Will Brazilian Jiujitsu eventually replace Japanese Jujitsu?

[O'Malley]

Well, can't talk about Hatsumi but Rory Miller went from judo to classical jujutsu and found the latter very applicable to real world violence, and his experience can hardly be discounted.

Interview: Rory Miller, Detentions Specialist and Conflict Expert - Ikigai Way

I just thought I'd drop this interview here.

 

[Steve]

There's a lot of people who throw the term "LARP" around as an insult at things that aren't. I've known folks who did actual real LARP. But most of the time it seems to be misapplied to people learning to actually fight, but in a context that most aren't likely to see today. Many of my friends who do HEMA are actually learning to fight with Longswords &tc. But none of them have convinced themselves that they're ever going to have an actual Medieval style armored life-and-death combat. But they have learned how to fight in that context. Why? Who cares.

And what is even more unexpected for people who throw the "LARP" insult around, is that there is quite often an intersection between actual LARPing and honestly learning how to fight in an ancient context. For example, I have friends in the SCA. They certainly dress in period cloths and try to "live" in period ways from time to time. But a lot of good research on period fighting methods have come out of those folks. Because it's a facet of the whole that they're interested in.

Another example would be SASS (Single Action Shooting Society), aka "Cowboy Action Shooting." They dress in "cowboy" period cloths, take "cowboy" style names, only use guns designed prior to about 1898 ims. Yet they know how to shoot better than most average folks I've seen, including a lot of "gun in the sock drawer" gun owners, are accurate and fast, and could, if needed drill a bad guy with alacrity using revolver, shotgun, or rifle. And, yes, I've seen them run SA revolvers as fast as a lot of average joes can run a semi without that goofy "fanning" that people seem to think. Not kidding.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Completely agree with all of that. I mentioned LARP specifically because it tends to be used pejoratively. I think it looks fun. The key, though, is that folks who LARP generally know that they are pretending. LARP is used in the context of martial arts to describe folks who don't know that they're pretending.

I have never participated in the SCA, but have many friends who did (we're all old now, so most are "retired"). Based on the stories they tell, they trained hard for the various types of things they did, and they went out and did those things. I don't know if what they were doing is historically accurate, but I do believe they were developing real skills.

 

[dunc]

I absolutely believe that some techniques from classical JJ can benefit Bjj. Wrist locks immediately come to mind, since it adds an extra layer of complexity to grappling, and is legal in many Bjj competitions, so it can be practiced fully in a sparring context.

Yes that's a good example. In BJJ most people know and use the compression style of wrist locks, but there are quite a few other ways to attack the wrist from JJJ that I use effectively all the time in rolling
I've also added a couple of new chokes to our arsenal (all but one of them are quite brutal so we tend to keep them in the "for a-holes" drawer) and reasonably regularly find ways to apply a concept or "part of a technique" from JJJ to improve on my BJJ technique

I just find the "no-rules" self defense stuff to be highly suspect. For example, that video of Hatsumi I posted where he's doing stuff like pulling hair and kicking the groin is certainly "no-rules", but the fundamentals are completely off.

There are two points here
1. No-rules techniques are suspect
I can confidently assert that there are many no-rules techniques that are both viable and more efficient than their rules-compliant alternatives. I've tested these to sort the wheat from the chaff and will continue to do so (because there are a lot of them)
I hope this is self evident, but maybe a simple example is when you're grappling in a gi (standing) instead of trying to hook their leg with yours kick them in the balls and you'll find them set up beautifully for a take down without much effort or pushing and pulling on your part. It's a more efficient way to create kuzushi

2. The clip posted is completely off
It's not a good clip to learn ground work from and I wouldn't recommend anyone learn groundwork from the Bujinkan curriculum. But Hatsumi shows variations of trap and roll (a BJJ foundational movement), he doesn't have to move very much because his partner has reacted a lot to the pain &/or he catches them very early before they've settled in & they don't really know how to attack well, but the bridge and roll is there
He also shows the feet in armpit mount escape, again used in BJJ
Worth remembering that he has 4th dan Judo so, whilst newaza is clearly not his thing, he does have some experience of it

However, the problems begin to emerge when you start believing that that kata you're performing in samurai garb is the same as the Judoka slamming his partner under full resistance. It's not the same, and you're not developing the same level of martial experience as that Judoka is.

I agree with this, but I don't think the two are mutually exclusive

 

[Steve]

Does he? I mean, he might, but I don't recall seeing him make the assertion. I know he's asserted expertise in certain Asian based martial arts which he's studied. Has he actually said he's a "self defense expert?"

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Errr.. yeah. He has.

 

[BrendanF]

I don’t think someone using Bjj in a self defense situation is mentally trapped in a “rules” mindset. They may show some level of restraint, but I’ve seen Bjj practitioners purposely snap limbs, or hold chokes far longer than necessary (and then start stomping the person after they passed out). They can get to that point because when they train, they’re 3/4 of the way there, only stopping because their partner taps.

My point is, I don’t think operating under a “rules” mindset is a factor one way or another.

Yes but the problem with that is that you don't know what you don't know. You don't know how some of the habits you form doing unarmed ground grappling can be the most efficient for that context but completely tactically UNsound when in other situations.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Completely agree with all of that. I mentioned LARP specifically because it tends to be used pejoratively. I think it looks fun. The key, though, is that folks who LARP generally know that they are pretending. LARP is used in the context of martial arts to describe folks who don't know that they're pretending.

I have never participated in the SCA, but have many friends who did (we're all old now, so most are "retired"). Based on the stories they tell, they trained hard for the various types of things they did, and they went out and did those things. I don't know if what they were doing is historically accurate, but I do believe they were developing real skills.

Yeah, SCA heavy weapons fighting is very much not historically accurate sword fighting (in a number of ways), but the top fighters are very good at what you might describe a a form of hard-contact sport stickfighting. In addition, I'd say that SCA fighting can provide some insights into certain aspects of historical combat (particularly the use of the shield and formation fighting) which aren't commonly addressed in most martial arts.

 

[lklawson]

Yeah, SCA heavy weapons fighting is very much not historically accurate sword fighting (in a number of ways), but the top fighters are very good at what you might describe a a form of hard-contact sport stickfighting. In addition, I'd say that SCA fighting can provide some insights into certain aspects of historical combat (particularly the use of the shield and formation fighting) which aren't commonly addressed in most martial arts.

The SCA folks I know all agree that the competition sports therein are not really good representations of historic (or any) combat. That said, many (but not all) also make a study of the actual fighting applications. They just know the difference between what is part of the game and what isn't. It's a bit like USPSA guys knowing that the 180 rule is part of the game and not necessarily applicable to anything outside of the range.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[Hanzou]

There are two points here
1. No-rules techniques are suspect
I can confidently assert that there are many no-rules techniques that are both viable and more efficient than their rules-compliant alternatives. I've tested these to sort the wheat from the chaff and will continue to do so (because there are a lot of them)
I hope this is self evident, but maybe a simple example is when you're grappling in a gi (standing) instead of trying to hook their leg with yours kick them in the balls and you'll find them set up beautifully for a take down without much effort or pushing and pulling on your part. It's a more efficient way to create kuzushi

Yes, I would agree that in some cases pain compliance can lead to better results. I'm talking more along the lines of silly stuff like Hatsumi kicking a guy in the nuts 4 times after he's supposedly moved him off of mount, or doing patty-kicks to the head when he's in north-south with absolutely no effort made to control the body. To your example, I would actually argue that learning the throw by hooking the leg instead of kicking in the nuts is the better option, because not only can you train it more, but then you'll know how to throw if your groin kick fails to achieve the desired result.

2. The clip posted is completely off
It's not a good clip to learn ground work from and I wouldn't recommend anyone learn groundwork from the Bujinkan curriculum. But Hatsumi shows variations of trap and roll (a BJJ foundational movement), he doesn't have to move very much because his partner has reacted a lot to the pain &/or he catches them very early before they've settled in & they don't really know how to attack well, but the bridge and roll is there
He also shows the feet in armpit mount escape, again used in BJJ
Worth remembering that he has 4th dan Judo so, whilst newaza is clearly not his thing, he does have some experience of it

Which is a joke. Reacting to possible pain reaction is a pretty terrible way to train a technique, because once again pain is unpredictable. In other words, if your trap and roll is dependent on a nipple twist, and you're in a situation where you can't reach or twist the nipple, then your trap and roll is doomed. It's even worse when your partner does a perceived reaction to the supposed painful technique and just rolls off of you like a helpless baby. That simply isn't the reality, and that's why utilizing the principles without the pain factor involved is the superior way to train the technique. If my Upa is based on sound body mechanics (proper trapping of the foot and arm, proper bridging and turning), then it has a much higher chance of being successful against a wider variety of assailants.

I agree with this, but I don't think the two are mutually exclusive

You can apply that same general principle to what I said above. If I've performed an Upa under duress hundreds of times in class, then I have a very high chance of performing that technique when someone is actually on top of me. Meanwhile, if I'm learning a side control escape and that escape is completely based on me jamming my finger into the eye of my assailant, I have a far less likely chance of performing that escape when someone is actually on top of me. Why? Because I've never really jammed my partner's eye, and I've never experienced the wide range of possible reactions from the eye jam.

 

[Hanzou]

Yes but the problem with that is that you don't know what you don't know. You don't know how some of the habits you form doing unarmed ground grappling can be the most efficient for that context but completely tactically UNsound when in other situations.

If we're talking purely about technique, again you're 3/4 of the way there. If I've locked a triangle choke on a multitude of opponents trying to punch me in the face and who know the basics of how to stop my triangle, then me locking the triangle on some goon who doesn't know what the hell is going on just became a lot easier.

It's the same situation here;

You can be at the starting point of that break (Omoplata) many times in training, and your partner will typically tap out because s/he knows its over. However, al it requires is continuing the pressure and you get a shoulder break, and an opponent who is no longer a threat.

 

[dunc]

Yes, I would agree that in some cases pain compliance can lead to better results. I'm talking more along the lines of silly stuff like Hatsumi kicking a guy in the nuts 4 times after he's supposedly moved him off of mount, or doing patty-kicks to the head when he's in north-south with absolutely no effort made to control the body. To your example, I would actually argue that learning the throw by hooking the leg instead of kicking in the nuts is the better option, because not only can you train it more, but then you'll know how to throw if your groin kick fails to achieve the desired result.


Which is a joke. Reacting to possible pain reaction is a pretty terrible way to train a technique, because once again pain is unpredictable. In other words, if your trap and roll is dependent on a nipple twist, and you're in a situation where you can't reach or twist the nipple, then your trap and roll is doomed. It's even worse when your partner does a perceived reaction to the supposed painful technique and just rolls off of you like a helpless baby. That simply isn't the reality, and that's why utilizing the principles without the pain factor involved is the superior way to train the technique. If my Upa is based on sound body mechanics (proper trapping of the foot and arm, proper bridging and turning), then it has a much higher chance of being successful against a wider variety of assailants.



You can apply that same general principle to what I said above. If I've performed an Upa under duress hundreds of times in class, then I have a very high chance of performing that technique when someone is actually on top of me. Meanwhile, if I'm learning a side control escape and that escape is completely based on me jamming my finger into the eye of my assailant, I have a far less likely chance of performing that escape when someone is actually on top of me. Why? Because I've never really jammed my partner's eye, and I've never experienced the wide range of possible reactions from the eye jam.

You can train these no-rules techniques under pressure. As a minimum to the point of set up and with safety equipment you can go further
People don't do that much because either it's a waste of time for competitors or they don't like the idea of sparring and hide behind the "this is hard to spar" argument

In my experience there are many banned techniques that are fundamentally more efficient than their rules compliant versions. I don't include pain compliance in these as that's really only icing on the cake of fundamental structural technique

So if you can train them under pressure and they are more efficient and your focus is self defence then why focus on less efficient & potentially risky (for self defence) safe versions?

 

[Hanzou]

You can train these no-rules techniques under pressure. As a minimum to the point of set up and with safety equipment you can go further
People don't do that much because either it's a waste of time for competitors or they don't like the idea of sparring and hide behind the "this is hard to spar" argument

In my experience there are many banned techniques that are fundamentally more efficient than their rules compliant versions. I don't include pain compliance in these as that's really only icing on the cake of fundamental structural technique

So if you can train them under pressure and they are more efficient and your focus is self defence then why focus on less efficient & potentially risky (for self defence) safe versions?

But even with padding, you can't properly simulate the pain component of an attack. For example, not everyone takes getting kicked in the groin the same, even if you hit the target dead on before a throw. So you're actually ASSUMING what your target's reaction will be, something you simply can't count on. You can never jam your partner in the eye to properly simulate the effects of an eye jam, or if poking someone in the eye would even be all that effective to begin with. Thus if you're relying on pain to make your techniques more effective, you're actually ending up with weaker techniques than the "safe" versions you can perform over and over again on a variety of opponents to the point of mastery.

 

[dunc]

I don't think relying on pain is a good idea
It's a very useful addition to a structural technique

 

[Hanzou]

I don't think relying on pain is a good idea
It's a very useful addition to a structural technique

Eh.... If you just want to add some brutality to what you do, sure. However, it's better to have a sound technique that can be practiced repeatedly without any unreliable components. You can add pain to the equation after you've executed the technique properly. For example, hip throw and then stomp their face.

 

[dunc]

Yes we agree that you need sound, structural technique that doesn't rely on pain

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Should we be concerned that everyone in this pic is a white guy?

Again, if you're Japanese, this is your history and culture, so whatever. However, if you're not Japanese, this isn't your history/culture, so why are you engaged in it to this extent?

Why not be?

 

[Dirty Dog]

Should we be concerned that everyone in this pic is a white guy?

Again, if you're Japanese, this is your history and culture, so whatever. However, if you're not Japanese, this isn't your history/culture, so why are you engaged in it to this extent?

I'm not Korean. According to the DNA people, I'm as white as you can get. And yet, I've spent a considerable portion of my life wearing Korean clothing. So what?

 

[Hanzou]

I'm not Korean. According to the DNA people, I'm as white as you can get. And yet, I've spent a considerable portion of my life wearing Korean clothing. So what?

There's a difference between wearing a uniform for a sport and pretending to be The Last Samurai.

 

[lklawson]

There's a difference between wearing a uniform for a sport and pretending to be The Last Samurai.

I'm curious. What's the club or event that this pic is from?

 

[drop bear]

Example of which?
Thanks

useful techniques in the old Japanese styles that are not found in modern systems

An example of one of these techniques that is better for SD.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Aren't those exceptions that don't prove the rule?

For example, if I'm looking to purchase a gun for my (and my family's) protection, would I purchase a revolver from the Civil War, or would I purchase a modern hand gun? Obviously, if I collect guns, and I have a hobby of shooting old fashioned guns, I might be interested in a Civil War firearm, however for practical purposes, I'd be using and carrying the modern hand gun.

The same applies when we talk about Modern versus Classical Jujitsu. Sure, there's value in studying those ancient arts, but if a woman is asking me what martial art can best protect her from getting attacked, I'd tell her to learn Bjj and take a self defense class. I would never tell her to join a Tenjin Shino Ryu or similar school.

Those two aren't at the same level. You've talked about the weapon in the first one and the system in the second. The SA revovler is more like the sword from Koryu arts. Training with the SA revolver for "Cowboy Action Shooting" would be more like training in a Koryu (though there are problems with that analogy).

The question would be whether training with the SA revolver improves overall ability with other guns that might be more desirable for defensive use, rather than for SASS competition.