# Machado vs Gracie style bjj?



## GreatUniter

I know that Machado family bjj is derived from the Gracie lineage because Gracie taught Machado brothers. I heard that Machado's bjj is different from Gracie's. If so, what is the difference? Also, I heard that Machado's is more practical and street oriented and Gracie's for competitions. Is it true? Hoping to hear from someone that is familiar with both styles.


----------



## Charlemagne

My experience has actually been the other way around.  Typically, when someone says that they train Gracie Jiu-Jitsu, they are likely to have maintained the original self-defense curriculum.  That does not mean that they don't compete, because they often do.  Some of this depends a bit on the side of the Gracie family you are referring to.  If you are looking towards the Helio Gracie side of things, I think you will see a greater likelihood that the original self defense curriculum has been maintained.  If you look toward the Carlos Gracie side (such as Gracie Barra) you are likely to see less of that, and a more sport focus, though some, such as Draculino, have certainly maintained the self defense aspect of things.  

The Machados are certainly legit, so that isn't even a question. However, from my experience, they are focused on competition, but they certainly have guys that they have produced, such as Chris Haueter that have maintained the original self-defense focus to a large degree.

It's a bit complicated.


----------



## MA_Student

Oh god another one of the which is best stuff....both are good both have strengths and weaknesses and both can be applied to self defence it all depends on the school and teacher...right I'm copying this message so I don't have to post it each time these types of thread appear lol


----------



## Danny T

I know a number of 'Gracie' schools and organizations that are almost all competition oriented. Rickson is pushing very hard to bring self defense back as their major emphasis because so many have gone to just competition. He is pushing a new white belt with a navy blue stripe rank that designates the combative or self defense curriculum has been passed prior to blue belt. On the Machado side I know Rigan has a strong self defense aspect (Chris Haueter is under Rigan) and is more old school but has begun to add some of the modern Jiu Jitsu because he wants his students to have some experience with it if the student wants to do competitions.


----------



## Buka

Welcome to MartialTalk, GreatUniter.


----------



## GreatUniter

MA_Student said:


> Oh god another one of the which is best stuff....both are good both have strengths and weaknesses and both can be applied to self defence it all depends on the school and teacher...right I'm copying this message so I don't have to post it each time these types of thread appear lol



No, actually my question* isn't* what is the best of those two, but  what are the differences because I cannot see them from my experience and seminars that I have visited.


----------



## GreatUniter

Buka said:


> Welcome to MartialTalk, GreatUniter.



Thank you and all the best.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

GreatUniter said:


> No, actually my question* isn't* what is the best of those two, but  what are the differences because I cannot see them from my experience and seminars that I have visited.


There isn't really a difference because they aren't two things. It's just branding.

BJJ is BJJ. Every practitioner and every instructor has a slightly different expression of the art. Some focus on grappling competition. Some focus on MMA. Some focus on self-defense. Some work on all three. Some only train in the gi. Some train no-gi. Some focus on aggressively hunting submissions. Some focus on staying safe and gradually working to dominate position. Sometimes you can find all these different approaches by different practitioners in the same school! The underlying principles are the same, but individuals can apply those principles differently.

There are a lot of Gracies and they don't all teach or practice the same way. There is no single approach which you could put under the umbrella of "Gracie Jiu-jitsu" that you couldn't also find among practitioners of "Machado Jiu-jitsu".


----------



## GreatUniter

Tony Dismukes said:


> There isn't really a difference because they aren't two things. It's just branding.
> 
> BJJ is BJJ. Every practitioner and every instructor has a slightly different expression of the art. Some focus on grappling competition. Some focus on MMA. Some focus on self-defense. Some work on all three. Some only train in the gi. Some train no-gi. Some focus on aggressively hunting submissions. Some focus on staying safe and gradually working to dominate position. Sometimes you can find all these different approaches by different practitioners in the same school! The underlying principles are the same, but individuals can apply those principles differently.
> 
> There are a lot of Gracies and they don't all teach or practice the same way. There is no single approach which you could put under the umbrella of "Gracie Jiu-jitsu" that you couldn't also find among practitioners of "Machado Jiu-jitsu".



Thank you for your explanation. On the last bjj seminar that I have visited, "masters" there talked about differences between the two. That's why I'm curious to ask here, mainly because I don't have experience with bjj and  I'm willing to try it.


----------



## Danny T

GreatUniter said:


> Thank you for your explanation. On the last bjj seminar that I have visited, "masters" there talked about differences between the two. That's why I'm curious to ask here, mainly because I don't have experience with bjj and  I'm willing to try it.


I feel the greater differences is more in mindset and the emphasis on what the techniques are designed to do. For example 'Knee on Belly' and 'Shin on Belly'. Both are uncomfortable and controls the person on bottom. When I first learn shin on belly by one instructor it was explained it allow for better control of the bottoms person's hip and it does. Under another instructor it was explained by using the shin rather than the knee it puts your foot against the bottoms waist/hip area preventing the bottom from accessing a possible weapon in their pocket or allowing a trapping of bottoms arm if reaching for a possible weapon in that pocket or waist band area.


----------



## Tony Dismukes

Danny T said:


> I feel the greater differences is more in mindset and the emphasis on what the techniques are designed to do. For example 'Knee on Belly' and 'Shin on Belly'. Both are uncomfortable and controls the person on bottom. When I first learn shin on belly by one instructor it was explained it allow for better control of the bottoms person's hip and it does. Under another instructor it was explained by using the shin rather than the knee it puts your foot against the bottoms waist/hip area preventing the bottom from accessing a possible weapon in their pocket or allowing a trapping of bottoms arm if reaching for a possible weapon in that pocket or waist band area.


I teach both of those reasons for preferring the "shin-on-belly" approach over "knee-on-belly". However I typically refer to both positions as variations of "knee mount" and explain the advantages and disadvantages of each. I've known others from my school who prefer the "knee-on-belly" approach. It really is more a matter of the individual and what they are trying to accomplish in the moment rather than a question of family lineage.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

My experience is that the BJJ schools closer to Helio's line of teaching have maintained the self defense aspects.  In general if they are linked to Rorion, Royce, Rickson or Rolker you will be learning the self defense aspects of BJJ.  After that it really varies based on my experience.


----------



## Charlemagne

Brian R. VanCise said:


> My experience is that the BJJ schools closer to Helio's line of teaching have maintained the self defense aspects.  In general if they are linked to Rorion, Royce, Rickson or Rolker you will be learning the self defense aspects of BJJ.  After that it really varies based on my experience.



I would add Relson to that list, but otherwise I have had the exact same experience.


----------



## Buka

I'm probably not as experienced as most of you guys, but I just like BJJ in general. Most of my training is with the Gracies, but everyone else I've had the opportunity to train with has helped me a lot. Good stuff that jits.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

Charlemagne said:


> I would add Relson to that list, but otherwise I have had the exact same experience.



Agreed, I forgot Relson but he teaches the core BJJ self defense as well.


----------



## Buka

I'd fight Rickson, Rorion and Stipe Miocic before I fought Relson. I mean, quick dead either way, and Relson is a _really_ nice man, but he just scares me. I'm not even sure why.


----------



## msmitht

GreatUniter said:


> I know that Machado family bjj is derived from the Gracie lineage because Gracie taught Machado brothers. I heard that Machado's bjj is different from Gracie's. If so, what is the difference? Also, I heard that Machado's is more practical and street oriented and Gracie's for competitions. Is it true? Hoping to hear from someone that is familiar with both styles.


The Machado brothers learned from Carlos Gracie Jr., who learned from Helio,  Rorion and Rolles. .They along with others had to do the self defense as a part of training and promotion. They all know the fundamentals but is up to each individual what is taught. Some focus on self defense and others on BJJ competitions.


----------



## GreatUniter

msmitht said:


> The Machado brothers learned from Carlos Gracie Jr., who learned from Helio,  Rorion and Rolles. .They along with others had to do the self defense as a part of training and promotion. They all know the fundamentals but is up to each individual what is taught. Some focus on self defense and others on BJJ competitions.



Thank you for your explanation.


----------

