# The elusive Self Defence Version of Gracie Jiu Jitsu



## Jusroc

I was wondering if any Gracie Barra Gracie Jiu Jitsu clubs in your area
teach courses that are only Self Defence Specific 

rather than teaching the Self defence aspect of Gracie Jiu Jitsu
as part of the process on the path to eventually grading to black balt in GJJ / BJJ.

It may be me misunderstanding, but at one point i thought there certain members of 
the Gracie family were now teaching purely Gracie Jiu Jitsu for self defence and
had broken away from the MMA / Sport jiu Jitsu focus. (i.e. Gracie University, 
Rickson Gracie's Self Defence Unit, and other clubs promoting Self Defence versions of BJJ)

I also understand that In history Gracie Jiu Jitsu was primarily developed as a
system of self defence and that only later on did the Gracie family and other notable
Brazilian Jiu Jitsu experts develop the style as a competitive sport.

Nonetheless, if anyone knows what the state of play is now with regards to the 
self defence side of Gracie Jiu Jitsu, I would be grateful for your advice.

I would be interested in learning what the self defence side of Gracie Jiu Jitsu entailed
and as to whether it was possible to go to a club specifically to learn this side of Gracie Jiu Jitsu,
with rolling / randori but with an empathise on preparing one self (as much as one can)
for a self defence encounter, rather than prepare oneself for a sport competition.

Thanks, appreciate good advice.


----------



## Hanzou

I’m not Gracie Barra, but my background is primarily from the Relson Gracie line of Gjj which is SD focused. I wouldn’t say it’s elusive, there’s Relson schools all over the US. Rorion’s line  (Rener and Ryron) is also SD focused.

I wouldn’t say they shy away from competition and MMA, but they’re not considered top schools if competition BJJ is your focus. Interestingly, Renzo Gracie’s school in NYC is considered one of the top sport BJJ schools in the world, training guys for BJJ comp and MMA. However, I don’t know about the self defense side of things. I can’t imagine that Renzo would let his black belts not be prepared for a SD situation.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Okay, there's a lot of marketing spin and misinformation out there, so let's see if I can provide some clarity ...

Firstly, BJJ/GJJ was never really primarily a system of self-defense. It was a system for fighting, under various circumstances. The early Gracie family members took part in a variety of formal and informal challenge matches under various rules, both grappling only and grappling + striking. They also took did a lot of flat out fighting (consensual and non-) on the street and beaches of Rio de Janeiro. These fights and competitions shaped the technical growth and evolution of the art. However they also did a fair amount of marketing the art as a self-defense system suitable for women and smaller, non-athletic people. This was intended to appeal to upper class students who could afford to pay more.

By the time BJJ/GJJ had really evolved into its own recognizably distinct art, you could view it as having 3 main components.

Pure grappling for competition.
Vale Tudo (i.e. proto-MMA), for challenge matches against trained fighters.
"Self-defense", i.e. techniques for use against typical attacks from untrained fighters, such as headlocks, standing chokes, grabs, etc. Much of this repertoire really wasn't much different from what you might see in a lot of TMAs.
In more recent years, there has been some divergence in BJJ schools.

A lot of them are primarily focused on tournament BJJ sport competition. In these schools, beginners are thrown immediately into mostly ground grappling, with takedowns and self-defense /fighting aspects not addressed until later (sometimes much later) in their development. Some of this comes from students who are only interested in the sport. Some of it comes from the development of MMA as its own entity - this leads to gyms that have separate BJJ, MMA, and striking classes, with students only crossing over if they feel like it.

Other BJJ schools market themselves as being self-defense oriented. In practice, this means that they make sure white belts get a foundation in the classic Vale Tudo and "self-defense" curriculum before moving on to the more sophisticated movements required for modern grappling competition.

Other schools balance out the curriculum by spending most practice time on competitive grappling, but using the classic self-defense techniques as warm ups.

I've only seen a small percentage of "self-defense" oriented schools which have attempted to keep the self-defense portion of the curriculum evolving and improving in the way the sport competition curriculum has. I've done my own little bit along those lines, but there are other instructors who have done more. Part of the issue is that the majority of what needs to be learned are foundational skills which apply across the art. Self-defense, grappling competition, MMA - these are just different contexts which require those foundational skills to be applied in different ways. If you have a student who hasn't developed the ability to reliably control their own body and an opponent's body at the same time in a friendly grappling match, they aren't going to do any better when dealing with surprise attacks, weapons, multiple attackers, unusual environmental factors, etc.

Currently I split my teaching time about 50/50 between stand up and ground skills and between "street " vs sport application. Other instructors at my school have their own approaches.


----------



## Jusroc

Thanks for the info.  

I figure part of my problem is that i live on a small island in the UK. Although there are two really competitive sport Jiu Jitsu clubs. Which i think are very good and have got good results for their students.

Personally, I want to do Gracie Jiu Jitsu for the self defence side, rather than for competition.
I am getting older, have one or two health problems that makes me less able to train to the same level 
as full time competition players.

i also have a strong interest in music, so would prefer to spend my time on both music and training,
rather than just training. I understand I'll never be a world champ at jiu jitsu. 

That doesn't bother me. 
Just being able to stop people beating me up would be enough. 

Thanks for your info / advice.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Jusroc said:


> I am getting older, have one or two health problems that makes me less able to train to the same level
> as full time competition players.


The good news is that at the majority of competitive sport oriented clubs, most students are not full time competition players. Just like anywhere else, it's the casual students who pay the bills.  There are exceptions - maybe the top 1% of gyms focused on world-class competitors can keep the doors open by catering to those top athletes who will actually move to train at these gyms. Everywhere else, you'll have lots of regular guys who come in 2-3 days a week trying to improve.


----------



## Jusroc

Tony Dismukes said:


> Okay, there's a lot of marketing spin and misinformation out there, so let's see if I can provide some clarity ...
> 
> Firstly, BJJ/GJJ was never really primarily a system of self-defense. It was a system for fighting, under various circumstances. The early Gracie family members took part in a variety of formal and informal challenge matches under various rules, both grappling only and grappling + striking. They also took did a lot of flat out fighting (consensual and non-) on the street and beaches of Rio de Janeiro. These fights and competitions shaped the technical growth and evolution of the art. However they also did a fair amount of marketing the art as a self-defense system suitable for women and smaller, non-athletic people. This was intended to appeal to upper class students who could afford to pay more.
> 
> By the time BJJ/GJJ had really evolved into its own recognizably distinct art, you could view it as having 3 main components.
> 
> Pure grappling for competition.
> Vale Tudo (i.e. proto-MMA), for challenge matches against trained fighters.
> "Self-defense", i.e. techniques for use against typical attacks from untrained fighters, such as headlocks, standing chokes, grabs, etc. Much of this repertoire really wasn't much different from what you might see in a lot of TMAs.
> In more recent years, there has been some divergence in BJJ schools.
> 
> A lot of them are primarily focused on tournament BJJ sport competition. In these schools, beginners are thrown immediately into mostly ground grappling, with takedowns and self-defense /fighting aspects not addressed until later (sometimes much later) in their development. Some of this comes from students who are only interested in the sport. Some of it comes from the development of MMA as its own entity - this leads to gyms that have separate BJJ, MMA, and striking classes, with students only crossing over if they feel like it.
> 
> Other BJJ schools market themselves as being self-defense oriented. In practice, this means that they make sure white belts get a foundation in the classic Vale Tudo and "self-defense" curriculum before moving on to the more sophisticated movements required for modern grappling competition.
> 
> Other schools balance out the curriculum by spending most practice time on competitive grappling, but using the classic self-defense techniques as warm ups.
> 
> I've only seen a small percentage of "self-defense" oriented schools which have attempted to keep the self-defense portion of the curriculum evolving and improving in the way the sport competition curriculum has. I've done my own little bit along those lines, but there are other instructors who have done more. Part of the issue is that the majority of what needs to be learned are foundational skills which apply across the art. Self-defense, grappling competition, MMA - these are just different contexts which require those foundational skills to be applied in different ways. If you have a student who hasn't developed the ability to reliably control their own body and an opponent's body at the same time in a friendly grappling match, they aren't going to do any better when dealing with surprise attacks, weapons, multiple attackers, unusual environmental factors, etc.
> 
> Currently I split my teaching time about 50/50 between stand up and ground skills and between "street " vs sport application. Other instructors at my school have their own approaches.


Thanks for your advice. Interesting to read. And again.

The reason why I have not encountered a club that has a strong Self defence focus, is the clubs in my area (or on the island that i live on) are really keen and geared up towards competing.

It just may be their personal preference not to bother too much with the SD side.
As I guess the more time out spent teaching the SD side, that x amount of time comes out of their 
training time for their competition program/s.

also, in the island that i live, there are other schools teaching other arts which likely cover a lot of similar techniques. Such as Krav Maga and Kenpo. Although not the same, perhaps those who practice BJJ 
simply leave the students looking for just SD to join one of the other clubs, so they don't have to bother teaching them. 

I don't know. I can't speak for these other guys, and perhaps i have misunderstood.
I personally would prefer to train at a club that is SD only focused

thanks for your advice


----------



## Hanzou

Jusroc said:


> also, in the island that i live, there are other schools teaching other arts which likely cover a lot of similar techniques. Such as Krav Maga and Kenpo. Although not the same, perhaps those who practice BJJ
> simply leave the students looking for just SD to join one of the other clubs, so they don't have to bother teaching them.
> 
> I don't know. I can't speak for these other guys, and perhaps i have misunderstood.
> I personally would prefer to train at a club that is SD only focused
> 
> thanks for your advice



Can you post the schools you’re looking at?


----------



## Buka

Jusroc said:


> Thanks for your advice. Interesting to read. And again.
> 
> The reason why I have not encountered a club that has a strong Self defence focus, is the clubs in my area (or on the island that i live on) are really keen and geared up towards competing.
> 
> It just may be their personal preference not to bother too much with the SD side.
> As I guess the more time out spent teaching the SD side, that x amount of time comes out of their
> training time for their competition program/s.
> 
> also, in the island that i live, there are other schools teaching other arts which likely cover a lot of similar techniques. Such as Krav Maga and Kenpo. Although not the same, perhaps those who practice BJJ
> simply leave the students looking for just SD to join one of the other clubs, so they don't have to bother teaching them.
> 
> I don't know. I can't speak for these other guys, and perhaps i have misunderstood.
> I personally would prefer to train at a club that is SD only focused
> 
> thanks for your advice


The best thing for you to do is visit all of those schools, spend several different nights watching, and ask yourself which one you think you would enjoy more. OR.....join one for six months, switch to a different one etc.

Good luck and go getum, bro.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Jusroc said:


> I personally would prefer to train at a club that is SD only focused


The other good news is that if you have prior martial arts background and end up at a sport-only BJJ school, it's not that hard to take the fundamental ground skills you learn for sport BJJ and then learn how to modify them for self-defense scenarios. The main thing you need is some training partners who are willing to go down that rabbit hole with you. There are good online resources and plenty of exercises and experiments you can work on. (I've posted here in the past regarding some of the experiments and training exercises I've worked on in that regard.)


----------



## Jusroc

Hello again
Thanks for the advice and sure, i know it wouldn't be too hard to adapt the syllabus to make it SD applicable.
Although, ideally, just want to find some people who already do the SD applied version.

Don't want to be a coach.
Don't want to start a club.
Don't want to organise a club.
Don't want to make money.
Don't want to win medals.
Don't want to get involved in politics.
Not even bothered about getting belts.

Just want to pay money (mat fees)
train and then go home
ideally without hurting anyone
or getting hurt by anyone
and not get involved in petty conflict
be happy



*sorry for rant. I spent a few years not so long ago, doing everything for a local Judo club.
doing everything for free, and getting people sponsorship to get their coaching qualifications,
etc. all to build the club. then, once i had started to build the club up (after an agreement had been made
by the people involved), someone, who no longer had coaching quals turned up with a bag of money,
gave it to the semi retired back seat coach, who took the money, gave him the club that i had
spent a few years helping to build up and which i had develop plans and an agreement with
senior members of the national association that we belonged to, to help us develop it.
Only to be sold out without a word.

Illegal in employment law, normally, but not in the odd little island that i live on. At least for now.
So... start a club. No thanks. Hence the above mini rant. Sorry...


----------



## Jusroc

Tony Dismukes said:


> The other good news is that if you have prior martial arts background and end up at a sport-only BJJ school, it's not that hard to take the fundamental ground skills you learn for sport BJJ and then learn how to modify them for self-defense scenarios. The main thing you need is some training partners who are willing to go down that rabbit hole with you. There are good online resources and plenty of exercises and experiments you can work on. (I've posted here in the past regarding some of the experiments and training exercises I've worked on in that regard.)



Sure. good idea. 
Although I think the few people who I know who want to train. I have over time, referred to the two clubs.
I have one or two buddies from old school kenpo that may be into some Gracie Jiu Jitsu / Judo
if SD orientated.


----------



## Jusroc

Buka said:


> The best thing for you to do is visit all of those schools, spend several different nights watching, and ask yourself which one you think you would enjoy more. OR.....join one for six months, switch to a different one etc.
> 
> Good luck and go getum, bro.


Thanks


----------



## Jusroc

Hanzou said:


> I’m not Gracie Barra, but my background is primarily from the Relson Gracie line of Gjj which is SD focused. I wouldn’t say it’s elusive, there’s Relson schools all over the US. Rorion’s line  (Rener and Ryron) is also SD focused.
> 
> I wouldn’t say they shy away from competition and MMA, but they’re not considered top schools if competition BJJ is your focus. Interestingly, Renzo Gracie’s school in NYC is considered one of the top sport BJJ schools in the world, training guys for BJJ comp and MMA. However, I don’t know about the self defense side of things. I can’t imagine that Renzo would let his black belts not be prepared for a SD situation.


Sure, thanks for the info. All interesting.

I remember watching some of the vintage Rorion vs karate experts fighting
have to admit, what the Gracies did, did make me laugh a lot.

Coming from a karate background growing up, and being a bit of a risk taker myself,
as well as someone who likes to experiment.

Yere. I liked what the Gracie's did. Felt a bit sorry for the Karate guys.


----------



## Jusroc

Hanzou said:


> Can you post the schools you’re looking at?


Prefer not to post actual clubs, in-case someone gets the wrong end of the stick and starts stirring up trouble.
Things like that happen when living on a small island I am afraid. Always someone who wants to throw dirt.

Just trying my best to stay out of conflict between anyone. As I have no quarrel with any one of these clubs.
People do what they do. I just try and find what's best for me.

Sorry if that isn't that helpful (doesn't help you help me).
I did train at one of the clubs around 99 - 2000, before going to uni.
But that was before the club was affiliated to the Gracie Barra.
Stop training because i had to go to uni, and during this period of time,
there wasn't many Gracie or BJJ clubs in the UK.

So ended up doing Muay Thai for a bit, then Judo.
Things we sacrifice for college... but nevermind.


----------



## Hanzou

Jusroc said:


> Prefer not to post actual clubs, in-case someone gets the wrong end of the stick and starts stirring up trouble.
> Things like that happen when living on a small island I am afraid. Always someone who wants to throw dirt.
> 
> Just trying my best to stay out of conflict between anyone. As I have no quarrel with any one of these clubs.
> People do what they do. I just try and find what's best for me.
> 
> Sorry if that isn't that helpful (doesn't help you help me).
> I did train at one of the clubs around 99 - 2000, before going to uni.
> But that was before the club was affiliated to the Gracie Barra.
> Stop training because i had to go to uni, and during this period of time,
> there wasn't many Gracie or BJJ clubs in the UK.
> 
> So ended up doing Muay Thai for a bit, then Judo.
> Things we sacrifice for college... but nevermind.



Nah, I was just curious at what schools you were looking at. If they're part of a larger branch of schools, I could inform you of what to expect. However, if you're not comfortable doing that for whatever reason, that's fine.

Even if you don't end up in a GJJ school, a legit BJJ school of any stripe will make you a more competent martial artist. I trained very briefly with 10th planet JJ which is a very sport oriented system and was quite different than my GJJ training. However, there were some aspects of 10 planet that I actually preferred (no gi, rubber guard, heavier emphasis on leg locks, etc.) over GJJ. In short, approach it with an open mind. You may want a more SD focused school, but the people at the competitive school might be a lot more welcoming and still give you the tools to defend yourself in a pinch. In the end, if you're not enjoying yourself, regardless of what the focus of the school is, you won't stay long.


----------



## Jusroc

Hanzou said:


> Nah, I was just curious at what schools you were looking at. If they're part of a larger branch of schools, I could inform you of what to expect. However, if you're not comfortable doing that for whatever reason, that's fine.
> 
> Even if you don't end up in a GJJ school, a legit BJJ school of any stripe will make you a more competent martial artist. I trained very briefly with 10th planet JJ which is a very sport oriented system and was quite different than my GJJ training. However, there were some aspects of 10 planet that I actually preferred (no gi, rubber guard, heavier emphasis on leg locks, etc.) over GJJ. In short, approach it with an open mind. You may want a more SD focused school, but the people at the competitive school might be a lot more welcoming and still give you the tools to defend yourself in a pinch. In the end, if you're not enjoying yourself, regardless of what the focus of the school is, you won't stay long.


Thanks for the advice. I read and watched some really interesting instruction with Eddie Bravo.
I found the rubber guard really interesting, and a great ploy. I believe this got banned from some competitions.
I found Eddie Bravo's personality really interesting. 

Funny guy. and from what i read, a strong advocate of the use of cannabis and training, which surprised me.
Especially compared with the Gracie families known reputation for being T-total.

Just out of interest. I believe the schools from the area I live are mainly affiliated to Gracie Barra  and Brazilian Power Team. Although i think both these clubs are run out of the love for GJJ / MMA etc.
and both, are run by people who are bright, and also organised. 

From what I know about them, they do organise seminars periodically.
I believe Gracie Barra Europe is headed by Braulio Estima. Which in itself is excellent.

I don't doubt the skills of the people who run both these clubs.

I just am more geared up for the hobbyist slow lane now, rather than the 6 or 7 day a week schedule,
that i trained years ago for a short period (due to health, and time).

Thanks again.


----------



## Hanzou

Jusroc said:


> Thanks for the advice. I read and watched some really interesting instruction with Eddie Bravo.
> I found the rubber guard really interesting, and a great ploy. I believe this got banned from some competitions.
> I found Eddie Bravo's personality really interesting.
> 
> Funny guy. and from what i read, a strong advocate of the use of cannabis and training, which surprised me.
> Especially compared with the Gracie families known reputation for being T-total.



Yeah, and just to show you how a Guard developed for sport can be useful for self defense;


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/pdd3y1




Jusroc said:


> Just out of interest. I believe the schools from the area I live are mainly affiliated to Gracie Barra  and Brazilian Power Team. Although i think both these clubs are run out of the love for GJJ / MMA etc.
> and both, are run by people who are bright, and also organised.
> 
> From what I know about them, they do organise seminars periodically.
> I believe Gracie Barra Europe is headed by Braulio Estima. Which in itself is excellent.
> 
> I don't doubt the skills of the people who run both these clubs.
> 
> I just am more geared up for the hobbyist slow lane now, rather than the 6 or 7 day a week schedule,
> that i trained years ago for a short period (due to health, and time).
> 
> Thanks again.



Yeah, both GB and BPT are legit and will teach you some good Jiujitsu. You'll be fine in either camp, because they're not going to force you to compete if you don't want to. The vast majority of BJJ practitioners are hobbyists, people looking to get in shape, or people who work dangerous jobs and just want a few extra tools to defend themselves. If you want to dabble in competition, that's open to you as well.


----------



## drop bear

With bjj you basically develop your own game. And the difference between street and sport is pretty much prioritising top control and standing up. Verses submissions from the bottom.


----------



## Jusroc

Hanzou said:


> Yeah, and just to show you how a Guard developed for sport can be useful for self defense;
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/pdd3y1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, both GB and BPT are legit and will teach you some good Jiujitsu. You'll be fine in either camp, because they're not going to force you to compete if you don't want to. The vast majority of BJJ practitioners are hobbyists, people looking to get in shape, or people who work dangerous jobs and just want a few extra tools to defend themselves. If you want to dabble in competition, that's open to you as well.


Thanks for your advice 
much appreciated


----------



## Jusroc

drop bear said:


> With bjj you basically develop your own game. And the difference between street and sport is pretty much prioritising top control and standing up. Verses submissions from the bottom.


sure, thanks for the info.


----------



## Buka

Jusroc said:


> Sure, thanks for the info. All interesting.
> 
> I remember watching some of the vintage Rorion vs karate experts fighting
> have to admit, what the Gracies did, did make me laugh a lot.
> 
> Coming from a karate background growing up, and being a bit of a risk taker myself,
> as well as someone who likes to experiment.
> 
> Yere. I liked what the Gracie's did. Felt a bit sorry for the Karate guys.


With your experience in the Arts you mentioned - trust me on this, bro - if you were to train in a Gracie school, even if it's sport oriented - it's all going to be self defense for you. That's how easy it will be for you to adapt it.


----------



## dunc

Jusroc said:


> Thanks for the advice. I read and watched some really interesting instruction with Eddie Bravo.
> I found the rubber guard really interesting, and a great ploy. I believe this got banned from some competitions.
> I found Eddie Bravo's personality really interesting.
> 
> Funny guy. and from what i read, a strong advocate of the use of cannabis and training, which surprised me.
> Especially compared with the Gracie families known reputation for being T-total.
> 
> Just out of interest. I believe the schools from the area I live are mainly affiliated to Gracie Barra  and Brazilian Power Team. Although i think both these clubs are run out of the love for GJJ / MMA etc.
> and both, are run by people who are bright, and also organised.
> 
> From what I know about them, they do organise seminars periodically.
> I believe Gracie Barra Europe is headed by Braulio Estima. Which in itself is excellent.
> 
> I don't doubt the skills of the people who run both these clubs.
> 
> I just am more geared up for the hobbyist slow lane now, rather than the 6 or 7 day a week schedule,
> that i trained years ago for a short period (due to health, and time).
> 
> Thanks again.


Hi
Most academies will have plenty of hobbyist folk training there. Relatively few people are focused on competition in my experience 
In terms of training for self defence: I very consciously focus my BJJ game on techniques that are most appropriate for self defence contexts. This is somewhat suboptimal compared to folks utilising the full tool kit of techniques, but hasn’t been much of an issue for me to be honest
The gains you get are really significant even if you can only train 2-3 times a week
Hope this helps


----------



## Jusroc

dunc said:


> Hi
> Most academies will have plenty of hobbyist folk training there. Relatively few people are focused on competition in my experience
> In terms of training for self defence: I very consciously focus my BJJ game on techniques that are most appropriate for self defence contexts. This is somewhat suboptimal compared to folks utilising the full tool kit of techniques, but hasn’t been much of an issue for me to be honest
> The gains you get are really significant even if you can only train 2-3 times a week
> Hope this helps


Thanks for your advice.


----------



## punisher73

Some good advice, but also advice given from some people who weren't exposed to BJJ/GJJ in the very early days.

There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages.  Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques.  If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now.  As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.

The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.


----------



## Flying Crane

punisher73 said:


> Some good advice, but also advice given from some people who weren't exposed to BJJ/GJJ in the very early days.
> 
> There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages.  Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques.  If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now.  As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.
> 
> The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.


Wow.  That video is a trip.  Heavily reminds me of various kenpo stuff.  Also noteworthy that this presentation suffers from the same issues that are so heavily criticized in other methods: slow, robotic attacks, compliant partners, etc.  Of course demonstration requires it, this is not an actual fight.  But that is true of any method.  But if this is all that anyone ever saw of the method, they could make that same conclusion that other methods are accused of: slow, unrealistic, overly compliant.


----------



## Jusroc

punisher73 said:


> Some good advice, but also advice given from some people who weren't exposed to BJJ/GJJ in the very early days.
> 
> There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages.  Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques.  If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now.  As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.
> 
> The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.


thanks for your advice and link to video
very interesting


----------



## Jusroc

just out of interest
anyone reviewed the Gracie University syllabus

There are free examples for people to watch

they teach the core Gracie syllabus for their "combative" belt 
which are mainly the same techniques that are the core of the sport syllabus

but are adapted for street self defence 
and are recommended to be drilled in stages
with a partner that simulates the attacker 

which i guess is in-between compliant attacker and rolling

When the course was first rolled out, the course got a lot of criticism from people who 
belong to academies who thought that the course was bs, because rolling was not part of 
their program, and that people could get graded to blue belt over the net by sending videos 

so the founders of the program stopped grading students to blue belt without rolling
but instead graded people to a new type of belt, the combative's belt

which could be upgraded after joining an academy and rolling for x months / years

i personally found the videos well presented and put together
but also i understand why the students from other academies didn't think training under this 
environment without a real life instructor, and without extensive rolling made it different

i am also aware that Rickson Gracie also released his sd program called self defence units
although i have not watched these

I would have thought from a quality perspective that Rickson Gracie's program would also be really good
but i also see that it also may be similar to the gracie university program, and without rolling
it would be more like trad ju jitsu program rather than Gracie Jiu Jitsu


----------



## Hanzou

punisher73 said:


> Some good advice, but also advice given from some people who weren't exposed to BJJ/GJJ in the very early days.
> 
> There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages.  Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques.  If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now.  As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.
> 
> The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.



I was taught a lot of this stuff in Relson’s schools. Hence why when people say BJJ lacks stand up, I don’t know what they’re talking about, because I was taught a lot of stand up.


----------



## Hanzou

Jusroc said:


> just out of interest
> anyone reviewed the Gracie University syllabus
> 
> There are free examples for people to watch
> 
> they teach the core Gracie syllabus for their "combative" belt
> which are mainly the same techniques that are the core of the sport syllabus
> 
> but are adapted for street self defence
> and are recommended to be drilled in stages
> with a partner that simulates the attacker
> 
> which i guess is in-between compliant attacker and rolling
> 
> When the course was first rolled out, the course got a lot of criticism from people who
> belong to academies who thought that the course was bs, because rolling was not part of
> their program, and that people could get graded to blue belt over the net by sending videos
> 
> so the founders of the program stopped grading students to blue belt without rolling
> but instead graded people to a new type of belt, the combative's belt
> 
> which could be upgraded after joining an academy and rolling for x months / years
> 
> i personally found the videos well presented and put together
> but also i understand why the students from other academies didn't think training under this
> environment without a real life instructor, and without extensive rolling made it different
> 
> i am also aware that Rickson Gracie also released his sd program called self defence units
> although i have not watched these
> 
> I would have thought from a quality perspective that Rickson Gracie's program would also be really good
> but i also see that it also may be similar to the gracie university program, and without rolling
> it would be more like trad ju jitsu program rather than Gracie Jiu Jitsu



Simply put, you need to roll to get a blue belt. I would *never* award a blue belt to anyone that has *never* rolled, and showed some level of competence with the techniques.

That online blue belt crap put out by the Torrance school was dumb, and a lot of people in the Bjj community didn’t like it. I’m glad they dropped it.


----------



## Hanzou

Flying Crane said:


> Wow.  That video is a trip.  Heavily reminds me of various kenpo stuff.  Also noteworthy that this presentation suffers from the same issues that are so heavily criticized in other methods: slow, robotic attacks, compliant partners, etc.  Of course demonstration requires it, this is not an actual fight.  But that is true of any method.  But if this is all that anyone ever saw of the method, they could make that same conclusion that other methods are accused of: slow, unrealistic, overly compliant.



To be fair, there’s a difference between what’s shown above, and catching fists out of the air and tossing them with a twirl, or  blocking a punch and hitting someone 20 times before they can react. That’s what you see in those other methods, and you know it’s nonsense.


----------



## dunc

FWIW Rickson is advocating that academies accommodate training for people who don’t want to roll…


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> FWIW Rickson is advocating that academies accommodate training for people who don’t want to roll…



Yeah, that’s a bad idea. If you don’t want to roll, you should do a different MA.


----------



## drop bear

Flying Crane said:


> Wow.  That video is a trip.  Heavily reminds me of various kenpo stuff.  Also noteworthy that this presentation suffers from the same issues that are so heavily criticized in other methods: slow, robotic attacks, compliant partners, etc.  Of course demonstration requires it, this is not an actual fight.  But that is true of any method.  But if this is all that anyone ever saw of the method, they could make that same conclusion that other methods are accused of: slow, unrealistic, overly compliant.



Yeah. Talented People go street. And for some reason just go insane. 

No idea why.


----------



## drop bear

dunc said:


> FWIW Rickson is advocating that academies accommodate training for people who don’t want to roll…



Which is garbage.


----------



## Jusroc

I guess the non rolling belt is a lot like the "technical" route to belts in Judo. 
The British Judo Association (BJA) newer approach to grading. 

The BJA give two options to people want to grade in Judo, the "technical route" which people can get through a technical examination and is judged on a persons technical ability performing an extensive syllabus of techniques and kata's of a series of techniques.

The other route, is the competitive route, where an individual can get belts by collecting points by winning fights at competition or at a sport style competitive grading.

In order to get points, a player must have to score points against other players who are at least the same belt level as them.

I believe that the technical route was developed in order to make the sport more appealing to folk who aren't interested or have other obstacles to competing (age, location, injury, health conditions, lack of ambition).

People still participate in Randori in their clubs regardless as to whether they are competitive players or recreational players.

Personally, I am not a big fan of the technical belt route. 

Someone who has never had a fight in competition can now in theory can grade to 5th Dan, and the technical Dan belts look the same as the competitive Dan Grades.

One problem that can arise with the technical Dan grade is that the players who aren't any good at fighting
can have much higher grade than a player who can beat them in Randori, who may have chosen not to do technical belts, or who is newer and has less years on the Judo clock, but perhaps more years in fighting experience.

This can cause major problems with hierarchy within the club, as the higher technical Dan people start to believe their ego, that they are technically better, and so sometimes end up bossing around or even bullying players who are better. I think some treat Grades like Army rank.

Personally, I think that for those who are doing Judo from a more Japanese "self perfectionist" mindset, I think that the technical perfection can be a worthwhile endeavour, however, in some cases, the people grading aren't always very strict with regards to grading people, due to the sport emphasis, and some of the players, will try and get technical grades with poorly practised alternative versions of the techniques in the syllabus, which may be fine for use in competition, but personally i think should be disallowed in technical gradings unless there is a really significant reason (such as major injury or disability).

But I guess that is one of the conflicting issues in competitive martial arts, sports men want to win medals, get belts for ego and some don't care how they get them. Where as those who follow a more Japanese Mindset, will want to train hard to perfect their technique, and not look for shortcuts or cheats to get belts, as to do so would show a bad spirit. Not saying people shouldn't use variations for techniques in competition, sure. after all, that is how sports evolve and thrive. But think that if a technical grading system is going to be worth anything, standards need to be established and kept, otherwise, you end up with loads of people with high belts and a poor quality level.

As for the Torrance thing
Course, their belt system is not equal to the belt standards at live comp clubs.
But I guess, for those, for what ever reason can't train at such a club,
it does give such people a way to achieve some understanding, prior to attending a 
good club.


----------



## drop bear

Jusroc said:


> I guess the non rolling belt is a lot like the "technical" route to belts in Judo.
> The British Judo Association (BJA) newer approach to grading.
> 
> The BJA give two options to people want to grade in Judo, the "technical route" which people can get through a technical examination and is judged on a persons technical ability performing an extensive syllabus of techniques and kata's of a series of techniques.
> 
> The other route, is the competitive route, where an individual can get belts by collecting points by winning fights at competition or at a sport style competitive grading.
> 
> In order to get points, a player must have to score points against other players who are at least the same belt level as them.
> 
> I believe that the technical route was developed in order to make the sport more appealing to folk who aren't interested or have other obstacles to competing (age, location, injury, health conditions, lack of ambition).
> 
> People still participate in Randori in their clubs regardless as to whether they are competitive players or recreational players.
> 
> Personally, I am not a big fan of the technical belt route.
> 
> Someone who has never had a fight in competition can now in theory can grade to 5th Dan, and the technical Dan belts look the same as the competitive Dan Grades.
> 
> One problem that can arise with the technical Dan grade is that the players who aren't any good at fighting
> can have much higher grade than a player who can beat them in Randori, who may have chosen not to do technical belts, or who is newer and has less years on the Judo clock, but perhaps more years in fighting experience.
> 
> This can cause major problems with hierarchy within the club, as the higher technical Dan people start to believe their ego, that they are technically better, and so sometimes end up bossing around or even bullying players who are better. I think some treat Grades like Army rank.
> 
> Personally, I think that for those who are doing Judo from a more Japanese "self perfectionist" mindset, I think that the technical perfection can be a worthwhile endeavour, however, in some cases, the people grading aren't always very strict with regards to grading people, due to the sport emphasis, and some of the players, will try and get technical grades with poorly practised alternative versions of the techniques in the syllabus, which may be fine for use in competition, but personally i think should be disallowed in technical gradings unless there is a really significant reason (such as major injury or disability).
> 
> But I guess that is one of the conflicting issues in competitive martial arts, sports men want to win medals, get belts for ego and some don't care how they get them. Where as those who follow a more Japanese Mindset, will want to train hard to perfect their technique, and not look for shortcuts or cheats to get belts, as to do so would show a bad spirit. Not saying people shouldn't use variations for techniques in competition, sure. after all, that is how sports evolve and thrive. But think that if a technical grading system is going to be worth anything, standards need to be established and kept, otherwise, you end up with loads of people with high belts and a poor quality level.
> 
> As for the Torrance thing
> Course, their belt system is not equal to the belt standards at live comp clubs.
> But I guess, for those, for what ever reason can't train at such a club,
> it does give such people a way to achieve some understanding, prior to attending a
> good club.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


>



Someone clearly paid for their purple belt......   😂 

Okay, to be fair to Kutcher, Craig Jones is a beast.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Someone clearly paid for their purple belt......   😂
> 
> Okay, to be fair to Kutcher, Craig Jones is a beast.



Brown.

And If Craig Jones can't make you look good. Then you don't look good.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> Brown.
> 
> And If Craig Jones can't make you look good. Then you don't look good.



@Jusroc, watch that video. You only get that good from rolling.


----------



## tim po

Hello Jusroc,

I'll offer my insight in hopes of guiding your path to learned self-defense groundwork.

My grappling training is from the Tagaki Yoshen Ryu, and I considered myself an excellent grappler. Until I grappled with some high level GJJ practioners-they owned me- but I was working within the context of the competition rules. In self-defense there are no rules, no ref, and no illegal techniques. That said, barring the more dangerous techniques, GJJ is that much more absolutely solid in it's basic principles and tactics, however as Tony Dismukes explained above, the strategy is taught mainly from a sport-fighting perspective.

The key differences, as I see it, is that first of all, on the street you do not want to go to the ground. you want your attacker on the ground, you on your feet(or one knee), unpinned, unentangled, head up eyes alert and ready to move quickly in any direction. you want that, but you may be on the ground with your attacker on top of you from the first anyway, and you must have the basic do's and don't's of groundwork under your belt. GJJ will provide that, but strategically it is a bad idea to seek to put yourself on the ground, depending on your skills and the circumstances, of course. I have known people who were so good on the ground that they could take out multiple attackers easily from  below, but if you are that good, you already know that.

in the ring, taking someone down and positioning for an arm-bar is a good strategy. you can afford to rest on your back and let your opponent wear himself down until the right moment to seize advantage presents itself. on the street there could be a second attacker, or the first could reveal a weapon.  in Takagi Yoshen Ryu, the attackers arm should already be broken before he hits the ground, and immediate escape is the strategy. Any take-down or submission hold that ties you up and entangles you with your opponent's body makes you vulnerable and should be avoided.


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> In self-defense there are no rules, no ref, and no illegal techniques.


Uhhhhh....is this advice intended for people *outside* Brazil?

Because...no.

Jutaijutsu vs GJJ?  Also, no.  That's a street I'm willing to die on.


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> Any take-down or submission hold that ties you up and entangles you with your opponent's body makes you vulnerable and should be avoided.


If you're a ninja in the 17th century maybe.  Not in 2021, because there are a million videos of real fights ending just like that, and as far as I know, zero of someone in a dominant position being vulnerable to anything else.  Does it happen?  Maybe, but it's a unicorn as far as evidence.

Here's a theory: It's more likely that everyone will stand around you recording with their phones, than join in a scuffle with two people on the ground, even if one is trying to rape or murder the other.  If the cops show up, be ready to eat a boot then.

Why do I find ninja jujutsu so funny?  I don't know, I just do.


----------



## dunc

Oily Dragon said:


> If you're a ninja in the 17th century maybe.  Not in 2021, because there are a million videos of real fights ending just like that, and as far as I know, zero of someone in a dominant position being vulnerable to anything else.  Does it happen?  Maybe, but it's a unicorn as far as evidence.
> 
> Here's a theory: It's more likely that everyone will stand around you recording with their phones, than join in a scuffle with two people on the ground, even if one is trying to rape or murder the other.  If the cops show up, be ready to eat a boot then.
> 
> Why do I find ninja jujutsu so funny?  I don't know, I just do.



I agree with @tim po in that In self defence you want to be on the top if possible 
However, that’s a pretty common approach for BJJ practitioners as well and certainly many people build a game around takedowns and top position
Also it’s clearly a benefit for a self defence situation if you know how to fight from bottom position because at least one of you is going to be there…

The point that I think is being made and I agree with is that in a self defence situation you probably don’t want to pull guard unless you’re really good at sweeps from there
And I agree that there are adaptions to take account of the rule sets or lack thereof


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> Uhhhhh....is this advice intended for people *outside* Brazil?
> 
> Because...no.
> 
> Jutaijutsu vs GJJ?  Also, no.  That's a street I'm willing to die on.


not really sure what you mean here, if you are implying that defending yourself outside of Brazil is somehow different, I say we all are just as mortal, anywhere in the world, and better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Also, I think i said as much about Jutaijutsu VS. BJJ, but the mindset and strategy are worlds apart. The former was developed in a world where warriors fought to the death every day at close quarters. And depending upon who is teaching it, of course, it still contains the tactics of survival by any means that it was formed upon.

I am not talking here about fighting. i'm talking about responding to a sudden and violent attack from a person with unknown intentions. a bar fight is not the same thing, even if you are not a willing participant.


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> If you're a ninja in the 17th century maybe.  Not in 2021, because there are a million videos of real fights ending just like that, and as far as I know, zero of someone in a dominant position being vulnerable to anything else.  Does it happen?  Maybe, but it's a unicorn as far as evidence.
> 
> Here's a theory: It's more likely that everyone will stand around you recording with their phones, than join in a scuffle with two people on the ground, even if one is trying to rape or murder the other.  If the cops show up, be ready to eat a boot then.
> 
> Why do I find ninja jujutsu so funny?  I don't know, I just do.


you find Ninja so funny because there is an overwhelming amount of misinformation, outright fraud, and horrific technique out there claiming to be Ninpo, and you clearly don't know the difference.

you are talking about 'casual fighting', the kind of dumb BS that goes down wherever fools gather. i am not interested in that, and I do not get the impression that the original poster is, either. 

Here's a scenario for you: how about, a stranger bumrushes you and seeks to tackle you to the ground and then...? you don't know. you're response is a skillful takedown that lands you on your back already locked into the arm-bar, and you seek to hold him there until he 'gives up'. instead he pulls a knife with his free hand and cuts both of your achilles' tendons before you even know he has a weapon. I suppose you think this is highly improbable, since you never saw it in a youtube video?

stay on your feet.


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> not really sure what you mean here, if you are implying that defending yourself outside of Brazil is somehow different, I say we all are just as mortal, anywhere in the world, and better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
> 
> Also, I think i said as much about Jutaijutsu VS. BJJ, but the mindset and strategy are worlds apart. The former was developed in a world where warriors fought to the death every day at close quarters. And depending upon who is teaching it, of course, it still contains the tactics of survival by any means that it was formed upon.
> 
> I am not talking here about fighting. i'm talking about responding to a sudden and violent attack from a person with unknown intentions. a bar fight is not the same thing, even if you are not a willing participant.


Always with the bar fights...

What I meant was the idea that there are "no illegal techniques" outside competition is just not true, unless you live in a lawless part of the world.  or a Brazilian favela.

There are very few "legal" techniques to use in a SD situation, because the range of what you can do to another human without going to jail is pretty small.


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> you find Ninja so funny because there is an overwhelming amount of misinformation, outright fraud, and horrific technique out there claiming to be Ninpo, and you clearly don't know the difference.


I know enough to know that you probably train a mostly dead Samurai art, but you also just said you're an excellent grappler, which means you're the latest person on the internet to claim to be that elusive unicorn, the ninja ground master who trains on his feet, but knows the ground well enough to not want to be there.

Was I close?

Either way, what the heck is "casual fighting".


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> Here's a scenario for you: how about, a stranger bumrushes you and seeks to tackle you to the ground and then...? you don't know. you're response is a skillful takedown that lands you on your back already locked into the arm-bar, and you seek to hold him there until he 'gives up'. instead he pulls a knife with his free hand and cuts both of your achilles' tendons before you even know he has a weapon. I suppose you think this is highly improbable, since you never saw it in a youtube video?


It's highly improbable because you just made it all up.


----------



## drop bear

In any event nobody is really forcing you to roll off mount in to arm bars if you desperately don't want to. (At least not in rolling) 

If your focus is to take people down but then be in a position to stand back up if you want. Then you just change your go to positions and submissions. I do kasegetami a lot because on the street other top positions used to scratch my knees up. 

Cops who use handcuffs tend to use kimouras. 

There is still a vehicle to pursue these special interests.


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> It's highly improbable because you just made it all up.


no doubt. but it's what I would do.


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> I know enough to know that you probably train a mostly dead Samurai art, but you also just said you're an excellent grappler, which means you're the latest person on the internet to claim to be that elusive unicorn, the ninja ground master who trains on his feet, but knows the ground well enough to not want to be there.
> 
> Was I close?
> 
> Either way, what the heck is "casual fighting".


you're a gem. I am no ninja. Nor am I Shinobi No Mono. I'm not even Japanese, and no, I don't have a magical horn protruding from my forehead. I have experience, and the desire to engage in friendly conversation with fellow martial artists, in the name of sharing our experiences so that we all may expand our skills and awareness. 

Casual fighting is what is occurring between two meatheads while all their friends are standing around filming it on their phones, as per your example intended to illustrate 'the way things really are'. it's quite common, and most of the time, it is a struggle for territorial and social dominance, and does not fall under the terms of life-or-death self-defense. Therefore rules of a sort still apply, you will gain no respect amongst your peers if you voluntarily enter such a contest, then immediately strike your opponent in the throat. it is 'expected' that you square off and duke it out with your fists, otherwise there is no display of dominance.


----------



## Oily Dragon

I think actual examples of real world violence is the best way to challenge theories about what happens in a "real" life or death encounter.

This woman was raped on public transportation in front of at least 10 witnesses.  Nobody stepped in, many filmed it.

So if this happens with a rape in public broad daylight...nobody even attempts to remove the man in dominant position.  Whether scared or apathetic, it's very telling.

If she'd had some BJJ SD training on the other hand...far more trustworthy than spectators, apparently.









						Philadelphia subway riders witnessed rape but did nothing, police say
					

The rape of a woman aboard a Philadelphia subway witnessed by as many as 10 passengers, some of whom appeared to film the attack, could have been stopped quickly if one had called 911, police said on Tuesday.




					www.reuters.com


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> Always with the bar fights...
> 
> What I meant was the idea that there are "no illegal techniques" outside competition is just not true, unless you live in a lawless part of the world.  or a Brazilian favela.
> 
> There are very few "legal" techniques to use in a SD situation, because the range of what you can do to another human without going to jail is pretty small.


I agree. our world has laws, and appropriate use of force will need to be justified. It is always paramount to do as little as is necessary, but that does not imply stopping short of as much is necessary.  Each person must reflect on this for themselves, and training will reduce the fear and insecurity that often causes people to overreact.  

Contextual awareness is the key. If i was at a party and didn't know most of the people, for no reason some lug picks me to pound on and I have done nothing to encourage it, it is a self-defense situation. However, it is a very different scenario than being jumped in an alley by an unknown assailant. In the first case, I would try hard to do as little as possible. in the second, i would try harder to do as much as i can, and worry about repercussions later, if i'm still alive. these two cases would be viewed very differently by the law, but you are very right, my 'self-defense' might not be over and i may need a lawyer.


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> I think actual examples of real world violence is the best way to challenge theories about what happens in a "real" life or death encounter.
> 
> This woman was raped on public transportation in front of at least 10 witnesses.  Nobody stepped in, many filmed it.
> 
> So if this happens with a rape in public broad daylight...nobody even attempts to remove the man in dominant position.  Whether scared or apathetic, it's very telling.
> 
> If she'd had some BJJ SD training on the other hand...far more trustworthy than spectators, apparently.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Philadelphia subway riders witnessed rape but did nothing, police say
> 
> 
> The rape of a woman aboard a Philadelphia subway witnessed by as many as 10 passengers, some of whom appeared to film the attack, could have been stopped quickly if one had called 911, police said on Tuesday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.reuters.com


or........if maybe the ten people who were there weren't total assholes.......

i grew up in philly. if it were anywhere else, i'd be surprised.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

tim po said:


> Here's a scenario for you: how about, a stranger bumrushes you and seeks to tackle you to the ground and then...? you don't know. you're response is a skillful takedown that lands you on your back already locked into the arm-bar, and you seek to hold him there until he 'gives up'. instead he pulls a knife with his free hand and cuts both of your achilles' tendons before you even know he has a weapon.


I'll share my thoughts on this scenario from my perspective as a BJJ instructor (over two decades) with a background in the Bujinkan (about a decade) and significant experience in various other systems, including multiple weapons arts.


I always teach my students that if a fight goes to the ground, top position is better, especially in a street confrontation. The guard is our backup plan in case staying on top fails, not our first choice. The only possible exception is in certain competition rulesets which are designed to equalize the chances for the top and bottom player. Even for people who intend to compete under those rulesets, I advocate a preference for top game because it carries over better to other contexts. Thus in the situation you present, I would always advocate that my students prioritize stopping the attacker's takedown attempt.
Your description of the defender's response is unclear. You say "a skillful takedown", but then "lands you on your back already locked into the arm bar." If you are the person performing the takedown you shouldn't be landing on your back. Are you envisioning the defender landing in guard and doing an armbar from there? Or are you thinking about the defender throwing the attacker, holding on to the attacker's arm, and then falling off to the side to perform an armbar? If it's the latter, then I wouldn't personally recommend or teach that approach in a self-defense situation (for a variety of reasons). If it's the former, then it means the defender failed to stop the takedown and is at least attempting an immediate counter attack rather than just laying on the bottom waiting to get beat up.
In a real fight, you don't use an armbar (especially the type of armbar you seem to be describing) to hold an opponent until he gives up. You just break his arm and then immediately move on. If the situation is not one which justifies breaking his arm then you shouldn't be going to an armbar position. There are plenty of other positions which are much better for controlling someone that you don't want to injure.
If you have an undeployed knife and someone is in the process of breaking your arm with a properly locked in armbar, it's not actually very easy to access and deploy your weapon. Especially before your arm is already broken. It can be done, but it's not easy. (It's a lot easier if you have the grappling skill to defend the armbar while you fish for your knife.) If an unprovoked street attacker has the will and the skill to draw and use the knife while he is being arm barred, then he probably would have had the knife out and been attacking with it in the first place rather than attempting to tackle his victim with empty hands.
If you are able to deploy your knife while being arm barred, then the achille's tendons are not a prime target. They aren't in an easily accessible position (assuming your opponent knows how to apply the armbar correctly) and you're likely to end up injuring yourself in the attempt to slice them. Much better to just stab your opponent in the leg. Mid thigh will be the most accessible target.
In any case, unarmed against a knife-wielding attacker is just a bad matchup overall, no matter what art you practice. I've been training martial arts for 40 years and have practiced a lot of knife defenses from different systems and done a reasonable amount of sparring with training knives. I have my preferred tactics for unarmed vs knife, but I'm not going to pretend that any of them give the kind of odds you would want with your life on the line.



tim po said:


> the strategy is taught mainly from a sport-fighting perspective.


A non-sportive context does change some aspects of application. (Not the overall physical principles, just tactical approach and some technical details.)

IMO, the best approach to understanding those details and tactics for someone who wants "street applicability" is to add in some sparring/live training where you change up the allowable techniques and tactical goals. Grapple with hair pulling allowed. Grapple with strikes. Spar two on one. Spar/grapple with training weapons. Grapple on furniture on in cars. Set asymmetric goals (partner A is trying to hold his opponent down and punch, partner B is trying to get up and get to the exit). The possibilities are endless.

In my experience, the primary driver of success in these drills is the time spend polishing fundamental skills in "sportive" sparring. You do need the mental flexibility to adapt to the new variables on the fly and it helps to do these drills to get a feel for what you have to tweak to account for the changed circumstances. (One pleasant discovery is that many of the adaptations for "street" application can actually feed back to make your "sportive" sparring better. For example, being aware of the possibility of head butts can lead you to put your head in a better position for pure sport grappling.)

Bottom line, "sport" grappling and "street" grappling don't have to be at odds. There are specialized techniques you can do for sport which take advantage of the tournament rules but aren't so good for a real fight. But there are also plenty of foundational techniques and tactics which work really well in both contexts. (Even a lot of the crazy tournament techniques can still teach some really good lessons about body mechanics and movement, so they aren't a total loss for someone approaching the art from a martial perspective.)


----------



## tim po

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'll share my thoughts on this scenario from my perspective as a BJJ instructor (over two decades) with a background in the Bujinkan (about a decade) and significant experience in various other systems, including multiple weapons arts.
> 
> 
> I always teach my students that if a fight goes to the ground, top position is better, especially in a street confrontation. The guard is our backup plan in case staying on top fails, not our first choice. The only possible exception is in certain competition rulesets which are designed to equalize the chances for the top and bottom player. Even for people who intend to compete under those rulesets, I advocate a preference for top game because it carries over better to other contexts. Thus in the situation you present, I would always advocate that my students prioritize stopping the attacker's takedown attempt.
> Your description of the defender's response is unclear. You say "a skillful takedown", but then "lands you on your back already locked into the arm bar." If you are the person performing the takedown you shouldn't be landing on your back. Are you envisioning the defender landing in guard and doing an armbar from there? Or are you thinking about the defender throwing the attacker, holding on to the attacker's arm, and then falling off to the side to perform an armbar? If it's the latter, then I wouldn't personally recommend or teach that approach in a self-defense situation (for a variety of reasons). If it's the former, then it means the defender failed to stop the takedown and is at least attempting an immediate counter attack rather than just laying on the bottom waiting to get beat up.
> In a real fight, you don't use an armbar (especially the type of armbar you seem to be describing) to hold an opponent until he gives up. You just break his arm and then immediately move on. If the situation is not one which justifies breaking his arm then you shouldn't be going to an armbar position. There are plenty of other positions which are much better for controlling someone that you don't want to injure.
> If you have an undeployed knife and someone is in the process of breaking your arm with a properly locked in armbar, it's not actually very easy to access and deploy your weapon. Especially before your arm is already broken. It can be done, but it's not easy. (It's a lot easier if you have the grappling skill to defend the armbar while you fish for your knife.) If an unprovoked street attacker has the will and the skill to draw and use the knife while he is being arm barred, then he probably would have had the knife out and been attacking with it in the first place rather than attempting to tackle his victim with empty hands.
> If you are able to deploy your knife while being arm barred, then the achille's tendons are not a prime target. They aren't in an easily accessible position (assuming your opponent knows how to apply the armbar correctly) and you're likely to end up injuring yourself in the attempt to slice them. Much better to just stab your opponent in the leg. Mid thigh will be the most accessible target.
> In any case, unarmed against a knife-wielding attacker is just a bad matchup overall, no matter what art you practice. I've been training martial arts for 40 years and have practiced a lot of knife defenses from different systems and done a reasonable amount of sparring with training knives. I have my preferred tactics for unarmed vs knife, but I'm not going to pretend that any of them give the kind of odds you would want with your life on the line.
> 
> A non-sportive context does change some aspects of application. (Not the overall physical principles, just tactical approach and some technical details.)
> 
> IMO, the best approach to understanding those details and tactics for someone who wants "street applicability" is to add in some sparring/live training where you change up the allowable techniques and tactical goals. Grapple with hair pulling allowed. Grapple with strikes. Spar two on one. Spar/grapple with training weapons. Grapple on furniture on in cars. Set asymmetric goals (partner A is trying to hold his opponent down and punch, partner B is trying to get up and get to the exit). The possibilities are endless.
> 
> In my experience, the primary driver of success in these drills is the time spend polishing fundamental skills in "sportive" sparring. You do need the mental flexibility to adapt to the new variables on the fly and it helps to do these drills to get a feel for what you have to tweak to account for the changed circumstances. (One pleasant discovery is that many of the adaptations for "street" application can actually feed back to make your "sportive" sparring better. For example, being aware of the possibility of head butts can lead you to put your head in a better position for pure sport grappling.)
> 
> Bottom line, "sport" grappling and "street" grappling don't have to be at odds. There are specialized techniques you can do for sport which take advantage of the tournament rules but aren't so good for a real fight. But there are also plenty of foundational techniques and tactics which work really well in both contexts. (Even a lot of the crazy tournament techniques can still teach some really good lessons about body mechanics and movement, so they aren't a total loss for someone approaching the art from a martial perspective.)


Well said and all on-point from my perspective. you asked about the example i'd given, though I can visualize several ways to take a person down directly into an arm-bar, what i was imagining was that being blindsided you were already going down, and turned the fall into a takedown. you don't land on your back, but roll there. it's never easy to describe moving technique.. but as you summed up, once there, you want to get out of there as quickly as possible. the arm should be broken immediately and mobility restored.

 i fully agree about the nightmare of facing a knife attack, armed or not.  as for drawing while in an arm bar, there is only one thing to be done once someone has effectively employed such technique - let your arm break, and keep fighting. i was only trying to point out that outside the ring, there are myriad unknowable variables, and certain adjustments need to be made if your learning an art as a sport, but intend it for self-defense, as was the idea behind the origin of this thread.

it seems I have given the impression that i am in disfavor of sport grappling. in my first post on this thread i explained that i hold GJJ technique in high regard, because it has to work within the rules. it is only in overall strategy that i meant to point out discrepancies that affect SD.


----------



## Oily Dragon

tim po said:


> or........if maybe the ten people who were there weren't total assholes.......
> 
> i grew up in philly. if it were anywhere else, i'd be surprised.


This is why we don't have many stories of BJJ, and self defense types, being the heroes in these types of stories.

I remember a BJJ professor getting knifed to death on a bus for trying to stop a robbery a few years back.

Might even have been in Brazil.  Maybe somebody remembers.  When I read it my first thought was "wait...do they even teach knife defense in BJJ?"


----------



## drop bear

tim po said:


> you find Ninja so funny because there is an overwhelming amount of misinformation, outright fraud, and horrific technique out there claiming to be Ninpo, and you clearly don't know the difference.
> 
> you are talking about 'casual fighting', the kind of dumb BS that goes down wherever fools gather. i am not interested in that, and I do not get the impression that the original poster is, either.
> 
> Here's a scenario for you: how about, a stranger bumrushes you and seeks to tackle you to the ground and then...? you don't know. you're response is a skillful takedown that lands you on your back already locked into the arm-bar, and you seek to hold him there until he 'gives up'. instead he pulls a knife with his free hand and cuts both of your achilles' tendons before you even know he has a weapon. I suppose you think this is highly improbable, since you never saw it in a youtube video?
> 
> stay on your feet.



How does he get both Achilles tendons?

I mean you are going for a submission from your back. Your feet are generally out of the way.


----------



## drop bear

Oily Dragon said:


> This is why we don't have many stories of BJJ, and self defense types, being the heroes in these types of stories.
> 
> I remember a BJJ professor getting knifed to death on a bus for trying to stop a robbery a few years back.
> 
> Might even have been in Brazil.  Maybe somebody remembers.  When I read it my first thought was "wait...do they even teach knife defense in BJJ?"



Nobody teaches knife defence to a point where you are even vaguely safe.

 That sort of evidence is kind of a scam.

What they would need to do is build a case to suggest their system can counter a real live knife attack.

But. Basically nobody can. So instead they pick a style that has failed against a knife and suggest if that system doesn't work. Then therefore mine does.

Otherwise BJJ does teach the components of knife defense. Which is generally standing arm controls. Just without the knife.

Arm drag concepts are good(ish) for knives.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

drop bear said:


> Nobody teaches knife defence to a point where you are even vaguely safe.
> 
> That sort of evidence is kind of a scam.
> 
> What they would need to do is build a case to suggest their system can counter a real live knife attack.
> 
> But. Basically nobody can. So instead they pick a style that has failed against a knife and suggest if that system doesn't work. Then therefore mine does.
> 
> Otherwise BJJ does teach the components of knife defense. Which is generally standing arm controls. Just without the knife.
> 
> Arm drag concepts are good(ish) for knives.


This is the reason for the title of the Dog Brothers video series “Die Less Often”. They’re not claiming that they can get you to the point of reliably defending against a knife attack. They’re just suggesting that they can improve your odds, so that in the myriad parallel universes where you are attacked by an assailant with a knife you could die less often.


----------



## dunc

Oily Dragon said:


> which means you're the latest person on the internet to claim to be that elusive unicorn, the ninja ground master who trains on his feet, but knows the ground well enough to not want to be there.


I guess that makes me a unicorn ;-)

Seriously ’though there are clearly limitations to ground fighting - these are generally overstated by folk who don’t train BJJ
There are also clearly limitations from rolling under a rule set - these are generally underestimated by folk who only train combat sports

Pretty much sums up most of these kind of conversations I think


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> I guess that makes me a unicorn ;-)
> 
> Seriously ’though there are clearly limitations to ground fighting - these are generally overstated by folk who don’t train BJJ
> There are also clearly limitations from rolling under a rule set - these are generally underestimated by folk who only train combat sports
> 
> Pretty much sums up most of these kind of conversations I think



There’s no way to train without a ruleset though. You can’t maim or murder your training partners. Training with a rubber knife is training with a ruleset, because you’re unlikely going to want to slash and stab your training partner with a live blade.

In terms of rolling, it doesn’t take a great deal of effort to add gloves and a mouthpiece and incorporate striking while grappling. In fact, that’s a foundation of GJJ/BJJ.


----------



## dunc

Hanzou said:


> There’s no way to train without a ruleset though. You can’t maim or murder your training partners. Training with a rubber knife is training with a ruleset, because you’re unlikely going to want to slash and stab your training partner with a live blade.
> 
> In terms of rolling, it doesn’t take a great deal of effort to add gloves and a mouthpiece and incorporate striking while grappling. In fact, that’s a foundation of GJJ/BJJ.


Yes of course
The impact of training under (formal &/or informal) rulesets over time have on the development of a style are quite profound I think


----------



## Hanzou

tim po said:


> Hello Jusroc,
> 
> I'll offer my insight in hopes of guiding your path to learned self-defense groundwork.
> 
> My grappling training is from the Tagaki Yoshen Ryu, and I considered myself an excellent grappler. Until I grappled with some high level GJJ practioners-they owned me- but I was working within the context of the competition rules. In self-defense there are no rules, no ref, and no illegal techniques. That said, barring the more dangerous techniques, GJJ is that much more absolutely solid in it's basic principles and tactics, however as Tony Dismukes explained above, the strategy is taught mainly from a sport-fighting perspective.
> 
> The key differences, as I see it, is that first of all, on the street you do not want to go to the ground. you want your attacker on the ground, you on your feet(or one knee), unpinned, unentangled, head up eyes alert and ready to move quickly in any direction. you want that, but you may be on the ground with your attacker on top of you from the first anyway, and you must have the basic do's and don't's of groundwork under your belt. GJJ will provide that, but strategically it is a bad idea to seek to put yourself on the ground, depending on your skills and the circumstances, of course. I have known people who were so good on the ground that they could take out multiple attackers easily from  below, but if you are that good, you already know that.
> 
> in the ring, taking someone down and positioning for an arm-bar is a good strategy. you can afford to rest on your back and let your opponent wear himself down until the right moment to seize advantage presents itself. on the street there could be a second attacker, or the first could reveal a weapon.  in Takagi Yoshen Ryu, the attackers arm should already be broken before he hits the ground, and immediate escape is the strategy. Any take-down or submission hold that ties you up and entangles you with your opponent's body makes you vulnerable and should be avoided.



I personally prefer shoulder locks to arm bars when I'm in a dominant position. If I'm in an inferior or neutral position, I'll take what I can get. That said, if you're on your back and someone is on top of you, knowing guard is *critical* for self defense.


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> Yes of course
> The impact of training under (formal &/or informal) rulesets over time have on the development of a style are quite profound I think



Well sure, but I think we sometimes get into the weeds with some styles training with rulesets. I used to see this a lot with classical JJ stylists when they would refer to Judo, implying that it is an incomplete style since they don't train striking outside of kata. I also see quite a bit of this when TMA stylists referring to sport systems. The simple reality is that just because you train with rules doesn't mean those rules get programmed into your brain. I know plenty of people who do wrestling for example, and they would have no issue slamming someone on their head and paralyzing them for life (if not outright killing them). 

Take this for example; 


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/pdd3y1

Here, the guy on the bottom is using Rubber guard, a sport technique, to achieve dominant position. Once he achieves it, he immediately goes into non-sportive tactics, attacking his opponent's head brutally.

In short, the training is just a guideline, and the student will fill-in the rest. If you train someone how to make their enemy helpless and vulnerable, it falls on the student to go from there in an ethical or moral fashion.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Hanzou said:


> Take this for example;
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/StreetMartialArts/comments/pdd3y1


Wow, Omoplata smash...narrowly avoided.  I was biting my lip there for a second...

People who think the beat down at the end is brutal, might not catch the fact that the loser almost lost an arm instead of some skin and pride.


----------



## tim po

Oily Dragon said:


> Wow, Omoplata smash...narrowly avoided.  I was biting my lip there for a second...
> 
> People who think the beat down at the end is brutal, might not catch the fact that the loser almost lost an arm instead of some skin and pride.





Hanzou said:


> I personally prefer shoulder locks to arm bars when I'm in a dominant position. If I'm in an inferior or neutral position, I'll take what I can get. That said, if you're on your back and someone is on top of you,





Oily Dragon said:


> Wow, Omoplata smash...narrowly avoided.  I was biting my lip there for a second...
> 
> People who think the beat down at the end is brutal, might not catch the fact that the loser almost lost an arm instead of some skin and pride.


the beat down is no more brutal than what is displayed in professional MMA sport fighting.  the only difference is the pavement. these two were not friends, obviously, but they were not trying to kill one another. this was a 'casual fight'. the onlookers(they obviously all knew one another) who filmed it stepped in and broke it up right about when the referee would have.  it does not illustrate a contradiction to my original point, that training to work on the ground should not impel you to take a fight there in unfamiliar circumstances.


----------



## Hanzou

tim po said:


> the beat down is no more brutal than what is displayed in professional MMA sport fighting.  the only difference is the pavement. these two were not friends, obviously, but they were not trying to kill one another. this was a 'casual fight'. the onlookers(they obviously all knew one another) who filmed it stepped in and broke it up right about when the referee would have.



There are few instances where someone is trying to intentionally kill you. However, in the case described above, someone smashing someone's head into concrete can in fact be lethal. On the flip side, someone on top of you punching you in the head continuously can also lead to serious injury or death. While people were there to break this up, it doesn't change the fact that both parties had the chance to get seriously injured.

Here is another situaiton;


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/arz5i9

In this case the person's shoulder gets dislocated. (graphic)



> it does not illustrate a contradiction to my original point, that training to work on the ground should not impel you to take a fight there in unfamiliar circumstances.



Well that entirely depends. There are times where you are forced to the ground against your will and must fight from there. There are also cases where taking your opponent to the ground is advantageous to your situation. Obviously everything must be taken on a case by case basis, and good judgement must be used. However, we shouldn't make blanket statements about an entire realm of fighting.


----------



## tim po

Hanzou said:


> There are few instances where someone is trying to intentionally kill you. However, in the case described above, someone smashing someone's head into concrete can in fact be lethal. On the flip side, someone on top of you punching you in the head continuously can also lead to serious injury or death. While people were there to break this up, it doesn't change the fact that both parties had the chance to get seriously injured.
> 
> Here is another situaiton;
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/bjj/comments/arz5i9
> 
> In this case the person's shoulder gets dislocated. (graphic)
> 
> 
> 
> Well that entirely depends. There are times where you are forced to the ground against your will and must fight from there. There are also cases where taking your opponent to the ground is advantageous to your situation. Obviously everything must be taken on a case by case basis, and good judgement must be used. However, we shouldn't make blanket statements about an entire realm of fighting.


nor have i. if you read my original response.


----------



## tim po

Hanzou said:


> While people were there to break this up, it doesn't change the fact that both parties had the chance to get seriously injured.


if the people there were concerned with either of their friends being seriously injured, they would have broken it up sooner. as for that second video, i dont know wtf to say as there was a crowd nearby and clearly not a f*** was given that day. all the better reason to stay off the damn ground, if you can at all help it! if you can't, seek to get the hell up asap!

this thread is about adapting GJJ to self-defense from sport. that is what i was responding to, read the original response. you guys keep posting videos of fights in public places. you're not going to see a video of a real violent attack people! you're friends aren't going to film it, then casually break it up once you're dead.


----------



## Hanzou

tim po said:


> if the people there were concerned with either of their friends being seriously injured, they would have broken it up sooner. as for that second video, i dont know wtf to say as there was a crowd nearby and clearly not a f*** was given that day. all the better reason to stay off the damn ground, if you can at all help it! if you can't, seek to get the hell up asap!




Which is different than what you stated earlier. You said that the video wasn't a life threatening situation because friends were nearby. Again, ground and pound and banging people's heads on concrete is potentially lethal.



tim po said:


> this thread is about adapting GJJ to self-defense from sport. that is what i was responding to, read the original response. you guys keep posting videos of fights in public places. you're not going to see a video of a real violent attack people! you're friends aren't going to film it, then casually break it up once you're dead.



Except GJJ is self defense based. In fact in recent years GJJ has codified itself it a more self defense based system in order to distinguish itself from general BJJ which is becoming more sport based over the years as sport BJJ has become more popular. You also miss the point of the original video. The defender in that video used a sport-based technique to regain dominant position and pummel his opponent in the face. The point being that just because it is a sport-based technique doesn't mean that it doesn't have a self-defense application.

We post fights in public places because fights in someone's bedroom, in a dark alleyway, or when they're getting kidnapped tend to not be videotaped. That said, if it works in a public place, there's no reason it shouldn't work in those situations as well.


----------



## tim po

Hanzou said:


> Which is different than what you stated earlier. You said that the video wasn't a life threatening situation because friends were nearby. Again, ground and pound and banging people's heads on concrete is potentially lethal.
> 
> 
> 
> Except GJJ is self defense based. In fact in recent years GJJ has codified itself it a more self defense based system in order to distinguish itself from general BJJ which is becoming more sport based over the years as sport BJJ has become more popular. You also miss the point of the original video. The defender in that video used a sport-based technique to regain dominant position and pummel his opponent in the face. The point being that just because it is a sport-based technique doesn't mean that it doesn't have a self-defense application.
> 
> We post fights in public places because fights in someone's bedroom, in a dark alleyway, or when they're getting kidnapped tend to not be videotaped. That said, if it works in a public place, there's no reason it shouldn't work in those situations as well.


the rubber guard video showed excellent jujutsu. or jiu jitsu, as is most likely his training. no doubt, it works. no doubt, this was a 'real fight' and yes, they were trying to hurt one another. and no doubt, they both chose to enter this contest to resolve some social dilemma. fighting is fighting. JJ works well for fighting, and it works well in self defense. i never denied that. 
it is clear you can only see what you can see. and since it is all you can see you assume that is all that there is to see. i will waste no more time with you.


----------



## Hanzou

tim po said:


> the rubber guard video showed excellent jujutsu. or jiu jitsu, as is most likely his training. no doubt, it works. no doubt, this was a 'real fight' and yes, they were trying to hurt one another. and no doubt, they both chose to enter this contest to resolve some social dilemma. fighting is fighting. JJ works well for fighting, and it works well in self defense. i never denied that.


So what was your point in this thread? That if you're in a dangerous situation you shouldn't purposely fall face first into the pavement?


----------



## Oily Dragon

That 2nd omoplata video was like smooth jazz and a neat scotch, Hanzou.  Like a boa constrictor crushing a mouse.  

Had to watch it a few times, just a refresher on why BJJ is one of the most dangerous styles in history.  

The way I see it, BJJ just wants to be jujutsu again.  And everyone is welcome....the hobbyists, sportos, and the Street Samurai.


----------



## dunc

Worth noting that JJ has many techniques where you choose to go to the ground
For example the Takagi Yoshin Ryu has a large suitemi section
There's also some crazy stuff in the ninpo traditions where you drop to the floor (albeit for rather specific reasons/scenarios)


----------



## tim po

Hanzou said:


> So what was your point in this thread? That if you're in a dangerous situation you shouldn't purposely fall face first into the pavement?


don't really feel like saying it all, again.


----------



## drop bear

dunc said:


> Worth noting that JJ has many techniques where you choose to go to the ground
> For example the Takagi Yoshin Ryu has a large suitemi section
> There's also some crazy stuff in the ninpo traditions where you drop to the floor (albeit for rather specific reasons/scenarios)


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


>



Those damn kids and their leg locks......


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> Those damn kids and their leg locks......



I am still not up to speed with them. But I wrist lock people instead.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> I am still not up to speed with them. But I wrist lock people instead.



The new generation of submission grapplers are getting extremely well versed in them, and developing new entries to better exploit them. The speed of leg lock evolution is crazy right now in BJJ especially since the IBJJF loosened up restrictions on their use. Some of the stuff these kids are doing now is completely unrecognizable to old GJJ farts like me.


----------



## drop bear

Hanzou said:


> The new generation of submission grapplers are getting extremely well versed in them, and developing new entries to better exploit them. The speed of leg lock evolution is crazy right now in BJJ especially since the IBJJF loosened up restrictions on their use. Some of the stuff these kids are doing now is completely unrecognizable to old GJJ farts like me.



A mate of mine did the Lachlan guiles seminar and came back a beast.


----------



## dunc

Hanzou said:


> The new generation of submission grapplers are getting extremely well versed in them, and developing new entries to better exploit them. The speed of leg lock evolution is crazy right now in BJJ especially since the IBJJF loosened up restrictions on their use. Some of the stuff these kids are doing now is completely unrecognizable to old GJJ farts like me.


Yeah - It will be interesting to see how this translates into MMA

I do think these kind of things have their place in SD kind of situations, because they are so unexpected and can do damage quickly. As others have said I'm not sure it should be a "go to" for SD just because your head can become a football (UK version), but it's certainly a viable option in the right circumstances


----------



## drop bear

dunc said:


> Yeah - It will be interesting to see how this translates into MMA
> 
> I do think these kind of things have their place in SD kind of situations, because they are so unexpected and can do damage quickly. As others have said I'm not sure it should be a "go to" for SD just because your head can become a football (UK version), but it's certainly a viable option in the right circumstances



Self defence isn't really technique driven. Yes you should have technique. But I think the concepts are more important.

So if the Leglock concepts get you from that point A to point B then they are as viable as anything else.

They make you very dangerous against a standing opponent if you are on your back. So if you are eating feet. Leg lock concepts will kind of help.

All this de la riva stuff.


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> A mate of mine did the Lachlan guiles seminar and came back a beast.



Giles is an underrated genius. A friend of mine got his DVDs and came back a beast, so I believe it.


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> Yeah - It will be interesting to see how this translates into MMA



I don't think you're ever going to see leg locking becoming a dominant force in MMA for a host of reasons. The main one being that if you know someone is a leg locker, you can train months in advance with the best in the business to counter them. Given that pretty much every pro MMA fighter these days is an advanced belt in BJJ or some form of submission grappling, learning to get out of leg locks doesn't really take a long time if you know the general fundamentals.


dunc said:


> I do think these kind of things have their place in SD kind of situations, because they are so unexpected and can do damage quickly. As others have said I'm not sure it should be a "go to" for SD just because your head can become a football (UK version), but it's certainly a viable option in the right circumstances



Yeah, there's an argument that leg locks/attacks are effective when facing a much larger opponent with superior upper body strength. Here's a vid of coach Firas Zahabi up against a champion arm wrestler who is also a Judoka;






BTW, this shows you how much Judo suffers as a grappling art by not embracing leg locks. Imagine trying to use Judo throws against that behemoth!


----------



## Hanzou

drop bear said:


> Self defence isn't really technique driven. Yes you should have technique. But I think the concepts are more important.
> 
> So if the Leglock concepts get you from that point A to point B then they are as viable as anything else.
> 
> They make you very dangerous against a standing opponent if you are on your back. So if you are eating feet. Leg lock concepts will kind of help.
> 
> All this de la riva stuff.



Yeah, that video is "old school", going from De La Riva to back take. Going to leg locks from DLR makes so much more sense nowadays. Yet another example of how much the game has changed.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Hanzou said:


> BTW, this shows you how much Judo suffers as a grappling art by not embracing leg locks. Imagine trying to use Judo throws against that behemoth!


As I understand it, Kano removed them because they were prone to injure students (like many joint locks).  I could be wrong, but I'm sure I read that somewhere in a book once, and it made perfect sense.

So, the reason they've become popular in BJJ is probably because the art is so refined now, with such expert level instruction, it's a little safer now than a century ago in Japan, where nobody wanted to tap out, ever.

Nowadays, people learn to tap first, then learn.

Make sense?


----------



## dunc

Hanzou said:


> I don't think you're ever going to see leg locking becoming a dominant force in MMA for a host of reasons. The main one being that if you know someone is a leg locker, you can train months in advance with the best in the business to counter them. Given that pretty much every pro MMA fighter these days is an advanced belt in BJJ or some form of submission grappling, learning to get out of leg locks doesn't really take a long time if you know the general fundamentals.


Maybe....
If you take that argument then no one would be submitting anyone with leg locks at a high level, which is clearly not the case
For me what is unproven to date is whether the addition of striking and gloves etc reduces the potency of leg locks. Personally I suspect the answer is "not much"


----------



## Oily Dragon

Curious enough I googled to check myself.  guess what I found.  

I was wrong, Kano didn't remove leg locks.  It happened over time.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

dunc said:


> For me what is unproven to date is whether the addition of striking and gloves etc reduces the potency of leg locks. Personally I suspect the answer is "not much"


I think the biggest difference striking makes is it forces you to get the control position completely right. In pure grappling if your control position is a little off, then the danger is your opponent might escape or pass your guard or counter leg-lock you. In MMA if your control position isn't really good then you may be getting your face smashed and not even have great options for bailing into another position.

Ryan Hall recently released an updated version of his 50/50 instructional video which incorporates the lessons he's learned from MMA. I'm curious as to what he has changed, but I don't have the money to invest in his (very good but very expensive) videos right now.


----------



## Hanzou

Oily Dragon said:


> As I understand it, Kano removed them because they were prone to injure students (like many joint locks).  I could be wrong, but I'm sure I read that somewhere in a book once, and it made perfect sense.
> 
> So, the reason they've become popular in BJJ is probably because the art is so refined now, with such expert level instruction, it's a little safer now than a century ago in Japan, where nobody wanted to tap out, ever.
> 
> Nowadays, people learn to tap first, then learn.
> 
> Make sense?



Well Ashi-garami was banned in Judo before the universal leg lock ban in 1922. Supposedly a student got their leg broken when it was applied, pushing it to get banned earlier.

That said, who knows the full reason all leg locks were banned. We do know that Kano had issues with ground grappling, and preferred Judo to be more about upright, spectacular throwing instead of rolling around on the ground. According to "legend" Kano introduced newaza only because his Judoka got beaten by Mataemon Tanabe, who developed a nasty ground grappling system from watching snakes (In fact, I'm pretty sure it was Tanabe who broke the leg of the judoka utilizing the Ashi-garami). Anyways.....

When there is a focus on ground grappling, leg locking naturally arises from that practice, and those submissions tend to dominate other forms of submissions and even compromise standing grappling. This is currently happening in BJJ comps btw, where leg locking is becoming a very dominant form of submission. Why is seated Guard so popular? Because it's relatively easy to nail a standing opponent with a leg lock form that position. The "Ashi slide" (where you can slide into the ashi guard from standing position) is gaining in popularity as well.


----------



## Hanzou

Tony Dismukes said:


> I think the biggest difference striking makes is it forces you to get the control position completely right. In pure grappling if your control position is a little off, then the danger is your opponent might escape or pass your guard or counter leg-lock you. In MMA if your control position isn't really good then you may be getting your face smashed and not even have great options for bailing into another position.
> 
> Ryan Hall recently released an updated version of his 50/50 instructional video which incorporates the lessons he's learned from MMA. I'm curious as to what he has changed, but I don't have the money to invest in his (very good but very expensive) videos right now.



I hope one of the lessons he learned was not to use the Imanari roll over and over again against an opponent who specifically trained to counter your game.


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> Maybe....
> If you take that argument then no one would be submitting anyone with leg locks at a high level, which is clearly not the case



That's a good point.



dunc said:


> For me what is unproven to date is whether the addition of striking and gloves etc reduces the potency of leg locks. Personally I suspect the answer is "not much"



I'm not sure you can strike your way out of a well applied leg lock.

The glove thing though is interesting. I would imagine that gripping sweaty legs and feet could be a factor as well.


----------



## Oily Dragon

Hanzou said:


> I'm not sure you can strike your way out of a well applied leg lock.


Flail, maybe.  It might work, but probably not.

Begging would probably work better.


----------



## dunc

Hanzou said:


> I'm not sure you can strike your way out of a well applied leg lock.
> 
> The glove thing though is interesting. I would imagine that gripping sweaty legs and feet could be a factor as well.


I suspect that striking will make the set ups for leg locks more difficult
The only risk I can see to the person with leg control will be kicks from an uncontrolled 2nd leg, but I think that’s probably manageable


----------



## Hanzou

dunc said:


> I suspect that striking will make the set ups for leg locks more difficult
> The only risk I can see to the person with leg control will be kicks from an uncontrolled 2nd leg, but I think that’s probably manageable



Well here's one of Danaher's boys pulling off a near perfect leg lock in MMA;






Here's a great article that actually talks about this;









						Opinion: Do Modern Leglocks Have A Place In MMA? - Grappling Insider
					

Luke Rockhold recently announced that he believes leglocks and the modern BJJ game have no place in MMA, but what do you think?




					grapplinginsider.com
				




Since the leg lock game is evolving rapidly, we may see a surge take place in MMA if more BJJ stylists enter MMA. The problem is that sport BJJ is lucrative if you're an elite BJJ exponent like Gordon Ryan, Lachlan Giles, Craig Jones, Kron Gracie, Ryan Hall, Keenan Cornelius, Garry Tonon, etc. so you might not want to even bother with MMA if you're bringing in loads of cash just doing BJJ. I'm starting to think that Hall and Tonon are the exceptions, not the rule.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Tony Dismukes said:


> 've only seen a small percentage of "self-defense" oriented schools which have attempted to keep the self-defense portion of the curriculum evolving and improving in the way the sport competition curriculum has.


This is always tough to do. Within competition, it's easy to catalog what is changing, which leads to a catalog of changes worth making. You also get to test out small changes regularly to see if they seem useful. For self-defense use, it's usually unclear where small changes should happen, and so there's usually a stasis lag until there's an apparent need for bigger changes (see all the places that have added some sort of takedown defense or groundwork to their curriculum over the last decade or two).

The base problem is that there's no clear catalog of what you'll be up against. If I want to train for a BJJ competition, I can go watch a few and see what I need to be prepared for. It'll be a reasonably recognizable body of work (obviously, while preparing, I'll have to keep watching what's going, because of the constant change). If you watch 1,000 different self-defense situations on video, you'll see a small number of overlapping bits, and a large variety around them. What's withing that small core doesn't really change much. But the wider range around it changes in ways that are hard to track.


----------



## Hanzou

Gerry Seymour said:


> This is always tough to do. Within competition, it's easy to catalog what is changing, which leads to a catalog of changes worth making. You also get to test out small changes regularly to see if they seem useful. For self-defense use, it's usually unclear where small changes should happen, and so there's usually a stasis lag until there's an apparent need for bigger changes (see all the places that have added some sort of takedown defense or groundwork to their curriculum over the last decade or two).
> 
> The base problem is that there's no clear catalog of what you'll be up against. If I want to train for a BJJ competition, I can go watch a few and see what I need to be prepared for. It'll be a reasonably recognizable body of work (obviously, while preparing, I'll have to keep watching what's going, because of the constant change). If you watch 1,000 different self-defense situations on video, you'll see a small number of overlapping bits, and a large variety around them. What's withing that small core doesn't really change much. But the wider range around it changes in ways that are hard to track.



I do find it interesting the sheer rise in groundwork and takedowns being added to the curriculums in various MA styles. Before I got hurt, I was invited to teach BJJ in quite a few TMA schools as an additional class for their students to take. I did take up one of the offers and I did it for a few months. It was a fun experience, and I think the students (in that case Karate) got a lot out of it.

I believe that getting a BJJ instructor is the best way to go about it. I don't think it's a good idea to watch BJJ on YT and make up stuff.

Example;





I want to take a moment and laugh at the fact that the first "street-oriented" thing they do in this video is teach how to (badly) defend against a (bad) arm bar. Because yeah, the thug on the street is going to go for an arm bar instead of simply pound you in the face.


----------



## Gerry Seymour

Hanzou said:


> I do find it interesting the sheer rise in groundwork and takedowns being added to the curriculums in various MA styles. Before I got hurt, I was invited to teach BJJ in quite a few TMA schools as an additional class for their students to take. I did take up one of the offers and I did it for a few months. It was a fun experience, and I think the students (in that case Karate) got a lot out of it.
> 
> I believe that getting a BJJ instructor is the best way to go about it. I don't think it's a good idea to watch BJJ on YT and make up stuff.
> 
> Example;


Even places that had a bit of kinda-viable groundwork have taken to doing BJJ seminars. For those with the right foundation, a seminar a year with some solid content can make a significant difference. I was fortunate to have some Judo groundwork waaaaaay back, and ran into a smattering of BJJ/MMA (the latter mostly BJJ in the groundwork at the time) over time to keep me working on bits. With a little foundation, just rolling goes a long way. 

My experience was that NGA had a few usable techniques for groundwork (including a couple of escapes from mount), but that the foundation for some of them was missing. So the technique was there, but done......not well. One of my friends actually went and added BJJ to his school (started with seminars, got himself trained up to purple to start teaching it - I think he's now black), somewhere in Ryron and Rener's branch, I think. They're not as hardcore as some BJJ places, but the groundwork there is significantly better than any other NGA school.


----------



## Hanzou

Gerry Seymour said:


> Even places that had a bit of kinda-viable groundwork have taken to doing BJJ seminars. For those with the right foundation, a seminar a year with some solid content can make a significant difference. I was fortunate to have some Judo groundwork waaaaaay back, and ran into a smattering of BJJ/MMA (the latter mostly BJJ in the groundwork at the time) over time to keep me working on bits. With a little foundation, just rolling goes a long way.



Yeah, it really doesn't take much to get the fundamentals of ground fighting down. Once you reach blue belt, you should be fine in most situations, unless you're simply dealing with an extremely good grappler. Obviously you need to keep your practice up and refresh your fundamentals from time to time. However, you can do that on your own with a dedicated partner.



Gerry Seymour said:


> My experience was that NGA had a few usable techniques for groundwork (including a couple of escapes from mount), but that the foundation for some of them was missing. So the technique was there, but done......not well. One of my friends actually went and added BJJ to his school (started with seminars, got himself trained up to purple to start teaching it - I think he's now black), somewhere in Ryron and Rener's branch, I think. They're not as hardcore as some BJJ places, but the groundwork there is significantly better than any other NGA school.



Ryron and Rener's branch is more self-defense oriented, so if you're looking for less sport-oriented stuff, and want more old school Gracie-based JJ, you're in good hands.

Of course, even GJJ is pressured by the economic need to be competitive, so I think that even in that environment you're going to get some sport-based stuff. I know that in my days with Relson Gracie JJ, they wanted to be more self-defense based, but they had to have a dedicated competition class on a multi-day basis to make sure to cater to those who wanted to compete. Frankly, a lot of people preferred the competition class to the base class, because the techniques shown in the former were more flashy and interesting.


----------

