Traditional JJJ And MMA

[Liver Punch]

I can't imagine X guard was really a valid choice for battlefield combatants.

You're claiming that Nobunaga didn't pull mission control mid battle? I'm not sure how I feel about this.

Sure, we can talk about fundamentals and hip control and trace similarities based on the fact we all share physiology and bio-mechanics but that does not make tactics the same.

I think this is a good explanation for quite a bit of things, including this.

[ps1]

I can't imagine X guard was really a valid choice for battlefield combatants.

You're claiming that Nobunaga didn't pull mission control mid battle? I'm not sure how I feel about this.

Sure he did. Right after he performed his Xtreme form to music! Lol!

[sojobo]

As I understand it, most of the core techniques in Judo came from Tenshin Shinyo-ryu and/or Kito-ryu. Kano sensei was well studied in both of these Koryu and it was from these that 99% of all of the core techniques of Judo came from. Also don't underestimate the influence of Sumo in the equation.

He did study classical ryu. However, he is still credited for coming up with many of the techniques of Judo. 99% would be an exaggerated figure. You can learn more about it in the many articles at https://www.judoinfo.com

He also did not “invent” Randori - it was practiced by styles like Yoshin-ryu.

In most Koryu, "Jujutsu" refers to the unarmed section of the syllabus - so there is no weapon work per-se. That said, because the principles run through all sections of the syllabus - it would be wrong to study a section remotely.

What you say is only true if someone wants to train in a classical system. I can't study BJJ and then claim to be an expert in a koryu, and BJJ stylists don’t do this. I have, however, seen the opposite happen quite frequently, but that's dishonesty and a topic for a different thread.

You have misunderstood - I meant from a ryu -ha perspective, in that “correctly” all aspects should be trained in parallel.

It was not my intension to be insulting.

Intention has little to do with effect.

If the effect was insulting I apologise. It was not my intension to offend.

Just as the air force is specialist in their type of warfare, dentists are specialist at what they do

Your analogy clearly put dentists as nothing more than a subfaction of physicians... The airforce is not a subfaction of the Army, rather a military faction in and of itself. They don’t just specialize in air combat. They have ground operators as well. It found it's origin in the Army, but grew to something every bit as useful on it's own. BJJ is the same. It grew from Judo. It has since grown into a complete art of its own, with doctrine and strategies of its own.

I understand what you are saying, and again I make the analogy not to belittle or offend - but the truth is the core skills were bourne out of the Koryu schools - granted the skills have been improved upon, but nonetheless they were there.

Originally, Jujutsu was taught as part of a whole unit in the Koryu Bujutsu schools of Japan.

The core methods/techniques and principles of movement remained constant whether you had an uchigatana in your hands, a Kodachi, both or neither. Whether you were doing standing exchanges nage-waza or ne-waza.

This is both correct and incorrect. The footwork, hip movement, and other gross movements remained rather constant. However, much was not. That is to say, the sword was not handled in the same manner as the spear. While the targets were similar, gripping and tactics were forced to change due to blades or being mounted on horseback. The two most widely used weapons in Japan's history, despite popular belief, were the bow & arrow and the spear. Do you honestly believe the weapons were employed in the same manner? Again, this is a conversation for another thread however.

Again this is not quite accurate. Japan went through stages of war and stages of "non-war". Depending on the time of their creation, schools catered for different needs.

Early Bushi often fought on horseback (with bow & arrow) and the use of Yari, Naginata etc. featured in their skill set, however in the later schools - techniques reflected the less "battlefield" type engagement and thus weapons like these weren't taught so much.

The style of swordsmanship also changed to incorporate things like Batto-jutsu (whereas before the Bushi had no need for fast drawing of the sword as they had unsheathed their weapon well before engagement began on the battlefield).

Atemi-jutsu also became more relevant with the wearing of civilian clothes (and less armour).

Edo period styles (like Tenshin shinyo ryu and Kito ryu) did not teach Bow and arrow, and Sojutsu.

The connectivity between weapon work and Jujutsu I was referring to is between the uchigatana, kodachi, tanto and hand to hand and I can tell you first hand that the techniques do transfer.

So when I mentioned perspective - that is what I meant, and although BJJ as a sport has paved the way for a new level of technical ability and Skill, chances are you would find many of the techniques the BJJ guys do today buried deep in scrolls of schools like Tenshin Shinyo-ryu, Takenouchiryu and Kito-ryu etc.

We won't get into the "scrolls" thing. Especially since there is little evidence they exist in that manner.

That’s an interesting statement. Why? Do you believe that they don't?

I have seen my teacher’s scrolls so I can tell you that they certainly do for my group.

So, again, when you say that BJJ stylists "need" to put things into perspective, my opinion is you are quite incorrect. I think you'd find that most skilled BJJ stylists know the history of their style and its origins. They can tell you about Mitsuyo Maeda, Jigoro Kano, Judo, the Fusen Ryu (from which Judo got much of it's newaza). Having trained in Diato Ryu Aiki Jujitsu, Kwanmukan Jujitsu, and with the Seishinkan under John Viol Shihan (http://www.seishinkan.com/martial_members_area/john_viol_daishihan_menkyokaiden.htm), I have seen few parallels between them and BJJ other than the basic aesthetics of the techniques. The methods of attaining joint locks and pins in more traditional systems are far different. As I stated earlier, understanding the basic mechanics of the moves helped me with BJJ, but the joint manipulations and chokes are the endgame of the art, not the art itself. BJJ is far more about transitional fluidity toward positional dominance than the chokes and joint locks.

I have a lot of trouble understanding your point. Pointing out the history of the styles and saying to “put it in perspective” has no bearing on the topic at hand. The OP stated disgust with the view that many “mma” and BJJ people have about JJJ; most specifically in takedown ability. Honestly, I’ve only seen a handful of such arguments. BJJ is certainly not known for amazing takedowns as a whole and MMA is a sport (some of its players haven’t ever taken anyone down and prefer to keep it on the feet to kickbox). So, I’m not sure how ancient wartime training has a lot to do with the topic at hand. Interesting to debate? Maybe. Relevant? IMO not really.

My point was simply a response to the OPs opening statement.

[ps1]

As I understand it, most of the core techniques in Judo came from Tenshin Shinyo-ryu and/or Kito-ryu. Kano sensei was well studied in both of these Koryu and it was from these that 99% of all of the core techniques of Judo came from. Also don't underestimate the influence of Sumo in the equation.

He did study classical ryu. However, he is still credited for coming up with many of the techniques of Judo. 99% would be an exaggerated figure. You can learn more about it in the many articles at https://www.judoinfo.com

He also did not “invent” Randori - it was practiced by styles like Yoshin-ryu.

No, he didn’t. He is the person (at least in the modern era) who is credited for realizing the true value of Randori. That is, being able to practice “non lethal” techniques at 100% resistance is infinitely more valuable than practicing lethal techniques with little to no resistance. He brought the idea of randori into the limelight and even had it made into an Olympic sport (the benefits of that can be discussed at another time and place).

In most Koryu' date=' "Jujutsu" refers to the unarmed section of the syllabus - so there is no weapon work per-se. That said, because the principles run through all sections of the syllabus - it would be wrong to study a section remotely. [/quote']

What you say is only true if someone wants to train in a classical system. I can't study BJJ and then claim to be an expert in a koryu, and BJJ stylists don’t do this. I have, however, seen the opposite happen quite frequently, but that's dishonesty and a topic for a different thread.

You have misunderstood - I meant from a ryu -ha perspective, in that “correctly” all aspects should be trained in parallel.

Fair enough. I see your point.

I understand what you are saying, and again I make the analogy not to belittle or offend - but the truth is the core skills were bourne out of the Koryu schools - granted the skills have been improved upon, but nonetheless they were there.

Absolutely yes. But no one is arguing the origin of the core skills. Things like armbars and chokes have been around for centuries. Same goes for a lot of the hip movement and balance work. However, it’s the finer details that will make or break the art.

Again this is not quite accurate. Japan went through stages of war and stages of "non-war". Depending on the time of their creation, schools catered for different needs.

Early Bushi often fought on horseback (with bow & arrow) and the use of Yari, Naginata etc. featured in their skill set, however in the later schools - techniques reflected the less "battlefield" type engagement and thus weapons like these weren't taught so much.

The style of swordsmanship also changed to incorporate things like Batto-jutsu (whereas before the Bushi had no need for fast drawing of the sword as they had unsheathed their weapon well before engagement began on the battlefield).

Atemi-jutsu also became more relevant with the wearing of civilian clothes (and less armour).

Edo period styles (like Tenshin shinyo ryu and Kito ryu) did not teach Bow and arrow, and Sojutsu.

The connectivity between weapon work and Jujutsu I was referring to is between the uchigatana, kodachi, tanto and hand to hand and I can tell you first hand that the techniques do transfer.

Ok. I see your point in terms of the evolution of warfare. However, in 25 years of training, no one has ever been able to convince me that all things transfer. I’ve dealt with some very classically trained people. The fact is, as the blade shortens your strategies and tactics change. Musashi wrote an entire book on swordsmanship and discussed this very subject. The basics are always there. Footwork, hip movement, connectivity to the earth and opponent, evasion ect…but the way you employ your techniques will change. As a solider I feel believing anything else is simply foolish and will get you killed in combat. There’s nothing you will ever type to change my mind on the subject. I’ve worked with very skilled people and they haven’t done it yet.

So when I mentioned perspective - that is what I meant' date=' and although BJJ as a sport has paved the way for a new level of technical ability and Skill, chances are you would find many of the techniques the BJJ guys do today buried deep in scrolls of schools like Tenshin Shinyo-ryu, Takenouchiryu and Kito-ryu etc.[/quote']

We won't get into the "scrolls" thing. Especially since there is little evidence they exist in that manner.

That’s an interesting statement. Why? Do you believe that they don't?

Because few, if any , ancient scrolls contained specific techniques. They tend to speak more to the lineage or basic strategy (long sword, short sword, horsemanship ect…) of a system. The specifics of the techniques were taught to people and it was for them to correctly pass on the information. I’ve never seen a translated scroll that speaks to the importance of underhook control on a half guard pass or using the back of the knee to “bite” the leg while mounting or how the inside leg can be used to set up a good x guard. Those kinds of things would never have fit on a scroll. I can think of at least 20 details to a basic mount with underhook control. Now combine all the variations (opponent is pushing, opponent is turning, opponent is shrimping ect…) One basic move can then have hundreds of steps. I just don’t see all that being in any scroll.

I have seen my teacher’s scrolls so I can tell you that they certainly do for my group.

That must be one heck of a scroll/group of scrolls. My guess would be that they were made in a more modern time. Because writing it down simply wasn’t done much in the past. But hey, your instructor may have a very rare artifact.

It really comes down to this:

Jiu-Jitsu is far more than the sum of its parts. You will never contain all of its nuance in any written work. It must be experienced for an extended period of time to truly understand what you’re learning. Until then it looks like the same moves. But it's not about the moves it's about making the moves work for you.