SubGrappler

I find that hard to believe, because as I read the history of jjj. It appears to originally be developed for fighters wearing armor on a battlefield (after they lose thier weapon). Striking a guy with armor would not be good. It sure would not be a smart way to fight. Im talking about "modern" Traditional Ju Jitsu. Most of the gyms nowadays focus primarily on standup techniques and the sort. As far as striking a guy in armor not being smart, recall that you yourself would have also been wearing armor. When using this for momentum, you could develop a great deal of power when you threw some strikes (hence the emphasis on spinal movement and alignment.) I would assume the reason JJJ is more oriented around striking (notice I dont discount grappling in the system) is because anyone who was involved in it and interested in groundwork or throwing would have most likely found themselves caught up in Judo when it first emerged- those in the groundwork would have caught up to it in the newaze revolution.

Shooto is just a shorthand way of describing Shootfighting which evolved from American Catch Wrestling in Japan (so it natrually incorporated some Judo into it as well). There are so many details involved in BJJ and many shooto and Judo fighters who have had extensive training recognized that their initial conceptions of BJJ being a simple mix of Judo and wrestling were quite inaccurate. Its almost like saying that Muay Thai is just boxing with kicks, when in reality it is much more than just that.

Not neccessarily- You have to take into account that what you're referring to relies on an individual fighters style rather than that of the entire martial art. There are some people who are quite dynamic when fighting with the gi, and there are plenty that move slowly and are rather boring that fight no gi.

Some people suggest that its a matter of genetics i.e. "your ears get messed up easy- his dont" I think its more along the lines of the style of play you have. A top player is less likely to have people grabbing his head than a bottom player (since head control is important when looking to pass the guard). Some people protect their heads very well, others not so well. Also take into account how your main training partners pass, whether it be controlling the hips or controlling the head.

Elbows and knees is correct- at the time of its conception and even during its MMA fights and challenge matches, there never was a question of "if" you got your opponent to the ground but rather when and what position would you fall in. In that respect, the groundwork was much more important. Nowadays when you refer to mixed martial arts, its neccessary to have a good takedown game if you plan on using your skills against a good striker.

one of the posts before you stated that they learned Judo but "concentrated on ground fighting" and added more submission holds or something like that. so I gess they may or may not have kept the throws, but if they kept them, they are not the primarry techniques and would not be practiced as much. (and the Judo guys, having to spread training time between standup and ground fighting, would like wise not be able to practice the ground stuff as much as the BJJ folks) see I'm getting the hang of this. Count Maeda taught the Gracies what was Judo and also some of the old school Japanese Ju Jitsu. The Gracies were purely interested in a real life effective fighting style and found that grappling skill on the ground was of more importance (at the time) than grappling skill on the feet. Taking the fight to the ground was a relatively easy task and a fight was won on the ground much more than it was ever won in the standing clinch, hence the great emphasis on the ground game almost to the neglect of the standing game.

Sure it will- BJJ will work even better on the street, because you're fighting a BJJ fighter IN a BJJ tournament- he knows the techniques you're trying and the counters to them- someone in the street most likely wont. I work in a bar- most fights involved 2 people, and I've been on the ground during brawls involving 20 people. Thats why I chose knee in the belly, where I could pin one guy down and keep a head up for anyone who chose to sneak up on me. Needless to say, I didnt get pounded into oblivion the moment I threw my opponent to the ground. BJJ's techniques were Judo influenced- that doesnt mean their fighting style is. Helio was a nasty little fighter in his days, and most of his fights involved no rules. As far as a Tai Jitsu or Aiki Jitsu being more effective in these situations, I dont buy that. Its not to say it cant work, but it didnt bring a whole lot to the plate when these fighters were tossed in the ring. Not true- many of these fighters had competition records that were quite long and rather impressive. The other grapplers you refereed to as "low class" involved the #1 ranked Shootfighter, Ken Shamrock, and Michigan State Wrestling Coach Dan Severn. There were attempts to get fighters such as Ernesto Hoost and other top notch boxers in there, but you have to remember that the UFC didnt have a whole lot of money to throw around to attract these individuals. Most fighters were getting paid somewhere around $3000 for one fight, which is pathetic compared to professional kick boxers and boxers. Why do so many people insist that MMA competitions favor the grappler? There is NO evidence that supports this! This is often an assumption made by people simply because the grapplers are the ones who won most of the time. MMA competitions, unfortunately, heavily favor striking over grappling. Depends on the position you're in when and if you can grab those fingers (he can grab yours too). Small joint manipulation isnt very effective in a fight- its very effective if used in an instance before a fight, but once punches are thrown and adrenaline is surging, broken fingers arent doing much. Consider that many bareknuckle fighters break their hands (larger than the fingers) and still keep fighting. In the old Pancrase days in Ancient Greece, there are accounts of champions who stood at the end of the day with all their fingers broken- they apparently still fought, or else they wouldnt be standing victorious.

Nothing is easy when you have to fight against more than one opponent. Besides that, most confrontations I've seen (and encountered) tend to involve one attacker as opposed to multiples. Im not saying that multiples dont happen, but the majority of the time, its one attacker. Not really after the first UFC, there where allot of fighters turned away, Soke Odabata Aikijujutsu people for example. They have been known to KO people with stand-up grappling methods (Muscle & pressure point grabs), same as the Chin Na practicers. But, I'll drop this since it's a pointless arguement. Natrually, they only had so many spots open for people (even though they had twice as many fighters in the 2nd UFC) they would have to turn a few people away. Jason Fairn was an Aiki-Jitsu fighter who would make his UFC debut in UFC 4 however. There were many people who challenged the Gracies, and the Gracies would set everything up for the challenge match, only to never hear from their challengers again. I agree with you on that, but allot of "olden days" where only 15 to 20 years ago. Think about how downward the spirl has came with a massed attention. BJJ will start being watered down by politics in about 10 to 12 years. Just watch... I dont think karate was in its "olden days" 15-20 years ago, I simply believe that there was so little information known about martial arts in general that it still contained that mysitcism where people thought martial artists were deadly If 12 guys want to stomp you on the floor, you're kinda deadmeat, grappling, antigrappling, striking or whatever. As far as your statement about being a fighter, your mindset kinda applies to just about everyone, dosent it? Obviously you can do the armbar just as well without attempting those moves. An Armbar breaks the arm, which almost wins you the fight right there. Against a skilled grappler as well, relieving the pressure in the slightest bit from your legs is all one would need in order to escape an armbar- you would be doing this if you attempted to heel kick him in the face or the ribs. Many of those same "masters" that so rejected Kano's teachings were in fact beaten by him. Aside from that, Kano's main intentions were to make a martial art that was combat effective while at the same time reinstilling the honor that used to be with JJJ (as at the time they were viewed as a bunch of thugs)

It should also be noted that working for the clinch, followed by a takedown is a safer strategy than shooting for legs. Both are applicable, but in the clinch you'll have many options, not just to take the guy down, but to strike, submit, or throw.

I dont mean to nit pick, but BJJ is FAR from being a mere mixture of Judo and wrestling. A more accurate description of Judo + wrestling would be Shooto. BJJ is entirely different, even though it shares many common techniques.

You really dont need head gear, and cauliflower ear isnt going to be something that sneaks up on you (i.e. you're not going to wake up one morning and go "oh no!"). Your ears will be more than generous when they want to tell you that they're in pain and accumulating fluid. Take into account how often you train. If you train everyday, head gear is an option, since you'll be constantly irritating your ears. If you're only training 2-3 x a week, I seriously wouldnt worry about it.

Jiu Jitsu was NOT developed as a police art, it was developed and used by the samurai on the battlefields of feudal Japan. Grappling, whether in the octagon or in the street, is a very effective approach to fighting. BJJ is even more effective in a street scenario than in the octagon. People in the street arent trained professional athletes, so when you argue that something like karate or kung fu will work on the street, so will BJJ. The old man, Helio Gracie, designed it specifically for street fighting with self defense in mind. You dont see that when two guys square off in the ring, but I assure you its there- people like Royce were BIG into the practical self defense, while people like Royler were big into the sport in addition to the self defense. Theres a few reasons why I dont see striking as being a "better" option on the street than in the octagon. 1: Striking is highly favored in the octagon- fighters are constantly stood up during fights, and there are 3 rounds- during which fighters start once again off their feet. 2: The use of 4oz gloves greatly protects a fighters hands. Without gloves, fighters would greatly injure their hands, even if perfect technique is used. This happened very frequently during early MMA matches. In fact, during the days that were pre UFC, the Gracies got a lot of challenge matches (of course he got many after he won a few tournies) and when Royce fought, one of his golden rules was never let the challenger fight by his own rules- rules were no biting and no eye gouging, and you were not allowed to wear gloves. 3: there are no weight classes in real life. MMA competitions are supposed to focus on the skills of the fighters, rather than brute strength (this is but one of the ideas being weight divisions). In the event that you're fighting someone who's much larger and stronger than you are, size advantage is much less of a handicap on the ground than it is on the feet. Consider Bob Sapp as an example- heres a 6'6 375 (with a 6 pack) ex pro football lineman who jumped into K-1 with "NFL" listed as his fighting style. He almost ran through the competition, defeating the top fighters in the tournament, including Ernesto Hoost. He comes over to MMA and is submitted by Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira, and taken down and pounded by Fujita. 4: This is just my opinion, but when you're fighting on the feet, your opponent can hit you just as well as you hit him. When you put him on his back, you're the only one that can punch with any power- isnt that so much more fun? Theres nothing wrong with striking when it comes to fighting, whether it be in the street or in the ring, but I would not conclude that its a more (or less) effective strategy.

TJS did give a good time frame, but you should also note that many things in wrestling transfer over to BJJ very well. Depending on how good a wrestler you were (say collegiate level) you could very well get your blue in a matter of months.

Andrew is correct, but I could add a little more about the subject, since I've had to deal with it numerous times. "Cauliflower" ear is caused when theres enough trauma caused to your ear to cause swelling- its the same as if you had a bad bruise that swelled up on your hand- the consequences of it are different though. Heres the catch- natrually your ears arent very large, so theres not a lot of space for fluid when it starts to swell up. As fluid accumulates, the skin needs to expand. As the skin expands, it is literally torn away from the cartilage that composes the structure of your ear. Unfortunately, the only blood supply that the cartilage has is through the skin surrounding it (your ear) and when this is torn away, the cartilage slowly begins to die, shriveling up and hardening in its characteristic way. The skin can not re attach itself if the ear is not drained (and applying a gauze for pressure will help afterwards). If this is done soon enough, you wont develop the ears. The longer and longer you wait, the more damaged and deformed your ears become. Natrually, just draining it wont allow for your ears to heal, but you must also stop training IF you dont want to damage them further. Constant draining while still training works, but you'll end up having a little more damage to your ear since you never allowed it to recover. In instances when the ear is drained often and grapplers continue training, the deformity is often only noticable if you look for it (i.e. it wont stick out like a sore thumb ala Randy Couture). The procedure to drain them is quite simple-sterilize the ear (rub with alcohol) numb the ear up- (I prefer ethyl chloride which is a spray that numbs on contact) and using a large guage needle, you simply stick it in and suck the blood out. The pockets may form in various places, so it may take 3-4 pricks to get the majority of the fluid out. Its kinda an in and out procedure IF you can find an ER that will do it for you (if you know a friend who's a nurse or physician, this makes things easier). I would advise against attempting this procedure yourself though. If you do not sterilize the ear properly (like a friend who tried using a sewing needle) there is a chance of creating an infection in the ear. Once again, you cant fight an infection in your cartilage if theres no blood going to it, and if the infection is bad enough, you'll end up with amputated ears. This is highly uncommon and basic sterilization will easily prevent this (in other words dont try to solve your own problem and stick a knife in your ear at dinner time). The whole process of getting the ears and healing may last as long as a month (assuming one keeps training). If you drain and let it heal, usually only takes a week before you can go back to training. Do they hurt? You better believe it. Once the ears are screwed up however, theres no going back- this is a permanent deformity that may only be fixed via plastic surgery. Its so common among grapplers though that its not an uncommon thing to have. If you're going to keep grappling as well, this would also defeat the purpose of getting plastic surgery (which you'd probably have to pay for) to fix your ears. Jiu Jitsu fighters get it mostly due to headlocks and head control. The same can be said with wrestlers, but when going for takedowns and off balancing people, they're taught to push with their head (sometimes they use the front, sometimes the sides where their ears are). Boxers also get it from punches to the ear. Its not something you accidentally get. Most the people who have it are hardcore fighters who dont like to stop training for any reason at all. If you're really scared about getting them, its a simple process of not training when your ear starts to swell up (so that it may heal).

I definately agree with that concept- I train in both and have had a lot of success in both. I like the way Jean Jaques Machado put it- there are 3 parts to Jiu Jitsu- gi, no gi, and self defense. If you're missing any of the 3, your game is lacking.

I've just recently started my first couple of classes with Muay Thai, and I have to agree, that compared to any other martial art, it is exceptionally brutal. Such is the way of a real fight, and brutal training yields brutal fighters, hence the reputation that Muay Thai fighters have. Its definately something for me- I love it, although I have to completely forget my BJJ philosophy when I start practicing.

Live training, emphasis on strategy, and emphasis on different techniques are what differentiate mainly between BJJ and JJJ. Although I am also biased, nothing has proven to be quite as effective as BJJ on the ground. Most JJJ emphasise striking techniques.

I think Scott Morris did better than many others could have hoped to with his ninjitsu, simply because of his aggressiveness. Not shown in the tournament (because the first 2 fights were not televised) was a vicious beatdown he gave to his first opponent. He tried for a belly to belly suplex, failed miserably, and didnt know how to escape the mount. He lost the fight more than Pat Smith won it if you can relate to what Im saying.

I find it makes your submission defense improve and tighten up..what I mean is with a Gi you cant just jerk your arm out or slide out of an arm bar like you can in sometimes in No-gi. Defense is harder in gi, offense is harder in no gi. While the gi helps build a defense, the same can be accomplished without the gi just as well. Defense is usually one of the first things to improve as you train your ground game more and more. Also, just because someone escapes an armbar in no gi doesnt mean it wasnt technical, and the same goes for the gi. Theres nothing you can do to magically improve your no gi game by doing gi (that is, that you cant otherwise do in no gi itself). So, what I am looking for is a definate explanation of how the gi makes the no gi game better. Developing your balance in reference to sweeps is debatable- wrestlers are notorious for having exceptionally strong bases, and they've never trained steady with a gi. As I said, I see the gi as a possible training tool, and I use it just as well, but I see no evidence that proves that training with the gi makes you a better no gi grappler than training without the gi in anticipation of the same results.

Abu Dhabi itself is less than 10 years old. Since this is submission wrestling, and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu was indeed the forerunner when it came to submissions, its only natrual to still see these fighters winning a tournament thats so young. More and more fighters are beginning to train in straight submissions wrestling without use of the gi. People like Tito Ortiz, Randy Couture, Pablo Pabovich, Jeff Monson and Diego Sanchez dont use a gi very often and yet are rather successfull in grappling and MMA. I used to believe that somehow the gi could make you a better no gi grappler, but I've looked hard at the facts and results and what is there that you can do WITH the gi that somehow you cannot perform while training no gi that will in fact make your no gi game better? Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira is horrible with the gi, hes world class in no gi. Dean Lister never proved to be spectacular in gi, but is once again world class in no gi. The only thing Im debating here is that if your sole focus is to improve in no gi grappling, then doing just that and not Brazilian Jiu Jitsu with the gi, is the best option one can choose.

To address your other question- clinch work and takedowns are considered the strength of Greco Roman Wrestling. Consider the quick differences between Greco, Folkstyle, and freestyle. Folkstyle is the kind you see in high school and college- wrestlers get points for riding time, which is when you get on your opponents back with him belly down on the mat. Freestyle doesnt award points for riding time and you could argue it is much more takedown oriented. Greco doesnt allow you to make grips below the waist, as such the competitors learn to use throws and such (this basically becomes a no gi Judo match). This works exceptionally well in MMA due to the safety of attempting takedowns from the clinch as opposed to a shot attempt. If you watch Coutures matches, you'll notice he often takes people down with great throws and wraps from the clinch because hes a Greco guy. Someone whos a freestylist like Coleman or Kerr you'll often see shoot in to take people down.

I didnt say that training exclusively with the gi wouldnt have unwanted side effects. One of those side effects, as Bravo pointed out, was that some people get so caught up in the grip game that it negates their need for positioning abilities (such as hip movement/position). Indeed, there are many gi fighters who base their entire game on one hand in the collar and the other on the sleeve with feet in the hips for armbar, triangle, choke, and sweep setups. Once the gi is taken away, people who are otherwise black belts have the skills of blue or purple belts, if that. That is the one thing I dont like about the gi- you get some guys who win a gi tournament based on only one move (i.e. a sweep from this position) and its easy to force your way there because of the grips. I feel that the no gi game is more natrual and showcases talent much better because you have to constantly switch up your game in reaction to what your opponent is doing (since you can no longer control him as well.). The big problem I have with people who hate the gi and preach all the time about no gi is that they are usually not good ground fighters due to poor strategy and technical skills. For instance, natrual athleticism arguably goes further in no gi than it does in gi. Lots of people who are either ex wrestlers that rely on positioning rather than subs, or those who want to do MMA as quickly as possible do not take the time to learn the ground game. As a result, I believe thats why you find jiu jitsu fighters tend to have better submission abilities than otherwise pure no gi fighters- once again, the same thing can be accomplished either with or without gi and this doesnt mean that there arent more than plenty of people who are sub artists in no gi. The other are those who do no gi because they dont like getting handled by someone who has better skills with the gi. As a result of this, they only do no gi where footlocks are allowed. All they do is attack the feet, and thats all they know how to do. They dont like to deal with passing the guard, so they avoid it altogether. Problem is that footlocks, while popular and usefull in submission wrestling, are much less popular and much less usefull in MMA competitions. Take it for what its worth- both sides of the grappling game have their flaws and strengths. For now, I favor the no gi game, but apply the strategy taught in the BJJ game.

Im not going to try to start up a whole "gi vs no gi" argument, but I'll still add some insight. First off, the gi is a good training tool for teaching people to achieve technicality- this is especially usefull for people who are natrual athletes and used to using their strength. The same techniques could be achieved in no gi just as well, but notice I said tool and not neccessity. That being said, its fine and well to add submissions to your game later on, however, many of the people you mentioned are not in the top tier when it comes to submissions skills. Hughes has had his hands full with jiu jitsu fighters in 2 of his fights- one against BJ Penn and another against Renato Verissimo. Although he technically won his fight against Renato, Renato caught him in a full blown triangle (which he should have never lost) and even after Hughes escaped, Renato would flow from one sub attempt to the next. I personally think he lost that match because the judges obviously knew nothing about ground fighting. This does swing both ways though- George St. Pierre is a purple belt and accomplished no gi fighter, but he was still submitted by Hughes (the gi obviously didnt work its magic in that fight ) Heres what I think- the gi doesnt make you better at no gi- its grappling that makes you better at grappling. Its much easier to fight when you're subtracting something than when you're adding it (for instance, it would be easier for a no gi fighter to fight a match where no leg locks are allowed, then it would for him to fight a match where the gi is added). Back to the gi- because the gi has so many grips and makes for a much slower game than no gi, you can arguably train in it more often. No gi is fast and strong and built for athletic fighters. Because the gi game can be slowed down to a pace much less than that of no gi, you could arguably train more often which would give you more grappling experience. Once again, this can still be achieved in no gi just as well, but I find it less likely. All of that being said, if you want to just do MMA, I see no problems with doing only no gi, but I do see the gi as a possible usefull tool. I myself prefer no gi to gi, and am much more a jiu jitsu fighter (attacking with triangles, armbars, and omoplatas) than I am a submission wrestler (takedowns, footlocks, stalling). Personally, I think that is the reason why you see the BJJ fighters beating the wrestlers who have crossed to sub wrestling- the BJJ fighters have been working on submissions for 10+ years- even though the wrestlers have been grappling for that long, they've only worked subs for a few years, and as i stated, I think its easier to fight when you subtract something (the gi) then adding something (submissions)

Just because you practice throwing punches and kicks doesnt mean you can either..... Its a possibility, but I doubt it. Hardcore fighters will tend to stay with the hardcore styles, but then again there are exceptions (such as belt collectors). We know that, but the question is do they, or their new students know that?

Because there are different schools of thought when it comes to BJJ. Brazilian Jiu Jitsu and Gracie Jiu Jitsu arent exactly the same thing- you can be taught BJJ from a non Gracie. Some people only care about the sport aspect of BJJ, in that they want their students to win as many tournament and have as many medals in their school to show off as possible. The Gracies, on the other, and a few others still remember why BJJ was created, and that was pure self defense in real life situations. People may take some things, such as defending a punch, for granted, but there are other things to take into account when considering self defense (one of them including awareness). Helio Gracie once proposed a question in one of his interviews- "how many ways do you know how to pass half guard?" he then asked "now ask yourself how many ways you know how to escape out of a basic headlock on the feet." He said he wouldnt be surprised if the answers were 10 and 0 respectively. I believe there was an instance a long time ago (say a little less than 10 years) when a BJJ school in California accused the Gracies of holding back techniques. This accusation came due to the schools dreaded showing in sport tournaments. In reality, what was happening was that the Gracies were showing many aspects of self defense jiu jitsu, while the other schools ignored that aspect and focused solely on the sportive part of it. One is not the same as the other. Take for instance Royce Gracie vs Amaury Bitteti. Bitteti is a far better jiu jitsu fighter than Royce is, and has won the world championships twice. Once they fought in the UFC though, Bitteti could not replicate the success that Royce had, and he took some vicious elbows at the hands of Don Frye, most likely due to the fact that his mind was still trying to make the transition from sport BJJ to fighting BJJ.