Rules for main forums
- Be nice
- No advertisement
- No events
- No fundraisers
- No topics asking for votes
- Only posts related to Brazilian Jiu Jitsu
"American Jiu-jitsu": What's Your Take?
4 month(s) ago • 813 views • 41 replies
BMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
I'm wondering what everyone's feelings are about what seems like a relatively new phenomena, presumably just here in the States.
I've heard several arguments ranging from the insistence that it's a totally different art than BJJ, to those with some more nationalistic points of view, for lack of a better term.
Here's Keenan's take on it: https://www.bjjee.com/bjj[...]jiu-jitsu/
So, what's your take: totally different thing than BJJ or just rebranding? Something else?
I have my own thoughts on this, of course. :)
I've heard several arguments ranging from the insistence that it's a totally different art than BJJ, to those with some more nationalistic points of view, for lack of a better term.
Here's Keenan's take on it: https://www.bjjee.com/bjj[...]jiu-jitsu/
So, what's your take: totally different thing than BJJ or just rebranding? Something else?
I have my own thoughts on this, of course. :)
IBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
If Keenan is branding it for marketing purposes, then so were the Gracies. Let's be honest: the vast majority of the Jiu-Jitsu canon came directly from Judo, and even that is oversimplifying it. You can find ancient drawings of people doing heel hooks, and old Judo manuals featuring the DLR guard. Techniques belong to human anatomy, not a specific country. What actually defines Jiu-Jitsu is the rule set. That is what drove the development of the positional hierarchy, and that is what the Gracies can rightfully take credit for. Without that specific rule set, you aren't doing Jiu-Jitsu, you're just playing a different sport.
WMBlack belt 5th degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
I'm wondering what everyone's feelings are about what seems like a relatively new phenomena, presumably just here in the States. I've heard several arguments ranging from the insistence that it's a totally different art than BJJ, to those with some more nationalistic points of view, for lack of a better term. Here's Keenan's take on it: https://www.bjjee.com/bjj[...]jiu-jitsu/ So, what's your take: totally different thing than BJJ or just rebranding? Something else? I have my own thoughts on this, of course. :)
It's not new.
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
America was it formed before or after Soshihiro Satake arrived in Brazil?
I’m just kidding, we all know it was after :)
Jokes aside, this part of martial arts history is not always easy to understand.
What many people call Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu today came through Japanese Judo/Jujutsu roots. In fact, the term “Judo” was officially created by Jigoro Kano in 1882, when he founded the Kodokan. Before that, systems were generally referred to as different schools of Jujutsu (Ju-Jitsu).
But here is where things become interesting:
At the beginning of the 1900s, the word “Judo” still meant very little outside Japan. So when masters like Soshihiro Satake and Mitsuyo Maeda arrived in Brazil, they often promoted what they taught as “Ju-Jitsu”, because that was the term people recognized and understood at the time.
So yes, in many ways, we are still doing Judo and more precisely Ne-waza, but through a historical path that evolved, adapted, specialized, and eventually became known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
To really understand this, you have to dig deeper than the usual simplified stories. Martial arts history is layered, names changed depending on the period, the country, and even the audience.
I’m just kidding, we all know it was after :)
Jokes aside, this part of martial arts history is not always easy to understand.
What many people call Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu today came through Japanese Judo/Jujutsu roots. In fact, the term “Judo” was officially created by Jigoro Kano in 1882, when he founded the Kodokan. Before that, systems were generally referred to as different schools of Jujutsu (Ju-Jitsu).
But here is where things become interesting:
At the beginning of the 1900s, the word “Judo” still meant very little outside Japan. So when masters like Soshihiro Satake and Mitsuyo Maeda arrived in Brazil, they often promoted what they taught as “Ju-Jitsu”, because that was the term people recognized and understood at the time.
So yes, in many ways, we are still doing Judo and more precisely Ne-waza, but through a historical path that evolved, adapted, specialized, and eventually became known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
To really understand this, you have to dig deeper than the usual simplified stories. Martial arts history is layered, names changed depending on the period, the country, and even the audience.
CBBrown beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
Personally, I think the better question is should we be using the term Jiu-Jitsu in the first place. I know everyone likes going on about lineage and what not, but being completely honest, nothing we're doing really has any connection to Japan. It would just make more sense to call what we do Submission Grappling. Then we don't need the whole American, Brazilian blah blah blah for anything other than noting where the practitioner is from.
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Personally, I think the better question is should we be using the term Jiu-Jitsu in the first place. I know everyone likes going on about lineage and what not, but being completely honest, nothing we're doing really has any connection to Japan. It would just make more sense to call what we do Submission Grappling. Then we don't need the whole American, Brazilian blah blah blah for anything other than noting where the practitioner is from.
No connection to Japan? They were doing this in Japan in the 1800s.
IBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
So yes, in many ways, we are still doing Judo and more precisely Ne-waza, but through a historical path that evolved, adapted, specialized, and eventually became known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu.
I am gonna play devils advocate. Are we really doing Judo? What is Jiu Jitsu and what is Judo? A collection of body movements? Because I don't know if its possible to prove those moves were invented in Judo or the origin at all.
MBrown beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
I am gonna play devils advocate. Are we really doing Judo? What is Jiu Jitsu and what is Judo? A collection of body movements? Because I don't know if its possible to prove those moves were invented in Judo or the origin at all.
As far as I know , reading all the Pedreira and Drysdale’s books, what Yacintho Ferro, Dontao Pires dos Reis and Carlos and Helio learned, was pretty early Judo, which Kano developed mainly from 2 ju Jutsu schools: early Judo evolved primarily from Tenjin Shin'yō-ryū and Kitō-ryū jujutsu. When I am not totally wrong Kano even studied some western wrestling (see kata guruma for example). Maeda was exposed not only to „early“ Judo, but also to catch as catch can.
All the stuff, like closed guard, open guard, Guillotine from closed guard, etc… was existing before Helio even was born (see the book by Taro Myake and Yukio Tani from 1906)…lot of Japanese „early“ Judokas, like Takeo Yano, Soshihiro Satake, Geo Ormori , the Ono Brothers helped developing and evolving the Jiu Jitsu we all know today (not to forget all cross trainings of all these guys and later legends of vale tudo, Luta Livre and Jiu Jitsu). George Gracie, The Gomes Brothers (Ivan, Jose and another one- Ivan Gomes ran a school together with Carlson Gracie for a while), Euclides Pereira, Roberto Leitao, Carlson, Rolls who trained some wrestling, then there is cross training and cross competitions in Sambo, which derives from Judo and wrestling, etc….
Also from what I read, in Brazil, nobody called it Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for a very long time… even the Brazilians just called it „Jiu Jitsu“….
There are origins and there is a lot of evolution.
The early Judo is different from today’s. The early Gracie Jiu Jitsu is different from what Carlson trained and what most people train today under the name „Brazilian Jiu Jitsu“ and submission grappling…
All the stuff, like closed guard, open guard, Guillotine from closed guard, etc… was existing before Helio even was born (see the book by Taro Myake and Yukio Tani from 1906)…lot of Japanese „early“ Judokas, like Takeo Yano, Soshihiro Satake, Geo Ormori , the Ono Brothers helped developing and evolving the Jiu Jitsu we all know today (not to forget all cross trainings of all these guys and later legends of vale tudo, Luta Livre and Jiu Jitsu). George Gracie, The Gomes Brothers (Ivan, Jose and another one- Ivan Gomes ran a school together with Carlson Gracie for a while), Euclides Pereira, Roberto Leitao, Carlson, Rolls who trained some wrestling, then there is cross training and cross competitions in Sambo, which derives from Judo and wrestling, etc….
Also from what I read, in Brazil, nobody called it Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for a very long time… even the Brazilians just called it „Jiu Jitsu“….
There are origins and there is a lot of evolution.
The early Judo is different from today’s. The early Gracie Jiu Jitsu is different from what Carlson trained and what most people train today under the name „Brazilian Jiu Jitsu“ and submission grappling…
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
As far as I know , reading all the Pedreira and Drysdale’s books, what Yacintho Ferro, Dontao Pires dos Reis and Carlos and Helio learned, was pretty early Judo, which Kano developed mainly from 2 ju Jutsu schools: early Judo evolved primarily from Tenjin Shin'yō-ryū and Kitō-ryū jujutsu. When I am not totally wrong Kano even studied some western wrestling (see kata guruma for example). Maeda was exposed not only to „early“ Judo, but also to catch as catch can. All the stuff, like closed guard, open guard, Guillotine from closed guard, etc… was existing before Helio even was born (see the book by Taro Myake and Yukio Tani from 1906)…lot of Japanese „early“ Judokas, like Takeo Yano, Soshihiro Satake, Geo Ormori , the Ono Brothers helped developing and evolving the Jiu Jitsu we all know today (not to forget all cross trainings of all these guys and later legends of vale tudo, Luta Livre and Jiu Jitsu). George Gracie, The Gomes Brothers (Ivan, Jose and another one- Ivan Gomes ran a school together with Carlson Gracie for a while), Euclides Pereira, Roberto Leitao, Carlson, Rolls who trained some wrestling, then there is cross training and cross competitions in Sambo, which derives from Judo and wrestling, etc…. Also from what I read, in Brazil, nobody called it Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for a very long time… even the Brazilians just called it „Jiu Jitsu“…. There are origins and there is a lot of evolution. The early Judo is different from today’s. The early Gracie Jiu Jitsu is different from what Carlson trained and what most people train today under the name „Brazilian Jiu Jitsu“ and submission grappling…
Very nicely documented Mirko, indeed.
One of the most important figures in Brazil from the Gracie family was George Gracie, yet very few people speak about him.
Also, Brazilians did not originally call it Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. For many years, it was simply called Jiu-Jitsu, Judo, or sometimes Gracie Jiu-Jitsu, depending on the period and the school.
People also forget that Judo was officially named by Jigoro Kano in 1882, but in the early 1900s the term meant little by the time, inside or outside Japan. That is why pioneers like Satake and Maeda, both Kodokan men, often advertised what they taught in Brazil as Ju-Jitsu, it was the term people recognized.
And perhaps the most important point: all of this ultimately came from self-defense. Before sport, before points, before federations, the core purpose was survival, control, and protecting oneself.
The name Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu came much later, largely to distinguish the Brazilian evolution of the art and, yes, with strong marketing purposes.
History is deeper than slogans. To understand it properly, you have to dig.
One of the most important figures in Brazil from the Gracie family was George Gracie, yet very few people speak about him.
Also, Brazilians did not originally call it Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. For many years, it was simply called Jiu-Jitsu, Judo, or sometimes Gracie Jiu-Jitsu, depending on the period and the school.
People also forget that Judo was officially named by Jigoro Kano in 1882, but in the early 1900s the term meant little by the time, inside or outside Japan. That is why pioneers like Satake and Maeda, both Kodokan men, often advertised what they taught in Brazil as Ju-Jitsu, it was the term people recognized.
And perhaps the most important point: all of this ultimately came from self-defense. Before sport, before points, before federations, the core purpose was survival, control, and protecting oneself.
The name Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu came much later, largely to distinguish the Brazilian evolution of the art and, yes, with strong marketing purposes.
History is deeper than slogans. To understand it properly, you have to dig.
PFBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
It’s Jiu Jitsu. The only time I’ll add “Brazilian” is in conversations where I don’t want to be confused as a practitioner of one of the local stick spinning flying wrist lock goofs.
CBBrown beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
No connection to Japan? They were doing this in Japan in the 1800s.
If you're arguing that grappling was done in medieval Japan and this is therefore Jiu-Jitsu, then yes, you're right. But that definition also is so general that it's basically useless. This would make American folk style wrestling Jiu-Jitsu too. Sure, things may have gotten there start with judo, but they have evolved independently of each other for quite some time now. I mean, Danaher was considered a renegade for using Japanese terms.
If you look at people training in "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu"today, they have absolutely no connection to Japan nor are they really interested in having one. They've never been to Japan, and have no intention of going. They've never trained under anyone Japanese or even trained WITH anyone Japanese either and they think Ashi Garami is a kind of Sushi. Even the Japanese "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu" competitors, like Kenta Iwamoto, are go outside of Japan to further their training. Trying to argue this is still "Jiu-Jitsu", just doesn't make any sense and isn't really honest. And let's be truthful, the only reason anyone still uses the term Jiu-Jitsu is marketing. If Submission Grappling got more students, they wouldn't be able to change the name fast enough.
If you look at people training in "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu"today, they have absolutely no connection to Japan nor are they really interested in having one. They've never been to Japan, and have no intention of going. They've never trained under anyone Japanese or even trained WITH anyone Japanese either and they think Ashi Garami is a kind of Sushi. Even the Japanese "Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu" competitors, like Kenta Iwamoto, are go outside of Japan to further their training. Trying to argue this is still "Jiu-Jitsu", just doesn't make any sense and isn't really honest. And let's be truthful, the only reason anyone still uses the term Jiu-Jitsu is marketing. If Submission Grappling got more students, they wouldn't be able to change the name fast enough.
JBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
MBrown beltVerified
MBrown beltVerified
JBlack belt 2nd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
I think that there might be some factual errors in the history lesson that starts around the 23:00 mark in the podcast. To the best of my knowledge, Maeda Mitsuyo was not Yamashita Yoshitsugu’s instructor. Yamashita was a direct student of Kano Jigoro (and the first person to be awarded a 10th dan in Judo by Kano himself). Also, Yamashita was the one who gave the Jiu-Jitsu demonstration to Teddy Roosevelt at the White House, not Maeda. Roosevelt learned Jiu-Jitsu from John O’Brien and Yamashita, but there is no record of him and Maeda ever meeting. It’s true that Roosevelt trained Jiu-Jitsu and spoke highly of the art, but it’s not likely that he learned it from Maeda. Also, while some police forces taught Jiu-Jitsu to their officers, the claim that “the entire American police force was being taught American Jiu-Jitsu” is, at best, hyperbolic. I have not seen any evidence to suggest that the term “American Jiu-Jitsu” was common during the 20th century. It seems like a more recent invention to put a patriotic spin on the tradition. Of course, this is not the first time we have seen this, since the popular Gracie Jiu-Jitsu origin story has been criticized in recent years for having some inaccuracies and embellishments.
BMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Personally, I think the better question is should we be using the term Jiu-Jitsu in the first place.
Regardless of what we should/could/would call this thing that all of us do here on beltchecker, the fact remains that we collectively all call it Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ).
BJJ (IMO) is different than Judo, as we prioritize positional progression and submissions over anything else. BJJ and judo are similar the same way as tennis and pickle ball are similar, yet totally different sports.
To continue using this analogy, imagine trying to call pickle ball "American pickle ball", despite having the exact same philosophy and rule set.
How could you make a reasonable argument for this?
"Well, we have a different vibe and approach to training this sport, so it's different".
No, it's not. It's exactly the same thing.
My opinion, of course.
BJJ (IMO) is different than Judo, as we prioritize positional progression and submissions over anything else. BJJ and judo are similar the same way as tennis and pickle ball are similar, yet totally different sports.
To continue using this analogy, imagine trying to call pickle ball "American pickle ball", despite having the exact same philosophy and rule set.
How could you make a reasonable argument for this?
"Well, we have a different vibe and approach to training this sport, so it's different".
No, it's not. It's exactly the same thing.
My opinion, of course.
JBlack belt 4th degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu is a sport. The IBJJF has a rulebook for that sport. That rulebook generally defines how you will train that sport.
Judo is a sport. It's an Olympic sport. The IJF has a rulebook for that sport. That rulebook generally defines how you will train that sport.
There is a "USA Jiu-Jitsu" (USAJJ) federation that is part of the United States Ju-Jitsu Federation (USJJF). Been around a long time. Doesn't have a rulebook. Can't really call it a sport. They are more focused on traditional (Japanese) Ju-Jitsu.
Until someone can tell me the difference between American Jiu-Jitsu, USA Jiu-Jitsu, United States Ju-Jitsu I will continue to just say "There's no such thing".
Judo is a sport. It's an Olympic sport. The IJF has a rulebook for that sport. That rulebook generally defines how you will train that sport.
There is a "USA Jiu-Jitsu" (USAJJ) federation that is part of the United States Ju-Jitsu Federation (USJJF). Been around a long time. Doesn't have a rulebook. Can't really call it a sport. They are more focused on traditional (Japanese) Ju-Jitsu.
Until someone can tell me the difference between American Jiu-Jitsu, USA Jiu-Jitsu, United States Ju-Jitsu I will continue to just say "There's no such thing".
JBlack belt 4th degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Regardless of what we should/could/would call this thing that all of us do here on beltchecker, the fact remains that we collectively all call it Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ). BJJ (IMO) is different than Judo, as we prioritize positional progression and submissions over anything else. BJJ and judo are similar the same way as tennis and pickle ball are similar, yet totally different sports. To continue using this analogy, imagine trying to call pickle ball "American pickle ball", despite having the exact same philosophy and rule set. How could you make a reasonable argument for this? "Well, we have a different vibe and approach to training this sport, so it's different". No, it's not. It's exactly the same thing. My opinion, of course.
Crap.....I didn't see this until after I submitted.
What you said.
What you said.
NBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
The leglock revolution was a totally homegrown American phenomenon that completely changed how the sport is played
You don't have to call it AJJ if you don't want to, but to call it BJJ is just disingenuous
The same goes for what keenans lapel guards did to the gi side
You don't have to call it AJJ if you don't want to, but to call it BJJ is just disingenuous
The same goes for what keenans lapel guards did to the gi side
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
It is truly remarkable to see how many different points of view exist regarding Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu and its origins. Reading some of the comments, I believe certain things deserve to be put into context more clearly.
First of all and important in my opinion: Jiu-Jitsu is not a sport. Judo is not a sport. They are martial arts. A martial art and a sport are fundamentally different things. You can give a martial art a sportive side, but you cannot give a sport a martial essence. Martial arts were born from survival, combat, self-defense, and real human confrontation.
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, at its core, is essentially Newaza. From the very beginning, it was groundwork. What people call “modern BJJ” today is still fundamentally the same thing. Yes, people added guards, grips, lapel variations, and countless details, but adding details does not mean changing the art itself.
What people are doing on the ground today is, in essence, what was already being done in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The principles remain the same. Control, leverage, positioning, submissions, survival, the basics never changed.
And this is what many people forget: it all comes from self-defense.
You had traditional Japanese martial arts, then Judo and Newaza, which traveled to Brazil and eventually became known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. But just because something evolves geographically does not mean its roots disappear. If I practice Jiu-Jitsu in Belgium, I do not suddenly call it Belgian Jiu-Jitsu. If someone practices in America, it does not automatically become American Jiu-Jitsu.
The martial art was born in Japan. That cannot be rewritten. Over time, people refined it, adapted it, added layers to it but the essence, the fundamentals, and the underlying principles have remained the same from the very beginning.
The deeper you study this art, the more you realize: the basics are timeless.
In my opinion, Jiu-Jitsu should never be reduced to a ruleset. The art itself is far greater than any federation, scoring system, or temporary competitive trend. Rules can help organize competition, but they should never define the essence of the art.
Jiu-Jitsu deserves to be studied in its complete form first through its principles, fundamentals, self-defense, control, timing, and adaptability. Only then should one learn how to navigate a particular ruleset, if competition is the goal.
There is nothing wrong with specializing for tournaments, but the art should remain the foundation. Because when training becomes entirely shaped by rules, there is always a risk of moving away from what Jiu-Jitsu truly is. The rules may change over time, but the art remains.
But this is just my opinion of course.
First of all and important in my opinion: Jiu-Jitsu is not a sport. Judo is not a sport. They are martial arts. A martial art and a sport are fundamentally different things. You can give a martial art a sportive side, but you cannot give a sport a martial essence. Martial arts were born from survival, combat, self-defense, and real human confrontation.
Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, at its core, is essentially Newaza. From the very beginning, it was groundwork. What people call “modern BJJ” today is still fundamentally the same thing. Yes, people added guards, grips, lapel variations, and countless details, but adding details does not mean changing the art itself.
What people are doing on the ground today is, in essence, what was already being done in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The principles remain the same. Control, leverage, positioning, submissions, survival, the basics never changed.
And this is what many people forget: it all comes from self-defense.
You had traditional Japanese martial arts, then Judo and Newaza, which traveled to Brazil and eventually became known as Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. But just because something evolves geographically does not mean its roots disappear. If I practice Jiu-Jitsu in Belgium, I do not suddenly call it Belgian Jiu-Jitsu. If someone practices in America, it does not automatically become American Jiu-Jitsu.
The martial art was born in Japan. That cannot be rewritten. Over time, people refined it, adapted it, added layers to it but the essence, the fundamentals, and the underlying principles have remained the same from the very beginning.
The deeper you study this art, the more you realize: the basics are timeless.
In my opinion, Jiu-Jitsu should never be reduced to a ruleset. The art itself is far greater than any federation, scoring system, or temporary competitive trend. Rules can help organize competition, but they should never define the essence of the art.
Jiu-Jitsu deserves to be studied in its complete form first through its principles, fundamentals, self-defense, control, timing, and adaptability. Only then should one learn how to navigate a particular ruleset, if competition is the goal.
There is nothing wrong with specializing for tournaments, but the art should remain the foundation. Because when training becomes entirely shaped by rules, there is always a risk of moving away from what Jiu-Jitsu truly is. The rules may change over time, but the art remains.
But this is just my opinion of course.
BMBlack belt 1st degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Jiu-Jitsu is not a sport. Judo is not a sport. They are martial arts.
Can't they be both though?
Jiu-jitsu is definitely a sport. You can find tournaments pretty much anywhere. Judo is definitely a sport. It's in the Olympics.
I think they are effective forms of martial arts because they are sports.
Jiu-jitsu is definitely a sport. You can find tournaments pretty much anywhere. Judo is definitely a sport. It's in the Olympics.
I think they are effective forms of martial arts because they are sports.
MBrown beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
It’s both….
AI Definition of martial arts:
„ martial art is a codified system of combat practices and traditions developed for self-defense, military application, competition, physical fitness, and mental or spiritual development“
AI definition of combat sport:
„ A combat sport (or fighting sport) is a competitive contact discipline where two contestants face off in one-on-one physical confrontation. The goal is to defeat the opponent or score more points using specific techniques like striking, kicking, or grappling, all within a strictly regulated environment.“
AI definition of „sports“:
„ A sport is an organized, competitive physical activity that requires skill and relies on a set of rules. The primary goal is usually enjoyment, recreation, or improving physical and mental well-being, though it can also be a profession.“
AI Definition of martial arts:
„ martial art is a codified system of combat practices and traditions developed for self-defense, military application, competition, physical fitness, and mental or spiritual development“
AI definition of combat sport:
„ A combat sport (or fighting sport) is a competitive contact discipline where two contestants face off in one-on-one physical confrontation. The goal is to defeat the opponent or score more points using specific techniques like striking, kicking, or grappling, all within a strictly regulated environment.“
AI definition of „sports“:
„ A sport is an organized, competitive physical activity that requires skill and relies on a set of rules. The primary goal is usually enjoyment, recreation, or improving physical and mental well-being, though it can also be a profession.“
JBlack belt 4th degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
The leglock revolution was a totally homegrown American phenomenon that completely changed how the sport is played You don't have to call it AJJ if you don't want to, but to call it BJJ is just disingenuous The same goes for what keenans lapel guards did to the gi side
100% not true. The Japanese fighters were using them before BJJ really took off in the US. In fact, I would go on to say that if Ken Shamrock had not tried to sit back and go for his heel hook against Royce in UFC 1 we might not all be practicing BJJ right now.
JBlack belt 4th degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
First of all and important in my opinion: Jiu-Jitsu is not a sport. Judo is not a sport.
Well, I would say that you are entitled to your opinion but it's not really something you can have an opinion about. BJJ is a sport. Judo is a sport. They are Combat Sports. Judo is in the Olympics. So is Taekwondo, boxing, wrestling, fencing, archery, and shooting.
BJJ, Judo and Taekwondo are also Martial Arts. Fencing isn't, but Kendo is.
A car is a vehicle. So is a truck. A car is not a truck. You can call your car a truck, doesn't mean you're correct.
And, in my opinion, the absolute best of all of those sports for self defense is shooting. Just know your local laws and you can defend yourself within a few months learning how to shoot.
BJJ, Judo and Taekwondo are also Martial Arts. Fencing isn't, but Kendo is.
A car is a vehicle. So is a truck. A car is not a truck. You can call your car a truck, doesn't mean you're correct.
And, in my opinion, the absolute best of all of those sports for self defense is shooting. Just know your local laws and you can defend yourself within a few months learning how to shoot.
IBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
First of all and important in my opinion: Jiu-Jitsu is not a sport. Judo is not a sport. They are martial arts. A martial art and a sport are fundamentally different things. You can give a martial art a sportive side, but you cannot give a sport a martial essence.
If I show someone a kimura. Is that a judo move, jiu jitsu move, or catch wrestling move? How can you define each martial art when they have overlapping movements unless you involve rule sets?
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
If I show someone a kimura. Is that a judo move, jiu jitsu move, or catch wrestling move? How can you define each martial art when they have overlapping movements unless you involve rule sets?
Easy question: the Kimura is named after Mister Masahiko Kimura. :)
Self-defense, Jiu-Jitsu (in its various forms of writing), and Newaza (Judo groundwork) already existed and were highly developed long before what we now call BJJ. When Kimura mastered that technique, “Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu” as we know it today had not yet fully emerged.
Self-defense, Jiu-Jitsu (in its various forms of writing), and Newaza (Judo groundwork) already existed and were highly developed long before what we now call BJJ. When Kimura mastered that technique, “Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu” as we know it today had not yet fully emerged.
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
100% not true. The Japanese fighters were using them before BJJ really took off in the US. In fact, I would go on to say that if Ken Shamrock had not tried to sit back and go for his heel hook against Royce in UFC 1 we might not all be practicing BJJ right now.
100%
RBlack belt 3rd degreeVerified
4 month(s) ago
Well, I would say that you are entitled to your opinion but it's not really something you can have an opinion about. BJJ is a sport. Judo is a sport. They are Combat Sports. Judo is in the Olympics. So is Taekwondo, boxing, wrestling, fencing, archery, and shooting. BJJ, Judo and Taekwondo are also Martial Arts. Fencing isn't, but Kendo is. A car is a vehicle. So is a truck. A car is not a truck. You can call your car a truck, doesn't mean you're correct. And, in my opinion, the absolute best of all of those sports for self defense is shooting. Just know your local laws and you can defend yourself within a few months learning how to shoot.
Have to read carefuly and folow the logic in there. They are martial arts first.
Definition of Martial Arts:
The word martial comes from Mars, the Roman god of war. Martial arts were created for combat, survival, self-defense, discipline, and the study of human conflict. They were never originally designed as sports.
Over time, some martial arts developed a sportive side — with rules, points, and competition — but their roots remain martial. That is why we call them martial arts: they are arts of combat first, sports second (if at all).
It was my opinion, but I didn't invent this. It's fact.
Definition of Martial Arts:
The word martial comes from Mars, the Roman god of war. Martial arts were created for combat, survival, self-defense, discipline, and the study of human conflict. They were never originally designed as sports.
Over time, some martial arts developed a sportive side — with rules, points, and competition — but their roots remain martial. That is why we call them martial arts: they are arts of combat first, sports second (if at all).
It was my opinion, but I didn't invent this. It's fact.
IBlack beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
Easy question: the Kimura is named after Mister Masahiko Kimura. :) Self-defense, Jiu-Jitsu (in its various forms of writing), and Newaza (Judo groundwork) already existed and were highly developed long before what we now call BJJ. When Kimura mastered that technique, “Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu” as we know it today had not yet fully emerged.
That didn't answer the question at all. Also Masahiko Kimura did not even close to invent the movement. Catch wrestlers were doing it before he was even born. I'm sure it was done long before they did it too. So again, how can you define each martial art when they have overlapping movements unless you involve rule sets?
CBBrown beltVerified
4 month(s) ago
That didn't answer the question at all. Also Masahiko Kimura did not even close to invent the movement. Catch wrestlers were doing it before he was even born. I'm sure it was done long before they did it too. So again, how can you define each martial art when they have overlapping movements unless you involve rule sets?
This is also why the statement "XYZ is a Judo/Jiu-Jitsu/Wrestling/whatever technique" is kind of dumb when you think about it. If your goal is to break an arm, there are a finite number of ways to do that. If you want to choke someone, there is a finite number of ways to do that too. Human beings are by an large the same. We have the same number of body parts, our joints all work the same and our d bodies all basically need the same things to stay alive.
Most people didn't get taught a Kimura. They figured it out by just trying to tap someone out. I can say I didn't get taught the triangle choke, I just figured it out. If someone has a goal, they will find a way to achieve that goal. Judo/Jiu-Jitsu/Wrestling/Whatever is just how you decide when someone won. It could honestly be argued that there are no "Martial Arts" and instead that there are only rules sets.
Most people didn't get taught a Kimura. They figured it out by just trying to tap someone out. I can say I didn't get taught the triangle choke, I just figured it out. If someone has a goal, they will find a way to achieve that goal. Judo/Jiu-Jitsu/Wrestling/Whatever is just how you decide when someone won. It could honestly be argued that there are no "Martial Arts" and instead that there are only rules sets.
