What's the difference?

[-=|§ØÛ£|=-]

OK. I really don't know that much about Ju-Jitsu, but I keep hearing about Brazilian Ju-Jitusu (BBJ). I can't remember where I read this, but I think Ju-Jitsu was originally made in Japan (Correct me if I'm wrong). I was just wondering what the differences are and which one would be the obvious one to choose.:confused:

[Sub zero]

Hello.
There is no obvious one to choose.I personaly prefer Japanese ju jitsu.

Japanese ju jitsu was the art practiced by the samurai (One of the arts).It is often referd to as the mother of japanese martial arts.
As for BJJ i'm not sure.U'd have to ask a bjj guy for that.I'm sure u'd find a history if u searched in google.I do know that some people are touchy (not in a bad way) between the difference between BJJ and Garcie Jujitsu.
I think that the gracies practiced JJJ and then formed there own style with more ground fighting and different aspects of JJ brought more to the fore.

I may be way off the mark but i'm not sure.Im sure a BJJ guy will come and explain things better.

Have a look here for a breif history of ju jistu
http://www.jujitsuscotland.com/

[Jim]

What would make you choose between them?

[-=|§ØÛ£|=-]

Well, I was thinking about starting up Ju-Jitsu. And I was wanting to know the differences bewteen the original ju-Jitsu style and the BBJ style. It seems to be the most talked about so I would have thought that it would have had more techniques or something like that incorporated into it. I was really wanting to start up the traditional styles.
(And thanks to Sub zero for the Ju-Jitsu info.)

[smee193]

hi all,

As Sub Zero said and i may be wrong too japanese jujitsu is a traditional art! it has Kata, lots of stances etc.

japanese jujitsu incorporates strikes and kicks similar to karate but emphasises throws (judo) and locks! it was designed to be used by the samurai for fighting without their sword as was aikido!

Bjj is very similar but doesnt have all the kata/stances ( i think)
Bjj has been called a sporting style ( not a bad thing at all ) and is used a lot in mma events and cage fighting. Bjj from what i have seen works a lot on ground fighting and grappling!

the best thing to do is think about what YOU want from your art!
do you want to go into competitions? do you want to look into the spiritual side of it? do you want to learn it for self defense?

If you have the chance try them both out, then you will be able to decide!

good luck with whatever style you choose!

Marky

[Sub zero]

Thanks.

I have to say that apart form wepon katas my club has very few which are learned form a low level.I believe we have a blocking kata,a wrist lock kata.Another sort of ju jitsu kata and a praying mantis kata.(From the chinese master who came over and taught this form to samurai).

HI jimj.I take it you're aasking me why i chose between them.It was becasue i had a JJJ club much closer to me.In my view.The JJJ club i had chosen was better than two jjj others that i found in my area.I preferred my JJJ club to the bjj club i saw.And jjj just seemed more my thing.

I fyou mean why didn't i do both?
Well beacuse i idn't have much money and i was (and still am) studying lau gar kung fu.

[-=|§ØÛ£|=-]

Actually, I'm already taking Kuk Sool Won but I'm going to have to quit soon because my brother was paying for our lessons, and it wouldn't seem right to go on without him anyways. I've just found out that ju-Jitsu is too far way and is out of the question. Thanks for the info anyways. Maybe I'll look into Judo now.

[TheMachine]

judo was formed from japanese jujitsu

the basic difference between bjj and jjj is that bjj focuses primarily on groundwork. jjj has throws and strikes as well

[-=|§ØÛ£|=-]

Ah, thanks for the info. That's all I really wanted, was for someone to tell me the difference so I could decide which one I liked the best.

Yes, i know Judo was derived from Ju-Jitsu

And I might be able to find someway to participate in Ju-Jitsu after all.

[saikyou]

there is a thread like this in the judo forums. check it out.

[mild7]

In general:


BJJ is focused more on clinch and groundwork(read; VERY close range fighting). It also uses full-force sparring methods. Claim to fame is great success in no-rules tournaments(UFC). If you like fighting check it out.
NOTE: Schools that adhere to the Gracie way of teaching will teach a self-defense portion as well(weapons, street style attacks etc)

JJJ is focused on just about every aspect of fighting(striking, grappling, weapons). Tends to prefer using cooperative training, but some schools use full-force sparring methods. If you like a wholesome art, check it out.
NOTE: some JJJ schools produce good sparring competitors as well, as I've personally witnessed.

I think both styles are good for self-defense.

[Qasim]

Originally posted by smee193
hi all,
.... japanese jujitsu incorporates strikes and kicks similar to karate but emphasises throws (judo) and locks!...

This statement gives the impression that Jujutsu borrows from Judo and Karate. You may know this is not so, but for someone who doesn't, this is the impression. Judo and Aikido are decendents of Jujutsu. Karate is new (not to be confused with Okinawan Te systems such as Shorin Ryu).

Jujutsu also does not borrow anything from Okinawan fighting. Those systems were developed because of the samurai.

Okinawa was and still is under Japanese control and the people weren't allowed to carry weapons, so they developed their systems as a way of defending themselves.

Aikido was not developed as a combat method for a Samurai who couldn't use his weapon. It was developed in the 1920's by Ueshiba Sensie, and the samurai no longer existed. He studied Aiki Jujutsu and created Aikido based on his martial arts experience.

BJJ is an offshoot of Judo.

Just my two cents.

[Sub zero]

Thanks for that clear way of putting it forward.

[BagelGod]

As a BJJ person myself, I would like to set a few things straight.

It is not, let me repeat, NOT an offshoot of judo. Infact, BJJ and Judo are the complete opposites. BJJ has lots of ground work, little take downs, Judo has lots of take downs, little ground work. They both however are derived from the japanese JJ, and are both related to sports. BJJ is not strictly sport, as someone pointed out earlier, it has its own self defence moves with guns, etc. etc. BJJ has little to no striking in it, although there are many opportunities when you could improvise and strike away, no weapons, and it has one stance, being an active grappling stance. Thats pretty much all I can think of at the time about BJJ...Hope I helped.

[Qasim]

Originally posted by BagelGod
As a BJJ person myself, I would like to set a few things straight.

It is not, let me repeat, NOT an offshoot of judo. Infact, BJJ and Judo are the complete opposites. BJJ has lots of ground work, little take downs, Judo has lots of take downs, little ground work.

Where did BJJ come from?

[BagelGod]

It came from brazil. To zoom in more, helio gracie came up with the whole shebang. He studied traditional japanese JJ, and thought it needed more of the ground work in it. So he scrapped everything else pretty much, and turned it into a major ground attack system.

[Pika]

BagelGod, Helio didn't come up with it. Maeda taught Carlos and Carlson. BJJ was refined in Brazil, but came from Judo, and hence Traditional JJ.

It was judo they were taught, and has since been modified from to suit Vale Tudo. The biggest changes occur in training techniques and the application to Vale Tudo.

By the way, I am also a BJJ practitioner.

[YODA]

Here's a good link...

http://www.bjj.org/rma-faq.html

[Qasim]

Originally posted by Pika
BagelGod, Helio didn't come up with it. Maeda taught Carlos and Carlson. BJJ was refined in Brazil, but came from Judo, and hence Traditional JJ.

It was judo they were taught, and has since been modified from to suit Vale Tudo. The biggest changes occur in training techniques and the application to Vale Tudo.

By the way, I am also a BJJ practitioner.

I was waiting for someone to follow up on this after Bagelgod's attempt to inaccurately correct my statement.

Quoting Bagelgod:

"As a BJJ person myself, I would like to set a few things straight.

"It came from brazil. To zoom in more, helio gracie came up with the whole shebang. He studied traditional japanese JJ, and thought it needed more of the ground work in it. So he scrapped everything else pretty much, and turned it into a major ground attack system."

Even better, it's from someone who studies/practices BJJ. :D

[Sub zero]

LOL YODA.

Nice avatar.


arghhhhhhhhhh snake aaaaaaaa snake!:D

[gaijinboa]

Actually...The traditional Jiu Jitsu was something Maeda studied and was a high level BB in BEFORE Kano (founder of Judo) and he began training together. It was Kano who decided that certain of those techniques in JJ were "too dangerous" to be practiced and therefore developed the much safer Judo, Maeda though he became a student of Kano, was more politically involved and not Kano's favorite student due to his tendancy to prove the effectiveness of his art in combat. He decided to assist in a development program for a Japanese community in Brazil

Gustao Gracie assisted in Maeda's project and in turn he taught Carlos, Gustao Jr., Osvaldo, & Jorge JJ but Helio was somewhat sickly at that time and didnot begin his study under Maeda but rather under Carlos once he opened a school in Rio. His brothers began the refining process through no rules fights and he then further refined the art for smaller practitioners to compensate for his lack of size and strength in comparison to his brothers. He then began to branch out and challenge any and all styles for the ultimate refinement and after several years of trial and error, became virtually unbeatable: hense modern BJJ's effectiveness at neutralizing and exploiting.

[nicolo]

duhhh...ok so in a nutshell...Maeda studied jujitsu (with the more hard techniques) and judo, taught Carlos Gracie....Helio Gracie refined it to incorporate more ne-waza techniques?
So BJJ is a more street-oriented grappling offspring of traditional JJ? In other words, BJJ is an even more serious, refined and evolved version of JJ because it cuts to the chase and allows a smaller person to learn more effective techniques in a shorter amount of time?

[Aegis]

Originally posted by nicolo
So BJJ is a more street-oriented grappling offspring of traditional JJ? In other words, BJJ is an even more serious, refined and evolved version of JJ because it cuts to the chase and allows a smaller person to learn more effective techniques in a shorter amount of time?

Depends how you define "street oriented". Traditional jujutsu is street effective, as it teaches you how to quicly deal with an attacker while remaining aware of your surroundings. It's probably been done to death before, but on the street taking an opponent to the ground can be a very serious mistake if he has friends, so the time BJJ spends wrestling on the ground will be well spent against one opponent or if taken down yourself, while the time spent in TJJ will prepare you for the stand-up against one or more opponents.

It's all a trade-off, and all comes down to what you prefer. Neither is actually more "Street-oriented" than the other, it all comes down to the student and the situation.

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by Aegis
It's probably been done to death before, but on the street taking an opponent to the ground can be a very serious mistake if he has friends,

Not just if he has friends with him. It can be a very serious mistake to 'take' someone to the ground in a 'Streetfight'. Period.

If you happen to find yourself there, then you'll have to fight from there, but your aim should be to get up ASAP and not Div about trying to look good going for a Kimura or whatnot. Get up and get out.

[Aegis]

I personally agree, but it's become clear that there are those who disagree, so I prefer to present all arguments in fairly good light so others can make their decision on hopefully less biased facts. Of course, I realise that my opinion is still somewhat biased, but hey, who's isn't? ;)

[gaijinboa]

There is a common misconception that BJJ has no standup defenses at all and is handicapped in that department, however there are schools that train in the older, less sport oriented version of the art which trains isolation, striking, position and submission as an answer to fundamental flaws in any style. Primarily and at its roots BJJ is an art of exploitation and self-defense. We exploit standing and we exploit on the ground, but the primary strength is in the grappling and ground control I will agree.

In most fights, intentionally or unintentionally one or both people will hit the ground, which is where the primary strengths of BJJ become paramount for the streetfighter even when multiple assailants are involved. Some common sense has to be applied but as a general rule, you are safer with than without groundfighting skill

[SoKKlab]

Yes,
Of course you are safer with Ground Fighting skill, notice both you and I said Ground Fighting and not Grappling.

But my thoughts are always the same, if you happen to find yourself on the ground, hit hard and fast and keep hitting and then try to regain your footing ASAP by any means neccessary and not faffing about going 'for position'.

Grappling combined with striking for survival and to regain the upright is the way to go whether it's against One or numerous.

[mild7]

(1)fighting against more than one opponent is better left for the movies, unless you are a person who likes to gamble.

(2)the person who can fight effectively from the ground, can also get up effectively from the ground.

FACTS. draw your own conclusions.

[mild7]

sokklab,

once again you make pretty good points. But... I have to question the 'keep hitting and get up ASAP' theory. Have you ever tried it before? I did, and it is difficult as hell. Especially when the other guy is hitting you and keeping you down ASAP as well. It really is an eyeopener!

take care my friend, train hard and stay safe.

[Aegis]

Originally posted by mild7
(1)fighting against more than one opponent is better left for the movies, unless you are a person who likes to gamble.

Very true, but ANY fight is a gamble regaredless of how good you are. I'm sure no-one here would actually want to be involved in a street fight, but we train so that if it happens we can deal with it with a greater chance of coming out alive than we would otherwise have.

[mild7]

true.

a better way of looking at it would be 'how good are my chances?'

I am 80-90% sure I could win most fights one to one. But with multiple attackers that would drop to around 5-10% in my estimation.

Just like in real life gambling, I prefer to leave the table if I feel I will be on a losing streak. but you're right, it also requires some form of martial ability to leave a fight(break grips etc)

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by mild7
sokklab,

once again you make pretty good points. But... I have to question the 'keep hitting and get up ASAP' theory. Have you ever tried it before? I did, and it is difficult as hell. Especially when the other guy is hitting you and keeping you down ASAP as well. It really is an eyeopener! take care my friend, train hard and stay safe.

Loads of times in MMA classes and more importantly I have been in that position in self-defence scenarios many times. I just favour what is available, but once again, I see the glee factor coming into this nonsense, Ie 'I'm quite happy to go to the ground'.

No-one should be happy to take the fight to the ground in a real situation. If you find yrself there then you have to deal it, but no-one should actively seek it. Putting them on/ in the ground, fine, but I always try to remain upright and if I find myself there (the ground), my main aim is to regain the vertical, pronto.

Yes alot of fights, most, even, goto the ground, but they don't neccessarily stay there and neither should you. And that goes for whether it's against one person or many.

[Qasim]

Originally posted by mild7
true.

a better way of looking at it would be 'how good are my chances?'

I am 80-90% sure I could win most fights one to one. But with multiple attackers that would drop to around 5-10% in my estimation.

Just like in real life gambling, I prefer to leave the table if I feel I will be on a losing streak. but you're right, it also requires some form of martial ability to leave a fight(break grips etc)

Not trying to clown you but, you seem to lack confidence in your skills. It is definitely preferrable not to get into a fight much less with multiple opponents, but what are you going to do if it happens?

Your estimation of your chances are near zero. You've already defeated yourself. Does this mean that you shouldn't train for the possibility of this happening? Multiple opponents training can actually make you a better one on one fighter since your training to stay aware and to end the conflict with one opponent quickly so that you can be reasonably ready for another.

Please do think about it.

[mild7]

qasim,

how many fights have you been in against multiple attackers?

I have only been in one. And it will be the last if I can help it. I do not fancy having another broken tooth and my nose is ugly enough as it is today.

Sure, maybe I was'nt the best but I was 1st Dan in bujinkan budo taijutsu, 1st dan TKD back then. I was still quite helpless in that situation. I literally turtled up and waited for them to get tired.

I will never tell anyone to take on more than one attacker. Not without a weapon anyway. That is my rule of thumb. Unless your attackers are guys who are pretty crappy in the first place.

So please do think about this.

As Mark Tripp once said, in a true combative situation you will almost always be able to disengage from the fight. Unless he grabs you, but in which case most martial arts will have techniques to deal with that. Or if the fight goes to the ground, which bjj and other ground arts have techs to deal with.

finishing a fight is always just an option. If I was in the middle of nowhere with nowhere to run to, I would consider finishing the fight with my attacker. Otherwise it's disengage, disengage, disengage. That's what I have ingrained into my mindset.

Sure, I understand the importance of mental attitude in a fight. You have to believe you are going to win. This is in essence the fighting spirit that can only be truly borne out of pressure testing.
But even then it is a good thing to have the 'winner's attitude' in your head.

What i'm saying is, before you have to jump into that frame of mind to win a fight, get out of the fight as soon as you can. If you have people with you and can't run away, consider using a weapon or improvise. Fighting is the last option.

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by mild7
finishing a fight is always just an option. If I was in the middle of nowhere with nowhere to run to, I would consider finishing the fight with my attacker. Otherwise it's disengage, disengage, disengage. That's what I have ingrained into my mindset.


Hallelujah! :)

[mild7]

yes sokklab. Most bjjer's have brains you know. :D

The few that don't have brains... well.... you always have those around no matter what. Back when I did ninjutsu there was a guy who said the best thing to do in a fight was to climb a tree or lamppost so the other guys could'nt get you.

j/k. train hard, stay safe!

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by mild7
yes sokklab. Most bjjer's have brains you know. :D


Yes and I'm one of them.

[mikelw]

Originally posted by -=|§ØÛ£|=-
OK. I really don't know that much about Ju-Jitsu, but I keep hearing about Brazilian Ju-Jitusu (BBJ). I can't remember where I read this, but I think Ju-Jitsu was originally made in Japan (Correct me if I'm wrong). I was just wondering what the differences are and which one would be the obvious one to choose.:confused:

Pick brazilian jiu jitsu no questions asked. You'll learn some real ground fighting there. Ever heard of ufc?

[Aegis]

Originally posted by mikelw
Pick brazilian jiu jitsu no questions asked. You'll learn some real ground fighting there. Ever heard of ufc?

Oh dear, another one...

There are always questions to be asked. JJJ has it advantages, BJJ has others. One is not clearly "better" than the other, just different.

[mild7]

one is clearly better for one-to-one fighting, as proven in the UFC, challenge matches, and streetfights. Which is BJJ.

But is that all there is to a martial art? I know practitioners of both BJJ and JJJ that have used their skills successfully in self-defense situations. If you are happy with whatever art you chose, or are going to do, just do it, who cares. There is still a lot more than just the art you choose.... you still need to explore the issue of 'combatives' and even crosstraining if time permits.

[Aegis]

As I said, it's an opinion. You like BJJ better so you see the UFC as proof of it's superiority. I personally prefer TJJ and don't see the supposedly obvious proof.

The fact of the matter remains: it's not the art that wins things, it's the person. There are some people who would win fights regardless of what art they studied. There are other people who don't really fit any system but the one they've found that's just right for them. Everything varies on the person, which is why there is no clearly superior art, no matter how much people try to claim otherwise.

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by mild7
one is clearly better for one-to-one fighting, as proven in the UFC, challenge matches, and streetfights. Which is BJJ.

Proven in Streetfights? Where is this proof? What you mean the marketing BS that that the Gracies pump out. I take most of the 'Proof' stuff with a pinch of salt. Nothing is proven, just maybes and perhaps.

I do both (Gracie-Brasilian JJ and Trad Jap JJ), when I can afford to. They both have value. I don't feel that BJJ is ultimately better at anything, but it is very good at certain aspects.

It's groundwork is very good, but then so is Sombo's, Catch wrestling etc. What Gracie/ Brasilian JJ has helped me with, is all the stuff that we have talked about, like staying upright against grappling-orientated attacks, creating a 'base' and some very cool defences against standing attackers whilst you are prone. I will continue with it as much as I can and learn as much as I can from it.

I will continue with Trad JJ because it is helped me with my locks and throws and is generally a very good all round system-It also has alot more directly applicable Self-Defence capabilities than Gracie/ Brasilian JJ. It has also helped me with Groundwork, but from a different perspective.

In conclusion they both have value, I enjoy them both, but neither is perfect. There are alot of things about Gracie/ BJJ that I don't like and there are certain aspects about it, that I modify, same goes for Trad JJ.

[mild7]

sokklab,

a lot of the Gracies have fought in streetfights. From Rolls, to Rickson, to Relson. There are stories that can be verified from not just the Gracies but others. There are also true no-rules one to one challenges. In GIA 2 Rorion chokes out a Hapkido guy who repeatedly tried to grab his balls. In one other video, Ryan bites the other guy's ear off from the mount.
Sure I may sound like a Gracie jockrider but they did develop the art after all.

Aegis,

man, I am not going to get into another one of those debates with you again! Like I said, and always have said, and always WILL say, all martial arts are good and have something to offer. Period.
But.... some martial arts are better than others for certain things. Since the mentioning of BJJ seems to trigger off a certain response in you, I will say this. Kali is a much better martial art to learn weapons than Taekwondo. See? By the same token, it's not about BJJ being best, but it certainly is better for certain things. Same goes for JJJ.
So don't take it too personally. :) peace

[SoKKlab]

Originally posted by mild7
sokklab, In GIA 2 Rorion chokes out a Hapkido guy who repeatedly tried to grab his balls. In one other video, Ryan bites the other guy's ear off from the mount.


This I would like to see, purely for Research purposes, you understand ;)

[gaijinboa]

BJJ like any art anywhere from any source has its pro's and con's. I am an adamant believer in crosstraining if for nothing else to better understand what the "other guy" is using against me. While I will agree that taking an opponent to the ground may not be the wisest thing to do among multiple assailants, it is also not entirely be considered a mistake especially for high level BJJ guys who exhibit a great deal of control from top or bottom positions.

I say that to say this; In a multiple attacker situation ANY style is at a disadvantage and it would be ludicrous to think that you should not go with what your strengths are. If I were in that situation personally, I would strike, bite, kick, punch, eye gouge, foot stomp, groin grab, whatever. If it goes to the ground so be it and I will do the same from guard or mount. Having been in and witnessed plenty of skirmishes with more than one badguy, I can say that you will control very little of of the action if any and success will hinge on the ability to adapt and persist under fire. Study every possible aspect of the art of unarmed combat you can and you will be better equipped for the situation in my opinion.

[BagelGod]

At 18 years old, Gastao began teaching Jiu-Jitsu in Rio de Janeiro with his brothers. Helio Gracie, Carlos younger brother, was limited in his ability to participate because of health conditions which weakened his already frail body. However, Helio observed classes and began to adapt techniques of his own which involved minimal strength. Over time Helio was able to improve on traditional jiu-jitsu applications to accommodate individuals of smaller, weaker stature. By focusing on superior technique, he was able to reduce a fighters reliance on strength. This began the tradition of Gracie Jiu-Jitsu which has evolved continuously through the years. In the early 1990's, Brazilian jiu-jitsu was first introduced to the American public through the Ultimate Fighting Championships where Royce Gracie, Helio Gracie's son, defeated numerous opponents with his superb application of the Gracie style.

Now,

Helio = learned JJ, was small, adapted it, = Gracie Jiu jitsu
Royce (= Helio's Son) Gracie brought it to america, = BJJ

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[Andy Murray]

Good information God of Bagels. :D

Personally, I'd heard of Gracie JJ long before UFC though, and I'm a few boat rides from the USA. ;)

[tkderf]

I am currently "shoping" for a good JJ school in my area. I have been doing Taekwondo for 14 years and i feel like i need to go for something else... different style and techniques, i found JJ is what interest me the most.

But here is my question, from what i read here BJJ seem to be focusing on the ground fighting, what i would like to understand is... Does bjj focus on 'going' to the ground with your oponent as opposed to 'getting your opponent' on the ground and then maneuvering? I have been a doorman and i can tell by experience that going to the floor with an oponent is a very bad thing in an uncontrolled environment...

Does BJJ have many techniques to throw your oponnent while standing on your feet?

[Archibald]

I'm probably the least qualified person to answer this, but as far as i can tell BJJ usually focusses on going with them to the ground, because thats where alot of their strengths lie.
And as far as i can tell BJJ doesn't incorporate throws, though i imagine there are takedown techniques. As I've said i know next to nothing about BJJ, so hopefully some guys who practise it can give you a better answer.

And as for multiple opponents, while every extra opponent greatly reduces your chances of living to tell the tale, it certainly isnt impossible.

I'm not sure how many people have heard of Ray Park, the wushu practising stunt double/movie actor, but when asked 'have you ever had to defend yourself for real?', he always gives the same answer.

While walking home for a club he was attacked by 15 semi drunk people, some with knives, who just for fun (remember they are quite drunk), decide to kill him. Using his martial arts he managed to fight his way out. Yes, he has scars on his neck etc; he still made it out. And i know theres a big difference to running and actually taking 15 people down, when you'r fighting that great a number, simply bolting becomes very difficult due to the amount of people holding you back. so there you are. When the worst happens, always remember Captain Jack Sparrow's saying.

"Improbable, but not impossible."

Hehe......ciao for now everyone

[KiWarrior]

as a sidenote it seems that what was learned by Carlso et al was not "JJJ" but rather primarily the kodkan's/kosen's newaza curriculum. Maeda was a representative of the kodokan and his time outside of the organization was limited.

Also the Carlos and Helio "lineages" of bjj don't really have any differences which calls into question the accuracy of saying "helio modified the techniques for the frail".


Strict efficacy and efficiency of time training I'd advise bjj. The comparison of both bjj and hapkido (a jj offshoot) indicates to me that one is a little more efficient.

[Scaramouch]

Originally posted by BagelGod
Helio = learned JJ, was small, adapted it, = Gracie Jiu jitsu
Royce (= Helio's Son) Gracie brought it to america, = BJJ

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Don't want to get into arguements over whether JJ (or Judo even) is "better" than BJJ. Its is also difficult to actually know whether the Japanese MAist, Maeda taught the Gracies JJ or Kodokan Judo. Some reports say he was originally sent to Brazil to promote Kodokan Judo, but he probably knew and taught JJ as well(?).

Also, if you want to compare things from a combat (UFC)perspective then both Helio and Royce Gracie have been beaten by in competitive fights by high level, Japanese Judoka. I'm not trying to say Judo is "better" than BJJ, its just food for thought when you hear all the marketing hype surrounding BJJ.

-=|§ØÛ£|=-, I would suggest you go along and either watch or train in both a JJ and a BJJ class and see which one you prefer. In the end its down to what suits you and the abilities of the instructors available to you in your area.

[KiWarrior]

Royce is apparently far from the best of the gracies, and kimura had a huge weight advantage on helio.

That being said, of course high level judoka,wrestlers, sambo guys may win out against a bjj guy. What the early ufcs (which were effectively no rules) as well as vt matches around the world show is that a lack of knowledge about grappling will get even the best striker in trouble. Big trouble.

[willy]

bagel how long have you been studying bjj? you havew the zeal of a newbie who thinks that the art he practices is the best merely because it is the art he practices

now on the bjj of shoot of judo thing-

meada learned judo from kano- FACT meada was involved heavily in the formation of kosen judo in which ground work is heavily taught and studied- FACT meada was sent by kano around to teach judo-FACT judo was often refered to as "kano ju juitsu"-FACT now we add all this up and include the fact that BJJ's ground work looks much more like judo's than traditonal JJ (tjj ground work contains alot of striking and little emphasis on staying on the ground, also many techniques obviously were ment to deal with being aromored and having weapons.)then wow :eek: it looks like the gracies were taught judo.
also the techniques in BJJ are almost all contained in judo. they are merely not as empahsized because of rules which unfourtantly means that they are not taught in many schools(this means the ankle, knee and wristlocks...etc..or throwing in the case of BJJ) the only major differance between BJJ and judo is the rules they fight under and the empahsis on different parts of a same cirruculm.

and yes i do both.

as to the origanal question-
JJJ is a an art that is more complete than BJJ or judo. you will get weapons training, striking, locks, standing and ground, chokes, throws..etc.

while in BJJ you will learn a lot about ground fighting including pins, postional domanice, transitions, submissons and a few takedowns/throws.

one thing to consider though is the style of training considering the high injury factor with many of the JJJ techs. it is difficult(not impossable) to practice in a full speed, continuous fashion against a fully resisting opponent. where as the true beauty of judo and BJJ is that from day one you can practice all out which means that you have little doubt in your skill and your mindset and skills are toughened every practice. the lower injury factor(major not bruises and soreness :D ) means that you also can practice and be well for work and your next practice the following day.

my suggestion is take the BJJ or find some judo and get used to dealing with uncooprative opponents and high levels of contact, than after a while incorperate some JJJ to round out your skill set and deal with striking and "dirty tricks"

[Kenpo Kicker]

I take bjj to get off the ground. You can choke out ppl fast even if they got buddies. You don't have to be on the ground to choke somone out either. I think it is good to know how to land on the ground in fight as well. I also enjoy grappling with others in bjj. I'm a newbie and it takes 15 years to get your bb /chuckle. I have been shown standing techniques not just all ground work. I hate katas/patterns/forms so looks like i'm cross-training with the right grappling system for me. Alot of ppl know basic wrestling where I live and will give you their back and bjj loves that. I think it is effective on the street.