Difference between jiu jitsu and BJJ?

[sensei8]

I'd say the simplest way to state the difference is that JJJ covers all ranges briefly, while BJJ covers the ground in depth.

Solid post!!

[ps1]

I'd say the simplest way to state the difference is that JJJ covers all ranges briefly, while BJJ covers the ground in depth.

Solid post!!

Respectfully, this is not an accurate statement. That's the perceived difference due to the sport rules. But the sport is only about 10% of the art. Standing techniques to include kicks and punches are covered in the curriculum.

[guird]

I'd say the simplest way to state the difference is that JJJ covers all ranges briefly, while BJJ covers the ground in depth.

Solid post!!

Respectfully, this is not an accurate statement. That's the perceived difference due to the sport rules. But the sport is only about 10% of the art. Standing techniques to include kicks and punches are covered in the curriculum.

I guess it also depends on where you train and what they focus on (whether it's more MMA, self defense, or sport BJJ).

[ps1]

I'd say the simplest way to state the difference is that JJJ covers all ranges briefly, while BJJ covers the ground in depth.

Solid post!!

Respectfully, this is not an accurate statement. That's the perceived difference due to the sport rules. But the sport is only about 10% of the art. Standing techniques to include kicks and punches are covered in the curriculum.

I guess it also depends on where you train and what they focus on (whether it's more MMA, self defense, or sport BJJ).

Still a misnomer. At present, the three largest sport BJJ teams are Gracie Barra, Alliance, and Atos. All of them teach standing defenses and striking. Alliance, which has historically been the winningest team, only works sport as 10% of its training time. Despite how things look, the vast majority of BJJ students do not compete in tournaments and train just for self defense and weight management. All the Gracie academies and the Pedro Sauer Association (largest in the world) require learning striking and standing defense against embraces and strikes.

[cheesefrysamurai]

BJJ has exceptionally improved upon the unarmed combat aspect of JJJ.

To compare the unarmed fighting aspect of JJJ to BJJ (I've trained with many JJJ black belts) a JJJ black belt is somewhere around the level of a tough white belt in BJJ. This is not meant as an insult to JJJ, but simply a testement as to how much more BJJ furthered things.

I completely is disagree with these statements. IMO Bjj is great and has it's advantages in the octogon but JJJ is hand to hand combat.

Bjj is a submission based system with some basic effective self defense peppered in as I've seen it. Explosive athleticism is essential.

JJJ I the application of physics, using momentum, levers and knowledge of the body- proper technique wins. - think aikido and judo with punches and kicks. We had to show intent on dislocating the joint, not just getting a tap out.

I believe BJJ is an evolution for competition, at the same modifying level as judo, but does not replace JJJ for real life situation. - these are my opinions of course and I've argued this point before. It's usually with people that feel like bjj is the ultimate evolution of martial arts and usually these same people have pretty terrible things to say about kata and pretty much everything that doesn't compete with BJJ in the octogon. Just my 2 cents, and I am no expert.

And btw I've seen some damn tough jjj green belts. maybe they won't get the tap out, but then again they aren't training for the tap out.

[pwen arye]

Ok, Im going to try to explain this as not to offend anyone. BJJ was taught to helio Gracie by a judoka. (cant remember name) This happened in the early 60's. The main focus of the samurai hand to hand was Daito Ryu Akijutsu which was Tekada Sokaku's system. Samurai learned these techniques they had to b able to use on the enemy and had to b affective and semi simplistic because of the armor issue. In my system, ryuho okuyama, the founder and ueashiba the founder of Aikido Studied under Tekada. At that time there was only four lisences, not belts. After training for many yrs, the two left and founded their own systems. Both r very spiritual styles. BJJ is more sporty and athletic, TJJJ is still strong in a defensive manor. Now im not saying MMA isnt, but a live fight on the street, and the fight goes to the ground, be ready to get stabbed or stomped on by the guys friends.

I am just wondering what kind of experience do you have with bjj? What type of groundfighting experience do you have? Do you think that BJJ or any grappling/groundfighting have any use in defense? Have you heard of gracie combatives? Not being disrespectful But I kinda heard this argument before from alot of TMAers and was wondering where they get the basis for such arguments and what formed their opinion.

[bushido_man96]

BJJ has exceptionally improved upon the unarmed combat aspect of JJJ.

To compare the unarmed fighting aspect of JJJ to BJJ (I've trained with many JJJ black belts) a JJJ black belt is somewhere around the level of a tough white belt in BJJ. This is not meant as an insult to JJJ, but simply a testement as to how much more BJJ furthered things.

I completely is disagree with these statements. IMO Bjj is great and has it's advantages in the octogon but JJJ is hand to hand combat.

Bjj is a submission based system with some basic effective self defense peppered in as I've seen it. Explosive athleticism is essential.

JJJ I the application of physics, using momentum, levers and knowledge of the body- proper technique wins. - think aikido and judo with punches and kicks. We had to show intent on dislocating the joint, not just getting a tap out.

I believe BJJ is an evolution for competition, at the same modifying level as judo, but does not replace JJJ for real life situation. - these are my opinions of course and I've argued this point before. It's usually with people that feel like bjj is the ultimate evolution of martial arts and usually these same people have pretty terrible things to say about kata and pretty much everything that doesn't compete with BJJ in the octogon. Just my 2 cents, and I am no expert.

And btw I've seen some damn tough jjj green belts. maybe they won't get the tap out, but then again they aren't training for the tap out.

The bold section highlighted above is the same for BJJ. It isn't just about the tap out. BJJ is based on leverage and technique, just like JJJ is. Explosive ability isn't necessary to do the style. If it was, I couldn't do it.

[guird]

JJJ I the application of physics, using momentum, levers and knowledge of the body- proper technique wins. - think aikido and judo with punches and kicks. We had to show intent on dislocating the joint, not just getting a tap out.

All grappling systems use momentum and leverage (which falls under physics). That's the whole point of training these techniques.

Also, I don't think you quite understand what the tap-out represents. Tapping out means 'you could totally break my arm if you wanted to' or ' if you were to continue choking with this pressure, i'd pass out', or something else along those lines.

[cheesefrysamurai]

BJJ has exceptionally improved upon the unarmed combat aspect of JJJ.

To compare the unarmed fighting aspect of JJJ to BJJ (I've trained with many JJJ black belts) a JJJ black belt is somewhere around the level of a tough white belt in BJJ. This is not meant as an insult to JJJ, but simply a testement as to how much more BJJ furthered things.

I completely is disagree with these statements. IMO Bjj is great and has it's advantages in the octogon but JJJ is hand to hand combat.

Bjj is a submission based system with some basic effective self defense peppered in as I've seen it. Explosive athleticism is essential.

JJJ I the application of physics, using momentum, levers and knowledge of the body- proper technique wins. - think aikido and judo with punches and kicks. We had to show intent on dislocating the joint, not just getting a tap out.

I believe BJJ is an evolution for competition, at the same modifying level as judo, but does not replace JJJ for real life situation. - these are my opinions of course and I've argued this point before. It's usually with people that feel like bjj is the ultimate evolution of martial arts and usually these same people have pretty terrible things to say about kata and pretty much everything that doesn't compete with BJJ in the octogon. Just my 2 cents, and I am no expert.

And btw I've seen some damn tough jjj green belts. maybe they won't get the tap out, but then again they aren't training for the tap out.

The bold section highlighted above is the same for BJJ. It isn't just about the tap out. BJJ is based on leverage and technique, just like JJJ is. Explosive ability isn't necessary to do the style. If it was, I couldn't do it.

You are right of course. but in jjj, We apply these principles standing also.

And Its not a sport,or competitive. Like someone else said, BJJ has more in common with judo then jjj.

Its hard to really compare a competition based system and a traditional fighting art. But I often find the JJJ practitioners arent doing the comparing.

[Kusotare]

A rose by any other name...

I think you first need to define the term “Jujutsu” before you can understand the question being asked.

Jujutsu is a rather “catch all” term that is fairly modern compared to the various systems that have developed and these fighting methods.

If you look at these old systems - the Jujutsu that they did wasn’t even referred to as such. More commonly it was called Kumi-uchi or Kogusoku.

In a nutshell, pretty much all jujutsu techniques practiced these days comes from a school called Takenouchi-ryu – the oldest extant system!

The techniques may have been modified / added to in order to work better in the sporting arena and training methods may have been updated but, in essence, like Judo, BJJ is still Jujutsu and as such it is a descendant of Takenouchi-ryu!

So what’s the difference? – How and why you use it.

K.