Yes, I would qualify that under performance art instead of martial art.[/QUOTE
Then you don't have the first clue about what is a martial art.
And how do you think that image appeared in his head?
Look, no-one has denied the popularity of BJJ, nor it's ubiquitous marketing... hell, I've praised it a number of times here. So it's no wonder he listened to the propaganda and marketing without knowing any of the wider variety behind the term... but that's really kinda besides the point. He had the image, it wasn't realistic, he learnt that, and went to something that suited him. Cool. It doesn't mean that classical jujutsu is going anywhere, it means that it remains, as it has been for a long time, a niche area of martial arts that don't suit the majority of people, often because of the largely inaccurate images put in people's heads...
He heard that Jujitsu was an effective martial art, sought out the Japanese version of it, and got that video you posted above.
Honestly, I doubt he found Araki Ryu, nor that you have much clue what is being shown there, but that's a bit beside the point for now. Let's just take this comment here "He heard that Jujitsu was an effective martial art..."
Going through the initial article, the writer is an MMA fighter competing in the cage... he has a 3rd degree in Kajukempo, and wanted to round that out, as "(d)uring my first MMA fight in Japan, I was shocked at how little I actually knew about groundwork." Classical Jujutsu doesn't really have much in the way of groundwork... the impression that "Jujitsu = groundwork" is very much an MMA/BJJ idea... so, in reality, he was only ever looking for BJJ... whether he knew it or not. Incidentally, there is not even an indication that he tracked down, or even approached any actual classical system... only that "his research" had lead him to the idea that there was only kata... which can be true, partially true, or not true at all, depending on the system itself.
Again, it should come as a shock to no one that he didn't like it.
Which, one more time, is fine. This is why so many different approaches exist... not any of them are suited to everyone. Personally, for example, BJJ bored the life out of me, I found the attitude one I had no interest in being near, I found the teaching sub-standard (compared to what I was used to), I felt the tactical approach highly limiting, and there was nowhere near the depth of study I am used to... that said, I have a good, healthy respect for BJJ's training approach (for it's goals), and I would get tooled on the ground by a serious BJJ guy. But, and here's the thing... I don't care. I'm not going up against serious BJJ guys, and if I do, there are other answers. BJJ is hardly the be-all, end-all of martial arts, self defence, MMA, competition, or anything else... it's simply a very effective specialist system... one that I don't overly care for.
That said, on the other side of the coin, there are dojos claiming to teach JJJ and they're not legitimate schools, as was also mentioned in the article.
Yes, there are. But if we're trying to discuss whether BJJ is "replacing" legitimate Japanese Jujutsu, then are they even something we're discussing?
So on one hand you have performance art,
No, you don't. Your lack of a clue as to what you're talking about or seeing doesn't make classical arts "performance arts".
on the other you have potentially effective JJJ but the people running those dojos are of questionable quality,
I'm a little agog at how you attribute Western-created, often baseless or based only on fairly low-level Judo schools "potentially effective", yet deride the classical systems, whose viability has been shown over centuries as the "potential food poisoning"... that label is far more attributable to the small pseudo-Japanese arts, as the quality control there is where it is non-existent. But, again, these are not even a part of the discussion as originally set out.
I know, I know, the next thing you'll say is that you don't see any evidence of viability/effectiveness in the classical systems... and that's right... you don't. But then again, you've shown no ability to recognise anything beyond a highly limited understanding of the term "effective", so it's hardly surprising when you don't recognise it in a different form.
and then you have Bjj that has reliable quality, and by all accounts is an effective MA. Is it any wonder why Jujitsu is being attributed mainly to Bjj than the other arts who carry the name?
Another perhaps is that it's incredibly rare to find an actual authentic system that uses the term "jujitsu"? We do have a preference for using the right word, you know...
Couple that with the aforementioned marketing and so forth, and it's hardly surprising... after all, you write things with a Biro, sneeze into a Kleenex, vacuum things up with a Hoover... none of these brands put others out of business, despite their popularity in the mass-consciousness. And that's the main point... yes, BJJ is popular (not a current "trend", though... that time has passed), yes, it's (through MMA, the commentators, and more) become the default image for "jiujitsu", "jitsu", "jits" and so on... but that doesn't mean it's replacing anything in actuality. The only thing you could say is that BJJ is replacing other forms of jujutsu in the popular consciousness... which is a different discussion entirely.
I realize YOU don't care, but what you care about really isn't the topic of discussion.
Wow, you really need to do a better job of reading... even of your own post, it seems...
The topic of discussion is people associating Jujitsu entirely with Bjj and nothing else.
Except it's not. You should know... you wrote the OP. And that's precisely NOT what you were asking. Tell you what, let's take a look back at the OP:
(Will Brazilian Jiujitsu eventually replace Japanese Jujitsu?)
Or has it already happened?
I've noticed a lack of traditional JJ schools over the last 10 years. Most of the ones around these days seem to be a combination of Karate, Judo, Aikido and even Bjj instead of a traditional samurai fighting style. I've also heard that in Japan, if you mention that you're looking for "Jiujitsu", the Japanese will point you to a Bjj gym. Bjj taking over the moniker of "Jiujitsu" in Japan itself..... I find that to be the irony of ironies. Here's an article about a foreigner moving to Japan, seeking to study either Bjj or JJJ, and went with Bjj because he simply couldn't find a JJJ dojo;
The Evolution of grappling in Japan: Why did I choose Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu in Japan? — Social Gelo with Angelo
Anyway, how healthy are true traditional Japanese Jujitsu systems? Is the term "Jiujitsu" destined to be taken over by Bjj?
Nothing about overtaking in the popular imagination... you are specifically asking about the health of the actual schools... stating that you've seen a lack of classical schools "over the last 10 years" (honestly, you would have been even harder pressed to find them before hand)... you are literally asking about the schools themselves.
So no, you are not asking about popular impressions.
You may think it's not a big deal that people are slowly getting the idea that Japanese JJ is ineffective, but over time that viewpoint begins to stick, and people will avoid those types of schools entirely.
Except they aren't. They're just realising that Classical Japanese arts are not the same as BJJ... and people who want UFC/MMA/Cage fighting systems will go towards arts based in that area. It doesn't mean that classical arts aren't "effective", it means that they're effective for a different purpose... which you have unfailingly failed to recognise, regardless of the number of times it's been spelt out to you.
Sure, I have no doubt that there will be some tiny places in Japan and elsewhere where you can continue to dress up as a samurai and pretend to live in the 16th century, just like people like to participate in Renaissance festivals and have jousting tournaments.
Child, grow up. You've been told, over, and over again, that this analogy is deeply inaccurate, and just shows you as having no understanding, and no respect. Which is exactly why it is insulting.
However when it comes to the martial arts, and fighting arts in general, the consensus is rapidly becoming Jujitsu=Brazilian Jiu-jitsu.
No, actually, it's not. It's actually, more than anything, become it's own thing... "jits"... and, realistically, is now just a shorthand for ground fighting in competition. Besides that, of course, the idea of taking a dominant position in the minds of people who don't know any better has never been disputed.. but that isn't the way you've set up this discussion.
Because you are showing no respect, and no interest in actually learning or understanding in the very topic you've brought up. You insist on deriding and diminishing arts that have survived for centuries, as you have no clue what they're actually doing, how they're doing it, or why.
That's exactly what you're doing, unless you're silly enough to believe that any of that stuff is practical from a self defense stand point.
Dude. For the approximately 1,578th time, your values are not those of these arts. We have never said anything about studying these arts as modern self defence. That's entirely your addled mind refusing to listen to what you're being told. That said, there is a lot in the way these arts are taught that is far more applicable to self defence than BJJ is at all. But I doubt even spelling that out to you would help.
It's no different than those HEMA folks who swing around broadswords and spiked maces.
I don't think you know the difference between the HEMA guys and the SCA....
Yeah, I dressed up as a Samurai for Halloween once because I thought it was cool, I suppose people like yourself never really grew out of that stage. Hey, there's nothing wrong with that, just please place what you're doing in the proper context.
We have. You haven't listened.
Look, if we're going to get petty about this, I could comment that it's really you BJJ guys who are playing dress-ups... after all, what you wear isn't exactly "Brazilian" culture, is it? So what is it, other than dressing up in another cultures clothes in order to play a game? I mean... you call it a kimono! You know what we call our outfits (which, by the way, are native to the culture the arts we study come from)? Keikogi. Which means "training outfit". Hardly any kind of "dress-ups" there... it's the equivalent of wearing overalls, or jeans and a t-shirt or jumper... it's basic workwear rather than anything particularly fancy. The more ornate forms worn at big demonstrations is because, well, they're big demonstrations.
But you call yours a "kimono". Which is about as formal-wear as you can get. It's like saying you practice in a top-and-tails tuxedo or a ball-gown. You know when Japanese people tend to wear kimono? When they get married. But you want to accuse others of "playing dress-ups".
Here's the thing. Most martial systems have some kind of uniform. Deriding one because it's not something you understand is not helpful, nor does it help your case.
And there's plenty of doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. who practice Bjj. I wouldn't say one group is more "educated" than the other.
There's a big difference between the natural spread of social strata found across far reaching systems, and systems that have a more stringent entrance requirement that tends to put them further towards one end of the scale.
And, of course, you're hardly making the case for an educated group in BJJ...
Six months training really isn't much of anything.
You'd need to as Mr Amdur about the reasons for his choice of 6 months, but I would suggest that it's more to do with the fact that that gets people at least acclimatised to close engagement ranges, as well as principles of leverage and resistance, without developing too many bad habits (from the perspective of the art he's then trying to impart to them), in order to more easily understand both sides of the techniques of the school.
However, beyond that, I'm clearly not talking about the Samurai dress-up schools you're talking about.
Firstly, we've dealt with your insulting "dress-ups" comment, so I'll leave it at the prior comment. Secondly.... dude... you know that video I posted with the offering of tea at the beginning? Literally the school that the requirement is for. So... yeah. That's the school we're talking about.
Can you just finally admit you are completely out of your depth in this conversation, and don't know what you're talking about?
I will admit that they are operating in a different sphere than your typical martial art school.
Yes, they are. Good. Only been saying that for a while...
I'm talking about the JJJ schools that are teaching for self defense purposes, and frankly the same type of people who prefer Aikido or some forms of Kung Fu.
Er.... what?
Is that why many self-defense oriented systems like Krav Maga integrate Bjj into their curriculums?
From a genuine perspective, none of the "integrate BJJ into their curriculums", at the most, they integrate technical methods drawn from BJJ... but even there, it's not always as prevalent as you may think... a number of Krav groups, for instance, quite definitely opposed the idea on a tactical level... which I agree with, considering their context (which, for the record, is not "self defence").
I'm sure. Some take up a martial art because they want to physically fit. Some take up a martial art because they work a dangerous job and want some additional training. Some take up a martial art because they want to study another culture. Some take up martial arts to become professional fighters. Some take up a "martial art" because they want to wear medieval costumes and swing around medieval weapons and culturally appropriate someone else's culture. Despite all of that, I would still argue that the majority of people enter a martial art school for the purpose of defending themselves.
Since a school teaching the Japanese equivalent of a Renaissance festival wouldn't offer that, I can see your point of view.
Wow, you really do go out of your way to be an insulting, yet thoroughly uneducated fool, don't you? You know that part in the middle where you spoke about wanting to study another culture? That's closest. The whole "medieval costume... renaissance festival" thing? Grow up.
Again, why would anyone be insulted by that characterization. That's exactly what people are doing in those types of schools. I mean seriously, there is no practical application for learning a routine where you're seated and throwing a cup of tea in someone's face when they rush you with a samurai sword. I take that back, there is an application; It's playing dress up and pretending to be a samurai master in medieval Japan.
You know what, I'm actually going to try to give you the tiniest bit of insight here. It is absolutely nothing like what you're thinking, and your attitude is something you really should think on... that said, I will attempt to explain why things are taught in this fashion.
You are thinking purely of "technique". You are looking at something, and thinking if you can use it, as it is shown, in what you think is a fight. You are wanting everything to follow that pattern. But here's the thing... that is literally the most basic, superficial, amateuristic way of thinking about martial arts.
In classical martial arts, the technique is the least important aspect. In fact, on a technical level, there's really not a lot to most of them. I can reduce most classical arts to between 1 and 5 "technical" lessons... the rest of it is more about the actual lessons of the system. Those lessons range from cultural (the culture of the art, as well as the time and place it came from), tactical, methods of timing, distancing, and far more. So let's look at the Araki Ryu technique.
On the surface, it's pretty simple. Walk up to the victim with a tray of tea, kneel down to offer it, when they reach, throw it at them (or just drop it), and apply a lock or strike. Simple, yes? Okay, so what is it really teaching? Realistically, this technique is more about understanding the mentality and context of the art itself... as well as teaching about how to hide intention. Historically, the school teaches that the founder of the school was ordered to assassinate a friend/colleague of theirs, and this is the method they used.
What is the student meant to take from it? Firstly, it's showing that this school is not messing around. When it's time to act, you act. Next, it's showing the position of the school on a social level... it may surprise you to learn that "samurai" wasn't just a single strata of society, with there being many different levels, from the highest officials and lords of various domains (up to the Shogun), down to essentially farmer-samurai (goshi) in rural areas. And which rank the samurai were that studied a particular art would determine a lot about the way the school was structured, and what type of methods it would contain. Araki Ryu, along with Shinkage Ryu, Yagyu Shingan Ryu, etc were examples of high-ranking samurai schools... Muhi Muteki Ryu, Chikubujima Ryu, the Tosa-Iai of Muso JIkiden Eishin Ryu and others were more "country samurai"... so would focus on skills appropriate to their usage, such as arresting, and a more "direct" form of jujutsu (when used).
From there, it's giving a lesson in hiding your intent, as mentioned. The aim is to not allow the victim to see your attack coming... which is tricky when both of you know what's meant to happen. It's only after that that we even start to look at the technical side of things. Sure, the technique needs to "work"... but more importantly, it needs to work in the context of the art itself. And that means not just "twist the wrist", it means finding how to get close enough to catch the wrist without the enemy getting away, finding a way to ensure that you are not in a position where you're going to get stabbed by a counter attack, ensuring that you understand where and how to position the enemy so they can be pinned safely, to be aware of other persons who might also move against you, and a lot more.These techniques and approaches teach not only a focus on the enemy in front of you, but on the entirety of your surroundings, including any potential other threats.
As a result, they are, at the same time, a cultural lesson, a tactical lesson, a mind-set lesson, an awareness lesson, and a technical lesson, all within a context that is unique to it's historical make-up. At no point, however, it is "dress up", or "playing samurai". And I get that you won't get this... but figured I'd try anyway.
What you're not seeming to grasp here is that tiny little JJJ schools can still exist, but for the vast majority of people "Jujtisu" will inextricably be tied to Brazilian Jiujitsu. Certainly for some tiny minority that will still want to seek out the classical stuff, but if 95% of the martial arts community thinks that "Jujitsu" is just BJJ that means that the classical forms have been replaced by the more popular variation.
Dude, I'M not getting that?!?! Are you kidding? I've pointed it out multiple times myself... and pointed out that that's utterly irrelevant when it comes to the way you're phrased this thread in your OP. It really doesn't matter what is "popular"... BJJ can be the most popular art in existence... and it does absolutely nothing to the existence and livelihood of classical (traditional) Japanese jujutsu.
I'll grant you about 10 years for each trend, with one easily blending into another. However, the Bjj trend that started in the 1990s is still going on today.
No, it's really not. It's still popular, yeah... but it's not a "trend" anymore. Again, I think you are not recognising the distinction...
The rise of RSBD never supplanted the Bjj craze.
Yes, it did. And it has itself been supplanted by MMA. Which is the current trend.
What happened is that RSBD types attempted to say that Bjj doesn't work in a "the streets" but it never really caught on because it was ripe with charlatans and sociopaths.
Would you like to make a single comment about other systems that's based in reality, and not your personal insults?
Krav Maga was perhaps the most successful out of that grouping, and now you'd be hard pressed to find a Krav Maga school that doesn't teach Bjj.
Krav isn't RBSD, you know....
As for MMA, the notion that MMA and Bjj are somehow separate is a bit of a strange angle to take.
It's really not... BJJ was highly influential in the origin of what we now refer to as MMA, but is far from the whole story... and doing BJJ doesn't mean that you are, by default, training (or competing) in MMA. Surely that's not something you fail to realise?
Bjj started the MMA craze, and in turn you'd be hard pressed to find a MMA gym where BJJ isn't being taught.
Actually, I'd dispute that... in fact, the way that BJJ "started" it was by being exactly the opposite of what would become MMA. History lesson time!
The first UFC, named the "Ultimate Fighting Championship" largely so that the Gracies, who were part of the organisers, and assisted in picking the location, set-up, competitors, and even had a presentation to Helio Gracie in the middle of the damn thing, could call themselves the "Ultimate Fighting" system in their advertising as they were opening up schools, billed itself as the first "Mixed Martial Arts" competition. Of course, what they meant at the time wasn't what we refer to as MMA today... instead, it was set up as a competition where a number of different arts would compete against each other (rather than judo only competing against judo, karate against karate etc, the arts would be "mixed" in competition against each other). This lead to the Gracies winning, of course (in hindsight, almost a foregone conclusion), and was meant to be a one-off.
However, as the spectacle had proven to be rather popular (in terms of financial recompense), they set up a second one... which Gracie won again. Then a third, which was won by Steve Jennum, a practitioner of RBWI, Robert Bussey's "modernised" art based in Bujinkan, TKD, and Bussey's own personal approach, who came in as an alternate (Royce Gracie pulled out due to exhaustion), with Royce coming back to win in the fourth. The fifth featured the "Super Fight" between Royce Gracie and Ken Shamrock that ran nearly 50 minutes (and was a major factor in instigating rounds and time limits later on). By the time of the UFC 4, though, people were starting to shift in their thinking. The first I noticed was Patrick Smith, a TKD practitioner who had already entered in the first UFC, and been defeated by being taken to the ground and submitted to a heel hook by Ken Shamrock... he then returned for the second one, where he commented that, after having seen all the matches in the first one, including his own loss to a ground-submission, he had been working on ground fighting to add to his striking skills. This resulted in Patrick managing to avoid some submission attempts, as well as applying some to gain a few victories until he met up against Royce, who took him to the ground, and caused him to submit to strikes. But the lesson had been learned... strikers started to learn grappling, mainly to avoid grapplers, then they would apply their stronger striking skills.
This would then start to make it's way through the competitors... strikers began seeking out a range of grappling methods, BJJ, wrestling, Judo, Sambo etc, with BJJ being one of the more popular choices, and often identified by the commentators even if not actually what someone trained in... which made it harder for grappling competitors to successfully apply their skills... so they started taking up striking arts, learning boxing and kicking methods. As time went on, it became a far more homogenised approach... with MMA becoming more of a training ideology, and more "standardised" in terms of make-up. So while BJJ (or, more realistically, Royce's early UFC success, which was as much to do with the environment/surface favouring grapplers and ground fighters as much as anything else) helped spur striking competitors to adopt some form of ground fighting training, MMA was more a reaction to BJJ, not what started MMA itself. It actually started with the strikers.
Part of the reason Bjj continues to grow is because of MMA and the fact that Bjj is considered the grappling art of MMA. NO ONE enters a MMA ring without some Bjj training. The two are like celestial bodies in consistent orbit with each other. One doesn't move without the other.
Yeah. Again, this is not disputed. In fact, it's been cited. Not sure what you think you're arguing against.
As for Bjj killing Judo; Judo is/was one of the most prolific martial arts in the world, and frankly it is institutionalized in many countries, including Brazil. What has happened with Bjj is that you have Judoka cross training in Bjj and vice versa which creates a nice little symbiotic relationship that helps grow Bjj and sustains Judo. As for TKD and Karate, those arts have lost a little bit of popularity, but (at least in America) it has a market as a martial art for kids, and for people looking for physical fitness.
I really don't think you got what I was saying there...
Again, none of that marketing or promotion works if Royce Gracie didn't win the first few UFCs, and it doesn't work if Bjj isn't objectively viewed as an effective martial art.
Wow, you mean marketing doesn't work if people don't believe it? I'm shocked....
In other words, Bjj's popularity rests entirely with its fighting ability.
No, it rests on it's reputation as an art imbued with fighting ability. There's more than a little difference there.
If a wrestler enters a Bjj school and beats down the entire class, then goes on to beat down elite Bjj practitioners, Bjj's popularity is damaged. What keeps Bjj popular is the wrestler/karateka entering the Bjj school and getting effortlessly submitted.
No.
Look, it's getting late here, and I don't have the time to explain all this to you, but someone coming out of their environment into someone else's and having less success is not much of anything.
Yes, and Judoka were beaten by wrestlers, and Karateka were beaten by boxers. However, Karate made a brief come back because people saw Bruce Lee movies, wanted to learn martial arts, and the only thing around were karate dojos. However, with that said Karate exponents were still getting beaten up by boxers.
Wow, it's almost as if you're saying marketing helps popularity....
I'm old enough to remember people saying that "Karate doesn't work" because we had black belts in Karate getting beaten up by the random schoolyard bully or the neighborhood street fighter. Thus when Aikido came along, people easily flocked to that because they saw Steven Segal toss bad guys around and thought that was super effective. Again, it is the perception of effectiveness that drives the ebb and flow, it isn't random by any stretch.
Again, marketing and public perception... not sure why you're making my argument for me...
Again, none of that works if Royce Gracie loses. I certainly hope you're not one of those types who believes he fought nothing but weak fighters, or that the fights were somehow fixed.
He didn't, and it wasn't... but is was certainly slanted in his favour...
Considering Bjj's performance in modern MMA, and the ruleset of modern Judo competition compared to even sport Bjj, I would say its far more reality based than Judo competition or a Kendo match.
Yeah... no. More on the judo, of course, but... no.
Uh, Karate, TKD, Aikido, Judo, and Ninjutsu schools are decreasing, while Bjj schools are increasing. I wouldn't say the trend is over by any stretch. And again, you'd be hard pressed to find a Krav Maga school that isn't teaching Bjj.
Yeah... again, popularity does not equal trend... it's a part of it, but things can retain popularity without being a trend, you know...
Like I said, when we get to the point where the martial arts community at large immediately thinks Brazilian Jiujitsu when Jujitsu is mentioned, that's the replacing I'm talking about. Again, 30 years ago that wasn't the case, but it is rapidly becoming the case now. You will always have those tiny little JJJ schools teaching whatever, but the standard is moving towards the most popular variant with consistent quality and brand recognition. As you said, it's simply human nature.
That's not what you said... the 30 years ago thing I've already covered... and even then, and before, the idea of "jujutsu" was not really anything in the majority of the martial arts communities mind. If anything, they'd just think "Judo", or similar.
I was intending to cover the rest of page 4, but time has gotten away from me. I'll return to this later...
