How effective is sport BJJ (or GJJ) on the Street?

[K-man]

Over the past 18 months, every thread where we have tried to discuss Karate, Aikido, Wing Chun or any other martial art you'd like to name, eventually it has turned into an arguement where it is pointed out how BJJ or MMA is so much better and the training inherent in any other style is vastly inferior to the sport based styles that spar. Even more, even those that spar are inferior because they don't have a specialised ground game of BJJ.

Now I happen to think that BJJ is a great martial art and MMA is great for anyone who wants to test themselves in the relatively safe environment of the ring, but how effective is BJJ in the street?

I'll start out by saying that BJJ, like many martial arts, is mostly taught in a way that produces excellent fighters for the ring but does not prepare you for the street.

Let's put BJJ under the microscope without style bashing please.

 

[drop bear]

It is specialised. It does what it does well but sacrifices adaptability to achieve that.

The thing is to be a well rounded fighter you need these specialisations because they have the most depth in that area.

 

[Mephisto]

Bjj and ground fighting are unique in that a small trained person can have quite an advantage on a larger untrained person on the ground. It's one of the few arts to really level the playing field between men and women. A larger trained man will still have an advantage but I've seen small female blue belts who can handle make white belts with relative ease. But what about the broken glass, and aids needles on the ground? The hordes of multiple opponents? Training in ground fighting gives you the training necessary to control and change your position. If you end up on your back (beyond your control) you'll have the ability to sweep and get up or change your position. As for multiple opponents? Good luck, without I weapon I don't think any art will give a smaller person an advantage. But it's still a scenario worth training.

Bjj is a specialty worth training, that or another art that has proven success in grappling. When you roll with resisting opponents regularly there's no speculation about how you'd apply your skill you've done it over and over. No training will ever 100% simulate reality. You can limit rules and roll or spar hard and learn to control an aggressive opponent or you can lighten the intensity and wirk more combative techniques. Both are a good approach to self defense. I personally value the ability to control an aggressive attacker first by trsinibg regular sparring.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

It largely depends on how the art is practiced.

If you train distance management, punch defense, takedowns, and tactical awareness then it is as street applicable as any unarmed martial art and more so than some.

If you train strictly for BJJ competition and neglect the aforementioned factors - you'll still develop some useful attributes, but you'll have some missing elements and may develop some bad habits.

If you train BJJ as a complement to a stand-up art, then you will be prepared if the fight goes to the ground but you will be less tempted to take the fight there when it's not situationally appropriate.

 

[drop bear]

Bjj also benefits from cross training in other grappling arts as well.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Here is one French BJJ black belts point of view:

BJJ Black Belt s Point Of View Why Jiu-Jitsu Is Not Suitable For Street Fighting Bjj Eastern Europe

 

[Mephisto]

Here is one French BJJ black belts point of view:

BJJ Black Belt s Point Of View Why Jiu-Jitsu Is Not Suitable For Street Fighting Bjj Eastern Europe

I think it's a good article and makes good points. He simply concedes that bjj doesn't have all the answers, I agree with this. I also think many advocates of bjj would also agree. Pulling guard and butt scooting aren't good strategies for a street fight, Im curious how many people within bjj really think this is a viable strategy on the street. The author mentions that situational awareness and striking are other important areas to train. He adds that bjj is valuable because it is trained with resistance as is boxing. He seems to also advocate krav but adds that the "deadly strikes" at soft targets can't be trained with resistance.

Bjj is valuable because you may end up on the ground in a self defense situation, in this scenario your ground fighting experience will enable you to take the dominant position and disengage. Just as you can be hit from behind on the ground so can you be hit from behind standing up. Awareness is the key, that is a common factor in any martial art and any self defense situation.

 

[Mephisto]

Many who train and recommend bjj will concede that it doesn't have all the answers. Disputes arise when practitioners of non ground fighting arts aren't equally critical of their own systems. Some think their system has it all and downplay the value of groundfighting, this is where conflict arises.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Pulling guard and butt scooting aren't good strategies for a street fight, Im curious how many people within bjj really think this is a viable strategy on the street.

I think that most BJJ practitioners are fully aware that pulling guard and butt scooting are tactics appropriate for sport competition, not for street fighting.

 

[Mephisto]

I think that most BJJ practitioners are fully aware that pulling guard and butt scooting are tactics appropriate for sport competition, not for street fighting.

Exactly, the article shared concerns about sport tactics such as pulling guard but I don't know how many guys are really going to pull guard on the street.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Here is one French BJJ black belts point of view:

BJJ Black Belt s Point Of View Why Jiu-Jitsu Is Not Suitable For Street Fighting Bjj Eastern Europe

Mr. Luccioni has some good points about the limits of BJJ in dealing with multiple armed attackers and so on, but I think I'll quote myself from another thread:

Okay, I think I need to address a dirty little secret of the relation between martial arts training and real world violence.

Most martial arts training is in some way or form related to developing ability in fighting. The context for that fighting may vary (archaic sword duels, modern ring fighting, "street" violence, theatrical fighting, etc) and there may be additional claimed objectives (fitness, "discipline", etc), but to some degree we all think we are learning how to fight.

The secret is this - once you get away from the "social" violence whereby individuals (mostly young men) try to establish their dominance or release excess testosterone in one-on-one clashes, the outcome of most violence is not settled by individual fighting skill. In most violence, the winner is the side which successfully deploys surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry. Regardless of whether you are a mugger selecting a victim, police officers arresting a suspect, or an infantry platoon assaulting an enemy fortification, you aren't looking for a fair fight. In fact, you don't want there to be a fight at all. You want the outcome to be determined before the encounter begins.

It's technically possible to prevail by means of superior fighting skill and spirit if you are outnumbered, out-armed, and caught by surprise, but it's not a high-percentage proposition, no matter how good you are. If you manage to survive and get away in that situation, then you are doing well.

What this means for self-defense is that 95% of the job is in a) steering clear of the temptations to engage in avoidable social violence and b) having the awareness to make sure that surprise, intimidation, superior positioning, superior numbers, and superior weaponry are not used against you (and are preferably on your side). It doesn't hurt to have some actual fighting ability for when everything else goes wrong, but that shouldn't be your primary concern.

In other words, BJJ does not have the answer for a surprise attack by a gang of murderous armed thugs. Neither does Goju ryu, Wing Chun, Krav Maga, Ba Gua, or any other martial art. If you are unlucky enough or screw up badly enough to end up in this situation, then your martial art might give you a chance to survive long enough to escape, but attributes, tactical sense, and pure luck will be as important as any techniques you might practice.

 

[K-man]

he author mentions that situational awareness and striking are other important areas to train. He adds that bjj is valuable because it is trained with resistance as is boxing. He seems to also advocate krav but adds that the "deadly strikes" at soft targets can't be trained with resistance.

This is a really good point, but the term here is 'resistance'. There are many ways you can train with resistance and I don't believe that the stand up sparring that some people advocate is anywhere near the best on when it comes to a violent street attack.

Here is another opinion from BJJ guys on using BJJ for self defence.

 

[K-man]

Bjj and ground fighting are unique in that a small trained person can have quite an advantage on a larger untrained person on the ground. It's one of the few arts to really level the playing field between men and women.

Here I can agree and disagree. I'm not sure I agree that the smaller person has the advantage on the ground. What they are training are ways of reducing the advantage that a bigger, stronger opponent inherently possesses. However BJJ is not unique in this area. If it were the case we would have no women training in other martial arts for other than competition where the bigger opponent is in a different weight class. Aikido is an art that comes to mind where a bigger opponent isn't an issue.

The problem with Aikido is not that it isn't effective. It is that it takes so long to be proficient. That same problem exists with BJJ. It has become so complex that it takes years to become proficient. That is were less complex arts like boxing are, in my opinion, better suited for street SD. If you want to step that up a notch you have Krav which is better because it is still relatively simple but trains all ranges and includes escaping from the ground. But boxing definitely gives the advantage to the bigger person as is the normal situation in Krav training, unless you realise that and tailor the training accordingly.

But what about the broken glass, and aids needles on the ground? The hordes of multiple opponents? Training in ground fighting gives you the training necessary to control and change your position. If you end up on your back (beyond your control) you'll have the ability to sweep and get up or change your position.

I think that broken glass and needles on the ground are a red herring. Certainly the ground may be uneven or slippery but that would generally be it. Stones on the ground are perhaps a greater issue if you aren't inside but again, not particularly relevant. Multiple attackers are much more likely and that is an area where BJJ is at a distinct disadvantage. The last thing you want against multiple opponents is to be on the ground. Again, people training for competition, particularly high level competition will have no need for that type of training, yet other arts with a focus on personal protection will train for it regularly. Having friends to back him up gives a lot of 'courage' to the idiot who wants to start a fight. If he gets into trouble his mates step in and the next thing you know is waking up in hospital, if you are lucky.

As for multiple opponents? Good luck, without I weapon I don't think any art will give a smaller person an advantage. But it's still a scenario worth training.

I disagree a little on both counts (lack of chance against multiple attackers and weapons) and agree on the need to train it. Now I can only speak from my own training but from reading posts in other threads I know I am not alone when I say that other arts train regularly against both multiple opponents and weapons. In Australia, guns are not as likely to be a problem as knives. We train gun disarms every week or so but we train against knives every session. That is even in a so called TMA. We also train in a way that allows a smaller person to control a larger person. That's not to say a smaller person is better training in 'XYZ' than BJJ, just that BJJ is not alone in providing training for smaller people against a larger opponent.

Bjj is a specialty worth training, that or another art that has proven success in grappling. When you roll with resisting opponents regularly there's no speculation about how you'd apply your skill you've done it over and over.

Rolling with resisting opponents is great but so is stand up grappling with resisting opponents. In a SD situation I'd much rather be standing up grappling than being on the floor grappling. When you can successfully grapple standing with a bigger resisting opponent there is no speculation either as to how you could expect it to work against an unskilled opponent in a street environment. The advantage standing is that you can still move to use your opponent as a shield if necessary, something you can't do on the ground.

No training will ever 100% simulate reality. You can limit rules and roll or spar hard and learn to control an aggressive opponent or you can lighten the intensity and wirk more combative techniques. Both are a good approach to self defense. I personally value the ability to control an aggressive attacker first by trsinibg regular sparring.

Agree 100%, but this applies to any martial art that is taught properly. But here is an interesting point. You say you must have regular sparring. What exactly do you meaning by sparring?

 

[hoshin1600]

In other words, BJJ does not have the answer for a surprise attack by a gang of murderous armed thugs. Neither does Goju ryu, Wing Chun, Krav Maga, Ba Gua, or any other martial art.

while i agree with Tony's point of view that real true violence is never a "fair" fight, i must stop there and question..if we are civilized people who do not go out looking for bar fights, what the heck are we training for?
real violence happens every day in every part of the world.
warning the following contains graphic content
Cheshire Connecticut home invasion murders - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Man shot during home invasion two young children unharmed abc13.com
3-year-old shot and killed in suspected home invasion

there are many many violent crimes everyday. it really bothers me when martial artists say "well you cant train for things like that" or "no art has the answer for surprise attacks like that" then what the heck are you trianing for!! if you dont count the terrorist attacks,, and you dont count the movie theater mass shootings or a home invasion by armed gang members what else is there? i seriously think many people forget or dont know what real violence consists of.
i cant quote the originator of this statement but "most martial arts is more about fear managment than risk managment"
which means most martial art schools are more about making you feel good rather than dealing with the real issues of violence.

while training in BJJ may make you feel like a "MAN" and satisfy your inner monkey, the real question is not how "effective" it is but rather how useful is it for real violent situations? effectiveness VS usefulness and relavancy is a big difference.
the rubber guard and arm bar may be very effective but how relevent is it when someone rings your doorbell and pushes your door open enough to get his leg in and then reaches in with the gun and shoots your 8 y'o daughter, continues to push that door open and two men rush in slamming you with a baseball bat. those first 60 seconds of a home invasion will have a violent intensity that is like being in the middle of a tornado. you wont know what side is up. all you will know is your little girl is bleeding to death in the corner and there isnt a damn thing you can do about it.

no doubt there will be some who read my words and scoff, yeah go ahead stroke your ego and make all the "bad thoughts" go away.
BJJ has a few good ideas and a few things worth training over and over until they are hard wired but so does every art. fighting technique is only one component of an over all protection plan. many will feel their art is the best and will put their faith in the chosen art. but when realty comes knocking many will feel like Linus without his security blanket.

 

[K-man]

there are many many violent crimes everyday. it really bothers me when martial artists say "well you cant train for things like that" or "no art has the answer for surprise attacks like that" then what the heck are you trianing for!! if you dont count the terrorist attacks,, and you dont count the movie theater mass shootings or a home invasion by armed gang members what else is there? i seriously think many people forget or dont know what real violence consists of.

Great point. In Australia, we recently had a cafe siege where a number of hostages thankfully escaped, others were rescued after a shootout with police but unfortunately two innocent people lost their lives. The guy had a sawn off shotgun. On numerous occasions he was in the position where a trained person could have disarmed him. We are training to counter violence, that is what RB means. We train using a replica sawn off shotgun. How does BJJ work here?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Bjj and ground fighting are unique in that a small trained person can have quite an advantage on a larger untrained person on the ground.

Here I can agree and disagree. I'm not sure I agree that the smaller person has the advantage on the ground.

The idea that groundfighting and/or BJJ give the advantage to a smaller trained person against a larger untrained person has been somewhat overstated. Size gives an advantage, whether standing or on the ground.

There is some truth to the idea, however. Groundfighting is a highly technical area and most* people have bad intuitions about how to move safely on the ground. It's less intuitive than stand up fighting. Therefore a completely untrained person is more likely to make mistakes that cause them to lose quickly on the ground then they would standing up.

*(Most, but not all. I occasionally encounter untrained people who have good natural instincts on the ground.)

The problem with Aikido is not that it isn't effective. It is that it takes so long to be proficient. That same problem exists with BJJ. It has become so complex that it takes years to become proficient. That is were less complex arts like boxing are, in my opinion, better suited for street SD.

This I will disagree with. In 6-12 months I can teach most people to reliably use fundamental BJJ techniques in a fight. Not saying I can turn them into unbeatable fighting machines, but the basics will be usable under stress.

(BTW - the more I study boxing, the less I regard it as a simple art. It may not have the breadth of BJJ, but it is remarkably deep.)

 

[Mephisto]

Here I can agree and disagree. I'm not sure I agree that the smaller person has the advantage on the ground. What they are training are ways of reducing the advantage that a bigger, stronger opponent inherently possesses. However BJJ is not unique in this area. If it were the case we would have no women training in other martial arts for other than competition where the bigger opponent is in a different weight class. Aikido is an art that comes to mind where a bigger opponent isn't an issue.

Aikido is an art that can't really be trained with resistance, it would probably be much too dangerous. I say the same for the FMA I do, there are standing locks and breaks but they have to be applied hard and fast, if you hesitate or let the opponent tap he may submit or take advantage of your politeness and escape. You can train the moves with some resistance and intensity but not at the intensity that bjj can be applied. A lot of arts claim to help a smaller person overcome a larger person but bjj and judo are the best examples I can bring forward. I have yet to see video of any aikido being trained with the level resistance seen in regular bjj rolling. This isn't to say it doesn't exist, I'd certainly like to see it, I just haven't seen it. I've trained with several aikido guys and I like the moves they've shown me, but much of it doesn't seem like it would work in a bjj format with resistance, you'd really have to disregard the safety of your partner to apply it. Which is why I think aikido is a good compliment to bjj, learn to control the opponent first w bjj and you have it to fall back on if your more combative aikido grappling fails.

The problem with Aikido is not that it isn't effective. It is that it takes so long to be proficient. That same problem exists with BJJ. It has become so complex that it takes years to become proficient. That is were less complex arts like boxing are, in my opinion, better suited for street SD. If you want to step that up a notch you have Krav which is better because it is still relatively simple but trains all ranges and includes escaping from the ground. But boxing definitely gives the advantage to the bigger person as is the normal situation in Krav training, unless you realise that and tailor the training accordingly.

I'd only say krav gives an advantage with the situational training it may offer. And it may have combative advantage if a decent level of sparring is implemented. To my knowledge many krav schools don't participte in hard sparring, in which even with soft targets allowed I'd give a boxer with lots of sparring experience the combative advantage.

I think that broken glass and needles on the ground are a red herring. Certainly the ground may be uneven or slippery but that would generally be it. Stones on the ground are perhaps a greater issue if you aren't inside but again, not particularly relevant. Multiple attackers are much more likely and that is an area where BJJ is at a distinct disadvantage. The last thing you want against multiple opponents is to be on the ground. Again, people training for competition, particularly high level competition will have no need for that type of training, yet other arts with a focus on personal protection will train for it regularly. Having friends to back him up gives a lot of 'courage' to the idiot who wants to start a fight. If he gets into trouble his mates step in and the next thing you know is waking up in hospital, if you are lucky.

Broken glass and needles are a red herring added in jest because some people really site these as reasons bjj is not effective in the street. Even if you do train multiple attacker scenarios the odds are against you. You can get attacked from behind just as easily standing as you can on the ground. As tony mentioned awareness is the factor that will protect you, although it may be harder to disengage from the ground. But again training bjj doesn't mean you have to take every fight to the ground, it's an answer to what to do if you end up their against your will.

I disagree a little on both counts (lack of chance against multiple attackers and weapons) and agree on the need to train it. Now I can only speak from my own training but from reading posts in other threads I know I am not alone when I say that other arts train regularly against both multiple opponents and weapons. In Australia, guns are not as likely to be a problem as knives. We train gun disarms every week or so but we train against knives every session. That is even in a so called TMA. We also train in a way that allows a smaller person to control a larger person. That's not to say a smaller person is better training in 'XYZ' than BJJ, just that BJJ is not alone in providing training for smaller people against a larger opponent.

A separate discussion on gun disarms may be needed, I think they're largely overrated and have very limited opportunities of useful application. For example the attacker must be very close. They may be worth training but I don't think they're as vital as some claim they are.

Rolling with resisting opponents is great but so is stand up grappling with resisting opponents. In a SD situation I'd much rather be standing up grappling than being on the floor grappling. When you can successfully grapple standing with a bigger resisting opponent there is no speculation either as to how you could expect it to work against an unskilled opponent in a street environment. The advantage standing is that you can still move to use your opponent as a shield if necessary, something you can't do on the ground.

Agree 100%, but this applies to any martial art that is taught properly. But here is an interesting point. You say you must have regular sparring. What exactly do you meaning by sparring?

I agree for self sdefense standing is best but If you're gonna train gun disarms you might as well train ground fighting as you're far more likely to end up on the ground in a fight than you are to be held at gunpoint with the gun within your reach.

while i agree with Tony's point of view that real true violence is never a "fair" fight, i must stop there and question..if we are civilized people who do not go out looking for bar fights, what the heck are we training for?
real violence happens every day in every part of the world.
warning the following contains graphic content
Cheshire Connecticut home invasion murders - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Man shot during home invasion two young children unharmed abc13.com
3-year-old shot and killed in suspected home invasion

there are many many violent crimes everyday. it really bothers me when martial artists say "well you cant train for things like that" or "no art has the answer for surprise attacks like that" then what the heck are you trianing for!! if you dont count the terrorist attacks,, and you dont count the movie theater mass shootings or a home invasion by armed gang members what else is there? i seriously think many people forget or dont know what real violence consists of.
i cant quote the originator of this statement but "most martial arts is more about fear managment than risk managment"
which means most martial art schools are more about making you feel good rather than dealing with the real issues of violence.

while training in BJJ may make you feel like a "MAN" and satisfy your inner monkey, the real question is not how "effective" it is but rather how useful is it for real violent situations? effectiveness VS usefulness and relavancy is a big difference.
the rubber guard and arm bar may be very effective but how relevent is it when someone rings your doorbell and pushes your door open enough to get his leg in and then reaches in with the gun and shoots your 8 y'o daughter, continues to push that door open and two men rush in slamming you with a baseball bat. those first 60 seconds of a home invasion will have a violent intensity that is like being in the middle of a tornado. you wont know what side is up. all you will know is your little girl is bleeding to death in the corner and there isnt a damn thing you can do about it.

no doubt there will be some who read my words and scoff, yeah go ahead stroke your ego and make all the "bad thoughts" go away.
BJJ has a few good ideas and a few things worth training over and over until they are hard wired but so does every art. fighting technique is only one component of an over all protection plan. many will feel their art is the best and will put their faith in the chosen art. but when realty comes knocking many will feel like Linus without his security blanket.
View attachment 19214

You've been watching too much Fear based media News, a home invasion is possible but a group of men busting in your front door? Unless you're holding your gun at the time you're probably f****ed, what martial art is going to provide you with a high percentage chance of taking out multiple armed opponents during a home invasion. Are you saying that going for a gogoplatta against several armed attackers is a bad strategy? We'd better get a memo out to bjj head quarters fast!

 

[Tony Dismukes]

there are many many violent crimes everyday. it really bothers me when martial artists say "well you cant train for things like that" or "no art has the answer for surprise attacks like that" then what the heck are you trianing for!! if you dont count the terrorist attacks,, and you dont count the movie theater mass shootings or a home invasion by armed gang members what else is there?

Here we get into a fundamental fact of human psychology: people are bad at evaluating risk.

Terrorist attacks, mass shootings, and home invasions by armed gangs make the news because they are scary and unusual. Statistically speaking, however, you are more likely to be killed by lightning than by a terrorist. If you are spending thousands of hours of hard training because you are afraid of a highly unlikely event that you will a) probably never encounter in your life and b) would have only a small chance of successfully handling with your martial arts training, then that is a poor allocation of your available resources.

If you are that determined to protect yourself and your family, you are better off devoting that time and energy and money towards the factors that are actually likely to kill you, i.e.:

Improve your diet and exercise: Heart disease and diabetes kill more people than 2000 times as many people each year in the U.S. as terrorists, mass shootings, and home invasions put together.

Take a defensive driving course: tens of thousands of people die from traffic accidents in the U.S. every year.

Take care of your mental health: suicide is the 10th most common cause of death in the U.S.

Teach your kids how to swim.

Heck - take the time to fix that loose step on the back steps. It's more likely to kill you than terrorists or a home invading gang.

 

[Mephisto]

Great point. In Australia, we recently had a cafe siege where a number of hostages thankfully escaped, others were rescued after a shootout with police but unfortunately two innocent people lost their lives. The guy had a sawn off shotgun. On numerous occasions he was in the position where a trained person could have disarmed him. We are training to counter violence, that is what RB means. We train using a replica sawn off shotgun. How does BJJ work here?

I think grabbing and controlling a weapon is instinctive, not that it shouldn't be trained though. It's not a bad idea, but I don't think a bjj guy is just going to lay down in die when facing a shotgun. I've seen a few videos of store clerks snatching away a weapon from an armed robber.

 

[K-man]

I agree for self defense standing is best but If you're gonna train gun disarms you might as well train ground fighting as you're far more likely to end up on the ground in a fight than you are to be held at gunpoint with the gun within your reach.

This is true, you are far more likely to end up on the ground than at the point of a gun. However, that is why we train regularly to regain our feet if we are taken to the ground, not training to stay on the ground. We train more on the ground than against guns and we train more against knives than the other two. I believe that the more complex BJJ has become for competition, the less suited it is for the street due to the belief that you can take your time to manoeuvre your opponent to submission. In reality, the longer you are on the ground the more chance someone will come to his assistance. Sure, you might have mates as well and it ends up as a general melee but that's perhaps less likely and more what we call a consensual fight.