Sam Harris on BJJ

An interesting read. Thanks for sharing that and posting the link.

Interesting piece thoug I wasn't so keen to see that one of the people, Chris Haueter, he communicated with referred to karate, TKD, kung fu and so on as the "fantasy" martial arts.

That's an awfully broad brush he's painting over us all with. It's quite a narrow view and a bit sad to see it coming from someone apparently as experienced as he his as an Inosanto student and Machado black belt.

"Anyone with legitimate talent doesn’t need to tarnish others to market himself" - Ross Enamait

Gary

True, Gary, true. Still it is all too prevalent sadly.

Here's some 'fantasy' stuff to amuse people.  It's 'old style' knockdown karate, before grabbing was outlawed.  (Best without sound I'm afraid - corny soundtrack)

3:33 and 3:48 give good examples of fantasy karate skills that have a fairly easy transfer to live situations.

But as I've said elsewhere, I teach this as a combat sport, not as self-defence. How people (legally) apply those skills outside the dojo is their business.

Gary

PS - People have remarked that his kata's a bit ropey.  Didn't seem to hold him back much 

i personally find all the hype about BJJ a bit OTT, I tend to see that its strikers with a bit of gound and pound training that seem to do well in the cage as opposed to BJJ'ists with a bit of striking experience.

I personally think that our Fantasy Arts and our inept way of handling ground fighters is our own fault. We tended to fallow our Instructors words as "Gospel" and not look at the "What If's"

It is people like Iain and Dave Morris and other Bunkai Specialists that are now turning the tales on our Ground fighting colleagues

I feel that from watching You tube, that the BJJ'ists most common defence again a striker is a double leg takedown. I always find a well placed Downwards X-Block and sprawl takes away the advantage. Also the chokes and armbars are another guise for the BJJ'ist. Again not giving them the advantage is well within our Fantasy Arts favour

Hmmm

I'm not sure who's got the answer to what, to be honest.  There are too many variables.

Gary

I'm a great admirer of the focus and commitment to training seen in BJJ - but have to add from my own perspective that;

BJJ = Basically Just Judo.

By that I mean for the most part it is (or was)  a re-packaging and re-marketing of Judo, and in particular judo ne-waza. This is not to say that BJJ does not offer a superior "package" in ne-waza compared to judo, on average it does. But that is not surprising - if one spends the vast majority of one's training time on the ground, and applies sound training practices - then one should get very good at ne-waza. I also recognise that BJJ has incorporated elements of Catch, Greco, Sambo (another Judo offshoot) so that nowadays it exists as it's own MA, but there is significant white-washing of BJJs history wrt Judo, I see it everyday at my gym where I train alongside BJJ guys who exhibit a remarkable ignorance of their own arts roots. More than once I've had a BJJ guy ask me if a "Kimura" is legal in Judo?, anyone who knows a little of judo/BJJ history will understand the irony implicit in such a statement!

Observations - Many Brazilian BJJ BBs are also Judo blackbelts, indeed in Brazil the distinction is a blurry one, and not well publicised on the BJJ side. On the judo side one only has to look at the judo of Olympic level competitors like Flavio Canto to see the holistic Brazilian "style".

Unfortunately outside of Brazil, and particularly in the US,  most BJJ'ers stand up grappling game is pretty ropey. They have lost the "holistic" approach. Again this is not an armchair observation, where I train in TX I regularly crosstrain with BJJ'ers. Whilst I understand that rulesets dictate tactics and techniques, I do think that BJJ has it "wrong" in the way that a solid throw to pin is not better rewarded under its points scoring scheme. Alot of what I see at the intermediate level , and even at some fairly high levels is standing -to-pulling guard, alot of (often poor) shooting and terrible sweeps simply designed to get both players onto the ground where the "game" can really start, if indeed they even start standing! I have to wonder what the self defence benefit of such tactics are? Many BJJ'ers (like Judoka) do not really care about self defence, but for those that do "market" the SD aspects - well, I have to go, Hmmmmmmm!? 

Judo had this struggle 100yrs ago. Yes, it is really good competition tactic to stress ne-waza and take inexperienced players down and sub them on the ground, but it doesn't translate very well to SD. Kano wrote at length of the importance of balancing standing vs. ground work and to not rely on ne-waza, but bias towards standing work as the more difficult "arena", learn balance first and then not be afraid of the ground if one is taken there - the more holistic approach. I'm not saying that judo has it right by the way, I think the sporting ruleset does not reward enough or give sufficient lattitude to ne-waza nowadays. It's a real shame that Judo and BJJ have diverged in this aspect - but I think BJJ's divergence to market itself as something "better" is by far the moreso, and in their specialisation they have lost sight of some important considerations od SD underpinnings in their "art".

I read in another Forum from a experienced Judo and BJJ practitioner, that is was easier for a Judo Player to grade to Black belt in BJJ than is for a BJJ fighter to get a Black belt in Judo, I think because Judo is technically harder to perfect.

I took up Judo as from Last Friday, but I do find the BJA licence fee a little high for what it is, especially when I myself only charge £10 for licences within my club!

Maybe he is trying to say that most judo guys will know more of Ne-Waza than BJJ guys will know more of Tachi-Waza, and as such can transition from one to the other better, but as to getting the BB that is a really tough one to answer.

It's my experience that getting a BJJ black belt is really, really  tough, at least through legitimate circles. I'd go so far as to say its the toughest BB to get in the martial arts. It is still the case that BJJ BB's are handed out based on direct lineage - the BBJ BB I know best, got his directly via Carlson Gracie Jr in Brazil, so it is very tightly controlled - but then again one could argue that the "direct promotion" approach is open to abuses and conflicts of interest (but these don't seem to have occurred as yet). The coach I work with has only given out a handfull of BB's and you have got to have about 10yrs of experience training 2-3 times a week minimum  to be considered for that level. That is more than typical for judo. A judo shodan training in BJJ at our gym typically will get belted to BJJ blue, which seems about right to me. I roll with blue belts under BJJ conditions and hold my own but with purples and blacks, forget about it! Those boys are solid ne-waza exponents, but I know judo ne-waza specialists who can hang with them (many of them also properly x-training in BJJ of course, which I don't, just the odd roll).

Also - as one advances one sees the sytle and pace of judo vs. BJJ ne-waza is actually quite different - judo guys have to move with much more intensity of directness under their ruleset and of course the pin is a high scoring technique. On the flipside we can also stall in the turtle or guard positions because we know we are going to get stood up. That's not true for BJJ, who can develop dominant positions in a much more relaxed way, work from the bottom, play guard and work more subs (leglock, body locks, shoulder locks etc.) at the high levels. They have much more latitude, and sometimes styles can clash. I regularly pin BJJ guys who come to judo and have to remind them that, under our ruleset, they are "losing".

That said, any legit BJJ purple or black belt, and many blues will be tough hombres. Once you are in the ground with them you are going to have your work cut out for you.

Enjoyed that, thanks for posting.  I agree that the tone is a little border-line... assured (?)... about the merits and overall adequacy of BJJ, but understood within the context of the author's recent piece on violence and some of the additional comments he makes (i.e. not going to the ground in a street fight), its pretty clear to me that he gets it.  And from, a 'pure skill vs. pure skill testing' point of view, I think he is correct to note that grappling to submission as in BJJ or Catch offers a way to 'best' test the application of the theoretical-- at least in a grappling subcontext.  ('But, introduce weapons, or G&P...' and yada yada yada...).

As to the small comment about 'fantasy' martial arts made by the author's associate, I agree that that's a pretty broad brush...  I used to think JKD was a fantasy martial art based upon my extremely limited exposure to guys that couldn't fight their way out of a room at tournaments-- until I met the right people, the ones doing 'quality' JKD, that is.  That's the problem with attempting to define 'effectiveness' at the systemic level-- you can't.  There is ALWAYS an exception to the rule to be found.  (Typically, 'multiple exceptions', and 'found quite easily'.)  There is just as much crap JKD out there as there is crap TKD as there is crap karate as there is (now) unfortunatley crap BJJ out there.

In all, I took this as a good article by a devoted practitioner of one art describing several valid criticisms of 'martial arts' in general; and then moving on to describe how 'in love' he is with the 'solution'  that he has found for himself to those problems.  Kinda like religion that way (as he notes) and as I have frequently concluded myself before.

My hunch is that if most people didn't have some underlying level of 'faith' in the  adequacy and 'greatness' of what they ultimately choose to study as the  'solution' for how they perceive violence, they probably wouldn't do it.  This is a phenomena Rory Miller talks a lot about in his first book, and elaborated somewhat in his second.  The 'problem', if there is one, is the blinkered kind of thinking that can lead to. 

A small almost off-hand comment from Miller's newest book which I just finished and which is therefore fresh in my mind he made in one of the appendices (from memory):  "You have spent years studying the 'answer'.  Study the 'question' a little." 

I thought that was a really good, simple statement which casts into immediate relief the sheer preponderance of assumptions inherent in just about 'any' organized martial art which doesn't START from the premise of how 'real' fights happen in an identified and SPECIFIC 'real' context.

Black Tiger wrote:

I read in another Forum from a experienced Judo and BJJ practitioner, that is was easier for a Judo Player to grade to Black belt in BJJ than is for a BJJ fighter to get a Black belt in Judo, I think because Judo is technically harder to perfect.

I'd say the opposite is true. Once you start expanding the groundgame beyond the limited time Judo boys get to play it it becomes technically immmense. BJJ black belts are very hard to come by. I've known guys get their Judo BB whilst also training to get their BJJ one almost as a side project. :)

PASmith wrote:

I read in another Forum from a experienced Judo and BJJ practitioner, that is was easier for a Judo Player to grade to Black belt in BJJ than is for a BJJ fighter to get a Black belt in Judo, I think because Judo is technically harder to perfect.

I'd say the opposite is true. Once you start expanding the groundgame beyond the limited time Judo boys get to play it it becomes technically immmense. BJJ black belts are very hard to come by. I've known guys get their Judo BB whilst also training to get their BJJ one almost as a side project. :)

Agreed, both arts have their merits, I suppose its down to the individual Dojo and "player" than it is to the Art itself.

The whole topic has been an excellent one and the article definately rattled/pushed some cages

Found this on another forum posted by a Threader named "Prizewriter" which I thought was dare I say quite relevant to the topic of this thread

Fascinating (but short) recent interview with Rickson Gracie. In it Rickson states that BJJ is a fading force in MMA. He said he sees the long term survival of the art outside of MMA by being taught more as a self-defense system.

From the interview:

I see it as a new race of fighter developing, something that’s been invented. There are no more style matchups. Now, everyone knows everything. It’s about the strengths of the individual. The time of fights was shortened, the weights were equalized and technology was incorporated into training. There is no more romanticism in seeing a smaller guy fight a bigger guy for two hours. Thinking of that, I believe jiu-jitsu has lost the capacity to be put into practice in today’s MMA, because it’s an art you have to wait for the right moment with. Now, MMA is a sport for the better-prepared fighter, the guy who can absorb more punches and still win. There’s still an admiration for the art by those who practice it, but there’s a decline in how it’s working in MMA. My motivation is completely focused on the concept. That’s where I believe I can make a difference: in making the shy kid feel normal, in making the weak woman believe she’s strong. I want people to have a sense of self-defense and a concept of the invisible power. That’s where jiu-jitsu will achieve its eternity.

Full interview: http://www.sherdog.com/news/interviews/6-Questions-for-Rickson-Gracie-36352

That's also interesting.  If you read the book he wrote with his son, Helio Gracie says in no uncertain terms that GJJ is FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT playing defense and waiting for the other guy to make a mistake, and he complains about the "attacking" mentality of some of the younger players.  The introduction of the timed rounds element forces the players to attempt a more offensive game.

That's also interesting.  If you read the book he wrote with his son, Helio Gracie says in no uncertain terms that GJJ is FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT playing defense and waiting for the other guy to make a mistake, and he complains about the "attacking" mentality of some of the younger players.  The introduction of the timed rounds element forces the players to attempt a more offensive game.

Black Tiger wrote:

If you read the book he wrote with his son, Helio Gracie says in no uncertain terms that GJJ is FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT playing defense

Although the Carlson Gracie lineage has always been more attack orientated so Helio is not the only voice of authority on BJJ/GJJ. Over the years there have been some attack minded Gracies (Ralph for example) so I think that's reflecting Helio's preference (probably because he was small) rather than an overiding principal that was there from the start.

No dispute PA, I guess I only meant that as 'the founder', in his own words, he says that GJJ was DESIGNED TO BE defensive.  And your right, there is more there about how 'his' game was to play defense, and that he favored chokes personally over other submissions.

"In my case, fighting not to lose [a specific concept he previously articulated], you play a defnesive posture and let your opponent take the chances.  He is the one keeping the pressure, he is the one exerting himself, he is the one makingmistakes and you are the one ready to capitalize on any mistakes...  This philosophy was built into Gracie Jie-Jitsu,ecause IT WAS MY NATURE [my emphasis].  I always thought 'Why should I attack?' That is my theory, the basis of my matial art.   When you fight not to lose, you fight a different way than when you fight to win. When you are defensive you always have the chance to counter but when you are attacking you are exposing yourself to counters."

Further on, after elaborting his compariative physical weaknesses as a youth:

"What Carlos and the rest did and learned was more like Judo, based on technique, power, and explosion.  That is a fight sport for competition. My Jiu-Jitsu was for reaL street fighting [whatever you think about the idea of platying defense for street defense, that's what he said]. 

Also later on, Royler, a co-author of the book specifically identifes Rolls as having an "aggressive attacking style".  So, I agree with your comment that Helio was perhaps talking more about his own personal style, and that teh remarks were not representative of all fo BJJ.

Still later from Royler:  "My father likes to say that to be very succesful in defense, you need to defend the preparation of the attack.  If you wait to defend the attack you are already too late".  That would go a long way to explaining Helio's comment above about defense and street fighting; and helps shed some context to Rickson's remarks.

PS:  All remarks in quotes are form Gracie Submission Essentials by Helio and Royler Gracie