Gracie Breakdown on Catch Wrestling vs Bjj

[drop bear]

Broadly, to make a more entertaining (and even) contest… by limiting other factors… while that can "give the little guys a chance", it's not actually the reasoning… in fact, it's more about the bigger guys being evenly matched… which is why you can fight in higher weight classes, but not lower ones.



That's the thing I've been trying to highlight to you since you started saying it… it's not an "RBSD argument"… it's a martial arts argument… and you don't have a clue what you're talking about in either regard.

You are kind of trying to say the weight class thing a bit backwards. To make the fight more evenly matched they Match weight. If weight wasn't a factor they wouldn't do it. But it is. In general martial artists understand this.

So not really a martial arts argument across the board.

FightingArts.com - Strength Training Benefits for Martial Artists: An Interview with Charles Staley Part 1
There are many martial arts who advocate strength training.

You said yourself that it is harder with bigger guys. They have the advantage.

Not at all sure how that is complicated.

 

[Chris Parker]

You are kind of trying to say the weight class thing a bit backwards. To make the fight more evenly matched they Match weight. If weight wasn't a factor they wouldn't do it. But it is. In general martial artists understand this.

It's one factor, and you're missing the rest of them. By the same token, you don't have white belts fighting 3rd Dan holders… but let's say you did… we'll make the white belt the bigger guy… how do you think that's going to pan out?

And mate, don't mistake sports martial artists for all martial artists…

So not really a martial arts argument across the board.

Are you sure about that? Can you name any martial art that stresses being bigger rather than technique?

FightingArts.com - Strength Training Benefits for Martial Artists: An Interview with Charles Staley Part 1
There are many martial arts who advocate strength training.

You didn't read that very closely, did you? He's a sports conditioning specialist who trained until he was 31 (a decade ago), who has focused on trying to be a superior athlete (not a superior martial artist)… his comments about martial artists being afraid of strength training is an old wives tale, frankly… and he's largely just pushing his book. Of course, the issues are that no-one, at any point, has said "being strong is bad"… what we've said is that being big, and strong isn't the only thing… there's always someone bigger and stronger, so training to cover that eventuality is more in line with martial arts/self defence than sporting systems… you don't have to deal with someone twice your size if you're always paired up with people the same size as yourself…

You said yourself that it is harder with bigger guys. They have the advantage.

Which is why you have to work the technique more… catching up yet?

Not at all sure how that is complicated.

It's not. The thing is, you're still refusing to see anything beyond your limited perspective.

 

[Sub Zero]

Im not taking sides but the Gracies are a bit biased. Just like there are some moves in BJJ that smaller people can do and larger ones can't does not mean Jiu Jitsu isnt for big men and excludes certain folks.

There are some Catch moves that smaller opponents can do to defeat larger foes. I should know I studied both at my dojo.

 

[drop bear]

Im not taking sides but the Gracies are a bit biased. Just like there are some moves in BJJ that smaller people can do and larger ones can't does not mean Jiu Jitsu isnt for big men and excludes certain folks.

There are some Catch moves that smaller opponents can do to defeat larger foes. I should know I studied both at my dojo.

OK and that is the bare bones of the matter. What move can a smaller person do that a larger person can't?

 

[drop bear]

It's one factor, and you're missing the rest of them. By the same token, you don't have white belts fighting 3rd Dan holders… but let's say you did… we'll make the white belt the bigger guy… how do you think that's going to pan out?

And mate, don't mistake sports martial artists for all martial artists…

there is also a difference in experience. But let's take this back to catch. If it is designed towards stronger martial artists then there would not be that difference in ability between a good catch wrestler and a bad one.

I am not confusing sport it would be the difference between compliant and non compliant. Obviously compliant martial arts neither rely on strength or ability.

Are you sure about that? Can you name any martial art that stresses being bigger rather than technique?

strength is technique technique is strength.

You didn't read that very closely, did you? He's a sports conditioning specialist who trained until he was 31 (a decade ago), who has focused on trying to be a superior athlete (not a superior martial artist)… his comments about martial artists being afraid of strength training is an old wives tale, frankly… and he's largely just pushing his book. Of course, the issues are that no-one, at any point, has said "being strong is bad"… what we've said is that being big, and strong isn't the only thing… there's always someone bigger and stronger, so training to cover that eventuality is more in line with martial arts/self defence than sporting systems… you don't have to deal with someone twice your size if you're always paired up with people the same size as yourself…

sporting systems pair you up with bigger and smaller guys that is a false statement

Which is why you have to work the technique more… catching up yet?

strength is still technique technique is still strength. Caught up gone passed waiting for you.

It's not. The thing is, you're still refusing to see anything beyond your limited perspective.

my experience is not as limited as you are trying to make out. I understand sport systems traditional systems and street hybrids as I have done all three.

 

[Chris Parker]

my experience is not as limited as you are trying to make out. I understand sport systems traditional systems and street hybrids as I have done all three.

Then it doesn't show in anything you write.

 

[drop bear]

Then it doesn't show in anything you write.

I am more practical than theoretical.

 

[Tez3]

I am more practical than theoretical.

Writing is a practical art. If you are writing about what you know rather than what you just think then theoretically it can't be theoretical.

 

[Chris Parker]

I am more practical than theoretical.

You're missing the point… it really doesn't have anything to do with "practical" versus "theoretical"… what I am saying is that your comments do not reflect the reality, or an actual grounding and understanding of pretty much anything you're trying to address. It's not that you're not expressing your ideas well… it's that your comments indicate that, well, you don't get it. In this thread, for example, you've commented on what you referred to as a "reality based" idea… except it's not, and is far more a "martial arts" idea, having little to nothing to do with reality based systems at all. Your comments on traditional systems are just as off-base… not expressed poorly, but simply inaccurate.

That's what I'm saying to you. Your posts do not indicate any real understanding of anything outside of a very narrow form of training methodologies… so, if you do have the experience you are saying, you missed most of what was there. That's not unheard of, or even uncommon… but simply having what you consider experience doesn't mean you have any real understanding… especially if that experience wasn't something you were able (or willing) to take on board.

 

[drop bear]

You're missing the point… it really doesn't have anything to do with "practical" versus "theoretical"… what I am saying is that your comments do not reflect the reality, or an actual grounding and understanding of pretty much anything you're trying to address. It's not that you're not expressing your ideas well… it's that your comments indicate that, well, you don't get it. In this thread, for example, you've commented on what you referred to as a "reality based" idea… except it's not, and is far more a "martial arts" idea, having little to nothing to do with reality based systems at all. Your comments on traditional systems are just as off-base… not expressed poorly, but simply inaccurate.

That's what I'm saying to you. Your posts do not indicate any real understanding of anything outside of a very narrow form of training methodologies… so, if you do have the experience you are saying, you missed most of what was there. That's not unheard of, or even uncommon… but simply having what you consider experience doesn't mean you have any real understanding… especially if that experience wasn't something you were able (or willing) to take on board.

I still think this accusation that I don't understand the really real martial arts is a cop out. Especially when I was asking for evidence you failed to provide.

 

[punisher73]

OK and that is the bare bones of the matter. What move can a smaller person do that a larger person can't?

A friend of mine competes in the World's and is a BJJ Brown Belt. He is a very large muscularguy and has told me many times that he has a VERY hard time trying to apply a triangle choke on somebody because his thighs are so big.

It's not that he can't do one, just not very easy to.

 

[Hanzou]

A friend of mine competes in the World's and is a BJJ Brown Belt. He is a very large muscularguy and has told me many times that he has a VERY hard time trying to apply a triangle choke on somebody because his thighs are so big.

It's not that he can't do one, just not very easy to.

That's funny, because I have that same problem. I have thunder thighs from my football days. Meanwhile, a good friend of mine who is thin and lanky has one of the nastiest triangles around.

He makes it a point to remind me of how nasty said triangle is every time we roll....

 

[drop bear]

You're missing the point… it really doesn't have anything to do with "practical" versus "theoretical"… what I am saying is that your comments do not reflect the reality, or an actual grounding and understanding of pretty much anything you're trying to address. It's not that you're not expressing your ideas well… it's that your comments indicate that, well, you don't get it. In this thread, for example, you've commented on what you referred to as a "reality based" idea… except it's not, and is far more a "martial arts" idea, having little to nothing to do with reality based systems at all. Your comments on traditional systems are just as off-base… not expressed poorly, but simply inaccurate.

That's what I'm saying to you. Your posts do not indicate any real understanding of anything outside of a very narrow form of training methodologies… so, if you do have the experience you are saying, you missed most of what was there. That's not unheard of, or even uncommon… but simply having what you consider experience doesn't mean you have any real understanding… especially if that experience wasn't something you were able (or willing) to take on board.

Have another bite at this because I thought of something funny. From what perspective are you arguing from in relation to a competitive martial art?

Why is your perspective all martial arts?

 

[Chris Parker]

I still think this accusation that I don't understand the really real martial arts is a cop out.

It's not an accusation, it's an observation. And it's about as far from a "cop out" as you can get… I'm not avoiding anything, it gets pointed out after your continual missing of what you're being told.

Especially when I was asking for evidence you failed to provide.

Do you really want to go back there? After you got that thread locked? Seriously?

You were given the evidence. You started from a ridiculous hypothetical (that samurai might have been killing each other in practice all the time), that was denied, and the denial was supported with existing training methods, taken directly from the methods the samurai used, as maintained, preserved, and codified in "samurai" arts (that still exist, for the record), as well as pointing out that there are documents and records from the time (the densho and other forms) that continue to support just how incorrect your hypothetical was, and, if that wasn't enough, it was demonstrated just how unrealistic your idea was.

In other words, you had documentary evidence, direct (first-hand) experience evidence, logical evidence, contemporary evidence, and current training evidence… and your response? "So… no proof?". Dude, you got nothing but proof… and completely ignored it all.

Have another bite at this because I thought of something funny. From what perspective are you arguing from in relation to a competitive martial art?

Why is your perspective all martial arts?

How would that be funny? Are you thinking that I don't have an understanding of your side of things here? Dude… way off… I've made numerous comments in favour of the more "sport" training methods, depending on the aims and context.

But, for your edification, my background includes Tani-ha Shito Ryu Shukokai Karate-do (a branch of Shito Ryu that was formed basically to win tournaments), Rhee Tae-Kwon Do, BJJ (Gracie affiliated, including some training under Royce), boxing, and kickboxing. I've also spent some time (occasional visits, really) in a couple of MMA dojo, done some wrestling, and explored Judo. Add to that my traditional work (the semi-traditional side of the Ninjutsu arts, my Koryu training, Iai, Kyudo, as well as some time in Aikido, and more), and my RBSD training (both in various training environments, and as a teacher of RBSD methods within my Ninjutsu classes), my range of friends and associates who train in many of the above, and more (sporting and other systems) with whom I communicate regularly, and my last 3 decades or so reading, learning, and training, and you end up with, quite frankly, one of the most well-rounded persons on this forum.

Why is my perspective "all martial arts"? It's not… but it is one that takes each art from it's own perspective, rather than from one that has nothing to do with it. Oh, but it is far more "all martial arts" than yours, for the record.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

But, for your edification, my background includes Tani-ha Shito Ryu Shukokai Karate-do (a branch of Shito Ryu that was formed basically to win tournaments), Rhee Tae-Kwon Do, BJJ (Gracie affiliated, including some training under Royce), boxing, and kickboxing. I've also spent some time (occasional visits, really) in a couple of MMA dojo, done some wrestling, and explored Judo. Add to that my traditional work (the semi-traditional side of the Ninjutsu arts, my Koryu training, Iai, Kyudo, as well as some time in Aikido, and more), and my RBSD training (both in various training environments, and as a teacher of RBSD methods within my Ninjutsu classes), my range of friends and associates who train in many of the above, and more (sporting and other systems) with whom I communicate regularly, and my last 3 decades or so reading, learning, and training, and you end up with, quite frankly, one of the most well-rounded persons on this forum.
Why is my perspective "all martial arts"? It's not… but it is one that takes each art from it's own perspective, rather than from one that has nothing to do with it. Oh, but it is far more "all martial arts" than yours, for the record.

Just curious, Chris, how would you break down the time you've spent in these various arts? I've got a comparably broad list of arts I've been exposed to, but there's a big difference in my understanding of the arts I've spent thousands of hours on vs the ones I've spent hundreds of hours on vs the ones I've only spent tens of hours on.

 

[Chris Parker]

Just curious, Chris, how would you break down the time you've spent in these various arts? I've got a comparably broad list of arts I've been exposed to, but there's a big difference in my understanding of the arts I've spent thousands of hours on vs the ones I've spent hundreds of hours on vs the ones I've only spent tens of hours on.

Hey Tony,

Sure. The first few (Shukokai and TKD) both 3-4 years each… BJJ about a year… boxing and kickboxing about 6 months each (there are reasons for the short span, of course, but not worth getting into here). My primary arts (traditional systems) go back 2 decades plus, the RBSD over a decade (that one's a bit harder to quantify, for a few reasons), and the occasional visit-style systems have been over the last 3 decades. The reading, learning, communicating, and striving to understand each and every approach from their own perspective and context, well, that's been a constant throughout everything.

I agree with you on the difference between understanding depending on the level of immersion, but I also feel that's only part of the story… it's entirely possible to have a long time in a system, and not really get much understanding, particularly as it contrasts and compares with other approaches (especially if that's the only reference you have)… and the reverse is also possible. It depends on the approach of the person.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Hey Tony,

Sure. The first few (Shukokai and TKD) both 3-4 years each… BJJ about a year… boxing and kickboxing about 6 months each (there are reasons for the short span, of course, but not worth getting into here). My primary arts (traditional systems) go back 2 decades plus, the RBSD over a decade (that one's a bit harder to quantify, for a few reasons), and the occasional visit-style systems have been over the last 3 decades. The reading, learning, communicating, and striving to understand each and every approach from their own perspective and context, well, that's been a constant throughout everything.

Thanks! For the record, my own training over the last 33 years probably breaks down something like:

5000+ hours BJJ
2000+ hours Muay Thai
1500+ hours Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu
600+ hours Yudansha Fighting Systems (a Danzan ryu spinoff)
400+ hours Judo
400+ hours Boxing
300+ hours SCA heavy weapons fighting
100+ hours Kali (various flavors)
10 - 100 hours each TKD, Bando, Tai Chi, Karate, Sambo, Wrestling
less than 10 hours each Silat, Wing Chun, JKD, Capoeira, Shaolin Do, HEMA

I figure the breakdown by hours is more informative than listing in terms of years.

I'm not counting the ridiculous number of hours spent reading books, watching videos, and talking with practitioners of different arts.

I agree with you on the difference between understanding depending on the level of immersion, but I also feel that's only part of the story… it's entirely possible to have a long time in a system, and not really get much understanding, particularly as it contrasts and compares with other approaches (especially if that's the only reference you have)… and the reverse is also possible. It depends on the approach of the person.

True, but ... I think there's a danger in becoming overly confident in theories about what the perspective and context of a given martial art should be about based on a beginners/outsiders viewpoint, especially if it leads you to dismiss the actual experiences and understanding of people who have spent a lot more time in the art.

 

[elder999]

I do judo. It is pretty commonly accepted it is harder to do on a bigger stronger person. Same with bjj. Maybe I do a strange version.

It certainly seems harder to do on bigger stronger guys.

Good Lord, I couldn't disagree more!

Judo-throws especially-is generally easier to do on a bigger, stronger guy.

I say this as a bigger, stronger guy ( 6'2",230lbs.) who has been doing judo what some would call a long time-43 years......

(Haven't read the whole thread yet-maybe you were being facetious?)

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Good Lord, I couldn't disagree more!

Judo-throws especially-is generally easier to do on a bigger, stronger guy.

I say this as a bigger, stronger guy ( 6'2",230lbs.) who has been doing judo what some would call a long time-43 years......

(Haven't read the whole thread yet-maybe you were being facetious?)

??? Am I missing something? Are you suggesting that when you compete with a 120 lb judoka whose overall skill and athleticism are about equal to your own that the advantage is in favor of the other guy?

There's a reason why weight classes were instituted in Judo after Anton Geesink won the world championship. It wasn't to protect poor Anton from getting beat up by all those mean lightweights.

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

[ballen0351]

??? Am I missing something? Are you suggesting that when you compete with a 120 lb judoka whose overall skill and athleticism are about equal to your own that the advantage is in favor of the other guy?

There's a reason why weight classes were instituted in Judo after Anton Geesink won the world championship. It wasn't to protect poor Anton from getting beat up by all those mean lightweights.

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding your point.

It is much easier to get under and get leverage on taller guys. One of the guys in out dojo was 6'7" I loved working with him Im only 6ft and could easily get low on him. He on the other hand had a much harder time getting low on me to get the leverage