I hear competing arguments for different coaches on whether you should call a move that gets a tap from affecting the airway viruses the blood supply to the brain . What are your guys thoughts? Do you call them all chokes, chokes and strangles? How do you define them?

I hear competing arguments for different coaches on whether you should call a move that gets a tap from affecting the airway viruses the blood supply to the brain . What are your guys thoughts? Do you call them all chokes, chokes and strangles? How do you define them?

Speaking of both. My good friend and fellow Beltchecker Jorgen Matsi made an excellent video on the theory behind choking/strangling. https://www.youtube.com/w[...]cBRd_nc3F0

I hope you never say the word choke in front of John Danaher. He will demonstrate the difference to you. Afterwards all confusion will be lost among other things. Unless your attacking the trachea which is actually a choke, the rest are strangles. As such most RNC's are actually RNS's and will be called that at certain academies. Another way to think of it...chokes actually should be very painful. Strangles should not be that painful.

Interesting, and while it makes sense, I've never heard it referred to an a 'rear naked strangle'

Yeah: I think it's Danaher being unnecessarily picky about terminology (again, he does that a lot). I can understand the impulse, as from what I understand he is technically correct, but at this point it would take more effort to explain the distinction to students, because Rear Naked Choke/RNC is such a solidly ingrained term at this point. I have some issues with using terms for techniques that are totally non-descriptive, like americana, kimura etc. Americana means absolutely nothing, in terms of trying to explain how to do the technique to a student (the name allegedly comes from it being a technique that Bob Anderson showed on a visit to Brazil, so as he was American it became the Americana. Which even if true - there is some doubt, from what I understand - doesn't help anybody picture the technique in their head based on the name). However, terms like 'kimura' and 'americana' are in such common usage now that it would hinder communication with students if I got all bloody minded about it and insisted on calling them ude garami, bent armlock or something like that.

What would you call the kimura and americana if it were up to you?

Probably something like 'upwards bent armlock' and 'downwards bent armlock', but that's clunky. Plus it wouldn't apply from every position: makes sense in side control, but as the kimura pops up all over the place, 'up' and 'down' gets less helpful a descriptor. So perhaps just 'bent armlock'.

I ask just because I was a pretty colorful belt before I really could remember which one was which... haha but I can tell you if someone added in something like up/down before the name would of helped sink it in really quick. How would you feel about removing the 'random' label and just calling it an internal or external (rotation) shoulder attack?

That's too generic, I think. Also, I reckon calling it a shoulder lock would confuse people, even though it is accurate. Although kimura/americana is indeed a shoulder lock, people often (wrongly) categorise americanas and kimuras as a type of armlock because you're grabbing and manipulating the arm. Calling it a shoulder lock would have the benefit of people realising that they should feel it in the shoulder and not their elbow, but on balance I think more people would be confused. And 'shoulder lock' wouldn't help people understand how to set it up, whereas 'bent armlock' tells them that they need to control a bent arm. Then there's the issue of an omoplata, which is basically the same thing but with your legs, so I'd probably call it 'bent armlock with the legs', though again that's clunky.

I think you're onto something, I like bent armlock. I think of that just like an armbar, I can get more 'straight arm locks' from different positions then I even know what they are 'called'. But to your point, I know it is an armbar aka 'straight arm lock' because the arm is straight, this would aline with calling the kamura/americana 'bent arm locks' and just know that you can get them from all different positions.

I totally agree with the whole kimura and americana names, we could just call strangles and chokes "neck attacks" and then talk about where to apply the force. What would you call the kimura and americana if it were up to you?

What we use in Finnish is translated as 'strangle' (kuristus), of all kinds of chokes/strangles. 'Choke' is easier to say in English though, so that's what I use when forced to speak this simplistic language. :)

I hear competing arguments for different coaches on whether you should call a move that gets a tap from affecting the airway viruses the blood supply to the brain . What are your guys thoughts? Do you call them all chokes, chokes and strangles? How do you define them?

It's easier to just say choke, but my understanding was that a choke is an internal block of the airway like food or objects whereas a strangle is an external blockage of the airway by force. Could be completely wrong on this.

I think you are spot on, I'm thinking I may just call them 'neck attacks' and then in the details of how I'm attacking the neck I can explain that it is a crank, choke or strangle or just that is is a neck attack focused on the air/blood/posture.