True or False? BJJ is worse than wrestling and judo for self defence

Hey guys

Got motivated to start this thread after spending last week doing deep half and getting told the focus of this week is lapel guard.

Don't get me wrong - deep half etc. is highly effective against judokas and wrestlings on the mats...especially since neither would have any real familiarity dealing with it. Also, they are really fun to play and can get really complex from a technical standpoint. That being said, these guards (as well as guards like spider/lasso/worm etc.) have little to no value in a self defence context. No one in a street situation should grab a piece of their opponent's clothing and sit down. And if you end up on the bottom somehow, surely the focus should be to sweep asap and/or get back to your feet/get on top. Same with the (in my opinion) over the top focus on leg locks - are you really going to give up position in a real life fight to go for someone's legs (instead of simply loop or cross choking them)?

I come from more of a self-defence BJJ lineage but increasingly guards like these beat out the guards of old (closed guard, half guard). Pro BJJ-ers focus on developing these new guards nowadays while the teaching and experimentation with the old guards have waned. I personally know at least a handful of new blues who can show you how to berimbolo but not how to do a pendulum or flower sweep. I also know heaps of white belts who can Granby roll, invert (somewhat) and play DLR/reverse DLR but who barely knows how to do a single/double/ankle pick.

Straight up, is BJJ the least effective of the grappling arts in a self defence scenario? Out of the combat sports, is it at this point also the least effective? You don't see MT fighters training spinning elbows and superman punches all day and you don't see boxers switch stance until usually a couple of fights in...

P.S. I am actually a BJJ-er and not a judoka or wrestler. I just find it sad that the ultimate self defence martial arts once upon a time ended up more like a fancy chess game.

 

What's so good about the flower sweep?

 

It depends of the school focus, the Gracies always had the focus on MMA and self defence so... Royce on the earlier ufcs just invalidate your point. Most schools focus on bjj competition because in my view it is sort of trending right now.
Ps: Any martial art is good for self defence 90% of people in the streets cant throw a punch.

 

BJJ is categorically worse than either for self defense, as soon as you have more than one attacker. Okay that part is obvious, but what's not obvious is that most people do not attack you unless they have a big advantage....like having multiple attackers (or weapon). So unless you are a weak looking person, actually BJJ is not helpful at all because those aren't the situations you will be in except in rare cases.

 

If you're worried about self-defense buy a gun. Grapple for fun.

 

where do you live? Judo wrestling or whatever sucks for SD if you considerer multiple opponents, grappling as a whole sucks for those scenarios, you better of weight lifting and boxing if you think judo wrestling or whatever is going to save your ass as soon as people start jumpiong on you.

 

you dont need more for SD than knowing how to close the space clinch trip mount rnc... close guard is extremely useful if you happen to end up on your back, deep half and shit is not meant to be used on SD jesus it doesnt take much to realize that wont be doing berimbolos and deep half on concrete, although deep half actully works.

 

1. Where I live isn't that relevant.
2. The question was comparing grappling styles, not all arts. At least Judo/wrestling can help you free yourself or potentially quickly take someone out.
3. Judo and wrestling is weight lifting in a functional way that translates into other standing techniques.

 

The best unarmed style for self-defense is, and by a long shot, the 110 meter hurdles. If they can't catch you they can't hit you with either fists or a knife, and most untrained guys can't hit a moving target more than 20 feet away with a hand gun. The hurdles is useful for going over fences and parked cars, making it even harder to hit you with a bullet.

 

Except if you have someone to defend.

This is a good example.... in self defense there are so many varying situations, so the best bet is more general fitness and knowledge of the body, plus some basic moves. In that sense, all grappling styles are great for that, and just learn basic punches and elbows.

 

you need size more than anything to deal with multiple opponents, and I will like you to hip throw anyone when you got 2 people swining at your face, be realistic, grappling with multuple opponents is a recipe to desaster, unless you have size and strenght on your side.

 

good jab.... leg kick and maybe a good front kick will go a long way

 

bjj is pretty bad for self defence

best combo is wrestling plus boxing

source worked as a bouncer or 2 years (can check out my thread in mayberry for stories lol)

 

bouncing isn’t sd... and boxing plus Bjj also works... but boxing? For bouncing? What were you beating the living shit out of clients?

 

Oh bouncing is sd if you are being hit with a syringe

Wrestling boxing thing was for self defence in general

Not for bouncing (you dont need anything for it, its just a job after all and a fairly shitty one)

Main thing is ground is absolutely last place you want to be in

 

I don't understand why a lot of people are saying BJJ is "bad" for self defense.

The LAPD study says that 90% of fights go to the ground. That's apparently a myth, but it's around 30-40% "in a way BJJ would be useful" or something.

The problem here is that: 1. Even normal people might know more technique than non-trained people from 1995-2005 comparatively. 2. The statistic is stupid anyway because it doesn't consider "trained" vs "untrained".

Obviously if the fight goes to the ground, or you can take it to the ground with decent trips (Judo I guess?) or decent wrestling - then you are at a massive advantage knowing BJJ vs an untrained opponent. That's a bigger advantage than being a hobbyist/casual boxer with 1-2 years of experience let's say, or muay thai, and light sparring.

The odds of you getting clocked or knocked out with bare knuckles, with random objects, with hard ground is probably much higher than the odds of you not being able to outclass and sweep/submit/gain dominant position over a random bro / douche at a bar, or party, or randomly.

Personally I don't really care about self defense...but they are all good. Wrestling, Boxing, Muay Thai or legit kickboxing, BJJ, Sambo, Judo. They're all going to be effective imo. And I would think BJJ would be MORE effective than anything but (high level) wrestling. But that's just picking a single art, why are we limiting ourselves to that?

Obviously if you do BJJ and care about SD then wouldn't you also be training wrestling / takedowns, clinch work / trips, boxing / striking? It's just a stupid argument to have when you can become proficient in multiple areas. And as someone already said if you care so much buy a gun or carry a knife, you're not guaranteed to have a 1 on 1 same weight class fight lol.

 

How would wrestling be > than BJJ if someone is trying to stab you with a syringe, or knife for that matter? It's basically the same problem and solution at that point, both arts/sports have a similar solution.

Here is why BJJ would be good for bouncing:

You're on the bottom somehow. Wrestlers generally struggle and suck from bottom positions until they learn BJJ, it's not a part of the wrestling system really to be using guard or sweeps or any submissions from top or bottom.

John Danaher said that BJJ made his bouncing dramatically easier in NYC full of crime in the 90s, so I disagree based on that and what logic would tell me

 

if they have a weapon then the art really doesnt matter anymore.This was about which art to choose in general for sd

I would pick Wrestling because you would have better chance of sprawling and staying on your feet so you can fight back/run away

Add boxing and you would be well off

This is just my 2 cents

About What bjj taught me for sd situations was how to get back up if taken down,so that was good thing.

Fighting off your back to get up to your feet was the most important thing in bjj from self defence point of view imo

 

In a brawl, absolutely

 

Fair enough, I just think this:

1. MMA fighters train BJJ/Grappling, there's a reason every single one of them do. It's very effective and needed. I think Wrestling + BJJ + Striking (boxing, MT, Kickboxing, whatever) is obviously the 3 most effective arts for MMA and therefore a street fight.

2. We are assuming we are in a street fight with someone untrained or very minimally trained right? So yeah I just would feel very confident if the distance was closed, clinched or takedown shot...that I would be able to just destroy the person from top or bottom position pretty fast. I'd imagine I could take someone's back from guard easily or sweep them, regardless of strikes.

But that's assuming we aren't fighting some monster 6'3-6'5, 225-250 lbs or something that is athletic. It's all situational too, don't know how big everyone is vs the opponent, skill levels, etc. I just think BJJ is clearly good, and it's definitely better than Judo imo, which the thread title says the opposite of. You aren't about to get into a street fight with someone in a Gi.