The role of sportive grappling in HEMA

[Stewart Sackett]

What in Jiu-jitsu we call the guard is simply placing your legs between you & your opponent so that you have leverage. Any Jiu-Jitsu coach will tell you the primary uses of the guard are to sweep, submit or stand up. To some extent, guard work is therefore justified in Ringen training as a part of aufstehen, since standing up out of a pin almost always involves either turning to quarters or recovering to guard as a transitional movement. When my group trains we talk about the guard as a position of leverage from which to move, but we also state that the historical emphasis seems to be on using the guard to stand up rather than submit or sweep. The manuals do show images of sacrifice throws however, which in my BJJ mind are just really committed butterfly sweep variations that start from standing.

[Mike Cartier]

Guard play should be minimized to be about reversiung the shitty position, historically ground fighting was more a necessity not a nw range of fighting.

i take my cues from Pankration where the guard is only used briefly ( to reverse a shitty position)

My other point is that teaching stand up grappling and not teaching ground fighting is BAD, because with stand up grappling comes the reality of haing to ground fight whether you wish to or not. Stand up grappling can often end up in a ground match, especially if the oponents are equal in skill, strength or knowledge.

[Stewart Sackett]

So Mike, it seems like you & I agree that the focus when training ground fighting should be on positional dominance, with the focus from bottom being on escaping back to the feet or reversing the position & while ground fighting should not be the central focus of the art it’s necessary to train it because it is quite possible to end up in a ground fight whether you want to be in one or not. Is that a fair assessment?

[David James Knight]

Stewart: I concur. The focus is on gaining a dominant position. My point is that there was definitely a ground game, primarily on the top but also on the bottom. What we want to avoid is guys pulling guard for 10 minutes while waiting for the Gogo Plata. At the same time, we shouldn't be standing them back up after 30 seconds on the ground just because the fight "looks too much like UFC" or because we have this preconceived notion that medieval groundfighting was always about deploying a dagger as quickly as possible.

Taking a cue from Sambo, we could have three different rulesets for different Ringen events (entry level bouts would be grappling only, intermediate would add strikes/kicks, advanced would add dagger simulators).

[David James Knight]

I can't think of a single image that I've seen which teaches fighting from one's back in the way that BJJ and other such arts do.

I can:



I haven't translate the text for this next one yet, but it very clearly depicts the bottom figure pulling guard, which is about as BJJ-esque as it gets. I've also translated a Shortstaff plate that instructs the mounted figure (who is about to be choked) not to sweep, but to counterattack from the bottom, which is also very BJJ.



Translation: "[If you are in the bottom position,] make sure from the start that your hands are not captured, quickly seize his face with one hand (hooking your thumb under his chin and pressing the other fingers into his eyes, gripping firmly), forcefully strike his groin with the other hand, kick out whichever leg is freer, and quickly draw it back, thus kneeing him in the groin." Mair, Cod. Vinob. 10825 162v.

[MichaelJPierce]

"clear" wouldn't be in my vocabulary when trying to discern what's going on in these images. Though I have seen the second one in other manuals enough to know what's going on.

if that's supposed to be a guard it a really crappy one. From the US Army ground fighting curriculum the guard is suppose to give you an advantage through hip control of your opponent. I would not consider that to be happening in the first image and definitely not in the second. The guy on his back is in bad shape. At best he has a half guard.

I take it back, looking at the image I don't think his feet are even locked together. So I wouldn't even consider the position appealing in anyway. With the position he holds on his back, even if he wanted to hold that position as a guard, the person on top would be able to pass into the mount.

[Mike Cartier]

yes Stew that would be an exact assement actually.
Groundfighting should be taught but not like in BJJ, more for positional dominance than sbu hunting. I love BJJ BTW, I do MMA and BJJ regularly myself (roughly blue belt rank in BJJ)


Also David Knight those images are not in fact Ground fighting, i beleive that is actually love making or more specifically Man-Love.

[Michael Chidester]

"clear" wouldn't be in my vocabulary when trying to discern what's going on in these images. Though I have seen the second one in other manuals enough to know what's going on.

Try these:

[David James Knight]

I never said the second image showed a guard. To the contrary, I specifically say that the bottom figure is mounted. Obviously, that is Not Good. My point was that in that plate, Mair instructs the mounted figure to fight back, not to sweep. Perhaps an escape is implied after the groin/face attacks, but Mair doesn't mention it (which he usually does in weapon plates, i.e. "and then withdraw from him by doing X").

Thanks for the color image, Chidester. Here is the full plate (in color): http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db ... &seite=580

Mair's text confirms that it is a type of guard, as that term is used generally in BJJ. Here's an idiomatic translation:

Top figure: "When both of you are on the ground, seize the inside of your opponent's right elbow with your left hand, push it up, apply your right hand to his left forearm, and spread his arms apart." The text also implies you should "press the weight of your chest into him" (see below).

Bottom figure: "If your opponent pins you in this way with his chest pressing into you, throw your right leg up over his back and your left foot up over his right leg, and in this way he will actually be trapped." The Latin for the italicized clause is "actu is interclusus est" and the root verb is "includere: to enclose, imprison."

Top figure: "To free yourself, knee him in the groin with your left leg so that he loses his strength and is forced to release you."

Given that Mair explicitly states that the bottom figure's legs are used to trap the top figure, I don't know how you could call this anything but a "guard," and a clear one at that!

[Michael Chidester]

Which supports the assertion that Unterhalten uses the ground-and-pound approach to wrestling. Interesting. Next question: submissions on the ground? I've seen dozens of different submissions performed standing up, but are they a component of HEMA ground game?

As to the notion of “Ringen as wished for”, I think it’s an interesting issue. It’s not a problem with the Longsword, because all we have to do is train the weapon functionally & the unique nature of how a Longsword functions will distinguish HEMA from other fighting arts.

Interesting thing about that. Brian Hunt and I were discussing this last weekend when he came up to play, and he says that good Japanese swordsmanship has an incredible degree of overlap with what we do. It's the ruleset, not the technique, that makes different arts look different.

On the other hand, if we let everything in then it’s hard to make a compelling argument for our art as distinct from anything else & the issue becomes: why would anyone train Kampfringen with us when they could do the same things training MMA under more qualified instructors?

That wouldn't be a bad idea for people serious about Ringen. They'll get more focused training there, and can come back and have a much easier time interpreting the manuals. In point of fact, everyone that I can think of that is skilled in Ringen also has a good deal of AMA or MMA training under their belt, which is not a coincidence. Further down the line, when we get Ringen ironed out once and for all and develop solid training programs for it, then it will be like asking why someone goes to Judo or Sambo when they can go to an MMA gym--because all other things being equal, they'll learn the same skill set and so it's mostly a question of which format and presentation they like best.

As for qualified instruction, the HEMA Alliance has plans in that area that have a lot of potential.