Talk:Grappling/Archive 1

Karate?

Karate has quite a few grappling techniques. The first three moves of both Pinan Shodan(Heian Nidan) and Pinan(Heian) Sandan (both introductory kata) contain joint lock techniques. They are rarely practiced in western dojos, presumably because the instructors are unaware of them.

Boxing has the clinch, Muay Thai/Thai boxing has a clinch and they are often used and practised. These are grappling techniques, then by your logic, these too should be included into the list of grappling arts even more so than Karate. The problem here is that the focus of these arts are not to grappling but to strike.Shardakar 16:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Grapping as a 'noun' is a fabricated concept and in my opinion is strictly a POV. Here are what I perceive to be the significant flaws in how we are trying to define grappling.

First, grappling (as a noun) is not defined in the Oxford dictionary. We can look up box and wrestle in the Oxford dictionary and both have derivatives ending in 'ING' and acknowledged as actual nouns.

wrestle

box

grapple

Secondly, this makes the current definition of grappling speculative at best and against wikipedia:attribute:

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true.

Thirdly, there is a current definition of 'grappling' on the International Federation of Wrestling Styles on a citible source that would be in line with wikipedia's guidelines for using published reliable sources. It would appear there may be some plagiarism from the International Federation of Wrestling Styles with some word manipulating to try and present 'grappling' as an actual noun. Penciljunk 16:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to change the first paragraph to reflect the POV of the International Federation of Wrestling Styles definition of what grappling is, however I would prefer to have a consensus first. Penciljunk 16:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I brought up the dictionary def when you started arguing about the roots of the word. I train in BJJ & am not particularly interested in the sport of wrestling. The FILA def of grappling is incredibly resent compared to how long it has been popular as a separate sport and as a term used to describe the type of training done. Just because they are an authority on wrestling dose NOT mean that they are an authority on grappling, unless you can 1st prove grappling is wrestling so please point to an out side source that is not primarily associated with wrestling that agrees with you.

[/rant]

I have mentioned this debate on Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial Arts as we are not getting any where like this--Nate1481 16:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Can I use Renzo Gracie as another source? Renzo Gracie serves as the Brazilian representative on the International Federation of Wrestling Styles' grappling committee; World Grappling Committee. It would appear to me the Gracie family and the corresponding large constituents of BJJ are on board with 'grappling' being considered a sub-group of wrestling. I understand you are not on board with this train of thought and out of respect for you is precisely why I have opted not to make any actual changes in the article. Penciljunk 17:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you quote him and dose one man represent his entire family's opinions? --Nate1481 17:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not interested in arguing POVs. I have a citable source that I want to put in the article (correctly). However, it would appear there has been some plagiarism (quite possibly an accident) and I want to give International Federation of Wrestling Styles full credit for the thought and definition of 'grappling'. If you were to find a source with an opposing POV and there own thoughts, it would not be my position to oppose the insertion of another source. Penciljunk 17:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I dissagree with the principle your working on so the source is irrelevant. That's why i've posted it on WPMA. --Nate1481 17:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The only principle I am operating on is that of the 7 major Martial Art families outlined in WPMA. They are:

- Chinese Martial Arts

- European Martial Arts

- Filipino Martial Arts

- Hybrid Martial Arts

- Indian Martial Arts

- Japanese Martial Arts

- Wrestling

Penciljunk 17:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Escapes

Could someone who knows grappling and grappling holds right a page for escapes or at least a subsection for escapes. I would do it, but as a Taekwondoist am not very knowledgeable.

Merge with Wrestling?

Both this page and the Wrestling page point to each other as synonyms, but neither explains why or if the two are any different. Perhaps a merge is in order?

Don't think that it would be a good idea to merge because Wrestling is just a style of Grappling

Wrestling is far more common a term. If merged, grappling should redirect into Wrestling. If not merged, each article should explain how they're different. Rlevse 15:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Terrible idea to merge. Wrestling does not amount to grappling. Wrestling, in its general usage, refers to the combat sport. Grappling is the set of skills that encompass wrestling techniques, as well as other techniques that are not generally practiced in wrestling due to the rules and equipment used for wrestling. For example, judo is a martial art that is primarily focused on grappling, yet is completely different from wrestling due to the ruleset (different kinds of pins, submissions allowed in judo but not amateur/Greco-Roman wrestling) and the clothing worn by judoka (allows for a different set of throws and takedowns due to the different kind of controls offered by different grips on the gis rather than wrists, elbows, underhooks, headlocks etc.). To those of us that cross-train in a number of different martial arts, saying one wrestles gives much different implications than saying one grapples - I would expect a pure wrestler to not have a working knowlege of submissions, not be familiar with the use of the guard on the ground, etc. Rembar 08:25, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

that doesn't make sense. You are saying that Judo is a particular form of grappling/wrestling. Wrestling in its general sense (as opposed to professional (staged) wrestling) is simply a synonym of grappling, as stated on both the grappling and wrestling articles. As long as you don't contest those definitions, a merge will be necessary. The OED doesn't recognize grappling as an independent noun, just as the participle of to grapple, in the sense of "To take a firm hold, as with a grapple, esp. in wrestling; to get a tight grip of another; to contend with another in close fight." -- hence, this article should either redirect to grappling hold or to wrestling (or be a disambiguation page between the two, but not an independent article). dab (𒁳) 15:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I contest these definitions (I've made some changes to the page) and I believe that merging would be awful. Grappling is certainly not synonymous with wrestling - they deserve their own pages. Wrestling has historically been the more popular of the two sports, but over the last few years, grappling has grown immensely in popularity. Also, Judo is not "a particular form of grappling/wrestling." Judo incorporates many grappling techniques, but it is primarily a throwing art. Note that no one would argue that the wrestling page and the Judo page should be merged; this would be akin to merging grappling with wrestling.

wrestling is synonymous with grappling. Of course, amateur/olympic/greco-roman wrestling is a different thing from MMA grappling is a different thing from pro wrestling is a different thing from judo (becasuse of the rulesets) - but they are all forms of grappling and they are all forms of wrestling. It wouldn't offend my sensibilities to either merge the wrestling/grappling ages or leave them separate. Aiki Patrick Parker 01:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

By your logic, all games that use a ball would be the same article. Different rules differentiate different sports - different sports warrant different articles. With all due respect to your qualifications... I'm astounded that anyone would argue that professional wrestling and Judo should have the same page. It's not a defensible position.

Not quite. By my logic, all games in which one plays with a ball are ball games, and if someone were to write an article on 'ballgames' then any ballgame could/should be mentioned in it. To carry the ballgame analogy further, soccer, american football, rugby, etc... are all variations on football - but it is reasonable for them to each have their own articles. Anyway, I'm not arguing to merge them. I am not so invested in this particular topic that I wouldn't be able to tolerate them being merged or separate. just stating an opinion, which is: judo is wrestling is grappling.Aiki Patrick Parker 22:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, we can agree to disagree. I think that your analogy breaks down when you consider that 'ballgames' is not a sport, whereas 'wrestling' is a sport - even an Olympic sport - and therefore should have its own page. But maybe you're thinking of the wrestling page as being about the word and not the sport? "Grappling" may be listed in some thesauruses as synonymous with "wrestling," but that does not mean that the two belong on the same wiki page. I think that the most extensive encyclopedia on the planet should list individual sports as individual pages. Thx for your POV.

Wrestling merge (or, What's the difference between grappling and wrestling?)

New opinion here. - I mentioned this on the wrestling discussion page. Wrestling is the oldest form of combat and hand-to-hand competition in human history and grappling was born of this type of combat we refer to as 'wrestling'. I consider wrestling and grappling related as much as father and son, but the son has developed enough of an identity to have his own page; but the underlying relationship between the two should be maintained on both pages.

Grappling is a catch all term that encompasses wrestling and other MA's the wrestling page covers rules, tactics etc. that are specific to the sport, this page is about all of the sports and arts covered. Both have enough good content and are notable different enough to warrant separate articles. --Nate1481 15:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I guess we we will disagree here. Which rules and tactics should the wrestling page be dedicated too? Folk-Style wrestling (USA competitions), Free-Style wrestling (international competitions), Greco-Roman wrestling (international competitions)? Should the page be inclusive of the Greek form of wrestling or even the dicipline of catch wrestling? The wrestling page should not be limited to just the current day definition of wrestling but should encapsulate wrestling from it's inception to today. Wrestling was the first hand-to-hand competition and the oldest form of competition known to man. Current day competitions such as folk-wrestling, free-style wrestling, greco-roman wrestling, grappling competitions, catch-wrestling and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu competitions are all forms of wrestling but each can stand alone as their own individual dicipline. The only grounds in which wiki 'grappling' should be seperated from wiki 'wrestling' is if it is treated as it's own unique dicipline, which I believe it is. If it is not going to be treated as it's own unique dicipline than the page should be merged with the wiki 'wrestling' page.

It's general considered bad etiquette to edit someone else's posts on a talkpage, the bold initial word thing is used as a summery and in votes. Good etiquette is to sign you posts with four tides (~~~~)

As to which rules set I'd suggest all of them, professional wrestling and various other disciplines with in the umbrella of wresting. Some mention of BJJ, Judo, etc should be made but that's what sub headings are for. The wrestling talk page seems equally opposed, there are related but not synonyms, you are impliying that grappling is a form of wrestling where as i would argue the reverse is true, to quote from the article (have you read it?) "Grappling is sometimes thought of as synonymous with wrestling; a more careful statement is that the different forms of wrestling are examples of grappling-based sports" . If you say wrestling to most people they think of American high school or pro-wrestling, but not the others. Both are large articles and cover soem of the same ground but a merge would mostly likely lose content to get the article to a manageable size and cause large arguments. --Nate1481 13:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the etiquette pointer, I overlooked these when I started to contribute to wikipedia. Other pointers are also appreciated.

My definition of wrestling is derived from the ancient Greeks in which two combatants engaged in a physical hand-to-hand battle. Since the inception of wrestling by the Greeks, other forms of combat have emerged such as folk-wrestling competitions (common in the United States[high school]), grappling competitions (popular in Brazil) and Sambo competitions in Russia. I believe these three entities should remain seperate while still referencing their origin of Greek wrestling. I strongly oppose the use of the word grappling to describe general hand-to-hand combat because it does an injustice to those individuals who train and compete specifically for grappling competitions. Penciljunk 21:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Your arguing linguistics now, my ancient Greek isn't hot but 'wresting' as far as I'm aware dose not derive from there. According to the Ancient Olympic Games article wrestling was referred to as 'pale' The article uses the term wrestling as grappling is less well known but may specifically refer to Greco-Roman wrestling Which according to the article "This form of wrestling was believed to have adapted from the Ancient Greek style of wrestling and to have been practiced mostly by Roman soldiers throughout the empire. In fact, it is derived from a 19th Century French form of show-wrestling popular for its high throws. Real ancient wrestling was quite different; see pankration." not particularly clear cut. Found this: Greek wrestling. Reading more of it, it seem to be describing something most similar to submition wrestling. Still a big claim that it is the origin of all wrestling styles, of which judo is considered one (see the article) and the is defiantly NOT of Greek origin.

The Concise Oxford English Dictionary (10th edition) defines wrestle as "take part in a fight that involves close grappling with one's opponent, either as a sport or in earnest" so that would make grappling the more general term.

I also fail to see any injustice, the rules of a free grappling competitions are less restrictive then those of wrestling so to combine the two and refuse the broader discipline it's own article would be unjust. --Nate1481 22:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)--

I am sure if you look up grappling we will also find a reference to wrestling. You argue the position of keeping the two separate however all your points are how the two words are synonymous. I have tried to differentiate between Grappling [competitions popular in Brazil], folk-wrestling, free-style wrestling, greco-roman wrestling, sambo, catch-wrestling and BJJ based on the individual rules of each respective discipline. And it is my belief that all these different disciplines fall under the general category of ‘wrestling’, not grappling.

I believe the grappling page should be dedicated to grappling competitions that originated (and popularized) in Brazil by BJJ practioners such as the Gracie, Muchado and other Brazilian families. Prior to the early 1900s (and the birth of BJJ), the general term used for hand-to-hand combat (with no striking) was wrestling. I fail to see how the inception of a new form of wrestling (BJJ) should impact the definition of wrestling. Penciljunk 15:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

To the dictionary comment I did & it doesn't, even to say 'such as'. The point I've tried to make is that while there is a HUGE overlap in the terms they are essentially different. Even your argument is not for a merge it's for a change in direction of the topic of this article, you feel that it should focus more on tournament BJJ, NAGA, or ADCC. You have a point of view I disagree with it. Even if i did agree with you a merger would not be the right answer. Part of the reason for the use of the term grappling was to differentiate the sport from wrestling, ANY current form of which has a larger rules set. --Nate1481 15:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Fwiw, I agree with Nate in this. Wrestling is very clearly one form of grappling, not a synonym of it. Judo is also grappling, but it ain't wrestling, and wrestling ain't judo. Same with BJJ. Same with Sambo. Unless we want to redirect "Lion", "Housecat", "Feline", and "Mammal" to point to "Puma", we should leave Grappling and Wrestling as distinct entries. Spoxjox 18:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice to know we can agree on some things... Thanks for comment. --Nate1481 09:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoxjox, Editing or deleting other people's post is bad etiquette, do you have particular reason for deleting my entire posts? Here are my thoughts re-posted. Penciljunk 13:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Penciljunk. For the record, I had no intention of editing your post. It appears I inadvertently erased a bunch of your stuff. I don't know how I managed to do that -- maybe I was editing an old version, as Nate suggests -- but I apologize. It was not intentional. Spoxjox 16:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I am thinking about withdrawing my argument, on the grounds there are no holes in your argument. However, I still have some reservations:

- (a) If we use the oxford definition of grappling and wrestling then I can agree in the literal sense grappling is a more general word to describe hand-to-hand combat (without striking) than wrestling. However this POV contradicts what is in the grappling article where it states 'grappling is a wrestling style'.

- (b) The concept of the two words: if two competitors engage in a hand-to-hand fight (without striking), the majority of the English speaking world is going to refer to them as ‘wrestling’. For example, if the average English speaking individual stumbled upon two kids engaged in a fight on the ground, they are not going to say, “Hey look at those two kids grappling.”

Although I see no holes in your argument, your argument is not congruent with the majority of the English speaking world and what their concept of wrestling is. My question for you then is, if the majority of the English speaking world views two combatants engaged in hand-to-hand fighting (without striking) as ‘wrestling’, why are we doing the contrary in wikipedia? Penciljunk 20:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

At a guess he accidentally edited an old version, please assume good faith.

There is a large hole in the argument you use relating to weasel words and the fact that as wrestling as a sport is common in English speaking countries people not involved with MA's are familiar with the term, in a similar manner to the general use of canoe to describe boats propelled by a paddle where Kayak might be the appropriate term. --Nate1481 13:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Your example of canoe and Kayak are way off base and strictly your own opinion. The opinion of the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles lists "Grappling", Judo, Sambo Amateur wrestling, catch wrestling and Sumo wrestling all as sub-disciplines of wrestling.

When I investigate the word wrestling in Portuguese I learned their word is pronounced Luta Livre. Luta means 'free', livre means 'fight' and luta livre together means wrestling. It would also appear to me that Portuguese speaking countries such as Brazil also consider wrestling to be the more general term than grappling, considering BJJ is refered to as a type of luta livre, or in English 'wrestling'.

Other than your strict and rigid interpretation of the Oxford dictionary, I fail to see any substantial evidence that grappling should be used as a more general term. Penciljunk 14:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I admit it is an opinion and not necessarily the best example but I suppose having been through a similar argument on that score it sprung to mind (also the canoe/kayak thing is more common in the UK).

As for the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles have recently released a set of rules for grappling competitions, which have proved unpopular in some grappling circles, and seem intent on being the governing body for all grappling/wrestling styles, so seem to have an agenda on the subject.

You can argue it back and forth forever I have my opinion you have yours, but either way a merge is a bad idea as it will lead to arguments and loss of information. Cross linking the articles (as I think they are already) is probably the easiest thing. --Nate1481 15:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I find it difficult to accept that the opinion of some ambiguous “grappling circles” should carry as much weight as the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles. However, as a community we should reach out to each other for a compromise.

Would you oppose me inserting the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles’s definition of grappling what their rules of grappling are? Penciljunk 16:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

There definition is worth noting. However as there are other more prominent grappling associations(NAGA, ADCC), who's rule sets have seen more use, don't know if any comps have been run on IFWA rules yet. To be honest I think any mention of rules should be left for an individual organisation's page or would require an article to itsself as there is no universally excepted set. --Nate1481 17:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Apparently their definition of 'grappling' is already noted.

Having done some research, it would appear the current ‘grappling’ introduction (and picture) may have been accidentally plagiarized at some time from FILA-Wrestling.com. A citation will have to be added for this work. If there is no citation for the current introduction, I believe we should go with the International Federation of Associated Wrestling Styles’s definition because it is citible source. Penciljunk 19:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Not the best i've read but not a bad one, again I'd reverse it to "Both clinch fighting and ground fighting are an essential part of grappling." That why you describe what it is not when it's used. --Nate1481 09:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, as stated above, the terms 'wrestling' and 'grappling' are synonymous, both meaning (basically) 'to fight without striking'. The fact that the japanese did it differently from the greeks who did it differently from the welch who did it different from the brazilians does not change the fact that 'to wrestle with' and 'to grapple with' are synonymous. This does not mean that I want to merge the articles. I personally like how the intro to each article is written with reference to each other (basically showing that y'all really do agree with me that they are synonymous ;-). It looks to me like most everyone's opinion here is intractable, and that this endless discussion is not approaching a resolution. I propose that we do not merge the articles because it is an un-necessary merge. Aiki Patrick Parker 18:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The issue was not to merge wrestling and grappling, the issue was the direction of the [grappling]] page and where grappling fits in the martial arts world relative to wrestling. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Penciljunk (talk • contribs) 15:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Okay, I updated the section title to reflect the current discussion. I already stated my opinion before; namely, that "grappling" was the overarching term and "wrestling" a specific type of grappling. That is how I have always used the terms, and how I have always heard them differentiated by those who employ both. But since my experience does not constitute proof of anything, I looked at the Merriam Webster online dictionary, which gives a pretty accurate representation of English as She is Spoken in America. What I found is, to be frank, not kind to my thesis. For the noun "grappling", I found:

Main Entry: grappling

Function: noun

Date: 1582

1 : grapnel

2 : grappling hook

So "grappling" as a noun has existed since at least the late 16th century, but not in the sense we have been using it. Turning to "grapple", I found:

Main Entry: grap·ple

Pronunciation: \ˈgra-pəl\

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English grappel grappling hook, from Old French *grappelle, diminutive of grape hook — more at grape

Date: 1601

1 a: the act or an instance of grappling b: a hand-to-hand struggle c: a contest for superiority or mastery

This is what we mean by "grappling", and it's been around since at least the very early 17th century. (Note the etymology; it comes from "grappling hook".) The verb form is a bit better, but look out:

Main Entry: grapple

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): grap·pled; grap·pling \ˈgra-p(ə-)liŋ\

Date: 1530

transitive verb

1 : to seize with or as if with a grapple

2 : to come to grips with : wrestle

3 : to bind closely

Early 16th century -- sounds good. Same meaning as we use -- that's nice. But wait! What's that I see in #2? 'Synonym' of wrestle?! Curses! And looking at that entry:

Main Entry: wres·tle

Function: verb

Etymology: Middle English wrastlen, wrestlen, from Old English wrǣstlian, frequentative of wrǣstan

Date: before 12th century

intransitive verb

1: to contend by grappling with and striving to trip or throw an opponent down or off balance

2: to combat an opposing tendency or force <wrestling with his conscience>

3: to engage in deep thought, consideration, or debate

And, to add insult to injury, the noun form:

Main Entry: wres·tling

Function: noun

Date: before 12th century

a sport or contest in which two unarmed individuals struggle hand to hand with each attempting to subdue or unbalance the other

This word in its various forms actually predates modern English. It even predates Middle English! It's an Old English word that has survived into modern times. And its meaning, as supplied here, cannot be clearer: "to contend by grappling with".

Much as I hate to admit defeat, I must concede that, based on the authority of Merriam Webster, "grappling" and "wrestling" are clearly synonyms, with "wrestling" being the much older of the two terms. This gravely shakes my whole worldview wrt these words, and I'm trying my best to deal with the emotional devastation. But judging by the OED and now M-W, the authorities appear to agree: "Wrestling" means what I mean by "grappling", and it's been around a lot longer.

The two terms should not be merged, but my thesis that "wrestling" is a specialized form of the more general "grappling" appears to be Just Plain Wrong. Shamefully, I hang my head in defeat. Spoxjox 16:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow. I am genuinely impressed by the awareness of spoxjox to look further than the current definition of a word and research the origin of the word, when it entered the english language and how the definition has changed over the centuries. I still stand by my original assumption the two concepts should not be merged, but I am satisfied to learn wrestling is the more correct term when describing hand-to-hand combat in hopes to 'subdue' or beat another competitor.

I will summarize this section (definition and orgin of the words...) of the grappling discussion page so others can quickly understand the relationship between 'wrestling' and 'grappling'. Penciljunk 15:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

A final reminder of something we all know: Language is living and dynamic. Word meanings and inferences change. Perhaps in wider usage, it is becoming common for "grapple" to be the general term and "wrestle" to be the more specific term, as I have always used them. However, I can't find any convincing evidence outside my own opinion that such is the case, and the etymological evidence is quite to the contrary. So that was really my only point. I wasn't trying to put in a vote on the debate beyond my already-stated opinions, just trying to shed some more light on the matter. Spoxjox 20:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)