Judo's Unfortunate Ground Fighting State

[bushido_man96]

Exactly. And you know me, I'd never try to imply one style is better than another. But back then, when Judo was in its purest form, they typically trained better than the Jujutsu practitioners and it obviously works so they shouldn't stray away from it.

I agree with you exactly.

[mizu]

I only trained in judo for a short while (about a year), but imho, it doesn't need to do any more on the ground than it does now.

I fought in a few novice tournaments, and watched plenty of seniors, and I think that they have the balance about right.

Our dojo used to train three aspects - standing, ground work and transition. For me, the hardest part was transition, and that's where I always got whupped in tournaments!

[JohnC]

What I see both in the dojo and in tournament is Judo has become more focused on the ground game (newaza or katamewaza) over the last few years. No doubt as a response to BJJ's popularity. To my knowledge newaza has been part of Judo practice since the beginning but for a time it wasn't focused on much.

As to sport vs. SD, most of what's taught now-a-days is heavily influenced by Olympic competition and its rules. I haven't found a good combat judo school in years, however sometimes a good Japanese style Jiu-Jitsu school will include enough throws, hold-downs and grappling moves to qualify.

I'd argue with that Judo, as commonly taught now-a-days, qualifies as a SD art. There're too many moves now that are rule based and that on the street would get you seriously injured or dead. Judo and Jiujitsu's edge on Karate training is that you can go almost all out in training / competition with much less risk of seriously injuring your partner. Additionally, you have to deal with the opponent's inertia, strength, etc all the time which gets you used to the body contact, etc. Dancing won't save you in a Judo match. However, of the down side, Judo (and BJJ, for that matter) are grip based arts, refuse him a grip or break the guy's hands and he's helpless (one of the reasons that finger attacks are verboten in both arts).

Just some random thoughts.

[MMA_Jim]

What I see both in the dojo and in tournament is Judo has become more focused on the ground game (newaza or katamewaza) over the last few years. No doubt as a response to BJJ's popularity. To my knowledge newaza has been part of Judo practice since the beginning but for a time it wasn't focused on much.

As to sport vs. SD, most of what's taught now-a-days is heavily influenced by Olympic competition and its rules. I haven't found a good combat judo school in years, however sometimes a good Japanese style Jiu-Jitsu school will include enough throws, hold-downs and grappling moves to qualify.

I'd argue with that Judo, as commonly taught now-a-days, qualifies as a SD art. There're too many moves now that are rule based and that on the street would get you seriously injured or dead. Judo and Jiujitsu's edge on Karate training is that you can go almost all out in training / competition with much less risk of seriously injuring your partner. Additionally, you have to deal with the opponent's inertia, strength, etc all the time which gets you used to the body contact, etc. Dancing won't save you in a Judo match. However, of the down side, Judo (and BJJ, for that matter) are grip based arts, refuse him a grip or break the guy's hands and he's helpless (one of the reasons that finger attacks are verboten in both arts).

Just some random thoughts.

Jiu Jitsu is anything but a grip based art. While there are techniques that involve the use of a gi or some sort of clothing, jiu jitsu is a leverage based art, with its submissions relying on leverage rather than grips. If it were a grip based art, then it wouldnt work if the gi were taken off. Given the success of jiu jitsu in the gi-less world of MMA, this generalization doesnt seem accurate.

[JohnC]

Perhaps I've been unclear. When saying "grip" I don't mean the formal judo training around various ways of gripping the gi but the more general meaning of grabbing someone. Thus, even in no gi I rarely see folks do holds, etc without using their hands (Rigan Machado not withstanding and on a personal note I think his BJJ is outstanding). I agree that BJJ does have several moves (e.g. rear interlock choke, foot lock, omoplata) that could be done without the use of hands. But, I'd also point out that the vast majority of rolling I've seen by the vast amount of practitioners I've seen uses the hands quite a lot for gripping / pulling / holding / etc.

It might be an interesting exercise at purple on up to try to do no hands just to see how higher ranks would fare under the restriction. In any case, I'm not so sure how blue on down would fare given the lower knowledgebase to work from.

Your thoughts?

[bushido_man96]

What I see both in the dojo and in tournament is Judo has become more focused on the ground game (newaza or katamewaza) over the last few years. No doubt as a response to BJJ's popularity. To my knowledge newaza has been part of Judo practice since the beginning but for a time it wasn't focused on much.

For your part, do you like this, dislike this, indifferent to it, or wondering why it should have even disappeared like it did for a while?

As to sport vs. SD, most of what's taught now-a-days is heavily influenced by Olympic competition and its rules. I haven't found a good combat judo school in years, however sometimes a good Japanese style Jiu-Jitsu school will include enough throws, hold-downs and grappling moves to qualify.

The way you talk about Judo here sounds very similar to some TKD discussions that I hear alot. The Olympic focus, although increasing exposure, tends to present a more limited view of these two Arts, and many schools fail to expand the view to prospective students.

[JohnC]

As you and I have talked several times in the past, it all depends on what you want out of it. As I'm combat focused, the current trend doesn't fit my focus very well.

Caveat: I'm going to ramble a bit here.

Judo was originally focused on the grappling and ground segments of the fight. From a combat standpoint I'd argue that both are important. From a sport standpoint I'd argue that the traditional grappling part (i.e. throwing) was more fun to watch (and to do in the traditional format). However, when Judo moved into the Olympics AND the Russians started to compete a lot of defensive play came on line (e.g. deliberately using grips to stall the action, spending a lot of time shutting down the opponent) which was totally against the traditional approach of randori (and eventually led to changes in the rules outlawing many of these practices) but did increase your odds of winning Olympic competition. However, other defensive measures still crept in (e.g. standing with your hips way back like a Roman-Greco wrestler) that forced the action from leveraged clean throws to much more brute strength sloppy throws. An argument can be made that this type of action is more 'realistic' but this is a sport and isn't realistic from the get go so I don't buy into the argument. Bottom line is that, imo, Judo competition became less fun to watch and do, for that matter, as practice now is much more 'wrasslin' then Kano style Judo. (As bona fides, I currently practice at a dojo that has generated several Olympic winners and live less than a hundred miles from the Olympic Training Camp at Colorado Springs. Folks from the Springs regularly come up to train with us.)

Traditionally, Judo's main focus was on the throwing with groundwork kind of an after thought. With the advent and popularity of BJJ, Judo dojos started to add more emphasis on groundwork, probably to stop students from leaving for BJJ schools and because BJJ students were coming into Judo schools to learn more about throwing moves. Again, from a combat standpoint I think this is good. From a sport standpoint I don't think it's much fun to watch (and before all the BJJ folks start lambasting me about how the ground game is like "a chess match", etc. Please understand that I do BJJ regularly and I understand and I agree and I like doing BJJ but there's a difference between doing it and watching it.)

So, B96, the short answer is I'm ambivalent. I like the more balanced view of training. I don't like the things that forced the re-balancing. And I think we may have lost as much as we've gained.

As to your second point, I agree that many of the downside points on current judo are equally applicable to TKD, imo. Bottom line is that, as a sport, the rules can be anything folks want them to be, and that will sell tickets. From a combat perspective, again in my opinion, both arts are now taught in such a way to make them of dubious value on the street.

My two cents.

[bushido_man96]

When it comes to being of "dubious value on the streets," I think that it comes down to the instructors, and whether or not they can strike a balance between the sport, and working in self-defense training as well. I do think that both can co-exist; it is just a matter of someone with the knowledge and the will to put both on the table for the students.

[JohnC]

To some extent I'd go along with respect to TKD, but even so, I'd argue that the fundamental approaches used for Olympic contest significantly teach / train wrong body mechanics, muscle memory and fight tactics.

With respect to Judo, I disagree. In my opinion, they have fundamentally different approaches and foci.

For example, contest judo says to get a point on the ground you either lock / choke the opponent or you get him on his back and hold him down for 25 seconds. This second idea leads to a lot of defensive work being based in laying face down and stopping the attacker from turning you over. From an SD standpoint, this is stupid.

Similarly, much training for contest judo is based in facing your opponent and then (especially for turning throws) spending lots of time trying to get to the prep position for the throw. In combat judo, one rarely does this as the strategy is to take advantage of what the opponent gives you. Thus, one executes a particular throw BECAUSE the attacker is already in position for that throw (e.g. seio nage (shoulder throw) with attacker doing a forearm choke from the rear). Thus, all the prep set up training done in contest judo is somewhat irrelevant. For combat judo, starting from prep, unbalancing from the prep position and executing the throw are more relevant, but this approach is rarely practiced in contest dojos where, again, the vast majority of focus is on getting to prep position.

Other experienced Judo players please chime in here, as, imo, it would be good to get some other prespectives.

[bushido_man96]

That helps to clarify things a bit. Thanks, John.