BJJ and JJJ

[judoguy]

[TriStateTerror]

I actually trained a little in JJJ before finding out that BJJ was more of what I was searching for. I am more interested in competing in MMA competitions than I am interested in learning self-defense. I tried a school in my hometown of Edison which taught Nagasu Ryu Jujitsu and after a about a week of classes it was clear it wasnt what I was looking for. So to get to the point I saw that the Japanese version of the art was much more geared towards streetfight and self defense scenarios, whereas BJJ(which I train in now and love doing so) is centered on structured grappling scenarios that are used most effectively in competitions. Im not saying that u couldnt use BJJ in a streetbrawl, but many manuevers(collar chokes etc.) wouldnt be so effective on somebody just wearing casual street attire. Whereas JJJ they show you how to basically mame your advisary.

Here is what it comes down to in my eyes

JJJ= Much more standup centered than BJJ and relies more on using your surroundings in order to inflict quick and permanent damage upon your victim.

BJJ= Mostly centered on grappling and establishing or working out of a guard while trying to either find a joint to extend or a chance to apply a choke.

[BJJ is 1]

Judo Guy said: "When I say a dead art I mean as far as adding NEW techniques to the core curriculam. Certainly you will have variations of the techniques but the tried and true techniques are what will stand as canon much like the 67 throws and 29 grappling techniques of the kodokan."

How can you say BJJ is a dead art, what about the X-guard, kuala guard, and butter fly guard that have only recently been developed

Also BJJ as a sport is a good thing, in fact that insures that it will not become a dead art. because as long as people keep competing they will keep finding new techniques

[TJS]

Also BJJ as a sport is a good thing, in fact that insures that it will not become a dead art. because as long as people keep competing they will keep finding new techniques

overall I agree but there are drawbacks..alot of the new sport jiu jitsu moves will get you clobered in a real fight or MMA bout. As long as people know the diffrence between sport jiu jitsu an self defense/vale tudo they will be fine though.

[SubGrappler]

BJJ(which I train in now and love doing so) is centered on structured grappling scenarios that are used most effectively in competitions. Im not saying that u couldnt use BJJ in a streetbrawl, but many manuevers(collar chokes etc.) wouldnt be so effective on somebody just wearing casual street attire. Whereas JJJ they show you how to basically mame your advisary.

It depends what casual street attire is- climate vary all over the word, so casual attire will as well. The submission holds in BJJ will maim your adversary as well as anything else you could teach. Most of the techniques in one system are found in the other, I believe the biggest differences has to do with how they train.

Here is what it comes down to in my eyes

JJJ= Much more standup centered than BJJ and relies more on using your surroundings in order to inflict quick and permanent damage upon your victim.

BJJ= Mostly centered on grappling and establishing or working out of a guard while trying to either find a joint to extend or a chance to apply a choke.

You're making generalizations here though- JJJ has standup, clinch, and groundwork applications to it- how someone from that style prefers to fight would most likely have to do with which area of fighting they're proficient at. The majority of JJJ schools heavily emphasize standup, I'll give you that.

As far as BJJ is concerned, you're making another generalization. Its not about working out of the guard trying to find a submission- thats a style of fighting within BJJ. There are many BJJ fighters who hate the idea of fighting off their back, just as there are strikers who prefer punching over kicking, kicking over punching, or clinch fighting over both.

[judoguy]

Judo Guy said: "When I say a dead art I mean as far as adding NEW techniques to the core curriculam. Certainly you will have variations of the techniques but the tried and true techniques are what will stand as canon much like the 67 throws and 29 grappling techniques of the kodokan."

How can you say BJJ is a dead art, what about the X-guard, kuala guard, and butter fly guard that have only recently been developed

Also BJJ as a sport is a good thing, in fact that insures that it will not become a dead art. because as long as people keep competing they will keep finding new techniques

I disagree with that. Those positions haven't been discovered but have been REdiscovered by and refined by great grapplers. And I didn't mean to say that BJJ is a dead art as in it's ineffective, but rather that when Helio decided to make a definitive text on what bjj is and isn't he essentially closed the canon on what consists BJJ. Techniques will be refined and people will find more effective ways to apply them but the technique in and of itself isn't new. Thats all I was trying to say. Sorry if I came off as attacking bjj

[Sammyrai]

Actually, Judo was concieved primarily as a sport. This was how Jigori Kano created Judo in 1882. It was, is, and will remain, a sport. That does not mean however that martial uses are not there, kinda like hockey.

[Kajukenbopr]

well, i find a bjj would have trouble with a wrestling practitioner. Someone from Judo, wouldnt allow the Bjj to take him to the ground, same goes for Aikido. Although I find the clinches and groundwork useful,you could use it in a fight, I dont find that most fights end up in the ground.

I've found jjj to be more self defense oriented because it adapts the strikes to an attacker making so it doesnt really matter if you are smaller. Also, the techniques dont require someone to get too close to the attacker making it easier to finish up your opponent and move on be it to escape or keep fighting another person. As far as groundfighting, people think JJJ doenst have any, but it does, but all it teaches is to get the attacker off and some simple clinches so the attacker stays held where it hurts.

[SubGrappler]

well, i find a bjj would have trouble with a wrestling practitioner. Someone from Judo, wouldnt allow the Bjj to take him to the ground, same goes for Aikido. Although I find the clinches and groundwork useful,you could use it in a fight, I dont find that most fights end up in the ground.

.

Its generally the other way around.

BJJ fighters typically do rather well against wrestlers because of their better finishing skills on the ground. Even though wrestlers win the takedown game, BJJ fighters typically win the submission game.

Wrestlers do well against sprawl and brawl standup fighters who are not very proficient at ground fighting. With takedowns that are second to none, its very difficult for many strikers to keep the fight on their feet.

The Sprawl and Brawl fighters generally do rather well with BJJ fighters. Known for having the weakest takedowns among grapplers, BJJ fighters often have trouble bringing the fight to the ground, and against an experienced striker with decent takedown defense, this is often a problem.

[Kajukenbopr]

well, i find a bjj would have trouble with a wrestling practitioner. Someone from Judo, wouldnt allow the Bjj to take him to the ground, same goes for Aikido. Although I find the clinches and groundwork useful,you could use it in a fight, I dont find that most fights end up in the ground.

.

Its generally the other way around.

BJJ fighters typically do rather well against wrestlers because of their better finishing skills on the ground. Even though wrestlers win the takedown game, BJJ fighters typically win the submission game.

Wrestlers do well against sprawl and brawl standup fighters who are not very proficient at ground fighting. With takedowns that are second to none, its very difficult for many strikers to keep the fight on their feet.

The Sprawl and Brawl fighters generally do rather well with BJJ fighters. Known for having the weakest takedowns among grapplers, BJJ fighters often have trouble bringing the fight to the ground, and against an experienced striker with decent takedown defense, this is often a problem.

Well , I'm more of a striker myself and I dont usually have trouble keeping my fights on my feet. Hardly do I let anyone get close enough to take me to the ground and if I get close enough I will strike like a Muay Thai fighter with elbows and knees and that pretty much keeps them from taking me to the ground.

Of course, with the udo knowledge I have and some Jujitsu locks, I am not so helpless on the ground either

and yes, I agree, BJJ fighters do best on the ground than other fighters