Out with the old in with the new?

CaseyRyback

With the increasing popularity of BJJ I am wondering how practitioners of BJJ and traditional Jiu-Jitsu (TJJ) now view the validity of TJJ styles?

Is there still value in the practice of TJJ considering the oft lacked live training on techniques 'too dangerous' for full resistance?

Is a lack of randori/rolling a sign that a TJJ club is a waste of time or is there still a place for this kind of training?

Comments?

Doug Cartel

Alive training is not a new thing.

Ush1

I'm more interested in the way BJJ has evolved more into a sport and is less about self defense.

I think BJJ for competitions and BJJ for MMA/Street is fairly different. As Roger Gracie famously said, 80% of BJJ is useless for MMA.

Barry.Oglesby

Ush1 wrote: »

I'm more interested in the way BJJ has evolved more into a sport and is less about self defense.

I think BJJ for competitions and BJJ for MMA/Street is fairly different. As Roger Gracie famously said, 80% of BJJ is useless for MMA.

I think that was a throwaway comment given in an interview that people have manipulated to suit their own agendas. I don't think roger day down and did a quantitive analysis of the number of BJJ techniques used in mma competition.

As regards the gravitation toward sport, I think there are done things that have been banned but that doesn't mean people can't train with them in their own gyms.

Ush1

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

I think that was a throwaway comment given in an interview that people have manipulated to suit their own agendas. I don't think roger day down and did a quantitive analysis of the number of BJJ techniques used in mma competition.

As regards the gravitation toward sport, I think there are done things that have been banned but that doesn't mean people can't train with them in their own gyms.

I doubt he did a proper analysis either but there is certainly a tangible difference in the type of BJJ training for MMA, as opposed to a BJJ comp. You could probably also say a difference in training between BJJ for MMA and self defense.

Most BJJ classes I've been to don't really regard much of the self defense element. Priorities seem comp. oriented (passing guard, superior position, scoring points etc...) rather than the opponent is throwing punches/kicks/knees and these are high percentage techniques that will keep your head from being smashed in.

I'm sure some classes do it but I think most are sport/team oriented.

Barry.Oglesby

Ush1 wrote: »

I doubt he did a proper analysis either but there is certainly a tangible difference in the type of BJJ training for MMA, as opposed to a BJJ comp. You could probably also say a difference in training between BJJ for MMA and self defense.

Most BJJ classes I've been to don't really regard much of the self defense element. Priorities seem comp. oriented (passing guard, superior position, scoring points etc...) rather than the opponent is throwing punches/kicks/knees and these are high percentage techniques that will keep your head from being smashed in.

I'm sure some classes do it but I think most are sport/team oriented.

If you mean most gyms don't have self defence as a specific focus then I agree. However I think what you're referring to is the difference between techniques and tactics.

EnjoyChoke

Ush1 wrote: »

Most BJJ classes I've been to don't really regard much of the self defense element. Priorities seem comp. oriented (passing guard, superior position,..

You don't want to pass guard or achieve superior position in MMA or in a self defense situation, whatever you do.

Ush1

EnjoyChoke wrote: »

You don't want to pass guard or achieve superior position in MMA or in a self defense situation, whatever you do.

I knew someone would say that. You obviously do, but in a bjj class is the instructor saying watch you don't get punched and elbowed to the head while you pass guard?

The Bored One

EnjoyChoke wrote: »

You don't want to pass guard or achieve superior position in MMA or in a self defense situation, whatever you do.

I'm not entirely sure why you would be in someone elses guard or attempting to pass it in a self defence situation. If your not the attacker, and he's on his back, should't the focus be on disengaging and getting the hell out of there?

Barry.Oglesby

I don't think anyone would doubt boxing's applicability to self defence, but no one ever asks boxing coaches why they don't say "watch out for the leg kick" when teaching the jab.

The Bored One

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

I don't think anyone would doubt boxing's applicability to self defence, but no one ever asks boxing coaches why they don't say "watch out for the leg kick" when teaching the jab.

I'd agree that its the tactics that change rather than the techniques themselves. I think the vast majority of martial arts, and I do consider boxing in that, aren't tactically designed for self defence. Thats not saying they're not suitable, just thats not their focus. I figure that solid self defence training is taking whatever skill sets you build in your martial art and then running through situational drills.

peter11

looks the same as TJJ to me..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q067Zj_kh70

Dyr

BJJ generally has a method of measuring skill so BJJ tends to have homogenous standards unlike most "traditional" jiu jitsu. Makes it less prone to questionable skill development.

Personally I would probably look for a competent self-defence orientated jiu jitsu club if I was interested in self defence.

techniques and tactics

tactics and techniques are defined by strategy and goals, and ruled by parameters. If your goal/strategy has changed then the tactics and techniques must be reviewed. If the parameters have changed then everything else might have to change.

EnjoyChoke

In Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, the tactics (Sport, MMA, Self defence) or environment (mat, cage, street, mountain top crag) might change, but the fundamental delivery system remains the same. People who don't understand this really don't understand Jiu-Jitsu.
Training purely for "self defence" is by and large a cop out, so you don't have to play with the big boys.

Dyr

EnjoyChoke wrote: »

In Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, the tactics (Sport, MMA, Self defence) or environment (mat, cage, street, mountain top crag) might change, but the fundamental delivery system remains the same. People who don't understand this really don't understand Jiu-Jitsu.
Training purely for "self defence" is by and large a cop out, so you don't have to play with the big boys.

People who don't understand goals, parameters, strategy, tactics and techniques tend to discount anything beyond their own approach.

Training for self defence is training for self defence. Being worried about who plays with big boys sounds a little bizarre tbh.

The Bored One

EnjoyChoke wrote: »

In Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, the tactics (Sport, MMA, Self defence) or environment (mat, cage, street, mountain top crag) might change, but the fundamental delivery system remains the same. People who don't understand this really don't understand Jiu-Jitsu.
Training purely for "self defence" is by and large a cop out, so you don't have to play with the big boys.

I train at an MMA club, and I'd consider myself more interested in self-defence than competition. Neither are my primary focus, that essentially being that I simply like learning.
I do however feel in order to suit what I learn to self defence, some extra work is required. That mostly involves applying the skills using a different set of goals, and with different variables in some drills, but then anyone who is practicing a competitive martial art should be more than familiar with using drills with different variables to develop their skill sets.

Ush1

Barry.Oglesby wrote: »

I don't think anyone would doubt boxing's applicability to self defence, but no one ever asks boxing coaches why they don't say "watch out for the leg kick" when teaching the jab.

That may be the difference between designed for sport and a traditional martial art. What did Helio Gracie have in mind?

A good boxer should be able to defend himself, but maybe the boxer that has dealt with leg kicks would be a little better equipped?

Stillweak

Who are the best fighters in the world? How and what do they train. ( I would love to hear people's opinion on this)
One guy I know thinks there are 70 year old Japanese men they could win a fight against any pro mma fighter.

My humble opinion would be that the best fighters are in the UFC. Not one of them trains in tjj and every single one of them train in bjj.

Tom BJJ

Stillweak wrote: »

My humble opinion would be that the best fighters are in the UFC. Not one of them trains in tjj and every single one of them train in bjj.

I think MMA has evolved so much that each fighter is now training MMA.

UFC fighters skills allow them to win MMA fights, but they would'nt (for the most part) win in BJJ, Boxing, Wrestling or Muay Thai contests.

Oh and btw, OPs name is CaseyRyback. What would Steven Segal do?

RainMaker

You can argue that all UFC fighters train in BJJ, but they don't just train in BJJ - most will cross train in Kickboxing, Muay Thai or Boxing.

If it was just about BJJ, the Gracies would still be winning all their fights!
What colour belt does Jon Jones have for BJJ?

As previous poster just said, most fighters train in multiple disciplines now rather than concentrating on just one.

Stillweak

Thanks for the insight there lads, although I was aware that it wasnt still 1995.
My point was. As part of their cross training, they all train in bjj, not one in tjj.

peter11

In my opinion TJJ was never developed for competitions and wouldnt work in that environment

EnjoyChoke

peter11 wrote: »

In my opinion TJJ was never developed for competitions and wouldnt work in that environment

Did the samurai not compete on the battlefield?

peter11

They did but mostly with weapons,and you cant compare a battle field to an mma fight

da-bres

peter11 wrote: »

They did but mostly with weapons,and you cant compare a battle field to an mma fight

Excellent point, it really isn't the same

EnjoyChoke

peter11 wrote: »

They did but mostly with weapons,and you cant compare a battle field to an mma fight

I think a Samurai would do well in the UFC.

peter11

Im not saying one is better than the other i have great respect for both of them,they were just developed for different times and different situations

The Bored One

peter11 wrote: »

They did but mostly with weapons,and you cant compare a battle field to an mma fight

Sword fighting in Japan only really developed as a martial art during peace time though, and it was more focused on duelling then battlefield combat.
I'm not suggesting any sort of comparison between it and modern day combat sports, just pointing out that alot of what people consider to be related to the samurai actually developed outside of warfare.

Doug Cartel

I'd have to look it up, but I don't think swords were used much as battle-field weapons in feudal Japan. They were all about the pole-arms.

UL_heart_throb

Is this true? The feudal japanese samurai actually didn't fight with swords? They used spears?

The Bored One

Doug Cartel wrote: »

I'd have to look it up, but I don't think swords were used much as battle-field weapons in feudal Japan. They were all about the pole-arms.

Spear and bow tended to be the main weapons for a long time, sword was really only a backup weapon, until more peaceful times where it became more of a symbol. The phrase "The Way of Horse and Bow" was apparently what the combat arts were originally referred to as.
Of course if you go back far enough you can find sword and shields being used in shield walls, and if you go further forward you have firearms becoming a big thing.
Stephen Turnbull has some great books about the way warfare developed in feudal Japan if you;re interested in it.

Doug Cartel

UL_heart_throb wrote: »

Is this true? The feudal japanese samurai actually didn't fight with swords? They used spears?

I'm not a historian so I probably have it wrong, but on a battlefield you'd use a polearm, in a duel a sword. Also the sword was a status symbol they carried around with them everywhere.

EDIT: Yeah, what The Bored One said.

Stillweak

As interesting as the new topic to this thread is, if we are to stay on the original point.
It's seems that bjj people don't have much time for the traditional stuff. Probably due to bjj methods of training with resisting opponents and and the competitive nature surrounding the sport. They also get to view the success bjj players have had in old school no rules/vale tudo and modern mma.
Traditional guys seem not to show much respect for bjj.
Probably be because after years of talking about what they could do in a real life situation they can actually view what bjj players have achieved in no rules/ vale tudo and modern mma. This envy results in the loop hole arguments about fighting within rules and techniques to deadly to be trained.

Dyr

BJJ is actually older and more "traditional" than the other styles of Jiu Jitsu in Ireland :eek:

Mr. CooL ICE

There are fighters like Dominick Cruz who are only blue belts but whose grappling ability is far beyond that. I can only assume this is due to not bothering to be graded, but thats just my opinion. I highly doubt anybody would reach that level without having the knowledge of purple/brown/black belt level of BJJ.

Also, I know little of TJJ, but I read about somebody (possibly in this forum) who compared sparring with BJJ, Judo and TJJ black belts and regarded the latter as only being able to perform impressive moves on static figures, but not actually fight properly.

CaseyRyback

LordChessington wrote: »

....regarded the latter as only being able to perform impressive moves on static figures, but not actually fight properly.

Is this the case though? I would have thought that it depends greatly on the individual player?

Interesting point earlier about BJJ moving away from self-defence towards a sport. As it originated from Judo, was it ever anything other than a sport?

roro1neil0

CaseyRyback wrote: »

Is this the case though? I would have thought that it depends greatly on the individual player?

Interesting point earlier about BJJ moving away from self-defence towards a sport. As it originated from Judo, was it ever anything other than a sport?

When judo and bjj 'broke away' from each other it was around 1930, long before judo had become the international olympic sport it is now. It was still very similar to the jujitsu popular in Japan, except Kano had removed some dangerious techniques and made his students masters of the remaining. The Kano judo guys beat all the other jujitsu guys and it became the standard training programme.

Im not sure points even exisited in judo when Maeda was out throwing people on their heads.

roro1neil0

CaseyRyback wrote: »

With the increasing popularity of BJJ I am wondering how practitioners of BJJ and traditional Jiu-Jitsu (TJJ) now view the validity of TJJ styles?

I feel 90% of TJJ is rubbish and 90% of TJJ people can't grapple, wrestler or strike. I feel 90% of BJJ is very good and 90% of BJJ peope can grapple and wrestle.

Is there still value in the practice of TJJ considering the oft lacked live training on techniques 'too dangerous' for full resistance?

Martial art training that doesn't involve 'aliveness' is dead in the water. Anything that holds onto the concept that these techniques are too difficult to practice is useless.

Is a lack of randori/rolling a sign that a TJJ club is a waste of time or is there still a place for this kind of training?

Complete waste of time from an alive performance perspective, be that sport, competition or a real fight. Not a waste of time in terms of having a hobby, complete waste of time if you have any fantasy about using it effectively.

Comments?

TJJ is just karate and judo thrown together with poor infrastructure, coaching and programming and should be left to die.

Stephen_King

UL_heart_throb wrote: »

Is this true? The feudal japanese samurai actually didn't fight with swords? They used spears?

Rich kids and the samurai class had swords or the other fancy weapons. Peasants would have used spears or anything else they had to hand that could be fashioned into a decent weapon.

Andrew H

I attended a Traditional Jiu Jitsu class in North Dublin we learned a couple of static throws with compliant partners and some rolling.

The instructors view on teaching rolling was that it was something that came naturally and therefore did not need to be thought so we paired off and muscled each other into basic submissions (blind leading the blind).

That was my first and last TJJ class and I started training BJJ properly shortly after.

CageWager

RainMaker wrote: »

You can argue that all UFC fighters train in BJJ, but they don't just train in BJJ - most will cross train in Kickboxing, Muay Thai or Boxing.

If it was just about BJJ, the Gracies would still be winning all their fights!
What colour belt does Jon Jones have for BJJ?

As previous poster just said, most fighters train in multiple disciplines now rather than concentrating on just one.

Jon Jones is an elite grappler, he didn't learn that standing guillotine in muay thai class. Regardless of belt, style, sport, self defense, whatever, at the end of the day you can either grapple of you can't. I'm also pretty sure Roger Gracie owns a random unarmed attacker in a street altercation 99 times out of 100.

CaseyRyback

roro1neil0 wrote: »

I feel 90% of TJJ is rubbish and 90% of TJJ people can't grapple, wrestler or strike. I feel 90% of BJJ is very good and 90% of BJJ peope can grapple and wrestle.

TJJ is just karate and judo thrown together with poor infrastructure, coaching and programming and should be left to die.

What would the 10% reflect? How much experience do you have of TJJ?

Surely TJJ preceeded both Karate and Judo?

roro1neil0

CaseyRyback wrote: »

What would the 10% reflect? How much experience do you have of TJJ?

Surely TJJ preceeded both Karate and Judo?

Obviously we have different definitions of TJJ. I suspect you don't know the difference between TJJ and CJJ

CaseyRyback

TJJ is what I know as Jujutsu. The unarmed combat system employed by the Samurai, derived from older Chinese martial systems. From Jujutsu sprang Kano's Judo which in turn gave rise to BJJ.

roro1neil0

TJJ is a an amalgamation of grappling and striking techniques built on the false-credence that the schools trace the art back to feudal Japan. Little if any schools genuinely follow the teachings and or methodologies of this period, those that do should be referred to as Classical Jujutsu ryus.

pearsquasher

Stillweak wrote: »

Who are the best fighters in the world? How and what do they train. ( I would love to hear people's opinion on this)
One guy I know thinks there are 70 year old Japanese men they could win a fight against any pro mma fighter.

My humble opinion would be that the best fighters are in the UFC. Not one of them trains in tjj and every single one of them train in bjj.

Ufc has rules, one on one fights, no weapons. Tjj doesnt train for that. Your confusing sport with combat. Would a bjjer willingly go to ground if the opponent had weapons, friends around the corner or the possabiliry of an ear being bitten off? Its not even apples and oranges...its apples and medicine. Bjj wins based on a skillset in a certain framework that favours it. Its an excellent skillset but within limits thats all.

Stillweak

pearsquasher wrote: »

Ufc has rules, one on one fights, no weapons. Tjj doesnt train for that. Your confusing sport with combat. Would a bjjer willingly go to ground if the opponent had weapons, friends around the corner or the possabiliry of an ear being bitten off? Its not even apples and oranges...its apples and medicine. Bjj wins based on a skillset in a certain framework that favours it. Its an excellent skillset but within limits thats all.

Ok please answer me this, because the last guy who used this training within a rule set argument would not.
Since mma is a only sport and some traditional styles are ready for anything. In a street fight ( no rules ). Do you think the you and the guys you train with would be able to win against professional mma fighters?

pearsquasher

Stillweak wrote: »

pearsquasher wrote: »

Ufc has rules, one on one fights, no weapons. Tjj doesnt train for that. Your confusing sport with combat. Would a bjjer willingly go to ground if the opponent had weapons, friends around the corner or the possabiliry of an ear being bitten off? Its not even apples and oranges...its apples and medicine. Bjj wins based on a skillset in a certain framework that favours it. Its an excellent skillset but within limits thats all.

Ok please answer me this, because the last guy who used this training within a rule set argument would not.
Since mma is a only sport and some traditional styles are ready for anything. In a street fight ( no rules ). Do you think the you and the guys you train with would be able to win against professional mma fighters?

You say 'ok' and look for simple black and white answers. What i stated is a fact of methidolgy - putting it into practice is down to individual ability whether in a ring or dealing with violent assault. For my own self, id rather not test it out...on a pro or anyone because actual violence isnt worth the risk...unlike sports arena.

Stillweak

I'm not suggesting that we go around looking for fights to test out our skills.
There are a variables in a fight however I know personally I would have no chance against a bad pro mma fighter in a street fight.
From your non answer I'm going to take it that you know you also have no chance but would never admit it because that is saying that your training is not effective.
This argument is 20 years out of date. I just can't understand how people in 2012 can still feel the traditional stuff actually works.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Stillweak wrote: »

Ok please answer me this, because the last guy who used this training within a rule set argument would not.
Since mma is a only sport and some traditional styles are ready for anything. In a street fight ( no rules ). Do you think the you and the guys you train with would be able to win against professional mma fighters?

Lets get something straight.. The topic is about BJJ and what the OP refer's to as TJJ, we'll take that as meaning traditional Japanese Ju-jutsu.

BJJ is NOT MMA, something some people have difficulties coming to terms with.

Personally if I was to choose one over the other (BJJ or TJJ) in terms of street fighting readiness I'd pick the traditional Japanese stuff every time.

There is not a snowballs chance in hell would I ever consider, or suggest to someone, that they train BJJ for self defence or for 'the street'.

Trad JJ against a pro-MMA fighter ~ the MMA athlete 99% of the time.

SEANoftheDEAD

Arely Spoiled Dress wrote: »

Lets get something straight.. The topic is about BJJ and what the OP refer's to as TJJ, we'll take that as meaning traditional Japanese Ju-jutsu.

BJJ is NOT MMA, something some people have difficulties coming to terms with.

Personally if I was to choose one over the other (BJJ or TJJ) in terms of street fighting readiness I'd pick the traditional Japanese stuff every time.

There is not a snowballs chance in hell would I ever consider, or suggest to someone, that they train BJJ for self defence or for 'the street'.

Trad JJ against a pro-MMA fighter ~ the MMA athlete 99% of the time.

Aye, I have to agree with this.

TJJ does incorporate a lot of nasty things too, last resort stuff if the situation presented itself! Biting, Eye gouging, strangling, low blows etc... plus theres normally a weapons training aspect too. This martial art is perfect for all round self-defence, if the rules of MMA/UFC etc where based on this then this would be the more effective art cause anything goes, in a scence.

Obviously a dedicated MMA or BJJ athlete would in most cases come out of top, as there fitness and stamina would be lot higher.

Just my two cents... of course I could be way of the mark here.