MFGQ Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I have been talking to a guy who has done both and is VERY good in both, I asked him which one was better for a confrontation in the street and he told me that even though a BJJ practitioner could maybe finish a wrestling guy on the floor that a wrestler focuses on putting your back to the floor and then striking you, so he says that a wrestler has the advantage, In my opinion Jiujitsu seems better for self defense because it uses less strenghtwhat do you think?Maybe this is for Comparative Arts but both are grappling arts so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubGrappler Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 In a sense your friend is right, and in a sense hes not so right.Bottom line here is that wrestling is by far the most underrated martial art to the point that its not even referred to as a martial art but a sport.No style is better at putting someone on their back than wrestling, but no style is better at fighting from your back then Jiu Jitsu.Weigh the pros and cons of each- first off, wrestling, while very good from the top, doesnt have any techniques for fighting from your back, because if you're on your back, you're pinned and have lost the match. I know lots of people will say "oh dont go to your back in a fight" but you dont exactly have a choice of how a fight goes- someones going to get beat up, and hes not planning on it either.BJJ, on the other hand, can fight from any position. Problem with this is getting the fight to the ground in the first place- this is where the added perk of intensive takedown practice in wrestling pays off- all the groundwork in the world is useless if you cant bring the fight there (but bear in mind than in an actual fight, it is rather easy to take the fight to the ground).Now the other thing to take into account has to be your physical attributes- are you a big and strong guy, or small and skinny? Or are you somewhere around average? There arent weight divisions in real fights, and wrestling someone to the ground to get on top becomes harder and harder the heavier they get.In my opinion, if you're big and strong and have the athleticism, go with wrestling if thats what you want to do. If you're not so big, BJJ is the martial art that teaches little guys how to beat the bigger ones. Simply put though, you cant go wrong choosing either one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewGreen Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I'd go with wrestling, or a BJJ club with a heavy wrestling focus.They tend to be far better at takedowns and clinch fighting, and that is going to be rather important.That said pure wrestling, like pure BJJ is lacking, you need to add some basic boxing and ground and pound work into it. Andrew Greenhttp://innovativema.ca - All the top martial arts news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Jab Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Hmm...ground and pound..*drools* "It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up." - Muhammad Ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striking_cobra Posted January 11, 2006 Share Posted January 11, 2006 we seem to be shortchanging bjj here for a moment, there's pleanty of tech. from the top and lots of ways to get to the top...there's nothing saying you can't punch people from the mount or side mount, just because you study it dosn't mean you're going to end up on your back... " The art of Kung Fu San Soo lies not in victory or defeat, but in the building of human character." Grand Master Jimmy H. Woo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimslade Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I have been talking to a guy who has done both and is VERY good in both, I asked him which one was better for a confrontation in the street and he told me that even though a BJJ practitioner could maybe finish a wrestling guy on the floor that a wrestler focuses on putting your back to the floor and then striking you, so he says that a wrestler has the advantage, In my opinion Jiujitsu seems better for self defense because it uses less strenghtwhat do you think?Maybe this is for Comparative Arts but both are grappling arts so....In my opinion BJJ is one of the best styles for self defense ONLY IF there is only one opponent. This is partial to my decision to partake in the training of MMA. But on the side, I think BJJ is more effective, I have seen it on many occasions. "I am your judge, Executioner, jury, Executioner, lawyer, prosecutor, and if necessary... your Executioner" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striking_cobra Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 having studied it for awhile, i completely agree with you, bjj is typically only usefull art against one opponent, but then remember, so is wrestling, not to mention a mixed martial artist has the same issues if a fight hits the ground, you better hope he dosn't have any backup as well because mma is designed for one on one competition, just like the other two. " The art of Kung Fu San Soo lies not in victory or defeat, but in the building of human character." Grand Master Jimmy H. Woo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJS Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 having studied it for awhile, i completely agree with you, bjj is typically only usefull art against one opponent, but then remember, so is wrestling, not to mention a mixed martial artist has the same issues if a fight hits the ground, you better hope he dosn't have any backup as well because mma is designed for one on one competition, just like the other two.If someone is a true mixed martial artist they would be skilled in striking, clinch fighting, takdedowns and more importantly takewdown defense...somehow I would think those skills would be useful when dealing with more than 1 opponet.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimslade Posted January 22, 2006 Share Posted January 22, 2006 I believe that generally nearly no style was based around the assumption that the user would engage in combat with a multitude of opponents. I Think that this is wrong, if a style of fighting is geared on self defense multiple opponents is required to be covered in training. End of story. But... I think judo is better for self defense "I am your judge, Executioner, jury, Executioner, lawyer, prosecutor, and if necessary... your Executioner" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAnimal Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 bjj doesnt focus on putting your back on the ground, and really, if you have someone in your guard, as far as i see it, youve done something wrong because youre not on top. it can be a powerful position, but youre best bet is side control, mount, knee on stomache, or standing (while hes not). i should hope that bjj teaches this as much as it does to work from the guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now