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

[Patrick Jane]

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.

Ahh, i misunderstood what you meant with the vertical angles before then. Regarding those, i think what you mean by underneath or above is having your center of gravity underneath or above their center of gravity, right?

 

[DeepFry]

Ahh, i misunderstood what you meant with the vertical angles before then. Regarding those, i think what you mean by underneath or above is having your center of gravity underneath or above their center of gravity, right?

Position/direction of leverage, more so.

It revolves around understanding that our power or direction of power application travels in straight lines.

Some argue "rotational power" but that is merely getting an angle on the opponent - stepping outside the direction of power (center line) whilst maintaining our own direction of power (center line) into them.

......

Working in vertical angles applies far less than lateral angles in any case, I wouldn't dwell on it too much.

As with any concept, when understanding it it can be a case of studying, visualizing etc., then applying/practicing, then back to studying/visualizing - until eventually the understanding clicks into place.

 

[efficientjudo]

Did you make this same thread a while ago: https://forums.sherdog.com/threads/angles-for-trips-and-judo-tosses-etc.4132531/

 

[Bluesbreaker]

Imbécil.

.....

If you're hips/shoulders are parallel to your opponents (i.e. you're facing each other) = you're "square" to them.

If your hips/shoulders are outside their center line but facing into them = you're at "an angle" to them.

If you are standing square to them, you at some angle to them. If you are perpendicular to them, you are at some angle to them.

 

[jack36767]

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).

Or as something the athlete is capable of doing at that moment while building the coordination and skill for other movements. Much like a half and wrist which almost never work on anyone who has a modicum of toughness and know how... it is not a bad or technically unsound move. It is a basic move with a distinct ceiling for most athletes. With a time and place for everything. Literal national and world level coaches roll their eyes at comments like this because there is a time and place for everything.

You’re trying to come across as an enlightened expert and instead coming across like the elementary dad coach who just discovered tilts.

Furthermore, if actually trying to “simplify and make approachable rather than try to act superior.. as someone who has been taught the “angles” approach among many others and actually coaching it.. the “angles” approach and explanation is extremely esoteric and won’t actually help anyone. Making the focus about “position” and “positioning” works much more effectively and quicker. By a ratio of 9-1 in my experience.

Yes yes I can already hear you old lady fluttering of hands and your spluttering “ackchually you imbithile that’s just another way of saying angles”. And no duh. But one way actually works and is useful. The other is an esoteric bordeline masterbatory exercise in self aggrandizement

 

[DeepFry]

Or as something the athlete is capable of doing at that moment while building the coordination and skill for other movements. Much like a half and wrist which almost never work on anyone who has a modicum of toughness and know how... it is not a bad or technically unsound move. It is a basic move with a distinct ceiling for most athletes. With a time and place for everything. Literal national and world level coaches roll their eyes at comments like this because there is a time and place for everything.

You’re trying to come across as an enlightened expert and instead coming across like the elementary dad coach who just discovered tilts.

Furthermore, if actually trying to “simplify and make approachable rather than try to act superior.. as someone who has been taught the “angles” approach among many others and actually coaching it.. the “angles” approach and explanation is extremely esoteric and won’t actually help anyone. Making the focus about “position” and “positioning” works much more effectively and quicker. By a ratio of 9-1 in my experience.

Yes yes I can already hear you old lady fluttering of hands and your spluttering “ackchually you imbithile that’s just another way of saying angles”. And no duh. But one way actually works and is useful. The other is an esoteric bordeline masterbatory exercise in self aggrandizement

Firstly,



Secondly, let me just placate this ideology for a moment;

I've concisely explained "angles" (it's easier demonstrated than typed though, I still did it in a line or two).

So - let's hear you explain "positions", a concept which allows students to develop proficiency in takedowns which, let's face it, the majority of people fumble (i.e. lateral drops)....?

'Splain it to us - this "positions" you speak of?

......

Help us understand....?

 

[DeepFry]

If you are standing square to them, you at some angle to them. If you are perpendicular to them, you are at some angle to them.

Square = zero angle, i.e. 0 angle = not an angle.

Perpendicular = 90 degree angle to them.

You ever try and hit someone with a straight punch whilst they're standing at 90 degrees to you?

Same applies with takedowns - cause why?

Cause power travels in straight lines.

.....

But keep on keeping on brother.

 

[Bluesbreaker]

Square = zero angle, i.e. 0 angle = not an angle.

Perpendicular = 90 degree angle to them.

You ever try and hit someone with a straight punch whilst they're standing at 90 degrees to you?

Same applies with takedowns - cause why?

Cause power travels in straight lines.

.....

But keep on keeping on brother.

If you want to play that game, you should look up the "zero angle".

Or if you're not going to do that, someone facing you directly would be 180° to you.

 

[jack36767]

Firstly,



Secondly, let me just placate this ideology for a moment;

I've concisely explained "angles" (it's easier demonstrated than typed though, I still did it in a line or two).

So - let's hear you explain "positions", a concept which allows students to develop proficiency in takedowns which, let's face it, the majority of people fumble (i.e. lateral drops)....?

'Splain it to us - this "positions" you speak of?

......

Help us understand....?

Firstly,



Secondly, let me just placate this ideology for a moment;

I've concisely explained "angles" (it's easier demonstrated than typed though, I still did it in a line or two).

So - let's hear you explain "positions", a concept which allows students to develop proficiency in takedowns which, let's face it, the majority of people fumble (i.e. lateral drops)....?

'Splain it to us - this "positions" you speak of?

......

Help us understand....?

Well considering I’ve had several athletes win matches with things like laterals in matches they were the underdog in.. and considering my experience personally. As well as understanding your post perfectly.

And you should understand exactly what I’m talking about... if you have even a modicum of the expertise and experience you claim.
If you don’t you’re just a little wannabe play acting intelligence

 

[Normot]

They seem pretty square right here:



At what point does the angle matter?Because here he cuts an angle immediately after getting the legs, but he gets to the leg with no angle, just elevation change and strait in on a squared opponent:

 

[shunyata]

Square = zero angle, i.e. 0 angle = not an angle.

Perpendicular = 90 degree angle to them.

You ever try and hit someone with a straight punch whilst they're standing at 90 degrees to you?

Same applies with takedowns - cause why?

Cause power travels in straight lines.

.....

But keep on keeping on brother.

Uh, forces can accelerate in arcs and circular vectors too.

Are you new to physics or just really like thinking that your oversimplification is a breakthrough of some kind?


You got all obsessed about extension vs twist in heel hook finishes but failed to notice that by extending the hips against the isolated knee while extending the body and heel in the other direction you're still twisting in a way.

It's like you've got a wet wash cloth and you're wringing it out, you twist it into a spiral then pull and squeeze to extract the water. But if you tried to pull and extend without twisting it first, you're not going to get as much power as if you extend it through a spiral rotation (or twist).


I'd agree with what's explained above. Kazushi is frequently about angles, finding a horizontal angle, vertical angle, or circular movement that allows one to disrupt the balance of the opponent.

In a double leg or morote gari, even if done square vs the opponent we are changing level, entering, grasping, and then rising up as we push through. The motion can be a bit like the lower half of a vertical circle.

Yes, there are angles we use in entry and kazushi, but it's more than that.

 

[DeepFry]

They seem pretty square right here:



At what point does the angle matter?Because here he cuts an angle immediately after getting the legs, but he gets to the leg with no angle, just elevation change and strait in on a squared opponent:

2nd vid didn't work - just post the link and I'll view it externally.

 

[DeepFry]

Uh, forces can accelerate in arcs and circular vectors too.

Are you new to physics or just really like thinking that your oversimplification is a breakthrough of some kind?


You got all obsessed about extension vs twist in heel hook finishes but failed to notice that by extending the hips against the isolated knee while extending the body and heel in the other direction you're still twisting in a way.

It's like you've got a wet wash cloth and you're wringing it out, you twist it into a spiral then pull and squeeze to extract the water. But if you tried to pull and extend without twisting it first, you're not going to get as much power as if you extend it through a spiral rotation (or twist).


I'd agree with what's explained above. Kazushi is frequently about angles, finding a horizontal angle, vertical angle, or circular movement that allows one to disrupt the balance of the opponent.

In a double leg or morote gari, even if done square vs the opponent we are changing level, entering, grasping, and then rising up as we push through. The motion can be a bit like the lower half of a vertical circle.

Yes, there are angles we use in entry and kazushi, but it's more than that.

*sigh*

 

[jack36767]

Uh, forces can accelerate in arcs and circular vectors too.

Are you new to physics or just really like thinking that your oversimplification is a breakthrough of some kind?


You got all obsessed about extension vs twist in heel hook finishes but failed to notice that by extending the hips against the isolated knee while extending the body and heel in the other direction you're still twisting in a way.

It's like you've got a wet wash cloth and you're wringing it out, you twist it into a spiral then pull and squeeze to extract the water. But if you tried to pull and extend without twisting it first, you're not going to get as much power as if you extend it through a spiral rotation (or twist).


I'd agree with what's explained above. Kazushi is frequently about angles, finding a horizontal angle, vertical angle, or circular movement that allows one to disrupt the balance of the opponent.

In a double leg or morote gari, even if done square vs the opponent we are changing level, entering, grasping, and then rising up as we push through. The motion can be a bit like the lower half of a vertical circle.

Yes, there are angles we use in entry and kazushi, but it's more than that.

What’s irritating is that we all said that his point is an ok one but it’s only one way of putting it. And it’s not as novel or brilliant as he thinks. And him trying to act so superior having clearly barely coached is irritating

 

[DeepFry]

What’s irritating is that we all said that his point is an ok one but it’s only one way of putting it. And it’s not as novel or brilliant as he thinks. And him trying to act so superior having clearly barely coached is irritating

100% of schools I've been to do a God-awful job of illustrating this core concept of wrestling.

They overcomplicate thinigs with, "step this way, move that way, turn like so...." etc., and the how they get students to execute the takedown and ground turns is simply sub par.

It's a straight forward concept, which is maybe why it's so constantly overlooked.

It's the base of every functional takedown - the angle.

Is it new, novel?

No.

On an intuitive, less explicitly cognitive level, we all know it already, mostly.

My point is highlighting it, simply, cognitively, verbally - to prevent it getting so easily overlooked, especially to new wrestlers.

And then when that concept is grasped, hell you can almost improvise your own takedowns on its basis.

Makes learning and practicing so much more fun.

 

[Dirty Holt]

There are plenty of takedowns that occur from being square. They arent rookie moves, and they dont just work on scrubs. They are hit at the highest levels against the best opponents. Further, power doesnt always move in a straight line; rotational force, torque, and direction changes are huge.

 

[jack36767]

100% of schools I've been to do a God-awful job of illustrating this core concept of wrestling.

They overcomplicate thinigs with, "step this way, move that way, turn like so...." etc., and the how they get students to execute the takedown and ground turns is simply sub par.

It's a straight forward concept, which is maybe why it's so constantly overlooked.

It's the base of every functional takedown - the angle.

Is it new, novel?

No.

On an intuitive, less explicitly cognitive level, we all know it already, mostly.

My point is highlighting it, simply, cognitively, verbally - to prevent it getting so easily overlooked, especially to new wrestlers.

And then when that concept is grasped, hell you can almost improvise your own takedowns on its basis.

Makes learning and practicing so much more fun.

It’s not my fault you’ve only been to bjj gyms with garbage takedown instruction. I literally had coaches explaining that stuff since 7th grade. Additionally there is always other ways of putting it. Additionally. Some people don’t learn by concepts.. they want/need. “Do abc” not esoteric expressions of theory. And if you did visit actual wrestling schools.. you should understand the variation in quality... if you actually have 1/100th of the experience and expertise you “imply” that you have.

You also confidently explained “it’s the only way of putting it”.

you could’ve made it just a decent thread about a good idea in wrestling. Instead you’ve done an imbecilic asshat job of trying to come across as some technical snob genius.

 

[jack36767]

There are plenty of takedowns that occur from being square. They arent rookie moves, and they dont just work on scrubs. They are hit at the highest levels against the best opponents. Further, power doesnt always move in a straight line; rotational force, torque, and direction changes are huge.

This is exactly why the only thing I say “never” anymore about is looking into half’s. Everything else that is usually a “most of time you don’t want to do it and here’s why”

 

[DeepFry]

It’s not my fault you’ve only been to bjj gyms with garbage takedown instruction. I literally had coaches explaining that stuff since 7th grade. Additionally there is always other ways of putting it. Additionally. Some people don’t learn by concepts.. they want/need. “Do abc” not esoteric expressions of theory. And if you did visit actual wrestling schools.. you should understand the variation in quality... if you actually have 1/100th of the experience and expertise you “imply” that you have.

You also confidently explained “it’s the only way of putting it”.

you could’ve made it just a decent thread about a good idea in wrestling. Instead you’ve done an imbecilic asshat job of trying to come across as some technical snob genius.

This concept is taught poorly and upteen cats still fumble lateral drops.

There's no getting around that fact.

End of discussion.

 

[RemyR]

I’d argue that effective level changing and getting past defenses is more important than angles for most takedowns