All wrestling moves/takedowns are performed at "an angle" - agree/disagree?

[DeepFry]

"Hips are perpendicular" with opponents.

All techniques are like this in some way.

Another example,



Ankle pick only works at an angle.

Think of the double leg - you shoot in, one foot up and drive at an angle.

Single leg, take the leg, turn to finish, pushing your shoulder into opponents leg.

The list goes on.

All judo style trips and throws also, they never work unless the setup comes from being at an angle to the opponent.

Any time I ever had difficulty figuring out the technique to a wrestling move or getting to actual work or flow (suplex and ground turns included), apply an angle = it works.

No angle = no functionality (unless it's against a total rookie).

**
I believe this is because we can only apply power in straight lines.

The "angle" means you bypass your opponents power and leverage, whilst maintaining your own (i.e. still facing into them, whilst they face "past" you, in a sense - we've stepped outside their line of power, aka center line).

Having this mechanical advantage is intrinsic to EVERY takedown.

 

[jack36767]

Ummm sure. That’s one way of putting It

 

[DeepFry]

Ummm sure. That’s one way of putting It

That's the only way of putting it.

Anything else is a misnomer.

 

[jack36767]

That's the only way of putting.

Anything else is a misnomer.

Your thread title asked “agree/disagree”. I said that’s one way of putting it... a little bit of it sounds like wanting to look esoteric and super smart. Which is fine. Bjj people actually doing takedowns “even if they’ll never take down a DI wrestler” without fear is a good thing..

But there’s plenty of other ways of putting it. So in summary, you’ve made good observations, but you should slow your roll on “anything” else is a misnomer”. Especially after asking if people agree or disagree

 

[Bluesbreaker]

Any possible position you stand at relative to your opponent will be at some angle, whether it's 0° or 359°.

 

[rmongler]

Seems like Mr. Shorts is enjoying his next life.

 

[EGDM]

Any possible position you stand at relative to your opponent will be at some angle, whether it's 0° or 359°.

Much like one of my pet peeves. "He's using a fraction of the power!" Well, WHAT fraction? 1/10? 10/1? That communicates nothing.

 

[HunterAcosta]

Mostly but you could shoot a freight train double NFL style snd tackle somebody straight on and straight up . No angle . Just blast thru them if you’re explosive /strong enough .

 

[DeepFry]

Mostly but you could shoot a freight train double NFL style snd tackle somebody straight on and straight up . No angle . Just blast thru them if you’re explosive /strong enough .

It's called a "bully double" and yeah only works if you're far stronger and your opponent is a rookie.

And it's taught as an "effective takedown" primarily by coaches who have no idea what they're doing (at least when it comes to rastling).

 

[DeepFry]

Your thread title asked “agree/disagree”. I said that’s one way of putting it... a little bit of it sounds like wanting to look esoteric and super smart. Which is fine. Bjj people actually doing takedowns “even if they’ll never take down a DI wrestler” without fear is a good thing..

But there’s plenty of other ways of putting it. So in summary, you’ve made good observations, but you should slow your roll on “anything” else is a misnomer”. Especially after asking if people agree or disagree

It was a rhetorical question.

I was merely enlightening the paste-eaters and uni-brows who over-complicate what should be the most intuitive sport, with their misknowledge.

 

[efficientjudo]

All judo style trips and throws also, they never work unless the setup comes from being at an angle to the opponent.

No angle = no functionality (unless it's against a total rookie).

I believe this is because we can only apply power in straight lines.

The "angle" means you bypass your opponents power and leverage, whilst maintaining your own

I think you've approached this from the wrong angle (pardon the pun).

There are takedowns that work with the attacker and defender squared up - look at something like tomoe-nage. Not every attack in Judo is done with angles.

I also don't agree that we only apply power in straight lines - in fact a lot of the power we are able to generate is rotational, and a lot of throws require this rotation.

In Judo we have the concept of Kuzushi, which means off balancing - as long as you are able to off-balance an opponent, you can open them up for an attack - but this doesn't necessarily mean an 'angle' if even often it can be. I great example is a simple change in direction of forward throw to rear throw (or vice versa)

 

[DeepFry]

I think you've approached this from the wrong angle (pardon the pun).

There are takedowns that work with the attacker and defender squared up - look at something like tomoe-nage. Not every attack in Judo is done with angles.

You don't think this dude is at an angle to his opponent?

 

[DeepFry]

I also don't agree that we only apply power in straight lines - in fact a lot of the power we are able to generate is rotational, and a lot of throws require this rotation.

In Judo we have the concept of Kuzushi, which means off balancing - as long as you are able to off-balance an opponent, you can open them up for an attack - but this doesn't necessarily mean an 'angle' if even often it can be. I great example is a simple change in direction of forward throw to rear throw (or vice versa)

Over complication does my head in with a lot of schools.

Honestly I think they like to make things more complicated than they have to be to show everyone how challenging their discipline is.

It's like a really fucked up way of getting "respect" or something.

 

[efficientjudo]

You don't think this dude is at an angle to his opponent?

That is a specific fighting stance of RvL - look at a classic tomoe-nage from RvR.

Honestly I think they like to make things more complicated than they have to be to show everyone how challenging their discipline is.

Do you mean kuzushi is an over complication? because its just a Japanese word that means off balance - I think that is as simple as it gets when it comes to speaking about what makes a takedown work - get them off-balance, attack to where they don't have balance - that is what every takedown, every sweep, every grappling style is about.

 

[Patrick Jane]

What about Saba Ori?

 

[DeepFry]

What about Saba Ori?

Technically that's a vertical angle, they're still getting an angle but in the vertical direction vs lateral direction.

It's kind of like the reverse of a pick-up or lift in freestyle wrestling.

If you change levels, shoot under your opponent and lift, you've gotten an "underneath" angle to their direction of power.

But, how frequent and effective is that takedown against a seasoned wrestler?

Almost non-existent.

 

[Patrick Jane]

Technically that's a vertical angle, they're still getting an angle but in the vertical direction vs lateral direction.

It's kind of like the reverse of a pick-up or lift in freestyle wrestling.

If you change levels, shoot under your opponent and lift, you've gotten an "underneath" angle to their direction of power.

Ahh, okay. If you count vertical angles, it means the only ways to attempt a takedown without an angle would be pushing straight forwards or pulling straight backwards. It's not quite an epiphany that this is not the most effective way of taking someone down.

But, how frequent and effective is that takedown against a seasoned wrestler?

Almost non-existent.

It's a very common move in sumo wrestling. Not some bullshit technique.

 

[DeepFry]

Ahh, okay. If you count vertical angles, it means the only ways to attempt a takedown without an angle would be pushing straight forwards or pulling straight backwards. It's not quite an epiphany that this is not the most effective way of taking someone down.

Think about how many "lateral drops" have been attempted where fighter A just ends up puling fighter B right down on top of themselves.

It may not be an epiphany, but as a concept it's taught and understood EXTREMELY poorly.

 

[Patrick Jane]

Think about how many "lateral drops" have been attempted where fighter A just ends up puling fighter B right down on top of themselves.

It may not be an epiphany, but as a concept it's taught and understood EXTREMELY poorly.

Even when one person pulls another right down on top of themselves, that would still be a downward angle, right? Same with a Tomoe Nage. The only way of doing something without an angle is pushing straight forward or pulling straight backward if i understand what you're trying to conceptualize here right.

 

[DeepFry]

Even when one person pulls another right down on top of themselves, that would still be a downward angle, right? Same with a Tomoe Nage. The only way of doing something without an angle is pushing straight forward or pulling straight backward if i understand what you're trying to conceptualize here right.

When someone goes chest to chest with another person, no lateral angle (out to their side, outside of their center line), no vertical angle (no underneath as with the lift, or above as with that sumo takedown) - then they're completely square to their opponent.

Being square = the power of each person is equal (each persons center line faces into the other, therefore each persons direction of power application faces into the other) no one person has a mechanical advantage, so unless there's a HUGE strength advantage or one person is an absolute rookie, the takedown become 10x more difficult, but mostly simply impossible or dysfunctional.

So no, one person failing a lateral drop and pulling their opponent on top of them = they tried to execute the takedown WITHOUT having the necessary angle - as a lateral drop, the angle will always be "lateral", out to the side of their opponents center line (thus direction of power) - not "over" or "underneath".

.....

Pushing straight forward of pulling straight back = will never work, for ANY takedown, against anyone even half decent.

Thus - wrestling = angles.