When the pursuit of "not being a sport" goes wrong...

[drop bear]

When it comes to traditional Japanese martial arts-and even when it comes to BJJ, which is Basically Just Judo...the original context for throws and groundfighting was being disarmed-or less armed, and in armor. The objective was, generally, to open a place in the opponents armor, and stick a knife in. This is especially true for the traditional arts that form the basis of the arts called "Bujinkan." (To be fair, my exposure to them was over 20 years ago, and they weren't called that then)In any case, when it comes to arts that are koryu, or claim to be, look for armored and armed applications. This is, of course, part and parcel of the " not for sport" mindset, as well as the "preserve for the art's sake" mindset: it's not likely that we'll ever see armed, armored conflict in a modern-day self-defense context. The Bujinkan is full of weapons that will never be carried or used on the street, or in self -defense even in the home, but, what if Hatsumi had a knife in one of his hands, throughout that video? There are places, like Norway, where he couldn't teach that with a knife in his hand-he'd have to talk around it, which brings us to the next bit of context:

This was my original point. OK if hatsumi had a knife in that situation he would have the advantage. But why does he also have to have crap groundwork?

I mean is there some dynamic of knife use that makes bad groundwork more applicable?

I would have thought good ground work would give the guy with the knife more of an advantage.

 

[drop bear]

Well Tae Kwon Do is basically just karate, and that is basically just Kung Fu.... Kickboxing is really just karate too, which is basically TaeKwon Do. Judo is basically wrestling, but with a jacket, so BJJ is basically catch wrestling, and catch wrestling is basically Judo.... ok, my head hurts now.

And they are all just drills for mma.

 

[drop bear]

True, for ground-fighting training. Not necessarily true in every other case. There are some simple techniques I can teach in an afternoon, which are reasonably effective with little training, but which cannot compare to what can be learned in a few weeks. That's the difference I was referring to. In my "Basic Self Defense Set" (mostly, the first parts students learn), I do include a few simple ground defense techniques. Better ground defense waits until later in the curriculum, simply because I cannot teach everything first - something had to wait. Since I can't build on the ground work as fully as (for instance) a BJJ school, I have to make some choices. Could I start from the same place as a BJJ school for groundwork? Perhaps, but I'd need to spend more time on groundwork early, which means less time on something else.

For self defence you teach the bump and roll. Because it is easy to learn with the knowledge that a competent top fighter won't let you do that.

It is still a viable basic and you can build it into other defences. So you can bump and roll and then shrimp out under the knee. (Which would be the next one you learn)

Simple basics.

If you want to eyegouge,bite or ninja chop people your bump and roll should really change. It should work without the extra measures so it works better when they are added.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This was my original point. OK if hatsumi had a knife in that situation he would have the advantage. But why does he also have to have crap groundwork?

I mean is there some dynamic of knife use that makes bad groundwork more applicable?

I would have thought good ground work would give the guy with the knife more of an advantage.

It absolutely would. I think a lot of styles put in small amounts of ground work, hoping to shore up gaps they see. I suppose something that sort of works is better than nothing, but not by much. It'd probably be better for students to simply struggle and experiment with the moves they already know (from their standing work).

 

[Buka]

When I first trained in grappling we were taught to escape the mount. And were then taught to defend the mount. IMO it's the only way to study or drill the mount. Damn tiring, too.

 

[elder999]

Yeah, don't believe the hype. Judo and Bjj have diverged to the point where they are two legitimately different styles. Judo's strict rules and Bjj's openess to outside influences have pushed the two into very different directions, despite them having the same root.

Yeah, don't believe the hype.

As someone who has done both, I'd say that Judo and BJJ's competitive rules have diverged so much that they are completely different competing styles. There i snothing in BJJ that wasn't in judo at one time, though there are things that might not be taught in most Judo dojo, as they are not permitted in competition, because judo has-for most dojo-become all about competition, under increasingly restrictive (and stupid!) rules....

 

[Hanzou]

Yeah, don't believe the hype.

As someone who has done both, I'd say that Judo and BJJ's competitive rules have diverged so much that they are completely different competing styles. There i snothing in BJJ that wasn't in judo at one time, though there are things that might not be taught in most Judo dojo, as they are not permitted in competition, because judo has-for most dojo-become all about competition, under increasingly restrictive (and stupid!) rules....

Which is like saying that boxing has grappling, since it had it back in the 1800s. The reality is that no one in boxing is learning boxing takedowns anymore because the rules forbid it.

Judo is no different. When people are getting chastised for doing guard pulls, leg takedowns, and leg locks in a Judo dojo, you have let competition rules dominate the original martial art.

 

[elder999]

Which is like saying that boxing has grappling, since it had it back in the 1800s. The reality is that no one in boxing is learning boxing takedowns anymore because the rules forbid it.

Judo is no different. When people are getting chastised for doing guard pulls, leg takedowns, and leg locks in a Judo dojo, you have let competition rules dominate the original martial art.

It's not like saying that at all.-there is, in fact, grappling taught in modern boxing, and if you think there are no elbows-or boxers being taught to follow the jab with an elbow from the same arm-then you aren't paying attention, and/or you're in the wrong gym.

In some places, judo is different, and those things are taught and encouraged. No one is chastised for doing them. @Steve can back me up on this-Aaron Fields sensei's Seattle Jujutsu club-one of the oldest in Washington if not the U.S-includes all of these things in all of it's curricula.(They compete in sambo and judo, so of course they do...)

Here: Sea-town Grappling. They used to be the Hatake Dojo, though, which is where Aaron began his martial arts, and which had a pre WWII judo program.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's not like saying that at all.-there is, in fact, grappling taught in modern boxing, and if you think there are no elbows-or boxers being taught to follow the jab with an elbow from the same arm-then you aren't paying attention, and/or you're in the wrong gym.

In some places, judo is different, and those things are taught and encouraged. No one is chastised for doing them. @Steve can back me up on this-Aaron Fields sensei's Seattle Jujutsu club-one of the oldest in Washington if not the U.S-includes all of these things in all of it's curricula.(They compete in sambo and judo, so of course they do...)

I think there's validity on both sides of this argument. Many Judo schools have lost those elements, so at those schools, those elements don't exist. Within the art, however, there are still a number of schools that teach the complete curriculum, from what I've been told. I don't know the proportion, but I know there's a similar discrepancy among BJJ schools, as well.

I guess the question is whether we describe the art by its history, the preponderance of schools, or the range of what's being taught across current schools. I'm not sure any one of those is a relevant definition across all discussions.

 

[Andrew Green]

It's not like saying that at all.-there is, in fact, grappling taught in modern boxing, and if you think there are no elbows-or boxers being taught to follow the jab with an elbow from the same arm-then you aren't paying attention, and/or you're in the wrong gym.

In some places, judo is different, and those things are taught and encouraged. No one is chastised for doing them.

I suspect if you asked the average boxer would not be familiar with old style grappling that was a part of boxing. Things like trips, throws, etc. Sure, there are going to be some groups that are more "historical" rather then competition based. But to say that boxing hasn't evolved, and in that evolution gained some new things and lost some old ones.

Judo is the same, perhaps not to the same extent as boxing as it tries to maintain some connection to what Kano taught. But it's evolved, new things added and old stuff lost. Which is the way it should be, if nothing is changing and evolving the art is essentially dead.

Now that said I would suspect that a lot of the Judo clubs that do a lot of heavy ground work draw from sambo / BJJ / catch / etc. And they should, why wouldn't they? Judo and Catch where exchanging things 100 years ago, in the end it's all just martial arts.

Personally I find the whole idea of techniques "belonging" to specific styles a little odd. Thing belong to whoever can make them work.

 

[elder999]

Personally I find the whole idea of techniques "belonging" to specific styles a little odd. Thing belong to whoever can make them work.

From the "Our Ethos" section of Sea-town grappling:

Nothing is new or original as the methods to gain mechanical advantage with regards to the body are finite.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

though there are things that might not be taught in most Judo dojo, as they are not permitted in competition, because judo has-for most dojo-become all about competition, under increasingly restrictive (and stupid!) rules....

Speaking as a BJJer, Judo is not alone in having stupid competition rules that negatively influence training at many schools.

(Actually I don't mind the existence of modern tournament BJJ as a fun specialized sport with some oddball rules. I do mind when schools focus on playing that particular game at the expense of training the full martial art.)

 

[Paul_D]

It's not some historical cultural piece he is trying to preserve.

If that is the case, then the video has been mis-labelled. It is clearly described as Ninjutsu in the video title, and that was my point. The tactics and methods used by Ninja to defend themselves from attack by other Ninja are not directly relatable to the modus operandi employed by modern criminals.

 

[Andrew Green]

If that is the case, then the video has been mis-labelled. It is clearly described as Ninjutsu in the video title, and that was my point. The tactics and methods used by Ninja to defend themselves from attack by other Ninja are not directly relatable to the modus operandi employed by modern criminals.

Hatsumi is the head of the Bujikan, it's his "school", he can toss whatever he wants in there and call it part of his style. I don't think he's ever claimed to be 100% traditional and historical, but rather modernized. The idea that a style can stay relevant and not adapt and evolve over time is not going to work, he is (I'm assuming) attempting to apply the principals of his style to modern needs of his students. With MMA popular people interested in self-defence are going to want to learn some defence off the ground. Culture influences the way people, even untrained people fight. With everyone watching UFC, guess what they are going to use as a model in their head for how they "should" fight?

No one is going "That's not BJJ because Helio didn't teach it" when someone pulls off a technique. Styles change, evolve, fork, disappear, merge, etc. But there is no one on the planet more qualified to say what is "Bujikan ninjutsu" then Hatsumi.

 

[Buka]

As to the boxing being mentioned in this thread - there is a certain flavor of grappling in clinch work. Both in mind set and principles.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

If that is the case, then the video has been mis-labelled. It is clearly described as Ninjutsu in the video title, and that was my point. The tactics and methods used by Ninja to defend themselves from attack by other Ninja are not directly relatable to the modus operandi employed by modern criminals.

Actually "ninjutsu" wasn't/isn't really supposed to be about defending from attacks from other "Ninjas" anyway.

Historical ninjutsu methods were primarily about espionage and military intelligence gathering.

The Bujinkan (and its offshoots), which may or may not have a direct lineage connection to historical ninjutsu, is built on 9 ryu (3 of which are verified historical traditions, 6 of which can be traced back only as far as Hatsumi's instructor). Those 9 ryu have various original purposes, but defending against "Ninja" attacks isn't really a focus. The modern Bujinkan is primarily about Hatsumi's personal expression of the martial arts, blending concepts from those 9 traditions. They are typically presented as being relevant to modern day self-defense application, which means dealing with attacks from assailants of all sorts - not specifically Ninjas.

You can make a reasonable argument that the Bujinkan and its offshoots shouldn't use the label "ninjutsu" in general. Only 3 of the 9 ryu in the Bujinkan are supposedly ninjutsu ryu and those aren't the 3 that are historically verified nor are they the arts that the majority of the training derives from. Still, Hatsumi used the ninjutsu label as marketing fodder back in the 80s and a lot of people have kept with it.

 

[Hanzou]

It's not like saying that at all.-there is, in fact, grappling taught in modern boxing, and if you think there are no elbows-or boxers being taught to follow the jab with an elbow from the same arm-then you aren't paying attention, and/or you're in the wrong gym.

Where did I say that they aren't taught elbows? I said that boxers aren't learning takedowns and kicks from 19th century boxing. Though there's no doubt you can find some books on 19th century boxing that shows those techniques, you'd be hard pressed to find boxers who are doing them.

Judo isn't much different. Sure you can find some crusty old manual showing Mifune fighting from half guard. Doesn't mean that modern Judokas are familiar with the position. Hell, almost every Judoka I've rolled with in the last 5 years just rolls up on their stomach and turtles. Kudos to the Judoka who are cross training in Bjj to bring Newaza back to the art, but they're really being thwarted at every turn by the powers that be.

In some places, judo is different, and those things are taught and encouraged. No one is chastised for doing them. @Steve can back me up on this-Aaron Fields sensei's Seattle Jujutsu club-one of the oldest in Washington if not the U.S-includes all of these things in all of it's curricula.(They compete in sambo and judo, so of course they do...)

Here: Sea-town Grappling. They used to be the Hatake Dojo, though, which is where Aaron began his martial arts, and which had a pre WWII judo program.

Of course they're going to be more open-minded when they're also teaching Sambo at the same location, they sort of have to be. It's no different than when you have a Judo class in a Gjj gym; that Judo class is going to be heavily influenced by the dominant style of the location. If Sea Town Grappling was called Sea Town Judo and only taught Judo, it wouldn't be nearly as inclusive or open to outside influences.

 

[Hanzou]

Speaking as a BJJer, Judo is not alone in having stupid competition rules that negatively influence training at many schools.

(Actually I don't mind the existence of modern tournament BJJ as a fun specialized sport with some oddball rules. I do mind when schools focus on playing that particular game at the expense of training the full martial art.)

Agreed, but Bjj is a feeder into three sports; Gi grappling, No gi grappling, and MMA grappling. Those three feeders are all very popular, and all influence each other. For example, Kron Gracie, Ryan Hall, Damien Maia, Roger Gracie, and soon Gary Tonnen are all sport Bjj guys who crossed over to MMA. In that transition you gotta learn how to deal with punches, and you gotta learn some solid takedowns. Because of that, and the mystique of old school Bjj casting a shadow over the entire art, those qualities will always be a part of Bjj.

On the other hand, Judo just feeds into Gi grappling, which is what has caused it to be extremely limited in scope. So while Bjj was fully capable of absorbing collegiate wrestling, Sambo, and Catch, Judo turned them all away to preserve the "essence" of Judo.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

In that transition you gotta learn how to deal with punches, and you gotta learn some solid takedowns. Because of that, and the mystique of old school Bjj casting a shadow over the entire art, those qualities will always be a part of Bjj.

I certainly hope you are correct on that.

On the other hand, just because those aspects will (hopefully) always be part of BJJ as a whole it doesn't follow that they are part of BJJ as specifically experienced by every student. There are plenty of blue belts and even purple belts out there who don't have good takedowns or experience dealing with strikes.

 

[elder999]

Where did I say that they aren't taught elbows? I said that boxers aren't learning takedowns and kicks from 19th century boxing. Though there's no doubt you can find some books on 19th century boxing that shows those techniques, you'd be hard pressed to find boxers who are doing them.

Elbows are against the rules. I was taught them in boxing-the elbow off the jab and cross. Grappling takes place in the clinch, though "holding" is against the rules.

You seem to be fond of martial "games," contests like BJJ and judo, that are bound by rules. The arts that are at their basis are not.

Judo isn't much different. Sure you can find some crusty old manual showing Mifune fighting from half guard. Doesn't mean that modern Judokas are familiar with the position. Hell, almost every Judoka I've rolled with in the last 5 years just rolls up on their stomach and turtles. Kudos to the Judoka who are cross training in Bjj to bring Newaza back to the art, but they're really being thwarted at every turn by the powers that be.

Judoka don't need to cross train in BJJ to bring ne waza back to the art: everything in BJJ was in judo first.

"Crusty old manuals?" Mifune?

Mifune was only 66 when my father met him, and I was only five when Mifune died. I started judo three years later.

Of course, "crusty old," becomes a better and better description of me, every day!

EDIT: 72...Mifune was 72 when my dad met him........