Whats the difference between BJJ and JJ

[FightClub101]

I agree with metamorph. Helio Gracie changed the whole style of BJJ and introduced leverage. Being only 145 lbs Helio was submitting opponents who were more that twice his weight. It doesn't matter how big you are. An arm bar is still an arm bar. A choke is still a choke. Besides, it can take 10 years to reach Black Belt in BJJ or even longer. I've been training Muay Thai, Filipino Martial Arts, Jeet Kune Do, Wrestling and BJJ and my favorite by far is BJJ. In my opinion it's the most effective and practical martial art around. If you can knock someone out with a Karate kick of punch more power to you but 85% of all fights end up on the ground.

 

No one can knock BJJ if they have never trained in it.

 

Peace!!

 

FightClub.com

[Treebranch]

85% of all fights end up on the ground. Wow, I give BJJ an A+ for the best MA marketing slogan ever created to sell a MA. I'll fight any BJJ fanatic on the roof of my house.

[goshinman]

85% of all fights end up on the ground. Wow, I give BJJ an A+ for the best MA marketing slogan ever created to sell a MA. I'll fight any BJJ fanatic on the roof of my house.

 

LOL at Treebranch!! Damn funny guy. I haven't laughed that hard in some time ! You notice that the infamous "fights ending up on the ground" stat keeps getting lower? At first it was 98% end up on the ground, then it went to 95%, then 85% and now I think Jim Wagner has it at 75%! All of this in spite of the fact that the original statistic was talking about cops and prison guards who get into fights with criminals, not civilian fights. The latest figure has civialians going down at about 70-75 % of the time with 51% of those being females! Talk about obfuscation of the facts. But the Gracie machine rolls on

Edited September 2, 2003 by goshinman

[Treebranch]

Yeah Goshiman can you believe people are still using that statistic to justify BJJ. BJJ is good, it doesn't need such silliness to sell it. If people like ground fighting and grappling it's damn good, but it's funny when people say that kind of stuff.

[goshinman]

Yeah Goshiman can you believe people are still using that statistic to justify BJJ. BJJ is good, it doesn't need such silliness to sell it. If people like ground fighting and grappling it's damn good, but it's funny when people say that kind of stuff.

 

What's interesting to me is the fact that even the Gracies don't advocate ground fighting for a street confrontation. In Royces' bjj for self defense book he has very few ground fighting techniques. As a matter of fact it begins to look more like japanese jujutsu when you look at the techniques he teaches in the book. There is even an interview done in blackbelt mag where Rickson talks about the vast difference in a street fight as opposed to fighting in a sporting event here> http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/blackbelt/1998/dec98/nhb.html

 

You would think that there followers would have the same sense when it comes to realising the limitations of there own style. Bjj is great against a trained opponent because it takes him out of his comfort zone and puts him in a situation where he is not comfortable and cannot use all of his weapons against the person who has trained extensively for the situation i.e ground fighting. It was a great strategy used by the gracies because they knew that most American martial artists had very limited experience with grappling in general and ground grappling in paticular in stark contrast to say, Japan where most of the fighters are great wrestlers and Judoka. I love the Gracies for what they have done, they showed the world that with jujitsu and grappling arts that a martial artist is not just someone who punches and kicks people into bloody heaps of flesh, but can be humane by applying holds and restraining techniques designed to bring an opponent into submission rather then busting up faces. Such is the very essence of Jujutsu or the "yielding art", we can serverly injure you if need be, but we would much rather restrain and control you so that serious injury can be avoided.

 

Royce showed that in the first ufc's when he was submitting opponents sometimes without ever throwing a punch while most of the other guys where kicking people in the face getting teeth stuck into their foot and busting open peoples heads. That is why I consider Gracie jiujitsu to be a true jujutsu art along side of TJJ and judo. But I am also disapointed with them because of the style superiority complex that they have brought into today's martial artists.

[kenpo4life]

I dont mean disrespect, but this is getting foolish. Helio Gracie, acording to members of his family and their followers claim that he refined everything. Have you ever seen Kosen judo? Without the striking component, it is just like bjj. Check out judo in action, grappling techniques and see all of " bjj's" omoplatas, triangles, guard sweeps and the like. There is no way that Helio could have made all of those refinements himself, since he was busy teaching every day all day. Read the Gracie way and get a feel for his schedule. I think that Carlson, Rolls and the Brazilian Top Team are responsible for a great deal of the bjj that we now see.

 

Tibby,

 

Bjj isnt a whole different art, it is a whole different type of marketing. Like SEVERAL NON-BRAZILIANS have told me, including Gene Simco ( Aranha for those who have heard of him at jiujitsu.net ) bjj is old school judo with strikes included. His brown belt under Reylson tends to make me agree with his assesment.

 

Also, I trained with Royce WAY back in the day for a little. The original claim was" 95% of fights end up in a CLINCH. A bjj man could then do a takedown and sub the guy. Plus, fighting in Brasil has developed differently than in the US. So maybe in brazilian fights that is true, but certainly not here.

[goshinman]

Well said Kenpo4life but I think you are beating a dead horse here and I will tell you why. I have been studying Japanese Jujutsu for a few years now. I have rolled with both judo players and Bjj people and for the most part have done well. When I beat a judo guy he simply complimented me on my technique and we talked about Jujutsu and how some of the jujutsuka are starting to get more serious about randori and Ne waza. When I beat a Bjj guy he REFUSED to belive that I had learned all of my skills from TJJ. We got into a little debate about the origin of the techniques used in BJJ. I tried to explain to him that Bjj got most of it's moves form kodokan judo and judo got it's moves form Jujutsu. He argued that BJJ is superior in technique to judo and has chokes and submissions that are unique to it. I showed him the classic text "Judo in action" and he was stunned at the number of techniques that Bjj had in common with Judo and reluctantly acknowleged that they were the same techniques. The problem is that BJJ people go through great lengths to conceal the roots of Bjj to maintain the impression that bjj is something new and what not. And I don't think the fact that their video "Gracie jiu jitsu in action" sounds similar to "judo in action" is a coincidence either. Edited September 17, 2003 by goshinman

[Sens55]

Goshinman & Kenpo,

 

I agree with you and completely disagree with Tibby. I have studied BJJ for a while until the commute to the school became a burden. I then took up TJJ closer to home. I have yet to see anything I learned in BJJ that I haven't seen in TJJ. I will say that I have seen plenty in TJJ that I did not see in BJJ. Certainly there are differences. Focus of training, training style and setups come easily to mind. However, there was remarkedly little focus on striking, in which there was a fair amount in the TJJ. The BJJ school and the TJJ school I studied at had an open randori, and it got ugly when the matches ended up being pretty even. We don't wear belts or gis in our classes, so there were accusations of guys rolling in lower belt classes and other things. And that brings me to what I think is one of the original selling points of BJJ, and now, to me, one of it's ugly sides and that's the machismo.

 

I'll try to stay away from sweeping generalizations, but it's a solid fact that machismo plays an very important role in most South American countries. It's a mark of manliness, verility and is highly esteemed. In fact, without a little bravado, it's hard to get respect. That is the culture. And that attitude was a siren's call when it came north because many of the traditional MA had become PC milquetoast. However, the BJJ mark is now well-established (and well-earned), but in many of its practitioners it's become arrogance. And what is worse, many of those that bash TJJ and say BJJ is better have never seen the other side and are baseing their claims on hearsay and ignorance.

 

All of this is well and good, but to say that it is an completely different art is WAY off in my opinion. It's not. It's a certain style of JJ, not a completely new art. Just like various forms of Karate and TKD have different schools within their art, so does JJ. I just would like to see those that brag that "my school's better than yours" try both schools before saying that.

[Sens55]

I should also put as an addendum, that this is based on my experiences. I read earlier where JohnnyS had TJJ schools say they had to learn some ridiculous amount of throws before they could work on ground. That's not the way it is at our school. It's TJJ, but a lot of the formality is dropped. It's very laid back in formility (somewhat similar to my BJJ class), but there's a somedays where it's stand up, some days it's throws, some days it ground, some days it's all of the above. So, I can say with honesty that I could study the same art at a different school and not like it as much.

[Treebranch]

Well guys I have alot of respect for what BJJ has done, but it is the off spring of TJJ. It is closer to Judo than it is to TJJ. I study very old JJ and my teacher has sparred with the Machados and they were impressed with his skills. He submitted them a few times and vice versa. So both arts are valid, no one art is better. Better is the practioner that trains hard.