MMA vs TMA

[Mauthos]

The one thing I think has not been mentioned in this thread is that at the end of the day MMA has its basis in TMAs and as such the majority of MMA fighters (especially those at the higher levels) have a grounding in what are considered TMAs, in fact the majority of champions, although cross trained in BJJ, wrestling etc, have held BB in TMAs for years (Lyoto Machida, GSP, Chuck Liddell to name 3 off the top of my head) and naturally they have relied on these deeper ingrained skills to win their fights. Although I will give it to you that GSP relies more on his wrestling ability to win nowadays which has made his fights pretty dull of late.

What this means is really to be an effective mixed martial artist you need to have a grounding in the basics which mainly were developed by TMAs. Personally I don't know what really defines a TMA, maybe it is an age thing, maybe it is the way of maintaining traditions. If you think that the age of the art defines it as traditional, although you (Hanzou) seem to respect Goju a little more than others the rough documentation of this art states that Higashionna started teaching his new art in 1882. Now Mitsuyo Maeda originally taught his (more than likely much older) version of JJ to Carlos Gracie in 1917 who passed it on to his brothers and therefore BJJ was born.

Now JJ, which I am sure you can agree on formed the basis of BJJ and JJ supposedly dates back to 1532 according to a quick google search which I am pretty sure would classify it as a TMA. Therefore, even if you don't consider BJJ a TMA it has its basis firmly planted in one and I am pretty sure that there will be a lot of techniques and training methods that have barely changed throughout the transition form JJ to BJJ.

Basically what I am trying to say is without TMA there would be no MMA, after all you can't develop a dictionary without knowing your ABC first and therefore in my humble opinion, without a fair understanding and training within TMAs I don't think you can be fully effective as a fighter as you will not fully understand or grasp the concepts taught by the basics.

 

[Hanzou]

The one thing I think has not been mentioned in this thread is that at the end of the day MMA has its basis in TMAs and as such the majority of MMA fighters (especially those at the higher levels) have a grounding in what are considered TMAs, in fact the majority of champions, although cross trained in BJJ, wrestling etc, have held BB in TMAs for years (Lyoto Machida, GSP, Chuck Liddell to name 3 off the top of my head) and naturally they have relied on these deeper ingrained skills to win their fights. Although I will give it to you that GSP relies more on his wrestling ability to win nowadays which has made his fights pretty dull of late.

What this means is really to be an effective mixed martial artist you need to have a grounding in the basics which mainly were developed by TMAs. Personally I don't know what really defines a TMA, maybe it is an age thing, maybe it is the way of maintaining traditions. If you think that the age of the art defines it as traditional, although you (Hanzou) seem to respect Goju a little more than others the rough documentation of this art states that Higashionna started teaching his new art in 1882. Now Mitsuyo Maeda originally taught his (more than likely much older) version of JJ to Carlos Gracie in 1917 who passed it on to his brothers and therefore BJJ was born.

Now JJ, which I am sure you can agree on formed the basis of BJJ and JJ supposedly dates back to 1532 according to a quick google search which I am pretty sure would classify it as a TMA. Therefore, even if you don't consider BJJ a TMA it has its basis firmly planted in one and I am pretty sure that there will be a lot of techniques and training methods that have barely changed throughout the transition form JJ to BJJ.

Basically what I am trying to say is without TMA there would be no MMA, after all you can't develop a dictionary without knowing your ABC first and therefore in my humble opinion, without a fair understanding and training within TMAs I don't think you can be fully effective as a fighter as you will not fully understand or grasp the concepts taught by the basics.

To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art. Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.

Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.

 

[Hanzou]

But you are totally ignorant of what is traditional karate. Here, I am being specific to karate and in this case Goju karate. This is my type of training. Straight from the Jundokan.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA&desktop_uri=/watch?v=UttTa7hGYqA

And, it is half paced. Taira is faster than a cut snake in real life.

Oh, I forgot to mention, what he is demonstrating is straight from that useless kata.

Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".

 

[Hanzou]

Interestingly enough, quite a few of my training partners are LEOs, COs, and one just retired after 30+yrs, working in a Psych Hospital. They have all, on more than one occasion, had to fall back on their training. They're all still alive and well today. This "If it isn't on video, then it didn't happen" BS, is just that.....BS! Sorry, not everyone walks around with a camera.

If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.

 

[MJS]

If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.

No, I never heard of that happening with them, however, blocks, various controlling methods, sweeps/takedowns, were used.

 

[K-man]

Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".

I'll call BS on that. None of the moves in our bunkai are choreographed. I can demonstrate the kata bunkai with anyone off the street. If it was choreographed I would agree with you. But what you are saying is, even when I post a video that shows something working, it must be false.

By the way. The biggest problem when you are working with someone like Taira, even when you think you know what is coming next, he varies the technique. (As to the willing target. All techniques even in BJJ are trained against willing targets.)

Your ignorant dig at aikido again shows again how little you understand of aikido and the irrelevance of the reference to the kiai master crap is putting both Taira's work and Aikido in the same basket. I find that extremely offensive and it is against forum rules.

 

[K-man]

To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art. Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.

Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.

Do you know anything about the history of judo? Kano started out with classical jujutsu much the same way as Ueshiba. Kano actually taught classical jujutsu the same way that Ueshiba taught Daito Ryu. They both had the understanding that soft overcomes hard and the same concept exists in traditional Goju karate (hard and soft). Both aikido and judo originally contained strikes and both were basically jujutsu. As Ueshiba progressed he reduced the emphasis on the atemi but it is still inherent in all the techniques. Where I study Aikido we include the strikes in our training. Kano's judo went into the Universities and to make it suitable for competition the potentially harmful or damaging techniques like strikes to vital points and joint breaks were removed. As a result Judo places more emphasis on the nage waza. Now because one (Judo) has evolved for competition and one (Aikido) is not for competition the only one that is practical and dynamic is the Judo. ????

You really are incredible. You demonstrate your lack of knowledge and understanding of traditional martial arts in every post.

 

[Kframe]

Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art. As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.

This might be better in the Aikido forum.

Still wondering why this thread is still open...

 

[Hanzou]

I'll call BS on that. None of the moves in our bunkai are choreographed. I can demonstrate the kata bunkai with anyone off the street. If it was choreographed I would agree with you. But what you are saying is, even when I post a video that shows something working, it must be false.

It is choregraphed because the target is just standing there accepting the technique. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.

By the way. The biggest problem when you are working with someone like Taira, even when you think you know what is coming next, he varies the technique. (As to the willing target. All techniques even in BJJ are trained against willing targets.)

For demonstration purposes. We have randori for resistance training, and amazingly, how we fight matches our demonstrations and our randori.

Your ignorant dig at aikido again shows again how little you understand of aikido and the irrelevance of the reference to the kiai master crap is putting both Taira's work and Aikido in the same basket. I find that extremely offensive and it is against forum rules.

I'm merely drawing a comparison. You have a compliant uke and you can make anything appear awesome. I would like to see Taira do those awesome hand techs against a boxer, or a wrestler trying to pop his head off. What's wrong with that?

Do you know anything about the history of judo? Kano started out with classical jujutsu much the same way as Ueshiba. Kano actually taught classical jujutsu the same way that Ueshiba taught Daito Ryu. They both had the understanding that soft overcomes hard and the same concept exists in traditional Goju karate (hard and soft). Both aikido and judo originally contained strikes and both were basically jujutsu. As Ueshiba progressed he reduced the emphasis on the atemi but it is still inherent in all the techniques. Where I study Aikido we include the strikes in our training. Kano's judo went into the Universities and to make it suitable for competition the potentially harmful or damaging techniques like strikes to vital points and joint breaks were removed. As a result Judo places more emphasis on the nage waza. Now because one (Judo) has evolved for competition and one (Aikido) is not for competition the only one that is practical and dynamic is the Judo. ????

Pretty much. I've seen and felt Judo work first hand. I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working. Heck, Bjj and Sambo comes from Judo. I also know that Bjj and Sambo are pushing Judo's evolution, because new techniques are being brought into all three systems constantly.

Aikido? I just can't say the same. I'd like to believe that someone could catch another person's wrist and throw them 20 feet into the air, but I just can't. My experience against an Aikido Brown belt was similar to those videos of Aikido against a wrestler, and Aikido against a Judoka. Its pretty to watch, but not very practical, outside of the wrist lock applications, which work great once you get control.

 

[ballen0351]

If you're going to tell me that you threw someone across a room with a one-hand Aikido throw, I need proof.

Sorry bud I live in the real world with real criminals real fights, no rules, no ref, no tapping out when its gets tough and I don't have a camera crew following me around. You don't believe me I really don't care. All your history of this art or analysis of that art is so utterly wrong I really don't care about your opinion.

 

[K-man]

Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art. As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.

This might be better in the Aikido forum.

Still wondering why this thread is still open...

A little topic drift might be refreshing in actual fact.

Kano actually developed an art not unlike karate. He even visited Okinawa and was particularly impressed by what he saw in the Naha-te style. In his training he added the randori but even with randori part of it was compliant. As with Aikido, that is important to train the reversals something that our unlearned friend doesn't understand.

Randori (free practice)
Judo pedagogy emphasizes randori (乱取り?, literally "taking chaos", but meaning "free practice"). This term covers a variety of forms of practice, and the intensity at which it is carried out varies depending on intent and the level of expertise of the participants. At one extreme, is a compliant style of randori, known as Yakusoku geiko (約束稽古?, prearranged practice), in which neither participant offers resistance to their partner's attempts to throw. A related concept is that of Sute geiko (捨稽古?, throw-away practice), in which an experienced judoka allows himself to be thrown by his less-experienced partner. At the opposite extreme from yakusoku geiko is the hard style of randori that seeks to emulate the style of judo seen in competition. While hard randori is the cornerstone of judo, over-emphasis of the competitive aspect is seen as undesirable by traditionalists if the intent of the randori is to "win" rather than to learn.
Randori is usually limited to either tachi waza (standing techniques) or ne waza (ground work) and, when one partner is thrown in tachi waza randori, practice is resumed with both partners on their feet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judo

In aikido some practitioners like Tomiki did go down the competition route.

Shodokan Aikido (昭道館合気道 Shōdōkan Aikidō?) is the style of Aikido founded by Kenji Tomiki(富木 謙治 Tomiki Kenji, 1900–1979). Shodokan Aikido is sometimes referred to as "Sport Aikido" because of its use of regular competitions, and although Tomiki used the name Shodokan, the style is still often referred to as 'Tomiki Aikido'. Shodokan places more emphasis on free-form randori sparring than most other styles of aikido. The training method requires a balance between randori and the more stylized kata training along with a well-developed set of training drills both specific for randori and for general aikido development. The participation in actual shiai (competitive randori) very much depends on the club with greater emphasis being found in the university clubs, although randori is core to all Shodokan clubs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shodokan_Aikido

Others like Saito who trained with Ueshiba after WWII still taught a hard style of Aikido including atemi.

Saito's instruction of aikido is particularly remembered for its emphasis upon the basics of aikido, and especially upon the relationship between the armed and unarmed aspects of the art.
Kazuo Chiba, a live-in student (uchideshi) of Ueshiba at the Aikikai Hombu Dojo in Tokyo, recalled in particular the intensity of the training that occurred at the Iwama dojo,
“ A large portion of the membership at Iwama Dojo consisted of local farmers, hard workers who spent all day in the fields. They had thick bones and great physical strength, combined with a peculiar local character known as “Mito kishitsu,” a type of manliness close to gallantry. Altogether, it was quite an opposite culture from Hombu Dojo in Tokyo. Because it is in the capital of Japan, Hombu’s membership consists of white-collar workers, intellectuals, businessmen, politicians and university students.
Any members who came to visit Iwama Dojo from Hombu must have looked pale and weak from city living to Iwama members. Indeed, the Iwama students treated us from Hombu as such and challenged us vigorously. It was a matter of survival for members from Hombu Dojo, including Hombu uchideshi like myself. And Saito Sensei was on top of that mountain, which we had to climb with all our might.
”
Chiba also emphasized Saito's focus upon katai-keiko (固い稽古?), or vigorous practice without holding back, which Ueshiba taught and Saito demonstrated in his methods of teaching and practice. Apparently, this rigorous training with Saito, which Ueshiba would often observe, also included intense conditioning exercises, as well as general farmwork that students at the Iwama dojo were expected to assist with.
Other students of Saito attest to his commitment to carry on Ueshiba's legacy, and to follow and preserve Ueshiba's teachings as Saito had learned them. Saito believed that striking techniques (atemi) are a "vital element" of aikido, and also that the principles of swordsmanship formed the basis of aikido techniques. He also advocated training to cope with the attacks of other martial arts, such as the kicks practiced in karate.

Ueshiba may well have gone another way if it wasn't for the horrors of WWII.

His third experience was in 1942 during the worst fighting of WWII, Ueshiba had a vision of the "Great Spirit of Peace".
"The Way of the Warrior has been misunderstood. It is not a means to kill and destroy others. Those who seek to compete and better one another are making a terrible mistake. To smash, injure, or destroy is the worst thing a human being can do. The real Way of a Warrior is to prevent such slaughter – it is the Art of Peace, the power of love."


The early form of training under Ueshiba was characterized by the ample use of strikes to vital points (atemi), a larger total curriculum, a greater use of weapons, and a more linear approach to technique than would be found in later forms of aikido. These methods are preserved in the teachings of his early students Kenji Tomiki (who founded the Shodokan Aikido sometimes called Tomiki-ry&#363, Noriaki Inoue (who founded Shin'ei Taid&#333, Minoru Mochizuki (who founded Yoseikan Budo), Gozo Shioda (who founded Yoshinkan Aikido). Many of these styles are considered "pre-war styles", although some of the teachers continued to have contact and influence from Ueshiba in the years after the Second World War.
Later, as Ueshiba seemed to slowly grow away from Takeda, he began to implement more changes into the art. These changes are reflected in the differing names with which he referred to his art, first as aiki-jūjutsu, then Ueshiba-ryū, Asahi-ryū, aiki budō,nand finally aikido.
As Ueshiba grew older, more skilled, and more spiritual in his outlook, his art also changed and became softer and more circular. Striking techniques became less important and the formal curriculum became simpler. In his own expression of the art there was a greater emphasis on what is referred to as kokyū-nage, or "breath throws" which are soft and blending, utilizing the opponent's movement in order to throw them. Many of these techniques are rooted in the aiki-no-jutsu portions of the Daitō-ryū curriculum rather than the more direct jujutsu style joint-locking techniques.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morihei_Ueshiba

I can understand where Ueshiba was going. As his understanding and use of Ki developed he had no need to train fast and hard. Hence the expression enter with irimi, hit with kokyu, the same principle I teach in my karate. Once you start down that path there is no turning back. It is like you just put a supercharger on your car. Once you experience that you don't want to go back to what you had before.
:s510:

 

[Hanzou]

Kano added in some rudimentary newaza, after getting beaten at a competition by them. My question is why did Ueshiba not do the same? Honestly watching Aikido videos, I think that, it combined with some good ground grappling would make a fantastic ring art. As it stands, just based on my less then basic understanding, from videos it is a good street art.

This might be better in the Aikido forum.

Still wondering why this thread is still open...

Supposedly, Ueshiba's original Aikido was pretty hardcore and practical. As he aged, his Aikido went from hardcore and physical to more soft and spiritual. The latter is what spread around the world.

I will say this; Aikido breakfalls are pretty fantastic.

I wouldn't send my daughter to an Aikido school for self defense though.

 

[K-man]

It is choregraphed because the target is just standing there accepting the technique. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.

You really are full of it aren't you? I tell you it's not choreographed because it is not but you still say it is. It teach it every class against proper attacks but because you haven't seen it it doesn't exist. Unbelievable! I haven't seen an atom either but I have no doubt it exists. You assertion has absolutely no basis and your arrogance is unassailable.

For demonstration purposes. We have randori for resistance training, and amazingly, how we fight matches our demonstrations and our randori.

I don't care what you do! I'm not arguing against the effectiveness of MMA. We train as we would fight all the time, just not at full speed and force. Just the same but because I don't teach MMA or BJJ it can't be as effective. What about when I teach the same technique as Krav Maga? Does that now make it valid. You have absolutely no idea of what training occurs in other places.

I'm merely drawing a comparison. You have a compliant uke and you can make anything appear awesome. I would like to see Taira do those awesome hand techs against a boxer, or a wrestler trying to pop his head off. What's wrong with that?

Oh Mate! You don't know how wrong you are. Taira is one of the best I have ever seen. That's why I have trained with him as often as possible. He was an undercover cop and he would be one of the toughest guys you could ever meet on the street. All his stuff is reality based, not the competition stuff you are playing with.

Pretty much. I've seen and felt Judo work first hand. I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working. Heck, Bjj and Sambo comes from Judo. I also know that Bjj and Sambo are pushing Judo's evolution, because new techniques are being brought into all three systems constantly.

No one is questioning that Judo works.

Aikido? I just can't say the same. I'd like to believe that someone could catch another person's wrist and throw them 20 feet into the air, but I just can't. My experience against an Aikido Brown belt was similar to those videos of Aikido against a wrestler, and Aikido against a Judoka. Its pretty to watch, but not very practical, outside of the wrist lock applications, which work great once you get control.

Your experience against an aikido brown belt means that aikido doesn't work? What garbage. Every time a guy comes into my dojo with BJJ experience I invite them to show me their locks and holds. They don't work either if you are skilful enough. That doesn't mean BJJ doesn't work.

What at is loose in your head that prevents you from realising that their are probably thousands of really good martial artists out in the real world who don't practise MMA and don't want to play around in the ring?

 

[RTKDCMB]

It is choregraphed because the target is just standing there accepting the technique. That sort of thing is wonderful for demonstrations, but I'd like to see it against a moving, resisting opponent in order to judge its effectiveness. Since I've never seen a Goju-Ryu stylist fighting like that, I can only guess that my assertion is correct.

Again you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing. To be any good at a technique, you must first practice it under controlled conditions to learn the basics of the technique and then apply it to a moving, resisting target. To not practice the basics is a very poor training method.

I can pull up numerous YT vids showing Judo working.

You are yet to provide a video of YOUR training to as proof of your supposed superior training methods.

 

[Hanzou]

Again you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing. To be any good at a technique, you must first practice it under controlled conditions to learn the basics of the technique and then apply it to a moving, resisting target. To not practice the basics is a very poor training method.

Then please show me the Goju Ryu stylists utilizing similar movements in a full contact setting.

There surely must be some Goju Ryu practitioners that have mastered the Bunkai.

 

[Chris Parker]

I was staying out of this one since my earlier comments, as to go through it, I'd want to pick up everything that is wrong and correct it... but I don't have the next 5 years to do so, and bluntly, I douby Hanzou here would hear any of it. But then you posted this.... you nearly had me in on your "ninjas" comments (dude, just no...), but this? Right....

To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu.

Judo is Jujutsu. It's original name was Kano-ha Jujutsu... pretty simply "Kano's branch of Jujutsu". Judo is simply one form of Jujutsu, you realize. BJJ has it's roots in an early expression of Kano-ha Jujutsu, combined with a few other things, and given a focus on groundwork, but the origins are Jujutsu.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, which is an archiac battlefield art.

No, Judo is a particular subset of Jujutsu, founded by Kano Jigoro, and developed/spread as much as an educational tool as a martial art. Kano's focus was on education as much as, if not more than, martial arts. Secondly, "Jujutsu... is an archaic battlefield art"? Uh, nope. Jujutsu is a generic term applied to a very wide range of Japanese unarmed or lightly armed systems of combat, which might be a stand-alone system, or part of a larger syllabus. If part of a larger syllabus, it might be a major, or minor section. But very, very little of it was "battlefield"... why? Well, because you'd use weapons on a battlefield... bows and arrows (later, firearms), spears and other polearms. Why would you go onto a battlefield and use unarmed methods in anything other than the worst of all possible situations? Then you get into the various forms Jujutsu can take... there were some systems that were very much for the Bushi (warrior class), which often involved small arms (and might be referred to as Kogusoku, referring to a "small set [of weapons]", or Koshi no Mawari, referring to "[the weapons found] around the waist", or might be Yawara, Yawaragei, Hade, Goho, Judo [here's a history lesson for you... that term was used in at least one system about 150 years before Kano...], Kumiuchi, Wajutsu, Torite, Te, and many more), or there were systems that were geared up as a form of "commoners yawara", which would not include weapons, but be almost exclusively unarmed. These systems developed in a large variety of circumstances over a very long period of time, with the earliest Jujutsu-centric system being founded in 1542 (Takenouchi Ryu - although there were unarmed aspects to some earlier systems, such as Kashima Shinryu and Katori Shinto Ryu), and continue to be developed today, some of which are new branches/variants of existing ones (such as Moto-ha Yoshin Ryu, a branch of Hontai Yoshin Ryu founded a few decades ago, or Hakko Ryu, a derivative of Daito Ryu from the 50's), others are purely new systems. And they are all Jujutsu.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era.

Judo became favoured of the Police and the educational system due to Kano's very effective lobbying of the education department, and in part due to the performance of Kano's students in competitions. The "modernization" you refer to is more about Kano re-structuring the way he presented and taught his approach to Jujutsu, dominantly for the school system. In a number of ways, Kano simplified his approach from the Ryu (systems) he had been taught... but that's not really the same as "modernizing" the system. The structure, the mechanics, the uniform, the etiquette, the forms of attacks, the usage of Japanese kata, and so on, are all straight out of classical Jujutsu... in fact, the only real thing he "modernized" was the idea of mass-teaching, which lead to the development of the i-dan (kyu and dan) ranking, as well as the adoption of coloured belts. But, to be blunt, that form of ranking was adapted from the game "Go"... which is a very old game... so maybe not so much "modernizing". The fact that other modern systems have followed suit, particularly in the ranking ideas, doesn't mean that Kano was "modernizing" Jujutsu... just that he hit upon an idea that caught.

So, uh.... no. Wrong.

I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu.

Judo absolutely has it's basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu, specifically Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu and Kito Ryu. In fact, it's considered by some to be the current branch of Kito Ryu, as Kano was the successor to his line of that system... and it's teachings are preserved within the kata of the Kodokan (the Koshiki no Kata basically is Kito Ryu, in a nutshell). It's restructured (well, the Koshiki no Kata isn't, but Judo as a whole is), but so are many classical systems.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.

What do you think has been added to Judo? Here's a clue... there's been a lot simplified, not added in. As far as BJJ, not much has been added there, either, it's simply developed along a different line (focusing on the ground, as a major aspect), with the overtly competitive aspect demanding constant adjustment, additions to, and adaptations to the mechanical methods... but it's basic approach is the same. Basically, someone comes up with a new sweep... so someone comes up with a counter... and then a counter to the counter... and so on. That's not adding things, it's developing naturally within it's context. And, for the record, that type of development has nothing to do with real fights/self defence, as it's to do with a competitive arms race... a street fight (to use an over-used and inaccurate stereotype) simply doesn't require development in that direction.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.

And what, exactly, is your experience with actual Jujutsu? I'm assuming you're referring to the way Judo and BJJ do randori/roll/spar (whichever term you want) here... you do realize that such training methods have been a part of classical traditions for centuries, yeah? I mean, the reason Judo has such a focus on randori is because Kano's first teacher (classical Jujutsu) was a big proponent of it... it comes directly out of Jujutsu training methods. His second school had randori as well... and so did his third (although the teacher wasn't as fond of it, and Kano ran those sessions himself). This was in two separate systems, not just one, you realize... and how could Kano have "supplanted Jujutsu" by winning all the Police tournaments if none of the other systems did randori? They'd have had to to be in the tournament at all... how about the guys from the Handa Dojo learning under the head of Fusen Ryu? They beat Kano's guys, based on their explorations in randori, under the guidance of Mataemon Tanabe... but, of course, these classical systems are dead, and can't possibly do all that sparring and stuff....

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj.

No, they don't. They consider BJJ to be BJJ. Jujutsu is pretty much any unarmed combat system, particularly non-striking ones (throws, chokes, locks etc). Perhaps MMA fans in Japan think automatically of BJJ, but that's like saying that if you say "Kobudo" to a karate student, they think of Okinawan weapons systems, but say it to a Koryu practitioner, and they have a very different idea in mind.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan.

Wow, I'll have to tell my friends that are training in, or have trained in, Sosuishi Ryu, Takeuchi Ryu, Araki Ryu, Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu, Kukishin Ryu, Asayama Ichiden Ryu, Shinden Fudo Ryu, Hontai Yoshin Ryu, Kashima Shinryu, Tatsumi Ryu, Shindo Yoshin Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu, Shinto Tenshin Ryu, Fusen Ryu, and more that they've trained in non-existant things... not to mention the dozens of other systems that I know of, have seen demonstrations of, have contact with people involved with, and so on.

So, uh... no. Wrong.

Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.

There's certainly a lot to make us wonder here, yes....

 

[RTKDCMB]

Then please show me the Goju Ryu stylists utilizing similar movements in a full contact setting.

There surely must be some Goju Ryu practitioners that have mastered the Bunkai.

1) I have practically no knowledge or experience in the Goju Ryu system that qualifies me to judge them.
2) It's not my job to hunt for videos for you.
3) Even if I found one you would not accept it anyway so why should I bother.
4) Your statements above are only proving my point (that you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing)

 

[MJS]

To be fair, Bjj is a modified form of Judo, not Jujutsu. Judo is the modernized form of Jujutsu, []which is an archiac battlefield art.[/b] Judo all but supplanted Jujutsu at the turn of the previous century, as it modernized JJJ for the modern era. I wouldn't say that Bjj has its basis firmly in classical Jujutsu, anymore than saying that Judo has its basis firmly planted in classical Jujutsu. Both are very different than the JJ systems they came from, and other things outside of Jujutsu were added to both.Judo and Bjj are dynamic, living arts, while JJJ is a dead art.

Ironically, when you go to Japan, they consider Jujutsu to be Bjj. Classical Japanese JJ is pretty much nonexistent in Japan. Makes you wonder where all those "traditional" Jujutsu dojos here in the states come from.

Gee, I just all the Small Circle JJ guys, as well as all of the other JJ schools out there, are nothing but a joke then, huh? Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with this post.

 

[MJS]

Choreographed moves against willing targets is easy to look effective. See Aikdo, or that Kiai Master who made people spin around in the air using his "chi".

So, you assume that everything is done against compliant opponents? Ok. I always find it interesting how people use YT as the measuring stick as far as what's legit and what isn't.

 

[Hanzou]

1) I have practically no knowledge or experience in the Goju Ryu system that qualifies me to judge them.
2) It's not my job to hunt for videos for you.
3) Even if I found one you would not accept it anyway so why should I bother.
4) Your statements above are only proving my point (that you are just looking at part of the learning process and assuming it to be the whole thing)

Actually I would accept it, if you provided the evidence. There has to be a Goju guy somewhere that can fight like Taira.

Why don't Goju guys fight like that kata, and if they don't then what's the problem? I don't think that's an unfair question to ask.