MMA is the only valid training for self-defense? Do you train a striking art? Do they allow single-leg takedowns? What about submissions? I was responding not to his pointing out that it was a demo (which was obvious) but things like "BJJ started out as JUDO and was modified by the gracies and on the ground improved upon. How does this = self defence." So? BJJ is both a martial art and a sport. edit: I'm saying the terms are not conflicting, boxing is arguably a martial art as well as sport even if most boxers would not consider themselves martial artists.
Nice demo, makes me want to do some grappling right now! Shows just how good they are at throwing as well as ground work, two true martial art masters.
I concede, I stand corrected BJJ is not just a sport, like boxing I would say that its trained primarily for sport but can be applied to self defense.
ugh.....drama, drama everywhere. To sum up my take on the BJJ street or sport, I'd say that if you train for competition (rolling for pre-set time limits, scoring points) then you train for sport, if otherwise then your training is a bit more ambiguous. With no knowledge of striking I could see someone applying their BJJ technique and adding them in with no real training of that, but not vice versa.
Huh? What are you going on about? My point was that BJJ rolling is clearly generally orientated towards the sport of grappling by the fact that strikes are not allowed. I was not saying this makes BJJ useless for self defence but that it makes Devildog's point that BJJ is primarily a sport hardly controversial. To answer your other questions the striking art I train in is Thai Boxing and oddly being a stand up sport orientated system takedowns outside of the clinch are not trained against because they are not allowed in the rules and the same thing applies to submissions. I again would not say this makes the training useless for self defence but I am not arguing this about BJJ either. If you were trying to get at my opinions on what makes the best self-defence I'd say MMA training (i.e. some training involving stand up fighting and grappling in a competitive enviroment) would be probably be the way to go but I also think that pretty much anyone who competes in a sport orientated MA at a decent level will have a decent chance of defending themselves. I'm not disagreeing but I think that your making too much of a big deal out of one or two sentences devildog posted especially since in his subsequent clarifications he has made it clear he does not think BJJ is useless for self defence so what's the big problem? Something being primarily sport orientated I actually see as usually being a positive. And about the compliant partners thing I wasn't directing that to you re-read the thread especially Korpy's responses if you want to see the attitude Im criticisng.
Psychology? I guess I have a psychology textbook that could really hurt a person if I hit him with it hard enough...
If you talk about the street you talk about awareness, decisiveness, fighting spirit the ability to go from nil to 100% in an instant, a handfull of pragmatic techniques. If YOU (not your art) lack these you are in trouble.All martial arts have these principles any BJJ guy who sees an opening to deliver a punch will do it.Who wouldn't? Know the difference when watching a demo that has rules. I tend to spend my time seaking out the weaknesses in MY OWN training rather than looking for assumed weaknesses in other brother/sister arts. Do not make assumptions. regards koyo What is this an aikidoka punching instead of "spinning around" who would have thought??
Duh...the clue's in the name - BJJ evolved from JJJ. Judo evolved from JJJ - so in that view they came from the same source, taking different focusses. What Geoff Thompson does is entirely different. The major principle of GT's training is the Fence, Guard and pre-emptive strike. I hold his stuff in great esteem, but he himself has pointed to the Gracies as exemplars of fighting skills on many occasions and his system also includes significant groundwork, albeit taken from Jodo and Sombo. A lot of this goes back again to what you're training for and who you're training with. Competition BJJ is very different from BJJ aimed t slef defence, just as Judo aimed at self defence will be very different from competition Judo which is bound by rules and conditions, just as Olympic TKD is just a shambles and represents the very worst of MA practicality.
BJJ does originate from Judo, not directly from Japanese Ju-jutsu. It arguably has more influence from catch wrestling than (non Kodokan) ju-jutsu. This is one of those instances where you can't take things on face value, alister
I'd have to agree that when it comes to self defense, some of what the Gracies show isn't that much different than other systems' self defense. One look at Royce's self defense book, and you can probably spot alot of familiar responses. But if I were to pick someone to teach me that stuff, it'd have to be these guys. As for BJJ being sport or street or whatever, it really depends on school to school, practitioner to practitioner. I'm actually kind of curious, for those of you who have BJJ street oriented classes, do you find that they're drastically different than normal BJJ or BJJ for MMA or no-gi classes? (My instructor only offers straight up BJJ, gi and no-gi, and MMA classes)
I'd say the self-defense curriculum is fairly different, in that focuses much more heavily on stand-up grappling, with a big emphasis on hip throws. I found it kind of ironic, since Gracie Jiujitsu has touted it's effectiveness being the result of "ninety percent of real fights going to the ground." Yet in our own self-defense curriculum, we very rarely deal with groundfighting. Of course, there's very little about the ground that isn't covered by the normal BJJ 'sport' curriculum. Edit: Atharel is right. Back in the early 1900's, Kodokan judo was referred to as a form of "Jujitsu." Does anyone know when the term "judo" arose? I would guess after WWII, but have no real idea.
That's why I said some, and I'm not just looking at this video. Yeah that's right. A kimura is a kimura, doesn't change depending on where you are or what you are doing. WWII started in 1939, I thought Kano came up with "judo", and he died in 1938. My knowledge of Judo history is almost nil so I dunno...
Judo was referred to as such by Kano years before his death, but it was known as Kano-ryu Jujutsu for quite some time before he decided on Judo. He took the name from Jikishinden-ryu Judo, a much older ryu, which is why Judo is properly known as Kodokan Judo. Adding to the confusion, judo and jujutsu were interchangeable terms for quite a long time after judo's inception and even after world war 2. There were many reasons for this: though Judo was taught in schools (often "Kosen" style) it was still referred to as Jujutsu for a long while and a few generations of Japanese students grew up calling it jujutsu. Eventually the government approved calling it Judo. There were many jujutsu masters who became part of the Kodokan and received dan rank after proving themselves (the Kodokan was used as a "proving ground" between the styles for a while) and these masters would of course refer to their teachings as "jujutsu" at least as much as Judo, even if they were mixing in what they learned with Kano. Finally it seems that there was an important distinction between "jujutsu" and "judo" in the eyes of Kano that led to a lot of his students, perhaps including Maeda, to refer to it as judo only if it was being taught properly - that is, in an environment emphasizing the principles Kano espoused. Mutual benefit, etc. Regardless, it is inarguable that Mitsuyo Maeda, instructor of Carlos Gracie (who was in turn instructor of Helio Gracie), was a dan-ranked member of the Kodokan and had had only minimal training in Tenjin Shinyo-ryu Jujutsu very early in his youth, and that the vast majority of what he taught Carlos seems to be straight out of Judo as it was practiced before Maeda's departure. Maeda was educated in a time when ne-waza was increasingly popular in the Kodokan shiai and randori, before Kano instituted rules limiting its time (and perhaps limiting techniques, I can't remember the chronology for that). Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that Judo is the primary source of BJJ, not Jujutsu. Indeed, Maeda's years of travel across the United States and throughout Europe doing mixed style matches and entering wrestling and catch wrestling competitions would indicate that wrestling and catch were perhaps more influential than any source other than Kano's Judo.
Yeah, but you weren't asking how old the system was, you asked when the term "judo" came about: You guessed at the end of WWII, but I say since WWII started in 1939, and Kano, who first used the term "judo", died in 1938, hence your guess is wrong.
"Kodokan Judo" was indeed coined by Kano before his death but it wasn't all that widespread of a term until after WW2, for a variety of reasons.
Dude, I just don't see what your argument is? You’re just echoing what I said of course Geoff Thompson’s approach is very different and in my opinion the best way to train if you’re interested in self defense. Like Geoff I too hold the Gracie’s in high regard as highly skilled fighters and I agree that grappling is an important factor within self defense. My point was that for an art that’s practitioners constantly go on about resistance training and realism, whilst having exemplary technique this video had very little realism at all.
