Mixed Martial Arts Forum banner

Grappling harder then Striking?

8K views 16 replies 11 participants last post by  Squirrelfighter 
#1 ·
I saw a thread on sherdog saying this. MAny people agreed that striking takes ALOT less time to learn then good Grappling.

Maybe im bised but i say no way.

For me graplling came so natural, just that fact that to can close your eyes and do just as good maybe better then your eyes open. Plus you can no almost no sub and still come out on top if you have more cardio or better postision. A rear naked choke is all you need

With striking you need to know movment, foot work, angles, timming, speed, felxiblilty and on top of all that you NEED to know how to take a shot and give one right back. I was rasied to learn to get hit and hit right back...SHOT FOR SHOT.

anyway thats just my take on it, ive been striker since i was 8 years old and im proud of it.
 
#2 ·
There is no definite answer. It is all opinion based. Some people enjoy grappling better and they will work harder and longer at it because of that. Some people are just more comfortable striking, so it comes easier to them. I personally developed my striking a lot faster than my grappling. It just came more naturally to me than grappling. Even though I like grappling a lot more than striking, I am always better at learning new striking techniques than I am learning new grappling techniques.

It depends entirely on the person. :thumbsup:
 
#3 ·
I don't think it's about it being harder or easier, just that MMA is biased towards grappling/wrestling.

Just look at the terrible striking you see in professional MMA. It's not because grappling is a superior technique, I can tell you it isn't. It's because strikers can make a lot more money doing boxing than they can at MMA, so to them it's a really pointless exercise to join an MMA organization.

B
 
#5 ·
While this is true ^^^^^^^ there is a difference in MMA striking and boxing.

With MMA striking you have to be more aware of your opponent since you can be taken down. If a boxer tried to fight a MMA bout using a boxing stance he would be taken down very very easily.

With MMA and takedowns a striker has to be ready for a takedown and fighting in a traditional boxing stance isnt an option. And this will also lead to sloppy striking.

Also people need to stop with the comparison between boxing and MMA striking since boxing is only a small part of MMA striking.
 
#4 ·
I trained as a professional boxer for 5 years in my early 20's.

During my late 20's I also trained in BJJ for a few months and I will say that grappling is much much harder than boxing.

There is also much more to learn with grappling than boxing. At least this is the way I see it.
 
#8 ·
I think that's a fair statement.

I could throw a punch or two before I ever stepped foot in a gym. I've never been able to grapple for shit. But striking does take years and years to fully develop. I've been in either boxing or kickboxing for almost 10 years now, I still make mistakes and I'm still learning shit.
 
#9 ·
IMO to be good at striking you have to also have some natural abilitys and natural mental abilitys or you will never be great wich seems to be the case in most of MMa fighters.Grappling on the other hand and again is just my opinion can be taught and learned the whole process so maybe it is harder to learn because striking your natural abilities help you but to me striking is way more technical some OK at striking is never going to do a damn thing to someone who is good but grapling if you are strong sometimes you can get the upper hand in grappling.
 
#10 ·
I think that it depends onthe person, not in that some people are naturally pre-dsposed to fighting skill or athleticism, that's unrelated to which form of fighting is harder IMO.

I think it has more to do with how your brain is wired. When it comes to ground, everything is tremendously technical. Moving, shifting weight, planting feet, rolling on angles. And that's just gaining position. Incorporate subs and you add another layer of complexity of technical motion.

When it comes to striking. Its much more of a fluid motion relying much more heavily on the imaginative side of the brain, instead of the technical. (Right or left, can't remember which is which) Striking does have a lot of technical movements, footwork and such, but you have to be able to improvisize and react much more often than anything else.

That's just my opinion. Tell me I'm dumb or wrong, whatever you feel.
 
#11 · (Edited)
Well put. I totally agree....boxing ive always had to force myself to learn and pay very close attention to what i was doing, Its more like dancing or playing an instrument, you just have to feel it out and learn for yourself, nobody can really "teach" you nice clean striking. I have more of a technical engineering brain and wrestling and grappling just sort of came naturally when i started it up. Just by me watching i learned a lot. Not that i am great at it, I have many years of practice to go, but I just have a way of seeing and understand the things i am taught. Like it has been said it depends on the person. Its like engineering vs art...can be very similar but take a totally different mindset
 
#12 ·
Really I think it's just the person rather than the trade. Some people have quick eyes and spot openings faster than others, making stand up easier, while some guys just have a knack for reading body movement and adjusting accordingly, making grappling easier.

I could be dead wrong though lol.
 
#13 ·
While it depends on the person, I would say striking is easier than grappling to learn. For me personally, I've been striking under a year and I do well against people that have way more experience. I wouldn't call myself a great striker by any means, but I am average. I've been grappling since September (when I started kickboxing), and against any blue/purple belts I face I lose definitvly. I realise I am still a rookie in both areas, but I'm a lot more progressed in striking than I am BJJ.

Developing the basics for striking takes about 3-8 months with a decent trainer, and becoming an advanced striker takes about 3-5 years.

Learning the basics in BJJ takes about 6 months - 1 year, but learning to be an advanced BJJ guy takes about 7-10 years.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Developing the basics for striking takes about 3-8 months with a decent trainer, and becoming an advanced striker takes about 3-5 years.

Learning the basics in BJJ takes about 6 months - 1 year, but learning to be an advanced BJJ guy takes about 7-10 years.

On paragraph 1, I gotta disagree. It takes much longer that 3-5 years to become an advanced striker. I would guesstimate closer to 10 to be genuinely advanced. And striking takes way more than 8 months to become versed at on the count of basics, I would estimate a year at least for the average joe.

On paragraph 2, I agree that it takes several years to become an advanced wrestling/jujitsu practitioner. But the basics probably, again take more like a year IMO to become adept for the average joe.

But that doesn't hold for everyone. Some people are intuitive strikers and can find that pinhole in their opponent's guard and sneak in a knockout punch. While some are more adept at at reading body language and movement, and feeling their opponent out in the groundwork sense of the term.

That varies dependant on how a person thinks and relates their thoughts and action/plans in the encounter. The fact is that there are so many variables involved in becoming versed at a martial art that you can't say this will take this long, or that will take that long without qualifing it as your personal opinion, or guess...even if that's how it goes for you.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top