japanese vs brazilian jujutsu

[academian]

what are the main diffrences between japanese and brazillian jujutsu. Which style do you think is more effective and why???

[Hardball]

Japanese jujitsu is more closer to Judo but trains with weapons. Most brazillian styles, focus on the ground and sometimes start their practice right from the ground. Japanese jujitus is full of throws; hip throws, foot throws and takedowns. Both styles have wrist locks, arm bars, shoulder locks, knee locks, ankle locks, finger locks. They both employ the basic front kick, round kick, and side kick.

In summary the biggest difference between japanese jujitsu and brazillian jujitsu is their respective REPUTATIONS. Brazillian repped out in the early UFC's with the Gracies. No known stylist of the Japanese jujitsu system has that type of reputation. The one exception is the Japanese who beat the Gracies. {Saubuka {sp}} but he credits Judo with being his style. Judo and japanese jujitsu are first cousins; whereas brazillian and jjj are more like second cousins.

[EmptyneSs]

japanese jj is more complete. it teaches u to fight in all ranges. i like jjj alot better, as its mindset is more aggressive and it contains alot more techniques. jjj techniques are meant to to str8 up kill and main your opponent, as its main focus is self defense and survival, it is not for sport at all. i especially like the jjj neck breaking submissions and techniques. most bbj school over here seem to be more about competition and sport, and focus mostly on groundwork. i used to read the world jj federation manual books that were in my college library, and i was impressed by alot of the techniques they had, and i learnt a great deal of useful info from those books. also alot of jj schools practice randori, so u do get to go up against resistiing opponents to learn to use the throws effectively. jjj is awesome and effective.

[Hardball]

Originally Posted by EmptyneSs

japanese jj is more complete. it teaches u to fight in all ranges. i like jjj alot better, as its mindset is more aggressive and it contains alot more techniques. jjj techniques are meant to to str8 up kill and main your opponent, as its main focus is self defense and survival, it is not for sport at all. i especially like the jjj neck breaking submissions and techniques. most bbj school over here seem to be more about competition and sport, and focus mostly on groundwork. i used to read the world jj federation manual books that were in my college library, and i was impressed by alot of the techniques they had, and i learnt a great deal of useful info from those books. also alot of jj schools practice randori, so u do get to go up against resistiing opponents to learn to use the throws effectively. jjj is awesome and effective.

Man don't give away all of our secrets. LOL (I.E. JJJ)

[Ronson]

I have to respectfully disagree and take EmptyneSs to task on his post:

jjj techniques are meant to to str8 up kill and main your opponent, as its main focus is self defense and survival, it is not for sport at all
- this is the standard company line that a martial art style uses to defend itself when it has been shown to be less than effective in real situations (pls. let's not get into the old and tired mma vs street debate)
- BJJ is not just for sport application; there is a self-defence, mma, gi/no gi aspect; even sport BJJ'ers would tool the f_ck out Joe Blow on the street
- Don't mistake the tap-out for BJJ's inability to maim or kill (chokes, neck cranks, and joint locks are friggin' nasty)

To academian, take our opinions here with a grain of salt and research the subject, better yet try both and see what's what. There's a reason why BJJ, wrestling, Sambo, Judo, Boxing, MT, Kyokushin (sp?) Karate are the Cat's Pajamas. All the MA's too deadly for the ring and designed for the street serve a purpose - if most people actually knew what it took to really defend themself and the hard training involved, the MA industry would be in shambles.

[academian]

I am very familiar with both styles I just wanted to hear other peoples opinions on the subject. I thought it would be interesting...It is!

[Ronson]

so what's your opinion academian? You started this, what's your take?

[academian]

I think they both serve their intended purposes well. bjj is an excellent sports competition style and jjj is a fuedal war art. I think jjj would be better for self defence applications as its too dangerous for sport i think bjj could be good self defence against unarmed asailants with little or no fighting experience. Although I have read that the gracies used bjj for self defence on the streets of brazil before it was ever used as sport fighting.I guess alot depends on the profiency of the user unstead of the style or the art.well thats my 2cents

[EmptyneSs]

Originally Posted by Ronson

- this is the standard company line that a martial art style uses to defend itself when it has been shown to be less than effective in real situations

this is the standard line that some martial artists who look down on other styles like to say to discredit other arts. i didnt say it was too deadly for the ring, i was saying how the emphasis was different. alot of jjj techniques and alot of the theory and philosphy of the techniques and the art are to kill and main your attacker. this is true, and anyone who is familier with jjj knows this.

Originally Posted by Ronson

- BJJ is not just for sport application; there is a self-defence, mma, gi/no gi aspect; even sport BJJ'ers would tool the f_ck out Joe Blow on the street

i didnt say all bjj was for sport, there are some school who focus on self defense, but there are many that are really all about competition and sport. this is becoming more and more the case with the rising poplarity of bjj. also, i dont think sport bjj'er would do that great on the street unless they had experience in standup and striking. ground fighting wont really work when someone trying to hurt u is bombing on u with hard strikes unless u have the standup skill and experience to keep your cool through the attack, and take the attacker to the ground, were then u could utilize bjj skills.

Originally Posted by Ronson

- Don't mistake the tap-out for BJJ's inability to maim or kill (chokes, neck cranks, and joint locks are friggin' nasty)

im not mistaking the tapout for the inability to maim or kill. also, just about all those locks chokes and cranks originate from jjj.

[EmptyneSs]

btw, when it comes to self defense and fighting, bjj focuses only in 1 range(unless your school teaches judo standup along with bjj), while jjj contains techniques in all ranges of fighting.

[HtTKar]

Since we're comparing Jutitsu, I see a lot of people that say the take british Jujitsu. What's the difference between that and JJJ?

Thanks