Which is harder to learn, striking or grappling?

Harder to learn?

  • Total voters
    192
  • Poll closed .
Neither are easy..,but striking is much harder...per every BJJ BB I have ever spoke with!
 
Absolutely depends on the person.

That's like asking "which subject is harder...math or english?"

It's just whichever you don't have a natural inclination towards.
 
I'd say grappling, you don't really see good level strikers turn good level grapplers. But we've seen guys like Hendo & Page go from one dimensional wrestlers to dangerous strikers...or BJJ phenoms like BJ & Gonzaga develop success with their striking.

For the hobbyist I think it splits down the line, some people are naturally gifted at being able to throw punches and some people struggle with the grappling thought process, or vice versa.
 
I don't get how many people chose grappling over striking. Grappling is so technical with so many little steps its almost impossible to remember and it takes many years to master. I'm not saying you can master striking in just a few years, but grappling has a high learning curve. I feel maybe its this way, because grappling is so counterintuitive.
 
Striking.

Grappling is what you go to when you aren't good at striking.
And you pray it's never a 2v1 situation.
 
cheesus said:
I'd say grappling, you don't really see good level strikers turn good level grapplers. But we've seen guys like Hendo & Page go from one dimensional wrestlers to dangerous strikers...or BJJ phenoms like BJ & Gonzaga develop success with their striking.

For the hobbyist I think it splits down the line, some people are naturally gifted at being able to throw punches and some people struggle with the grappling thought process, or vice versa.
Click to expand...

I can think of a striker that turned into a top level grappler...GSP.
 
Considering many top ten guys have top level grappling but almost none have top level striking it's probably the latter.

Honestly, even many UFC champions have had some pretty ordinary technique when it comes to striking offense, and yet they'd have success anyway because the striking defense of their opponents was so shithouse. With footwork alone I can count on two hands the number of UFC fighters who should be considered black belts in striking.
 
Striking by far. Natural abilities won't take you nearly as far in striking as they will in grappling.
 
BJJ for me, it seems so much more cerebral, you have to think a lot while you're in the action; a true human chess match, whereas in striking I just go in auto-pilot and let my body react.
Then again, it is probably because I started boxing at 12 and picked up BJJ a couple months ago, but I do remember that I was pretty good with boxing as soon as I started, whereas in BJJ I just get fucked all the time. My brother seems to have it the other way around, first class of BJJ he triangle choked a couple of blue belts.
 
It took Rousey most of her life to get good at grappling, couple years to be a championship level striker. But then again she has the best boxing coach since Cus D'amato to train her.
 
I've taken both, and I think each person is different. Some can pick up both well, some are naturally better in one or the other. I could't answer the poll, because I think each one takes incredible amounts of time and dedication to reach the upper echelons.........
 
RedSoul said:
I can think of a striker that turned into a top level grappler...GSP.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'll give you that, but GSP had some exposure to grappling when he was 16-17 so it's not like he was totally foreign to the concept when he made his mma debut. Hendo was maybe early mid 20's when he started consistent training in striking and ended up being one of the more dangerous guys on the feet in his division.
 
You are asking this question in the WRONG subforum.

The Heavies is better equipped to answer questions like "Which flavor of Doritos? Nacho Cheese or Cool Ranch?"
 
I think grappling usually will take longer to learn to a high level


BUT


I think everyone can learn to grapple, but not everyone can learn to strike. Speed, body type, reflexes, coordination, and most other aspects of athleticism are much more critical to excelling in striking than grappling. Plus, not everyone can handle getting hit.


So it takes longer to get good at grappling techniques than striking techniques...

but many (most?) people just cannot ever be good strikers, whereas anyone who puts the time in can become a good grappler.

They're each easier and harder than one another in different respects. So the question is meaningless unless you narrow it somehow.
 
As someone from a wrestling background, I will say without a doubt that striking is more difficult to learn.

The primary difference is I can test my wrestling and grappling on a regular basis at very near full strength and speed. I can't do that with striking. If I do, I won't last long. I show up for a fight and hope that my striking is as effective in a live situation as it is in a sparing session, but I won't know until the fight gets underway.

That being said, MMA is a sport where the wrestling/grappling game defines everything. A better wrestler/grappler can look like the better striker in there just by being the better wrestler/grappler. On the surface it always it looked like a guy like Johny Hendricks picked up some pretty solid striking in a hurry. But then along came Wonderboy, and nope, not so much. Put Johny in a kickboxing match, and take out the wrestling threat altogether, and he'd look even worse.
 
Gun'n'Run said:
I think grappling usually will take longer to learn to a high level


BUT


I think everyone can learn to grapple, but not everyone can learn to strike. Speed, body type, reflexes, coordination, and most other aspects of athleticism are much more critical to excelling in striking than grappling. Plus, not everyone can handle getting hit.


So it takes longer to get good at grappling techniques than striking techniques...

but many (most?) people just cannot ever be good strikers, whereas anyone who puts the time in can become a good grappler.

They're each easier and harder than one another in different respects. So the question is meaningless unless you narrow it somehow.
Click to expand...

This ^^^ is probably a better answer than mine, overall.

(I'd quibble with the first statement, though. It seems a few guys, at least, have come from zero grappling experience to being world class in a relatively short period of time. I don't think that happens very often in, say, boxing.)

Agree fully with the rest.
 
jeremyemilio said:
This ^^^ is probably a better answer than mine, overall.

(I'd quibble with the first statement, though. It seems a few guys, at least, have come from zero grappling experience to being world class in a relatively short period of time. I don't think that happens very often in, say, boxing.)

Agree fully with the rest.
Click to expand...
You can quibble with it, so long as you ignore the word "usually" in there ;)

thanks
 
I took mma classes for a bit before having to quit due to a jacked up neck and have done quite a bit of work on the heavy bag. The footwork of striking is by far the hardest thing to pick up on, at least for me. Grappling seemed to come the easiest, although i only scratched the surface.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,552
Messages
55,426,973
Members
174,773
Latest member
DREDATORXXXXL

Share this page

Back
Top