- Joined
- Sep 30, 2014
- Messages
- 1,556
- Reaction score
- 1,081
Haha... that made me LOL for real!!
Why did people act as if BJJ was something new when it's just Newaza Judo?
- Thread starter spacetime
- Start date
Haha... that made me LOL for real!!
I'm curious since you're obviously a well informed Judoka, who would you put your money on to make make the takedown on a mat between an Olympic Gold medialist in Judo vs an Olympic Gold medalist in Wrestling. Also, does it matter if the wrestler is a Greco Roman or Freestyler?
I asked this question to a wrestler and he says the Judoka is the favourite in the clinch. What say you?
I don't wish to object to your superior knowledge, but I have hip thrown a big dude on cement, and he got up both times. He was fat, I should add, but not massively. How do you explain that?
Also I left my self exposed when grabing his clothes.and got an elbow to my face (it didn't affect me, but it could have). How does Judo adress dirty klinches??
There's jujitsu in Traditional TaeKwondo you retard.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Messages
- 5,969
- Reaction score
- 3,171
Was your attempt to kill the opponent?
Japanese jujitsu was meant to kill, you throw a guy and stab them or break a limb because the armor limits strikes.
Did you try to stomp the guy’s skull right after the hip throw? And if so, why not?
Whatever the answer, legitimately slamming someone on concrete or dirt most likely will give you time to maim or seriously injure someone if you really wanted to.
The fact the person got up quickly might be because he was tough OR you didn’t follow up immediately because you were somewhat civil and didn’t want to go to prison.
In either case, it’s not necessarily the limit of the art, but the unwillingness of the user. Which is good... because you’d be in for potential manslaughter.
I threw him 3 feet forward so there was nothing to stamp on. But my point is that he got right back up both times.
But your contention was that a judo throw will do the job on cement. My experience is very different from that, and I got the sucker flying and hitting cement good. He was a regular street scraper.
Not all throws are the same. Some do hardly any damage, as you saw.
Ultimately the power of the throw is from acceleration (and impact conditions), so there is an exponential relation to the quality of the throw. One may do little damage but a master is a different story.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2013
- Messages
- 5,969
- Reaction score
- 3,171
My contention is that slamming someone on concrete or dirt will often take the person out or lead to something that will finish the fight fast.
Your personal experience is minor compared to empirical evidence of even BJJ guys being knocked out from slams in competition.
Slamming someone who has full guard is not the same as throwing someone but the point is, the mat is not the ground.
Had Dan Severn thrown Macias on concrete, he would have murdered him.
Had Shamrock done the same with Igor, he would have potentially paralyzed him.
Or the many times Matt Hughes picked someone up and hoisted him over his shoulder. ...
Okey but you still didn't answer who you put your money on in the take down department - Olympic Judo vs Olympic freestyle wrestler. Who is more likely to land a takedown slam?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2013
- Messages
- 15,284
- Reaction score
- 11,123
Doesn't make it any less gay
grappling on the ground with another guys ass in your face is not gay?
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2013
- Messages
- 15,284
- Reaction score
- 11,123
It's only gay if the balls touch. Taekwondo is for the Paul Mitchell performance academy of gays
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,455
- Reaction score
- 1,283
You betray a lack of perspective with statements like this. There are whole universes of details that go into how to move ones body through space; adding another body in contact to that mix, that is actively trying to foil you at the same time you are trying to foil them? Multiplies that factor by an exponential amount.
Even something as 'simple' as a guillotine choke has like a bajillion different variations, set-ups, and transitions being used by active competitors.
Last edited:
I'll bite. I think you've already made your mind up but still, I've got a few minutes to kill. For note, I've trained Judo longer than I've trained BJJ.
Why DID people think BJJ was a new style?
Helio and Carlos were clever marketeers with huge egos. I believe that back then they didn't give much credit to Judo, where you are right, most of BJJ's techniques come from (although they might have also been taught some catch wrestling and other bits too that Maeda had picked up elsewhere, but this is all conjecture). They wanted to push their own style they said was unbeatable. However we know that was not true with matches like Kimura.
So why DID people think it was a new style? Marketing.
What about now?
BJJ now is a separate style from Judo. If you watch, train or compete in both, you'll quickly realise this. At the basic level Judo has the emphasis on throws, BJJ has the emphasis on ground fighting. That is definitely an oversimplification but works for the discussion.
You couldn't call it 'Newaza Judo' mainly because that would imply you could use the techinques you learn in BJJ in Judo matches, which most of them you cannot, due to the rules. In that sense, BJJ is actually pretty poor 'Newaza Judo' now, as most of it is irrellevant to Judo.
BJJ has a unique identity, so alongside all the development of the techniques and specific tournaments, it definitely warrants being labelled its own style. However, BJJ is proud of its Judo roots these days and has massive respect (and some jealousy for the throws!!) of the art.
Why DID people think BJJ was a new style?
Helio and Carlos were clever marketeers with huge egos. I believe that back then they didn't give much credit to Judo, where you are right, most of BJJ's techniques come from (although they might have also been taught some catch wrestling and other bits too that Maeda had picked up elsewhere, but this is all conjecture). They wanted to push their own style they said was unbeatable. However we know that was not true with matches like Kimura.
So why DID people think it was a new style? Marketing.
What about now?
BJJ now is a separate style from Judo. If you watch, train or compete in both, you'll quickly realise this. At the basic level Judo has the emphasis on throws, BJJ has the emphasis on ground fighting. That is definitely an oversimplification but works for the discussion.
You couldn't call it 'Newaza Judo' mainly because that would imply you could use the techinques you learn in BJJ in Judo matches, which most of them you cannot, due to the rules. In that sense, BJJ is actually pretty poor 'Newaza Judo' now, as most of it is irrellevant to Judo.
BJJ has a unique identity, so alongside all the development of the techniques and specific tournaments, it definitely warrants being labelled its own style. However, BJJ is proud of its Judo roots these days and has massive respect (and some jealousy for the throws!!) of the art.
Last edited:
Was there no outlash from the Judo community back then calling out the BS?
- Joined
- May 13, 2011
- Messages
- 1,930
- Reaction score
- 344
If I'm in the Gi I do BJJ, because I train within the IBJJF ruleset to eventually compete in BJJ.
If I'm in no gi I use the generic term of grappling or just '' No Gi''.
I would never use the term of Gracie Jiu Jitsu, because I'm not very good with worshiping deities.
I don't know, to be honest. Probably not due to there being no internet. You might find this article useful as it is extremely well researched (if not a little boring) as it deals with most of the myths surrounding the history of BJJ: http://global-training-report.com/myths.htm
What you need to distinguish between is the history, which is expanded on in the above article, and today. Today they are different styles, back then, well, not so much, but no one knows 100% what went on.
Last edited:
