SevenStar Posted November 7, 2003 Posted November 7, 2003 Well, yes, I'll agree that MMA does tend to have grapplers winning, but I don't believe that MMA is a fair comparison to actual fighting. Of course, there are those that disagree and there's been numerous threads on that topic in the past. 1. you're right, but that's about as close as you can get to real fighting 2. how do you spar? full contact with takedowns? only self defense drills? light contact? many people's training methods lul them into a false sense of security...
SevenStar Posted November 7, 2003 Posted November 7, 2003 It makes me laugh how many people says that their styles can deal with "mutiple attackers" and that BJJ doesn't, when in a ring they can't deal with neither one guy... Well, in "the ring" usually both people have practiced BJJ at least some. Would it then be fair to say that half the time a BJJ practitioner goes into the ring he/she loses? That argument is no more valid than saying Karate is no good because in a karate-only tournament most of the guys end up losing. I hate to seem skeptical, but to my knowledge the defense in BJJ relies on manipulation of the other persons body, to remove their ability to fight back. How would one go about doing this to multiple attackers? bjj also includes standup throws, like judo. Heck, there are dozens of bjj guys, myself included, who also train judo. Where I train, standup techniques and self defense drills are a mandatory part of the beginner's curriculum.
Treebranch Posted November 7, 2003 Posted November 7, 2003 What Karate are you talking about? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Okinawan Karate used in Combat? If so, then it had to be design to deal with multiple attackers. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Treebranch Posted November 7, 2003 Posted November 7, 2003 By the way BJJ is very different than Karate. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
SevenStar Posted November 10, 2003 Posted November 10, 2003 I've trained in both- I'm very aware how different they are. What I meant by bjj being no different is that it's not designed for multiple attackers, but can be aplied to multiple attacker situations. Being designed for combat doesn't imply that it's designed for multiple attackers by any means. Just as the karate guy will kick and punch, the bjj guy will throw and sweep, and use his ground knowledge to efficiently get up from the ground if he goes down.
JohnnyS Posted November 10, 2003 Posted November 10, 2003 Can we get an official definition for the word "combat"? Does it mean "armed conflict"? Does it mean "streetfights"? Does it mean "bar-room brawls"? The reason I ask is because Treebranch says that Okinwan karate was used in combat, but what exactly does this mean. As far as I know it was never used against an invading force in an armed conflict was it ? BJJ - Black Belt under John Will (Machado)Shootfighting - 3rd Degree Black BeltTKD - Black Belt
Treebranch Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 I don't know, I thought it was. Train for stand up, train for ground. What about what's in the middle? "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
JohnnyS Posted November 11, 2003 Posted November 11, 2003 I can't find any references to karate (or tode)actually being used in armed conflict, which is why I'm suspicious of the claim. It would make more sense to teach people rudimentary skills with weapons for guerilla fighting rather than a complex system of unarmed combat. BJJ - Black Belt under John Will (Machado)Shootfighting - 3rd Degree Black BeltTKD - Black Belt
Treebranch Posted November 12, 2003 Posted November 12, 2003 JohnnyS, a good system of fighting teaches unarmed combat in which the movements and fighting in general is the same with or without a weapon. Of course practicing weapons is necessary, but both were practiced. If you lost your weapon you had to know what to do. Also you had to be able to pick up anything and use it. "It is easier to find men who will volunteer to die, than to find those who are willing to endure pain with patience.""Lock em out or Knock em out"
Warp Spider Posted November 12, 2003 Posted November 12, 2003 My understanding was that the Okinawans did not have access to weapons because there was some kind of ban on them or something. Also I heard they were farmers so guerilla warfare might be out of the question. Plus I'm not sure that guerilla warfare had really developed by then. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Recommended Posts