Jonathan Waller wrote:What we see in the manuals is grappling that throws you to the ground on your head.
The same sort of throw is actually used in boxing as well, we call it the cross-buttock. Unfortunate name.
If you put them down its on their front or in a way so they can't kick out you knee and you are controlling them its so you can draw or pick up something as a weapon.
I don't know what manuals you specifically work from, I have Talhoffer and Meyer, my KDF instructor primarily teaches from Meyer. All I can say is that if you don't have hold of somebody you don't have control of them and even if you do have hold of them you still may not. I don't know where you live but if we happen to run into eachother at a seminar I think it'd be neat to go over some of these scenarios in a sportsmanlike manner. I have kind of a weird background so things like up/down or front/back don't mean the same thing to me when on the ground.
Controlling some one and smashing them into a wall is a way to strike them with something harder than a fist, knee or elbow.
I agree with that completely though being strike-oriented I'd be more likely to use a wall or the ground as an anvil. Kind of appropriate since I'm into blacksmithing... anyway hard isn't really the problem, focusing and delivering energy are what's really critical. For instance your palm is pretty soft but it can be a very effective striking weapon.
Now i'm not saying that striking is ineffective. But we have to come back to the fact that it plays a very small part in the majority of sources.
I'm with you actually, the only difference is era and context. KDF is very important to me but my primary study is the Art Of Defence as known in the 18th and 19th centuries. Grappling was alive and well in that era but boxing had also risen to prominence and between the two I personally prefer it except when swords are involved... even then much of the wrestling component of my boxing carries over.
The main reason in my opinion is that if 1 - you can strike then strike them with a weapon. 2 - If you don't have a weapon smash them in to the ground control them and get or draw a weapon and strkike them with it. 3 - they have a weapon and you don't. Then control them smash in to the ground and take their weapon or go to 2 and repeat if necessary.
I'm all good with that. As I said it's like the cut and thrust, in this case your art is a little more cut oriented than mine. My main point is in any situation don't discount the strike, even if you don't use it much yourself your opponent may and if you're not guarded against it that might put you at a disadvantage... like a striker who doesn't grapple. A real world example would be I've been held from the rear and used the back of my head against my enemy's face till he let go which is usually pretty quick. Come to think of it that's been done to me too.
Control is a whole nother issue though. I toyed with the concept for a while when it was first introduced to me but I'm not a big believer in control anymore. I seek neutralization.