ok so its probly been asked before and on my other thread about Grappling Differences i am beginning to wonder....
seriously, if you have a BJJ black belt and Judo black belt (if they do belt rankings i have no idea) and the judo guy knows all the "illegal" stuff that isn't allowed in judo comps...
who wins this fight and why?
i hear judo get ALOT of flak but it seems from what i hear to be just as good ground game as the next?
YOU DONT WANT TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD.
judo is mostly throws, but lately, they have been training a lot more ne-waza (ground game). so, if the bjj guy didnt get knocked out from the throw, i would give it to the bjj guy. that being said, if this was on concrete with jackets, i think the judo guy could win with a good toss.
The thing is, TexasThai, a black belt in Judo means something different than a black belt in BJJ.
In Judo you get a black belt when you become proficent in all the basic moves. You can get a Judo black belt in 2-3 years, maybe even faster if you are talented.
In BJJ a blackbelt means you are an expert in BJJ. It takes about 8-12 years to get a black belt in BJJ.
elgringo has ipponed the correct:) seriously though it depends alot on the individual practicioners(sp?)some judo guys are very good on the ground some not so much.The same can be said the other way some bjj guys are very good at throws some not so good.I like both and am proud to be associated with both arts.
Depends on how they train. When I was training bjj they really didn't teach us any takedowns or throws. Right now I'm training judo and there is plenty of ground work.
ok, so what about BJJ with the GI, i thought GI training in BJJ was soley used for throws??
hhhmmm, wow thanks Zero, so is GI training better?
im going next week to start BJJ for the first time and i know i should know if i want to learn GI or not
Texas Thai, The gi/no-gi subject is sometimes touchie in the grappling community. Some people are really "passionate" about one or the other. I think your best bet is to do both. I'm one of the guys that believes that gi training will get you to think more technically and hopefully be able to pass that over to your no-gi. Unfortunately sometimes no gi people rely too much on strength and speed and become a little sloppy in terms of proper technique. On the other hand, just doing Gi might make you rely too much on grabbing sleeves/pants and you might develop a slow and perhaps not-too athletic game. Bottom line, be a renaissance man and train both! Hope this helps.
P.S. I can already hear people angrily replying to this post!
TP, thanks for the info but wont training both, slow me down, or take longer to learn the art?
the one thing i dont want to do is mess up the greatness that the art is or get confused and im sure just starting out i will be confused, so how do i know which one to start with and how long to switch?
or should it be where one session i do gi, the next session no gi?? but again cant that end up being more than i need to lear at one time?
TexasThai, Usually your school will either have separate classes for gi/no-gi or the bjj classes will alternate each week or so between gi and no gi. If you can only do one, I'd suggest gi though. I've heard it's easier learning the concepts in gi and then adapting them to no gi. It certainly won't slow you down doing both. A technique is a technique. I'm not good with analogies but I'd say it's almost like writing with a pen versus a big marker. What you're writing is the same you'd just have to adapt to the instrument you're using. If you're concerned about "not messing up the greatness of the art" and not getting confused then again I'd say stick to Gi.
Either way, start training!!!
I've noticed lately a lot more schools are offering both Judo & BJJ. It only makes sense to me. You see a lot of BJJ vs Judo wars on the internet but I'm conviced it's just goofy white belts who want to feel like they are superior. I train with a lot of guys that do Judo and there has never been any animosity between any of the guys.
It depends on the judo instructor. Some only teach you enough on the ground to get the fight stood up in a tournament. Others go into great detail and don't just train for tournament rules.
I think at first people should train with Gi, for like a year or something. then go to no gi. I'm 50/50 in my training, and I think it helps... It's good rolling with someone in a gi, and then seeing the differences with no-gi.
If you have some wrestling in the area, do BJJ and wrestling... If you don't have any wrestling... Still do BJJ :)... No, if there's no TD shcools, you definitely have to have some solid takedowns if you want to be good at bjj.
I honestly believe that starting with the gi is a far faster way to becoming a good grappler. Wrestling no GI relies too much on athleticism. Poor escapes are too often rewarded against average guys. THis builds poor technique. I believe that there is no point in taking the gi of until about Blue belt as it will hamper your technique.
In saying that if you are looking to train MMA, a little bit of commensense applies.
* Concentreate less on GI choke
* Stick to the basics (old school techniques)
Regarding Judo pretty much all the top competitors are Judo black belts. They are firt and foremost BJJ fighters but they recognise the importance of takedowns as well. They also have a lot of wrestling practice behind them. I am pretty sure all of BTT have Judo black belts.
and as they say the proof is in the pudding!
lol thanks! i guess the GI is the best way to learn first and for me it would be better, im quite tatted and dont want my tatts to be the focus of attention when im training....
I kind of agree with Eddie Bravo on the gi vs no gi debate. If you want to be good at no-gi or MMA you should train no-gi. If you have good solid technical teaching there is no reason why you wouldn't be just as technical training all no-gi. It really is a different game. Sure, if you have good solid skills you can make the transition but it takes a little time to get used to it. I enjoy training both so I split my time up.