UnderGround Forums
 

BJJGround Forum >> 2 points for taking the back with no hooks in BJJ?


11/22/12 11:42 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/22/12 11:42 PM
Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 702
 

For years, I've been thinking that this should be the case.  For instance...

If grappler A pulls guard, then grappler B proceeds to double stack him, knee cut across pass, etc., and puts all sorts of unholy pressure on the bottom man, passing his guard many times momentarily, but bottom man (grappler A) avoids the pass points by bailing out to fours seven or eight times in the match... Grappler B goes for the hooks, goes for submissions, etc., but can't finish... and if all of a sudden, grappler A gets up and does a single takedown with 10 seconds left... Grappler A wins?

I don't know if you can visualize the scenario I'm talking about - but it looks really weird when it happens.

Personally, I'm against penalty-free guard pulling - but I can accept it.  You are going into a somewhat nuetral position on the ground, where a good submission artist can attack with lots of subs and sweeps... however, from bottom turtle, your options are relatively limited... the only reliable subs you got a kimura and a rolling kneebar and a very limited selection of sweeps... one can argue that there are more or less just as much sweeps and submissions available from bottom side control.

A lot of the scoring for positions was supposed to be to reward good positioning for self defense... but taking the back with no hooks is definitely better than being in the guard... a lot more better than an advantage point is worth (IMO). 

In my opinion, taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds of control, should be two points... a point less than a full guard pass to side control.

What do you guys think?

 

11/22/12 11:47 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Baroquen Record
22 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/20/07
Posts: 17025
I think it's too easy to get someone in turtle position for it to be worth 2 points Phone Post
11/22/12 11:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/22/12 11:48 PM
Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 703

Baroquen, is it REALLY too easy... or is it easy because people don't mind getting put to turtle because there are no point deductions?

11/22/12 11:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 704

For example, I train for MMA / Self Defense, and it is definitely not easy for someone to get behind me with no hooks.  Is it easier than passing to side control?  Yeah.  That is why I think it should be worth less points.  But it is definitely not easy, no way.

11/23/12 12:21 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 705

I'm not too concerned HolyAvengerP5, but this is a BJJ forum, is it not? :)  Would you prefer if I started a thread about internet marketing? lmao :)

But yeah, I do have a "dog in the fight" with sport grappling since some of my students compete in grappling tournaments and my brother still competes in grappling tournaments as well.

Do you have any rules you would like to see tweaked or do you think the system is perfect?

11/23/12 12:36 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
joshjitsu
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/6/08
Posts: 4941
Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
11/23/12 12:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Baroquen Record
22 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/20/07
Posts: 17026
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post
11/23/12 12:43 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 706
Baroquen Record - 
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post

I like even a point for the back... something.  However, I wouldn't like to give a point for everything that is currently ruled an advantage... imagine the controversy when somebody gets a point for a shaky looking submission or gets a point for a near sweep or takedown...

But taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds control, is a definitive position... not as subjective as deciding to give points for a near takedown, sweep, or submission.

11/23/12 2:18 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
burner22
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/17/12
Posts: 331
Marcos Avellan -
Baroquen Record - 
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post

I like even a point for the back... something.  However, I wouldn't like to give a point for everything that is currently ruled an advantage... imagine the controversy when somebody gets a point for a shaky looking submission or gets a point for a near sweep or takedown...

But taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds control, is a definitive position... not as subjective as deciding to give points for a near takedown, sweep, or submission.

So what you define as 'taking the back' then. Seatbelt grip? Double unders? Or just having the guy in turtle and being behind him? Phone Post
11/23/12 5:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Jessy30
9 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/28/10
Posts: 629
I think you make a great case for it. Thus far no one has given any reasons NOT to. For sure bjj should be about improving position and points are awarded for just that. this is without doubt an improved position. Phone Post
11/23/12 6:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
trianglegrrl
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 11/23/12 6:50 AM
Member Since: 8/25/07
Posts: 1319
I think the more obvious (and necessary) rule change would be to give back points for body triangles and/or ankles crossed.

But I'm with Josh, I don't think it's worth two points. I'd love to see some way to push the action, though: forcing the person on the bottom to move instead of staying turtled. Unfortunately I don't think awarding two points would do that.
11/23/12 6:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Jessy30
9 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/28/10
Posts: 630
^^^Really??? I absolutely think it would!!! If I go turtle to try to keep from getting side mounted and I have three seconds to keep you from scoring points I am going to scramble for my life! Phone Post
11/23/12 7:23 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
joshjitsu
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/6/08
Posts: 4943
I agree, giving points regardless of if you have your ankles crossed or a body triangle is a more pressing issue. Phone Post
11/23/12 8:14 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PayItForward
162 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/02
Posts: 13583
wrestling wouldn't give the points.
11/23/12 8:34 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
JRockwell
89 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/13/02
Posts: 7030
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
Agree on the crucifix! Phone Post
11/23/12 9:20 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ChipW
162 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/2/10
Posts: 1582
PayItForward - wrestling wouldn't give the points.
Yes , I think wrestling would give the points. The position he's talking about would be considered control for the top guy, it is scored a takedown in folkstyle wrestling.

I Agree with the OP that this position should be worth seething to grappler B Phone Post
11/23/12 9:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PayItForward
162 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/02
Posts: 13588
personally, i think if you establish control w/ the seatbelt or belly to back double unders, a point should be awarded.
11/23/12 9:51 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Baroquen Record
22 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/20/07
Posts: 17027
Marcos Avellan -
Baroquen Record - 
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post

I like even a point for the back... something.  However, I wouldn't like to give a point for everything that is currently ruled an advantage... imagine the controversy when somebody gets a point for a shaky looking submission or gets a point for a near sweep or takedown...

But taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds control, is a definitive position... not as subjective as deciding to give points for a near takedown, sweep, or submission.

True, 1 point I think would be more realistic for the turtle/no hook back take. But I don't really compete enough to have a valid opinion. Phone Post
11/23/12 9:53 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ChokeTheFace
11 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/27/06
Posts: 1067
Back is 2 pts in NAGA rules. I believe they have a much better nogi rule set then the IBJJF. Phone Post
11/23/12 10:10 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Calibur1980
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/16/08
Posts: 556
I think this would just make BJJ more unrealistic. No one uses an active turtle because no matter how well you sweep your opponent from there you get no points.

You already get an advantage putting someone in turtle.

Now we want to make turtle even less explorable for giving points for just getting on top?

That's crazy when you consider all the utility it has in MMA. You can't call turtle an inferior position and still say the guard isn't. Phone Post
11/23/12 10:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 707
Calibur1980 -  I think this would just make BJJ more unrealistic. No one uses an active turtle because no matter how well you sweep your opponent from there you get no points.

You already get an advantage putting someone in turtle.

Now we want to make turtle even less explorable for giving points for just getting on top?

That's crazy when you consider all the utility it has in MMA. You can't call turtle an inferior position and still say the guard isn't. Phone Post

Your post confuses me...

You said that "no one uses an active turtle because no matter how well you sweep your opponent from there, you get no points,"... that isn't true?  If you sweep your opponent from turtle, you do get two points... no?

You also said, "That's crazy when you consider all the utility it has in MMA."

Are you arguing that the turtle has as much utility in MMA as the guard?  And the little utility the turtle does have in MMA would not translate to real fighting... the "no strikes to the back of the head and spine" and "no knees/kicks to a grounded opponent" rules really give the turtle the little utility it has.  In MMA, the vast majority does not use the turtle as an offensive position, but rather people bail out to turtle when being overwhelmed by strikes (which only works for them becuase of the striking rules on the ground) or when trying to get back up to their feet...

If we were going to make a list of all the submissions and sweeps in MMA that have happened from the turtle versus from the guard... which do you think would be higher?

 

11/23/12 11:00 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 708
ChokeTheFace -  Back is 2 pts in NAGA rules. I believe they have a much better nogi rule set then the IBJJF. Phone Post

Yes it is, and despite what a few have said here, people are not giving up points for this position in NAGA comps.  It isn't like people are going around flipping people to turtle and getting easy points... people fight much harder when they know they will give points up for the position.

11/23/12 11:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 709
joshjitsu -  I agree, giving points regardless of if you have your ankles crossed or a body triangle is a more pressing issue. Phone Post

Yes, yes, yes!

The body triangle is a more secure position than the hooks... otherwise, you wouldn't have people take the back with the body triangle, switch to the hooks, get their points, and then switch back to body triangle :)  If hooks were superior, people would stay with the hooks.  I agree with this 100%

11/23/12 11:03 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Marcos Avellan
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/28/09
Posts: 710
burner22 - 
Marcos Avellan -
Baroquen Record - 
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post

I like even a point for the back... something.  However, I wouldn't like to give a point for everything that is currently ruled an advantage... imagine the controversy when somebody gets a point for a shaky looking submission or gets a point for a near sweep or takedown...

But taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds control, is a definitive position... not as subjective as deciding to give points for a near takedown, sweep, or submission.

So what you define as 'taking the back' then. Seatbelt grip? Double unders? Or just having the guy in turtle and being behind him? Phone Post

Personally, I think any sort of back control.  If the guy stays turtled for more than three seconds, then I'm guessing control has been established.

11/23/12 11:06 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
deepu
27 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 15098
burner22 - 
Marcos Avellan -
Baroquen Record - 
joshjitsu - Nah, I can see an advantage but not 2 points. I would rather see 2 points for a crucifix from the back before that. Phone Post
How about no advantages at all and have whatever would have been an advantage count as 1 point. Phone Post

I like even a point for the back... something.  However, I wouldn't like to give a point for everything that is currently ruled an advantage... imagine the controversy when somebody gets a point for a shaky looking submission or gets a point for a near sweep or takedown...

But taking the back with no hooks, with three seconds control, is a definitive position... not as subjective as deciding to give points for a near takedown, sweep, or submission.

So what you define as 'taking the back' then. Seatbelt grip? Double unders? Or just having the guy in turtle and being behind him? Phone Post

This. How do you define 'Taking the back' without hooks? Even worse is you have side mount and the guy underneath turns away exposing his back ... not quite turtle, but almost.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.