Whats the Difference between Brazilian and Japanese Jujitsu?

[Samurai Shotokan]

I was wondering because i heard that japanese Jujitsu doesnt work on all types of people mainly large people and im in the dark about Brazilian

[SevenStar]

japanese jujutsu covers all ranges - striking, kicking, clinching and ground. They do alot of standing joint locks - that's what many people say are hard to pull off in a real situation, which is true.

 

bjj is focused on ground grappling and takedowns. there are more differences, but this is an immediate and recognizable difference that can help answer your question.

[Gumbi]

Japanese Ju Jitsu also lacks any real general strategy. Kano described it as a "collection of tricks" to use in different situations.

 

Brazilian gives an overall strategy (take the opponent down, pass the guard, gain full mount, etc).

 

JJJ doesnt engage in live training/randori near as often as BJJ does either and can very often teach other aspects of an art besides unarmed combat (sword drawing for example)

[Harmony]

I think the most recognizable difference is marketing.

[Treebranch]

There are many Jujutsu Ryu and many different approachs. I think the real problem is that TJJ is too caught up in tradition and not in the now. BJJ isn't perfect either, it has it's own problems. I think we are getting to an old argument here which is more about training methods than the MA itself. As far as joint manipulation is concerned, it is hard to pull it off in a real situation. It's also hard to knock someone out when they know what they are doing. It's a matter of strategy and experience. In Budo Taijutsu locks, throws, strikes, etc. happen naturally, we don't try to force them on someone. If they resist one way we go with it and get them into something else. Or we will strike you and then take it. The path of least resistance is a definite strategy. I consider Budo Taijutsu a Jujutsu, it's very similar in many ways. The key is to capture the balance first and the lock goes on without the person knowing it.

[KUNTA KINTE]

One is form Brazil and one is form Japan.

[pineapple]

Most of the Japanese jujitsu that was taught to me was on my feet.

 

Most of the BJJ that was taught to me was on the ground.

 

Just my personal experience and not necessarily what is taught in other schools.

[Treebranch]

See the only thing is BJJ only concentrates on ground fighting and there stand up skills a few a far between. JJ if it's a good school teaches all ranges, at least my school does. 1/3 striking, 1/3 standing grappling (throws, locks, etc..), and ground fighting. Also, weapons training permeated throughout as well.

[AngryMatt]

See the only thing is BJJ only concentrates on ground fighting and there stand up skills a few a far between. JJ if it's a good school teaches all ranges, at least my school does. 1/3 striking, 1/3 standing grappling (throws, locks, etc..), and ground fighting. Also, weapons training permeated throughout as well.

I'm relatively new to the art, and obviously very new to the forums, but I'm right there with you man.

 

My sensei first decided to teach just BJJ for awhile, then opened it up to taijitsu for those who seemed more dedicated. Lots of neutral work with strikes, defense of strikes, takedowns and then ground work. And of course, we have a drawing class which is fantastic. Love the sword work even if I don't have a katana.

[GhostlySykanRyu]

"Japanese Ju Jitsu also lacks any real general strategy. Kano described it as a "collection of tricks" to use in different situations."

 

Then Jigoro Kano faultered at some point, if that quote is true, then he just didn't get it

 

I can't speak for all styles of JJJ, but I can say that mine covers pretty much everything, ground grappling included. Much more than just a bag of tricks, Sykan Ryu was made for the street (based on the Danzan Ryu system). JJJ was made for war...I assure you it has practical application.

 

And if you can't pull off a joint lock of some sort in a live situation, you're doing it wrong