Kimura

Well, this is not EXACTLY the kind of discussion I was expecting, but I will respond to a few statements. First, TJS is absolutely right about people who underestimate the value of the guard. The biggest innovation to come to mainstream combat arts in the last 20 years is most certainly the guard. It is simply a matter of physics. By elevating my lower back, and wrapping my legs around the waist, or lower abdomen, of my attacker, I negate his center of gravity and the impetus for his downward leverage. I can effectively use my legs, the strongest parts of the human body, to control my attackers positioning and balance. This is far preferable to allowing an attacker a full mounted position upon your chest, a knee upon your stomach, or even a perpendicular half mount (aka side mount). Quite frankly, if you are not in some sort of top position, the absolute best situation is the guard. However, I also disagree with TJS in the fact that when he completely refutes tactics such as "dirty" fighting (eye gouges, fish hooking, etc), small joints, biting, pressure points, and such. Perhaps one of the most dangerous martial arts ever encountered is also one of the forefathers: Yoshin-Ryu Ju Jitsu. YRJJ is the original form of Japanese Ju Jitsu, and it is the basis for all other Japanese martial arts, from Karate to Kendo to Judo. Yoshin-Ryu, along with many other forms of Japanese Ju Jitsu, teaches: Submission fighting, grappling, clinching, throws and takedowns, striking (knees, elbows, kicks and punches), weapons use, pressure point manipulation, anatomical understanding, and, more controversially, "dim mak", or death touches. All of this is learned, and it takes many, many years for someone to achieve the purple belt (equiv. to black in other arts), often 12-15 years. My father is a fourth degree Purple in Yoshin-Ryu, and I have dabbled myself in many arts and trained with him. I am now studying Muay Thai and Brazilian Ju Jitsu under a Romero Cavalcanti certified Brown Belt...and it doesn't do jack against my 64 year old father. I am 22. And it is interesting to note how he fights, when we fool around and such. Attempting armbars on someone who knows Pressure points and can toy with your sciatic nerve (and does!) gives you, as a grappler, a new appreciation for the depth of ground combat. and I have learned countless alternate ways to apply ankle locks, heel hooks, and triangles that leave me in awe of their effectiveness. All from the supposedly "obsolete" style of JJJ. As to whether Vale Tudo is the most effective form of martial arts (the original question for this thread), I think the street oriented drive of Vale Tudo, which is INCREDBILY effective in real life situations, is not necessarily the MOST effective. Vale Tudo has a ridiculous advantage over single style arts when put in NHB situations, and most Karateka, Judoka, Tae Kwon Do, Silat, Kickboxers, and especially Boxers, are totally outclassed when fighting a seasoned Vale Tudo fighter. However, other arts, such as combat versions of aikido, and many styles of Japanese Ju Jitsu, bestow far more options, most of them lethal, to aid in one's self defense. So it really is a toss up.

Hi. New to Karateforums.com. Just wanted to say that I enjoy the intelligent debates here in the "Comparing Styles" section. Thought I might spark another one. One argument that rages today, just as it was in '93 after the first UFC, and is bitterly debated on all sides: "Is Vale Tudo (aka Mixed Martial Arts, No Holds Barred, Ultimate Fighting, etc.) the most effective form of combat arts?" The new breed of fighter born out of the 90's, weaned on the exploits of Royce Gracie and the UFC, argues that Brazilian Ju Jitsu is the greatest form of martial arts in the world. The fact that BJJ's obssesseive focus with leverage and technique in application of its immobilzation and submission maneuvers has given it (at least in the eyes of its proponents) an air of martial purity is not questioned. However, I find it interesting that much of the basis for these claims of dominance fall on the rather specious reasoning that their unrivalled success in so called "No Holds Barred" fighting spectacles translates to unrivalled success in ALL combat situations. BJJ is an incredibly effective art, as Carlos, and later Helio, Gracie intended it to be. It studies combat from a real world, full contact situation, and decides to focus on the ground aspect. Now, first off, Gracie Ju Jitsu is very correct in saying "you own the ground, you own the fight". The FBI keeps statistics on all forms of fighting and assault, and concludes that 86% of all fist fights will end up on the ground. So, obviously, having an expertise in fighting on the ground, and especially from your back, provides a definitive edge over unschooled opposition. I study, and have a deep passion for, Brazilian Ju Jitsu for precisely this reason. However, I question the validity in saying that a style that finds great success in amateur and professional exhibition combat will also naturally have great success in battles of life and death. Not only is that akin to saying, "Because I excel at the jumping aspect of Basketball, I will naturally excel in Olympic high jump", or "Because I am a master of computer wargames, I am also a master of military tactics", it is facetious to believe a martial art that teaches NO lethal striking, NO pressure point usage, NO small joint manipulation, and NO esoteric or hidden biological knowledge is the undisputed king of combat arts. It is naive and childish to make such claims. I would like to know what the rest of the community thinks on this issue, and if necessary, I will make another post, listing IMHO what advantages and this "new age" combat and more traditional forms of martial arts have. Let the discussion begin!