# am i over looking judo for real self defence?



## jwmims

i am been thinking of taking up classes at seibukan jujutsu school,there is a very well respected judo school very near me.
I have always though of judo as a sport.I have pretty good striking skills,would judo add alot to my self defence skills?I know judo is a sport,but could 
you make it a little nasty in a street fight?how would you compare JJJ to judo in a down and dirty street fight?One big plus is the judo classes cost alot less.
thanks,
james


----------



## arnisador

Judo is a sport, but it can be very effective in self-defense because the sport training insures you can make the techniques work. However, for self-defense concerns I'd suggest BJJ over it.


----------



## frank raud

arnisador said:


> Judo is a sport, but it can be very effective in self-defense because the sport training insures you can make the techniques work. However, for self-defense concerns I'd suggest BJJ over it.


Why BJJ over judo?


----------



## frank raud

jwmims said:


> i am been thinking of taking up classes at seibukan jujutsu school,there is a very well respected judo school very near me.
> I have always though of judo as a sport.I have pretty good striking skills,would judo add alot to my self defence skills?I know judo is a sport,but could
> you make it a little nasty in a street fight?how would you compare JJJ to judo in a down and dirty street fight?One big plus is the judo classes cost alot less.
> thanks,
> james


 To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete. Unlike most martial arts, judo is taught and regularly practiced against a resisting opponent who is trying to throw you at the same time. Ju jutsu is generally taught with either a co-operative uke, or if they are resisting, are not attacking or countering at the same time. I am basing this observation on 30 years experience in ju jutsu, with seminar instruction from senseis from throughout North America, Europe and parts of Asia, as well as about 5 year s experience in judo.


----------



## arnisador

I agree with the above. Studying BJJ puts less emphasis on the standing game but much more on the ground game, and both are important. It's practiced against resisting opponents too and is more likely to be taught in a context where empty-hands striking/defense for non-sport or at least MMA applications is discussed. For self-defense I would suggest BJJ over Judo but both are good.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Judo is a strong system for self defense.  Any throw on concrete, etc. is going to be brutal!


----------



## zDom

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Judo is a strong system for self defense.  Any throw on concrete, etc. is going to be brutal!



For someone without breakfalling experience: any throw would be brutal even on a mat.

The most impressive (and scary) martial artists I've ever worked out with is an age 70-something Korean grandmaster who specializes in Yudo.


----------



## Manny

I am not judoka but do some when I was a little boy, I have a high respect for judokas, judokas develop a strong body, good coordination and very good reflexes and  if some judoka put his hands on me I will have a hard time trying to not be trown.

Any martial art like Karate, Judo and TKD for example that have a great emphazis in sport competition can be very efective on the streets, all depends in the main set and the abilities of the person.

Manny


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

zDom said:


> For someone without breakfalling experience: any throw would be brutal even on a mat.
> 
> The most impressive (and scary) martial artists I've ever worked out with is an age 70-something Korean grandmaster who specializes in Yudo.



However it will hurt a lot more if the thrower knows what they are doing.  Good throws = head hitting concrete and not the body.  So breakfalls really mean nothing if the other guy knows what he is doing.


----------



## chinto

I would suggest Judo if its Kodokan Judo over Bjj for the street.  the BJJ i have seen is not what I would use on the street as it goes to the ground and stays there. ( that is a very unhealthy place to be on the street in a self defense situation!) judo goes to one knee usually and you can get up and move quickly if you need....


----------



## arnisador

It does vary with BJJ. Where I took it we did a moderate amount of standing throws despite the emphasis on groundwork.

If you only studied one art I'd agree with Judo over BJJ for self-defense, but as an adjunct I'd recommend BJJ. The OP mentioned he had pretty good striking skills and so I'd see adding ground grappling as a better complement than standing grappling, given that each has some of the other.


----------



## wingchun100

frank raud said:


> To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete. Unlike most martial arts, judo is taught and regularly practiced against a resisting opponent who is trying to throw you at the same time. Ju jutsu is generally taught with either a co-operative uke, or if they are resisting, are not attacking or countering at the same time. I am basing this observation on 30 years experience in ju jutsu, with seminar instruction from senseis from throughout North America, Europe and parts of Asia, as well as about 5 year s experience in judo.



I agree. The one thing that sucks about practicing a striking art is that you have no idea if it will work. You can't send yourself or your classmates home with black eyes and less teeth every night. I mean, what would happen when you ran out of teeth? LOL But seriously, you can prove whether or not your judo works because if the guy is on the ground, then it means you threw him.

Then again, it IS a bit unrealistic to practice from a position where you both have your hands on each other already. In a street fight, someone might be coming at you from further out. So as long as the judo school has you practice entering and THEN getting your grip on someone, you'd be all set. (At the judo school I attended, I always saw people start off with their hands on the other person's gi already. It'd be more effective to start AT LEAST arm's length away, IMHO.)


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

frank raud said:


> To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete.


Like this:







Your throwing skill can last with you through your old age. Your striking skill may not.


----------



## Steve

frank raud said:


> To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete. Unlike most martial arts, judo is taught and regularly practiced against a resisting opponent who is trying to throw you at the same time. Ju jutsu is generally taught with either a co-operative uke, or if they are resisting, are not attacking or countering at the same time. I am basing this observation on 30 years experience in ju jutsu, with seminar instruction from senseis from throughout North America, Europe and parts of Asia, as well as about 5 year s experience in judo.


Not much worse than being hit with a planet.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

It depends on how the judo is taught and trained.  If you train it combatively, learning how to protect against strikes, get your grips, and throw safely, then it's an excellent self-defense art.  If you only train for sport, then you are likely to get your head knocked off while you try to grab your opponent's lapels.


----------



## drop bear

wingchun100 said:


> I agree. The one thing that sucks about practicing a striking art is that you have no idea if it will work. You can't send yourself or your classmates home with black eyes and less teeth every night. I mean, what would happen when you ran out of teeth? LOL But seriously, you can prove whether or not your judo works because if the guy is on the ground, then it means you threw him.
> 
> Then again, it IS a bit unrealistic to practice from a position where you both have your hands on each other already. In a street fight, someone might be coming at you from further out. So as long as the judo school has you practice entering and THEN getting your grip on someone, you'd be all set. (At the judo school I attended, I always saw people start off with their hands on the other person's gi already. It'd be more effective to start AT LEAST arm's length away, IMHO.)




You could wear gloves and a mouth guard.



Judo is fine for self defence.


----------



## wingchun100

I have been hit full blast when my training partner and I thought it would be okay because we were wearing those things. It didn't help much. A blow to the head is still a blow to the head.


----------



## Mr. President

The specific martial art you pick is far less important than how the specific school you choose teaches it. That being said, if you are feeling confident about your stand up skills and want to learn ground fighting, That's what BJJ and Judo are for. 

But the most "gritty" SD arts are probably Krav Maga, JKD, Systema and various types of Eskrima (Modern Arnis, Inosanto Kali...) and Silat (Perisai Diri, Seni Gayung Fatani...).
.


----------



## Manny

frank raud said:


> To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete. Unlike most martial arts, judo is taught and regularly practiced against a resisting opponent who is trying to throw you at the same time. Ju jutsu is generally taught with either a co-operative uke, or if they are resisting, are not attacking or countering at the same time. I am basing this observation on 30 years experience in ju jutsu, with seminar instruction from senseis from throughout North America, Europe and parts of Asia, as well as about 5 year s experience in judo.



Your points make sense to me.

Manny


----------



## Tony Dismukes

frank raud said:


> To make judo nasty in a street fight, all you need to do is any judo throw on concrete. Unlike most martial arts, judo is taught and regularly practiced against a resisting opponent who is trying to throw you at the same time. Ju jutsu is generally taught with either a co-operative uke, or if they are resisting, are not attacking or countering at the same time. I am basing this observation on 30 years experience in ju jutsu, with seminar instruction from senseis from throughout North America, Europe and parts of Asia, as well as about 5 year s experience in judo.



It depends on the style of jujutsu.  BJJ has tons of sparring/randori with a resisting partner.  Danzan Ryu includes sparring/randori.  So does Shingitai Jujutsu.  Plenty of other jujutsu styles do as well.  The jujutsu styles which eschew sparring in favor of kata with a compliant uke are more likely to be the older historical systems.


----------



## Chris Parker

Very true, Tony, but even there, there are quite a number of systems (older, historical ones) that feature randori as well...


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Chris Parker said:


> Very true, Tony, but even there, there are quite a number of systems (older, historical ones) that feature randori as well...



Yeah, I know. I was just generalizing.


----------



## Chris Parker

Oh, I know... that was more for others who might not have realized, and could have thought that there was one single way things were done in older systems... which we both know is just not the case.


----------



## mcmoon

wingchun100 said:


> I agree. The one thing that sucks about practicing a striking art is that you have no idea if it will work. You can't send yourself or your classmates home with black eyes and less teeth every night. I mean, what would happen when you ran out of teeth? LOL But seriously, you can prove whether or not your judo works because if the guy is on the ground, then it means you threw him.
> 
> Then again, it IS a bit unrealistic to practice from a position where you both have your hands on each other already. In a street fight, someone might be coming at you from further out. So as long as the judo school has you practice entering and THEN getting your grip on someone, you'd be all set. (At the judo school I attended, I always saw people start off with their hands on the other person's gi already. It'd be more effective to start AT LEAST arm's length away, IMHO.)



You do not start with grips unless it is blind judo.  You fight for your grips and also learn to break theirs to get in an advantageous position for the throw.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

wingchun100 said:


> Then again, it IS a bit unrealistic to practice from a position where you both have your hands on each other already. In a street fight, someone might be coming at you from further out. So as long as the judo school has you practice entering and THEN getting your grip on someone, you'd be all set. (At the judo school I attended, I always saw people start off with their hands on the other person's gi already. It'd be more effective to start AT LEAST arm's length away, IMHO.)



Starting with the grips in place is done for exercises that are focused just on the execution of the throws.  Getting (and breaking) dominant grips is a whole area of study in itself and is very important for judo competition.

The point I was making in my earlier comment is that the types of grips used and the methods for achieving them that are appropriate for judo competition are very different than the grips and entries that you use when an opponent is trying to hit you.  Many schools only practice the sportive grips and entries and not the more combative applications.


----------



## Mass

Wow, not much talk about Judo Ne Waza. Depending on what school you attend, Judo has great ground work too. So you have the throwing & ground work of (Judo) + what ever standup martial art you do = a complete art!


----------



## Laplace_demon

Modern sport Judo is not recommended in self defence. You leave yourself open to strikes when attempting to grab and throw someone over.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Modern sport Judo is not recommended in self defence. You leave yourself open to strikes when attempting to grab and throw someone over.


 
Oh my. I suspect you're going to hear differently from people that, you know... are actual judoka...


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Oh my. I suspect you're going to hear differently from people that, you know... are actual judoka...



How surprising.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Modern sport Judo is not recommended in self defence. You leave yourself open to strikes when attempting to grab and throw someone over.



you leave yourself open to strikes when you try to hit someone as well.

for myself i believe in being able to strike and throw. Because that gives me the best chance.

but saying that a throw is not a viable defence against striking isn't accurate.


----------



## elder999

drop bear said:


> *you leave yourself open to strikes when you try to hit someone as well.*
> 
> .


 

*QFT.*


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> you leave yourself open to strikes when you try to hit someone as well.
> 
> 
> 
> but saying that a throw is not a viable defence against striking isn't accurate.



Eh no, that's what a guard is for. Besides, I don't need to open myself up to kick someone at a distance.



drop bear said:


> for myself i believe in being able to strike and throw. Because that gives me the best chance.



Then your not using Judo, but Judo and striking. Judo in and of itself is dubious.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> Eh no, that's what a guard is for. Besides, I don't need to open myself up to kick someone at a distance.
> 
> 
> 
> Then your not using Judo, but Judo and striking. Judo in and of itself is dubious.


Dubious? Judo _and_ striking?

Judo *has* striking.


----------



## Laplace_demon

elder999 said:


> Dubious? Judo _and_ striking?
> 
> Judo *has* striking.



Sport Judo has striking?


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Eh no, that's what a guard is for. Besides, I don't need to open myself up to kick someone at a distance.
> 
> 
> 
> Then your not using Judo, but Judo and striking. Judo in and of itself is dubious.



i don't kick from a distance much because ironically i am concerned with being.taken down

saying.that.you should strike and.grapple.doesn't make.grappling.dubious. Judo will still work. Striking isn't inherently better than grappling.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> i don't kick from a distance much because ironically i am concerned with being.taken down
> 
> saying.that.you should strike and.grapple.doesn't make.grappling.dubious. Judo will still work. Striking isn't inherently better than grappling.



 I've tried it and he of course hit me over the eyes before slamming to the ground.  I opted out from using any striking to not cause serious harm. 

Any competent opponent could have headbutted me or done something much worse.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> I've tried it and he of course hit me over the eyes before slamming to the ground.  I opted out from using any striking to not cause serious harm.
> 
> Any competent opponent could have headbutted me or done something much worse.



not sure what you mean.

i strike and grapple in training.


----------



## ballen0351

If I had to start over and only focus on one art for self-defense it would be judo.  I'd suggest it to anyone that came to me and asked.  Im also adding several judo techniques to what I teach police recruits


----------



## elder999

ballen0351 said:


> If I had to start over and only focus on one art for self-defense it would be judo.  I'd suggest it to anyone that came to me and asked.  Im also adding several judo techniques to what I teach police recruits


WIshin' I could "like," *and* "agree," ballen.

Damn. "Shuttin' up!" KIds........


----------



## Mephisto

arnisador said:


> I agree with the above. Studying BJJ puts less emphasis on the standing game but much more on the ground game, and both are important. It's practiced against resisting opponents too and is more likely to be taught in a context where empty-hands striking/defense for non-sport or at least MMA applications is discussed. For self-defense I would suggest BJJ over Judo but both are good.


IMO it depends both have standing and ground games and time spent training each area can vary. It seems to me one could become proficient in BJJ quicker than judo, due to the technical complexity of throws. It also seems BJJ is easier on the body. Some BJJ schools offer a more self defense geared curriculum. But if I were starting martial arts all over I'd recommend judo. Dumping someone on their head is a sure fight ender.


wingchun100 said:


> I agree. The one thing that sucks about practicing a striking art is that you have no idea if it will work. You can't send yourself or your classmates home with black eyes and less teeth every night. I mean, what would happen when you ran out of teeth? LOL But seriously, you can prove whether or not your judo works because if the guy is on the ground, then it means you threw him.
> 
> Then again, it IS a bit unrealistic to practice from a position where you both have your hands on each other already. In a street fight, someone might be coming at you from further out. So as long as the judo school has you practice entering and THEN getting your grip on someone, you'd be all set. (At the judo school I attended, I always saw people start off with their hands on the other person's gi already. It'd be more effective to start AT LEAST arm's length away, IMHO.)


A lot of wc guys seem to follow this line of thinking but boxers do it all day. Head gear, mouth guard, gloves, and a little restraint go a long way. When I teach FMA we wear headgear with a plastic face cage because we train elbows, and use mouth guards and MMA gloves. Everyone keeps their teeth and no on dies .


Kung Fu Wang said:


> Like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your throwing skill can last with you through your old age. Your striking skill may not.


Oh really? 







Laplace_demon said:


> Eh no, that's what a guard is for. Besides, I don't need to open myself up to kick someone at a distance.
> 
> 
> 
> Then your not using Judo, but Judo and striking. Judo in and of itself is dubious.


Any attack include kicks from lounge range create openings that an experienced person can exploit. If mma has shown us anything it's that you can't defeat a skilled grappler with striking alone, but you can combine striking and grappling and defeat a superior grappler.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Mephisto said:


> IMO it depends both have standing and ground games and time spent training each area can vary. It seems to me one could become proficient in BJJ quicker than judo, due to the technical complexity of throws. It also seems BJJ is easier on the body. Some BJJ schools offer a more self defense geared curriculum. But if I were starting martial arts all over I'd recommend judo. Dumping someone on their head is a sure fight ender.
> 
> A lot of wc guys seem to follow this line of thinking but boxers do it all day. Head gear, mouth guard, gloves, and a little restraint go a long way. When I teach FMA we wear headgear with a plastic face cage because we train elbows, and use mouth guards and MMA gloves. Everyone keeps their teeth and no on dies .
> 
> Oh really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any attack include kicks from lounge range create openings that an experienced person can exploit. If mma has shown us anything it's that you can't defeat a skilled grappler with striking alone, but you can combine striking and grappling and defeat a superior grappler.



A small fraction of the worlds martial artists ever enters UFC. Do you know how many phenomenal strikers in the worlds population there is and how many that actually competed?

Do I need to tell you none of them were or are grandmasters?


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> not sure what you mean.
> 
> i strike and grapple in training.



You are claiming grappling is equally effective as striking. Would you only use grappling/throws then?

I can only employ striking only. Let any fool on the street attempt a takedown and I will smash, knee and kick his face to oblivion.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> You are claiming grappling is equally effective as striking. Would you only use grappling/throws then?


Sure I can think of situations Id only want to grapple and not strike and I can think of times Id strike and not grapple and I can think of times Id use both.


> I can only employ striking only. Let any fool on the street attempt a takedown and I will smash, knee and kick his face to oblivion.


Then what happens if that doesn't work?


----------



## Langenschwert

I would certainly say Judo very is useful for self-defence, but I wouldn't use it as my first line of defence should an altercation take place if I can help it. I'd prefer to strike if I can, and if the range collapses, use my Judo. I don't want to tie up with someone not knowing the situation, but I know what to do if that happens. The standard lapel and sleeve grip still allows for an opponent to strike, so I would likely use the medieval German clinch which is bicep and elbow, but similar in concept to the Judo version. It just controls the arms much better.

But most people can't strike worth a hill of beans anyway. It's highly unlikely that the average joe is going to knock a Judoka out before said Judoka hits him with a planet regardless of the grips used. Most really good fighters don't go around picking fights in public and the chances of a Muay Thai fighter and Judoka meeting at a bar and throwing down over something after playing poke-chest is so small as to be laughable.

The only "real" danger is if there's a knife involved. You don't want to be mucking OR fiddling in close range if that's the case since it's suicide. Neither boxing nor Judo as taught for sport will prepare you for that.

The striker vs. grappler debate has been done to death. You've got to be an amazing striker to be safe from a reasonable grappler. The odds favour a grappler, but it's not 100%. Nothing ever is. Yeah, you can get your face kneed going for a singe leg. You can also miss your knee and get taken down. If you don't know how to fall and smack the back of your head from the takedown you could be seriously injured. Or you could slip on beer doing your uchi mata and take a header on the ground and knock yourself out.

Don't go getting into fights, it's stupid. 

-Mark


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Then what happens if that doesn't work?



I view it in the same category as knocking me out. If it happens, bad luck. Doesn't mean it's very likely.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Langenschwert said:


> The striker vs. grappler debate has been done to death.
> 
> -Mark



Name me one grandmaster in Taekwon-do participating in the octagon. You won't find any in that white trash cage. Some people care about more things in life than money and being Dana Whites *****.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> I view it in the same category as knocking me out. If it happens, bad luck. Doesn't mean it's very likely.


LOL so your plan is if my knee doesnt work I give up and let them have their way with me?  Great plan


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> LOL so your plan is if my knee doesnt work I give up and let them have their way with me?  Great plan



 I am of course a huge underdog if he get's me down. Why would a striker deny that?


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Name me one grandmaster in Taekwon-do participating in the octagon. You won't find any in that white trash cage. Some people care about more things in life than money and being Dana Whites *****.


None of this has anything to do with what was posted.  Dana White and the UFC have nothing to do with the grapple vs strike debate


----------



## jks9199

Laplace_demon said:


> Eh no, that's what a guard is for. Besides, I don't need to open myself up to kick someone at a distance.


If you're in range to hit or kick them -- you're in range for them to hit or kick you.  Best case, if Tom Cruise is fighting Lebron James... Cruise can still concentrate on injuring James's leg as he kicks and then moving in to a range where he can do more...


> Then your not using Judo, but Judo and striking. Judo in and of itself is dubious.


Judo can be very effective on the street.  I know folks who have used it for real -- in fact, I've used judo throws for real, not that I claim to be even a novice judoka.  Just been taught a throw or two...


----------



## Laplace_demon

jks9199 said:


> If you're in range to hit or kick them -- you're in range for them to hit or kick you.



Not comparable to being in someones face and trying to grab a hold of him.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> You are claiming grappling is equally effective as striking. Would you only use grappling/throws then?
> 
> I can only employ striking only. Let any fool on the street attempt a takedown and I will smash, knee and kick his face to oblivion.



I'm will to bet I'm not the only person who read this, laughed, and hoped that you'd remain the category if "people with no real experience". 

I take down people in the ER way too often. My face is just fine. Never smashed, kneed or kicked. 


Sent from an old fashioned 300 baud acoustic modem by whistling into the handset. Really.


----------



## Reeksta

Judo's great for self defence. Aside from all the things already mentioned, there's a certain physical intensity that (in my experience) no martial arts except judo and wrestling will subject you to during training. You will be pushed to and beyond your limits in the dojo regularly; this is a good thing


----------



## Mephisto

Laplace_demon said:


> A small fraction of the worlds martial artists ever enters UFC. Do you know how many phenomenal strikers in the worlds population there is and how many that actually competed?
> 
> Do I need to tell you none of them were or are grandmasters?


What's your point? No one in the UFC has a paper that calls them a gm? I can create my own system and make myself a GM, rank certainly isn't indicative of skill, especially from a system that doesn't spar. 



Laplace_demon said:


> You are claiming grappling is equally effective as striking. Would you only use grappling/throws then?
> 
> I can only employ striking only. Let any fool on the street attempt a takedown and I will smash, knee and kick his face to oblivion.


Id go as far to claim grappling is more effective than striking on the basis that a decent grappler can take down and dominate a skilled striker and leave him helpless. I don't mean that as a slight to striking arts a skilled striker can learn some grappling and one up the pure grappler. Lol you're one if those guys that thinks you'll smash your way through a grappler? All that has to happen is you run into a guy big or tough enough to fall onto you as you're striking him and you're grappling. That's why we see it in every  boxing and kickboxing match. A guy starts getting pummeled and he clinched or backs out. It's not unrealistic to assume a guy getting pummeled on the street might grab you in a desperate attempt to avoid getting hit.



Laplace_demon said:


> Name me one grandmaster in Taekwon-do participating in the octagon. You won't find any in that white trash cage. Some people care about more things in life than money and being Dana Whites *****.


So do you think there's some illusive highly skilled guys fighting somewhere outside of the MMA, kickboxing, boxing world? You mean all the tkd grandmasters that make you sign annual contracts, pay testing fees, have huge franchises, and nickel and dime their students are of such high moral character that they won't step into a ring to represent their chosen country or art? What about the Olympic tkd guys? Or the tkd guys that learn Muay thai too and enter the ring? You're living in a dream world man.


----------



## Mephisto

Another benefit of judo and grappling in general is the ability to control a person and use non lethal force. You can't eye gouge or ko you're drunk or out of control friend. A ko can end badly if the guy falls and hits his head. Some are quick to state that grappling is a death sentence of a blade is involved. If you can control to limb holding the weapon grappling is a valid approach. Controlling and securing the weapon is important in a knife encounter, especially if space is limited, some blade specific training would help a grappler but it's not the instant death sentence many act it is. Let's not forget you're in a very bad spot if you're forced to engage a knife wielding attacker. Most blade systems will tell you to expect to get cut even for a highly trained person.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> I am of course a huge underdog if he get's me down. Why would a striker deny that?


So instead of throwing up your hands and saying oh well why not fix the disadvantage in your game and do a little cross training in something to give you more options besides I'm going to mash in your face with my knee.  Judo, bjj, wrestling, hapkido etc.


----------



## Mephisto

ballen0351 said:


> So instead of throwing up your hands and saying oh well why not fix the disadvantage in your game and do a little cross training in something to give you more options besides I'm going to mash in your face with my knee.  Judo, bjj, wrestling, hapkido etc.


That's my thought or Laplace_Demon could just concede that learning both would be best but he chooses not to. You don't have to be the best at everything. I don't train grappling right now, that's okay, any grappling I do now would be rusty and sub par compared to someone who does it regularly including myself years ago when I trained it regularly. if you don't want to train something that's find but don't denigrate other arts a fughters that do just because it's not what you do. For some reason a lot of people feel the need to justify why what they do is best, it's a low level of thinking. Be objective, a decent amateur competitive MMA player could kick the asses of most people, a solid hudo competitor as well, yes even in the streets with no rules


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> You are claiming grappling is equally effective as striking. Would you only use grappling/throws then?
> 
> I can only employ striking only. Let any fool on the street attempt a takedown and I will smash, knee and kick his face to oblivion.



you would be surprised how many strikers say that. 

i do mma.  I get to encounter quality strikers who are attempting just that.

Queensland is also the home of world class muay thai.

possibly the only fight sport where we can say we are a dominant force.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Name me one grandmaster in Taekwon-do participating in the octagon. You won't find any in that white trash cage. Some people care about more things in life than money and being Dana Whites *****.



then how do you know they can take on grapplers?

there is a tkd guy in one of our elite gyms somewhere here. And by accounts his striking is quite formidable.

(heard it mentioned in passing. I could probably chase up who if anyone cares)


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> A small fraction of the worlds martial artists ever enters UFC. Do you know how many phenomenal strikers in the worlds population there is and how many that actually competed?
> 
> Do I need to tell you none of them were or are grandmasters?


 
Anthony Pettis is 3rd Dan in tae kwon do. Hardly a grandmaster, but still-it must have cost him a good $10000 to get there....


----------



## Dirty Dog

elder999 said:


> Anthony Pettis is 3rd Dan in tae kwon do. Hardly a grandmaster, but still-it must have cost him a good $10000 to get there....


 
Now you know that's not true. It certainly didn't cost me anywhere near that much.

If there are no "Grandmasters" competing, I suspect it has more to do with the nebulous definition of the term, the fact that many (if not most) system that use the title award it based more on a lifetime of contribution to the art than on a specific test (althought tests may well be a part of it) and the fact that if they're competing in the ring, the rank they're looking for is in the ring, not the specific individual arts they may use.


----------



## elder999

Dirty Dog said:


> Now you know that's not true. It certainly didn't cost me anywhere near that much.
> 
> If there are no "Grandmasters" competing, I suspect it has more to do with the nebulous definition of the term, the fact that many (if not most) system that use the title award it based more on a lifetime of contribution to the art than on a specific test (althought tests may well be a part of it) and the fact that if they're competing in the ring, the rank they're looking for is in the ring, not the specific individual arts they may use.


 
I don't know that it's not true at all-back in the 90's, it probably cost about $2500 to get to 1st Dan, so I extrapolated a little...but I was being facetious.


----------



## Dirty Dog

elder999 said:


> I don't know that it's not true at all-back in the 90's, it probably cost about $2500 to get to 1st Dan, so I extrapolated a little...but I was being facetious.


 
Perhaps at some schools. There are certainly places (from lots of styles) with outrageous prices. But I don't think it's ever been the norm for any style.
Are you saying $10,000 total, including all the monthly fees, or $10,000 in belt testing fees, or $10,000 for just the three Dan gradings?

If you're saying $10,000 for training from day 1 through 3rd Dan, then that's maybe plausible. In my area, commercial schools run $100-$150 a month, but I couldn't say with any authority how long it takes to reach 1st Dan. If we assume a KKW school, and a really fast 1 year to 1st dan, then it would be 2 years to 2nd (KKW time in grade is 1 year 1st to 2nd, 2 years 2nd to 3rd) and 4 years to 3rd Dan. At $100 a month, that would be $4800 to 3rd Dan. That would leave $5200 in belt fees. A bit of a stretch...

Our school is $40 a month. It takes an average of 8 years to reach first Dan. That's still well short of $10,000, but we're not a commercial school.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Now you know that's not true. It certainly didn't cost me anywhere near that much.
> 
> If there are no "Grandmasters" competing, I suspect it has more to do with the nebulous definition of the term, the fact that many (if not most) system that use the title award it based more on a lifetime of contribution to the art than on a specific test (althought tests may well be a part of it) and the fact that if they're competing in the ring, the rank they're looking for is in the ring, not the specific individual arts they may use.



Semantics aside, you won't even find 3rd Dans competing in MMA. Pettis is an exception and he's equally good at BJJ. 1993 and Royce Gracie included a handful competitors out of the worlds population. Only a fool would draw conclusions from that. But people do, and think TKD guys can't compete with a grappler in reality.

I know bona fide Karate masters who don't even know who Lyoto Machida is. The same with TKD and Pettis.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Langenschwert said:


> The odds favour a grappler, ...


IMO, the anti-striking is possible but the anti-grappling is not. When your opponent gets you into a "clinch", the striking game is over and the grappling game start. There are so many different ways to obtain a valid "clinch" such as:

- wrist control,
- arm wrap,
- head lock,
- under hook,
- over hook,
- bear hug,
- waist wrap,
- single leg,
- double legs.
- ...

All you need is just an "arm parry, comb hair", you are in. If you treat your arms as the octopus 's arms and give up your striking, to obtain a "clinch" is not hard to do.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Pettis is from ATA - the biggest MCdojo manufactorers in the world. It's in spite of, not because of TKD that he made it.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> IMO, the anti-striking is possible but the anti-grappling is not. When your opponent gets you into a "clinch", the striking game is over and the grappling game start. There are so many different ways to obtain a valid "clinch" such as:
> 
> - wrist control,
> - arm wrap,
> - head lock,
> - under hook,
> - over hook,
> - bear hug,
> - waist wrap,
> - single leg,
> - double legs.
> - ...
> 
> All you need is just an "arm parry, comb hair", you are in. If you treat your arms as the octopus 's arms and give up your striking, to obtain a "clinch" is not hard to do.



A striker with no training in grappling, could still grapple standing and hold his own. It's on the ground the problem starts.


----------



## elder999

Dirty Dog said:


> If you're saying $10,000 for training from day 1 through 3rd Dan, then that's maybe plausible. l.


 
That's exactly what I was saying-I wasn't even considering ranking fees.....


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> Now you know that's not true. It certainly didn't cost me anywhere near that much.
> 
> If there are no "Grandmasters" competing, I suspect it has more to do with the nebulous definition of the term, the fact that many (if not most) system that use the title award it based more on a lifetime of contribution to the art than on a specific test (althought tests may well be a part of it) and the fact that if they're competing in the ring, the rank they're looking for is in the ring, not the specific individual arts they may use.


Not to mention the age factor.  Unless there are some 24 year old grand masters running around the cage stuff is a young man's game


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> Perhaps at some schools. There are certainly places (from lots of styles) with outrageous prices. But I don't think it's ever been the norm for any style.
> Are you saying $10,000 total, including all the monthly fees, or $10,000 in belt testing fees, or $10,000 for just the three Dan gradings?
> 
> If you're saying $10,000 for training from day 1 through 3rd Dan, then that's maybe plausible. In my area, commercial schools run $100-$150 a month, but I couldn't say with any authority how long it takes to reach 1st Dan. If we assume a KKW school, and a really fast 1 year to 1st dan, then it would be 2 years to 2nd (KKW time in grade is 1 year 1st to 2nd, 2 years 2nd to 3rd) and 4 years to 3rd Dan. At $100 a month, that would be $4800 to 3rd Dan. That would leave $5200 in belt fees. A bit of a stretch...
> 
> Our school is $40 a month. It takes an average of 8 years to reach first Dan. That's still well short of $10,000, but we're not a commercial school.




it would generally cost more than that in training fees,supplements,travel,equipment,rehab and such to be a pro fighter.

if we are comparing the cost of the two.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Not to mention the age factor.  Unless there are some 24 year old grand masters running around the cage stuff is a young man's game



If you start training at age 5 or 10 it's not impossible in your mid 20s to have at least 4th Dan. Even if I were to grant your premise, it's still very few that have ever tried it. BJJ masters however have and the rules are adapted to their art (one of the gracies initiated the UFC). That's why everybody needs BJJ, because it's not no holds barred, and the rules in place favour the wrestlers.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> A striker with no training in grappling, could still grapple standing and hold his own. It's on the ground the problem starts.



why would you suggest that?


----------



## drop bear

Ok tkd and fight sports.

Olympic Taekwondo Centre - Elite Martial Arts Melbourne

tkd masters training sports fighting champions.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> why would you suggest that?



Because wrestling/grappling is closely related to striking abilities. If your exceptional at one you will also excel in the other, at least standing.

I am quite good at grappling standing and have had no training. I am a very fast striker.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Because wrestling/grappling is closely related to striking abilities. If your exceptional at one you will also excel in the other, at least standing.
> 
> I am quite good at grappling standing and have had no training. I am a very fast striker.



who are you comparing this to. Have you for example won a wrestling competition?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> If you start training at age 5 or 10 it's not impossible in your mid 20s to have at least 4th Dan. Even if I were to grant your premise, it's still very few that have ever tried it. BJJ masters however have and the rules are adapted to their art (one of the gracies initiated the UFC). That's why everybody needs BJJ, because it's not no holds barred, and the rules in place favour the wrestlers.


 
Can you provide a reference for any TKD system that uses the title "Grandmaster" for a 4th Dan? I've been around a while... and although I certainly am not intimately familiar with the traditions in every system of TKD (let alone every MA system...) I am unaware of any system of any sort that titles a 4th Dan as "Grandmaster".


----------



## Dirty Dog

drop bear said:


> it would generally cost more than that in training fees,supplements,travel,equipment,rehab and such to be a pro fighter.
> 
> if we are comparing the cost of the two.


 
We were not comparing anything. Maybe you should read the thread?


----------



## drop bear

Kelly seif.
XFC Gym - Our Staff

tkd master sports fighting trainer.

if people remember an enforcer i worked with called clay. that is his trainer.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Because wrestling/grappling is closely related to striking abilities. If your exceptional at one you will also excel in the other, at least standing.
> 
> I am quite good at grappling standing and have had no training. I am a very fast striker.




There is _always _someone faster and mostly in the case of being attacked *always *someone dirtier, meaner and just plain nastier so it pays to have as many weapons in you armoury as you can.
Your personal dislike of the UFC and MMA has nothing to do with anything.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> who are you comparing this to. Have you for example won a wrestling competition?



I've grappled a wrestler from a freestyle or Greco Roman background. He was around my weight class and actively training. He couldn't put me on my back. We were around 17-18 years old. I havent' tried it as an adult

Then theres wrestling on the ground, as well as submission wrestling of which I have no clue how I would do. I don't know anything about submissions.  That's why I specifically said as long it's _standing._


----------



## drop bear

Dirty Dog said:


> We were not comparing anything. Maybe you should read the thread?



elder999 said: ↑ 


"Anthony Pettis is 3rd Dan in tae kwon do. Hardly a grandmaster, but still-it must have cost him a good $10000 to get there.

not really a massive leap from this to comparing the cost of different endeavours.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> I've grappled a wrestler from a freestyle or Greco Roman background. He was around my weight class and actively training. He couldn't put me on my back. We were around 17-18 years old. I havent' tried it as an adult
> 
> Then theres wrestling on the ground, as well as submission wrestling of which I have no clue how I would do. I don't know anything about submissions.  That's why I specifically said as long it's _standing._



yeah see i believe skills in wrestling are not really the same skills you see in striking. If we remove basic athleticism and focus on technical training.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Can you provide a reference for any TKD system that uses the title "Grandmaster" for a 4th Dan? I've been around a while... and although I certainly am not intimately familiar with the traditions in every system of TKD (let alone every MA system...) I am unaware of any system of any sort that titles a 4th Dan as "Grandmaster".



Someone who is of grandmaster streight and tries a grappler. 4th dan is of course "only" instructor level.  The problem as mentioned is that a technical grandmaster would be too old.

Fact is almost no noteworthy TKD guy have ever fought grapplers.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> yeah see i believe skills in wrestling are not really the same skills you see in striking..



 It is related. Ask any "authority" on the subject and they would tell you it is. Might sound paradoxical at first, but it isn't.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> It is related. Ask any "authority" on the subject and they would tell you it is. Might sound paradoxical at first, but it isn't.



i have been taught by rob gruifrida who is one of the best submission fighters in Australia. He recently was training with Derek heckle who is one of the best wrestlers in the world.

the techniques that make you good at striking. Hands high,chin down,light feet. Make you crap at grappling. Hands low,head up,low stance.

this is why i strike and grapple. Because they cant defend both at once. I punch a guy in the head, the hands go up and they are open for the double leg. I double leg, the hands go down, I have an opportunity to strike.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> i have been taught by rob gruifrida who is one of the best submission fighters in Australia. He recently was training with Derek heckle who is one of the best wrestlers in the world.
> 
> the techniques that make you good at striking. Hands high,chin down,light feet. Make you crap at grappling. Hands low,head up,low stance.
> 
> this is why i strike and grapple. Because they cant defend both at once. I punch a guy in the head, the hands go up and they are open for the double leg. I double leg, the hands go down, I have an opportunity to strike.



Most competitors in MMA transition from either one smothlessly. Daniel Cormier as an example is a terrific striker. Anthony Pettis is a proficient grappler. In fact, some might argue he's better at BJJ than TKD.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Most competitors in MMA transition from either one smothlessly. Daniel Cormier as an example is a terrific striker. Anthony Pettis is a proficient grappler. In fact, some might argue he's better at BJJ than TKD.



you switch quickly from one to the other rather than do both at once. Hence transition.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Fact is almost no noteworthy TKD guy have ever fought grapplers.



The days are long gone where it was style v style, it's MMA now, where it's an integrated system with techniques taken from different styles. I know a good many people who have trained TKD as their stand up and have competed well in MMA.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> If you start training at age 5 or 10 it's not impossible in your mid 20s to have at least 4th Dan. Even if I were to grant your premise, it's still very few that have ever tried it. BJJ masters however have and the rules are adapted to their art (one of the gracies initiated the UFC). That's why everybody needs BJJ, because it's not no holds barred, and the rules in place favour the wrestlers.


I'll defer to people that actually train in TKD which isn't me but I dont consider 4th dan as a grandmaster.  
I don't agree that everyone needs bjj but if that were true why do you feel you don't need any grappling training?


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Because wrestling/grappling is closely related to striking abilities. If your exceptional at one you will also excel in the other, at least standing.
> 
> I am quite good at grappling standing and have had no training. I am a very fast striker.


What do you train in?


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> I'll defer to people that actually train in TKD which isn't me but I dont consider 4th dan as a grandmaster.



5th Dan in Taekwon-Do is more appropriate. You are graded by chief instructors and simply have to perform to their standards. There are 5th dans in their late 20s, early 30s. Nobody is even close to that level in the fights seen. The grapplers however are the Gracie family and other all time greats. It would be like comparing Mike Tyson  to a mere black belt in Karate, and showing how boxing prevails. It doesn't indicate anything.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Someone who is of grandmaster streight and tries a grappler. 4th dan is of course "only" instructor level.  The problem as mentioned is that a technical grandmaster would be too old.


 
Backpedal much faster? Why not just admit your statement was wrong? it would save time...



Laplace_demon said:


> Fact is almost no noteworthy TKD guy have ever fought grapplers.


 
Simply not true, as has been shown time and time again.


----------



## Reeksta

Laplace_demon said:


> A striker with no training in grappling, could still grapple standing and hold his own. It's on the ground the problem starts.


I'm sorry but this just isn't true. The single anecdote from your late teens that you present as evidence doesn't stack up. Judo/wrestling are incredibly technical arts and if you try engaging in vertical grappling against anyone who's reached a decent level in either when you haven't you'll be going for a ride


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> 5th Dan in Taekwon-Do is more appropriate. You are graded by chief instructors and simply have to perform to their standards. There are 5th dans in their late 20s, early 30s. Nobody is even close to that level in the fights seen. The grapplers however are the Gracie family and other all time greats. It would be like comparing Mike Tyson  to a mere black belt in Karate, and showing how boxing prevails. It doesn't indicate anything.


So is your point that guys that casually train a few hours a week don't compare in skill to trained fighters that earn their living in the ring?   Well that's kind of a no brainer.  These pro fighters treat training like a full time job so of course they are going to be better then guys that train as a hobby.  Go to local nonprofessional fights I've seen pure TKD or Karate or BJJ guys on the ring.  It comes down to the individual not the style.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> 5th Dan in Taekwon-Do is more appropriate. You are graded by chief instructors and simply have to perform to their standards. There are 5th dans in their late 20s, early 30s. Nobody is even close to that level in the fights seen. The grapplers however are the Gracie family and other all time greats. It would be like comparing Mike Tyson  to a mere black belt in Karate, and showing how boxing prevails. It doesn't indicate anything.


 
5th Dan is not a Grandmaster in any system of TKD with which I am familiar. I can gaurantee it's not in the Moo Duk Kwan, KKW, ITF, Rhee TKD, ATA or any other major system.


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> Not to mention the age factor.  Unless there are some 24 year old grand masters running around the cage stuff is a young man's game


 
No... that can't be it... I remember seeing Mr Miagi beat up a whole buch of much younger men all at the same time...


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> 5th Dan is not a Grandmaster in any system of TKD with which I am familiar. I can gaurantee it's not in the Moo Duk Kwan, KKW, ITF, Rhee TKD, ATA or any other major system.



Which part of grandmaster streight wise don't you understand? Are you intentionally not trying to understand?


----------



## elder999

Dirty Dog said:


> No... that can't be it... I remember seeing Mr Miagi beat up a whole buch of much younger men all at the same time...


 
Hey, I met this nutjob a few years back :



> The 70-year-old from New Brunswick, Canada became the oldest person to ever compete in a professional MMA bout when he took on 49-year-old former pro wrestler Larry Brubaker on July 24 in Moncton. On paper it sounds like a carnival act, but the fight was serious business, Williams said, done to prove a serious point.
> "I was trying to bring attention to the fact that when a person becomes a senior, society kind of pushes them out of the loop. The attitude toward them is that they're dumb, they can't do anything, physically they're just vegetables, and they're sort of shunned by society," Williams told MMA Fighting. "I wanted to find a way to show that life isn't over at 55 or 60 years old. You're not useless or obsolete. We live in a use-oriented society, and you get told that enough that even you start to believe you're useless."


 
Of course, he's a _judoka_-and certifiably insane. .........

.......funny, I reckon when I met him back in 1990,  he was younger than I am now....


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> So is your point that guys that casually train a few hours a week don't compare in skill to trained fighters that earn their living in the ring?   Well that's kind of a no brainer. .



No, I am saying the skill level between competitors is not fair. There are no exceptional TKD guys that have ever fought grapplers. If there are they are in a minority and would not be representative.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> No, I am saying the skill level between competitors is not fair. There are no exceptional TKD guys that have ever fought grapplers. If there are they are in a minority and would not be representative.



You don't understand MMA do you?


----------



## Laplace_demon

I am talking style vs style, which the early cage fights were. The discussion was striking vs grappling.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> I am talking style vs style, which the early cage fights were. The discussion was striking vs grappling.


And here, I have to interject-the discussion was whether judo was useful for self-defense. Not even whether or not it's better than any other striking or grappling art, but simply whether it's any good for self-defense. Several of your statements have revealed that you really have no idea about the utility of judo, ala the "open to a punch or kick when trying to grab" statement. (Ever consider how open to being grabbed you are when you throw a punch or kick?  

)


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Which part of grandmaster streight wise don't you understand? Are you intentionally not trying to understand?


 
Well, we can start with "streight wise". I'm a native born English speaker with a reasonable education. I aware of the word "streight" as an archaic spelling of "strait" of course, but in the context of your statement, neither spelling makes any sense whatsoever.


----------



## Laplace_demon

elder999 said:


> And here, I have to interject-the discussion was whether judo was useful for self-defense. Not even whether or not it's better than any other striking or grappling art, but simply whether it's any good for self-defense. Several of your statements have revealed that you really have no idea about the utility of judo, ala the "open to a punch or kick when trying to grab" statement. (Ever consider how open to being grabbed you are when you throw a punch or kick?
> 
> )



I am less exposed than attempting to throw someone. It's executed faster and causes more damage when done accurately. I can guard myself while executing the kick also. 

The downsides to kicking are not connecting properly to the target and getting ready to adjust. Those factors are down to skills and a certain amount of luck, which cuts both ways.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> Well, we can start with "streight wise". I'm a native born English speaker with a reasonable education. I aware of the word "streight" as an archaic spelling of "strait" of course, but in the context of your statement, neither spelling makes any sense whatsoever.



Fine, substitute it with "skill" and you might get it.


----------



## ballen0351

Thank you Elder I was sitting here trying to figure out how we went from a 17 month old thread on the self defense aspects of Judo to now "why there are no TKD grandmasters in the Ufc"


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> I am less exposed than attempting to throw someone. It's executed faster and causes more damage when done accurately. I can guard myself while executing the kick also.
> 
> The downsides to kicking are not connecting properly to the target and getting ready to adjust. Those factors are down to skills and a certain amount of luck, which cuts both ways.


 
As someone who's been doing judo and karate since before he was 11, boxed Golden Gloves, and practiced a few other martial arts along the way,  I have to say that your first two sentences are simply not true-and demonstrate your lack of judo knowledge.
When it comes to self-defense, "exposed" is "exposed." In both instances, there's an element of exposure-but the judoka, in a self-defense situation, is just as likely to wait to defend against a committed attack from a striker as he is to attempt to preemptively "attempt to throw someone."  I'm not likely to throw someone without their help, in the form of a committed attack.

Of course, these days, I'm far more likely to pull out a weapon and use it......


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> No, I am saying the skill level between competitors is not fair. There are no exceptional TKD guys that have ever fought grapplers. If there are they are in a minority and would not be representative.


Not fair?  Im not sure what that even means.  You honestly believe there has never been a TKD guy fight a grappler in all the history of the world?


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Not fair?  Im not sure what that even means.  You honestly believe there has never been a TKD guy fight a grappler in all the history of the world?



In 1993, all styles of martial arts were allowed to compete and Royce Gracie (BJJ) won. He fought a kickboxer/TKD guy, wrestler and won. People since that time believe, since the UFC is dominated by people from wrestling or BJJ backgrounds, that striking arts such as kickboxing, Muay Thai and TKD are inferior to grappling arts if you were to put them against each other.

I submit this is wrong and down to the individual.  I have not heard of any prominent Tae Kwon Do fighter ever involved in a challenge match of style vs style. And by prominent I mean dedicated, techniqually honed practitioner in the art, signified by a 5th Dan achievement under a respectable organisation. Someone who one could label a grandmaster technique wise.


----------



## Laplace_demon

elder999 said:


> As someone who's been doing judo and karate since before he was 11, boxed Golden Gloves, and practiced a few other martial arts along the way,  I have to say that your first two sentences are simply not true-and demonstrate your lack of judo knowledge.
> When it comes to self-defense, "exposed" is "exposed." In both instances, there's an element of exposure-but the judoka, in a self-defense situation, is just as likely to wait to defend against a committed attack from a striker as he is to attempt to preemptively "attempt to throw someone."  I'm not likely to throw someone without their help, in the form of a committed attack.
> 
> Of course, these days, I'm far more likely to pull out a weapon and use it......



So what you are saying is that Judo works in defence but not offence? I can attack as well as counter, without having to get into his face. Can  a judo exponent say the same? What is he supposed to do if the fight is not close range? My reach is far greater with my kicks, and I don't need to get close into my opponent for a strike.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> In 1993, all styles of martial arts were allowed to compete and Royce Gracie (BJJ) won. He fought a kickboxer/TKD guy, wrestler and won. People since that time believe, since the UFC is dominated by people from wrestling or BJJ backgrounds, that striking arts such as kickboxing, Muay Thai and TKD are inferior to grappling arts if you were to put them against each other.
> 
> I submit this is wrong and down to the individual.  I have not heard of any prominent Tae Kwon Do fighter ever involved in a challenge match of style vs style. And by prominent I mean dedicated, techniqually honed practitioner in the art, signified by a 5th Dan achievement under a respectable organisation. Someone who one could label a grandmaster technique wise.


you do understand people have been competing LONG before 1993. And all over the world.  One competition in 1993 really means little in the grand scheme of things


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> So what you are saying is that Judo works in defence but not offence?


Nope thats not what he is saying.  There is more to Judo then throws.  I use takedowns in the offense at work often.  I use arm bars and wrist locks at work all the time.


> I can attack as well as counter, without having to get into his face. Can  a judo exponent say the same?


Yep they can say the same


> What is he supposed to do if the fight is not close range?


Move in closer.  Its not hard Its one of the main elements of several martial art styles to get inside


> My reach is far greater with my kicks, and I don't need to get close into my opponent for a strike.


Until they get inside of your kicks and cancel out your range


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> So what you are saying is that Judo works in defence but not offence? I can attack as well as counter, without having to get into his face. Can  a judo exponent say the same? What is he supposed to do if the fight is not close range? My reach is far greater with my kicks, and I don't need to get close into my opponent for a strike.


 
No, that's not what I'm saying. 

-_sigh!_-You just need to put your theory to the test with a well trained grappler. Good luck.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> In 1993, all styles of martial arts were allowed to compete and Royce Gracie (BJJ) won. He fought a kickboxer/TKD guy, wrestler and won. People since that time believe, since the UFC is dominated by people from wrestling or BJJ backgrounds, that striking arts such as kickboxing, Muay Thai and TKD are inferior to grappling arts if you were to put them against each other.
> 
> I submit this is wrong and down to the individual.  I have not heard of any prominent Tae Kwon Do fighter ever involved in a challenge match of style vs style. And by prominent I mean dedicated, techniqually honed practitioner in the art, signified by a 5th Dan achievement under a respectable organisation. Someone who one could label a grandmaster technique wise.



So, in 1993 the UFC (which is only one of many MMA promotions) had a style v style type of competition and therefore this means that Judo is not good for self defence?
Who are these people that believe striking is inferior to grappling arts because I will show you plenty of evidence that people believe the opposite. The truth is that the UFC and other promotions are dominated by those who will sell tickets when they fight. Fights rarely prove which style is better than another, they are about individuals fighting MMA not any one style, the fighters have to be entertaining and popular ( either for being good or for being the baddie people love to hate )now and I don't think any promotion/company does style versus style competitions anymore.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Move in closer.  Its not hard Its one of the main elements of several martial art styles to get inside



You speak as if it's easy to close the distance. It's not easy against a trained martial artists who doesn't want to. Is a modern judoka trained to block strikes to the face? Can he strike equally well himself(....) All of this is in the strikers favour. Judo as of today is a sport and needs striking to work.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> You speak as if it's easy to close the distance. It's not easy against a trained martial artists who doesn't want to. Is a modern judoka trained to block strikes to the face? Can he strike equally well himself(....) All of this is in the strikers favour. Judo as of today is a sport and needs striking to work.




What rank are you in Judo?


----------



## Buka

_"There is no such thing as a wise young man_."

And you can take that streight to the bank.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> You speak as if it's easy to close the distance. It's not easy against a trained martial artists who doesn't want to.


You speak as if closing the distance isnt a major part of many arts including striking arts like Goju Ryu where we do it all the time.  


> Is a modern judoka trained to block strikes to the face?


Like anything else it depends on the school.  Where I was taught Judo we were taught all of that and more


> Can he strike equally well himself(....) All of this is in the strikers favour. Judo as of today is a sport and needs striking to work.


Judo has striking


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Judo has striking



Equal to someone training 50% striking? I very much doubt it, given that Judo is a grappling art.

Goju Ryu has two branches of its modern schools. One is akin to modern shotokan, while the other is much tougher. Goju Ruy is really not saying a hole loth, unless this is clarified.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> I am less exposed than attempting to throw someone. It's executed faster and causes more damage when done accurately. I can guard myself while executing the kick also.
> 
> The downsides to kicking are not connecting properly to the target and getting ready to adjust. Those factors are down to skills and a certain amount of luck, which cuts both ways.


 
These statements don't show massive ignorance of how grappling works at all. Nope. Not at all.



Laplace_demon said:


> Fine, substitute it with "skill" and you might get it.


 
And this doesn't show any ignorance of the subject either. Nope. Not a bit of it.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Btw, I just googled Judo, and as predicted, the "sport schools" do not offer striking as part of their curriculum. I am well within my rights to dismiss it and anybody claiming the oppposite is not referring to the Judo I am talking about.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> anybody claiming the oppposite is not referring to the Judo I am talking about.


LOL thats true were speaking of the actual Judo we learned not the made up Judo you pretend to be an expert of


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Equal to someone training 50% striking? I very much doubt it, given that Judo is a grappling art.


LOL so 1st you say there is no striking now you say it is there but doesnt equal a striking art.  Come on man stop changing your points.  Its ok to be wrong just admit it and learn something


> Goju Ryu has two branches of its modern schools. One is akin to modern shotokan, while the other is much tougher. Goju Ruy is really not saying a hole loth, unless this is clarified.


No Goju Ryu is Goju Ryu there are several different organizations But Goju Ryu as taught by Chojun Miyagi is Goju Ryu and one of the main principals is get in close we train it in almost everything we do.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> LOL thats true were speaking of the actual Judo we learned not the made up Judo you pretend to be an expert of



I don't need to be an expert to know Boxing has no kicking, and sport judo has no striking. Don't be silly. I made it clear from the start which type of Judo I was referring to.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> No Goju Ryu is Goju Ryu there are several different organizations But Goju Ryu as taught by Chojun Miyagi is Goju Ryu and one of the main principals is get in close we train it in almost everything we do.



I will quote from another forum: _Not that simple. It depends where you go, some schools will teach you a style of goju that is more okinawan and more like kyokushin, or you may get the sort of style that Gunnar Nelson does with a side on stance more like shotokan. So it really depends_


----------



## ballen0351

apparently I cant use the quote function right now so:
_I don't need to be an expert to know Boxing has no kicking, and sport judo has no striking. Don't be silly. I made it clear from the start which type of Judo I was referring to._

That totally depends on the school, not the art of Judo itself.  strikes are in the kata and are part of judo.  they are not in competition but even some competition based schools still teach them.  Where I train was a sport based program but they still taught strikes and other parts of judo that are banned from competitions


----------



## Mephisto

Laplace_demon said:


> I am less exposed than attempting to throw someone. It's executed faster and causes more damage when done accurately. I can guard myself while executing the kick also.


I'd disagree, if both a kick and throw are completed successfully the throw has the potential to do much more damage. A successful kick can cause a ko, the opponent could possibly hit his head from the fall of the ko and die. A successful throw for the street will directly slam the opponent on his head guaranteeing a ko, severe injury and possible death. Even a more polite throw putting the opponent on his back can be very detrimental to someone who doesn't know how to fall. Either way a successful throw has much more potential for injury than a successful strike. 


Laplace_demon said:


> In 1993, all styles of martial arts were allowed to compete and Royce Gracie (BJJ) won. He fought a kickboxer/TKD guy, wrestler and won. People since that time believe, since the UFC is dominated by people from wrestling or BJJ backgrounds, that striking arts such as kickboxing, Muay Thai and TKD are inferior to grappling arts if you were to put them against each other.
> 
> I submit this is wrong and down to the individual.  I have not heard of any prominent Tae Kwon Do fighter ever involved in a challenge match of style vs style. And by prominent I mean dedicated, techniqually honed practitioner in the art, signified by a 5th Dan achievement under a respectable organisation. Someone who one could label a grandmaster technique wise.


If having a 5th Dan were helpful to anyone in the ring we'd see more of it. Tkd masters are not some morally incorruptible class of fighters above competition. I'm sure you can find some high ranking guys in Olympic tkd competition. The problem is the lack of emphasis on leg kicks and use of hand techniques its a hole in the competitive game but that may be changing. But if you believe your instructor who says he could take this UFCs barbarians go ahead and believe him. Here's a fight where a very successfull kick boxer goes up against a Muay thai fighter. My point in posting it is to show that currently much of tkd lacks some important tools to make it more applicapable to the ring and reality. The emphasis of high kicks is risky on the street. 






Tez3 said:


> So, in 1993 the UFC (which is only one of many MMA promotions) had a style v style type of competition and therefore this means that Judo is not good for self defence?
> Who are these people that believe striking is inferior to grappling arts because I will show you plenty of evidence that people believe the opposite. The truth is that the UFC and other promotions are dominated by those who will sell tickets when they fight. Fights rarely prove which style is better than another, they are about individuals fighting MMA not any one style, the fighters have to be entertaining and popular ( either for being good or for being the baddie people love to hate )now and I don't think any promotion/company does style versus style competitions anymore.


Please show your evidence that is opposite the the argument that grappling is superior. I wouldn't go so far as to say one is superior but I think if anything evidence shows just the opposite. You also sounds like you have MMA confused with WWE or whatever they call "professional wrestling" these days. Yes it's entertainment to a degree but these are legitimate fighters using the same proven formula for success.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Mephisto said:


> I. A successful throw for the street will directly slam the opponent on his head guaranteeing a ko



Dear lord. You must be a judoka. How could you seriously post that a successful throw will gurantee the victim falls on his head? I have thrown guys doing full summersaults in the air, landing on their back, and getting up. He was slightly heavy set  and had no trouble getting up both times.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> I will qoute from another forum:


Well I actually train in Goju so I don't need a random quote from an unknown person on an unknown forum to form my opinion


> _Not that simple. It depends where you go, some schools will teach you a style of goju that is more okinawan _


Goju is Okinawan there is no "more" Okinawan.  Other then perhaps Goju Kai


> _ and more like kyokushin, or you may get the sort of style that Gunnar Nelson does with a side on stance more like shotokan. So it really depends_


Wait so some MMA fighter that stopped training Goju Ryu at the age of 16 now has his own "style" of Goju?  Stop dude your making a  fool of yourself now.   Stop telling people that actually train in these style what is and isnt in their styles.


What do you train in?


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Dear lord. You must be a judoka. How could you seriously post that a successful throw will gurantee the victim falls on his head? I have thrown guys doing full summersaults in the air, landing on their back, and getting up. He was slightly heavy set  and had no trouble getting up both times.



a successful throw will put a person on the ground. Which as you said a striker will then be in serious trouble.

why grappling tends to overcome striking is difficult to explain in logical terms a bit. Because it is not intuitive. 

especially using ideas like a successful throw vs a successful punch.

the idea has come about through live testing. More than rational argument.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Dear lord. You must be a judoka. How could you seriously post that a successful throw will gurantee the victim falls on his head? I have thrown guys doing full summersaults in the air, landing on their back, and getting up. He was slightly heavy set  and had no trouble getting up both times.


Full summersaults in the air huh  WoW


----------



## Tez3

Mephisto said:


> Please show your evidence that is opposite the the argument that grappling is superior. I wouldn't go so far as to say one is superior but I think if anything evidence shows just the opposite. You also sounds like you have MMA confused with WWE or whatever they call "professional wrestling" these days. Yes it's entertainment to a degree but these are legitimate fighters using the same proven formula for success.



You misunderstand me. He was stating one thing, I said I could show him just as many who would say the opposite, it doesn't mean either is true.
I promote MMA fight nights as well as coach fighters, I also ref, corner and judge MMA, I've been doing this for over 15 years now. To have a successful fight night one needs fighters who can 'entertain' a crowd, that means fight well. In that respect it's no different from boxing, no one wants to watch a boring fight. Saying that does not detract from fighters in anyway.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> a successful throw will put a person on the ground. Which as you said a striker will then be in serious trouble.



That's not what he said. He claimed the thrown guy will land on his head if it's successful, as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.

I train Taekwon-Do myself.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> Btw, I just googled Judo, and as predicted, the "sport schools" do not offer striking as part of their curriculum. I am well within my rights to dismiss it and anybody claiming the oppposite is not referring to the Judo I am talking about.



Oooh. "Google." How thorough of you. 

Have you ever actually watched the "judo you are talking about?"

Better yet: Ronda Rousey- "sports judo," or something else? And I mean that pre-MMA training.


----------



## Reeksta

Laplace_demon said:


> That's not what he said. He claimed the thrown guy will land on his head if it's successful, as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.
> 
> I train Taekwon-Do myself.


Of course the technique used affects how the person being thrown lands. A good judoka can exert a huge amount of influence over how uke lands with their choice of takedown and the point at which they choose to release. If they want to spike your head into the ground there's a good chance that this is exactly what will happen


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.


Of course it does just because you dont understand it doesn't make it not true


----------



## Mephisto

Laplace_demon said:


> Dear lord. You must be a judoka. How could you seriously post that a successful throw will gurantee the victim falls on his head? I have thrown guys doing full summersaults in the air, landing on their back, and getting up. He was slightly heavy set  and had no trouble getting up both times.


Nope, not a judoka just a realist but I have trained throws in depth at a JJJ/judo school in the past. Well if guys are summersaulting left and right out of your throws maybe you should visit a non tkd school or better yet a judo school before you make a decision about the validity of throws.



Laplace_demon said:


> That's not what he said. He claimed the thrown guy will land on his head if it's successful, as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.
> 
> I train Taekwon-Do myself.


Yes, you throw the opponent on his back for sport and safe practice. In application you tighten up the motion and dump him on his head, you'll have grips set so he won't be summersaulting away.


----------



## Tez3

Sport Judo must be a whole different sport then from what I've seen if the Judoka have no control over how and where the person they throw lands! I can't imagine people somersaulting away after being thrown lol. Is this a different sport?
I didn't start doing Judo/BJJ until I was an adult, learning to break fall was painful, a controlled throw by my instructor letting me down 'gently' on my back still managed to knock the air out of me in the beginning. A full throw used on someone not used to it would certainly wind them too much for somersaults.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> I know bona fide Karate masters who don't even know who Lyoto Machida is. The same with TKD and Pettis.



Given the millions of karateka training in the world, it's not surprising that not all the high-level practitioners know who each other are.



Laplace_demon said:


> BJJ masters however have and the rules are adapted to their art (one of the gracies initiated the UFC). That's why everybody needs BJJ, because it's not no holds barred, and the rules in place favour the wrestlers.



Actually the current rules of MMA are somewhat biased in favor of strikers.



Laplace_demon said:


> Because wrestling/grappling is closely related to striking abilities. If your exceptional at one you will also excel in the other, at least standing.



Ah, so by that logic an exceptional wrestler or judoka will also excel at striking, correct?



Laplace_demon said:


> I've grappled a wrestler from a freestyle or Greco Roman background. He was around my weight class and actively training. He couldn't put me on my back. We were around 17-18 years old. I havent' tried it as an adult



So you have a sample size of one against a wrestler of unknown ability and background.

Speaking for myself, I've got experience sparring hundreds (if not thousands) of different folks, including boxers, karateka, TKD practitioners, Muay Thai practitioners, Kung Fu practitioners, judoka, jiujiteiros, samboists, and wrestlers. I've also watched hundreds (if not thousands) of sparring matches, competitions, and real fights which included both striking and grappling.

Based on that experience and observations, stopping the takedown against a skilled grappler is a non-trivial task and attaining the clinch is probably easier than preventing the clinch.

I'm seeing other folks in this thread who have extensive experience in various systems of both striking and grappling indicating that their experiences line up with mine.



Laplace_demon said:


> 5th Dan in Taekwon-Do is more appropriate. You are graded by chief instructors and simply have to perform to their standards. There are 5th dans in their late 20s, early 30s. Nobody is even close to that level in the fights seen. The grapplers however are the Gracie family and other all time greats. It would be like comparing Mike Tyson to a mere black belt in Karate, and showing how boxing prevails. It doesn't indicate anything.





Laplace_demon said:


> No, I am saying the skill level between competitors is not fair. There are no exceptional TKD guys that have ever fought grapplers. If there are they are in a minority and would not be representative.



I don't know about top TKD guys, but there have certainly been world-class strikers in MMA competition. James Toney is a 3-division world champion in boxing. Semmy Schilt is a 4 time K1 Grand Prix champion. Heck, even back in UFC 1, you had Gerard Gordeau, who was a world champion in Savate. (BTW, Gordeau is a *9th* dan in Kyukushin karate, although I don't know what rank he had at the time.)

I'll note also note that a top level MMA striker is actually probably going to be quite a bit more skilled than your average 5th dan in karate or TKD, just because the MMA fighter is a professional who trains full time for a living, while most 5th dans in karate and TKD are not.

BTW - Royce Gracie is a great martial artist, but he was never a top level BJJ competitor.



Laplace_demon said:


> I am less exposed than attempting to throw someone. It's executed faster and causes more damage when done accurately. I can guard myself while executing the kick also.



That's a nice theory. How have you tested it?



Laplace_demon said:


> I have not heard of any prominent Tae Kwon Do fighter ever involved in a challenge match of style vs style.



If so, that's a personal choice on the part of the TKD fighters to only compete against practitioners of their own style. It also means that you have zero evidence that these "prominent" TKD practitioners would do well against grapplers or any other type of fighter.



Laplace_demon said:


> You speak as if it's easy to close the distance. It's not easy against a trained martial artists who doesn't want to.



It's also not easy to _prevent_ a determined opponent from closing the distance. Based on my observations and experiences, preventing someone from closing the distance is the greater challenge.


----------



## tshadowchaser

why all the discussion on cross training and striking vs grappling  the OP wanted to know if Judo would be good for defense


----------



## ballen0351

tshadowchaser said:


> why all the discussion on cross training and striking vs grappling  the OP wanted to know if Judo would be good for defense


The OP hasnt been back to MT in over a year so they got their answer apparently.  As for the rest who knows


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> A striker with no training in grappling, could still grapple standing and hold his own. It's on the ground the problem starts.


The "single leg" is a very powerful skill. If you try to punch your opponent, you will need to step in. Sometime your opponent just wait for that "step" of yours. If you step in, he doesn't need to shoot in. You just help him to close that distance between his hands and your leg. Sometime even your kick can offer a chance for your opponent's "single leg" too.


----------



## jks9199

Laplace_demon said:


> That's not what he said. He claimed the thrown guy will land on his head if it's successful, as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.
> 
> I train Taekwon-Do myself.


Quite a few throws, when done properly, in a real environment with someone not trained to take the fall, will do just exactly that.  Don't be fooled by what you see in competition or practice with partners who know how to take the fall and are prepared for it...


----------



## Tez3

jks9199 said:


> Quite a few throws, when done properly, in a real environment with someone not trained to take the fall, will do just exactly that.  Don't be fooled by what you see in competition or practice with partners who know how to take the fall and are prepared for it...



Years ago our instructor took us to a martial arts seminar for experience with different martial arts, one of which was Aikido. The guy I was partnered with assumed I knew how to break fall, I didn't at that point. He did a throw, I can't tell you what, other than it was Judo like, I was unprepared for it,  landing hard and flat on my back with the back of my head hitting the mat very hard. I couldn't move for several minutes and had to be helped up by a medic, I've been thrown off horses before and this was every bit as bad as that. I had to sit out the rest of the day with a banging headache and sore neck.


----------



## elder999

tshadowchaser said:


> why all the discussion on cross training and striking vs grappling  the OP wanted to know if Judo would be good for defense


Apparently, judo isn't good for defense, because a striker will pummel a judoka at will..........................................................wait for it..............................................................................


----------



## Tez3

elder999 said:


> Apparently, judo isn't good for defense, because a striker will pummel a judoka at will....




And what has Will done to deserve that?


----------



## Laplace_demon

jks9199 said:


> Quite a few throws, when done properly, in a real environment with someone not trained to take the fall, will do just exactly that.  Don't be fooled by what you see in competition or practice with partners who know how to take the fall and are prepared for it...



The guy I judo threw over my back who tumbled and hit concrete was a mere street fighter who challenged me. It was not practise or fun. He didn't know anything about Judo but was fat enough to not feel anything from the fall. I slammed the guy twice.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> Modern sport Judo is not recommended in self defence. You leave yourself open to strikes when attempting to grab and throw someone over.


In

- gi environment, if your opponent grabs on your right sleeve, your right hand won't be able to punch. If he also grabs on your left upper lapel, when you punch his head with your left hand, he can raise his right elbow and hide his head under it.
- no-gi environment, if your opponent wraps on your right arm, your right hand won't be able to punch. If he also have right neck tie, when you punch his head with your left hand, he can also raise his right elbow and hide his head under it.

Of course you can try to strike him before he gets that "clinch". When the clinch has been established, the punch won't be effective after that.  All effective clinches are developed in such a way that your own safety should be the most important consideration.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> The guy I judo threw over my back who tumbled and hit concrete was a mere street fighter who challenged me. It was not practise or fun. He didn't know anything about Judo but was fat enough to not feel anything from the fall. I slammed the guy twice.



Are you a bouncer then?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> Of course you can try to strike him before he gets that "clinch". When the clinch has been established, the punch won't be effective after that.  All effective clinches are developed in such a way that your own safety is the most important consideration.



I can *try* and strike him? LOl, it's quite a big target for me to miss if I want to strike before a clinch/grappling. That's probably what a striker should, but doesn't do in the match ups I've seen. They think their superior physique against ordinarily built JJ guys will prevail even in the clinch, so there is no urgency on their part.  I know better and would act far more aggressively.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tez3 said:


> Are you a bouncer then?



No.


----------



## KydeX

Well, there are lots of different throws, some are most likely to put somebody on their back first, others are more likely to put them head first into the ground. I would still agree with those that say most throws have a high damage potential against the untrained. And many throws can be altered slightly from safe training to be a lot nastier. For example, the basic tomoe nage can be really dangerous just by not releasing your collar grip. This will almost insure that you plant their head to the ground first.

However, adrenaline and drugs may cancel out a lot of pain, as is the case with any techniques used in self defense.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> The guy I judo threw over my back who tumbled and hit concrete was a mere street fighter who challenged me. It was not practise or fun.


You judo threw him?  Whats that even mean?


> He didn't know anything about Judo


Nor do you


> but was fat enough to not feel anything from the fall. I slammed the guy twice.


And?  So your one attempt a trying a technique your not train in failed so now all judo is bad?


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> You judo threw him?  Whats that even mean?
> 
> Nor do you
> 
> And?  So your one attempt a trying a technique your not train in failed so now all judo is bad?



By "judo throw "I mean this the first one displayed here: 




I don't think Judo is bad.. But these things all suppose we are both attempting to throw each other. My only objective is to hit a grappler. I won't try to outwrestle him.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> t these things all suppose we are both attempting to throw each other..



No, they don't.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> How could you seriously post that a successful throw will gurantee the victim falls on his head?


It's not that hard to do. Any throw that you just "apply 1/2 way" and won't give your opponent a chance to do his break fall can achieve this kind of result. It's called "air plane crashing (head down first)" in the grappling art.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Oh Yeah it's not hard lifting a guy at 220lb or more. Not hard at all.


----------



## Tez3

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's not that hard to do. Any throw that you just "apply 1/2 way" and won't give your opponent a chance to do his break fall can achieve this kind of result. It's called "air plane crashing (head down first)" in the grappling art



That's how I went down, it wasn't from a height like that though but I certainly landed with the back of my head first then my back. It really wasn't good. I would however recommend doing it if attacked!

However you don't need to lift a 220lb guy  to do this, that's what the Judo is for, to give you techniques to throw someone bigger. Later on when I had actually learnt to break fall and a decent bit of Judo I was throwing the big guys around. It amused them and me that it could really be that easy.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Do you know the difference between throwing and lifting? I did not lift my opponent, I used his force  launching at me in the throw. Lifting him up in the air is a different task.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Oh Yeah it's not hard lifting a guy at 220lb or more. Not hard at all.



The fact that you think you're supposed to lift your opponent says a lot. Mostly, it says that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Even though Taekwon-Do is primarily a striking art, you should have a better understanding of the principles involved with throws and takedowns than you've demonstrated. Unless you're a complete beginner, of course. You've been asked about your training before, but you've been evasive.

So, once again, what is your training an experience?


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> The fact that you think you're supposed to lift your opponent says a lot. Mostly, it says that you have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> Even though Taekwon-Do is primarily a striking art, you should have a better understanding of the principles involved with throws and takedowns than you've demonstrated. Unless you're a complete beginner, of course. You've been asked about your training before, but you've been evasive.
> 
> So, once again, what is your training an experience?


I was wondering about grappling and this in TKD I know nothing about it and was going to ask but didn't want to have the "stay on topic" police show up


----------



## Dirty Dog

ballen0351 said:


> I was wondering about grappling and this in TKD I know nothing about it and was going to ask but didn't want to have the "stay on topic" police show up



TKD has always included joint locks, take downs, throws, and pressure points. Just like pretty much every Martial Art does. They're not the primary focus, but they are included, especially in schools that focus on the Art, rather than the sport. Since they're not the focus (it IS a striking art, after all...) a low-geup ranked student wouldn't really be expected to have much (if any) real understanding of their use.

As for staying on topic... there are several links between the founders of TKD and Judo. Shockingly, Judoka can see connections between their training, and the grappling techniques taught in TKD.  Just as a taekwondin can see connections between our kicking and the kicking done in JKD.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> Oh Yeah it's not hard lifting a guy at 220lb or more. Not hard at all.


You don't need to lift your 220 lb opponent up. All you need is to get hold on one of his legs and hook/sweep/lift his other standing leg. When both of his legs are in the air, he will have to fall on his head. His own 220 lb weight will give his own head some trouble.

This is why the "single leg" is more powerful than you think. You use "single leg" to get your opponent's 1st legs. You then use other skill to get his 2nd leg. If your goal is to smash your opponent's head, you will use "single leg" a bit differently.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> TKD has always included joint locks, take downs, throws, and pressure points. Just like pretty much every Martial Art does.



There are no throws taught in Shotokan Karate. So it's not true of all Karate/martial art styles. I have talked to elderly black belts in my  TKD club, and they have not been taught throws.


----------



## ballen0351

Dirty Dog said:


> TKD has always included joint locks, take downs, throws, and pressure points. Just like pretty much every Martial Art does. They're not the primary focus, but they are included, especially in schools that focus on the Art, rather than the sport. Since they're not the focus (it IS a striking art, after all...) a low-geup ranked student wouldn't really be expected to have much (if any) real understanding of their use.
> 
> As for staying on topic... there are several links between the founders of TKD and Judo. Shockingly, Judoka can see connections between their training, and the grappling techniques taught in TKD.  Just as a taekwondin can see connections between our kicking and the kicking done in JKD.


I figured there had to be grappling in there it's notnots focus but I couldn't imagine it was totally absent.  Thank


----------



## ballen0351

It's not it's focus.........still can't edit from my phone


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> There are no throws taught in Shotokan Karate. So it's not true of all Karate/martial art styles. I have talked to elderly black belts in my  TKD club, and they have not been taught throws.


As far as I know there are like 9 throws in shotokan


----------



## Laplace_demon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> You don't need to lift your 220 lb opponent up. All you need is to get hold on one of his legs and hook/sweep/lift his other standing leg. When both of his legs are in the air, he will have to fall on his head. His own 220 lb weight will give his own head some trouble.
> .



Clever! If your brave enough to do a dive that is


----------



## ballen0351

The Nine Throws of Gichin Funakoshi Senshin The Enlightened Mind


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> As far as I know there are like 9 throws in shotokan



Really? Are you referring to kata patterns which could be developed as throws? That's not "being taught throws".


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> There are no throws taught in Shotokan Karate that I know of. So it's not true of all Karate/martial art styles.



Ah, so if you don't know about it, it doesn't exist? 






Clearly, there is plenty that exists despite your ignorance of its existence.



Laplace_demon said:


> I have talked to elderly black belts in my  TKD club, and they have not been taught throws.



If true (which I frankly doubt) I'd feel very sorry for students of your club.

I note, as I am sure others do too, that you've once against avoided answering the direct question about your level of training and experience...


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Really? Are you referring to kata patterns which could be developed as throws? That's not "being taught throws".


Nope I'm talking about throws.  You should probably stop commenting on styled you don't actually train in


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> Nope I'm talking about throws.  You should probably stop commenting on styled you don't actually train in



So asking a chief instructor in shotokan if he taught students throws is not enough? He showed me some pictures of a kata which could be developed as throws. That's about it.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> There are no throws taught in Shotokan Karate. So it's not true of all Karate/martial art styles. I have talked to elderly black belts in my  TKD club, and they have not been taught throws.


There *are* throws in Shotokan Karate.
Here are some images from the founder's book, written in 1929:


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> So asking a chief instructor in shotokan if he taught students throws is not enough? He showed me some pictures of a kata which could be developed as throws. That's about it.


If they teach the kata, they teach the throws.

Apparently, you weren't _listening_ to what he told you.


----------



## elder999

,,,,,and, of course, if you study TKD, depending on what flavor, odds are good that these throws are in you kata, too........
....part of the reason I don't do TKD, anymore...


----------



## Laplace_demon

elder999 said:


> ,,,,,and, of course, if you study TKD, depending on what flavor, odds are good that these throws are in you kata, too........
> ....part of the reason I don't do TKD, anymore...



Which Katas in TKD are you thinking of, and why was that a reason for you to leave the art?


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

Laplace_demon said:


> Clever! If your brave enough to do a dive that is


To a grappler, the closer the distance, the safer it can be. If a grappler uses his "rhino guard" to move in, it will be very difficult for his striker opponent to punch him.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> Which Katas in TKD are you thinking of, and why was that a reason for you to leave the art?



I was in Duk Sung Son's WTF-Chung do kwan, basically-and, well, all of them. Almost all of the kata  have throws. 

Of course, the teachers were completely unaware of this.I was also studying kyokushin at the same time (long story short-I went to boarding school, and did one art there and one at home) and the forms were basically the same, with a few stylistic variations. My kyokushin teacher knew the _bunkai_ for those kata,and knew about the throws, so he could answer my congenital klutz questions about why we do it this way, or that. 

So, basically, at that time, TKD could be okay, but if you were looking for any depth, everywhere I looked it didn't have any...not to mention I was pretty well kneeling at the altar of full contact by then...


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

elder999 said:


> I was in Duk Sung Son's WTF-Chung do kwan, basically-and, well, all of them. Almost all of the kata  have throws.
> 
> Of course, the teachers were completely unaware of this.


My long fist system also claims to have throwing. But every time my long fist brothers competed in the Shuai-Chiao (Chinese wrestling) tournament, they all lose big time. This is why I decided to train the "true" throwing art instead.

It's not whether a style has the throwing art or not. It's whether or not that style treats "throwing art" seriously as part of their daily training. When you train your sparring in the ring, someone else train their wrestling on the mat, of course they will have better wrestling skill than you have. But you will have better sparring skill than they have and that's for sure.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Which Katas in TKD are you thinking of, and why was that a reason for you to leave the art?



Ummm... all of them? There are grappling techniques in every tul. It's not uncommon for new students to be unaware of these techniques, but they are certainly there.


----------



## elder999

Kung Fu Wang said:


> It's not whether a style has the throwing art or not. It's whether or not that style treats "throwing art" seriously as part of their daily training..



In all seriousness, the rest of your post proves that it's not the style, or whether the style treats throwing seriously, but how seriously the individual practitioner treats throwing.....

I was lucky enough to be doing judo and boxing for most of that time, and wrestling for part of it.....


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

elder999 said:


> In all seriousness, the rest of your post proves that it's not the style, or whether the style treats throwing seriously, but how seriously the individual practitioner treats throwing.....
> 
> I was lucky enough to be doing judo and boxing for most of that time, and wrestling for part of it.....


Agree!

Here is a good example that a WC instructor treats throwing art seriously. He even talks like a Chinese wrestler, "If you go this direction and you 'don't have', you go to the opposite direction". In the grappling art, "don't have" means that your opponent's resistance is so strong to make your move fail. If you apply a different move in the opposite direction, you can borrow his resistance and make your throw "effortless". A pure "striker" just won't be able to say that.


----------



## jks9199

Laplace_demon said:


> Oh Yeah it's not hard lifting a guy at 220lb or more. Not hard at all.


If you know the technique, and use the proper leverage, it's not hard at all.  Then, of course, there are some around who are just plain strong enough to do it by brute force.  I was working with a student a couple of weeks back, he got into a position and was trying to take me down, and I just dropped my hips and basically squatted him, then walked across the room.


----------



## jks9199

elder999 said:


> If they teach the kata, they teach the throws.
> 
> Apparently, you weren't _listening_ to what he told you.


Or, perhaps, the answer to our friend Laplace-demon was different from the answer another student might have received.  Students often receive the answer they merit...


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> I can *try* and strike him? LOl, it's quite a big target for me to miss if I want to strike before a clinch/grappling. That's probably what a striker should, but doesn't do in the match ups I've seen. They think their superior physique against ordinarily built JJ guys will prevail even in the clinch, so there is no urgency on their part.  I know better and would act far more aggressively.



is this gi or no gi?


----------



## Dirty Dog

jks9199 said:


> Or, perhaps, the answer to our friend Laplace-demon was different from the answer another student might have received.  Students often receive the answer they merit...



There is a lot of truth to this statement. I certainly don't expect a yellow belt to have the same level of understanding of the forms as a black belt.


----------



## drop bear

Kung Fu Wang said:


> To a grappler, the closer the distance, the safer it can be. If a grappler uses his "rhino guard" to move in, it will be very difficult for his striker opponent to punch him.



that does sound better than big fist by the way.


----------



## Buka

As for throwing people and having them land on their head, this is me. Fortunately, I have experience breaking fall with my......face.
If a skilled person has tight throws, they'll pretty much plant you anyway they want.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> That's not what he said. He claimed the thrown guy will land on his head if it's successful, as if the technique would have anything to do with the guys landing.
> 
> I train Taekwon-Do myself.



it will best case.





but even put on their back can finish a fight.


----------



## elder999

jks9199 said:


> Or, perhaps, the answer to our friend Laplace-demon was different from the answer another student might have received.  Students often receive the answer they merit...



As I said, then......


----------



## Kung Fu Wang

jks9199 said:


> If you know the technique, and use the proper leverage, it's not hard at all.  Then, of course, there are some around who are just plain strong enough to do it by brute force.  I was working with a student a couple of weeks back, he got into a position and was trying to take me down, and I just dropped my hips and basically squatted him, then walked across the room.


Agree!

The correct way to use your "body structure" is the key. It's not about arm muscle or brute force. My friend can lift his 300 lb student like this. This is a very unusual throw "块抱别(Kuai Bao Bie) - knee lift, leg block throw", you

- use your knee to lift your opponent up under his hip,
- swing him behind your back, and
- throw him forward above your leg.

If you try this move with your training partner, you will find out soon that your arm muscle and your brute force won't be able to help much in this situation.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> is this gi or no gi?



No gi


----------



## Laplace_demon

Kung Fu Wang said:


> To a grappler, the closer the distance, the safer it can be. If a grappler uses his "rhino guard" to move in, it will be very difficult for his striker opponent to punch him.



That's why boxing is limited but kickboxing isn't. The grappler must overcome hands and legs. I might use both!


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> That's why boxing is limited but kickboxing isn't. The grappler must overcome hands and legs. I might use both!


Yeah, but you've already said that you won't "grapple," though one has to wonder how a TKD guy is a kickboxer (who grapples from the clinch)....


----------



## Laplace_demon

elder999 said:


> Yeah, but you've already said that you won't "grapple," though one has to wonder how a TKD guy is a kickboxer (who grapples from the clinch)....



A grappler has to overcome this obstacle _before_ grappling.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> A grappler has to overcome this obstacle _before_ grappling.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Bodyslam supporters in here, if it's so easy to pull off why not "lift" BJJ guys up in the air and  dump them on their head. BJJ training starts at knee level (they rarely train takedowns). Should be an easy win for Judo vs BJJ. Yet BJJ is all we here about, and not Judo.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Bodyslam supporters in here, if it's so easy to pull off why not "lift" BJJ guys up in the air and  dump them on their head.


Its been done 


> BJJ training starts at knee level (they rarely train takedowns).


Making more sweeping generalizations.


> Should be an easy win for Judo vs BJJ. Yet BJJ is all we here about, and not Judo.


Bjj is all you ever hear about where?  Last I checked Judo was an Olympic sport and had world wide exposure.  Also one of the most popular fighters in MMA right now is Ronda Rousey who is famous for her Judo and shes not even the best Female Judo player.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Its an accurate generalization. BJJ training starts at knee level for most of the training. The current hierachy in Grappling goes BJJ/SW→Wrestling→Judo. Judo is not required for MMA.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Its an accurate generalization.


No its not


> BJJ training starts at knee level for most of the training.


where?  what school?  you have been to all BJJ schools to know they dont work on takedowns?


> The current hierachy in Grappling goes BJJ/SW→Wrestling→Judo.


Says who?


> Judo is not required for MMA.


Nothing is Required for MMA.


----------



## Laplace_demon

ballen0351 said:


> No its not
> 
> you have been to all BJJ schools



 Do you know what a generalization is?

BJJ/SW is required in MMA. Not only because Its a sport but the fact the rest of the guys train both striking and BJJ.Even accomplished wrestlers learn BJJ or SW


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> Do you know what a generalization is?


Yes and your still wrong


> BJJ/SW is required in MMA. Not only because Its a sport but the fact the rest of the guys train both striking and BJJ.Even accomplished wrestlers learn BJJ or SW


No its not REQUIRED.  Nothing is REQUIRED.  Plenty of MMA fighters train in Judo


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> Bodyslam supporters in here, if it's so easy to pull off why not "lift" BJJ guys up in the air and dump them on their head. BJJ training starts at knee level (they rarely train takedowns). Should be an easy win for Judo vs BJJ.



What context are you speaking of here? MMA? Grappling competition? Street fight?

The BJJ specialists who compete in MMA have all done extensive training in takedowns (executing them, countering them, and breakfalling safely when being taken down).

Grappling competitions vary in their rules, Judo tournaments favor judo players, BJJ competitions favor BJJ players.

For a street fight, a lot would depend on the individuals and whether they trained for street application or not. A BJJ player from a school where they only practiced from their knees would indeed be in danger of being slammed into the sidewalk by the judo player.



Laplace_demon said:


> Yet BJJ is all we here about, and not Judo.



Who is "we" and in what context are you "hearing about" one or the other?



Laplace_demon said:


> Its an accurate generalization. BJJ training starts at knee level for most of the training. The current hierachy in Grappling goes BJJ/SW→Wrestling→Judo. Judo is not required for MMA.



Speaking as a BJJ practitioner, I have no idea where you are getting this hierarchy from or what it means.

If you're talking about MMA, then wrestling would probably be the most valuable single background. However based on your earlier comments regarding TKD and strikers vs grapplers, I thought you were saying that MMA doesn't prove anything?


----------



## Tez3

In the UK and Europe I would say that Judo is probably the best known of all martial arts, it has been around a very long time here since the late 19th century. France especially is a huge Judo country with their Olympic team being famous, the UK has more famous Judoka than any other martial artists.  Judo is known through films, novels and television programmes such as The Avengers a 60's series where one of the characters played by Honor Blackman ( I saw her recently if anyone remembers here at Comic Con, she's in her late eighties and looks fabulous!) famously used Judo. Many of our MMA fighters started in Judo, they have also go on to BJJ but that's natural the same way they train some boxing, MT and anything else they think will improve their game. Wrestling isn't so common here as we don't have the school/college background in it but some of the old catch wrestlers have started up again teaching which is great both for it's own sake and MMA.


----------



## Tez3

The history of Judo in the UK, interesting in itself but if you look at the bottom of the page you will find British Judo's partners, one of them being the UFC.
The History of Judo British Judo Association


----------



## Tez3

I was going to post the following in the women's martial arts section or even just the Judo one but on consideration because of the self defence comments on it I thought I would post it here. Early on Judo was thought to be very good for women for the purposes of self defence, I don't believe that either Judo or the need for female self defence has changed much in a century so I believe this is a valid contribution to this thread. That is also contains history about women in Judo is a bonus 

InYo women s judo 1900-1945 Svinth


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Tez3 said:


> I was going to post the following in the women's martial arts section or even just the Judo one but on consideration because of the self defence comments on it I thought I would post it here. Early on Judo was thought to be very good for women for the purposes of self defence, I don't believe that either Judo or the need for female self defence has changed much in a century so I believe this is a valid contribution to this thread. That is also contains history about women in Judo is a bonus
> 
> InYo women s judo 1900-1945 Svinth






			
				The linked article said:
			
		

> Photographs of "Mrs. Garrud, a well-known Suffragette," throwing a uniformed British policeman appeared in the London _Sketch_ on July 6, 1910. Soon after, _Punch _printed a cartoon showing uniformed policemen cowering before a solitary "Ju-Jutsu Suffragette."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _What we may expect when our women all become Ju-Jutsu Suffragettes. By R.Wallis Mills, originally in Punch, and reprinted in Health& Strength, July 23, 1910_.



Wait, judo/ju-jutsu leads women to be suffragettes? Wanting to vote and be equal members of society and be treated like human beings rather than chattel? Sounds like a dangerous influence to me!


----------



## ballen0351

Suffragettes?


----------



## Tez3

The Suffragettes in fact had bodyguards trained in Judo/Ju-jutsu and if it's good enough for them it should be good enough for anyone frankly! It makes a nonsense of this 'Judo is useles's etc and also the Judo is unknown rubbish.
The Amazons of Edwardian London kick-*** suffragette bodyguards


----------



## elder999

Tez3 said:


> I as The Avengers a 60's series where one of the characters played by Honor Blackman ( I saw her recently if anyone remembers here at Comic Con, she's in her late eighties and looks fabulous!) famously used Judo. .



For most of us on this side of the Atlantic, mention The Avengers, and it's all about Diana Rigg as Mrs. Peel. Some of us, though, remember  this:


----------



## Tez3

Honor Blackman on Judo.


----------



## Langenschwert

Just when I thought I wouldn't get anything fun for Christmas, I get this thread.


----------



## elder999

Langenschwert said:


> Just when I thought I wouldn't get anything fun for Christmas, I get this thread.


Yeah, been more than a little amusement due to agenda troll necromancy, lately....


----------



## Tez3

and in case anyone thought Judoka were just concentrating on the sport aspect........Self Defence Commission British Judo Association


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you're talking about MMA, then wrestling would probably be the most valuable single background. However based on your earlier comments regarding TKD and strikers vs grapplers, I thought you were saying that MMA doesn't prove anything?



A wrestler cannot win on the ground against serious BJJ opposition without knowing how to defend against submissions. There are world class wrestlers and JJ guys in the UFC, but no TDK stylists. Not from my system of TKD (ITF). Never have been either.

Anything but no holds barred handicap strikers chances, since certain targets/vital points and techniques are prohibited for a striker, while the wrestler/JJ practitioner can do which ever submission and takedown he likes. He can also perform these techniques with his vital organs protected by the rules.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> There are world class wrestlers and JJ guys in the UFC, but no TDK stylists. Not from my system of TKD (ITF). Never have been either.



I'm not quite sure why as a TKD person you are telling firstly that Judo doesn't work for self defence and now that there are no TKD stylists in the UFC when I personally know at least four. I know _of _more than that of course but here in the UK along with Judo TKD is a serious style, it doesn't have the same reputation as it does elsewhere of being a place for children. Serious martial arts come out of the training here, like Dan Hardy for a start who will tell you that TKD is a big part of what he does. Unless you are aware of every TKD training place in the world I'd be careful about making such sweeping statements because they will be someone who can prove you wrong.
I also don't know how you can turn a thread about Judo into a hate one about MMA and one of it's top promotions the UFC.


----------



## Laplace_demon

I made it clear pure grappling is risky against pure striking in self defence, to which the user Mephisto responed with MMA. If you are interested in learning why threads take a certain path, you could always scroll back:



Mephisto said:


> * If mma has shown us anything it's that you can't defeat a skilled grappler with striking alone*, but you can combine striking and grappling and defeat a superior grappler.



This is nonsense, since MMA competitions don't translate to real life and self defence, and the early style vs style events encompassed a VERY small fraction (like a few hundred) people competing of the worlds population.

That's how we got into grappling vs striking, since I objected to sport judo (pure grappling) being exposed to striking.


----------



## Laplace_demon

And there are no proven *world class* ITF TKD guys that ever competed in either style vs style or in The UFC. If there against all odds are, I can count most likeley count them on my fingers. Most if not all don't care for it - completely different sport. 

And I repeat wrestling/Grappling/Judo translates better to MMA rules than a primarily striking art, IMO. The TKD guys stay at their world championships and Olympics and are happy with that.


----------



## Tez3

Look, you are entitled to your own opinion but you aren't entitled to your own facts. Repeatedly saying something does not make it true. If you want to think something is a fact well that's fine but you mustn't be surprised when people, who actually know about the style/art you are having a go at, tell you that what you say simply _isn't_ true.
If TKD guys (you don't have women in TKD then?) are happy with what they do why are you, as one of those TKD 'guys' on here arguing the toss with people who are Judoka and MMAists? Why aren't you focussing on TKD alone?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tez3 said:


> Look, you are entitled to your own opinion but you aren't entitled to your own facts. Repeatedly saying something does not make it true. If you want to think something is a fact well that's fine but you mustn't be surprised when people, who actually know about the style/art you are having a go at, tell you that what you say simply _isn't_ true.
> If TKD guys (you don't have women in TKD then?) are happy with what they do why are you, as one of those TKD 'guys' on here arguing the toss with people who are Judoka and MMAists? Why aren't you focussing on TKD alone?



Take it up with  user claiming MMA proves striking alone can't defeat grappling.  As if sport competition has anything to do with self defence and using an art (Judo) which changed Do and became a sport.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Take it up with  user claiming MMA proves striking alone can't defeat grappling.  As if sport competition has anything to do with self defence and using an art (Judo) which changed Do and became a sport.




You know, I have no idea what you are talking about?
You have your own ideas, you are stuck with them which is odd as you are neither a Judoka nor an MMAist and despite enough proof to show you are wrong you cling to these ideas like a drowning man to a piece of wood. Yet you want us to believe you are correct......without proof.

and having thought further about this... why as a TKDist are you on a thread about Judo as self defence telling us that TKD isn't used in MMA?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Now as to Judo and it's current status, the fact that I can google Judo+ Striking, and learn there are schools which don't teach striking and some that do, tells me that something has really changed. But go on pretend as if Judo has not changed Do.


----------



## Buka

Laplace_demon said:


> Now as to Judo and it's current status, the fact that I can google Judo+ Striking, and learn there are schools which don't teach striking and some that do, tells me that something has really changed. But go on pretend as if Judo has not changed Do.



You can google anything. Even good stuff like this -






But that doesn't change Do, either. (Gee, there might a song in there somewhere.)


----------



## Laplace_demon

Buka said:


> You can google anything. Even good stuff like this -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that doesn't change Do, either. (Gee, there might a song in there somewhere.)



What in fact changes Do, if not schools adhering to the *sport* element, while rejecting the self defence and art aspect?

Please elaborate!

/Humble, non Judoka.


----------



## Tez3

I showed you the link to the British Judo Self Defence Committee which overlooks and ensures that Judo for self defence is still taught alongside a 'sporting' side, yet you chose to ignore that and come up with the clichéd 'I googled and found this' excuse. Judoka have told you that Judo is for self defence yet you choose to ignore this too. We could go on and on about the lack of self defence in TKD, how it's kicking only, how it's just a sport because we can find via Google, videos 'proving' this but we don't because we know better, you found a couple of places that do what you, a _non Judoka_, consider inferior Judo and thus condemn all Judo. Speaks volumes about you and nothing about Judo.


----------



## Reeksta

Laplace_demon said:


> What in fact changes Do, if not schools adhering to the *sport* element, while rejecting the self defence and art aspect?
> 
> Please elaborate!
> 
> /Humble, non Judoka.


Kano's vision of judo was based around 3 ideals: cultivation of physical health, learning the martial aspect and inspiring students to become morally good people who contribute to society. This was his do and I believe that much of the contempory judo community adheres to this.
Practicing judo will make you very strong and fit, there's really no doubt about this. It's fantastic exercise. It is also - despite what unfounded claims anyone might make - a hugely effective martial art both in competition and self defence contexts. Finally, my experience is that many judo clubs do a great deal for the wider community. A number of the clubs in the city I live participate in charity throwathons and the like, plus of course they do an excellent job of injecting purpose and positivity into the lives of many young men and women who may be lacking these things in their lives prior to taking up the sport. Don't want to go into too many details but rediscovering judo in my 20s completely turned my life around and I know countless others with similar stories.
People's definition of do will obviously vary, but as far as Kano's goes (which is surely the only one judokas have any kind of responsibility to uphold?) I believe the art is doing a very good job personally


----------



## Laplace_demon

British judo self defence comittee can not  ensure world wide principles. ITF TKD schools are to include self defence, and I haven't heard it being rejected in any school. Your analogy is flawed.


----------



## Mephisto

Laplace_demon said:


> I made it clear pure grappling is risky against pure striking in self defence, to which the user Mephisto responed with MMA. If you are interested in learning why threads take a certain path, you could always scroll back:
> 
> 
> 
> This is nonsense, since MMA competitions don't translate to real life and self defence, and the early style vs style events encompassed a VERY small fraction (like a few hundred) people competing of the worlds population.
> 
> That's how we got into grappling vs striking, since I objected to sport judo (pure grappling) being exposed to striking.



You're still quite wrong and willfully ignorant. Not one person here agrees with you. Please provide some evidence as to why pure grappling against pure striking is risky. I can refer you to the old Gracie challenge videos where pure grapplers like the Gracie's were able to dominate many pure strikers. There are many examples of the need for grappling in a realistic format. Where did you get the idea that tkd alone is all you need for self defense? Your instructor? How long have you been training? What systems have you trained? Do you think you're one of these elite super tkd-ers? If not than you could use some grappling knowledge too.

You've been wrong about several things here and shown your ignorance many times. I don't know what else to tell you.


----------



## Buka

Tez3 said:


> I was going to post the following in the women's martial arts section or even just the Judo one but on consideration because of the self defence comments on it I thought I would post it here. Early on Judo was thought to be very good for women for the purposes of self defence, I don't believe that either Judo or the need for female self defence has changed much in a century so I believe this is a valid contribution to this thread. That is also contains history about women in Judo is a bonus
> 
> InYo women s judo 1900-1945 Svinth



Awesome stuff there, Tez. Thanks.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Mephisto said:


> You're still quite wrong and willfully ignorant. Not one person here agrees with you. Please provide some evidence as to why pure grappling against pure striking is risky. I can refer you to the old Gracie challenge videos where pure grapplers like the Gracie's were able to dominate many pure strikers.








The gracies are world renowned grapplers against not so good strikers.... The karate instructor here, accepting the challenge, is not very aggressive, to say the least. Even his stance is weak. I mean, to even have to adress these challenges offends me.


----------



## Reeksta

Okay @Laplace_demon I can accept that controlled challenge/MMA matches may not be the ideal format to examine an art's suitability for self defence, so let me put things a different way and see if we can reach some understanding.
The last time I properly had to defend myself in a 'real' situation was about 6 years ago (at which point judo was the only martial art I'd trained in to any extent) when I was attacked by 5 lads on the top deck of a bus. They threw a few punches but it quickly became apparent that what they really wanted to do was grab a hold of me and haul me to the ground so they could give me a kicking. This is generally the way packs operate in my experience. Because I knew how to break grips I was able to keep their hands off me and because I had practice in moving bodies around I was able to continually move them and myself so that I did not become surrounded. Eventually the driver called up that he'd rang the police and they legged it. I had a few cuts and bruises but it could have been much worse. The fact that it wasn't is because of judo. I genuinely can't see any way that I would have avoided being overwhelmed if I'd only known a striking art. That's not to put them down but in this situation it wouldn't have saved me; there was too many of them in too confined a space.
Does that make any more sense in terms of why judo would be useful for someone in a self defence context?


----------



## Mephisto

Laplace_demon said:


> The gracies are world renowned grapplers against not so good strikers.... The karate instructor here, accepting the challenge, is not very aggressive, to say the least. Even his stance is weak. I mean, to even have to adress these challenges offends me.


That's one video of many. Of course I'm sure they just never really fought a "good" striker. In UFC one the first guy Royce fought was a skilled boxer, he was allowed to wear a glove to better use his jab without risk on injury. It didn't end well for the boxer. I asked for videos where superior striking prevails over grappling. There are some out there that I've seen but they are also the exception rather than the rule. Also a lot of the strikers that beat grapplers know how to grapple and choose to keep the fight standing. 

Knowledge of grappling and standup enables you to control the fight and where it takes place. A striker that can't grapple can't depend on striking alone to keep things from going to the ground. A skilled grappler, a brawler that doesn't fear your strikes, a bigger opponent, can all take distance and get the clinch and take down. Distance is a luxury that can easily be lost in a fight, your surroundings in reality such as the example of a bus or confined space all favor a grappler. If an opponent can grab you he can take you down. In this respect I think grappling knowledge is more important than striking. Keep in mind I train striking arts, I am not a grappler who favors his way. As a striker I know where my weaknesses lie, but I dont fight people outside of sparring, so it's not really a concern to me. You need to have a realistic view of the world not a view that suits what you currently do. Obviously you favor striking and tkd because that's what you train but you are biased and too ignorant to realize that.


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> British judo self defence comittee can not  ensure world wide principles. ITF TKD schools are to include self defence, and I haven't heard it being rejected in any school. Your analogy is flawed.




It is not an analogy at all so therefore cannot be a flawed one. You stated that_ absolutely no_ _Judoka at all_ were doing self defence, I showed you where some were therefore _you are absolutely wrong_ in your assertion that all Judoka are not doing self defence. Perhaps if you stopped talking in absolutes you would not be disagreed with.
Your second sentence makes no sense, 'ITF TKD* are to* include self defence', they aren't doing it now? You haven't heard *what *being rejected in *what *schools?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> British judo self defence comittee can not  ensure world wide principles.



Neither can any of the various ITF groups. Nor the (much larger) KKW group. Nor any other organization.
Because it isn't possible, outside the very small minority of any group that competes at a given level.



Laplace_demon said:


> ITF TKD schools are to include self defence, and I haven't heard it being rejected in any school. Your analogy is flawed.



And yet you claim that "elderly black belts" at your club have never been taught any throws. Which are, by any reasonable definition, important to self defense.

You do tend to contradict yourself a lot...


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> The gracies are world renowned grapplers against not so good strikers.... The karate instructor here, accepting the challenge, is not very aggressive, to say the least. Even his stance is weak. I mean, to even have to adress these challenges offends me.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> Take it up with user claiming MMA proves striking alone can't defeat grappling.



Which user was that? I think you were the one to bring up MMA in this thread.



Laplace_demon said:


> ... and using an art (Judo) which changed Do and became a sport.



I don't understand what this sentence means. An art which changed Do? Could you clarify what you are trying to say?


----------



## Tez3

While having a cuppa I idly googled 'Judo and self defence USA'. Pages and pages of clubs and schools came up that say they do Judo for self defence, there's videos and books for sale of Judo for self defence, forums ,blogs and other sites that cover the self defence aspect of Judo , however google 'Judo and sport' and you will get the sports aspect....funny that.
I can't testify to the competence of all these places of course but  certainly Judo for self defence is out there.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> Take it up with user claiming MMA proves striking alone can't defeat grappling.


Just to clarify, I don't think anyone here is making that claim. I'm a passable grappler, but if I were to get into a fight with Jerome Banner I would almost certainly be unconscious before I got anywhere near taking him down.

What we are saying is if you have two fighters whose abilities are even within the same order of magnitude, then it can be very tricky for a pure striker to prevent a grappler from closing the distance, clinching, or getting the takedown. In fact, it's pretty common for two pure strikers to end up in the clinch or even going to the ground even though neither of them have trained for that. (BTW - I came to that realization over a decade before the first UFC.)

Anyway, this doesn't have a lot to do with the initial question regarding Judo for self-defense. Even if you were correct in your contention that a high-level TKD expert can stop a grappler cold, the fact is that there aren't too many TKD grandmasters out there mugging people in dark alleys.


----------



## Laplace_demon

I can't provide any video since no world class kickboxing/TKD striker fought the Gracies or any other grappler, captured on easily accessible tape.

And since you mentioned him: I would much prefer to face a strong Judoka or BJJ black belt in street fight over Jerome Le Banner, even if Le banner for the sake of the discussion has no prior knowledge of grappling. I would also prefer to face anyone of the Gracies over Le Banner.

My odds of prevaling are by far the worst against Le Banner. I would need to KO either one, and Banner is ten times harder being a full contact fighter.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> I can't provide any video since no world class kickboxing/TKD striker fought the Gracies or any other grappler, captured on easily accessible tape.



Um, I don't know if you read my earlier post, but there are plenty of world class kickboxers and other strikers that have competed in MMA, from the beginnings of the UFC up through the present.

Gerard Gordeau, Semy Schilt, Mark Hunt, Maurice Smith, Rick Roufus, the list goes on and on.


----------



## elder999

Laplace_demon said:


> And since you mentioned him: I would much prefer to face a strong Judoka or BJJ black belt in street fight over Jerome Le Banner, even if Le banner for the sake of the discussion has no prior knowledge of grappling. I would also prefer to face anyone of the Gracies over Le Banner.
> 
> My odds of prevaling are by far the worst against Le Banner. I would need to KO either one, and Banner is ten times harder being a full contact fighter.


 
I dunno, man, Le Banner has a glass chin, and those Gracies, well, learning how to eat a couple to get where they want to be is part of their game.....having fought full contact in Japan, against world class (at the time) fighters (though by no means being "world class": myself,) and having consistently lost all of my life to judoka who went on to be or were world class, and being a congenital klutz myself, and having fought in what would today be called "MMA" against grapplers and strilkers, and being something of a grappler and something of a striker myself, I'd put it this way:

In the ring, under current MMA rules, I'd rather face a pure striker, than pure anything else.

In the street, I'd rather face a pure grappler-if I had to choose-but it really doesn't matter, because odds are good-given my proclivities, and 43 year long adjustment and training to congenital klutzhood-they're going to lose something necessary to keep fighting, whichever they are.


----------



## drop bear

There are plenty of striking focused events that allow takedowns. 

Muay Thai has world class strikers and they still get taken down.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> There are plenty of striking focused events that allow takedowns.
> 
> Muay Thai has world class strikers and they still get taken down.



Muay Thai includes throws. There is no suprise to find two strikers of that style attempting to take each other down.

There is also no mysterious science behind a martial art which incorporates strikes and kicks. Gracie fought mostly bums. The one legit TKD guy he faced (Leopoldo) didn't use any TKD whatsover, so that couldn't possibly count. Matt Hughes knocked Royce out, and Hughes is a  *wrestler.
*
Here's another pathetic showing in one of the gracie matches against strikers:






No serious person would attach any significance to these displays.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> Muay Thai includes throws. There is no suprise to find two strikers of that style attempting to take each other down.


 

So does TKD. There are really not very many with anything other than the most basic knowledge of TKD who don't know this.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> So does TKD. There are really not very many with anything other than the most basic knowledge of TKD who don't know this.



I never said it didn't. The techniques in TKD outside of the strikes and kicks are fairly basic compared to the grappling arts it stole from. I wouldn't speak too highly of it. But if you want to pretend that TKD is a mixture of striking and grappling then go ahead. Fact is not all schools teach throws. It depends on the instructor. Self defence involving no good joint locks is however common place for ITF.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> I never said it didn't. The techniques in TKD outside of the strikes and kicks are fairly basic compared to the grappling arts it stole from. I wouldn't speak too highly of it. But if you want to pretend that TKD is a mixture of striking and grappling then go ahead. Fact is not all schools teach throws. It depends on the instructor. Self defence involving no good joint locks is however common place for ITF.


 
It is? How many ITF schools have you attended to make such a generalization? And what is your training and experience that qualifies you to decide is a joint lock is "good" or not?


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> It is? How many ITF schools have you attended to make such a generalization? And what is your training and experience that qualifies you to decide is a joint lock is "good" or not?



I have been exposed to these worthless jointlocks, since we have them. There is no time for that silly nonsense in a street altercation. Joint manipulations have been debunked years ago. It is a cheap attempt by martial arts schools to try and instill a false sense of security and fake advertisement.

I have been informed by 3rd dan black belts not only here but abroad that ITF TKD does not teach throws everywhere. If something being taught depends on the instructor I wouldn't say it's an integral part of the system.


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Muay Thai includes throws. There is no suprise to find two strikers of that style attempting to take each other down.
> 
> There is also no mysterious science behind a martial art which incorporates strikes and kicks. Gracie fought mostly bums. The one legit TKD guy he faced (Leopoldo) didn't use any TKD whatsover, so that couldn't possibly count. Matt Hughes knocked Royce out, and Hughes is a  *wrestler.
> *
> Here's another pathetic showing in one of the gracie matches against strikers:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No serious person would attach any significance to these displays.



but that is still world class strikers being taken down.

so it can be done.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> but that is still world class strikers being taken down.
> 
> so it can be done.



Of course it can be done. Just as I can strike a grappler before the clinch.


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> I have been exposed to these worthless jointlocks, since we have them. There is no time for that silly nonsense in a street altercation. Joint manipulations have been debunked years ago. It is a cheap attempt by martial arts schools to try and instill a false sense of security and fake advertisement.
> 
> I have been informed by 3rd dan black belts not only here but abroad that ITF TKD does not teach throws everywhere. If something being taught depends on the instructor I wouldn't say it's an integral part of the system.


 
So basically, you don't have any factual or experiential basis for your statements.
And, I note (as do others) that you have once again avoided answering a direct question about your training and experience.

Personally, I think it's quite likely that you're just making it up as you go along.


----------



## ballen0351

Laplace_demon said:


> I have been exposed to these worthless jointlocks, since we have them. There is no time for that silly nonsense in a street altercation. Joint manipulations have been debunked years ago.


Hmm I use joint jocks at work all the time Guess they don't really work maybe I just tricked the guys into complying


----------



## drop bear

Laplace_demon said:


> Of course it can be done. Just as I can strike a grappler before the clinch.



i am not saying you cant. But then we are comparing the fighter. Not really the style


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> Gracie fought mostly bums.



Ooh, I've got an idea. How about you try walking up to Gerard Gordeau and tell him he's a bum who doesn't know how to strike. Get someone to video the results. Please? 



Laplace_demon said:


> The one legit TKD guy he faced (Leopoldo) didn't use any TKD whatsover, so that couldn't possibly count.



Actually, it doesn't count because Kimo never studied TKD. He made up that rank to get a shot in the UFC. His actual fighting qualifications were being a roided up wrestler and football player.

Royce _did_ beat Pat Smith, who holds black belts in Tae Kwon Do, Tang Soo Do, Hapkido, and Kempo and who has a 66-8 record in kickboxing and who knocked out Andy Hug in K1 and who outweighs Royce by about 50 pounds, but I suppose that doesn't count because Smith isn't a _5th_ degree black belt.  



Laplace_demon said:


> Matt Hughes knocked Royce out, and Hughes is a *wrestler.*



Matt Hughes's original _base_ is wrestling. He _is_ a mixed martial artist. He has trained extensively in striking. Also, his wrestling played a big part in being able to defeat both Royce and Renzo - his wrestling allowed him to neutralize their jiu-jitsu so that he could strike unimpeded.



Laplace_demon said:


> No serious person would attach any significance to these displays.



Well, no one attaches any significance to Royce's victory over Bobby Ologun, because that was a novelty exhibition match against a celebrity opponent. It isn't even listed on Royce's record. Many serious martial artists _do_ attach significance to Royce's victories over a series of bigger, stronger martial arts from a variety of backgrounds.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Tony Dismukes said:


> Ooh, I've got an idea. How about you try walking up to Gerard Gordeau and tell him he's a bum who doesn't know how to strike. Get someone to video the results. Please?
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it doesn't count because Kimo never studied TKD. He made up that rank to get a shot in the UFC. His actual fighting qualifications were being a roided up wrestler and football player.
> 
> Royce _did_ beat Pat Smith, who holds black belts in Tae Kwon Do, Tang Soo Do, Hapkido, and Kempo and who has a 66-8 record in kickboxing and who knocked out Andy Hug in K1 and who outweighs Royce by about 50 pounds, but I suppose that doesn't count because Smith isn't a _5th_ degree black belt.



Patrick Smiths record in K1 is 1 win and 5 straight losses. His kick was telegraphed an hour in advance before Gracie closed the distance.,,,  I did not knew that about Kimo, haha. Why wouldn't wrestling be  good enough credentials for UFC if BJJ is?


----------



## Tez3

Laplace_demon said:


> Why wouldn't wrestling be good enough credentials for UFC if BJJ is?



It is. As is Judo. I don't know how much you actually know about TKD but I can tell that you don't know very much about MMA. I think you missed the point about Kimo, the wrestling bit *is* fine, it was the roided up bit that wasn't.


----------



## Laplace_demon

[QUO


Tez3 said:


> It is. As is Judo. I don't know how much you actually know about TKD but I can tell that you don't know very much about MMA. I think you missed the point about Kimo, the wrestling bit *is* fine, it was the roided up bit that wasn't.



Tony said Kimo needed to make up that  TKD rank to get a shot in the UFC. How am I supposed to interpret that any differently than that a single Wrestling background was not enough?


----------



## Dirty Dog

Laplace_demon said:


> [QUO
> 
> 
> Tony said Kimo needed to make up that  TKD rank to get a shot in the UFC. How am I supposed to interpret that any differently than that a single Wrestling background was not enough?




Tony did not say Kimo *needed* to make up TKD rank. He said he made it up. There are plenty of people who have invented ranks they never earned. They didn't need to, except in their own minds, or to placate their ego, or to try and cash in on the most recent fad.


----------



## Laplace_demon

Dirty Dog said:


> . He said he made it up..



"To get a shot in the UFC"


----------



## drop bear

Is mark hunt a world class striker by the way?

winning k1 and all.


----------



## Dr.Smith

I think the Japanese police force uses Judo in fact.


----------



## Laplace_demon

drop bear said:


> Is mark hunt a world class striker by the way?
> 
> winning k1 and all.



Sure. I just don't think someone who's first win was an obvious a fluke, then lost 5 in a row before retiring, is *world* class. Do you?


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Laplace_demon said:


> Sure. I just don't think someone who's first win was an obvious a fluke, then lost 5 in a row before retiring, is *world* class. Do you?



I assume that's referring to Pat Smith. Nah, I don't think he's *world* class. However, he is a legitimate TKD black belt and with a 66-8 kickboxing record, I do think he's quite a bit  tougher than most TKD black belts. I'd rate him as a solid professional, even if he never made it to the top ranks.

In comparison, Royce Gracie has never won a major BJJ competition or defeated a top BJJ competitor, so I can't quite buy your contention that their fight was a match up of a world-class grappler against a striking "bum". (Also, let's not forget Smith's 50 pound weight advantage.)

Gerard Gordeau would be the highest ranked striker that Royce has defeated. I'm curious as to how you will attempt to denigrate _his_ abilities and accomplishments.


----------

