Finding the submission force

Last Saturday at Wrestling Show Live I, once again, had a match against Ricky Vendetta, and this time the stipulation was that either wrestler can only win by submission - an idea I felt very comfortable with. Since technical wrestling, especially when it takes place on the mat, is really my area more than that of anyone else in FCF, I now want to take a closer look at some moments in time during the bout.

Submission holds, unlike one might expect, are not about strength - there's nothing wrong with being strong but let me quarantee that once you catch the opponent the most effecient way to deal with the situation is not to squeeze as hard as you can. In the picture above I've taken Ricky down and I'm going for the hold; my approach is almost Baguazhang-like as I direct his arm with a slight touch. It's all manipulation: instead of wasting time and energy I make him move the way I want and, feeling at ease, wait for the opportunity to come and then complete the strike.





The picture of the double wrist lock is a very important one for many people have problems understanding the hold in the first place. It's a powerful hook but can also be problematic when one doesn't have a proper background for utilizing it. See, I'm not bending over to reach the wrist but bringing Ricky's elbow up so his hand is being pulled closer... I'm maintaining a strong upright position, gaining control and making the opponent bend in order to find some way to get out of the situation he's been put in.



In the next picture Ricky is using no other hold than Indian death lock. If you take a look at the expression on my face you can tell I'm not actually happy with his decision, but I do find it satisfying when wrestlers have the brains to use old tricks that happen to be better than most of the new ones. You can clearly see how easy it is for Ricky to twist my arms and increase the amount of pressure while he indeed remains in a position most natural. However, as for the match I prefer luring the opponent into a trap instead of preparing the hold one step at a time (as Ricky did). Don't give the enemy any extra time but choose to turn his advance into a fall.

Drop toe hold is a simple move but more difficult to execute than one might assume. I just want to point out what I'm doing and how tight this particular technique should be: it's definetely a hold rather than a kick - and sure to take the opponent down. The key lies in floating to the side in one fluid and explosive move, obvious in my case.



Upper wrist lock is another catch-wrestling technique that is in fact far from a mere control hold. Opponents often bring the arm in themselves, trying to push you farther away, so this is a very common lock you see technicians use. It's possible to escape it by stretching your arm out - again, not so much with strength but by putting the body behind it. Then again, there's a countermove for that but I'm not in the ring to cause severe damage. Intense as wrestling matches can be, there's a difference between hurting the opponent and injuring him/her.

What we see next is one of the best neck cranks. I've got my arm spiraled around Ricky's head, his chin being the handle. I'm using the weight of my body to push him downwards, adding one more direction in it, and my legs to prevent him from rolling along with the pressure. It's an extremely tight hold - like a screw cap - especially when you're able to flow into it straight from the previous situation. In the match my hand actually slipped a little bit while doing the transfer so this didn't become the finish that time.

People often regard spinning head scissors as a high impact maneuver, but it's really just the ground fighting technique modified. Imagine that the wall/ceiling at the back is the floor, and you'll know what I'm talking about - also, what I'm doing looks like an attack: the hold itself is very solid, my legs placed perfectly for applying pressure and instead of swaying my upper body down towards the mat I'm pushing myself up and spinning around in an aggressive manner. This of course is what creates the high impact. So, whether you're attacking or countering, always keep in mind that it is you who must dominate the opponent and not the other way around.

People who practice any form of combat skills are probably familiar with the plead "show me something". Then, under conditions most friendly, you put them in grovit or sleeper hold, they feel the pressure and, in excitement, go show it to the next person etc. This has very little to do with martial arts. The measure of prowess is not the capacity of strangling someone who's not fighting back but one being able to have the opponent in a hold to begin with. That's why the picture of Ricky landing me on my head: in wrestling we go for the high impacts as set-ups for phases to follow. The combination of raw power and poetry in motion is, among other things, what makes our art the most spectacular sport in the world. Anything can - and will - happen.

(Photos by Marko Simonen.)

The Ryuken time

Since I was defeated by my ex-student and team partner Ricky Vendetta at the Winter War wrestling show last Saturday, I decided to point out a few details of what happened that evening. I guess in the end of the day it was the heat of the challenge that gave Ricky the extra edge to overcome the serenity I hold as strength thanks to my experience - to Ricky it was not just another match, whereas I've been in the very situation many times before. So I can now look at it as a chance to re-learn some of the martial art teachings I haven't had my mind set on recently.


Instead of a typical lock up I chose to apply: a bit of Dumog kind of approach for starters. See how I claim the arm, and note the strong stance - clearly different from that of Ricky's.

You might think one prefers to stand taller than the opponent, but I'm going lower istead. I want to make sure he doesn't pull me over, and I can see the influence of Japanese swordmanship there as well.

When there's not much distance the front kick is sometimes either a "scrape" or simply weak. Not in my case. I bring the knee high up and drive the foot forwards in a stomp-like manner. This I learned from the ninjas of Togakure ryu.

They often expect the clinch but one can also go reverse: "The dragon whips with its tail", said Bruce Lee.

I thought Ricky Vendetta couldn't surprise me in the ring but he did (well at least he's standing outside). An intelligent move to first retreat and then quickly strike while I'm feeling confident.

A variation of chin lock where he's grabbing the beard - and why wouldn't he? As long as any body part may work as a handle one must use it, and Ricky is not a stupid wrestler.

Nothing much to do in a position like that, as you're supposed to go down anyway. One must simply take the blow and come back with a game plan to ensure it's the opponent who goes down the next time.



Ricky going for submission. Good for him, but then again he's not The Original Constrictor. The hold is not nearly as tight it could be, so I didn't have that much trouble getting my foot on the rope. He should have paid more attention when I taught him how it's done in catch-as-catch-can.

Speaking of which, here's a nice photo of my half-hatch suplex. I've got the opponent hooked in two different ways and I take him off balance by pulling to the one direction that's "empty" - it is the rotating move that makes him light and allows me to gain control over the head and the arm immediately after hitting the mat.

Ricky may beat me in strength, but never in speed and agility. Not only can I avoid his attack, but also turn the situation into an instant counter-strike.

Didn't quite get him this time - there should be more weight behind the kick, and that's done by floating in the air so that you can really have yourself in the right position. Do take the time required and never rush into the next phase, just rely on the rhythm of the situation and do what's necessary.



The outcome of a single move poorly executed. Anybody can make a mistake, but the price of that may very easily be losing the bout; see that he's not just bringing me to the mat, he's tossing me across the ring - I'm literally about to land on my neck with the force of the move behind the crash.

My Muay Thai coach told me: "Always make sure you get the last point." He meant the rounds, but since we don't have them it's one piece of advice that concerns every situation to me. Not only in combat arts, but in life is the way I see it. In this particular case I want the opponent to land heavily...

... and myself to land heavily on him. See, Ricky Vendetta wasn't the only person in the ring with the fire of battle.

A significant part of our fine art is that anything can happen. The rules and the actual fighting style in pro wrestling serve the element of unpredictability, so it's a huge emotional experience for the spectator when the person doesn't know whether to expect the unexpected or even something beyond belief. Yet it only takes that 3 count to lose, which means that eiher participant might be the better one at least for the number of seconds required. Hybris goes before a fall.

It was the same with the Championship match as well. Valentine and King Kong Karhula are both excellent wrestlers, but while watching the bout I was certain that the latter would take the title due to the pure determination so clearly visible in him. Sometimes it's good to be wrong - it gives you more.







The Tao equation

A Chinese friend of mine once said that the universe is like a baby inside the Great Mother.

Before birth there is the darkness of the womb - as a primordeal state. That must not be regarded as negative although it tends to be light that we yearn for in both everyday life and questions of ethics. For the unborn there are no choices to be made, none that could lead to an ill outcome. However, this leaves us with the problem of evil: is is not then, concidering the nature of things, dependent on circumstances or one's actions?

Let us think of a fetus as the universe in its state right after the very origin. In that case the Big Bang would be the conception and the birth the beginning of the cosmos as we know it, following the furnace of chaos during the first few moments of existence. And like the human being, the universe also grows, ages, changes and ultimately dies. Through the process of corrosion there will be nothing left of the body/matter except atoms, which too will decompose into energy as aeons pass. The theory suggests that the universe will have its end in a void of complete blackness (I for my part find this only being partially correct).

Stephen Hawking has pointed out that before the Big Bang time itself cannot have existed, which should mean that there has been no time for anything else to exist either. The time-dimension on the other hand is merely one part of the universe's continuity as another direction in it. So the mistake Hawking makes is that he looks at the world from the human point of view whereas the universe, or the forces behind it, have a perspective of their own (very much so). The cosmos, huge as it is, does remain relative for there are boundaries for it, and beyond those lies what we call nothingness, or wuji. The absolute can only be found in zero, yet its true nature lies beyond comprehension. We may know of it the way we gain knowledge about black holes: by making conclusions based on the phenomena we are able to observe. Thinking of the fetus metafore again me could say that the womb was there before the conception.

Mathematics really is a code of symbols descibing reality. There is an endless amount of numbers on both sides of zero, going all the way to infinity. But no measure of greatness counts when compared to what really is the core: any numerical value, infinity included, times zero is same as nothing. Zero marks the absolute.

We know by now that good and bad as concepts are relative, and thus come to understand the meaning of yin/yang. The two as words used to stand for hillsides, one set in the sunlight while the shadow is cast upon the other. With the sun moving the "yin" would of course become the "yang" and vice versa. This is the relativity that works in all reality, and speaking of ethics we must remember that sometimes there are no "good" choices; one just has to pick what he or she finds likely to be "less bad". Then again the difference between right and wrong stays clear in every case, at least as long as we have the strength to be honest to ourselves - there is always the path we should tread upon and not stray.

So should the concepts of right and wrong be seen as two opposite poles equal to each other? It's most easy to answer once we've studied the relation between true and false: there can certainly be truth without any existence of falsity, but at the same time falsity only emerges from absence of truth. This is exactly the same as the power ratio of God and Satan, the latter being a (distorted) mirror image of the whole - no more than a reflection. Therefore I dare to say that, dispite of any circumstances or what things may appear to be like, justice will prevail - over the course of billions and billions of years the corrosion is only for the false. What is True keeps growing from every little bud of it instead, infinitely.

Buddha, mankind and the cosmos - not the same, but similar.