Angles for trips and judo tosses etc

[EatMyShorts]

What they never teach you in class.

Angle to opponents center line sets the momentum for every throw.

I applied the "angle" concept to wrestling some time ago to great success, body lock tosses etc.

Now trips and sweeps, same concept.

 

[EatMyShorts]

....

Begs the question - why don't teach in class?

I've been to umpteen schools and never once did any coach ever clearly illustrate the concept of angles (except in a muay thai school - for striking).

Given every throw and wrestling turn is based on it - do they just expect students to grasp it by default?

Is it like a, right of passage for wrestling/judo, you have to personally deduce how to grasp the concept of angles?

 

[CFGroup]

Gotta be way more specific.

"angles"

In what context?

My schools have always taught angles for Maai, Kazushi Tsukuri and Kake.

Each throw has a set of angles to unbalance, to intersect and to project. Some throws have similar angles of Tai Sabaki some have similar spatial distances of mat angles....it's almost an infinite study of angles....

Give us more specifics.....

 

[efficientjudo]

Agree with CFGroup - Kazushi is inherently about angles, so I'm not sure if I understand what you mean by the 'angles concept'?

 

[TheFakeMacoy]

Every dojo I have been to has taught the importance of angles for throws. This is both when initially learning the throws as well as when applying them in combinations. I don't know what the quality of judo instruction is like where TS is, but if they are not teaching you about appropriate angles for throws then they were teaching you poorly.

 

[shunyata]

They just didn't use the "angle" word.

But the concept is fundamental, and different words are often used to describe it.

"enter from here"

"this is the kazushi"

"uki should be sent this way, in this vector"

"the force of the throw goes in this direction"

etc.

 

[EatMyShorts]

Gotta be way more specific.

"angles"

In what context?

My schools have always taught angles for Maai, Kazushi Tsukuri and Kake.

Each throw has a set of angles to unbalance, to intersect and to project. Some throws have similar angles of Tai Sabaki some have similar spatial distances of mat angles....it's almost an infinite study of angles....

Give us more specifics.....

Angles,

Meaning - stand square to opponent - facing directly into their power = 10x more difficult (or impossible) for us to finish a throw/takedown.

Step "around" the opponent essentially - so that we still face into them, but our position "by-passes" their straight-on direction - we're no longer "square" to them.

i.e. if they stepped forward, they'd miss us - but the angle we're at, if we stepped forward, we'd go straight into them.

We're square to them - they're not square to us = we have the angle on them.

....

Well, no one ever clearly explained that to me, in wrestling, BJJ, anywhere.

But it's clearly the concept behind every takedown - they're all entered into and finished at an angle.

 

[EatMyShorts]

Take this by example - Khabibs chest is pressing into his opponent's side.
i.e. he's square to his opponent, his opponent is not square to him.

Actually, Weidman explains it well here - though he uses an angle on one side to switch to an angle on the other side.

But the core concept is - "MY HIPS ARE PERPENDICULAR TO HIS".

i.e. I have the angle on him; I'm square to his body, he's not square to mine.

 

[Daz2300]

Angles,

Meaning - stand square to opponent - facing directly into their power = 10x more difficult (or impossible) for us to finish a throw/takedown.

Step "around" the opponent essentially - so that we still face into them, but our position "by-passes" their straight-on direction - we're no longer "square" to them.

i.e. if they stepped forward, they'd miss us - but the angle we're at, if we stepped forward, we'd go straight into them.

We're square to them - they're not square to us = we have the angle on them.

....

Well, no one ever clearly explained that to me, in wrestling, BJJ, anywhere.

But it's clearly the concept behind every takedown - they're all entered into and finished at an angle.

In BJJ people normally talk about it using names like 'the Dead Angle' or 'where he has no base' when talking about sweeps.

In a wrestling or judo context you're always being taught to create that angle as part of the technique through circling, drawing them with collars or collar ties, using feints or real opening attacks to make move so you're square to them etc. even when the coach isn't spelling it out surely?

 

[efficientjudo]

But it's clearly the concept behind every takedown - they're all entered into and finished at an angle.

not true - a technique like Tomoe-nage is often performed from both in a square stance, need to break the opponents balance forward - and occurs in a direct line forwards (or backwards from the attackers perspective)

 

[EatMyShorts]

not true - a technique like Tomoe-nage is often performed from both in a square stance, need to break the opponents balance forward - and occurs in a direct line forwards (or backwards from the attackers perspective)

More an exception, and kind of a bad example cause technically the angle based leverage is just redirected to getting under them vs to the side.

Still an angle to their direction of power.

Focus is angles - not going directly into their line of power = effectiveness.

I just came across this clip,



Mid way there's a lovely transition to a very straight forward body lock/trip takedown - but it emphasizes the use of the angle to his opponents center line very well.

Steps outside - hips perpendicular to his opponents = easy takedown.

 

[Chandler sama]

I see this taught quite often although maybe note using the term "angle". Also it isn't actually true that you have to attack from an angle, you can attack them square, but considering human arms are the strongest in that position it is usually better to attack at some angle. In judo the whole point of Kuzushi is to break their balance and get them out of position, so I'd argue that "angles" are part of that and most people understand the concept. In BJJ I've often heard people say "don't run into his power".

I think the reason you don't hear people say it is because it isn't always true, although it is a useful rule of thumb most of the time. A better concept/framework is "weak plane/strong plane", but even has exceptions.

 

[TheMaster]

Begs the question - why don't teach in class?

I've been to umpteen schools and never once did any coach ever clearly illustrate the concept of angles (except in a muay thai school - for striking).

Given every throw and wrestling turn is based on it - do they just except students to grasp it by default?

Is it like a, right of passage for wrestling/judo, you have to personally deduce how to grasp the concept of angles?

Because it's not true.

Not every throw in Judo works like that.
Ippon seo nage is a good example.
You are not 'square to him at an angle', you need to get your hips in is more important and turn through to complete the throw.



For me, getting the position of the hips in is the core principle for many Judo throws.
Angles are part of this but less important since you can manouver your hips in from many angles.

 

[EatMyShorts]

Because it's not true.

Not every throw in Judo works like that.
Ippon seo nage is a good example.
You are not 'square to him at an angle', you need to get your hips in is more important and turn through to complete the throw.



For me, getting the position of the hips in is the core principle for many Judo throws.
Angles are part of this but less important since you can manouver your hips in from many angles.

Even for that technique to pull off in situation which is more intense than a drill, I find one must really create an angle to the opponents body to have a straight line to their arm, in a sense.

I personally can only ever pull that off by kind stepping back and turning to face their arm, which creates an angle to their body.

I think there's resistance cause of historical conventions when it comes to these techniques - which leaves some people as per last two post which can "pick up intuitively" on the concept - and others that follow conventional instruction that will never be able to pull them off.

Which I guess is also why someone who can actually pull off a slick judo toss would be more the exception that the rule in mma.

The governing concept is simply taught so poorly and there's an inherent idea that one should just, "get it" by virtue of the technique itself, without illustration of the core principle.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

I think TS is right. Very often this aspect is neglected. In most dojos I have seen, attacks and kuzushi are by default in a straight line when being taught.

 

[Paolo Delutis]

What they never teach you in class.

Angle to opponents center line sets the momentum for every throw.

I applied the "angle" concept to wrestling some time ago to great success, body lock tosses etc.

Now trips and sweeps, same concept.

Been taught this since day one...kewaza ( balance) both your own and your opponents has to do with frame,footwork,centerline and offsets or angles as you said ..

No way they dont teach this in judo schools...i learned it in my Japanese Jiujitsu Dojo ...

 

[EatMyShorts]

I think TS is right. Very often this aspect is neglected. In most dojos I have seen, attacks and kuzushi are by default in a straight line when being taught.

 

[EatMyShorts]

Some nice throws/trips which are done straight on, against an upright opponent.

It's still the angle, but from a different angle, basically.

The angle he gets is, down in front of his opponent, vs to the side.

 

[EatMyShorts]

I guess you could argue the double leg to lift finish - uses the "underneath" angle also - vs the perpendicular angle.

 

[EatMyShorts]

Inside angle (getting an angle inside their centerline - making our hips perpendicular to theirs)

For throws of this nature.


Outside angle (getting an angle OUTSIDE their centerline - making their hips perpendicular to ours)

...for throws of this nature.


And then arguably "underneath" angle - which is really more changing levels.