What is the most effective?

[Brian R. VanCise]

Chris that is too bad it sounds like you were linked in with a group going for the sporting side of BJJ only. Even if they had Royce in may be that his focus for that seminar was just the sporting side of BJJ. (he does that as well) However, if you train with an affiliated Gracie school from the Gracie Academy or Royce I know for a fact you will get the self-defense side taught of BJJ. This is pretty standard and I have good friends on each side and came from a Training Hall affiliated with them at that time. (now affiliated with Caique) As groups broke away from the Gracies though some began to more specialize in the sporting side only. (some started to specialize when they were affiliated) You can walk into a Brazilian Jiujitsu school and never learn any self-defense. This is true. Yet if they are affiliated with the Gracie Academy or Royce you are going to learn self-defense as Helio Gracie developed it. I know that has not changed yet......

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I would agree with everything Tony except your last few sentences. I think Rorion and those at the Gracie Academy would disagree that there system has relatively little in the original development for self-defense methodology in Brazil. (it's origin) Not totally disagreeing with you but I feel they would disagree based on my experiences training with some of them, talking, etc. When training with Rolker Gracie a long time ago when he came from Brazil he talked about using Gracie Jiujitsu in self-defense in Brazil and understanding the difference between a violent encounter and a sporting match. He was pretty specific about several things even if some of it was a little hard to follow at times.


Other than that I love your post!

Yeah, I'm sure the folks at the Gracie Academy would probably disagree with me, but I've noticed they often have a tendency to conflate street fighting with self-defense. Of course there is a curriculum of techniques which are clearly self-defense oriented (gun disarms, standing defenses against rear chokeholds, etc), but those can mostly be found in many other forms of jujutsu. I'm not convinced that BJJ had a lot of original development in that department, compared to what was developed for street fights, challenge matches, and sport competition.

 

[Steve]

Hey, one little thing I forgot, Chris. You said:

No, it's not about "choosing to alter (my) name", it's that the name changes when spoken in a different language.

I've never, ever heard anyone else say something like this. I've lived in a few countries over my life, and traveled through many more, and I've always been Steve. And my given name, on my passport, has never changed. I didn't become Etienne when I was in France, nor did I become Stefan or Stephan when I lived in Germany. I have an employee who works for me named Juan. Are you suggesting that it would be correct and appropriate for me to insist on calling him John? I can't even imagine a scenario where that would be appropriate.

 

[SamD]

Interesting questions. Firstly do you mean Japan jujutsu or Brazilian jiujutsu (BJJ). Neither Judo nor BJJ as it is taught in many dojos is designed for fights outside of a competition match on the mat. The emphasis is on regulated (rule based) competitions. The problem is that competition or sport arts and styles have many safety rule to protect participants and they are not used to distance variations when someone is no longer grabbing their GI, but is now throwing punches and kicks at them. Fighting for your survival has no real rules or disqualifying techniques. Look at MMA fighters and notice how they don't just walk up and clinch. They throw kicks and jabbing punches to test the range to their opponent before entering for grappling. They know if they just walk in and try and grapple they will be on their butt. The Gracie's have said the same thing. Saying that of course, I am sure if you were good at Judo or BJJ and one person started pushing you around you could deal with them. But often on the street the attacker is not alone and you don't want to be on the ground struggling. In my opinion I think Japanese style jujutsu is probably more useful for street fighting situations because it incorporates strikes as well as all the grappling, chokes and throws, but more importantly you learn defences against these attacks too. As for Japanese and non Japanese jujutsu well I think that is all snobbery. There are so many great styles out there including Judo and BJJ, you just have to figure out what you want from it and dedicate yourself to it. Just my opinion.

 

[Steve]

There are so many great styles out there including Judo and BJJ, you just have to figure out what you want from it and dedicate yourself to it. Just my opinion.

Terrific first post! Welcome to MT.

The snip above is something I really agree with. I've said many times here that the most effective style is the style that you enjoy enough to train in regularly. It doesn't matter how great a martial arts school is, if you never go to class.

 

[wingchun100]

In my experience I have seen judo schools leaning more toward sport than self-defense. As far as jiu jitsu, all I have ever seen is what got used in the UFC. Certainly there were some people from the judo school I went to who knew how to use it on the street, but it took them a LONG time before that payoff came since the school was more about sport.

 

[Mr. President]

Is it "correct" from the point of view of the actual Japanese term? No. However, it can't be ignored that, at the time, it was considered to be, if not the "correct" form, then it was the standard form of rendering the word.

Think of it this way - It's the same thing if Americans developed their own Krav Maga and called it Krev Magu. A simple mispronunciation of the Hebrew word. Would that have been OK?

Judo and Jujutsu are distinct the same way each different Jujutsu system is distinct from the others...

Not quite. The rest of the Jujutsu Ryus are more real life combat styles, designed for killing and self defense, so competitions without diluted rules are too dangerous. Judo was a competitive synthesis. It was designed with full speed grappling in mind, and therefore safer to practice under full speed, full intent situations. Plus Judo had enough exclusive techniques and moves added to its arsenal. If BJJ came from Jujutsu, it wouldn't have looked the same as it does now, and it would likely have a different approach to the competitive aspect.

And, honestly, those videos don't really fill me with a huge amount of confidence that they've really grasped the differences... the focus is still in the wrong direction, and no matter how much Rener tries to separate the two, they're really little more than variations on each other in that approach.

That would depend on your definition of the word "little". His point about distance management is really the core of the issue. Learning competition style BJJ might prove more detrimental than helpful in self defense. In a competition, the competitors simply grab each other's lapels and begin careful negotiating of position, but what if someone if launching himself at you with a baseball bat? Ask him to grab your shirt?

Self defense forces you to bring a completely different contextual approach to your combat sport. it's not just whether he's armed, but the environment in which you're fighting. The width of the space you're in, the type of ground you're standing on, the emotional context of the encounter, the number of people you're facing etc.

There was a very interesting example of that in the now canceled TV show "human weapon". In the Krav Maga episode, the host Jason Chambers is in Israel and is asked to defend against a knife attack. The knife isn't real and can't hurt him, so it's OK to do it at full speed. Chambers is a rather successful MMA fighter and a BJJ black belt, but in that simulation, he is stabbed multiple times in about 3 seconds into the simulation. With all his combat sport training, he didn't have a clue on how to stop it. And more than anything, THAT is the concern when picking a school for self defense. What will they work with you on?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Chambers is a rather successful MMA fighter and a BJJ black belt, but in that simulation, he is stabbed multiple times in about 3 seconds into the simulation.

Just nitpicking, but Jason Chambers is a BJJ brown belt and was a purple belt at the time of the show.

 

[Mr. President]

Just nitpicking, but Jason Chambers is a BJJ brown belt and was a purple belt at the time of the show.

Fair enough. I thought it was black, but OK. Still, purple belt is above blue, and according to the Gracies, finishing blue belt means you're street ready and are able to defend yourself against a full-on knife attack.

Plus, Chambers learns BJJ at "10th planet Jiu Jitsu", which prepares students specifically for submission grappling tournaments and MMA, and Chambers does have quite the MMA record. I doubt that he would have been able to repel a knife attack even at black belt.

 

[Chris Parker]

Think of it this way - It's the same thing if Americans developed their own Krav Maga and called it Krev Magu. A simple mispronunciation of the Hebrew word. Would that have been OK?

If it's not claiming to be the Israeli system, then yes. It's an ugly name, but so are some other legit ones.

Not quite. The rest of the Jujutsu Ryus are more real life combat styles, designed for killing and self defense, so competitions without diluted rules are too dangerous. Judo was a competitive synthesis. It was designed with full speed grappling in mind, and therefore safer to practice under full speed, full intent situations. Plus Judo had enough exclusive techniques and moves added to its arsenal. If BJJ came from Jujutsu, it wouldn't have looked the same as it does now, and it would likely have a different approach to the competitive aspect.

Er... are you seriously trying to tell me, of all people, what the different Japanese Jujutsu Ryu-ha are about? Really? Poor choice, mate.... oh, and no, that's not correct. At all. In anything you said (save that BJJ came from, in part, Japanese Jujutsu, in particular, early Judo).

That would depend on your definition of the word "little". His point about distance management is really the core of the issue. Learning competition style BJJ might prove more detrimental than helpful in self defense. In a competition, the competitors simply grab each other's lapels and begin careful negotiating of position, but what if someone if launching himself at you with a baseball bat? Ask him to grab your shirt?

I define "little" as "small", "less than big", "not a lot"... you have a different definition? Distance management is also the core of sporting success, just a different form of distance management (which is part of what I was talking about when I said I wasn't impressed with the way they were describing things... there's a lot they don't get, based on that clip... and everything else I've seen. Very good technicians, absolutely, but that's not the same thing).

Oh, and you're really talking to the wrong person if you think you're educating me about the differences between sporting methodology and non-sporting/self defence methodology... and your examples are more strawmen than anything else.

Self defense forces you to bring a completely different contextual approach to your combat sport. it's not just whether he's armed, but the environment in which you're fighting. The width of the space you're in, the type of ground you're standing on, the emotional context of the encounter, the number of people you're facing etc.

Yeah.... you've really misjudged who you're addressing with those comments.

There was a very interesting example of that in the now canceled TV show "human weapon". In the Krav Maga episode, the host Jason Chambers is in Israel and is asked to defend against a knife attack. The knife isn't real and can't hurt him, so it's OK to do it at full speed. Chambers is a rather successful MMA fighter and a BJJ black belt, but in that simulation, he is stabbed multiple times in about 3 seconds into the simulation. With all his combat sport training, he didn't have a clue on how to stop it. And more than anything, THAT is the concern when picking a school for self defense. What will they work with you on?

Okay. Of course, Koryu Jujutsu dealing with weapon defence isn't the same thing either....

Fair enough. I thought it was black, but OK. Still, purple belt is above blue, and according to the Gracies, finishing blue belt means you're street ready and are able to defend yourself against a full-on knife attack.

Ha! Nah, I've seen their knife defence... and I really doubt they'd say that anyone, at any level, is necessarily "able to defend yourself against a full-on knife attack". Anyone who's spent any time dealing with actual knife attacks doesn't say such things.

Plus, Chambers learns BJJ at "10th planet Jiu Jitsu", which prepares students specifically for submission grappling tournaments and MMA, and Chambers does have quite the MMA record. I doubt that he would have been able to repel a knife attack even at black belt.

And your training is in....?

To be clear, that's not an attack, it's a comment on the realities of dealing with knife assaults, and the fact that even black belts in anything will have one hell of a time "repelling" a knife attack... so is your training better? If so, how so?

 

[Mr. President]

If it's not claiming to be the Israeli system, then yes.

I'd probably still call it Krav Maga, but whatever.

Er... are you seriously trying to tell me, of all people, what the different Japanese Jujutsu Ryu-ha are about?

I'm saying that when Kano developed Judo, he threw out all the Jujutsu moves and techniques that did not conform to his vision of maximum efficiency under real time testing, which meant Nage waza and Katame waza without Atemi outside of Kata.

Oh, and you're really talking to the wrong person if you think you're educating me

Well, if you think learning a combat sport prepares you just fine for the street then you need to be educated. If you don't think that, then there's no argument.

and your examples are more strawmen than anything else.

No. I think they're dead on.

Yeah.... you've really misjudged who you're addressing with those comments.

Is this the part where I bow to you?

and I really doubt they'd say that anyone, at any level, is necessarily "able to defend yourself against a full-on knife attack". Anyone who's spent any time dealing with actual knife attacks doesn't say such things.

Check out the video I linked to in this thread. They do say it.

And your training is in....?

Street fighter video games, mostly.

To be clear, that's not an attack, it's a comment on the realities of dealing with knife assaults, and the fact that even black belts in anything will have one hell of a time "repelling" a knife attack...

I think that learning Krav Maga for 3 years prepares you for a knife attack much better than 3 years in your run-of-the-mill BJJ school does. It doesn't mean it's better or worse, but it does address different situations and scenarios.

Krav Maga is more suited if you're clearing houses of insurgents in Gaza, but for an MMA match, I'd prefer BJJ.

 

[Chris Parker]

I'd probably still call it Krav Maga, but whatever.

Then you missed the point. If it isn't the Israeli art of Krav Maga, why would you insist that it is called Krav Maga?

I'm saying that when Kano developed Judo, he threw out all the Jujutsu moves and techniques that did not conform to his vision of maximum efficiency under real time testing, which meant Nage waza and Katame waza without Atemi outside of Kata.

Yeah... that's not correct. And my point was that your description of other jujutsu ryu-ha was not correct either.

Well, if you think learning a combat sport prepares you just fine for the street then you need to be educated. If you don't think that, then there's no argument.

No, the point was that you seemed to be "correcting" me, when I've been saying that for years.

No. I think they're dead on.

No, you were creating false hypotheticals in order to prove that sports based arts aren't designed with non-sports applications. That makes them strawmen arguments, so... no. They're not "dead on".

Is this the part where I bow to you?

No, it's the part where you start to realize that I know a lot more about this than you do.

Check out the video I linked to in this thread. They do say it.

I missed the exact statement... okay, then, they're either using marketing rhetoric, or they don't really get what they're saying.

Street fighter video games, mostly.

Right. And the Aikido fits in where?

My point was that your training might be just as inadequate for knife defence, when it all comes down to it.

I think that learning Krav Maga for 3 years prepares you for a knife attack much better than 3 years in your run-of-the-mill BJJ school does. It doesn't mean it's better or worse, but it does address different situations and scenarios.

Krav Maga is more suited if you're clearing houses of insurgents in Gaza, but for an MMA match, I'd prefer BJJ.

Sure, that's agreed, but none of it changes the fact that dealing with a knife is one hell of a challenge for anyone, regardless of what they've trained in. Some will give a slightly better chance than others, but that's really about it. And that's really more to do with the incredibly small margin of error allowed.

 

[drop bear]

Think of it this way - It's the same thing if Americans developed their own Krav Maga and called it Krev Magu. A simple mispronunciation of the Hebrew word. Would that have been OK?



Not quite. The rest of the Jujutsu Ryus are more real life combat styles, designed for killing and self defense, so competitions without diluted rules are too dangerous. Judo was a competitive synthesis. It was designed with full speed grappling in mind, and therefore safer to practice under full speed, full intent situations. Plus Judo had enough exclusive techniques and moves added to its arsenal. If BJJ came from Jujutsu, it wouldn't have looked the same as it does now, and it would likely have a different approach to the competitive aspect.



That would depend on your definition of the word "little". His point about distance management is really the core of the issue. Learning competition style BJJ might prove more detrimental than helpful in self defense. In a competition, the competitors simply grab each other's lapels and begin careful negotiating of position, but what if someone if launching himself at you with a baseball bat? Ask him to grab your shirt?

Self defense forces you to bring a completely different contextual approach to your combat sport. it's not just whether he's armed, but the environment in which you're fighting. The width of the space you're in, the type of ground you're standing on, the emotional context of the encounter, the number of people you're facing etc.

There was a very interesting example of that in the now canceled TV show "human weapon". In the Krav Maga episode, the host Jason Chambers is in Israel and is asked to defend against a knife attack. The knife isn't real and can't hurt him, so it's OK to do it at full speed. Chambers is a rather successful MMA fighter and a BJJ black belt, but in that simulation, he is stabbed multiple times in about 3 seconds into the simulation. With all his combat sport training, he didn't have a clue on how to stop it. And more than anything, THAT is the concern when picking a school for self defense. What will they work with you on?

That demo in human weapon was a bit rigged.

When the presenters defended the knife they got sewing machine attacked and got mauled.

Then the instructor did the drill and the sewing machine stopped.

Not to mention that was after he was trained in the philipino fighting.

(Maybe. the episode came after)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Weapon

 

[drop bear]

Krav Maga is more suited if you're clearing houses of insurgents in Gaza, but for an MMA match, I'd prefer BJJ.

Machine guns.

Wrestling.

Just my opinion.

 

[Marnetmar]

What is the most effective?

I'm sorry, that question was incorrect. Please try again.

 

[Mr. President]

If it isn't the Israeli art of Krav Maga, why would you insist that it is called Krav Maga?

Because the words are still the words. Is it OK that Americans pronounce it "Keradee" instead of Ka-Ra-Te? Well, at least they didn't change the spelling.

Yeah... that's not correct. And my point was that your description of other jujutsu ryu-ha was not correct either.

Just saying "that's not correct" isn't good enough.

No, the point was that you seemed to be "correcting" me, when I've been saying that for years.

Good.

No, you were creating false hypotheticals in order to prove that sports based arts aren't designed with non-sports applications.

What is it specifically that makes that hypothetical invalid?

they're either using marketing rhetoric, or they don't really get what they're saying.

I agree that their blue belt talk is nonsense, but the overall point about distance management and a different approach between sport and street is spot on.

dealing with a knife is one hell of a challenge for anyone, regardless of what they've trained in. Some will give a slightly better chance than others, but that's really about it. And that's really more to do with the incredibly small margin of error allowed.

Knives are short, so they can only really be used as an extension of your hand. One could argue that the same defense you would use for blocking/evading/countering an unarmed attack could also use to defend against a knife. As in - The knife is really nothing more that a more dangerous punch.

In fact, I believe that's the point of Filipino martial arts. That all knife/stick techniques are the same moves you would use when you're unarmed. The principle doesn't change just because a knife is involved.

 

[Chris Parker]

Because the words are still the words. Is it OK that Americans pronounce it "Keradee" instead of Ka-Ra-Te? Well, at least they didn't change the spelling.

It's not the same word, though, it's derived from the word. If you're not getting that, you're really not going to understand the distinction.

Just saying "that's not correct" isn't good enough.

Really? I point out that your take on classical jujutsu is incorrect, as it really just isn't correct at all. You state that "the rest of the Jujutsu Ryus (sic) are real life combat and self defence", when that's just not the case. Some were arresting methodologies, others were for unarmed methods for handling armed assault (or using light arms), some were more about an expression of a particular range of tactics to fit in with, or provide a basis for weaponry study, some are more competitive in nature, and so on. So, you were wrong. You stated that Kano's Judo was a "competitive synthesis", which is also not correct... competition was kind of a side-benefit of the methodology of Judo... it was more about a more logical progression and training device than the overly complex methods of the Koryu he had studied. It was also less of a synthesis, and more of a natural development of his personal study... sure, aspects were taken from Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu and Kito Ryu (with some other influences), but they weren't synthesised together, they were simply part of what went into Judo. You state that Judo was designed "with full speed grappling in mind", implying that other systems weren't... uh, what? Other arts are only designed to work with half speed attacks? Dude, so far wrong it's difficult to begin to point out how wrong it is. "Therefore safer to practice under full speed, full intent"? Again, what makes you think that other arts don't have such methods and training practices? "Exclusive techniques and moves added to it's arsenal"? Wow, have you missed the point on that one... "techniques and moves" aren't the unique aspect of any art, and none of it is exclusive, especially when almost all of it can be traced to older systems and approaches.

So yeah, saying "that's not correct" is good enough when everything you put down was not correct.

Good.

Yeah... you really don't seem to quite know what I mean here. But that's fine.

What is it specifically that makes that hypothetical invalid?

The fact that it's a false hypothetical which had no basis in reality, and was the same as insisting that a shark is a terrible bird as it can't fly as well as an eagle.

I agree that their blue belt talk is nonsense, but the overall point about distance management and a different approach between sport and street is spot on.

Do you seriously think that sports don't have distance management? Really? And, it has to be noted, the distance management is not the real difference between "sport and street", no matter how much Royce's kids want to say it.

Knives are short, so they can only really be used as an extension of your hand. One could argue that the same defense you would use for blocking/evading/countering an unarmed attack could also use to defend against a knife. As in - The knife is really nothing more that a more dangerous punch.

Really? Wow, I really hope you don't actually approach, or, for gods sake, teach knife defence with that idea.... it's delusional to the point of suicidal.

In fact, I believe that's the point of Filipino martial arts. That all knife/stick techniques are the same moves you would use when you're unarmed. The principle doesn't change just because a knife is involved.

Yeah... that's not what they mean.

 

[K-man]

Knives are short, so they can only really be used as an extension of your hand. One could argue that the same defense you would use for blocking/evading/countering an unarmed attack could also use to defend against a knife. As in - The knife is really nothing more that a more dangerous punch.

In fact, I believe that's the point of Filipino martial arts. That all knife/stick techniques are the same moves you would use when you're unarmed. The principle doesn't change just because a knife is involved.

Really? Interesting concept.
:hmm:

 

[Mr. President]

It's not the same word, though, it's derived from the word.

No. It's not derived from that word. It's a mispronunciation of it.

Some were arresting methodologies

Which is real life, like I said. As in - Non competitive.

others were for unarmed methods for handling armed assault

As above.

some were more about an expression of a particular range of tactics to fit in with, or provide a basis for weaponry study

As above.

You stated that Kano's Judo was a "competitive synthesis"

I'm not saying Kano created it for competition. Synthesis means "the combination of ideas to form a theory or system", which is exactly what Judo is. He took all of the Jujutsu principles and concepts that conformed with his vision of what Judo should be, and formed a new system from it.

By "competitive" I mean that he wanted it to be a safe system to practice with full speed sparring. Since many of the other Ryus, such as Daito Ryu, are designed for warfare and contain various strikes that could cause severe injuries in full speed training, these were excluded from Judo, or at the very least, highly de-emphasized.

Again, what makes you think that other arts don't have such methods and training practices?

Outside of Judo and probably Sumo, Japanese martial arts are practiced with a compliant Uke, and do not contain sparring as such, since the point of these arts is not to fight, but to merely defend oneself.

I'm not sure that is correct for 100% of Jujutsu ryus, but that's the overall point.

The fact that it's a false hypothetical which had no basis in reality

Are you saying that the example I brought cannot happen in real life? If not, why not?

Do you seriously think that sports don't have distance management?

I'm saying that combat sports have a different idea of what distance management is.

Yeah... that's not what they mean.

I've actually heard this in several places. One of them is at the 5:45 mark on this video:

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v945665g2WkCnew?h1=Human+Weapon+Philippines+and+eskrima

 

[K-man]

Knives are short, so they can only really be used as an extension of your hand. One could argue that the same defense you would use for blocking/evading/countering an unarmed attack could also use to defend against a knife. As in - The knife is really nothing more that a more dangerous punch.

In fact, I believe that's the point of Filipino martial arts. That all knife/stick techniques are the same moves you would use when you're unarmed. The principle doesn't change just because a knife is involved.

I've actually heard this in several places. One of them is at the 5:45 mark on this video:

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v945665g2WkCnew?h1=Human+Weapon+Philippines+and+eskrima

I think you have misquoted what he said. He said the system of striking is the same with the stick, the knife or the hand. In that context you are correct in saying the knife is the extension of the hand. When it comes to defending against a knife, with empty hands, the defence is not the same as defending against empty hand. The defence is similar but not the same.

If your attacker purely used thrusting strikes or simple slashes you might get away with the same techniques that you use against empty hand in some MAs. Krav is an example of that. But if you reckon you can use those same techniques against a series of short slashes and thrusts as in 'slice and dice', all I can say to you is, "Good Luck, may your God be with you".
:asian: