Hiya, just wondering what the differences are between Judo and Ju Jitsu. I've read that Judo is a "refinement" of Ju Jitsu. I also remember my Muay Thai teacher telling me that Judo was "the gentlemens grappling art" when compared to Brazillian Ju Jitsu (which they teach next door to my Muay Thai class). Anyway, jus looking on gaining some knowledge on these two art forms. I'm thinking of supplamenting my Muay Thai with either some Judo, Ju Jitsu, or Aikido.
Judo focuses on throws while jiu jitsu I think, focuses on submission holds. Judo started first than brazilian jiu jitsu. maybe your talking about "ju jutsu" w/c existed in Japan a long time ago. Jigoro Kano(He is the Founder of Judo) got the Judo moves from Ju Jutsu and refined them into a less lethal fighting sysytem. maybe that's the reason why your instructor told you that it is the gentlemans grappling art.
I prefere Ju jitsu as there are a lot more locks combined with the throws & strikes too.......as you already do a striking art, Judo would be a good supplement but i personally would go for Ju Jitsu. As long as you can find a very decent instructor either would be a plus.
I would say that the main difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu is Intent. I feel that is fair to say that Ju Jitsu is nastier in its intent and outcome than Judo intends to be (If you see what I mean). A great Judo throw is a brilliant thing to behold and a marvel of timing, precision, balance, technique etc, but generally Judo throws do not 'intend' to seriously hurt someone. Of course they can, but the intent behind them is not destruction. Generalising, I know. Whereas the majority of Ju Jitsu throws etc intend to do some serious damage as a response to an attack.
So, is it right to assume that Judo is less agresive form of Ju Jitsu? What confuses me is that I've read about Judo having a number of submission moves, including arm bars and choking(!) techniques. Are you taught in Judo to just make the other guy submit and leave him be? How is it different in Brazillian Jiu Jitsu (or just regular Ju Jitsu)? Are the Ju Jitsu fighters trained to make sure that the person you face won't get up? Hmmm, so I take it on a level of "nastiness" Brazillian Jiu Jitsu would come first, then Ju Jitsu and then Judo? Think might end up taking Brazillian Jiu Jitsu, seeing as how it's conveniently next door to my Muay Thai class . Speaking of Ju Jitsu, I recently heard from my teacher that the Jiu Jitsu teacher has been learning boxing at our gym. Apparently he was beat by a woman who has been training for quite some time (I think he thought he could take her on). I asked my teacher "..what if he didn't have the gloves on and was allowed to use his MA?" My teacher looked at me with a serious face and said "Oh, he would have killed her !" Crazy
Judo was developed from Traditional Japanese Ju Jitsu/ Jutsu/ Yawara by Jigoro Kano, so it contains alot of the same/ or similar techniques-alot of the basic throws etc are the same, just that the 'Intent' behind them is different. Alot of Ju Jitsu throws are designed so that your assailant lands in a very awkward, destructive position, say on their head-pile driving into the ground or mangled in a heap of bone and gristle-you are not limited by convention-if you can throw someone by their hair, then you would. In Ju Jitsu there are a lot of strikes, the nastier the better as far as i'm concerned, in order to set up throws, locks, breaks, pins and holds. In Judo there are no strikes, or rather at the highest levels Judokas are taught Atemi techniques, if they go to a less sport orientated Judo school-apparently a rarity these days. But striking is not used in Judo competition and is not of any significance in Modern Judo.. The Judo techniques work fine in a self-protection scenerio. Arm bar is Arm bar, Choke is Choke, after all. Ultimately Judo is a Martial Way and a Sport, whereas Ju Jitsu is anything but a sport. Gracie/ Brasilian Jiu Jitsu is a development from Judo Ne-Waza (Groundwork), it is taught mostly as a Sport, it has rules and conventions. Its groundwork is excellent, its striking is pretty useless and not really their thing-90 percent of their techniques are Groundwork-orientated. some of their defences against strikes from the Ground are excellent and have much value from a Self-Protection POV. Generalising: Japanese Ju Jitsu is a Stand up art that contains some Groundwork, mainly the type where you try to get up and out of the situation Asap. Brasilian Jiu Jitsu is a Groundwork Art, which contains a little bit of stand up work. In Brasilian Jiu Jitsu, if you can get a submission quickly then that's fine, but mostly groundwork between two skilled practitioners becomes a tactical game on the ground, but with much more leeway than in Judo. In their intent, if I had to make a definitive statement on the matter and from my direct experience, then Japanese Ju Jitsu is the nastiest, purely by the many ways it has to mangle, maim and mutilate and its lack of rules and regulations. But they all contain Chokes, Locks, Arm Bars etc. Really they are all different things for different purposes, I feel that they are all worthwhile skills in their own right. Hope this helps.
You're welcome. It's a minefield out there, isn't it? Difficult sometimes to know what stuff really is. Good Luck with yr training Crovax.
I wouldn't say BJJ's striking is "useless". As you said, BJJ is predominantly a groundfighting art, it's main aim is to place the opponent in an inferior position from which the BJJ practitioner can apply submissions or strike. Striking on the ground is very different when compared to striking while standing up. While striking on your feet, your posture is important, using your hips and waist to generate power in your strikes is important, sometimes using the falling step technique is important, your feet and its placement play an important role in striking (whether punching, kicking, elbowing, headbutting). Striking on the ground - the most important thing in BJJ is to place yourself in a superior position (which does not have to be on top of your opponent). A superior position can be where your opponent's ability to strike becomes diminished or where he can't even reach you (eg. when you are in the mount position, your opponent cannot reach you but you can hit your opponent, very hard, as many times as you want). Anyone can incorporate striking into their BJJ training, but the skill is when you can secure the submission without resorting to striking, hence it's not the focus during training and tournaments. In a survival situation your BJJ skills will allow you to get into a good position to strike if necessary. Have you seen Rickson Gracie or Royce Gracie's fights? You can see how they use their skills to get themselves into a good position where they can strike at will. Sometimes striking is used to wear the opponent down (eg when on your back with opponent in your guard), other times it's used to go for a knockout (eg when you are in the mount or half mount position). It's the same in boxing. Boxers are known to have great striking skills, sometimes the jab is used to wear your opponent down, or for some boxers like Ali and Dempsey (& others), the jab itself is a knockout weapon. Someone like Mario Sperry, before he formed the Brazilian Top Team he was strictly BJJ under Carlson Gracie in all his NHB/MMA/vale tudo fights. He incorporated striking too. These days he trains standup as well.
Oh man, a lot of incorrect information here on BJJ/Judo/JuJutsu etc. You really have to read the history to understand what really happened, because its complicated and todays judo is not the original judo. Jigoro Kano the inventor of judo knew many styles of japanese ju jutsu. He combined all the best techniques, started a new school, and called his new style Judo (Kodokan Judo) which consisted mostly of striking and throwing. Old school Judo was therefore one of the most effective forms of ju jutsu at the time. They defeated many other jiujitsu schools at the time, until.... They ran into the fusen-ryu school which concentrated on ground fighting. This was the first time in 8 years the Kodokan Judo school had lost. Kano immediately incorporated ground fighting into judo because of this defeat. Joint locks, chokes and holds were added to his syllabus. This happened right before one of this top/best students, Mitsuo Maeda went to brazil where he taught the first Gracie. The gracies further evolved the ground fighting to a whole new level which is now known as gracie jiu jitsu and closely related brazillian jiu jitsu. ( Some say its the same thing). The Gracies tested their techniques in actual street fights to figure out what actually worked against any opponent of any size in anything goes fights. However, Judo was turned into an international sport, and dropped all its deadly techniques leaving mostly the throws. You can still find traditional kodokan judo schools that teach ground fighting with joint locks/chokes etc , but the majority of the population thinks of judo as being modern day sport judo. May be difficult to find in the USA. I would just take BJJ, its even more evolved now. Brazillian/Gracie jiu jitsu also has a sporting aspect to it now but its still damn deadly with all the joint locks and chokes. Certain wrist locks are not allowed and small joint locks, etc. However, many BJJ schools also teach the full blown BJJ with all the nasty stuff in it too For details read this: http://bjj.org/rma-faq.html http://jujitsu.gungfu.com/
Interesting snippet on Fusen-ryu - and more history Fusen-Ryu Jujutsu was founded by Takeda Motsuge in the early 1800's. Motsuge was born in 1794 in Matsuyama Japan. He studied jujutsu since a young age and by his late teens was considered a shihan and was teaching in Aki. He had studied Nanba Ippo-Ryu from Takahashi Inobei. He also studied Takenouchi, Sekiguchi, Yoshin, Shibukawa, and Yagyu-Ryu during his lifetime. As his style came together at about the same time as the dissolution of the Samurai class, it developed mostly toward unarmed combat. Fusen-Ryu finally became an art that focused almost exclusively on ground fighting.(this may have only been in several branch schools, as certain other branch schools of Fusen-Ryu still exist today, and they do not focus on newaza). Around the turn of the 20th century, the Fusen-Ryu master Mataemon Tanabe challenged a new jujutsu master to the area - Kano Jigoro. His new jujutsu style had challenged several of the old style Jujutsu schools to contest and had beaten them easily. So Mataemon Tanabe's school fought Kano's school and won every match - not trying to throw, but going right to the ground and doing armlocks, leg locks, chokes, etc. Thus was the real birth of newaza as a science. Kano was so fascinated with the ease his judoka were beaten that he persuaded (and perhaps paid) Tanabe to reveal the core of his technical strategy. Over the next few years, Kano assigned several of his top students to focus exclusively on this newaza. Soon, newaza was "absorbed" as part of the Judo syllabus, and Judo began to spread across the world. After having several of his top students become newaza experts, Kano thought it a good idea to use this type of Judo in the school system. As the matches ended in submission instead of serious injury, it would be seen more in a sportive way. So in 1914 he organized the All Japan High School championships at Kyoto Imperial University. He called this sportive style Kosen. By 1925 so much emphasis was on newaza - because of its success in contest that Kano had to make some new Judo rules limiting the amount of time the Judoka could stay on the ground. This "Kosen Rule" continued into the 1940's, stating Shiai had to be 70% standing and 30% ground fighting. This led to an early split in the Kodokan Judo movement. Many of those Judoka whom Kano had set to master newaza, had spent time inventing new series of movements, escapes, and submissions. They and their students were now dominating even the Kodokan contests. There was so much negativity with this, that Kano sent many of them abroad to teach Judo elsewhere. He was very aware that they would not be easily defeated no matter where they went, and he also smartly removed the challenge they presented in Japan. Some of the known Kosen Judoka were Yamashita, Hirata, Tomita, Yokoyama and Maeda. Kosen Judo has only continued in a few places. One example is Hirata Kanae's dojo is in Japan. He died in 1998, but the dojo still continues. Then there is Brazil, which started with Maeda. Mitsuyo Maeda who began training in Judo in 1897, and became one of the troublesome Kosen Judoka who was sent abroad with Tsunejiro Tomita. Traveling in the US, Maeda outshone his senior Tomita, defeating wrestlers and fighters that had beaten Tomita. Tomita and Maeda went their separate ways - with Maeda going onto the early "fighting circuit" for money. He even travelled to Europe where he lost the only two matches of his life against a Catch Wrestler. He spent extra time with the wrestler learning some of those techniques. Finally in 1915 Maeda settled in Brazil where he taught Carlos Gracie, the son of a local politician. Carlos Gracie and his brothers adopted the Kosen Judo techniques and developed them further during the 20th century into what came to be known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
well id have to say that bjj is mostly ground, not a whole lot of throws but the ones they teach are simple and effective, and some striking. the striking techniques are not useless but it would be beneficial to cross train in a striking art (which you do so bjj would complament it well i say take that). now i have a ?, are you guys saying that Japanese ju Jitsu has better or nastier throws then Judo? it seems like the Judo throws are practice with more livelyness then traditional Ju Jitsu with all its Katas and such, is this true?
I would wager that modern judo has better throws simply due to evolution. The sport version focuses so much on throws, that those guys probably rule in the throwing department. However, even the traditional kodokan judo probably had superior throws, or at least the same, as ju jitsu since it was an accumulation of all the best stuff from a bunch of different ju jitsu's. The Kodokan school ruled and it was mostly throws and strikes back then. Their fights were fricken bloodly, not the fun and clean stuff practiced in Mc Dojos all over the USA I also think it depends on the school. As long as you practice your judo throws with a lot of force against a resisting opponent, you will develop good throws. Unfortunately, there is a high injury rate in this kind of training. A good judo guy can slam you so hard you are knocked out in one throw.
The descriptions many have given refer to sport judo(olympic judo). It's almost impossible to find true judo anymore but at one time it was a true martial art. Kano's original reason for creating a newer version was to improve throwing strategy. When he first created judo it had all the locks and atemi of the ju jutsu style he had previously studied. Most of the throws in martial arts were designed for the battle field and they take advantage of force and momentum to bring your enemy into the throw. In more recent times those types of battles no longer exist so alot of ju jutsu guys were forcing thier throws to work in self defense trainning and randori. They would muscle the throws or shoot in with speed or what ever advantage they could find but for thee most part they were no longer useing thier opponents force against them. ju jutsu guys would sometimes use off balancing techniques to set up a throw but it wasn't a constant principle in the style Kano studied. He originally created judo to say that a throw should ALWAYS have three parts, the off balancing, the fit in, and the execution. It was later refined further into a safe sport but that's not what makes it judo.
I think the term best stuff is a relative term. Kano chose the best stuff that could be practiced against a resisting opponent without causing too serious of an injury. It isn't the techniques that separate traditional jujitsu for judo, but the training methods. Jujitsu had been primarily taught with compliant partners, and choreographed movement. Judo's biggest contribution, although not a new one, was a training environment that put resisting opponents against one another. Why do people keep thinking true judo isn't sport judo? Kano wanted Judo to become a sport. He was hoping to make it into an olympic sport at the time. He understood the value of competition within martial arts. During the early days of the Kodokan, atemi was reserved for the higher ranks. The school focused primarily on the throws and groundwork. Kano believed in the place of strikes, but most of that is found in katas. If you wanted to avoid a Judo McDojo, go to a club that actively competes. Clubs have varying strategies. Some might focus on throws as opposed to groundwork, but the competition element gives you and your club the opportunity to test your skills. If your club trains to compete, you will train to commit to a throw and learn to plant the opponent into the ground. You learn what works and what doesn't, and that's the sort of thing you want from an art.
Kano founded judo before he ever thought about makeing it a sport. He originaly wanted to add the principle of always off balancing before the throw. He set his goals on makeing an olympic sport long after he changed his jujutsu to judo. Also as you pointed out yourself he taught all the techniques of jujutsu even if he only did so at a high level. Most schools today don't have that material availible. If you leave out the most martial techniques you no longer have a martial art and true judo is a martial art.
Hi all, It should also be pointed out that there is a difference between classical Japanese (koryu) jujutsu and what is commonly taught as jujitsu/jiu jitsu in the west. The koryu arts are generally very old - some dating back four or five hundred years. They were not only unarmed self-defense systems, but often included techniques against and with weaponry. Also, they were not always stand-alone systems, but sometimes formed part of more comprehensive military systems. I'd recommend this website for a fuller definition: http://www.koryu.com/library/mskoss8.html The author, Meik Skoss, is one of a handful of westerners to be licensed in any koryu arts. They are very rare outside of Japan. Some classical jujutsu schools (e.g. Daito-ryu, Kito-ryu and Tenjin Shinyo-ryu) were very important in the development of modern arts like aikido and judo. The systems taught as jujitsu or jiu jitsu in the west are very often modern systems that were not developed in Japan. Often, they are based around a core of judo, with strikes and possibly some weaponry added. Many times, the techniques that have been reverse-engineered from judo have been modified to make them more combative and with more painful and dangerous effects. They are also often changed so that they do not rely on a judogi. Ironically, what most people know as jiu jitsu is actually younger than judo, not more ancient. Best, Nick
I recently read a book by Kano about the process he went through whlie creating Judo, and learned a lot that I did not know before. He says that when he created Judo, he did not look for the throws that wouldn't hurt the opponent at full speed, he looked for throws that used what he considers to be the most important principle in Judo: Maximum efficiency, minimum effort. It seems to me that (and take into consideration that I practice Judo, and thus will be biased) the difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu is simply refinement. Ju Jitsu, at least during Kano's time, was a compilation of moves put together because of similarities in their technique. Judo took these, pulled out or altered the weaker ones, and ended up with an art that is more defined around what Kano believed were the basic similarities in the moves. Though people say that Ju Jitsu is the more lethal art or something like that, I see this as more of a side-effect of the difference, than a difference itself. Both can be deadly, both can be gentle and still get the job done, it just depends on the individual using them.
The fact is, he pursued the goal of making judo an olympic sport. Whether or not Kano had sport as his original intention is a moot point. Kano understood the importance of competition to the art, and how competition can help develop an individual's abilities. The self-defense katas are still available to anyone who wishes to practice them. Pick up the Kodokan Judo book. They are still there. Judo kata competitions are still held worldwide. I personally don't care for the katas, but the material is still available and still practiced. Again, I think you are more likely to find these techniques practiced at competitive schools than others. The fact that judo is a sport actually helps it, because it allows individuals the opportunity to test their skills, get an idea of how good they really are, and what they need to develop. The throws ARE martial techniques. You can use them in a fight, and there are plenty of stories about judokas using their techniques effectively off the mat. A true martial art is one that can be applied in a fight against an aggressive resisting opponent. Judo is such an art.
