Has the BJJ phenomenon peaked??

[Laughing Cow]

Is the BJJ fad passing or still going as strong as ever?

Some signs seem to indicate that it has peaked and has started to decline.

Your views?

[Serpent]

Like Karate and Ninjitsu before it, the popular fad is slowly (thankfully) easing and the real practitioners can continue in their chosen art without all the meathead attention. As can the rest of us.

Careful - you might wake it up again!

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Serpent
Careful - you might wake it up again!

Just curious what the next fad will be??

FMA or similar??

[joedoe]

BJJ proved a point by exposing the weakness in the training of many MAs. I think a lot of MAs are addressing that weakness, so BJJ is no longer the overwhelming force it was when it burst onto the scene. That is not to say that it is any less effective, simply that people have learned to deal with it a bit more effectively.

[Serpent]

BJJ exposed a sport weakness under a certain set of rules.

How often did you hear about BJJ people successfully taking out street attackers, etc.?

It was a media frenzy in the MA world more than anything else.

The next fad? I'm betting on Wushu, with the Beijing Olympics and all the movie fu at the moment. I think it'll be the next big thing. Obviously for very different reasons.

[Laughing Cow]

Wushu it may be.

Either way won't affect my Kwoon luckily, at the most we will get a few more people peep in and leave again.
:D

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Serpent
BJJ exposed a sport weakness under a certain set of rules.

How often did you hear about BJJ people successfully taking out street attackers, etc.?

It was a media frenzy in the MA world more than anything else.

The next fad? I'm betting on Wushu, with the Beijing Olympics and all the movie fu at the moment. I think it'll be the next big thing. Obviously for very different reasons.

Well, yes and no. It did expose the fact that a lot of TMA practitioners had no idea what to do when they were taken to the ground. Now, while this doesn't occur 90% of the time as claimed by the Gracies, it does occur in real life.

[Serpent]

Yeah, it can. But how many people that end up on the floor in a streetfight are at the hands of a BJJ practitioner? They're usually just being accosted by a d!ckhead who has no knowledge of any kind of systematised fighting, let alone a solid wrestling/ground game.

[CrippledAvenger]

But what happens if they DO? What happens if your friends are chicken**** and don't come running to your rescue? What if your leopard strikes don't have the effect on the ground? What if you slip on a puddle of beer and fall? What if you haven't explored this in a live environment before it happens?

Nobody's been saying (outside of the trolls) that it's an ultimate art-- in fact, the Gracies have admitted it has serious holes in it for self-defense situations. However, it addresses something fundamental in combat-- the ground game. It simply makes more sense to me to be aware of that, rather than to simply treat it like a myth, such as chi-blasts.

Calling it a fad like ninjas or whatever is doing a great disservice to a very real aspect of real-life combat.

I'd rather train for the worst then hope for the best, ya know?

Edit: Let me make it clear that I prefer the stand-up to the ground immensely. I'd rather throw or hit somebody with my feet solidly under me, no question about it. That being said, I think I'm going to take steps so that I'd know what to do if I ever got on the ground, because at the moment, I know very VERY little of anything that works there.

[joedoe]

That is all true also. However, even a schoolyard bully knows to sit on the person's chest/abdomen once they have them on the ground, and that from there you have far superior position for ending the altercation.

I guess my point is that prior to BJJ hitting the scene, a lot of MA had simply ignored the part of their training that might deal with being put on the ground. What BJJ did was to make people think about that facet of their arsenal again, and I don't think that is a bad thing.

As with anything that gains sudden popularity though, there have been soem very annoying aspects of it, but as usual that has been perpetuated by the standard percentage of d!ckheads that any MA discipline will attract :)

[Laughing Cow]

Agreed, that BJJ was an eye-opener for many MA.

Also I think many MA started to neglect their ground-fighting skills due to point-sparring and similar competition formats. Judoka always aimed for Ippon to win.

I think in the future serious MA will research what their style got to offer in counters and answers to the ground game.

TMA are not known for making rabid changes or adjustements.
;)

To be honest I think we will see an evolution of all MA thanks to BJJ, these counts for both ground-based and striking/throw-based arts.

Just some random thoughts.

[CrippledAvenger]

Agreed, LC.

I think we're on the same page on this one, for the most part. And surprisingly... it doesn't hurt. Not one bit. ;)

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Agreed, that BJJ was an eye-opener for many MA.

Also I think many MA started to neglect their ground-fighting skills due to point-sparring and similar competition formats. Judoka always aimed for Ippon to win.

I think in the future serious MA will research what their style got to offer in counters and answers to the ground game.

TMA are not known for making rabid changes or adjustements.
;)

To be honest I think we will see an evolution of all MA thanks to BJJ, these counts for both ground-based and striking/throw-based arts.

Just some random thoughts.

I also think a lot of TMA had ground fighting techniques in them, but they were simply neglected and in some cases lost because of the neglect. I know for a fact that my sifu has never studied anything other than Ngor Chor, but he knows counters for several ground fighting situations (though I am sure it is not as extensive as an art dedicated to ground fighting). It is just that the focus tends to be on stand up/striking.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Serpent
Yeah, it can. But how many people that end up on the floor in a streetfight are at the hands of a BJJ practitioner? They're usually just being accosted by a d!ckhead who has no knowledge of any kind of systematised fighting, let alone a solid wrestling/ground game.

The majority of the people I know that have been in bar fightrs were high school wrestlers...

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow

Also I think many MA started to neglect their ground-fighting skills due to point-sparring and similar competition formats. Judoka always aimed for Ippon to win.

That hasn't changed - they have to train according to the format they are competing in

I think in the future serious MA will research what their style got to offer in counters and answers to the ground game.

I dunno... I think that just restarts the vicious cycle that BJJ broke. People said "this is a defense against a tackle" and everyone thought that that defense would work - until they had an experienced grappler double leg them. You can't find the answers within your style if nobody at your school knows how to properly execute the technique you are wanting to defend against.

TMA are not known for making rabid changes or adjustements.
;)

To be honest I think we will see an evolution of all MA thanks to BJJ, these counts for both ground-based and striking/throw-based arts.

I dunno, for the very reason you stated above - too reluctant to change.
[/B]

[SevenStar]

The difference between the above mentioned fads and bjj is that bjj exposed a major flaw in the thoughts of many people's game. That's something that will never die, especially in the sport fighting arena.

[Laughing Cow]

Sevenstar.

I don't think that the groundfighting skills are truly lost, just that they have been neglected. There are a few styles I am aware of that do have ground fighting techs.

I think that there are still people within each system that know them and can train/teach them.

Also I am sure that those counters could be found in older documentation and be re-introduced by skilled MA.

Naturally they would have to be tested and adjusted for modern applications.

I think that the biggest stumbling blocks will be if students are willing to learn them or not. ;)

I have seen it in my current style, some moves actually make people reconsider if they want to learn our art. :D

[Merryprankster]

I guess my point is that prior to BJJ hitting the scene, a lot of MA had simply ignored the part of their training that might deal with being put on the ground.

Or had REALLY dumb ideas about what to do there, vice ignoring it :D


Serpent:

I know, personally, two people who have used their BJJ in a streetfight. One broke his opponents arm and ran like hell. The other managed to reverse position, make a hole, and run like hell in a group situation. That opportunity may never have existed if he hadn't taken BJJ.

As for your argument, how many people you might get in a brawl with are trained fighters of any sort? There's no ultimate style, but I sure don't understand what the problem is with "going to the experts," to get what you want/need.

[Mr Punch]

I don't think there's any evidence to suggest that BJJ is waning.

And I don't really agree with the assessment of karate, BJJ, TKD, kungfu, or even ninjutsu as a 'fad'.

LC, even here in Tokyo, there are many MMA gyms like Purebred, which deal with some well-rounded skill sets inc groundwork from old-style JJJ as well as BJJ, thus helping to keep both of them alive through the tried and tested business of giving people useful skills that they enjoy/want! And then add the Gracie JJ gym in Meidaimae, and the other two different BJJ gyms that have grown up in the last couple of years...

As you know, in Tokyo, there are martial arts for every taste: from the fluffiest to the most ring-tested to the too-deadly-for-the-planet variety, and BJJ more than holding its own.

As for the 'fad' thing: sure there have always been fad practioners of martial arts, as there are of weight-training, home-brewing, bee-keeping, just about every activity known to human kind... but I don't think there are that many more in proportion to serious practioners in MA, traditional or otherwise.

IMO (based on no evidence, purely my own experience), I would
say there's a higher proportion of people who stick to their art through thick and thin, even when it's obvious their art is a bunch of crap!... ahem, has a different goal set... ahem...!

Sure, karate, kungfu, TKD and ninjutsu styles have all hit the spotlight through Bruce Lee, Ninja Turtles or whatever, but why should people trying something out be labelled as a fad?

BJJ is here because of good marketing, and more importantly, skills or training techniques that people feel they need, or they enjoy. I see it as a MA at least as traditional as many styles of karate, as aikido, as TKD etc, and I'm happy for it to stay rolling around on the floor at a dojo near me!

Just my 2 yen.

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
I don't think that the groundfighting skills are truly lost, just that they have been neglected. There are a few styles I am aware of that do have ground fighting techs.

I think that there are still people within each system that know them and can train/teach them. Oh go on then: do tell! What styles that are reasonably readily available have groundfighting techs? And are they useful? Give us an example or two of these training methods...! ;)

The problem, without going too far into old forum burial grounds, is that if they have been neglected so, as you say, the chances are they are no longer practical/alive. If they were, how the hell did BJJ corner the market so well?

[Laughing Cow]

Hmmm, lets see Jujitsu.

I have also seen Taiji Guys defend against takedowns and similar.

I am pretty sure that the Shaolin based arts will also have things in them to counter takedowns.

Like Joedoe said, don't expect the same level of depth as in BJJ, but there are some that have it.

It all depends on how you employ what you were taught in your style.

Seeya.

[Laughing Cow]

Mat.

I know that there are all falvours of MA in Tokyo, I also know that a few BJJ/MT schools are now starting to advertise a LOT and offer cardio-kicks classes for ladies and similar.

Agreed that many people will stick with their art even though it is crap.

Cheers.

[shaolinboxer]

"If they were, how the hell did BJJ corner the market so well?"

Which market are we talking about? How have they cornered it?

In this months JAMA there is an interesting evaluation of the evolution of MMA (Focused on the UFC).

The author notes that statistically (the guy watched EVERY fight), striking is beginning to overtake ground submissions for winning fighters. This is a result of rule changes and adaptation by the fighters. The author also notes that only once in the UFC has a throw been the deciding technique, which is interesting. That I think may be causing a new flaw to emerge in martial arts...the willingness to fall without proper caution because of the advantages that can be gained by heading down to the ground.

So has the BJJ phenom come and gone? I don't think so. I think people will continue to see the value in this powerful and interesting martial art. But BJJ, at this point, has had just as much a reality check as the old stand up only fighters.

[Mr Punch]

LC
Hmmm, lets see Jujitsu.
Sooooo, that'd be the JJ after the B, right?!!!



I have also seen Taiji Guys defend against takedowns and similar.

I am pretty sure that the Shaolin based arts will also have things in them to counter takedowns.
Yeah, I've seen that too. But just now you were talking about groundwork, and I asked you for specifics, and you've come back with counters to takedowns. This is different.


shaolin b
Which market are we talking about? How have they cornered it? I'm talking about the market for people who like to roll around on the ground! Don't get me wrong, I know that in that so-real-sit that everybody talks about but that not many people actually get into, the aim of BJJ or any JJ is not to roll around on the floor, but to get up with an advantage: but let's face it, a lot of people from year dot like to roll around on the floor and pummel their buddies!!! I did it at school and out of school, and I bet most of you did too, unless you were playing with Barbie or something!!!:D ;)

SB, I can fully believe that striking is regaining it's popularity in MMA, and has never lost popularity in TMA, but I can also believe that ground grappling also has it's place in MMA... and as such is not losing it's popularity with the folks that like that kind of thing.

LC, the BJJ schools I'm talking about don't advertise at all, and sure as hell don't offer any boxcercise but still have a firm TMA-based following ... like the one in Komagome... it's not Gracie, (can't remember its origins but...) which has a hardcore following of TMAers, including some people from the JJJ style that it sprang from.

Edit: SB, I agree that the lack of ability to take a fall, and the blase way in which some people think taking a fall 'outside' will be a bowl of cherries because they can then get their six-billion dollar choke on is a dangerous trend for a rounded MAer... but since I practise both when I get the chance, I don't care!!!:D Plus, it has no relevance to whether BJJ is losing popularity or not, eh?!

[Ray Pina]

At my master's school we all bring Gi's to class. They are part of our gear, no different than boxing gloves or head gear. When called for, we grab the gear we need to train what we need to train that night.

Training goes from stand up grappling to ground fighting. Like all our training, it's about rules -- how to get and maintain position, what mechanics to turn to for power and leverage -- not technique per see.

My master's style is E-chuan, but he teaches Ba Gua, Hsing-I and Taiji as well. I would consider us a traditional school in the real sense. We train martial arts. I would think other Ba Gua and Hisng-I guys out there are comfortable on the ground as well. Principles are principles. I believe it's just a matter of being comfortable and keeping a cool head at different ranges of combat.

With that said, I'm thankful for NHB and BJJ in particular, because they opened my eyes to many weaknesses I had as a fighter. It caused me to go out and seak solutions. I think many BJJJ however, would find the same if they checked out a good Hsing-I school. I think their mechanics would be improved. As they specialize on the ground, Hsing-I specializes on getting the most out of a movement.

[Mr Punch]

Yeah, but EF, that's part of what I was saying.

LC was implying that BJJ may be losing popular appeal because it's niche market, that of groundwork, was covered by other arts, albeit
I don't think that the groundfighting skills are truly lost, just that they have been neglected. You're saying that your school still practises them. Fair play. But if you neglect it, you haven't got it!!!

As my Sensei was always so fond of saying: If you don't use it, you lose it!

[truewrestler]

This thread is sooo 1995... have we learned nothing?

[Mr Punch]

Originally posted by truewrestler
This thread is sooo 1995... have we learned nothing? I have learned to put my underpants on before my trousers and only to take them off when alone or alone with my girlfriend.

What's your point Mr Wrestler?!

[truewrestler]

My point was that BJJ and submissioin grappling in general is a vital part of fighting and is here to stay.

[Mr Punch]

Gooood, that was my point too.

Unfortunately, my fingers are working overtime today!:( :D

[truewrestler]

:D

[shaolinboxer]

TW - That is soooo 500 AD :)

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
We train martial arts. I would think other Ba Gua and Hisng-I guys out there are comfortable on the ground as well. Principles are principles. I believe it's just a matter of being comfortable and keeping a cool head at different ranges of combat.


That's not entirely true... the principles of standing grappling do not directly translate to the ground.

[chen zhen]

its not like u train Bagua & then *poof* u're perfect on the ground. u'll have to train specifically for it.

[MasterKiller]

When I was in college, I knew a girl who was a BJ phenomenon. She was pre-med, too.

[Ray Pina]

You lose a lot of the power generated from pushing off the back leg, but STRONG SHAPE and POSITION are still No. 1 in my book.

To go further becomes a discussion of technique, which is futile over the web. Just like, "Tell me what you do to stop a shoot." Even if it is explaned well on here, no one believes it anyway. Or everyone comes up with a dozen counters -- which do exist. I'm learning that there are actually very few "dead" locks. I'm learning how to get out of some stuff that had me tapping before.

Of course the ground is different from standing. Just like my reaction (don't like that word, prefer to think of it as training kicking in) is different when my back is turned, or sitting. But the principles, rules, formula -- call it what you will -- is the same.

If you disgaree, it's simply because we are taking a different aproach to our training. Which is all good. I just like my way better:D

[Black Jack]

I think that suggesting FMA is a very poor choice to label as a possible upcoming fad. More so with how I think you join the word fad with some lack of depth in history and function.

Everything FMA has in spades.

IMO BJJ just reshowcased to the hardline traditionalists that the ground range was a neglected part of there training. There have always been ground fighting arts but none with the national marketing background of a MMA fighting event behind them to get the masses interested.

Something which should be commended in the long run. But again you have BJJ's mother art of judo, you have jujitsu, catch wrestling, folk and freestyle and many, many other ground fighting systems from the world over, spanning both sport and combative.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by EvolutionFist
You lose a lot of the power generated from pushing off the back leg

:confused:

[Ray Pina]

?Que pasa?

Hsing-I drives off the back leg. Collapsing someone has as much to do with the back leg driving (think pushing a car) as it does with the shape of the arm and using shoulder/elbow power. On my back, I can't drive off the back leg the same way. I can still use the legs for leverage in some positions, but not nearly to the extent as standing prone. But keeping my arms in and in a strong shape, using the upper back, shoulder, elbow, and wrist (Hsinh-I bear and eagle) for power, doesn't change.

[Christopher M]

Aha, thanks. I just wasn't sure what you meant.

[old jong]

High kicking mania is back!... (http://www.thedude.org/images/content/granny1.jpg) ;)

[LeeCasebolt]

"The author also notes that only once in the UFC has a throw been the deciding technique, which is interesting."

It's also false. Shamrock/Zinoviev, Ortiz/Tanner, and Hughes/Newton 1 all were KOs from a takedown/throw, just off the top of my head. You could argue the Johnston/Nasri fight, as well. This is discounting any fights where a throw or takedown led directly to a dominating position or finishing technique (a la Remco Pardoel v Orlando Weit). From your synopsis, I'm not terribly impressed with the author of this article, and I'm thinking it's highly unlikely he watched every UFC fight, let alone every fight.

"That I think may be causing a new flaw to emerge in martial arts...the willingness to fall without proper caution because of the advantages that can be gained by heading down to the ground."

This I'd have to agree with, though. I gave up arguing with the "I'd just pull guard" BJJ brigade years ago, for much the same reason I don't advocate non-grapplers add grappling to their training - the evidence is there, and if they're too dumb to see it, screw 'em.

Sport-specific training (as opposed to sport-based training) can inspire some uniquely stupid tactics for Real Fights (TM). "Full contact" karate guys don't guard their face well, 'cause no one tries to punch it. Boxers don't do much in a clinch, 'cause refs break them up. Wrestlers and judoka give up their back too easily, and BJJers pull guard.

I wonder if concrete-floored vale tudo would fly in Brazil?

Lee Casebolt

[rogue]

Whew, thank God there's nothing wrong with TKD or else I'd be scewed.:eek:

[TjD]

mabye the next trend will be well-trained kung fu :D

[Shaolin-Do]

TKD is the deadliest form on earth, bar nun.
..
...
.....













:eek:

[Vash]

'Specially ATA (American Tae Kwon Do ASSociation). They duh bom!!!



























:rolleyes:

[rogue]

Very funny Vash, considering it comes from a guy whose arts practitioners are so lame they couldn't even have beginners kata!:p Rei!

[Vash]

Yeah, we do suck. Starting next month or two, I'll suggest, nay, DEMAND, that all of our classes start and end with thirty minutes of two-step kata and thirty-point bows!

The future is later!!!

Oh, RE MasterKiller and the BJ phenom . . .

Did she ever run track? I think a buddy of mine knew her . . . :D

[diego]

Originally posted by Serpent
BJJ exposed a sport weakness under a certain set of rules.

How often did you hear about BJJ people successfully taking out street attackers, etc.?



funny enough i was recently viewing a royce gracie street defence book and all the texts are basic good kungfu kata applications!!? :)...what's all the fuss:)

[LEGEND]

Diego...we all think ROYCE was smoking crack when he released that BOOK! That book is HORRIBLE...and yes...it's like 1 step 2 step kata drills. I suggest getting the MASTERING JUJITSU by Royce's cousin...RENZO GRACIE...by far...much better than the crap Royce published.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by joedoe
That is all true also. However, even a schoolyard bully knows to sit on the person's chest/abdomen once they have them on the ground, and that from there you have far superior position for ending the altercation.


Yeah, true, but my system has taught some groundfighting as most complete kung fu systems will. The people that think the armbar was a Gracie invention really bother me! ;)

[Serpent]

Originally posted by SevenStar


The majority of the people I know that have been in bar fightrs were high school wrestlers...

That's a fairly uniquely American thing. High school wrestling is pretty unheard of in lots of other countries. However, basic groundfighting techs that should be included in all good systems should give you the tools to deal with this.

This is a circular argument anyway. It's a valid point, but not that relevant.

[Serpent]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Serpent:

I know, personally, two people who have used their BJJ in a streetfight. One broke his opponents arm and ran like hell. The other managed to reverse position, make a hole, and run like hell in a group situation. That opportunity may never have existed if he hadn't taken BJJ.



Sure, it could prove useful in a street fight, as any kind of fight training could. But it's primarily a sport style and designed that way.



As for your argument, how many people you might get in a brawl with are trained fighters of any sort? There's no ultimate style, but I sure don't understand what the problem is with "going to the experts," to get what you want/need.

Couldn't agree more. But I see BJJ as the experts in sport fighting and other systems as the experts in stuff that's more street oriented. And, again I reiterate, a good system like this will include some goundfighting and grappling techs.

[Laughing Cow]

Have to agree with Serpent situations and opponents will vary according to location.

Back home chances of meeting a wrestler, American football players, hockey player or similar were slim.

Said that I will stay far aware from Rugby players, those are bad news.

Most problems were the 18yr old on their first leave from their compulsory military service when the "Drug" started to wear off. :D

Seeya.

[Merryprankster]

Yeah, true, but my system has taught some groundfighting as most complete kung fu systems will.

I'm betting in much the same way that BJJ teaches "takedowns," ie, kinda sketchy when compared with guys who really know how to do it.


But it's primarily a sport style and designed that way.

Not necessarily. My experience and that of others is different than your conjecture.


But I see BJJ as the experts in sport fighting and other systems as the experts in stuff that's more street oriented.

We've all got rules in our training. To pretend otherwise is a joke. What's more realistic? Randori-style arts emphasize taking out things like eye-gouging, groin shots, throat strikes, etc so you can practice your techniques full speed. Some arts 'acknowledge' that the eye-strike 'would have got them' when they spar. I, for one, have never seen any school, "traditional" or "sportive" practice these types of techniques full speed. Which approach is more vaild? One way may leave you vulnerable to certain techniques, the other may leave you vulnerable cause you aren't REALLY used to landing a good chunk of the stuff you train.

So I'm afraid I don't buy your distinction--just like somebody says "Oh, well even though we're pulling it NOW, a FIGHT's different!" Kinda the same with "sport." I'm not going to rush up to my opponent, pull guard and try to flower sweep him over cause I'll get f'ed up, any more than somebody using a groin shot would accidentally tap their opponent in the jimmy vice pounding his nuts through the top of his head.


And, again I reiterate, a good system like this will include some goundfighting and grappling techs.

In the same way WC teaches you to throw, and SC teaches you to knock out people by punching? I'll take my chances with wrestling, Judo, SC and BJJ rather than some non-grappling oriented art, thanks, just as I don't expect to learn to punch and kick really well in these arts.

I really don't get what the problem is for acknowledging certain arts have expertise in certain things and might be listened to on those matters.

[old jong]

I think BJJ has influenced a lot of people in the more traditional Martial arts. I practice Judo semi-regulary and I can tell you that it looks like a BJJ class for the most. More than half the lesson is Ne-Waza!...When I first did Judo maybe 25 years ago, Ne-Waza was maybe only 20% of the total time practice. BJJ influence...
We see a lot of Kung Fu schools that are integrating "Ground work" in their curriculum. It can be a complement to any styles of Kung fu without "denaturing" the art!...
I think it is "everywhere" to stay.;)

[Merryprankster]

Old Jong,

I agree. Groundfighting, long neglected, is here to stay. Further people are realizing that because ground and standing are so different, you can practice both without compromising either.

[MasterKiller]

TKD is the deadliest form on earth, bar nun. Only for the person trying to use it.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Merryprankster


I'm betting in much the same way that BJJ teaches "takedowns," ie, kinda sketchy when compared with guys who really know how to do it.



Not necessarily. My experience and that of others is different than your conjecture.



We've all got rules in our training. To pretend otherwise is a joke. What's more realistic? Randori-style arts emphasize taking out things like eye-gouging, groin shots, throat strikes, etc so you can practice your techniques full speed. Some arts 'acknowledge' that the eye-strike 'would have got them' when they spar. I, for one, have never seen any school, "traditional" or "sportive" practice these types of techniques full speed. Which approach is more vaild? One way may leave you vulnerable to certain techniques, the other may leave you vulnerable cause you aren't REALLY used to landing a good chunk of the stuff you train.

So I'm afraid I don't buy your distinction--just like somebody says "Oh, well even though we're pulling it NOW, a FIGHT's different!" Kinda the same with "sport." I'm not going to rush up to my opponent, pull guard and try to flower sweep him over cause I'll get f'ed up, any more than somebody using a groin shot would accidentally tap their opponent in the jimmy vice pounding his nuts through the top of his head.



In the same way WC teaches you to throw, and SC teaches you to knock out people by punching? I'll take my chances with wrestling, Judo, SC and BJJ rather than some non-grappling oriented art, thanks, just as I don't expect to learn to punch and kick really well in these arts.

I really don't get what the problem is for acknowledging certain arts have expertise in certain things and might be listened to on those matters.

MP has double legged the correct, mounted it and viciously pounded it.

You basically stole the words outta my mouth.

[MasterKiller]

I really don't get what the problem is for acknowledging certain arts have expertise in certain things and might be listened to on those matters. I don't think anyone has a problem with acknowledging that grappling arts have more expertise in grappling than striking arts; the issue is only debated when grapplers claim to have cornered the market on using and/or inventing ground and submission techniques.

[Liokault]

Said that I will stay far aware from Rugby players, those are bad news.


My teacher has just started to teach tai chi to a few rugby teams. Hes ok with the grappling and pushing hands with 19 stone uber fit nutcases till they stamp on his feet with studds on LOL. It seems to happen once a week.

[Merryprankster]

Not true. The issue is when grapplers claim to have cornered the market on BETTER ways to obtain or do said locks.

I mean, these guys spend 90% of their training time doing this stuff--why not acknowledge it? I won't listen to a straight BJJer who tells me how to punch--why should I listen to a person who spends 90% of their time on their feet about what to do on the ground? Why should I listen to a person who spends the majority of their time striking about how to put somebody on the ground? ESPECIALLY if it looks nothing like the grappling arts--which ALL look similar because good principles transcend stylistic boundaries.

No thanks.

There are certain things that each arts do well. We can learn from that, or we can engage in belief preservation and walk away no better off than before. I mean, heck, I don't lecture people on how to punch!

[SevenStar]

As far as ground work being in the curriculum of some CMA schools, unless the person teaching it has had some experience in a grappling art, I wouldn't put alot of stock in it. We grappled when I was in longfistbut after beginning bjj, I'm beginning to see how basic their grappling was, and even those basics were mediocre.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
I don't think anyone has a problem with acknowledging that grappling arts have more expertise in grappling than striking arts; the issue is only debated when grapplers claim to have cornered the market on using and/or inventing ground and submission techniques.

to an extent, they can say that. in the past several years, the ground game has evolved so much. There are techniques and transitions to them now that were unheard of until now. It was all part of the evolution that came from competition. Of course, they didn't invent the principle of locking the arm for an armbar, but what other art has made such a science off of that? that goes for other submissions as well. Bottom line is if you want to learn grappling, go to a grappler.

[MasterKiller]

We grappled when I was in longfistbut after beginning bjj, I'm beginning to see how basic their grappling was, and even those basics were mediocre Aren't basics what you rely on, more often than not?

but what other art has made such a science off of that?I'm not saying it's any better or worse, but there are 100s of Chin Na techniques for standing and grappling arm bars.

[old jong]

Originally posted by SevenStar
As far as ground work being in the curriculum of some CMA schools, unless the person teaching it has had some experience in a grappling art, I wouldn't put alot of stock in it. We grappled when I was in longfistbut after beginning bjj, I'm beginning to see how basic their grappling was, and even those basics were mediocre.

I think,the main idea is to have good basics ... Not to become an expert in groundfighting but to have some skills in order to get out of a bad situation if needed.
No need to become the next Royce Gracie to be able to use simples but effectives positions and escapes. and a choke or two!...



;)

[LeeCasebolt]

"I'm not saying it's any better or worse, but there are 100s of Chin Na techniques for standing and grappling arm bars."

Which is, I think, part of the problem. BJJ and judo have basically two arm locks - straight (juji gatame) and bent (ude garami, Americana/Kimura). Yes, there are other techniques in both systems, but they tend to be ignored in favor of the Big Two, to the point that you rarely if ever see them in competition. Even omo plata is just another way of getting a bent arm lock.

The advantage to this system is you spend less time learning additional (and often arcane and nigh-useless) techniques, and more time improving your execution of these basics. Rather than using a different move for each position, you use a different entry or set up for the same move.

"Technique collection" is a phase most martial artists go through, and I think grapplers are more susceptible to it than most. "Look at the new throw/lock/pin/pass I learned today!" Eventually it sinks in that you don't need more moves - you just need to be good at them. Randori-based training, focused on a handful of high-percentage techniques with a wide range of applications, seems to be more effective than 100s of moves.

Lee Casebolt

[old jong]

This is true for any martial art. Not only grappling. ;)

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by MasterKiller
Aren't basics what you rely on, more often than not?

They are. But, as I mentioned, even those were mediocre. When I started bjj, I noticed and felt the details that were missing - those small details make all the difference. And once you progress beyond basics, you see a world of things you can do that you had no clue of before.

I'm not saying it's any better or worse, but there are 100s of Chin Na techniques for standing and grappling arm bars.

How many people have all of those mastered though? It's easy to master a straight arm bar. the trick is learning different ways to set it up. That kinda goes back to sport arts being more conentrated than non-sport arts.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by old jong


I think,the main idea is to have good basics ... Not to become an expert in groundfighting but to have some skills in order to get out of a bad situation if needed.
No need to become the next Royce Gracie to be able to use simples but effectives positions and escapes. and a choke or two!...



;)

I agree with that. But where are you getting those basics?

[norther practitioner]

So long as the basics are good..
I think that is the point.

[SevenStar]

right - but the point behind that is how do you know they're good if you're training in a style that doesn't specialize in what you are learning the basics of? If I go to bjj and they teach us longfist basics - how much stock should I put in them? How do I know I am learning solid longfist basics? If I want longfist basics, I'll train with a longfist guy. for grappling basics, I want to train with a grappler.

[norther practitioner]

Granted, but what if your long fist did have good grappling basics (I know this is a long shot, but whatever).

[SevenStar]

If it does that's fine. There are schools out there - RTB's WT school, for example. His sisok has had some training in catch and in some other grappling style - It's not unlikely that they have good basics.

My whole thing is to always question. I'm not gonna take anyone's word on it that what they are teaching me is good if it's not something they do.

[norther practitioner]

My whole thing is to always question. I'm not gonna take anyone's word on it that what they are teaching me is good if it's not something they do.

I'd never debate against that for the most part....
I'm just saying, sometimes, after the basics, many things can come of the practitioner if they try to....For example, the Yang taiji single whip can be applied as an arm bar, etc.

[old jong]

Originally posted by SevenStar


I agree with that. But where are you getting those basics?

Go to the sources available!...I train with a Judoka who was already a black belt when Royce was still in diapers!...;) This is how (or where) I get it.
My instructor is a real ne-waza maniac and I concentrate only on that aspect of Judo with him. I absolutely don't care about belts for myself.All I want is the know how.

[SevenStar]

Which is exaclty the way it should be done!

[diego]

Originally posted by LEGEND
Diego...we all think ROYCE was smoking crack when he released that BOOK! That book is HORRIBLE...and yes...it's like 1 step 2 step kata drills. I suggest getting the MASTERING JUJITSU by Royce's cousin...RENZO GRACIE...by far...much better than the crap Royce published.

Okay then...if you want to be harsh about it I will :)

Question for yall...what did BJJ add to the ground game that old school JJ and wrestling arts didn't have...did BJJ invent new tech's etc?
peace

[diego]

to add to my first question based on what 7* said about the game evolved as of recent...why through all of man's years at war did he not have the ground evolution upto par to where it is today?...did our ancestors find that to much detail in the ground game is unneccassary orwhat?...like in war you're best off trying to stay on your feet then worrying about getting back on them? what's the deal yall grapple-scholar/fighters?.

I have heard in some chinese kungfu circles they thought it was disgracefull to fight on the ground like you a dog or whatever, anyone heard this? fill me in:)

[rogue]

I absolutely don't care about belts for myself.All I want is the know how. Got spanked during belt testing yet again OJ?:p

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by diego
Question for yall...what did BJJ add to the ground game that old school JJ and wrestling arts didn't have...did BJJ invent new tech's etc?
peace

I am also interested in the answer.

AFAIK, BJJ only specialised on newaza but didn't add anything to the art.

Combine that with UFC that showcased and marketed what a fighter specialising in one fighting aspect can do over guys that doesn't specialise in it.

Granted prior to UFC and similar events there was little chance for a wrestler to fight a MT guy and similar.



IMO what gave the gracies the edge to win early UFC compes was not so much GJJ/BJJ, but that they took their game "Vale Tudo" to a new audience and fighters that lacked their experience in it.

Vale Tudo started in Brazil around the 1920's meaning that the Gracies fought in that type of competidion for decades and their games was totally geared towards it.


Cheers.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by diego
to add to my first question based on what 7* said about the game evolved as of recent...why through all of man's years at war did he not have the ground evolution upto par to where it is today?...did our ancestors find that to much detail in the ground game is unneccassary orwhat?...like in war you're best off trying to stay on your feet then worrying about getting back on them? what's the deal yall grapple-scholar/fighters?.

I have heard in some chinese kungfu circles they thought it was disgracefull to fight on the ground like you a dog or whatever, anyone heard this? fill me in:)

This may have been the case, but I doubt it given that there are whole styles devoted to fighting from the ground (though not groundfighting as it is know today) like dog style. Monkey style also spends some time on the ground, as do some lohan techniques (if only briefly and usually only long enough to clear the area and get back on your feet).

I suspect that a lot of traditional systems had some good reasons to avoid 'ground wrestling', but those reasons may not be valid today. Or I could just be talking out of my arse :)

[CrippledAvenger]

Originally posted by joedoe
I suspect that a lot of traditional systems had some good reasons to avoid 'ground wrestling', but those reasons may not be valid today. Or I could just be talking out of my arse :)

Like the prevelance of horses for transportation? Goodness knows I wouldn't want to go to the ground if it meant landing in the remainants of a stallion's lunch.

:D

[Serpent]

I think these are the points most relevant to my thinking here:



I don't think anyone has a problem with acknowledging that grappling arts have more expertise in grappling than striking arts; the issue is only debated when grapplers claim to have cornered the market on using and/or inventing ground and submission techniques.




There are certain things that each arts do well. We can learn from that, or we can engage in belief preservation and walk away no better off than before. I mean, heck, I don't lecture people on how to punch!




My whole thing is to always question. I'm not gonna take anyone's word on it that what they are teaching me is good if it's not something they do.

[diego]

Thanks LC, I'm going to look into the genesis of Vale Tudo:).

I'm very curios to find out more about all of our ancestors thinking relating to the fight-game so further input from the tma's and mma's is much appreciatted.

Many kungfu schools have triad links so alot of their jewels i imagine relates to things like multiple opponnent fighting theorys etc...why don't these types of schools speak on groundfighting as much as say BJJ schools....what do the BJJ schools have to say about fighting triad style...two crews with hatchets going at it at a crosswalk before the light turns green......read that was basically the first american newsprint of a triad war...in 1900 two gangs met up and fought while peeps on they balconys placed bets and sh-it:)...things like that

pressed for time sorry about the erradic typing yall
peace

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by diego
to add to my first question based on what 7* said about the game evolved as of recent...why through all of man's years at war did he not have the ground evolution upto par to where it is today?...did our ancestors find that to much detail in the ground game is unneccassary orwhat?...like in war you're best off trying to stay on your feet then worrying about getting back on them? what's the deal yall grapple-scholar/fighters?.

If you are in the middle of a war, you don't want to be on the ground. Quite logically, that shouldn't have been a focus of theirs. Today, there is plenty of awesome competition in groundfighting. You have to evolve and constantly advance your game if you're gonna stay on top.

I have heard in some chinese kungfu circles they thought it was disgracefull to fight on the ground like you a dog or whatever, anyone heard this? fill me in:)

I've heard that about several cultures, not just the chinese

[LEGEND]

"Question for yall...what did BJJ add to the ground game that old school JJ and wrestling arts didn't have...did BJJ invent new tech's etc?"

Helio Gracie added his own flavor to JUDO. BJJ is basically an off shoot of JUDO. So the GROUND TECHNIQUEs are more refined etc...

"why through all of man's years at war did he not have the ground evolution upto par to where it is today?"

Hand to hand combat was not a factor in war. It was the development of weapons and stragedy. Weapons played a hugh factor in WARFARE. Streetfighting although mostly is hand to hand...it gets extremely deadly when weapons( bottles, chairs, knives, and guns ) are involved.

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow

AFAIK, BJJ only specialised on newaza but didn't add anything to the art.

The rubber guard, the omoplata, the flying armbar, rolling knee bar...the list goes on. BJJ added alot to ne waza, and they did so because they did specialize in it.


Combine that with UFC that showcased and marketed what a fighter specialising in one fighting aspect can do over guys that doesn't specialise in it.

And theoretically, that means strikers could have won in the early days too. And some did - mo smith and keith hackney come to mind.

IMO what gave the gracies the edge to win early UFC compes was not so much GJJ/BJJ, but that they took their game "Vale Tudo" to a new audience and fighters that lacked their experience in it.

I don't think so, because it wasn't just the gracies who won - it was grapplers in general. Also, The gracies aren't known as anything other than BJJ guys. Matter of factly, if you ask royce (and I have asked him) he'll tell you that he doesn't do mma - he only does bjj.

Vale Tudo started in Brazil around the 1920's meaning that the Gracies fought in that type of competidion for decades and their games was totally geared towards it.

I dunno... I would think that if their game was totally geared towards it, they would be better at striking. royce's striking is sub par, and I'm sure several of the other gracies share that same affliction.

[Merryprankster]

Seven,

Gotta disagree with you here--there aren't any techniques in BJJ that aren't in Judo except for, perhaps, a couple of highly specific, unusual ones. The omo plata, for instance, isn't heavily practiced in Judo, but it's there--same with leg locks.

I would say that it's the entries and chaining that define BJJ vice Judo newaza. The understanding of the ground game by BJJers and little details noticed, collected and gathered really make a difference in execution.

But "new" techniques? Not so much, IMO--more "creative and different ways of getting there."

[Budokan]

Yes, like all fads (and yes, it was a fad, although that's not to denigrate its fighting style and techniques) BJJ has taken a downturn. Not surprising seeing as how it was red hot with hype for so many years -- it had to burn itself out sometime.

Next fad? We've already had one and it burned out with a white hot flame a lot quicker than BJJ. It was called tae bo.

But the next really big fad, like it or not, is gonna be Wushu. And boy, if you thought you heard a lot of screaming from traditonal MA about BJJ you ain't heard nothing yet until Wushu becomes a fad and captures the public imagination and airwaves.

[red5angel]

yes, BJJ wil soon be replaced by the superior killing techniqes of Krav Maga.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow


Just curious what the next fad will be??

FMA or similar??

Feh. FMA and various other southeast asian martial arts had their fad period in the early nineties.

BJJ's fad phase may be ending (fingers crossed). But all that really means, to my mind, is that the legitimate practitioners will keep doing what they've always done. And the rest of us can get a realistic view of it, sans quite as much marketing nonsense. (Not that BJJ had as big a problem with outlandish marketing as something like, say, ninjutsu did.)



Stuart B.

[red5angel]

Ap, are you back from vacation?!

[apoweyn]

Yep. Got in yesterday. :)

[red5angel]

well welcome back! How was the trip?

[apoweyn]

Thanks Red5.

The trip was good thanks. London was a bit hot. Lincoln (where my family lives) was a lot of fun. The wedding and all. And Edinburgh was fantastic. The Fringe Festival was going on. Lots of fun.


Stuart

[SevenStar]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Seven,

Gotta disagree with you here--there aren't any techniques in BJJ that aren't in Judo except for, perhaps, a couple of highly specific, unusual ones. The omo plata, for instance, isn't heavily practiced in Judo, but it's there--same with leg locks.

yeah, you're correct on that - but leglocks aren't allowed in competition. Judo has spine locks also, but they aren't allowed. As for the omo plata - I haven't seen that in judo - do you know what it's called? Or is it just grouped under ude garami?

I would say that it's the entries and chaining that define BJJ vice Judo newaza. The understanding of the ground game by BJJers and little details noticed, collected and gathered really make a difference in execution.

But "new" techniques? Not so much, IMO--more "creative and different ways of getting there."

right. which is why I mentioned the rolling kneebar and flying amrbar as being new.

[LeeCasebolt]

As for the omo plata - I haven't seen that in judo - do you know what it's called? Or is it just grouped under ude garami?

Ude garami w/legs. I couldn't tell you the japanese term for it, but I have seen it on an old judo (Kosen?) instructional I've got.

And isn't the rolling knee bar a sambo original?

[truewrestler]

omo platas aren't legal in judo right since it directly attacks the shoulder?

[ShaolinTiger00]

judo's omoplata

as bjjers will tell you there are several versions of this hold (the word means Scapula or shoulderblade in portugese)

the version that is legal in judo shiai is called called an ashi gatame. (there are many versions of ashi gatame.)

example (http://www.judoinfosite.nl/images/armklem/Ashigatame.jpg)

bascially you do a typical omoplata but once you have turned thru it, you do not sit up fully and lock out the shoulder. you not grab the forearm and bend the elbow.

[truewrestler]

ST, I thought about attacking the elbow right after I posted that comment :)

twisting elbow locks are fine right? ...for example a kimura with the arm nearly straight so all the pressure is on the elbow

[diego]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
Seven,

The understanding of the ground game by BJJers and little details noticed, collected and gathered really make a difference in execution.

But "new" techniques? Not so much, IMO--more "creative and different ways of getting there."

If it's not to much trouble for you Groundgame-scholars:),
would yall give me a general breakdown of the entering differrances between BJJ and JJ-Judo (preferably from styles similar to the one which Helio Gracie evolved from) with the aid of online video-clips?.
Please:cool:

[LEGEND]

"But the next really big fad, like it or not, is gonna be Wushu. And boy, if you thought you heard a lot of screaming from traditonal MA about BJJ you ain't heard nothing yet until Wushu becomes a fad and captures the public imagination and airwaves."

I don't think WUSHU can be a FAD. The arial forms are just too hard to do for most normal human beings. There customer base would be lowwwwwwwwwwwww. I think the next fad maybe SAN SHOU...a good mix of boxing and takedowns. Plus it's fun...

[ShaolinTiger00]

TW,

All attacks of the elbow are permitted.

Kimura & Keylock are very common. - ude garami

[truewrestler]

I think the next fad maybe SAN SHOU...a good mix of boxing and takedowns. I think the next FAD will be computers, boxing, football or maybe even the color blue.

...moving on...

ST, I may be confused. I understood the rules as saying locks against the shoulder are illegal. How do they differentiate between Kimuras or Keylocks that attacks the shoulder and those that attack the elbow? If you could clear this up for me I'd appreciate it! Thanks

[ShaolinTiger00]

TW,

its really a grey area.

IMHO the keylock, hammerlock, kimura, chicken wing (whatever you want to call them..) do often torque the shoulder, but they are considered elbow locks. (in reality when properly applied they cause a quick tap and the pressure to the elbow is immense) problem is that in reality, grappling with a guy to get the lock doesn't always allow you to get the perfect 90 keylock and you have to torque the shoulder as well before they tap..

[truewrestler]

Thanks