judoka86

I saw a movie once.... Muay Thai v. TaeKwonDo. The Taekwondo guy had his * handed to him. Why? I mean Taekwondo uses the laws of physics much moreeffectively that Muay Thai.. They kick shins and elbow... I dont understand why the Taekwondo guy lost.... he has much better techniques at his hands... Can someone tell me what i am missing? Help me out here PLEASE!

daeinwolf.... i have taken some ninpo taijutsu, and i think that ba gua could help out with the taihenjutsu techniques because of the circular aspects of it. i am told that budo taijutsu and ninpo taijutsu are similiar... so.. theoretically it should help. So give her a try out!

Sibylla...you shouldnt have to use your back to lift your opponent when throwing... you are not doing your technique right...the throws of judo and jujutsu are low energy and maximum effieiency. I thought i would just clarify that.

I have been reading a lot of these posts and, I think that aikido or even judo (to a lesser extent) is great if you just want to control the enemy and get him neutralized. I might not be right..... but you know. Some techniques in Aikido hurt for maybe a minute or two and are excrusiating but then the pain goes away, and in judo just dodge his attack, smack him with a backfist, throw him down, and then just leave.

I agree with treebranch... I have studied some ninpo taijutsu (aka ninjutsu). What you said about ninjutsu cant win a nhb competition or mma match... what about frank dux (he synthesized a ryu....dux ryu ninjutsu).I believe he could wreck any BJJ'er. ninpo/budo taijutsu is not made for your petty ground and pound competitions. It is much more... and the dojos train very hard and hardcore. There is a concept of HANKA.. it means to create. In ninpo taijutsu it is the way of covering all the bases and letting the practitioner experiment with the time honoured techniques. By the way.. also watch a Hatsumi video and see if a BJJ'er can handle doing some of the things he can do at the age of 83. Ninpo/Budo taijutsu differs from BJJ because the goals of each martial art are different... in ninpo/budo taijutsu there are no holds barred... they fight dirty and cheap. You havent seen nhb until you see the way that a practitioner of ninjutsu practices... they are cheap and dirty and will win on the ground because they practice all of the cheap shots. I have only tried the bo and the jo in ninpo taijutsu and they go way past my bo training in karate. I hope youy dont ever have to mess with a ninpo/budo taijutsu man on the street because he/she will mess your s!$# right up.

What about about the fact that if you were on an adrenaline rush and you inflicted more damage than you thought was possible?

Wrestling is the oldest fighting style on the planet, it deals exclusively with making your opponent give up. The chokes are designed for safety, it has armbars of sorts, holds of ewvery different kind. Wrestlers know submission because thats how they win, or lose.

turonaga.... you didnt really take the context of that too effectively. Judo is not an effective multiple attacker art. If you take the time to throw someone in a multiple attacker situation then you yourself will be struck several times by the other people against you. While Aikido's circular motions make it hard for several opponents to get after you when it is a multiple attacker situation.

I agree with you treebranch. BJJ would be more devastating on the mat because, that is what comprises most of their training. I wonder, what would happen if a BJJ'er was challenged by a wrestler? Wrestlers are fast, agile, strong, they seek to put their opponents on their backs and applying chokes, pins etc. BJJ'ers are trained to go to the ground because thats where they are at their best. I am not even sure if BJJ'ers have a vast knowledge of throws or trips. I think they are more into a double leg takedown scenario. Also they like to go on their backs. But a wrestler would take advantage of them being on their back and choke them out. Numerous scenarios can happen. Now, what would happen if a Judoka challenged a Wrestler. I believe that the Judoka would win, because wrestlers love to lock up in the beginning of the match and judokas are trained to setup the throw from the lock up. So a judoka throws the wrestler fast and furious to the ground and leaves him/her behind because it is over.

I think I have hit a soft spot, but I think I worded it incorrectly. So, all of this points to one thing.... it is not the art itself, it is the practitioner. Because BJJ never loses the match, and neither does Judo. It is the practitioner who wins or loses. Also, a second thought.... wasnt this section about the top 5 combative arts. It seems it is an arguement between a guy who has done nhb comps, also a modern martial artist. The other guy who is a practitioner of the traditional martial arts, and is studying for the moral and artistic aspects that the martial arts offer. By the way, treebranch do you study ninpo taijutsu? I have never heard extensively of budo taijutsu. I have a incline that they are similiar if not equal. Sorry if I hit a soft spot anyone.

If bjj is the ultimate combative art, then why was gracie defeated in the 1950's by the kimura. Also why was he beaten by a Judoka? Traditional Martial Arts are just as good, maybe not in your opinion Matt.

J Lee, I have a friend like you. He is korean and is fairly touchy towards jokes and stuff. A couple points... just let the words roll off your back, make it look like you dont care. They want you to fight them because they know that they have an advantage and will most likely win. Also, if you do take up the martial arts and try to use it to fight offensively then you become the bad guy. I am not saying to not take the martial arts, I have only had to use my Judo a couple times to defend myself from some smart * who thought he could mock me. Also, try to talk it out. Most idiots are not smart with words and most likely will lose then. Also youve taken TKD, your legs should be your primary weapon if you choose to fight. Never ever attack, only defend. You should find that the most potent offense is a rock hard defensive strategy.

TELL ME ABOUT SELF DEFENSE LAWS IN CANADA. I have heard many different stories like: you can knock him down, but if u go to the ground to pummel him then your the attacker. and what about if they die from a standing chokehold and they have a knife stuck in your leg or something like that. PLEASE GET BACK TO ME!!

Grappling vs Striking is a topic that relies on circumstances. Where you are, How many, and weapons etc. Grappling is least effective if you have many opponents because locks must be held to stop your opponent. Throws take too much time to complete and leave your whole body occupied with only one man (then your messed because theyve got their boots to you now). Groundfighting in a multiple attacker situation is out of the question because you only have one opponent in your hold, and there are others that are going to kick you on the ground etc etc. Striking is the way to go when you have multiple opponents because it is fast and effective if done properly. Fast kicks to knee caps, groin etc etc. Punches and elbows when you are in close will take out many opponents much faster than grappling. A boxer would have a better chance in a multiple opponent situation than a judoka. They have fast, powerful punches and are generally strong. Judokas are trained to throw, mount, and choke, or whatever. So.... it relies purely on teh situation that your in.

Judo is different from Aikido in many aspects. Well Aikido uses handfighting (wrist twists, thumb crushes, and kyusho points) skills and joint locks to the extreme. Also it is very philisophical. Aikido has one major advantage over Judo.... Aikido is designed to fight many opponents at once, whereas Judo you have one adversary and you will choke him out. Dont get me wrong I like Judo a lot... but the techniques are simple and involve little strength. Generally after being slammed on the ground your opponent will not muster the energy to get back up again. The two (when in comparison) have their pros and cons. Judo is a great one vs one art, with superior grappling skills, great throws, and practical. Aikido is great if you have to take 3 or 4 at once where you need fast action to protect yourself. Also the techniques are fun to do and experiment with.

Traditional ninjutsu (current leader:34th soke of the Bujinkan Massakki Hatsumi) is the art of winning. Now dont get skeptical! Listen! Ninjutsu takes advantage of everything on the human body and uses the environment to the practitioners advantage. Things like knee level kicks, stomp kicks, eyegouges, pressurepoints, chokeholds etc are prevalent in Bujinkan Ninjutsu. The 9 schools of the Bujinkan are the basis for the Ninjutsu traditions. Ninjas are taught to more or less fight cheap and dirty to accomplish their mission. Hitting from behind, psyching out their enemies were key in good Ninjutsu. A common psychout of today is "Hey, look over there" the same set of rules apply. Fake and strike with something completely different. Well, I could go on for awhile but I have to compare this to Jujutsu. Jujutsu was what spawned Ninjutsu. Ninjas took their knowledge of Jujutsu and other fighting styles, and mixed it with SunTzu's "Art of War". Jujutsu has a lot of similiarites with Ninjutsu. They arent identical. Jujutsu is nore heavily based into hand to hand fighting because the concept of "Ju" has nothing to do with haveing a higher mindset than that of his opponent. "Ju" is supplemess, softness, pliability. It teaches to take the low ground and take advantage of the opponents mind rather than their muscle. Any barbarian with a weapon can take advantage of muscle, but a skilled Jujutsuka doesnt need a weapon because they have the skills necessary to use only their hands. Sure a weapon is all fine and good, but it is only an extension of your hands. Jujutsu and Ninjutsu are similiar but not identical!

I have studied some Ninjutsu under a friend who is quite adept in it. It is possibly the most interesting fight based art of all time. It uses everything from light kyusho pressure points to bonecrushing kicks and punches. It relies heavily on weapons because the ninja's adversary was the samurai. The samurai was never without a wakizashi and his trusty,rusty katana. So ninjas had to be able to disarm all these weapons from a skilled opponent. Also the weapons the ninjas used were simple, light, and effective. The ninja's didnt have the wealth and resources the samurai did. Everything was improvised and made by hand.

I know what a stomp kick is. I want to meet the person who can block one of those, because they are in for a treat. Ninjitsu was created to mess up Armoured Samurai. The ninja were in cloth and tabi boots, they could kill a armoured samurai with one well placed stomp kick to the solar plexus. It has plenty of power, especially if you use your arms to generate momentum. Roundhouses are pretty and fantastic when you are sparring for points. But in real life.. if you miss your roundhouse you are gonna be screwed because your leg is out there and your opponent is coming straight for ya.

The weapon should only be considered as an extension of the hand. If anyone has practiced Bojutsu then they would know. You shouldnt have to rely on a weapon, because if you are cocky and rely on a weapon, then chances are when your weapon is broken or taken from you, you may not work as efficently as you needed to to get that armed attacker away and disabled. Weapons are secondary porogative, and the empty hand and foot concept should be primary if you have to rise to the challenge of an armed attacker.

A good martial art should be able to be taken from the dojo, and the artificial conditions that one trains in and stuck anywhere, and be preformed with cunning and percision. This can't be said definately, because the art isn't doing the fighting, the practitioner is. But enough of that.... I think that the most effective arts are Ninjitsu, Jujutsu, Combat Sambo(aka "systema"), Ba Gua Zhang, and Hapkido. These are well rounded arts. Ninjitsu and Jujutsu were tested and proven effective on the battlefields of Japan. An effeicent Jujutsuka or Ninjutsuka are very pliable and adapt to conditions and surroundings easily. Ninjutsukas are crafty and clever when using their surroundings... they throw things at you, dodge, weave and taunt their opponents. Then they strike with lethal percision and accuracy. Jujutsukas are great one-on-one fighters... their skill with handling opponents on the ground and on their feet. Skilled Jujutsukas strike pressure points and joints to disable their opponents so they can get into an advantageous position. Combat Sambo (systema) is very effective. It was created to train soldiers and special forces under modern battlefield conditions. It uses cunning to take advantage of momentum and inertia to beat your opponent. Ba Gua Zhang is similiar to Aikido. Capable of handling multiple attackers with efficiency and percision. It's practitioners are pliable and creative. It is used in China for Police Training and works well if it's practitioners are present in quantities of 2 or 3. It uses the bodyguard system, where they watch each others back and protect each other. Hapkido is a Korean Martial art that fuses traditional Korean foot and leg techniques, but with the grappling ability of Japanese arts. It represents Korea.. it is a mix of everything. A little bit has been borrowed from Chinese Kung Fu styles. A little from traditional Korean arts (Tae Kwon Do aka Tae Kyon, Soo Bahk Do, Tang Soo Do, Kuk Sool Won etc etc). Also since Japan dominated Korea from 1910--1945 the Japanese have had a say in the creation of modern Hapkido. Jujutsu and Karate have been key in the creation of this art. So, seeing as how Hapkido has so much in its makeup.. it is pliable and useable under extreme conditions. They can kick like a TKD'er, they can grapple and throw like a Jujutsuka, and they have the grace of the Chinese Kung Fu influence.