning, then 1 point to the opponent after each additional stalling call. 

Yea I don't like sub only much either. Giving up dominant positions should mean you are losing. I think alot of this could be solved by eliminating overtime and just doing a judges decision at end of regulation.

4/20/18 7:44 AM
9/14/13
Posts: 6585

watch quintet, shit was amazing

4/20/18 7:45 AM
4/25/11
Posts: 2243
mideastgrappler -
Sgt. Slaphead - You want action....Have a pin and back rule, 45sec....you dead. Ippon throw onto the back. Sitting=lose. No gripping restrictions, but have stalling and defensive grip rule.....3or4 shido and lose. All subs/attacks legal down to rape choking, neck crank and wrist locking.

ADCC has basically all of what you described besides the parts about pin, ippon, and sitting lose. Minus points for guard pulls and incentives for takedowns that land in dominant positions really encourage more wrestling and clinch skills. They could enfore stalling better though. 

All subs allowed and slams in addtion. As close as you can find for now

Actually there is a rule set that is closer....

You guys should take a look at the UWW grappling competition rules.

4/20/18 10:59 AM
9/7/17
Posts: 141
mideastgrappler - 
Sgt. Slaphead - You want action....Have a pin and back rule, 45sec....you dead. Ippon throw onto the back. Sitting=lose. No gripping restrictions, but have stalling and defensive grip rule.....3or4 shido and lose. All subs/attacks legal down to rape choking, neck crank and wrist locking.

ADCC has basically all of what you described besides the parts about pin, ippon, and sitting lose. Minus points for guard pulls and incentives for takedowns that land in dominant positions really encourage more wrestling and clinch skills. They could enfore stalling better though. 

All subs allowed and slams in addtion. As close as you can find for now


In a way ADCC does have ippon but I don't know that I've ever seen it play out. If you throw someone cleanly and land past their guard then it's 4 points (which is more than even the back control) and it's almost impossible to recover from a 4 point deficit at ADCC.

4/22/18 2:46 AM
7/27/13
Posts: 2424

EBI style of sub only is even worse. You got guys stalling till overtime, then stalling while on someone’s back for “ride time”. How can you win a “submission only” match, without getting a submission.? 

 

“But he won’t be paid!” 

Most tournament winners aren’t 

4/25/18 9:23 AM
1/1/01
Posts: 3851
I think that the best rule set is Abu Dhabi match rules where the first 5 minutes are sub-only and the next 5 are points, with EBI-Overtime rules, if that is necessary.

I guess I am a bigger fan of sub only than all of you, although I don't like the fact that takedowns are meaningless. I don't really care about how cool a guard pass is or how awesome that transition was. These are nothing more than means that are used to reach the end, which is supposed to be a submission.
4/25/18 9:59 AM
9/14/13
Posts: 6610

bad sub only is prettey heinous, good sub only is awesome

also learning about leg locks makes the but scooting far more interesting