Self defence is used before and after any altercation. For the bit in between its better to know how to fight
I posted the video because an early argument was "you have no experience in BJJ so you know nothing". Here we have people with plenty of experience who opinions align with mine but it seems people are still focusing on exploiting a character flaw than the actual points made. I know nothing of his integrity and neither do you. All we know is that he promoted someone to a rank most people feel he shouldn't be holding. That could stem from a myriad of reasons, many having nothing to do with integrity. Moreoever, it's neither here nor there as it is 1) not the subject at hand and 2) doesn't impact the validity of the man's opinion on sport JJ taking over SD just as it happened in Judo one bit. Not sure what you mean by "The SD difference is mostly marketing". My point is this: Once upon a time, learning BJJ involved learning the combatives. These days, it seems to me that most schools focus almost exclusively on tournament BJJ and maybe sprinkle some SD here and there. Judo has gone through the same thing. That's not to say that sport-trained BJJ or Judo players can't defend themselves, just that the SD aspect is slowly disappearing from most BJJ schools' curriculums. No more, no less.
The combatives do not improve someone's ability to defend themselves nearly as much as being good at the sporting aspect does.
^This^ It is all well and good saying "too much sport, not enough SD" but the sport evolved the way it did to counter it's own moves. BJJ fighters are creatures of instinct and feel. They will not pull a spider guard sweep and pass against some street yobbo because they won't have to; their game will find the path of least resistance and they will probably "grab, choke onto the next one...." because they have the skill to do so through a competitive outlet Saying "they do sport" is only applicable if said sport fighter won't whup yo ass in an all out brawl...and the chances are they will because they drill faster, harder and stronger against better Methodology > Art
Mount, Guard, submissions, chokes, sweeps, passes, escapes, takedowns...these are the basic elements of the combatives What part of these is missing from "Sport" BJJ?
I think you are missing some context. Here is an article from Keith Owen's blog where he talks about how most purple belts could defend themselves on the street: http://keith-owen.blogspot.com/2013/12/how-i-treat-my-purple-belts.html "Being a Purple Belt is one of the coolest things ever. The reason is that it's the most difficult belt to get. Most people quit before receiving it and most purple belts COULD defend themselves out on the street if need be and they have shown themselves to be tough individuals." You mentioned that "once upon a time, learning BJJ involved learning the combatives". How do you know "who" is and isn't learning combatives in BJJ schools today? Also were they primarily teaching combatives way back when you first started BJJ?
I think this is much misunderstood. The reason a competative BJJef, judo player, Muay Thai(er?), kickboxer, boxer or MMAer doesn't bother about self defence so much is because he'll destroy most untrained fighters in seconds. The worry is weapons which can? Equalise so much. Apart from that its generally all gravy
You do realise " combatatives" is the term used by gracie acadamy to sell their online training system.
I agree but again this isn't meant to be an either/or proposition. If sport didn't detract from the SD aspect to a certain degree, I don't think Rorion or Helio would have lamented on the trend. Unless we're working under the premise that the Gracies' goal was to peddle their system and nothing else.
I agree but again this isn't meant to be an either/or proposition. If sport didn't detract from the SD aspect to a certain degree, I don't think Rorion or Helio would have lamented on the trend. Unless we're working under the premise that the Gracies' goal was to peddle their system and nothing else, I suppose.
As far as I know the term "combatives" appeared before the online era, or at least before they started selling their system online. Erik Paulson talks about being taught the combatives by the Gracies in their garage in the early 90s in his rolledup interview. Even if it were a way to market their stuff, in itself that does not mean the system offers 0 added value from a pure self-defense standpoint.
What better way to gain back your share of a market than to declare you have "teh real deal"...especially as (Rickosn aside) teh best players are not Gracie family members anymore
I'm sorry I think I'm not being to clear. 1) The modern emphasis on the use of the term 'combatatives' is pure marketing, its a way to diferentiate themselves from others in the BJJ world, and in the case of the 'gracie acadamy' its their get out claus for selling belts on the internet, becuase their internet belts in combatatives not BJJ. 2) The original Self defense moves, are still taught by many different groups, and in fact form part of the Gracie Barra foundation classes which everyone has to learn. And Barra are the Largest BJJ group around, who also own the IBJJF and are the ones most often labeled as mostly IBJJF Gi sports guys. 3) In some groups, A lot of the SD material, has been replaced by people fighting in MMA, with cross training wrestling and striking and working out SD applications from there. 4) If you listen to interviews with the old school guys such as Rickson henry atkins, the dirty dozen etc, their day in, day out training didnt consist of SD kata practise, but the usual rolling and drilling of fundamentals with the occasional revisiting of the SD training, they first trained in as a introduction to BJJ.
True, but so are Saulo and Marcelo and a plethora of others - perhaps it would be better to say the Gracies no longer have ALL the best fighters
There still aren't too many degrees of separation yet, though it is coming. Many of the best fighters don't have the name, but looking at their training heritage the Gracie name is still very close with most.
You missed the point entirely. YOU put up a video of Keith Owens as an example in your words of a person with plenty of experience who's opinion aligns with yours. My point is his opinion doesn't really align with yours based on his other posts and you are missing context.
