BJJ in the street ?

[MJS]

BJJ is the best martial art in the world for street defense. Taking the fight to the ground does not mean being the guy on the bottom or on your back. The BJJ practitioner can finish the fight from multiple positions. As for multiple attackers, I say that WHOEVER you are, WHATEVER your style, if you have multiple attackers you do not want to go to the ground BUT how can the strikers who are not even able to defend takedowns against a SINGLE man expect to remain standing against multiple opponents. This is not the movies. Against multiple attacker you are better off trying to escape or you will more than likely get stomped reagrdless of your syle of martial art.

Very good points! I've said the same in the past. Just because one studies a stand up art, does NOT mean that they have the market cornered on mult. attackers. You're right, it ISNT the movies, and unless its something that you practice on a reg. basis, its going to be pretty damn hard to do!!

{quote]The Garcie challenge still exists to this day. Anyone in the world is welcome to test their skill against BJJ, just by showing up at the academy in Rio. They will give you someone to fight.[/QUOTE]

Another good point!! Again, I've suggested that to people who always seem to doubt BJJ, but you know what the funny thing is? I never get a response to that! Gee, I wonder why??

Mike

 

[CrushingFist]

Very nice said...

 

[arnisador]

My BJJ classes are structured much as you describe--some instruction/practice, followed by some rolling. Often the rolling is done starting from a certain position, and sometimes with restrictions as problem-solving sessions--e.g., in the guard, top person is only to hold position, not pass, while bottom person tries to submit with chokes/armbars/sweeps.

As to curriculum, see:
http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=787

 

[Littledragon]

First off I have no desire to fight in the ring at all, but love to train for self defense purposes. Now I currently take OJKD and feel it is a more than capable art in the streets as far as stand up fighting goes, and some grappling. Now I don't want to go to the ground but if I have no other choice, I figure I better be confident there. So my question is, is BJJ effective in the street ? You have no Gi's or anything ( I know you'll have regular clothes ) to grab a hold of but are all the moves appliable in the street ?

Also does BJJ have any stand up fighting at all, or is everything geared to taking your opponent down on the ground, or are the stand up techniques strictly for getting them on the ground ?

Yes once on the ground BJJ will work. In a street self defense situation I will be a multi dimensional fighter. Using my kicks to the legs and groin to close in then get the opponent on the ground. BJJ is very affective because 95% of street fights end up on the ground and BJJ imo is the most effective grappling combatant I feel it is a great self defense art for any street situation. I still think you need to know how to kick in order to close the distance to the opponenet to take him to the ground. If kinves and bats are involved I would use kicks and Aikido movements. You have to adapt to the situation don't let the art adapt if for you. Any martial art can be effective for self defense all depending on what the situation is. Some martial art might be too traditional and might not work as effectivley but I all depends on the person, the martial artist himself not necessarily the art.

 

[Littledragon]

BJJ is the best martial art in the world for street defense. Taking the fight to the ground does not mean being the guy on the bottom or on your back. The BJJ practitioner can finish the fight from multiple positions. As for multiple attackers, I say that WHOEVER you are, WHATEVER your style, if you have multiple attackers you do not want to go to the ground BUT how can the strikers who are not even able to defend takedowns against a SINGLE man expect to remain standing against multiple opponents. This is not the movies. Against multiple attacker you are better off trying to escape or you will more than likely get stomped reagrdless of your syle of martial art. The Garcie challenge still exists to this day. Anyone in the world is welcome to test their skill against BJJ, just by showing up at the academy in Rio. They will give you someone to fight.

BJJ is the best martial art in the world for street defense.

Don't be too confident about that. No one martial art is superior over another, it is the fighter the man himself who is the superior one. BJJ is very effective, I study BJJ and will be studying with Rickson in a couple weeks but remember there are more tecniques to self defense than just grappling. If I can use kicks punches grappling and join locks and combind them all in a street situation than that is the best. With just one style you are limited to a predominant focus and specialty, if you are multi dimentional you are not restricted to just lets say the grappling techniques of Jiu-Jitsu. I am just 16 years old and have been doing martial arts for 11 years but my advice, In a street situation I use EVERYTHING, I will never limit my self to one style because a street fight is everything goes.

 

[Jissen]

About BJJ and SD: http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/blackbelt/1998/jan98/fail.html

And about gi or no gi: many of us live in areas where people wear coats/jackets up to 10 months of the year. And training with gi makes you learn how to stop the opponent from using your clothing against you, something submission wrestling (no gi grappling that is) won't teach you.

 

[DuckofDeath]

And about gi or no gi: many of us live in areas where people wear coats/jackets up to 10 months of the year. And training with gi makes you learn how to stop the opponent from using your clothing against you, something submission wrestling (no gi grappling that is) won't teach you.

I agree. And the mugger, bully, or aggressive drunk who accosts you is more likely to be attired in shirt (and maybe jacket as well), belt, and trousers instead of just Tapout shorts.

 

[Littledragon]

About BJJ and SD: http://www.blackbeltmag.com/archives/blackbelt/1998/jan98/fail.html

And about gi or no gi: many of us live in areas where people wear coats/jackets up to 10 months of the year. And training with gi makes you learn how to stop the opponent from using your clothing against you, something submission wrestling (no gi grappling that is) won't teach you.

Welcome to the site. Yes thats a very true and good obsrvation. While using BJJ in the street you can easily control your opponent like you practice with the gi if they are wearing multiple layers of clothes like a heavy jacket. If they are shirtless BJJ still teaches you the techniques to sucesfully immobiliaze your opponent to the ground quickly to end the fight.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

When dealing with multiple attackers, I suppose there is some validity to any ground art...BJJ or not. But one thing we don't take into account is to how quickly a talented grappler can whip an arm/shoulder/leg lock or choke on a guy...and then move on to the next evil-doer. I love that term...evil-doer..

I personally know a man who was mugged by three freaks as he was coming out of his liquor store. A BJJ adept (World class as a brown belt) he threw one...and the guy hit hard, knocking him out. He applied a cross lapel choke on the second (it was winter, there was a jacket) and the force of the application caught the guy's jaw and dislocated it...BADLY. I guess the tip of his jaw was pointing at nearly right angles. The guy fainted. The third guy decided discretion was the better part of valor, and he fled. BTW...the attack opened up with them hitting him with a board, breaking a rib in his upper back. Ain't adrenalin a wonderful thing?

I point out that this story is anecdotal. It does not contribute to hard data as to whether grappling works on the modern battlefield. I point to it to illustrate how it might come down were it to.

I encourage (and eventually require) my students to study grappling so they know their limitations. I think its a necessary skill for self defense, and a wonderful set of tools for your bags of tricks as a stand up fighter.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Littledragon]

When dealing with multiple attackers, I suppose there is some validity to any ground art...BJJ or not. But one thing we don't take into account is to how quickly a talented grappler can whip an arm/shoulder/leg lock or choke on a guy...and then move on to the next evil-doer. I love that term...evil-doer..

I personally know a man who was mugged by three freaks as he was coming out of his liquor store. A BJJ adept (World class as a brown belt) he threw one...and the guy hit hard, knocking him out. He applied a cross lapel choke on the second (it was winter, there was a jacket) and the force of the application caught the guy's jaw and dislocated it...BADLY. I guess the tip of his jaw was pointing at nearly right angles. The guy fainted. The third guy decided discretion was the better part of valor, and he fled. BTW...the attack opened up with them hitting him with a board, breaking a rib in his upper back. Ain't adrenalin a wonderful thing?

I point out that this story is anecdotal. It does not contribute to hard data as to whether grappling works on the modern battlefield. I point to it to illustrate how it might come down were it to.

I encourage (and eventually require) my students to study grappling so they know their limitations. I think its a necessary skill for self defense, and a wonderful set of tools for your bags of tricks as a stand up fighter.


Regards,


Steve

Very well said, I absolutly agree with you!

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Very well said, I absolutly agree with you!

I note, Little Dragon, that you have a similar background to mine. Its refreshing to see another Tae Kwon Do person getting into other areas.


Regards,


Steve

 

[gusano]

BJJ is the best martial art in the world for street defense.

Don't be too confident about that. No one martial art is superior over another, it is the fighter the man himself who is the superior one. .

The martial art elevates the man. It is the art that brings out the potential in the man. If you train B.S., you will be beaten by a "lesser" man who is trained in something that actually works. This does NOT mean that just because you train BJJ you can beat up ANYONE who doesn't. There are many variables involved in determining the outcome of a fight.

BJJ is very effective, I study BJJ and will be studying with Rickson in a couple weeks....

If Rickson had studied TKD instead of BJJ would he be the same fighter? Rickson is the fighter he is BECAUSE of jiu-jitsu, don't be confused about that! If you don't believe me then ask him yourself when you see him.

but remember there are more tecniques to self defense than just grappling. If I can use kicks punches grappling and join locks and combind them all in a street situation than that is the best....

You just described BJJ!

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Anytime I hear anybody say a particular art is "the best in the world" for self defense (or whatever), alarm bells go off.

Insofar as BJJ, I'd say no, it isn't. I know of schools that practice sport jujitsu only, go to tournaments (Vale Tudo included, perhaps) and that's it. They train no appreciable self defense against mass attack, knives, guns at close range, impact weapons or any other variation of weapon out there that perps carry. They don't necessarily realistically deal with issues of rape, the nature or psychology of the rapist, or his tactics. Their focus is winning the next tournament.

Now granted, YOUR school may address all these issues. If so, great. But many do not.

To be fair, the same criticisms leveled above can be directed at probably every other martial art out there.

Know this: There is no objective yardstick where you can measure an art's worth on the street compared to other arts. At best we have anecdotes like the one I provided. Happily, that guy's BJJ prevailed. A Kenpo man might have done as well with his techniques. Bottom line, there aren't enough anecdotes to compile significant data.

Now we've all seen the "Gracies In Action" volumes, and might try to use that as an indication that it works in self defense. Those fights were duels...and there is a difference.

Train your art and be good at it. See what weaknesses it has (and I don't care what style it is...it has 'em) and be content.

But when you start saying a style is "the best"...particularly in this forum...it will call attention to your post. If you like to debate, this too is okay.


Regards,



Steve

 

[TonyU]

Train your art and be good at it. See what weaknesses it has (and I don't care what style it is...it has 'em) and be content.

Amen. By the way are you a former marine?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Yes sir, I am. The handle gives it away, does it not?


Regards,


Steve

 

[Littledragon]

I say BJJ is effective in the street because it can immobilize an opponent so quickly. Closing the distance and choking one out in the ground can end the fight very quickly.

Just a little note, every martial art can be effective in the street again I say this it all depends on the man, the martial art does elevate the man I totally agree on but the man has a bigger impact on how effective the art can be.

Tarek

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Effectiveness is contextual. As an avid BJJ-er from the early days of it hitting U.S. shores, as well as a lifetime stand-up martial artist who, in his younger, dumber days, went out of his way to participate in confrontations to see what worked...

I have been in both scenarios...using BJJ in the street, choking a guy out while his friends booted me in the head, calling for a change in strategy (variations on this happening 2-3 times, total). HOWEVER...I have MORE OFTEN gone to the ground, in the streets, quite successfully, on asphalt, cement, wood floors, carpeted rooms...and choked the living snot out of some cheeselog who more than had it coming! (I discovered early on that if I could not justify force prior to engaging, I couldn't remember anything I studied once in the fracas).

I keep reading woulda-coulda-shoulda posts about the liabilities of BJJ in self-defense...that it is sportive only...developed in the context of rules, and therefore inherently deficient...etc. What, you think BJJ guys throughout Brazil...a country with an alarmingly high violent crime incidence...managed to get through the last 75 years without ever having to fight for their skins? You think Olympic Judo players couldn't drop you on your head so hard, that future aggression ceases to be an option?

"They were feuds"...what context do you suppose most Asian martial arts were developed in? Battlefield tactics? Hardly...too many unlikely impracticalities buried in form to have come from "tried, tested, and true" arts straight out of border skirmishes or invasion campaigns. The guys who were really good were put at the front of the lines, where odds alone eventually removed them, and their knowledge, from the face of the earth. We get handed down the tips from the guys in the back who either ran, or were lucky enough only to have to finish off the few survivors from the opposite side.

"What if there is more than one guy"...been there, done that, and if you truly ever face more than 1-2 guys, use your head and your feet for getting the heck out of there, and not bunting and kicking. Don't be silly enough to assume that people in multiple opponent situations attack one at a time, on cue, like they do in Bruce Lee movies. Certainly, don't be silly enough to believe that your kung-fu is better than their kung-fu, to the tune of emerging victorious from a 5-on-1 knock-down/drag-out brawl. On the ground or on your feet, if there are enough guys, you will go down (learn to use your arms to cover your temples while tucking your chin hard to protect the throat...everything else is expendable, and can be surgically corrected if a bystander calls 911 in time).

"What if the guy has a knife"...contrary to popular belief, some schools train for this possibility...quite well. And when all is said and done, it is wiser to run from the knife and charge the gun, anyways. (try stabbing a guy who is running full-tilt in the opposite direction...kinda hard, no? Now, sight the runner down the barrel, and squeeze off a couple-a rounds...easier, no?) I have fought for my life against opponents armed with knives...it is pure chaos; all the technique training in the world will only barely prepare you for the mayhem that fills the air when a decent knife player pulls on you. Typically, count on getting cut (you will shed more blood than he); having accepted that...if running is not an option...try to control for the location of the cuts (distal appendages more than proximal; dorsal surfaces of the forearms more than anterior; opposite for the lower extremities). And, despite your preparations, the outcome will ultimately depend more on luck, then skill. That being said, it does seem true that chance favors the prepared mind. Still, run. Your karate/kung-fu/kickboxing will serve you little better than somebody elses BJJ. Matter of fact, since BJJ guys spend more hours working on controlling appendages in tight quarters, I would be more likely to put money on the Gracie who takes the knife fighter to the ground, then the standard TKD or Kenpo guys who try to execute some one-steps or self-defense techniques...things get blend-o-matic ugly, fast. If you're lucky, you won't even know he had a knife until it's over...adrenaline can mask a lot of pain and narrow a lot of perception.

Gi...no gi...I've choked out people in ski jackets, pretty ties, and tank tops...it's all good.

Big / Not Big...I've posted on this before, but in a nutshell: In the vein of "I've been rich and I've been poor...rich is better"...I've been small and I've been big...Big is better. Choking people out is easier with 22-inch guns and a chest then it is with 15 inch arms, and a sunken hole where a chest should be. That having been said...I've had my hind quarters kicked by little guys on the mat. As a bouncer, though, it was never the big guys I worried about: They were easy, as they would predictably try to use their size and strength against me, and somehow magically manage to conveniently place themselves in my traps. The small guys were unknown quantities: fought harder, came back for more-more often, and were more likely to have some dirty trick up their sleeve you had to watch out for (i.e., one guy always made sure he had one drink in his hands, and an empty glass or bottle in the other...drink to the eyes, followed immediately by a glass to the head...all while aiming a kick to the groin).

BJJ works in the streets, quite well. Granted, I coulda been killed the few times I went to the floor and there was more than one guy. But I also coulda been killed any of the dozens of times I was standing up, and there was more than one guy.

As for elevation? Guys like Rickson are a specimen, and would (and do) excel at anything they do. The art may have channeled the genetic propensity to be damned good at anything, but the man himself is a dynamo at anything he's ever attempted...surfing, volleyball, name it. I hated these guys in High School: He could have never seen a pool table in his life, but after watching for an hour to learn the rules, he'll be taking your money by the end of the night.

No, the arts aren't elevated by the phenom's who excel naturally, but by the guys who have to try harder, because they don't have the talent of the others. Funakoshi, Ueshiba, Carlos and Helio all started off as small, weak guys who had to rise to an occasion in order to acquire the top of the mountain. THEY propel the arts, NOT the guys BORN on the mountain.

Salud!

Dave

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Dave,

Excellent post, and I agree self defense is contextual. But I disagree with some other points you made.

You didn't reference to whom you responding, but I think you were responding in part, at least, to my post. I'll clarify some things I brought up.

I didn't use the term "feud", I used the term "duel". By that I meant that on the "Gracie Jujitsu in Action Series" we find either a Vale Tudo match, or the "settling of an issue" type scenario wherin two guys get into it over who knows what (fill in the blank--insult, woman, money loaned?). In these we do not see one of the antagonists...not once...pick up an object and throw it, bludgeon with it, or cut with it. In the "gym fight" on those tapes there were some zippy ten pound dumbells along the back wall that would have been perfect for braining the opponent. Both fighters refrained from this and other crude tactics, as if they were playing according to some sort of gentleman's agreement, a Brazilian version "Marquis of Queensbury" rules.

In these fights the object was never to kill the other man. They were not "self defense" altercations, but were battles that were largely brought upon by one person calling another out. By no legal definition I know of would any of these antagonists be able to use "self defense" as a means of defense in court. Further, in a self defense situation...a real self defense situation, would we find people coaching and cheering from the sidelines while filiming with a video camera? Were it "self defense" I would think partisans would step in and settle the issue rather than record it for posterity.

I do not doubt that many Brazilians have had true self defense situations or even arranged fights that have escalated to truly dangerous levels. I'm confident that BJJ has...and will continue to be...used in actual self defense situations effectively.

Again, in saying self defense is contextual, we can not assume that the person in need of the self defense is a young, fit, athletic male. Women, older people, somebody that is disabled also train for self defense. The "Gracie Jujitsu In Action" series was somewhat deficient in presenting gladiators with these qualities. I say "gladiators" tongue in cheek, so as to make a point.

You state that some schools train for the possiblility of a blade being introduced. I never said they didn't, but I do know of schools and clubs that do not realistically train for this eventuality. Insofar as running from the knife, I agree. I would do that. However, if I've slapped somebody into the guard and he pulls it right then...versus before we went to the ground... he's likely to cause some serious damage before I can get up and out of there. The blade doesn't always appear initially. Some knifers train specifically that way. Some knifers, I suspect, might also know how to suck in their elbows.

Your rationale for suggesting a grappler would do better controlling the appendages of a knife wielder is sound. I agree with you on that. Those schools that you know of that teach self defense against the blade likely do a good job of it. Those schools that don't teach it might have a different emotional response on seeing the blade, and for all their skills might find themselves fatally disadvantaged. See the last three sentences of the preceding paragraph for review of a point.

Your criticisms of TKD schools (or any traditional stand up art) not having a good response against a blade are well founded. This has been one of my harshest criticisms of TKD in general. I can't speak for the weaknesses of those arts I've not practiced. That said, some TKD schools no doubt address the issue, as you've pointed out is done with certain BJJ schools.

Your observations on Rickson are well put. In fact, I agree with much of what you've written in your post...and where I disagree I can at least say you make good arguments in stating your position.

Regards,


Steve

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Steve:

Thanks for your reply. I didn't actually aim my remarks towards you, so if they seemed a bit aggressive, I do apologize. I was training with the Gracies in the Torrance academy while they were still taking challenge matches, and on many occasions the subject of mauling came up...that is, critics sayng "what if?" about eye gouging, etc. On one occasion, Rorion looked the guy square in the eye and said, "you think we don't know how to scratch eyes out too? Maybe in 65 years, you are the only guy to come up with this idea. How much easier will it be to maul you while you are sleeping off a choke?"

The lesson wasn't lost on me, a dyed in the wool kenpo eye scratcher. Somehow, though, it seems continually lost in the mainstream.

Regards,

Dave

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Dave,

I didn't think your post was too agressive at all. In it, as in this other one, you've made some excellent observations.

Rickson also was quoted in a magazine some time back as saying he'd use a pistol for multiple opponents, and that he's very good with it. The Gracies are pragmatists, I'll grant them that.

Regards,


Steve