What in JJJ did the Gracies change to create BJJ?

[ChickenBrother]

I took Judo for several years before getting into bjj. Not once in Judo did we ever cover any ground work other than turtle up and restart. So to me, at least, they are different styles

FWIW I've done drop ins at the Judo school in my area and they did zero ground work. But I think this is a relatively recent development. The Judo club I came up in in the 90's spent about a third of our training time on ne waza. And unless they've changed it, pins and subs are part of the promotion criteria at each belt. Likewise, a lot of BJJ clubs (including the one I train at) has Judo throws on the test curriculum.

But over time each style has entrenched in its forte as defined by the rulesets. As long as you have a dominant TD game, you can win under Judo rules without a viable ground game. And vice versa for BJJ.

 

[Paolo Delutis]

I think where the main difference is and this is coming from Japanese Jiu-jitsu practitioner myself is the philosophy more then the moves...

I mean an armbar is an armbar... A sweeps a sweep... A chokes a choke...

But the differences lie IMO as why you do certain things and the outcome purposes...

BJJ is about establishing control and prevention of damage for smaller guys and bigger guys in combat situations that grappling can take place... competition,self defense, street fights ETC...all while getting the upper hand and ultimately submitting your opponent ...the main goal is to either take advantage of situation with or through grappling

Japanese Jiu-jitsu is a full encompassing fighting system developed for unarmed combat for the japanese soldier(Samurai class) in the Feudal era of Japan when he was without sword or weapon..it is designed to eliminate a threat as quickly and as low effort as possible by strike...throw or submission...or all 3 together...its main purpose is to allow a Samurai to fight as effectively without a weapon as he could with one...this is a war time martial art alot of the true techniques are not ones you could use in MMA competition ( throws into head stomps,arm/wrist/finger breaking techniques) but a high percentage do to translate very well and given that it has striking , throws and submissions is pretty a more structured version of mix martial arts ...your not really gunna see a pure BJJ stand on his feet for awhile trading and then go the ground where as a pure Japanese Jiu-jitsu fighter will look to end the conflict on the feet,clinch or ground...

The techniques will be shared in some areas for sure...but the philosophy couldnt be more different..

Another key difference is specialization vs variety..

BJJ = concentration on high percentage moves done over and over again 10 techniques repeated or attempted over and over again with slight changes but not much ...shorter route to proficiency and is why it got popular recently because of this but overall your game has less options ( weve seen this in BJJ guys who cant get takedowns or are horrible on the feet even after learning to "strike")

JJJ- A huge mixture of moves with varying percentages of success based on situation , repeated again and again with limitations only being a ruleset and/or desired outcome ( winning a competition vs killing someone)..there is less specialization in JJJ but in the end you have more tools and options to work with but it may take longer to achieve true proficiency and thus people arent studying it as much or as true as it should be...(everything has to be fast for some reason these days)


Specific technique example..

BJJ pull guard or butt scoot..

JJJ - No self respecting JJJ gym with do this move or allow this .. this would be a major NO NO in a live combat situation for a Samurai

 

[Matsukaze]

I have trained in both, and still do, but the majority is spent with bjj. Years of JJJ and the time is spent mostly standing tech. Very, very painful joint locks from standing taking the attacker to the ground. BJJ, primarily, the emphasis is live training on the ground and that's where the difference takes a huge leap. My experience, it's very difficult to pressure test the standing JJJ moves for fear of major joint injury to your training partner. BJJ, for the most part, can be practiced at near murder speed and therefore lies the benefit

 

[carpediem]

I found this thread fascinating and there's only one thing that is missing.

What do you suppose they call BJJ in Brazil?

 

[Foppa21]

I'm sure I've chucked in my 2c before but given that this necro thread has been brought back, let's try a new tack.

"Marketing"

 

[Matsukaze]

I found this thread fascinating and there's only one thing that is missing.

What do you suppose they call BJJ in Brazil?

jiu jitsu

 

[Patrick Jane]

I wonder who came up with the misconception that JJJ was intended primarily to use when you don't have a weapon. From what i've seen, it is exactly as with the HEMA wrestling ("Leibringen" or whatever they call it) in that throwing someone down or disarming them while you have a weapon is the normal case. It's also why you see a lot of defenses against wrist grabs in JJJ styles. All fencing comes from wrestling.

 

[shunyata]

I wonder who came up with the misconception that JJJ was intended primarily to use when you don't have a weapon. From what i've seen, it is exactly as with the HEMA wrestling ("Leibringen" or whatever they call it) in that throwing someone down or disarming them while you have a weapon is the normal case. It's also why you see a lot of defenses against wrist grabs in JJJ styles. All fencing comes from wrestling.

With armor involved, HEMA and premodern jiujitsu were all about armed grappling.

If you add horses to the equation it's a different story and it's more about horsemanship with jousting / lance work or mounted archery skills.

But armed and armored fighting on foot does in fact involve a fair amount of grappling. Often in direct relationship to how good the armor is.

 

[Fruitsaladsushi]

The Gracie’s invented açai

 

[Coconutwater]

Positional hierarchy on the ground is the most important change. The old school techniques are very basic techniques, and present in just about every sub grappling art. That said, absolutely no one on this board is qualified to answer beyond this, because we weren't around. Judo and BJJ both have an armbar from the "guard" position. Did Helio teach if differently from the way it was being done at the time? We don't know. We don't know if he added some new details or what. The key difference was the strategy imo. As far as tactics, very hard to say.

I would imagine Japanese jujitsu understands positional hierarchy, but because the samurai needed to use it on the battlefield with hundreds of men trying to murder each other with swords, knives and arrows, they just went for the quickest kill possible as even 30 seconds would probably be too long to still be on the ground and most likely would have ended up with a warrior killed from behind or trampled by horses.

Gracie jiu-jitsu is the byproduct of judo and the work of Maeda tweaked for duels and two men squaring off.

 

[rmongler]

With armor involved, HEMA and premodern jiujitsu were all about armed grappling.

If you add horses to the equation it's a different story and it's more about horsemanship with jousting / lance work or mounted archery skills.

But armed and armored fighting on foot does in fact involve a fair amount of grappling. Often in direct relationship to how good the armor is.

A man in a good suit of full harness is practically invincible against anything you could swing at him, and anything big enough to swing that could hurt could also be defeated by his skill and agility with a more versatile weapon.

That's why 'sticky hands' when you clash, transitioning into takedowns and disarmament, was such a big part of many warrior caste traditions throughout the ages. Someone pinned on his back is as good as dead before you slide your dirk into his eyesocket through the gaps in his visor.