So I asked my friend what the difference between Jjj and Bjj was. He's done Jjj before but not Bjj. He said that Bjj is the same as Jjj, but without the "useless" techniques. What do you guys think of his statement??
The differences? BJJ was formed after the historical Meiji restoration of Japan and is based on Kodokan Judo. Mitsuo Maeda (AKA: Konde Koma) was a student of the Kodokan, under one of Kano Jigoro's best students, Yokoyama Sakujiro (N.B. At this period in time, Judo and Jujutsu were synonymous terms.) Maeda attained a 4th dan at the Kodokan (A very high rank in those days) and was invited to tour around the americas to promote and demonstrate Kodokan judo at the behest of Kano Shihan. He went with a senior to the U.S. named Tomita Tsunejiro. Tomita was defeated after being publicly challenged by a wrestler and this embarrassed the Kodokan and Maeda greatly. Maeda in turn became a professional wrestler to test his skills, and earn some money. This in turn, embarrassed the Kodokan and Maeda was excommunicated. From 1906 until 1908, Maeda professionally wrestled in the U.S., Britain, Belgium, France and Spain. During the Meiji period, lots of Japanese were emigrating to Peru and Brazil for political reasons. Maeda may have wanted to settle down in Brazil, or maybe just tour and demonstrate. Enter Robert Gracie and the Gracie family. A viewing of the three Budokan Kosen Judo tapes shows many of the same moves and positions as are done in BJJ. There seems to be a different technical approach in terms of positions and submissions favored, but clearly the core art is the same. Japanese classical jujutsu is very different and combative in nature, with very few ground fighting skills. Most classical jujutsu techniques are performed from a kneeling position (Idori), a position where one practicioner is standing and the other seated (Hanza Handachi) and then you have stand up techniques. Strikes, eye gouges and other techniques are taught in classical jujutsu, as well as striking, kicking, throws, joint locks, strangulations, weapons negotiation, weapons usage and certain body skills are taught, depending on the ryuha. Classical Japanese jujutsu is the father of Kodokan Judo. Kodokan Judo is the father of Brazillian jujutsu.
In short if you must pick between the two, you are better off doing BJJ. Unless you find the rare JJJ that spars full contact otherwise, give your soul to Gracie.
Or you could just do both and learn the combative side as well as the sportive side. The best of both worlds.
Read this article. http://www.grapplearts.com/Submission-Grappling-vs-ju-jutsu.htm The quality of JJJ really depends on the school. The training methods and techniques can differ radically between schools. That being said, if you find a good JJJ school, they will spar, and it's unarmed curriculum is going to look like BJJ or maybe MMA. Personally, I've never been impressed by the level of grappling by any JJJ practitioner I've ever met. For the newbie, an armbar by a JJJ guy and an armbar by a BJJ guy look the same, but believe me when I say that there is usually a world of difference. For instance, I can't think of a single elite level submission grappler or MMA fighter who claims JJJ as their style, the reasons for which will be made clear if you read the article above.
I think the major difference is Randori. This is VERY generalized, and does not fit all tradtional JJJ schools, but I think for the most part BJJ (and Judo), folks tend to roll/spar/Randori more, than tradtional JJJ. This is part of the genius of Jigoro Kano. He realized that by making JJJ safe to practice against a resisting opponent (he didn't phrase it like that, but its essentially what he did), that you increased your combat effectiveness overall while at the same time allowing people to practice more by preventing serious injury. The other effect this has, can be positive or negative. Certain techinques are not stressed, or practiced at all in BJJ or Judo, either due to the fact that they have a high percentage of injurying your partner, or that they're not that effective against someone who's already fighting against you. (note I said, already fighting. I think there are techinques that are very useful either against someone who isn't trained, or at the start of a confrontation before it escalates) I don't think techinques like this should be discarded, but when you emphasize safe practice, you naturally shift away from techniques such as these. Again, that's very general. I know there are some traditional JJJ schools that spar/Randori, and are very combat effective. But I think for the most part the focus on sparring is what sets the BJJ guys apart from tradtional JJJ schools.
I also think that outside of Japan there is actually very little real JJJ. Most is some guy adding in aikido and karate (Or some other striking art) back into judo and calling it JJJ. I have always wondered why these guys tend to take out the randori.
Its ignorant to think that BJJ only has a "sportive" side. BJJ can be classified as a BATTLEFIELD art now for its use on the modern battlefield. You are correct. There is still very little legit koryu JJ outside of Japan. Mostly what you will find are gendai JJ and for the most part they are exactly how you said. Someone throws in karate, aikido, and Judo then calls it JJJ. Randori is usually thrown out to protect the ego. Can't have you uber deadly techniques fall flat on their face now can you.
ALL JJ is combative in nature. JJ is outdated because for the most part it centered around kumiuchi and the dealing with the major battlefield weapons. The "layman" schools of koryu JJ was developed in the confines of cultural norms. Thus the reason why many of the techinques ar done in idori or you have suwariwaza which were intended for more formal japanese settings. A quick FYI both Judo and BJJ contained striking. This can be seen in both Kano's KODOKAN JUDO and JUDO/JUJUTSU book and Helio Gracie's GRACIE JIU JITSU MASTER TEXT. However striking in such arts, even classical JJ, is lacking compared to many others and they severed little more than to help enter into a grappling situation.
Well the US Army is one thing I guess, but it's not universal. Also you go to the floor as is taught in the first volume of the army combatives in a battlefield melee situation and you're dead meat. Even on the street, it's great for one on one, but you go up against multiples and voluntarily give up your mobility, then you will be the guest of honour at a boot-party. (If you've ever seen skinheads kick off, you will know what I am talking about here.) Also the H2H system that is taught to the U.S. Army at the moment is more of a morale booster and a psychological training method to make them tougher. Why use a choke hold to finish an enemy off when you have a rifle butt, bayonet or entrenching tool? Aye, it's rather silly not to test your techniques against a live, resisting opponent. Quite a few koryu jujutsu do randori for that very reason.
Yes, the Kime No Kata, Kodokan Goshinjutsu, Seiryoku Kokumin Taiiku kata and the Kime Shiki all teach striking. THe Seiryoku Kokumin Taiiku no Kata is a solo form where you learn to strike. The other remaining kata are paired and striking is used in conjunction with grappling techniques. One of my koryu jujutsu teachers in Japan used to teach these alongside the koryu techniques so that all students would have a comprehensive knowledge. Depends on the school IMHO.
1) Actual events contradict you. Soldiers have used exactly what was taught in Level 1 of Combatives in Iraq and Afghan against a GROUP of insurgents and they lived while the insurgents were killed. This has happened a few dozen times already which shows that people really don't understand whats going on with such comments. 2) There is NO ART that adequately prepares you for multiple opponents unarmed. The biggest thing you have going for you is LUCK. The biggest thing that I think is overlooked when pple talk about multiples is they don't take into account what their friends are doing and why would you be alone in an enviorment where you run the risk of being jumped. 3)Sadly, Skinheads don't worry me as much some of the gangs that plaque my hometown. Having to deal with Cubans, Colombians, Jamacians, Hatian, Dominican, etc gangs is alot more common. I am a MAC instructor. You don't get the full picture. Yes it a morale booster, yes it helps instill a warrior mindset, but it is also geared to the battlefield. Ever clear a room and have your weapon jam? Ever had to deal with and aggressor and ROE dictates that you can't just put a bullet in them? Thats where combatives come into play and as I mentioned before it has been used. Not really. Any Muay Thai school would own any koryu JJ school when it comes to striking. Thats why many JJ schools xtrain with much better striking arts.
Very interesting. Are there any accounts of these that can be read about anywhere on the net or newspaper acrhives? Amen. I wasn't being gang specific. I was using them as an example. Any bunch of scumbags are going to use that behavior. Wasn't an attempt at a peeing contest, just a mere example based on my geographical backgrounds. Fair point. A friend of mine in her majesty's armed forces was in Basra a couple of years ago. A riot was in progress and he was set upon by a small group of rioters, throwing bricks and using timber as clubs. Rifle butting one of the rioters was I thought, a good non-lethal response to get the rest of the rioters away from him, since they did back down, but unfortunately, he ended up with a court-martial. Depends on the regs. Question: How long does it take to train up a soldier to use those skills after level 1? How many koryu jujutsu schools have you seen? They strike a certain way for some good reasons. Some reasons are archaic, other are just physiological truths (i.e. never strike with a closed hand to the head - Your weapon hand will be FUBAR'd or Never kick high, as this places you off balance.) A lot of koryu jujutsu kata are done in Torite style, so it's offensive jujutsu, against an opponent who is unaware of the practioner's presence. Quite a few koryu schools teach particular BG type scenarios, as well as ambushes, not to mention team training (One enemy two pracitioners restraining, etc). The contexts of their strikes are rather valid. Match fighting is a very different thing. Also, it is a misconception to think that all koryu jujutsu schools are empty hand technique oriented. A number of short and long weapons are incorporated into techniques with great ease. The jutte, tessen and kodachi (Tined truncheon, iron fan - basically a cosh and a short sword/dirk) are common short weapons taught in jujutsu technique.
I posted 2 accounts on BULLSHIDO and you can find them on MMA.tv under the SOLDIERGROUND forum but the rest aren't for public veiw yet. I've been trying compile a book on such accounts but many have to be sanitized for public release. I know its just that skinheads aren't a big problem where I'm from. If you are a white supremeist then Miami is not the place for you. During my time in Kosovo I had to deal with riots and the rioters actually knew our ROE. I had one tell me when I pointed my weapon at them, "No shoot, ROE!" But a baton was just nice. The course itself is only one week for Level 1. 2 weeks for Level 2, a month for Levels 3 and 4. It unit itself is suppose to conduct training on a regular basis. Unfortunately not all are on the same sheet of music, some do some don't. My last unit we had Combatives every Thurs and we had a old German warehouse setup as our fight house. At my current unit they don't do it often for the cadre but I train the new soldiers 6 days a week. Many. I used to be a borderline "Koryu bunny" (alsmost similar to an Aikibunny.) if it wasn't koryu it wasn't anything. Thankfully I changed my views. I know this very well, but there are others that do it way better. Many of the atemi is designed mainly to enter into a grappling situation where you can gain great control over the opponent. Muay Thai does a better job at getting to a clinch than koryu JJ arts. In Koryu atemi you aim to distract or block the vision of the opponent so that you can seize hold of him. In MT you will deal a lot more damage when entering to make what ever else you plan on doing easier. The only reason "match fighting" is different is because you have two skilled opponents facing off. When people say match fighting is different its because they don't fully take into account whats going on. If you were to run up against an equally or greater skilled opponent in a real fight then it will look a lot like "match fighting". When you come against one who is not as skilled then things are different. I know about buki and hibiki of classical JJ, I have quite an arsenal myself. However these weapons are outdated and will land you in more trouble for carrying them than with more modern equivalents. Trust me I had to explain on why I was carrying a manrikigusari when I was in college. Classical JJ is a great reference but shouldn't be taken for more than that.
Nah, we're in a new quarter already here at RIT, and I'm more concerned about PhD applications. Or are you talking about the self defense essay challenge? - http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=61690) But thanks to Kogusoku and Asia for the show. This was exactly what I had hoped might happen. It's great to get this type of discussion and analysis going on. - Matt
