Difference Between BJJ, Jujutsu and Kung Fu

nino1

whats the difference between traditional jj and bjj?

This question was initially posted in this thread, but I've moved it and the following responses as they go a bit far from the original topic.

- Doug Cartel

cowzerp

nino1 wrote: »

whats the difference between traditional jj and bjj?

Very basic explanation but JJJ is more like Kung Fu and BJJ is Purely grappling based art, BJJ's origins come from JJJ but they are totally different, Judo would be more like BJJ.

OLDMAN1

cowzerp wrote: »

Very basic explanation but JJJ is more like Kung Fu

Would you explain?

cowzerp

OLDMAN1 wrote: »

Would you explain?

Basically it's a striking art with some grappling where Bjj is a pure grappling art, kung Fu is well known so suitable example in my opinion.

Does that suit you or do you want to make more of it!

ryoishin

Traditional can mean anything though. Most "traditional" jiu jitsu clubs are a mix of judo and karate in varing degrees.

Japanese jujutsu, as in what was thought in Japan before it was modernised, is usually grappling based with limited strking depending on the time period it comes from. Theres very little Japanese jujutsu in Ireland.

Niall Keane

Well I don't want to speak for "oldman" but saying JJJ is like Kung Fu is like saying JJJ is like martial arts! There are over 200 recognised styles of kung Fu in china, now the relatively small anglocentric world with its limited exposure might view "Kung Fu" as a style in itself but that's just ignorant in the true meaning of the word!
R could you care to express how say "tong bai", "Chang Chuan" "Shen Xi Quan" "White eyebrow" and say "Chang family boxing" are similar to JJJ?
From my limited knowledge JJJ was introduce by two "Chen" brothers from China who were "Nei Jia" practitioners in Nagasaki around 1640.Their "Nei jia" was "six paths and ten tapestries" which from my point of view is considerably different in approach and training methods from te styles I have mentioned, particularly in its "Shen fa" or am I missing something??? And I've made this question easy as all styles mentioned above are internal!

dasmoose

I'd say your knowledge of martial arts history is far better than mine Niall but I think it's also worth bearing in mind that most 'traditional' or 'Japanese' jujitsu in the uk and Ireland was really just cobbled together bits of karate judo and aikido invented about 30-40 years ago. Particularly the world jujitsu federation I believe, where you'll learn 400 different responses to a haymaker...

cowzerp

Niall Keane wrote: »

Well I don't want to speak for "oldman" but saying JJJ is like Kung Fu is like saying JJJ is like martial arts! There are over 200 recognised styles of kung Fu in china, now the relatively small anglocentric world with its limited exposure might view "Kung Fu" as a style in itself but that's just ignorant in the true meaning of the word!

Niall im not talking about Iron shoulder flying tiger Kung fu, was just giving a very simplified explanation that BJJ is grappling and JJJ is more a striking art with some grappling more similar to Kung fu as people know it, better example than Kickboxing-Kung fu as most people know it is more like JJJ, I was not explaining it to Kung Fu aficionados like you.

And this Jiu Jitsu thread should not be Hijacked by you trying to preach Kung fu in all its forms, it's not peoples fault that Kung fu as they know it is what Bruce lee showed them and he never explained the hundreds of various versions of Kung fu.

There is hundreds of threads on here wrote by you with huge paragraphs that people get bored reading cause there so long on here that we don't need to add to it here.

Michael O Leary

Hi all,

From what I have read, when Chinese people want to stress that they are referring to Chinese martial arts they either use the term "Kuo Shu" in Mandarin or "Kwok Sut" in Cantonese. Otherwise they will use the terms "Wu Shu" or "Kung Fu" which are terms to describe all martial arts such as BJJ, Karate, etc. And "Wu Shu" is more of a formal term for martial arts whereas "Kung Fu" is an informal term and can also apply to skill in cooking.

In his book, "Mastering Jujitsu", Renzo Gracie writes that there are four main differences between traditional Jujitsu and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.

1. Positional Strategy
2. Training Methods
3. Point System
4. Technique Differences

Regards,

Michael

OLDMAN1

cowzerp wrote: »

Niall im not talking about Iron shoulder flying tiger Kung fu, was just giving a very simplified explanation that BJJ is grappling and JJJ is more a striking art with some grappling more similar to Kung fu as people know it, better example than Kickboxing-Kung fu as most people know it is more like JJJ, I was not explaining it to Kung Fu aficionados like you.

And this Jiu Jitsu thread should not be Hijacked by you trying to preach Kung fu in all its forms, it's not peoples fault that Kung fu as they know it is what Bruce lee showed them and he never explained the hundreds of various versions of Kung fu.

There is hundreds of threads on here wrote by you with huge paragraphs that people get bored reading cause there so long on here that we don't need to add to it here.

First of all i have always found Nialls posts very intresting, just because you dont is of no concern to me, nobody was hijacking the thrend, i just asked you to explain your statement because anyone that would say that obviously hasn't got a clue about chinese martial arts as a hole but thinks they do, is that making enough of it for you!!!

Chris89

Nobody ever argues about Jiu Jitsu on this forum do they?

Sid_Justice

nino1 wrote: »

whats the difference between traditional jj and bjj?

BJJ is the art and sport of highly skilled ground grappling. It focuses on strategic and technical superiority over speed, strength and aggression. Traditional is iujitsu is not this.

BJJ is a fairly homogeneous martial art, BJJ in one school will be grossly similar to BJJ in another school, even at the widest spread of the spectrum. Do you know what BJJ is?

Judo again is fairly homogeneous, Judo in Japan isn't a whole lot different to Judo in San Francisco or Donnycarney.

With regard to Traditional Jiujitsu, I don't even think the guys can agree on how to spell it (jujitsu, jujutsu, ju-jitsu,ju-jutsu,jiu-jitsu, jiujitsu). I think the last time I talked about this on boards I think it got broken down into 'Classical' Jiujitsu, 'Traditional' and 'Modern'.

Just looked it up on boards, from a post about 4 years ago. The website this is quoted from is gone i think but it was quoted

http://www.kyushoshinjitsu.com/ wrote:

To answer the two big questions, what is the difference between Classical Ju-Jutsu, Traditional Ju-Jutsu [Ju-Jitsu et al] and modern Ju-Jitsu [jiu-jitsu, jiujitsu etc]. And the answer is really quite simple, and hardly rocket science.

Modern Ju-Jit su etc. is not, in the real sense, anything to do with Ju-Jutsu, either Traditional or Classical. It is a mix of Judo, Karate and Aikido techniques, blended into a nice glitzy package.A very limited number of techniques, and plenty of ‘variations’ on the basic technique.
The emphasis varies from school to school, some being very fashion conscious, giving the student what they want, or what is most likely to pull in the new members, so it could be Brazilian Jiu-jitsu this week, or full contact next week, or even gymnastics, if that is what pulls people in.


Modern Ju-Jitsu, jiu-jitsu etc. owes more to Judo, and boxing, Karate and sport grappling, than to any real interpretation of the Art of Ju-Jutsu, in the actual or practical sense. Among those who teach modern Ju-Jitsu, there are those, as always, whop are dedicated to the ideal, and demonstrate excellence, and personify their Art. Unfortunately, they are far too few. For the main part, the emphasis is on competition, either grappling, standing combat, or a gymnastic display.


This does NOT make it bad; it is just a slight case of misrepresentation. For the likes of the modern sport grappling forms, including jiu-jitsu, the words practical and Martial Art, should not be used in the same breath. It is a very enjoyable way to train, and has a huge following, the only thing wrong, is the term Ju-Jitsu, because it simply isn’t.

Traditional Ju-Jitsu [Ju-Jutsu] uses Karate style punches, sometimes even Karate style Kata, and incorporates throws, locks, holds, chokes/strangles, and Kata, some even preserve the old traditions, such as the nerve locks, and the weapon skills. But the emphasis on developing a sporting aspect, for Ju-Jitsu, is threatening the very existence of not only the Traditional Ju-Jitsu Ryu, but also the Classical Ryu as well. In the Traditional Styles, there is a set syllabus, and the traditions are adhered to, the discipline is strong in the Dojo, and the Sensei is extremely knowledgeable.


There is respect shown for the other Bugei Arts, and in doing this; they show themselves also, as worthy of respect. It is fun to do, and suitable for practical use, in a life threatening situation.

The Classical format of Ju-Jutsu is very much the subject of conversation by the ignorant.
A recent visitor, doing a bit of “sussing out” came along to a session, one session, and from this, was able to judge that we taught only wrist locks, [which never work] and that we taught a few pressure points. A truth, for those who like to talk Martial Arts, instead of doing Martial Arts, there is no such thing as a lock; a lock is a break, end of story. Only, we can’t do that, now, can we? It would not be politically correct, and you can lose so many students that way. When you break their wrists, they don't come back, strange.

But, he should have come along for the next session, because no two sessions in Classical Ju-Jutsu are the same, we do NOT teach ‘a few wristlocks’, or ‘a few pressure points’. In fact what is taught in the Style of Kyushoshinjitsu, Ju-Jutsu, is 9 weapons skills, taught to the basic proficiency level.

Ken [Sword]
Bo [6ft staff]
Hanbo [4ft staff]
Tanto [knife]
Yubi-Bo [finger staff]
Nawa [rope]
Tanbo [small staff, 10 ins]
Jo [baton]
Tanjo [twin batons]
We teach all the Classical virtues;

Te Waza [hand techniques]
Nage-Waza [throwing techniques]
Keri-Waza [kicking techniques]
Jintai- Kyusho [vital points]
Ne-Waza] ground techniques] armed and unarmed defense, and also the Classical Kata, both Sho-nin [solo] and Ni-Nin [two person].
We also teach the art of Koppo Jutsu [bone breaking] both in Ju-Jutsu, and in the Seibutsu Yanagi Aiki Ju-Jutsu.But as can be imagined, these techniques are only taught to students at Dan Grade or above.

We are Ju-Jutsu, not “that stuff on the ground”.

.

Not sure who wrote that, but it's written from the perspective of someone doing 'Classical Jujutsu' who isn't overly fond of other 'jiujitsu' particularly BJJ.

Website relocated to hear
http://www.ijjk.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1&Itemid=1

cowzerp

I don't care or want to know all about Kung Fu on a jiu jitsu thread, it's not relevant, my example was a good 1 for someone who knows little about martial arts and was not Meant to start a debate on what Kung Fu is, I never said his posts where crap but there always too long and I guarantee you only Kung Fu people read the whole thing without switching off.

Anyway to the person who asked for the difference I hope I helped a little.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Clive wrote: »

What a great welcome to the BJJ community :rolleyes:

Unfortunetly it happens all too often around here.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Ok sorry for the slow reaction time to this, but life gets in the way of boards.ie sometimes... So I'll continue.

This was a very good, simple and clear explaination from Paul;

cowzerp wrote: »

Very basic explanation but JJJ is more like Kung Fu and BJJ is Purely grappling based art, BJJ's origins come from JJJ but they are totally different, Judo would be more like BJJ.

This was a question which lead to the thread going off topic;

OLDMAN1 wrote: »

Would you explain?

And this, although short & sweet was off topic.

Niall Keane wrote: »

Well I don't want to speak for "oldman" but saying JJJ is like Kung Fu is like saying JJJ is like martial arts! There are over 200 recognised styles of kung Fu in china, now the relatively small anglocentric world with its limited exposure might view "Kung Fu" as a style in itself but that's just ignorant in the true meaning of the word!
R could you care to express how say "tong bai", "Chang Chuan" "Shen Xi Quan" "White eyebrow" and say "Chang family boxing" are similar to JJJ?
From my limited knowledge JJJ was introduce by two "Chen" brothers from China who were "Nei Jia" practitioners in Nagasaki around 1640.Their "Nei jia" was "six paths and ten tapestries" which from my point of view is considerably different in approach and training methods from te styles I have mentioned, particularly in its "Shen fa" or am I missing something??? And I've made this question easy as all styles mentioned above are internal!

And this;

cowzerp wrote: »

Does that suit you or do you want to make more of it!

Reads as overly aggressive.

Lads lets keep the chats on topic.. All too often a newbie comes in here with a simple question which then quickly turns into a cluster f*ck like this.

My turn to go off topic but I'll get it out here and its not up for discussion..

Its been said to me a ton of times that there's too much BJJ, Judo & Muay Thai bias on the forum and it makes other's feel unwelcome. Its something I'm well aware of, as are the other moderators - we've tried to address the issue a few times but without the co-operation of everyone in the forum the status quo will remain.

Barry.Oglesby

I don't know about biases or anything like that, but I can certainly see why someone wouldn't want to post about their Karate or Kung Fu training when generalisations like Paul's description above exist. I know Paul meant no offence by it but if someone said something similar about BJJ or Muay Thai then you can imagine there'd be a fall out.

Anyway. To the OP. I think you'll find most clubs extremely welcoming of newcomers regardless of their level of training or background. We're all trying to build our clubs to be as popular and successful as possible so I'm sure regardless of what you've done before you'll be welcomed wherever you go. A word to the wise on your background would be that it may be a little more like changing codes when you're training. ie. like going from Rugby Union to Rugby League. There'll be a lot in common with what you've done before but the style of the game is a bit different though the ultimate goal is the same.

Regarding the differences or similarities between Japanese/Traditional/Brazilian Jiu Jitsu I'd say that the biggest difference would be that people who do Japanese JJ would say that it's the best, people who do Traditional would say it's the best, and people who do Brazilian would say it's the best. It's sort of a common theme .

Regardless of where you end up I hope you enjoy the sport/art and all it has to offer.

cowzerp

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

but I can certainly see why someone wouldn't want to post about their Karate or Kung Fu training when generalisations like Paul's description above exist.

What generalisations? I Said nothing offensive or bad against Kung Fu-arguing with me because there is 100's of styles of Kung fu on a JJ thread is just pointless as i was just giving a very basic indication which definetly gave the question asker a better idea what both BJJ and JJJ are.

question was asked about difference between BJJ and JJJ and as a basic explanation i used Kung fu as an example of been a striking art with grappling also, then was basically attacked because (I DON;T REALLY EVEN KNOW)

This would be like me getting offended because someone said BJJ is a grappling art like Judo, even though there very different but close enough that it is a good example to someone who knows nothing.

Barry.Oglesby

I know you meant nothing by it, I was just saying if someone came on and said "Muay Thai is like kickboxing", I'm sure thaiboxers would be miffed.

cowzerp

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

I know you meant nothing by it, I was just saying if someone came on and said "Muay Thai is like kickboxing", I'm sure thaiboxers would be miffed.

I get that but if it was to describe it as been closer to kickboxing than judo you would understand if it was aimed at a total newbie, i know a bit about Thai so could go into more detail-i don't know enough about Kung Fu to go into more detail and it wasn't really necessary as the poster wanted to know about jjj not Kun fu anyway..

Its all a lot of moaning over nothing really and been defensive when no offense was meant in the 1st place..

Barry.Oglesby

cowzerp wrote: »

Its all a lot of moaning over nothing really and been defensive when no offense was meant in the 1st place..

You must be new here

ryoishin

Japanes jujutsu is extremely different to alot of the Chinese arts usually because the techniques are so influenced by the culture and the training method by budist ideas etc. Japanese people used to have a different walking method than we do in the west which is why alot of the times the strikes have a step forward motion. Social etiquette also influenced what was practical and what was nt etc.

Its further complicated by modern systems originating in the west that are only liknked to Japan because they have paid a fee to have their certs signed by a Japanese organisation.

Jujutsu used in Japan in the pre-modern times is usually refered to as koryu. And then jujutsu can mean anything and often went by other names like kenpo, judo, yawara etc. However it was usually grappling in nature with limited striking. Although there are some exceptions.

I can only think of 4 Irish people who practice koryu jujutsu and 3 of them dont live in Ireland.

EnjoyChoke

nino1 wrote: »

whats the difference between traditional jj and bjj?

Coming from extensive experience in both,
BJJ works as a practical martial art/sport. Traditional/Japanese JJ does not.

Doug Cartel

One way that jujutsu and kung-fu are similar, is that both are general terms that each refer to a fairly wide range of martial arts.

With jujutsu though there have been particular styles that have become so dominant that you can just say jujutsu and people will know what you mean. For example in the UK, people in TJF schools just call their style jujutsu in conversation, and I wouldn't be surprised if most of their students didn't even know the proper name of the martial art they are studying.

pearsquasher

From my point of view - a Bujinkan practicioner for over 20 years and a Japanese martial arts history enthusiast. That is I read a lot of Mol, Friday, Draeger etc. these are THE western experts on classical Japanese arts.

Jujutsu is, in the West a general term, for Japanese grappling arts that haven't been sportified... except that BJJ came along and sort of corrupted that definition. .. and stuck in an "i" or two! :eek:


In Japan it is associated with a particular methodology of combat that involved strikes and weapons and is generally the close quarters component of "complete" martial traditions that contain long weapons like swords, spear, naginatas and bo. To put it fairly crudely....."Jujutsu is what happens when your distance weapon is no longer functional". Except that the classical Japanese systems don't really use the term "jujutsu", but it's sufficient to describe what they do anyway and everyone will know what you mean.

In Bujinkan we use the terms taijutsu, koshijutsu, koppojutsu, jutaijutsu etc but they're all "jujutsu" types if you like.

One of my students once did a style of jujutsu he told me. He said it was mixed with muai thai "to give it strikes". This seems very strange to me because actual Japanese jujutsu has striking in it. I've also had various "kung fu" practicioners come in over the years and while they do have various strikes/weapons/grappling moves I see the body mechanics being so different that I can't really compare general "kung fu" to Japanese Jujutsu as I know it.

Another aspect of this is that while BJJ maybe be technically excellent on the ground from what I've seen - and felt the odd time - it has a different outllook to Jujutsu which contains and underlying tenet of doing your very very best to not be there in the first place because it assumes if you're on the ground then the attackers buddies and /or weapons are on the way shortly afterwards. The flip side is that jujutsu tends to try and knock an attacker over in order to use weapons/pals on him or simply to facilitate outright escape... all things that would be deemed not-jolly-well fair in a competitive situation.