Demian Maia admits he needs more punches and elbows Jiu-jitsu teaches you not to hurt your opponent - MMA Fighting
Interesting comment, opinions anyone?
Interesting comment, opinions anyone?
"Jui Jitsu just teaches you not to hurt your opponent"
- Thread starter Tez3
- Start date
Very interesting thank you Tez.. You have to admire his heart and integrity towards his JJ.. pity for him there is a conflict in his game
JxHe was offering up a critique of his performance and he admitted he could have improved in some areas. He also admitted that bjj doesn't have all the answers, which is no surprise to anyone. He also referred to bjj as the best martial art, I'd agree it's one of the best but "best" is a subjective term. A kick boxer could easily say that they need to work on their ground game too. I don't think what he says is anything surprising.
I see statements like this, and I think "don't all arts teach you not to hurt your opponent more than absolutely necessary?"
OP
- Thread Starter
- #5
True, and in MMA the idea is not to destroy your opponent but to win the competition despite what some think it's not a death match!
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,943
- Reaction score
- 8,690
For us anyway. We train to hit,train to hurt them in every way we can. If there is an option that hurts them and an option that doesn't. We are hurting them.
I do know of guys that have won with a top side submission. But that is usually from mount,punching them untill they give up,roll over and allow a rear naked choke..
I do know of guys that have won with a top side submission. But that is usually from mount,punching them untill they give up,roll over and allow a rear naked choke..
Hanzou
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,770
- Reaction score
- 1,330
He's right. Unlike other arts that teach you to bash someone's face in, Bjj teaches you to subdue someone by bringing them down, and putting them to sleep. My instructor is found of saying that it's the perfect art to take care of your drunk uncle.
After hearing my Grandmaster talk about SD Id say necessary can be relative(regardless of what art you use)..My sahbumnims instructor advocates staying calm, walking away, and de-escalation, whereas our GM will blatantly tell you to put them down, striking first sometimes, because "they should not be acting that way"
Obviously neither are curbstomping folks who are down, but its weird to think about the different levels of aggression and defining whats necessary.
Well other arts still have a considerable amount of chokes and locks that dont require you to beat some to apply. We can still subdue and bring them down, i really wouldnt say BJJ is different for doing it simply because grappling is its focus
I also wouldnt say BJJ isnt about hurting people....Theres still a good degree of pain in most techs. Even in chokes, those few seconds before you pass out if you dont tap feel like hell.
If you arent applying torque to harm me, im not gonna just lay there in the submission. If you dont lock it up, I could fight out of it. It happens all the time
Dont get me wrong, I understand your point. Where a boxer has to throw a punch, a grappler can usually take control and restrain someone. But I wouldnt go as far to say that it teaches you to not hurt someone at all, especially when you can see clear pain on people face...
Hanzou
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,770
- Reaction score
- 1,330
Well I'm not saying that Bjj is incapable of hurting someone, there are joint and limb breaks within the system after all. However, I was always sort of taught that the paramount submissions in the art is the choke, since its the most humane, and causes the least harm. Limb and joint locations are there in case you can't get the choke, and need to disable someone.
However, if you compare Bjj to a striking style that teaches you to smash someone's windpipe with a knife-hand strike, smash a nose with a palm-heel strike, scoop someone's eyes out with a gouge, grab and twist someone's groin, or crush a rib with a stamping kick while someone is down, I would say that Bjj is far more gentle and humane.
The problem is that the more 'humane' styles take longer to learn. Your journey in BJJ has been long as has my Aikido. In Krav we teach to get in and hit hard but once the guys have those skills we start teaching them restraints. Then, as always, you have the choice of techniques to apply as is appropriate. Mind you, if I'm being seriously attacked by several guys you can forget humane.
This is actually a Pretty good point
Ive never seen or heard of a real BJJ white belt submitting guys like a gracie....i wonder how the early days of UFC would have went if Royce wasnt already so highly ranked in BJJ.
Ive only ever met one Aikido practitioner in my life, he threw us and a few MT guys around and controlled us like it was nothing...But he had been training for 20 some years,
Really makes you think abour the return on time investment of some styles. Can i apply this now or do i need considerablly more time and work?
Hanzou
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,770
- Reaction score
- 1,330
To be fair, you've stated that it took you 8 years just to make techniques work for you in Aikido. I had Bij techniques working for me while I was still a white belt. Many Gracie Bij schools say/advertise that a Bij blue belt should be proficient enough to take apart an unskilled opponent in a street fight.
In the end, I would say that Bjj has a much more forgiving learning curve than Aikido.
I don't usually enjoy Damien's matches. Sometimes, I'd rather watch paint dry. I don't mean that as a critique of his skills, the man is rock solid skilled - and then some.
But as for what he said, I love it. And I agree with it one hundred percent.
But as for what he said, I love it. And I agree with it one hundred percent.
I had most things in Aikido working for me years earlier as well. It took me over seven years to get the last technique to work, without using strength, against trained people. Using strength, sure the techniques worked against most untrained people much sooner.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Messages
- 23,943
- Reaction score
- 8,690
For us if there is an opportunity to throw elbows or apply submissions we throw elbows. This is from a guys first fight to our coaches recent win at nitro.
(ok not generally elbows on a first fight. Probably punching because most don't fight elbows first off)
We put guys from the street into the ring in 12 weeks.
(ok not generally elbows on a first fight. Probably punching because most don't fight elbows first off)
We put guys from the street into the ring in 12 weeks.
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
Ha, mate, you really need to see some of the stuff in Koryu… some of it's simply outright bloody murder! Ha!
RTKDCMB
Senior Master
Just as a grappling student has the option to be gentile or to choke someone to death or break an arm a striking style has gentler options as well. From blocking a punch and applying an arm bar to tickling a drunken friend under the armpits to make him let you go.
In a self defense situation your safety is your number one priority. Your attacker's safety is much lower down on the list. If people want to be safe then they shouldn't attack other people.
There is indeed an aesthetic or ideal within a large segment of the BJJ community that the highest form of the art is to be able to submit someone without injuring them and that strikes are only for setting up those submissions.
This ideal is not universal. You can watch old Mario Sperry instructional videos to see him demonstrating how to use positional dominance to punish an opponent with strikes. In general, I think folks who trained under Carlson Gracie were more likely to embrace the use of strikes than the folks who trained under Helio.
The idea of "submitting" someone without hurting them is primarily about sport competition. In a self-defense situation, there is no tapping out. If you have to apply a joint lock, you will need to break the opponent's arm or leg and move on. You might be able to choke someone out without harm or (in a less serious situation) pin them until they calm down, but you can't count on that.
This ideal is not universal. You can watch old Mario Sperry instructional videos to see him demonstrating how to use positional dominance to punish an opponent with strikes. In general, I think folks who trained under Carlson Gracie were more likely to embrace the use of strikes than the folks who trained under Helio.
The idea of "submitting" someone without hurting them is primarily about sport competition. In a self-defense situation, there is no tapping out. If you have to apply a joint lock, you will need to break the opponent's arm or leg and move on. You might be able to choke someone out without harm or (in a less serious situation) pin them until they calm down, but you can't count on that.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2013
- Messages
- 6,770
- Reaction score
- 1,330
When I think of TKD, I don't think of blocking and applying arm bars.
I think of that.
Not every self defense situation requires maximum force though, and if I choke someone unconscious, choking them to death isn't necessary.
Similar threads
