# BJJ vs TKD...yep, let's kick the dead horse



## BrandonLucas (Dec 9, 2008)

I figured I would start this thread since no one else wanted to...

So, let's discuss for the 100,000,000,000,000 time why BJJ is more effective than TKD, or how TKD is more effective than BJJ...

Personally, I think it's a great idea to train both, and that both are equally valuable to SD...

So, everyone, please share your thoughts.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 9, 2008)

I would love to debate you on this, but damn it...I agree.  Train in both if you have the opportunity.  The more tools you have the better you will be prepared.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I figured I would start this thread since no one else wanted to...
> 
> So, let's discuss for the 100,000,000,000,000 time why BJJ is more effective than TKD, or how TKD is more effective than BJJ...
> 
> ...


 I like both...I tjust think that BJJ doesnt get any credit that it rightly deserves.


----------



## hkfuie (Dec 9, 2008)

I like both, too.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> I like both...I tjust think that BJJ doesnt get any credit that it rightly deserves.



Depends on the venue.  MT probably has more TMA participating, so there's bound to be a bit of prejudice there.  You will find the opposite is true on MMA forums.

In the end, it doesn't matter what some fanboy thinks on the internet.  If you're happy with your style, then great.  You think the Gracies care what some TKD guy on MT thinks?

Back to original topic:  it doesn't matter because a real ninja would beat up any BJJ or TKD guy!  So, neener, neener!


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> Depends on the venue. MT probably has more TMA participating, so there's bound to be a bit of prejudice there. You will find the opposite is true on MMA forums.
> 
> In the end, it doesn't matter what some fanboy thinks on the internet. If you're happy with your style, then great. You think the Gracies care what some TKD guy on MT thinks?
> 
> Back to original topic: *it doesn't matter because a real ninja would beat up any BJJ or TKD guy!* So, neener, neener!


 Thats true...


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 9, 2008)

I do have to admit that for a while, I was opposed to grappling arts...but not because of the art itself, but rather the people that I had talked to that trained in the grappling arts...such as BJJ.

The majority of the guys that I've talked to, both in person and on other forums besides this one, have had the attitude that if you don't practice BJJ, Muay Thai, or Judo, then you're wasting your time.  I admit, it used to ruffle my feathers to talk to those kind of guys.  But, after talking to others who have trained in BJJ that can actually act respectfully, I've come to understand where I was going wrong.

I wasn't looking at the benefits of the different arts...rather, I was acting defensive of my own art.  I always used to argue that I could defend a take down, and I don't need to know how to grapple...but the truth of the matter is that it's better to know what to do just in case than to keep saying that you don't need it, and end up on the ground needing it.

I know it was posted on that other thread that BJJ'ers don't practice on cement, and would back out of the opportunity to roll on cement....well, the last time I checked, none of the TMA's have a cirriculum that involve cement other than breaking the blocks.

It shouldn't matter what surface you're on...you should be prepared for anything...just like a striker should be prepared to fight on both hard and soft surfaces.  Which one is more likely to fight on?  Who knows for sure???  I have the same probability that I'm going to fight on the beach as I am fighting on the sidewalk.

I understand that BJJ gets disrespected sometimes because of what we all see in the UFC...and that's not all there is to BJJ, I'm sure.  But it's the same as someone disrespecting TKD because of what they see in the Olympics...it's just not a fair assesment.  I personally think that if someone is going to say that an art has no SD value, then they need to have facts to back it up.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 9, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> Depends on the venue. MT probably has more TMA participating, so there's bound to be a bit of prejudice there. You will find the opposite is true on MMA forums.
> 
> In the end, it doesn't matter what some fanboy thinks on the internet. If you're happy with your style, then great. You think the Gracies care what some TKD guy on MT thinks?
> 
> Back to original topic: it doesn't matter because a real ninja would beat up any BJJ or TKD guy! So, neener, neener!


 
And the ninjas win again..thread closed.


----------



## crushing (Dec 9, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> *I understand that BJJ gets disrespected sometimes because of what we all see in the UFC*...and that's not all there is to BJJ, I'm sure. But it's the same as someone disrespecting TKD because of what they see in the Olympics...it's just not a fair assesment. I personally think that if someone is going to say that an art has no SD value, then they need to have facts to back it up.


 

I don't understand this.  I think BJJ gets a lot more respect because of what we all see in the UFC.  If someone fighting in the UFC has a TKD background, the announcers will say that in a "oh, by the way" manner.  If someone fighting in the UFC has a BJJ background, that is a big deal!  The announcers will come out and say what type of advantage that gives the fighter.

Once again, BJJ gets a ton of respect and attention because of the UFC and other MMA venues, not despite it.  There is this 'Gracie' name that keeps coming to mind.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 9, 2008)

crushing said:


> I don't understand this. I think BJJ gets a lot more respect because of what we all see in the UFC. If someone fighting in the UFC has a TKD background, the announcers will say that in a "oh, by the way" manner. If someone fighting in the UFC has a BJJ background, that is a big deal! The announcers will come out and say what type of advantage that gives the fighter.
> 
> Once again, BJJ gets a ton of respect and attention because of the UFC and other MMA venues, not despite it. There is this 'Gracie' name that keeps coming to mind.


 
I mean that in regards to SD.  There are quite a few people who argue that the BJJ that the UFC'er's train is not SD quality, but designed to fit a certain ruleset.

I personally don't agree with that...I think that everyone knows that there is a certain ruleset within the UFC, and just because you don't train to punch someone in the back of the head doesn't mean that you won't know to take sieze the opportunity if it presents itself.

I'm just speaking from personal experience from posting on MMA forums, and from speaking to a few guys in person.  I've never actually participated in BJJ, although I would like to.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

better



what does better mean?

better for being an MMA fighter?
better for street defense?
better for getting in shape?
better for competing in the olympics?

TKD-evolved from shotkan, originally a brutal self defense based system now sometimes taught as the original, sometimes as a sport art for competition. Stand up, limited or no ground

BJJ-evolved from a sport art, Judo Perfected in sport matches in Rio, taught as a sport art with some self defense application. ground fighting, limited or no stand up

whats better?

too many variables, too many conditional modifiers to have just one answer


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

crushing said:


> I don't understand this. I think BJJ gets a lot more respect because of what we all see in the UFC. If someone fighting in the UFC has a TKD background, the announcers will say that in a "oh, by the way" manner. If someone fighting in the UFC has a BJJ background, that is a big deal! The announcers will come out and say what type of advantage that gives the fighter.
> 
> Once again, BJJ gets a ton of respect and attention because of the UFC and other MMA venues, not despite it. There is this 'Gracie' name that keeps coming to mind.


 St Pierre comes from a TKD history and is arguably one of the best fighters in the world.  He also understands that it takes more than just TKD to survive in the UFC.  But the problem is that certain people think they can go their whole lives without getting taken down.  And if they do get taken down they will pop back up with the 20 mins a week ground training they are doing.  I guarantee if I take you down you will not be getting back up very easily.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> It shouldn't matter what surface you're on...you should be prepared for anything...just like a striker should be prepared to fight on both hard and soft surfaces.  Which one is more likely to fight on?  Who knows for sure???  I have the same probability that I'm going to fight on the beach as I am fighting on the sidewalk.



I live 5 hours from a beach, and there are no marshmellow plantations around here, so my odds are on having to fight on nice solid hard ground. Your mileage may vary


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> I live 5 hours from a beach, and there are no marshmellow plantations around here, so my odds are on having to fight on nice solid hard ground. Your mileage may vary


 Yeah and odds are youre going to that hard ground during that fight...


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> I guarantee if I take you down you will not be getting back up very easily.



LOL

sure thing

do you realize just how ridiculous that claim is?  making that blanket statement to everyone, with no idea of thier skills, training, experience, or mind set?


Thats akin to someone saying "i can knock anyone out"


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> LOL
> 
> sure thing
> 
> ...


 Not true my friend...to knock someone out it takes a certain amount of strength, training and skill.  Taking you down only takes training and skill.  A 3 yr old can take you down.  Leverage is a beautiful thing.  And I know your skills...not much.  Once youre down youre in my world.  Just like if I were to stand with you...uh dont think im gonna be doing that.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> Yeah and odds are youre going to that hard ground during that fight...



wrong again.

that "90% of fights go to the ground" claim is crap put out by the Gracies to hype thier style back in the 90's.

maybe in grade schools all fights turn into wrestling matches, but that aint reality. 10 years in bars. more FIGHTS (not sport matches) than I can remember. Went to the ground less than 5 times.

That idea fails the reality test HARD.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> And I know your skills...not much.  Once youre down youre in my world.  Just like if I were to stand with you...uh dont think im gonna be doing that.



aside from the blatant ad hom attack, which is against the rules here btw, you dont know me from adam.

And since you have to resort to insults, I am now done wasting time with you.

good day


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 9, 2008)

I know BJJ isn't a gazillion years old but doesn't it date back to the 40's (Not sure of that date)?  How can that not be treated as a TMA compared to TKD which is considered a "TMA"?


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> wrong again son.
> 
> that "90% of fights go to the ground" claim is crap put out by the Gracies to hype thier style back in the 90's.
> 
> ...


 90% may be a stretch, but if you did go down what would you do.  Im hoping you were a bouncer and not a toolbag picking fights.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 9, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> Depends on the venue. MT probably has more TMA participating, so there's bound to be a bit of prejudice there. You will find the opposite is true on MMA forums.
> 
> In the end, it doesn't matter what some fanboy thinks on the internet. If you're happy with your style, then great. You think the Gracies care what some TKD guy on MT thinks?
> 
> Back to original topic: it doesn't matter because a real ninja would beat up any BJJ or TKD guy! So, neener, neener!


 
Yes, but the pirates would beat up the ninjas.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

miguksaram said:


> I know BJJ isn't a gazillion years old but doesn't it date back to the 40's (Not sure of that date)?  How can that not be treated as a TMA compared to TKD which is considered a "TMA"?



thats a very good point. 

BJJ is actually a TMA, used in sport matches

funny thing is, BJJ evolved from JUDO, not jujitsu


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

miguksaram said:


> I know BJJ isn't a gazillion years old but doesn't it date back to the 40's (Not sure of that date)? How can that not be treated as a TMA compared to TKD which is considered a "TMA"?


 The real argument is actually dealing with BJJ and striking.  Not specifically TKD.

I would however love to see one of those perfecthead kicks you guys love to throw....TIMBER!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> thats a very good point.
> 
> BJJ is actually a TMA, used in sport matches
> 
> funny thing is, BJJ evolved from JUDO, not jujitsu


 Japanese Jiu-Jitsu was introduced to the Gracie family in Brazil in 1915 by Esai Maeda...and if you wanted to argue that: Judo is a style of Jiu Jitsu.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> St Pierre comes from a TKD history and is arguably one of the best fighters in the world.  He also understands that it takes more than just TKD to survive in the UFC.



I'm a Georges St. Pierre fan myself, but doesn't he actually have a kyokushin karate black belt not TKD?


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

wrong again

 from wiki

The art began with Mitsuyo Maeda (aka Conde Koma, or Count Combat in English), a Japanese expert judoka and member of the Kodokan. Maeda was one of five of the Kodokan's top groundwork experts that Judo's founder Kano Jigoro sent overseas to spread his art to the world. Maeda left Japan in 1904 and visited a number of countries[2] giving "jiu-do" demonstrations and accepting challenges from wrestlers, boxers, savate fighters and various other martial artists before eventually arriving in Brazil on November 14, 1914.[4]


http://www.jiu-jitsu.net/history.shtml

Maeda was a champion of Judo and a direct student of its founder, Jigoro  Kano, at the Kodokan in Japan.

and now judo is a style of jujitsu?

man, i know a lot of judoka that are gonna be pissed when they find out they have been calling it the wrong name for 100 years..........


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> wrong again
> 
> from wiki
> 
> ...


Just incase you dont know...Wikipedia is not a very credible source...reason being that anyone can alter the info contained in there.  And Yes Judo is a style of traditional Jiu Jitsu of Japan.  I really dont care how many of your buddies disagree..It is fact.

And Maeda brought "Jiu Jitsu" to Gracie.  And Judo was once referred to as Kano's Jiu Jitsu.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> I'm a Georges St. Pierre fan myself, but doesn't he actually have a kyokushin karate black belt not TKD?


 Youre absolutley right...sorry.


----------



## crushing (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> The real argument is actually dealing with BJJ and striking. Not specifically TKD.
> 
> I would however love to see one of those perfecthead kicks you guys love to throw....TIMBER!!!!!!!!!!


 
Why would you want to go out like that?

:angel:


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

crushing said:


> Why would you want to go out like that?
> 
> :angel:


 Oh rest assured I wouldnt be out, dip under the leg and youre going down...hahahaha...This is pointless.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> wrong again
> 
> from wiki
> 
> ...


 
www.jiu-jitsi.net
Jigoro Kano (1860--1938), a practitioner of Jiu-Jitsu, developed his own system of Jiu-Jitsu in the late 1800's, called Judo.....hmmm


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

"Jigoro Kano was the founder of Judo, however, Judo is simply a style of Jiu-jitsu and not a separate martial art. Kano was not the first to use the name Judo, the Jiu-jitsu schools he studied at, which would be the source of much of his Judo's techniques had used the phrase before he made it famous in the late 1800's. "


www.jiu-jitsu.net

Its all over the site that you quoted.  Guess googling an art you know nothing about doesnt work very well.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> better
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Ummm sorry to break this to you, but if you really want to dig into history, then you have to see that path Judo and Shotokan took are pretty much the same.  Both stem from combative martial arts.    Both were promoted as a physical exercise nationwide.  Also Kano felt  traditional JJ relyed on too much pre-arranged attacks.  He develped Judo to focus more on Randori, free moving resisting opponents.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> And Yes Judo is a style of traditional Jiu Jitsu of Japan.  I really dont care how many of your buddies disagree..It is fact.



I think a good case could be built either way for classifying judo as a jujitsu art or not.  Kano combined methods from several styles of jujutsu that he learned in forming what would become judo, so judo is at the very least a clear child.  That said, to my recollection, Kano adopted some rules in the practice of judo to govern the conduct of matches, which is a clear movement into sport.  Some jujutsu people were more than a little offended with Kano and they turned their back on him and his art.  Ironically enough, judo eventually won a reputation for itself through challenge matches pitting judoka vs. jujutsu men.

Depends on whom you ask...


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> I think a good case could be built either way for classifying judo as a jujitsu art or not. Kano combined methods from several styles of jujutsu that he learned in forming what would become judo, so judo is at the very least a clear child. That said, to my recollection, Kano adopted some rules in the practice of judo to govern the conduct of matches, which is a clear movement into sport. Some jujutsu people were more than a little offended with Kano and they turned their back on him and his art. Ironically enough, judo eventually won a reputation for itself through challenge matches pitting judoka vs. jujutsu men.
> 
> Depends on whom you ask...


 And when that happened Judo actually lost because the Jiu jitsu fighters were pulling guard and submitting them and they had no idea what to do.  But why were they just pulling guard?  Well they had less than impressive striking skills.  I see the need for both, but the disrespect of Jiu Jitsu is disheartening.


----------



## crushing (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> Oh rest assured I wouldnt be out, dip under the leg and youre going down...hahahaha...*This is pointless.*


 
Exactly!


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Wow this turned into a history lesson pretty quick.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> And when that happened Judo actually lost because the Jiu jitsu fighters were pulling guard and submitting them and they had no idea what to do.  But why were they just pulling guard?  Well they had less than impressive striking skills.  I see the need for both, but the disrespect of Jiu Jitsu is disheartening.




Actually, according the accounts I read, the judo guys did very well since they engaged in randori more frequently than the jujutsu guys did.  This eventually forced a rethinking among the koryu jujutsu senseis and they adopted more 'resisting' training methods.


----------



## crushing (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> And when that happened Judo actually lost because the Jiu jitsu fighters were pulling guard and submitting them and they had no idea what to do. But why were they just pulling guard? Well they had less than impressive striking skills. *I see the need for both, but the disrespect of Jiu Jitsu is disheartening.*


 
Where have you seen the disrespect?


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

judo is a seperate martial art, derived from jujitsu, yes, close to jujitsu, yes, but seperate, as Tang Soo Do is seperate from TKD

The japanese think so, and i will take thier word for it over the rabid 19 year old fan boys currently flocking to BJJ who think jujitsu dominated judo when the facts say otherwise:

"Kano devised a powerful system of new techniques and training methods, which famously culminated on June 11, 1886, in a tournament that would later be dramatized by celebrated Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa (&#40658;&#27810; &#26126; _Kurosawa Akira_, 1910&#8211;1998), in the film "Sanshiro Sugata" (1943). In that tournament, fifteen of Kano's students faced fifteen students from a rival jujutsu school. The result was two losses, one draw, and twelve victories for the judo students."

http://www.judoinfo.com/helio.htm

"Kosei Maeda known by the name of Konde Koma was a judo-ka who got out of Japan to spread Kodokan Judo to the world in Meiji period, and performed an open fight with a different style in each country"

now even Maeda called it judo sometimes and jujitsu other times, because at that time the split wasnt as pronounced as it is now.

not to mention that carlos gracie was a 6th dan in JUDO before forming BJJ........

SABJJ , you dont know what you are talking about

you should go hang out on the website that shall not be named, they are not that concerned with actual facts there, and this site is full of people, like myself that know the actual FACTS. something you seem to be lacking in.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> judo is a seperate martial art, derived from jujitsu, yes, close to jujitsu, yes, but seperate, as Tang Soo Do is seperate from TKD
> 
> The japanese think so, and i will take thier word for it over the rabid 19 year old fan boys currently flocking to BJJ who think jujitsu dominated judo when the facts say otherwise:
> 
> ...


And you rely on your BS facts from Wikipedia.  You are an illinformed redneck who cant listen to anything rational.  Stay in the dark...have fun!


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

And yes genius Judo WAS in fact formed from jiujitsu.  It is not its own art yet a mere subset of Jiujitsu.  Wow you people here think you know everything about Martial Arts.  I guess anyone can google...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2008)

Gosh, reading all that has taken me ten minutes of my life I won't get back again. Can't you lot play nicely, if you carry on like this the thread will be locked and what could have been an interesting discussion will be remembered as the children fighting again.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2008)

Okay gentlemen, I think that's quite enough.  

If you cannot argue like the adults I do you the credit of granting the status of, it is probably best if you let this bone lie for a while.

However, if you can continue to discuss the views you hold on the matter in hand without resorting to the sort of 'attitude' that has been seen hitherto, then please do.

Just bear in mind that there are certain standards of behaviour you agreed to when you signed up here and altho' certain leeway is granted for subjects which arouse passions in the Study Forum, that 'sea-room' does not apply elsewhere.

Further skirting of the boundaries of civilised debate can only hold one outcome and I happen to think that this subject is interesting enough for it to be a shame if this thread gets shackled.

EDIT:  Ah, I see that *Tez* got there first.  Quite so, good lady.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=150

Kano's new system was not without obstacles, however, and many of the          old line classical systems held back no criticism. This criticism was          largely silenced by a match in 1886 between his Kodokan Judo School and          that of the Yoshin ryu (jujutsu) organized by the Tokyo police department.          Kano's school won thirteen victories, one draw and only two losses out          of fifteen individual matches. 

historical facts dont lie, BJJ fanboy's dont know any better

http://hubpages.com/hub/Brazilian-Jiu-Jitsu

Although (there)was no clear distinction between Judo, and Jiu-Jitsu in the past, the current styles could not be more separate.

again, facts dont lie, fan boys though...........

http://www.essortment.com/hobbies/historyjudo_spmj.htm

Originally an offshoot of the hand-to-hand combat used by the samurai in ancient Japan, Judo has developed its own identity--one that stresses not just physical strength, but also moral and intellectual fortitude.

facts, the kryptonite of BJJ fan boys since 1992

look, I know, you love what you do, and clearly, you dont know any better, but quit while you are behind ok?

NO ONE disputes that judo came from JJ, but wether you like it or not, (1) judo is a seperate entity, (2)that in 1882 embarrassed the hell out of jujitsu in open competition, (3)Carlos gracie was a JUDO BB before forming BJJ, (4) Maeda was a JUDO BB before comming to Brazil

thats FOUR things you are flat out WRONG about.

quit now.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

HEY, i am the one getting insulted and called names here. Every assertion I have made has been backed up with FACTS, and relevant links and posted in a manner consistant with the rules.



Tez3 said:


> Gosh, reading all that has taken me ten minutes of my life I won't get back again. Can't you lot play nicely, if you carry on like this the thread will be locked and what could have been an interesting discussion will be remembered as the children fighting again.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2008)

As with many situations like this in the real as well as the virtual world, after the first exchange, who 'started it' is not the issue in question.  

I can understand you might feel yourself to be the injured party and when your dander is up it is hard to pull back from the brink.

Nonetheless, I refer those in dispute to my previous post.  It would be most advantageous to everyone viewing this thread with interest if it continues from this point in polite fashion.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Okay gentlemen, I think that's quite enough.
> 
> If you cannot argue like the adults I do you the credit of granting the status of, it is probably best if you let this bone lie for a while.
> 
> ...


 
Sukerkin, you are more tactful than I am!


Ok lets try this one.....the word 'sport' has been put before several styles, my own, karate included. To my mind this means that the participants are usually doing a watered down style, usually non contact or at the very least minimal contact that actually debases the original art. I realise btw that no contact in judo/juijitsu is inpossible but I take it you know what I mean lol!
Has the argument here been about the 'sport' styles of our arts or the real thing? I put it to you gentleman that we have been looking at the 'sport' versions and assuming that is the proper thing.
BJJ when done properly and please do forget about the UFC ( btw did I tell you we have a fighter trying out next year for the TUF, thought I'd boast and let that one out) that's BJJ done under MMA fight rules, is quite a serious art with some serious defences and attacks. Likewise TKD, forget the Olympics, I have a friend who teaches 'real' TKD with kicks, punches, takedowns and a few quite nasty surprises. My own first love Wado Ryu has a great many takedowns and ground fighting moves because it's founder was also a juijitsu master.
Can we all find videos to show what our true art is or explain moves from our true arts? I think that way we will end up with us somewhere in the middle as opposed to opposite sides. Or we will all agree that the bastardisation of our arts is a bummer ( there - a nice American phrase I believe?0)I would have said it was bollocks personally!


----------



## hkfuie (Dec 9, 2008)

I thought the whole point of this thread was that the horse is already dead.  I thought the invitation was rhetorical.  Guess I was wrong.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> HEY, i am the one getting insulted and called names here. Every assertion I have made has been backed up with FACTS, and relevant links and posted in a manner consistant with the rules.


 

I'm an equal opportunity Ms Whiplash, when kids fight they all get shouted at! 

I've met several Brazilians now whos primary art is BJJ, they are nice guys but have come up from the slums where you fight hard or don't survive, that's not in competition. They compete to make money, to make things better for themselves and family and that actually makes them fairly ruthless, their BJJ is also ruthless from what I've seen. It also makes them greedy on the whole but thats another argument.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> I'm an equal opportunity Ms Whiplash, when kids fight they all get shouted at!



I dont care who you are, that right there's funny!!

as to the rest, well, those same people could make origami brutal, that comes from the mindset, which is, in martial arts as a whole, the single biggest "X Factor" in discussions of style vs style


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Dec 9, 2008)

*A couple of points:*

*Wikipedia accuracy.*


> "Overall, Wikipedia's accuracy rate was 80 percent compared with 95-96 percent accuracy within the other sources. This study does support the claim that Wikipedia is less reliable than other reference resources. Furthermore, the research found at least five unattributed direct quotations and verbatim text from other sources with no citations.
> 
> Title: Comparison of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias for accuracy, breadth, and depth in historical articles
> Author(s):Lucy Holman Rector
> ...


Other studies I've seen referenced indicate Wiki is on par with Enc. Britannica, however I can't locate that link at the moment.




*Judo & Jujutsu History*


*Introduction to Kodokan Judo by Neil Ohlenkamp*
*Jujutsu Becomes Judo by Jigoro Kano*
*History of Judo by Keo Cavalcanti*
*Kodokan Judo by Matsutaro Shibazaki*
*Origins of Judo by Allen Gordon*
*Origins of Judo and Jujitsu by Sumitomo Arima*
*History of Judo by Phil Rasmussen*
*Origins  of Judo in the US by Kazuo Shinohara*
*Jigoro Kano by Andy Adams*
*Jigoro Kano's Death at Sea*
*Jigoro Kano and the Kodokan by Kazuzo Kudo*
*On Jujutsu and its Modernization by Kenji Tomiki*
*Jigoro Kano Historical Photos*
*Jujutsu by Jigoro Kano and T. Lindsay*
*Origins of the Samurai by David Lay*
*Kodokan Tenth Degree Black Belts*
*Ranking Systems in Modern Japanese Martial Arts by Donn F. raeger*
*Randori and Unification of Jujutsu by the Kodokan by Kosuke Nagaki*
*Judo Rank System by Neil Ohlenkamp*
*Evolution of Judo Rules by Neil Ohlenkamp*
*Original Kodokan Contest Rules*
*"My Judo" by Masahiko Kimura*
*Master Tsunetane Oda by Toshikazu Okada*
*Sarah Mayer: Letters to Gunji Koizumi*
*The Noble Struggle of the Warrior by Taisen Deshimaru*
*Scholarly and Athletic Accomplishments of Dr. Jigoro Kano by Matt Ball*
*Judo by Emilio Bruno*
*A Letter About Judo Weight Classes by Emilio Bruno*
*Friction Fractures U.S. Judo Factions*
*Karate Outpaces Judo in the US*
*The Growth of Judo and Karate Declining in the US*
*First Issue of Black Belt Magazine: "Special Judo Issue"*
*Judo Symbols*
*Old Newspaper Advertisements*
*Traditions of Judo*
*Do You Know?*
*Discussion of History on JudoForum.com*
Considering that one or more of the above were reportedly there back in the beginning, I'll defer to them.




*Personal Attacks:* 
MT Rules: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26480


No "Flaming": Please do not post any messages that harrass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. *NO insulting or personal attacks on other members* - if some one insults you, do not retaliate but report the offending post using the 'report this post' button link located in each post's top right corner! Respect each others' opinions - you don't have to agree with them but please respect them.
Rudeness, flaming, trolling, or any messages (via the forum, e-mail, or PM) that constitute a personal attack will not be tolerated. You'll only get one warning. _*Any member who is intentionally unpleasant or disruptive may be banned without warning.*_
If you can't debate a topic without resorting to insults, get the hell off this site. Got a problem with this post, talk to Steering.


----------



## Carol (Dec 9, 2008)

Awww, but I wanna kick the dead horse, too!  

Personally I like the idea of doing ground and standup work.  I like the idea of cross-training.  But I'm also very committed to the idea of enjoying your training (even during times its not fun....LOL).  I don't think cross-training should be "mandated", for lack of a better word.  Some folks don't like stand-up arts, others don't like ground.  Me, I like 'em both, but I absolutely _loathe _working out in class with someone doesn't want to be there! 

Was it Jake of "Body by Jake" that said "Get fit, and don't quit?"   Personally I think the most important thing a MAist can do is _not quit.   _We train today to defend ourselves tonight, if we have to...but if we want to be able to defend ourselves 10 or 20 years later, we need to be training for the next 10 or 20 years. The theories, the training, the cross-training...their fullest potential can only be realized if the student doesn't quit. 

Soo...(how's that dead horse looking?)   Which is best?  TKD?  BJJ?  Both?  IMO, The one that will result in the most interest and longevity to the student is the one that's best.  :asian:


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 9, 2008)

Aye, that's the wisdom that sticks, Carol :rei:.  

I've said it before in other threads which touched on the "Which art is best?" question - it's the art in which a student continues training.  Everything else is moot.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 9, 2008)

Sukerkin said:


> Aye, that's the wisdom that sticks, Carol :rei:.
> 
> I've said it before in other threads which touched on the "Which art is best?" question - it's the art in which a student continues training.  Everything else is moot.


Very true, I suppose there will always be "haters" of BJJ.  Its just something we deal with.  Those of us that have been around it for years before BJJ was the cool thing to do realize what it takes to be successful in our art.  No art is better than another.  The only real thing that matters is if you like it or not.  Nuff said..Im done now...:soapboxStepping down)


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 9, 2008)

well yeah, except for NINJA, that stuff rocks!!!!


----------



## jarrod (Dec 9, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> Very true, I suppose there will always be "haters" of BJJ. Its just something we deal with. Those of us that have been around it for years before BJJ was the cool thing to do realize what it takes to be successful in our art. No art is better than another. The only real thing that matters is if you like it or not. Nuff said..Im done now...:soapboxStepping down)


 
sometimes the martial arts is kind of like a family arguement.  i can say whatever i want about my brother, but nobody outside of the family had better say anything!

i'm not a bjj practioner, & i have my criticisms of it.  but it's still jujitsu, & it's still grappling, & i hate to see it derided by those who aren't grapplers.

jf


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2008)

The funny thing is that over here it's a BJJ v MMA thng, it's always Gi or no-Gi with the argument going that when attacked in the street neither you nor your attacker will be wearing Gis so why train SD with a Gi on! We don't tend have have quite so many arguments about TMA v MMA.


----------



## jarrod (Dec 10, 2008)

interesting.  i think there's a degree of that here, too, at least in terms of gi vs no gi.  in terms of bjj vs mma being better for defense or streetfighting, i think most americans in those communities think bjj is good, mma is better.  

i have several mma-focused guys who train with me at my grappling club, & most of them have really needed a good-hard convincing about the value of judo for mma.  i praise judo up & down to these guys.  but you should hear some of the stuff i say about judo when it's just me & my judo coach.  just like family.

jf


----------



## myusername (Dec 10, 2008)

I think it is time to roll out my completely crap satire again! Now with improved punchline courteosy of TheLetch1......



myusername said:


> *A satire*​
> *No-shizu practitioner:* _I think that Lactalose is better than Senokot for constipation!_
> 
> *Carapa-poo practitioner:* _No way dude the only true answer to constipation is Senna!_
> ...


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 10, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> So, let's discuss for the 100,000,000,000,000 time why BJJ is more effective than TKD, or how TKD is more effective than BJJ...


Sure..

BJJ rocks because 99,87% of all fights go to the grouund and TKD is the best because the leg is the strongest weapon and enables you to keep your opponent at a distance.

BJJ sucks because going to the ground with multiple knife wielding attackers is suicide and TKD is crap because high kicks and no guard only work against other TKDists.

Off to wash rotting horse flesh off my boots..


----------



## Sylo (Dec 10, 2008)

> Originally Posted by *BrandonLucas*
> 
> 
> _So, let's discuss for the 100,000,000,000,000 time why BJJ is more effective than TKD, or how TKD is more effective than BJJ..._


 
TKD is only good if you have at least a 9th degree black belt.

In BJJ even a beginner can win.

(sarcasm off)


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 10, 2008)

I seriously didn't intend on anyone getting *this* involved with this thread.  I left from work yesterday and came back today, and this thing has grown 5 pages...

Really, it doesn't matter whether TKD is better than BJJ or if BJJ is better than TKD, or really if it's only as good as the practitioner.  What does matter is that if you were to combine the 2 arts...to cross train in both...you would be a pretty well-rounded martial artist.

The argument can be said that BJJ isn't good for SD...the same argument can be said for TKD.  I really don't think anyone can make those claims unless they've actually taken both of the arts and know from first-hand experience.

I have no BJJ experience, so I can't comment on its effectiveness in SD situations...and I really think that anyone else who has no experience in the art should clam up about it as well.  And the same goes for TKD.

I really started this thread to stop derailing the other one where this discussion seemed to be forming...but I didn't seriously think people would get this far into it.  

You can't go back and forth with someone on the internet and say "Well, if you were to try to take me down, I would sprawl and then knee you in the face.." and then the other person would say "Wel, if you tried to knee me in the face, then I would block the knee and take a single-leg takedown..."

It just starts to get stupid after a while.  Before long, both people have fought for 17 pages and have reached a stale-mate because every single move has been reversed.  As it was stated before, pointless.

Twinfist, I understand that you don't see the point of BJJ as an SD art...but I think it's more because you either haven't spent any time in the art or haven't fought anyone with experience in the art, or both.  And really, the exact same reasoning that you're using for BJJ not being SD can be used for TKD.  I think before you can really pass judgement on the art's effectiveness, you should give it a shot and find out what it's all about.  Much like people who pass by a TKD dojang and think that we're all just "playing karate"...they won't know unless they get in there and find out what it's all about.

And even the argument about the history is blown way, way out of proportion.  What difference does it make what BJJ's history is in regards to its effectiveness in SD situations?  I don't really care who came up with it or when they decided to come up with it, or where it was derived from or any of that.  If it works, it works.

I don't see the point in all this arguing over the effectiveness anyway...if we were all ninjas, we wouldn't even need to discuss it.  In fact, I don't think ninjas discuss anything...


----------



## terryl965 (Dec 10, 2008)

All I can say is can we let this dead horse alone, my god it is dead!! Remember dead things need to rest too!!!


----------



## Sylo (Dec 10, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I seriously didn't intend on anyone getting *this* involved with this thread. I left from work yesterday and came back today, and this thing has grown 5 pages...
> 
> Really, it doesn't matter whether TKD is better than BJJ or if BJJ is better than TKD, or really if it's only as good as the practitioner. What does matter is that if you were to combine the 2 arts...to cross train in both...you would be a pretty well-rounded martial artist.
> 
> ...


 

I think we should derail this thread and turn it into a Frank Dux discussion. Thats totally not a dead horse.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 10, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I seriously didn't intend on anyone getting *this* involved with this thread. I left from work yesterday and came back today, and this thing has grown 5 pages...
> 
> Really, it doesn't matter whether TKD is better than BJJ or if BJJ is better than TKD, or really if it's only as good as the practitioner. What does matter is that if you were to combine the 2 arts...to cross train in both...you would be a pretty well-rounded martial artist.
> 
> ...


 
Ninjas only talk about the one thing that is more deadly than they are....Chuck Norris!


----------



## terryl965 (Dec 10, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> Ninjas only talk about the one thing that is more deadly than they are....Chuck Norris!


 
You have brought the curse of Chuck upon us all, duck and cover boys.


----------



## Sylo (Dec 10, 2008)

terryl965 said:


> You have brought the curse of Chuck upon us all, duck and cover boys.


 

Chuck Norris actually won the kumite using the name "Frank Dux" as an alias. Noone else on earth could be that awesome.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 10, 2008)

terryl965 said:


> You have brought the curse of Chuck upon us all, *duck and cover boys*.


 
Funny story about that saying...and this is a true story...

We all know that Chuck was in the military...we're not sure which branch, but my money says all of them...

Anyway, Chuck actually coined this term when he would haze the new privates as they would come in for boot camp.

He would actually have a live duck, wrapped in a blanket, and would mercilessly beat the men with the "weapon" if they looked him in the eye.  All anyone could do was to curl up in fetal position under their bunks and hope against hope that Chuck couldn't reach them with the duck.

Thus, the term duck and cover was created, with 2 actual meanings.

Just thought I would share that tidbit of knowledge.


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 10, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> Funny story about that saying...and this is a true story...
> 
> We all know that Chuck was in the military...we're not sure which branch, but my money says all of them...
> 
> ...


 Creative none the less.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 10, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> Funny story about that saying...and this is a true story...
> 
> We all know that Chuck was in the military...we're not sure which branch, but my money says all of them...
> 
> ...


 
From now on you are never to mix Niquil with Petron shots after you get home from work or before you go on the computer.  My Chuck have mercy on your soul.


----------



## crushing (Dec 10, 2008)

miguksaram said:


> From now on you are never to mix Niquil with Petron shots after you get home from work or before you go on the computer. *My Chuck have mercy on your soul.*


 
Your Chuck?  Ownership?  My goodness, good luck with that slip up, it's been nice knowin' ya and R.I.P.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 10, 2008)

crushing said:


> Your Chuck? Ownership? My goodness, good luck with that slip up, it's been nice knowin' ya and R.I.P.


BAH!!!  Darn 'A' finger not working...should have said MAY Chuck....


----------



## SA_BJJ (Dec 10, 2008)

crushing said:


> your chuck? Ownership? My goodness, good luck with that slip up, it's been nice knowin' ya and r.i.p.


 bwahhhhhhhh!


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 10, 2008)

not quite

as to the history, it is very simple. I do not like it when someone spouts errant nonsense, that I KNOW to be false as facts.  

Those of us that TEACH have an obligation to reject ALL that is false.

And much like police, if you are a teacher, you are always a teacher. And so you must ALWAYS reject that which is false.

like :
"JJ dominated judo when they met in open competition" 

it is a historical FACT that it didnt happen that way. And even if the person making the erroneous statement may not care what the truth is, someone else reading the forum might see the crapola, believe it, and pass it on as a fact. As a teacher, i cannot alow that to happen if i can correct it.

The FACT is that BJJ is a SPORT art, that came from another SPORT art, JUDO. it was developed for use in sport matches, with rules. Not FIGHTS that dont have rules

BJJ may well have some self defense application, thats fine (i dont THINK so, or rather I will say that whatever SD value it has is accidental, not intentional. but thats my opinion, and I will only claim that it is an OPINION, not a fact) so does fencing. So does Judo for that matter. And Olympic style TKD

But all are sports, in every sense of the word. 

Now TKD is different, because there are just as many, if not MORE schools that teach TKD as the brutal self defense art it was originally.

TKD started as a SD system, that some people turned into a sport
BJJ started as a sport, and it may have some accidental SD value, but that isnt it's reason for being.

Thats the difference, not "better", just *different*.

Those of us that TEACH have an obligation to reject ALL that is false.

I am a teacher. When I see something that i KNOW is false, i will correct it. To not do so would be a betrayal of my oath as a TEACHER




BrandonLucas said:


> Twinfist, I understand that you don't see the point of BJJ as an SD art...but I think it's more because you either haven't spent any time in the art or haven't fought anyone with experience in the art, or both. And really, the exact same reasoning that you're using for BJJ not being SD can be used for TKD. I think before you can really pass judgement on the art's effectiveness, you should give it a shot and find out what it's all about. Much like people who pass by a TKD dojang and think that we're all just "playing karate"...they won't know unless they get in there and find out what it's all about.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> not quite
> 
> as to the history, it is very simple. I do not like it when someone spouts errant nonsense, that I KNOW to be false as facts.
> 
> ...


 
Please provide proof where Judo and BJJ were originated as sport arts.

I accept that as your opinion, and I'm not arguing what you think...I can't control what you think, and I'm not arguing that I'm right and you're wrong.

But, if you are saying that BJJ and Judo are purely sport arts, created for the sole purpose of sport with only accidental SD qualities, then please provide factual proof of what you're saying.

I know that TKD wasn't created for sport...it was originally created for SD, pure and simple...but along the way, it has been adapted into a sport by some, which I suspect is the case here, but I don't have the facts to back that up.

I can respect what you're saying about being a teacher, and you may very well be right about both of them being created for sport...I truly don't know...so, if what you're saying is correct, please provide facts to back it up.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 11, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> Please provide proof where Judo and BJJ were originated as sport arts.



Brandon, I do a bit of judo myself, and I have all the respect in the world for it, but I don't think there's much doubt that judo was designed to be what we would call a sport today.  Kano and his close students instilled competition rules and an element of character improvement to its practice.  He deliberately took out some of the more brutal techniques found in jujutsu as well as most atemi.  

Not sure why you want to argue this point with Twinfist.  I do believe he's a bit extreme in his belief about the application of BJJ to self-defense, but he's right enough about the origins of judo. 

For the record, I think both judo and BJJ could be used effectively in the street for self-defense.  It's all about being aware of your surroundings and adaptation, and this would be true if you practiced a _koryo_ martial art also.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 11, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> I do believe he's a bit extreme in his belief about the application of BJJ to self-defense, but he's right enough about the origins of judo.
> 
> For the record, I think both judo and BJJ could be used effectively in the street for self-defense. It's all about being aware of your surroundings and adaptation, and this would be true if you practiced a _koryo_ martial art also.


 
One thing to keep in mind is that the implementation of "rules" in Judo came after Kano decided that he wanted to spread the art. His first intention was to add ratori and utilize resisting opponents which he felt JJ lacked.  

The problem I have with TF's view point is the irony of it.  He claims that TKD in its "purest" form came from a deadly combative art, but in fact by the time Shotokan was presented to the TKD pioneers it too had been watered down in order to teach it in the educational system of Japan.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> Brandon, I do a bit of judo myself, and I have all the respect in the world for it, but I don't think there's much doubt that judo was designed to be what we would call a sport today. Kano and his close students instilled competition rules and an element of character improvement to its practice. He deliberately took out some of the more brutal techniques found in jujutsu as well as most atemi.
> 
> Not sure why you want to argue this point with Twinfist. I do believe he's a bit extreme in his belief about the application of BJJ to self-defense, but he's right enough about the origins of judo.
> 
> For the record, I think both judo and BJJ could be used effectively in the street for self-defense. It's all about being aware of your surroundings and adaptation, and this would be true if you practiced a _koryo_ martial art also.


 
I don't practice Judo myself, and am unfamilier with its origins.  As I previously stated, I'm not really trying to argue this point at all...I'm just asking for facts....which you have provided, and I appreciate that.

I guess maybe the question I should be asking is exactly how is BJJ not reasonable for SD?  I don't care if everyone and their grandmother that has competed in the UFC uses it, and since UFC is a sport now, what they do isn't necessarily SD...I want to know why BJJ isn't good to use in an SD situation.  And really, I don't think someone who has no training in the art can answer that question.

If someone who has trained in BJJ comes to this thread and says, "Yes, I know that BJJ doesn't have reasonable SD qualities, and I only train in it for fitness and sport," then I'll be more apt to believe that.  Either that, or someone who has had to deal with a BJJ practitioner in an SD situation, whether simulated or real.

It's the same way that I can say that sport TKD doesn't help anyone in SD situations...I've "scrapped" (friendly fighting, not life threatening) with 2 or 3 sport TKD guys...and when they were forced to keep their hands up, their entire arsenal went away.  As a matter of fact, at least one of those "matches" with them went to the ground...I was able to control what happend as I have some experience in highschool wrestling.

But I can also tell you that I've "scrapped" with a BJJ guy before...and while he didn't completely dominate me, he knew how to control the fight by taking it to the ground.  I sprawled and did the standard take down defense, but the guy knew what he was doing, and was faster than me, so he was able to take me down...but the thing is, once we got to the ground, we didn't just stay there like you see in the UFC....he quickly tried for a sidechoke and then an armbar...I got out of both fairly quickly, and the fight went back up to our feet.

It was pretty much a progression of taking me down, trying subs, and when he couldn't apply any subs, he just settled on wearing me out....and sure, you can sit there and argue all day long that if I had buddies, then he would have been "in trouble"...but I didn't have buddies with me, and I'm quite sure if I had, he would have handled the fight differently.

All I'm saying is don't count something out until you've experienced it.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

Not quite

If you do the research, you will find that Funikoshi himself HATED the sport direction that his Shotokan was moving toward in the university system.

Choi didnt learn Shotokan from the University system however.

Plus, when TKD was founded, the techniques included were the ones most suited for self defense. 

The system Rhee brought to the united states in 1958-1959 was self defense start to finish.






miguksaram said:


> The problem I have with TF's view point is the irony of it.  He claims that TKD in its "purest" form came from a deadly combative art, but in fact by the time Shotokan was presented to the TKD pioneers it too had been watered down in order to teach it in the educational system of Japan.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 11, 2008)

miguksaram said:


> The problem I have with TF's view point is the irony of it.  He claims that TKD in its "purest" form came from a deadly combative art, but in fact by the time Shotokan was presented to the TKD pioneers it too had been watered down in order to teach it in the educational system of Japan.



Well, there's the rub.  What makes one art supposedly more effective for self-defense than another?  What's the difference between shotokan karate and its parent shorin-ryu karate?  Most karate snobs in my circle would rate shorin-ryu as the 'better' art, but why so?

I truly doubt the Korean soldiers that fought in Vietnam practiced any of the esoterical bunkai found in shuri kata.  Nor do I think they generated power in their strikes with spinal wave motion or percussive penatration, two of the key concepts within shorin-ryu.  Nope, they likely used pure acceleration, hip twist, and shoulder turn.  "Primitive" technique by comparison.

But they probably trained hard and could manifest 'intensity' and focus at a moment's notice.  Think of breaking 3-4 boards with a single chop or punch or kick.  Most of us here likely can do it too, but imagine that ferocity honed to a razor so a soldier can go from 0-90 mph in a second without thought or preparation.  Now add that to a working knowledge of the body's weakpoints to target with your chop or punch.  Scary stuff.

The truth is that even a punchy, kicky level of martial arts (something I would characterize sports karate or TKD as) can be very effective in the street if you have learned timing and you have explosive force in your strikes.  Do you really need to have learned the arm lock and break in say _kata seiunchin_ if you can simply put your fist through the back of someone's skull?

The same idea carries forth with judo (I don't know enough about BJJ to offer an educated comment).  The throws in judo are generally taught in a safe fashion; you execute them so that your partner can breakfall successfully and disperse the shock even across his body.  But a sufficiently skilled and _aware_ judoka can transform something as innocent as a fireman's carry throw into a brain-busting move which would likely lead to death on a surface like concrete.

Judo and BJJ are sport arts since they meet the popular definition of a sport.  Now you can choose to only play them at the fun and games level or with some modification and change in mindset you can make them into a set of skills that are decidedly more deadly.


----------



## Sylo (Dec 11, 2008)

if you want to get extremely technical..

in some facets.. some would say that firearms can be considered a sport..

and they seem to be pretty deadly when used on the street.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 11, 2008)

> It was pretty much a progression of taking me down, trying subs, and when he couldn't apply any subs, he just settled on wearing me out....and sure, you can sit there and argue all day long that if I had buddies, then he would have been "in trouble"...but I didn't have buddies with me, and I'm quite sure if I had, he would have handled the fight differently.



You must have pretty good natural instincts if you managed to avoid an armbar from a trained ground fighter.  Or have you've done a bit of rolling yourself?

One of the best qualities about BJJ is that you have to be in great cardio shape to last in a BJJ class.  Some strength is handy and probably even required too.  Good physical fitness itself is a form of self-defense against disease, and in a fight being fit helps or you could even run away.  Too often, schools teaching striking based arts don't focus enough on fitness.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> You must have pretty good natural instincts if you managed to avoid an armbar from a trained ground fighter. Or have you've done a bit of rolling yourself?
> 
> One of the best qualities about BJJ is that you have to be in great cardio shape to last in a BJJ class. Some strength is handy and probably even required too. Good physical fitness itself is a form of self-defense against disease, and in a fight being fit helps or you could even run away. Too often, schools teaching striking based arts don't focus enough on fitness.


 
Actually, I think the only reason I was able to avoid the subs was that I was stronger than the other guy...I know enough not to let my arms or legs get caught out in the open...

But the problem I was having, like you're saying, is the cardio factor.  I was really tired from being put down and having to get right back up again to try to attack or defend.  While he may not have been able to "wrap me up", he was more used to the physicallity of the up and down aspect than I was, and was more able to keep his stamina than I was.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

WHY do i have the opinions I do about SD applications of grappling arts?

ok, from the top:
*TWIN FIST'S RULES FOR EFFECTIVE SELF DEFENSE* (tm) lol​
1-avoid what you can avoid
2-when you cant avoid, take action with no hesitation
3-stay on your feet when you can, if you cant, do ANYTHING to get them to let go, and get back on your feet
4-dont stop till they drop
5-ALWAYS assume they have a friend behind you

now, those rules are broad and loose for a reason, real life has no rules, and adaptation is essential.

anything that violates these rules is outside the realm of "effective self defense"

now, i dont teach many joint locks. Why? Because i dont feel you can rely on them. joint locks work because of pain compliance. However, different people can handle different levels of pain. Therefore, relying on pain compliance is dangerous. So instead i focus on destruction. 

I dont rely on chokes either. Why? they take both hands, they take too long, and while I am trying to choke them they are free to beat me about the head and shoulders. So instead i focus on destruction.

I dont go to the ground. Why? Multiple bad guys. Concrete equals road rash, broken bones and head stomps. Instead I focus on destruction.

joint locks bad
chokes bad
ground bad

ok, now what are the main elements of BJJ? thats right: joint locks, chokes, and ground work.

so, the vast majority of the BJJ techniques fall outside the realm of what I consider effective self defense.

same with judo

Now that being said, elements from grappling styles can be used effectivly.

Wanna slam someone to the ground? judo throws work really well for that.  Just modify them so you dont go down too

Find yourself on ground? BJJ can help you escape to get back up.

So can jamming your finger in thier eye socket.

I havnt tried cocain, but do i have to to know it isnt for me? no not really. I just have to do the research to know it isnt a good idea.





BrandonLucas said:


> I guess maybe the question I should be asking is exactly how is BJJ not reasonable for SD?


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist, I can see where you are coming from.  You sound like an old school TKD guy and I greatly respect that.  I would only offer the comment that locks don't have to used as a pain-compliant or arresting mode technique.  They're versatile, so sure you can use them that way against your overly frisky uncle at the family reunion, but they can also be a pure disabling move.  Kind of hard for someone to attack you further if you have broken their wrist or elbow, no?


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

actually, i am a half TKD half Kenpo guy....

that said, i do teach joint/bone destruction.

bone breaks, joint hyper-extension, dislocation, etc

So yeah, i agree with you, I just dont RELY on those techniques.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> WHY do i have the opinions I do about SD applications of grappling arts?
> 
> ok, from the top:
> *TWIN FIST'S RULES FOR EFFECTIVE SELF DEFENSE* (tm) lol​
> ...


 
Ok...I can agree with what you're saying.  But the key is that BJJ isn't going to work for *you* for SD applications.  These are things that *you* abide by, and, for all intents and puroses, the list is a pretty good one.

And there are points that I think can be agreed on in the list.  I agree that the list has to be loose to make room for unexpected variables.

I just think that one of the unexpected variables that's worth taking a look at is what happens when you just *can't* get back to your feet?  

I can understand your argument that *you *don't think BJJ is effective for SD for *you*.  But people fight differently.  The BJJ guy I "scrapped" with didn't want to stay on the ground...he used the mentality of me trying to get back to my feet against me.  It tired me out having to avoid takedowns and trying to deliver devestating attacks.  BJJ worked for SD for the guy I scrapped...I wouldn't say either one of us technically "won" the match...we both finally just gave up.

I don't think it would be a waste of anyone's time to take BJJ as a SD art...as long as they have researched it, much like what you're talking about...and have decided that it's for them.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

fair enough

and thanks. I like to think I make sense sometimes at least.............LOL


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> actually, i am a half TKD half Kenpo guy....
> 
> that said, i do teach joint/bone destruction.
> 
> ...


 
And to kind of reinforce some things....

There was a great example of a TKD guy getting subbed by an armbar last night on UFC...granted, the TKD guy was not impressive in the least...but his arm was broken in an armbar...a standard armbar, that is taught in BJJ.

If I can find a link of the fight, I'll post it so you can see what I'm talking about, but it really brings out what I'm talking about...it basically looked like a real fight...I didn't see where the rules would have limited either fighter...

If anyone else is able to find the link, please post it.  I can't remember their names...


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> fair enough
> 
> and thanks. I like to think I make sense sometimes at least.............LOL


 
You do make sense...I can be slow at times...lol


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> Not quite
> 
> If you do the research, you will find that Funikoshi himself HATED the sport direction that his Shotokan was moving toward in the university system.
> 
> ...


 
No..no..I'm not talking about the sport route it took. When it was introduced into the Japanese education system, it became "watered" down long before it went the way of the competition.  

Where does Choi claim to learn it from? (Please don't tell me the japanese prison during a stint there as a POW)

I'm not saying what was brought by Rhee or any other pioneer for that matter was not SD, just probably not as deadly as you are making it out to be compared to the Shuri-te that Funakoshi originally learned.


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 11, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> Well, there's the rub. What makes one art supposedly more effective for self-defense than another? What's the difference between shotokan karate and its parent shorin-ryu karate? Most karate snobs in my circle would rate shorin-ryu as the 'better' art, but why so?
> 
> I truly doubt the Korean soldiers that fought in Vietnam practiced any of the esoterical bunkai found in shuri kata. Nor do I think they generated power in their strikes with spinal wave motion or percussive penatration, two of the key concepts within shorin-ryu. Nope, they likely used pure acceleration, hip twist, and shoulder turn. "Primitive" technique by comparison.
> 
> ...


 
I agree whole heartedly with this.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

compared to the original Shuri-te?

oh absolutely yes it had been watered down

but it was still a combat art, not a sport.


----------



## Sukerkin (Dec 11, 2008)

I think you chaps have reached the effective core of this with your posts #87 and #88 :tup:.  

For the 'record', my attitude as to what comprises SD techniques that work for me is almost identical to *TF*'s but I do see quite clearly that everyone has their own way of fighting that they feel 'comfortable' with and to not train up in that fashion would be less optimal for them.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 11, 2008)

Nothing against BJJ, TKD or MMA or any other style but I keep reading the same things in multiple posts on the same subject

Things like "guarantee you&#8217;re going to the ground" or "95%  of all fights go to the ground" (that has been used elsewhere many times on MT and other sites). And sometimes as low as 90% sometimes as high as 98%

Could someone please point me in the direction of a study that supports such claims?


----------



## miguksaram (Dec 11, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> compared to the original Shuri-te?
> 
> oh absolutely yes it had been watered down
> 
> but it was still a combat art, not a sport.


 
Right...eventually it stated to go the way of competition and watered down more.  Just like judo did.  Kano did start with hey let's make a game out of this.  He saw flaws in what he was studying and remade it.  Eventually he went the way of sport which watered it down.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Could someone please point me in the direction of a study that supports such claims?



there wasnt one.

that started because the gracies used that claim to hype thier art back when they were just starting to get well known.

it's an outright lie, and most people know that now.

Actually, Loren Christiansen, a MA teacher and police officer put the number closer to 25% or lower based on his experiences as a cop.


----------



## dancingalone (Dec 11, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Nothing against BJJ, TKD or MMA or any other style but I keep reading the same things in multiple posts on the same subject
> 
> Things like "guarantee youre going to the ground" or "95%  of all fights go to the ground" (that has been used elsewhere many times on MT and other sites). And sometimes as low as 90% sometimes as high as 98%
> 
> Could someone please point me in the direction of a study that supports such claims?



I doubt there's any such scientific study.  Anecdotally, all the fights I have been in from grade school through high school were all fist fights.  The one altercation I have been involved in since I became an adult ended with a wristlock takedown and that's only because I had been training it and *I* *was the one doing it*.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

dancingalone said:


> I doubt there's any such scientific study. Anecdotally, all the fights I have been in from grade school through high school were all fist fights. The one altercation I have been involved in since I became an adult ended with a wristlock takedown and that's only because I had been training it and *I* *was the one doing it*.


 
Yeah, the whole "study" of fights going to the ground isn't proven...but I've seen from experience that they can and do go to the ground, whether it's on purpose or someone slips.

I think it hapens more often on accident when the fights end up on the ground...I don't actually think most real fights have actual takedowns...from the fights I've seen in person, either one or the other, or sometimes both, fighters trip moving backward or forward and end up scuffling on the ground.

To me, that's where I think BJJ would be useful.  If you end up in an encounter with someone larger than you that can keep you down if you happen to trip or get pulled down on accident, I think it would be useful to know how to handle yourself if the situation arises.

As far as percentages go, it's b.s.  I don't see anyway to get actual percentages from the number of fights that would be an accurate number...fights happen all the time that people don't "document".


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Dec 11, 2008)

Great googly moogly!!  I just read this entire thread and all I can say is shoot the horse again, because it sure aint dead.

Seriously:  I have read some seriously erroneous comments made on this thread, and by people that I would not have expected them from.  Things like, "a three year old can take anyone down" or joint locks and choke holds being bad.  And I'm not even going to address the multiple infractions of the "90% of all fights go to the ground" comment by multiple people (inaccurate at best).  I'm not picking on anyone here, so to whoever made those statements (I don't honestly remember, as this thread has over nintey posts), my apologies if it comes across as picking on you specifically.

Then there was name calling and insults.  

Why such animosity when takewondoists (Kukkiwon anyway) and Brazillan Jiu Jitsu practitioners both have an equal problem: say "WTF" or "BJJ" to a most people and strking art or grappling art is not what they will think you're driving at.

There's quite a bit that practitioners of both arts can learn from eachother, as there isn't really a whole lot of overlap between modern Taekwondo and Brazillian Jiujitsu.  And regarding taekwondo, there are very few traditional schools as compared to the number of modern and/or sport schools, so if your traditional TKD school (which I'd probably be in heaven training at) teaches SD oriented grappling, then guess what?  You're in the minority (sadly).

I seldom read a thread on this site that leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but this one is one of the few.  And meaning no disrespect to the OP.  Yes, some very insightful statements were made, particularly when the thread shifted to history, but in terms of talking about the content of both arts, this has been pretty much a 'mine is better than yours' thread from my perspective.

My apologies.  Rant ended.

Daniel


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 11, 2008)

Celtic Tiger said:


> Great googly moogly!! I just read this entire thread and all I can say is shoot the horse again, because it sure aint dead.
> 
> Seriously: I have read some seriously erroneous comments made on this thread, and by people that I would not have expected them from. Things like, "a three year old can take anyone down" or joint locks and choke holds being bad. And I'm not even going to address the multiple infractions of the "90% of all fights go to the ground" comment by multiple people (inaccurate at best). I'm not picking on anyone here, so to whoever made those statements (I don't honestly remember, as this thread has over nintey posts), my apologies if it comes across as picking on you specifically.
> 
> ...


 
No disrepect taken....

I started this thread because the topic was starting to derail another thread.  Honestly, I didn't think it would go as far as what it has.

I didn't intend on starting a "my art is better than your art" thing, and I still dont' think that's entirely what happened.  I do agree that things seemed to get a little out of hand, though.

I still stand by what I said in my OP...I think that if someone were to study both arts, they would compliment eachother nicely, regardless of the apparent SD quality of either.  I also think that the art someone studies depends on what they are comfortable studying...are they more comfortable striking or rolling?  Whichever a person is more comfortable with should be the primary art, and the other would be the crosstrained art...to fill in the gaps.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Dec 11, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I still stand by what I said in my OP...I think that if someone were to study both arts, they would compliment eachother nicely, regardless of the apparent SD quality of either. I also think that the art someone studies depends on what they are comfortable studying...are they more comfortable striking or rolling? Whichever a person is more comfortable with should be the primary art, and the other would be the crosstrained art...to fill in the gaps.


I would definitely agree with that.

Daniel


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 11, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I still stand by what I said in my OP...I think that if someone were to study both arts, they would compliment eachother nicely, regardless of the apparent SD quality of either. I also think that the art someone studies depends on what they are comfortable studying...are they more comfortable striking or rolling? Whichever a person is more comfortable with should be the primary art, and the other would be the crosstrained art...to fill in the gaps.


 
I would agree with that as well.

Heck I have thought for sometime now that Wing Chun and Judo would be a good blend.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 11, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I don't practice Judo myself, and am unfamilier with its origins. As I previously stated, I'm not really trying to argue this point at all...I'm just asking for facts....which you have provided, and I appreciate that.
> 
> I guess maybe the question I should be asking is exactly how is BJJ not reasonable for SD? I don't care if everyone and their grandmother that has competed in the *UFC uses it, and since UFC is a sport now*, what they do isn't necessarily SD...I want to know why BJJ isn't good to use in an SD situation. And really, I don't think someone who has no training in the art can answer that question.
> 
> ...


 

NO NO NO!! The UFC is a company like Microsoft, Ford and Burger King etc! It's a business not a sport, it has stockholders,owners, directors that sort of thing. *Mixed Martial Arts is the sport.*


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 11, 2008)

Oh, lighten up Francis............

KIDDING
LOL





Celtic Tiger said:


> Great googly moogly!!  I just read this entire thread and all I can say is shoot the horse again, because it sure aint dead.
> 
> Seriously:  I have read some seriously erroneous comments made on this thread, and by people that I would not have expected them from.  Things like, "a three year old can take anyone down" or joint locks and choke holds being bad.  And I'm not even going to address the multiple infractions of the "90% of all fights go to the ground" comment by multiple people (inaccurate at best).  I'm not picking on anyone here, so to whoever made those statements (I don't honestly remember, as this thread has over nintey posts), my apologies if it comes across as picking on you specifically.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 11, 2008)

Of course a three year old can take a man down!! I've seen it! the best child for this technique should be head height to the uke's lower torso , the child stands face to face with uke several feet away, child takes a good run at uke getting a fast turn of speed and clearly seeing no need to stop once his head connects to uke! damn good technique takes a man down everytime, uke's female companions need to be revived asap though as possibly one could collapse from raucous laughter! Oh and as an afterthought, an ice pack please for the uke.


----------



## Marginal (Dec 11, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Of course a three year old can take a man down!! I've seen it! the best child for this technique should be head height to the uke's lower torso , the child stands face to face with uke several feet away, child takes a good run at uke getting a fast turn of speed and clearly seeing no need to stop once his head connects to uke! damn good technique takes a man down everytime, uke's female companions need to be revived asap though as possibly one could collapse from raucous laughter! Oh and as an afterthought, an ice pack please for the uke.


Heck, I watched my 45lb dog throw my dad once. She liked to walk backwards and forwards 'cause it tended to make her leash pop off after a while. One time she backs right up into my dad's shin, then shoots forward, and my dad looked like he'd just been hit by a one arm shoulder throw. He went straight head over heels, and landed flat on his back.


----------



## bigfootsquatch (Dec 11, 2008)

SA_BJJ said:


> "Jigoro Kano was the founder of Judo, however, Judo is simply a style of Jiu-jitsu and not a separate martial art. Kano was not the first to use the name Judo, the Jiu-jitsu schools he studied at, which would be the source of much of his Judo's techniques had used the phrase before he made it famous in the late 1800's. "
> 
> 
> www.jiu-jitsu.net
> ...



This may have already been addressed, but Judo is not a style of jiu jitsu/jujutsu. It is a combination of the various schools of japanese jj. For instance, throwing techniques are from the Kito JJ, and grappling and striking from Tenshin Shin'yo. There are other schools of jujutsu that were also combined to form Judo. It should also be said that most traditional japanese JJ schools did not practice randori, but relied on kata. Kano not only combined his knowledge of the various jujutsu styles he studied, but he also revolutionized the training approach, and many japanese jujutsu schools had trouble keeping their students. 

So it is not really fair to say that judo is a style of jujutsu. It is more like an evolution of it(not saying it is better). My source is from Kodokan Judo by Jigoro Kano, so maybe that help clears up any confusion.


----------



## jarrod (Dec 12, 2008)

i don't think it's derogatory towards judo to refer to it as a style of jujitsu.  it was perceived as such in it's early days, with it being referred to both as kodokan jujitsu & kodokan judo.  it was inargueably very innovative, in either case, & i think that if it was a style of jujitsu in the past it can't be considered one now with the immense emphasis placed on the sporting aspect of it.

jf


----------



## Marginal (Dec 12, 2008)

jarrod said:


> i don't think it's derogatory towards judo to refer to it as a style of jujitsu.  it was perceived as such in it's early days, with it being referred to both as kodokan jujitsu & kodokan judo.  it was inargueably very innovative, in either case, & i think that if it was a style of jujitsu in the past it can't be considered one now with the immense emphasis placed on the sporting aspect of it.


It's worth saying that a MA with a sporting focus isn't necessarily bad. It all depends on the rule set, and how far that rule set varies from effective application. Boxing's a sport, but it's still effective as self defense for example. MT's very much a ring sport as well. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive. 

The whole reason anyone practicing BJJ would want to seperate themselves from Judo is because of the mindset early UFC's generated. "If it doesn't work in the octagon right away, it sucks!" Since Judo didn't fare all that well in early MMA, it clearly was yet another horrible TMA from which nothing good has ever come. (Small wonder not everyone thinks highly of the core art responsible for generating that particular loudmouth mindset.) Not sure why tying it to JJ somehow makes it better. Kata practice = "That art is dirt horrible!!!" in the same circles.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 12, 2008)

May the best man person win. I have seen a lot of turnovers in my day, and the end result is, that the better person wins every time. It is not how much you know, but how much you can take. Heck, Ive seen new students come into MA that were down right dangerous, every art has them.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Dec 12, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> Oh, lighten up Francis............
> 
> KIDDING
> LOL


Nobody calls me that!  Everybody calls me psycho! 

Dan


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 12, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> NO NO NO!! The UFC is a company like Microsoft, Ford and Burger King etc! It's a business not a sport, it has stockholders,owners, directors that sort of thing. *Mixed Martial Arts is the sport.*


 
I understand that UFC is a business, but they are, in my opinion, the company responsible for making Mixed Martial Arts a sport...and, also in my opinion, I don't consider Mixed Martial Arts a sport in its entirety...

I was trying to convey this message in a thread in the general martial arts forum, but I don't think I was saying things clearly...

The UFC is the one who put the rules on the fighters, who just happened to train in multiple martial arts at the time.  The fighters started training in multiple martial arts as it was a necessity to beat other fighters with a more complete fighting style, i.e. a mixture of striking and grappling.

After the UFC (as well as other orgs...just using UFC as it is the most popular) started creating rules the fighters had to abide by, the style of training changed to accomodate the rules, thus MMA training became sport-oriented.

Whether or not the ground was cushioned or not in the cage, the fact still remained that grappling continued to give strikers from all MA's a hard time.  And the strikers from the early UFC's were far more SD oriented than the strikers are in today's UFC.

That's why I am referring to UFC as a sport...because, to me, mixing martial arts, or crosstraining martial arts, shouldn't be considered only in the interest of sport...it's a great idea for SD as well.  UFC "sported up" the mixing of martial arts, making the training shift in regards to what strikes were and were not allowed.  So now, you may have the new MMA guys that train for UFC that are not getting the SD training, as in they aren't practicing small joint locks and puches to the back of the head and spine area.  

And really, it's not entirely the UFC's fault...they were forced to change the rules because of the seperate states' boxing comission's rules...if the UFC was going to continue, it had to adapt...which wasn't a bad thing at all, IMO.

That's why I am referring to UFC the way that I am..and I mean no disrepect by this at all...but the act of mixing martial arts is not a sport...not until they step into that Octagon or ring or whatever and are made to fight by a certain ruleset.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> I understand that UFC is a business, but they are, in my opinion, the company responsible for making Mixed Martial Arts a sport...and, also in my opinion, I don't consider Mixed Martial Arts a sport in its entirety...
> 
> I was trying to convey this message in a thread in the general martial arts forum, but I don't think I was saying things clearly...
> 
> ...


 
This refers to America, in the UK and Europe the UFC didn't bring it here other promotions did. We've been more influenced by Pride and the other Japanese shows than the Americans. The UFC is only now starting to take off here with Mike Bisping, up until then Cage Rage, Cagewarriors and Ultimate Combat were more important. Cage Rage still pulls in crowds larger than the UK UFC.
The UFC hasn't set the rules here, we do. We are also probably more grounded in TMAs than the States too. We haven't evolved from the UFC model which is why perhaps we haven't developed the same way.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 12, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> This refers to America, in the UK and Europe the UFC didn't bring it here other promotions did. We've been more influenced by Pride and the other Japanese shows than the Americans. The UFC is only now starting to take off here with Mike Bisping, up until then Cage Rage, Cagewarriors and Ultimate Combat were more important. Cage Rage still pulls in crowds larger than the UK UFC.
> The UFC hasn't set the rules here, we do. We are also probably more grounded in TMAs than the States too. We haven't evolved from the UFC model which is why perhaps we haven't developed the same way.


 
That would make sense, especially with what you're saying about the TMA's...you're closer to the east where most of the TMA's were created than we are...so we get a slightly filtered version of things....

Also, our way of living here is different than it is over there, which probably contributes to a great many differences that we're seeing.  I don't think that there was anything around from other countries at the time when UFC first came out in the 90's with UFC 1, though...that's why I attribute the changes mostly to the UFC and not so much other fighting orgs of the same type.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 12, 2008)

BrandonLucas said:


> IThe UFC is the one who put the rules on the fighters, who just happened to train in multiple martial arts at the time. The fighters started training in multiple martial arts as it was a necessity to beat other fighters with a more complete fighting style, i.e. a mixture of striking and grappling.
> 
> After the UFC (as well as other orgs...just using UFC as it is the most popular) started creating rules the fighters had to abide by, the style of training changed to accomodate the rules, thus MMA training became sport-oriented.


 
Interesting, and I had not thought of this before in association with MMA but Sanda (Sanshou) has 2 distinct branches that do look pretty different in training and application. The first was Military/Police Sanda that later became sport Sanda. Would Pre UFC be all that different than post UFC MMA? 



Tez3 said:


> This refers to America, in the UK and Europe the UFC didn't bring it here other promotions did. We've been more influenced by Pride and the other Japanese shows than the Americans. The UFC is only now starting to take off here with Mike Bisping, up until then Cage Rage, Cagewarriors and Ultimate Combat were more important. Cage Rage still pulls in crowds larger than the UK UFC.
> The UFC hasn't set the rules here, we do. We are also probably more grounded in TMAs than the States too. We haven't evolved from the UFC model which is why perhaps we haven't developed the same way.


 
Similar question, did MMA change as the ruling organizations appeared in England?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Interesting, and I had not thought of this before in association with MMA but Sanda (Sanshou) has 2 distinct branches that do look pretty different in training and application. The first was Military/Police Sanda that later became sport Sanda. Would Pre UFC be all that different than post UFC MMA?
> 
> 
> 
> *Similar question, did MMA change as the ruling organizations appeared in England*?


 

:lfao:


What ruling organisations? We have absolutely none at all!!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

There's not that many of us, fighters or promotions so we generally agree on what rules we want to use, it does vary between promotions though. Fighters will decide which shows they want to fight on. we have a couple of outstanding referees and they tend to lead the way on which rules work and which don't, fighter safety is the first consideration, 'entertainment' value second. It's more done by consensus, if the fighters and coaches don't like the rules they won't fight on the show. 
We are all agreed on a few things though like no children fighting ( and then they are junior bouts when they do start at approx 16 though we've had 14 and 15 yr olds), the three main rule sets, amateur, semi pro and pro.


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 12, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Interesting, and I had not thought of this before in association with MMA but Sanda (Sanshou) has 2 distinct branches that do look pretty different in training and application. The first was Military/Police Sanda that later became sport Sanda. *Would Pre **UFC be all that different than post UFC MMA? *
> 
> 
> 
> Similar question, did MMA change as the ruling organizations appeared in England?


 
From watching the first few UFC's and similar fighting competitions of their kind, I would say yes.

Fighters today are far more well-rounded than they were 10 - 15 years ago, but on the other side of the coin, they have far more rules and limitations in place in the tournements now than they did before.

In fact, I can list all the rules from the first UFC's off the top of my head:

1.  No eye gouging
2.  No fish hooking
3.  No small joint locks
4.  No groin shots
5.  No biting
6.  No weapons

That was it, if I'm not mistaken.  I couldn't quote 1/4 of the rules that are in place now.

If you take that into consideration, it would make sense that if your goal was to compete and do well in the UFC or similar orgs, then you would want to train within the ruleset.

Not only that, but the in the first UFC's, the tournement was single-elimination style.  Fighters had to fight multiple times, and there were no weight classes to speak of.  It was really the closest thing to real fighting as one could get without really fighting.

It's kind of a paradoxical situation...the fighters from the first UFC's (I'm using this term as a generic org) were mostly trained in one core art.  They entered into a tournement with virtually no rules (I wouldn't count what I listed above as "rules" of any kind, really).  We didn't really see any of these fighters use training from multiple martial arts to their advantage, but they didn't have anything limiting their use of most techniques from any art.

The fighters now are very well versed in multiple martial arts, and train specifically for the fights, but have many limitations placed on them.

And really, the training is the biggest factor...as I was typing, I realized what the key is here between the 2 generations of fighters...the fighters from the first UFC's didn't train specifically for their slotted fight, forsaking all other aspects of their personal lives to train...it wasn't their *job*.  The fighters now are mostly fighting as their sole means of income, or training to fight for that reason, so they have the opportunity to dedicate far more of their time for training.  As far as the fighters who haven't achieved a large enough bank to only train all day every day, the UFC has provided a goal for them to train harder for than the previous UFC's did...the first UFC's were just tournements with 1 cash prize at the end for 1 winner....the UFC now (as well as the other orgs out there) treat it more like boxing, where each fighter earns a purse, win or lose.

I think that coupled with the ruleset could be the difference.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

This is our promotion's full professional rules.

*Fouls*:
Butting with the head
Eye gouging of any kind
Biting
Hair pulling
Fish hooking
Groin attacks of any kind
Putting a finger into any orifice or into any cut or laceration on an opponent
Small joint manipulation
Striking to the spine or back of the head
Striking downward using the point of the elbow
Throat strikes of any kind including without limitation grabbing the trachea
Clawing, pinching or twisting the flesh
Grabbing the clavicle
Kicking the head of a grounded opponent
Stomping a grounded opponent
Kicking to the kidney with the heel
Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck
Throwing an opponent out of the ring or fenced area
Holding the shorts or gloves of opponent
Spitting at an opponent
Engaging in an unsportsmanlike conduct that causes an injury to an opponent
Holding the ropes or the fence
Using abusive language in the ring or fenced area
Attacking an opponent on or during the break
Attacking an opponent who is under the care of the referee
Attacking an opponent after the bell has sounded at the end of the round
Flagrently disregarding instructions of the referee
Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent intentionally or consistantly dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury
Interference by the corner


3 x 5 minute rounds with a mintue between for rest.

We have all agreed weight categories, the rest is probably up for negociation lol!


----------



## 14 Kempo (Dec 12, 2008)

I usually stay out of this type of 'discussion', but for some reason I decide now to chime in. Fighting effectively is a matter of distance. Here is a partial list beginning at the top with the furthest distance, then growing closer. Only one art is mentioned at each level, there are many, but here goes ...

Weapons: Bombs, Guns, Poles, Sticks, Knives

Kicking Arts, such as TKD, etc.
Hand Arts, such as Kempo, etc.
Muay Thai, etc.
Jiu Jitsu, etc.
Judo, etc.
BJJ, etc.

... each art has its positives and negatives and yes, some arts cross boundaries. Learn as much as you can, for as long as you can. It is a never ending journey. If a person chooses to believe that they study the one and only art that can handle every possible situation, then so be it, let them think it. If anybody is THAT GOOD at any given art, they will be able to handle most situations that will be encountered in the real world, but nobody will be able to handle every situation.

This, the comparison of two or more arts, has been argued for years and will probably be argued long after we are all gone.

Just my two cents ... carry on!


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 12, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> :lfao:
> 
> 
> What ruling organisations? We have absolutely none at all!!


 
Are you laughing at me...Are YOU laughing at me...you saying I'm funny? ...:uhyeah:




BrandonLucas said:


> From watching the first few UFC's and similar fighting competitions of their kind, I would say yes.
> 
> Fighters today are far more well-rounded than they were 10 - 15 years ago, but on the other side of the coin, they have far more rules and limitations in place in the tournements now than they did before.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks, CMA fights changed drastically with the addition of rule. However Sports Sanshou was specifically designed to fight in a ring however depending on where you fight those rules may change. 

But over all it sounds as if the UFC has changed MMA to a more professional sport. But prior to that what was it for? If I understand your previous post correctly it was just some guys that wanted to cross train and then started fighting later. I will admit I originally thought that MMA was specifically a combination of BJJ and Muay Thai; I have since seen it is much more but was it originally just BJJ and Muay Thai or was it just a conglomerate of various styles? And is that now more or less standardized? 



Tez3 said:


> This is our promotion's full professional rules.
> 
> Fouls:
> Butting with the head
> ...


 
You mean, let me understand this cause, ya know maybe it's me,  but I'm funny how, I mean funny like I'm a clown, I amuse you? I make you laugh, I'm here to amuse you? What do you mean funny, funny how? How am I funny?  

Sorry I apparently watch too many movies and have lines from Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci running through my noggin today

So since I apparently know nothing about MMA in England where the early days different from today?

Like I said Sanda was originally military but later changed (by the government) to a sports version for the general public and sports competition. And the addition of rules made the change necessary and those rules, as they changed the style changed. However the military version still exists and is rather different form the sport.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

My dear, I'm sorry  I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at the idea of us having ruling bodies! The very subject makes us laugh I'm afraid. Not a chance, me old mate!

What's changed from the early days? the shows have got more professional, fighters are training cleverer, more knowledge around but other than that very little really. Public perception of MMA is growing though but not that much. MMA people here come from TMA, TKD, karate full contact fighters wanting more of a challenge (limited amount of people to fight here, small island) Judo people who had done striking, kickboxers both K1 type and MT again wanting a challenge. We only have a couple of full time pro fighters though plenty of fighters fighting pro rules. It's very much a sport here, you can't make a living unless you are extremely lucky as Bisping was to get into TUF. We've had a few fighters in the UFC though.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 12, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> My dear, I'm sorry I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at the idea of us having ruling bodies! The very subject makes us laugh I'm afraid. Not a chance, me old mate!


 
No problem, I was not in the least upset, I just had to get these Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci line out of my head, it has been a slow day here and I think it has driven me a bit over the edge. A word of advice when your really board never think about movies like Taxi Driver, King of Comedy and Good Fellas 



Tez3 said:


> What's changed from the early days? the shows have got more professional, fighters are training cleverer, more knowledge around but other than that very little really. Public perception of MMA is growing though but not that much. MMA people here come from TMA, TKD, karate full contact fighters wanting more of a challenge (limited amount of people to fight here, small island) Judo people who had done striking, kickboxers both K1 type and MT again wanting a challenge. We only have a couple of full time pro fighters though plenty of fighters fighting pro rules. It's very much a sport here, you can't make a living unless you are extremely lucky as Bisping was to get into TUF. We've had a few fighters in the UFC though.


 
Thanks. So would you say that the training is now more geared towards winning the match? Based on what you said about cleverer I would assume that they got rid of things that would not help in the ring. 

Here we have, or at least I think we have, schools that are MMA schools and at times I wonder what makes the instructor believe he is an MMA instructor. I believe I told you about a guy near me that from his background and attitude I have no problem with calling him MMA but that is just one school.


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 12, 2008)

actually, for UFC 1-3 i think the only rules were:
no biting
no eye gouges
no fish hooks

the groin shots rule didnt come in till AFTER Joe Son, the supposed trainer of Kimo Leopoldo took like 25 uppercuts to his junk in UFC 4 and literally passed out.........


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 12, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> No problem, I was not in the least upset, I just had to get these Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci line out of my head, it has been a slow day here and I think it has driven me a bit over the edge. A word of advice when your really board never think about movies like Taxi Driver, King of Comedy and Good Fellas
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Well you have to remember I'm English female and think what Robert Di Niro sounds like when I read it lol!

I was meaning when I said cleverer that fitness training is more scientific and there's more research about techniques, more searching and training with other clubs etc but thinking about it yes you're right things that don't work will be thrown out or adapted to suit your strengths. there's a lot of helping others with traiing going on which I think is one of the nicest things about MMA here, lots of open mats and showing techniques to others.
MMA here tends only to be called that by those who train and fight even if it's amateur rules. I expect though there will be those who are going to jump on the bandwagon, the best bit about being a small island though is that fighters found out about the phony ones and tend to wander in and take part in training with them which can be very very funny!!


----------



## Marginal (Dec 12, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> actually, for UFC 1-3 i think the only rules were:
> no biting
> no eye gouges
> no fish hooks
> ...


The rules varied for the first three events. 2 didn't even allow ref stoppages, so there was no way to actually enforce any rules they happened to have.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Dec 12, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> Well you have to remember I'm English female and think what Robert Di Niro sounds like when I read it lol!


 
Yup right after I posted it I thought of how humor is not always cross cultural (I have discovered this more than one with my wife who is from China) and that it can be even more difficult over the web.



Tez3 said:


> I was meaning when I said cleverer that fitness training is more scientific and there's more research about techniques, more searching and training with other clubs etc but thinking about it yes you're right things that don't work will be thrown out or adapted to suit your strengths. there's a lot of helping others with traiing going on which I think is one of the nicest things about MMA here, lots of open mats and showing techniques to others.
> MMA here tends only to be called that by those who train and fight even if it's amateur rules. I expect though there will be those who are going to jump on the bandwagon, the best bit about being a small island though is that fighters found out about the phony ones and tend to wander in and take part in training with them which can be very very funny!!


 
Thanks it sound rather interesting I would like to see it someday. Maybe I will get to England one day, but my luck I will get there right after the UFC takes over :uhyeah:


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 13, 2008)

Xue Sheng said:


> Yup right after I posted it I thought of how humor is not always cross cultural (I have discovered this more than one with my wife who is from China) and that it can be even more difficult over the web.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks it sound rather interesting I would like to see it someday. Maybe I will get to England one day, but my luck I will get there right after the *UFC takes over* :uhyeah:


 

No chance! the may think they're taking over but we have a lot of promotions here, oursleves included, who will never give in to the UFC, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing fields, we will never surrender.....you get the idea lol!! It's not the biggest or most popular promotion here, it is however the most expensive.
However the TUF is having a UK v USA 'edition' next year, auditions in spring so thats going to prove interesting, guess the subtitles will be in use again lol! Hopefully though it will give you a chance to see what we have, hopefully one of them will be our fighter, mind he doesn't talk much lol!


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 13, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> actually, for UFC 1-3 i think the only rules were:
> no biting
> no eye gouges
> no fish hooks
> ...


 
That's right...I forgot about that....

Junk punches suck.


----------



## jim777 (Dec 15, 2008)

Two of my younger brothers study BJJ with the Gracies in NYC, and they both love it. One is Sandan in Shotokan as well. So, in honor of them (if you're out there Charlie and/or Mike), I'll just add here the same code I put at the bottom of all of my emails to them. 

It seems only fair, given that there are thousands of vids on youtube that make TKD look bad (or worse!)

(Please keep in mind this is from a comedy TV show, that lasted exactly one episode before being pulled off the air - it's meant to be funny and light hearted so please take it that way  )


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 15, 2008)

funniest 
thing
EVER


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2008)

Seen it before and I still want to know who the guy in the denim jacket is that tells her its gay.... he's fit!!

I grapple with men and enjoy it but I'm not gay rofl!!


----------



## BrandonLucas (Dec 16, 2008)

Awesome!!  What was the name of the show?

I really think it's funnier to martial artists than to the average person watching tv.


----------



## jim777 (Dec 16, 2008)

I believe it was called "Emily's Reasons Why Not", and I suppose the premise was that she'd have 10 reasons (or so) per episode for why he current guy wasn't 'The One For Her'. And I agree this is funnier to MAs than it would be to most other people


----------



## Steve (Dec 16, 2008)

jim777 said:


> I believe it was called "Emily's Reasons Why Not", and I suppose the premise was that she'd have 10 reasons (or so) per episode for why he current guy wasn't 'The One For Her'. And I agree this is funnier to MAs than it would be to most other people


This one's been floating around for a while.  What's really funny is that they are actually filming somewhat credible BJJ.  Gayest Sport There Is. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily's_Reasons_Why_Not


----------



## crushing (Dec 16, 2008)

stevebjj said:


> This one's been floating around for a while. What's really funny is that they are actually filming somewhat credible BJJ. Gayest Sport There Is.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily's_Reasons_Why_Not


 
I thought it was gay only if you make eye contact (not that there is anything wrong with that).

:idunno:


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2008)

crushing said:


> I thought it was gay only if you make eye contact (not that there is anything wrong with that).
> 
> :idunno:


 

nah it's only gay if you push back!!


----------



## Pyrock (Dec 19, 2008)

I just wanted to get back to the subject of BJJ vs. Tae Kwon Do.  My son trains in Tae Kwon Do and is currently a blue belt  which is smack dab in the middle of his schools ranking system (since some schools rank differently).  As part of his TKD schools program, they teach some Jiu Jitsu basics especially to the upper ranking kids which IMO, is a great idea.  They even issue Jiu Jitsu belts every 6 months or so. 

 My son liked it so much that 5 months ago, he started training with a Gracie BJJ school nearby because he wanted more mat time.  Recently, he attended a TKD tournament held by his TKD school in which they had an exhibition event that they called "Sports Jiu Jitsu".  It was mainly for the upper belts to practice their Jiu Jitsu along with their TKD Sparring.  They allow striking up until the clinch at which point striking is no longer allowed and they go strictly to Jiu Jitsu.

Anyway, in this video, my son was matched up against a student who recently received his TKD blackbelt.  My son has had better matches in which he demonstrated better BJJ skills but he was a bit tired and rushed things a bit so please excuse his sloppy technique...afterall, he's only 7 and has only been at it for a short time.  The second video below is of the tournament before...in short, I think it's best to train in both BJJ and TKD so you can be well balanced.  Oh, my son is the smaller one in each video...  Both opponents held higher TKD ranks than my son yet he won both matches because of his BJJ training.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg5b1iN0t1c&feature=channel_page

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=h8TIidGs40k&feature=channel_page


----------



## Twin Fist (Dec 19, 2008)

your son did well.

i am un-easy with kids that age doing grappling, but he did very well.


----------



## Pyrock (Dec 19, 2008)

Twin Fist said:


> your son did well.
> 
> i am un-easy with kids that age doing grappling, but he did very well.


 
I was at first but after watching his classes, his instructors are very close by.  I believe the ratio is typically 1 instructor for every 5-6 kids.  When they roll, there is always 1 instructor for every 2 pairs or maybe 3 at the most.  Obviously, the older and more experienced kids usually require less supervision.


----------



## CDKJudoka (Dec 24, 2008)

So how many times has this horse been beaten? 

As a TKDer and a Judoka, I see that there is a reason to cross train in a grappling style and a striking style. But neither is superior to the other.

As for Judokas not being good at groundwork, maybe some of you have never been to a judo tourney. I'd say 7 times out of ten, a judo match ends with a submission, be it an armbar, leg lock, or a choke. I have never met a judoka that can do newaza.


----------



## Pyrock (Dec 24, 2008)

DarkPhoenix said:


> As a TKDer and a Judoka, I see that there is a reason to cross train in a grappling style and a striking style. But neither is superior to the other.


 
I agree.  As a child, I trained in Chinese Kung Fu and loved it.  I only stopped when my parents stopped paying.  Now my 7 year old son trains in Tai Kwon Do, Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and Wrestling.  People ask why he does all three and it's simple...he asked me if he could.  I think it will just make him appreciate all martial arts and not just one.  In fact, I never really considered him training in TKD and BJJ/Wrestling so he will be good on the ground and in striking...it just happened this way.  I actually credit his TKD school for exposing him to Jiu Jitsu because they occasionally taught some Jiu Jitsu in his classes.  A true martial artist should respect all martial arts.  If not, it would be like a pianist saying that the trumpet is not a true instrument...which makes no sense.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 24, 2008)

DarkPhoenix said:


> So how many times has this horse been beaten?
> 
> As a TKDer and a Judoka, I see that there is a reason to cross train in a grappling style and a striking style. But neither is superior to the other.
> 
> ...


----------



## CDKJudoka (Dec 24, 2008)

Tez3 said:


> DarkPhoenix said:
> 
> 
> > So how many times has this horse been beaten?
> ...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 24, 2008)

DarkPhoenix said:


> Tez3 said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry, that is my lack of typing skills. It should have said *can't*.
> ...


----------



## matt.m (May 3, 2009)

I am predominately a grappler.  However, knowing the strikers game is also paramout in combat.  Even if you don't prefer to use it, I.E. Kicking......well at least you know what to look for and how to defend against it.

I say train both and be happy.  Oh yeah "It's only gay if you look at them with lust while making them submit."


----------

