With your experience in the Arts you mentioned - trust me on this, bro - if you were to train in a Gracie school, even if it's sport oriented - it's all going to be self defense for you. That's how easy it will be for you to adapt it.
The elusive Self Defence Version of Gracie Jiu Jitsu
- Thread starter Jusroc
- Start date
Hi
Most academies will have plenty of hobbyist folk training there. Relatively few people are focused on competition in my experience
In terms of training for self defence: I very consciously focus my BJJ game on techniques that are most appropriate for self defence contexts. This is somewhat suboptimal compared to folks utilising the full tool kit of techniques, but hasnāt been much of an issue for me to be honest
The gains you get are really significant even if you can only train 2-3 times a week
Hope this helps
Thanks for your advice.
punisher73
Senior Master
Some good advice, but also advice given from some people who weren't exposed to BJJ/GJJ in the very early days.
There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages. Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques. If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now. As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.
The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.
There was definitely a "self-defense" curriculum that used to be taught in Brazil by the BJJ/GJJ lineages. Royce Gracie published a book on the Gracie Self-Defense techniques. If you look at the techniques, they are VERY similar to other S-D techniques from other TMA's. Many of the BJJ lineages dropped this portion of their program and teach what most people recognize as "BJJ" now. As others have said, with the right understanding, it can be used for both sport and self-defense.
The Gracies also put out a VHS set in the "early days" on their techniques.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Wow. That video is a trip. Heavily reminds me of various kenpo stuff. Also noteworthy that this presentation suffers from the same issues that are so heavily criticized in other methods: slow, robotic attacks, compliant partners, etc. Of course demonstration requires it, this is not an actual fight. But that is true of any method. But if this is all that anyone ever saw of the method, they could make that same conclusion that other methods are accused of: slow, unrealistic, overly compliant.
thanks for your advice and link to video
very interesting
just out of interest
anyone reviewed the Gracie University syllabus
There are free examples for people to watch
they teach the core Gracie syllabus for their "combative" belt
which are mainly the same techniques that are the core of the sport syllabus
but are adapted for street self defence
and are recommended to be drilled in stages
with a partner that simulates the attacker
which i guess is in-between compliant attacker and rolling
When the course was first rolled out, the course got a lot of criticism from people who
belong to academies who thought that the course was bs, because rolling was not part of
their program, and that people could get graded to blue belt over the net by sending videos
so the founders of the program stopped grading students to blue belt without rolling
but instead graded people to a new type of belt, the combative's belt
which could be upgraded after joining an academy and rolling for x months / years
i personally found the videos well presented and put together
but also i understand why the students from other academies didn't think training under this
environment without a real life instructor, and without extensive rolling made it different
i am also aware that Rickson Gracie also released his sd program called self defence units
although i have not watched these
I would have thought from a quality perspective that Rickson Gracie's program would also be really good
but i also see that it also may be similar to the gracie university program, and without rolling
it would be more like trad ju jitsu program rather than Gracie Jiu Jitsu
anyone reviewed the Gracie University syllabus
There are free examples for people to watch
they teach the core Gracie syllabus for their "combative" belt
which are mainly the same techniques that are the core of the sport syllabus
but are adapted for street self defence
and are recommended to be drilled in stages
with a partner that simulates the attacker
which i guess is in-between compliant attacker and rolling
When the course was first rolled out, the course got a lot of criticism from people who
belong to academies who thought that the course was bs, because rolling was not part of
their program, and that people could get graded to blue belt over the net by sending videos
so the founders of the program stopped grading students to blue belt without rolling
but instead graded people to a new type of belt, the combative's belt
which could be upgraded after joining an academy and rolling for x months / years
i personally found the videos well presented and put together
but also i understand why the students from other academies didn't think training under this
environment without a real life instructor, and without extensive rolling made it different
i am also aware that Rickson Gracie also released his sd program called self defence units
although i have not watched these
I would have thought from a quality perspective that Rickson Gracie's program would also be really good
but i also see that it also may be similar to the gracie university program, and without rolling
it would be more like trad ju jitsu program rather than Gracie Jiu Jitsu
Hanzou
Grandmaster
I was taught a lot of this stuff in Relsonās schools. Hence why when people say BJJ lacks stand up, I donāt know what theyāre talking about, because I was taught a lot of stand up.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Simply put, you need to roll to get a blue belt. I would never award a blue belt to anyone that has never rolled, and showed some level of competence with the techniques.
That online blue belt crap put out by the Torrance school was dumb, and a lot of people in the Bjj community didnāt like it. Iām glad they dropped it.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
To be fair, thereās a difference between whatās shown above, and catching fists out of the air and tossing them with a twirl, or blocking a punch and hitting someone 20 times before they can react. Thatās what you see in those other methods, and you know itās nonsense.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Yeah, thatās a bad idea. If you donāt want to roll, you should do a different MA.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Yeah. Talented People go street. And for some reason just go insane.
No idea why.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Which is garbage.
I guess the non rolling belt is a lot like the "technical" route to belts in Judo.
The British Judo Association (BJA) newer approach to grading.
The BJA give two options to people want to grade in Judo, the "technical route" which people can get through a technical examination and is judged on a persons technical ability performing an extensive syllabus of techniques and kata's of a series of techniques.
The other route, is the competitive route, where an individual can get belts by collecting points by winning fights at competition or at a sport style competitive grading.
In order to get points, a player must have to score points against other players who are at least the same belt level as them.
I believe that the technical route was developed in order to make the sport more appealing to folk who aren't interested or have other obstacles to competing (age, location, injury, health conditions, lack of ambition).
People still participate in Randori in their clubs regardless as to whether they are competitive players or recreational players.
Personally, I am not a big fan of the technical belt route.
Someone who has never had a fight in competition can now in theory can grade to 5th Dan, and the technical Dan belts look the same as the competitive Dan Grades.
One problem that can arise with the technical Dan grade is that the players who aren't any good at fighting
can have much higher grade than a player who can beat them in Randori, who may have chosen not to do technical belts, or who is newer and has less years on the Judo clock, but perhaps more years in fighting experience.
This can cause major problems with hierarchy within the club, as the higher technical Dan people start to believe their ego, that they are technically better, and so sometimes end up bossing around or even bullying players who are better. I think some treat Grades like Army rank.
Personally, I think that for those who are doing Judo from a more Japanese "self perfectionist" mindset, I think that the technical perfection can be a worthwhile endeavour, however, in some cases, the people grading aren't always very strict with regards to grading people, due to the sport emphasis, and some of the players, will try and get technical grades with poorly practised alternative versions of the techniques in the syllabus, which may be fine for use in competition, but personally i think should be disallowed in technical gradings unless there is a really significant reason (such as major injury or disability).
But I guess that is one of the conflicting issues in competitive martial arts, sports men want to win medals, get belts for ego and some don't care how they get them. Where as those who follow a more Japanese Mindset, will want to train hard to perfect their technique, and not look for shortcuts or cheats to get belts, as to do so would show a bad spirit. Not saying people shouldn't use variations for techniques in competition, sure. after all, that is how sports evolve and thrive. But think that if a technical grading system is going to be worth anything, standards need to be established and kept, otherwise, you end up with loads of people with high belts and a poor quality level.
As for the Torrance thing
Course, their belt system is not equal to the belt standards at live comp clubs.
But I guess, for those, for what ever reason can't train at such a club,
it does give such people a way to achieve some understanding, prior to attending a
good club.
The British Judo Association (BJA) newer approach to grading.
The BJA give two options to people want to grade in Judo, the "technical route" which people can get through a technical examination and is judged on a persons technical ability performing an extensive syllabus of techniques and kata's of a series of techniques.
The other route, is the competitive route, where an individual can get belts by collecting points by winning fights at competition or at a sport style competitive grading.
In order to get points, a player must have to score points against other players who are at least the same belt level as them.
I believe that the technical route was developed in order to make the sport more appealing to folk who aren't interested or have other obstacles to competing (age, location, injury, health conditions, lack of ambition).
People still participate in Randori in their clubs regardless as to whether they are competitive players or recreational players.
Personally, I am not a big fan of the technical belt route.
Someone who has never had a fight in competition can now in theory can grade to 5th Dan, and the technical Dan belts look the same as the competitive Dan Grades.
One problem that can arise with the technical Dan grade is that the players who aren't any good at fighting
can have much higher grade than a player who can beat them in Randori, who may have chosen not to do technical belts, or who is newer and has less years on the Judo clock, but perhaps more years in fighting experience.
This can cause major problems with hierarchy within the club, as the higher technical Dan people start to believe their ego, that they are technically better, and so sometimes end up bossing around or even bullying players who are better. I think some treat Grades like Army rank.
Personally, I think that for those who are doing Judo from a more Japanese "self perfectionist" mindset, I think that the technical perfection can be a worthwhile endeavour, however, in some cases, the people grading aren't always very strict with regards to grading people, due to the sport emphasis, and some of the players, will try and get technical grades with poorly practised alternative versions of the techniques in the syllabus, which may be fine for use in competition, but personally i think should be disallowed in technical gradings unless there is a really significant reason (such as major injury or disability).
But I guess that is one of the conflicting issues in competitive martial arts, sports men want to win medals, get belts for ego and some don't care how they get them. Where as those who follow a more Japanese Mindset, will want to train hard to perfect their technique, and not look for shortcuts or cheats to get belts, as to do so would show a bad spirit. Not saying people shouldn't use variations for techniques in competition, sure. after all, that is how sports evolve and thrive. But think that if a technical grading system is going to be worth anything, standards need to be established and kept, otherwise, you end up with loads of people with high belts and a poor quality level.
As for the Torrance thing
Course, their belt system is not equal to the belt standards at live comp clubs.
But I guess, for those, for what ever reason can't train at such a club,
it does give such people a way to achieve some understanding, prior to attending a
good club.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Someone clearly paid for their purple belt......
Okay, to be fair to Kutcher, Craig Jones is a beast.
drop bear
Sr. Grandmaster
Someone clearly paid for their purple belt......
Okay, to be fair to Kutcher, Craig Jones is a beast.
Brown.
And If Craig Jones can't make you look good. Then you don't look good.
Hanzou
Grandmaster
Hello Jusroc,
I'll offer my insight in hopes of guiding your path to learned self-defense groundwork.
My grappling training is from the Tagaki Yoshen Ryu, and I considered myself an excellent grappler. Until I grappled with some high level GJJ practioners-they owned me- but I was working within the context of the competition rules. In self-defense there are no rules, no ref, and no illegal techniques. That said, barring the more dangerous techniques, GJJ is that much more absolutely solid in it's basic principles and tactics, however as Tony Dismukes explained above, the strategy is taught mainly from a sport-fighting perspective.
The key differences, as I see it, is that first of all, on the street you do not want to go to the ground. you want your attacker on the ground, you on your feet(or one knee), unpinned, unentangled, head up eyes alert and ready to move quickly in any direction. you want that, but you may be on the ground with your attacker on top of you from the first anyway, and you must have the basic do's and don't's of groundwork under your belt. GJJ will provide that, but strategically it is a bad idea to seek to put yourself on the ground, depending on your skills and the circumstances, of course. I have known people who were so good on the ground that they could take out multiple attackers easily from below, but if you are that good, you already know that.
in the ring, taking someone down and positioning for an arm-bar is a good strategy. you can afford to rest on your back and let your opponent wear himself down until the right moment to seize advantage presents itself. on the street there could be a second attacker, or the first could reveal a weapon. in Takagi Yoshen Ryu, the attackers arm should already be broken before he hits the ground, and immediate escape is the strategy. Any take-down or submission hold that ties you up and entangles you with your opponent's body makes you vulnerable and should be avoided.
I'll offer my insight in hopes of guiding your path to learned self-defense groundwork.
My grappling training is from the Tagaki Yoshen Ryu, and I considered myself an excellent grappler. Until I grappled with some high level GJJ practioners-they owned me- but I was working within the context of the competition rules. In self-defense there are no rules, no ref, and no illegal techniques. That said, barring the more dangerous techniques, GJJ is that much more absolutely solid in it's basic principles and tactics, however as Tony Dismukes explained above, the strategy is taught mainly from a sport-fighting perspective.
The key differences, as I see it, is that first of all, on the street you do not want to go to the ground. you want your attacker on the ground, you on your feet(or one knee), unpinned, unentangled, head up eyes alert and ready to move quickly in any direction. you want that, but you may be on the ground with your attacker on top of you from the first anyway, and you must have the basic do's and don't's of groundwork under your belt. GJJ will provide that, but strategically it is a bad idea to seek to put yourself on the ground, depending on your skills and the circumstances, of course. I have known people who were so good on the ground that they could take out multiple attackers easily from below, but if you are that good, you already know that.
in the ring, taking someone down and positioning for an arm-bar is a good strategy. you can afford to rest on your back and let your opponent wear himself down until the right moment to seize advantage presents itself. on the street there could be a second attacker, or the first could reveal a weapon. in Takagi Yoshen Ryu, the attackers arm should already be broken before he hits the ground, and immediate escape is the strategy. Any take-down or submission hold that ties you up and entangles you with your opponent's body makes you vulnerable and should be avoided.
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
-
éåæ ZhĆ²ngxÄ«n center of gravity
- Latest: Wing Woo Gar
-