Judo, Aikido, and Bjj: Similarities and Differences

[Hanzou]

I thought it would be interesting to run a compare and contrast of the three major styles of post-Jujutsu. I think we have enough stylists here to compare notes and experiences to have an interesting discussion.

I'll start us off:

Judo- Sport oriented, yet rigid. Movements purposely removed because of competition rules. Experiencing a burst of popularity due to MMA and Bjj. Famous for throwing.

Bjj- Sport oriented, yet eclectic. Style influenced by several sources. Famous for ground fighting, and dominance in early MMA.

Aikido- Generally Non-Sport oriented. Characterized by circular movements leading to throws and pins. Probably the most "traditional" of the three.

That's very general. Hopefully some other posters would be willing to add to it.

 

[Shai Hulud]

Can't really talk about BJJ much as I've no actual experience with it, but I've observed Aikido for a while now and have some experience in Judo.

From what I can gather, the non-competitive Aikido seems more esoterical and focused on that essential "transfer of energy" we see in Japanese wrestling. It's much more gentle and "spiritual", if I may, compared to Judo. I think Ueshiba was going for a more sublime art when he made his own derivative of Jujutsu.

Dr. Kano's Judo, as a distillation of the old jujutsu, was really intended for martial sport and competition. Besides sharing Aikido's principles on energy transfer and economy of force, it also has a good deal to do biomechanics, and physics. It also goes a lot further than the tewaza-dominated array of techniques we see in Aikido. We see sweeps, reaps, hip throws and shoulder throws in Judo as well, and a substantial framework for ground techniques involving pins, chokes and arm-bars.

Hope this helped.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

One difference between Judo and Aikido is the "leg skill". Judo guys use more leg skill such as cut, hook, sweep, lift, ...

 

[Hanzou]

One difference between Judo and Aikido is the "leg skill". Judo guys use more leg skill such as cut, hook, sweep, lift, ...

You see that in Bjj standing techniques as well. One thing I found interesting is that Bjj has continued to pick up a lot from wrestling, Judo, Sombo, and other sources. While Judo has sort of shied away from incorporating wrestling and other grappling arts via their competitive rule changes since the 1960s. No-gi has also grown pretty rapidly in Bjj circles, further facilitating the incorporation of wrestling, while still very rare in Judo, and non-existent in Aikido. Hence why I stated that Bjj is the more eclectic of the trio.

Question: Does Aikido teach weapons? I remember seeing demos of Aikidoka using swords.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

You see that in Bjj standing techniques as well. One thing I found interesting is that Bjj has continued to pick up a lot from wrestling, Judo, Sombo, and other sources. While Judo has sort of shied away from incorporating wrestling and other grappling arts via their competitive rule changes since the 1960s. No-gi has also grown pretty rapidly in Bjj circles, further facilitating the incorporation of wrestling, while still very rare in Judo, and non-existent in Aikido. Hence why I stated that Bjj is the more eclectic of the trio.

Question: Does Aikido teach weapons? I remember seeing demos of Aikidoka using swords.

There is aiki-ken (sword) and aiki-jo (medium length staff). This may vary depending upon which Aikido organization you're talking about.

 

[Buka]

I'll comment as to how the three apply to me, personally. Standing up, Aikido does a great deal of damage to my joints. It is in that area of Aikido that I am most vulnerable. I have good balance and a good working sense of entry into the space of another. I am less susceptible to my enemy yielding and me losing balance than most....if I make the first move. Not so much if an Aikidoist is already moving and I enter. It's kind of like trying to catch a wasp, you might....but you get stung really bad before crashing through a window.

Getting thrown hard by a good Judoka hurts, and makes you want to quit Martial Artists. In my opinion, good Judo throws should be outlawed by Congress or the church or some G-damn-body.

Of the three, BJJ is what I have the most experience with. Unfortunately, so does everyone else. (or so it seems to me) It's like getting stuck in deep mud with a light vehicle that has no front wheel drive. You go through all the check marks that you were taught on how to get out of mud.....and find yourself suddenly door deep.....and it's starting to rain really hard.

As tongue in cheek as that might seem, it's true. As I am primarily a striker, I hate all you people.

 

[Hanzou]

I have the same experience with Judo. It was literal hell on my body, and I was a lot younger when I took it. I have a great deal of respect for the guys who reach advanced level and dedicate their lives to it. I couldn't.

Bjj is a gentler form of Judo IMO.

 

[Shai Hulud]

I have the same experience with Judo. It was literal hell on my body, and I was a lot younger when I took it. I have a great deal of respect for the guys who reach advanced level and dedicate their lives to it. I couldn't.

Bjj is a gentler form of Judo IMO.

I can relate. Taking an uchimata wasn't the most cherishable moment of my experience with the sport.

 

[Mephisto]

I thought it would be interesting to run a compare and contrast of the three major styles of post-Jujutsu. I think we have enough stylists here to compare notes and experiences to have an interesting discussion.

I'll start us off:

Judo- Sport oriented, yet rigid. Movements purposely removed because of competition rules. Experiencing a burst of popularity due to MMA and Bjj. Famous for throwing.

Bjj- Sport oriented, yet eclectic. Style influenced by several sources. Famous for ground fighting, and dominance in early MMA.

Aikido- Generally Non-Sport oriented. Characterized by circular movements leading to throws and pins. Probably the most "traditional" of the three.

That's very general. Hopefully some other posters would be willing to add to it.

im curious how you define traditional, and arrive to the conclusion that aikido is the most traditional of the three. I think most people would agree w you, I'm just curious as to how people define traditional. all three arts come from a long line of practitioners, so I don't see how one is more traditional than the other. Unless of course you mean in willingness to apply skill to other fighters, which judo and BJJ do while aikido takes a more esoteric approach based on philosophy rather than ability. I think it was pretty common for old styles to engage in fights and competitions so if anything a system that fights and competes might take the more traditional approach of pressure testing. Aikido is less traditional because it does not embrace combat. Their are stories of ueshiba traveling and engaging in fights but it seems he didn't encourage this on his students.

Can't really talk about BJJ much as I've no actual experience with it, but I've observed Aikido for a while now and have some experience in Judo.

From what I can gather, the non-competitive Aikido seems more esoterical and focused on that essential "transfer of energy" we see in Japanese wrestling. It's much more gentle and "spiritual", if I may, compared to Judo. I think Ueshiba was going for a more sublime art when he made his own derivative of Jujutsu.

Dr. Kano's Judo, as a distillation of the old jujutsu, was really intended for martial sport and competition. Besides sharing Aikido's principles on energy transfer and economy of force, it also has a good deal to do biomechanics, and physics. It also goes a lot further than the tewaza-dominated array of techniques we see in Aikido. We see sweeps, reaps, hip throws and shoulder throws in Judo as well, and a substantial framework for ground techniques involving pins, chokes and arm-bars.

Hope this helped.

id just add that most if not all martial arts share principals of energy transfer and economy of motion/force, biomechanics, and physics. Bjj uses the same aiki principals that aikido does, use the opponents strength against them, it's a common theme among many arts. The striking arts are equally scientific in approach with use of distance, angle, and also economy of motion. I think you'd be hard pressed to find an art that doesn't encourage fighters to move efficiently and purposefully. Maybe some of the more performance oriented wushu? Even boxers and eskrimadores have very specific ways of power generation. I question that any art is more scientific than another.

If anything aikido is less scientific when you consider the scientific method. Arts such as judo produce empirical measurable results that can be reproduced. The test is randori, the evidence is the success of a technique against a resisting opponent. Generations have passed on these techniques to students that can also produce the same results. Are this generations judoka better than the last? Has any judoka surpassed the skill of Kano? Probably, if a system produces proven effective techniques and can pass them on to the next generation then we have a scientifically proven system. Due to the nature and philosophy of aikido we can't scientifically test it's techniques (maybe only some) so the system is not scientific in its approach to actual combat because success in it can't be empirically measured. Many aikidoka put ueshiba on a pedestal and consider him the best in aikido, which may be true. But if he were to produce a scientific art than he should be able to produce practitioners better than him. I'm not trashing aikido here, so don't get upset aikido guys. I'm just looking at the reality of things. I think aikido is a good advanced art that can emphasize some great principals, I think it would be great for Bjj pr judo black belts who are already able to control a resisting opponent and have already developed and tested their technical skill.

 

[hussaf]

Bookmarking for later comment.

As to last poster, I think most JMA people using the term "traditional" refer to focusing on principals of gendai budo vice sports-centric focus. Many judo and jujitsu schools emphasize competition, which is great, but they are such complicated martial arts you tend to spend time focusing on aspects of "your game" you think give you an advantage. So you see parts of the martial art not allowed in competition get pushed to the wayside, or even some techniques you may not be particularly gifted at doing being pushed aside on favor of tools you know you can win with. A more traditional approach may include some competition, but focuses more on learning the art and the philosophies behind it.

Some may confuse traditional with koryru, but I feel that's not what they really mean to reference as koryryu are it's own thing.

 

[Hanzou]

Bookmarking for later comment.

As to last poster, I think most JMA people using the term "traditional" refer to focusing on principals of gendai budo vice sports-centric focus. Many judo and jujitsu schools emphasize competition, which is great, but they are such complicated martial arts you tend to spend time focusing on aspects of "your game" you think give you an advantage. So you see parts of the martial art not allowed in competition get pushed to the wayside, or even some techniques you may not be particularly gifted at doing being pushed aside on favor of tools you know you can win with. A more traditional approach may include some competition, but focuses more on learning the art and the philosophies behind it.

Some may confuse traditional with koryru, but I feel that's not what they really mean to reference as koryryu are it's own thing.

Pretty much why I viewed it as more traditional. Thanks for the post.