3 ms·

"Then Gracie jujitsu decided to re-brutalize judo." Sincere question, but when did that happen? I suspect that you're conflating Gracie Jiu-Jitsu with MMA. T

by bmelton 11y ago

"Then Gracie jujitsu decided to re-brutalize judo." Sincere question, but when did that happen? I suspect that you're conflating Gracie Jiu-Jitsu with MMA. The art of jiu-jitsu seems to me to be as passive as it ever has been. There've always been choke holds, and armbars, and while the techniques evolve over time, none of that has changed in BJJ. A punch is not a BJJ technique, for example, but a boxing, or Muay Thai, or whatever technique that gets incorporated into part of a competitor's MMA toolkit... but that doesn't make it BJJ. When I first read that sentence, I was reminded of having sparred with a BJJ practitioner way back in the mid-90s. He practiced a brutal form of BJJ that I had never encountered. To be fair, BJJ wasn't popular back then, and there certainly weren't gyms in every city, so it was a bit foreign. Long story short, even though it was just a competitive sparring competition, I lost, and I lost in embarrassing fashion because he used some kind of pinky lock that made me want to cry. So, reading about re-brutalization, my first thought was that they were teaching the small joint manipulation again, but I haven't heard of anybody doing that, which is kind of sad, because it's super effective as a defense. But they wouldn't, because the gaming commissions won't allow small joint manipulation techniques in the octagon, so there's not really any point in teaching it outside of shops specializing on self defense, and even those can't be trained effectively because you can't employ those techniques against other humans without a severe risk of injury.

peatmoss 11y ago
> Sincere question, but when did that happen? I suspect that you're conflating Gracie Jiu-Jitsu with MMA. The art of jiu-jitsu seems to me to be as passive as it ever has been. There've always been choke holds, and armbars, and while the techniques evolve over time, none of that has changed in BJJ. Fair question, and I'll readily admit I have limited experience with BJJ. However, at my first judo dojo, we shared space with a BJJ club, and I watched them perform locks on joints that are verboten in judo as practiced today--the reason being safety. Funny enough, aikido even has joint locks (wrist) that aren't done in competition judo due to the potential for injury when applied during shiai. As Wikipedia describes it, however, the presence of some of these techniques is due to BJJ forking early from Kodokan judo. So, I have my chronology a bit wrong. BJJ didn't (in this traditional form) re-brutalize judo; it forked from an earlier more brutal form of judo, and judo evolved toward less injury. In terms of small joint manipulation, I don't know about BJJ. However, I studied for a while in Danzan Ryu jujitsu in a blessedly not-testosterone-fueled environment. And that style very definitely had finger and toe locks. They were often combined with pins and were left in place as the final application of submission hold on someone you intended to extricate yourself from--mainly to make sure they weren't going to get up as you were trying to put distance between yourself. That escape aspect might have been my instructor's own flourish from aikido / Daito ryu training though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu#Divergence_from_Kodokan_rules https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu#Divergen...
- metamet 11y ago
  Having experience in both, there are far fewer injuries in BJJ than Judo. While BJJ does practice takedowns, it is not the primary focus of the sport, where Judo always starts standing. You rarely, if ever, get injured from a joint lock, even when rolling (sparring) or competing in a tournament in BJJ. Wrist locks and heel hooks are mentioned and practiced early on in BJJ, but they are not permitted as techniques to use on or by white belts while rolling. It is certainly a riskier submission, as you don't tend to feel it before it's too late, but I have never seen someone injured by a joint lock in years of training when it wasn't admittedly their fault (ie: they didn't tap when they should have). But I have seen quite a few shoulder injuries from takedowns, in both Judo and BJJ. People need to learn how to fall properly, but accidents do happen.
  - peatmoss 11y ago
    > Having experience in both, there are far fewer injuries in BJJ than Judo. I'd actually be curious to know what the stats on that are. I certainly don't think either of our anecdata are sufficient to answer the question. However, as noted in the wikipedia article I linked earlier, the judo's banning of various joint locks that are not banned in BJJ was done from a safety motivation. In principle, I'm open to the idea that these modifications of judo were not effective in their intended purpose to reduce injury. However, given some knowledge of (non-arm) joint locking techniques, an observed reduction in injury seems highly plausible. In short, I'm open to the possibility that the locks in BJJ don't constitute a significant additional risk above and beyond judo. However, judo's ban on BJJ-sanctioned locks does not strike me as particularly ill conceived.
    - metamet 11y ago
      Stats would be interesting. I rarely see injuries in BJJ, whether that's at the gym or at a tournament. Even then, it's most commonly due to an overextended armbar and someone not tapping soon enough. You also don't spend a lot of time in Judo attempting to submit or defending a submission. There's a lot of talk that Judo's bans have really watered the sport down, including things as fundamental as what sleeve grips are allowed, such as being unable to break an opponent's grip with two hands. It's becoming a point-fighting martial art in competition. Heel hooks are dangerous because they don't hurt and someone untrained in them (and particularly hard headed) may not tap in time. You can feel most joint locks, such as knee bars and arm bars, so it's safe to know when it's time to tap. Wrist locks aren't very common in BJJ. Aikido does far more wrist locks. We don't train them in BJJ very often because they aren't very effective and are easy to get out of. Most blood chokes, including arm and leg triangles, are easy to tap to and low risk. Sometimes someone may put on a choke that is a trachea choke, but the worst you have there is a sore throat. Neck cranks are also no-no's for lower belts. Shoulders are, by far, the most common place of injury. The most dangerous subs are usually shoulder locks, such as Americana and Kimura, as people have vastly different flexibility. And, as I mentioned earlier, getting injured from takedowns.
metamet 11y ago
> "Then Gracie jujitsu decided to re-brutalize judo." This isn't particularly true. I think the poster was thinking closer to Vale Tudo (and, of course, MMA), which BJJ has close roots with. BJJ is a descendant of Judo in that it essentially takes Judo to its logical conclusion. Judo (and BJJ) begin standing. But Judo ends with a simple series of points (take down into, maybe, a submission). BJJ goes until someone taps. That is, you start the roll standing (or kneeling, which is more lax) and continue sparring until a submission is performed. Judo would stop after the take down and quick sub attempt. The Gracies, however, did initially use BJJ as a form of self defense. It's still very much an aspect of rolling to go for position over submission. While you can submit from traditionally vulnerable spots, you can also nullify your opponent's offense, such as in guard. Ultimately, however, you want to mount them or take their back. In a street fight, this dominate position would let you strike and choke with ease. In fact, a lot of early BJJ schools would have people from other martial arts who would dojo storm. There's a pretty well known story where one BJJ teacher (I forget who off hand) told his students to not strike with fist. Only slap. So they would mount the opponent and slap at them until they could choke them. I enjoy doing BJJ because I can train and spar at whatever intensity (light, medium, hard), and even go compete at tournaments, without injury. You learn your limits and tap early and often.
- peatmoss 11y ago
  > This isn't particularly true. We may be disagreeing on what constitutes more or less brutal. And I freely admit that my experience with BJJ is limited. Quoting: > one BJJ teacher (I forget who off hand) told his students to not strike with fist. Only slap. This suggests to me that this was in contrast to the norm, which would be to mount and then strike with the fist. However, in judo, I know of no competition in which atemi waza (striking techniques) are permitted. To me the application of strikes to a controlled opponent is more brutal / violent than judo, where those things do not occur. Actually, I've only ever seen atemi practiced in judo as part of kata.
  - metamet 11y ago
    There is no striking in BJJ, just like there is no striking in Judo. End of story. > This suggests to me that this was in contrast to the norm, which would be to mount and then strike with the fist. This was a dojo raid situation, which, believe it or not, used to happen quite a bit. A gym (of whatever martial art) shows up and challenges your gym because they say their art is better. So a lot of times schools would accept for whatever reason, and they'd have a fight. A different era, etc. Say what you want about whether or not you agree with the challenge fighting, but schools would fight schools--Judo schools included. The point of my story was that they were able to defeat the school without striking. On to a another point: if you are defending yourself on the street, you'd be an idiot to restrict yourself from striking if the situation is truly dangerous.

by bmelton 11y ago

peatmoss 11y ago

> Sincere question, but when did that happen? I suspect that you're conflating Gracie Jiu-Jitsu with MMA. The art of jiu-jitsu seems to me to be as passive as it ever has been. There've always been choke holds, and armbars, and while the techniques evolve over time, none of that has changed in BJJ. Fair question, and I'll readily admit I have limited experience with BJJ. However, at my first judo dojo, we shared space with a BJJ club, and I watched them perform locks on joints that are verboten in judo as practiced today--the reason being safety. Funny enough, aikido even has joint locks (wrist) that aren't done in competition judo due to the potential for injury when applied during shiai. As Wikipedia describes it, however, the presence of some of these techniques is due to BJJ forking early from Kodokan judo. So, I have my chronology a bit wrong. BJJ didn't (in this traditional form) re-brutalize judo; it forked from an earlier more brutal form of judo, and judo evolved toward less injury. In terms of small joint manipulation, I don't know about BJJ. However, I studied for a while in Danzan Ryu jujitsu in a blessedly not-testosterone-fueled environment. And that style very definitely had finger and toe locks. They were often combined with pins and were left in place as the final application of submission hold on someone you intended to extricate yourself from--mainly to make sure they weren't going to get up as you were trying to put distance between yourself. That escape aspect might have been my instructor's own flourish from aikido / Daito ryu training though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu#Divergence_from_Kodokan_rules https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_jiu-jitsu#Divergen...

metamet 11y ago
Having experience in both, there are far fewer injuries in BJJ than Judo. While BJJ does practice takedowns, it is not the primary focus of the sport, where Judo always starts standing. You rarely, if ever, get injured from a joint lock, even when rolling (sparring) or competing in a tournament in BJJ. Wrist locks and heel hooks are mentioned and practiced early on in BJJ, but they are not permitted as techniques to use on or by white belts while rolling. It is certainly a riskier submission, as you don't tend to feel it before it's too late, but I have never seen someone injured by a joint lock in years of training when it wasn't admittedly their fault (ie: they didn't tap when they should have). But I have seen quite a few shoulder injuries from takedowns, in both Judo and BJJ. People need to learn how to fall properly, but accidents do happen.
- peatmoss 11y ago
  > Having experience in both, there are far fewer injuries in BJJ than Judo. I'd actually be curious to know what the stats on that are. I certainly don't think either of our anecdata are sufficient to answer the question. However, as noted in the wikipedia article I linked earlier, the judo's banning of various joint locks that are not banned in BJJ was done from a safety motivation. In principle, I'm open to the idea that these modifications of judo were not effective in their intended purpose to reduce injury. However, given some knowledge of (non-arm) joint locking techniques, an observed reduction in injury seems highly plausible. In short, I'm open to the possibility that the locks in BJJ don't constitute a significant additional risk above and beyond judo. However, judo's ban on BJJ-sanctioned locks does not strike me as particularly ill conceived.
  - metamet 11y ago
    Stats would be interesting. I rarely see injuries in BJJ, whether that's at the gym or at a tournament. Even then, it's most commonly due to an overextended armbar and someone not tapping soon enough. You also don't spend a lot of time in Judo attempting to submit or defending a submission. There's a lot of talk that Judo's bans have really watered the sport down, including things as fundamental as what sleeve grips are allowed, such as being unable to break an opponent's grip with two hands. It's becoming a point-fighting martial art in competition. Heel hooks are dangerous because they don't hurt and someone untrained in them (and particularly hard headed) may not tap in time. You can feel most joint locks, such as knee bars and arm bars, so it's safe to know when it's time to tap. Wrist locks aren't very common in BJJ. Aikido does far more wrist locks. We don't train them in BJJ very often because they aren't very effective and are easy to get out of. Most blood chokes, including arm and leg triangles, are easy to tap to and low risk. Sometimes someone may put on a choke that is a trachea choke, but the worst you have there is a sore throat. Neck cranks are also no-no's for lower belts. Shoulders are, by far, the most common place of injury. The most dangerous subs are usually shoulder locks, such as Americana and Kimura, as people have vastly different flexibility. And, as I mentioned earlier, getting injured from takedowns.

metamet 11y ago

> "Then Gracie jujitsu decided to re-brutalize judo." This isn't particularly true. I think the poster was thinking closer to Vale Tudo (and, of course, MMA), which BJJ has close roots with. BJJ is a descendant of Judo in that it essentially takes Judo to its logical conclusion. Judo (and BJJ) begin standing. But Judo ends with a simple series of points (take down into, maybe, a submission). BJJ goes until someone taps. That is, you start the roll standing (or kneeling, which is more lax) and continue sparring until a submission is performed. Judo would stop after the take down and quick sub attempt. The Gracies, however, did initially use BJJ as a form of self defense. It's still very much an aspect of rolling to go for position over submission. While you can submit from traditionally vulnerable spots, you can also nullify your opponent's offense, such as in guard. Ultimately, however, you want to mount them or take their back. In a street fight, this dominate position would let you strike and choke with ease. In fact, a lot of early BJJ schools would have people from other martial arts who would dojo storm. There's a pretty well known story where one BJJ teacher (I forget who off hand) told his students to not strike with fist. Only slap. So they would mount the opponent and slap at them until they could choke them. I enjoy doing BJJ because I can train and spar at whatever intensity (light, medium, hard), and even go compete at tournaments, without injury. You learn your limits and tap early and often.

peatmoss 11y ago
> This isn't particularly true. We may be disagreeing on what constitutes more or less brutal. And I freely admit that my experience with BJJ is limited. Quoting: > one BJJ teacher (I forget who off hand) told his students to not strike with fist. Only slap. This suggests to me that this was in contrast to the norm, which would be to mount and then strike with the fist. However, in judo, I know of no competition in which atemi waza (striking techniques) are permitted. To me the application of strikes to a controlled opponent is more brutal / violent than judo, where those things do not occur. Actually, I've only ever seen atemi practiced in judo as part of kata.
- metamet 11y ago
  There is no striking in BJJ, just like there is no striking in Judo. End of story. > This suggests to me that this was in contrast to the norm, which would be to mount and then strike with the fist. This was a dojo raid situation, which, believe it or not, used to happen quite a bit. A gym (of whatever martial art) shows up and challenges your gym because they say their art is better. So a lot of times schools would accept for whatever reason, and they'd have a fight. A different era, etc. Say what you want about whether or not you agree with the challenge fighting, but schools would fight schools--Judo schools included. The point of my story was that they were able to defeat the school without striking. On to a another point: if you are defending yourself on the street, you'd be an idiot to restrict yourself from striking if the situation is truly dangerous.