Tim,

Would you please explain the difference between a 'takedown' and a 'throw?'

I'm not Tim, but IMO there is not much difference, but with a throw you may have more "air time." Ex. I may take you down by going low to the legs or, with a throw, over my back or hip. Personally don't like throws where I turn my back to opponent unless I've knocked them silly and they are standing there wanting to fall down.

Hey MFM,
Good Q...it made me think (or at least steal the thoughts of others). Here's my take on your question [paraphrased, plagiarized, & extrapulated from Tim's book on "Effortless Combat Throws" plus the works of those English-speaking Websters (Noah & Miriam)]:
A throw projects/casts/propels/hurls/flings a person so that they arc, circle, or spiral to the ground or into some other object [it connects with, then engages with principles that cause such a motion to a person, then eventually disconnects when the desired direction/result has been achieved -- much as in (spin)cast-fishing or in throwing a ball; yet, if throwing to the ground close to you, you may wish to remain connected for further control/follow-up applications; for once the connection is disengaged or disconnected, control is lost; another connection would then have to be made in order to further control the person].
A takedown is any move (or series of moves) that brings a person lower (sometimes depressing or pulling them downward) -- often all the way to the ground (but you could merely take someone down to one or both knees); so throwing a person into a wall may or may not result in a takedown, but throwing them down onto the ground is a takedown. It's also possible to take someone down or knock them down with a linear angle (or subtle arcing so that their fall seems linear): head-over-heels at or seemingly at an angle or head-to-heels straight down or seemingly so.
Think of a Venn Diagram where one circle is "Throws" and another is "Takedowns," then overlap these two circles, but don't put each in the exact same location. Sometimes there is no difference.

Tim,
I too am looking forward to your answer(s) as always.

For the short answer, I agree with what Randall posted above. Most people think of 'takedowns' as techniques that cause an opponent to fall directly down (usually in arcing techniques) and 'throws' as techniques that cause an opponent to flip or rotate in the air (usually circle techniques). I suppose the terms could be used interchangeably for many techniques.

I also agree with most of what Mike said above as well (I'd probably agree with everything Mike said if I knew what a Venn Diagram was).

How about an uproot? Or, the technique drived from the Dun (to lower) form of the Gao style, where the opponent is yanked off balance? I am having trouble placing these techniques into the categories of Arc, Circle, or Spiral from Tim's book.

A venn diagram is just smarty-pants-speak for
two overlapping circles

- Dave, a repentent smarty-pants

That's it: two overlapping circles. Sorry for using the smarty-pants version. If it's any consolation, I had trouble remembering the names "set" & "subset."

MFM,
Uproot a guy & he may or may not stay on his feet. Either way his body will travel along an arc (like passing a basketball or throwing a heavy rock -- with a sudden stop & rebound or a somewhat rough landing should he hit a wall, a car, or some furniture). I'm not familiar with the Dun form (or Gao style), but Luo yanked me pretty good at a seminar a couple of years ago. Had he let me fall I could have been lauched in an arc or even a spiral (I won't know for sure because he was kind to me -- I only suffered mild whiplash).

Tim,

I tend to agree with Randall about turning my back to the opponent. It just doesn't feel right. Also, I noticed that wrapping my arm around the opponent's back (as in the basic hip throw) tends to twist my torso, misaligning my hips and shoulders. Not to mention, as a taller person, I have to squat pretty low to get under my opponent's center of gravity. These types of throws seem to be predominant in Judo practice. Do you think these throws are practical for 'real' fighting? I haven't seen any UFC fighters using them.

Steven

A hip throw isn't an offensive throw. It's used more as a counter throw or in the middle of a combination. I don't think it's possible to effectively lead with a hip throw. Same thing with a shoulder throw. That usually comes at the end of a combination.

Throws work in combos just like punching. Leading with an uppercut could work, but it's most likely not the best first punch. Although it could be if the situation is right.

I think a good thrower could do very well in MMA. The problem is, I don't think there's many people who study throwing in MMA. Learning a throw or two won't cut it. To use this stuff, you need to know the throws, combinations, counters, etc. Just like any other martial art.

As to the original ?. I think the difference between a throw and a takedown is the intent. The intent of a takedown is to get the other guy on the ground. The intent of a throw is to use the ground to take the fight out of the guy.

Steven,
Like Mike said above, an uproot/projection isn't necessarily a throw or takedown. If the opponent does fall, it is usually in an arc. The 'Dun' arm pull causes the opponent to flip over and land on his back in a rear spiral.

There have been quite a number of hip and shoulder throws done in the UFC and other MMA venues. As for their practicality, the very first throw I ever used in a real fight (when I was about 13 or so) was a basic hip throw. It not only won the fight for me, it worked so well I got suspended from school (for banging up a kid that tried to rob me!). I've used hip throws on two other occasions in fights, and countless times sparring. You're right though, you have to set them up well, and they are harder to pull off on much shorter opponent's.

Thanks everybody. I appreciate all the great responses. Now we are ALL familiar with the concept of a 'Venn Diagram.' Here's what I have so far:

1) There isn't a way to distinguish clearly between a 'takedown' and a 'throw,' but takedowns tend to be associated with arcing techniques.

2) An uproot/projection is not necessarily a throw at all. It is in a category of its own.

I am trying to come up with my own system of categorizing throws based on the body dynamic of the THROWER. I like Tim's method of classifying them according to how the opponent moves in space (Arc, Circle, Spiral), but I want to be able to sort of 'cross-reference' with what I am doing, as well. The Nage no Kata of Judo is divided this way - 1)hand, 2)hip-loin, 3)foot-leg, and 4)sacrifice - representing the primary body part used. This doesn't really quite work for me because, for instance, even if you sweep the other guy's FOOT, you are still controlling him with your HANDS. So, maybe, the best way is according to the primary methods in Tim's book - 1)Weight Dropping, 2)Coupling, and 3)Removal of Support (Leverage should be used in all throws). I have also seen 'holding the leg(s), holding the waist,' etc. Any thoughts?

Also, at 6'3 I don't spar with people my own height very often, let alone taller. So, I don't think I'm going to specialize in hip throws, whether they are practical, or not. But, I will sure need to know how to defend against them.

Steven