BJJ for the Street. Does it work?

[FightHACKS]

Hey guys! I Nancy is a BJJ Blue Belt, she's 5'0" and 102lbs. A couple of weeks ago, she found herself in a road rage incident where another larger female followed her in to the gym parking lot exited her car and "rushed" Nancy. Here she talks about using her training to subdue her attacker and some of what was running through her mind.
People often question the validity of BJJ for self defense for different reasons, the most common being the "multiple attacker" scenario. However, I think the scenario that Nancy found herself in is probably more likely for most people than being attacked by a gang of knife wielding thugs.
Anyway, hope this helps some people that maybe are on the fence about training BJJ. If it worked for Nancy, It can work for you!

FH

 

[Charlemagne]

Agreed, completely.

Even in a single person engagement, going to the ground voluntarily is dangerous, and any BJJ/GJJ instructor who actually knows fighting will tell you that. However, knowing what you are doing on the ground is your best chance of getting up rapidly, of controlling the fight if you are taken there against your will, or of taking the fight there and controlling it if it is the prudent decision in that situation. Even in a multiple attacker scenario, what is better?

1. Knowing what you are doing on the ground
2. Not knowing what you are doing on the ground

The answer is pretty obvious, though sadly, there are still those who ignore it or even deny it.

Thanks for sharing the video.

 

[lklawson]

People often question the validity of BJJ for self defense for different reasons, the most common being the "multiple attacker" scenario.

They do? What is it, 1998?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

 

[jobo]

people seem to challenge the,sd use of every art
, karate, to vertical, bjj to horizontal, aikido to twirly, gung fu, to wing chunny

 

[Charlemagne]

They do? What is it, 1998?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

One wonders, but I have seen multiple threads here where that comes up. Heck there was an entire thread dedicated to the subject not that long ago. I still also hear it regularly in conversation.

 

[Charlemagne]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154894284742607

Works on concrete, not just mats. LOL

 

[drop bear]

They do? What is it, 1998?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

Yeah aparently you can get sucker punched while on the ground by multiple oponants.

Oh. Wait................

 

[Steve]

Yeah aparently you can get sucker punched while on the ground by multiple oponants.

Oh. Wait................

Okay. But was that self defense? I'm really confused.

 

[drop bear]

Okay. But was that self defense? I'm really confused.

It depends on the color of his shirt and what the weather is like at the time.

 

[Fuhrer Drumpf]

The main flaw I see in grappling is that you can't really end the confrontation without injuring your attacker. If you simply release him, he could easily surprise attack you. If you have your attacker in an armbar or whatever, will you let go and risk attack, or break his arm and risk getting arrested for excessive force?

It's still good to know how to grapple, though. Just don't willingly go to the ground.

 

[drop bear]

The main flaw I see in grappling is that you can't really end the confrontation without injuring your attacker. If you simply release him, he could easily surprise attack you. If you have your attacker in an armbar or whatever, will you let go and risk attack, or break his arm and risk getting arrested for excessive force?

It's still good to know how to grapple, though. Just don't willingly go to the ground.

Choke him unconscious or just knee ride him until he promises to stop.

 

[Fuhrer Drumpf]

Choke him unconscious or just knee ride him until he promises to stop.

That's seems silly to me. Choking someone unconscious is always dangerous--especially if the person you choke out has a heart condition and dies. (This has happened in martial arts events, btw.) And about kneeing someone "until the promise to stop," what are you talking about, exactly? I thought we were talking about self-defense, where the goal is to immobilize the threat enough to flee.

 

[Fuhrer Drumpf]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154894284742607

Works on concrete, not just mats. LOL

This video demonstrates the fatal flaw of grappling in real fights. You must choose between injuring your opponent versus simply letting him go and thus risk a surprise counterattack. The BJJ man chooses to release him each time, leaving the opponent annoyed and ready for more fighting.

 

[drop bear]

That's seems silly to me. Choking someone unconscious is always dangerous--especially if the person you choke out has a heart condition and dies. (This has happened in martial arts events, btw.) And about kneeing someone "until the promise to stop," what are you talking about, exactly? I thought we were talking about self-defense, where the goal is to immobilize the threat enough to flee.

Well if they have promised to stop you can flee at a much more sensible rate.

Otherwise there is risk in a fight. You can't completely control everything.

 

[Fuhrer Drumpf]

Well if they have promised to stop you can flee at a much more sensible rate.

Otherwise there is risk in a fight. You can't completely control everything.

Self-defense and fighting are totally different things. If you're at the ATM and a guy decides to attack you, why in the hell would you willingly take it the ground if striking will suffice? The problem with BJJ guys is they want to take it immediately to ground--which is fine in the safety of the ring, but foolish in real life.

Lol. If you're mugged at an ATM and spot an opening to perform, say, o-soto-gari, why not do that? Knock him on his *** with a a simple o-soto-gari and run. No need to get tangled with the guy. (And if he's like most muggers, he's probably got a knife or something in his pocket. More reason not to willingly go straight to grappling.)

 

[MA_Student]

Self-defense and fighting are totally different things. If you're at the ATM and a guy decides to attack you, why in the hell would you willingly take it the ground if striking will suffice? The problem with BJJ guys is they want to take it immediately to ground--which is fine in the safety of the ring, but foolish in real life.

Lol. If you're mugged at an ATM and spot an opening to perform, say, o-soto-gari, why not do that? Knock him on his *** with a a simple o-soto-gari and run. No need to get tangled with the guy. (And if he's like most muggers, he's probably got a knife or something in his pocket. More reason not to willingly go straight to grappling.)

And if you throw a guy to the ground on concrete the fights as good as over...

 

[MA_Student]

That's seems silly to me. Choking someone unconscious is always dangerous--especially if the person you choke out has a heart condition and dies. (This has happened in martial arts events, btw.) And about kneeing someone "until the promise to stop," what are you talking about, exactly? I thought we were talking about self-defense, where the goal is to immobilize the threat enough to flee.

That's there problem if they choose to attack you

 

[drop bear]

Self-defense and fighting are totally different things. If you're at the ATM and a guy decides to attack you, why in the hell would you willingly take it the ground if striking will suffice? The problem with BJJ guys is they want to take it immediately to ground--which is fine in the safety of the ring, but foolish in real life.

Lol. If you're mugged at an ATM and spot an opening to perform, say, o-soto-gari, why not do that? Knock him on his *** with a a simple o-soto-gari and run. No need to get tangled with the guy. (And if he's like most muggers, he's probably got a knife or something in his pocket. More reason not to willingly go straight to grappling.)

Osotogari is grappling.

Anyway hitting people in the street is as dangerous as choking them.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Osotogari is grappling.

Anyway hitting people in the street is as dangerous as choking them.

Especially if you hit them WITH the street...

 

[oftheherd1]

The main flaw I see in grappling is that you can't really end the confrontation without injuring your attacker. If you simply release him, he could easily surprise attack you. If you have your attacker in an armbar or whatever, will you let go and risk attack, or break his arm and risk getting arrested for excessive force?

It's still good to know how to grapple, though. Just don't willingly go to the ground.

First, so what if you do injure your opponent? Assuming of course your opponent has attacked you first. You should not continue attacks yourself if your attacker stops, but while you opponent is attacking you, he deserves whatever he gets imho.

Second, you evidently don't know much about grappling. you can control an attacker by causing pain that doesn't cause actual injury such as dislocating a joint breaking a bone.

That's seems silly to me. Choking someone unconscious is always dangerous--especially if the person you choke out has a heart condition and dies. (This has happened in martial arts events, btw.) And about kneeing someone "until the promise to stop," what are you talking about, exactly? I thought we were talking about self-defense, where the goal is to immobilize the threat enough to flee.

What else do you call self defense? I would prefer an opponent flee. Disengage when the threat goes away, yes, leave the area without increasing the threat to me if possible, yes. Render an attacker incapable of continuing to attack because the technique I used in self defense injured him? Mine is a defensive art, we normally only defend when attacked. But when attacked we defend and what happens to the attacker is on him.