But most matches I've seen grapplers sort of exploit the one knee down rule and they make sure that's the first thing that touches the ground when attempting a takedown, so that the opponent cannot do much attacks.
What else is banned? Apparently you can't strike the throat, or elbow bend their neck, elbow the neck, or do a chicken wing... right?
Chicken wing? As in Kimura? It's a reasonably common as a defense, especially combined with a sumi gaeshi against a high crotch.
In general, the best way to stop (wrestling) takedowns, is to actually use and learn wrestling. Also the one knee down rule is not to stop strikes, but i'll get to that later. Trying to time a guy shooting with a punch or a knee is inherently risky and a good way to put yourself out of position and end up on your back. The reason we don't see it much isn't because of rules, it's because it just doesn't work that well.
If someone shoots in on you then you absolutely can knee or kick them in the face as long as they are still on their feet "technically". If your knee lands the moment before or after their knee touches the mat for a double, you're fine.
As far as i'm aware, the rule is where the opponent is when you commit to the strike. So if you throw the knee before or during their transition to the three point stance it is legal. It's why you see refs warn people when they keep touching and releasing their hands from the ground to try avoid knees.
I wonder if you can knee someone in the head if they have one foot and one hand on the ground. Like say, you have them in a headlock and they put their hand down to form 3 points of contact. Could you theoretically transition to lift up one of their legs and knee them in the head? Im sure a really skilled Thai stylist could pull off the maneuver.
It's easier to lift the arm, it happens occasionally. I want to say I have seen Zingano pulling people up to knee them in the face from the front headlock.
That's the thing though, must grapplers know this rule is only in their favor, so when it's almost like before they even attempt to takedown, they already have in their minds to drop one knee or arm onto the floor to be relatively safe when doing the takedown.
Going to one knee is the correct wrestling way to shoot a single/double/high crotch. It is so you can easily get under your opponent. It largely isn't necessary in mma, usually because the stances are higher.
Usually you drop to a knee in grappling, because you need to get under an opponents hips. Going to one knee is slower, but it is harder to stop and offers the greatest ability to get under someones hips. It also allows you to cut the corner easier which means better defences against guillotines and better ability to chain wrestle.
The takedown you're talking about is the blast double, which definitely has its place but compare the stances of both gifs and notice how getting low works better against people in a low stance. Going to a knee has nothing to do with avoiding strikes, notice how kneeing someone in the face below would also be pretty tough.
Under unified rules, you're not technically allowed to spike people on their head or neck, but I've literally never seen a ref enforce that.
If the person getting slammed can let go of something, technically it's not a spike. So if you're going for a submission and can let it go to avoid a spike it's not illegal (JDS vs Cain 3) I would also assume that the spike would also have to be intentional to be considered a foul, so if you land on your head from a suplex or something, I assume you're not gonna get called for it.
God damn that's a damn nice KO.
That wasn't a KO, Nogueira went on to win that fight.
Side rant not directed at anyone specifically: The idea that knees to a grounded opponent is kryptonite to a grappler is simply false, even in Pride/One FC we don't see it happen. You don't use striking offence instead of grappling defence, likewise you don't use grappling offence instead of striking defence. If you throw a right cross at me, I slip and then go for the takedown, I don't try arm drag your punch. Look at Holm vs Rousey, Holm used adequate grappling defence to stop Ronda's takedown attempts. Well executed wrestling defence beats poorly executed wrestling offence, just like well timed boxing defence beats poorly timed boxing offence, sure there are exceptions here and there, but for the most part it's true.
A lot of people have the misconception that the ruleset is unfairly tilted towards grapplers, which is simply not true. I could flip them and make arguments for how the rules can benefit strikers.
The idea that a grappler that has done this thousands of times, would be the one who would suffer if knees to grounded opponents were legal is laughable.
