BJJ and Multiple Opponents

[JohnnyS]

Treebranch,

 

I agree with what you're saying. However, I don't believe that if you want to train people to fight a guerilla war against your oppressors, that you would spend years teaching them karate. Just as the modern and ancient armed forces don't/didn't spend much time teaching unarmed combat, why would the Okinawans try to teach karate when thye could just teach some basic skills with weapons and get a much better cost/benefit ratio? I understand that weapons were banned in Okinawa at that time, but it still doesn't make sense to teach people karate to fight against samurai armed with swords, halberds etc.

 

I just have a problem with people saying that karate, or kung-fu etc is combat tested, when the reality is that armies teach their soldiers to use weapons and try to teach them as much as they can in a short a time as possible.

[Treebranch]

So way have a system of fighting if there is no outside force to fight?

[JohnnyS]

Can you see the difference though?

 

If it's used for self-defence then fine, but that's completely different to saying it's "combat tested" or "combat proven" which suggests it's been used as a primary tool in wars. Undoubtedly there are people who have used their skills in a war environment however we don't have soldiers being trained to defeat their opponent's using BJJ, or karate or kung-fu etc. They are trained to use their weapons, and any spare time they have might be spent on a little bit of unarmed training, but no-one taught their soldiers karate and said "Now go get 'em".

[Treebranch]

Sure, but you have to look at MA's in the context in which they were created. Some systems like Pre-1800's Jujutsu taught both simultaneously, weapons and unarmed. This is the beauty of this art. Same stuff, the only thing that drastically changes is distance and timing. The key is that the body creates the strikes and everything else, offensively and defensively. You don't abandon the techniques when you have a weapon in hand or vice versa. But I do see what you are saying.

[SevenStar]

the empty hand was only for use if their weapon was lost. That being the case, they were likely focusing on weapons more than empty hand. That's why Kano's judo guys mauled them in tournies. They focused on empty hand effectiveness only.

[Treebranch]

No Kano's Judo guys were Jujutsu before they were Judo so they knew things the Jujutsu guys lacked and the Jujutsu guys couldn't use strikes in the tournament. Strikes are a huge part of Jujutsu and was concidered too violent after the Unification of Japan. Besides we don't know how big or small they were and if the Judo guys out weighed the Jujutsu guys. For your information, when Americans started learning Judo they excelled faster because of their size. So size has a lot to do with it. But with real Jujutsu in a real situation you equal out the equation with a stick or knife or whatever it takes to survive. It's just a different MA better for real life, not better for competition. Is that so hard to believe, or have your instructors fed you a bunch of lies. I hear it all the time, that Traditional stuff doesn't work. How would they know if they do something completely different?

 

By the way the hand to hand was used by Police and they used a Jutte instead of a sword. These guys were fierce and could control and subdue a Samurai even against a sword. They may have mauled them in tournies, but the Judo guys would have been sitting ducks in the battlefield.

[JohnnyS]

Actually, I remember one of the Judo competitors (Saito I think) was very much out-weighed by his Ju-jitsu opponent who was much, much larger.

[Treebranch]

That's nice.

[SevenStar]

No Kano's Judo guys were Jujutsu before they were Judo so they knew things the Jujutsu guys lacked and the Jujutsu guys couldn't use strikes in the tournament.[/b]

 

Which is something I've always had a problem with. IMO, if an art is going to be effective, you should be able to always be effective with it. I train muay thai, but when I fight in American rules matches, I can't use knees or leg kicks, which are a HUGE part of what I do. Does that handicap me? No. I can fight waist level and above, and I have good hands. I am also a sankyu in judo, and train with shuai chiao (chinese fast wrestling) guys. the shuai chiao guys use strikes to set up throws, like jjj, I'd imagine, but they don't HAVE to. they know the throws and principles well enough that they can just move in and go for a throw. That may have been a training oversight on the part of the jj guys that lost to kano.

 

For your information, when Americans started learning Judo they excelled faster because of their size. So size has a lot to do with it.

 

I do agree - size has plenty to do with it, but that's not what excelled Americans. competition is what excelled them. Traditional Judo training is different in application from competition. Watch a judo tourney - How often do you see an orthodox, by the book japanese O soto gari work? Not very. It is thrown from various angles with different grips, because it's just too hard to run through an experienced judo player with a traditional o soto. The americans and the europeans recognized that and adapted their training. That's why they excelled.

 

But with real Jujutsu in a real situation you equal out the equation with a stick or knife or whatever it takes to survive. It's just a different MA better for real life, not better for competition. Is that so hard to believe, or have your instructors fed you a bunch of lies. I hear it all the time, that Traditional stuff doesn't work. How would they know if they do something completely different?

 

I've trained in shotokan, tang soo do, done 4 years of longfist kung fu, a couple years of kali... I know plenty about traditional training. but this isn't the feudal era. you aren't walking around with sticks and knives. you may not be able to pick a stick up off the ground, and may not be able to get to that knife that's in your pocket. You may only have your hands when you are attacked. Considering my traditional background, I won't say traditional styles don't work - I know they do, but not because of weapons training. What many people are actually trying to say is that some traditional schools don't work, not the style itself. There are plenty of traditional schools who half train, aren't in good shape, don't spend sufficient time doing applications against resistance, sparring with contact, etc. that's something you will not find in a sport style because those are whay the sport styles are built on. Those are also factors that help determine the outcome of a fight.

 

By the way the hand to hand was used by Police and they used a Jutte instead of a sword. These guys were fierce and could control and subdue a Samurai even against a sword.

 

yeah, I know. my uncle was a marine in Okinawa and has told me plenty of stories about the japanese police. I hear the hong kong police are awesome also. That's not because of their style though, it's because of their training.

[Treebranch]

O.K. so it's the training methods, not the system of fighting that's the key to effectiveness. I would now like to hear a resounding Amen. There is a God we've finally made a break through.

 

So by that logic if the training methods of Sport MA's were employed in TMA's the good one's it would be a different story altogether. Yes.