granmasterchen Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 man,.....i forgot what this post was about.....i've just read arguements over bjj and nbt......wow.....with all the arguements going on and the little talk of what ever the subject was....i think i may be dumber..... can we just get back to the topic and talk like civil people once again....so everyone just go back and reread what white warlock said again...take a breath, expel all the negative remarks that are building in your head and speak positively..... every style has a strong side and a weak side.... we should all know that..... ninpo is a lot different than bjj..... the history is different and .....well,....yeah, both are good arts......lets work on this....what is good about your system and other systems, not what is bad.....speaking negative about one another doesnt' get us anywhere. We need to suck up our pride and focus on the benefits of each system...thanks for hearing me out That which does not destroy me will only make me stronger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolverineGuy Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 My point exactly. I tend to get worked up over style bashing, so forgive me if my tone has been a little less civil than normal. Thanks for being the voice of reason, chen. Wolverine1st Dan - Kalkinodo"Shut up brain, or I'll stab you with a q-tip""There is no spoon." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treebranch Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Sorry guys but the thread says Jiu-Jitsu for Combat and I gave my opinion. If you don't like my opinion, I can live with that. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich67 Posted March 25, 2004 Author Share Posted March 25, 2004 Holy schnikies!! I leave for a day and this post has EXPLODED!! Sorry guys...never meant to cause such a rift between everyone. Let's be totally honest and just summarize everything. First off, someone mentioned that BJJ doesn't address stand up grappling. That is untrue. Although it isn't stressed nearly as much as ground work, there is a considerable amount of stand up technique that is taught. Secondly, it is impossible to say for sure one style is better than the other, ad nauseum. You can be taking the deadliest form of martial art known to man, but if YOU SUCK AT IT, you'll get your butt kicked every time. I also see a lot of people knock other styles without much knowledge in that particular style. Please, if you don't know about it, don't post a sour opinion of it. I plan on well-rounding myself by taking as many styles as I can and applying the techniques I learn into things that will work for me in my life. I guess I am the consummate MMArtist. I enjoy learning new things and discovering for myself. I enjoyed TSD, and loved KF San Soo, and now I'm starting to touch on BJJ. I hope to apply all that I've learned well, and hope that I can be the best I can be. Mixed Martial Artist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treebranch Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Rich 67 you sound like you are open to new things and old. It just bothers me that people regard traditional styles useless. I guess I'm a MMA as well, look at all the styles I've studied over the years. But to be fair there are styles that are better suited for specific things. This thread was about Combat and I gave my opinion. Whether someone sucks at a style doesn't automatically make that style useless. This is exactly the mentally of most of the people arguing on this thread. Just because some TMA people got thrashed in the early UFC's that doesn't mean that those styles are useless. That kind of thinking is the same kind of stereotyping you see when people judge others. They use the example of a few and lump the whole bunch together. It's plain and utter ignorance. I've said enough here. Experience is the greatest teacher so good luck with your preconceptions of what Combat is.(That comment was directed at the people who that applies to) "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Whether someone sucks at a style doesn't automatically make that style useless. I agree with treebranch. You can't always see the effectiveness of a style by watching a guy win or lose in a competition. Its just like saying people crash cars all the time, therefore driving is useless. But really its the driver of the car who is useless. A skillful driver will have no problems on the road. So basically if you learn and understand your style well and realise what it is designed for, then all styles have to potential to effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reklats Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Not naming any specific styles here, but what if you compare the style to the car? Then even if you have equally skilled drivers there can be a difference in the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treebranch Posted March 26, 2004 Share Posted March 26, 2004 Yeah, but the car is foreign object and machine, not part of the human body. The car and driver analogy works better when comparing someone using a weapon. There better made and bigger weapons and it depends on the skill of the person using the weapon that will determine the outcome. I like to think of it more along the lines of the Artist and Craftsman. Certain styles focus on one specific aspect of Combat and perfect it. This one would fall under the Craftsman. Other styles focus on the broadest range to cover all forms of Combat, although you may never master all that is to be taught you master the basics in order to learn all the rest. The basics of these Arts are usually very similar to those of the Craftman. The Artist has more room to grow and explore answers on his own. Both are great, and both have their advantages and disadvantages. It is also entirely up to the individual to decide which of these he is. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 Well Budo Taijutsu is basically Traditional or Combat Jujitsu which is to taught to Armed forces and Judo came from this stuff. Also BJJ is nothing new when it comes to ground work. I've seen variations of the same techniques in Kodokan Judo as well as Hapkido. So basically I'll go back to the original topic. BJJ is not good for Combat unless it only a part of the MA training. There are groundwork techniques in other arts that would suffice for Combat. Like you said Judo is heavily used in training forces and you can trace that back historically after WW2. True Jujutsu would have been better for Combat but Judo gained popularity at that time so there you go. I have nothing against either style, but Judo is far better an art for Combat than BJJ is. BJJ should put the striking and stand up throws back into the Jujitsu. I think we have seen that BJJ alone will not stand up in NHB and it sure as hell won't stand up to actual combat. Just admit that it is not a complete art and that it needs other arts to complete it to be rounded art. there is no one complete art - that's common knowledge... stand up jj isn't as thorough in groundwork, thai boxing lacks groundwork, judo lacks weapons traing,etc... Also, nobody said bjj techniques had never been seen anywhere. The kosen judo guys were very big on groundwork. Kodokan was not so big on it. However, bjj guys are always inventing new ways of using the techniques and have run across some techniques that aren't seen in other styles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SevenStar Posted March 27, 2004 Share Posted March 27, 2004 This is exactly the mentally of most of the people arguing on this thread. Just because some TMA people got thrashed in the early UFC's that doesn't mean that those styles are useless. Dude...1995 just called and said it wants its tired, lame argument back. That's not what we base stuff on. All that is is basically documented evidence on the shortcomings of TMA training methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts