Kimura from bottom of half guard low percentage?

[Waxwingslain]

Tapskilz has a video on the position here.

 

[unearth187]

It's very low percentage. If you catch a guy with a kimura from bottom half, you have a major advantage in either strength or technique (or you caught him sleeping, that happens too). Kimura from bottom half is extremely EXTREMELY easy to counter with a kimura of your own, it's like the most basic move in catch wrestling.

 

[Calibur]

It's very low percentage. If you catch a guy with a kimura from bottom half, you have a major advantage in either strength or technique (or you caught him sleeping, that happens too). Kimura from bottom half is extremely EXTREMELY easy to counter with a kimura of your own, it's like the most basic move in catch wrestling.

Christ, I don't know how many ways I can say "that's not true."

But "that's not true." If you know what you are doing, it is normal percentage. I don't want to disagree with any catch wrestlers or anything (you know, with their well documented lineages of success :wink: ) but If you keep both your shoulders on the mat, you don't get counter-kimura'd, no matter what people will tell you.

The move works fine. The question is, what are you doing in bottom halfguard with no underhook? The situation is low percentage, not the technique.

 

[Solidus Snake]

For some strange reason I find it a lot easier to get the sweep-the sub itself from under side control, or even better if I start the kimura in half guard and they free their trapped leg in the process.

 

[unearth187]

Christ, I don't know how many ways I can say "that's not true."

But "that's not true." If you know what you are doing, it is normal percentage. I don't want to disagree with any catch wrestlers or anything (you know, with their well documented lineages of success :wink: ) but If you keep both your shoulders on the mat, you don't get counter-kimura'd, no matter what people will tell you.

The move works fine. The question is, what are you doing in bottom halfguard with no underhook? The situation is low percentage, not the technique.

It doesn't matter how many ways you say it because the fact is, it is a low percentage strength or speed dominant technique to hit from bottom half guard. There are a few very good counters that are very difficult to stop, since the most common counter basically initiate a battle of strength which the top man should win 9/10 times due to the fact that he has his base. Having your shoulders pinned to the ground may stop you from actually being submitted, it has nothing to do with the % of losing the sub which is still very high. If you weren't so quick to discredit other martial arts you might learn something.

 

[unearth187]

Just wanted to add, way to be a hypocrite by on one side saying its a normal percentage fully viable technique which isn't easily countered etc. Then on the other hand saying that going for it and not having an underhook and deep half is incorrect strategy? Why do you think its incorrect strategy... NEWFLASH : because going for the kimura from bottom half is EZ to block and counter.

 

[Calibur]

Let's start over then. I am average strength and speed for a 170 lb 30 year old. Not only have I tapped people at my level with this move who were 240 pounds but I have also used this move to sweep black belts more then once.

I explained how I do it and once I get the kimura grip i can take my time so it is clearly not a speed game.

Not to mention that this thread has two vids by two black belts (one of whom competes at 145 IIRC) Showing how to pull the move off. I don't know what to tell you.


The move itself is reliable but the position is not. Just like when someone has your back and you do that ankle lock counter. The move does not require strength or speed. The move requires you to already be in a dangerous spot and as you get better you find yourself getting your back taken less so you practice that ankle lock less.

IMO this kimura is the same. The fact remains if you get the connection and turn to the correct angle than strength doesn't matter. Your opponents elbow is to flared to fight back and your lacked halfguard with the added rotation will unscrew your opponents posture.

 

[Shemhazai]

If you weren't so quick to discredit other martial arts you might learn something.

If you weren't so quick to assume that CACC is this esoteric collection of unorthodox moves that BJJ guys have never seen or thought of before, you might learn something as well. The chicken wing counter you are talking about is common in BJJ, yet guys who are good at the Kimura from bottom half know how to prevent it. There's no such thing as a counter or defense that cannot itself be countered or defended.

 

[PayPerView]

Let's start over then. I am average strength and speed for a 170 lb 30 year old. Not only have I tapped people at my level with this move who were 240 pounds but I have also used this move to sweep black belts more then once.

I explained how I do it and once I get the kimura grip i can take my time so it is clearly not a speed game.

Not to mention that this thread has two vids by two black belts (one of whom competes at 145 IIRC) Showing how to pull the move off. I don't know what to tell you.


The move itself is reliable but the position is not. Just like when someone has your back and you do that ankle lock counter. The move does not require strength or speed. The move requires you to already be in a dangerous spot and as you get better you find yourself getting your back taken less so you practice that ankle lock less.

IMO this kimura is the same. The fact remains if you get the connection and turn to the correct angle than strength doesn't matter. Your opponents elbow is to flared to fight back and your lacked halfguard with the added rotation will unscrew your opponents posture.

What does your anecdotal stories of what you've done have to do with anything?

I always hit kimuras on people who weigh less than me but can never get em on people who are super strong or weigh more than me. Therefore kimura requires strength. See what I did there?

Fact is, kimura especially from the bottom and in half guard where your opponent has leverage and gravity on his side DOES require a good deal of strength.

 

[PointyShinyBurn]

What does your anecdotal stories of what you've done have to do with anything?

I always hit kimuras on people who weigh less than me but can never get em on people who are super strong or weigh more than me. Therefore kimura requires strength. See what I did there?

Your logic is faulty, those cases are not analogous. If his single example is true it disproves the notion that the move always requires greater strength. No number of anecdotes of move x requiring strength prove that this is always the case, but a single counterexample disproves it.

Fact is, kimura especially from the bottom and in half guard where your opponent has leverage and gravity on his side DOES require a good deal of strength.

This forum's own Oliver Geddes uses this move a lot and often on much bigger guys, peruse his video collection: YouTube - ‪Stalkachu's Channel‬‏

 

[Lug's Spear]

Best to use it as a sweep and then kimura from side control (when they defend tough)

I second that one. I've gotten It before, but it's much more likely to be used as a sweep as someone passes.

 

[dza76wutang]

It's not necessarily low-percentage, it's just a particularly effective/efficient position with a good number of safe counters.

Obviously there's recounters and ways to tighten up the technique and subsequently boost the success rate (as evidenced by black belts still using it), but I am of the opinion that it's better utilized as a secondary or tertiary component to a half-guard game, not the go-to move. One nice application (one that I am fond of personally) is using it to counter certain guard passes mid-pass since you can usually use it for a sweep if you get the leverage in transition.

 

[PayPerView]

Your logic is faulty, those cases are not analogous. If his single example is true it disproves the notion that the move always requires greater strength. No number of anecdotes of move x requiring strength prove that this is always the case, but a single counterexample disproves it.

This forum's own Oliver Geddes uses this move a lot and often on much bigger guys, peruse his video collection: YouTube - ‪Stalkachu's Channel‬‏

When did I say "always requires greater strength". And since you didn't understand my first example which was a joke btw. I'll give you another example so you can dig deep and over-think it as well.

My friend (who goes on this forum) tells me he has seen the Wolfman in the woods. He goes into the woods often and often sees Wolfman. -- Now I don't know if the Wolfman exists but just because he claims it exists proves nothing. Let me make it clear. Just because you have done it and typed it over an internet message board does not prove anything and means nothing to me. Do you understand that logic?

Nobody is saying the move is not effective or cannot be done on bigger stronger guys, in fact I would even say it's not low percentage depending on who you are. But if you think there is not a good portion of strength involved with the technique then get your head out your ass.

 

[Calibur]

If that's what you really believe than I guess I got nothing else to say. :/

 

[unearth187]

The fact remains if you get the connection and turn to the correct angle than strength doesn't matter.

Obviously once its sunk its sunk, I'm not denying that. However it is true that actually locking up this submission in is quite hard to do when the opponent knows how to defend it and how to posture. Unless you have some epic sneaky setup you're not telling us about, its not hard to see coming at all, and if the guy starts resisting before you have it locked in and pulled away from his body, good luck. If we want to go by anecdotal stories, this is obviously the most common sub for anyone on bottom half to try, I've probably had people try this on me several hundred times, and only succeed about a handful or so.

IMO, this is the lowest level of jiu jitsu technique. It's something that will work on someone if you beat them to the punch, or if they don' know how to defend it, as long as they aren't too much stronger than you.

 

[countlphie]

IMO, this is the lowest level of jiu jitsu technique.

No. This technique does not rely on strength and speed. It is complemented by both like all techniques, but does not necessarily depend on them.

You are correct about "beating them to the punch." Jiu jitsu, in a way, is often about beating your opponent to the punch, but not in the head-to-head manner that you're thinking of. It's more like, I'm going to put them in a position to make them vulnerable to this move, or I'm going to distract them to set up this move...which will allow me to beat them to the punch (ie i hit the move regardless of whether he knows how to defend it or not.)

it is not the lowest level of jiu jitsu technique. in fact, i would argue it's a higher level of jiu jitsu technique because it's hard to do and takes a lot of practice to master, and there are many steps and adjustments to this technique for it to be successful (on top of knowing your basics in the half guard, because as somebody mentioned, if you miss the kimura then you better know what you're doing in the half guard or you will get passed)

it's perceived to be a low percentage move because a lot of people who don't know how to do it will try to catch somebody off guard with it. a lot of people will also go for it when their half guard is about to get passed and they don't know what else to do. these are both habits of beginners and lower level players - which is why they will fail at the move. and then in turn, they don't bother to invest the time to actually get good at it.

like most techniques, the percentage of success depends on your overall skill in bjj as well as your mastery in the particular technique. makes no sense to call the technique itself low level, shitty, or unsuccessful when really it's your own lack of skill that's causing the technique to fail.

 

[_Tyler]

No it doesn't.

The kimura is a technique, and it can successfully be pulled off against anybody of any size, but I feel like it does require a certain amount of strength that a lot of other submissions (like many chokes, which I prefer) don't. I shouldn't have said it takes strength to "finish" a kimura, because finishing it is the easy part. I was referring more to the steps necessary before actually finishing the submission.

 

[unearth187]

No. This technique does not rely on strength and speed. It is complemented by both like all techniques, but does not necessarily depend on them.

You are correct about "beating them to the punch." Jiu jitsu, in a way, is often about beating your opponent to the punch, but not in the head-to-head manner that you're thinking of. It's more like, I'm going to put them in a position to make them vulnerable to this move, or I'm going to distract them to set up this move...which will allow me to beat them to the punch (ie i hit the move regardless of whether he knows how to defend it or not.)

Except that its TREMENDOUSLY EASY TO SEE COMING, which makes your whole argument invalid.

 

[countlphie]

Except that its TREMENDOUSLY EASY TO SEE COMING, which makes your whole argument invalid.

have you ever sparred with anybody good?

edit: and how long have you been training?

 

[rmongler]

i disagree with anyone poo-poohing this as 'low level', if i had to chose one single move to teach someone, it would be the double wrist lock, whether a sweep, throw, or submission, its one of the most versitile moves out there that you can hit from just about anywhere, including bottom half.