Which is easier to get better or at least competent in, striking or grappling?

I guess the point of the question would be. Is it easier for someone who wrestled or did BJJ their whole life to get really good at striking (or at least competent)? Or is it easier for someone who has done striking their whole life to get really good at wrestling/grappling (or at least competent)?

This might be a slightly different convesation as well but I'd guess it's better in today's MMA ruleset to have a grappling background of 15 years and pick up enough striking to be relevent (like Phil Davis) as opposed to striking your whole life and trying to pick up enough grappling or sprawling to be relevant (like Dan Hardy?....can't think of anyone offhand)

 

Apparently grappling, since Ronda is good at that and sucks ridiculously at striking.

 

In striking you are only as good as your teachers. It is easy to be a good striker but you must find the right training. Grappling is a more difficult subject. Anyone can buy a book by Bruce Lee and learn to strike but grappling is not as easy.

 

No, she doesn't. She's the most effective striker in the UFC.

But that wasn't the question. It was: is it easier for a striker to develop effective or good grappling than a grappler to develop effective or good striking?

 

Striking for me,is far easier.

 

There is no answer to that question. It depends on the individual. I would say there is not even going to be a general answer.

 

Mirko Crocop?
Lyoto Machida
GSP

 

Speaking from zero experience, grappling.

 

Defensively - grappling is easier


Offensively - striking is easier

 

In my personal experience, I have found grappling easier to learn and get better at. While striking is simpler, I find it frustrating.

 

I found striking to be far easier to learn than grappling.

Striking is more about mechanics, footwork, movement and timing. Much of counter striking is about seeing what the opponent is going to do and responding accordingly.

Grappling is mechanics, footwork and timing, but requires thousands of hours of mat time in order to master the ability to read the physical cues from your opponent and respond accordingly. What makes it hard is because you're physically engaged with your opponent you can't actually SEE what they're doing so you have to read them through small shifts in balance, position and movement that you read through your body.

Also, grappling is continually evolving. New submissions and counters are constantly being created and introduced in grappling competitions since techniques are being brought in from multiple disciplines. You can train Judo your entire life, then you're on the mat and a catch wrestler throws on a twister. Or a BJJ player throws in a d'arce choke. Etc, etc.

Boxing and muay thai really hasn't changed in decades. And the rule sets are very established so you can't just bring Muay Thai kicks into a boxing ring.

 

I just puked in my mouth a little bit....do you even UFC bro?

 

Grappling, BY FAR.

 

It's a fact.

Yeah, competition is relatively weak, yada yada - that's why I said "effective" and not "best".

 

For me, grappling is more of a system that has an easier path to getting good than striking. In striking, you can learn the basics and with tons of practice, a litte athleticism and real competitive sparring you can get great.

Striking is like that game that is easy to learn, difficult to master.

Grappling is the game that takes forever to learn but if you are dilligent and disciplined you will keep getting better and better.

Super oversimplification but hey, it's a post on Sherdog.

 

I think it varies by your base or original martial art. A lot of excellent wrestlers never managed to get the hang of striking...K1 Hughes is a good example of this.
Same with pure BJJ guys crossing over to MMA, takes them a long time to get to a proficient level and be effective....Maia would be a good example of this.
Striking is much more complex and dynamic then the MMA ground game today IMHO.
Now a good striker really only needs to learn a few things for the ground game to be effective...takedown defense, getting back up, and staying out of bad positions.
Overall you would probably have an easier time learning a few subs, TD defense, and standing up which would keep you in the fight and let you do your thing.
That's why Ronda's standup game will always suck....lol

 

How about "most effective striker in the womens 135lb class"...I could buy that.
I can think of many more effective strikers, unless you have a different meaning for effective or striking then the rest of us do?

 

Any statistics to back that up? From what I remember her stats in stand up were never really that good even if somewhat distorted by her freakishly quick fights.

 

It is easier to learn defensive grappling and offensive striking.

It is very hard to learn good defensive striking or to be a sub wiz

 

As for the which is easier question....
I believe there's no answer. Each person's body and even mentality are different. Some guys are built for striking, others are built for grappling. It's not always obvious, but we can see some guys that start at one discipline and really excel at another even if they train that one for a shorter time.

I think the best example for that is GSP. Started with karate and ended up having one of the best wrestling games in the business. His body was built for wrestling.