Why is sport jiu jitsu...

[sunnycoastbjj]

While we are on the topic of illegal moves, in Australia they have banned pulling on the head of your opponent when you have them in a standard leg triangle and only 'one arm in' guilotines are now legal.. if you dont have the arm in you cant submit. Both were banned from the pan pacs for the reason of to much pressure on the neck... thoughts?

I personally think its way over the top....

 

[Falconry]

I don't think the rule on the triangle is THAT bad to be honest. I mean I can understand banned neck cranks. Heel hooks, the worst that happens is you wreck somebody's knee. Neck cranks, the worst that can happen is, well, much worse. I think the idea behind that rule on the triangle is that guys would pull sloppy triangles with poor technique, and then because they couldn't get the tap, they'd grab onto the back of the opponents neck and start cranking the shit out of it, essentially turning it into a lame neck crank. Which I guess is potentially dangerous. But the reason I don't think it's really all that bad is because you can still pull down on your own knee, which gives much the same effect anyway.

But the rule on guillotines is bullshit, I think. As long as people aren't pulling sloppy guillotines and then arching like crazy deliberately trying to crank the neck then I don't see the problem. Just penalise the people who ARE doing that and let the rest of us who don't have shitty technique go about business as usual.

 

[Tony Manifold]

Well first of all, heel hooks are still taught in jiu-jitsu and used in no-gi advanced competitions. Rick Macauley, Lloyd Irvin, and many others use them a lot. For gi competitions,

They aren't being hypocritical. They still allow most leg locks in gi at black belt. i.e. The only competition rank which matters to Renzo and the Gracie clan. The career enders - neck cranks and twisting leg locks - are illegal there. Surely you can get behind having those limited. In no-gi competitions, twisting leg locks are often still legal. It is safer in no-gi because shorts can't get caught up in the lock. There are sensible limits like for career and life threatening situations - and gi and no-gi are two different situations.

Renzo said he disagreed with Kano, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a limit (sorry for the double negative). Do you want BJJ competitions to include pankration-style strikes as well? After all, they are usually less dangerous than heel hooks, slams, or neck cranks. What about just MMA? Or old-school vale-tudo. Or anything goes? Where do you draw the line?

Personally, I stand behind neck cranks not because they are career enders but because they can paralyze you. The risk is just way too high. That is pretty much the limit. Now if you want to limit heel hooks at the white belt level because, in theory, the guy could be a complete noob who doesn't understand that he should tap when it hurts or at the children level (kind of like how little kids can't choke in judo comps) that is fine. But a purple belt (which is the level the TS mentioned) is anything but a beginner. Even at the biggest belt factory of a BJJ school, this is a couple of years in.

I understand that these things are still taught and that a lot of tournaments allow them at some level. The TS implied that this is a new direction that BJJ was going and I said that it is a bad direction for BJJ. If they continue on this path, it runs contrary to the spirit of BJJ (as expressed in the Renzo quote). The fact is that BJJ is about sports now, not combat. Not that it is a bad thing. I happen to like it that way.

As for strikes...that is why we have MMA to combine strikes and grappling. And for the record the only restrictions I agree with are ones that endanger the neck and the so called "unsportmanlike" fouls which would include things (mo at least) like eye gouging and breaking fingers.

With all that said, I am kind of used to heel hooks being banned, they have been frowned upon for a long time. I hope that things like knee bars and ankle locks are still allowed because they are some of my favorite techniques and restricting submissions to the arm and chokes would essentially transform bjj to judo without good throws or stand ups. Although maybe, at some point, the two could fuse together again which would be pretty cool.

 

[Gsoares2***]

if your friend wants to do leglocks tell him to enter the black belt division..

 

[Zankou]

Kneebars and toe holds are allowed at brown belt on up. All you are missing is the heelhook.

If I had my way, I'd make kneebars legal at purple belt, since they are a relatively safe leglock. Toe holds are worse, and heelhooks are horrible.

 

[irc]

Figure-4 toeholds are easy to control, but leave pretty much zero time to tap. They are, in my opinion, one of the most effective submissions in all of bjj because if you look for them, they are almost always there.

I do toe hold all day. It is BAR FAR the highest percentage submission I can think of. I would say 8/10. That's crazy.

I think they should be allowed in training because of this. Competition, I don't know. Tyron Glover is a toe-hold monster, and has quickly finished many good guys with it.

 

[irc]

God I hate dubs.

 

[Zankou]

Figure-4 toeholds are easy to control, but leave pretty much zero time to tap. They are, in my opinion, one of the most effective submissions in all of bjj because if you look for them, they are almost always there.

I do toe hold all day. It is BAR FAR the highest percentage submission I can think of. I would say 8/10. That's crazy.

I think they should be allowed in training because of this. Competition, I don't know. Tyron Glover is a toe-hold monster, and has quickly finished many good guys with it.

Yeah, toe holds are ridiculously easy to slap on. IMHO, a lot of traditional BJJ approaches are somewhat obsolete due to leglocking vulnerability. You simply cannot afford to put your feet anywhere that your opponent can grab them at higher levels in BJJ -- you will get leglocked over and over again.

 

[TheHighlander]

I think it would make more sense for kneebars to be legal in competitions at whitebelt and restrict achilles locks to higher ranks. I'm actually for opening up all techniques to all ranks, but if they are going to be restricted based on safety I'd rather they did it in a more sensible fashion.

 

[Chinaboxer]

If you think about it logically, kneebars are no different in nature than armbars. And if you really think about it, armbars are MORE dangerous than kneebars.

 

[Zankou]

I think it would make more sense for kneebars to be legal in competitions at whitebelt and restrict achilles locks to higher ranks. I'm actually for opening up all techniques to all ranks, but if they are going to be restricted based on safety I'd rather they did it in a more sensible fashion.

It's already pretty sensible ... achilles locks are blue belts and up. Kneebars I would move down to purple, there is no good reason why purple belts can't handle a kneebar. That's about the only change I would do.

Kneebar is a fairly safe submission, but the problem with having whitebelts do it is that they are likely to screw up the escapes, and your knee is just too vulnerable and important. I do think blue belts can do kneebars safely in training, but for competition I'd rather see them at purple.

 

[Masakatsu Funaki #1]

Yeah, toe holds are ridiculously easy to slap on. IMHO, a lot of traditional BJJ approaches are somewhat obsolete due to leglocking vulnerability. You simply cannot afford to put your feet anywhere that your opponent can grab them at higher levels in BJJ -- you will get leglocked over and over again.

Toe holds aren't any easier to apply than armbars or triangles when you have two athletes versed in leg locks.

Ignorance is why people get caught in them easily. Once you learn how to apply and defend agaisnt them the success rate depends soley on the athletes natural ability to apply the hold.

 

[Sean-Roberts]

Becoming so lame in regard to leglocks? Part of the reason I decided to start training jiu jitsu was because I always heard that it was the most effective form of fighting. Recently a purple belt in my school was DQed after slapping a knee bar on a guy in the PanAms. WTF is that about? The guy's been training for like 6 or 7 years and he's not allowed to use leglocks???

Lol Wow im a Blue Belt and i got DQed also for doing a stright footlock. IBJJF Tournaments rules are stupid. Now Lets Be Honest If i were from the Gracie Barra Team or if my last name was Gracie i would of not been Dqed.

 

[JerseyTrash]

I'm guessing that's a pic of you getting DQed.

 

[Zankou]

Cool pics!

You left yourself wide open for a monstrous reverse heelhook counter in the first pic tho.

 

[Rbagu3]

Cool pics!

You left yourself wide open for a monstrous reverse heelhook counter in the first pic tho.

qft. i thought he was that guy at first getting ready to heel hook

 

[Sean-Roberts]

Cool pics!

You left yourself wide open for a monstrous reverse heelhook counter in the first pic tho.

I Dont know how to do heel hooks. but by the look of that guy heel hooks are the last thing he is thinking of.

 

[blanko]

Lol Wow im a Blue Belt and i got DQed also for doing a stright footlock. IBJJF Tournaments rules are stupid. Now Lets Be Honest If i were from the Gracie Barra Team or if my last name was Gracie i would of not been Dqed.

you didn't get dq'ed because you used a foot lock. YOu got dq'ed because of where your leg was while you are doing a footlock

Your leg can't come across his body when you straight footlock someone. The rule has been there for at least 3 years in the mundials and pan ams.

So either one of two things happened:

#1).Your coach taught you what would be a legal footlock in CBJJ tournaments and you forgot in the heat of the moment

#2) Your coach didn't bother to teach you something that has been in the rulebook for years. In which case he wasted your time, money, blood and sweat.


Sounds harsh but as a person who helped translate/researched the CBJJ rules for competition for the last 2+ years.. that's how it looks to me.

 

[Rbagu3]

you didn't get dq'ed because you used a foot lock. YOu got dq'ed because of where your leg was while you are doing a footlock

Your leg can't come across his body when you straight footlock someone. The rule has been there for at least 3 years in the mundials and pan ams.

So either one of two things happened:

#1).Your coach taught you what would be a legal footlock in CBJJ tournaments and you forgot in the heat of the moment

#2) Your coach didn't bother to teach you something that has been in the rulebook for years. In which case he wasted your time, money, blood and sweat.


Sounds harsh but as a person who helped translate/researched the CBJJ rules for competition for the last 2+ years.. that's how it looks to me.

so had he just bent his knee and had his foot up under the groin it would have been ok?

 

[Sean-Roberts]

IBJJF are just scared of footlocks they manipulate the rules. Footlock Is a footlock