I recently acquired a BJJ book and found their view of the "Genius of (Jigaro) Kano" quite interesting. They stated that by changing the maiming techniques of jujitsu to sport-friendly techniques that did not injure they actually made the art deadlier because one could now practice the techniques full-force against a resisting partner and hence truly improve at them. The idea was that the art may in some sense be weakened but that the training is strengthened and on balance the practitioner benefits, and in fact benefits considerably.
I am reminded of how often Muay Thai practitioners--whose art is a sport--defeat their "my art is too deadly to spar with" peers due to their toughness and ability to deliver and withstand full-power techniques. Similarly for Western boxing (and most likely savate).
But I was also reminded of the Professor's innovation of practicing stick-on-stick rather than stick-on-hand for much the same reasons--one could go full power without the lengthy training delays while broken bones heal. Before reading the BJJ book I hadn't realized how general this principle might be.
Incidentally, the BJJ book was:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1931229082/104-5365916-2686325
I am reminded of how often Muay Thai practitioners--whose art is a sport--defeat their "my art is too deadly to spar with" peers due to their toughness and ability to deliver and withstand full-power techniques. Similarly for Western boxing (and most likely savate).
But I was also reminded of the Professor's innovation of practicing stick-on-stick rather than stick-on-hand for much the same reasons--one could go full power without the lengthy training delays while broken bones heal. Before reading the BJJ book I hadn't realized how general this principle might be.
Incidentally, the BJJ book was:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1931229082/104-5365916-2686325