jujistu

Posted by: Anonymous

jujistu - 11/15/04 08:21 PM

ok guys.. i really need help on this one! i want to enter jujitsu.. and i have no idea what it looks like or how close it is to aikido ( i used to do aikido ) some people told me its the opposite of aikido... like aikido promotes harmony and jujitsu promotes a little more violence.. and does anyone have some websites with video clips of them?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: jujistu - 11/16/04 12:04 AM

Jujitsu is alot different then Aikido its more force on force, more strengh oriented. Jujitsu uses throws and methods alot like judo but the main emphasis is on groundwork and submission. There are many forms of jujitsu. Most are mainly ground oriented. I dont really understand why they call it the gentle art. In my experience it can get very violent.
Posted by: Yojimbo558

Re: jujistu - 11/16/04 10:45 AM

Hi there,

AgenT was slightly off in response to your question. There are approximately 5,000 different styles of martial arts & out of those 800 of them are different styles of Jujutsu.

While there will be numerous similarities, different schools emphasize different strategies and principles over the other.

AgenT states that Jujitsu focuses more on Judo type throws and methods that most of these schools focus mainly on submission. This description is not characteristic of most Jujutsu styles...but is a more apt description of Gracie or Brazillian Jujitsu. BJJ doesn't include numerous principles and strategies which are utilized by most Jujutsu schools & as a result, in their tournaments many of those principles are prohibited from being used (( i.e. various wrist locks, nerve and pressure points etc -- although venues such No Holds Barred or UFC often advertise anything goes, there is a whole list of things that you aren't allowed to do ))

The reason for BJJ's striking similarities to Judo is due to the fact that the Gracie family befriended a Japanese Judo Practioner in Brazil (( not a Jujutsu Practioner )). The Judo-ka shared his knowledge of Ne-Waza (( Ground Fighting )) with the Gracies out of thanks for their friendship. Originally, Judo utilized strikes -- but over time these were phased out, and prohibited from Judo Competitions.

Most Jujutsu Systems include strategies for dealing with single and multiple opponents and include dealing with opponents from a standing, kneeling and seated positions as well. Most also include disarm and retention methods with traditional weapons such as: Bo, Jo, Hanbo, Tanbo or Yawara, Katana, etc...as well against modern weapons such as firearms.

The reason BJJ doesn't include this aspect of training is due to its Judo...not Jujutsu origins.

My recommendation to you would be to first open the phone book and discover the number of Jujutsu Schools in your area. Then go to each one and watch a couple of classes. This way you'll get an idea of the manner of the instructor, the senior and junior students and whether or not what they're teaching and the manner in which they are teaching appeals to you.

I'm not saying that BJJ isn't a good art or that it's not effective...but that what it really is, is Judo Ne Waza with Strikes thrown in.

There actually is an answer to the question: "What's the best style?" The answer is "The one that inspires you to keep coming back and leaves you feeling like you can't wait to get back and train is the best style for you." Whatever that style is...be it Jujutsu, Judo, Karate, JKD, etc.

Eric
Posted by: senseilou

Re: jujistu - 11/16/04 11:38 PM

Eric is right on. I study 6 different Jujutsu styles. Some go to the ground, others are throwing oriented and another locking oriented. It really depends on the style. Sambo, is the Russian version of Brazillian Jujutsu, and without knowing many eliminate from Jujutsu styles, but it is. To assume that all are the same is wrong, don't forget the Aiki-Jujutsu and the pre-Judo Jujitsu's. Also early on, every sword Ryuha had an empty hand Jujutsu system, in case a warrior lost his weapon.Other old styles not very common are Yawara Jutsu and Wa Jitsu and some Modern ones like Small Circle Jujutsu, Dazan Ryu Jujutsu, San Jitsu, Vee Jitsu and Sanuces Ryu. They all have similarities, but are all different.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: jujistu - 11/18/04 02:51 PM

____________________________________________
"I'm not saying that BJJ isn't a good art or that it's not effective...but that what it really is, is Judo Ne Waza with Strikes thrown in."

originally posted by Yojimbo558
____________________________________________

Mr. Yojinbo I believe that you are, at least, partially wrong. As far as I know Brazilian jujitsu is not only "judo with strikes thrown in", although it has some judo moves,as far as I know, it also derivated from jujitsu.
Mixing judo with jujitsu Gracie created his fighting style. When Gracie's sons started to compete in MMA competitions, he started to modify his style so that his sons could fare better in competitions.
____________________________________________
"Sambo, is the Russian version of Brazillian Jujutsu, and without knowing many eliminate from Jujutsu styles, but it is."

Originally posted by senseilou.
____________________________________________

Mr. senseilou. I've aways been told that all jujitsu styles have came,at least partially, from japan(including Bjj). Is that true? Because if it is, they are right in excluding Sambo. would you please explain this to me?

Thanks for your time.

Kagemusha


[This message has been edited by kagemusha (edited 11-18-2004).]

[This message has been edited by kagemusha (edited 11-18-2004).]

[This message has been edited by kagemusha (edited 11-18-2004).]

[This message has been edited by kagemusha (edited 11-18-2004).]
Posted by: Yojimbo558

Re: jujistu - 11/21/04 02:41 PM

Hi Kagemusha,

History is something that is really easy, all you have to do is be willing to take the time to look at it.

If you do, you'll find as I stated before that the Gracie's befriended a Judo practioner...not a Jujutsu practioner. Judo is a great art, but it's hard on the body. When the Gracie's befriended the Japanese man (( sorry forgetting his name just now )), the guy was older, and for this reason what he shared with the Gracie's was the Ne Waza from Judo.

The Gracie's eventually renamed what they'd learned and called it Jujitsu...the Japanese word for it is Jujutsu...but it is common for foreigners to make phonetic pronunciation mistakes and as a result the Jujitsu has been around long enough that this spelling is now simply accepted.

The origins of the Gracie's teachers is why there style and why none of their tournaments utilize wrist locks, finger locks etc...and as a result -- Jujutsu practioners who enter their tournaments are hampered as numerous of their accepted techniques are prohibited.

BJJ derived from its Judo Ne Waza has numerous arm bars, shoulder locks, etc...again as I said before...I'm not saying that this isn't an effective art -- but in all reality it's not Jujutsu.

What they've done would be no different than a Karate-Do practioner trying to drum up business by claiming to teach Karatejutsu when that's not what they're doing.

BJJ has some great stuff -- but there's a lot of standing techniques that the Gracie's weren't originally taught...both due to their original teacher's age, as well as a lack of tatami mats back then for them to train for throwing and landing on.

BJJ practioners tend not to know how to fall and land safely from the tachi (( Standing )) Judo throws. Those that do, know how to either by cross training with Judoka's or in having instructors who've done so.

Ne Waza has some great stuff that's outstanding and belongs in everyone's toy box...but you need to understand that this is there focus. Some Jujutsu styles emphasize entering, chokes & throws, some focus more on finger locks etc. BJJ's got some great stuff -- but it has a whole host of techniques that aren't apart of what most people identify as jujutsu because it isn't apart of their system.

Remember, there system is new...I'm not disputing whether or not it's effective...but the new kid on the block (( in comparrisson to others that have been around for centuries )) is improper to claim to be something that -- due to it not being in their curriculum is something other than what it is.

It would be like you claiming to be a Marine if you were in the Army both are outstanding -- but each one is different from the other.

Eric
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: jujistu - 11/22/04 10:23 AM

Hey Yojimbo,

Thanks for the answer.