http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=20011015220606.01583.00000098%40mb-mj.aol.

c
om
Subject: Re: Multiple opponents scenario
Date: 16 Oct 2001 02:06:06 GMT
From: robrpm2222@aol.comInternet (RobRPM2222)
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
>Well, I guess I'll just have to keep my eyes open. :P
are you talking about the X% of fights go to the ground statistic?
Well, here's what I've heard, and posted a while back, which is namely that
those statisistics come from LAPD officer arrest records, and that somewhere
between 90% to 95% of fights where the subject(s) resisted arrest went to the
ground. Rorian Gracie was the person to first publicize those statistics to
promote groundfighting, and since Rorian was very much buddy-buddy with the
LAPD, I have no reason to doubt this.
What Rorian didn't say, however, is that the police were trained to take a
subject to the ground during an arrest, being that it is easier to restrain a
person there with fewer injuries to the subject being restrained ( important in
our lawsuit culture. ) Since there are more police officers than opponents in
most cases, this is a viable tactic a large percentage of the time.
Despite the misuse of statistics, what Rorian implied was correct, namely that
fights often went to the ground whether the opponents wanted it to or not.
-Rob Meyer
Kempo-Jujitsu, Sombo,
Goshinbudo Jujitsu ( MMA )

| As Voltaire once said| " Witty quotes mean nothing."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=B5B5D255.D71%25jls%40jps.ne
From: Jason Lawrence Stauff (jls@jps.net)
Subject: Law enforcement: where "most fights go to the ground" may have begun.
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
View: (This is the only article in this thread) | Original Format
Date: 2000/08/08
Hello,
I was reading a law enforcement self defense book called Law enforcement:
reasonable force options. It was written by Rod Sanford. In this book he
said that, based on an L.A.P.D. study by Sergeant Greg Dossey, 62% of
officer involved altercations ended up with the two parties grappling on the
ground.
I am attending a P.O.S.T. academy in California now. This is the basic
academy that California requires in order to become a peace officer. I am
very, very upset that there is no ground fighting taught in the academy. I
have taken it upon myself to teach some other interested recruits a little
grappling.
I have found more than a little resistance from the self defense instructors
and others in the academy staff. I took a strong stance when they tried to

dissuade me from teaching the grappling. After I got a cautious okay to

start teaching I only had two willing students. After the first class I now
have about fifteen who want to be in the next class (this Sunday). Opening
their eyes to ground fighting has actually made them scared of their own
ineptness on the ground.
I am left with just one question: why is there so much resistance against
just learning some ground fighting skills and California P.O.S.T. academies?
Regards,
Jason
==================================================
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=fights+%22go+to+the+ground%22+lapd&hl=en&rnum=
7&selm=37E006FD.497376FB%40healtheon.com
From: Damon Stone (damon@healtheon.com)
Subject: Re: ufc is real-life combat.
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
View: Complete Thread (78 articles) | Original Format
Date: 1999/09/15
Jerry Love wrote:
>
> > >In a match geared (at least somewhat) toward grapplers
> >
> > Like hell it is.
> > Soft floor, one-on-one, nothing on the floor, no weapons, no walls, no
> eye-goughes, groin shots, tearing, biting......
Speaking from experience right Jerry? I mean you have
actually been INSIDE of one of SEG's regulation octagons to
speak about it right? The floor is soft in comparison to
concrete, but isn't any softer than a number of surfaces you
may find yourself fighting on such as a field of grass or
the like. Nothing on the floor... Well in all honesty my
city is pretty clean there isn't much on the city street or
sidewalks that stays there long. No walls... no but the
fenced cage does a good job of restricting movement and
getting thrown into it or pressed against it hurts. As
anyone who has fought in one should know... Eye gouging,
groin shots, tearing and biting... got news for you Jerry, a
grappler has access to these exact same tactics as a striker
and considering all require you to be reasonably close if he
has you on the ground he will be in a FAR better place from
which to use these techniques than you are.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
ed
> >
> >

>in the birthplace of

>a grappling art, in a competition full of grapplers, many fights go to the
>ground? I am not suprised.
One dimensional strikers dont enter anymore,cause they all got the shit kick
out of em.
See previous entry.

Which was that? That grapplers who train against strikers

could takedown and beat strikers who never trained against

grapplers and relied on "anti-grappling" techniques that

worked when used against their karateka/kung-fu/silat
training partners? Well then you are right. If it was the
bit about the enviroment favoring grapplers, how about you
wait until you have actually been inside of one before you
pass judgement on something you have no experience in.
> > >So you are saying there is no actual study to validate a claim the 95% of
> > >fights end up with both fighters on the ground?
> >
> > i'M SURE THERE ARE STUDIES,BUT I ONLY CARE ABOUT MINE,AND IN MINE,MORE THAN
95%
> > GO DOWN(GENERATED THROUGH WATCHING VALE TUDO)
> > Strike a nerve? You complain when I don't have video-tape and you don't even
> have literature.
Actually a number of reports about it have been cited.
Contact the FBI or LAPD for their reports on crime
statistics. The original reports used were from 89-91 I
believe but any year should be able to provide you with the
general statistics. If you want to attack this point you are
going about it wrong. The stats are there, what you should
be arguing is whether any of the participants were trained
fighters when the fight went to the ground. If they were was
either or both of them trained as grapplers/groundfighters.
If the combatants were average Joe's and Jane's then the
data becomes questionable. Also you should inquire whether
this includes altercations were one of the principles was a
member of law enforcement. If so then a number of their
"fights" go to the ground since they are attempting to
restrain someone versus beat the piss out of them (though
with the LAPD that may not always be true ;).
> I take the possability of ending up on the ground very seriously. How
> seriously do you take the possability of your opponent NOT ending up there?
Me personally I treat both very seriousely. I train in
maintaing my feet and being able to escape from the ground
if I find myself there and fight from the ground if
returning to my feet is not a viable option at the time. I
also train on how to execute throws and takedowns that
either leave me still standing or place me in a controling
place on the ground where I may strike as I return to my
feet. Mobility is key to survival in a fight.
> I take one-on-one fights very seriously, but you seem to ignore the
> possability of multiple attackers.
I don't but being able to fight effectively on the ground is
VERY important against multiple attackers. One on one you
have the freedom to focus a lot of your attention on one
person and resist any takedowns or other influences
(enviroemnt, plain bad luck) that may put you on the ground.
Against multiple assailants you must divide your attention
and this increases the chances that you may find yourself on
the ground. A grappler is NOT a groundfighter necessarily. I
can grapple extremely effectively from a standing position,
and use oneof my opponents as a shield and even a weapon if
need be from other attackers. I can use pain and threat of
injury/death to aid me in my escape. Grappling will allow me

to neutralize a non-grappler and still allow me to use

striking skills which for some may be rudimentary but in my
case are probably my best asset.
> I take unarmed fights very seriously, but you seem to pay little heed to the
> effect of armed conflict on your fighting style.
Whereas I am always aware of the potential for any conflict
to esculate to the point of weapons and generally expect it
to do so. Better safe than sorry. If your opponent has a
weapon I have found it safer to either avoid them completely
or control the hand with the weapon. I'm either going to
take the first oppurtunity to bail or the first chance to
close and control. What I won't do is stay on the outside
and hope to strike at an armed attacker in hopes of getting
the KO or a maiming or killing blow. If I can control the
weapon it is MUCH less of a threat and by controling the
weapon I control him allowing for any strikes I use to be
that much more effective.
dms
=========================================================
http://www.cnn.com/US/9805/02/police.misconduct/index.html
Study by police chiefs: Cops rarely use force
[Police trainibg]
Los Angeles Police must take an arrest-and-control training course every 18 mont
hs
May 2, 1998
Web posted at: 10:54 p.m. EDT (0254 GMT)
LOS ANGELES (CNN)--A nationwide study of police departments shows that police ra
rely use
force in their interaction with citizens, according to a report released Saturda
y by the
International Association of Chiefs of Police.
[vxtreme] CNN's Jim Hill reports
The report, funded by the Justice Department, examined nearly 400 law enforcemen
t agencies
from 1994 through 1997, including their use of physical, chemical, impact, elect
ronic and
firearm devices. For every 10,000 responses to police calls for help, force was
used an
average of four times, according to the study.
The study also found:
* Officers were most likely to use force while making arrests, followed by t
raffic stops and responses to disturbances.
* There were 61 reported cases of people using chemical force against police
officers.
* Seventy-eight percent of female suspects and 60 percent of male suspects s
uffered no reported injuries resulting from the use of force.
* In 63 percent of arrests, force was used by both suspects and officers dur

ing confrontations.
* Fifty-two percent of reported confrontations were interracial.
The report is the largest examination of police use of force based on data compi
led by law enforcement agencies, according to the police chiefs' organization.
Public perception affected by high-profile cases
But the highly publicized cases of violent arrests paint another picture of how
law enforcement officers perform on duty.
[king beating]
A citizen captured the 1991 police beating in Los Angeles of motorist Rodney Kin
g
Some examples: The arrests and beatings of suspected illegal immigrants by Calif
ornia authorities that was captured on videotape by a Los Angeles news helicopte
r, the case of Haitian-born Abner Louima, who allegedly was sexually assaulted w
ith a plunger by New York Police officers, and the videotaped beating of Rodney
King by Los Angeles Police, which sparked riots in Los Angeles.
"Police misconduct is not rare ... I regret to say," said attorney Hugh Manes, w
ho specializes in cases of alleged police misconduct.
The Los Angeles Police Department is trying to use a kinder, gentler approach to
subduing violent suspects. The LAPD began arrest training after a study of past
incidents and recommendations from self-defense experts.
"What was the most effective way to restrain them and what was the safest way to
restrain them ... not only safe for the officer but safe for the suspect," said
Los Angeles Police Sgt. Greg Dossey of the training, which is required every 18
months.
Despite the Justice report, Manes doubts police violence is decreasing, and he s
aid Los Angeles' new training requirement is still not enough.
"Once every 18-months ain't gonna cut it ... you need training on a daily or cer
tainly on a several-times-a-week basis in order to be effective," Manes said.
Correspondent Jill Hill contributed to this report.
==========================================================================
http://www.nlectc.org/inthenews/newssummary/12171998.html
http://www.nlectc.org/justnetnews/12171998.html#story7
"The LAPD's Reality Check"
Los Angeles Times Magazine (12/13/98) P. 22; Cray, Dan
Greg Dossey of the Los Angeles Police Department is revolutionizing law enforcem
ent
confrontation techniques, starting with his troubled hometown force. Dossey base
s his new
training program on the findings from his University of Southern California doct
oral thesis,
which found that a substantial number of arrests that involved force could have
been
prevented or handled better if the officers had been more well-trained. His appr
oach
differs from traditional police confrontation training in the way officers are t

aught
to maintain control of the situation. The most striking finding Dossey uncovered
was that
two-thirds of all altercations with suspects take place with both parties on the
ground, a
contingency for which the LAPD was all but unprepared. Other tactics, such as pl
acing a
"firm grip" on the suspect's arm, tended to engender fights that otherwise might
not have
taken place. Dossey has replaced these old-fashioned methods with a combination
of
prevention, teamwork, and martial arts training, and all LAPD officers are now r
equired to
undergo Dossey's 40-hour training course and be re-certified every 18 months. Th
e program
seems to be producing results: since its introduction last year, less than 1 per
cent of
arrests have involved force--compared to the previous six-year average of 1.7
percent--injury rates fell 19 percent, and brutality rates dropped 13 percent. S
ome groups
are still skeptical, considering the LAPD's reputation, but others have faith. I
n addition
to continued support from the LAPD leadership, Dossey has been recruited to put
on his
training seminars for 65 police departments, the FBI, the DEA, and the Navy Seal
s.
============================================================================
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:59:21 -0500
From: "Burdick, Dakin R" <burdickd@indiana.edu>
To: <the_dojang@martialartsresource.net>
Subject: [The_Dojang] 90% of fights go to the ground
Reply-To: the_dojang@martialartsresource.net
Kirk Lawson wrote:
It comes from a study that Sergeant Greg Dossey did for the LAPD in
which
he found that about 2/3 (62%) LEO arrests or altercations ended with
both
parties on the ground. Apparently this statistic was commonly cited by
Rorian Gracie for quite a while (used out of context actually) and the
number grew from 2/3 to "most," to "90%" in the retelling by people who
heard Rorian but didn't listen closely or forgot the source of the stat.
My Reply:
Actually, no. At the article by Dossey at
http://www.defendu.com/10_bjj.htm, he mentions: "Both LAPD statistics
and the Gracie family assert that between 65 to 85 percent of
altercations eventually end up on the ground anyway." Dossey himself
was a student of the Gracie stuff (taught in LAPD because of the
marvelous influence of Hollywood on American fighting styles), so his
"research" was really more in the line of supporting what the Gracies
were teaching. Brad Parker's "The Ten Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu Moves Every

Cop Should Know" at

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:6H65KhhAyigJ:scv1988.redirectme.net
:64080/~fitzy/unarmed%2520combat/texts/Jujitsu%2520Moves.pdf+ground+%22g
reg+dossey%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 had this to say:
"Many martial artists and defensive tactics instructors tell their
students to 'never go to the ground' with a subject because of the
dangers to be found there. However, Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioners
aim for the exact opposite outcome - their goal is to always take the
fight to the ground. "
Of course, even if most fights did end up on the ground, that is NOT
where you should aim to be. The Gracies train for fighting one on one,
without weapons, for a title. Their stuff works for that. On the
street, try not to get in position where five guys can jump on you!
True story time -- because of the Gracie success, our federation (USHF)
increased the number of ground grapping requirements. For my 2nd dan
test, I had to demonstration escapes from pinned position (man on top,
etc.). My partner did this by bucking, turning over, passing the guard,
and going to the mount. I did it by reaching down and grabbing his
nuts. He jumped off pretty damn fast. :)
Craig Stovall writes:
That was just ad copy from Rorion Gracie back in the early 90's when he
and Royce released the original Gracie Basics tape set.
My reply:
THANK YOU CRAIG!!!!!
Yours in the arts,
Dakin
dakinburdick@yahoo.com
================================================================================
====
Subject: Re: 90% of fights end up on the ground
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 13:49:52 -0400
From: Joao de Souza <no@sp.am>
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Kirk Lawson wrote:
> Daaaaave wrote:
>
>>So i expect youve heard this before that 90% of fights end up on the
>>ground.
>
> Yeah. This is a bogus stat. The most accurate you can be is "a lot of fights
> end up on the ground."
Its a bad cultural translation. Its very common in Brazil to use
numbers such as "90%" to indicate a great majority, or 99% to indicate a
vastly great majority.
Those numbers are not meant to be taken
literally, but that cultural aspect doesn't translate too well into

other cultures. So when the Gracies came to the US and started using
the same "90% of all fights go to the ground" line they used in Brazil,
most people (about 90% of them ;) took it as they meant it literally.
Joao "93.7% of all statistics are made up" de Souza