No points for body triangle back take - one od the dumbest rules?

Discussion in 'Grappling Technique' started by michi972, Aug 9, 2018.

  1. Alech33

    Alech33 White Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2018
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    46
    I can agree with that, that getting the triangle is easier than hooks but what I was saying is actually ending up behind the person is the hardest part of the back take. Getting the triangle vs the hooks is the icing on the cake
     
  2. THEfightsAREfixed

    THEfightsAREfixed White Belt

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2018
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    116
    Yes is it dumb, but the entire premise of awarding points for certain transitions from one to another, and the initiation, and not for the positions themselves is even more dumber.

    There isn't a logically consistent thread for the rules outside whatever subjective "art" interpretation people want to believe in.
     
    Calibur likes this.
  3. esteven

    esteven Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2012
    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    72
    Location:
    Wisconsin, United States
    One dumb rule among many
     
  4. yetanother

    yetanother Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    813
    IBJJF rules where invented by stupid people so there are a lot of vague and silly situations where how you sweep someone determines if you get points.
    There is some merit in not getting points when you are in bottom side and reverse position because the top guy messed up a sub as that encourages him to attack instead of hold you there for all eternity.
     
  5. rmongler

    rmongler Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    4,639
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Location:
    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    A risible line of thought; should we perhaps award people extra points for doing a backflip before passing guard, because it is harder? Perhaps make it so they should let their opponent lock in a triangle in first, and it doesn't count if they don't?

    Why would you not want methods that most easily accomplish a desired objective? Do you like effective martial skills or not?
     
    esteven likes this.
  6. yetanother

    yetanother Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    813
    For the sake of arguments if two skills where equally more valuable (like usable in a street fight or entertaining to the audience whatever) and one was harder to perform in a BJJ match it would make sense to give more points for it to encourage a more varied arsenal.
     
  7. rmongler

    rmongler Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    4,639
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Location:
    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

    Im not sure it would make sense at all.

    A stronger argument i would acknowledge would be in terms of spectacle; extra reward for certain tactics, techniques, or procedures, because they would be more exciting.
     
    EGDM likes this.
  8. yetanother

    yetanother Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    813
    Difficult exiting tactics would need a higher rewards because they are more difficult to do.
    But the rules are for historical reasons rather then carefully constructed.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2018
  9. Ice 9 Cobra

    Ice 9 Cobra Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    229
    My understanding is it isnt scored because you are able to get body locks from angles where you aren't fully square on the back, if you have long legs.
     
  10. Calibur

    Calibur Jiu Jitsu Snob

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    8,908
    Likes Received:
    783
    Location:
    Fuchu City, Tokyo
    Even after all these years, the mental gymnastic popping up to justify these rules amaze me.
     
  11. yetanother

    yetanother Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    813
    It would be super interesting what sort of rules the general population of competitors want.
    Based on the internet you would assume people want heel hooks in the gi for white belts, -1 for guard pulling and +5 points for a high amplitude power bomb slam but I doubt it's the case.
     
    TheGZA likes this.
  12. thegreenblender

    thegreenblender Brown Belt

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,014
    Likes Received:
    263
    As a tall guy who'd actually benefit, I sort of agree with the rule, on the grounds of ambiguity. I can be in closed guard, going for a back take and have body triangle *and* seatbelt without actually being belly-to-back on a guy, where I need to be if I'm going to actually be effective...a "side", still sorta beneath the guy body triangle if you will, which I find pretty worthless.

    Getting the hooks pretty much requires you have to be squarely on his back, or fully consolidated.
     
    TheGZA likes this.
  13. cjd

    cjd Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2013
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    203
    Given how many weird, hyper-specific rules get added to the rulebook annually, I'm pretty sure we could come up with a straightforward definition of "back control" that includes body triangles, leg across, *and* hooks that also excludes obvious edge cases, WHILE still being relatively straightforward amongst the corpus of the IBJJF rulebook.
     
    esteven likes this.
  14. yetanother

    yetanother Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    2,681
    Likes Received:
    813
    If the change happened the IBJJF would just add the worlds "body triangle" to the rulebook and have the rest explained in a rules seminar.
     
    cjd likes this.
  15. SidRon

    SidRon White Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    84
    This
     

Share This Page