Triangle masters with short legs

My friend, never apologize for contributing :) The fact that I might have acumulated more knowledge and experience than you doesn't mean that I can't learn something new from you. If it works for you, despite actually having a greater height disadvantage relative to opponents of your own size than I do, then it means you are doing something right. I'm not entirely sure exactly what set up you are refering to, I would probably need a video to understand, but I think it is one of the most basic set ups, correct? If it is the one I'm thinking about, I really like it, teach it alot and use it to some extent. However, I find it hard to get against people with a meaningfull size advantage over me (+50 lbs and I can only get it on white belts). Generally, I find it hard to controll posture against bigger guys using this set up.

Yeah I belive its really basic, but I learned it from one of Keenan Cornelius' videos on Youtube, i think it was even called something like "the easiest triangle setup" or something like that.

If you have an opponent in guard, I break their posture and trap their arm with my arm, reaching over to opposite lapel to keep them down. THen just push the other arm back and my leg over, lock it, then grab back of the head with both hands and adjust. Its super simple and probably the most common set up out there, but to me it was pretty illuminating and that is how I set up all my triangles now, and it seems to work where before my short legs gave me all sorts of trouble.
 
Been subbed alot by small people lately?

lol not even close it was a joke also cause other guy was joking too but can tell you are def a manlet since you were very triggered by my response which is funny
 
lol not even close it was a joke also cause other guy was joking too but can tell you are def a manlet since you were very triggered by my response which is funny

Sorry man, didn't catch that. Irony isn't always easy to spot online. And as I'm stating in my opening post, yes I am a small guy. 5"8, 135 lbs.
 
I've always had a decent triangle choke, but it's never been one of my best moves. I really haven't got the ideal body type to be dangerous with triangles, being 5'8 and 130 pounds, but on the other hand my small man complex and general bull headedness has made me turn alot of my weaknesses into strengths. I have developed a very nasty pressure passing game, a heavy knee-on-belly and crushing chokes from the mount, and now I have decided to really make the triangle my own. I have figured out some really effective principles that keeps me from getting stacked or picked up, so I think I'm on to something good, but I'm having trouble finding effective entries to the position. I thought of looking at what the pros do, but most of the guys I associate with triangles are lanky guys with long legs that relies alot on elaborate grips in the gi. I'd like to see how stockier guys like to solve the triangle, so can any of think of someone that chokes the shit out of people with their legs, without being super tall?
Idk man. Short legs and triangles are not always the best combo
 
Marcelo Garcia is a triangle master with short legs (Eddie Cummings is pretty good at triangles too with a similar physiology). I've seen Marcelo explain that his triangle philosphy is simple: cap opponent's head with your hand and then give a few scoots until you lock it up. dovetails with ryan hall explanation that controlling the head keeps opp's spine out of allignment, which prevents him from posturing out, which essentially gives you a long time to readjust
 
Marcelo Garcia is a triangle master with short legs (Eddie Cummings is pretty good at triangles too with a similar physiology). I've seen Marcelo explain that his triangle philosphy is simple: cap opponent's head with your hand and then give a few scoots until you lock it up. dovetails with ryan hall explanation that controlling the head keeps opp's spine out of allignment, which prevents him from posturing out, which essentially gives you a long time to readjust
I like this. I don't have particularly short legs, but my thighs are very large which causes similar issues when locking up a triangle.

Like said above, controlling the posture so that i could make adjustments was critical. I'm very confident now throwing on the initial lock, keeping my opponent trapped inside it, and making micro adjustments from there.

Also using secondary submissions is a huge part of finishing from there. Sometimes i can't finish with the squeeze but can use the triangle for control, and finish with an armbar or different sub.
 
Marcelo Garcia is a triangle master with short legs (Eddie Cummings is pretty good at triangles too with a similar physiology). I've seen Marcelo explain that his triangle philosphy is simple: cap opponent's head with your hand and then give a few scoots until you lock it up. dovetails with ryan hall explanation that controlling the head keeps opp's spine out of allignment, which prevents him from posturing out, which essentially gives you a long time to readjust
I was about to name those 2 dudes whose games have more in common than people realize. They both have strong triangle games and especially with entries from cross-body or mounted positions. I forgot why but Marcelo is also a big fan of the reverse triangle (I don't know the fashionable 2019 Japanese name for it) but the one where you're still in front of the guy but your legs are switched so the usual locking leg is now the choking leg. I think he said that finish is really powerful for people with shorter legs.
 
I like this. I don't have particularly short legs, but my thighs are very large which causes similar issues when locking up a triangle.

Like said above, controlling the posture so that i could make adjustments was critical. I'm very confident now throwing on the initial lock, keeping my opponent trapped inside it, and making micro adjustments from there.

Also using secondary submissions is a huge part of finishing from there. Sometimes i can't finish with the squeeze but can use the triangle for control, and finish with an armbar or different sub.

In my opinion, secondary submissions from the triangle should not be considered unless the opponent is definitely going to escape if you don't switch (only exception is the classic triangle to armbar transition where you bring your far leg over his head). Reason is that if you have good head control or good upper shin control then opp's posture is stuck and you will eventually be able to adjust and finish the triangle. I really like this Renzo Gracie tip to lock the triangle against big guys-- I also teach it to beginners who have short legs and/or beginner flexibility:
 
In my opinion, secondary submissions from the triangle should not be considered unless the opponent is definitely going to escape if you don't switch (only exception is the classic triangle to armbar transition where you bring your far leg over his head). Reason is that if you have good head control or good upper shin control then opp's posture is stuck and you will eventually be able to adjust and finish the triangle. I really like this Renzo Gracie tip to lock the triangle against big guys-- I also teach it to beginners who have short legs and/or beginner flexibility:

Well sure, i would assume it goes without saying you dont abandon a submission that you can finish. All the same i think it is necessary to have secondary options, there will always be times when you can't finish. If you dont have follow ups things when just get progressively worse when they are able to defend.
 
In my opinion, secondary submissions from the triangle should not be considered unless the opponent is definitely going to escape if you don't switch (only exception is the classic triangle to armbar transition where you bring your far leg over his head). Reason is that if you have good head control or good upper shin control then opp's posture is stuck and you will eventually be able to adjust and finish the triangle.
What if you just like finishing with arm locks more than triangles? I agree with you that we all should strive for the skill to finish triangles chokes once we threaten with them. But once someone is proficient with not losing and finishing triangles then if they prefer to finish with elbow, shoulder, or wrist locks do you have an issue with that? I'm not challenging you and I'm just curious. You're one of my favorite posters on here and I'm asking because your first sentence sounds very emphatic. Some out there (and Rafa Mendes is a famous example) that like to just use triangles and rear triangles for control to finish arm locks and rarely finish the choke itself. I don't have a strong opinion on it except to say that I think it's not good to be able to threaten triangles but lose people and not have the skill to finish them.
 
What if you just like finishing with arm locks more than triangles? I agree with you that we all should strive for the skill to finish triangles chokes once we threaten with them. But once someone is proficient with not losing and finishing triangles then if they prefer to finish with elbow, shoulder, or wrist locks do you have an issue with that? I'm not challenging you and I'm just curious. You're one of my favorite posters on here and I'm asking because your first sentence sounds very emphatic. Some out there (and Rafa Mendes is a famous example) that like to just use triangles and rear triangles for control to finish arm locks and rarely finish the choke itself. I don't have a strong opinion on it except to say that I think it's not good to be able to threaten triangles but lose people and not have the skill to finish them.

Don’t know about that man... triangle is superior to armlocks, a choke > joint lock. IMO, you should never just abandon a triangle and go for an let’s say omoplata just cause your opponent defended by overlooking the locking leg. Unless of course. Just an example.
 
Don’t know about that man... triangle is superior to armlocks, a choke > joint lock. IMO, you should never just abandon a triangle and go for an let’s say omoplata just cause your opponent defended by overlooking the locking leg. Unless of course. Just an example.
Oh I agree with all of that. Especially on a choke being superior to a joint lock. But just take a triangle/armbar right? If you keep the triangle locked tight but try to finish on the arm I don't really see how you're losing anything? It's a different story if you unlock the triangle to finish the armbar or go omoplata or something. I'm just talking about keeping the triangle just as deep and locked up.
 
What if you just like finishing with arm locks more than triangles? I agree with you that we all should strive for the skill to finish triangles chokes once we threaten with them. But once someone is proficient with not losing and finishing triangles then if they prefer to finish with elbow, shoulder, or wrist locks do you have an issue with that? I'm not challenging you and I'm just curious. You're one of my favorite posters on here and I'm asking because your first sentence sounds very emphatic. Some out there (and Rafa Mendes is a famous example) that like to just use triangles and rear triangles for control to finish arm locks and rarely finish the choke itself. I don't have a strong opinion on it except to say that I think it's not good to be able to threaten triangles but lose people and not have the skill to finish them.

I've noticed a lot of people who will teach triangles as "triangle guard" where, essentially, the idea is to get your feet locked and then you have all these different sub options (the triangle choke just being one). I've never understood why you would go for something like an arm crush from that spot considering how high percentage the choke is. One example that always sticks out to me is Tito Ortiz vs Lyoto Machida when Tito caught him in that triangle and then, inexplicably, transitioned to some rolling armbar that allowed Lyoto to escape-- if he had just stayed on the triangle he would have finished e choke and won the fight.
 
I've noticed a lot of people who will teach triangles as "triangle guard" where, essentially, the idea is to get your feet locked and then you have all these different sub options (the triangle choke just being one). I've never understood why you would go for something like an arm crush from that spot considering how high percentage the choke is. One example that always sticks out to me is Tito Ortiz vs Lyoto Machida when Tito caught him in that triangle and then, inexplicably, transitioned to some rolling armbar that allowed Lyoto to escape-- if he had just stayed on the triangle he would have finished e choke and won the fight.

The armcrush/triangle sub thought is brutal...
 
Oh I agree with all of that. Especially on a choke being superior to a joint lock. But just take a triangle/armbar right? If you keep the triangle locked tight but try to finish on the arm I don't really see how you're losing anything? It's a different story if you unlock the triangle to finish the armbar or go omoplata or something. I'm just talking about keeping the triangle just as deep and locked up.

The only thing I can think of is that the attacker fails in either controlling posture or keeping himself from getting stacked. If you notice the defender starts to stand up, I guess it makes sense to transition to an armbar before you get stacked, as your chance of finishing from there is extremely compromised, and your risked of getting injured increases when pressure is placed upon your neck and spine. However, I'd say that is a consequence of critical mistakes made by the attacker, not that it in any way is the optimal route to go. Tito isn't really known for being a technically brilliant fighter :)

I've begun threatening with kimuras and chicken wings, but the choke is always the goal, and I won't let go of the triangle until someone taps.
 
Back
Top