Which is better for effective self defense?

Hi,

That's an interesting suggestion - I like Judo simply because most of the Judoka I have known have had a super aggressive - get the job done - attitude and in a self defence situation attitude is 99.99% of the outcome

 

I agree completely. Here in the states freestyle/folkstyle wrestling fills the same need especially if you train no-gi. Let a decent wrestler sink his underhook and there's a good chance you're going for a ride.

 

So people don't punch, kick, wrestle, and try to injure each other in a street fight?

What do you consider an "average street encounter"?

 

Absolutely. If nothing else, that kind of training will help you deal with getting thrown. I was always pretty confident in being able to take a good shot, and I don't panic on the ground, but I had no way to deal with being thrown until I started Judo. Maybe bjj in other areas do some stand-up randori training, but in my area it's almost exclusively ground based.

 

The school I go to is MMA based some there are some throws as part of the training. I looked for a Judo school before I started where I did and there was nothing anywhere close to where I lived.

What I would really like to try is Greco. That stuff looks wicked. :evil:

 

that's most of what we have. mma based schools that offer muy thai, bjj and some conditioning classes. which is cool, it's just really popular right now and has narrowed the selection down a bit. on a different note, i've been seeing all my neighborhood TKD schools close recently.

 

I'd bet either ninjas, zombies or zombie ninjas.

That MMA stuff is way to weak for that. :evil:

 

The differences are:
No rules (well very different ones).
No referee.
No prompt medical attention.
Legal considerations (appropriate legal response to threat).
No prearranged agreement to fight.
No warm-up.

There are probably lots more differences - do you agree that a UFC match and a Street Fight are VERY different?

 

Those points are true. Not to mention, attackers pulling out knives or guns. Unfortunately, the only real way to properly prepare for a street fight is to be an experienced street fighter. However, since most of us aren't criminals and thugs, and not going out getting in random fights for practice, we just want to give ourselves the best possible skills and training we can.

I suppose the closest self defense training to a real street fight is something like Krav Maga...But since I don't have that option where I am, I have to choose the best option I have available to me.

However, learning effective striking, grappling and take-downs would still come in VERY handy in a street fight.

 

No one disputes there are differences. The question is whether the differences necessitate different tactics. Lets look at the ones you've brought up:

1. No Rules

Going by the official UFC rules (available [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Fighting_Championship#Rules"here[/URL]), although there are a number of more dangerous striking attacks removed, most of them I would argue don't necessitate a change of tactics. In general MMA attack methods are pretty devastating, so the issue is not that the MMA fighter would be unable to inflict harm without them, but if they would put themselves in danger through their normal tactics if these techniques were legal.

In general, I don't think they do. Eye gouges might be nasty, but you avoid them by blocking a clear line to your face while standing and controlling their arms on the ground; which are the same tactics you use normally. The same with things like throat strikes and downwards elbows. Normal MMA tactics should avoid them just like you avoid a jab.

A couple of things do stand out though. Restrictions on stomping/kicking the head of a downed opponent mean that it is safer to be on the ground as long as you keep a guard together. Some MMA fighters do integrate this into their tactics, either through techniques such as pulling guard, or by defending themselves from their back when downed (if the opponent hasn't reached them yet), rather than perhaps scrambling to their feet. But on the other hand, many fighters have been TKOed by being punched by an opponent in that situation, so maybe this restriction doesn't change things so much after all.

2. No referee

In general, I again this this isn't significant. The Referee only comes into play if a foul is done (which I have already dealt with), or when they are stopping the fight. Since if the ref saves you by stopping the fight you have lost, I would argue that MMA tactics already try to avoid this happening, so the fact that the ref is there shouldn't change the way they fight. They fight as if needing the fight stopped is a failure, as you should do for fighting on the 'street'.

3. No prompt medical attention

Again, if you need medical attention then you have usually lost your fight, so MMA fighters try to avoid using this aid wherever possible. The only examples where you wouldn't have lost are situations like those fighters who have fought on with broken limbs/hands; and I would argue this shows a tenacity which would only be a boon in a streetfight.

4. Legal considerations (appropriate legal response to threat)

Here I think we start to have something. Not all streetfights are to the death, and the ability to deal proportionate damage without going too far is a valuable skill to avoid legal issues. MMA fighters (like many combat sportsmen) train to overwhelm their opponent, and not let up until the fight is stopped. This is good against a potential stabbing, but when a drunk guy throws a lazy haymaker choking him unconscious will probably get you in trouble...

5. No prearranged agreement to fight
6. No warm-up

I'm going to put these together because I think they're the same issue, that of performance on demand. I think it is reasonable to claim that given combat sportsmen are used to having a long time to prepare for a fight, both mentally and physically, they might well not perform up to their usual standard if it is suddenly thrust upon them. They might fight it difficult to get into the right frame of mind, which could be disastrous if the situation is serious enough. Saying that, being as fit and strong as any athlete will give you an advantage in being able to deal with the physical debilitation of sudden adrenaline spikes, and give you the physical performance that could well overwhelm a less fit person even if they are prepared.

It seems to me, disregarding weapons (which I did intentionally as that is a whole nother topic to discuss) the MMA fighter is, in skill and physical ability, easily capable of dealing with a street encounter. The areas I think they should work on are mental, both the ability to judge a situation and hold back when necessary, and the ability to go from 0-10 when the situation warrants. Both of these can defiantly be trained by any MMA fighter interested, as has been mentioned the works of Geoff Thompson are excellent resources on the matter. But fundamentally, I would conclude that you could do a lot worse when defending yourself than studying MMA.


Now I may be wrong, I'm not exactly an expert given I'm only just over a year into martial arts myself. If you disagree with my analysis, I would be very happy to have someone poke holes in my argument!

 

You are mistaken. BJJ teaches incredably important attributes that are almost vital in terms of self defence. Obviously you have the ability to apply chokes and other submissions, with or without using someones clothing, standing up or on the ground.

You also have the toughness aspect, BJJ is no joke and will teach the strength of will so important in a real situation.

One of the most important and overlooked skills it also teaches is the ability to get out from underneath someone if they land on top of you, and either stand up or finish them from top position. This is extremely important, espcecially in a multiple attacker/crowd situation. Its also not easy to learn and takes alot of rolling practice to perfect.

Do you know the Gracie families pre UFC history? Do you know that many of them were famous street fighters? I suggest watching the Renzo Gracie documntary and seeing the footage of Ryan Gracie fighting all comers in the middle of a riot. BJJs roots are more based in real fighting than pretty much any other art, 'sport' or 'traditional'.

Remember, if there are rules you tap out, if there aren't any rules you go to sleep. But the choke is just the choke and that doesn't change.

 

I've always been curious how Bjj evolved from the time Judo was introduced into what it is today. Where this some definitive moment where there was a conscious decision to really focus on developing the ground techniques? Was it Carlos Gracie who is mainly responsible or since Maeda was already known for being good on the ground, was it groundwork focused from the beginning? Did Maeda teach Kodokan Judo in full or just mainly groundwork to the Gracies?

 

keep doing BJJ, take up Mauy thai, ignore the self defence morons, job done.

 

im not having a go at whoever posted this personally but why do these types of threads on map always have someone throwing in the Judo card, (just to be clear im not down on judo at all I do it myself). someone comes on asking about a choice between two arts they are considering taking up when there is a clear answer out of the two we should be giving and every single time someone says something like "you should throw some judo in as well cos what good is Mauy thai going to do if someone run's up and grabs you", "you should do some Kali encase someone runs at you with a stick in one hand and a knife in the other cos what good is boxing going to be then", "you should buy some clean underwear cos what good is BJJ if your hit with a bus crossing the street". two things I highly doubt many people have the time to attend 3 different martial art classes that will no doubt be running lessons on more than one night during the week and why would they have to ? not everyone is going to be stepping into a cage or getting in gang fights every night, all I'm saying is some times I think people over evaluate the hole you need to be a complete fighter thing, unless your a professional in a combat sport or will be going into life and death situations regularly you don't need to be doing or recommended anything other than what you enjoy and are interested in as long as its decent training.

 

like you say he was renowned for his ground work so when he taught judo to the graices it was probably just a large factor in his method of instructing and there for influenced how they would pass it on, no great big concious decision at a certain point in time just natural evolution.

 

I had typed up this long response, but it's probably not warranted. I think Judo gives you a wide range of experience, and if someone has the chance to learn some it'll help get them where they want to go... especially since BJJ has Judo roots and the op is already interested in BJJ. That was it, really.

 

like I say I wasn't having a go at you or anyone else just observing a recurring theme

 

Okay. let me put something different on the table =) rather than fussing over which martial art you should do, try focusing on making the martial art work for you. What i mean is that decide what u want out of the martial art, Street fighting, Sportsfighting, Mental and spiritual development or plain fitness.
I'f you're more of a self defence type, find out the bad habits of BJJ and avoid them. From personal experience with experimenting around with a neighbour who does bjj, u wanna avoid pulling guard or full mount on someone in the street. there are probably more but u get my drift. Bjj chokes, subs and take down defences are perfect for a street fight as long as you don't develop the sport mindset cuz what gets in your instinct will be there for life.
I currently do Kyokushin karate, which is brilliant for conditioning and practicality, but our sparring has no holds and no face punching so i like to train those the best i can after class and out of class times.
I think if u have a place which teaches good conditioning and regular sparring near you you should do it. if its muay thai for u, do that. Boxing, do that. heck, if you find a ninjutsu school where they are not shy of whacking each other, do that =P


On a more personal note, i prefer judo as a grappling style over Bjj. reasons are completely personal preference and situation in my country. BJJ and Judo both developed from Jujitsu, bJJ focused on the ground, Judo focused on the throws. I feel that going to the ground isn't a very good idea and i'm more the throws kinda guy anyways, besides, judo has pretty good groundwork to. *Bjj has awesome throws too for that matter =P*

 

Hi

Agreed

Agreed Although there is still the psychological SHOCK of suddenly being attacked which is different.

I don't think it matters at all that you have just over a year and I am in my 40th year of training - truth is truth

Also often younger and fresher eyes see things more clearly than older eyes that are prejudiced by experience.

I still think that for self defence I'd choose other arts before BJJ but that does not mean that I'm down on BJJ at all.

Also and most importantly, different arts suit different people - if the 'best' art in the world doesn't suit you, then it's not the 'best' art for YOU