JJJ vs. BJJ

[TJS]

Damn, not being allowed to stand at all sucks. So you think JJJ is better?

If it's a good BJJ school they will tach you some standing techniques and takedowns..but yea the general focus will be ground fighting

[marie curie]

Damn, not being allowed to stand at all sucks. So you think JJJ is better?

If it's a good BJJ school they will tach you some standing techniques and takedowns..but yea the general focus will be ground fighting

BJJ competition starts from standing, so I would really imagine that most schools teach takedowns.

[TJS]

Damn, not being allowed to stand at all sucks. So you think JJJ is better?

If it's a good BJJ school they will tach you some standing techniques and takedowns..but yea the general focus will be ground fighting

BJJ competition starts from standing, so I would really imagine that most schools teach takedowns.

sadly there are still quite a few that still dont really practice takedowns. But like I said they are getting better and most schools these days incorperate more of them.

[Ottman]

Damn, not being allowed to stand at all sucks. So you think JJJ is better?

If it's a good BJJ school they will tach you some standing techniques and takedowns..but yea the general focus will be ground fighting

BJJ competition starts from standing, so I would really imagine that most schools teach takedowns.

sadly there are still quite a few that still dont really practice takedowns. But like I said they are getting better and most schools these days incorperate more of them.

But isn't the whole point of BJJ that all you need is groundfighting because most fights end up on the ground anyway, and therefore if you can win from the ground it doesn't matter if you have good takedowns or not?

Ok, so maybe not that extreme, but the focus is specifically on ground fighting in BJJ. I personally think that this is because as BJJ developed in brazil, it didn't have the influence of and 'marriage' (so to speak) to arts like Judo, aikdo, and even karate which all have good stand up techniques and takedowns. What else was there in Brazil? Capoeira? And even if there were good stand up arts and takedown arts in Brazil, the different styles didn't share the same relationship as they did in Japan, where for centuries, a mixture of arts were traditionally taught to the warrior classes, therefore creating students and masters with a much broader range of MA experience, and an overlapping of styles emerged as a result. Not to mention all these styles often competed against one another, and as they say: 'know thine enemy.' Brazil doesn't share this type of MA history and BJJ didn't grow up amidst a country full of MA's, so therefore: no overlap.

[UseoForce]

Well, that's not really true.

BJJ came directly from judo, not so much jiu-jitsu. The main reason why it is Brazilian Jiu-jitsu and not Brazilian Judo is because it is meant to be an art, not a 'way.'

Original Gracie jiu-jitsu was focused more on self-defense than jiu-jitsu, say, 5 years ago. It had lots of takedowns. If you read "Brazilian Jiu-jitsu: Theorey and Technique," you will see hip throws, the body drop and several other judo techniques. In addition, BJJ began to incorporate wrestling style takedowns. Because BJJ came from judo, it has many of the same throws. And, yes, there WERE lots of other martial arts around when the Gracies were developing their art. Lutra Livre and Capoeira are both native Brazilian arts. There were also plenty of boxers, various kinds of wrestlers, and judoka.

The takedowns and throws in BJJ began to disappear in the early MMA era. No one knew groundfighting. As long as the jiu-jitsu fighter could SOMEHOW bring his opponent down, then he would surely win. The jiu-jitsu fighter didn't care whether he was on top, bottom, or if he got hit. As long as his opponent was on the ground, he knew he could win. So, if the jiu-jitsu guy could just tie up with the other guy and drag him to the floor, that was as good as any takedown. All that mattered was what happened AFTER the fight hit the floor.

Nowadays, things have changed. Everyone in MMA has at least some grappling skill. It's harder to take people down. It's even harder to attain a dominant position on the ground. Furthermore, jiu-jitsu fighters cannot dominate from the guard like Royce did in the early UFC's. Sure, it's better than being mounted, and you still might get an armbar or triangle choke, but it's not what it used to be.

Better takedown defense has necesitated that groundfighting specialists get better takedowns or else fight on their feet.

[elbows_and_knees]

But isn't the whole point of BJJ that all you need is groundfighting because most fights end up on the ground anyway, and therefore if you can win from the ground it doesn't matter if you have good takedowns or not?

according to police stats, yes. that's where the propoganda started. However, that's far from the 'point' of bjj.

Ok, so maybe not that extreme, but the focus is specifically on ground fighting in BJJ. I personally think that this is because as BJJ developed in brazil, it didn't have the influence of and 'marriage' (so to speak) to arts like Judo, aikdo, and even karate which all have good stand up techniques and takedowns. What else was there in Brazil? Capoeira?

1. two words - vale tudo. brazil had access to several MA. and as said above, bjj came directly from judo, so how can it not have the 'marriage' of which you speak? Gracie realized that his strength was in groundwork, so that is what he placed his focus on, as opposed to the judo throws and takedowns he had learned.

2. capoeira has several takedowns also. consequently, even if capoeira WAS all they had, they would still have access to takedowns, elbows knees and headbutts.

And even if there were good stand up arts and takedown arts in Brazil, the different styles didn't share the same relationship as they did in Japan, where for centuries, a mixture of arts were traditionally taught to the warrior classes, therefore creating students and masters with a much broader range of MA experience, and an overlapping of styles emerged as a result. Not to mention all these styles often competed against one another, and as they say: 'know thine enemy.' Brazil doesn't share this type of MA history and BJJ didn't grow up amidst a country full of MA's, so therefore: no overlap.

what? two words - vale tudo. brazil has a history of fighting and MA. Don't think so? Visit Rio. Heck, even amongst their own groups, it's not uncommon for disputes and fights. I've heard of several disputes amongst capoeira groups. Then there are sometimes style rivalries, like capoeira and bjj. there is even a capoeira roda song about a capoerista that KOed a BJJ guy in a vale tudo match.

what mixture of arts was taught to the warrior classes of japan? their empty hand training was jujutsu. period. They had weapons training, horse training, etc, but empty hand was jujutsu, and nothing else, AFAIK. a mixture of empty hand training didn't make a lot of sense for a warrior because he ideally would always have a weapon on him. consequently, weapons were their focus.

[UseoForce]

good post.

Also, another note on old school jiu-jitsu in Japan. Many of the empty hand technqiues and weapons techniques are very similar. For example, a typical defense against the sterotypical looping punch is the inside-out wristlock. The lock is performed just like a power slash with a katana.

Is it relevant to this thread? Probably not. But it's cool

[UseoForce]

Oh, BTW, read "Mastering Jujitsu" by Renzo Gracie. I know some of you are getting sick of me saying that, but it answers about 75% of the questions people ask on this web site.

[Ottman]

Also, another note on old school jiu-jitsu in Japan. Many of the empty hand technqiues and weapons techniques are very similar. For example, a typical defense against the sterotypical looping punch is the inside-out wristlock. The lock is performed just like a power slash with a katana.

This is is the type of cohesion between the MA's in Japan I was talking about that make JJJ a lot different, at least in application, than BJJ. You don't see this type of cohesion and mixing of traditional arts in Brazil, even with Vale Tudo. And don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not trying to de-value either Vale Tudo or BJJ, they are both excellent practical defense arts, and as you'll see in my styles, I'm a practitioner of BJJ and love it. I'm just trying to rout out where the differences in JJJ and BJJ come from, even though they are inherently the same art. It's a little like arguing the differences between ITF and WTF TKD. The application of each style evolved based on different objectives and cultures, while the actual techniques remain nearly identical. However you'd rarely see an ITF TKDer fighting exactly like a WTF TKDer. The distinction can be deciphered by looking at the history of each style just like with JJJ and BJJ. JJJ developed in a country with a strict MA tradition and lots of people who study many different styles. This MA tradition doesn't exist in Brazil, or if it does, it doesn't go back nearly as far in Brazilian history, and the styles aren't mixed with as much frequency and cohesion as in Japan.

[UseoForce]

Brazilian Jiu-jistu should not be considered as any other style of jiu-jitsu. BJJ's whole strategy is entirely different than that of JJJ. Some of the techniques look the same, but as many are totally different. JJJ is closer to hapkido than it is to BJJ.