BJJ limitations

[spetnatz]

What do you think are BJJ limitations? I think the biggest problem lies in the standup fighting technique.You will fight effectively once on the ground but for the whole time (and it can be a long time) you are standing, you will feel you are not really fighting in your natural element. You just have to watch a Judo tournament and a BJJ tournament and compare the throwing and takedown technique in each one. There is a great difference, and that is probably the reason why many top BJJ men are also JUDO black belts. They probably feel BJJ is an incomplete grappling art that has to be suplemented with JUDO to make a really complete grappler.
Why do you think BJJ doesn´t seem to put much emphasis on standup fighting technique? Does anyone know if some schools of BJJ put more emphasis on the development of throwing and takedown technique than others?

[Bjjexpertise@be]

Well.. Bjj guys do know some takedowns and clinch fighting...

[Yakov]

All i can say try sambo
we have both,
sambo standing techniques are almost the same as judo(the only difference in judo they have pent and in sambo shorts)
and we have leg locks and some ground techniques that even bjj guys don't practice...

[spetnatz]

You lack strangles though,or so I´ve heard. There is also the problem that Sambo is far less widespread than JUDO or BJJ which makes it very difficult to find SAMBO instruction.

[MrPoopy]

He is right about the techniques not being practiced in Judo and BJJ. I haven't done Sambo myself, but I used to have a couple videos and it showed some pretty odd looking moves.

[Yakov]

whats' strangles?
is it like chokes?
in sambo official rules chokes are prohibited but i know alot of clubs in America that practice chokes in their classes.

[chris davis 200]

and to answer the original question of ......

What do you think are BJJ limitations?

Any takers - I would very much like to hear the opinion of experienced BJJ stylists.

We always hear of the good aspects of this art n the not often to we question its weaknesses.

Cheers
Chris

[cakegirl]

I think because BJJ doesn't use striking, that would have to be considered a 'weakness' in the style. In order for a BJJ stylist to become an effective fighter outside of BJJ, i.e. in Vale Tudo or whatever, they need to effectively learn a whole new art, of striking, kicks, etc.

Mind you, I can't think of an art that has 'everything'.

Cakegirl

[pstevens]

I think that everyone cross-trains to become more acquainted with different martial arts or to become better fighters, because they understand that no martial art has all the answers. Thus, we have MMA...

My experience with BJJ has been that throwing someone is much harder to do than taking them down. Hence, we train to take people down with the least amount of trouble. Not saying that throwing is bad...heck, if you can throw someone, by all means do it. But a lot of people, especially smaller individuals, will have problems trying to throw someone significantly larger, therefore BJJ prefers takedowns like the double-leg, or single-leg.

As far as stand-up, I understand that BJJ lacks in striking...but it is afterall, a ground-fighting system with it's own set of principles. One can easily argue that karate lacks ground-fighting, therefore on the ground it's incomplete. But the whole point is that in every style of martial arts, there are pros and cons... If you're a grappler, you're relying on your ability to takedown and grapple... If you're a striker, you want to cause damage before you go down, etc...

Anywho, today's martial arts scene is comprised of individuals who are learning all disciplines so now it's more a question of who is the better fighter, not so much the better stylist.

[gracilva]

Bjj is weak in throws (compared to judo)
Bjj is weak in strikes ( compared to Muay Thai)
but a good Bjj instructor should compensate for that i.m.o.
If you were to walk into a Bjj lesson and saw no striking or throws
i wouldn't even think of joining up.
95% of fights may end up on the ground
but 100% of fights start standing.

[alwaysmixwell]

i agree totally with gracilva !!

this is kinda off the subject but.....my only misunderstanding is this. judo is about throws.. more so than submissions and chokes ?? i have this judo video series and he concentrates more on submission and mat work.. i mean it has some takedowns but i was just wondering if judo has a lot more grappling involved than just grip and clench fighting ?


I think as far as strikes go there are ways to avoid them to an extent in a real fight. by going to a clinch (with minimum blows landed to you) and going for a take down.. besides even if you have weak striking skills (like Royce) you can still use the basics to get into a better position(clench and/or takedown).. i think bjj has some weaknesses but there not as bad as other MA's in my opinion. personally i would like some BJJ and muay thai for a "complete fighting system"

[alwaysmixwell]

oh yeah when i meant like Royce in the previous post for anyone who's watched UFC you know what im talking about ! haha..

[chris davis 200]

I agree with what you all are saying.

But ... I do think that even if you mix muay thai with BJJ you still wont have all the solutions. The stand up grappling / control and restraint of both arts is somewhat lacking in my opinion.

Muay Thai has good clinching skills but getting someone in a clinch does not stop them grabbing your nuts n ripping them off! I think that this lack of concideration of grabbing / gripping skill is due to the focus on competition and the wearing or boxing gloves. MT fighters dont have to worry about grabbing / tearing methods because they never come across them. hence they dont prepare for them.

BJJ has very little stand up grappling from what i understand, it tries to find the easiest way to take down the opponent. I have always found this interesting when thinking about the claim that 80% of fights end up on the ground. Why such an emphasis on taking down if the odds are so stacked in your favour? Take downs or throws in my opinion should be used to seriously damage the opponent. A Ba gua guy i spoke to once said try to hit the opponent with the heaviest thing you can find .... the earth will do!! This theory seems to be completely lacking from BJJ with a takedown just being a means to an end.

Although a superb and unparralled competition art the BJJ theories DO have some large gaps in knowledge, especially with regard to street work.

But as has been stated - BJJ has proved its worth, has got in the ring and proved its dominance of Competitions, and this cannot be taken away.

BJJ is THE art in its area of combat. Just not the most practical system for all situations - but then what system is.

Cheers
Chris

[TylerDurden]

If you are training BJJ you definitely want to work on takedowns in addition to it. Either Judo or learning some from a wrestler is the way to go. I look at the guard as a fall back, my take down went bad but I still have a way to fight. Better to control the take down and use your top game, since most people are far less able to fight on their back (non BJJ people I mean) and will in all likelyhood panic and do something stupid.

Stand up training is never a bad idea, if you can knock someone out before they even grab you so much the better. So yes BJJ has some limitations, but they can be easily covered by a little cross training.

[chris davis 200]

So yes BJJ has some limitations, but they can be easily covered by a little cross training.

But surely that is true of every single art on the planet???

Cheers
Chris