Whats the Difference between Brazilian and Japanese Jujitsu?

[Gumbi]

I totally agree TJS, your right.

 

Gumbi you are very wrong with your analogy, it's a bad one. You don't understand the simple fact that shooting a gun is a long range weapon and a projectile.

 

Yeah, perhaps it was, but Im trying to convey a general idea here. Take something like escrima or knife fighting- a fighter would be very deadly with his weapons of choice, but how deadly is he when he no longer has them?

You have to absolutely know how to fight, move and use your body to use weapons. Are you forgetting that if in fact they were fighting with weapons, both sides had weapons and were trained. Also the fact that you had to "kill" more than one person in a given battle. I don't know any weapons master who is not a master of hand to hand. You can't separate the two, it just doesn't work when it takes your body to wield a sword or spear for that matter.

 

Calling someone a "master" can be seen fit if they simply are better than you. He may be excelled in hand to hand (or any other part of combat for that matter) but that does not exactly mean hes a master at it.

 

 

But I'll assume that you have never had weapons training or you would already understand this. Don't you think your skill doesn't have to be higher when you and your opponent both have 3 foot razors in your hands and you are probably going to die? Ridiculous, there's absolutely no comparison. Now I'll give you one thing, there are probably very few people today that have fought this way in real life, but that doesn't mean the MA that they are learning is invalid or won't work.

 

Your skill has to be better than that of your opponents if you want to survive- yes I agree. Now, as far as saying that JJJ wont work, let me rephrase this:

 

The following techniques are VASTLY OVERRATED for determining fighting skill: eye gouging, biting, groin attacks

 

I have friends that do JJJ, and as long as their answer for escaping an armbar isnt "oh well, I'll bite his leg" then theres nothing wrong with it. Like I said, the techniques are there, its just the training methods that need tweaking.

BJJ has been more successful than TJJ from what we've seen in competition, yes. But that also has to do with the practitioner, the rules and the context. NHB doesn't mean "DEATH MATCH", don't you think the fight would be very different from what it is now if this were the case? You don't seem to understand the difference between a contest and a real situation. I'm not talking about the situation where there is some smack talking and pushing that turns into a fight. I'm talking about someone attacks you with the full intent on ending your life. That kind of dynamic is not taught in BJJ, because if it was they would tell you the ground should be avoided at all costs. You can't run when you are on your back. You'll be very surprise with what we know.

 

First off, the whole idea of fighting someone on the ground is the idea of taking your opponent to his weakest point of the fight, while at the same time the place that you happen to be strong at (which in most cases is the ground).

 

Beyond that, give me practical reasons why the ground should be avoided, and I'll give a BJJ'ers insight as best I can.

 

Now as far as the guys being more combat efficient due to it depending on their life, thats a pretty bold statement to make- according to this reasoning, a marine or any armed serviceman would defeat an experienced MMA fighter. No one ever said "gee, I guess I'll just give up right now" in an MMA fight and decided he would be pounded into oblivion. Do you think Scott Morris didnt think he taking on serious bodily harm when Pat Smith lowered elbow after elbow to his head? Think Zane Frazier wasnt worried when he was getting stomped in the head by Kevin Rozier?

[Treebranch]

Gumbi wrote: You're WAY off base here- BJJ was NOT developed as a sport. It was created by fighting on the streets of Rio de Janeiro. You realize some of the techniques are similar, but its mostly the training methods and methodology that set the two apart. BJJ has PROVEN itself in fights, both on and off the street and I have documented recorded proof of it- FAR more than Budo Taijitsu.

 

Where are the recorded street fights and how long have people been using it for Combat. Your being silly. BJJ is a great Groundfighting Art not a Combat Art live with it.

[Gumbi]

Where are the recorded street fights and how long have people been using it for Combat. Your being silly. BJJ is a great Groundfighting Art not a Combat Art live with it.

 

Wow, the number of videos I have on this computer alone of of street fights with BJJ......

 

Go to https://www.gracieacademy.com and take a look at the Gracies in Action series.

 

Or dont, seriously I dont care anymore. If you want to insist that you know the "real way" to fight, then by all means go ahead and do so. I just really hope you dont get hurt one day.

[TJS]

Where are the recorded street fights and how long have people been using it for Combat.

 

There are actually Tons of videos of street fights in Brazil aswell as no rules challenge matches if you look around.

[Treebranch]

I'll check out your Brazilian street fight videos. Do they show you the guys who lost using BJJ in the street fights as well? Probably wouldn't be good to further promote the art.

 

So Gumbi you are saying that BJJ is the perfect Combat fighting MA? Your saying you know the "real way"? I'm not claiming that JJJ is the ultimate fighting art, I'm just saying it's way more rounded than BJJ. Look if you want to believe the hype feel free. I applaud BJJ and the Gracies for their Marketing Genius.

 

So where's the link with the actual street fights in Brazil?

 

Please don't worry about me getting hurt, but that's the chances you take when you fight. Besides I only fight if I'm attacked which rarely happens to me.

[Treebranch]

Gumbi said: First off, the whole idea of fighting someone on the ground is the idea of taking your opponent to his weakest point of the fight, while at the same time the place that you happen to be strong at (which in most cases is the ground).

 

Weakest point when the attacker might be hiding a knife in one hand? Weakest point when his buddy decides to stomp your face in? Weakest point is assuming your attacker is alone and unarmed? Weakest point is assuming the ground is like your padded dojo?

 

Beyond that, give me practical reasons why the ground should be avoided, and I'll give a BJJ'ers insight as best I can.

 

Now as far as the guys being more combat efficient due to it depending on their life, thats a pretty bold statement to make- according to this reasoning, a marine or any armed serviceman would defeat an experienced MMA fighter. No one ever said "gee, I guess I'll just give up right now" in an MMA fight and decided he would be pounded into oblivion. Do you think Scott Morris didnt think he taking on serious bodily harm when Pat Smith lowered elbow after elbow to his head? Think Zane Frazier wasnt worried when he was getting stomped in the head by Kevin Rozier?

 

O.K. not once did I mention a marine or any such armed serviceman defeated a MMA fighter. I'm not even talking about a MMA fighter, I'm talking about you the practitioner, not the pro.

[GhostlySykanRyu]

"Calling someone a "master" can be seen fit if they simply are better than you. He may be excelled in hand to hand (or any other part of combat for that matter) but that does not exactly mean hes a master at it. "

 

So by your definition, the Gracies are not masters of their art. They're simply better than you. Odd.

 

I believe BJJ is extremely beneficial to a person, and is effective in live combat, just as practically ANY MA if the user has trained hard enough. I respect the Gracies, but it does offend me when they claim Brazilian JuJitsu to be "The Fundamental Solution To The Martial Arts"...especially when their foundations and most of their techniques were taken from traditional arts.

 

Are pure traditionalists correct in assuming that their ancient ways are always the best? Probably not...but traditional arts are still effective:this is something "conventional" martial artists can not change.

 

Are martial artists who claims that their new system is "the best ever", and that the old ways are now void, correct? Of course not, in fact they often sound like impudent children (not pointing any fingers, just stating something).

 

There is a happy medium that must be reached; being open to the new and being able to accept and use (or at least respect) the traditional ways.

 

You can argue on the effectiveness of any system...but you still won't change the mind of the practitioner of that art, because that person knows that those techniques work for him/her.

 

Theres my rant...

[Treebranch]

Well said JeetKuneDo. This out with the old in with the new talk makes me laugh. People forget where they came from. They also forget how every technique they do that works for them came from a Traditional MA. Since they made some small tweaks and threw away all the other techniques they didn't have the patience to master, they've renamed it, slapped a snappy logo on it and now it's the best MA in the world. Laughable.

[Venezolano]

First of all, i think Gracies did more than "some small tweaks" to Jiu-Jitsu they weere taught, BTW, nowdays Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu has evolved TOO much (and it continues doing ot everyday), and it has developed its own techniques.

 

And what's the problem? the same that Gracie did, many people before them did it too, Kano took JJJ and remove the "deadly"s techniques, added more randori and there is Judo, so if we are going to that point, he "changed" the name, and it's the same sh*t.

 

And it's not one of the most effectives MA because they say it, it has been proved during time, it's not "supposed" to work, it _does_, and like many people says here, "there is not worst blind person, that the person that doesn't want to see".

 

In theory, JJJ is more well rounded that BJJ, but in practice, it isn't so effective as BJJ, whatever you say, facts are there, JJJ doesn't have as much sparring like BJJ and that's one of its weaks points..

[AngryMatt]

When, in any BJJ training, have you worked with knives, bats or even strike combinations? I'm serious here.

 

And since when did sparring give you the edge all the time? Do you need to know how to take shots? Yeah. You have to learn what it feels like to GET HIT. That's extraordinarily important. But drilling technique is better than sparring and/or "scrimmaging." It's the case in every sport and I fail to see why it wouldn't be the same for BJJ.

 

Oh, and will you BJJ fanboys really stop with this JJJ -v- BJJ thing? When did you see one studying JJJ ever trash BJJ? I was pretty sure the couple guys here who train in Budo Taijitsu have said that BJJ is fantastic as a sport, works very well in competition and is effective in teachiing you to get your base.