Bravo argues the science of gi vs. no-gi

                    <div class="Article" style="float: left;">
                        <table>
                        <tr style="vertical-align: bottom;">
                        <td>
                            <h3><a href="/go=news.detail&gid=442481" target="_blank">
                                Bravo argues the science of gi vs. no-gi

                            </a></h3>
                        </td>
                        </tr>
                        </table>
                        <a href="/go=news.detail&gid=442481" ><img class="photo" src="http://img.mixedmartialarts.com/method=get&rs=33&q=75&x=17&y=83&w=310&h=165&ro=0&s=eddie-bravo-05-30-12-10-25-34-314.jpg" /></a>



                        <div style="clear: both; line-height: 1px;height: 1px;">&nbsp;</div>
                    </div>

                    <p>Eddie Bravo will compete in a no-gi jiu-jitsu match versus Eddie Royler this weekend at Metamoris 3, which is a rematched of their famed 2003 ADCC bout.</p>

Bravo recently sat down for an interview with MMAFighting.com, where he spoke on varying subjects, including training in the traditional gi versus training without it.

I don't have a dog in the fight. I'm just asking for your position, but I'll give you what Cabral said, namely, that training in the gi makes you more creative and sensitive to technique. How would you respond to that?

That's not scientific. The sciences, it's the sciences. How can yanking and pulling be better for your clinch and squeezing than clinching and squeezing itself? It's impossible. It's impossible and that's the science. So, if you're spending most of your time yanking and pulling, you are not spending that time clinching and squeezing.

Just look at the UFC. There's so many black belts in the UFC. How many are known to have incredible guards? How many black belts in the UFC have three submissions off their back? I would say none.

I'm not sure, but it must be zero.

Zero, but in the gi in a jiu-jitsu competition, they have multiple, multiple submissions off their back. The difference is, in the gi, you're yanking and pulling on the sleeve from the guard and there's no punching or elbowing. Now, you take away the collar and the sleeve, that means you take away the fighter's stance, his fighting stance. And then you add punches and f--king elbows? How is the gi helping that? The gi is not helping that.

What the gi helps is gi training and gi competitions. It appears the gi makes your no gi better because you can train in the gi 10 years straight, never do no gi and then you can take the gi off one day and you'll be pretty good without the gi even though you've never trained no gi before. You'll be pretty good, but would it have been better had he trained no gi the whole time?

Let me ask you something. Would you rather go against a guy who has trained no gi for 10 years straight and you're going to do a no gi match with him or a guy who spent 10 years with a gi and his first no gi training was going to be with you? What would you rather have?

I'm not capable of effectively answering that, but intuitively, certainly the guy with the 10 years no gi experience is probably a formidable challenge.

Absolutely, just common sense. If, with the gi, yanking and pulling somehow magically was better for your clinching and squeezing than clinching and squeezing itself, then why aren't any wrestlers training in judo? They're not.

The gi makes you more open to techniques that don't work no gi. That's what it does. It opens your mind to working on techniques where you choke your opponents out with the back of his jacket. How is that going to help you no gi? It opens your mind with the gi and you figured out a way to choke your opponent out with his belt, but how is that going to help you no gi.

Even Marcelo Garcia himself, his newest strategy, his latest strategy - the best jiu-jitsu guy on the planet - says do not do anything in the gi that you can't do no gi because it won't translate and it's not good for your game. He's already saying half of what I'm saying. I've been saying that the whole time. Now he's saying it. He's saying it. So, what does that mean, scientifically? Is he more on what I'm saying or more what that guy you're quoting is saying? Marcelo is saying, when you're training in the gi, don't do anything you can't do no gi. Stay away from grabbing gi collars and sleeves because you can't do it no gi. He's basically saying what I'm saying now. Why? Because that's the problem. It's not going to help you no gi. He's already confirming it.read entire article...

                    <div style="clear: left; line-height: 1px;height: 1px;">&nbsp;</div>

And somehow Bravo finds a way to work Tower 7 into the interview. Jesus. Phone Post 3.0

Dont know if that is science, sounds like his option

with that said, the whole debate is silly. Grappling w/ and w/o a gi is fun. There are aspects of each that are different and enjoyable. If you want to experience all aspects of grappling, you should explore both.

Of course, some people will prefer one over the other. That doesnt make the other worse.

Also add, it also depends on your goal and experience. To be a fighter, you probably want to do less gi especially once to reach a certain level

Wow much science many chemtrails.

"Eddie Bravo will compete in a no-gi jiu-jitsu match versus Eddie Royler this weekend"

Eddie Royler, no can defend.

UG News: Worst editing and proof reading on the Internet for over a decade. Phone Post 3.0

"versus Eddie Royler" ?

"Of course, some people will prefer one over the other. That doesnt make the other worse."

I don't think Eddie disputes that people prefer one or the other. What's in dispute is whether or not training in a gi makes you actually better without the gi. I don't see how it possibly could and I've heard every argument on the topic.

Like Eddie said, if using the gi helped you when you take the gi off, Greco Roman wrestlers would be cross-training in Judo.

Sorry to any bjj coach ive ever had but i really hate gi im not taking it for self defense but more to sharpen my grappling skills so i dont see the point other than tradition . Why not just give the guys weapons i mean there are hundreds of ways to use the gi and the belt to sub and choke fools out which i understand is the point but it just seems less like grappling to me and more like fencing Phone Post 3.0

Eddie - Science. I don't believe it means what you think it means.

Isn't Sambo like Greco using a Judo jacket, of course the sports are different by rules, eddie never talks about Sambo when using the examples :P

I don't know if he's saying UFC black belts don't have three submission techniques off their backs or three submission victories off their backs. If it's the latter, Nate Diaz subbed Alvin Robinson, Kurt Pellegrino, and Takanori Gomi off his back.

I will seriously write/edit/proof for this website for a small fee.

science, bro.

My one and only natural athletic gift is being a sweaty mother fucker. I can oull out of shit in no-gi that I can't in gi. Which means I get away with more bad posture and positioning in no-gi.

Gi forces me correct those mistakes.

On the opposite side of the coin is sweaty bastards can pull out of my subs in no-gi better, so it makes me more precise and more active.

the answer is always train both.

ChimairaGT - I don't know if he's saying UFC black belts don't have three submission techniques off their backs or three submission victories off their backs. If it's the latter, Nate Diaz subbed Alvin Robinson, Kurt Pellegrino, and Takanori Gomi off his back.
I'm pretty sure he's saying that most black belts in the UFC don't have 3 different types of submissions from their back without a gi on. Phone Post 3.0

Also think he should be discussed how the gi is used. Some grapples are dependent of gi related attacks and others are not. Myself, 800 years ago when trained, never used the gi as key point of attack, so I easily transitioned from gi to no gi will little struggles.

I do like learning new moves with gi and then going to no gi. Just one person's preference.

Think the most important aspect is mat time no matter what you wear

GI bjj simulates the application against an opponent wearing pants and a long sleeve shirt better than no GI. Phone Post 3.0

Military for instance would better benefit from practicing neither, and developing their attack/defense while in uniform and combat boots Phone Post 3.0

I don't disagree with Bravo, but I think there's one aspect of gi training that is extremely beneficial for both no-gi and gi: Friction. Escapes with a gi are flat out harder.

IMO Gi improves your defense and resistance strength. No-gi improves your clinch and offense.