This is IME only. But that high of a mount is bad news for a GnP kind of guy. I love high mount because I can strike and set up a sub from it. But most newer players can't hit the armbar fom getting bucked over the top from having a high mount. And lets face it, from the high mount you demonstated all you really have is an armbar. Notice, I am a BJJ idiot, but an armbar is all I see fom there. Being that high is exceptionally uncomfortable for me. I preffer to stay lower to the hips. To have my weight seated right on his belly button. If he gets funky I surf out, spread his legs and ride back up. This is most likely a 100% tallboy tactic though. Also, I like the option to maintain mount if at all possible. Being on top is points in my favor. And any ref worth his salt would never stand up a mounted situation. If you can stay on top you win. And inan evenly matched situation you take very possible route needed to let the judges know you are in control without really giving the other guy a chance to take it back. Moun is a bad subject tough. I preffer to kill from the feet.. then half.

This is completely legitimate, Tabwyo. I think the largest difference in our style of mount is our body styles. Most of the guys that I'm training with have always been bigger/stronger than me, so the lower I stay on their body, the quicker I get bucked off or rolled.

As for the subs from the high mount, you have more than just the armbar. First and foremost, the natural reaction is for the opponent to point both elbows straight up and then put their hands on their head. That is a great opportunity for a goose neck wrist lock directly into americana and/or armbar. I love the high mount, but it's also the mount that I'm used to utilizing. If you're one of the guys with long legs that you can tie up and grapevine with- then definitely stick with what works for you.

Being 6'5" I do tend to be quite a bit longer than anybody I fight. I guess maybe the question I would pose to you would be. Would you consider a high mount more optimum for setting up a sub or for striking?

Personally- I use it for both. But that's primarily because i find that I can keep the mount much more effectively if I have a high mount. Having a low mount requires far too much strength and effort for me to maintain the position without getting rolled. People that are stronger than me can usually buck their hips up when I'm in a normal mount and will require me to base my arms out. This forces me to abandon a strike or submission setup to keep from getting rolled. When in high mount, I'm not over their hips so it really provides me a way to not worry about their hips. I can just squeeze the knees together and throw strikes to set up submissions or vice versa.

If I were 6'5" I'm sure I can implement a few other alternatives as well!

I'm totally in the same boat as you Richard, I can maintain a high mount much better than a low one (for the record, I am only 5'6" ). In a low mount I find myself having to grapevine too much just to avoid getting bucked off or even simply pushed back into guard (if the guy's very strong). Although I agree with Tabwyo that most of my subs from mount (minus the armbar) are harder to set up from the high mount, though I love it for striking (especially throing in some sneaky rib shots behind my legs - usually surprises them into moving their hands for a sec).