ps1

@honoluludesktop I've competed at national levels in karate, kung fu, and in BJJ tourneys. So I know what you are saying about rule sets...but that's really not on topic. Just to ease your mind, though...there are tourneys outside the US where slamming the opponent is perfectly legal. In addition, many tournaments penalize the person who "jumps guard." Because, you're right...it's not a good idea from a self defense perspective.

Lol... here's for the firearms http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEdUo&feature=player_embedded Better train well!

Congratulations! 20,000 posts is crazy! Wow...just...wow!

Over the years I have studied many "ranges" of combat. Limiting it to empty hand techniques, there was usually a kicking range, punching range, short technique range (knee/elbow)/clinching range and a grappling range (ground). However, in reading Renzo Gracie's Mastering Ju Jitsu, he postulates that there are no ranges but only phases of combat. Further, he takes them down to just three categories. The free movement phase The clinch phase The ground phase He points out that modern MMA has demonstrated that the "ranges of combat" have proven not entirely accurate. That is to say, punches and knee strikes are often accomplished from "kicking range", head kicks have been thrown from "punching range," and takedowns have been used from both ranges. Therefore, he calls it the "Free Movement Phase." That is to say, there are no grabs that are hindering your movement and you are free to do what you wish based on your tactics and skill set. The "Clinch Phase" is the phase of combat that begins once grabbing has been established. Again, many types of strikes and takedowns are possible from this phase. It is up to the fighter to determine which moves are best for him based on his own skill set. The 3rd phase is the "Ground Phase" and is quite self explanatory. The fighters are now on the ground. Again, there are several technique sets that can be effective in this phase of combat. The most effective tend to be those that are based on achieving a dominant position before launching an offense. After reading his book, I also adopted his train of though. It's important to realize that virtually any strike can come from any range. So, to define your place in regard to a specific range is not quite accurate. What are your thoughts?

As a grappler, I think traps are extremely important. It's always nice to throw someone without getting hit. Traps not only allow for you to enter and strike, they allow you to enter and clinch more safely. A really simple form of trap would be the basic armdrag. Gets you behind the opponent...beautiful.

Bingo! Also, how many of these masters followed the "go train then drink sake all night" vs the "keep the body a temple" philosophy? Putting up an average age does not mean there is any correlation.

Which one? The guy that wants extort money (via contracts / deals) or the guy that wants value for money? Heck - you should be able to get the best training in the world for $ 7.00 per hour max otherwise you are just entering into the Mc Dojo. Sojobo I can't quite agree with the contract thing. It's become an industry standard across the board. From the "mcdojo" concept to actual schools. From an coaching standpoint, you're going to invest a great deal of time in making an individual better. If they drift off after 6 month of work, then you're out that investment of building, usually really slowly, a training partner. The contract has to help with actually showing up to training. I just don't see an issue with contract, and I've trained at schools both with and without. I have yet to hear a pitch that didn't include a way out for either medical reasons on forced lifestyle change (ie. loss of job, job transfer to another city, ect.) At the rate of 7/hour you quoted, assuming that you're going to class 3 times per week (around my average I'd guess) and that you're there about 2 hours per session, you're looking at a monthly fee of 168. That's actually above what you're average BJJ school will charge per month. I don't think that's an issue most of the time. So, even if they are using a contract this does not mean that you're being exploited finacially for the knowldege and coaching you're recieveing. I just think it's a reality in this day and age. I agree here. I'd also add that a McDojo isn't a place where the instructors make a living off of teaching. It isn't even a place where the fees may be high. It's a place where you go, sign long term contracts (usually 2 to 3 years) and are promoted at an accelerated rate. They usually have things like "black belt club" where you pay another fee and you learn even more forms and weapons ect. Probably the most important distinction, however, is the lack of actual skill you gain at a McDojo. You get 8 and 9 year old kids wearing black belts, teaching classes and, in reality, they have no actual ability to defend themselves.

For better reference. Here's a link to a podcast transcript with Rener Gracie. The stuff about Gracie University is toward the bottom, although the whole thing is interesting. http://thefightworkspodcast.com/2009/12/06/rener-gracie-academy/

Glad to hear the good news.

He did study classical ryu. However, he is still credited for coming up with many of the techniques of Judo. 99% would be an exaggerated figure. You can learn more about it in the many articles at https://www.judoinfo.com He also did not “invent” Randori - it was practiced by styles like Yoshin-ryu. No, he didn’t. He is the person (at least in the modern era) who is credited for realizing the true value of Randori. That is, being able to practice “non lethal” techniques at 100% resistance is infinitely more valuable than practicing lethal techniques with little to no resistance. He brought the idea of randori into the limelight and even had it made into an Olympic sport (the benefits of that can be discussed at another time and place). You have misunderstood - I meant from a ryu -ha perspective, in that “correctly” all aspects should be trained in parallel. Fair enough. I see your point. Absolutely yes. But no one is arguing the origin of the core skills. Things like armbars and chokes have been around for centuries. Same goes for a lot of the hip movement and balance work. However, it’s the finer details that will make or break the art. Ok. I see your point in terms of the evolution of warfare. However, in 25 years of training, no one has ever been able to convince me that all things transfer. I’ve dealt with some very classically trained people. The fact is, as the blade shortens your strategies and tactics change. Musashi wrote an entire book on swordsmanship and discussed this very subject. The basics are always there. Footwork, hip movement, connectivity to the earth and opponent, evasion ect…but the way you employ your techniques will change. As a solider I feel believing anything else is simply foolish and will get you killed in combat. There’s nothing you will ever type to change my mind on the subject. I’ve worked with very skilled people and they haven’t done it yet. That’s an interesting statement. Why? Do you believe that they don't? Because few, if any , ancient scrolls contained specific techniques. They tend to speak more to the lineage or basic strategy (long sword, short sword, horsemanship ect…) of a system. The specifics of the techniques were taught to people and it was for them to correctly pass on the information. I’ve never seen a translated scroll that speaks to the importance of underhook control on a half guard pass or using the back of the knee to “bite” the leg while mounting or how the inside leg can be used to set up a good x guard. Those kinds of things would never have fit on a scroll. I can think of at least 20 details to a basic mount with underhook control. Now combine all the variations (opponent is pushing, opponent is turning, opponent is shrimping ect…) One basic move can then have hundreds of steps. I just don’t see all that being in any scroll. That must be one heck of a scroll/group of scrolls. My guess would be that they were made in a more modern time. Because writing it down simply wasn’t done much in the past. But hey, your instructor may have a very rare artifact. It really comes down to this: Jiu-Jitsu is far more than the sum of its parts. You will never contain all of its nuance in any written work. It must be experienced for an extended period of time to truly understand what you’re learning. Until then it looks like the same moves. But it's not about the moves it's about making the moves work for you.

You're claiming that Nobunaga didn't pull mission control mid battle? I'm not sure how I feel about this. Sure he did. Right after he performed his Xtreme form to music! Lol!

He did study classical ryu. However, he is still credited for coming up with many of the techniques of Judo. 99% would be an exaggerated figure. You can learn more about it in the many articles at https://www.judoinfo.com What you say is only true if someone wants to train in a classical system. I can't study BJJ and then claim to be an expert in a koryu, and BJJ stylists don’t do this. I have, however, seen the opposite happen quite frequently, but that's dishonesty and a topic for a different thread. Intention has little to do with effect. Your analogy clearly put dentists as nothing more than a subfaction of physicians... The airforce is not a subfaction of the Army, rather a military faction in and of itself. They don’t just specialize in air combat. They have ground operators as well. It found it's origin in the Army, but grew to something every bit as useful on it's own. BJJ is the same. It grew from Judo. It has since grown into a complete art of its own, with doctrine and strategies of its own. This is both correct and incorrect. The footwork, hip movement, and other gross movements remained rather constant. However, much was not. That is to say, the sword was not handled in the same manner as the spear. While the targets were similar, gripping and tactics were forced to change due to blades or being mounted on horseback. The two most widely used weapons in Japan's history, despite popular belief, were the bow & arrow and the spear. Do you honestly believe the weapons were employed in the same manner? Again, this is a conversation for another thread however. We won't get into the "scrolls" thing. Especially since there is little evidence they exist in that manner. The ancient Koryu specialized in real combat. Having been in the military myself, I can attest to the fact you don't have much time for learning hand to hand combat. On top of that, it isn't that useful. It is, and has always been a last resort. As such, it is the thing you practice the least. So it's very unlikely that a people whose battles were spent primarily using archery, horsemanship, and swords had a great deal of time to practice empty handed grappling. While they certainly knew how to perform joint manipulations and chokes, the finer details of how to transition smoothly from one position to another more than once or twice would have been quite useless to them. It's more likely they learned a few takedowns, locks, and holds that would put them in a position for a killing stab or cut very quickly. So, again, when you say that BJJ stylists "need" to put things into perspective, my opinion is you are quite incorrect. I think you'd find that most skilled BJJ stylists know the history of their style and its origins. They can tell you about Mitsuyo Maeda, Jigoro Kano, Judo, the Fusen Ryu (from which Judo got much of it's newaza). Having trained in Diato Ryu Aiki Jujitsu, Kwanmukan Jujitsu, and with the Seishinkan under John Viol Shihan (http://www.seishinkan.com/martial_members_area/john_viol_daishihan_menkyokaiden.htm), I have seen few parallels between them and BJJ other than the basic aesthetics of the techniques. The methods of attaining joint locks and pins in more traditional systems are far different. As I stated earlier, understanding the basic mechanics of the moves helped me with BJJ, but the joint manipulations and chokes are the endgame of the art, not the art itself. BJJ is far more about transitional fluidity toward positional dominance than the chokes and joint locks. I have a lot of trouble understanding your point. Pointing out the history of the styles and saying to “put it in perspective” has no bearing on the topic at hand. The OP stated disgust with the view that many “mma” and BJJ people have about JJJ; most specifically in takedown ability. Honestly, I’ve only seen a handful of such arguments. BJJ is certainly not known for amazing takedowns as a whole and MMA is a sport (some of its players haven’t ever taken anyone down and prefer to keep it on the feet to kickbox). So, I’m not sure how ancient wartime training has a lot to do with the topic at hand. Interesting to debate? Maybe. Relevant? IMO not really.

Beautiful! I have now stolen this! I love the analogy. There are no more McDojos...only used martial arts lots.

It's tough to find any truly qualified sambo instructors in the US (at least in my experience). It may just be worth your money to go where you know the instruction is good.

Yes and no. BJJ actually came from Kano Jiu-Jitsu, which later became known as Judo. Of course, Judo has its roots in more classical jiu-jitsu systems. Kano, however, is the one who added randori as a necessary part of training, removed the "dangerous" techniques and weapon work, and even created a few new throws. His goal was to make it possible to practice the entire curriculum with a low likelihood of injury. So, he actually changed the material quite a bit. I'm not sure BJJ stylists need perspective. Most understand exactly where the art was derived and what it's original intentions were. However, the use of many of the classical elements are of little or no interest to many BJJ practitioners. They don't want to learn about things like how armor was worn and where weaknesses were. They have no use for learning spear and sword. Heck, for that matter, many BJJ stylists aren't even interested in self defense; they are happy to practice it just as a sport. That's not my particular view, but it's true none the less. Further, to say that BJJ is just a sub-faction (as your analogy clearly suggests) of JJJ is not incredibly accurate. The differences are astounding. In the United States, our military used to include the Army, and the Navy. Part of the Army was the Army Air Corp. During and after World War II, the Air Corp became what we now call The United States Air Force. While it was originally part of the Army, it has now grown to something far more and is an entity in and of itself. It has it's own missions, rank structure and doctrine. So it is with the relationship between BJJ and JJJ. They are similar only so far as they are both martial arts that contain some level of grappling; at best they are distant cousins. So, respectfully, to compare them as dentist to physician is not only inaccurate, but a bit insulting.

Agreed

I agree with this. I should also mention that the changes I had made were to add some things in from BJJ and Aiki Jujitsu. I had set it up so that when a student tested for black belt in Shotokan, they would also be eligible to test for their black belt in Aiki jujitsu and BJJ blue belt as well. I didn't change any of the core arts or call them anything new. It was clear to each student what they were learning. Each individual technique was taught just as it was taught to me.

You're at the same point I was at a few years back. I had told my instructors what I was doing, what I had changed or modified, and my feelings of why. Initially, I was told it was all great and that my students would still be welcome in the large belt testings, and inner school tournaments that were taking place at the time. My school was to be part of the family. Then something weird happened. I received a call from the mother of a young student who had taken a liking in me. She was curious why I hadn't come to see her daughter test as I had promised. After apologizing profusely I explained that I hadn't been told any testing was taking place. You see, this student was from the main school and my instructors hadn't bothered to tell me there was going to be a test. A week prior to the test I had called them to ask when it was because I had some students who were ready. They told me they didn't know. They lied to me. I didn't call them out on it immediately, but as the mother had told me of the upcoming inner school tourney, I called and asked about the event and how to register my students. That's when it happened. The school owner (not my head instructor but still senior to me) said he would rather my students not compete as they learned a different curriculum. I immediately asked what our Sensei thought about that to which the response was, "It's my school, and I don't feel it's right for your students to come to it and compete. Sensei teaches here and will agree with me." I politely said thanks and asked about testing again. "I'll let you know when it's coming up," was all he said. I was being lied to. It bothered me then. Heck...it bothers me now. But I still had loyalty to them and wanted to mend fences. My opportunity came about 3 months later when job changes forced me to leave my teaching duties. I immediately called the head of the dojo and offered him my school. He was very excited and gladly took the offer. It turns out he wanted to be in that area anyway. I asked him if it was ok for me to come up and train in class that evening and he said yes. Excitedly I packed my gi and belt and headed to class. Upon arriving, I was pulled into the office and told to leave...by the very person who told me it was ok to train. He said he was upset I was training BJJ also and I had to stop training BJJ if I wanted to train there. That wasn't going to happen. So here I am. I now run a BJJ school and have absolutely no ties to my former karate instructors. Sadly, my head instructor died a month later in a parachuting accident. I never got to ask him about the situation. That's what happened to me. But it was my path...it was the path I needed to follow. It was the path i chose. I would not change it. And I am happy with where it has led. My advice is to follow what you feel is right for you. If your instructors don't like it, then they don't really care about you, just preserving what is theirs. They should not expect you to carry their burdens.

Really? Strange. I think this is the problem with many people's mentalities. Self defense should be do prevent someone from hurting you. This does not, by necessity, mean that you will have to hurt them.

How are things going with this Sensei?

Holley, First, stop apologizing. This is an online forum. If you can't vent here, what's the point of being on it? We really do want to hear what you have to say. It's always nice to have new people in the community and I don't think anyone here wants you to stop talking or anything like that. Here's how I see it. You have given us a very isolated look at your dojo. Like looking through the blinds on a window. I see the following: 1. A Sensei who seems unconcerned with how a ten year old boy is doing 2. Kids fooling around and getting hit 3. Adults stepping all over each other and not caring. 4. A TOTAL LACK OF DISCIPLINE It's unconscionable to me that I would step on someone's foot and, upon them telling me it hurt, I would basically tell them to sluff off! An apology of some sort should have been in the air. From that point on, you would have to be aware of his "large feet." It's unconscionable to me that an instructor would have a 20 year old orange belt be in charge of the discipline of a 10 year old trouble maker. The instructor should be all over this kid like white on rice. You don't pay for classes so you can babysit someone else's kid. Despite what you think, no orange belt is that advanced. You just have more control over your body due to being more developed by 10 years. Don't feel bad, I don't even look at newer black belts as advanced. It's ridiculous that after the kid moving the pad even 2 times, you would keep going with the drill. It's neither your duty or your obligation to deal with that. In similar situations, I've had students step out and held pads myself. Did you open your mouth during the drill to ask for help? To me, this isn't about the kid, it's not about someone stepping on your toes, and it's not much about you. It sounds like you have a crappy instructor that isn't too interested in your training. Again, I totally realize that my view of the situation is very limited and one sided. But this is how I view what you've said.

I knew you would know more about that. Thanks for the knowledge kind sir!

Respectfully, I think this is a horrible video! It looked more like a huge guy just running at a little guy like a bull. That was not BJJ in action. That's the problem I think the OP has though. Guys like "Anthony" going out there running their mouth, when they aren't even that skilled. It gives BJJ the impression of a bad attitude. That's not how all of us think. It's certainly not how I fight. Let's break down an actual BJJ expert's fighting style: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho2MUZBtAwM This is an old video, and admittedly against a body builder...not a martial artists. But the point is how BJJ is designed to be used in combat. Pedro Sauer is now an 8th degree black belt. Notice how he keeps his distance. He uses leg kicks to set up his range. He makes it so the big guy wants to clinch with him. Then he goes where the fight leads. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RawPYGzYOQ&feature=related You see the same thing here. Rorion simply jams the kick and clinches. But his head is up. He's defending himself. Not just putting his head down and running in like a bull. The guy he was fighting didn't seem like HKD though. Brian can probably shed light on that. I thought HKD was more about joint manipulations than kicking. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjK0g-cDJI4&feature=related This last one is a little brutal. That's Royce's style though. The point of me showing the last video is, again so you see the way stand up is taught in BJJ. Use the kick to maintain distance and eventually close the gap. However, there is another important thing to see here. Notice that Royce passes on 4 different submissions in favor of striking. Brutal? Certainly...perhaps even uncalled for. But the point is that striking is an important skill. In my opinion, however, BJJ has one of the best delivery methods for striking. Get into a great controlling position first. This way the opponent does not have the opportunity to dance around and hit you back. For the record...I do wish they'd keep their hands up more! LOL

I personally, don't do much boxing. However, a gentleman I train with is aptly nicknamed "Boxer Ray." This is because he's spent 24 years boxing. When he first started doing MMA with us, he would get kicked all over the place. After just one year, he was able do adjust to the angles and add all the kicking elements into his style of movement. So yes, it can be done with a little attention to detail. You already understand your angles. You just need to learn how the kicks fit into them.

I've trained both. I trained Aiki Jujitsu for 6 years and earned the rank of shodan. I have studied BJJ for 7 years and am currently a brown belt. In my opinion, BJJ is superior. I say this not because the techniques or strategies of JJJ aren't good. Rather because, at least in my experience, most of the time is not spent in randori. We did randori once a week for about 15 minutes. Other time was spent in various kihon (drills) like footwork, disarms, and throws. It felt very stagnant. It was fun, and in the spirit of preserving an art, it was excellent. But it wasn't until I started studying BJJ that I really started learning how to use the things I've learned. In BJJ, from a very early point, you do free rolling (randori). There are none of the "traditional" elements such as work with swords, spears and other old style weapons. Yet, the disarms the apply to today still exist. Certainly, I benefited from having the knowledge of what various techniques were. But it is the lack of a cohesive system that makes JJJ inferior. I was taught several moves and positions, however, no strategic method of transitioning between them. That's all BJJ is! Certainly, if you don't want the fight to go to the ground, you can avoid it. But you'll have to do alot of running away. That's not a fight is it? That's just smart self defense, and I don't hear about anyone arguing against it. The point is that a person who actually wants to hurt me is going to get into range to touch me. If they can touch me, I can touch them. From there, I will control and subdue them...on the ground or not is of no consequence. As far as being stomped, stabbed, shot or any of the other arguments that go with the ground. The same can be done to my opponent as well and that can happen on the ground or on your feet! That's about having good situational awareness. So that argument doesn't really hold water. I don't know anyone who would set this scenario, "You're surrounded by three attackers. Take each one to the ground and fight them! Go!" That doesn't even make sense! That's when I use a duck under and choke the guy unconscious while using him as a shield. Then, as his friends watch his unconscious body slump to the floor, I stare them in the eye and ask who's next. I make sure my zanshin is strong. Don't take my word for it though. Go to a local bjj school. Find a brown or black belt and tell them you'd like to try your JJJ against their BJJ. Give them any set of rules or lack there of...I think you'll be far more impressed by the results than you realize. One last point. I've been to many martial arts schools in my 25 year career. I've met several black belts that can't fight their way out of a paper bag. There are various reasons this happens. We won't get into them here. But, in your time, I'm sure you can say you've seen the same. However, in just 7 years of BJJ, I've never met ANY brown or Black belt who can't fight. They are always able to put their money where their mouth is. Who knows, as the art gains popularity, that may change. But for now, it's still very true.