Examples of people who train for points and those who train for submissions

I was reading an interview with Damien Meia and he mentioned that he trains for submissions rather than points.

I have heard this previously from other fighters but to me it seems you usually need position before submissions. The positions are usually ones that get you points.

I understand that there are people who play to just get their points and like to stall but I haven't really encountered a bjj school which will teach the students to just take this approach.

I was wondering what the fellow sherdoggers opinions are on this and what it means to train submissions rather than points.

 

position before submission, however, training for points means you have a goal to aim for getting points. Most guys will focus on position first, but not on the points themselves. Training for points in mind is just stupid imo, but just because people don't give up position for a submission, doesn't mean that thy're looking justr to score points.

 

I must admit that I have had many times where I have not felt comfortable giving up some positions to go for submissions. Its a bad habit its just that the people in my club are excellent at escaping and have guards that are a bitch to pass. I will be spending most of my time passing their guard just to get to a stable position. It doesn't leave much time left to get the submission.

I find maintaining side controll whilst going for a submission (unless I have their gi wrapped around behind their head or over their arm) very difficult. Its only when I get to the mount or back mount do I feel comfortable to go exclusively for submissions.

 

Brasa loves submission. Drysdale is the same way. Subs from everywhere.

 

Position before submission isnt about racking points. Its about slowing down and not spazzing out. You just passed a dudes guard and got side control, great. Dont Immediately jump for a kmura the instant you get past his legs though. You need to establish a good solid side control to work from. Especially if you're against a better opponent who you're gonna need to be tricky with. If you're gonna need to fake a gi choke for a kimura, or fake a kimura to get mount, you cant do any of this if you have some sloppy side control thats not actually controlling the guy.

 

I like to go for positioning, if I am confortable then I move to the submission, but the submission is secondary. That is just the way I roll, but of course I prefer to watch a guy that goes for submissions all the time.

I think you see a lot of guys (specially from brasa - as mentioned above) that go a lot for submissions, but I don't see any of them going for submissions relentlesly without positioning themselves superiorly first..

 

I like to LnP when I get a dominant position.

 

You need to play for points to help you get that submission. If you build up a lead, then your opponent is forced to open up and take more chances. This gives you a better opportunity to score a submission.

And don't get those guys wrong. Every one would rather win their match by points than lose because they went for a stupid submission. Doesn't mean they don't always work to finish off their opponents, but that also doesn't mean they would be happy if they lost because they were too anxious for that tap.

 

Pan Ams 2008. Final match. I was ahead on points and two minutes from the Gold. I was in his closed guard. There was two minutes to the Gold.

His guard was loosing up a little; is he giving up or gassed? Two minutes, so I think shit lets pass and go for a sub, a great way finish the tournament.

But he wasn't tired he grabs for the Kimura and pulls like an elephant. I had to roll out and he got the points. I got the silver.

 

The higher the level of competition the less likely you are to get the submission for the very reasons previously described. Especially given the limited amount of time for matches. Therefore I don't think it's a matter of specifically going for points, it's a matter of taking what you can get.

 

QFT

 

Normally I am very methodical about the way I approach an opponent.

a)First pass the guard.

b)Try and consolidate side controll, if I am having problems then go to north south which is a very stable position for me. If the person manages to turtle then take the back.

c)Open their gi and use it to either wrap their arms or turn round the back in which case I will start a knee on belly. At the moment I am also practacing passing the gi to the other arm and go for a clockwork choke.

d)If prior to opening the gi, they have left an arm out, I isolate it and trap it holding my own gi.

e)Turn to the other side still controlling their arm then push forward to turn them on their side. If their side and go for a kimura, if they hold on to their belt go for an armbar. If they are getting out of the armbar switch to an omoplatta.

Of course many other things happen in the match but this is what I aim for. I have been having problems finishing c,d and e so ive been taking peoples backs recently which is starting to get repetative and not good for my jiu jitsu.

 

depends on your skill imo.

 

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I patently disagree with this statement. I believe that not enough people attempt submissions during the transition of positions. Some of the best guys I've ever rolled with will pass the guard and armbar or choke in one fluid motion. They will let you think you are escaping side control only to walk right into a trap. When you establish a good solid side control your opponent is also likely be establishing a good solid defensive position as well.

Perhaps people who train for points are the ones who establish position and work from there first and the ones who train for submission are the ones who are looking for the openings between positions?

 

Interesting topic there.

I think there IS a difference in style, even in a comp. What got me thinking was Kron's statement about his training and his father's philosophy in his most recent interview:

GRACIEMAG.com: Was getting the submission in every one of your fights the result of this daily effort?

Kron: I think it's the result of the technique my father's been teaching me since I was a kid. There's a difference between the Jiu-Jitsu you see going around and the way it should be done. Jiu-Jitsu was always about the submission, the detail of seeking out the easiest route to the submission is what my dad taught me.
(http://www.graciemag.com/news/144/ARTICLE/10165/2008-04-10.html)

What does this mean?

I think, if you train as described by Kron here, you develop a style that focuses on the easiest way to get to your goal (submission) which makes you a more efficient fighter.

Some other schools (or maybe even many) put out competition fighters that excell at a unique gameplan, to have that one type of guard or that one sweep that no one is familiar with (exaggerating here of course) and using that in a comp scenario to get the points and win.

Now I am not saying that one is better than the other, but I strongly believe that different training will produce different fighters.

If you're goal is the submission and finding the best way there, you will get a Rickson, Roger or Kron who are all about basics.

If you are focused on developing a special, unique game, you get a player that is more likely to have a strategy that revolves around hitting that one sweep or guard pass and holding on for the win.

Discuss if you please.

 

I think this topic is similar to the slick vs technical discussed about miguel torres, another example of going for submission would be Filho/sonnen when filho doesnt go through the steps of seting the armbar up, he kinda just agressively throws his leg over to get it.

 

I think what he is talking about are the guys that want to finish by submission, regardless of how they get there, and the guys that seem to settle for point wins. In other words the guys that get a point lead and will get a position and just stall until time runs out rather than attempting to finish the fight.

Personally, I am a postion over submission guy, I prefer to maintain dominant position rather that give it up for a sub. For example, I never armbar from the mount. I have a lot more options that let me keep mount (or at least a strong postion) rather than risking getting swept. But then again, my goals don't involve being a crowd pleasing fighter. As a fan, I want the guy to work to finish the fight from start to finish.

 

I hear ya, I go for lower risk submissions in terms of losing positon. Kimuras, Americas, and Arm triangles.

 

I look at it like a boxing match. There are the "boxers" and there are the "brawlers".

The boxers rack up the points and are usually in great cardio condition. they work on getting the best position instead of getting the big knockout.

The brawlers are always looking for the "flash knockout". These are the guys that have a short career because they take so much damage.

From my experience, the heavier the guy, the more cardio becomes an issue, so they tend to go for the submission over position.

The smaller frame the guy, the better the cardio, so they bounce around from position to position until they can secure a submission.

what's interesting is when you get extremes...such as the Heavy guy who grapples or boxes like a small guy. Or a small guy who has the "heavy hands" or subs guys left and right like a heavy guy.

 

i haven't competed in quite some time but i always look to finish in training. even when i competed more frequently, i wanted to finish 1st. i don't i'll ever train any other way, competing or not.