I remember, not long ago, reading postings by some BJJ purists that trash talked strikers and Judo.
I haven't read these, lately.
I'm glad that many people now acknowle the contributions that various striking and grappling arts have made to MMA.
KMS
Great post, I agree 100%...
unless your opponent is wearing a gi in the match, the takedowns are wrestling, not judo. judo may be better than nothing in this respect but it is not the most efficient way to train for mma.
"unless your opponent is wearing a gi in the match, the takedowns are wrestling" = not correct... Judo is about unbalancing your opponent, not out powering them...
Watch some of Karo Parisyan's fights in the UFC and tell me if you still think that Judo takedowns can't be done without the gi.
there are always gonna be trolls on the internet, but most of the time, this place has some pretty brilliant cross conversations and some great things have happened as a result of this place...
Judo is a lot more than the Olympic sport, and a lot more than gi gripping
"unless your opponent is wearing a gi in the match, the takedowns are wrestling, not judo"
You have obviously never trained in judo.
lol, give it time. And please, as if judo didn't have double legs or singles (it, just like bjj, sambo, etc etc are just a form of wrestling. There are only so many ways to take people down, so the techniques are more widespread across the arts than most people will ever realize).
And the point of this thread is what?
"unless your opponent is wearing a gi in the match, the takedowns are wrestling, not judo"
You have obviously never trained in judo.
Wrestling is obvioulsy better suited for MMA takedowns for obvious reasons but anyone who's done both wrestling and judo (myself for one) knows that some techniques are similar or identical in movement, technique, etc.
There are tons of moves done in judo that do not absolutely require a grip of the gi. The inside leg trip / ouchi gari is a perfect example of this (used by Couture, Randleman, Shoji, etc)
But why listen to people that have done both and know what they are actually talking about?
of course there is an overlap of techniques. that is a given. but ANY judo technique that works without the gi, is also a wrestling move. so you might as well call it wrestling, and not judo. it is a matter of choosing the more precisely descriptive term.
gi or no-gi, Judo takedowns are far superior to wrestling's. You may as well just train rugby instead of wrestling, at least you get to have fun while you practice your so called takedowns. Judo is a sophisticated science, wrestling is just a bar room brawl without the strikes, (in other words the effective bits).
"Judo is about unbalancing your opponent, not out powering them"
lol. Yeah, that the original idea with judo, but pure power sure does happen a lot in judo, as it does in all combat arts.
That being said, I think that Judo rules. But BJJ is more for me, for now, probably because of the ground game is more technical (and the takedown game less technical, probably).
"Judo is a sophisticated science, wrestling is just a bar room brawl without the strikes"
LMFAO!!!!!
You have, obviously, never wrestled.
I have actually. After pinning everyone in my first class I decided to stick to judo.
I've never understood the mindset of a person who must proclaim their style the best, whatever that style may be. I assume they're trying to compensate for a lack of confidence in it and themselves.
"After pinning everyone in my first class I decided to stick to judo."
lol. I can see right through you, brother.
Unless you are talking about fucking gym class. lol.
ah shite, I think I've been rumbled our kid....
"but ANY judo technique that works without the gi, is also a wrestling move. so you might as well call it wrestling, and not judo."
So if learned it from years of wrestling and used it once in a judo match, it automatically becomes a "judo technique?"