Back Control

In mixed martial arts, there is a position called back control. In this position, one competitor moves behind the other to control and stop his movement.  For purposes of explaining more clearly, the competitor in the aggressive position will be called the aggressor, and the other competitor, the subdued.

How Back-Control Position Works?

To gain back control, the aggressor wraps his legs around the back of his subdued opponent, presses his heels inside the thighs of the other, and this way controls the latter’s torso and arms. Back control is a strong position that puts the aggressor at an advantage because the subdued opponent cannot move well enough to defend himself. It is a move that has a better impact if the subdued opponent is first pinned to the floor.

Back Control Basics

The goal of back control is to subdue the opponent from the back. The first step is to force the opponent to his knees by pinning him from the back. The aggressor should move and keep behind the opponent and use his weight to force him down. Most likely, the subdued opponent will get into a turtle position. To gain complete dominance, the aggressor should use his feet as hooks and force them into the subdued opponent’s thighs, forcing them open. The aggressor should hook his legs into the opponent’s inner thighs and then wrap his arms like a seatbelt around the torso of the subdued opponent. Again, the aim is to completely dominate the opponent and prevent him from striking back or from rearing up to get control.  

In the back-control position, the subdued opponent’s head is very vulnerable, and the aggressor can choose to either choke him or strike. The subdued opponent’s defence at this point is weak. The aggressor can also press or push his hips forward, and then flatten the opponent until he is on the floor. The aggressor can then choke the subdued opponent from either the left side or the right. The aggressor can also use his legs that remain hooked inside the subdued competitor’s thighs to strike and immobilize the latter.

What's Your Take?

0 comments
Reply to
Loading