Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu
Posted by: Christie
Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 10:16 AM
Currently I am training in Tae Kwon Do. I intend to continure my TKD traning but also add a grappling art. I love Tae Kwon Do, it really is great, but it isn't going to do me much good when/if I'm pushed to the ground if attacked on the street.
I want to start doing Tae Kwon Do 4 times a week instead of 6 to add Ju Jitsu 2 times a week however there isn't a Ju Jitsu training center close to my university, only Judo. So I wanted to know what the difference between the two is.
Thanks.
Posted by: Intrepidinv1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 10:27 AM
Christie,
I've done both to some degree and this is my opinion.
Judo places more emphasize on the throwing techniques than the ground fighting. The ground techniques are almost identical except the bjj guys & girls practice the ground portion to a high degree so they're better at it. Judo is an excellent grappling art, it's what I started with when I was much younger. It has been a strong core of my ability to defend myself on the street as a police officer for 20 years. Don't worry if you don't have a bjj school nearby go for the judo, just work on the ground aspects hard. In one judo class I attended we spent 1.5 hours practicing throws and 30 mintues grappling. Go to a Borders or a Barnes and Nobles and get a good book on judo and one on bjj. Compare the ground fighting techniques - almost the same.
Posted by: Neko456
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 10:30 AM
Basicailly Jujitsu is the fighting form of Judo the sport, right now Jujitsu has changed in that it once stressed all four ranges but concentrated on on strikes, throws and locks then grappling, if he was still moving.
Now just like Judo it concentrates on Takedowns, Grappling then locking and chokes. Now it still does some of the stand up action but it doesn't stress it as much, due to the UFC or Gracies idea of where the fight should be. It must be noted that Master Helois Gracies, Brother's, Japanese instructor was a Judo player not a Jujitsu fighters.
So in short Judo would work for you since you already study TKD, as a matter of facts your kicks will be better then their Black belts, pending where you are in TKD.
Posted by: Dereck
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 11:55 AM
Hey Christie I'm also taking Taekwondo but am lucky that it is blended with Jujitsu. The ground fighting is my favorite part of my training. We brought in some people from Judo and some of our people went to their classes. Each learning what the other does.
I talked with my instructor several times as well as recently. I talked to him about taking Jujitsu full time ... along with remaining in Taekwondo ... as a cross training but he suggested Judo. He knows I like the ground fighting but he also knows I love the tossing, sweeping and throwing aspects. He knows what I'm capable of and I think I will go with his suggestion. This of course I won't do until I've reached Black Belt (currently red) and am comfortable. And again I will still remain with the Taekwondo.
Posted by: butterfly
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 01:56 PM
Christie,
My judo instructor had a fabulous ground game, he even won the heavy weight BJJ Pam Am games held in Domiguez Hills, CA about 2 years ago.
You have to remember that BJJ came from Judo as it was taught to the Gracies by Maeda Sensei. Very similar techniques, though the Brazillians added mucho good stuff to it to make their take on things their own.
In my opinion, it is less what you train, but how you train...though certain arts may address live, reistant, competition training better than others.
Regards,
-B
-B
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 01:59 PM
Hey Christie,
Go to
www.judoinfo.com and you'll get TONS of info on Judo, including video and animations of all the Judo techniques.
As for Jiu-Jitsu, I'm not clear on what it is you want to focus on. Classical Jiu-Jitsu covers both stand up and some grapppling, where as Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu (BJJ) is all grapping. Huge difference between the two, so make sure you're clear on which art you want.
Judo primarily focuses on throwing and has a grappling (aka Ne Waza) element to it as well. If you really want to get good at grappling, BJJ (or submission wrestling) should be your first choice, and if that's not available, do Judo.
For info on BJJ, go to
www.bjj.org.
Posted by: butterfly
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 02:30 PM
Christie,
I agree with BR's post, generally accurate. I have met Judo people with a good ground game, but not nearly, generally speaking, as good as most BJJ people that I have personally met.
But again, it goes to how they each compete, where throwing is emphasized in Judo.
-B
Posted by: Circle_of_Owls
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 03:32 PM
As BigRod mentioned, classical Japanese Ju Jitsu (JJJ) is a stand up art, and includes little ground fighting. It does include all of the grappling, throws and joint locks from Judo and Aikido. However, it is a battlefield-derived style, not a sport, so many of the techniques used will be more brutal than what you might find in Judo.
It is a great compliment to TKD, if you can find a school.
- CoO
Posted by: Christie
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/19/05 04:10 PM
Thank you for all of your responses.
After what seems like hours of searching I have found a BJJ dojo close to all three of my university, my Tae Kwon Do dojang and where I live. So thats what I'll be doing then. Even better yet, their class times fit perfectly into my schedule to be able to fit 7 1 hr Tae Kwon Do classes, 1 3hr BJJ class and 1 1.5hr BJJ class.
Posted by: kempo_jujitsu
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/23/05 08:24 AM
it is also important what you want to learn, sport or self defense? bjj, if you want self defense, make sure your instructor knows that, because in judo, and sport bjj, you rely on the gi to grab, choke etc...for many of the techniques. but they also have no gi grappling as well, which you can do with a gi on, just dont rely on it to use your techniques.
its also good to understand WHY japanese jujutsu does not contain as much groundfighting as bjj...simply because that is not where you want to be in a fight, in jjj you take down, and end it with a break or something, not roll around looking for a gi choke or armbar to tap out your opponent, you just break the arm and its over, you get back to your feet asap, because their may be more than one assailant.
neko, interesting, because i was told differently, that carlson gracie's instructor was a member of the kodokan, but in its beginning stages before it was really 'judo' it was still jujutsu at that time, and that he was not really a student persay of kano's. but im not positive about it.
Posted by: thegnome
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/24/05 11:34 AM
But techniques using the gi do have alot of self defense applications. I live just outside of Ottawa and most of the year I am wearing at least a medium weight coat, and the standard clothing where I live includes a thick flannel shirt. I'm not saying that it would be the same in Florida or somewhere else down south but for much of North America at least part of the year is spent wearing someting warmer. Also alot of the gi chokes don't actually use the gi for the choke, but as a place to anchor your hand. The same can be done by getting a nice handful of cloth. To counter my own argument, I did once rip an opponents T-shirt trying for a cross choke from my back. Leaving me with a handful of Tshirt collar, no choke, and a rather p'd off college wrestler on top of me. So maybe you shouldn't listen to me after all.
Posted by: Fletch1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/24/05 11:19 PM
Quote:
it is also important what you want to learn, sport or self defense? bjj, if you want self defense, make sure your instructor knows that, because in judo, and sport bjj, you rely on the gi to grab, choke etc...for many of the techniques. but they also have no gi grappling as well, which you can do with a gi on, just dont rely on it to use your techniques.
Well, although it is a good point to discuss what you want out of training with your coach, a good BJJ program should include a lot of gi to no-gi options.
Quote:
its also good to understand WHY japanese jujutsu does not contain as much groundfighting as bjj...simply because that is not where you want to be in a fight, in jjj you take down, and end it with a break or something, not roll around looking for a gi choke or armbar to tap out your opponent, you just break the arm and its over, you get back to your feet asap, because their may be more than one assailant.
Are you sure about that? The emphasis on the groundwork in BJJ is because that's where they believe that most fights end up, not neccesarily because they want to roll around looking for a submission.
Posted by: Dereck
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/25/05 01:46 PM
Quote:
... its also good to understand WHY japanese jujutsu does not contain as much groundfighting as bjj...simply because that is not where you want to be in a fight, in jjj you take down, and end it with a break or something, not roll around looking for a gi choke or armbar to tap out your opponent, you just break the arm and its over, you get back to your feet asap, because their may be more than one assailant.
You are stereotyping Japanese Jujitsu just like everybody else stereotypes Taekwondo, Karate, etc. We need to stop doing this and understand that different schools and different instructors teach differently.
Japanese Jujitsu is taught in our school and we spend a lot of time on the ground similar to BJJ looking for chokes, arm bars, different holds, etc. Yes we are also taught arm breaks as you said but the ground work is the most important part we learn so that we are comfortable on the bottom and the top.
Again it depends on the instructor so some schools may teach more to your description but others may teach more my description. We should not generalize all martial arts with the same name as being the same.
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/25/05 02:20 PM
Quote:
Are you sure about that? The emphasis on the groundwork in BJJ is because that's where they believe that most fights end up, not neccesarily because they want to roll around looking for a submission.
Remember the classical JJ was WARFARE oriented. Rolling around on the ground in the midlle of hundreds or thousands of soldiers trying to kill you is NOT a good idea. More than likely you would have been stabbed while you attempt to armbar your opponent. Or trampled on by horses.
Now we think of self-defense primarily in terms of bar fights, or simple assualts by some kids dad who's upset because his son is riding the bench.
BJJ is primarily sport-oriented. The same for goes Judo.
JJ = warfare, BJJ/Judo = sport.
Posted by: Christie
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/25/05 02:31 PM
Quote:
it is also important what you want to learn, sport or self defense?
Mostly self defense but I do understand that bjj is sport oriented. I figure since I'm doing tkd theres little (not none) gain in cross training in another art that is mainly standing. In a fight I would do everything to say standing, but if it ever went to the ground, thats why I want to learn bjj
...
and to be able to take my dad down - he wrestled in highschool and at one point was #2 in Ontario, everytime I practice sparring with him he takes me to the ground because thats where he does best, I currently don't know what to do once down there
Posted by: thegnome
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/26/05 11:08 AM
Since I'm a former Judoka that just started BJJ classes, here's what I've noticed so far as differences go. 1)Leg Locks 2) They let you go in stalemate positions ALOT longer than in Judo. 3) Leg Locks 4)When you are on the bottom in a hold you don't have to burn yourself out escaping as quickly since there isn't a time constraint (In Judo you have to escape or your opponent keeps moving up in scoring) 5) Leg Locks 6)Turtling up doesn't help as much since the ref isn't going to stop the action. 7)Very few Japaneese terms (Ha you thought I was going to say leg locks! Can you tell how I have lost my early sparring/randori matches?) 8)Alot of times you are not wearing a gi.
Good luck with your dad Christie. When playing against wrestlers I learned that no matter what I did I would always wind up on my back. I think they learn some kind of voodoo curse thing that keeps you pinned to the floor.
Posted by: Neko456
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/26/05 11:09 AM
I got my info from one of Helois personal interview that featured the Graicies origin he states that their training came from a Japanese Judo player that moved to Brazil, as for them training before Kano brought forth Judo from JJ. He did that in the 1880s, the Gracies training began in the 1900s.
So what is right? Where did you hear that? Was it from one of the Gracies?
Posted by: Neko456
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/26/05 11:19 AM
You don't find that the wrestlers seem to walk into chokes and arm locks, especially leg locks. I mean I have wrestler place their head into my gulloutine choke or help me triangle choke them trying to cradle me.
They think because they are on top their winning, I like the mount better then the guard also, but I don't push away straignt armed nor do I use my head to steer the body when I single leg, like they do thats asking for a choke or elbow/shoulder Kimaria'd.
They are very strong and have driving takedowns, I just don't fight them until we land, but I do work on the setup while in flight.
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/27/05 02:25 PM
The problem with wrestlers is they learn quickly and in a few short weeks you've got your hands full.
Posted by: Intrepidinv1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/27/05 05:39 PM
What is the name of that web site where you found the animations of judo techniques? I like that, pretty neat and easy to understand.
Posted by: MattJ
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/28/05 09:13 AM
Posted by: Intrepidinv1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/28/05 10:42 AM
Thanks, put it on the favorites. Good site.
Posted by: Mtripp
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/29/05 07:06 AM
There are some common errors in the history here.
First, the stories of JJ being a "battlefield" art are simply "tall tales", not unlike the ones of Unarmed Okinawan's defeating Samauri with bare hands and farm tools. The unarmed Samauri did not use jujutsu to disarm another Samauri to use his sword. Watch a Kendo match sometime and ask yourself how likely it was that that happened.
Samauri Jujutsu had ONE goal. To get your arm free to draw your sword. This is why most traditional Jujutsu schools have about a hundred or so escapes from wrist and body grabs.
Once swords were banned in Japan, and Jujutsu moved from a get your sword to a protect yourself system, then techniques came in for personal defense.
Kano's Judo came from his need to make a system that was progessive to learn, safe to study, and made better people. That always included effective self-defense training. The often seen quote that Kano created Judo to be a sport is simply not true, and we have Kano's own words to refute it.
GJJ or BJJ is a subset of traditonal kodokan judo, just like olympic or sport Judo is. Madea, who brought the techniques to Brazil was not a "jiujitsu" expert, but a Kodokan Judo black belt sent there to train people in judo. Same for Kimura who never was a world jiujitsu champion as there was never such a contest in his lifetime.
TODAY, and that is an important context, almost all judo programs are run as amature sport programs, with the focus on contest judo. Many BJJ schools are falling into the same trap.
The key to the differences is what is the focus of the training. However, if there are belts, and free prastice, and contest, it came from Judo not jujutsu.
Posted by: Fletch1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/29/05 01:06 PM
Mark Tripp aka JudoCoach.
Posted by: Tant01
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/30/05 12:35 AM
Hello, Mark Tripp, nice to see a familiar name.
Hope you don't get the idea I'm some kind of internet stalker following you from forum to forum...
LOL
RG.
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/30/05 08:18 AM
I've read that Maeda practiced Kosen Judo, as opposed to Kodokan. Or perhaps he was a student of both? Given that the Gracies are ground experts, it's not totally unbelievable that Maeda came from the Kosen branch of Judo.
Posted by: Mtripp
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/30/05 01:10 PM
Quote:
I've read that Maeda practiced Kosen Judo, as opposed to Kodokan. Or perhaps he was a student of both? Given that the Gracies are ground experts, it's not totally unbelievable that Maeda came from the Kosen branch of Judo.
Well the problem is "Kosen Judo" IS Kodokan Judo, just played by a different set of rules in the Shiai or contest version.
Kosen refers to the Colleges who play the game that way, not a style of Judo.
Kinda like saying Michigan Football or Iowa Wrestling
Posted by: thegnome
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/30/05 09:42 PM
Wouldn't the differences in the rules tend to reinforce different techniques? I've never even seen a Kosen style match, but wouldn't it be logical that someone more familiar with competing in that forum to emphasize Newaza over Nagewaza?
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/31/05 02:52 AM
Aw man, I made a fairly long post that seems to be missing.
Maybe I posted it in the wrong place.
Posted by: BigRod
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/31/05 02:55 AM
Hmmm. Here's a snippet of something I found on the net. Let me know if you think this is accurate:
Quote:
The Kodokan had established itself as a well-respected and undefeated school until 1900 when it entered a contest against Fusen Ryu Jiu-Jitsu. The Fusen Ryu differed from other Jiu-Jitsu school in Japan in that they dedicated almost all their training to "ne waza", or grappling techniques. At this point the Kodokan was skilled in striking and without companion in throwing skill, however they had very limited ability in ground grappling. In the contest the Fusen Ryu realized they could not outmatch the Kodokan on their feet so they employed a unique ploy. The Fusen Ryu fighters would pull the Kodokan fighters between their legs and fall to the ground, once on the ground they would apply a choke or joint lock and force the Kodokan fighters to submit (the modern day equivalent to "pulling guard"). The Kodokan were defeated by submission in all ten of their matches, it was the school's first defeat. Kano now realized that ne waza was of equal or greater importance to tachi waza (throwing techniques). Immediately following his school's defeat Kano persuaded Fusen Ryu's headmaster, Mataemon Tanabe, to instruct him on Fusen Ryu's techniques and principles. Kano also sought out a similar grappling intensive style Jikishin Ryu Jiu-Jitsu and began to incorporate its techniques into the Kodokan.
The entire article can be found here: http://www.bjjfighter.com/History/
I guess if the above is true, then you are correct, because Kosen Judo didn't exist (I'm guessing here) until after Kano's Kodokan Judo had embraced the grappling techniques from Fusen Ryu Jiu-Jitsu.
Posted by: AttorneyJohn
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/31/05 08:00 PM
The difference between judo and jujutsu is simple. Rules. Not the lack of them or whatever, but how one scoes in one as compared with the other.
Don't worry about taking judo instead of judo. What you learn in one can be easily converted to the other with little more than a mental adjustment.
Posted by: Fletch1
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/31/05 10:08 PM
As this is a Judo and Traditional JJ (as oppsed to BJJ) forum, I would suggest that you will need a bit more than a mental adjustment to adapt from JJ to Judo.
Judo to JJ maybe.
Posted by: thegnome
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 07/31/05 10:52 PM
What defines traditional Jujitsu? Is it the length of time a style has been in use? The country of origin? Is it more emphasis on self-defense techniques vs. sport? In many ways I feel the style of Hapkido I studied is close to traditional JJ, especially since my teacher was also a high ranking Judoka. (At least this is the section of the forum where I feel the most comfortable.) I guess my question is at what point is something traditional vs. not traditional?
Posted by: butterfly
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/01/05 01:38 AM
thegnome,
Traditional is as the term implies.
Traditional jujitsu has its origins in styles relating to the teaching of different Samurai arts. These were subordinate to and taught along side weapons arts. These traditional Jujitsu were then connected with different Samurai groups and thus had their own particular styles dependent upon the location of this group.
Traditional styles would include Kito Ryu, Tenjin Shin'yo Ryu (both involved as precursor arts forming Judo); Sosuishitsu Ryu; Daito Ryu (known as a precursor art to Aikido).
Thus, traditional jujitsu is more a specific, historical curriculum associated with lineage to a specific Samuarai group and passed down (more or less) intact and studied in a similar way as it has always been studied.
Compare this to the more modern take on Judo and BJJ with a sport emphasis and an approach that would not generally consider weapons or armour in its study.
Regards,
-B
Posted by: Tant01
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/01/05 12:54 PM
Quote:
Hmmm. Here's a snippet of something I found on the net. Let me know if you think this is accurate:
The entire article can be found here: http://www.bjjfighter.com/History/
I guess if the above is true, then you are correct, because Kosen Judo didn't exist (I'm guessing here) until after Kano's Kodokan Judo had embraced the grappling techniques from Fusen Ryu Jiu-Jitsu.
Hello Big Rod. My name is Raymond G. I have researched the particular contest(s) you are asking about and that (research) includes Coach Tripp's articles on the history of the Kodokan Judo
There are a number of dates floating around the internet as to when the matches actually took place. Some put it around 1906 and 1900 but I think it was more like 1888.
By the turn of the century the Kosen (highschool) Judo was already well established.
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fight/judo/judo.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosen_judo
"Since Fusen-ryu matches ended in a pin or submission instead of serious injury and it avoided difficult throws, it was easily learned in the school setting. Kodokan Judo had formed great newaza experts. This, along with Kanoīs willingness to promote Judo as a way of life and a form of physical education, greatly influenced the face of Judo in itīs early days and helped him promote it in Japanese schools".
Posted by: Tant01
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/01/05 02:29 PM
To add:
It was just 1904 when Mitsuyo Maeda was sent to America and by 1914 Kano had established the "All Japan" high school championships at the Imperial University (Kyoto)
By 1925 Newaza was so popular that Kano changed the rules of competition to emphasize throwing techniques over the more submission focused game...
Posted by: hugo
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/04/05 01:51 AM
I'll just reply to any old post. In answer to the original question Judo is selected Juijutsu techniques and Juijutsu rretains kicks and punches as well as more advanced locks and lock throws whereas Judo is only throws, ground locks and strangles. Locks may be attempted on the ground but are not used with throws.
Posted by: Mtripp
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/04/05 05:26 AM
Quote:
I'll just reply to any old post. In answer to the original question Judo is selected Juijutsu techniques and Juijutsu rretains kicks and punches as well as more advanced locks and lock throws whereas Judo is only throws, ground locks and strangles. Locks may be attempted on the ground but are not used with throws.
Nope, sorry, but the above is just not correct.
The idea of men in armor punching and kicking one another on the battlefield is just silly.
Again, battlefield jujutsu was about getting your arm or arms free to draw your sword. There was a form of grappling in armor, but this was with a tanto (knife). Also some leg trips were there if you clashed" with another swordsman and could then trip him and finish him with the sword.
Unarmed technqiues were not a core part of any jujutsu style until after swords were banned.
However, lacking effective randori or shiai, they were not all that effective until Kano came along.
Traditional Kodokan Judo includes strikes, kicks, joint locks, throwing with a locked joint, and more.
It is the focus on olympic sport that makes people believe differently.
Mark Tripp
Posted by: hugo
Re: Difference between Judo and Ju Jitsu - 08/04/05 07:12 AM
You need to read more carefully. I never said that original Juijutsu did not have throws or anything of the sort.
Posted by: TimmyBoy
In my humble novice opinion... - 08/10/05 06:12 PM
I've tried Japanese Jiu Jitsu and I have to say that I prefer judo, even for self defence. The thing is, being able to fight is about more than knowing X amount of techniques, it's about knowing how to apply them against a resisting opponent. This doesn't go for all JJJ clubs as some are excellent, but a lot of them train their techniques against compliant partners all the time. They can call judo a sport all they like but they fact is that we actually learn to apply what we know.
There's a guy at my judo club who's done BJJ for a couple of years, and his groundwork is really good. However, I'm an MMA guy and I prefer more well rounded training, so judo with its adequate groundwork and far superior clinchwork still gets my vote here.